No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRS_Wetland_Assessment_220920_v1 29 April 2022 TAL-1952 Jill Ding, Senior Planner City of Renton Community and Economic Development 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 Via Email: jding@rentonwa.gov RE: Critical Areas – Existing Conditions Letter Report Dear Ms. Ding: This letter provides the Executive Summary for the Critical Areas – Existing Conditions Letter Report. The full report is attached for your review. Executive Summary The attached Letter Report prepared by Talasaea Consultants analyzes existing wetlands, stormwater ponds, and other features at the subject property commonly known as Longacres (the“Campus”) in compliance with City of Renton’s critical areas regulations (RMC 4-3-050). The Letter Report informs the entitlement and development of a proposed Sounders FC training facility (the “Site”), located on a portion of the Campus). Figure 4 provides a Site Plan for the Sounders FC training facility. The Campus has been subject to various developments over the past century, including the Longacres horse racetrack and a Boeing Headquarters. These developments have resulted in extensive modifications to the Campus, including development of existing structures, stormwater management systems, on-site wetland mitigation, driveways, and surface parking. The Sounders FC training facility proposal includes the development of five new soccer training pitches, a keeper training area, the development of a new maintenance facility and restroom facilities, the use of a portion of an existing structure, a deck addition to this existing structure, and realignment of existing trails at the Site. The proposal also includes the removal of parking spaces. Figure 4 in the report provides a site plan for the proposal. The Letter Report concludes that only Wetland A is subject to the City’s critical areas regulations as it relates to the entitlement and development of the Site. This Letter Report identifies the applicable buffer, code-authorized buffer alteration and applicable mitigation. The Letter Report also concludes: Ms. Jill Ding 29 April 2022 Page 2 of 3 Pond B Pond B is extensively documented as a stormwater drainage pond. Pond B was expressly not included in the Longacres Mitigation Plans prepared by Shapiro and Associates in 1998 and 1999, and, accordingly, Pond B has not been utilized for wetland mitigation. Thus, Pond B is not regulated under the City’s critical areas regulations pursuant to RMC 4-3-050B.1 Any maintenance, repair, or expansion of Pond B associated with stormwater storage capacity would also be exempt from critical areas regulations pursuant to RMC 4-3-050C.3. Feature D Feature D fails to satisfy the hydrology requirements for a wetland, and therefore does not meet all the wetland criteria set forth in the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 2010). Feature G Feature G is a stormwater treatment facility that has not been utilized as wetland mitigation. Thus, Feature G is also not regulated under the City’s critical areas regulations pursuant to RMC 4-3-050-B. 1 RMC 4-3-050B.1 provides, “Regulated wetlands do not include those artificial wetlands intentionally created from non-wetland sites, including, but not limited to, irrigation and drainage ditches, grass-lined swales, canals, detention facilities, wastewater treatment facilities, farm ponds, and landscape amenities, or those wetlands created after July 1, 1990, that were unintentionally created as a result of the construction of a road, street, or highway.” Ms. Jill Ding 29 April 2022 Page 3 of 3 Wetland A, Pond B, Feature D, and Feature G are identified in the image above and also shown in Figure 3 of the report. The Site does not include any other wetlands, critical area buffers, stormwater ponds, or features that would otherwise impact this proposal. The Letter Report includes the following information: 1. Property Location and Proposal 2. Property Description and Current Land Use 3. Proposed Development 4. Past Land Use and Historical Documentation 5. Field Investigation and Findings 6. Compliance with Critical Areas Regulations for Buffer Alterations (RMC 4-3-050J) Attachments 1– 14 Figures 1 – 4 We ask that the City respond to this letter confirming that: 1. Pond B, Feature D, and Feature G are not subject to the City’s critical area regulations pursuant to RMC 4-3-050B.1; 2. Wetland A is a Category II wetland with moderate habitat scores; and 3. Field 1 and the Goal Keeping Area (as identified in the Site Plan on Figure 4) are low intensity uses subject to a 100-foot buffer pursuant to RMC 4-3-050G.2, note 7 and RMC 4-11-120. Should you have any questions or require additional information at this time, please feel free to contact Jacob Prater or me at (425) 861-7550. Thank you. Sincerely, TALASAEA CONSULTANTS, INC. William E. Shiels Principal Attachment: Critical Areas – Existing Conditions Letter Report 29 April 2022 TAL-1952 Jill Ding, Senior Planner City of Renton Community and Economic Development 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 Via Email: jding@rentonwa.gov REFERENCE: Longacres Unico Property Located in Renton, Washington SUBJECT: Critical Areas – Existing Conditions Letter Report Dear Ms. Ding, Talasaea Consultants has prepared this Existing Conditions report in collaboration with Unico Properties, the Seattle Sounders FC, Coughlin Porter Lundeen (CPL), and others to address the Seattle Sounders FC Performance Center that is proposed for construction on the Longacres Office Park property in Renton, Washington (Figure 1). This report includes descriptions of the property location and the proposed development, a comprehensive review of past documents which address development of the property since 1990, and a current field evaluation of the subject property for the presence of critical areas that could potentially impact development proposals. 1 Property Location and Proposal The Seattle Sounders FC Performance Center at Longacres is proposed to be located at the Longacres Office Park in Renton, Washington (the “Campus”, Figure 1).1 The approximately 108-acre Campus is composed of 18 parcels located west of Oakesdale Avenue SW in Renton, Washington (Figure 2). The Sounders “Site” accounts for seven of these parcels (King County tax parcels 2423049022, 0886700110, 0886700120, 0886700130, 0886700140, 0886700220, and 0886700370). Referencing the Boeing Longacres Property Second Amended Binding Site Plan (King County Recording No. 20050504000673, City of Renton, King County, WA; the “BSP”), the Site occupies lots 11, 12, 13, 14, and 20, and a portion of office building 25-20 located on lot 22 of the BSP (see Attachment 13). Shared parking facilities are located on lot 21 of the BSP, and some Sounders’ specific parking is proposed on a portion of lot 22 and into lot 11. The Site (excluding the office building and shared parking) is approximately 22 acres in size and is bordered to the west by Tracts A 1 The Campus is composed of the totality of the BSP, approximately 108-acres in size, located within a portion of the SE 1/4 of Sec. 24, Township 23N, Range 4E, W.M.. The Campus was recently purchased by Unico, which independently has plans to redevelop a substantial portion of the Campus property in the future. Ms. Jill Ding 29 April 2022 Page 2 of 38 and B of the BSP (the “Tracts”). The Site, including Building 25-20 and shared parking, is bordered on the east by Oakesdale Avenue SW, which provides access to the Site. The Sounders will develop a field complex on the Site, which will include five (5) full-size soccer pitches, a goalkeeper training field (“GK Field”), associated improvements, and parking. This Report addresses the existing conditions of the Site and adjacent Tracts, and includes a slightly expanded study area to capture related aspects of the landscape. No adjacent properties were accessed without owner permission; thus, our assessment of adjacent properties is based on visual observation and knowledge of work previously completed by Talasaea Consultants and past consultants. The Site, and approximately 300 feet surrounding the Site, are referred to jointly as the “study area.” 2 Property Description and Current Land Use The Campus has undergone extensive redevelopment over the past century. Aside from the obvious built environment captured by the buildings and associated parking areas, much of the Campus has undergone manipulation since the 1930s, including the creation of stormwater Pond B on Tract B and other man-made drainage features. The majority of the eastern and northern portions of the Campus are developed and feature several large office buildings and associated parking areas, with various other access roads and infrastructure throughout the Campus (Figure 3). The Site borders two large ponds (Wetland A and Pond B, discussed in Section 5) and borders on or includes various other stormwater features. Some of these features were the result of stormwater facilities and development-related mitigation associated with the initial Boeing development that took place during the 1990s and early 2000s (discussed in Section 5 below). The areas of the Site directly adjacent to the building and parking areas are vegetated by maintained lawn and other landscape plantings. Other plant communities across the Site are composed of native tree species, including black cottonwood (Populus balsamifera ssp. trichocarpa) and red alder (Alnus rubra), with occasional Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), western redcedar (Thuja plicata), bigleaf maple (Acer macrophyllum), and others. The Site includes several species of native shrubs and saplings including Sitka willow (Salix sitchensis), salmonberry (Rubus spectabilis), vine maple (Acer circinatum), and others. Throughout the Site, there is a prevalence of non-native and invasive Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus), reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea), and English ivy (Hedera helix). 3 Proposed Development The Sounders’ development is proposed to be constructed in one or two construction phases. This Existing Conditions Letter Report addresses the Sounders Site and Tracts A and B, for the Sounders FC proposal, and includes: • Construction of five (5) full-sized training fields and a GK Field; • Construction of a new maintenance shed and an outdoor restroom facility; • The use of approximately 50,000 SF of an existing structure that will house the club’s operations, including front office personnel, first, second, and academy teams, and other uses associated with the club; Ms. Jill Ding 29 April 2022 Page 3 of 38 • Deck addition to the existing structure; • Realignment of existing pervious and/or impervious trails; • Removal of approximately 150 surface parking stalls for the placement of training pitches; and • Relocation of removed parking stalls for Sounders’ facility and use. The current design places the five (5) fields and the GK Field positioned in the western portion of the Site, adjacent to the southeast side of Wetland A and east side of Pond B (Figure 4). Several project elements adjacent to Tract A will require a critical areas alteration to minimize or avoid wetland buffer impacts. The extent of the buffer impact from the pitches and GK Field is dependent upon the City’s confirmation that field use is low intensity, which is a determining factor for applicable buffer width. Parking areas would not be considered low intensity, and therefore would be subject to the standard wetland buffer width for the wetland classification. 3.1 Avoidance The proposed field placement was modified and refined to the greatest extent possible to avoid impacts to Wetland A and its associated buffer (see Section 5). Field 1 is programmatically required to have direct access to the training facility within Building 25-20, so its location is fixed. The GK Field is programmatically linked to Field 1, and the remaining pitches (Fields 2 through 5) are proposed to the south of Field 1 to avoid impacts to the wetland buffer. To facilitate moving the fields south, some existing surface parking stalls are proposed to be removed to create additional space for the fields and to minimize encroachment into the Wetland A buffer.2 Wetland A is rated as a Category II wetland with a moderate habitat score. Thus, the code establishes a 150-foot standard buffer (for nonexempt uses that are not low intensity land uses), and a 100-foot buffer for low intensity land uses (RMC 4-3-050.G.2)3. Currently, Wetland A on the Site is bordered by a paved trail. The code defines low impact land use as those uses “which are not likely to have a significant adverse impact on critical areas because of the low intensity of the use, minimal levels of human activity, limited use of machinery or chemicals, site design or arrangement of b uildings and structures, incorporation of mitigation measures, or other factors." Additional details pertaining to Wetland A are discussed in further detail in Section 5 below. Depending upon the determination of whether the soccer pitches and keeper training area are low intensity land uses, buffer alterations will be calculated from standard 150-foot buffer or from the low- 2 Field 1 and the GK Field, located east of a trail that borders Wetland A, will be the least intensely used fields of the Sounders FC Performance Facility. These are grass fields, which will be used approximately 2-5 hours per day, exclusively for professional soccer training and team activities. The fields will be fenced, and although lighting will be provided, Field 1 and the GK Field will not be used for evening practices, so the lights would be used rarely. During the growing season these grass fields would be mowed approximately every 2-3 days, with mowing occurring less frequently outside the growing season. Surface runoff from the fields will be collected primarily through under-field drains, and will be routed through an enhanced stormwater quality treatment and detention system prior to being discharged to a pond directly upstream of Wetland A. 3RMC 4-3-050G.2, note 7 states, “Low intensity land uses include but are not limited to the following: unpaved trails, low intensity open space (hiking, bird-watching, preservation of natural resources, etc.) and utility corridor without a maintenance road and little or no vegetation management." Ms. Jill Ding 29 April 2022 Page 4 of 38 impact 100-foot buffer (Figure 4). Pond B, Feature D, and Feature G (discussed in Section 5 below) are not wetlands subject to critical areas regulations and do not require buffers (RMC 4-3-050B.1).4 4 Past Land Use and Historical Documentation The Campus functioned as a thoroughbred horse racetrack for much of the 20th century until Boeing purchased the property in 1990. Boeing developed a Customer Services Training Center (CSTC) in the early 1990s, and in the mid-1990s Boeing constructed the Longacres Office Park (“LOP”) (Attachment 1). Boeing prepared extensive permitting reports and environmental documentation to entitle the LOP. A list of documents considered is included in Attachment 2. These documents include, but are not limited to: • Jurisdictional Wetland Determination for Longacres Park Development (April 1992, Attachment 3); • Existing Habitat Conditions and Wildlife Study Report (June 1993, Attachment 4); • Jurisdictional Wetland Determination (August 1998, Attachment 5); and • Surface Water Management Project and Conceptual Mitigation Plan published in December 1998 (Attachment 6) and revised January 1999 (Attachment 7). The reports noted above were prepared by Shapiro and Associates, Inc (“Shapiro”). In addition, this Letter Report will also discuss the Drainage Report and Conceptual Drainage Plan prepared by Sverdrup Civil, Inc (September 1998, Attachment 8). These reports were instrumental in preparing the Environmental Impact Statement used to entitle LOP through a development agreement executed by Boeing and the City in December 2000. More recently (2015-2021), various consultants have prepared wetland delineation reports and biological assessments for all or portions of the Campus. These documents include: • Biological Assessment and Critical Areas Study prepared by Terracon Consultants, Inc (December 2015, Attachment 9); • Wetlands Delineation and Regulatory Analysis Memorandum prepared by Amec Foster Wheeler (September 2016, Attachment 10); and • Delineation of Wetlands and Other Waters report prepared by NV5 (March 2021, Attachment 11). The City’s critical areas ordinance exempts all permitted stormwater detention facilities not used for wetland mitigation (RMC 4-3-050B.1). The three reports identified above did not address this exemption, or they misinterpreted background information on permitted stormwater detention improvements. Thus, these reports could be misleading without additional permitting background 4 RMC 4-3-050B.1 provides, “Regulated wetlands do not include those artificial wetlands intentionally created from nonwetland sites, including, but not limited to, irrigation and drainage ditches, grass -lined swales, canals, detention facilities, wastewater treatment facilities, farm ponds, and landscape amenities, or those wetlands created after July 1, 1990, that were unintentionally created as a result of the construction of a road, street, or highway.” Ms. Jill Ding 29 April 2022 Page 5 of 38 information and context. Therefore, it is necessary to explore, in detail, several documents pertaining to the development of the LOP to differentiate between regulated and non-regulated features of the property. Jurisdictional Wetland Determination for Longacres Park Development, Shapiro and Associates, Inc, April 1992 As one of the more preliminary attempts at a wetland assessment on the LOP property, Shapiro conducted a wetland investigation throughout 1991 in order to formally delineate all wetlands on the property. This “1992 Shapiro Report” was published in 1992 (Attachment 3). The study area recognized areas to the south and east but focused their work around the main track area (current day Wetland A and Pond B, Figure 3 of the 1992 Shapiro Report, between pages 12 and 13). Shapiro established 25 different test plots across the LOP and identified a total of five (5) wetlands that correspond with Figure 4 (between pages 15 and 16) of this 1992 Shapiro Report (see below image), with one wetland corresponding with the marsh located to the south of the LOP. As demonstrated in the following reports, many of the identified wetlands were filled or modified as a result of the Longacres redevelopment. Thus, the 1992 Shapiro Report provides a baseline for the Site before the redevelopment of Longacres. Figure 4 from Shapiro and Associates, Inc, April 1992 Ms. Jill Ding 29 April 2022 Page 6 of 38 Existing Habitat Conditions and Wildlife Study Report, Shapiro and Associates, Inc, June 1993 In June of 1993, Shapiro and Associates prepared a comprehensive study of existing habitat areas and wildlife use of the LOP Site (Attachment 4). This “1993 Shapiro Report” assessed both the quality and quantity of habitats and the abundance of species of wildlife using the property. This 1993 Shapiro Report identified four different habitats as existing within its study area: mowed racetrack infields, a southern open field area, marsh areas in the southeast, and a constructed environment of buildings and parking lots. The study area of the 1993 Shapiro Report was much broader than the current study area, but its characterizations of the areas within Tract A and Tract B are pertinent. It is also relevant to note that the “mowed infield” is the proposed location of the Sounders field complex. Although the 1993 Shapiro Report focused heavily on the wildlife found on the property, there was mention of Category III wetlands found in low-lying swales and drainage ditches in the mowed infields, and it identified the marsh located to the south of the property as a Category II or III wetland (see Figure 3 of the 1993 Shapiro Report, p. 12). Other figures included in the 1993 Shapiro Report further illustrate potential wetland areas without providing a naming scheme, formal ratings, or formal wetland determination data forms. Like the 1992 Shapiro Report, the 1993 Shapiro Report provides a baseline for the Site prior to the redevelopment of Longacres. Jurisdictional Wetland Determination, Shapiro and Associates, Inc, August 1998 In 1998, Shapiro prepared a Jurisdictional Wetland Determination report in order to re-delineate the features previously characterized as wetlands under the 1987 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (“Corps” hereinafter) methodology (Attachment 5). Furthermore, this “1998 Shapiro Report” confirmed that several wetlands were filled between 1991 and 1998 as part of other site development activities; thus, an updated delineation was necessary ahead of further LOP construction. The wetland labeling system used in the 1998 Shapiro Report is different than those used in later reports for the Longacres Property and those used in this Existing Conditions Report. The 1998 Shapiro Report omits the existing “main pond” area and surrounding wetland area within the “Customer Services Training Center” property, limiting delineations to the other parcels. Their 1998 report designates a “Wetland A” and “Wetland B” in the southern extent of the main pond and surrounding wetlands. Only their Wetland B falls within the current Wetland A area (1998 Shapiro Report, Figure 2, p. 8, see image below). Pond B had not been planned or created at the time of the 1998 report. Thus, the 1998 Shapiro Report’s statement that “portions of Wetland A and B still exist, and areas impacted by development have been mitigated”5 provides no bearing on the status of Pond B as identified in this current report. As shown below, the 1998 Shapiro Report identified eight (8) wetlands within the study area (compared to the five (5) identified in the 1992 report), and further divided the wetlands into 15 sub-wetlands. Seven (7) of the 15 wetlands lacked at least one of the qualifying criteria and were considered non - wetlands or were considered non-regulated due to being perched on fill. These non-regulated wetlands included Wetlands G, H3, I2, I3, J, Ka, and L2 per Figure 2 of the 1998 Shapiro Report (see below). Conclusion: Pond B did not exist at the time of the 1998 Shapiro Report, and therefore was not the regulated wetland identified in the report. Pond B was not used for any wetland mitigation. 5 1998 Shapiro Report, Attachment 5, p. 1 (4th paragraph in the Executive Summary). Ms. Jill Ding 29 April 2022 Page 7 of 38 Figure 2 of Shapiro and Associates, Inc., August 1998 (with insert of existing conditions from Talasaea, 2022). Ms. Jill Ding 29 April 2022 Page 8 of 38 Surface Water Management Project and Conceptual Mitigation Plan, Shapiro and Associates, Inc , December 1998, revised January 1999 The Surface Water Management Project and Conceptual Mitigation Plan prepared by Shapiro and Associates in December of 1998 (Attachment 6, the “1998 Mitigation Plan”) and revised in 1999 (Attachment 7, the “1999 Mitigation Plan”) are the most helpful documents to understand previous mitigation and current regulatory standing. Collectively, the 1998 and 1999 Mitigation Plans are referred to as “Mitigation Plans” hereinafter. The Mitigation Plans assessed existing conditions ahead of the LOP and the construction of the associated Surface Water Management Plan (“SWMP”), analyzed the impacts resulting from the construction of the LOP and SWMP, and identified appropriate compensatory mitigation required to offset impacts to critical areas. The 1999 Mitigation Plan identified the same wetlands addressed in the 1998 Shapiro Report. (1999 Shapiro Report, Figure 3, p. 10, see image below). None of the wetlands, with the exception of Wetland A and Pond B (discussed in Section 5), were identified by the Mitigation Plans as existing on the property prior to the construction of the LOP. The 1999 Mitigation Plan clearly documents Pond B (as it is referred to in this Existing Conditions Report) as a stormwater facility, not a wetland regulated under the City’s critical areas ordinance. The following provisions in the 1999 Mitigation Plan are particularly informative: Page 3: “The proposed SWMP will create a combined wetpond/detention pond necessary to meet water quality requirements for future development on the site. The wetpond/detention pond mitigation will create or restore 2.15 acres of wetlands that will provide ter tiary water quality enhancement after flows through catch basins, wet vaults, and wet ponds. These wetlands associated with the wetpond are not included as part of the wetland mitigation.” Page 13: “The project will entail creation of a stormwater pond where one presently does not exist. While this wet pond will be nearly identical in appearance to the mitigation wetland, it is not included within the mitigation area.” Page 16: “Immediately south of the wetland mitigation area will be a stormwater detention and water enhancement pond. While not being used as wetland mitigation, it will be landscaped similar to the wetland mitigation area with open water, floating leaved, emergent, scrub -shrub, and forested components.” These findings are consistent with the 1998 Mitigation Plan. For example: Page 15: “Immediately south of the wetland mitigation area will be a stormwater detention and water quality enhancement pond. While not being used as wetland mitigation, it will be landscaped similar to the wetland mitigation area with open water, floating leaved, emergent, scrub-shrub and forested.” Ms. Jill Ding 29 April 2022 Page 9 of 38 Figure 3 in Shapiro and Associates, Inc, January 1999 Ms. Jill Ding 29 April 2022 Page 10 of 38 Page 14 of the 1998 Shapiro Report provides Figure 3 (see image below) that clearly delineates proposed stormwater treatment pond, which corresponds to Pond B as identified in this report (note the north arrow pointing to the left): Looking broadly across LOP, pursuant to the 1999 Mitigation Plan, the construction of the LOP SWMP was found to result in 1.4 acres of direct wetland fill. Impacts were located in the central portion of the main track (present day Wetland A, Figure 3), and the practice track located east of Oakesdale Avenue Southwest. To mitigate for the direct wetland fill, the 1999 Mitigation Plan proposed the preservation of 10.9 acres of wetland to the south of the LOP Site (south marsh area, located south of the proposed fields), the creation and/or restoration of 3.3 acres of wetland on the LOP Site, and 1.5 acres of wetland reserve on the CSTC Site (see Figure 3 within Attachment 7). The 1999 Management Plan clearly outlines the location of mitigation, and explicitly states that although the south pond (Pond B) will be nearly identical in appearance to the mitigation wetlands, “it is not included within the mitigation area” (1999 Mitigation Plan, p. 13, Attachment 7). The stormwater treatment system as outlined in the 1999 Mitigation Plan was designed to direct water from the primary catch basin into Pond B (referred to by Shapiro as the “wet pond”), then into the mitigation area (today’s Wetland A) and eventually through the CSTC mitigation wetlands and into Springbrook Creek. Conclusion: The south pond (i.e., Pond B) is a stormwater pond and not a wetland. The Mitigation Plans excluded Pond B from all wetland mitigation measures. Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan, Sverdrup Civil Inc, September 1998 As part of a submittal to the City of Renton, the Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan (“Drainage Report”) was prepared to meet the requirements of the City of Renton Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Content List (Attachment 8). This document covers many of the same Figure 3 in Shapiro and Associates, Inc, August 1998 Ms. Jill Ding 29 April 2022 Page 11 of 38 details expanded upon by the 1999 Mitigation Plan, including the expansion of the CSTC main pond (present day Wetland A, Figure 3) and associated wetlands as mitigation for the SWMP construction, as well as the construction of a combined “wetpond/detention pond” (present day Pond B, Figure 3) south of the mitigation area. The Drainage Report uses a slightly different naming scheme than that employed by the 1999 Mitigation Plan. The Drainage Report terms present day Wetland A as the “CSTC Main Pond,” while referring to the wetpond/detention pond (present day Pond B) south of the CSTC Main Pond as “Pond D.” As part of the construction of Pond D (present day Pond B, Figure 3), a temporary water quality treatment and control pond was constructed, which directed water into Pond D. This Pond, referred to as Pond B in the Drainage Report, is the location of present-day Feature G (Figure 3). This temporary water treatment pond was constructed sometime during the late 1990s and was removed within two years following the construction of the present-day Pond B (Figure 3). No wetlands were identified in the Feature G area prior to the construction of the temporary water treatment pond, and it was proposed that the pond would be filled once no longer needed. Conclusion: The Drainage Report Pond D (i.e., present-day Pond B) and Drainage Report Pond B (i.e., present-day Feature G) were stormwater ponds and not wetlands. Biological Assessment and Critical Areas Study, Terracon Consultants, Inc, December 2015 The Biological Assessment and Critical Areas Study prepared by Terracon Consultants, Inc (December 2015) was intended to review the Longacres Business Center Phase II development project which now houses both the Kaiser Permanente and Jeanne Lester Offices (Attachment 9). This project included the construction of two buildings found on the southern portion of the Campus today, as well as the detention pond located directly north of those buildings. These improvements are outside the Site of the current proposal. The Terracon report briefly discusses the wetland features found on the LOP site as indicated by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s National Wetland Inventory (NWI) and references the Shapiro and Associates documents discussed above. No further discussion regarding wetlands found on the LOP Site is included. Wetlands Delineation and Regulatory Analysis Memorandum, Amec Foster Wheeler, September 2016 The Wetlands Delineation and Regulatory Analysis Memorandum prepared by Amec Foster Wheeler (the “Amec Report,” Attachment 10) was prepared for the Boeing Company to determine existing wetland boundaries, perform wetland functional assessments, conduct regulatory review of the jurisdictional status of the north and south ponds (what we refer to today as Wetland A and Pond B), and to provide required offset for regulatory buffers to these features. The Amec Report includes a review of the Mitigation Plans and further expands on details pertaining to the designed mitigation and stormwater management. Additionally, the Amec Report discusses details pertaining to Corps jurisdiction and regulated features, as well as aquatic systems resulting from compensatory actions permitted under the Clean Water Act and those which have a significant nexus with traditional navigable waters or relatively permanent waters. Although other wetlands identified by NWI and the City of Renton are discussed in the report, the work focused primarily on the north and south ponds (present-day Wetland A and Pond B, Figure 3). Ms. Jill Ding 29 April 2022 Page 12 of 38 Pursuant to the Washington State Wetlands Rating System for Western Washington: 2014 Update (Hruby, 2014), both ponds were rated as Category II wetlands requiring 150-foot standard buffers. A section of the Amec Report entitled “Regulatory Status Evaluation,” includes a discussion of the regulatory status of present-day Wetland A and Pond B. The report initially recognizes the exclusion of the south pond from the original mitigation outlined by the 1999 Mitigation Plan, which is consistent with all previous reports produced for the LOP. However, the report then goes on to state that, because both ponds were created under the Mitigation Plans, they are both subject to applicable wetland regulations. The Amec Report’s conclusion regarding Pond B is not supported by the Mitigation Plans (Attachments 6 and 7) and it is inconsistent with Renton Municipal Code, which exempts stormwater facilities unless the stormwater facility was also utilized for wetland mitigation (RMC 4-3-050B). The Amec Report does not provide any citation to support its conclusion that present-day Pond B was converted from a stormwater facility into a wetland subject to critical areas regulations. The Amec Report’s conclusion is in direct contradiction with the express language of the Mitigation Plans cited above (e.g., 1999 Mitigation Plan, pp. 3, 13, 15 and 16 and 1998 Mitigation Plan pp. 14-15). Thus, we disagree with the Amec Report’s conclusion for present-day Pond B, as the north pond (Wetland A, Figure 3) was included in the Mitigation Plans as a wetland, and the south pond (Pond B, Figure 3) was created for stormwater management only (although landscaped to be aesthetically identical to the north pond). The Mitigation Plans leave no doubt that the south pond was expressly “not included as part of the mitigation area.” 1999 Mitigation Plan, p.3 (Attachment 7) Conclusion: Pond B was a stormwater pond and not a wetland. The Mitigation Plans expressly excluded Pond B from any wetland mitigation measures. Delineation of Wetlands and Other Waters, NV5, March 2021 The Delineation of Wetlands and Other Waters report prepared by NV5 (“NV5 Report,” March 2021, Attachment 11) outlines a full delineation and documentation of all regulated and non-regulated features identified on the property. In a brief review of past site alterations, the NV5 Report (2021) states that the 1999 Mitigation Plan includes the creation of both the north and south ponds (present day Wetland A and Pond B, Figure 3), and notes that the south pond was created to provide water quality improvement, water storage, and wetland habitat. The NV5 Report expanded their area of research beyond that of the Amec Report and investigated areas similar to those investigated by Talasaea Consultants. The NV5 Report identified seven (7) wetlands and rated them according to the standard methodology in the Washington State Wetlands Rating System for Western Washington: 2014 Update (Hruby, 2014). Buffers were assigned according to the 2002 Renton Municipal Code (RMC) based on a recorded Development Agreement between Boeing and the City of Renton. The NV5 Report states “the purpose of the South Pond was to provide water quality improvement, water storage, and wetland habitat.”6 Similar to the Amec Report, the NV5 Report does not include any 6 NV5 Report, p. 5. Ms. Jill Ding 29 April 2022 Page 13 of 38 citation for this conclusion. The NV5 Report’s reference list cites the Amec Report. Thus, NV5’s conclusion likely relies on the Amec Report’s presumption that Pond B was used for mitigation under the Mitigation Plans, thereby incorrectly classifying a stormwater facility as a “wetland” subject to critical areas regulations. As noted above, the Amec Report’s conclusion regarding Pond B contradicts express language in the Mitigation Plans and is inconsistent with controlling code. The permit record demonstrates that the present-day Pond B was only permitted as a stormwater facility. 2003 and 2005 Binding Site Plans The Longacres’ Binding Site Plans (BSP) further support our wetland conclusions (Attachments 12 and 13). The 2003 and 2005 BSPs label Wetland A as “Wetland” with associated buffers. Similarly, the southern wetlands (located outside the Site for the report) are also labeled as “Wetland” with buffers identified. Consistent with the findings of this Letter Report, Pond B is not labeled as a wetland and there are no markings for wetland buffers surrounding present day Pond B. The 2003 and 2005 BSPs were approved by the City of Renton and not appealed. Conclusion: Taken together, the applicable wetland studies demonstrate that Pond B is, and Feature G was, stormwater ponds, and therefore not wetlands subject to critical areas regulations. This conclusion is based on information received through an extensive public records request from the City of Renton, permit records provided by Boeing, and materials available at the Puget Sound Archives. 5 Field Investigation & Critical Areas We evaluated the Site and the surrounding areas of the Campus on February 22 and 25, and March 1, 2022. During the February site visits, Talasaea staff performed a full Site reconnaissance and delineation of all wetland areas within the study area (Figure 3). During the site visit on March 1st, the remaining area of the property (outside of the primary study area) was documented, although no formal test plots or delineations were recorded. Although the entire property spans both sides of Oakesdale Avenue SW, our investigation focused on the areas directly adjacent to the north and south ponds (present day Wetland A and Pond B discussed below). Although we recognize that there may be other critical areas found east of Oakesdale Avenue SW, Oakesdale was a logical eastern boundary for the present study, and those features are not discussed herein. Wetland determinations were made using the routine approach described in the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 2010). Plant species were identified according to the taxonomy of Hitchcock and Cronquist (Hitchcock, et al. 2018). Taxonomic names were updated, and plant wetland status was assigned according to the National Wetland Plant List, Version 3.5 (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 2020). Wetland classes were evaluated with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s system of wetland classification (Cowardin, et al. 1979). Vegetation was considered hydrophytic if greater than 50% of the dominant plant species had a wetland indicator status of facultative or wetter (i.e., facultative, facultative wetland, or obligate wetland). Wetland hydrology was evaluated based on the presence of hydrologic indicators listed in the Corps’ Regional Supplement. These indicators are separated into Primary Indicators and Secondary Indicators. To confirm the presence of wetland hydrology, one (1) Primary Indicator or two (2) Secondary Ms. Jill Ding 29 April 2022 Page 14 of 38 Indicators must be demonstrated. Indicators of wetland hydrology may include, but are not necessarily limited to: drainage patterns, drift lines, sediment deposition, wat ermarks, stream gauge data and flood predictions, historic records, visual observation of saturated soils, and visual observation of inundation. Soils on the Site were considered hydric if one or more of the hydric soil indicators listed in the Corps’ Regional Supplement were present. Indicators include presence of organic soils, reduced, depleted, or gleyed soils, or redoximorphic features in association with reduced soils. Background information from the following sources was reviewed prior to field investigations: • US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Wetlands Online Mapper (National Wetlands Inventory, NWI) (https://fwsprimary.wim.usgs.gov/wetlands/apps/wetlands-mapper/); • Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), Web Soil Survey (www.websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app); • King County Critical Areas Database (King County IMap, 2022); • City of Renton Environmental Data (Renton COR Maps, 2022); • Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) Database on the Web (https://geodataservices.wdfw.wa.gov/hp/phs/); • Washington Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Natural Heritage GIS database, 2022; • Fish usage data from SalmonScape (http://apps.wdfw.wa.gov/salmonscape/map.html), StreamNet (https://www.streamnet.org/home/data-maps/sn-mapper/ and the Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission (https://geo.nwifc.org/swifd/); • Orthophotography from Earth Explorer (2022), and Google Earth (2022); and • Previous Reports Prepared for the Property (various, discussed above). Three (3) wetlands were identified within the area of the property investigated. Two (2) other features were identified within the same area and formally documented and determined not to be regulated features. For the sake of completeness, these features are still discussed below. Various other areas that have previously been identified as wetlands (Wetland D and Wetland G per the 2021 NV5 report) were also investigated and documented. These features were found not to be wetlands but are also discussed herein. Included in the discussion of each feature below are the vegetative, hydrologic and soil conditions of the feature (aside from Feature D and G), a brief review of the past documentation of the feature, and a general regulatory conclusion and associated rationale. To avoid potential confusion regarding the wetland naming schemes and how they compare to past reports for the property, a naming summary has been provided in Table 1. Ms. Jill Ding 29 April 2022 Page 15 of 38 Table 1: Naming Scheme of Individual Features by Report. Talasaea Consultants (2022) Shapiro and Associates (1999) Sverdrup Civil (1998) Amec Foster Wheeler (2016) NV5 (2021) Wetland A Mitigation area / Mitigation Wetland CSTC Wetland / Detention Pond North Pond Wetland A Pond B Wet pond / detention pond Wet pond / detention pond / Wetland D South Pond Wetland B Wetland C Not Explicitly Identified Not Explicitly Identified Not Explicitly Identified Wetland C Feature D Not Explicitly Identified Not Explicitly Identified Not Explicitly Identified Wetland D Wetland F Not Explicitly Identified, potentially included as mitigation area CSTC Delta Area Not Explicitly Identified Wetland F & Wetland E Feature G Not Explicitly Identified Pond B Not Explicitly Identified Wetland G Ms. Jill Ding 29 April 2022 Page 16 of 38 5.1 Wetland A Wetland A is a Category II depressional wetland and the northern-most pond located on the property (Photo 1). Wetland A scored 7 points for Improving Water Quality, 8 points for Hydrologic Functions, and 6 points for Habitat Functions. RMC 4-3-050G.2 establishes a 150-foot standard buffer for Category II wetlands with moderate habitat scores. Wetland A hydrology is provided by direct precipitation, surface runoff, and from Pond B located to the south (discussed below). Pursuant to the 1999 Mitigation Plan, Wetland A was designed as part of the LOP SWMP and receives stormwater from the Campus. Vegetation within Wetland A is characterized by red alder, black cottonwood, salmonberry, slough sedge (Carex obnupta), and cattail (Typha latifolia). Soils within Wetland A were generally a dark, greyish brown (10YR 3/2 to 4/2 and 2.5Y 4/2) loam or silty clay loam dependent on the location within the Wetland. Dark yellowish brown to dark brown redox features (10YR 4/2 to 4/6) were commonly found within Wetland A (Attachment 14). The use of Wetland A as compensatory mitigation, as well as its use in stormwater treatment, is clearly explained by numerous reports previously prepared for the Site (Sverdrup Civil, 1998; Shapiro and Associates, 1999; Amec Foster Wheeler 2016). As compensatory mitigation, Wetland A was an expansion of a previously existing wetland (Shapiro and Associates 1992; 1993; 1998; 1999) and included the creation of wetland from previously upland areas. Due to its inclusion as compensatory mitigation in the mitigation plan outlined in the 1999 Mitigation Plan, this wetland is considered a regulated feature at the local, State and Federal levels. Photo 1: Aerial of Wetland A (Oriented North). Ms. Jill Ding 29 April 2022 Page 17 of 38 5.2 Pond B Pond B is a stormwater detention and treatment pond located directly south of Wetland A. Pond B hydrology is provided by direct surface flow during rain events and from the stormwater detention pond located to the south. Pursuant to the 1999 Mitigation Plan, Pond B is designed to receive and treat stormwater from the Campus. Vegetation within and adjacent to Pond B is characterized by red alder, black cottonwood, salmonberry, slough sedge, and cattail. Soils within Pond B are generally a black to dark, greyish brown (10YR 2/1 to 3/2) sandy or silty loam, dependent on the location within the Pond. Dark yellowish to grayish brown redox features (10YR 4/3 to 5/4) were commonly found within Pond B (Attachment 13). Unlike Wetland A, Pond B was not included as part of the compensatory mitigation for the construction of the LOP. This conclusion is supported in Section 4. Thus, Pond B is excluded from permits issued by the Corps and exempt from the City’s wetland critical area regulations. Per RMC 4-3-050B, “regulated wetlands do not include those artificial wetlands intentionally created from non-wetland sites, including, but not limited to, irrigation and drainage ditches, grass-lined swales, canals, detention facilities, wastewater treatment facilities, farm ponds, and landscape amenities.” Pursuant to this section of the RMC, and considered concurrently with the previous documents prepared for the Site, we do not consider Pond B a regulated feature, and is instead a stormwater management facility. 5.3 Wetland C Wetland C is a Category II depressional wetland located to the northwest of Wetland A (Photo 2). Wetland C scored 7 points for Improving Water Quality, 8 points for Hy drologic Functions, and 5 points for Habitat Functions. RMC 4-3-050G.2 establishes a 150-foot standard buffer for Category II wetlands with moderate habitat scores (5-7). Although outside the Site, Wetland C was included in the study area due to its relative proximity to Wetland A and as part of the research into the 1999 Mitigation Plan. Wetland C hydrology is provided by direct surface flow during rain events and potentially from Wetland A during above average rain events. Although Wetland C is not explicitly mentioned by any reports predating the NV5 Report, we believe it was included as part of the mitigation outlined by the 1999 Mitigation Plan. Vegetation within Wetland C is characterized by red alder, Sitka willow, and hairy bitter cress (Cardamine hisuta). Soils within Wetland C are a dark grayish brown (2.5Y 4/2) silty clay loam with yellowish brown (10YR 5/8) redoximorphic features (Attachment 14). The potential use of Wetland C as compensatory mitigation, as well as its use in stormwater treatment, results in a regulatory standing similar to that of Wetland A. As compensatory mitigation, Wetland C was the result of the wetland creation and restoration outlined by the 1999 Mitigation Plan and is considered a regulated feature at the local, State and Federal levels. Ms. Jill Ding 29 April 2022 Page 18 of 38 5.4 Feature D Feature D is an upland area located upslope and east of Pond B. Both test plots conducted within Feature D failed to satisfy the requirements of a hydrology indicator, and one of the two test plots failed to satisfy the requirements of either a hydrology or hydric soil indicator. Feature D hydrology, when present, appears to be historically provided by an installed irrigation system which draws water directly from Pond B. Aside from the installed irrigation system, hydrology can only otherwise be provided by direct precipitation due to local topography. Feature D is an area that is indicative of intentional plantings designed to make the area visually appear as a wetland. Vegetation within Feature D is almost entirely dominated by slough sedge, with various red alders, black cottonwoods, and Sitka willows. The soil profile within Feature D was characterized by a dark brown (10YR 3/3) coarse sandy loam overlying a very dark gray to dark brown (10YR 3/1to 3/3) dense restrictive layer composed of silty loam/clay (Attachment 14). Because the area does not meet the criteria of a wetland according to the methodology set forth in the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 2010), a regulatory discussion is not warranted. Conclusion: Feature D does not meet wetland designation criteria and is not a regulated wetland. Photo 2: Aerial of Wetland C (Oriented Southeast). Ms. Jill Ding 29 April 2022 Page 19 of 38 5.5 Wetland F Wetland F is a Category II depressional wetland located to the east of Wetland A and directs water from Wetland A towards the CTSE Wetlands located east of Oakesdale Avenue SW (Photo 3). It is the only wetland located on the property where the open water habitat has any measurable flow, although the flow velocity is minimal. Wetland F scored 7 points for Improving Water Quality, 8 points for Hydrologic Functions, and 6 points for Habitat Functions. Pursuant to RMC 4-3-050G(2), Category II wetlands with moderate habitat scores (5-7) are subject to a standard 150’ buffer (Attachment 14). Wetland F hydrology is provided by direct surface flow during rain events and from Wetland A located to the west. Vegetation within Wetland F is similar to other wetlands found on the property, with a prevalence of red alder, Sitka willow, slough sedge, and several Western redcedars. Soils within Wetland F were generally dark grayish brown (10YR 3/2 to 4/2) sandy/silty loam. A gravel fill layer occupied the upper stratum of the soil profiles collected within and around Wetland F. Dark yellowish brown and strong brown redox features (10YR 3/6 to 4/4 and 7/5YR 5/8) were commonly found within Wetland F. Wetland F is not explicitly mentioned in the 1999 Mitigation Plan but is referred to as “CTSC Delta Area” by Sverdrup Civil (1998). Sverdrup Civil (1998) explains this area as a constructed wetland area designed to accept stormwater flows from the upstream site (Wetland A). Based on the figures included in the 1999 Mitigation Report, it appears to have not been included in the “wetland mitigation area” but Photo 3: Aerial of Wetland F (Oriented Northeast). Ms. Jill Ding 29 April 2022 Page 20 of 38 is highlighted as an existing wetland by the 1993 Existing Conditions Report prepared by Shapiro. Wetland F as it exists today is potentially a restoration and/or expansion of the pre-existing wetland. Conclusion: Due to the Wetland being identified prior to the construction of the LOP SWMP, Wetland F should be considered a regulated feature at the local, State and Federal levels. 5.6 Feature G Feature G is a depressional wetland located east of Pond B (Photo 4). Feature G hydrology is supported by both surface water flow during periods of above average precipitation, and by shallow groundwater flow. However, Feature G is also noted as being a site of stormwater treatment by the City of Renton (Photo 5) and indicates numerous private surface water mains entering and exiting the area. Vegetation within Feature G is characterized by a predominance of invasive species such as reed canarygrass and Himalayan blackberry with various other grass species such as bent grass (Agrostis sp.) and velvet grass (Hocus lanatus). The soil profile within Feature G is characterized by a dark gray (10YR 4/1) silty clay loam with strong brown (10YR 4/6) redoximorphic features overlying a dense, restrictive clay layer (Attachment 14). Feature G is identified by the NV5 Report. However, the Svedrup Draining Report (1998) outlines the construction of a “Pond D” (present day Pond B) and a temporary water quality treatment and control pond which directed water into Pond D. This Pond, referred to as “Pond B” in the Sverdrup Drainage Report (1998), is the location of present-day Feature G. This temporary water treatment pond was constructed sometime during the late 1990s and removed within two years following the construction of the present-day Pond B (Attachment 1). It is unclear how “Pond D” was removed or filled; however, Photo 4: Aerial of Feature G (Oriented Northwest). Ms. Jill Ding 29 April 2022 Page 21 of 38 no wetlands were identified in this area prior to the construction of the temporary water treatment pond by any reports published throughout the 1990s and early 2000s. Additionally, fragments of concrete and terracotta tile remaining from the previously constructed and filled stormwater ponds were removed from test plots examined within Feature G. Feature G is a non-regulated feature when these fragments are considered concurrently with the construction of roads, paved pathways and berms surrounding the feature, as well as the past construction and fill of the temporary “Pond D.” Pursuant to RMC 4-3-050B, this feature meets (1) exemption criteria of “wetlands created after July 1, 1990, that were unintentionally created as a result of the construction of a road, street, or highway” and/or (2) the exemption criteria for an existing stormwater facility per photo 5 above. Conclusion: Feature G is not a regulated wetland. Photo 5: Surface Water System mapping of Pond B and Feature G from City of Renton COR Maps. Ms. Jill Ding 29 April 2022 Page 22 of 38 6 Compliance with Critical Area Regulations for Buffer Alterations To Critical Areas RMC 4 -3- 050J.4 This Letter Report asks the City to confirm the following: 1. Pond B, Feature D, and Feature G are not subject to the City’s critical area regulations pursuant to RMC 4-3-050B.1; 2. Wetland A is a Category II wetland with moderate habitat scores; and 3. Field 1 and GK Field (as identified in Figure 4) are low intensity uses pursuant to RMC 4-3- 050G.2, note 7 and RMC 4-11-120.7 Therefore, the appropriate buffer for these uses is 100 feet. Thus, the proposal will require buffer alteration to Wetland A as depicted in Figure 4. There will be no alteration to Wetland A itself. A subsequent Critical Areas Report and Conceptual Mitigation Plan (“Mitigation Report”) will identify compensatory mitigation in greater detail. The Mitigation Report will propose mitigation that considers a variety of available compensatory mitigation methods for wetland buffer impacts. Available mitigation methods may include on-site wetland buffer enhancement at a 1:1 ratio (authorized per RMC 4-3-040J.4.d); the purchase of credits from an approved Mitigation Bank; employing the Wetlands as Buffers concept from the Ecology Wetlands Mitigation Handbook (Ecology Publication 06-06-011a, as updated by Publication 21-06- 003); other methods that are determined to appropriately safeguard applicable wetland functions and values; or a combination of the above. The determination of whether the soccer pitches and GK Field are low intensity land uses will govern applicable buffer widths and may influence the mitigation proposal. Mitigation for any encroachment from the parking component of the proposal will be calculated using the standard 150-foot buffer width, and if the pitches and field are determined to be low intensity land uses a hybrid buffer may be proposed as depicted in Figure 4. Should you have any questions or require additional information at this time, please feel free to contact Jacob Prater or me at (425) 861-7550. Thank you. Sincerely, TALASAEA CONSULTANTS, INC. William E. Shiels Principal 7 Footnote 2 of this Letter Report describes the use of Field 1 and the GK Field. Ms. Jill Ding 29 April 2022 Page 23 of 38 Attachment: Figures, Talasaea Consultants Inc., 2022 Attachment 1: Chronological Photo Documentation, Numerous Sources & Dates Attachment 2: Full List of Background Materials Attachment 3: City of Renton Jurisdictional Wetland Determination for Longacres Park Development Project, Shapiro, and Associates Inc., 1992 Attachment 4: Existing Habitat Conditions and Wildlife Study Report for the Longacres Office Park Project, Shapiro, and Associates Inc., 1993 Attachment 5: City of Renton Jurisdictional Wetland Determination for Longacres Park Development Project, Shapiro, and Associates Inc., 1998 Attachment 6: Longacres Office Park Surface Water Management Project and Conceptual Mitigation Plan, Shapiro, and Associates Inc., 1998 Attachment 7: Revised Longacres Office Park Surface Water Management Project and Conceptual Mitigation Plan, Shapiro, and Associates Inc., 1999 Attachment 8: Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan for Longacres Office Park, Sverdrup Civil Inc., 1998 Attachment 9: Biological Assessment and Critical Areas Study, Terracon Consultants Inc., 2015 Attachment 10: Wetlands Delineation and Regulatory Analysis Memorandum, Amec Foster Wheeler, 2016 Attachment 11: Delineation of Wetlands and Other Waters, NV5, 2021 Attachment 12: 2003 Binding Site Plan Attachment 13: 2005 Binding Site Plan Attachment 14: Wetland Determination Data Forms, Talasaea Consultants Inc., 2022 Ms. Jill Ding 29 April 2022 Page 24 of 38 FIGURES TALASAEA CONSULTANTS, 2022 Figure 1. Vicinity & Driving Directions Figure 2. Parcel Map Figure 3. Existing Conditions Figure 4. Proposed Site Plan with Buffer Width Alternatives a a OHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPx OHPx OHPx OHPxOHPxOHPxOHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHTx OHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSxSSxSSxSSx SSxSSx SS x SS x SS x S S x SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SDxSDx SDx SDx SDxSDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SSxSSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSx SSx SSx SSx SSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDxSDxSDxSDx SDx SDx SDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDx SDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDx S D x SDxSDxSDxSDxSDxS D x SDxSDxSDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx S D x S D x S D x SDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDx SDx SDx SDx SDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDx SDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDxSDxSDx SDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDx SDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDx SD x SDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDx SDx SDxSDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDxSDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx S D x S D x S D x S D x SD x SDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDx SDx SDx SDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDx SDx SDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDx SDxSDxSDx SDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDx SDxSDxSDxSDx SDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDx SDxSDxSDxSDx SDxSDxSDx SDx SSx SSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx WxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWx WxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWx WxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWx Wx Wx Wx W x W x W x W x Wx WxWxWx WxWxWx WxWx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx WxWxWxWxWx Wx WxWxWxWxWxWxWx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx W x Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx WxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWx SDx SDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx S D xSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDx SDx SDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDxSDxSDxSD x SDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxa Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx W x W x Wx OHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHTx OHPxOHPxOHPxOHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPx OHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPxOHPx OHPx SSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSxSSx S S x SS x SS x SS x SDx SDx SDx SDx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSxSSxSSxSSxSSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSx SSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDxSDxSDx SDxSDx SDxSDxSDxSDx SDxSDx SDx SDx SDx SD x SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDx SDx SDx SDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDx SDx SDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDx SDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDx SDxSDx SDx SD xSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDx SDx S D x SDxSDxSDxSDxSDxS D x SDxSDxSDx SDx SDx SDx SDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDx SDx SDx SDx SDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDx SDxSDxSDxSDxSDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDxSDx SDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDx SDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDx SDx SDx SDx SDxSDxSDxSDx SDx SDx SDx SDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDx S D x SDxSDxSDxSDxSDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDx SDx SDx SD x S D x SD x S D x SD x SDxSDxSDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDx SDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDx SDx SDxSDxSDxSDx SDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDx SDxSDxSDx SDxSDxSDxSDxSDx SDxSDxSDxSDxSDx SDxSDxSDxSDx SDxSDxSDx SDxSDxSDx SDxSDxSDx SDx SSx SSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSSxSDxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx WxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWx Wx WxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWx Wx WxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx WxWxWxWx WxWxWxWxWxWxWx WxWxWxWxWxWx WxWxWxWx WxWxWxWx Wx Wx Wx WxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx WxWx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx Wx WxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWxWx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDxSDxSDx SDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDx SDx S D x S D xSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDx SDx SDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDx SDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SDx SD x S D x SDx SDx SDx S D xSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDxSDx SDxa Ms. Jill Ding 29 April 2022 Page 25 of 38 ATTACHMENT 1 CHRONOLOGICAL PHOTO-DOCUMENTATION, NUMEROUS SOURCES & DATES Resource & Environmental Planning 15020 Bear Creek Road Northeast • Woodinville, Washington 98077 • Bus: (425)861-7550 Fax: (425)861-7549 Photo 1: 1936 Aerial, King County iMap. Resource & Environmental Planning 15020 Bear Creek Road Northeast • Woodinville, Washington 98077 • Bus: (425)861-7550 Fax: (425)861-7549 Photo 2: 1990 Aerial, Google Earth Resource & Environmental Planning 15020 Bear Creek Road Northeast • Woodinville, Washington 98077 • Bus: (425)861-7550 Fax: (425)861-7549 Photo 3: 1998 Aerial, King County iMap Resource & Environmental Planning 15020 Bear Creek Road Northeast • Woodinville, Washington 98077 • Bus: (425)861-7550 Fax: (425)861-7549 Photo 4: 2000 Aerial, King County iMap Resource & Environmental Planning 15020 Bear Creek Road Northeast • Woodinville, Washington 98077 • Bus: (425)861-7550 Fax: (425)861-7549 Photo 5: 2002 Aerial, King County iMap Resource & Environmental Planning 15020 Bear Creek Road Northeast • Woodinville, Washington 98077 • Bus: (425)861-7550 Fax: (425)861-7549 Photo 6: 2005 Aerial, King County iMap Resource & Environmental Planning 15020 Bear Creek Road Northeast • Woodinville, Washington 98077 • Bus: (425)861-7550 Fax: (425)861-7549 Photo 7: 2007 Aerial, King County iMap Resource & Environmental Planning 15020 Bear Creek Road Northeast • Woodinville, Washington 98077 • Bus: (425)861-7550 Fax: (425)861-7549 Photo 8: 2009 Aerial, King County iMap Resource & Environmental Planning 15020 Bear Creek Road Northeast • Woodinville, Washington 98077 • Bus: (425)861-7550 Fax: (425)861-7549 Photo 9: 2012 Aerial, King County iMap Resource & Environmental Planning 15020 Bear Creek Road Northeast • Woodinville, Washington 98077 • Bus: (425)861-7550 Fax: (425)861-7549 Photo 10: 2013 Aerial, King County iMap Resource & Environmental Planning 15020 Bear Creek Road Northeast • Woodinville, Washington 98077 • Bus: (425)861-7550 Fax: (425)861-7549 Photo 11: 2015 Aerial, King County iMap Resource & Environmental Planning 15020 Bear Creek Road Northeast • Woodinville, Washington 98077 • Bus: (425)861-7550 Fax: (425)861-7549 Photo 12: 2016 Aerial, Google Earth Resource & Environmental Planning 15020 Bear Creek Road Northeast • Woodinville, Washington 98077 • Bus: (425)861-7550 Fax: (425)861-7549 Photo 13: 2017 Aerial, King County iMap Resource & Environmental Planning 15020 Bear Creek Road Northeast • Woodinville, Washington 98077 • Bus: (425)861-7550 Fax: (425)861-7549 Photo 14: 2021 Aerial, Google Earth Ms. Jill Ding 29 April 2022 Page 26 of 38 ATTACHMENT 2 FULL LIST OF BACKGROUND MATERIALS, GENERATED BY TALASAEA CONSULTANTS INC., 2022 Resource & Environmental Planning 15020 Bear Creek Road Northeast • Woodinville, Washington 98077 • Bus: (425)861-7550 Fax: (425)861-7549 1. City of Renton and Boeing Customer Service Training Center Agreement, 1992 2. City of Renton Jurisdictional Wetland Determination for Longacres Park Development Project, Shapiro and Associates Inc., 1992 3. Existing Habitat Conditions and Wildlife Study Report for the Longacres Office Park, Shapiro and Associates Inc., 1993 4. Longacres Public Notice of Application For Permit, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1994 5. Longacres Final Environmental Impact Statement, Jones & Stokes Associates Inc., 1995 6. Longacres Environmental Impact Statement Mitigation Document, City of Renton, 1995 7. City of Renton Jurisdictional Wetland Determination for Longacres Park Development Project, Shapiro and Associates Inc., 1998 8. Longacres Office Park Surface Water Management Project and Conceptual Mitigation Plan, Shapiro and Associates Inc., 1998 9. Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan for Longacres Office Park, Sverdrup Civil Inc., 1998 10. Longacres Permitting Memos and Permits Reference 93-4-00059, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1999 11. Revised Water Quality Certification for Corps Public Notice #93-4-00059, Washington State Department of Ecology, 1999 12. Revised Longacres Office Park Surface Water Management Project and Conceptual Mitigation Plan, Shapiro and Associates Inc., 1999 13. City of Renton and Boeing Development Agreement, City of Renton, 2000 14. Renton City Council Regular Meeting Minutes June 24 2002, City of Renton, 2002 15. Boeing Longacres Binding Site Plans, W&H Pacific, 2003 16. Boeing Longacres Binding Site Plans, W&H Pacific, 2005 17. Resolution No. 4078, City of Renton, 2010 18. Biological Assessment and Critical Areas Study, Terracon Consultants Inc., 2015 19. Wetlands Delineation and Regulatory Analysis Memorandum, Amec Foster Wheeler, 2016 20. Certificate of Exemption from Shoreline Substantial Development Project Number LUA16-000727, City of Renton, 2016 21. Delineation of Wetlands and Other Waters, NV5, 2021 Ms. Jill Ding 29 April 2022 Page 27 of 38 ATTACHMENT 3 CITY OF RENTON JURISDICTIONAL WETLAND DETERMINATION FOR LONGACRES PARK DEVELOPMENT PROJECT, SHAPIRO, AND ASSOCIATES INC., 1992 Ms. Jill Ding 29 April 2022 Page 28 of 38 ATTACHMENT 4 EXISTING HABITAT CONDITIONS AND WILDLIFE STUDY REPORT FOR THE LONGACRES OFFICE PARK PROJECT, SHAPIRO, AND ASSOCIATES INC., 1993 Ms. Jill Ding 29 April 2022 Page 29 of 38 ATTACHMENT 5 CITY OF RENTON JURISDICTIONAL WETLAND DETERMINATION FOR LONGACRES PARK DEVELOPMENT PROJECT, SHAPIRO, AND ASSOCIATES INC., 1998 Ms. Jill Ding 29 April 2022 Page 30 of 38 ATTACHMENT 6 LONGACRES OFFICE PARK SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT AND CONCEPTUAL MITIGATION PLAN, SHAPIRO, AND ASSOCIATES INC., 1998 Ms. Jill Ding 29 April 2022 Page 31 of 38 ATTACHMENT 7 REVISED LONGACRES OFFICE PARK SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT AND CONCEPTUAL MITIGATION PLAN, SHAPIRO, AND ASSOCIATES INC., 1999 • longocres Office Park Surface Water Management ?roiect Conceptual Wetland Mitigation Pl'Jn Prcpcreci for : Boe ir.g Commercia l Airplone Gr,;,up P.O. Bex )707 Sea tt le, WA :18124-2'.'07 Shapiro or,d A.ss oci otf;!s, In ·.:. 10 1 Yesler Way, S1Jite ,100 Sea ttl 0 \.YA. 98 ~ 04 DecetTil:,€r i 998 o · d · 1 woo :s.ev1sc~ Jam1cr; . , . r r [ r [ [ l [ l l. l l [ [ TABLE OF CONTENTS Page SUI\IIMARY ................................................................................................................................... 1 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. INTRODU CT ION ............................................................................................................ 6 1.1 Project Descript ion ................................................................................................... 6 1.2 Summary o f Wetland Impacts, Avoidance, and Compensation ............................... 9 1.2. l Wet land Impact s ........................................................................................... 9 1.2.2 Wetland Impact Minimization ...................................................................... 9 1.2.3 Compensatory Wetland Mitigation ............................................................... 9 WETLAND REGULATIONS ......................................................................................... 9 2.1 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers ................................................................................ 9 2.2 State Environmental Policy Act. ............................................................................. 11 2.3 Cit y of Rent on ........................................................................................................ 11 CONCEPTUAL MITIGATION PLAN ...................................................................... 11 3.1 Goals , Objectives, and Des ign Criteria ................................................................... I I 3.1. l Goal s .......................................................................................................... 11 3.1.2 Objectives ................................................................................................... 11 3.1.3 De sign Criteria ............................................................................................ 12 3 .2 Planned Habit ats ..................................................................................................... 14 3.2 .1 Open Water Pond ....................................................................................... 16 3.2.2 Stonnwater Pond ........................................................................................ 16 3.2.3 South Mars h ............................................................................................... 16 3 .3 Impl ementation Considerations .............................................................................. 18 3.3.1 Con st ruction and Planting Seque nce ........................................................... 18 3.3.2 Sources of Plant Material.. .......................................................................... 18 3.3.3 Soil Amendment/fopsoil ........................................................................... 18 3.3.4 Constmct ion Observation ........................................................................... 18 3.3.5 Watering ..................................................................................................... 19 3.3.6 Land sca pe Maintenance .............................................................................. 19 PERFORMANCE STANDARDS, MONITORING, AND CONTINGENCY .................................................................................................. 19 4.1 Performan ce Standards ........................................................................................... 19 4.2 Mo nitorin g .............................................................................................................. 21 4 .3 Contingency Pl a n .................................................................................................... 22 LIMITATIONS OF THIS REPORT ........................................................................... 24 REFERENC ES ................................................................................................................ 25 Boeing Longacrcs Of li ce Pnrk Conceptua l We tland Miti g:rnon Plan I /18/99 r r f [ r TA BL E O F C ONTENTS (continued) L is t of Tables Tab le 1: We tl a nd [mpac ts and Proposed Compensation ........................................................ 9 Table 2: M itiga tio n Goa ls, Methods, and Perfo rmance Standards ....................................... 12 Table 3: P roposed Plants for Mitigat io n ............................................................................... 17 Table 4: Con tinge ncy Pla n .................................................................................................... 23 List of F ieures Figure I : S ite V ici nity Map ...................................................................................................... 7 F igure 2: Site W e tl ands ............................................................................................................ 8 Figure 3: W e tl a nd Im pacts and Mitigatio n ............................................................................. 10 Figu re 4 : Co nceptu al Wetland Mit iga ti on Plan ...................................................................... 15 Figure 5 : Co nceptua l Mitigat ion Pla n Cross-sec tio nal View A .............................................. 20 APPENDICE S Ap pendix A: Juri sdi cti onal Wetland De te rmin at ion fo r th e L ongacres Office Par k ( 1987 Manual) Appe nd ix B : Corps of Engineers We tl and Ve rificati o n Le tt er ( 1998) Ap pendi x C: L o ngac res Office Park Exis tin g Habita t Co nditi ons and Wi ldli fe S tu dy Report Ap pe ndix D: Existing a nd M iti gati o n Wet l ands Boeing Longacre~ Ollicc Park Concep tual W etl and Miugauon Pl.in II 1/18/99 r r r l [ l l l l [. SUMMARY Introduction The Boe in g Co mpany is co ns tru c tin g th e Longacres Office Park (LOP) in Renton, Wa shing to n (Tow ns hip 23N, Range 4E, Sections 24 and 25). Because de ve lop me nt of th e Surface Wat er Management Plan (S WMP) for LOP wi ll affe ct about 3 acres of wetland, a mitig a tion plan has been formulat ed to achieve no net loss of wetland area or function. Approxi mat e ly 14 acres of wet land are loca ted on s ite. Construction of th e office park would entail fillin g 1.4 acres of wet land wit h res torati on and/or creatio n of 3.3 acres on s it e and creation of 1.5 ac res off site. Th e miti gation plan proposes to prov id e a total of 4.8 acres of high quality wet lands throu gh excavation of existing uplands and re storation of di s turb ed or previ o usl y tilled wetlands; ex cavation and replacement of exotic plant species; and the preservation of 10 .9 acres of existing wet land s . The final result would be the creati on, restorati on and pre se rvation of 15 .7 acres of onsite wet land areas . Completed project wetland s will ha ve s ubstantiall y greate r functi onal va lu e tha n th ose curren tly on site. The 164 -acre LOP s ite is located o n the former Lo ngacre s Park thorou ghbred horserac in g track site. The north ernmost 5 1 acres of th e original 2 15-acre ra cetrack site previou s ly were developed as the Boein g Cu s tomer Services Training Center (CSTC). W e tlands on th e CSTC site wer e altered under the auth ority of a Clean Water Act Nationwide Permit Number 26 issued in I 992 . Consistent with the preferred altern ative LOP Mas ter P lan that is th e subject of an enviro nm ental impact statement iss ued in 1994 by the City of Renton as lead agency , the Family Care Center (FCC) and Boeing Commercial Airplane Group Head quarters (BCAGHQ) have rec ently been comp leted on the LOP site. Objectives Miti ga tion goals formulated to ac hieve no net lo ss of wet land are a and function have bee n developed to offset the anticipated wetland impacts resu lt ing from co nstruction of the LOP. In addition to meeting the requirements of applicable regulations, these goa ls take into accoun t ex is tin g topography, wat er sources, vegetat ion , soil s, and restorat io n pot ential for the wetland s; th e appropriateness of variou s mitig ati on tech niqu es ; and the function s norm ally associated with se aso nally inundated emergent mars h, scrub -s hrub , and forested wetland systems. Based on assessmen t o f the s it e and th e proposed deve lo pment, the functions that appear to have th e greatest pot e ntial for res toration a re wat er qual ity enhan ce ment, sto m1w a ter stora ge. and wil dlife habitat. The s pe c ific obj ectives of the miti ga tion plan are: (I) Lo improve the quality of water lea vin g the LOP and CSTC s it es and ent e rin g Spr ingbrook Creek ; (2) to increase stormw ater storage capacity o n Lh e s it e; (3) to crea te, res tore, and/or enhanc e habitat for wi ldl ife; and (4) to create an aesthetically pl eas in g environment for e mpl oyees and c li e nts of the Boein g Company Approach A four-phase approac h wa s used to develop a mitigation plan for th e LOP Sile . Phase l wa s an eva luation of exis tin g site co nditi ons. Th e eval ua tion con s is ted o f Lhe fo ll ow in g: delineating wetlands on th e s ite (usin g th e Corps of Engin eers Wetland s Delineati on Manual , Environm ental Lab oratory , 198 7); co nductin g a co mp re hens ive analy sis of wildlife habitat s and use of th e s ite ; and measuri ng o f wate r q ual ity and quantity on the si te and in nearby Springbrook Cree k. Boeing Longacres Office P::irk Conceptual We tla nd Miu gation Plan 1/18/99 r [ f I [ l [ l l l l L L Phase 11 assessed the impact deve lopme nt of th e LOP Master Plun wi ll hav e on the wetlands, ba sed on infomiati o n ga th ered in Phase I. Wetland s that will be direct ly affected (i.e., filled ) by development , restored, and not affected were identifi ed. Th is inform ation was th en use d to eva lu ate im pacts o n the function of th e we ll ands and wild li fe habitat. The thi rd phase of Lh e project deve loped measure s to miti ga te for the impact on we tl and s as a res ult of de ve lopme nt. The goa l of th e mitigation plan is to c reate or restore g reater fun cti on lo the wetlands than was previou sly pre se nt. Excavatio n o f existing upland areas an d rep lanting with we tl an d species wi ll result in th e creatio n of new we tland areas. A tota l of 3.3 acres will be created and res to red on the SWMP s ite. The mitigation plan (a portion of th e overall SWMP) inv olves creati on and res torati o n of 3.3 acres of wetland on site, th e preservation of L0 .9 acres o f existin g wetlands, and inc ludes creati o n of an additional 1.5 ac re of wetland on the adj acent CSTC prope rty in 1993. This 1.5 acre area on the CS T C property was co ns tru cted as wet la nd during cons tru c ti on of the CSTC project, bu t was neither id e ntifi ed nor in c lud ed as part o f th e mitigation we tl a nd fo r CSTC. It is common ly referred to as th e "rese rve area." The crea ted and restored we tl ands w ill re sult in a greme r d iversity of wildlife habitat throug h es tabli shm ent of d iverse vege tati on com muniti es on si te and mainte nance of a corridor to co nn ec t offs ite habitats. Th e crea tion of open water wetland ponds also will prov ide greater on site capac it y for sto rm a nd floodwater storage . The final ph ase of the p lan assesses th e result s o f the mit igatio n e ffo rt. This is accomplished by co mparin g th e ex istin g wetlands to those proposed, determining th e vegetative and hydrologic c har ac teri sti cs that will be cre ated, and co mparin g the functions of th e predeve lopment wetlands with tho se of th e wetlands created as compensatory mitigation. Thi s assessment indic ates that wetland fun c ti ons c reat ed o n sit e will be grea ter th an th ose presently id e ntifi ed o n the sit e. Evaluation of Existing Conditions Eig ht wetlands (A, B , G , H, I, J, K, and L) we re id entifi ed in the LOP proj ec t area in 1993. These wetlands were redelin ea ted and the new de lin ea ti on re port was comple ted in 1998 (Appendi x A) They are ge nerall y sma ll depression s a nd drain age ditc hes within the lawn and open field areas of the project sit e. The 1993 wet land repo rt identities three se parate areas for Wetland H , three separa te areas fo r We tla nd I, and two separa te areas fo r Wetland L. For clarity of discu ss io n, the 1998 draft wet land report identifies th e separa te wet land areas as HI , H2, H3, l I , !2, I3, LI , and L2 , respective ly. In add iti o n, the I 998 draft report divid es Wetland K in to two pa rt s, Ka and Kb , at an ex isting access road from th e prac ti ce racetrack on the in fie ld. The 1998 wet la nd de lin eation report was submitted to the Corps for review and co nfinnation of jurisdictional wet lands . Following the Co rp s s it e visit and we tl and confimiati on inspec ti on, areas identifies as 12, I3, L2. and Ka were detennined to be non -jurisd ictional. The resulls of the 1998 Corps rev ie w are prese nted in Appendix B . Wi ldlife use of the LOP site was assessed tlurin g three differe nt se aso ns and co nsiste d of both visual obse rvat ions and trappin g on si te in 1993. Resu lt s of the w il dlife habitat and use s tudi es arc fo un d in Appendix C. A cove r memo Lo the 1993 Wildlife Habita t Report discusses c hange s in habitats o n the si te in the ensui ng five years . Boe ing Longu c rc :. Oflkc P:1rk Co nc eptual Wetland Mit1 ga11on Plan 1/1 8199 6 I l l l l Assess Impacts Development o f the LOP SWMP project wi ll res ult in the fill of 1.4 acres or wet land and restoration and creation of 4.8 acres of wetland o n-and off-s it e, exc ludin g stormwate r ponds . Wetland impacts ge nerall y wil l occur in the central portio ns of the mail track a nd in the practice track. The large we tland in the sou the as t portion of the site (So uth Marsh) wi ll not be affected by development and will be placed wi thi n a conservatio n easement. A map id e ntifying existing wetland and proposed miti gati on ar eas is presen ted in Appendix D. Witho ut miti gat ion e ffort s, th e overall functi on of existing we tl ands o n s it e likely wou ld decrease in the future as a re s ul t of piecemeal fill ing and disturbance from uncoordinated development of the s ite and fro m co ntinuin g interruptions of hydrol ogic co nditions. S uc h a dec rease in wetland funct io n would no t me et th e goal of no ne t loss, o r th e Boeing Compa ny's objectj ves of increased stormwater storage, water qu ality e nh ancemen t, a nd wildlife hab it at diversi ty. It is for these reasons that the mitigation plan was developed to co mpen s at e for imp acts on we tl and s re su ltin g from developmen t of the SWMP. Mitigation Plan Mitigation wetlands wil l be expected to achieve a net gru n in wet land function s within three years, and to achieve substantially hi gher function s b y the end of th e five -year monitorin g period . Miti gation efforts should res ult in a subs tantial in crease in we tl and fun c tions on th e LOP site over existing conditions. The following descriptions o f design criteria include the overall des ig n objectives and design e le me nts intended to achieve th e stated goals. Provi s io n fo r Increased Water Qual ity Enhan cement Hi storic use of the site has had a negative impact o n water quality. Waler fl ow in g from the s ite prior to recent deve lo pm e nt did no t meet s tat e guide lines, as it had low dissolved oxygen levels , hi gh fecal co liform le ve ls, and hi gh sus pe nded solids content. S ub sequ ent to rece nt development, discharge water quality has improved . Several feature s have been in c luded in individual bui ldin g designs to reduce po tential wa ter quality i mpacts. These include th e fo ll owing: approximate ly twice the normal den s it y of cntc h bas in s in the parki ng areas; o il /water se paration tees in Lh e catc h bas in s; ca tc h basin s located o ff-line; wet vault se d ime nt trap s; and wet ponds (Be nso n, 1993). After the water flow s th rough the prim ary catch bas in and we t vault sys te m, it is directed to the wet pond. Water th en nows from th e wet pond to the mit igatio n area, through the ex istin g miti ga tion wet lands o n the CSTC site, and on to Sprin g brook Creek. The proposed SWMP wi ll create the combi ned wetpo nd/detention po nd necessary to me et wate r qual it y requ ir emen ts for future development on th e s ite. The wetpond/de te nti on pond miti gat ion will create or restore 2.15 acres of we ll and that wi ll provide tert iary water qualit y e nha ncement aft er flow s thro ugh catch basins, wet vau lt s and wet ponds. These we tland s assoc iated with the we tpond are not included as part of th e we tl and mit igation. 8oi!1ng Longncrc~ Offi ce Park C onccp1ual Wetland Mi11 g a11 o n Plan 3 1/18/99 r r l [ b l Provisions for In creased Stormwater Storage T o co mp e nsa te for wetland loss associated wi th co ns tru cti on of the SWMP, approximately 3.3 acr es of wetland will be cre ated and resto red o n th e LOP site. A n additiona l 1.5 ac re s of wet land on the adjacent CSTC prop erty (reserve area) will be included in the mi tig ati o n. (Thi s wet land was constructed as a land scap e amenity as part o f CSTC, but no t as miti gati o n for CSTC wet land impa c ts. Co nstru ct ion of SWMP wil l require so me di sturb ance a nd restoration of wetlands in this area .) The created we tland a nd wetp o ncl/d ete nt ion pond area are designed to provide gre:lter stonnwater s torage than curre ntly exists on th e s ite. The primary design components to increase sto rm wa te r treatment and s torage includ e: (I ) reducing flow s to th e existing piped outfall system; (2) detaining flows in the created wetpond/detention pond sys tem; (3) enlarging the existing pond ; and (4) pre ve nting untreated water from running offsi te by piping runoff water from the s ite throu gh the wet pond , and we tl and system. These design e lemen ts will increas e s tor mwater storage capacity on the site by 21 acre- feet below flood elevati on of 11 .0 feet (Sc hull, 1998). Enhancement of Bio logica l Productivity and Wildlife Habi ta t in Existing and Created Wet lands Another benefit of detaining water in we tlands is the establish ment of a hydro logic regime mo re favorable to wetland vegetation than the exi sting seasonal regime . Wildlife species associated with deeper, more pennanent water bodi es are expected to use th e en hanced habitats. Experien ce at the CSTC confirm s this expectation. Although much of the surroundin g area is developed, enoug h habitat appears to exis t to the north, eas t, a nd south of the LOP s ite to provide colonizin g wildlife species. A gain in habitat vaJue is expec ted be cau se th e propo sed design will pr ovi de a greater diversi ty of wet land vegetation and the es tab li shm ent of buffer plantings. Becau se inundation will become pennanent throu g hout th e year, a hi gher incidence of spec ies associated with ope n water are expected to occur. (Moni torin g at the adjoining CSTC s ite ha s s ho wn continued increase in abunda nce and diversity of waterfow l and wetland orien ted bird species.) The overal l site layout will provide an ope n space and wildlife corridor, allowing mammals and passerine bird species to mov e between exi sting Cit y of Renton wetlands so uth of th e s ite and the Springbrook Cree k corridor. To increase wildlife habitat diversity a nd use. the miti g ation plan will establ ish a pl ant co mmunity s pe c ie s composition, cover abundance, and cover struc ture native to the Pacific Northwes t. The selected plant species are nati ve or natura li zed plants fr equ e ntly fou nd in we tlands and up lands of the Paci fi c Northwe st. Becau se th e spec ie s indica ted are not currently fo und on the LOP s ite, the ir introdu c tion will in c rease the vege tative diversity of the si te and improve wildlife habitat. Pl ant s pec ie s have be e n c ho sen for th eir adaptability to the anticipated plantin g env ironme nts and for their co mm e rcial av aila bility . Assess Results After miti ga ti o n is co mplet e, 15.7 acres o f int e rco nn ected wetland habitat wi ll exist on the LOP sit e, no t in c ludin g the s tom1wat e r trea tm e nt pond. Add iti ona l up land habitat will be maintain ed to provide a wild life co rridor be tween So uth Mars h and the sto rmw a ter treatment pond . Th is wildlife corridor is o n the LOP s it e but outside th e SWMP project area. No spec ifi c pl ans hav e been deve loped for th e wildlife corridor. As developm ent of the Longac res Office Park extends southward detail::; for th e wi ld life corrid o r wi ll be deve loped. Boeing Long::i t:re ~ Olf,ce Pnrk Co nceptual Wc1lanu M1Lt g::111 0 11 Plan I/ I 8199 r r [ [ [ [ [ l [ l l L [ Miti ga tion activities on th e SWMP s ite, and u lti mately the LOP site , will create a wi ldlife corridor between the City of Renton wet lands to the south and the mitigation wcllands o n th e CSTC si te . Mitiga ti on for the SWMP will includ e 1.5 acres of wet land reserve on the CSTC site. Five sepa rate wet land habitat types will be c rea ted or res tored , in cl udin g ope n water, aquatic bed, eme rgen t, scrub-shrub, and forested co mpon ent s . Wetland habitats on the SWMP site will be con nec ted to the wetland habitat s o n the CSTC si te. Mit igati on act ivi ti es on the LOP site will re sult in wetland habitats with an overall function greater than currentl y ex ists on the property. Conclusion The deve lopment of the LOP SWMP in Renton, Washington, will have an impact on existing we tlands. The mitigation plan developed to compensate for the se impacts will result in greater wetland areas with greater functional va lu es than currently occ ur on the site . The pl an also will sa tisfy the stated goals of enhancing water quality by increasing dis so lved oxygen and reducing suspended so lid s level s, increasing sto nnwater storage capacity o n the site , and creatin g a divers ity of wild li fe habitat. A total of 4.8 acres of wetland will be cre ated, or re sto red on the LOP and CSTC s ites to miti gate fo r the loss of l.4 acres of ex isting wetlands. Boe ing Lon g:1c re s Office Park Co ncep 1ual Wetland Mi1ig ntio n Pl an 5 1/18/99 r r r r [ [ l [ l l. l. l L L 1. INTRODUCT ION Thi s report de sc ribes measures desi gned to miti gate unavoid ab le we tland impacts assoc iated with development of th e Lo ngacres Offic e Par k (LO P) S u rface Wate r ManagemenL Plan (S WMP). Activiti es proposed to compe nsate for wetland impact in clud e wetla nd creation , and restoration. Wetla nd c reati on wi ll be accompli shed throu gh excavati on of ex is ting uplands. Resto ration will in c lud e exc avation and replacement of exo tic plant spec ies in ex istin g wetlands . Some wetlands previous ly co ns tru c ted o n th e C us tom e r Services Training Ce nt er (CS TC site) (b ut not included as CSTC mitigation) will be di st urbed as part of cons tru ction of thi s project and th e n restored. In additi on to co mpen satin g fo r wetland impacts as a res ult of development of th e SWMP, miti gat io n activities are de s ig ned to in crease th e ex ten t and overa ll func tio ns of wetlands on th e LOP site. The in c reas ed wetland fun c tions o n s it e will combine with previo us ly created and re sto red wetlands o n th e CSTC si te to the north. Th e proposed action s, and tho se previous ly implemented at CSTC, will create a corrid or linking Springbrook Creek in th e north , to the C ity of Renton's miti gatio n wetlands Lo the south. 1.1 PROJECT DESC RIPT ION The B oe in g Company is in the process of develop in g an o ffice park on the south e rn 164 acres of the former Longacre s Park thoroughbred horse racing track . The nort hern 51 acres of the original 2 I 5-acre property were prev io us ly developed as th e CSTC. In additi o n, the Family Care Center (FCC) and Boeing CommerciaJ Airp lane Group Head quarter s (BCAGHQ) we re rec ently completed on the LOP. The LOP s ite is located in Rento n, Washin gton (Township 23N, Ran ge 4E, Sections 24 and 25) and bounded on the north by the CSTC, on the we st by Burlin gton North e rn Railroad track s, on the south by undeve loped land, and o n the east by several recent developments (F igure 1). Existing facilities on the site includ e th e southern half of th e former race track, a practice racetrack, parking lo ts, the foundat io ns of the g ra nd stand and o th er anci ll ary bui ldin gs as we ll as FCC and BCAGHQ. We tlands within the si te we re del ineated and characterized by Shap iro and As sociate s, Inc . (SHAPIRO) in 1993. Wet land boundaries were co nfirm ed by the U .S . Army Corps o f Engineers (Co rps) in J uly 1993. Wetlands have sub sequent ly been redelineated in 1998 . F our of the eight wetlands deli neated o n the LOP site in 199 3 were relabeled for clarity of di scuss io n in Lh e 1998 wetland delineation rep o rt . The four wetlands (H, T, K, and L) were relabeled as HI , H 2, H3, IJ, 12, 13, Ka , Kb , LI , and L2. This new labe l in g chan ged th e number of wetlands ons it e from eight to fo urtee n (S hapiro and Associates, 1998) (App e ndix A). Foll ow ing a Co rps review in Ju ly 1998, 4 areas were determin ed not to be re gulated by the Corps (Append ix B ). The re mainin g ten wetland s were aga in relabe led to reflect th e regu late d sta tus of the se areas as co nfinned by the Corp s . Areas f2, 13 , Ka and L2 were re moved as regulated wet land s. As such , Wetla nd I I is now lab e led as Wetland I; Wet land Kb is now labeled as Wet land K ; and Wetland LI is now labe led as Wetland L. The j uri sdicti ona l decis ion by th e Corps and th e re lab elin g o f wetland s has c hanged th e number of o ns ite wetland s from fo urt een ( 1998) to ten . The te n wetland s o n th e LOP site tota l approxi ma te ly 3 ac res (Fi gure 2). In add iti on, th e 10.9 ac re So uth Marsh (de s ig nated wetla nd in 1993), is loca ted in the so u theast corner of the s ite. T opogra ph y of th e si te is primarily fl at. Mi cro topog rap hy in c lu des a se ri es of c losed depress ions, slight mou nds, and swalc s di ssected wi th dra inage di tc hes. The sit e gradua ll y s lopes down to the north and east. Boein g Longocrcs Office Park Co ncep tu al We tl anu Miti gation Pl an 6 1/18/99 6 I r l r [ [ ( [ l. [. l l. L r , FOSTER GO LF"-~. LINKS , SOUTH CE NTER TUKWILA NOT TO SCALE 'in S H AP I RO L ~ J\SSOC I I\TE.5 .,.,.c ...... • EVERETT SEATTLE • • BREMERTON I SSAOUAH • ■SITE •TACO MA •OLYMPIA . LONGACRE$ 1----r, OFFICE PARK PROJECT SITE RIENT 1 N h Sile u (Approximoto Boundary) RENTON AIRPO RT \ 167 FIG URE l SITE VICINITY MAP BOEING I '198 LONGACRES 198 1047 12/9° r [ [ ( b [ l 1 l l. L L SERVICES TRAINING A --~ i ' -n : ~ H l b ~ HZ . I I ~~ H J --- ------------------------------------------------------------=- ·--------- PARK ' . 'l... r ~:_- 1 I . . • -i ,-. --..... I -... - r--1. ---... l . . -_:--------I - 0 300 600 ScalD in F~, SHA PlRO &. A S5 0 C:i ATES 1,-i c LEGEND ...__ , Di tches C) Wetlands FIGURE 2 SITE WETLANDS (Revised , U. S. Army Corp of Engineers) BOEING 1998 LONGACRl:.., 198 1042 12 /98 h ( r r [ L f 1.2 SUMMARY OF WETLAND IMPA CTS, AVOIDAN CE, AND COMPENSATION 1.2.1 Wetland Imp acts Project impac ts wo ul d in cl ud e tillin g of approx imate ly 1.2 acres of pa lust rine emerge nt wetla nd and 0.2 ac res of pa lustrine scrub-shrub we tl and o n th e LOP s it e. 1.2.2 We tland Impact Minimi zation All ap pro pri ate and prac ti cabl e measures have been or wi ll be take n to minimi ze im pacts on des ira b le ex ist in g we tland hab ita ts. Th ese meas ures inc lu de: (I ) avo idi ng imp ac ts o n the s tru cturall y co mp lex South Mar sh in th e so ut heas tern port io n o f th e s ite; (2) co ntroll ing sedime nt at io n and eros ion du rin g co nstruc tio n; and (3) im ple mentin g a co mpre he nsive wet land miti gat io n, ma nage me nt , and monit o rin g pro gram to e nsure bot h long-term pro tection o f exis ting reso urces and success of miti ga ti on effo rt s. 1.2.3 Compensatory Wetland Mitigation After miti gati on ac ti viti es are co mplet e, 14 . I ac res o f pa lust rin e open wa te r, emer ge nt , sc ru b- shrub , a nd fo res ted we tl and will be created, res tored, or preserved o n the LOP site. In add iti on, 1.5 ac r es of wetl a nd will be res tored o n th e CSTC site to contribute to co mp ensati o n fo r existin g wetl and s lost on th e LOP sit e fo r a total o f 15 .7 ac res and wetland o n sit e (a nd o n the C ST C si te) after project compl eti on (see Table 1). Excav ati on o f exi stin g we tlands and re pl acement of exotic veget ati on will res tore appro ximate ly I. 7 ac res of ex istin g we tland s and l.5 ac res of we tl and wi ll be c re ated fo r a to tal of 3.3 acres on th e LOP site (Figur e 3). Im pac t areas and miti gation require me nt s by th e C ity of Re nton are di splayed in Appe ndi x C. Table 1: WETLAND IMPACTS AND PROPOSED COMPENSATION Exi stin g wetl and area o n LOP si te 13.98 ac res Wetl and are a to be fill ed 1.4 ac res We tl an d area to be pr ese rv ed W etland area to be c reated or res tored on L OP si te W etland reserve area on CS TC si te To tal we tla nd area at proj ec t comp leti on So urce: Sverd ru p Corporatio n, 1998 2. WETLAND REGULATIONS 2.1 U.S. ARMY CORPS OF E NGINE ERS 10.9 ac res 3.3 ac res 1.5 ac res 15.7 ac res Pu rs uant to the Clea n Wate r Ac t and thro ugh lhe Sec ti on 404 permittin g process, lh e U.S. Army Corps of E ng in eers (Corps) has been g ive n respo nsibil ity to reg ul a te th e d isch arge of dredged or fill mater ial into wa ters of the United S tates. incl uding we tl a nds (Federal Registe r, 1986). Juris d ictiona l exte nt of we tl ands unde r Corps reg ul ati on are de te rmined us in g th e Corps of Engi neers Wetl ands Del ineation Manual (Env ironme nt a l Laboratory, 1987). In orde r to permit a we tl and fi ll , the Corps requires tha t the fo ll ow in g info rmatio n be prov ide d : de terrnj nati on of the project nee d; an an alysis of practicab le alternatives to the project and; a determ ination of the Boeing Longacres Office Park Conccp1u.1l We1l □111J Mi1ig □t1on Pl:rn 9 1/18/99 Ms. Jill Ding 29 April 2022 Page 32 of 38 ATTACHMENT 8 DRAINAGE REPORT FOR CONCEPTUAL DRAINAGE PLAN FOR LONGACRES OFFICE PARK, SVERDRUP CIVIL INC., 1998 C CD DRAINAGE REPORT CD i FOR et ill:CONCEPTUAL DRAINAGE PLAN CD °* C.iwim) t 44 5 rr* hWWV1 Longacres Office Park et Renton, Washington C September, 1998 Prepared By: Sverdrup Civil, Inc. Bellevue,Washington Prepared For: g)LIA17E/Arlir' DEVELOPMENT PLAri,.iNG CITY OF RENTON SEP 3 0 1998 RECEIVED DRAINAGE REPORT FOR CONCEPTUAL DRAINAGE REPORT The Boeing Company Surface Water Management Project Longacres Office Park Renton,Washington REPORT CERTIFICATION data included in this reportpreparedThetechnicalinformationandwas by or under the direct supervision of the undersigned, whose seal as a registered professional engineer licensed to practice as such in the State of Washington is affixed below: 7 ..3A 1YegWAS w 1, , : 01;• rir f• 4• I3 22 9' 11 SS%TER EXPIRES 06/05/ 'do Jeffrey J. Schutt, P.E. Project Manager Surface Wa er Management Project-Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 014002\222 \wp\dmrpt01.doc i September 1998 DRAINAGE REPORT FOR CONCEPTUAL DRAINAGE PLAN The Boeing Company Surface Water Management Project it Longacres Office Park Renton,Washington TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE Report Certification i Table of Contents ii List of Figures iv Ap endices iv I PR JECT OVERVIEW I-1 A. Purpose I-1 B. Introduction I-1 C. Project Datum I-2 II P' LIMINARY iCONDITIONS SUMMARY II-1 A. Discussion of Core Requirements II-1 1. Core Requirement#1 -Discharge at the Natural Location II-1 2. Core Requirement#2 - Off-Site Analysis II-1 3. Core Requirement#3 -Runoff Control II-2 4. Core Requirement#4- Conveyance Systems II-2 5. Core Requirement#5 -Temporary Erosion/Sedimentation Control II-3 B. Discussion of Special Requirements II-3 1. Special Requirement#1 - Critical Drainage Areas II-3 2. Special Requirement#2 - Compliance with an Existing Master rainage Plan II-3 3. Special Requirement#3 - Conditions Requiring Master Drainage Plan II-3 4. Special Requirement#4 -Adopted Basin or Community Plans 11-4 5. Special Requirement#5 - Special Water Quality Controls 11-4 6. Special Requirement#6 - Coalescing Plate Oil/Water Separators 11-4 7. Special Requirement#7 - Closed Depressions 11-4 8. Special Requirement#8 -Use of Lakes, Wetlands or Closed Depressions for Peak Rate Runoff Control II-5 9. Special Requirement#9 -Delineation of 100 Year Floodplain 11-5 4 ' Surface Wat•r Management Project-Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil. Inc. 014002\2220\wp\dmrpt0l.doc ii September 1998 1 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) 10. Special Requirement#10-Flood Protection Facilities for Type 1 aInd 2 Streams II-6 11. Special Requirement#11 - Geotechnical Analysis and Report 11-6 12. Special Requirement#12 - Soils Analysis and Report II-7 i III OFF-SITE ANALYSIS III-1 A. Regional Overview III-1 1. Introduction III-1 2. Green River III-1 3. Springbrook Creek III-3 4. Black River III-4 , B. Task 1: Study Area Definition and Maps III-6 I C. Task 2: Resource Review III-7 D. Task 3: Field Inspection III-8 E. Drainage System Description and Problem Screening D1-8 F. Mitigation III-8 G. Previous Studies III-g IV RE 1TENTION/DETENTION ANALYSIS AND DESIGN IV-1 A. Existing Site Hydrology IV-1 1. Basin 3 -North Main Track Basin IV-1 2. Basin 4- South Main Track Basin IV-1 1 1 B. Developed Site Hydrology 1V-2 1. Basin A- CSTC Site Basin IV-2 2. Basin 131- South Main Track Basin IV-3 C. Hydrologic Analysis IV-3 1. Hydrograph Method IV-3 2. Compu ration Software IV-3 3. Design torm Precipitation Values IV-4 it 1 D. Retention/Detention System IV-4 1. Overview 1V-4 2. Hydrograph Routing IV-5 3. Summary of Hydrologic Analysis IV-6 I E. Water Quality System IV-6 V CONVEYANCE SYSTEM ANALYSIS AND DESIGN V-1 A. Proposed Conveyance System Overview V-1 B. Conveyance System Analysis and Design V-1 1. Uniform Flow Analysis Method V-1 2. Backwater Analysis Method V-1 3. System Materials V-1 Surface Wat r Management Proje I t-Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 014002\222 1wp\drnrpt01.doc iii September 1998 I I TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) II VI FLOODPLAIN AND GROUNDWATER INFORMATION VI-1 A. Baseline Floodplain Conditions VI-1 B. Existing Floodplain Conditions VI-2 C. Proposed Floodplain Conditions VI-2 D. Groundwater Influence VI-2 VII TEMPORARY EROSION/SEDIMENTATION CONTROL VII-1 A. Temporary Erosion/Sedimentation Control (TESC) Plan VII-1 B. NPDES Requirements VII-1 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 TIR Worksheet Page 1 Figure 2 TIR Worksheet Page 2 Figure 3 Location Map Figure 4 Vicinity Map APPENDICES APPENDIX A Floodplain Information APPENDIX B Existing Site Hydrology APPENDIX C Developed Site Hydrology APPENDIX D R,etention/Detention Calculations APPENDIX E Water Quality Evaluations APPENDIX F Water Quality Design APPENDIX G C1onveyance System Design APPENDIX H Groundwater Information APPENDIX I Temporary Erosion/Sedimentation Control (TESC) Surface Wad1er Management Project-Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 014002\ 227\wp\dmrpt0l.doc iv September 1998 P OJECT OVERVIEW Purpose This report is written to fulfill the requirements of the City of Renton Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Content List. The City requires submittal of a drainage report with several of its permits, including the SEPA,Wetland, and Grade and Fill permits. 1. Introduction The Boeing Surface Water Management Project Site is located in the City of Renton, Washington, on the Boeing Longacres Office Park property. Longacres Office Park ("LOP") is a corporate office complex developed by The Boeing Company on the site of the former Longacres Park Racetrackin Renton, Washington. The 1994 EIS prepared by the City ofg Renton analyzed a preferred alternative Master Plan for LOP. This preferred alternative projected the construction of. approximately 15 buildings on the 164 acre site over 15-20 years. To date, property immediately north of the LOP site has been developed by Boeing for its Customer Services Training Center ("CSTC," 1993). Within the LOP campus itself, both the Boeing Commercial Airplane Group Headquarters Building and the Boeing-Renton Family Care Center (a day care facility for children of Boeing employees) are currently under construction. In addition an extension of Oakesdale Avenue SW, which will serve as a major access to LOP, is currently under construction by the City of Renton. The proposal includes enlargement of the existing CSTC wetland and detentio l pond, construction of a combined wetpond/detention pond and establishment of mitigation wetlands to compensate for wetland losses associated with LOP development. Later phases of the surface water management system will include installation of piping and other , infrastruIcture necessary for construction of individual buildings. The Technical Information . Report (TIR) Worksheets detailing site information and constraints to development are included as Figures 1 and 2. The site location and vicinity maps are detailed on Figures 3 and 4, respectively. All figures are located at the conclusion of the written portion lof the report, preceding the appendices. All tables are located in the appendices. This project is designed to integrate with the proposed Master Plan Development, the Drainage Report - BCAG Headquarters Building 25-20 Site Development, dated July, 1997, and the Drainage Report I— Boeing Family Center Building 25-10 Site Development, dated January 1998. Each of these documents were previously approved by the City of Renton. Surface W'ter Management Project-Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, leo. 014002\220\wp\dmrpt01.doc I-1 September 1998 C. Project Datum The current City of Renton vertical datum is NAVD 1988 according to the City's Drafting Standards. However, all previous mapping, design, reports and studies completed for the CSTC and Longacres Office Park Sites were based on NGVD 1929 Sea Level .datum, including the CSTC Site Development TIR, dated October, 1992, the Drainage Report - BCAG Headquarters Building 25-20 Site Development, dated July, 1997, and the Drainage Report — Boeing Family Center Building 25-10 Site Development, dated January 1998. Additionally, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) continues to utilize the NGVD 1929 datum for their Flood Insurance Rate Maps. Boeing and the City reached an agreement at the Mapping and Survey Control Meeting held at the City's offices December 12, 1996 allowing projects at Longacres to be completed based on NGVD 1929 vertical datum as long as FEMA continues to utilize the NGVD 1929 datum. This Report is based on assumed NGVD 1929 vertical datum. The conversion equation is: NGVD 1929 =+3.21' NAVD 1988 I Surface Water Management Pro ect-Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Ina. 014002\2220\wp\dmrpt0l.doc I-2 September 1998 it II LIMINARY CONDITIONS SUMMARY his Section includes a discussion of Core Requirements 1 - 5 and all Special requirements from the King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM) a referenced in the City of Renton Drainage Report Content List (from the City's rafting Standads). The City of Renton Building Regulations §4-22-8 formally a.opt the current version of the KCSWDM, and amend them to include additional c iteria for proj acts located within Zones 1 and 2 of the Aquifer Protection Area. he Aquifer rotection Area Map produced by RH2 Engineers, dated March 21, 1995, confirms that this project does not fall within the Aquifer Protection Area. Discussion of Core Requirements 1. Core Requirement#1 -Discharge at the Natural Location The existing project site drains to Springbrook Creek, as shown in Figure B.1, and will continue to do so under post-development conditions, as shown in Figure C.1. For the purpose of engineering analysis, the Longacres Office Park Site is divided into five drainage basins which all flow to Springbrook Creek. Under existing conditions, the project site falls within two drainage basins. The northern basin drains through the CSTC site outfall and the southern basin drains through the former practice track outfall. As indicated in the Site Master Plan, upon full site l iuildout, .all surface water runoff from SW 16th Street south to SW 27th Street will be routed through the CSTC Main Pond and Delta system prior to discharge through the CSTC outfall (except eas east of Oakesdale Ave SW, which will discharge through the Practice Track outfall. This project proposes to enlarge the CSTC Main Pond and construct an upstream combined wetpond/detention pond to collect r sItormwater runoff from the site west of Oakesdale Ave SW. Discharge from the wetpond will flow through the CSTC Main Pond, Delta system, and ultimately through the CSTC outfall to Springbrook Creek. 2.Core Requirement#2 - Off-Site Analysis The Level 1 off-site analysis for this project includes the Boeing CSTC site to the north, Springbrook Creek, the Black River and tine Green River. A report entitled "Surface Water Management Off-Site Analysis Report," Sverdrup Civil, Inc., August 1998, was Surface Water Management Project-Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 014002\2220\wp\dmrpt0l.doc II-1 September 1998 previously submitted to the City of Renton for this project. See Section III of this Report for more detail. 3. Core Requirement#3 -Runoff Control a.Peak rate runoff control The existing CSTC Main Pond will be enlarged and a combined wetpond/detention pond (Pond "D") will be constructed to provide peak rate runoff control for the Longacres Office Park site. This includes the Headquarters Building 25-20 site since Pond "B", which currently provides peak rate runoff for the 25-20 site, will be filled in and eliminated by this project. Biofiltration This project is not required to provide biofiltration because it will not create more than 5,000 square feet of impervious surface subject to vehicular use and storage. However, since runoff from the 25-20 site will be redirected to Pond D", biofiltration will be required. According to City policy, when treatment pond volume and surface area exceed code requirements by a factor of 2, biofiltration is not required. Pond "D" will be sized to provide at least 2 times more surface area and volume than required by code to meet biofiltration requirements. Refer to Appendix F for more detail. c.Existing site conditions As defined within this Core Requirement, the existing site conditions are defined as those that existed prior to May 1979 since the specific project area never had an approved drainage system. Existing conditions are documented by aerial photography and field surveys. These sources indicate that existing conditions at this project site generally consisted of a horseracing track. 4.Core Requirement#4 - Conveyance Systems The proposed conveyance system consists of a small pipeline system and culverts designed to convey the on-site peak rate runoff for the 100-year 24-hour design storm. Some surcharging may ccur during 100-year 24-hour design events, while the 25-year Surface Water Management Pr erect-Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Mo. 014002\2220\wp\dmrpt0l.doc 1I-2 September 1998 2 -hour event will be conveyed without surcharge. See Section V o this Report for more detailed information. 5. Core Requirement#5 -Temporary Erosion/Sedimentation Control Engineered drainage plans are required for this project, hence, temporary erosion/sedimentation control (TESC) measures in accordance with Core Requirement #5 are also required. The 1 1 minimum 'requirements, KCSWDM Standard Plan Notes and tlje City of Renton Standard Plan Notes are addressed by the Erosion/Sedimentation Control Construction Drawings which were submitted as part of the Schematic Design Package dated August 26, 1998. For more detail, refer to the Schematic Design Package a d Section VII of this Report. t. Discussion of Special Requirements 1.Special Requirement#1 - Critical Drainage AreasP The project site does not lie within a designated criticalproposed drainage area as indicated within Reference 3 Critical Drainage Area Requirements of the KCSWDM, therefore this special requirement does not apply. 2. Special Requirement #2 - Compliance with an Existing MasterPqP Drainage Plan A conceptual site Master Plan was previously transmitted to the City of Renton. The draft plan included enlarging the existing CSTC Main Pond and constructing additional facilities south of the I! enlarged CSTC Main Pond for stormwater conveyance, treatment, and detention. This project is in compliance with the Draft Master Drainage Plan by enlarging the CSTC Main Pond to provide wetland areas and detention for existing and future stormwater runoff. The combined wetpond/detention pond south of the enlarged CSTC Main Pond will also be constructed as part of this project. 3. Special Requirement #3 - Conditions Requiring Master Drainage lan This special requirement does not apply, as the proposed project is stand-alone, and: i I Surface Water Management Project-Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Incl. 014002\22i0\wp\drnrpt01.doc II-3 September 1998 a.is not within a Master Planned Development (MPD) as described in an adopted Community Plan; OR b.is not a subdivision or Planned Unit Development (PUD) that will eventually have more than 100 single-family residential lots and encompass a contiguous drainage subbasin of more than 200 acres; OR c.is not a commercial development or Planned Unit Development (PUD) that will eventually construct more than 50 acres of impervious surface; OR d.will not clear an area of more than 500 acres within a us drainagea subbasin.g 4.Special Requirement#4-Adopted Basin or Community Plans No Adopted Basin or Community Plan exists for this area, therefore this special requirement does not apply. 1 5. Special Requirement#5 - Special Water Quality Controls Less than 1 acre of new impervious surface will be constructed for vehicular use and storage of chemicals, therefore this special requirement does not apply. I1 i 6.Special Requirement#6- Coalescing Plate Oil/Water Separators This site will not be subject to petroleum storage or transfer or heavy equipment use, storage or maintenance, and the estimated traffic due to this project will be less than 2,500 vehicle trips per day, therefore, this special requirement does not apply. 7.Special Requirement#7 - Closed Depressions R.W. Beck and Associates reviewed the adjacent CSTC Site IDevelopment design for conformance with City and FEMA equirements in a technical memorandum dated September 11, 1992. Within Section III(B)2d of that memorandum, it was stated that "it should be noted that although Springbrook Creek does have a restricted outlet (due to the [Green River Management Agreement] GRMA), such restrictions have occurred so infrequently that [the site] should not be considered a closed depression." Springbrook Creek can reach flood elevations which temporarily restrict drainage from the site. These high water Surface Water Management Prject-Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, leo. 014002\2220\wp\dmrpt0l.doc 11-4 September 1998 I elevations on Springbrook Creek will be taken into account within conveyance system backwater analyses, which will be in the final drainage report. For more detailed information, see Section V(B)2 o this report. I 8. Special Requirement #8 - Use of Lakes, Wetlands or Closed Depressions for Peak Rate Runoff Control The CSTC Main Pond (also a wetland) will be enlarged along with tI a construction of a combined wetpond/detention pond (Pond D") south of the CSTC Pond to provide peak rate runoff control fdr the CSTC Building 25-01 site and the Headquaters Building 2 -20 site, including all future developments west of Oakesdale Avenue SW. Runoff from the BCAG Headquarters Building 25-20 site will be redirected from Pond"B"to Pond"D" for water quality treatment and water quantity control. Following construction of PI nd "D", Pond `B" will no longer be required and will be filled Pond "D" will drain into the enlarged CSTC Main Pond for additional water quantity control. The enlarged CSTC Main Pond will continue to drain into the CSTC Delta area, as it does under elsting conditions. The CSTC Delta area is a constructed wetland area designed to accept stormwater flows from the upstream site. The Delta forms the downstream end of a linear stream system to be constructed as the development of the Longacres Office Park site progresses. 9. Special Requirement#9 -Delineation of 100 Year Floodplain This project site is in the vicinity of Springbrook Creek, which has a1 associated floodplain based on Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map Panel 53033C0978F. This project is outside the limits of the floodway but is within the flood fringe, or that portion of the plain outside the floodway Which is covered by flood waters during the base flood. The dEMA floodplain and compensatory storage determination are iscussed in Section VI of this Report and more detailed information about the floodplain, including mapping, is included in Appendix A. I I Surface Water Management Project-Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Mo. 014002\2210\wp\dmrpt01.doc II-5 September 1998 10. Special Requirement #10 - Flood Protection Facilities for Type 1 and 2 Streams No existing flood protection facilities exist for the portion of Springbrook Creek adjacent to the project, therefore this special requirement does not apply. 11. Special Requirement#11 -Geotechnical Analysis and Report A geotechnical report for this project was prepared. It is titled Report, Geotechnical Engineering and Hydrogeologic Services, CSTC Pond Excavation, Boeing Longacres Park, Renton Washington," dated April 23, 1998, and was completed by GeoEngineers, Inc. Other related geotechnical reports include: a.Geotechnical report, entitled "Report, Geotechnical Engineering Services, Boeing BCAG Family Center Building 25-10, Boeing Longacres Park, Renton Washington," dated October 3, 1997 by GeoEngineers, Inc. b. Geotechnical report, entitled "Geotechnical Engineering Services, Boeing BCAG Headquarters Building 25-20, Boeing Longacres Park, Renton, Washington", dated January 7, 1997 by GeoEngineers, Inc. c.Geotechnical report, entitled "Geotechnical Engineering Services, Boeing Customer Services Training Center Renton, Washington", dated February 11, 1992 by GeoEngineers, Inc. d.Addendum No. 1 Geotechnical Design Recommendations Lateral Pile Design and Buoyancy Clarification Boeing CSTC Development, Renton, Washington", dated March 25, 1992 by GeoEngineers, Inc. e.Addendum No. 2 Geotechnical Design Recommendations Lateral Pile Design (16 inch diameter) Boeing CSTC Development (UB 25-02, CB 25-03) Renton, Washington", dated March 27, 1992 by GeoEngineers,Inc. f.Report of Supplemental Geotechnical Engineering and Hydrogeological Services, Boeing Longacres Park, Renton, Surface Water Management Project-Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Ina. 014002\2220\wp\dmrpt01.doc II-6 September 1998 Washington for Boeing Support Services", dated December 9, 1991 by GeoEngineers, Inc. g.Geotechnical Consultation, Potential Lake Impacts, Boeing Longacres Park, Renton, Washington," dated April 29, 1991 by GeoEngineers, Inc. h. Geotechnical report, entitled "Geotechnical Engineering Services, Boeing Longacres Park, Renton, Washington", dated January 23, 1991 by GeoEngineers, Inc. 12. S ecial Requirement#12 - Soils Analysis and Report The existing mapping completed by King County in 1973 appears sufficient for the purposes of this project, therefore this special requirement does not apply. Surface WI ter Management Project-Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 014002\22 0\wp\dmrpt01.doc II-7 September 1998 III OFF-SITE ANALYSIS A. Regional Overview 1. Introduction There are two predominant waterways in the vicinity of the site. The Green River is the largest and is located in the City of Tukwila,Washington, about 1,200 feet west of Longacres and west of the West Valley Highway (State Highway Route 181). The Green River has a levee system along its banks protecting nearby property. The flow is partially regulated by the Corps of Engineers' Howard A. Hanson Reservoir near the headwaters of the River. Controlled flow releases, coupled with the levee system provides protection of the site from the Green River for at least a 100-year flood. In the vicinity of the project site, the West Valley Highway is higher than the levee system adjacent to the River providing additional flood protection. The second predominant waterway is Springbrook Creek (located to the east of the project site), a tributary of the Black River which is tributary to the Green River). All stormwater from the Project site flows easterly to Springbrook Creek. The project site is within the watershed of Springbrook Creek, and portions of the site are also within the floodplain of the Creek according to Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) mapping. The stream channel for Springbrook Creek was previously reconstructed downstream of the SW 16th Street Bridge, near the project site, by an excavated channel, also known as the P-1 Channel. Currently, the City of Renton is constructing P-1 Channel improvements south of the SW 16th Street Bridge, to a point upstream of the future Oakesdale Avenue SW crossing location. 2.Green River The watershed area of the Green River above Renton is 450 square iles. Above the Howard A. Hanson Dam the watershed area is 215 square miles. The Green River flow is controlled by the Corps of Engineers, Seattle District, which is responsible for the regulation of dam outflows from the Howard A. Hanson Dam at Eagle Gorge on the upper Green River. The regulation limits the flow at Auburn to less than 12,000 cfs for up to a 500-year storm frequency. This flow rate represents a 2-year recurrence flood event if the stream was not regulated. The flood profiles for the Green River in the vicinity of the Longacres site indicate the same Surface Water Management Project-Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Mo. 014002\2220\wp\dmrpt0l.doc HI-1 September 1998 III flood elevation for both the 10-year and the 500-year flood frequency. FEMA flood profiles are presented in Appendix A. Flood profiles of the Green River with. and without levees generally indicate the same elevation of 23.2 feet in the vicinity of the Longacres Park site, opposite S. 158th Street (Longacres Way). Elevation 23.2 is significantly below the West Valley Highway I which is at approximately elevation 25 to 29 adjacent to the project site. Therefore, floodwater from the Green River will not enter the. site during a 500-year or lesser flood. On July 18, 1985, the Green River Management Agreement was entered into by King County and the.cities of Auburn, Kent, Renton, and Tukwila. This agreement was updated in 1992 and generally outlines and provides guidelines for improvements, n Ionitoring, operations, and financial responsibilities. Important operating procedures are presented for the P-1 pump station, i cluding maximum pumping rates from Springbrook Creek/Black River as follows: Black River (P-1)Pumping Operations Limits Measured Green River Black River (P-1) Flows at Auburn Maximum Allowable Pumping Gage (cfs) cfs) Less than 9,000 cfs As required 9,000 cfs 2,945 cfs ( 1) 9,500 cfs 2,900 cfs 10,000 cfs 2,400 cfs 10,500 cfs 1,900 cfs 11,000 cfs 1,400 cfs 11,500 cfs 900 cfs 12,000 cfs See Note ( 2) Note 1: Assumes full installed capacity is available. Note 2: Maximum allowable pumping rate is 400 cfs to zero depending on levee monitoring by King County Director of Public Works or his designee. Further restrictions on P-1 pumping capacity may be required per the Pumping Operations Plan. Surface W ter Management Project-Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 014002\220\wp\dmrpt01.doc III-2 September 1998 I I 3. Springbrook Creek The confluence of Springbrook Creek with the Black River is established by FEMA as the upstream end of the P-1 storage bay of the Black River. This confluence point is 0.6 miles upstream of the Black River P-1 pumping station and 1 mile upstream of the confluence of the Black River with the Green River. The watershed area of Springbrook Creek is 21.9 square miles with the following peak discharges: Peak Discharges CFS at Confluence Design Storm Event Peak Discharge Rate (cfs) 10-year 590 50-year 930 100-year 1,100 500-year 1,550 In the area of the project site the 100-year flood elevation is indicated as 16.4 at SW 16th Street and 16.0 at SW 23rd Street. This is because the 1989 FEMA update for lower Springbrook Creek only extended up to SW 16th Street. The drop in flood elevation upstream of SW 16th Street is a discrepancy between the 1989 FEMA update and the previous study that was not resolved. The FEMA flood boundary map and the site contours as field mapped are shown in Appendix A. The flooding elevation of 16.4 is obtained by using the 875 cfs capacity of the P-1 pump station in loperation at the time of the FEMA study assuming no pumping restrictions from flooding on the Green River when a 100-year flood occurs on Springbrook Creek. The highest elevation occurs n the forebay when the flood flow is less than the peak of 1,110 cfs, during the downward leg of the hydrograph at a flow rate of approximately 785 cfs. This high water elevation in the forebay is 15.0. This elevation is used in a HEC-2 (Hydraulic Engineering Model for Floodway Water Surface Profiles) to generate upstream water levels to SW 16th Street. This results in an elevation of 16.42 at the SW 16th Street bridge. Surface Water Management Project-Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil. Inc. 014002\2220\wp\dmrpt01.doc III-3 September 1998 The FEMA data does not include provisions for the SW 16th Street Bridge with a 60-foot span compared to the old span of 36 feet. It also does not include the multi-barrel box culvert:under Grady WI ay, the box culvert constructed under I-405 or the completed P-1 jl Channel cross section from the mouth of Springbrook Creek up to tile SW 16th Street bridge. The City of Renton authorized R.W. Beck and Associates, Inc. to complete the "East Side Green River Watershed Project Hydraulic u Analysis Report," dated December 1996. This report recognizes conditions beyond those of the FEMA studies, such as the current Black River Pump Station operation plan, Black River Pump Station capacity, P-1 channel improvements, future land use conditions, the proposed City of Kent Lagoons project, and other i frastructure improvements planned by the City of Kent and the V ashington State Department of Transportation. The result of these improvements and future development result in Springbrook Creek water surface elevations considerably lower than those reported by FEMA. In fact, the most extreme water surface elevation reported is approximately 13.2 at the practice track outfall under future 100-year, "storage" conditions assuming no further capacity improvements. This is 3.2 feet lower than that reported by FEMA. These elevations are summarized in Appendix G. As discussed in Section VI(C) of this report, the City of Renton now utilizes the results of it's latest modeling to determine flood elevations for the purpose of compensatory storage. She City of Renton is currently coordinating additional pringbrook Creek channel improvements from SW 16th Street upstream to a point south of the future Oakesdale Avenue SW bridge at Springbrook Creek. These improvements are being made ip the same time frame as the Oakesdale Avenue SW project to limit disturbance to the creek, wetland areas and adjacent property cfwners. The improvements will somewhat reduce flood elevations from those currently modeled, by improving channel capacity and i I storage volume. 4. Black River The Black River as it exists today is 1 mile in length and its confluence with the Green River is 11.0 miles upstream of Puget Sound. A pumping station is located on the Black River 0.3 miles upstream of its confluence with the Green River. The watershed area at the pump station is 24.8 square miles which includes the Surface Water Management Project-Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 014002\2210\wp\dmrpt01.doc II1-4 September 1998 21.9 square miles of Springbrook Creek. The pumping station has no gravity flow provisions. All upstream flows must be pumped up to a gravity open channel which discharges to the Green River. The fully installed nominal rated pumping capacity of the station is 2,945 cfs. There are eight main pumps with one of the larger pumps currently off-line. There are five diesel pumps rated at 514 Ids, two diesel pumps at 150 cfs, and one automated electric pump rated at 75 cfs. The FEMA study. was based on the nominal installed capacity at the time of 875 cfs as the pump station's firm capacity of maximum discharge.. The_pump station has a forebay called the P-1 pond storage area) that was expanded by excavation in 1984. The pump station's current installed nominal operating capacity is 2,431 cfs. The 1989 FEMA study indicates that peak outflows from the pump station had not exceeded 525 cfs (November, 1986 event with nominal P-1 pond storage). On March 4, 1991, the pump station operator indicated he was pumping at a rate of 750 cfs. During the February 1996 event the pump station operator had to operate 1 large pump, the two medium pumps, and the small pump for a combined nominal capacity of 889 cfs. According to the pump station's operating plan, the first large pump is to be activated when the level in the forebay reaches elevation 4.0. According to FEMA, a Green River flow of 12,000 cfs equates to levation 19.0 downstream of the pump station. The pump room oor elevation is 25.0 NGVD. Since all upstream flow must be umped the electric pumps are automated by float switches. The urger diesel pumps must be manually started and are used as required to pump out the storage pond. Trash racks are cleaned periodically depending on the debris build-up. There have been Some flap gate failures with the rocker arm breaking off. However, the pump bays can be isolated from backflow with stoplogs. II Surface Water Management Project-Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil. Ina. 014002\2220\wp\dmrpt01.doc III-5 September 1998 An upstream fish ladder at the pump station is operated during the upstream migration period from mid-September through January. Between early April and mid-June the downstream migration is accommodated by an air lift system. A simplified fish counter consisting of a paddle in the upstream migration trough counts electronically the number of fish passing. Historical fish counts are as follows (H. Allmendinger, personal communication): Black River Fish Counts Season Number of Fish 83-84 155 84-85 119 85-86 47 86-87 82 87-88 166 88-89 95 89-90 77 90-91 70 91-92 107 92-93 291 93-94 120 94-95 268 95-96 355 96-97 206 B. Task 1: Study Area Definition and Maps The project site falls within Sections 24 and 25 of Township 23N., Range 4E., W.M.. The triblitary' drainage area to the proposed project site is shown in Figures B.1 and C.1. igure B.1 shows that under existing conditions, the proposed project site falls within portions Drainageionsofon-site Basins 3 and 4. Figure C.1 Ihowsthatconstruction of the proposed project will alter these on-site drainage pasins. Following construction, Sub-basins 4-1, 4-4, and 4-5, are combined with Basin 3 to create Basin A. The limits of Sub-basin 4-3 will not be altered by this roject. Following construction, this sub-basin becomes Sub-basin B-2. urrently, runol ff from the BCAG Headquarters Building site, located within asin 4, is collected in the building, landscape, and parking areas and routed to and "B", the former practice track swale, and ultimately to Springbrook Creek. s part of the Surface Water Management Project, Pond "B" will be filled in and noff from the BCAG Headquarters Building site will be re-routed to the combined wetpond/detention pond located at the south end of the project site. Surface Water Management Project-Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Mo. 014002\2220\wp\dmrpt0l.doc 111-6 September 1998 i The combined the CSTC MainPond pond will drain to the CSTC Main Pond. Discharge from P nd will continue to flow over a weir to the CSTC Delta Area, through a large precast concrete vault structure housing a timber weir and fish screen, and finally, through a 36-inch ductile iron pipe with an elastomeric check valve to Springbrook Creek. C. Task 2: Resource Review In accordance with the requirements of Task 2 of the Off-Site Analysis Section of the King County Surface Water Design Manual, the following table shows the resources reviewed regarding existing and potential flooding and erosion problems for t1ie project area: Resource Findings Basin Reconnaissance Summary Reports The City has extensively studied the East Side Green River Watershed and produced the Draft East Side Green River Watershed Project,Plan and Environmental Impact Statement,December 1996. This report includes information related to existing and proposed conditions within the basin,proposed improvements,and hydrologic and hydraulic analyses of these conditions. Critical Drainage ea Maps As described above,the project is within the East Side Green River Watershed. FEMA Floodplain Maps Flood Insurance Rate Map Panel 53033C0978F This project is outside the limits of the Springbrook Creek floodway but is within the flood fringe,or that portion of the plain outside the floodway which is covered by flood waters during the base flood. King County Sensitive Areas Folio Wetlands-No portions of the project area are listed as wetland areas in the folio, however, wetland mapping has been completed for this project area, identifying a number of small wetland areas which will be impacted or restored. Impacted wetlands will be mitigated by this project. Stream and Flood Hazard Areas-No portions of the project area are indicated to be within streams or 100-year floodplains,however,the project does drain to Springbrook Creek,which is a Class 2(with salmonids). Erosion Hazard Areas-No portions of the project area are classified as erosion hazard areas. Surface Water Management Project-Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil. leo. 014002\2220\wp\dmrpt01.doc 111-7 September 1998 1 I 1 Resource Findings Landslide Hazard Areas-No portions of the project area are classified as landslide hazard areas. Seismic Hazard Areas- No portions of the project I area are considered seismic hazard areas. Coal Mine Hazard Areas-No portions of the project area are considered coal mine hazard areas. ` liienton SWM Division Drainage Services No problems are documented at this project site. All P oblem Database drainage,flooding or erosion problems within the Springbrook Creek main stem are being addressed by the City's channel improvement projects. SDA King County Soils Survey This information is shown in the drainage basin mapping of Appendix B and C. Most of the project site soils are classified as Urban Land. D. Task 3: Field I spection 1 Sverdrup completed a field visit May 28, 1998. The temperature was about 65°F and the sky was clear. According to National Weather Service (NWS) records for i t e Sea-Tac International Airport Station, total precipitation for the 6 days receding the May 28th field investigation was 1.00 inches. The investigation levealed that some portions of the existing Boeing drainage system (open iChannels) outside of the CSTC, Headquarters and Family Center sites were I covered by vegetation, but no evidence of flooding, erosion or plugging was 41pparent. It has also noted that each of the proposed project site discharge 1 locations at Springbrook Creek were operating correctly and showed no signs of • erosion. The northern discharge point consists of a 36-inch ductile iron pipe with an elastomeric check valve, and the southern discharge point is a 36-inch steel tide ate at the practice track outfall (at the east property line, just upstream of Springbrook Creek). E. Drainage System Description and Problem Screening Minor cleaning of the existing open channels outside of the CSTC, Headquarters and Family Center sites will ensure that flows are unrestricted. F. Mitigation Minor cleaning of the existing open will ensure that the existing system operates s intended. Surface W ter Management Project-Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil. Inca. 014002\22 0\wp\dmrpt01.doc III-8 September 1998 G. Previous Studies Numerous studies and reports have been written about the area in the vicinity of Longacres Office Park. In addition to those reports listed in Section 11(B)11, some of the more pertinent studies are as follows: 1.Soil Conservation Service P-1 and P-9 Channel studies. 2. FEMA Flood Insurance Study of Renton,May 20, 1996 3. U.S. Department of Army Corps of Engineers Green River Flood Reduction Study, 1984. 4.King County Department of Public Works Green River Management Agreement, July 18, 1985. 5. Kramer, Chin & Mayo, Inc., December, 1986, City of Tukwila, Nelson Place/Ilongacres Drive Basin Drainage Study. 6.Kramer, Chin & Mayo, Inc., June, 1988, City of Tukwila, Nelson Place/Longacres Way Storm Drainage System Preliminary Design. 7.King County, revised September 29, 1989, Washington FEMA Flood Insurance Study, Four Volumes. 8. Jones & Stokes Associates, Inc., May, 1990, City of Tukwila, Water Resource Rating and Buffer Recommendations. 9. Landau Associates, Inc., August 31, 1990, Environmental Site Assessment Broadacres Property Renton, Washington, Volume I. 10. L.C. Lee & Associates, Inc., January 3, 1991, An Analysis of the Distribution and Jurisdictional Status of Waters of the United States Including Wetlands, at Longacres Park, Renton, Washington. 11. Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc., October 10, 1991, Water Quality Monitoring and Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Black River Water Quality Management. 12. Sverdrup Corporation, April 30, 1991, Draft Flood Plain and Storm Water Report for Longacres Park Site Development. 13. R.W. Beck & Associates, September 1992, City of Renton Surface Water Utility Technical Memorandum; Boeing CSTC Facility Floodplain Analysis Review. Surface Water Management Project-Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 014002\2220\wp\dmrpt0l.doc III-9 September 1998 I ' 1 4. Sverdrup Corporation, October, 1992, Technical Information Report on the Floodplain/Stormwater System for Customer Services Training Center Site Devll elopment, Support Facilities and SW 16th Street, Renton, Washington. 1•. Hammond, Collier & Wade-Livingstone Associates, Inc., December 29, 1992, City of Tukwila Nelson Place/McLeod/Boeing CSTC Storm Drainage Study Technical Report. 16. Sverdrup Civil, Inc., November, 1994, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,404 Clean Wter Act Alternatives Analysis. 17. L.C. Lee & Associates, Inc., November 14, 1994, Manual for Monitoring Maintenance of Water Quality in Stormwater Ponds & Wetlands at the Boeing CSTC. 18. Northwest Hydraulic Consultants Inc., March 1996, East Side Green River Watershed Hydrologic Analysis. 9. R. W. Beck, March 1996, East Side Green River Watershed Project Hydraulic Analysis Report, Existing Drainage System. 0. R. W. Beck, December 1996, City of Renton East Side Green River Watershed Project, Plan and Environmental Impact Statement (Draft). 1. Sverdrup Civil, Inc., July, 1997, Drainage Report, BCAG Headquarters Building 25-20 Site Development, Renton, Washington. 2. Sverdru o Civil, Inc., January, 1998, Drainage Report, Boeing Family Center Building 25 10 Site Development, Renton, Washington. I Surface Water Management Project-Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 014002\22/0\wp\dmrpt01.doc III-10 September 1998 IV RETENTION/DETENTION ANALYSIS AND DESIGN A. Existing Site Hydrology The Surface Water Management Project site is located at Longacres Office Park in the City of Renton. The project site is located between the Green River hannel on the west and the Springbrook Creek Channel on the east. To the immediate north is the Boeing CSTC Site and to the south are the remnants of the main horseracing track. The 35 acre Surface Water Management site development itself includes remnants of the previous horse racing facility, such as a portion of the main racing track, several trees, a portion of the practice track racing oval and existing utilities. The j majority of the Surface Water Management site is relatively level with elevations generally between 11 and 16. The pre-development drainage basins for the entire CSTC and Longacres Office Park sites are shown in Appendix B. Only two local basins are impacted by the Surface Water Management project; Basins 3 and 4. 1. Basin 3 -North Main Track Basin This basin is detailed in Figure B.1, Appendix B. This basin covers 73.9 acres and contains three study areas which drain to the Boeing CSTC Main Pond. The first area is the CSTC Site and the second is a portion of SW 16th Street. The CSTC site encompasses 48.2 acres to the south of SW 16th Street, and the SW 16th Street study area totals 3.1 acres. The remaining 22.6 acre area is made up of the northern portion of the previously demolished main racing oval and infield which drains overland to the CSTC Main Pond. Flow leaves the CSTC Pond (Sub-basin A- 2) and flows over a V-notch weir before entering the Delta Area Sub-basin A-3) and flowing to the CSTC Site outfall. The CSTC Site outfall is made up of a large precast concrete vault structure housing a timber weir and fish screen which directs flow under a public pathway and vegetated bank through a 36-inch ductile iron pipe with an elastomeric check valve at a riprap-protected outfall. More detailed explanations of the CSTC Site and SW 16th Street conveyance systems can be found in Section V of the CSTC Site Development TIR. 2. Basin 4- South Main Track Basin This basin is detailed in Figure B.1, Appendix B. This basin includes 90.9 acres and has been divided into six subbasins. Subbasin 4-4 drains into Subbasin 4-1 through existing 12-inch storm drains south of the main track and outfalls into the main Surface Water Management Project-Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, leo. 014002\2220\wp\dmrpt01.doc IV-1 September 1998 I,I tr ck swale. Subbasin 4-1 then enters an existing 12-inch storm II drain at the north end of the main track swale, draining the southern half of the main racing track, and flows to a recently constructed 24-inch RCP which also collects flows from Subbasin 4-15 (via the 25-20 site Pond `B"). Flow is then conveyed to an existing 36-inch CMP which discharges inside the north end of the foIrmer practice track within Subbasin 4-3. Subbasin 4-2 flows to it an existing 12-inch culvert under Oakesdale Avenue SW and discharges to a swale inside the former practice track. Subbasin 4- 6 drains through Pond "C", which collects runoff from the B ilding 25-10 site, to the swale inside the former practice track. Finally, all six subbasins join inside the practice track swale within Subbasin 4-3) and enter an existing 36-inch CMP located under the practice track and protected from backwater events with a cast iron flap gate at the east Boeing property line. From this point, flow travels through an open channel and finally through a short 36-inch CMP which ultimately discharges to Springbrook eek. Hydrogr phs were developed for the pre-development Surface Water Managerrient Project site conditions for the Water Quality Event, the 2-, 5-, 10-, 25-, 50-, and 100-year, 24-hour. A summary of these hydrographs and site parameters used to generate them are detailed in Appendix B. Detailed information is also provided in Appendix B, including soil groups, hydrologic soil groups, runoff curve numbers, existing land use descriptions, areas of each particular land use, time of concentration P aramet rs and detailed basin (hydrograph) reports. B. Developed Site Hydrology The post-development Surface Water Management Project drainage basins are shown in,Appendix C. The areas of re-development Basin 4 which I PP P are located west of Oakesdale Avenue SW (70.1 acres) are combined with pre-development Basin 3 creating post-development Basin A. The remaining areas of pre-development Basin 4 which lie on the east side of Oakesdale Avenue SW create post-development Basin B. Both Basin A and Basin B continue to drain into Springbrook Creek at the same locations as pre-development conditions. 1. Basin A- CSTC Site Basin The boundaries of Basin A are the same as pre-developed conditions for Basin 3, except that pre-developed Subbasins 4-1, 4-4, and 4-5 are re-routed to Basin A due to the elimination ofPond"B". Basin A total area is increased to 144.0 acres. Surface W'ter Management Project-Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil. Inc. 014002\22.0\wp\drnrpt0l.doc IV-2 September 1998 1 I i 2. asin B - South Main Track Basin hree of the six subbasins in Basin B that were located west of Oakesdale Avenue SW have been combined with Basin A. The three remaining subbasins east of Oakesdale Avenue SW were Used to analyze runoff quantities, see Appendix C, Figure C.1. The subbasin boundaries are the same as pre-developed conditions for the subbasins located east of Oakesdale Avenue SW, except that area were renumbered as Subbasins B-1, B-2, and B-3. The total area of Basin B is reduced to 20.8 acres. Post-development hydrographs were developed for Basins A and B for the Water Quality Event, the 2-, 5-, 10-, 25-, 50-, and 100-year, 24-hour event. A summary of these hydrographs and site parameters used to generate them are detailed in Appendix C. Detailed information is also provided in Appendix C, including soil groups, hydrologic soil groups, runoff curve numbers, existing land use descriptions, areas of each particular land use, time of concentration parameters and detailed basin (hydrograph) reports. C. Hydrologic Analysis 1.Hydrograph Method In accordance with Chapter 3 "Hydrologic Analysis" of the KCSWDM, the hydrologic analyses in this Report are based on a Single-event SCS-type model known as the Santa Barbara Urban Hydrograph (SBUH) method along with the User 1 design storm rainfall distributions. This design storm hyetograph was interpolated by King County Surface Water Management Division staff, and resolved to 10-minute intervals. Discussions with King County staff indicate that the distribution shown on page 3.5.1-2 of the King County.Surface Water Design Manual (and termed Type 1A) is actually a slightly modified version of the SCS Type 1A, and they consider it the "User 1" distribution. All analyses in this report utilize the User 1 distribution, which is identical to the KCSWDM's definition of a Type lA distribution. 2.Computation Software All SCS runoff curve numbers are based on Table 3.5.2B of the KCSWDM, and are tabulated and combined for input into the lydrology software with a spreadsheet created by Sverdrup Civil, Inc. Time of concentration calculations are also computed by a spreadsheet, completed in accordance with page 3.5.2-5 of the Surface Water Management Project-Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, leo. 014002\2220\wp\dmrpt01.doc IV-3 September 1998 KCSWDM. Hydrologic analyses were completed using WaterWorksTm hydrology software, Release 4.13c. 3. Design Storm Precipitation Values Total precipitation values for each design storm event were interpolated from isopluvial maps found in the KCSWDM, Tables 3.5.1C to 3.5.1H, as noted below: I Precipitation Design Values Design Storm Event Total Precipitation (inches) Water Quality 0.67 (P2/3) 2-year, 24-hour 2.00 5-year, 24-hour 2.40 10-year, 24-hour 2.90 25-year, 24-hour 3.40 50-year, 24-hour 3.45 100-year, 24-hour 3.90 100-year, 7-day 9.80 I. Retentio 1 etention System 1. Overview Following completion of the Surface Water Management Project, ' tie area west of Oakesdale Avenue SW drains to Pond "D" and the enlarged CSTC pond. Pond "D" is designed as a combination wetpond/detention facility. Pond"D" has a dead storage volume of 2i61,800 cubic feet from El 3 to 8.5, not including the bottom 1 foot '! of sediment storage, and a live detention storage volume of 302,900 cubic feet from El 8.5 to 12. The enlarged CSTC pond has a dead storage volume of 1,186,000 cubic feet from El 3 to 8.5, not including the bottom 1 foot of sediment storage, and a live detention storage volume of 1,400,000 cubic feet from El 8.5 to 12. Both ponds have a combined dead storage volume of 1,447,800 cubic feet and a live detention storage volume of 1,702,900 cubic feet. After completion of the Surface Water Management Project, al 100-year 24-hour storm event will require a detention volume of 743,200 cubic feet, corresponding with elevation 10.20. This is based on a future 2-year storage event tailwater influence at , pringbrook Creek of EL 8.60 (high tailwater impacts are addressed in Section V(B). The 2-year tailwater influence was alssumed for the following reasons: I Surface Wa er Management Project-Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil. leo. 014002\222t\wp\dmrpt01.doc IV-4 September 1998 I 1) The conveyance event is the critical condition for flow velocities in Springbrook Creek. 2) City of Renton policy is for live storage to be above the 2-year elevation in Springbrook Creek, which is elevation 9.15. 3) Since this analysis does not use a model configured to simulate a changing tailwater, a single tailwater had to be selected. The 2-year elevation in Springbrook Creek at the outfall was selected as the design tailwater because of potential for non-coincidence with main stem Springbrook Creek peaks and the size of the pond is largely determined by the 2-year events (the lowest frequent event required to meet detention standards). In the future, Pond "D" and the enlarged CSTC pond will provide detention for buildout of the Longacres Office Park west of Oakesdale Avenue SW. Based on the current masterplan at full buildout, the required detention volume for a 100-year 24-hour storm event will be 761,156 cubic feet, corresponding with elevation 10.23 using the 2-year tailwater elevation of 8.60 in Springbrook Creek. Stage-storage table, stage-discharge tables, peak inflows, peak outflows and corresponding stages for Basins A and B are shown in Appendix D. 2. Hydrograph Routing The proposed Surface Water Management Project site lies within drainage basins 3 and 4 (also A and B). Drainage basin 3 (also A) was divided into two pre-developed (A-2 and A-3) and three post- developed (A-1, A-2, and A-3) subbasins. For pre-development, Subbasin A-2 was routed through the CSTC Pond and over a V- notch weir upstream of the Delta Area. The flow over the V-notch weir was combined with Subbasin A-3 and routed through the CSTC discharge vault and into Springbrook Creek. Basin 3/A was not divided into subbasins in previous reports. However, since Basin 3/A was divided into three post-development subbasins, the Post CSTC, Post Building 25-20, and Post Building 25-10 Basin 3's also had to be divided up and re-routed to allow a comparison. Refer to Appendix D for the routing calculations. Surface Water Management Project-Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 014002\2220\wp\drnrpt01.doc IV-5 September 1998 Post-development Subbasins A-1 and A-2 were routed through Pond "D", through the enlarged CSTC pond, and over the V-notch weir. Flow over the V-notch weir was then combined with Subbasin A-3 and routed through the CSTC discharge vault to jI Springbrook Creek. Drainage basin 4 (also B) was divided into six pre-developed (4-1 tl}rough 4-6) and three post-developed (B-1, B-2, and B-3) subbasins. For the pre-development Surface Water Management Project routings the hydrographs for Subbasins 4-1 and 4-4 were added together and routed through the main track swale. Subbasin 4-5 was routed through Pond "B" and combined with Subbasins 4- 1 and 4-4 in a 24" storm drain on the 25-20 Building site. Subbasins 4-1,4-4, and 4-5 were then routed through the 24" storm drain to the practice track. Subbasin 4-6 was routed through Pond C" at the 25-20 Building site to the practice track. All six Subbasins were then combined at the practice track and routed t rough the practice track to Springbrook Creek. Post-development Subbasin B-3 was routed through Pond "C" and thl en combined with Subbasins B-1 and B-2 at the practice track. All three subbasins were then routed through the practice track to Springbrook Creek. The overall release rate from Basin 3/A to Springbrook Creek for a 1100-year 24-hour storm event,increased from 6.67 cfs to 17.85 cfs. The increase was caused from re-directing 70.1 acres from Basin 4B to Basin 3/A. The reduction in area for Basin 4B reduced the release rates from Basin 4/B to Springbrook Creek for a 100-year 4-hour storm event from 17.30 to 9.05 resulting in an increase of only 2.97 cfs in the overall release rate from the Longacres site to Springbrook Creek during a 100-year 24-hour storm event. The Overall release rate is still 15.26 cfs less than baseline conditions. efer to Appendix D,Table D.1 for details. 3. Summary of Hydrologic Analysis Avariety of tables and figures have been created to summarize the hydrologic and hydraulic analyses completed for this project. They re in Appendix D. E. Water Quality System The Surface Water Management Project does not add more than 5000 square feet of pollution generating impervious pavement. However, Pond u Surface Water Management Project-Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 014002\22i0\wp\dmrpt01.doc IV-6 September 1998 B" currently provides water quality treatment for the 25-20 Building site and wil be eliminated. Stormwater from the 25-20 Building site will be re-routed to Pond "D" and Pond "D" will provide water quality treatment. Pond "D" was designed as a combined wetpond/detention pond in accordance with the KCSWDM as adopted by the City of Renton. Water quality design calculations for Pond "D" are shown in Appendix F. Appendix E contains water quality data derived from samples taken from Springbrook Creek and the site prior to any Boeing development. This information shows the relatively poor water quality of the creek and some on-site locations. The on-site wetpond/detention system will improve the quality of runoff leaving the project site and will help improve the water quality of Springbrook Creek. Surface Water Management Project-Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Ina. 014002\2220\wp\drmpt01.doc N-7 September 1998 V ONVEYANCE SYSTEM ANALYSIS AND DESIGN A. Propose Conveyance System Overview Storm water runoff from the 25-20 site will be rerouted through a 24-inch reinforced concrete pipe to Pond "D", which is a combination wetpond%detention pond. From Pond "D", flow will pass through culverts to the enlarged CSTC pond. The CSTC pond drains through a narrow stream acid over a 120 degree V-notch weir to the CSTC Delta area. The , The CS''C Delta area drains through a large precast concrete vault structure housing a timber weir and fish screen, and through a 36-inch ductile iron pipe with an elastomeric check valve to Springbrook Creek. Conveyance System Analysis and Design: The proposed conveyance system for the project site is designed to conform with Chapter 4 of the KCSWDM which provides approved methods and criteria for hydraulic analysis and design of storm drainage facilities. 1. niform Flow Analysis Method The proposed storm drainage pipelines were preliminary sized using the Rational Method for Conveyance System Analysis and Sizing - Uniform Flow Condition table in Appendix G. This table is based upon Figure 4.3.3C of the KCSWDM. Footnotes at the Ind of the table explain the various information sources and assumptions. 2. Filackwater Analysis Method Selected storm drainage pipelines will be analyzed using King County Surface Water Management's "BW" computer model, Version 4.22. The pipeline segments analyzed will include the lllongest segments of the system and those which have the lowest iipstream grate elevations. Tailwater elevations for the analyses vill be based on the 2-year storm event elevation within Springbrook Creek as determined by the City's East Side Green River Watershed hydraulic modeling effort. 3.System Materials The storm drainage system that will be constructed to reroute flows from the 25-20 site to the proposed wetpond/detention pond (Pond I` D") will be reinforced concrete pipe. Culverts will be installed to I Surface W ter Management Project-Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, leo. 014002\270\wp\drnrpt01.doc V-1 September 1998 II connect Pond "D" to the enlarged CSTC pond. Perforated PVC underdrain pipes will be placed in existing ditches that are to be filled as part of this project. Surface Water Management Pr4ect-Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Mo. 014002\2220\wp\dmrpt0l.doc V-2 September 1998 VI FLOODPLAIN AND GROUNDWATER INFORMATION A. Baseline Floodplain Conditions According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map Panel 53033C0978F and Flood Profile 45P for Springbrook Creek, the 100-year floodplain elevation in the vicinity of this project is 16.4 feet based on National Geodetic Vertical Datum (NGVD) of 1929. The.FEMA map showing existing floodplain at elevation 16.4 is detailed in Appendix A, Figure A.1. Some discrepancy with actual conditions exists,as shown in Figure A.5, which is a baseline topographic survey of the site shaded to depict actual-areas at or below elevation 16.4. Actual floodplain volume calculations utilize the FEMA 16.4 foot flood elevation and actual topographic surveys. Flood profiles of the Black River an Springbrook Creek are included in Appendix A, Figures A.2, A.3 and A.4.' For the purpose of backwater analysis of the proposed conveyance system, Springbrook Creek elevations (forming site tailwater) are based on the City of Renton East Side Green River Watershed Model rather than the FEMA flood profiles. This design assumption is based on review comments from city staff on the Building 25-20 Site Development Drainage)Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan, December 20, 1996. Prior to construction at the CSTC site, an existing outlet culvert with a tide gate prefented inflow to the site from Springbrook Creek. However, the site had kn existing bank, or sill, located approximately above the outlet culvert 4nd allowed flow into the site only when the Creek elevation exceeded elevation 15. The sill provided enough capacity to inundate the entire sitr, flooding all connected areas to elevation 16.4 even without any on-site sItorniwater storage at the time of flooding. Note that City of Renton review comments on the Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan for the 25-20 project required that detention facility live storage volume be excluded from the compensatory storage determination. This differed from the determination method used for the CSTC Site Development TIR, which did include the live storage volume. To account for this !difference in methodology, the floodplain volume for baseline conditions were recalculated. The revised calculation yielded a cumulatitve storage volume of 265 acre-feet at elevation 16.4 for the Longacres Office Park site under baseline conditions. The starting elevation for floodplain storage was assumed to be the pre-development peak stage elevation for each of 5 on-site basins. The peak stage of the various detention -facilities was determined based on free discharge conditions to,Springbrook Creek. Surface Water Management Proj ct-Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 014002\2220\wp\drmpt01.doc VI-1 September 1998 I I The City of Renton made an Administrative Policy Determination, dated June 26, 1997, that allows the use of the City's model results for determining the volume of compensatory storage required for filling within the 100-year floodplain of Springbrook Creek. According to the policy determination this applies only to current and future projects and is not to be applied retroactively. However, according to the December 22, 1997 review comments on the Conceptual Drainage Report for the Family Center Building 25-10 site project, the retroactive provision of.the policy will not be applied to the Longacres Park Site. Furthermore, the City does i_-- not require recalculation of floodplain volumes since there will be no filling pelow the City's 100-year floodplain elevation of 13.2. For more detail, refer to Table 7-3 of the ESGRWP draft plans included in Appendix A,Figure A.9. B. Existing Floodplain Conditions Existing floodplain conditions for the Surface Water Management Project analysis are those that existed when Boeing purchased the Longacres Site, as since modified by construction of the CSTC, 25-20, and 25-10 projects. According to the City's model results, the project site floodplain elevation under future, "storage" event is elevation 13.2. The existing project site does not include areas subject to flooding by Springbrook Creek at or below elevation 13.2 due to check valves at both existing site outfalls and topography along the creek. C. Proposed Floodplain Conditions The floodplain as modified by the proposed project is detailed in Appendix A. D. Groundwater Influence A geotechnical report completed April 23, 1998 by GeoEngineers, Inc. provides specific information about the groundwater at this project site. Groundwater conditions were evaluated by measuring the water level in nine mlnitoring wells installed at depths of 8.5 to 9 feet and at depths of 16.5 feet. Groundwater levels were measured 3 times between April 9, 1998 and April 21, 1998, following publication of this report, the wells have b en measured at least monthly. Throu h September 1998, groundwater levels measured in the wells installed at depths of 8.5 to 9 feet ranged from Elevation 4.1 near the CSTC pond to an Elevation less than 7.5 near the central portion of the southern lobe. Groundwater levels measured in the wells installed at a Surface Water Management Project-Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 014002\2220\wp\dmrpt0l.doc VI-2 September 1998 II depth of 16.5 feet ranged from Elevation 6.1 near the CSTC pond to Elevation 7.2 near the central portion of the southern lobe. The report states that "The ground water measurements to date show that there is a downward flow gradient between the upper silt and underlying sand. Based on the previous ground water level measurements completed in 1991, we (GeoEngineers) expect that the ground water levels will fluctuate between 3.5 to 4.5 feet annually. This would result in an estimated high ground water level of about Elevation 10 in feet in April to it a low of about Elevation 2 feet in October." Groundwater levels will continue to be measured at least monthly through early 1999. I ' II li Surface Wa er Management Project-Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 014002\2220\wp\dmrpt0l.doc VI-3 September 1998 VII EMPORARY EROSION/SEDIMENTATION CONTROL Temporary Erosion/Sedimentation Control (TESC) Plan The TE C plan is designed to comply with Chapter 5 of the King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM) as adopted by the City of Renton. The first detail sheet in the TESC plans lists the standard City of Renton Erosion Control Notes (from the Drafting Standards) as well as II applicable requirements from the KCSWDM Reference - 9 Standard Plan Notes. ce the notes are based on two independent sources and often have thearasame intent, they are organized to match the recommended construcion sequence as shown at the end of Reference - 9. Detail sheets of the Erosion/Sedimentation Control Drawings are included in Appendix I. Complete TESC plans will be made part of the site development drawings for this project. NPDES Requirements I I Since this project will disturb more than five acres of total area, the applicant will file a Notice of Intent (NOI) for coverage of this project under the Baseline General Permit for Stormwater on or about October 16, 1998. Additionally, the applicant will prepare a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan to fulfill the requirements of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 USC 307) and the State of Washington Water Pollution Control Law (Chapter 90.48 RCW), and regulations that address the control of storm water discharges (40 CFR, Parts 122, 123, 124; WAC 173-201AI , 216, 220 and 226). The Plan will be completed after this drainage(report is completed. I I it Surface Wat?r Management Project-Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 014002\2220'wp\dmrpt0l.doc VII- 1 September 1998 i I FIGURES Surface Water Management Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 014002\2220\wp\dmrpt0l.doc Figures September 1998 I Page 1 of 2 King I countyounty Building and Land Development Division 1 TETHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHE ET PART 1 . PROJECT OWNER AND PART 2 PROJECT LOCATION PROJECT ENGINEER AND DESCRIPTION I PIroectOwner The Boeing Company ProjectName Surface Water Management Proj:ct Address 1901 Oakesdale Ave SW Location Township 23 NPhoneRentonWA98055 1 Range 4 E Project Engineer Conrad Szymczak Section SZ Sec 24 NZ Sec 25 Company The Boeing Compatly Project Size 35 AC Address Phone t425) 477-0094 Upstream Drainage Basin Size Nelson P1 AC 93 I PART 3 TYPE OF PERMIT APPLICATION PART 4 OTHER PERMITS Management I I I Subdivision n DOF/G HPA Shoreline Mana g i, I I I Short Subdivision I X I COE 404 n Rockery Grading DOE Dam Safety 0 Structural Vaults Commercial n FEMA Floodplain Other 11 I I Other I fl COE Wetlands 0 HPA PART 5 SITE COMMUNITY AND DRAINAGE BASIN Community City of Renton Drainage Basin Spri ngbrook Creek I PART 6 SITE CHARACTERISTICS I River I X I Floodplain Springbrook Creek, Zone AE 1 AlStream Spri ngbrook Creek I k I Wetlands Urban disturbed Critical Stre im Reach I I Seeps/Springs I I Depressions/Swales I 0 High Groundwater Table 1 I 1 Lake 1 Groundwater Recharge I I Steep Slope 0 Other I Lakeside/Er sion Hazard I 1 PART 7 SOILS Soil Type I Slopes Er sjon Potential Erosive Velocities Urban Lnd 3:1 ,Maximum Low/Minimal 5.0 ft/s maximum i I I I Additional Sheets Attatched I 1 1/90 I Figure 1 11 1 Page 2 of 2 King'County Building and Land Development Division TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET I•ART 8 DEVELOPMENT LIMITATIONS REFERENCE I LIMITATION/SITE CONSTRAINT I X 1 Ch.4-Downstream Analysis l Black River (P.1) Pump Station* 1 fl I I.II I Additional Sheets Attatched 1 *No effect on Project. i PART 9 ESC REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM 'ESC REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS DURING Cr NSTRUCTION FOLLOWING CONSTRUCTION X I Sedimenta ion Facilities 1 Stabilize Exposed Surface I Remove and Restore TemporaryXIStabilizedConstructionEntrancelX_ p ry ESC Facilities X Perimeter Funoff Control I X I Clean and Remove All Silt and Debris X 1 Clearing a d Grading Restrictions I X I Ensure Operation of Permanent Facilities X 1 Cover Practices 0 Flag Limits of NGPES X I Construction Sequence 0 Other Other 1 I ART 10 SURFACE WATER SYSTEM :- I I 1 Grass Lined Channel CI Tank fl Infiltration Method of Analysis I X I Pipe System I I Vault 0 Depression SBUH "User 1" I 1 Open Channel I I Energy Dissapator = Flow Dispersal Compensation/Mitigation I I Dry Pond CI Wetland Waiver of Eliminated Site Storage I X I Wet Pond Stream Regional Detention 11 Brief Description of System Operation See Drainage Report, Sections IV and V. 1 Facility Related Site Limitations I I—I Additional Sheets Attatched Reference Facility Limitation 1 I 1 PART 11 STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS PART 12 EASEMENTS/TRACTS May require special structural review) ' E, :: . Drainage Easement O Cast in Place Vault 0 Other 0 Access Easement i 0 Retaining all 1 Native Growth Protection Easement I I Rockery>4'High I—I Tract I I Structural oIn Steep Slope 1 El Other 1 ART 14 SIGNATURE OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER ' S • S I or a civil enginleer under my supervision have visited the site.Actual site conditions ads observed were incorporated into this worksheet and the 91e/attatchments. 1)o the best of my knowledge the information provided 9,6Q,/i/441 8 here is accurate_ ao.r. I Figure 2 i190 THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT it, p gentl e c 1 , POlna • •1 V 520 w,r, NE--- JT7E1 Yeommr.O u Iversily S w \ 3 7 78A Y ` ay•e go ao Pnmt •r 3 It'Oaf'•J W I-. q=,.; ' 5 ,. Hill,,.vl ,• M• Not, Inglewood RR[T ,: 16, v z i in„ 1 71Ir- tii.:'.....nf L•i`.I,T i't ®`,,, N • rOFk7tb I' Seattle. x -•r-.' ®/• Medin+ , A t", ea eenvoi f\ 1.,I, Bellevue:L c1/Dulvamrsh- - — 1aUn ven,ly R p eo: I my•,n,ld„r_: II I',,I, Beaux 1 ® ' - W r,n,•L r r 9estoratron' •' 1/ I- anu vJ ;. •• A 5 is + U/ Polnr /% 414, , 1 WAY I. , , IS i V. Js1iti Pot," so.•1638 163 o` om s 9 4 11 4'• N,, r 2 r-E sE `-• e ts. Bellevue 4 T = E i it_ + • E631 7oaN..< Ballevua tEAe Er,„ w •' V W pSni t`\I IM rce'r In ..•"; e o CoInemge i a®..›,.::..N.,..„, ti I.,.le iJ)tTI3 W 1 , 6, d V 3 "s '' ®' ' 60TH Sr ^ m r+A 339 c L\ 1.., r si 6 - '"wc.spE. g zr ty n`,,,*.\ Cqr 0 coal co,** o espl• 1 E+,ntferq t.Omm• C ++ra* tilt teunl i I aP, N E SUNSET 1 n ` t — _Co ' eu70N Col.1 i'hgnt 3 Issaquah y = a \ 3,sr K h n sw,c....•s, 1.},,,, I TNI I /,^ IVhile ,`\ ®i O, y vlAN Ci)'" 1 I ,DOlpnln Center nl,n ` 1 ism REN,n.y 1 f a ?nrnt r ` P. . ` .''' I• 1 M1 . 10 jj It s em kND.•i t s.'. i•;::, 1„ t, i+1 1 R e I(i v el ,nt sr - 5E Man ,74 c r. 1;5 ?900 ent•n'o•.,+ t y 4EY J 9 c y D y,, tSE sw C iifn Riverton ''. I anil i' t'¢ 1 Aalhlcen), c ao s1f0 ,,A Heights ,„„5, o,yukwila c,•dar ,! 3 Paint BUI'len o u.,,. , y i deals CJ • • WITH ST , ! t»4ENTON®^•ANf 8 Sw Cow RD ar'\. .aty.' S NTL C '41.en•4%I . 11 P Three Jr it r,ec R, AIRPORT 1 \ G POW 6TN sr Fainvaod T t s Z •jaslron O 2 ' sw+7R0 B r PEIR I.I h•.,r.. toA 1 AB BO O yNormZndyS • 1 x laen sr J T Park Se•Tac y c70+tri EAST t'antLin,. - r ST S •Vashon 0 5 5,00, FRbER t V,e,. tCenter8eIRDs t. ti O 1 k• 7WTH ST z cDes e S :,:TN 8 hadn„ • Maple 2 s:. _ .W Moines O,2 ,. .Q' 77:TN Valley 5:,. NI 411V: 1an AN 1 T h ROBINSON RD ,7ntmr,5011 r Bltrt ty 0 n, Zenith • ft sE t+orN sT se 7.arN sr $ . 1 \ J p PCs Highlino [0. 4.ER sT o, : sf 3 eo 9V Comm g ci 4 td,.•n, rF Dlxkton r i Saltwater fitP. • v Col 3 I• 0,Irnd,an I I ut w e V Fo 4 ROc •l 4s 717No ST 4N, • wider y1 5 CDZl'. PASSAGE d ` - Redondo• r ar 1 s vmt sr 'c I V •Covington zr SE 776TN ST g tpok OPRNOTON'snw,„ 4D 169i ancr Y y * Green River 2 i 1i. xrrl Y y Vc. Dashlir t 5 1-1 Co Collage O e,l • / Point y d 1- S 5 'E 3an 5 \i rnr 3h.15TN sr 5E 317TH 5T f j, 370M ST O® ent ST SE BLACK DM,+ONO t •\:.,..., NO O ID Feder.I W.Auburn .. ro L lP 08r0,rrs t oY lrE . nnr 8 . aoREN SNDBt r V SW e• • lr2 T Cti t Huhn lh,r.,•,h, h + Sw 1,, 336,H ®,3 I r f t 11 AUBURN-B; 1 COMMENCEMENT M* or MPvS S IN*, Whrte nn rr'.): • "5I \bmc,.n,ahrBAYyr+• \ iG D .N... ISTN 51 sw ._ 4. Historn:.d lbh.:cun,4A15ER 40 NQ ... TA. G. LOCATION MAP Source: Washington Official State Highway Map, WSDOT FIGURE 3 Surface Water Management Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 014002\2220\wp\drnrptOl.doc Figures-3 September 1998 THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT lack R fi j0i N, ,'` R F Q 1 r .. Y Black -Riuef V 3 it- i,' .B 3 7, um ping Sta r- r i l i ' C I I i Y. -en— -VI II if, *\ t u 1\ r.•pi I I 1. Power, . 6 PlantFr, NI ir41 m * t! Sewage ,' ••s+ .,r a:-: - - m i • s, lan$$$. • i:. . 4". -7 1 A_ 3.4' N''••`77314. 77gr----01-- i ill I.:%: ... ".. -"a'. - ... w•- ----- - . NAtillirr- i-.lir 411•T,.."--- ii., --,44.. 8 4 11 bsta• 1 1 ) 1-/...\ c ioltil41,, 1 10 /2 I1'l R PROJECT i.Ilig5/ v . y SITE f 1 t I , i -- 7:e of , , I 1 1j II t:::.._ ru ie I il . 104.. 1 i 25 I j I I rW _ . 1,Cs' " Tukwila I as li i* 7--- 0 I( bt / I I f di Greens ugg i I I w r i Os• I° i,k., . - r: Ii , K _ --_• _- LOIØ[I1t CORD ptc,4, 4, 11 i14. r1 ( pk"UII li l y' n )1///Ili i \\f VICINITY MAP Source: USGS Renton Quadrangle FIGURE 4 Surface Water Management Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Mo. 014002\2220\wp\drnrpt0l.doc Figures-4 September 1998 APPENDIX A 11! 41 1, 111 ti Surface Water Management Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, leo. I; 014002\2220\wp\dmrpt01.doc Appendix A September 1998 APPEN IX A FLOODPLAIN INFORMATION This appendix contains floodway and floodplain information related to the project site. The information included,consists of FEMA mapping and floodway profiles as well as topographic survey of the site shaded to indicate areas at or below FEMA floodplain elevation 16.4. Also included are pre- and post-development floodplains delineated at elevation 13.0 to approximate the City's 13.2' floodplain. Portion of FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map from Panel 978 of 1725, 5/16/95,Fig. A.1 FEMA Flood Profile: Black river,Fig. A.2 FEMA Flood Profile: Springbrook Creek, Fig. A.3 FEMA Flood Profile: Springbrook Creek, Fig. A.4 Pray-Development F1oodplain (16.4'), Surface Water Management Project ,Fig. A.5 , Pot-Development Floodplain (16.4'), SurfaceWater Management Project, Fig. A.6 Table 7-3 (13.2' Floodplain)from ESGRWP, R.W. Beck, dated Dec. 1996, Fig. A.7 Surface Water Management Project-Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, leo. 014002\2220\wp\drnrpt0l.doc Appendix A-1 September 1998 THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT t____ -7' Li SOUTHWEST 16THr--------..--------.----..- 8 I( R 334 7 24 jt O ZONE X r-ZONE X 16 V L. a r k 0z 4,. , 2 LONG ACRES RACE TRACK SOUTH', i ZONE X M ZONE X ZONE AE fc- 7- ZON 0 ZONE X p 2 4 BRIDGE ZONE X fillr O I / . - - FEMA FLOODPLAIN MAP Source: Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) FIGURE A.1 Surface Water Management Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 014002\2220\wp\drnrptO1 doc Appendix A-2 September 1998 I 1 i 1 III I it II g ELEVATION (FEETI NGVD) II' o o _ o a, o • cn N n>' i , • f • I ' ' ( 1 I , rl : " I.! I ' TLiTfT1Ti! fLrTiI • I1 , II • i ! ) . II1 . , I• • . • I ! I . I ONFLUENCE WIC AI I • 1 t-' 'r • +--- +.1.. _. . .I , GAEEr RIVER I I 1 I- I . ! i • I . 1 i I ! I _ 1 . : I I : . . i ' • i.. III III - I [+•{1: 11 . I I i .1 , LcI I4jti '! , I 1 -I I . i , I _ ; . . j II ILWAUK E T LtIISPIAI. —I I I ! I : _ ' ,' l'.!j I. . f I ! I j . 'ANLI'y., ACIFIIC!FAILROII?. L ) o ' L,_' I.. I8UNGTON NO 1HE NiffrIt41-:I I l• 1 I11 1 i .I i ) I1inI 1 • I . : . . , -• , , -.a•1, . ! I , ; _ , ._. : i., o'y a c ICgad.-' ._.:.i' I 1 i I i I , ;I _ .I . . ..II_ II j M: ."_.' , A t31 I .. ._. 111V 1LW UK E,'ST. PAr, '. .'- ' m I 1. • 1I 1 k I 1 e ! :• - I.! I -- 1 7b „1 j bNQ P Cl jl. AILga - - 'a. I. 1 1 ._L_ _I ; ! • 1 1 ! • '--1. i r 1 I I. .- —-r II-,_I. fj1I! I .. . • _ I I 5 , •-; r..: { I I 1 I i 11II1 • • t 1 I I I 11 +•i l .• i ! _ -- f I' -t• 1 Z'OTd ' 1 ' • , I ! i 1 I I 1 al I1 ; ; , ' 1I • .1. ; 1 I . I o I1II I a I , i 1 i 1 i I _ _ j 1 •< : ! I .1 ; I I 1 I bl 1 • 1 1 ! ! r-L)•li • I 1 -1- ,-- ' i I ! - I ; 1 I 1 . 1 1 1 , 1. •-I 1 I.I .f I , - •1 --• I • 1 • I ! I •_ j I mIII tt->- =, T I' ' i i 1 I._- I I ' I I I I :-. '• 1 I r I.Obit(' Ins ---- in I 1i ! I I 1 + 1 I 1 I "-, . T' I : j . I_ "Ft=1 I1 111 I. ! I • : I • ! I I O , 11 1 I . I ; ! !STf1T10N ' .. 1. ; IT tI ! ' ; _f; : rc4t .. :l ; 1iJ ... i. j : ; ; f1I • -- •i : I.....I • .1 I _ - : I.- - . 1._ _ •_ . ..:_- 3 r I i I-I I ,• 11 , r 0 I ! I ! 1 ' ' j • : : ,I- i I I • L'J11 : I1I ,I I• En I t I.I. -- I I.,I - . .1: I i • i !• i.• I ' . I• I .._ ! I_ .. : : ,1. n I i ! I I .j I-- . I - I I • I ._I .I I . ., ..I--I , I 1. .. .. ! I. Ilim • 1 I' 1 + • 1 • . I . • • . 1 •.. I : .-... I ..._ . . I Ul IIIIIII ; • ' 1I , I i • - i ' •• I • • t • --. I1 -----;--'-1--/- •I • • •il • '. tl ' : : 1 I • • -li - •-• I -- - •! Ii•• il ; II Z I 1 ! 'I I ! )r'I. I' ' .l__.1_`l1II : t.fi 1 1 f i iI ' 1. r It 1.i- ---- .1. --- ... - • • 1.iw le f ,H 1 ;-"• I I I - I.I..— -' 1 --r• 11. 1 I__. , 1 T:• I ` • ._ I —•I Ti 1 _ i f ii•.._. .I.; I ! i -__. . _. __ .i _ "_ IoI ; i :_ ; f: I :. - :_ II,. m w ._ .. ._I ; 1_I ! ,-' ._I R1111 1 I' - j 1 I ^ t- !. . . r 11,. C• I I 7 I II I i •.!. I. _ .I1i .--__ I. MI - ' i 1 11 1 . _ -I I .III- ....- --! ,-..F., .-. . . _ k .- i_1 I•, I.. - ! • PIIill I I, N. Iiiiiiiiii 11. Li 1.___ _Lai .-_— [-. .--_- .. .-.1.- ....1-2-... . . .., _ ___. ,. .____ ..,_-•:•.. - . • 11-7.11 r-- .." ." . -. . 1':. 7....,.-7-_____•___.,.; _2.. .. i. : , . . m &.I , II. II11•••. 111111 - 7. 1-. 1-i-- -------1--.-. 1_ T.:I H '.. HI-..... .. - :sr.. : .-..2 21 ., . .-::___-----,..,.: . i61- ' ' • 1 I I r. --i. , .. 1_1_--,:._., .--1 .. i , .. . . .. . ..... .______ ., . ...=.,. ...1 1 .... ii 1 1, 1 . - - 1 i • ... 1 No 1 p BE m m -c •. 7 I"I I I , 1.1- 1 1 I III1 la i 1 I m al 70 3>I Ii „ I I .. 1-__ T 0 0 O O 1 -- •.—f _ ., ii - 1 5 G: • .KtR I( 0 0 N I.I. I I .i C»,1 1= j Ii 01 Il1I at r.a I II, FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT A• GENCY 11 11 FLOOD PROFILESF 1 ICING COUNTY, WA 1 N AND INCORPORATED AREAS., 1 i BLACK RIVER. II 1 li 11 it i • I : I,.. 1 I 1• 1 1 1ELEVATION (FEET NGVE) I I FP o 1 I - a• o a cn . ks cn o I I I I I $ - , • I • - cn T.Il I.. - 1. „..sr . I 1 .- . II - .. r •.. I I I; , . - 571 .., •'._...=._. . !: ; .. ! . I...... .. . ' ill..' i 7. .-. -__ I 1 f, ' I i I I i i r 1 T• I • ! ' •-• - •-•! • • - I -I 1 ' 1 i : • I 1 •-• I 1IrIr. I •I. , - - I ! • • -t I - .• t i • • .. • I.1I -1 .1 . I : • •I o • • • Hi : I •.I I I ; 1 ; • 1• 1 IONFI.Li- -t Vii11114 1341', 11tIIti • I .._ i.• 1 1 • I . • I - -- •! : • - • I • : • 1 : 1-14..1 ; ,. . ,. rSTt'RAGE POND I •• •• I ' • I4 • i •---,• ••-4, . to • 1- t-,•• - 1- I- ..--4-----._ -: -, .__i -• • I I ' 1 I ' . : I . . V - ii : . .-... 1, i . - I I ! .. . i • 1 . i 'I- - I I • • / 11 I. ; . : ....-:_-:. . i...- ! . I - i . • ' • -0. I ' . .. ' i i : I. - " - : • 1 I f. . I • 11i I All I I ' I I 1 I 1.-- ' - - - -- i•I ' - I I I1. ii..-.4vi 6. ... ... ..IA.. : .. .. ..1 SO TM E i . law. , g; .0, i- • I . , • , .... 701 STREET " . 1 ir 7- t- ---• 1 1-•---• •• - l• • I 1.- 7-- - •;-•-1. ' ' 1 4-• .- • •-' • ••I. • --I t i Itt----•• •14 • ; I I I• 1 1• . 1 , . , ; •-.. . . ..1.. .i 1 ,_,.. .. ! ... li i ! i i-1 I I , - I --- ... ; - • • --- I I • • ; I 1 1 1 1 _.. . .,. . . ... ... 11 I I pil 1 .1 ' i ., , .1. ..-. il I I -__-...j.C...i:" ., I..- I -,-- 7... --.I I, .11.4. I 1. --.-....7.r I.Ir_1.I ! I. 7. - I -• • I-.1".I.-.-II I i I : I . . 11111,1 i. i -1 1 • In • i.-- -.." '1 1 1 I 1 I I i I •I 1, • I •--/- - • - -, ---..=i• • , ••-i : 1.• t i---••-• ••[ 1.-1 1 1 r 1: ! . ' Iit • "- -I1 .. _._..,_.i.,_ 1 4-.. ...iti: I ,1 ! ! - • ! 1 i I r a • 1-.,- • -Fr-• • • - - NORTHERN -• --I . • I..-••• • •---- i • 1 -.5.-- -! - • -....- ;. • 1 • tbruntivEsT -- F A11110AD - ''''• • . I ! •t • •• • :I •,gek . . I , 1 . . ..111j1 -1____ 1,NI, I 1 :' : 1 .ioiiir•I i .: -• •1 . 1 I ----- -4. . I . . 4•01 'Dy wAy _...... I. .. . L. .f_ . .1 . .. . I,- . ;- - : • - , 1INTERSATB • , • ,..•-••- • I•••- • t• • ,'-• -, I• i -r ....._ L.__ : . . RIGHWAy 40E i • ! -- -• - 4 •, . . i. .1 ... . . .. rii . .• _,.. ,...._ Md. I I 1 -.' I -"--.- • - t. .I, . j I I • 1 o 1 ' • . • - ; ,, , I - - - I.. .. ...,.....- t it_ . • • • as 4%."1--- . i lizir\• 4-4-1 ...•• . 1.; I 1. 1_, i _... ... _ I. I .t ; i r•-•'•• .- r-rT111 . . 11i ' '' • ji ----I 1 ' '- • • ''11 II7-1..! I..--: .: ..4 I I._ . ...... . ______ .1, . .. _ , ..., . , .. 1 i .l ..: . 'I __ I__. 1..._ . .1IA . f-I 1. I . - -- I I-1 •I i •X I OM .. f i • I'•-I $ - • 1. i•! ; 1I '• •I I i•• i . . --, i_. 1-, I il a : , II ; .1 .11Li-. . ! i..i...i 1 . - •• .1- 1 1 I 1 II, t-t - : •,-. 1 . • 0----- 1 . „ .Hil • . ! Ili I - • Trr, 11-- • • i - IiII • I 1 . 1 . r • I 11. 1, 11. !:0-. ill • Ill ' ii I , • .. t 1 : 1 I .in 1 •I ' ! i ' l l • -'01 ' - HI ' II- -- I ' Illi • ' 11 II • • •; ' i . : I I I 4 1 .1 i I . . ; 44 1 . • • 1,, • , -,-f4 . • i • • . , •• 1• • 1 • , 1 • . , ! . . . • I . ? ! , , 4 11 , • I '1D • . . ; i I • • • • • . 1 ; 4 i . 1 . .---; ! 4. 1 .. il • 1 . , 11.4 •.. ; 11 iii :0: 1 I : I • : ; 1 , r. , , 2 • ! , ; , 1 •• • 4 • I „...,,, - , , ,, , , , •, 4 i , I 1.1 I : , I . . , I I01 • i • ; • • ii • • . I , i •Iii . -- - I - f if- -: • ; -Ii • : 11 : 1I • • ..1 . , i , 11 : : : . . 11 IMI • I I • 1 ' 1 • v I. • 1 i . i1 ..1. i. 4.,, a,; 1, 1•' I• i; Ii.••..•,,! C.••.. iII7,'11. j..- 4.) I;• i1, Ii1I• i:.,'„ 1I: 1 I:•.' J'. T; a:;.. i1!-IIHI'-.4I1I1,i.•.-•! I"••.•..',. i',.,! I I;• 1.III;, diiI-.'._ 1' 1. 4I! Ii, I; i 1-__-•" 1II!• tt:, i I,:i,•' Ii. i! II.;';,.., I•.: l•.•.•• 1i:1i,-.--• 1•.•..•.i. 111• I. t1..-•.. I I• 1*-.---- 1••"-, I• 1.!' 1!-"..-• 1•"'.4"'--- I'-. 1 i!: nI1I• 1•.'„•••!• I4iair1 i-_.._ 1Ik_" .•:.:11I. 1II • i,; I; 1•---•_'".-• r',• riVi! 11iI; F v t:•.--.•1;_.-_-_-.:--._• 1, i141-.-. 1I.„,. I..•4t4r1..••.-:•.•:i4'..• ii.j.... 1, T•'.. I-, iIT11t.-'-'•i_.i1-_•-."•,ii, 1_• •'-; t? 1.!-•' 2:, i: i;..,-'•-;;, 11." 1I.-.. 1. 4.....' i•. 1•.. 1Ir, 8 I1I1t• pI. I0. 1--•, 1-. k Z_-.•.. 141.-- T.•:..-2•. 1.; 1-- iE.•I.11I1t;i i--•..•;•. I11..; 7T r• 11I iI.1L1,..:-.• 1, sI1Ii; I Ii1II1i! I, 1 _ . I. ,_ II__ 1 ,. 1 . . 4_1 • I• i•, I','1i••! 1...•;• 1I'iI, 4f.I11i! i 1l11I. I 1 . • • •I• J. I I • 1 1 I I I ,t,- i - 4i 11 11 ,7 4 W 1 - - 11 -ff fI i Ii1 1 .1 ; 1 I - - i1-11 RIdGEUNOF c I 1 - 1 I I 1 1 0 JSTRUCTIOh- k ' - • 1 11 I 11 1 - • l I 11 ' i. 1-.I s , 1, • i 1 1 II!. 11•. 1, p 1,, 1IiIII 1 I • • • ..-- ••1 44 4,11 I 7 .. .. _ ..., - 1 ,-- 71 • !•- •• . I- • -! : 1. • --II-I 1 - I I11 ! I 11 i--'I . il I... .- I -• . .• •-,•-• I ,. , ' '. " -:-1 '- 1 ' • - 17.- 1.1-- I . 1 ___.. :. -.. -_::-1.-il.., 1...:1- : i ; .1.1 . 74 ,1.17.: : I 1..-1 .i i .-- 1 ' 1 i• . i i I 1 . 1 . . ,. ..L 1 t- : _I. i.•1 _ • • , , 1.. . 1..11 , I . . . ,. ... ... , . ._i. i_i i... .. _ . . I. .. 1- -.71-I I I 1 1 -.-t • ; ...• ..• i.•:-i . , 1._MINN -t NEN _ 1 I ._1 , I. - -., .. .1._ 1 . MEIN MINIM I -1 i I ' 1-7- --I i• :I I t-•- -. , 1 - 1 4-• I L._.:.. ... .,._.1 • • 1..1•.- 1- .-- ' i :I _ t...! . .f 11-. t--- ---1-- •-•- I 1 1 1-- I • "•-• • 'I ; • • I II-1 1 i •i- -1- I• •• ! I- .- r•-••' •I• r• • I - I , , ..,_ i ,• •r . .i - - - . I- iI.... . . 11 ff. :....1. . ' I• ---- Is 1 1.1 !: . ' .1..1:: P NIA- E-D.Flit D I- I . •.' .1: •• .1 I I• -- I - -1' - ' l'i 4:. 1 I, 1. :• - 1 i i .7 • I-'7'= . 1 I I I 1 •• - II.' - . ! 7 7 i, _•I,I 1 .1 ! MEM 1 . Mill .,_ ._ . •:.-. . 1..r.._...... . .... 111 • 1. 1 • .r i I I 1 i ......... .1 .1 .1 '. •• • . - . 1 • --• . .i..1 ' - . 101iI ....• , 1 ., . .. - I i I1 . . . .m - • i --. i " I. j I 1 -I 1. . i." • - •• 1 • . I , iIt : : - •.... ; • i : • Inus ••-% 8 -. § 0 ,.._ . 4 . 1 ,.. . ..... • --,-• i I 1-• i-1---• - t- t • ,- -• i--- ? • -- - -LI I' ' ! ' t• •r.0 x; • . I , . I . '" I . '. " ''' II • -. 1. 1 ...li i ..... . ' '• 1 . • l'.”. .• !I. 1' -I -.. . • t. i • , :i. 9.coo g >m x.m rii. ia i •-.- • ,-, , ,.. 4 m 03 XI 33 g. It-I. ---7 . i . - iIi. 1-.-_-, . 1 I.. ._ -. 1 J.. 1. ..---_.1 i 2:••.... ... ... ;I •• • • $ . • i- 1 , • ' • I : • • i. I.o m ,, 1'1 1 .„.r .1. I - I I i - '.. : .. . . 1..4: J.-.i 1 . . i .12 0 ° 6 g i: G itpskt- :- 1 I i• ;1 I .4 1-.7 i i . i ..z 0 0 1 . .-••••1 l• ..1 • • • 1 - - ••• 1 1. . . .. . . P SA ONED ••I : i I • i10000NA 1 • -- 1._IAILROAD • I • .i 1 . 1aaI1j.II 1- I : I , • li 01- 1_..1...-. II •••• • , .. 1•I. ..II 46 e I ..1 1 e MA cn ea o 1 1 FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY ' FLOOD PROFILES .TI C) KING COUNTY, WA IANDINCORPORATEDAREAS , SPRINGBROOK CREEP1 w 1 1 I 1 1 i 11 ELEVATION (FEET NGVD) 1I I N r^r_ O 0 U1 - C O+ O O.I i I • : 1• i 1 j.: •I ' _17 : I- I. 1111 1:1 .! , 4. ..I y f.I , L ' .^ , t , VI.LLI-Y:Pp pK II . I •Ii 1 I1irI. 1 1 I I .• I ••, ' ' . i i-t•I 1: ' • I • :I ' ' S ' i ` : I IA :I i I , 1 ! . ,1 ! I I • . , 1 . , 1 • .._, I 1 1 1, , ! 1 I I !.: , tyi r i i; I 1 I :I '• I , i . • I . • : • •. I t , • , . ; I I 1 1 ; Try - •y.J....;- •..-.-.••. t-}__... Tom-. .. . i at I I1 1 • I!• 1I t11 . . , .I r . I I t 1 - I • I i. . • , , : 1 . 1, L.is 1 I •1 j I i I 1 • 1 1 ii I II + 1 i 1 I I , I {' I I , ; 1 1 I , I .r., I. I i • ,./ 4 • .1 II I.+I ; ' , • . i 1.77:_ii.-...1..1 1 : , f j 1 .. I I• 1. : I i i•, 1 : ;'+. . • 1 ' '• , ' • ' , 11 1 • 1. _ ' i .'I 1 '- i • I- 1 1 r N . . • • I . . . . . . . '. !. . .. _ 1•- 1 i ' '. 1 i ; I I $9U JVEST 43R;y , . . I'' 00 1 , EN• ' .;. ; Il. . : .;.I '• .. •I I t-I ' . .i_.i.._ ,TfiEET iI. •-' • :T.+. i CITY p KENt !.-I-+ I }; • ' 1• 4. 1 i• 1 •I . 1 i h_ I }. 1 t-fit r$y ;.I• , ;1. ,_, , r i . '-.1 CONF U'ENCEWI H . , • j . ' -1. II 1' j i_ •I• I_ • I I -• I F I. i-. . . . ; ' . •.;.., •MILL' REEK (KE 11T) 1 II' _ • • +i_ -. ,. _ .. 1.... -_--- 1 i' : ; I i •• , .1 I i i ! ! 1...T i _.__. a • r i' ' 1• . , I J {..:; : ;. ti ; r i I i. 1 1 i' r. 1+. I ' .-ter_•-: ; 4 , _ .• I t , 1' fII I.,.I.1 L . I .•I • , If I • • : • . fl k=. :. i .1' I • f_. .;'11!' II . I ; I' i..1 f ;..; : ' i1. i . • • ,• • : Ii. I I - 1 I I i I i . . . j : w• + ! • . . _ r. '.i .. . .. ( I. • 1 II ' i i i. - II • ..I + I IIfr F'+ '... T' I. i ' • II11 ' ii 1 I.,I 1 1 I 1 I i 8OTH AVEI tUE'SOi TH' I. , . . !I . •. I 1 I•• I 1.. 1 , •-. 11 1..1-i 1.• 1.-r , •_4-'J` / • ; • . . • I. • 1 f I 1 1 • . . . 11 . I 1 1. • •• - I. I ;. 4 'i.1.. • - 4 • , r I. 1-- .I I i. I • • . • • • , •-. ; r •• • I I 11 1 1 I •• , {{ -+ I- _i 1..1_i .1 I. 1 t I , i , i I !1 '• i- F•F.' , I, t--• ' . ' :. ; ; • : 1---I 1 ' I i ! ; I ; FPRIV ATE BRIDbE; • . ; . 1 1. Li i ,i 1 i I ; i III . .. I. • • 3o w i . 1.1 • • f. I I.i •1.,,_. i, . , -. 1 • 1 I ' . . . I I. I I II IiII : •I I . i • • ir. : • II. ! •/ t..; , . . • I O II . , I Ir + r1 1 I i I I I• irl • . I ;,; o• I I1 :I I : I mwi 1 iii i •y i I ... 1.. • , 1 i 1 I • 1 r••I'-• 1•I- • 1, 1... . . ....! i I I 1 1 , I I 1..__ I I l 1- 1 r-i I: . ..,• i . . . , 1 I : : N jjll. •11 •- . i I , + I--if-t 1 r . I I 1 RAILROAD spurn m I -C i , 1 i • .. 1 • . I' I•i 1 ;•; 1 O w i • O I. 1 : 1.I. i.; 1 I +I l' .1 I i I I'' .. I m rtT. T. a II •._. . --SOUTH 188TH•STRE • I..I t. • i . .I 1 i• 1• r. 1 . . II• f , I 1 1 I, . A 1 ,I .. ; 1 , 1 • s I 1- 1 ;. i I , I i 1 I: ' : ' 84TH AVEN• UE nOOTH i D f._• ,•_ i • i 1.: I• EAST VALLEY ROADOI ' : , .T. 1 _- -1.{ •. •I 1 I 1 i ,NAV 14`A.N..\\%\\V 1 I ,I I.;, , 1 i I 1 1I.ji.I 1 , . I I1 , 1 1 . ,_ I III :. N 1.I e. 1 1 i i V. 1 i.- is ; (. .I 1_: '.t: 1• • ,I;t 1 I - 1 I y 1-.-.. ._..._1 -- •L.i , .; • : i j 1 1 • 1. ! - I* I I' . . . 1.4 1 ; , . ,•I • • ; • • • . _. !.{ ' ,. I_.. I I i .f.r,._'__!_.. , : 1 ••1 ,. • • . I 1 . • • 1 : . .I : • I. . . . 1 1..• • i11 I . I + I I . 3 1 1 .. . f -.. I T, -:..-- -}-- 1- ' t I i.. .. . II If t ; •-1'- - , 1I- _ I ;_- 1jI1.1 , . 1 , . • ••.•I • • -1-I- _/ . • t. • . • I 1..;. -....._ .1 , • • 1 r l ! • i • 1 1 I•1 1 1 1 . • . i r. , 10: 1• 1 _-• • !-E_-" . . 1 I. , i I ; I i • • . •. I 1 : 1 I 1 • i I ! i I l' :.I 1:; ,;..; i I. i 1 • PRIVATE.BRIDG . .I , 1 . 1 1 I Fr-, -.7.,---.. :IT. .' ..1.\ 1. i..t..1• A I mr. I.'-.1.-Ft.-I t ffI4 I • i a rTjr-'-m i 2 o 8 -p • f y _. 1 l•-i-. 1 • ; , 1 I { i. ORIVATE BRIbOt . . ; A O r.0 m •C tKi ji • . I, i •-t. I-' .l' _ • . • i t I i i . . • , . ` 1 r7" • • . 1 b m $ 7 0 D ' i .11! 1 i:F %"_ : }! 1 I 1 i-- ' i- 1 pr3 m m f . . -. . I1 - • : 't 1 - 11. . , • . . ! I. : • . : ' 1 : i i 1 : : . . . . i . ZO O O r I i.i. I. I • i H 1 • 1 I f I • i I II poo0i. 1 1 . ' • iF. 1 I- 1 I II i I I II L. ..i•.i. 1- t -`- ...' I i ' _L. i F 1•. ..'.} i . . i ali O ClI O C I II11 1 IIty'li l il 11 FEDERAL EMi.RGEINCY ANAGEMENT AGENCY . j 'FLOOD PROFILES 111 1. KING COU TY, WA AND INCORIPO ATED AREAS •, ! SPRINGBROOK CREEK II,I i I/ 1 11111111111.11111.....h, Cr.:. 0.,:;1:,.. ..ii i .0... ...,.. . iBOEINGCSTCPROPZRTY'LiNE BOEING LONGACR ; OFFICE . ii.,rPARK (LOP) PROPERTY UNE 1..ilit- ', pl FLOODPLAIN AREAS BELOWELEVATION13.0' (REFER TO RENTON ADMINISTRATIVE POUCY DETERMINATION FOR COMPEN- SATORY STORAGE REQUIREMENTS, o 150 300 1 GRAPHIC SCALE 500 I 6/26/97)iii 4..'.'*"„,, 0,••';4'411- ' - ”'- ' —...---.-,.........,.. '' -4/iii : '. "'.-0.1, q$;? Old elli. ip ,,,__,-.._,„„-.. .._ - 4. • -do* 4:-,..,,:....‘;.....:4,,iy fii d ,..i,o•-• witr....•' i,...:,, i•Vo...'l!' : 1)?;..44. i,.,. ., doke.,‘5,, , trjore. :::;,,":1•....;;:;?,!!.,;:: ,_th... -..,,,..........___, ..._...._.- ..._.. , 4e:4,....._ ••-Fi':. . .= !I L.W.,.,16V.• - al • 1,01 :i.- j-------„, -\ I 1it 14110.41,!.P.,.1r•-ii;.,..-i,-,;•.:-. .;.t.'ff'..: lii,!,,,' ',I.4----------,-.--vn _,,,....,,, I' S' 4/ I \ ••••••• I:!I::::-..--,,!-..:.:-,.:-.....-,L,i,-,---.---:-..1,,,,-o,;.. , .,. N 'hT',--'-..::,:=.. ,2.---,?. ,... ,T..-1 ,C1TY OF SEATTLE i BOEING si s_ ,, 4 ' -. 4tiffilgitti:P%ii:T.,.;:ttiVIIIIMIIPrimillip'., . l'I'' . L- - 7--'' ' ',...L i:•:', • -.% .. , 11.. p0Millt1100011*..,..li FJ411.0111M111.10114 ..,..,.-_, it - ,,. „ a rwc, is. 4 I I DAKESDALE- i..; - 't •-.41i , UNE irlime.:: sot__. ri,,,,,,,,,,,,,,73 m(44' •---' . ';1 ,:,::•,:i'4'il.,i,,..,:•,,:. '..„'".„.... : a-1,1z'!‘''-'',. . • - • , _ • • .. •... : ,' 1" Iii:,, .• •• :I.',..:', ... .._ ,-;;. rooc, ahn. . . - - r., INTA____________1 -_, motHr.rmimartoll5 sloomominly , ,, -,\N•••• ,• • • •AILN, .,•i;, '!i: . -4..' 'I rep. „Wilter.I' LI80E1w1I. tva WM SI 1'...if% .1,,i10, 1 istt•I ,1 csrc 4. il-[IMMO I• . I .4,1, *I . 1 PROPERTY ;. p---iiii I I,iii .............. . ..... . ,....:::t.,, i,ti...iiii;,.,,,,. :......„, 1 . 40.01.41. IIII U 1941allre-1.21111r. '';:; t;" I':'" P‘ 1:ieillillillIll.IIIIII'=Hlil;::1 litiriiityllinall 4 iibiel UNE 111., I' , : ...;PI;:i'llill'2::•!!:,i'''.0 ':::.'-•it l'il!:.•::':, I . ,;iii:-. 111=•"""=,, VOrill 1`..''...• I I'!! 1 25-0-2-1 Y111111.11. 41' op BUILDING Fa , ''. ',1144;:., ..'„.: : A ',7!:-.' !!.•.., 1 i.-.. ....................„..-....-Al', 11118111 -,4411 tiagllfri,h - Cr, i16, ..,_, IIIIP2.11 L... ..hip..,,....... • 15.. le.; I 1.., 11-1 ...............1,,...-,:',•-:.:,..!::!,..;:.i.. .'-'• 1 0, 77..!-ISIN - • : - - ..-- -..A... .......,•,--11‘.. - -VIII - 7 , . •., I,., :,.:::-.. • i•-•i_.i.i.J....,.•':-...:• I',, 1,,, I . . .. .' -'' • ',',°, -, 1, 1•5 !--,r,- ' - - - ,4".' . ' -' .• .: !•!, y,',.',,`,'-,-,;..0..' ., ' • li i' I,• ''! ,: • • . tf AIL -----j4 IT- Di 11 '.1111. 1 \ (''.." 1 ...' f f.. ',:.:::',.:-...,!!!:: 1: 1 1 i A,i'itijii '••• . , •, • 1,41.41 ; i. 0 ,. .—......,--,.. 0 ',,, i!!;:.:.,-,,',..•, ,---,,,! 1: • .. ., !,,,‘,,:-"Ilii L. ...`.-;;i;iiii, :-. . ik.1111'2 .ill'i' 14:''.:•'44... 1',t‘. trit,,,h,:,/T4i,,,... "--.4: ; ,. • ... ::.. : a 4..*: ,;4, .. - - ; • :. •.; i, ' . L e,,., .,: • 4 . GI •- ' , i • i,1 , . • ,,tit110.11.11,11.M14 ii 1 . .. 1 cinix,,.....,,,,,IN t • , •I , 1,-,',1 '!...1', 'I '.:. '-..,. ',.-0'' 1., 1,'' :'-''C*.: 1 11,111111iii.fifiPli ii. ..: ':,:.': ,,:.,:'.'1 il'i% t, 1 'i '. :, , . ' ,%,%.,. 11,.;'•r.., '. , ., "11)1 ,. ; ','' ,'..;''' 11 I.',i' ' 11 ' ,141:i.:::::.::...._,::::.'..:;;11. 3.1.!...! igT; i. i; 1.!iiii.iijiiii,::....::::(,:..........,...:,!...,:::::;,;,.. I, •,,.111 I II • 1 t 41 11111110 lk ii i 4' V'irr 1J N\\ i ilmonol I? ' ' •''' ' '' i,' A - 11 ' . ''''." '..... ,,ii' II' 1.144'. ti '.; '.. '.. ''... NSIiiiJiiii:.,": '...\...........•:::: ....::::;;::f!,.::(.----- "'...,.. ,iEtTi",;,,":;::;....... I .• .• .,' •.".1 ...flf..l'i 4: i *. '...%. ''., .. ';. '.:,'-`:i:41.:.:4- -i:------...,:.:;:ii:,:-/„--, -.I I 1 eft.........,_ fw - l• I 4$. . ' Ii;"1171171114"11 \'i •'... i I"'''';:°,110"I' 1::'.'•':. -i-'1 ...'. ' . ..' '' I '' i i1/4.:.: 11 ."‘'‘ 41441.41 dliIC:.,ii• ...: -"._k:'. - ,- / 1 III11 r 111)111114t I P b 4\ r , ri 1,,, ,...... .,. . .. .„, i 9-•- 40Alltill(19. Illd ML\IM\I•\\ 1s 7I M" i.:;.,.• N I i•..••':' : I.::. : O,-f.„.•.,.. .I1..M....._M,O.. ...,....„,._4.14 ._..; L...- .,‘A_-.:r.-.,A-•,rAg•z---.A---''-*.-r---g-.—BUI1Mi41PRiiM.°iUiC:uO1N. 0 EIGPf1T1I'Oia.17. O iNflwj14r NO•1IR..H' i'- E-IR- M- NM!. R4' 144Apl" 7Il2f)L1jO.RU'1g1141OaL.jUylAt8i1,-DlI l.1li1.*eE.aA4'i1-. D11El1plV1.NPmmTRt-io 0...4...•. „., IOENG PROPERLINE RANAGEMENT WSa1, IwF, E.„.„R I,G..,..-... E... r-.. M..--.... l-. A-...-.. T....„.-.-. A.- sip.5PRVA ROAD\ SURFACEWOJECTM Ial ol—l. a 014002 awilt.fuuweG 5lOritt CNL WS1ER BOOM LONGACRES OFFICE PARK 1 i BOEING CSTC PROP-RTY E 1 I FLOODPLAIN AREAS BELOW i BOEING LONGACR ELEVATION 13.0 (REFER TO PARK ((LOP) OFFICE P RENTONTERM ADMINISTRATIVEIOFORCO POUCY o tso aoo eoo f PROPERTY UNE DETERMINATION COMPEN- SATORY STORAGE REQUIREMENTS, GRAPHIC SCALE r f rrf s 2s 0414 G 1 it i10.y N 4 J/ 'r t.1 ;' A /,„,,......, t,, ,^ ::P :-, v......___..., _. \ \t 1 II _ T if/ Q. t_ 1 i PROPERTY OF f i 71 `I' BOENGo IL i i'12_ 1i.^, \ , jj ! ty,r T,"" yrt mnlurttsu i N ;I` on. ,,,... it,_ tolikt Se ` l lR wow 1 7.I 1 yy. ir le"."—"-- i tilla _ j ice'! Csrc loam 1 1 PROPERTY fmom i if, N 1 r —1 UNE l T r eI I, 1, j 1rie i \ SOUTH 7111irtj'' rc. 25-01 4 i , ti N •' "___._._._.,,__.._._.._. _ , , ill litli c' l O Q tc G: 1 4,i , U' 1 i 11- r ,.. 25-02 41 CSTC I? 1. -'•! c r---•*- BUIU)ING i„91110 Pt .l C .1! a1`I il'.: ifiAllilit mo t ;_ 1.- - A 4.; _........,..........,. .... ......,j t t. I 1 41 i n 19_, ti PPP k \ 04' , 1, -.44 4V J\ 1 at } 1 JII t f i ' f- / i l 1\ ;\ J i rawl 1 - F JJ/ t 1 tumeettetsm't / , c\ -"' .` "' _ : 11.: 11 1 ^ t \ U ! 1 iFn,Ii Itfe t 1 I , t ttm,..ruil 4 j t 1 7// t o 1 -..., t 1 TTT ii, e t, II // i{ 1 t l 1 J/ jt11111isilllltfNti 'f f j r t Wilt t 1 l l y,uuunnuau,etqy 1 / / 1 \` L a~r-ram f )1, +f '# @trnla+ttrunass4 I L^\wi _ r \\ l •illi sj i {I71174elllt Pl llltll _ li: / / / _.. 1 i J 1..j 1 3 moo .eYnt ,• e -__ _' -. 13'---: 4 nuynulnsrn f 4r t dP tIIo f,. 7 II} i t ill, , „. , ----. j It 1 nt +ran:1 I 1' ki ft ,, ` ems.' 1 1IfI ., f '!if;' r le J t: ; J` Jjp.,q,-HZww„tmn V O'% l : I e, 7, , , f 1) ) --•-__j- 7' * Nilkiti t- 7,---1.---..---f--;..;‘-,'.1-_, y i 4 l M t ONG PROPERTY UNE PRNATE ROAD a4st . .' e BURUNGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD 'RACKS C'Ivt L. INC. all IBM a DEWIND a.IBM MEI ME Ae Sreie cn uwnt tea 1 : .r s POST-DEVELOPMENT FLOODPLAIN MAP (1e.49 Q BOI//VQ O• IIIPL I` gos SURFACE PROJECTREPORT FIG AGA•6km' ISsmunicO CNL VASIEG BoaNG LacN S OFFICE PNAI"" i I III I I I I TABLE 7-3 i Comparison of Peak Flows and Water Surface Elevation FEQ Computer Model and FEMA (1) VG. = 13, 1 ; Elevation Datum NGVD) a I I 1 Road- 100-Yr Cur.Flow 100-Yr Fut.Flow 100-Yr Cur.Flow 100-Yr Fut.Flow FEMA(5) way Top Conveyance(6) Conveyance(6) Storage(6) Storage(6), Elev. Location/Discription I 1 Flow Elev Flow Elev Flow Elev Flow Elev Flow Elev I I (efs) (feet) (cfs) (feet) (cfs) (feet) (cfs) (feet) (cfs) Panther Creek u/s of IR-I67(2)170 170 82 92 16.0 i Rolling Hills Creek a I Renton(2)(3) 1 1 167 21.8 174 21.8 87 20.7 99 20.9 130 i 4.0 Shopping Center Culv.Outlet 1 ' Rolling Hills u/s I-405 132'culvert(2)(3) ! i 167 17.8 174 17.8 87 16.8 99 16.9 91 24.0 SR-167 North Crossicig 100 17.0 98 17.0 58 15.2 69 15.6 16.0 I Springbrook Creek BRPS outflow 1044 1223 1360 1700 BRPS inflow 1044 4.1 1223 4.1 734 8.4 1153 13.0 1230 15.0 Grady Way u/s I 935 7.2 1110 7.6 638 8.6 1045 13.0 1100 '16.0 SW 16th Street 934 7.7 1106 8.2 577 8.6 960 13.0 16.4 Confluence of Rolling Hills Creek 930 11.0 1088 11.6 571 9.7 898 13.1 1 15.8 Confluence of Sr 23rd St Channel 819 12.0 989 12.6 502 10.4 807 13.3 I,16.0 sw 27th u/s 17.9 825 14.2 989 15.6 492 11.4 775 14.3 16.3 SW 34th u/s 14.9 887 15.4 1219 16.1 490 12.4 845 15.2 16.8 oakesdaled/s i i 17.1 891 16.0 1227 16.9 489 12.9 846 15.8 17.3 Oakesdaleu/s 117.1 833 17.4 1167 17.9 463 13.6 792 17.3 17.4 1 SW 43rd d/s 22.9 830 17.7 1158 18.3 459 14.0 783 17.6 _ 17.8 SW 43rd u/s i ' 22.9 830 18.2 1158 19.5 459 14.2 783 18.0 1055 17.8 Notes I1)FEMA uses current land use conditions and does not consider future land 1 conditions. Elevations are from FEMA floodway data tables. 2)FEQ simu ated flows at these locations are based upon frequency analysis of Springbrook Creek i flows to the BRPS forebay. Refer to ESGRWP Hydrologic Analysis Report(NHC, 1996) for flows I • based u I on frequency analysis of Panther Creek and Rolling Hills Creek. 3)Flows are)based upon assumption that capacity restriction through Renton Shopping Center is improved such tha no attenuation from isutiface ponding occurs. 4)u/s=upstream,d/s =downstream1 5)Rise in F 3MA water surface elevation at SW 16th Street from the confluence of Rolling Hills Creek is due to unresolved discrepa cy at the upstream boundary of 1989 FEMA restudy(FEMA,1989). 6)Conveyance event reflects a severe local rainstorm without pumping restrictions at the BRPS due to high Green River flows. Storage event reflects a high Green River flow event in which the BRPS must restrict pumping rates in accordance with GRIA. I 1 I ' I ' j I I I I I I ' FIGURE 7. 7 I I C 1 1 ! APPENDIX B Surface Water Management Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 014002\2220\wp\drnrpt01.doc Appendix B September 1998 I 1 it II APPENDIX B EXISTING SITE HYDROLOGY This appendix contai>is;information related to Section IV(A) "Existing Site Hydrology" and is organized as follows: 1. Basin 3 !,North Main Track Basin Figure 'll B.1 - Pre-Development Surface Water Management Drainage Basins.'' This figure indicates existing flow travel path information and existing' (conditions used to complete the Area Weighted Runoff Coefficient table,below. ji Table -,Area Weighted Runoff Coefficient. The table includes soil groups, hydrologic soil groups, runoff curve numbers, existing land use descriptions, and areas of each particular land use. This information is combined to determine the pervious and impervious- area runoff curve numbers. Table 1 j Pre-Development Surface Water Management Time of Concentration or Travel Time. II Detailed) pre-development Surface Water Management hydrographs for Water Quality, 2-, 5-, 10-, 25-, 50-, and 100-year, 24-hour events and the 100-year Ili day event. 2. Basin 4 L South Main Track Basin I 1 Figure 13.1 - Pre-Development Surface Water Management Drainage Basins. I This figure indicates existing flow travel path information and existing i conditionsi used to complete the Area Weighted Runoff Coefficient tables, below. Table - Area Weighted Runoff Coefficients for each subbasin. The tables include soil groups, hydrologic soil groups, runoff curve numbers, existing land use descriptions, and areas of each particular land use. This information is combined to determine the pervious and impervious area runoff curve numbers. I ! i Table - Pre-Development Surface Water Management Time of Concentration or Travel Times for each subbasin. 1l Detailed pre-development Surface Water Management hydrographs for each subbasin for Water Quality, 2-, 5-, 10-, 25-, 50-, and 100-year, 24-hour events and the 100-year 7-day event. 1 Surface Water Management Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, leo. 014002\2220\wp\drnrpt01.doc Appendix B-1 September 1998 I NM 5-BASIN 4-8 1 4.'',' ' Z % W.''Z4*., SCALE: NONE SPRINGBROOK CREEK a ji+f ãti: 4& ii,-' - PROJECT SITE 4. - . l411., c.•• i I I'. •,..4(..4:4•...-•*•144, .4, ' 0 n... . a moo.:+-k t 1 lz Li__ -.,,, 4 I.0‘,..t.-'.. t.,.., ii, Sit E, 4 11 filoAli\i177 ,f-. .,1...„ .A.-,....-... 1 e.,r.:Ittj, .."'-'7.-**74t---7-'---... 77-_-_-- ,...'' • I ';IflPiPbb.fttitit 1 I t•'.'t a 0 i l at p a C 1-01-j _ .. 1.i..,''..... A.. I i'•••.: Irk, ir ,r4000 ' ' 14i;',,-,----- 1, `...:"`' . -= I. ' .1 r..,.... 43, , 4 hit/ . ,,,../zsr_ ---....----, ar.s. .,11 111400i 1 f i l\ 14fl€flt iitn 7 7 , iri....r.r ti,itt q awi tI isiSW16thSTD .y•. •.." i 1 14 i{ i= -\ It r t ; I iii TLk 4.:: -!''‘' k E„1 " ft.! i[,• r....+ ., s+++,_ •'„ 8 rmr.an €_E iJ •+c.1} 4'...41 SITE SOIL GROUPS r. ;i, T uta UR - URBAN LAND g \.. p 1ti"` y.." :K C ^•p .a` :..., Sy.: I r 01meg Yr ice1WO - WOODINVILLE SILT LOAM l\\\ PY - PUYALLUP FINE SANDY LO BNRR- _I NG - NEWBERG SILT LOAM z, I"x _ UPRR rf 00. 5011111114 NO gi ..:Ibi•- 01 ' 8 von. 41:1 Slit , III , !,,cili a ,1 rai-Ap,, _ y k1 II I AS- AHIGWWAiESTV4611GREENRIVER l G NM..1 IN A•..,11L era MOM Pi ns . . M Ifw. flYACCEPTM PRE-DEVELOPMENT DRAINAGE BASINS •••••-+• FIG. B.1SURFACEPROECTNA©E AENT ,0;t__AVAIEFACOr 01•002 ia:%son i OPAL)MASTER wMCArAES CATICE PARK I Boeing Commercial Airplane Group BCAG Headquarters Building 25-20 Site Development Area Weighted Runoff Coefficient Post-Development CSTC Drainage Basin A North Main Track Basin) Sub-Basin A-2 Soil Hydrologic Curve Land Use Area I Weight I Weighted Group Group Number Description sO Curve Number Ur I D 98 Building Roofs 392,512 1 14%13.56 Ur D 98 , Pavements 733,588 1 26% j 25.35 Ur 1 91 , Gravel Parking Lots 158,000 6% 5.07 Ur I 1 D 90 1 Landscaping(good)1 980,705 35% !31.12 Ur 1 D 90 Lawns(good) 380,501 13%12.07 Ur D 100 Water Surfaces 182,098 6% 6.42 Py B 80 Lawns(good) 8,978 0% 0.25 TOTALS I 2,836,382 I 100% 93.84 Notes: 1. Soil groups estimated from Soil Survey of King County Area, Washington, Des Moines Quadrangle 1973 2. Hydrologic groups determined from King County Surface Water Design Manual, Figure 3.5.2A 3. Curve Numbers determined from King County Surface Water Design Manual,Table 3.5.2E Impervious area(curve number>=98) 30.03 Acres Impervious area curve number 98.28 Pervious area (curve number<98) 35.08 Acres Pervious area curve number 90.04 Basin Composite Curve Number 93.84 BLsin Total Areal 65.11 Acres 013747/2210/engr/-Kbcalc16.xls[Post CSTC A-2] 9/11/98 Sverdrup Civil,Inc. The Boeing Company Surface Water Management Project (SWMP) Post-Development CSTC Time of Concentration or Travel Time Drainage Basin A CSTC Site Basin) Sub-Basin A-2 Sheet Flow(4pplicable to rc only) Surface description (see Table 3.5.2C) asphalt parking Ipt s Manning's roughness coefficient, nSh 0 011 ' Flow length (Lk=300'),sheet 70 feet: 2-year,24-hogr rainfall, P2 2A00indhei Land slope, Sheet 0•00titt 1Ttsheet 0.02 hours 1 nTtsheet1.15 min Channel Flow, Section 1 Surface description (see Table 3.5.2C) concrete Pipe Flow length, Lch annel Watercourse ,lope, S channel 6,906 Factor, kc (see Table 3.5.2C) 42 Velocity, Vc,he1 3.0 f/s Tt channel 0.11 hours Tt channel 6.85 min Results:Basin A (Post-Development) Total Tc or Tt 0.13 hours Total Tc or Tt 8.00 min Notes: 1. Worksheet is based on Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds, 2nd Edition (Technical Release Number 55), US SCS, 1986 2. Worksheet!modified to conform with Section 3.5.2 of the King County Suiface Water Design Manual 013893/2220/engr-Kbcalc17.xls[Post-CSTC A-2] 9/11/98 Sverdrup Civil,Inc. 9/11/98 10 :43 :24 am Sverdrup Civil Inc page 1 THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT POST CSTC, BASIN A-2 BASIN SUMMARY BASIN I : AA-2-10 j NAME: BASIN A-2 POST CSTC, 10YR SBUH ME HODOLOGY I TOTAL EA 65 . 11 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFAL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP . PRECIPI'ATION 2 . 90 inches AREA. . : 35 ..08 Acres 30 . 03 Acres TIME IN ERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 04 98 .28 TC 8 . 00 min 8. 00hmin ABSTRAC ION COEFF:I 0 .20 i` PEAK RA E: 38 .22 cfs VOL: 12 .30 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min II BASIN I : AA-2-100Ii NAME: BASIN A-2 POST CSTC, 100YR SBUH ME HODOLOGY TOTAL EA 65 .11 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIP#ATION 3 . 90 inches AREA. . : 35 . 08 Acres 30 . 03 Acres TIME IN ERVAL • • 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 04 98 .28 TC • • 8 . 00 min 8 . 006min ABSTRAC ION COEFF: 0 .20 PEAK RA E: 54 . 58 cfs VOL: 17. 52 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN I : AA-2-2 • NAME: BASIN A-2 POST CSTC, 2YR SBUH ME HODOLOGY TOTAL EA 65 . 11 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFAL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPI ATION 2 . 00 inches AREA. . : . 35 . 08 Acres 30 . 03 Acres TIME IN ERVAL , •] 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 04 98 . 28 TC 8 . 00 min 8 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 PEAK RATE: 23 . 74 cfs VOL: 7 . 72 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN I : AA-2-25i1 NAME: BASIN A-2 POST CSTC, 25YR SBUH ME HODOLOGY TOTAL EA i65 . 11 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFAL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPI ATION j 3 .40 inches AREA. . : 35 . 08 Acres 30 . 03 Acres TIME IN ERVAL I 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 04 98 . 28 TC 8 . 00 min 8 . 006min ABSTRAC ION COEFF: 0 . 20 PEAK RA E: 46 .39 cfs VOL: 14 . 90 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min 9/11/98 10 :43 :2 am Sverdrup Civil Inc page 2 THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT POST CSTC, BASIN A-2 BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: AA-2-5 NAME: BASIN A-2 POST CSTC, 5YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 65 .11 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE L KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 2 .40 inches AREA. . : 35 . 08 Acres 30 . 03 Acres ' _ TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 04 98 .28 TC 8 . 00 min 8 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF 0 .20 PEAK RATE: 30 . 12 cfs VOL: 9 . 74 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: AA-2-50 NAME: BASIN A-2 POST CSTC, 50YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 65 . 11 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION: . . . : 3 .45 inches AREA. . : 35 . 08 Acres 30 . 03 Acres ,__. TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 04 98 . 28 TC 8 . 00 min 8 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 PEAK RATE: 47 .20 cfs VOL: 15 . 16 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: AA-2-WQ NAME: BASIN A-2 POST CSTC, WQ SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 65 . 11 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 0 . 67 inches AREA. . : 35 . 08 Acres 30 . 03 Acres ,_ , TIME INTERVAL. . . . :: 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 04 98 .28 TC 8 . 00 min 8 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 PEAK RATE: 4 .41 cfs VOL: 1 . 62 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min I The Boeing Company Surface Water Management Project(SWMP) Area Weighted Runoff Coefficient Post-Development CSTC Drainage Basin A Delta Area Basin) Sub-Basin A-3 Soil Hydrologic Curve Land Use Area Weight Weighted Group Group Number . Description sf) Curve Number Ur D ' 90 !Landscaping(good) 121,924 24%21.37 Ur D 100 . !Water Surfaces 42,836 8% 8.34 Ur D 91 1 Gravel Parking Lots 5,500 1% 0.97 Ur I C 87 ' !Sand Racing Track(dirt road) I 59,753 12%10.12 Ur D 92 ' Horse Walking Areas(fair) 16,739 3% 3.00 ' Py I B j 80 . Landscaping(good) 180,242 35%28.08 Py B 85 ' Gravel Parking Lots 22,966 4% 3.80 Py B 78 , Meadow 41,250 8% 6.27 Py B 80 ;Lawns(good) 1,347 0% 0.21 Py 1 B 100' Water Surfaces 20,956 4% 4.08 TOTALS I 1 1 513,513 100% 86.25 Notes: 1. Soil groups estimated from Soil Survey of King County Area, Washington,Des Moines Quadrangle 1973 2. Hydrologic roups determined from King County Surface Water Design Manual,Figure 3.5.2A 3. Curve Numbers determined from King County Surface Water Design Manual,Table 3.5.2B Impervious area(curve number>=98) 1.46 Acres Impervious area curve number 100.00 Pervious area(curve number<98) 10.32 Acres Pervious area curve number 84.29 Basin Composite Curve Number 86.25 Basin Total Area' 11.79 Acres 01 38 9 3/2220/engr/-Kbcalcl6.xls[Post-CSTC A-3] 9/11/98 Sverdrup Civil,Inc. The Boeing Company Surface Water Management Project (SWMP) Post-Development CSTC Time of Concentration or Travel Time Drainage Basin A CSTC Site Basin) Sub-Basin A-3 Sheet Flow(Applicable to T c only) Surface description (see Table 3.5.2C) lawn:,:: Manning's roughness coefficient, nsheet Flow length (L<=300), Lsneet 200,fee# 2-year, 24-hour rainfall, P2 2.00 inches"":'; Land slope, Ssheet Ttsheet 0.36 hours Ttsheet 21.6 min Shallow Concentrated Flow Surface description (see Table 3.5.2C) brushy ground..Witf7somitrees;.•`, Flow length, Lsheilow Watercourse slope, Sshanow 0.060 ft/ft Factor, ks (see Table 3.5.2C) Velocity, Vshanow i 1.2 f/s Ttshallow 0.07 hours Tt shallow 4.4 min Results:Basin A (Post-Development) Total To or Tt 0.43 hours Total To or Tt 1 126.0 min Notes: 1. Worksheet is based on Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds, 2nd Edition (Technical Release Number 55), US SCS, 1986 2. Worksheet modified to conform with Section 3.5.2 of the King County Surface Water Design Manual 013893/2220/engr-Kbcalc17.xls[Post-CSTC A-3] 9/11/98 Sverdrup Civil,Inc. I I 1 9/11/98 10 :43 :37im Sverdrup Civil Inc page 1 THE BOEING COMPANY I SURFACE ATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT POST CST BASIN A 3 BASIN SUMMARY j , BASIN ID: AA-3-10 NAME: BASIN A-3 ,POST CSTC, 10YR SBUH MET ODOLOGY TOTAL AR A 11.78 Acres BASEFLOWS: '0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITr•TION 2 . 90 inches AREA. . : 10 .32 Acres 1 .46 Acres TIME INT RVAL 10 . 00 min . CN 84 .29 99 . 99 I TC 26 . 00 min 26 . 00 'min ABSTRACT ON COEFF: 0 .20 i ' PEAK RAT : 3 .43 ifs VOL: 1 . 60 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: AA-3-100 NAME: BASIN A-3 POST CSTC, 100YR 1 1 SBUH METHODOLOGY I TOTAL AT: A 11. 78 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 3 . 90 inches AREA. . : 10 .32 Acres 1 .46 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 .min CN 84 . 29 99 . 99 TC 26 . 00 min 26 . 001min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 PEAK RAT : 5 . 55 cfs VOL: 2 .46 Ac-ft TIME: ' 480 min BASIN ID: AA-3-2 NAME: BASIN A-3 POST CSTC, 2YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL ARIA 11. 78 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 2 . 00 inches AREA. . : 10 . 32 Acres 1 .46 Acres TIME INTERVAL ' • 10 . 00 min CN 84 . 29 99 . 99 TC 26 . 00 min 26 . 00 ;min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 PEAK RAT! : • 1 . 71 cfs VOL: 0 . 89 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: AA-3-25 NAME: BASIN A-3 POST CSTC, 25YR SBUH MET ODOLOGY TOTAL ARIA 11 . 78 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE I KC24HR PERV IMP i PRECIPITATION I 3 .40 inches AREA. . : 10 . 32 Acres 1 .46 Acres 1 TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 84 . 29 99 . 99 TC 26 . 00 min 26 . 00 .min ABSTRACTION COEFF: I 0 . 20 PEAK RAT! : 4 .47 cfs VOL: 2 . 02 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min Civil Inc page 219810 :43 :37 am Sverdrupp g9/1 / THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT POST CSTC, BASIN A-3 BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: AA-3-5 NAME : BASIN A-3 POST CSTC, 5YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 11 . 78 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 2 .40 inches. . AREA. . : 10 .32 Acres 1 .46 Acres I ' TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 84 .29 99 . 99 TC 26 . 00 min 26 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 I PEAK RATE: 2 .44 cfs VOL: 1.20 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: AA-3-50 NAME: BASIN A-3 POST CSTC, 50YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 11 . 78 Acres • BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP I PRECIPITATION 3 .45 inches AREA. . : 10 . 32 Acres 1.46 Acres . _, TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 84 .29 99 . 99 TC 26 . 00 min ' 26 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 PEAK RATE: 4 . 58 cfs VOL: 2 . 07 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: AA-3-WQ NAME: BASIN A-3 POST CSTC, WQ SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 11 :78 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE L KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 0 . 67 inches AREA. . : 10 . 32 Acres 1 .46 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 84 . 29 99 . 99 TC 26 . 00 min 26 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 PEAK RATE: 0 . 18 cfs VOL: 0 . 12 Ac-ft TIME : 480 min I__ Boeing Commercial Airplane Group BCAG Headquarters Building 25-20 Site Development Area Weighted Runoff Coefficient Post-Development Building 25-20 Drainage Basin A North Main Track Basin) Sub-Basin A-2 Soil hydrologic Curve Land Use Area Weight Weighted Group Group Number Description sf) Curve Number Ur D 98 Building Roofs 392,512 14%13.56 Ur D 98 Pavements 766,896 27%26.50 Ur D 91 Gravel Parking Lots 158,000 6% 5.07' Ur j D 90 , Landscaping(good) 947,397 33%30.06 Ur D 90 Lawns(good) 380,501 I 13%12.07 Ur D 100 Water Surfaces 182,098 6% 6.42 Py B 80 Lawns(good) 8,978 0% 0.25, TOTALS 2,836,382 I 100% I 93.94 Notes: 1. Soil groups estimated from Soil Survey of King County Area, Washington,Des Moines Quadrangle 1973 2. Hydrologic groups determined from King County Surface Water Design Manual, Figure 3.5.2A 3. Curve Numbers determined from King County Surface Water Design Manual,Table 3.5.2B Impervious area(curve number>= 98) 30.80 Acres Irrtpervious area lcuve number 98.27 PI rvious area(curve number< 98) 34.32 Acres P rvious area curve number 90.05 Basin Composite Curve Number 93.94 Basin Total Area ,65.11 Acres II i 4 I 13747/2210/engr/-Kbcalcl6.xls[Post-2520 A-2] 9/11/98 Sverdrup Civil,Inc. The Boeing Company Surface Water Management Project (SWMP) Post-Development Building 25-20 Time of Concentration or Travel Time Drainage Basin A CSTC Site Basin) Sub-Basin A-2 Sheet Flow(Applicable to T, only) Surface description (see Table 3.5.2C) asphalt parking(ot Manning's roughness coefficient, nsheet 0.011; Flow length (L =300'), Lsheet 70 feet2. 2-year, 24-hour rainfall, P2 2;04 inches; ". ; Land slope, Sslheet 0;020.ftlft Ttsheet 0.02 hours Ttsheet 1.15 min Channel Flow, Section 1 Surface description (see Table 3.5.2C) concrete.pipc.:, . Flow length, l-channel 1220 ft Watercourse slope, Schannel 0.00510t;': Factor, kc (see Table 3.5.2C) 42. : . I Velocity, Vchannel 3.0 f/s Ttchannel 0.11 hours Tt channel 6.85 min Results:Basin A (Post-Development) Total Tc or Tt 0.13 hours Total Tc or Tt 8.00 min Notes: 1. Worksheet'is based on Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds, 2nd Edition (Technical Release Number 55), US SCS, 1986 2. Worksheetimodified to conform with Section 3.5.2 of the King County Su face Water Design Manual it 013893/2220/engr-Kbcalc17.xls[Post-2520 A-2]9/11/98 Sverdrup Civil,Inc. 9/11/98 10 :44 :10 am Sverdrup Civil Inc page 1 THE BOEING COMPANY II SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT i POST BL G 25-20, BASIN A-2 I. I I BASIN SUMMARY BASIN I : BA-2-10 NAME: BASIN A-2 POST 25-20, 10YR SBUH ME HODOLOGY TOTAL EA 65 .12 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs II RAINFAL TYPE i KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPI ATION 2 . 90 inches AREA. . : • 34 . 32 Acres 30 . 80 Acres TIME IN ERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 05 98 . 27 TC 8 . 00 min 8 . 00 ' min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 PEAK RATE: 38 .38 cfs VOL: 12 .35 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN II : BA-2-100' NAME: BASIN A-2 POST 25-20, 100YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL A ',EA 65 . 12 Acres • BASEFLOWS : ' 0 . 00 cfs RAINFAL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 3 . 90 inches AREA. . :. 34 .32 Acres 30 . 80 Acres TIME IN ERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 05 98 . 27 TC 8 . 00 min 8 . 00ilmin ABSTRAC ION COEFF:' 0 .20 PEAK RA E: 54 .73 cfs VOL: 17 .58 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN I : BA-2-2 NAME: BASIN A-2 POST 25-20, 2YR SBUH ME HODOLOGY TOTAL AlEA 65 . 12 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFAL TYPE I KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 2 . 00 inches AREA. . : 34 . 32 Acres 30 . 80 Acres TIME IN ERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 05 98 .27 TC 8 . 00 min 8 . 00 min ABSTRAC ION COEFF: 0 . 20 PEAK RA E: 23 . 89 cfs VOL: 7. 77 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN I ' : BA-2-25 i . NAME : BASIN A-2 POST 25-20, 25YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 65 . 12 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPI ATION 3 .40 inches AREA. . : 34 .32 Acres 30 . 80 Acres TIME IN ERVAL j 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 05 98 . 27 TC 8 . 00 min 8 . 00ifmin ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 PEAK RATE: 46 .55 rcfs VOL: 14 . 95 Ac-ft TIME : 480 min I I_- j I' F I it 1 s 9/11/98 10 :44 :10 am Sverdrup .Civil Inc page 2 THE BOEING COMPANY ii SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT POST BLDG 25-20, BASIN A-2 BASIN SUMMARY I BASIN ID: BA-2-5 NAME: BASIN A-2 POST 25-20, 5YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 65 . 12 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 2 .40 inches AREA. . : 34 .32 Acres 30 . 80 Acres !_ TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 05 98 .27 TC 8 . 00 min 8 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 PEAK RATE: 30 .28 cfs VOL: 9 . 78 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: BA-2-50 NAME: BASIN A-2 POST 25-20, 50YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 65 . 12 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 3 .45 inches AREA. . : 34 .32 Acres 30 . 80 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 05 98 .27 TC 8 . 00 min 8 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF': 0 .20 PEAK RATE: 47. 36 cfs VOL: 15 .22 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: BA-2-WQ NAME: BASIN A-2 POST 25-20, WQ SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA i• 65 . 12 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE I• KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION I• 0 . 67 inches AREA. . : 34 .32 Acres 30 . 80 Acres TIME INTERVAL I• 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 05 98 .27 TC 8 . 00 min 8 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 PEAK RATE: 4 . 50 cfs VOL: 1 . 65 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min l j i i The Boeing Company Surface Water Management Project(SWMP) Area Weighted Runoff Coefficient Post-Development Building 25-20 Drainage Basin A Delta Area Basin) Sub-Basin A-3 Soil Hydrologic Curve Land Use Area Weight Weighted Group Group Number Description sf) Curve Number Ur D 90 Landscaping(good) 121,924 24% 1 21.37 Ur D 10'0 Water Surfaces 42,836 8% 8.34 Ur j D I 91 ' 'Gravel Parking Lots 5,500 1% 0.97 Ur II C I 87 (Sand Racing Track(dirt road) ; 59,753 12% I 10.12 Ur 1 D 92 Horse Walking Areas(fair) 16,739 3% 3.00 Py B 80 Landscaping(good) 180,242 35% 28.08 Py B 85 I Gravel Parking Lots 22,966 4% 3.80 Py B 78 , Meadow 41,250 8% 6.27 Py B 80 Lawns(good) 1,347 0% 0.21 PY I 1 B I 100 Water Surfaces 20,956 4% 4.08 TOTALS i I I I 513,513 I 100% I 86.25 Notes: 1 . 1. Soil groups estimated from Soil Survey of King County Area, Washington, Des Moines Quadrangle 1973 2. Hydrologic groups determined from King County Surface Water Design Manual,Figure 3.5.2A 3. Curve Numbers determined from King County Surface Water Design Manual,Table 3.5.2E Impervious area(curve number>= 98) 1.46 Acres I pervious area curve number 100.00 Pervious area(curve number<98) 10.32 Acres Pervious area curve number 84.29 I Basin Composite Curve Number 86.25 Basin Total Areal 11.79 Acres I 0'3893/2220/engr/-Kbcalcl6.xls[Post-2520 A-3] 9/11/98 Sverdrup Civil,Inc. I The Boeing Company Surface Water Management Project (SWMP) i Post-Development Building 25-20 Time of Concentration or Travel Time Drainage Basin A CSTC Site Basin) Sub-Basin A-3 Sheet Flow(Applicable to T c only) Surface description (see Table 3.5.2C) lawn:,-- „ :'` ,:` . Manning's roughness coefficient, sheet Flow length (L<=300'), Lsneet 200 feef, ;: 2-year, 24-hour rainfall, P2 2.00 inches: ,:,„°„„ Land slope, Ssheei 0:020 ftfft:„:;'' Tt sheet 0.36 hours Ttsheet 21.6 min Shallow Concentrated Flow Surface description (see Table 3.5.2C) brushy grourid;with sorrie trees"":_ Flow length, Lshaliow 325 ft;;, Watercourse slope, Sshallow 0060 ; y°.:.` Factor, ks (see Table 3.5.2C) 5 ;:..: . Velocity, Vshallow 1.2 f/s Ttshallow 0.07 hours Ttshallow 4.4 min Results:Basin A (Post-Development) Total T,or Tt 0.43 hours Total T,or Tt 126.0 min Notes: 1. Worksheet is based on Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds, 2nd Edition (Technical Release Number 55), US SCS, 1986 2. Worksheet modified to conform with Section 3.5.2 of the King County Surface Water Design Manual 1 013893/2220/engr-Kbcalcl7.xls[Post1,2520 A-3]9/11/98 Sverdrup Civil,Inc. I I 9/11/98 10 :44 :28am Sverdrup Civil Inc page 1 THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT POST BLIG 25-20, BASIN A-3 BASIN SUMMARY BASIN I : BA-3-10 ! NAME: BASIN A-3 POST 25-20, 10YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AEA 11 . 78 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 2 . 90 inches AREA. . : 10 . 32 Acres 1 .46 Acres TIME IN7ERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 84 . 29 99 . 99 TC 26 . 00 min 26 . 00Imin ABSTRACTION COEFF 0 .20 PEAK RA E: 3 .43 licfs VOL: 1. 60 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN I4 : BA-3-100 , NAME: BASIN A-3 POST 25-20, 100YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 11 . 78 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs. RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPI ATION 3 . 90 inches AREA. . : 10 .32 Acres 1.46 Acres TIME IN ERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 84 . 29 99 . 99 TC 26 . 00 min 99 . 99 26 . 00 ABSTRAC I ION COEFF:i 0 . 20 II PEAK RATjE: 5 . 55 cfs VOL: 2 .46 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: BA-3-2 ! NAME: BASIN A-3 POST 25-20, 2YR I SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 111 . 78 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs I RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION! 2 . 00 inches AREA. . : 10 . 32 Acres 1 .46 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 84 . 29 99 . 99 TC 26 . 00 min 26 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF:i 0 .20 PEAK RA]'E: 1 . 71 ;cfs VOL: 0 . 89 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: BA-3-25 ' , NAME: BASIN A-3 POST 25-20, 25YR I SBUH METHODOLOGY I TOTAL AREA 11 . 78 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALLL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 3 .40 inches AREA. . : 10 : 32 Acres 1 .46 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 84 . 29 99 . 99 TC 26 . 00 min 26 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF 0 .20 I PEAK RATE: 4 .47. Hcfs VOL: 2 . 02 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min i 1 I 9/11/98 10 :44 :28 -am Sverdrup Civil Inc page 2 THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE' WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT POST BLDG 25-20, BASIN A-3 BASIN SUMMARY i BASIN ID: BA-3-5 NAME: BASIN A-3 POST 25-20, 5YR iI SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 11. 78 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP I ' PRECIPITATION 2 .40 inches AREA. . : 10 .32 Acres 1 .46 AcresL. TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 84 .29 99 . 99 TC 26 . 00 min 26 . 00 min ,- ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 Ii, PEAK RATE: 2 .44 cfs VOL: 1 .20 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: BA-3-50 NAME: BASIN A-3 POST 25-20, 50YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 11. 78 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION i• 3 .45 inches AREA. . : 10 .32 Acres 1.46 Acres ` _' TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 84 .29 99 . 99 TC 26 . 00 min 26 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 PEAK RATE: 4 . 58icfs VOL: 2 . 07 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min I BASIN ID: BA-3-WQI NAME: BASIN A-3 POST 25-20, WQ SBUH METHODOLOGY 1 TOTAL AREA 11 . 78 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 0 . 67 inches AREA. . : 10 .32 Acres 1 .46 Acres , ! TIME INTERVAL I• 10 . 00 min CN 84 .29 99 . 99 TC 26 . 00 min 26 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 PEAK RATE: 0 . 18 cfs VOL: 0 . 12 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min I Boeing Commercial Airplane Group Boeing Family Center Building 25-10 Site Development Area Weighted Runoff Coefficient Post-Development Building 25-10 Drainage Basin A North Main Track Basin) Sub-Basin A-2 ji Soil lfydrologic Curve I Land Use Area Weight Weighted Group Group Number Description s0 Curve Number Ur 1 D 98 I Building Roofs 392,512 14% I 13.561' Ur D 98 I Pavements 800,204 28% 27.651I Ur D 911 I Gravel Parking Lots 158,000 6% 5.07 I Ur D I 90 : I Landscaping(good) 947,397 33% 1 30.0611 Ur I D 90 Lawns(good) 347,193 12%11.021 Ur I D 100 Water Surfaces 182,098 6% 6.42 Py B I 98 I Pavements 8,978 0% 0.31 TOTALS I I 1 1 2,836,382 1 100% 1 94.09 Notes: 1 ' 1. Soil group estimated from Soil Survey of King County Area, Washington,Des Moines Quadrangle 1973 2. HydrologiC groups determined from King County Surface Water Design Manual,Figure 3.5.2A 3. Curve Nu bers determined from King County Surface Water Design Manual,Table 3.5.2B I ' Impervious area(curve number>=98) 31.77 Acres Impervious area curve number 98.26 Pervious area (curve number<98) 33.35 Acres Pervious area curve number 90.11 Basin Composite Curve Number 94.09 B sin Total Area 65.11 Acres I j II I I I I 013893/2220/engr/-Kbcalc16.xls[Post-2510 A-2] 9/11/98 Sverdrup Civil,Inc. I ii The Boeing Company Surface Water Management Project (SWMP) Pre-Development SWMP (Post-Development Building 25-10: Time of Concentration or Travel Time Drainage Basin A CSTC Site Basin) Sub-Basin A-2 Sheet Flow(Applicable to T c only) Surface description (see Table 3.5.2C) asphalt"parking lot Manning's roughness coefficient, nsheet 0 011 -'" =,' ;= . _-,- Flow length (L<=300'), Lsheet 70 fleet i xF 2-year, 24-hour rainfall, P2 2:00 inches > , :` :> Land slope, Ssneet 0:020 ftlft Ttsheet 0.02 hours Tt sheet 1.15 min Channel Flow, Section 1 Surface description (see Table 3.5.2C) concrete Flow thlen 1220 ftlength, [-channel Watercourse slope, Schannel 0:005.ft/ft ..: Factor, kc(see Table 3.5.2C) Velocity, Vchannei 3.0 f/s Ttchannel 0.11 hours Ttchannel 6.85 min Results:Basin A (Post-Development)j Total Tc or Tt ! 0.13 hours Total Tc or Tt 8.00 min Notes: 1. Worksheets is based on Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds, 2nd Edition (Technical Release Number 55), US SCS, 1986 2. Worksheet modified to conform with Section 3.5.2 of the King County Surface Water Design Manual 013893/2220/engr-Kbcalcl7.xls[Post-2510 A-2]9/11/98 Sverdrup Civil,Inc. 9/11/98 10 :44 :46 am Sverdrup Civil Inc page 1 THE BOEING COMPANY 1 SURFACE ATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT POST BLDG 25-10, BASIN A-2 LI I I BASIN SUMMARY 1 1 BASIN ID : CA-2-10 NAME: BASIN A-2 POST 25-10, 10YR SBUH ME HODOLOGY TOTAL "EA 65 . 12 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFAL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPI ATION 2 . 90 inches AREA. . : 33 .35 Acres 31 . 77 Acres TIME IN ERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 11 98 . 2E TC • • 8 . 00 min 8 . 00 min ABSTRAC ION COEFF: 0 .20 PEAK RA E: 38 . 62 cfs VOL: 12 .43 Ac-ft TIME: ' 480 min BASIN ID : CA-2-100 NAME: BASIN A-2 POST 25-10, 100YR 1 SBUH ME HODOLOGY TOTAL ,EA 65 . 12 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFAL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPI ATION 3 . 90 inches AREA. . : 33 .35 Acres 31. 77 Acres TIME IN ERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 11 98 .26 TC 8 . 00 min 8 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 PEAK RATE: 54 . 97 cfs VOL: 17. 66 Ac-ft TIME: • 480 min BASIN ID : CA-2-2 NAME: BASIN A-2 POST 25-10, 2YR SBUH ME HODOLOGY TOTAL EA 65 . 12 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFAL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPI ATION 2 . 00 inches AREA. . : 33 . 35 Acres 31 . 77 Acres TIME IN ERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 11 98 . 2 TC 8 . 00 min 8 . 00 min ABSTRAC ION COEFF: 0 .20 PEAK RA E : 24 . 12 cfs VOL: 7. 83 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN I : CA-2-25 NAME: BASIN A-2 POST 25-10, 25YR SBUH ME HODOLOGY TOTAL EA. . .. . . . . : 65 . 12 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFAL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPI ATION 3 .40 inches AREA. . : 33 .35 Acres 31 . 77 Acres TIME IN ERVAL • • 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 11 98 . 26 TC 8 . 00 min 8 . 00min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 PEAK RA E: 46 . 78 cfs VOL: 15 . 03 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min 1 1 II I 1 1 I 1 i 9./11/98 . 10 :44 :46 am Sverdrup Civil Inc page 2 ' : THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT POST BLDG 25-10, BASIN A-2 BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: CA-2-5 NAME: BASIN A-2 POST 25-10, 5YR 1 SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 65 . 12 Acres 'BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 ,cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP j ' PRECIPITATION 2 .40 inches AREA. . : 33 .35 Acres 31 . 77 Acres Li TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 11 98 . 26 TC 8 . 00 min 8 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 I . PEAK RATE: 30 .52icfs VOL: 9 . 86 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: CA-2-50 NAME:' BASIN A-2 POST 25-10, 50YR SBUH METHODOLOGY J TOTAL AREA 65 . 12 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV ' IMP j PRECIPITATION 3 .45 inches AREA. . : 33 .35 Acres 31 . 77 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 11 98 .26 TC 8 . 00 min 8 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 If PEAK RATE: 47 . 60 cfs VOL: 15 .30 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: CA-2-WQ NAME: BASIN A-2 POST 25-10, WQ SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 65 . 12 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP j ! PRECIPITATION 0 . 67 inches AREA. . : 33 . 35 Acres 31 . 77 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 90 .11 98 . 26 TC 8 . 00 min 8 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 PEAK RATE: 4 . 62 cfs VOL: 1 . 68 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min j , 1 1 1 ii The Boeing Company Surface Water Management Project(SWMP) I Area Weighted Runoff Coefficient Post-Development Building 25-10 II II, Drainage Basin A Delta Area Basin) Sub-Basin A-3 Soil Hydrologic Curve Land Use Area Weight Weighted Group Group Number Description sf) Curve Number Ur D 90 Landscaping(good) 121,924 32% 28.83 Ur D 100 Water Surfaces 42,836 11%11.25 Py B 98 Pavements 5,248 1% 1.35j' Py ! B 80 Landscaping(good) 189,678 50%39.86 Py B I 10,0 Water Surfaces 20,956 6% 5.51 TOTALS I 380,642 I 100% (86.80 Notes: 1. Soil groups estimated from Soil Survey of King County Area, Washington,Des Moines Quadrangle 1973 2. Hydrologic groups determined from King County Surface Water Design Manual, Figure 3.5.2A 3. Curve Numbers determined from King County Surface Water Design Manual,Table 3.5.2E Impervious area((curve number>=98) 1.58 Acres l pervious area curve number 99.85 Pervious area(curve number<98) 7.15 Acres P rvious area curve number 83.91 Basin Composite Curve Number 86.80 Basin Total Areal '8.74 Acres II i i II 013893/2220/engr/-Kbcalcl6.xls[Post-2510 A-3] 9/11/98 Sverdrup Civil,Inc. The Boeing Company Surface Water Management Project (SWMP) Post-Development Building 25-10 Time of Concentration or Travel Time Drainage Basin A CSTC Site Basin) Sub-Basin A-3 Sheet Flow(Applicable to T c only) Surface description (see Table 3.5.2C) lawn:< ,. Manning's roughn',ess coefficient, nsheet 0:15 Flow length (L<=300'), sheet 200:feet' 2-year, 24-hour rainfall, P2 2 00 inches .;; ;< '` Land slope, Ssheet 0 020 ff/ft: .7 Ttsneet 10.36 hours Ttsheet 21.6 min Shallow Concentrated Flow Surface description (see Table 3.5.2C) brushy grounii}with•aonie trees` ~" Flow length, L hallow 125 ft"; Watercourse slope, Sshallow 0060;ft/ft° ;'=. Factor, ks (see Table 3.5.2C) Velocity, Vshallow 11.2 f/s Ttshallow 10.03 hours Tt shallow 11.7 min Results:Basin A (Post-Development) Total Te or Tt 10.39 hours Total Tc or Tt j 23.3 min Notes: 1. Worksheet is based on Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds, 2nd Edition (Technical Release Number 55), US SCS, 1986 2. Worksheet m edified to conform with Section 3.5.2 of the King County Surface Water Design Manual 013893/2220/engr-Kbcalc17.xls[Post-2510 A-3]9/11/98 Sverdrup Civil,Inc. 9/11/98 10 :45 :3 am Sverdrup Civil Inc page 1 THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT POST BLDG 25-10, BASIN A-3 BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: CA-3-10 NAME: BASIN A-3 POST 25-10, 10YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 8 . 74 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALLTYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPIT TION 2 . 90 inches AREA. . : 7 . 15 Acres 1 . 59 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 83 . 91 99 . 85 TC 23 .30 min 23 . 30 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 PEAK RAT, : 2 . 75 cfs VOL: 1. 23 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: CA-3-100; NAME: BASIN A-3 POST 25-10, 100YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 8 . 74 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION I . 3 . 90 inches AREA. . : 7 . 15 Acres 1 . 59 Acres TIME INTERVAL I 10 . 00 min CN 83 . 91 99 . 85 TC 23 . 30 min 23 .30 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 PEAK RAT : 4 .39 cfs VOL: 1 . 87 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: CA-3-2 I NAME: BASIN A-3 POST 25-10, 2YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 8 . 74 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 2 . 00 inches AREA. . : 7 . 15 Acres 1 . 59 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 83 . 91 99 . 85 TC 23 . 30 min 23 . 30 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 PEAK RATE: 1 .43 cfs VOL: 0 . 70 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: CA-3-25 NAME : BASIN A-3 POST 25-10, 25YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 8 . 74 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL1TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITAATION 3 .40 inches AREA. . : 7 . 15 Acres 1 . 59 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 83 . 91 99 . 85 TC 23 .30 min 23 .30 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 PEAK RATE: 3 .56 cfs VOL: 1. 55 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min 9/11/98 10 :45 :3am Sverdrup Civil Inc page 2 THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT POST BLDG 25-10, BASIN A-3 BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: CA-3-5 NAME: BASIN A-3 POST 25-10, •5YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 8 . 74 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE L KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 2 .40 inches AREA. . : 7 . 15 Acres 1 . 59 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN-83 . 91 99 . 85 TC 23 . 30 min 23 .30 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 PEAK RATE: 1. 99 cfs VOL: 0 . 93 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: CA-3-50 NAME: BASIN A-3 POST 25-10, 50YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 8 . 74 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 3 .45 inches AREA. . : 7 . 15 Acres 1 . 59 Acres ! TIME INTERVAL. . . . : 10 . 00 min CN 83 . 91 99 . 85 TC 23 . 30 min 23 .30 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 PEAK RATE: 3 . 64 cfs VOL: 1 .58 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: CA-3-WQ NAME: BASIN A-3 POST 25-10, WQ SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 8 . 74 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION. . . . : 0 . 67 inches AREA. . : 7 . 15 Acres 1 . 59 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 83 . 91 99 . 85 TC 23 .30 min 23 .30 min ABSTRACTION COEFFI: 0 .20 PEAK RATE: 0 . 21 cfs VOL: 0 . 11 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min The Boeing Company Surface Water Management Project(SWMP) Area Weighted Runoff Coefficient 1 Pre-Development SWMP Drainage Basin B South Main Track Basin) Sub-Basin 4-1 Soil Hydrologic Curve j Land Use Area Weight ' Weighted Group i Group I Number 1 Description sf) I Curve Number Ur D I 98 I Building Roofs 23,727 j 4% 3.92 Ur D I 98 ' Pavements 34,958 6% 5.78, Ur D 91 ' Gravel Parking Lots 85,727 14%13.16 Ur I C 87 ,Sand Racing Track(dirt road) ; 54,723 9% 8.03 Ur 1 D 90 Lawns 287,313 48% j 43.60 Ur D 92 Horse Walking Areas(fair) 83,525 14% ;12.96 Ur D 89 Meadow 23,041 4% 3.46 TOTALS I i ' I 593,014 I 100% 90.90 Notes: 1. Soil groups estimated from Soil Survey of King County Area, Washington,Des Moines Quadrangle 1973 2. Hydrologiq groups determined from King County Surface Water Design Manual, Figure 3.5.2A 1 3. Curve NuTbers determined from King County Surface Water Design Manual,Table 3.5.2E Impervious area(curve number>= 98) 1.35 Acres Impervious area curve number 98.00 Pervious area(curve number<98) 12.27 Acres Pervious area curve number 90.12 Basin Composite Curve Number 90.90 Basin Total Area 13.61 Acres 1 I 1 0 3747/2210/engr/-Kbcalci 6.xls[Pre-Basin 4-1[1 9/10/96 Sverdrup Civil,Inc. I I The Boeing Company Surface Water Management Project(SWMP) Pre-Development SWMP Time of Concentration or Travel Time Drainage Basin 4 South Main Track Basin) Sub-Basin 4-1 Sheet Flow(Applicable to T, only) Surface description(see Table 3.5.2C) Bare Soils'•; Manning's roughness coefficient, nsheet 0.011 Flow length(L<=300'), Lsheet 60 feet 2-year,24-hour rainfall, P2 12.00 inches Land slope,Ssheet 0:033ft/ft:_ Tt sheet 0.01 hours Tt sheet1 min Shallow Concentrated Flow I Surface description(see Table 3.5.2C) Flow length,Lshallow 0 ft': Watercourse slope,S shallow 11000 ft/ft Factor, ks(see Table 3.5.2C) 0-:. Velocity, Vshallow 10.0 f/s Tt shallow 0.00 hours Tt shallow 10 min Channel Flow,Section 1 Surface description(see Table 3.5.2C) Concrete pipe"(n=0012) Flow length,jLchannel 1725 ft Watercourse slope, Schannel 0.004ft/ft. ` . : : . z. Factor, kc(see Table 3.5.2C) Velocity,Vchannel 2.5 f/s Tt channel i 0.19 hours Tt channel 112 min Results:Basin B Sub-Basin B1(Post-Development) Total Tc or Tt 0.21 hours Total TcorTt 12min Notes: 1. Worksheet is based on Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds,2nd Edition(Technical Release Number 55), US SCS, 1986 2. Worksheet modified to conform with Section 3.5.2 of the King County Surface Water Design Manual 1 013893/2220/engr-Kbcalc17.xls[Pre-Basin,4-1] 9/3/98 Sverdrup Civil,Inc. 9/10/98 9 : 13 :39 am Sverdrup Civil Inc page 1 THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT PRE-DEVEIIL,OPMENT BASIN- 4, SUB-BASIN 4-1 BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: P4-1-10 NAME: BASIN 4, SUB 4-1, PRE, 10YR 1 SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 13 . 62 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 2 . 90 inches AREA. . : 12 .27 Acres 1 .35 Acres TIME INT RVAL 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 12 98 . 00 TC 12 . 00 min 12 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 PEAK RATE: 6 . 63 cfs VOL: 2 .25 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min I ; BASIN IDI: P4-1-100' NAME: BASIN 4 , SUB 4-1, PRE, 100YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 13 . 62 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL1TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITiATION 3 . 90 inches AREA. . : 12 . 27 Acres 1 . 35 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 12 98 . 00 TC 12 . 00 min 12 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 PEAK RATE: 9 . 92 cfs VOL: 3 .31 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN It : P4-1-2 NAME: BASIN 4, SUB 4-1, PRE, 2YR SBUH METHODOLOGY ' TOTAL AREA 13 . 62 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALIJ TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 2 . 00 inches AREA. . : 12 . 27 Acres 1 .35 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 12 98 . 00 TC 12 . 00 min 12 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 PEAK RATE: 3 . 77 cfs VOL: 1 .33 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: P4-1-25 NAME : BASIN 4, SUB 4-1, PRE, 25YR SBUH METHODOLOGY ' TOTAL AREA 13 . 62 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALLi TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 3 .40 inches AREA. . : 12 .27 Acres 1 . 35 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 12 98 . 00 TC 12 . 00 min 12 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 PEAK RATE: 8 .27 cfs VOL: 2 . 77 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min 9/10/98 9 :13 :39. am Sverdrup Civil Inc page 2 THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT i ' PRE-DEVELOPMENT BASIN 4, SUB-BASIN 4-1 BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: P4-1-5 i NAME: BASIN 4, SUB 4-1, PRE, 5YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 7 13 . 62 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 2 .40 inches AREA. . : 12 .27 Acres 1 . 35 Acres ' TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 12 98 . 00 TC 12 . 00 min 12 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF 0 . 20 i , PEAK RATE: 5 . 02 cfs VOL: 1 . 73 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: P4-1-50 NAME: BASIN 4, SUB 4-1, PRE, 50YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 13 . 62 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 3 .45 inches AREA. . : 12 .27 Acres 1 .35 Acres H TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 12 98 . 00 TC 12 . 00 min 12 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 PEAK RATE: 8 .44 cfs VOL: 2 . 83 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: P4-1-WQ NAME: BASIN 4, SUB 4-1, PRE, WQ SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 13 . 62 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 0 . 67 inches AREA. . : 12 .27 Acres 1 .35 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 12 98 . 00 TC 12 . 00 min 12 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 PEAK RATE: 0 . 30 cfs VOL: 0 . 19 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min i- I I I I The Boeing Company Surface Water Management Project(SWMP) Area Weighted Runoff Coefficient Pre-Development SWMP Drainage Basin B South Main Track Basin) Sub-Basin 4-2 Soil b'ydrologic Curve! Land Use Area Weight Weighted Group Group Number Description sf) Curve Number Ur D 98 Building Roofs 4,000 I 1% 1.08 Ur D 98 ' Pavements 5,000 1% 1.35 Ur D 91 Gravel Parking Lots 27,275 8% 6.861 Ur C 87 , 'Sand Racing Track(dirt road) 1 39,648 11% f 9.53 Ur D 90 ILawns 208,686 58% 51.91, Ur D 92 Horse Walking Areas(fair) 60,517 17%15.39 Ur D I 89 ' MMeadow 16,694 5% 4.111 TOTALS I I I 361,820 100% 90.23 Notes: 1. Soil group estimated from Soil Survey of King County Area, Washington, Des Moines Quadrangle 1973 2. Hydrologicgroups determined from King County Surface Water Design Manual, Figure 3.5.2A 3. Curve Nunbers determined from King County Surface Water Design Manual,Table 3.5.2B Impervious area(curve number>=98) 0.21 Acres Impervious area curve number 98.00 P rvious area(curve number<98) 8.10 Acres Pervious area curve number 90.04 Basin Composite Curve Number 90.23 Basin Total Area; 8.31 Acres li 013747/2210/engr/-Kbcalcl6.xls[Pre-Basin 4-2] 9/10/98 Sverdrup Civil,Inc. I The Boeing Company Surface Water Management Project(SWMP) Pre-Development SWMP • Time of Concentration or Travel Time Drainage Basin 4 South Main Track Basin) Sub-Basin 4-2 Sheet Flow(Applicable to T,only) Surface description(see Table 3.5.2C) Shortgressprarie: Manning's roughness coeftident,rtd,, 015 Flow length(L<=300'),Lg,, 150 feet 2-year.24-hourrainfall,P2 2.00inches - •- •- - Land slope,Sd„d 0.003 Rift..: T,dw„; 0.59 hours T,d,,,,j 35 min Shallow Concentrated Flow Surface description(see Table 3.5.2C) 8rushyr grelmd with some trees 0=0.060) Flow length,Ly ,,, 100ft Watercourse slope,Sd a,, 0,002ff/ft " Factor;k,(see Table 3.5.2C) 5. - - -• Velocity,V,i„m„ 0.2 Us T,dww: 0.14 hours T,d dw 9 min Channel Flow,Section 1 Surface description(see Table 3.5.2C) Earth lined Waterway(n.025) Flow length,L,i,,,a 1050 fb.' Watercourse slope,Sd,,,,,, 0.017f1At Factor;k,(see Table 3.5.2C) Velocity,Vd,,,,,,d 2.6 f/s 0.11 hours T,d,„;I 7min Channel Flow,Section 2 Surface description(see Table 3.5.2C) Concrete pipe(n--0012), • Flow length,Ld,,,,,d 127.0 ft Watercourse slope,Sd,,,,,,, 0.0061t/ft Factor!ke(see Table 3.5.2C) 42 Velocity,Vd,,,,,,, 3.3 Us Tr channel 0.01 hours T,d,,,,,e, 10.65 min 1 Channel Flow,Section 3 Surface description(see Table 3.5.2C) Grassed waterway(m-0.025) Flow length,ld,,,,,,, 540.0ft Watercourse slope,Se..., 0.005 ft/ft Factor;k,(see Table 3.5.2C) 117 Velocity,Vd,,,,, 1.1 f/s d,a„it 0.13 hours T,d„nnt'm 7.89 min Channel Flow,Section 4 Surface description(see Table 3.5.2C) CMP pipe(n=0.024) Flow length,Ld,,,„N 60.0ft• Watercourse slope,Sd,,a 0.003 ft/ft Factor;ke(see Table 3.5.2C) 21 Velocity,Vd,,,,,,, 1.1 Ifs 0.01 hours T,d,,,,;, 0.90 min Results:Basin B Sub-Basin B2(Post-Development) Total T,or T,11.00 hours Total Tc or T,160 min Notes: 1.Worksheet is based on Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds,2nd Edition(Technical Release Number 55),US SCS,1986 2.Worksheet modified to conform with Section 3.5.2 of the King County Surface Water Design Manual 013893/2220/engr-Kbcalc17.xrs:Pre-Basin 4-2i I 9/3/9B Sverdrup Civll,Inc. i 9/10/98 9 : 13 : 54 am Sverdrup Civil Inc page 1 THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT PRE-DEVELOPMENT BASIN 4, SUB-BASIN 4-2 BASIN SUMMARY 1 BASIN ID: P4-2-10i NAME: BASIN 4, SUB 4-2, PRE, 10YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AllEA 8 .31 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 2 . 90 inches AREA. . : 8 . 10 Acres 0 . 21 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 04 98 . 00 TC 60 . 00 min 60 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF:: 0 . 20 PEAK RATE: 2 . 15 cfs VOL: 1.33 Ac-ft TIME: 490 min I I BASIN ID: P4-2-100 NAME: BASIN 4, SUB 4-2, PRE, 100YR SBUH METHODOLOGY ; TOTAL AREA 8 .31 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 3 . 90 inches AREA. . : 8 . 10 Acres 0 .21 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 04 98 . 00 TC 60 . 00 min 60 . 0CY min ABSTRACTION COEFF:' 0 .20 PEAK RATE: 3 . 30 cfs VOL: 1. 97 Ac-ft TIME: 490 min BASIN ID: P4-2-2 1 ' NAME: BASIN 4, SUB 4-2, PRE, 2YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 8 . 31 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 2 . 00 inches AREA. . : 8 . 10 Acres 0 .21 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 04 98 . 00 TC 60 . 00 min 60 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF:, 0 . 20 PEAK RATE: 1 . 16 cfs VOL: 0 . 77 Ac-ft TIME: 490 min i BASIN ID: P4-2-251 NAME: BASIN 4 , SUB 4-2, PRE, 25YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 8 . 31 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALLL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 3 .40 inches AREA. . : 8 . 10 Acres 0 .21 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 04 98 . 00 TC 60 . 00 min 60 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 PEAK RATE: 2 . 72 'cfs VOL: 1. 65 Ac-ft TIME: 490 min 9/10/98 9 :13 :54 am Sverdrup Civil Inc page 2 THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT PRE-DEVELOPMENT BASIN 4, SUB-BASIN 4-2 BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: P4-2-5 NAME: BASIN 4, SUB 4-2, PRE, 5YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 8 .31 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 2 .40 inches AREA. . : 8 . 10 Acres 0 . 21 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 04 98 . 00 TC 60 . 00 min 60 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 PEAK RATE: 1 . 59Hfs VOL: 1 . 01 Ac-ft TIME: 490 min BASIN ID: P4-2-501 NAME: BASIN 4, SUB 4-2, PRE, 50YR SBUH METHODOLOGY I TOTAL AREA 8 . 31 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 3 .45 inches AREA. . : 8 . 10 Acres 0 .21 'Acres TIME -INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 04 98 . 00 TC 60 . 00 min 60 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 PEAK RATE: 2 . 781cfs VOL: 1 . 68 Ac-ft TIME: 490 min BASIN ID: P4-2-WQ1 NAME: BASIN 4, SUB 4-2, PRE, WQ SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 8 . 31 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION L 0 . 67 inches AREA. . : 8 . 10 Acres 0 .21 Acres ; TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 04 98 . 00 TC 60 . 00 min 60 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 PEAK RATE: 0 . 08Icfs VOL: 0 . 10 Ac-ft TIME: 760 min 1 I The Boeing Company Surface Water Management Project(SWMP) Area Weighted Runoff Coefficient Pre-Development SWMP Drainage Basin B South Main Track Basin) Sub-Basin 4-3 Soil ' Hydrologic Curve Land Use Area Weight Weighted Group Group Number Description sf) Curve Number Ur D 98 . 1 Building Roofs 1 11,011 3% 2.98 Ur D 98 , Pavements 1 14,109 4% 3.82. Ur D 91 1 Gravel Parking Lots 60,755 17%15.26 Ur C 87 ,Sand Racing Track(dirt road) 25,700 I 7% 6.17 Ur D 90 !Lawns 170,000 47% 1 42.23 Ur D 92 1 Horse Walking Areas(fair) 53,860 15%13.68 Ur 1 1 D 89 !Meadow 1 26,859 1 7%1 6.60 TOTALS I I I I I 362,294 100% I 90.73 Notes: 1. Soil groups estimated from Soil Survey of King County Area, Washington, Des Moines Quadrangle 1973 2. Hydrologic groups determined from King County Surface Water Design Manual,Figure 3.5.2A 3. Curve Numbers determined from King County Surface Water Design Manual,Table 3.5.2B Impervious area(curve number>=98) 0.58 Acres Impervious area curve number 98.00 Pervious area(curve number< 98) 7.74 Acres Pervious area curve number 90.19 Basin Composite Curve Number 90.73 Basin Total Area 8.32 Acres 13893/2220/en r/-Kbcalc16.xls[Pre-Basin 4-3] 9/3/98 Sverdrup Civil,Inc.9 The Boeing Company Surface Water Management Project(SWMP) Pre-Development SWMP Time of Concentration or Travel Time Drainage Basin 4 South Main Track Basin) Sub-Basin 4-3 f I Sheet Flow(Applicable to T,only) Surface description(see Table 3.5.2C) (Bale soli Manning's roughness coefficient,n,,,,d 10.011 • ;• - Flow length(L<=300'),Ld,.,, 180 feet.:.:,-_ .' 2-year,24-hour rainfall,P2 2.00 inches- • Land slope, T,a„e„ 10.02 hours T,dad 11 min Shallow Concentrated Flow Surface description(see Table 3.5.2C) Flow length, Watercourse slope,Sd a, 44000,000 fUR, Factor,k,(see Table 3.5.2C) Velocity,Va„a,,, 12307.4 f/s T,d,a„o„ 0.00 hours T,shallow. 0 min Channel Flow,Section 1 Surface description(see Table 3.5.2C) Grassed waterway-(nmo.025) Flow length,Le, 0 830 ft ; ' Watercourse slope,Sd,,,,d 0.005 tuft, ,1 Factor,Ico(see Table 3.5.2C) 1Z • Velocity,Vd,,,,,,1 1.2 f/s TIcha,,,el 0.19 hours Ti channel 112 min I i I Channel Flow,Section 2 Surface description(see Table 3.5.2C) (CMP pipe(rr0.024) 1 • Flow length,ld,,,- 17.0 R Watercourse slope, Factor,k,(see Table 3.5.2C) I21 •. Velocity,Vda,,,,,, 2.5 f/s T,channel 10.00 hours T 10.11 minUennel Channel Flow,Section 3 Surface description(see Table 3.5.2C) Grassed waterway(n=0,025)- Flow length.1. ,,,„,r Watercourse slope,Sm„„,e, 0.005ft/tt'.• Factor,k,(see Table 3.5.2C) 17,.,, Velocity,Vd,,,n„, 11.1 f/s T,channel 10.14 hours T,channel 18.26 min Channel Flow,Section 4 Surface description(see Table 3.5.2C) ICMP pipe(n ).024)• Flow length, 160.0 R : Watercourse slope,Sd,,,,,a, 10.003(flit Factor,ko(see Table 3.5.2C) j21. Velocity,Vc„,,,, 11.1 f/s T,d,a,„,el 0.01 hours 7,m,,,1 10.90 min Results:Basin B Sub-Basin B3(Post-Development) Total To or T,10.36 hours Total To or T,122 min Notes: 1.Worksheet is based on Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds,2nd Edition(Technical Release Number 55),US SCS,1986 2.Worksheet modified to conform with Section 3.5.2 of the King County Surface Water Design Manual 013 89 3/222 0/engr-Kbcalcl7.:ls[Pre-Basin 4-31 9/3/98 Sverdrup CMI,Inc. 9/3/98 3 :32 : 13 pm , Sverdrup Civil Inc page 1 THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT PRE-DEVELOPMENT BASIN 4, SUB-BASIN 4-3 BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: P4-3-10 NAME: BASIN 4, SUB 4-3 , PRE, 10YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 8 .32 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 2 . 90 inches AREA. . : 7 . 74 Acres 0 . 58 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 19 98 . 00 TC 22 . 00 min 22 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF:; ' 0 . 20 PEAK RATE: 3 . 39 ;cfs VOL: 1. 36 Ac-ft TIME : 480 min BASIN ID: P4-3-100 NAME : BASIN 4, SUB 4-3 , PRE, 100YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 8 .32 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 3 . 90 inches AREA. . : 7 . 74 Acres 0 . 58 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 19 98 . 00 TC 22 . 00 min 22 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 PEAK RA E: 5 . 11 'cfs VOL: 2 . 01 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN I : P4-3-2 NAME: BASIN 4 , SUB 4-3, PRE, 2YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 8 .32 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE 1 KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 2 . 00 inches AREA. . : 7 . 74 Acres 0 . 58 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 19 98 . 00 TC 22 . 00 min 22 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 PEAK RA E: 1 . 90 cfs VOL: 0 . 80 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN I : P4-3-25 ' NAME: BASIN 4, SUB 4-3 , PRE, 25YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 8 . 32 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 3 .40 inches AREA. . : 7 . 74 Acres 0 . 58 Acres TIME IN ERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 19 98 . 00 TC 22 . 00 min 22 . 00 min ABSTRAC'h'ION COEFF: 0 .20 i PEAK RATE: 4 . 25 cfs VOL: 1 . 68 Ac-ft TIME : 480 min I. 1 9/3/9.8 3 :32 :13 pm Sverdrup Civil Inc page 2 THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT PRE-DEVELOPMENT BASIN 4, SUB-BASIN 4-3 IBASINSUMMARY BASIN ID: P4-3-5 NAME: BASIN 4, SUB 4-3 , PRE, 5YR 1 SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 8 .32 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP 1 , PRECIPITATION 2 .40 inches . AREA. . : 7 . 74 Acres 0 . 58 Acres ,__ TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN.90 . 19 98 . 00 TC 22 . 00 min 22 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 PEAK RATE : 2 . 551cfs VOL: 1 . 04 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min I BASIN ID: P4-3-50 NAME: BASIN 4, SUB 4-3, PRE, 50YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 8 . 32 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE i• KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 3 .45 inches AREA. . : 7 . 74 Acres . 0 . 58 Acres TIME INTERVAL. . . .: 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 19 98 . 00 TC 22 . 00 min 22 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 1 PEAK RATE : 4 .33 cfs VOL: 1 . 72 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: P4-3-WQ NAME: BASIN 4, SUB 4-3, PRE, WQ SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 8 . 32 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 0 . 67 inches AREA. . : 7 . 74 Acres 0 . 58 Acres TIME INTERVAL. . . . : 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 19 98 . 00 TC 22 . 00 min 22 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 PEAK RATE : 0 . 13 cfs VOL: 0 . 11 Ac-ft TIME: 490 min The Boeing Company Surface Water Management Project(SWMP) Area Weighted Runoff Coefficient Pre-Development SWMP Drainage Basin B South Main Track Basin) Sub-Basin 4-4 Soil Hydrologic Curve Land Use Area Weight ' Weighted Group Group Number ; . Description i (sf) Curve Number Ur I D I 98 I Building Roofs I 112,162 6%i 5.55! Ur D 98 ' Pavements 145,456 7%j 7.20 Ur D 91 , Gravel Parking Lots i 227,644 11%10.46 Ur ' • C i 87 I Sand Racing Track(dirt road) 145,315 7% 6.38 Ur D 90 ' 'Lawns I 762,945 39% j 34.68 Ur D 92 I Horse Walking Areas(fair) 221,796 11%10.30 Ur I D 89 Meadow 61,185 3% 2.75 Wo D 98 Pavements I 9,549 0% 0.0 Wo D 91 , IGravel Parking Lots 35,991 2% 1.65 Wo D 92 'Lawns 143,065 7% 6.65 Ng B 98 , Pavements 17,052 1% 0.84 Ng B 85 , I Gravel Parking Lots 9,447 0% 0.41 Ng B I 85 ;Lawns(fair) 88,534 j 4% 3.80 TOTALS 1 ; ; 1 1 1,980,141 ; 100% 91.15 Notes: i i 1. Soil groups estimated from 8oiliSurveyof King County Area, Washington, Des Moines Quadrangle 1973 2. Hydrologic groups determined from King County Surface Water Design Manual,Figure 3.5.2A 3. Curve Numbers determined from King County Surface Water Design Manual,Table 3.5.2B Impervious area(curve number>=98) 6.52 Acres Impervious areal.curve number 98.00 Plervious area(curve number<98) 38.93 Acres Pervious area curve number 90.00 asin Composite Curve Number 91.15 asin Total Area 45.46 Acres v 13893/2220/engr/-Kb alcl6.xls[Pre-Basin 4-4] 9/3/98 Sverdrup Civil,Inc. The Boeing Company Surface Water Management Project(SWMP) Pre-Development SWMP Time of Concentration or Travel Time Drainage Basin 4 South Main Track Basin) Sub-Basin 4-4 Sheet Flow(Applicable to T. only) Surface description(see Table 3.5.2C)Short.grass prarie Manning's roughness coefficient,nsheet 0.15 Flow length(L<=300'),Lsheet 300 feet,. ',., 2-year,24-hour rainfall,P2 2.00'inches Land slope,Ssheet 0.017•ft/ft •• • Ttsheet 1 0.53 hours Tt sheet 1 132 min Shallow Concentrated Flow Surface description(see Table 3.5.2C)Short grass'„, Flow length,Lshalbw 1000 it., Watercourse slope,Sshalbw 0.005 ftfft Factor,ks(see Table 3.5.2C) 11• Velocity,Vshallow 0.8 f/s Tt shallow' 0.36 hours Tt shallow 21 min Channel Flow,Section 1 Surface description(see Table 3.5.2C)Concrete Pipe'(n=0.012) Flow length,Lchannet 710 ft , Watercourse slope,Sct,ennet 0.008 tuft Factor,!kc(see Table 3.5.2C) 42 Velocity,Vchannel 3.8 f/s Tt channel 0.05 hours Tt channel 3 min Channel Flow,Section 2 Surface description(see Table 3.5.2C)Concrete Pipe(n=0.012)•. • Flow length,Lchannel 40.0"ft; Watercourse slope,Schannel 0.014 ft/ft Factor,!kc(see Table 3.5.2C) 42" Velocity,Vchannel 5.0 f/s Tt channel 0.00 hours Tt channel 10.13 min Results:Basin B Sub-Basin B4(Post-Development) Total Ti or Tt 0.95 hours Total Ti or Tt 57 min Notes: 1. Worksheet is based on Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds,2nd Edition(Technical Release Number 55),US SCS,1986 2. Worksheet modified to conform with Section 3.5.2 of the King County Surface Water Design Manual 013893/2220/engr-Kbcalcl7.xls[Pre-Basin 4-4] 9/3/98 Sverdrup Civil,Inc. 9/3/98 3 :34 :21 pm Sverdrup Civil Inc page 1 THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE AIATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT PRE-DEVELOPMENT BASIN 4, SUB-BASIN 4-4 BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: P4-4-10 , NAME: BASIN 4, SUB 4-4, PRE, 10YR SBUH METHODOLOGY ' TOTAL AREA 45 .45 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 2 . 90 inches AREA. . : 38 . 93 Acres 6 . 52 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 00 98 . 00 TC 57 . 00 min 57 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 PEAK RAT : 12 . 67 cfs VOL: 7 . 59 Ac-ft TIME: 490 min BASIN ID: P4-4-100 NAME: BASIN 4, SUB 4-4, PRE, 100YR SBUH MET ODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 45 .45 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 3 . 90 inches AREA. . : 38 . 93 Acres 6 . 52 Acres TIME INTiERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 00 98 . 00 TC 57 . 00 min 57 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 PEAK RATE: 19 . 09 cfs VOL: 11 . 15 Ac-ft TIME: 490 min BASIN ID: P4-4-2 NAME : BASIN 4, SUB 4-4, PRE, 2YR SBUH MET ODOLOGY TOTAL AR A 45 . 45 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 2 . 00 inches AREA. . : 38 . 93 Acres 6 . 52 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 00 98 . 00 TC 57 . 00 min 57 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 PEAK RATE : 7 . 13 cfs VOL: 4 . 51 Ac-ft TIME: 490 min BASIN ID: P4-4-25 I NAME: BASIN 4 , SUB 4-4, PRE, 25YR I SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AkEA 45 .45 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALLfTYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 3 .40 inches AREA. . : 38 . 93 Acres 6 . 52 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 00 98 . 00 TC 57 . 00 min 57 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 PEAK RATE: 15 . 86 cfs VOL: 9 . 36 Ac-ft TIME: 490 min 1 9/3/98 3 :34 :21 .pm Sverdrup Civil Inc page 2 1 THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT PRE-DEVELOPMENT BASIN 4, SUB-BASIN 4-4 IBASINSUMMARY 1 BASIN ID: P4-4-5 ' NAME: BASIN 4, SUB 4-4, PRE, 5YR SBUH METHODOLOGY 1 TOTAL AREA 45 .45 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION. . . .;: 2 .40 inches AREA. . : 38 . 93 Acres 6 . 52 Acres TIME INTERVAL. . . . 1: 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 00 98 . 00 j TC 57 . 00 min 57 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFFI: 0 . 20 PEAK RATE: 9 .541cfs VOL: 5 . 86 Ac-ft TIME: 490 min BASIN ID: P4-4-501 NAME : BASIN 4, SUB 4-4, PRE, 50YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 1• 45 .45 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE. . . .,: KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 3 .45 inches AREA. . : 38 . 93 Acres 6 . 52 Acres ' TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 00 98 . 00 1 TC 57 . 00 min 57 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 PEAK RATE: 16 .181cfs VOL: 9 . 54 Ac-ft TIME: 490 min 1 BASIN ID: P4-4-WQj NAME : BASIN 4, SUB 4-4, PRE, WQ SBUH METHODOLOGY 1 TOTAL AREA 1• 45 .45 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE r KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 0 . 67 inches AREA. . : 38 . 93 Acres 6 . 52 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 00 98 . 00 TC 57 . 00 min 57 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF,: 0 . 20 PEAK RATE: 0 . 63 cfs VOL: 0 . 68 Ac-ft TIME: 520 min I I I ' The Boeing Company Surface Water Management Project(SWMP) Area Weighted Runoff Coefficient Pre-Development SWMP Drainage Basin B South Main Track Basin) Sub-Basin 4-5 Soil Hydrologic Curare;Land Use Area Weight Weighted Group Group Number , Description sfl I Curve Number Ur D I 98 1Building Roofs I 67,900 14%13.84 Ur D 98 . Pavements 314,271 65% 64.07 Ur D 90 , Landscaping(good) 98,495 20%18.44 TOTALS ;I 480,666 1 100% 1 96.36 Notes: I , 1. Soil groups estimated from Soil Survey of King County Area, Washington,Des Moines Quadrangle 1973 2. Hydrologic(groups determined from King County Surface Water Design Manual, Figure 3.5.2A 3. Curve Numbers determined from King County Surface Water Design Manual,Table 3.5.2E Impervious area(curve number>=98) 8.77 Acres It ipervious area curve number 98.00 Pervious area(curve number<98) 2.26 Acres Pervious area curve number 90.00 B sin Composite Curve Number 96.36 B1•sin Total Area 11.03 Acres I I I I i I f I I i ,a 13747/2210/engr/-Kb alcl6.xls[Pre-Basin 4-5,j 9/10/98 Sverdrup Civil,Inc. The Boeing Company Surface Water Management Project(SWMP) Pre-Development SWMP Time of Concentration or Travel Time Drainage Basin 4 South Main Track Basin) Sub-Basin 4-5 Sheet Flow(Applicable to T o only) Surface description(see Table 3.5.2C) lAsphalt Manning's roughness coefficient, nsheet 0.011 Flow length(L<=300'), Lsheet 75 feet 2-year,24-hour rainfall, P2 2.00'inches I Land slope,Ssheet 0.005 ft/ft . Tt sheet 0.04 hours Tt sheet 2 min Shallow Concentrated Flow Surface description(see Table 3.5.2C) Flow length,-shallow Oft Watercourse slope,S shallow 0.000 Mt: Factor, ks(see Table 3.5.2C) Velocity,Vshellow 0.0 f/s Tt shallow 0.00 hours Ttshallow 0 min Channel Flow, Section 1 Surface description(see Table 3.5.2C) Concrete pipe.(n=0012), Flow length,,Lchw,nel 1575 ft. ..• Watercourse;slope, S channel 10.004ft/ft'•` Factor, kc(see Table 3.5.2C) 42 Velocity,Vchannel 2.5 f/s Tt channel j 0.18 hours Ttchannel j 11 min Results:Basin B Sub-Basin B2520(Post-Development) Total Tc or T{0.21 hours Total To or T, 113 min Notes: 1. Worksheet is based on Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds,2nd Edition(Technical Release Number 55),US SCS, 1986 2. Worksheet modified to conform with Section 3.5.2 of the King County Surface Water Design Manual i 013893/2220/engr-Kbcalcl7.xls[Pre-Basin 4-51 9/3/98 Sverdrup Civil,Inc. i 9/10/98 9 :25 :15 am Sverdrup Civil Inc page 1 II THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT PRE-DEVDLOPMENT BASIN 4,, SUB-BASIN 4-5 BASIN SUMMARY I I BASIN ID : P4-5-10 NAME: BASIN 4, SUB 4-5, PRE, 10YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL EA 11. 03 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs II RAINFAL TYPE j . KC24HR - PERV IMP PRECIPI'IfATION 2 . 90 inches AREA. . : 2 .26 Acres 8 . 77 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 00 98 . 00 ABSTRAC ION COEFF: 0 .20 TC 13 . 00 min 13 . 00Imin i PEAK RA E: 6 . 68 cfs VOL: 2 .31 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN I : P4-5-100 NAME: BASIN 4, SUB .4-5, PRE, 100YR Id, SBUH METHODOLOGY j TOTAL AREA 11 . 03 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 :00 cfs 1 RAINFALL TYPE VI KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 3 . 90 inches AREA. . : 2 .26 Acres 8 . 77 Acres TIME IN ERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 00 98.. 00 TC 13 . 00 min 13 . 00 'min ABSTRAC ION COEFF: 0 .20 PEAK RA E: 9 .25 cfs VOL: 3 . 21 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN I : P4-5-2 NAME: BASIN 4, SUB 4-5, PRE, •2YR SBUH ME HODOLOGY TOTAL EA 11. 03 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFAL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPI ATION 2 . 00 inches AREA. . : 2 .26 Acres 8 . 77 Acres TIME IN ERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 00 98 . 00 TC 13 . 00 min 13 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF:,I 0 .20 PEAK RA E: 4 . 37Icfs VOL: 1 . 50 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN I : P4-5-25 NAME: BASIN 4, SUB 4-5, PRE, .25YR I SBUH ME HODOLOGY I TOTAL EA 11 . 03 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 3 .40 inches AREA. . : 2 .26 Acres 8 . 77 Acres TIME IN ERVAL I ; 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 00 98 . 00 TC 13 . 00 min 13 . 00 min ABSTRAC ION COEFF: i 0 .20 PEAK RA E: 7 . 96 cfs VOL: 2 . 76 Ac-ft TIME : 480 min I I I , it 1 9/10/98. 9 :25 :15 am Sverdrup Civil Inc page 2 ___ THE BOEING COMPANY ' , SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT iI PRE-DEVELOPMENT BASIN 4, SUB-BASIN 4-5 BASIN SUMMARY , I BASIN ID: P4-5-5 I NAME: BASIN 4, SUB 4-5, PRE, 5YR jf SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 11 . 03 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 2 .40 inches AREA. . : 2 .26 Acres 8 . 77 Acres ' _! TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 00 98 . 00 1 TC 13 . 00 min 13 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF 0 .20 1 PEAK RATE: 5 .40icfs VOL: 1 . 86 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: P4-5-50 NAME: BASIN 4, SUB 4-5, PRE, 50YR SBUH METHODOLOGY ! i ' TOTAL AREA 7 11. 03 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE 1. KC24HR PERV IMP I PRECIPITATION 3 .45 inches AREA. . : 2 .26 Acres 8 . 77 Acres , TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 00 98 . 00 i TC 13 . 00 min 13 . 00 min i ABSTRACTION COEFF1: 0 .20 PEAK RATE: 8 . 09Icfs VOL: 2 . 80 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: P4-5-WQ1 NAME: BASIN 4, SUB 4-5, PRE, .WQ fl SBUH METHODOLOGY i TOTAL AREA 1• 11 . 03 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE. . . . I: KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION I: 0 . 67 inches AREA. . : 2 . 26 Acres 8 . 77 Acres } ; TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 00 98 . 00 j TC 13 . 00 min 13 . 00 min , , ABSTRACTION COEFFI: 0 . 20 PEAK RATE: 1 . 051cfs VOL: 0 . 37 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min i 1 j 1 I I j Ii I I I 1 1 1 I d I The Boeing Company Surface Water Management Project(SWMP) Area Weighted Runoff Coefficient Pre-Development SWMP Drainage Basin B South Main Track Basin) Sub-Basin 4-6 Soil ydrologic Curve Land Use Area Weight Weighted Group Group Number Description sf)Curve Number Py B 98 ; ' Building Roofs 22,000 12% I 11.78 Py B 98 j Pavements 59,633 33% i 31.94 Py B 90 Lawns 35,369 19%17.40 Py I B 80 Landscaping(good) 47,464 26% j 20.75 Py B 100 Water Surfaces 5,860 3% 3.20' Py 1 B i 78 Meadow I 12,662 7% 5.40 TOTALS I 1 I 182,988 I 100% 90.46 Notes: 1. Soil groups estimated from SoilSurvey of King County Area, Washington, Des Moines Quadrangle 1973 2. Hydrologic groups determined from King County Surface Water Design Manual,Figure 3.5.2A 3. Curve Numbers determined rot King County Surface Water Design Manual,Table 3.5.2E Impervious area(curve number>= 98) 2.01 Acres Impervious area curve number 98.13 PI rvious area(ciurve number<98) 2.19 Acres Pervious area curve number 83.44 asin Composite Curve Number 90.46 Basin Total Area 4.20 Acres I 1 I I I 1 013893/2220/engr/-Kbcalc16.xls[Pre-Basin 4-6] ' 9/3/98 Sverdrup Civil,Inc. The Boeing Company Surface Water Management Project(SWMP) Pre-Development SWMP Time of Concentration or Travel Time Drainage Basin 4 South Main Track Basin) Sub-Basin 4-6 Sheet Flow(Applicable to Tc only) Surface description(see Table 3.5.2C)Short-grass prarie Manning's roughness coefficient,nsheet 0.15., Flow length(L<=300'),Lsheet 25 feet '. 2-year,24-hour rainfall,P2 2.00 inches• • Land slope,Ssheet 0.030"ft/ft'' Tt sheet j 10.06 hours I I Tt sheet 1 13 min Shallow Concentrated Flow Surface description(see Table 3.5.2C) Flow length,Lshallow 0 ft Watercourse slope,Sshatbw 44000.000 ft/ft Factor,ks(see Table 3.5.2C) 11 " Velocity,Vshaibw 12307.4 f/s Tt shallow) 0.00 hours Ttshatbwj 0 min t i I Channel Flow,Section 1 Surface description(see Table 3.5.2C)Concrete pipe' Flow length,L channel 575 ft Watercourse slope,Schannei 0.005 ft/ft Factor,Ikc(see Table 3.5.2C) 42' Velocity,Vchannei 13.0 f/s Ttchannei 10.05 hours Tt channel 13 min Channel Flow,Section 2 Surface description(see Table 3.5.2C)CMP pipe(n=0.024) Flow length,I-channel 55.0 ft„ Watercourse slope,Schannei 0.002 Mt Factor,jkc(see Table 3.5.2C) 21 Velocity,Vchannei 10.9 f/s Tt channel10.02 hours Tt channel 0.98 min Results:Basin B Sub-Basin B3(Post-Development) Total TL or Tt 0.13 hours Total Tic or Tt 18 min Notes: 1. Worksheet is based on Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds,2nd Edition(Technical Release Number 55),US SCS,1986 2. Worksheet modified to conform with Section 3.5.2 of the King County Surface Water Design Manual 013893/2220/engr-Kbcalc17.xls[Pre-Basin 4-6] 9/3/98 SverdrupCivil,Inc. I 1 II a9/3/98 3 :37 : 54 pml Sverdrup Civil Inc page, 1 I THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE ATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT I PRE-DEVE OPMENT BASIN 4, SUB-BASIN 4-6 BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: P4-6-10 1 NAME: BASIN 4, SUB 4-6, PRE, 10YR II SBUH MET ODOLOGY I TOTAL ARIA 4 .20 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE li KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION i 2 . 90 inches AREA. . : 2 . 19 Acres 2. 0i Acres TIME INTERVAL j 10 . 00 min CN 83 .44 98 . 13 TC 8 . 00 min 8 . 00 °min ABSTRAC ION COEFF: 0 .20 PEAK RA E: 2 . 12 cfs VOL: 0 . 70 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN II : P4-6-100 NAME: BASIN 4, SUB 4-6, PRE, 100YR SBUH ME HODOLOGY i . TOTAL £ 'EA i 4 .20 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFAL TYPE II KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPI ATION 3 . 90 inches AREA. . :2 . 19 Acres 2 . 01 Acres TIME IN ERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 83 .44 98 . 13 TC 8 . 00 min 8 . 00 min ABSTRAC ION COEFF: 0 . 20 PEAK RA E: 3 . 13 'cfs VOL: 1. 02 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID : P4-6-2 NAME: BASIN 4, SUB 4-6, PRE, 2YR SBUH ME HODOLOGY TOTAL £ 'EA i 4 . 20 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFAL TYPE I KC24HR PERV IMP 1 PRECIPITATION I 2 . 00 inches AREA. . : 2 . 19 Acres 2 . 01 Acres TIME IN ERVAL j 10 . 00 min CN 83 .44 98 . 13 TC 8 . 00 min 8 . 00 , min ABSTRAC ION COEFF: 0 . 20 PEAK RAZE: 1 . 26 cfs VOL: 0 .43 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID : P4-6-25 1 NAME : BASIN 4, SUB 4-6, PRE, 25YR SBUH ME I HODOLOGY TOTAL L "EA 4 . 20 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFAL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 3 .40 inches AREA. . : 2 . 19 Acres 2 . 01 Acres I TIME INTERVAL I 10 . 00 min CN 83 .44 98 . 13 TC 8 . 00 min 8 . 00 min ABSTRAC I ION COEFF: 0 . 20 PEAK RA E: 2 . 62 cfs VOL: 0 . 86 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min I I II' I I 1 9/3/98 3 : 37 :54 pm.Sverdrup Civil Inc page 2 , THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT PRE-DEVELOPMENT BASIN 4, SUB-BASIN 4-6 BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: P4-6-5 NAME: BASIN 4, SUB 4-6, PRE, 5YR I SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 4 . 20 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 2 .40 inches AREA. . : 2 . 19 Acres 2 . 01 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN - • 83 .44 98 .13 TC 8 . 00 min 8 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF;: 0 .20 PEAK RATE: 1 . 64icfs VOL: 0 . 55 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: P4-6-50, NAME: BASIN 4, SUB 4-6, PRE, 50YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA I: 4 . 20 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 1 3 .45 inches AREA. . : 2 . 19 Acres 2 . 01 Acres , , TIME INTERVAL I: 10 . 00 min CN 83 .44 98 . 13 TC 8 .,00 min 8 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFFi: 0 . 20 PEAK RATE: 2 . 67: cfs VOL: 0 . 88 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: P4-6-WQ NAME: BASIN 4, SUB 4-6, PRE, WQ SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 4 .20 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 0 . 67 inches AREA. . : 2 . 19 Acres 2 . 01 Acres TIME INTERVAL. . . . : 10 . 00 min CN 83 .44 98 . 13 TC 8 . 00 min 8 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 PEAK RATE: 0 . 26 cfs VOL: 0 . 09 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min I I I I 1 APPENDIX C I 1 Surface Water Management Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Mo. 014002\2220\wp\dmrpt01.doc Appendix C September 1998 APPEN IX C DEVELOPED SITE HYDROLOGY This app ndix contains information related to Section IV(B) "Developed Site Hydrology" and is organized as follows: 1. Basin A CSTC Site Basin I ' Figure C.1' - Post-Development Surface Water Management Drainage Basins. This figure indicates proposed flow travel path information and existing conditions used to complete Area Weighted Runoff Coefficient table, below. Table-Area Weighted Runoff Coefficient. The table includes soil groups, hydrologic soil groups, runoff curve numbers, proposed land use descriptions, and areas of each particular land use. This information is combined to determine the pervious and impervious area runoff curve numbers. Table - Post-Development Surface Water Management Time of Concentration or Travel Time. Detailed post-development Surface Water Management hydrographs for Water Quality, 2-, 5-, 10-, 25-, 50-, and 100-year, 24-hour events and the 100-year 7-day event. 2. Basin B I South Main Track Basin Figure C.1 - Post-Development Surface Water Management Drainage Basins. This figure indicates proposed flow travel path information and existing conditions used to complete the Area Weighted Runoff Tables, below. Table - Area Weighted Runoff Coefficients for each subbasin. The tables include soil groups, hydrologic soil groups, runoff curve numbers, proposed land use descriptions, and areas of each particular land use. This information is combined to determine the pervious and impervious area runoff curve numbers. Table - Post-Development Surface Water Management Time of Concentration or Travel Times for each subbasin. Detailed pre-development Surface Water Management hydrographs for each subbasin for Water Quality, 2-, 5-, 10-, 25-, 50-, and 100-year, 24-hour events and the 100-year 7-day event. I Surface Watr Management Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 014002\2220 wp\drnrpt0l.doc I Appendix C-1 September 1998 UB 7A7..2....11.1 1tb B.-3 r,..t..k0VPROJECTSITE SCALE: NONE SPRINGB ••K CREEK 1,',, 1;..,, A._•__ ii-_,,,,, 1 N:=.-.- A- wmo-‘ u--- w• v-: i' ee-" n, l. f.''.'--.'!'14'0ri4-0‘-L1 I1' 12111' 1•-'' 1..,,''.,,,,,* i.,)` - n11rp."4• m. v-.- 4.•• a 1tk:• i„, r=.., 47... k..-.,1L.. 4. 6'4:.. 14-:),- 44-:•.-.*',:. b.*i*- VNt0N 0_"__,,.__e._'-_a__•.c_"c_a5_-2.m-..i1.. 3. i1e11:rlf;.7* l.se4' 2-; BASIN 5- 4 %'- P 7ar.1. r‘.. 1.— t.:t11t'1T.711. 1111-111. i10r167t`,v1*_.; 1'11: 7i ,. , 4Iiillm_.! , i ii a,... - a --"-•-- -- -- ----'- Ih"---... 111"41- 16ZA.---- 11,,t:, i."1-itEril.1 \,,-...-,.,, 2. . ,. . 774I 1 1,= * ' ' .--•-•-•- '''' A ...All*L VII t ' '--. '"lik, i "1"1". 16: 1' ( ' _2 :IT s 1%2* '•,,..:::4z.... .----- , 047r/-,,,i- 1 6 1 . 1, t• i v ', 1fill 1....10 i.17 l'1 1 s........L,„.m., ,1 4 A i. f 1 ii I 111........-..=......-••. 1, 411141$100I 1, Al1471t9". -7j--- 14t tlitt. '4 .••7---\...,sw 16th ST 1 2_ -• -!ii 0 \Ilk ,,,T,,,....i., ,..,,,,, , .... ---_,:•----___ -----1,1 .,, _ _ tifi ,, Jo i ';41: " l' ii r i 41,s DI\adffr --_____ ..,,, ...i.7,77---.....:....--_,...-....,1,0:-,-,..--:.4.,,,,,,1„0:,- r,... .:.._,....,... •_,..11 __. / 1 r-1, obi: ,,,'..,';',4; :41' Iiiii - I; T 11:--. 111111111111111g: I i.al , _....iiima......_.....--,_-,-- --5...................."'"-- 7- -......-,..:•07.0' \."2„..,sihi.,___I 1,4 jj ;1 1, 1 iv,.4.0„;,,,,, -.,•;.....sap,- f r...."--.-.-....-4,•------ I -- if 14 -r" IT 41 4, Tail NLARGEMINT OF CSTC - imi'rniiii__ jika".$1SITESOILGROUPSviiTLANDANDDETENTION'1/4. . .mm0. ,„_,,..„ 1 ff 1.COMBINED WE TPOND/ j ''DETENTION POND i 4.-_,..m.,........ki• 1„..,,,,..-rid1111...' ----.0a, c.',,,,------iin ' -......-r---- .---- 4...... - gtial —r- 2'.- UR - URBAN LAND ir''. t.--+-1-'17,7: •,,..,•,, P_ C‘_ ..‘ Iv 11"." 111'....".-1 1 .71 WO - WOODINVILLE SILT LOAM \ I- A PY - PUYALLUP FINE SANDY LOA` '1 : -:----- 1 V' II --ipNG - NEWBERG SILT LOAM 71',• .T.-- , , 0 glormi0*W r.,, - i -- UPRR e II 1 i s \\ ...._._ kVD i f 111111r--"-"-*/1 ilM•VI;A U R go 1IIJulke.,,'-"' .2•01,..„IA 1r aci , linagrill Dc3i ii, ..... Joy— 74IPiiiliII , '01-11 g . 11 am En t _-,1-'"----,, „...ad 6,.. L.+. 00 MB lit MIM:I4 4"'.:;,'•, 4 M'.::...•!,E,, 4 1l117 MUM NSea i-rt-5r.. i- c-1n1t95f1 Y141G Ag '' N GREEN RIVER Aculurr iMSCIINIvNI/m1e1-er.mdINrCmuo.m sitravaL walim .1m1P05T-CIEVELOPIABIT DRAINAGE BASINSgaire3Z• Mt lag EPP=AMISS REPORT FIG. C.1ei_AmerirAvar• IMMO VI INIPL re sass Nan SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT ROM PROJECT mai. 014002 IllIsinums 1 imo OSIER ROM Loam of=PA I I 1 I. The Boeing Company II Surface Water Management Project(SWMP) 11 Area Weighted Runoff Coefficient Post-Development SWMP l 1 1 Drainage Basin A South Main Track Basin) Sub-Basin A-1 Soil II Hydrologic Curve Land Use Area Weight Weighted Group I Hydro Group Number 1 Description Curve Nst) umber Ur I C I 187 (Sand Racing Track(dirt road) 200,038 7%I 5.70 Ur I D 198 I Building Roofs 203,789 7% 6.54 Ur I D 98 I Pavements 494,685 j 16%15.87 Ur II D T 92 Horse Walking Areas(fair) 1 305,321 j 10%9.20 Ur 1 I D 91 Gravel Parking Lots I 313,371 1 10%9.34 Ur D 90 Lawns 1,050,258 j 34%30.95 Ur D 90 Landscaping(good) 98,495 3% 2.90 Ur I D 89. Meadow 84,226 3% 2.45 Wo I D 98 •Pavements 9,549 0% 0.31 Wo 1 D 92 Lawns 143,065 5% 4.31 I Wo I D Ng 9,1 Gravel Parking Lots 35,991 1%1 1.07II B 98 Pavements 17,052 1% 0.55, 1 Ng j I B I 85 'Gravel Parking Lots 9,447 I 0%1 0.26', Ng I I B I 85 I Lawns(fair) I 88,534 I 3%1 2.461 TOTALS 1 1 i 1 1 3,053,821 1 100% i 86.22 I Notes: I1. Soil groups estimated from Sail Survey of King County Area, Washington, Des Moines Quadrangle 1973 2. Hydrologic\groups determined from King County Surface Water Design Manual, Figure 3.5.2A 1 3. Curve Numbers determined from King County Surface Water Design Manual,Table 3.5.2B 11 Impervious area(!curve number>=98) 16.65 Acres 1 Impervious area curve number 98.00 i Peril ious area(curve number<98) 53.46 Acres Pervious area curve number 90.03 1 Basin Composite Curve Number 86.22 Basin Total Area 70.11 Acres f I 1 1 I 1, I I 01389 /2220/engr/-Kbcalcl6.xls[Post-Basin A-1] 9/10/98 Sverdrup Civil,Inc. I I I 1 I The Boeing Company Surface Water Management Project (SWMP) Post-Development SWMP Time of Concentration or Travel Time Drainage Basin A CSTC Site Basin) Sub-Basin A-1 Sheet Flow(Applicable to T e only) Surface description (see Table 3.5.2C) Manning's roughness coefficient, nsheet 015° . .` "`; `;: . = Flow length (L<=300'), Ltheet 50<feet- H;.; 2-year, 24-houri rainfall, P2 2.00inches Land slope, Ssheet 0.040 ft/ft-='; Ttsheet 0.09 hours Ttsheet 5.4 min Channel Flow, Section 1 Surface description (see Table 3.5.2C) concrete.pipe Flow length, II 1900 ftchannel Watercourse slope, Schannel 0 005 ft/ft ;;" ' . :. ' Factor, ke (see Table 3.5.2C)42 . Velocity,Vchannei 3.0 f/S Ttchannel 0.18 hours Tt channel 10.7 min • Results:Basin A (Post-Development) Total Tc or Tt 0.27 hours Total Tc or Tt 16.1 min Notes: 1. Worksheet is based on Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds, 2nd Edition (Technical Release Number 55), US SCS, 1986 2. Worksheet modified to conform with Section 3.5.2 of the King County Surface Water Design Manual 013893/2220/engr-Kbcalc17.xls[Post-Basin A-1]9/9/98 Sverdrup Civil,Inc. I 9/10/ I810 :7 :48 am Sverdrup Civil Inc page 1 THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT POST-DEVELOPMENT BASIN A, SUB-BASIN A-1 BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: DA-1-10 NAME: BASIN A, SUB A-1, POST, 1OYR SBUH METHODOLOGY\ TOTAL (AREA 70 . 11 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IiMP PRECIPITATION 2 . 90 inches AREA. . : 53 .46 Acres 16 . 65 Acres TIME ITERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 03 98 . 00 TC 16 . 10 min 16 . 10 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 PEAK RTE: 33 .40', cfs VOL: 12 . 15 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ]D: DA-1-100 NAME: BASIN A, SUB A-1, POST, 100YR SBUH METHODOLOGY li TOTAL AREA 70 . 11 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALIL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 3 . 90 inches AREA. . : 53 .46 Acres 16 . 65 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 03 98 . 00 TC 16 . 10 min 16 . 10 min ABSTRACTION COEFF 0 .20 PEAK RATE: 49 . 21 \\cfs VOL: 17 . 68 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN I : DA-1-2 I NAME : BASIN A, SUB A-1, POST, 2YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 1 70 . 11 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 2 . 00 inches AREA. . : 53 .46 Acres 16 . 65 Acres TIME INTERVAL I 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 03 98 . 00 TC 16 . 10 min 16 . 10 min ABSTRACTON COEFF: ', 0 . 20 PEAK RATE: 19 . 57 cfs VOL: 7 .34 Ac-ft TIME : 480 min BASIN ID: DA-i-25 NAME : BASIN A, SUB A-1, POST, 25YR SBUH METI'pDOLOGY TOTAL AREA 70 . 11 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL \TYPE li KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION I 3 .40 inches AREA. . : 53 .46 Acres 16 . 65 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 03 98 . 00 TC 16 . 10 min 16 . 10 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 PEAK RATE: 41 . 27 cfs VOL: 14 . 90 Ac-ft TIME : 480 min I 1 9/10/98. 10 :7 :48 am Sverdrup Civil Inc page 2 THE BOEING COMPANY i ' SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT POST-DEVELOPMENT BASIN A, SUB-BASIN A-1 BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: DA-1-5 NAME: BASIN A, SUB A-1, POST, 5YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 70 . 11 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 2 .40 inches AREA. . : 53 .46 Acres 16 . 65 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 03 98 . 00 TC 16 . 10 min 16 . 10 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: . 0 .20 PEAK RATE: 25 . 63 cfs VOL: 9 .45 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: DA-1-50 NAME: BASIN A, SUB A-1, POST, 50YR SBUH METHODOLOGY ' TOTAL AREA 70 . 11 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 3 .45 inches AREA. . : 53 .46 Acres 16 . 65 Acres ' _' TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 03 98 . 00 TC 16 . 10 min 16 . 10 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 PEAK RATE : 42 . 07 'cfs VOL: 15 . 17 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min U. BASIN ID: DA-1-WQ' NAME: BASIN A, SUB A-1, POST, WQ SBUH METHODOLOGY ' TOTAL AREA 70 . 11 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE. . . .: KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 0 . 67 inches AREA. . : 53 .46 Acres 16 . 65 Acres TIME INTERVAL. . . .;: 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 03 98 . 00 TC 16 . 10 min 16 . 10 min , ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 PEAK RATE: 2 . 32 cfs VOL: 1 . 24 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min 1 I I I The Boeing Company Surface Water Management Project(SWMP) Area Weighted Runoff Coefficient Post-Development SWMP I Drainage Basin A CSTC Basin) Sub-Basin A-2 Soil Hydrologic Curve Land Use Area Weight Weighted Group ,I Group Number Description sf) I Curve Number Ur i D I 98 1 Building Roofs 1 278,260 10% 1 9.61 Ur D 98 Pavements 788,620 28%27.25 Ur D 90 Landscaping(good) 1,548,103 I 55%49.12 Ur D I 100 1 Water Surfaces 212,421 7% 7.49 Py I B 98 1 Pavements 8,978 0% 0.31 TOTALS I 2,836,382 I 100% 93.78 I Notes: 1. Soil groups estimated from Soil Survey of King County Area, Washington, Des Moines Quadrangle 1973 i 2. Hydrologic groups determined from King County Surface Water Design Manual, Figure 3.5.2A 3. Curve Numbers determined from King County Surface Water Design Manual,Table 3.5.2B Impervious area(curve number>=98) 29.57 Acres Impervious area curve number 98.33 Pervious area(curve number< 98) 35.54 Acres Pervious area curve number 90.00 1 Basin Composite Curve Number 93.78 Basin Total Area ! 65.11 Acres I, I I I I I 013893 2220/engr/-Kbcalc16. i s[Post-Basin A-2] , 9/9/98 Sverdrup Civil,Inc. 1 The Boeing Company Surface Water Management Project (SWMP) Post-Development SWMP Time of Concentration or Travel Time Drainage Basin A CSTC Site Basin) Sub-Basin A-2 Sheet Flow(Applicable to T, only) Surface description (see Table 3.5.2C) asphalt-parking lot Manning's roughness coefficient, nsheet 0:01;1 Flow length (L<=300'), 4neet 70 feet.; 2-year,24-hour rainfall, P2 2.00 inches Land slope, Ssheet 0:020Yftfft ;; Ttsheet I 0.02 hours Ttsheet 1.2 min Channel Flow, Section 1 Surface description (see Table 3.5.2C) concrete pipe Flow length, channel 1220 ft' Watercourse slope, Schannel 0.005-0 Factor, ks (see Table 3.5.2C)42 , Velocity, Vchannel 3.0 f/s Tt channel 0.11 hours Ttchannel 16.8 min Results:Basin A (Post-Development) Total Ts or Tt 10.13 hours Total Tc or Tt j 8.0 min Notes: F 1. Worksheet is based on Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds, 2nd Edition (Technical Release Number 55), US SCS, 1986 2. Worksheet modified to conform with Section 3.5.2 of the King County Surface Water Design Manual 013893/2220/engr-Kbcalcl7.xls[Post-Basin A-2]9/9/98 Sverdrup Civil,Inc. 9/9/98 11 : 3 :3 am Sverdrup Civil Inc page 1 li I I THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT POST-DEVELOPMENT BASIN A, SUB-BASIN A-2 I BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: DA-2-10 NAME: BASIN A, SUB A-2, POST, 10YR SBUH ETHODOLOGY I TOTAL !AREA L : 65 . 11 Acres KC24HR BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFAhL TYPE PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 2 . 90 inches AREA. . : 35 . 54 Acres 29 . 57 Acres TIME INTERVAL h 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 00 98 .33 I TC 8 . 00 min 8 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 PEAK RATE: 38 . 1i cfs VOL: 12 . 27 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min I BASIN ID: DA-2-1010 NAME : BASIN A, SUB A-2, POST, 100YR SBUH METHODOLOGY1 TOTAL AREA 65 . 11 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE i• TIME INIERVAL. . . . I KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION i• 3 . 90 inches AREA. . : 35 . 54 Acres 29 . 57 Acres 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 00 98 .33 TC 8 . 00 min 8 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF 0 . 20 PEAK RATE: 54 .47kkcfs VOL: 17 .49 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: DA-2-2 SBUH METHODOLOGY j NAME: BASIN A, SUB A-2, POST, 2YR ITOTAL AREA I1 65 . 11 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALII, TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATIONTIME I7ERVAL2 . 00 inches AREA. . : 35 . 54 Acres 29 . 57 Acres I 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 00 98 . 33 TC 8 . 00 min 8 . 00 min ABSTRAC !ION COEFF: ; 0 .20 PEAK RAT : 23 . 64 cfs VOL: 7 . 70 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min I BASIN ID: DA-2-25 I NAME : BASIN A, SUB A-2 , POST, 25YR SBUH MET ODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 65 . 11 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE I KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION I 3 .40 inches AREA. . : 35 . 54 Acres 29 . 57 Acres TIME INTERVAL I 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 00 98 .33 TC 8 . 00 min 8 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: I 0 . 20 PEAK RATE : 46 . 28 cfs VOL: 14 . 87 Ac-ft TIME : 480 min 11 I . I 1 I I 9/9/9.8 11 :3 :32 am Sverdrup Civil Inc page 2 THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT POST-DEVELOPMENT BASIN A, SUB-BASIN A-2 BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: DA-2-5 NAME: BASIN A, SUB A-2 , POST, 5YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 65 . 11 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 2 .40 inches AREA. . : 35 . 54 Acres 29 . 57 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN-90 . 00 98 . 33 TC 8 . 00 min 8 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: , 0 . 20 PEAK RATE: 30 . 02 cfs VOL: 9 . 71 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: DA-2-50 ; NAME: BASIN A, SUB A-2, POST, 50YR SBUH METHODOLOGY , 1 TOTAL AREA 65 . 11 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 3 .45 inches AREA. . : 35 . 54 Acres 29 . 57 Acres ; , TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 00 98 . 33 TC 8 . 00 min 8 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFFi 0 . 20 PEAK RATE: 47 . 09: cfs VOL: 15 . 13 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: DA-2-WQ NAME: BASIN A, SUB A-2, POST, WQ SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 65 . 11 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 0 . 67 inches AREA. . : 35 . 54 Acres 29 . 57 Acres ' 1 TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 00 98 . 33 TC 8 . 00 min 8 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 PEAK RATE: 4 .38 cfs VOL: 1 . 62 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min 1 1 I The Boeing Company Surface Water Management Project(SWMP) Area Weighted Runoff Coefficient Post-Development SWMP I Drainage Basin A Delta Area Basin) Sub-Basin A-3 Soil Hydrologic Curve Land Use Area Weight Weighted Group Group Number I Description Of) Curve Number Ur 1 D 190 'Landscaping(good) 121,924 32% I 26.83 Ur 1 D , 1100 'Water Surfaces 42,836 11%1125 Py I B I 198 Pavements 5,248 1% 1.35 Py B 1 80 ,Landscaping(good)189,678 50% I 39 i86 Py B 100 Water Surfaces 20,956 6%1 5.51 TOTALS I I I I 1 380,642 100% 1 86.80 Notes: I 1. Soil gro ps estimated from Soil Survey of King County Area, Washington, Des Moines Quadrangle 1973 2. Hydrolo is groups determined from King County Surface Water Design Manual,Figure 3.5.2A 3. Curve N k tubers determined Ifro,m King County Surface Water Design Manual,Table 3.5.2B II pervious area(curve number>=98) 1.58 Acres Impervious area curve number 99.85 Pervious area(curve number<98) 7.15 Acres P rvious area curve number 83.91 Basin Composite Curve Number 86.80 Basin Total Area 8.74 Acres i_ I I 0138.3/2220/engr/-Kbcalc16.xls[Post-Basin A-3] 9/9/98 Sverdrup Civil,Inc. I I l I The Boeing Company Surface Water Management Project (SWMP) Post-Development SWMP Time of Concentration or Travel Time Drainage Basin A CSTC Site Basin) Sub-Basin A-3 Sheet Flow(Applicable to T, only) Surface description'(see Table 3.5.2C) lawn ' -.= Manning's roughness coefficient, nsheet Flow length (L<=300'), I-sheet 200 feet:: 2-year, 24-hour rainfall, P2 2.00 inches.~ : .'' Land slope, Ssheet ; 0:020 ft/ft_', Ttsheet 0.36 hours Ttsheet 21.6 min Shallow Concentrated Flow Surface description (see Table 3.5.2C) brushy ground;rivith:some;tree5".';:;, Flow length, Lshallow 125ft; Watercourse slope, Sshallow 0.060 ft/ft Factor, ks (see Table 3.5.2C) 5. Velocity, Vshallow 1.2 f/s Ttshallow 0.03 hours Ttshallow 1.7 min Results:Basin A (Post-Development) Total To or Tt 0.39 hours Total Ts or Tt ; j 23.3 min Notes: 1. Worksheet is based on Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds, 2nd Edition (Technical Release Number 55), US SCS, 1986 2. Worksheet modified to conform with Section 3.5.2 of the King County Surface Water Design Manual 013893/2220/engr-Kbcalc17.xls[Post-Basin A-3]9/9/98 Sverdrup Civil,Inc. I 9/9/98 11 :3 :48 am Sverdrup Civil Inc page 1 I THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT POST-6EVELOPMENTBASIN A, SUB-BASIN A-3 I BASIN SUMMARY II I BASIN ID: DA-3-10 NAME: BASIN A, SUB A-3 , POST, 10YR SBUH METHODOLOGY k, TOTAL AREA 8 . 73 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE I • KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION ! • 2 . 90 inches AREA. . : 7 . 15 Acres 1 .158 Acres TIME INTERVAL. . . . : 10 . 00 min CN 83 . 91 99 . 85 TC 23 . 30 min 23 . 30 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 PEAK RATE : 2 . 75! cfs VOL: 1 .23 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN IID: DA-3-100 NAME: BASIN A, SUB A-3 , POST, 100YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 8 . 73 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 3 . 90 inches AREA. . : 7 . 15 Acres 1 . 58 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 83 . 91 99 . 85 TC 23 .30 min 23 . 30 min ABSTRACITION COEFF 0 . 200 . 20 PEAK RATE: 4 . 38 ;cfs VOL: 1 . 87 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: DA-3-2 NAME : BASIN A, SUB A-3 , POST, 2YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 8 . 73 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 2 . 00 inches AREA. . : 7 . 15 Acres 1 . 58 Acres TIME INTERVAL I 10 . 00 min CN 83 . 91 99 . 85 TC 23 .30 min 23 . 30 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 PEAK RATE: 1 .42 cfs VOL: 0 . 70 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min II I. BASIN IDI. DA-3-25 ! NAME: BASIN A, SUB A-3 , POST, 25YR SBUH METHODOLOGY II TOTAL AREA 8 . 73 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL \TYPE I KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 3 .40 inches AREA. . : 7 . 15 Acres 1 . 58 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 83 . 91 99 . 85 TC 23 . 30 min 23 .30 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 10 . 20 PEAK RATE: 3 . 55 cfs VOL: 1 . 54 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min I 9/9/98 11 :3 :48 am./ Sverdrup Civil Inc page 2 THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT POST-DEVELOPMENT BASIN A, SUB-BASIN A-3 BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: DA-3-5 NAME: BASIN A, SUB A-3 , POST, 5YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 8 . 73 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE j KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 2 .40 inches AREA. . : 7 . 15 Acres 1 . 58 Acres , ! TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 83 . 91 99 . 85 TC 23 . 30 min 23 . 30 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 1 0 . 20 PEAK RATE: 1 . 99 cfs VOL: 0 . 93 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: DA-3-50 , NAME: BASIN A, SUB A-3 , POST, 50YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 8 . 73 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 3 .45 inches AREA. . : 7 . 15 Acres 1 . 58 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 83 . 91 99 . 85 TC 23 .30 min 23 . 30 min ABSTRACTION COEFF? 0 . 20 PEAK RATE: 3 . 63 , cfs VOL: 1 . 58 Ac-ft TIME : 480 min BASIN ID: DA-3-WQ; NAME: BASIN A, SUB A-3 , POST, WQ SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 8 . 73 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 0 . 67 inches AREA. . : 7 . 15 Acres 1 . 58 Acres TIME INTERVAL. . . .i : 10 . 00 min CN 83 . 91 99 . 85 TC 23 . 30 min 23 . 30 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 PEAK RATE: 0 .21 cfs VOL: 0 . 11 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min I The Boeing Company Surface Water Management Project (SWMP) Area Weighted Runoff Coefficient Post-Development SWMP Drainage Basin B South Main Track Basin) Sub-Basin B-1 Soil Hydrologic Curve Land Use Area Weight Weighted Group I Group Number Description sfl Curve Number Ur j D I98 Building Roofs 4,000 1% 1.08 1.35UrIDI ,98, !Pavements 5,000 1% Ur D 91 Gravel Parking Lots 27,275 8% 6.86 Ur 87 ;Sand Racing Track(dirt road) 39,648 11%9.53 Ur j I C D 90 Lawns 208,686 58%51.91 Ur ! D 92 Horse Walking Areas(fair) 60,517 17%15.39 Ur ! D 89 (Meadow 16,694 5% 4.11 TOTALS I I I I 361,820 I 100% 90.23 1 i Notes: I 1. Soil groups estimated from Soil Survey of King County Area, Washington, Des Moines Quadrangle 1973 2. Hydrologic groups determined from King County Surface Water Design Manual,Figure 3.5.2A 3. Curve Numbers determined from King County Surface Water Design Manual,Table 3.5.2E Impervious area(curve number>=98) 0.21 Acres Impervious area curve number 98.00 Pervious area(curve number< 98) 8.10 Acres Pervious area curve number 90.04 I Basin CompositelCurve Number 90.23 Basin Total Area II 8.31 Acres I I I j I I I II-I I I I 01389 2220/engr/-Kbcalcl6.xls[Post-Basin B-1] 9/10/98 Sverdrup Civil,Inc. I I The Boeing Company Surface Water Management Project(SWMP) Post-Development SWMP Time of Concentration or Travel Time Drainage Basin B South Main Track Basin) Sub-Basin B-1 I Sheet Flow(Applicable to T,only) Surface description(see Table 3.5.2C) Short grass grade-' - " • Manning's roughness coefficient,ne,,a Row length(L<=300'), 2-year,24-hour rainfall,P2 2.00 Inches,'"-' Land slope,S„„„ 0.003 ft/It 0.59 hours 135 min I Shallow'Concentrated Flow Surface description(see Table 3.5.2C) Brushy ground with Some trees(lit=0.060). Row length,La„a,,, t00ft;':•`:;' ,,, Watercourse slope, Factor,k,(see Table 3.5.2C) 5, Velocity:V„„„ 02 Us T,„„ao„ 0.14 hours T,emir; 9 min Channel Flow,Section 1 Surface description(see Table 3.5.2C) Earth lined waterway(neo.0251• Flow length,La.„w Watercourse slope,Sow, 0.017 f/It, Factor,k„(see Table 3.5.2C) Velocity,Vd„,,,,,, 12.6 f/s T,„,a„„l 0.11 hours 7min Channel Flow,Section 2 Surface description(see Table 3.5.2C) Concrete pipe(n=0012) Row,length,Ld„„„, 127.0ft Watercourse slope,S„„,,,„, 0.006ift/ft. Factor,k,(see Table 3.5.2C) 42 Velocity,Vd„„,„ 13.3 f/s T,channel 10.01 hours 10.65 min Channel Flow,Section 3 Surface description(see Table 3.5.2C) !Grassed waterway(1t_0.025) Row length,Ldw„„, 540:0 ft Watercourse slope,Sc,„„„„, 0.005 ttflt - Factor,k,(see Table 3.5.2C) Velocity,V„„„,„ 11.1 f/s T„r„„,„ 10.13 hours T,„„„n„ 17.89 min Channel Flow,Section 4 Surface description(see Table 3.5.2C) CMP pipe"(n=0.024)'= Flow length,Ld„„„ Watercourse slope,S„„„,„ 0.003 ftlft Factor,k,(see Table 3.5.2C) Velocity,Vd„„,„ 1.1 f/s Tr channel 0.01 hours Tr dunned 0.90 min Results:Basin B Sub-Basin B2(Post-Development) Total T,or T,11.00 hours Total T,or T,160 min Notes: 1.Worksheet is based on Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds,2nd Edition(Technical Release Number 55),US SCS,1986 2. Worksheet modified to conform with Section 3.5.2 of the Ming County Surface Water Design Manual 013993/2220/engr•Kbcalc17.els(Post-Basin B-1) 9/8/98 Sverdrup OW,Inc. I 9/10/98 10 : 9 : 1!1 am Sverdrup-Civil Inc page 1 THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT I POST-DIEVELOPMENTiBASIN B, SUB-BASIN B-1 BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: DB-1-10 NAME: BASIN B, SUB B-1, POST, 10YR SBUH METHODOLOGY ; TOTAL AREA i . 8 .31 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE. . . :, :'KC24HR PERV I'4P PRECIPITATION 2 . 90 inches AREA.. : 8 . 1004 Acres 0 .21 Acres TIME INTERVAL. . . .'I : 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 98 . 00 TC 60 . 00 min 60 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFFI: 0 .20 PEAK RATE: 2 . 15 cfs VOL: 1 .33 Ac-ft TIME: 490 min I BASIN ID: DB-1-100 NAME : BASIN B, SUB B-1, POST, 100YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 8 .31 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION i 3 . 90 inches AREA. . : 8 . 10 Acres 0 . 21 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 04 98 . 00 I i TC 60 . 00 min 60 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF:I 0 . 20 PEAK RA' E: 3 . 301.cfs VOL: 1. 97 Ac-ft TIME: 490 min I BASIN ID: DB-1-2 INAME: BASIN B, SUB B-1, POST, 2YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AI EA II1 8 . 31 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE PRECIPITATION I PERV IMP 2 . 00 inches AREA. . : 8 . 10 Acres 0 . 21 Acres TIME INTERVAL I 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 04 98 . 00 TC 60 . 00 min 60 . 00 min 1 ABSTRACTION COEFF: 'I 0 . 20 PEAK RATE: 1 . 16 cfs VOL: 0 . 77 Ac-ft TIME : 490 min II BASIN ID: DB-1-25 II NAME: BASIN B, SUB B-1, POST, 25YR II SBUH METHODOLOGY i TOTAL AREA 8 . 31 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL \TYPE I KC24HR PERV IMP li PRECIPITATION i 3 .40 inches AREA. . : 8 . 10 Acres 0 . 21 Acres II TIME INTERVAL l 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 04 98 . 00 TC 60 . 00 min 60 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 PEAK RATE: 2 . 72 cfs VOL: 1 . 65 Ac-ft TIME: 490 min I Y ' I I I, I I I I i I 9/10/98 10 : 9 :11 am Sverdrup Civil Inc page 2 THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT POST-DEVELOPMENT BASIN B, SUB-BASIN B-1 BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: DB-1-5 NAME: BASIN B, SUB B-1, POST, 5YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 8 . 31 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 2 .40 inches AREA. . : 8 . 10 Acres 0 .21 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 04 98 . 00 TC 60 . 00 min 60 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 PEAK RATE: 1 . 59 cfs VOL: 1 . 01 Ac-ft TIME: 490 min BASIN ID: DB-1-50 . NAME: BASIN B, SUB B-1, POST, 50YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 8 .31 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 3 .45 inches AREA. . : 8 . 10 Acres 0 . 21 Acres TIME INTERVAL J 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 04 98 . 00 TC 60 . 00 min 60 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF 0 . 20 PEAK RATE: 2 . 78 !cfs VOL: 1 . 68 Ac-ft TIME: 490 min BASIN ID: DB-1-WQr NAME: BASIN B, SUB B-1, POST, WQ SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 8 .31 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP I PRECIPITATION 0 . 67 inches AREA. . : 8 . 10 Acres 0 .21 Acres ! ' TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 04 98 . 00 TC 60 . 00 min 60 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 PEAK RATE: 0 . 08 cfs VOL: 0 . 10 Ac-ft TIME: 760 min I I- I 1 The Boeing Company I Surface Water Management Project(SWMP) I Area Weighted Runoff Coefficient Post-Development SWMP 1I I 1 Drainage Basin B South Main Track Basin) I Sub-Basin B-2 Soil Hydrologic I Curve Land Use Area Weight Weighted Group I Group Number Description sf) Curve Number Ur H D Ur 98 Building Roofs 11,011 3% 2.98 D 98 Pavements 14,109 ;4% 3.82 Ur j Ur ; D 91 Gravel Parking Lots 60,755 j 17%15.26 C 87 Sand Racing Track(dirt road) 25,700 j 7% 6.1p Ur D 90, Lawns 170,000 47%42.23 Ur D 92 Horse Walking Areas(fair) 53,860 15%13.68 Ur D 89 Meadow 26,859 I 7% 6.6b TOTALS 1 I , 1 1 362,294 I 100% I 90.73 I Notes: 1. Soil groups estimated from Soil Survey of King County Area, Washington, Des Moines Quadrangle 1973 I2. Hydrologic groups determined from King County Surface Water Design Manual, Figure 3.5.2A I 3. Curve Numbers determined from King County Surface Water Design Manual,Table 3.5.2B Impervious area(curve number>= 98) 0.58 Acres Impervious area curve number 98.00 Pervious area(curve number<98) 7.74 Acres I Pervious area curve number 90.19 Bain Composite\Curve Number 90.73 I Basin Total Area I; 8.32 Acres I I I I I I 1 I 1 I 1 0 I 13893(2220/engr/-Kbcalcl6.\Is[Post-Basin B-2] 9/9/98 Sverdrup Civil,Inc. I The Boeing Company Surface Water Management Project(SWMP) Post-Development SWMP Time of Concentration or Travel Time Drainage Basin B South Main Track Basin) Sub-Basin B-2 Sheet Flow(Applicable to T a only) Surface description(see Table 3.5.2C) Bars soil• Manning's roughness coefficient,r ge„ 0.011, ; Flow length(L<=300'),L 80 feet;.-:_. 2-year,24-hour rainfall,P2 200 inches;.' Land slope, 10.02 hours 11 min Shallow Concentrated Flow Surface description(see Table 3.5.2C) Flow length, . rO ft. Watercourse slope,Se,,,a„ 44000.000 ft/ft Factor,k,(see Table 3.5.2C) 11 Velocity,Va„d,,, 2307.4 Us T,e,,,,,e, 0.00 hours j T,a eaa 0 min Channel Flow,Section 1 Surface description(see Table 3.5.2C) Grassed waterway(n=0.025) Flow length,Ld.ma 830 ft - rrrr, Watercourse slope,Sdun 0.005 tVft . . Factor,k,(see Table 3.5.2C) 17 Velocity,Vdv,v,,, 11.2 f/s Menne 10.19 hours Ti channel 112 min Channel Flow,Section 2 Surface description(see Table 3.5.2C) 4CMP pipe(n 0.024) r Flow length,Ld,,a 117.0 ft Watercourse slope,Sc„.,,, Factor,ke(see Table 3.5.2C) Velocity,Vd,,,a,,, 12.5 f/s T,Ma,.,.! 1 0.00 hours dannel 10.11 min Channel Flow,Section 3 Surface description(see Table 3.5.2C) (Grassed waterway-(rt=0.025) I Flow length, Watercourse slope,Sd,,,,ei Factor,ka(see Table 3.5.2C) 17 ... , • Velocity;vd,,,,,,,i 1.1 f/s T,channel 0.14 hours T,d,„,aai 18.26 min Channel Flow,Section 4 Surface description(see Table 3.5.2C) ICMP pipe(n=0.024) Flow length,h„naei I60.0 ft • ' ' Watercourse slope,Sd,a,a,e, 0.003 ft/ft, • • , Factor,k,(see Table 3.5.2C) 21 Velocity,Vd,,,a,N 11.1 Us T,d,a,eI r0.01 hours T,d,anel 10.90 min Results:Basin B Sub-Basin B3(Post-Development) Total T,or T,10.36 hours Total T,or T,122 min Notes: 1. Worksheet is based on Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds,2nd Edition(Technical Release Number 55),US SCS,1986 2. Worksheet modified to conform with Section 3.5.2 of the!Ong County Surface Water Design Manual 013893/2220/engr-Kbcak17.,ds lPost•Basin 9.21 e/W913 Svordrup Civil,Inc. 9/9/98 11 :4 :27 am Sverdrup Civil Inc age 1 I THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT POST-DEVELOPMENT BASIN B, SUB-BASIN B-2 BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: DB-2-10 NAME: BASIN B, SUB B-2, POST, 10YR SBUH METHODOLOGY, TOTAL AREA. . . . . . \. : 8 .32 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE l • KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 2 . 90 inches AREA. . : 7 . 74 Acres 0 . 58 Acres TIME INTERVAL ' • 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 19 98 . 00 TC 22 . 00 min 22 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 PEAK RFLTE: 3 . 39 cfs VOL: 1 .36 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min I BASIN ID: DB-2-160 NAME: BASIN B, SUB B-2, POST, 100YR SBUH METHODOLOGY ; TOTAL AREA 1. 8 . 32 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE 1• KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION I. 3 . 90 inches AREA. . : 7 . 74 Acres 0 . 58 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 19 98 . 00 TC 22 . 00 min 22 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF 0 . 20 PEAK RATE: 5 . 11cfs VOL: 2 . 01 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: DB-2-2 \ NAME: BASIN B, SUB B-2, POST, 2YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA I 8 . 32 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE I KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 2 . 00 inches AREA. . : 7 . 74 Acres 0 . 58 Acres TIME INTERVAL I ' 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 19 98 . 00 TC 22 . 00 min 22 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF:'I 0 .20 PEAK RATS : 1 . 90 cfs VOL: 0 . 80 Ac-ft TIME : 480 min II BASIN ID: DB-2-25 ', NAME: BASIN B, SUB B-2 , POST, 25YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA RAINFALLITYPE 8 . 32 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00_ cfs Ii KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 3 .40 inches AREA. . : 7 . 74 Acres 0 . 58 Acres TIME INTERVAL II 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 19 98 . 00 1,-- 1-:-, TC 22 . 00 min 22 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 PEAK RATE: 4 . 25 cfs VOL: 1 . 68 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min I 9/9/9.8 11 :4 :27 am , Sverdrup Civil Inc page 2 THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT POST-DEVELOPMENT BASIN B, SUB-BASIN B-2 BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: DB-2-5 NAME: BASIN B, SUB B-2, POST, 5YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 8 . 32 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 2 .40 inches AREA. . : 7 . 74 Acres 0 . 58 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN-90 . 19 98 . 00 TC 22 . 00 min 22 . 00 min r-I ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 PEAK RATE: 2 . 55 cfs VOL: 1. 04 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: DB-2-50 NAME: BASIN B, SUB B-2, POST, 50YR I SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 8 . 32 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 3 .45 inches AREA. . : 7 . 74 Acres 0 . 58 Acres : TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 19 98 . 00 TC 22 . 00 min 22 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF 0 . 20 PEAK RATE : 4 . 33 : cfs VOL: 1 . 72 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: DB-2-WQ NAME: BASIN B, SUB B-2 , POST, WQ I , SBUH METHODOLOGY ' TOTAL AREA 8 .32 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 0 . 67 inches AREA. . : 7 . 74 Acres 0 . 58 Acres ; TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 19 98 . 00 TC 22 . 00 min 22 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 PEAK RATE: 0 . 13 cfs VOL: 0 . 11 Ac-ft TIME: 490 min The Boeing Company Surface Water Management Project(SWMP) Area Weighted Runoff Coefficient Post-Development SWMP Drainage Basin B South Main Track Basin) Sub-Basin B-3 Soil Hydrologic Curve Land Use Area Weight Weighted Group Group Number Description sf) Curve Number Py B I '98 'Buildin Roofs 22,000 12%11178 Py _ B I 98 I Pavements 59,633 33%31194 Py B j 90 Lawns rI 35,369 19%17140 Py , B 80 Landscaping(good)r 47,464 26%20.75 Py B 100 Water Surfaces 5,860 3% 3.20 Py B I 78 Meadow 12,662 7% 5.40 TOTALS I I I I I 182,988 I 100% 90!46 Notes: 1. Soil groups estimated from Soil Survey of King County Area, Washington, Des Moines Quadrangle 1973 2. Hydrologic groups determined from King County Surface Water Design Manual,Figure 3.5.2A 3. Curve Numbers determined from King County Surface Water Design Manual,Table 3.5.2B Impervious area(curve number>=98) 2.01 Acres Impervious area curve number 98.13 Pervious area(cL1rve number<98) 2.19 Acres Pervious area curve number 83.44 i ' Basin Composites Curve Number 90.46 Basin Total Area 4.20 Acres 013893/2220/engr/-Kbcalcl6.xls[Post-Basin B-3] 9/9/98 Sverdrup Civil,Inc. i I The Boeing Company Surface Water Management Project(SWMP) Post-Development SWMP Time of Concentration or Travel Time Drainage Basin B South Main Track Basin) Sub-Basin B-3 Sheet Flow(Applicable to Tc only) Surface description(see Table 3.5.2C)Short grass pride': Manning's roughness coefficient,nsheet OJ5 Flow length(L<=300'),Lsheet 25 feet.:.: 2-year,24-hour rainfall,P2 2.00 inches. • Land slope,Ssheet 0A30 ft/ft Tt sheet 1 10.06 hours Tt sheet I 3 min Shallow Concentrated Flow Surface description(see Table 3.5.2C) Flow length,4halow 0 ft Watercourse slope,Sstanow 44000.000ftfft':•,:_" Factor,ksl(see Table 3.5.2C) 11; Velocity,Vshafbw 1 2307.4 f/s Ttshattow 0.00 hours Ttshataw 10 min Channel'Flow,Section 1 Surface description(see Table 3.5.2C)Concrete.pipe' Flow length,l-channel 575 ft, Watercourse slope,Schannei 0.0954t/ft Factor, (see Table 3.5.2C) 42 Velocity,Vchannel 13.0 f/s Tt channel I 10.05 hours Tt channel 13 min I Channel,Flow,Section 2 Surface description(see Table 3_5.2C)JCMPpipe(n=0.024)- Flow length,'-channel 155A ft.: Watercourse slope,Schannel 0.002 ft/ft Factor,kt(see Table 3.5.2C) Velocity,.Vchannel 0.9 f/s Ttchannel 1 0.02 hours Tt channel 0.98 min Results:Basin B Sub-Basin B3(Post-Development) Total Te or Tt 0.13 hours Total Tc or Tt 18 min Notes: 1. Worksheet is based on Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds,2nd Edition(Technical Release Number 55),US SCS,1986 2. Worksheet modified to conform with Section 3.5.2 of the King County Surface Water Design Manual I 013893/2220/engr-Kbcalc17.xls[Post-Basin B-3] 9/8/98 Sverdrup Civil,Inc. l i 9/9/98 11 :4 :44 am Sverdrup Civil Inc page 1 THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT POST-DEVELOPMENT BASIN B, SUB-BASIN B-3 BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: DB-3-10 NAME: BASIN B, SUB B-3 , POST, 10YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 4 .20 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 2 . 90 inches AREA. . : 2 . 19 Acres 2 . 01 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 83 .44 98 . 13 TC 8 . 00 min 8 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: ! 0 . 20 PEAK RATE: 2 . 12 cfs VOL: 0 . 70 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: DB-3-100 NAME: BASIN B, SUB B-3 , POST, 100YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 4 . 20 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL ;TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 3 . 90 inches AREA. . : 2 . 19 Acres 2 . 01 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 83 .44 98 . 13 TC 8 . 00 min 8 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 PEAK RATE: 3 . 13 cfs VOL: 1 . 02 Ac-ft TIME : 480 min BASIN ID: DB-3-2 NAME: BASIN B, SUB B-3 , POST, 2YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AR A 4 .20 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 2 . 00 inches AREA. . : 2 . 19 Acres 2 . 01 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 83 .44 98 . 13 TC 8 . 00 min 8 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 PEAK RATE: 1 . 26 cfs VOL: 0 .43 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: DB-3-25 NAME: BASIN B, SUB B-3 , POST, 25YR SBUH MET4ODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 4 . 20 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 3 .40 inches AREA. . : 2 . 19 Acres 2 . 01 Acres TIME INTERVAL I 10 . 00 min CN 83 . 44 98 . 13 TC 8 . 00 min 8 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF : 0 . 20 PEAK RATE: 2 . 62 cfs VOL: 0 . 86 Ac-ft TIME : 480 min 9/9/98 11 :4 :44 am . Sverdrup Civil Inc page 2 THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT POST-DEVELOPMENT BASIN B, SUB-BASIN B-3 BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: DB-3-5, NAME: BASIN B, SUB B-3 , POST, 5YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 4 .20 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 2 .40 inches AREA. . : 2 . 19 Acres 2 . 01 Acres TIME INTERVAL. . ... : 10 . 00 min CN 83 .44 98 . 13 TC 8 . 00 min 8 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFIF: 0 .20 PEAK RATE: 1 . 64 cfs VOL: 0 . 55 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: DB-3-50 NAME: BASIN B, SUB B-3 , POST, 50YR SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 4 .20 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE . • KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 3 .45 inches AREA. . : 2 . 19 Acres 2 . 01 Acres TIME INTERVAL 1 • 10 . 00 min CN 83 .44 98 . 13 TC 8 . 00 min 8 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 I PEAK RATE: 2 . 67 cfs VOL: 0 . 88 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: DB-3-WQ NAME: BASIN B, SUB B-3, POST, WQ SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 4 .20 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION. . . . : 0 . 67 inches AREA. . : 2 . 19 Acres 2 . 01 Acres : ' TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 83 .44 98 . 13 TC 8 . 00 min 8 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 PEAK RATE: 0 . 26 cfs VOL: 0 . 09 Ac-ft TIME : 480 min j I ' APPENDIX D I I I I Surface Water Management Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Ine. 014002\2220\wp\dmrpt0l.doc Appendix D September 1998 APPENDIX D RETENTION/DETENTION CALCULATIONS This appendix contains' all project retention/detention calculations mentioned in Section IV(D) of this Report. The appendix contains the following summary information: Table D.1 is a'icomparison of hydrologic values as described in Section IV(D). The last column in the table is the combined outflow to Springbrook Creek. Comparison iof the data in the last column, among the five scenarios (baseline, post-CSTC, post-25-20, post 25-10, and post SWMP projects) indicates that even after completion of this project, the total outfall to Springbrook Creek is less than when'Boeing purchased the property. Such a baseline can be utilized should additional work be proposed at the site. Figure D.1 is a chart of the last column in Table D.1 graphically indicating the decrease in peak outflows to Springbrook Creek. Table D.2 summarizes the pre- and post SWMP Basin A, Sub-Basins A-1 and A-2 peak inflow and outflow runoff rates. Figure D.2 is a chart of Table D.2 graphically indicating the decrease in peak outflows from Basin A, Sub-Basins A-1 and A-2. Table D.3 summarizes pre- and post SWMP Basin A peak inflow and outflow runoff rates. I Figure D.3 is a chart of Table D.3 graphically indicating the decrease in peak outflows froth Basin A. Table D.4 summarizes pre- and post SWMP Basin B peak inflow and outflow runoff rates. Figure D.4 is a chart of Table D.4 graphically indicating the decrease in peak outflows from Basin B. This appendix also contain's the following detailed information: 1. Post-Development CSTC project Basin 3 - CSTC Site Basin a. Sub-Basins A-1 and A-2 Routed Level Pool Table Summary b. Basin 3 Release Rates to Springbrook Creek Level Pool Table Summary 2. Post-Development 25-20 project Basin 3 - CSTC Site Basin a. Sub-Basins A-1 and A-2 Routed Level Pool Table Summary Surface Wate i Management Project Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 014002\2220\tp\dmrpt01.doc Appendix D-.1 September 1998 b. Basin 3 Release Rates to Springbrook Creek Level Pool Table Summary 3. Pre-Development SWMP project (Post-Development 25-10 project) Basin 3—CSTC Site Basin .. a. ISub-Basins A-1 and A-2 Routed Routing Comparison Table Stage - Storage Table Stage-Discharge Table I Detailed Discharge:Structure Analysis Level Pool Table Summary b. Basin 3 Release Rates to Springbrook Creek Routing Comparison Table I Stage - Storage Table Stage -Discharge Table Detailed Discharge Structure Analysis Level Pool Table Summary 4. Pre-Development SWMP project (Post-Development 25-10 project) Basin4—CSTC Site Basin a. Sub-Basins 4-1 and 4-4 Routed Through Main Track Swale Routing Comparison Table Stage - Storage Table Stage -Discharge Table Detailed Discharge Structure Analysis Level Pool Table Summary b. Sub-Basin 4-5 Routed Through Pond "B" Routing Comparison Table Stage - Storage Table Stage -Discharge Table Detailed Discharge Structure Analysis Level Pool Table Summary c.Sub-Basins 4-1, 4-4,and 4-5 Routed to Practice Track Routing Comparison Table Stage - Storage Table Stage -Discharge Table Detailed Discharge Structure Analysis Level Pool Table Summary Surface Water Management Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 014002\2220\wp\dmrpt01.doc Appendix D-2 September 1998 d. Sub-Basin 4-6 Routed Through Pond "C" Routing Comparison Table Stage - Storage Table Stage -Discharge Table Detailed Discharge Structure Analysis Level Pool Table Summary e. Basin 4 Release Rates to Springbrook Creek Routing Comparison Table Stage - Storage Table Stage -Discharge Table Detailed Discharge Structure Analysis Level Pool Table Summary 5. Post-Development SWMP Basin A—CSTC Site Basin a. Sub-Basins A-1 and A-2 Routed Through CSTC Pond to Delta Routing Comparison Table Stage- Storage Table Stage-Discharge Table Detailed Discharge Structure Analysis Level Pool Table Summary b. Basin A Release Rates to Springbrook Creek Routing Comparison Table Stage - Storage Table Stage -Discharge Table Detailed Discharge Structure Analysis Level Pool Table Summary 6. Post-Development SWMP Basin B—CSTC Site Basin a. Sub-Basin B-3 Routed Through Pond "C" Routing Comparison Table Stage - Storage Table _ Stage-Discharge Table Detailed Discharge Structure Analysis Level Pool Table Summary b. Basin B Release Rates to Springbrook Creek Routing Comparison Table Stage - Storage Table Stage - Discharge Table. Detailed Discharge Structure Analysis Level Pool Table Summary Surface Witter Management Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 014002\2220\wp\dmrpt01.doc Appendix D-3 September 1998 i i The Boeing Company Surface Water Management Project Site Development II TABLE D.1-COMPARISON OF HYDROLOGIC VALUES Pre-Development,CSTC,Building 25-20,Building 25-10,and SWMP p 111 Pre-Development Baseline Peak Flows and Elevations 1 Combined Outflow ' I STORM Peak Runoff Uncontrolled 1 to Spdngbrook FREQUENCY 1 without routing through detention storage) 2 3 4 5 16 Creek 2 13(c(s) I 4(c(s) 5 6 Outflow Elev. Outflow Elev. Outflow Elev. Outflow Elev. Outflow Elev. cfs) till,' cis) 1 12 31 Total 1 2 13 4 2520 6 1 Total (els) (cis) (els) (NGVD) (cis) (NGVD) (cis) (NGVD) (c(s) (NGVD) (cis) (NGVD) II 5-Year 1.42 23.59 Na Na 2.08 0.46 0.20 0.14 0.63 Na Na 1.45 0.59 ; 0.38 0.63 '8.45 18.55035 7.7H 9.17 54 • 13.95 3.49 /161 3L98 ! Water Qualm 0.20 2.08 Na_ N - 9.15 2-Year 24-Hour 1.12 17.83 il/a Na 17.83 4.83 2.07 2.08 7.13 rile Na 1 16.11 4.50 7.61 0.50 9.35 15.14 10.13 _ 6.19 9.17_ 1.17 13.84 2.70 11.54 25.70 1 e 23.59. 6.37 2.76 '2.80 9.54 _ Na - Na '21.47 5.86 a 10-Year 24-Hour 1.80 31.02 ri/a Na 31.02 8.36 3.66 3.74 12.67 Na Na I 28.43 7.60 13.99 0.78 9.51 22.16 10.57 9.86 9.17 2.02 14.05 4.54 1 11.71 39.36 25-Year 24-Hour 2.18 38.62 Na Na 38.62 10.37 4.57 4.70 15.86 rileNa 35.50 9.36 17.70 0.92 9.53 25.33 10.76 11.73 9.18 2.52 14.12 5.65 11.82 46.15 II' 50•Year24-Hour .222 39.39 rile Na 39.39 10.57 4.66 -4,79 16.18 rile' Na 36.20.-- 9.53' •18.07 , '.0.93 9,53 : 25.63 10.78. 12.05 . 9.18 2.57- 14.13 -5.76 ; "11.83 46.94 Ii 100-Year 24-Hour 2.56 46.31 r}/a N3 46.31 12.39 5.49 5.66 19.09 Na Na 42.63 11.13 21.45 1.05 9.55 28.30 10.94 13.85 9.18 3.03 14.20 6.80 11.92 53.03 11 I Poost-Development CSTC Peak Flows and Elevations IIICombinedOutflowI STORM Peak Runoff Uncontrolled to Springbrook FREQUENCY without routing through detention storage) 2 A B 5 1 6 Creek 2 I A(cfs)I I B(c(s) 5 6 Outflow Elev. Outflow Elev. Outflow Elev. Outflow Elev. Outfloel Elev. c(s) cis) 1 12 Total 1 2 13 4 2520 6 I Total (cfs) (cis) (cis) (NGVD) (cfs) (NGVD) (c(s) (NGVD) (cis) (NGVD) (els) I (NGVD) ilWaterQuality0.21 Na 4.41 0.8 4.59 0.53 0.22 b.14 0.63 Na Na I 1.52 0.59 0.42 0.09 9.10 0.00 __ 7.60 _ 1.01 9.15 0.15 13.54 0.27_- 11.06 __ 1.52 __ 2-Year 24-Hour 1.13 Na 23.74 1. 1 25.45 5.30 2.32 2.08 7.13 Na Na 16.83 _4.50 7.61 0.49 9.35 1.89 8.64 6.45 9.17 1.17 13.84 2.70.1_ 11.54 12.70 r 1_...- 954 ' _ _._.._._.-..._........._.........._.....5•Yeer 24-Hour 1.43 Na 50,t2 2.4 32.56 7.00 3.10 2.80 9.54 Na. Na 22.44 5.86 10.36 0.63' 9.45 2.95 8.88 '8.13.,_ 9.17 1,54 13.95 3.49_i__ 11.61 16,74 ! 10-Year 24-Hour 1.82 Na 38.22 3.I3 41.65 9.17 4.10 3.74 12.67 Na Na 29.68 7.60 13.99 0.78 9.51 4.22 8.69 10.32 9.18 2.02 14.05 _ 4.54 L 11.71 21.88 , 25-Year 24-Hour 2.20 Na 46.39 4.47 50.86 11.38 5.12 ;4.0 15.86 n/a Na7 I 37.06 9.36 17.70 0.91 9.53 5.53 8.71 12.41 9.18 2.52 14.12 5.65 1 11.82 27.02 50-Year 24-Hour 2.24Na 47.20 4_58 51.78 11.60 5.23 '4,79 16J 8 Na Na'-: 37;80 9.53„ 18.07" 0,92 • 9,53 68 '-.8,72 12,62 9.18 '2;57 14.13 5.76 L 11.83 27,53.5' 11 I 100-Year24-Hour 2.59 Na 54.58 5.55 60.13 13.60 6.16 5.66 19.09 Na N 1a 44.51 11.13 21.45 1.04 9.55 6.84 8.74 14.44 9.19 3.03 14.20 6.80- 11.92 32.15 i I Post-Development Building 25-20 Peak Flows and Elevations Combined Outfioxi STORM Peak RJnolt Uncontrolled to Springbrook i FREQUENCY without routing through detention storage) 2 A B 5 16 Creek 2 I A(ci)4 B(cfs) I 5 6 Outflow Elev. Outflow Elev. Outflow Elev. Outflow Elev. Outflow Elev. e(s) cfs) 1 1 2 A Total 1 2 13 4 2520 6 1 Total (c(s) (cis) (cis) (NGVD) (cis) (NGVD) (cis) (NGVD) (cis) (NGVD) Ws)! (NGVD) I'II Water Quality 0.21 Na 4.50 0.18 4.68 0.30 0.08 10.14 0.63 1.05 Na 2.20 0.59 0.42 0.09 - 9.10 0.00 7.60 0.86 9.15 _ 0.15 13.54 0.27 11.06 _ 1.37 _ 2-Year 24-Hour 1.13 Na 23.89 1 71 25.60 3.77 1.16 2.08 7.13 4.37 Na 18.51 4.50 7.61 0.49 9.35 1.93 8.64 9.75 9.17 1.17 13.84 - 2.70 11.54 16.04 I 5-Year 24-Hour 1.43' Na 30.28____,2 44 32.72 5.02 1.59 2.80' 9.54 5.40 Na '24.35 5.86 10.38., 0.63.' 9.45 2.97 '8.66 11.29, 9.18 1.54 .13.95- 3.49`' 11.61 19.92 10-Year 24-Hour 1.82 Na 38.38 3143 41.81 6.63 2.15 3.74 12.67 6.68 Na 31.87 7.60 13.99 0.78 9.51 4.24 8.69 12.91 9.18 2.02 14.05 4.54 11.71 24.49 _ ! 25-Year24-Hour 2.20 Na 46.55 447 51.02 8.27 2.72 4.70 15.86 7.96 Naa 39.51 9.36 17.70 0.91 9.53 5.55 8.72 14.76 9.19 2.52 14.12 5.65 11.82 29.39 50-Year 24-Hour 224 Na 47.36 4 58 51.94 8.44 2.78 4.79 16.18 8.09 Na 40.28 . 9.53,_ 18.07. 0.92. . 9.53 5.88 •8.72 15.01 ' , 9.19 2.57 ' 14.13 .5.76 i 11.83 29.94 ,I 100-Year 24-Hour 2.59 Na 54.73 5,55 60.28 9.92 3.30 5.66 19.09 9.25 Na 47.22 11.13 21.45 1.04 9.55 6.87 8.74 17.11 9.19 3.03 14.20 _ 6.80 11.92 34.85 I Post-Development Building 25-10 Peak Flows and Elevations(Pre-Development SWMP, 1 II Combined Outlier),I STORM Peak R Ir notf Uncontrolled to Springbrook i FREQUENCY without routing through detention storage) ' , 2 A B 5 16 Creek ',1 2 I A(cfs) I B(cis)5 6 Outflow Elev. Outflow Elev. Outflow Elev.. Outflow Elev. Outflow Elev. efs) c(s) 1 2 3 Total 1 2 1 3 4 5 6 Total (cis) (cfs) (cis) (NGVD) (cis) (NGVD) (cfs) (NGVD) (cfs) (NGVD) (els)II (NGVD) Water Quality 0.21 rile /4.62 021 4.83 0.30 0.08 0.13 0.63 1.05 0.03 2.22 0.59 0.42 0.09 9.10 0.00 7.60 1.02 9.11 0.15 13.54 0.27 11.06 _ 1.53 2-Year 24-Hour 1.13 Na 24.12 1 43 25.55 3.77 1.16 1.90 7.13 4.37 1.26 19.59 4.50 7.61 0.49 9.35 1.64 8.63 10.06 9.21 1.17 13.84 2.70 11.54 16.06 li6-Year 24-Hour 1.43 • Na ' 30.52 1 99 32.51 5.02 1.59 12.55 '9.54 5.40' 1.54, 25.74 '• -5.86 10.38 0.63 9.45 2.86, 8.66 11.63 9.22 1.54 13.95 3.49 1 L61•20.15-. 10•Year24-Hour 1.82 rife 38.62 2.75 41.37 6.63 2.15 3.39 12.67 6.68 2.12 33.64 7.60 13.99 0.78 9.51 4.10 8.69 13.41 9.23 2.02 14.05 4.54 11.71 24.85 25-Year24-Hour 50-Year24.Hour 2.24 ' 2.20 Na 46.78 3.56 50.34 8.27 2.72 4.25 15.86 7.96 2.62 Na 47.60 3i64 51.24 ••8.44 2.78 4.33 16.18 8.09. 2.67 TT 42.49 99.53 1807 0.92 mm 9.53 5.49 8.71 15.22 , 924 ' 2.57 14.13 5.761- 11.83 29.96, "i4I' 100-Year 24•Hour 2.59 Na 54.97 4139 59.36 9.92 13.30 5.11 19.09 9.25 3.13 i 49.80 11.13 21.45 1.04 9.55 6.63 8.74 17.30 9.26 3.03 14.20 6.80 11.92 34.80 ! Post-Development Surface Water Management Project Peak Flows and Elevation: i Combined Outflo v, STORM Peak fjunoft Uncontrolled I to Springbrook, FREQUENCY without routing'through detention storage) 1 2 ' A B 5 II 6 Creek !I I 2 I A 1 B(c(s) 5 6 Outflow Elev. Outflow Elev. Outflow Elev. Outflow Elev. Outflow Elev. cfs) ' cfs) 1 1 2 3 Total 1 2 I 3 4 5 6 I 'Total (cfs) (els) (cis) (NGVD) (cfs) (NGVD) (cfs) (NGVD) (cis) (NGVD) (c(ss (NGVD) Water Quality 0.21 2.32 4.38 -0.21 6.91 0.08 0.13 0.26 Na_ Na Na 1 0.47 0.59 0.42 0.09 9.10 0,00 7.80 - 0.00 7.27 0.15 13.54 0.2 I 11.06 0.51 2-Year 24-Hour 1.13 19.57 23.64 '.42 44.63 1.16 1.90 1.26 Na Na_ Na 4.32 4.50 7.61 0.49 9.35 5.29 8.71 1.59 9.12 1.17 13.84 2.70 11.54 11.24 8-Year 24-Hour 1.43 25.63 '30.02 9 2,55957.64 1.69 I 1.00 Na Na Na 5_14. 5_86 10.38 0,63, 9.459.45 7.31_ 8.75 : 2.90 , 9,14 _' 1.54 13.95 - 3.46 11.81 - 15.87', I Iiiipf 10-Year 24-Hour 1.82 33.40 '38.11 t.75 74.26 2.15 3.39 11.64 Na ala Na 7.18 7.60 13.99 0.78 9.51 10.32 8.81 4.52 9.16 2.02 14.05 4.54 11.71 22.18 1 a 25-Year 24-Hour 2.20 41.27 46.28 1.55 91.10 2.72 4.25 I 2.62 Na Na Na 289.59 9.36 17.70 0.91 9.53 13.72 8.89 7.48 9.20 2.52 14.12 5.65 11. 30.28 50-Year24•Hour 2.24 42,07 :47.09 :1.63 92,79 2,78 4,33 i 2.67 Na' ,Na '' MI, , 9.78 9.53 18.07 0.92_,__ 9.53 14,05 8.89 7.63 9,19 - 2.57 14,13 5.76 11.83 30,93 _ 100-Year 24-Hour 2.59 49.21 154.47 .38 108.06 3.30 5.11 13.13 Na Na Na 1 11.54 11.13 21.45 1.04 9.55 17.85 8.97 9.05 9.21 3.03 14.20 6.80 11.92 _ 37.77- 1 1 111 I I I I 1 I 1 II 1 1 ' P:f)ob/013747/2210/engr-I<bcalc20 xls[Table D.1] I Drainage Report-Table D.1 9/14/98 Sverdrup Civi I Inc. I 1 1 Combined Outflow to Springbrook Creek Discharge vs Recurrence Event 60.00 Baseline 0—Post CSTC Development i e—Post 25-20 Development i n x--Post 25-10 Development x—Post SWMP Development o---- -- --------' 40.00 e'' 100-Year Event U 03 a 20.00 viii"i Water Quality Event 0.00 - i 1 2 5 10 25 5 100 Recurrence Interval for 24-Hour Storms (years) 013747/2210/engr-Kbcalc20.xls[Chart D.1] Drainage Report- Figure D.1 9/14/98 Sverdrup Civil,Inc. The Boeing Company Surface Water Management Project Pre-Development SWMP Basin A (Post-Development Building 25-10) Sub-Basin A-2 Routed Through CSTC Pond to Delta Area Existing Site Outflow Under Existing Conditions Storm Peak Inflow Peak Outflow Decrease In Release;Rate Outflow/Inflow.;:,' ;-' ,Peak Stage', '-i Frequency- - - - (cfs),- cfs)-,- - .: ._..;--,,_-- -:(cfs) _-_ ,-- -. ;.-(percent) --., , s..._( elevation) Water Quality 4.62 0.00 4.62 0% 8.69 2-Year 24-Hour 24.12 1.69 22.43 7% 9.20 5-Year 24-Hour 30.52 2.51 28.01 8% 9.31 10-Year 24-Hour 38.62 3.62 35.00 9/0 9.43 25-Year 24-Hour 46.78 4.77 42.01 10% 9.54 50-Year 24-Hour 47.60 4.88 42.72 10% 9.55 100-Year 24-Hour 54.97 5.90 49.07 11% 9.63 Post-Development SWMP Basin A Sub-Basin A-1 & A-2 Routed Through CSTC Pond to Delta Area Developed Site Outflow Under Proposed Conditions Storm ; PeakInflow Peak:Outflow s Decrease.In Release Rate: Outflow/Inflow Peak Stage Frequency cfs)< " : cfs) cfs)": . ;.:..': :,percent)" " : : ,(elevation);" ;: . Water Quality 6.70 0.18 6.52 3%8.82 2-Year 24-Hour 43.21 5.02 38.19 12% 9.56 5-Year 24-Hour 55.65 6.93 48.72 12% 9.71 10-Year 24-Hour 71.51 9.79 61.72 14% 9.89 25-Year 24-Hour 87.55 12.98 74.57 15% 10.05 50-Year 24-Hour 89.16 13.29 75.87 15% 10.07 100-Year 24-Hour 103.67 17.15 86.52 17% 10.20 013747\2210\engr\Kbcalc2l.xls-Table D.2 Drainage Report-Table D.2 9/14/98 Sverdrup Civil, Inc. J Basin A-1 &A-2 Discharge my Recurrence Event for Pre-and t SINWP 2 OO - i 2O8O GVV Pruuu,/vpm n 0-'Pre-Development SVVMP 18.00 - 18l0 14.OD - F- | ---- 5 i12I0 - 10.00 10O'YmarEventCU o' 8.00 i --'i' 61X0 41]O VVober{3mddvEvent 2.00 - O]}O ° 1 2 5 10 25 5 100 Recurrence Interval for 24'Hour Storms kx*orsA o1n747/2o1meng,'nboovo1.xIs[Chart o.2] Drainage Report' Figure O.2 9/14/e8 Sverdrup Civil,Inc. The Boeing Company Surface Water Management Project Pre-Development SWMP Basin A (Post-Development Building 25-10) Basin A Routed Through Delta Area to Springbrook Creek Existing Site Outflow Under Existing Conditions Storm Peak Inflow Peak Outflow;• •DecreaSe In ReleASe Rate ;OutflOW/Inflow- ::: -,Peak Stage:: Frequency- - cfs) cfs)- - - -' -: -(Cfs) '" - . .. '(percent): ; ., -- ,(elevatIOn) -. Water Quality 0.21 0.00 0.21 0% 7.60 2-Year 24-Hour 2.00 1.64 0.36 82% 8.63 5-Year 24-Hour 2.90 2.86 0.04 990/0 8.66 10-Year 24-Hour 4.13 4.10 0.03 99% 8.69 25-Year 24-Hour 5.39 5.37 0.02 100% 8.71 50-Year 24-Hour 5.51 5.49 0.02 100% 8.71 100-Year 24-Hour 6.67 6.63 0.04 99% 8.74 Post-Development SWMP Basin A Basin A Routed Through Delta Area to Springbrook Creek. Developed Site Outflow Under Proposed Conditions Storm . - , 'Peak Inflow , s Peak Outflaw r : Decrease In Release Rate '': OutflowfinfloW.„ ,, : -::Peak Stage : Frequency• : .. .: : (cfs) ' cfs) . --. - . : ' (cfs) : ''' r : . • .- (percent) ': ; ."(elevation) - Water Quality 0.22 0.00 0.22 0% 7.80 2-Year 24-Hour 5.33 5.29 0.04 99% 8.71 5-Year 24-Hour 7.33 7.31 0.02 100% 8.75 10-Year 24-Hour 10.36 10.32 0.04 100% 8.81 25-Year 24-Hour 13.73 13.72 0.01 100% 8.89 50-Year 24-Hour 14.08 14.05 0.03 100% 8.89 100-Year 24-Hour 18.13 17.85 0.28 98% 8.97 013747\2210\engr\Kbcalc21.xls-Table D.3 Drainage Report-Table D.3 9/14/98 Sverdrup Civil,Inc. Basin A Discharge vs Recurrence Event for Pre-and Post-Development SWMP 20.00 - 18.00 Pre-Development SWMP Post-Development SWMP 16.00 i 14.00 12.00 100-Year Event 10.00 -. ... . Water Quality Event co i 8.00 - 6.00 -S 4.00 1 2.00 0.00 1 2 5 10 25 50 100 Recurrence Interval for 24-Hour Storms (years) 013747/2210/engr-Kbcalc2l.xls[Chart D.3] Drainage Report- Figure D.3 9/14/98 Sverdrup Civil,Inc. The Boeing Company Surface Water Management Project Pre-Development SWMP Basin B All Sub-Basins Routed Through Practice Track to Springbrook Creek Existing Site Outflow Under Existing Conditions Storm ' Peak Inflow ' Peak Outflow , : Decrease In:Release Rate . Outflow/Inflow • -,Peak Stage Frequency-* • -(Cfs)- : cfs) , - elevatiOn)-, --•-- - -- Water Quality 1.27 1.02 0.25 80% 9.11 2-Year 24-Hour 10.06 10.06 0.00 100% 9.21 5-Year 24-Hour 11.63 11.63 0.00 100% 9.22 10-Year 24-Hour 13.41 13.41 0.00 100% 9.23 25-Year 24-Hour 14.99 14.99 0.00 100% 9.24 50-Year 24-Hour 15.22 15.22 0.00 100% 9.24 100-Year 24-Hour 17.30 17.30 0.00 1.00% 9.26 Post-Development SWMP Basin B All Sub-Basins Routed Through Practice Track to Springbrook Creek Developed Site Outflow Under Proposed Conditions Storm Peak Inflow Peak Outflow .: Decrease In Release Pate OUfflOW/Inflow. • : peak Stage . . Frequency .: ': (cis), ' 'cfs)1 -:: ,;(cfs) ;. percent) , : "elevation) Water Quality 0.44 0.00 0.44 0% 7.27 2-Year 24-Hour 3.37 1.59 1.78 47% 9.12 5-Year 24-Hour 4.45 2.90 1.55 65% 9.14 10-Year 24-Hour 5.87 4.52 1.35 77% 9.16 25-Year 24-Hour 7.48 7.48 0.00 100% 9.20 50-Year 24-Hour 7.64 7.63 0.01 100% 9.19 100-Year 24-Hour 9.05 9.05 0.00 100% 9.21 013747\2210\engr\Kbcalc21.xls-Table D.4 Drainage Report-Table D.4 9/14/98 Sverdrup Civil, Inc. r-- ' Basin B Release Rates &mSprimgbrook Creak Dischargeps Recurrence Event for Pre-and Post—Development SWMP 18.00 o-Poat-Deve|opn ontSVVMP 1GlX} - P-Oaveopn er SVV P 12lD0 C 10J00 10U'Yemr Event as 5 8l0 03 m u- GJ)O WaterQuality ^^~^^ 4lD) i 2l]D CiO0 1 2 5 10 26 50 100 Recurrence Interval for 24-HourStorms (years) 013747/221u/eng,'Kbcalc21As[ChartDAJ Drainage Report' Figure O.4 9/14/98 Sverdrup Civil,Inc. 9/11/98 10 : 58 :31 am Sverdrup Civil Inc page 1 THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT POST CSTC, BSN A-2 ROUTED TO DELTA LEVEL POOL TABLE SUMMARY MATCH INFLOW -STO- -DIS- <-PEAK-> OUTFLOW STORAGE DESCRIPTION cfs) (cfs) --id- --id- <-STAGE> id (cfs) VOL (cf) 1 WQ, POST CSTC A-2 0.00 4.41 CSTC V-WEIR 8.68 8 0.00 70757.20 cf 2YR, POST CSTC A-2 0.00 23.74 CSTC V-WEIR 9.19 9 1.66 6 ac-ft 5YR, POST CSTC A-2 0.00 30.12 CSTC V-WEIR 9.30 10 2.46 8 ac-ft 10YR, POST CSTC A-2 0.00 38.22 CSTC V-WEIR 9.43 11 3.57 9 ac-ft 25YR, POST CSTC A-2 0.00 46.39 CSTC V-WEIR 9.54 12 4.72 10 ac-ft 50YR, POST CSTC A-2 0.00 47.20 CSTC V-WEIR 9.55 13 4.83 10 ac-ft 100YR, POST CSTC A-2 0.00 54.58 CSTC V-WEIR 9.63 14 5.86 11 ac-ft oS-t CS1-Cr 13Aspnj 'A-a Rou-TED 'CNRuvvH CSTTL POND W E1 1 1 o DELTA pv£R ^No'Cc1a I 9/11/98 10 : 56 :34iam Sverdrup Civil Inc page 1 THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT POST CSTC, BSN A ROUTED TO SPRINGBROOK LEVEL POOL TABLE SUMMARY MATCH INFLOW -STO- -DIS- <-PEAK-> OUTFLOW STORAGE DESCRIPTION cfs) (cfs) --id- --id- <-STAGE> id (cfs) VOL (cf) WQ, POST CSTC A 0.00 0.18 DELTA PSTA 7.60 1 0.00 6984.20 cf 2YR, POST CSTC A 0.00 2.07 DELTA PSTA 8.64 2 1.89 91699.78 cf 5YR, POST CSTC A 0.00 2.99 DELTA PSTA 8.66 3 2.95 93659.95 cf 10YR, POST CSTC A 0.00 4.26 DELTA PSTA 8.69 4 4.22 96005.13 cf 25YR, POST CSTC A 0.00 5.56 DELTA PSTA 8.71 5 5.53 98422.64 cf 50YR, POST CSTC A 0.00 5.69 DELTA PSTA 8.72 3 5.66 98665.19 cf 100YR, POST STC A 0.00 6.89 DELTA PSTA 8.74 7 6.84 2 ac-ft ppg ( - OEVLOC,McnY CS TC. BASIN) A- ; A-3 R v-rEo "THAo coo fl p15G HARG E VAvLT 1'1) 5P IfoG ?Root. GKEsK E_ (EAR -tA,L.r1 a, = g. 60 I i I 9/11/98 11 : 0 :18 am Sverdrup Civil Inc page 1 THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT POST 2520, BSN A2 ROUTED TO DELTA LEVEL POOL TABLE SUMMARY MATCH INFLOW -STO- -DIS- <-PEAK-> OUTFLOW STORAGE DESCRIPTION cfs) (cfs) --id- --id- <-STAGE> id (cfs) VOL (cf) I WQ, POST 2520 A-2 0.00 4.50 CSTC V-WEIR 8.69 8 0.00 71726.18 cf 2YR, POST 2520 A-2 0.00 23.89 CSTC V-WEIR 9.19 9 1.67 6 ac-ft 5YR, POST 2520 A-2 0.00 30.28 CSTC V-WEIR 9.31 10 2.48 8 ac-ft 10YR, POST 2520 A-2 0.00 38.38 CSTC V-WEIR 9.43 11 3.59 9 ac-ft 25YR, POST 2520 A-2 0.00 46.55 CSTC V-WEIR 9.54 12 4.74 10 ac-ft 50YR, POST 2520 A-2 0.00 47.36 CSTC V-WEIR 9.55 13 4.85 10 ac-ft 100YR, POST 2520 A-2 0.00 54.73 CSTC V-WEIR 9.63 14 5.88 11 ac-ft p65-7 -oevE'LoPt'taN1 emLOrn)G g25-Q0 QASrti A-3 Rov-rro T14aooG4L Cs-cc. PO^ip nvark V— NoTL.N J IR. To DEL,TA AREA 9/11/98 11 : 6 :58 am Sverdrup Civil Inc page 1 THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT POST 25210, BSN A ROUTED TO SPRINGBROOK j LEVEL POOL TABLE SUMMARY I I i MATCH INFLOW -STO- -DIS- <-PEAK-> OUTFLOW STORAGE DESCRIPTION cfs) (cfs) --id- --id- <-STAGE> id (cfs) VOL (cf) 1 I WQ, POST 2520 A 0.00 0.18 DELTA PSTA 7.60 1 0.00 6984.20 cf 2YR, POST 2520 A 0.00 2.08 DELTA PSTA 8.64 2 1.93 91772.36 cf 5YR, POST 2520 A 0.00 3.01 DELTA PSTA 8.66 3 2.97 93695.80 cf 10YR, POST 2520 A 0.00 4.28 DELTA PSTA 8.69 4 4.24 96044.24 cf 25YR, POST 2120 A 0.00 5.58 DELTA PSTA 8.72 5 5.55 98460.73 cf 50YR, POST 2520 A 0.00 5.71 DELTA PSTA 8.72 6 5.68 98702.82 cf 100YR, POST 2520 A 0.00 6.93 DELTA PSTA 8.74 7 6.87 2 ac-ft i I 9Dy- OE LO?M E,J1 Q -a a t3A5tN A-a 4 A 3 ftov-rEQ c-kftvv614 v 5C.HAi.GE. VAVL'T -rD Sf(kifoGd(Lootc- c.12.E14. II i I 1 ID File Input Hydrograph Storage Discharge LPool Proj : SWMP IeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeRouting Comparison Tableeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee ;, o MATCH INFLOW STO DIS PEAK PEAK OUT 0 o . DESCRIPTION PEAK PEAK No.No. STG OUT HYD o o- WQ, PRE SWMP A-2 0 . 00 4 . 62 CSTC V-WEIR 8 . 69 0 . 00 1 2YR, PRE SWMP A-2 0 . 00 24 . 12 CSTC V-WEIR 9 .20 1 . 69 2 5YR, PRE SWMP A-2 0 . 00 30 .52 CSTC V-WEIR 9 .31 2 . 51 3 0 10YR, PRE SWMP A-2 0 . 00 38 . 62 CSTC V-WEIR 9 .43 3 . 62 • 4 j 25YR, PRE SWMP A-2 0 . 00 46 . 78 CSTC V-WEIR 9 . 54 4 . 77 5 0 50YR, PRE SWMP A-2 0 . 00 47. 60 CSTC V-WEIR 9 . 55 4 . 88 6 0 100YR, PRE SWMP A-2 0 . 00 54 . 97 CSTC V-WEIR 9 . 63 5 . 90 7 o c o 0 o a o O Done< Press any key to exit aeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee'eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeef Menu: Perform Level pool computations using input table instructions I -, R5 - O LO PiAgArr St7RFA.ce WPtiEN t'IP0"EKEPI- ?O SEcr C Pos-c -o..et.oP MEI. 9„ as 1 QASin/ Pci^ RA v T EO i t tp.o 6N CS'SC P oNp Ov E!t v^Nkc.4t WEtI To DGL'CA AR.tA . 9/14/98 7 :32 :34 at Sverdrup Civil Inc page 1 THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT PRE SWMP, BSN A-2 ROUTED TO DELTA STAGE STORAGE TABLE CUSTOM STORAGE ID No. CSTC Description: CSTC STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (fl) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- 8.50 0.0000 0.0000 9170 502749 11.542 10.90 1116440 25.630 12.10 1865645 42.829 8.60 38363 0.8807 9.80 547168 12.561 11.00 1169821 26.855 12.20 1936568 44.457 8.70 76726 1.7614 9.90 591587 13.581 11.10 1232311 28.290 12.30 2007492 46.086 8.80 115089 2.6421 10100 636006 14.601 11.20 1294801 29.725 12.40 2078415 47.714 8.90 15352 3.5228 10110 689388 15.826 11.30 1357291 31.159 12.50 2149339 49.342 9.00 191315 4.4035 10120 742769 17.052 11.40 1419781 32.594 12.60 2220262 50.970 9.10 236234 5.4232 10130 796151 18.277 11.50 1482271 34.028 12.70 2291186 52.598 9.20 280653 6.4429 10140 849532 19.503 11.60 1544761 35.463 12.80 2362109 54.227 9.30 325072 7.4626 10.50 902914 20.728 11.70 1607251 36.897 12.90 2433033 55.855 9.40 369491 8.4824 10.60 956295 21.954 11.80 1669741 38.332 0.00 2503956 57.483 9.50 413911 9.5021 10.70 1009677 23.179 11.90 1732231 39.767 9.60 458330 10.522 10 180 1063058 24.404 12.00 1794721 41.201 J i I i1 9/14/98 7 :32 :34 am Sverdrup Civil Inc page 2 THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT PRE SWMP, BSN A-2jROUTED TO DELTA STAGE DISCHARGE TABLE CUSTOM DISCHARGE ID No. V-WEIR Description: V-WEIR STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> ft) ---cfs ft) ---cfs ft) ---cfs ft) ---cfs I 8.70 0.0000 i9.50 4.2774 10.30 122.54 11.10 201.82 8.80 0.1450 I9.60 5.4425 10.40 131.57 11.20 212.82 8.90 0.3801 19.70 6.7779 10.50 140.86 11.30 224.04 9.00 0.7102 9.80 8.2911 10.60 150.41 11.40 235.49 9.10 1.1534 9.90 9.9894 10.70 160.21 11.50 246.33 9.20 1.7218 10.00 11.880 10.80 170.25 9.30 2.4256 10.10 13.969 10.90 180.54 9.40 3.2746 10.20 16.264 11.00 191.06 I I I I 1 i I I f _' I. a FROM IFROILITIES TO a 06 822 3300 1SsS.06-02 07sSSRM #877 P.01/02 4.571/171i fgif/J 1/4.....; 6 Gr. 0, aliagnirsj %Ia.% , UP MT 10 3S Van -sk goon 1 Matuttle, dear ?Atm.& Elba. i It 0 t liii 1 Iry1 Sisvoi mac " nil • I - k i.UT is all S.Ztrel- g, # to rettasure. Dlegiek H. iiiiiiegni 74" st t 3-", i.# is- # , not' cl-v>„,,, 1/1 Svur.Inke cats! ilk. ins-, s a L1 Ju. 40 ckt#pen. o+.- ea. non- a ne tol p u i , a t hartnia. ,* -1 vw. q.x, kt. et (vu Pkic ta+eat o S" S _ 1 r 4 1 '`n rya R.+i11u- dP ' I MO:MVO S 9/14/98 7 :32 :36, am Sverdrup Civil. Inc page 3 _ THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT PRE SWMP, BSN A-2; ROUTED TO DELTA LEVEL POOL TABLE SUMMARY MATCH INFLOW -STO- -DIS- <-PEAK-> OUTFLOW STORAGE DESCRIPTION cfs) (cfs) --id- --id- <-STAGE> id (cfs) VOL (cf) WQ, PRE SWMP A-2 0.00 4.62 CSTC V-WEIR 8.69 1 0.00 73087.41 cf 2YR, PRE SWMP A-2 0.00 24.12 CSTC V-WEIR 9.20 2 1.69 6 ac-ft 5YR, PRE SWMP A-2 0.00 30.52 CSTC V-WEIR 9.31 3 2.51 8 ac-ft 10YR, PRE SWMP A-2 0.00 38.62 CSTC V-WEIR 9.43 4 3.62 9 ac-ft 25YR, PRE SWMP A-2 0.00 46.78 CSTC V-WEIR 9.54 5 4.77 10 ac-ft 50YR, PRE SWMP A-2 0.00 47.60 CSTC V-WEIR 9.55 6 4.88 10 ac-ft 100YR, PRE SWMP A-2 0.00 54.97 CSTC V-WEIR 9.63 7 5.90 11 ac-ft 1 I I I 1 III I? File Input Hydrograph Storage . Discharge LPool Proj . SWMP 5eee"eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee0eeRouing Comparison Tableeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee ; MATCH INFLOW STO DIS PEAK PEAK OUT , ESCRIPTION PEAK PEAK N o. - N o_S T G OUTUT HYDYD 0 . 46, •RE SWMP A 0 . 00 0 . 21 DELTA .PSTA 7 . 60 0 . 00 8 2YR, PRE SWMP 'A 0 . 00 2 . 00 DELTA PSTA 8 . 63 1 . 64 9 0 SYR, PRE SWMP A 0 .,00 • 2 . 90 DELTA PSTA 8 . 66 2 . 86 10 0 10YR, PRE SWMP A 0 . 00 4 . 13 DELTA PSTA 8 . 69 4 . 10 11 0 25YR, PRE SWMP A 0 . 00 5 . 39 DELTA PSTA 8 . 71 5 .37 12 0 50YR, PRE SWMP A 0 . 00 5 . 51 DELTA PSTA 8 . 71 5 .49 13 100Y' , PRE SWMP A 0 . 00 6 . 67 DELTA PSTA 8 . 74 6 . 63 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 Done< Press any key to exit ; 0 Apeee=eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee-eeeeeef enu: Perform Level pool computations using input table instructions RE_ pCvCL-O9 fr T SutiFacC tivA-Ten- M,AiVACE' t .pdT Pl&cyEcj CQoS1 - 06vELovr'1EtdV l3v«owG aS^' C3ftSIN) kovi. D Vi 614 DCLca 01 C.1414.1tG VP% To • SP(twvBilook L TA%L,WPs'Z62 = e, coo I 9/14/98 7 :39 :14am Sverdrup Civil Inc page 1 THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT PRE SWMP, BSN A ROUTED TO SPRINGBROOK CR STAGE STORAGE TABLE CUSTOM STORAGE ID No. DELTA Description: DELTA STAGE c----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- 7.50 0.0000 0.0000 8.40 70453 1.6174 9.30 157876 3.6243 10.20 265457 6.0940 7.60 6984 0.1603 8.50 79336 1.8213 9.40 169251 3.8855 10.30 279434 6.4149 7.70 13968 0.3207 8.60 88218 2.0252 9.50 180626 4.1466 10.40 293411 6.7358 7.80 20953 0.4810 8.70 97101 2.2291 9.60 192001 4.4077 10.50 307389 7..0567 7.90 27937 0.6413 8.80 105984 2.4331 9.70 203376 4.6689 10.60 321366 7.3775 8.00 34921 0.8017 8.90 114867 2.6370 9.80 214752 4.9300 10.70 335343 7.6984 8.10 43804 1.0056 9.00 123750 2.8409 9.90 226127 5.1912 10.80 349320 8.0193 8.20 52687 1.2095 9.10 135125 3.1020 10.00 237502 5.4523 10.90 363298 8.3402 8.30 61570 1.4134 9.20 146500 3.3632 10.10 251479 5.7732 I i 9/14/.98 7 :39 : 14 'lam Sverdrup Civil Inc page 2 THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT PRE SWMP, BSN A ROUTED TO SPRINGBROOK CR I STAGE DISCHARGE TABLE CUSTOM DISCHARGE ID No. PSTA Description: CSTC-OUT I STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> ft) cfi ft) ---cfs ft) ---cfs ft) ---cfs 8.60 0.0000 10i00 41.370 11.40 81.054 12.80 128.54 8.70 4.8150 101110 44.000 11.50 84.120 12.90 132.17 I 8.80 9.6300 10.20 46.630 11.60 87.378 13.00 135.80 8.90 14.445 10130 49.260 11.70 90.636 13.10 139.61 I I 9.00 19.260 10.40 51.890 11.80 93.894 13.20 143.42 9.10 21.378 10150 54.520 11.90 97.152 13.30 147.23 9.20 23.496 10160 57.374 12.00 100.41 13.40 151.04 9.30 25.614 10170 60.228 12.10 103.86 13.50 154.85 I 9.40 27.732 10.80 63.082 12.20 107.31 13.60 158.83 I 9.50 29.850 10190 65.936 12.30 110.76 13.70 162.81 9.60 32.154 11100 68.790 12.40 114.21 13.80 166.80 9.70 34.458 11.10 71.856 12.50 117.66 13.90 170.78 1 9.80 36.762 11.20 74.922 12.60 121.29 14.00 174.76 9.90 39.066 11.30 77.988 12.70 124.92 I I I I II I I I CSTC Delta Area Discharge Vault Summary Basin 3 Discharge Structure to Springbrook Creek) Stage Vault Inlet Capacity Vault Interior Capacity Vault Outlet Capacity Actual Vault ft)(1) Contracted Broad- 18°RCP Total Inlet Broad-Crested Weir 36°DIP Outlet Release Rate Crested Weir(cfs)( 2) Inlet(cfs)( 3) Capacity(cfs)( 4) Stoplogs)(cfs)( 5) cfs)( 6) cfs) (7) 8.60 0 0 0 0 0 0 9:00 0 19 19 67 80 19- 9.50 0 30 30 125 124 30 10.00 3 38 41 188 157 41 10.50 10 45 55 259 185 55 11.00 18 51 69 337 210 69 11.50 28 56 84 422 233 84 12.00 39 61 100 514 254 100 12.50 52 66 118 612 273 118 13.00 65 70 136 717 291 136 13.50 80 75 155 828 309 155 14.00 96 79 175 946 325 175 Notes: 1) 2-year tailwater in Springbrook Creek=8.60 (Table 8-2, ESGRWSP, R.W. Beck, Dec 1996) 2) Refer to CSTC Delta Area Discharge Vault Element 1 for details. 3) Refer to CSTC Delta Area Discharge Vault Element 2 for details. 4) Total vault inlet capacity is sum of contracted broad-crested weir( 2) capacity and 18" RCP(3) capacity 5) Refer to CSTC Delta Area Discharge Vault Element 3 for details. 6) Refer to CSTC Delta Area Discharge Vault Element 4 for details. 7) Vault inlet capacity, internal capacity and outlet capacity were compared to determine the actual release rate from the vault. 0 1 3747122 1 0\engr\Kbcalc18.xls[Summary] 16'-0 I 4•-a. IAH OPENING IMHSTEPTYP f L3x3x3/8 I ,- GAL TTYYPP 6'-0'x8'-IT l I BILCO 000R POINT OF IDENTIFYING STOP• I r 1 COORDINATES• I LOOS•-- I I • 3r DIP CL 53 FLOE J. I TO SPRINGBROOK CREEK I /` Iy b 1 I 0 b r I1 1 I• 1 I I Q ^ 1 I 10E4 o)a 11(0) 1Is CONC-/ I •'BOLTED FLANGED JOINT L J CYUNDRICAL WATER INTAKE SCREEN OVERFLOW-' I r• T-60 WITH 1/If SCREEN BYrL'•JOHNSON SCREENS OR APPROVED EQUALOPENMGb:.b NOTE: FOR DETAILS NOT SHOWN1t.I SEE 1 S80(D) r PVC DRAIN I I• DIP CAST INTO PVC UNION CONCRETE Z YA2 fvrv/e ,sr I;c ACCESS COVER 2- I . PVC BALL VALVE E ON ,Spe/NGBAa•00/4. OUTLET STRUOOK CREEK C/E/c •eL a• ,OUTLET STRUCTURE SCALE NONE 1C1 e • ') b MH OPENING W%4. 6•-0'x8•-d BIL • j I • (%-.\% \.\" -''\ • I DOOR OPCNING N\.ti ./// 0VIOE REMOVABLE CRA NOTE: W/ 1 •M00TH CALV STEEL BARS AT G OC VERTICAL EL 12.0 EL 15.2. STOP LOG, ANCHOR TO ORIENTA .CONSIST OR 578 0 BOLTS, STOP LOG ANGLE GUI') NUTS AND WASHERS'PASSING r THROUGH BOTH STOP LOG ANGLE GUIDES ON BOTH 2'-0'z3'-0' SIDES WILLOW • 3/IC GALV•WEB r SEE ANC NPW1 OPENINGRW STIFFENER 0 12} OC FOR SP CIES AND TYP II I r SPACING EL 9:5 3C0 OUTLET STOP LOG MACH• 18' SO BEVEL TO I AA.i• + I' ri . LE EL 6.• I.E. EL-5.9 q iiiiii•ii• ••iiO i I.E./ EL-5.40 LE. 0. 4 0.42X 60• .;DIA •••••••• i V PVC i•+:•••r 0.80% DRAM LEEL 3/4 0 EPOxY ANCHOR BOLTS, e. r NUTS AND WASHERS • 4, OO•12' B OC EHT CrIP) 4 . — 4 6%12" TIMBER STOP LOGS a • I' r • r • • Q A r SPRINGBROOK CREEK SECTION OUTLET STRUCTURE SCALE: NONE 1,• ,' • 0) Sou .cE : GSTL S, G Dci‘rEL.DPMENT Sot("\ 0RAINA(E DETA%L.S -SHEET 5 DRA I1N6 c.159C6) r 1 i CSTC-Delta Area Discharge Vault Element 1 2' x 3' Overflow Contracted Broad-Crested Weir) 1 j Stage Hydraulic Weir Coefficient Actual No.of sides Effective Flowrate ft) Head Height C1 ( 1)Width contracted Width 0(cfs)(3) H(ft) Y(ft) bactuat(ft) N beff.(ft)(2) 9.5 0.0 18.5 0.000 3.0 2 3.00 0 10.0 0.5 8.5 0.615 3.0 2 2.99 3 _ 10.5 1.0 j8.5 0.616 3.0 2 2.98 10 1 11.0 1.5 I8.5 0.620 3.0 2 2.97 18 11.5 2.0 8.5 0.624 3.0 2 2.96 28 12.0 2.5 18.5 0.629 3.0 2 2.95 39 12.5 3.0 18.5 0.633 3.0 2 2.94 52 13.0 3.5 8.5 0.638 3.0 2 2.93 65 13.5 4.0 I8.5 0.643 3.0 2 2.92 80 14.0 4.5 8.5 0.647 3.0 2 2.91 96 Notes: I 1) C1=[0.6035+0.0813(H/)+(0.000295/Y)]*[1+(0.00361/H)J3/2 (Rehbock) 2) beff=bactual-(0.1)(N)(H) 3) Q=2/3(C1)(beff)(2g)1i2(H)312 CSTC Delta Area Discharge Vault Element 3 Submerged Supressed Broad-Crested Weir, Stoplogs) Stage Hyd. Head Hyd. Head Weir Coefficient Actual Flowrate Flowrate i ft)(1) Upstream Downstream Height C1 ( 2) Width Free Flow Submerged Hup(ft) Hdown(ft)Y(ft) actual(ft) Qtree(cfs)( 3) ()sub.(cfs)(4) 8.60 1.1 I1.10 6.5 0.620 16.0 61 0 j 9.00 1.5 1.10 6.5 0.625 16.0 98 67 9.5 2.0 I1.10 6.5 0.630 16.0 153 125 10.0 2.5 1.10 6.5 0.636 16.0 215 188 10.5 3.0 11.10 6.5 0.642 16.0 286 259 11.0 3.5 1.10 6.5 0.648 16.0 363 337 11.5 4.0 I1.10 6.5 0.654 16.0 448 422 12.0 4.5 11.10 6.5 0.661 16.0 540 514 12.5 5.0 11.10 6.5 0.667 16.0 638 612 13.0 5.5 i 1.10 6.5 0.673 16.0 743 717 13.5 6.0 11.10 6.5 0.679 16.0 854 828 14.0 6.5 1.10 6.5 0.685 16.0 972 946 Notes: 1 1) 2-year tailwater in Spririgbrook Creek=8.60(Table 8-2, ESGRWSP, R.W. Beck, Dec 1996) 2) C1=[0.6035+0.0813(H/Y)+(0.000295/Y)]11+(0.00361/H)]312 (Rehbock) 3) ()free=2/3(C1)(bactuai)(29)V2( Hup) 312 4) °sub=Qfree[1 -(Hdowr/Hup)31 385 1 013893\2220\engr\Xbcalcl8.xls[E1andE3] Page 1 of 3 Pressure Pipe Analysis & Design Circular Pipe orksheet Name: basin 3 pre-dev Description: Basin 3 Outlet 18" RCP Solve For Discharge Given Constant Data; Pressure @ 1 0 . 00 Elevation @ 2 8 .60 — 2.NR. TW At SPRaNQUi4ol c2EEK Pressure @ 1 0 .00 Discharge 45326 .53 Diameter 18 .00 Length 24 .00 Hazen-Williams C 140 . 0000 variaole Input Data Minimum Maximum Increment By Elevation @ 1 8 .60 16 .00 0 .10 BASI(Q "h : 18" RCP INLET -Co CoNTR,ot... STRVc.T\) . CS le.... ck,AN ELErAIQI. I- I Open Channel Flow Module, Version 3 . 11 (c) Haesta Methods, Inc . * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708 i Page 2 of 3 1 VARIABLE COMPUTED Elev. Pressure Elev'. Pressure Discharge Diameter Length Hazen-W C @ 1 @ 1 @ 2; @ 2 gpm in ft 1 ft psi ft 1 psi Unable to compute this instance. 8.70 0 .00 8 .60 0 . 00 4090 .00 18 .00 24 .00 140 .00 8 .80 0 . 00 8 .60. 0. 00 5946 .75 18 .00 24 . 00 . 140 .00 8.90 0 .00 8 . 60 0 .00 7402 .34 18 .00 24 . 00 140 . 00 9. 00 0 .00 8 .60 • 0 .00 8646 .41 18 .00 24 . 00 140 .00 9 .10 0 . 00 8.60 0. 00 9753 .65 18 . 00 24 . 00 140 .00 9.20 0 .00 8 . 60 0 .00 10762.79 18 . 00 24 . 00 140. 00 9.30 0 .00 8 .60 0 .00 11697. 05 18 . 00 24 .00 140 . 00 9.40 0 . 00 8 .69 0.00 12571.64 18 . 00 24.00 140 . 00 9.50 0 . 00 8 .610 0 .00 13397.21 18 .00 24.00 140 .00 9.60 0 . 00 8 .60 0 .00 14181.54 18 .00 24 .00 140.00 i 9.70 0 .00 8 .60 0 .00 14930 .54 18 . 00 24 .00 140 .00 9.80 0 . 00 8 .60 0 .00 15648.81 18 .00 24. 00 140 .00 9. 90 0 .00 8.6,0 0.00 16340 . 03 18 .00 24 .00 140.00 10.00 0 .00 8 .60 0.00 17007.19 18 . 00 24. 00 140 . 00 10.10 0 .00 8.60 0 .00 17652 .76 18 . 00 24 .00 140 .00 10.20 0 . 00 8 .60 0 .00 18278 . 82 18 . 00 24.00 140 .00 10.30 0 .00 8.60 0.00 18887 .12 18 . 00 24.00 140 .00 1.0.40 0 . 00 8.60 0 .00 19479 .17 18 .00 24 .00 140 .00 50 0 .00 8 .60 0 .00 20056 .28 18 . 00 24 .00 140 .00 0.60 0 . 00 8 .60 0. 00 20619 .57 18 . 00 24 .00 140 .00 10 .70 0 . 00 8 .60 0. 00 21170 .04 18 . 00 24 .00 140 .00 10.80 0 .00 8 . 60 0 .00 21708 .59 18 . 00 24 .00 140 . 00 10. 90 0 . 00 8 .60 0 .00 22235 .99 18 . 00 24 .00 140 . 00 11.00 0 . 00 8 .60 0 . 00 22752 . 93 18 .00 24 .00 140 . 00 11. 10 0 . 00 8 . 60 0 .00 23260 . 07 18 .00 24 .00 140 . 00 11.20 0 . 00 8 .60 0 . 00 23757.95 18 . 00 24 .00 140 . 00 11.30 0 .00 8.60 0 . 00 24247.10 18 . 00 24 .00 140 .00 j 11.40 0. 00 8 .60 0 .00 24727.98 18 .00 24.00 140 . 00 11.50 0 . 00 8 .60 0 .00 25201.03 18 .00 24 .00 140.00 11.60 0 .00 8 .60 0.00 25666 .63 18 . 00 24.00 140 . 00 11.70 0 .00 8.60 0.00 26125 .14 18 .00 24.00 140 .00 11.80 0 .00 8 .60 0 .00 26576 . 90 18 . 00 24 .00 140.00 11. 90 0 .00 8 .60 0. 00 27022 .21 18 . 00 24 .00 140 . 00 12.00 0 . 00 8 . 60 0 . 00 27461.36 18 .00 24 .00 140.00 • 12 .10 0 . 00 8 .60 0 .00 27894 . 60 18 . 00 24 . 00 140 . 00 12 .20 0 . 00 8 .60 0 . 00 28322 .18 18 . 00 24 .00 140 . 00 12 .30 0 . 00 8 .60 0 .00 28744 .34 18 . 00 24 .00 140.00 12 .40 0 .00 8 . 60 0 . 00 29161.27 18 . 00 24 . 00 140 . 00 12 .50 0 . 00 8 .60 0 .00 29573 . 19 18 . 00 24 .00 140 . 00 i Open Channel Flow Module, Version 3 .11 (c) Haestad Methods,: Inc. * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708 Page 3 of 3 VA 2IABLE COMPUTED Elev. Pressure Elev. Pressure Discharge Diameter Length Hazen-W C @1 @1 @2 ,@2 gpm in ft ft psi 4. ft psi 12 . 0 0 .00 8 . 69 0.00 29980.28 18 . 00 24 .00 140 . 00 12 . 0 0 .00 8 .60 0 . 00 30382 .72 18 .00 24 . 00 140 .00 12 . 0 0 . 09 8 .69 0 .00 30780 .66 18 . 00 24 . 00 140 . 0 12. 0 0 .010 8 .60 0 . 00 31174 .27 18 . 00 24 .00 140 .00 13 . 0 0.00 8 .60 0.00 31563 .69 18 .00 24 .00 140 .00 13 . 0 0 .01i0 8 .60 0 . 00 31949 .06 18 .00 24. 00 140 .00 i 13 . '0 0 .00 8 .60 , 0 .00 32330 .51 18 . 00 24 .00 140 . 00 13 . co 0 .00 8 .60 0 .00 32708 .17 18 .00 24 .00 140 .00 113 . 0 0 .0 0 8 .60 0. 00 33082 .14 18 . 00 24 .00 140 . 00 13 . .0 0.0 0 8 .60 , 0 .00 33452 .55 18 .00 24.00 140.00 13 . .0 0 ..010 8 .60 0.00 33819 .50 18 .00 24 .00 140 .00 13 . 0 0.00 8 .60 0 . 00 34183 .08 18 .00 24 .00 140 .00 13 . :0 0 .00 8.60 : 0.00 34543 .41 18 .00 24 .00 140 . 00 13.:0 0 .00 8 .60 0 .00 34900 .55 18 .00 24.00 140.00 14. 10 0 .00 8 .60 0 .00 35254 .62 18 . 00 24.00 140 .00 14.10 0 .00 8 .69 0 . 00 35605 .67 18 .00 24.00 140.00 14.+0 0.00 8 .60 0 .00 35953 .81 18 .00 24.00 140 .00 14.c0 0 .00 8.60 0. 00 36299 .09 18 .00 24 .00 140 . 00 14. , 0 0.00 8 .60 0 .00 36641.60 18 .00 24.00 140 .00 1.50 0 .00 8 .60 0 .00 36981.41 18 .00 24 .00 140 .00 14.60 0 .00 8 .60 0.00 37318 .57 18 . 00 24 .00 140.00 14.70 0 .00 8 .69 0 .00 37653 .16 18 . 00 24.00 140 .00 14 .80 0 . 00 8 .6 0 0 .00 37985.24 18 .00 24 .00 140 .09 14 . 90 0 .00 8 .60 0 . 00 38314 .86 18 .00 24.00 140 . 0 15.00 0 .00 8 .60 0 .00 38642 .08 18 . 00 24 .00 140 .00 15 .10 0 .0I0 8 . 6i0 , 0 .00 38966 . 96 18 . 00 24 . 00 140 .00 15 .20 0 .00 8 .60 : 0 .00 39289 .55 18 . 00 24.00 140 . 00 15 .30 0 .00 8 .610 ' 0 .00 39609. 90 18 .00 24 .00 140.09 15 .40 0 .00 8 .610 0.00 39928 .06 18 .00 24.00 140. 0 15 .50 0.00 8.60i 0 .00 40244 .07 18 .00 24.00 140 .09 15.60 0.00 8 .60 0 .00 40557.98 18 .00 24.00 140 .09 15 .70 0 .00 8 .60 0 .00 40869 .83 18 .00 24 .00 140.00 15.80 0. 00 8 .60 0.00 41179.67 18 . 00 24 .00 140 .09 15. 90 0 .00 8 .60 0 .00 41487.54 18 .00 24.00 140. 00 16 .00 0 . 00 8 .60 0 .00 41793 .47 18 . 00 24 .00 140 .00 • 16 . 10 0 . 00 8 .60 0 .00 42097 .51 18 . 00 24 . 00 140 .00 II Open Channel Flow Module, Version 3 . 11 (c) Haestad Methods, Inc. * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708 iI I Page 1 of 3 Pressure Pipe Analysis & Design Circular Pipe Worksheet Name: basin 3 pre-dev 36" Description: Basin 3 Outlet 36" DIP Solve For Discharge Given Constant Data; Pressure @I1 0 . 00 Elevation @ 2 8 . 60 Pressure @; 1 0 . 00 Discharge 46869 .55 Diameter 36 . 00 Length 44 .00 Hazen-Williams C 130 .0000 Variable Input Data Minimum Maximum Increment By Elevation @ 1 8 .60 16 . 00 0.10 tJa51N - : 3;(:: DIP OvTLET FROM C.o;NTRou SiRocr vtka, 01su4ARGE To SPRir\K,cRoo S cPEEl<, CC51- Oe\\-0.. Nreo, v v` J Open Channel Flow Module, Version 3 . 11 (c) Haestad Methods, Inc. * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708 Page 2 of 3 JAR ABLE COMPUTED Ele . Pressure Elev. Pressure Discharge Diameter Length Hazen-W C @ @ 1 @ 2 @ 2 gpm in ft ft psi ft psi Un ble to compute this instance. 8.70 0 .00 8.60 ; 0. 00 16947.17 36 .00 44 . 00 130 . 00 8 .80 0 .00 8.60 ; 0 .00 24640 .72 36 .00 44 .00 130 . 00 , 8 .90 0 .00I 8 .60 0 .00 30672 . 04 36 .00 44 .00 130 . 00 ' 9 .00 0 .001 8 .60;0 .00 35826 . 93 36 . 00 44 .00 130 . 00 9 .10 0 .00 8 .60;0 .00 40414 . 85 36 . 00 44 . 00 130 .00 9.20 0 .00 8 .60 0 .00 44596 .30 36 . 00 44 . 00 130 . 00 9.30 0 .00 8 .60 0 . 00 48467 .44 36 .00 44 .00 130 .00 ; 9.40 0 .00 8.60 0 . 00 52091.37 36 . 00 44 . 00 130 . 00 9 .50 0.00 8.60 0 .00 55512 .16 36 .00 44 .00 130 . 00 9 . 0 0.00 8.60 0 .00 58762 .08 36.00 44 .00 130 .00 9 . 0 0 .00 8 .60 0.00 61865 .60 36.00 44 .00 130 . 00 9. 0 0 .00 8.60 ; 0.00 64841.80 36.00 44.00 130 . 00 9 . 0 0 .00 8 .60I 0 .00 67705 . 91 36.00 44 . 00 130 . 00 10. 0 0.00 8.60 0 .00 70470.33 36 .00 44 . 00 130 .00 10. 0 0 .00 8.60i 0 .00 73145.31 36.00 44 . 00 130 .00 1 10. 0 0 .00 8 .60 0.00 75739 .42 36 .00 44 .00 130 . 00 10 . 0 0 .00 8 .60 0 .00 78259 . 96 36 . 00 44.00 130 . 00, 1O. 0 0 .00 8.60 0 .00 80713 .16 36 . 00 44 .00 130. 00E 0 0.00 8.69 ' 0 .00 83104 .42 36 .00 44 .00 130 .00 0 . 0 0 .00 8.60 0 .00 85438.45 36 .00 44 . 00 130 . 00 10. 0 0 .00 8.60 0 .00 87719 .39 36 .00 44 .00 130 .00 10. 0 0 .00 8 .60 0 . 00 89950 .88 36 .00 44 . 00 130 . 00 10 . 0 0 .00 8 .60 0 . 00 92136 .18 36 .00 44 . 00 130 . 001 11. 0 0 .00 8 .60 0.00 94278.19 36 .00 44 . 00 130 . 00 11. 0 0 .00 8.60 0 .00 96379 . 53 36 .00 44 . 00 130 . 00' 11. :0 0 . 00 8.60 0 .00 98442 . 54 36 .00 44 . 00 130 . 00 11. 0 0 .00 8.60 0 .00 100469.36 36 . 00 44 .00 130 . 00 11. , 0 0 .00 8 .60 ' 0 .00 102461.93 36 .00 44 .00 130 . 00 il. ' 0 0 .00 8.66 0.00 104422 .02 36 .00 44.00 130 . 90 11. :.0 0 .00 8 .60 0 .00 106351.26 36 .00 44 .00 130 .00 11. '0 0 .00 8.601 0.00 108251.14 36 .00 44 .00 130 .00 11. 0 0 .09 8 .60 0 .00 110123 .03 36 .00 44 .00 130 .90 11. 10 0 . 00 8 .601 0 .00 111968 .20 36 .00 44 .00 130 . 00 12 . 10 0 . 00 8 .60 0. 00 113787.83 36 . 00 44 .00 130 . 00 • 12 . , 0 0 . 00 8 .60 0 . 00 115582 . 99 36 . 00 44. 00 130 . 00 j 12 . 0 0 . 00 8 .60 0 .00 117354 .71 36 . 00 44 . 00 130 . 00 12 . : 0 0 . 00 8 .60 0 . 00 119103 . 94 36 . 00 44 . 00 130 . 90 12 . - 0 0 . 00 8 .60 0 .00 120831. 54 36 .00 44 .00 130 . 00 I ; 12 . .0 0 .0I0 8 .60 0 .00 122538 .36 36 . 00 44 .00 130 . 00 Open Channel Flow Module, Version 3 . 11 (c) Haestad Methods, Inca * 37 Brookside Rd *. Waterbury, Ct 06708 i 1 Page 3 of 3 H._H i JI VARIABLE COMPUTED Elev. Pressure Elevl. Pressure Discharge Diameter Length Hazen-W C @ 1 @ 1 @ 21 @ 2 gpm in ft I ft psi ft 1 psi 12 .60 0 . 00 8 . 60 0 .00 124225 .16 36 .00 44.00 130 .00 12.70 0.00 8 .60 0 .00 125892 . 68 36 .00 44 . 00 130 .00 12 . 80 0 . 00 8 . 60 0 .00 127541.58 36 . 00 44 . 00 130 .00 12 . 90 0 . 00 8 . 60 0 .00 129172 .52 36 . 00 44 . 00 130 . 00 13 .00 0 .00 8 .60 0 .00 130786 .11 36 . 00 44 .00 . 130 . 00 13 .10 0 . 00 8 . 60 0 . 00 132382 . 91 36 . 00 44 .00 130 .00 13 .20 0 .00 8 .60 0 .00 133963 .48 36 . 00 44 .00 130 . 00 13 .30 0 .00 8 .60 0 .00 135528 .31 36 . 00 44 .00 130 .00 H 13 .40 0 . 00 8 .60 0 .00 137077 . 90 36 . 00 44 .00 130 . 00 13 .50 0 .00 8 .60 0.00 138612 .71 36 .00 44 .00 130 .00 13 .60 0. 00 8 .60 0 .00 140133 .18 36 .00 44 .00 130 .00 13 .70 0 .00 8 .60 0.00 141639 .73 36 . 00 44 .00 130 .00 13 .80 0 .00 8 . 60 0 .00 143132 .74 36 . 00 44 . 00 130 .00 13 . 90 0 .00 8 .60 0 .00 144612 . 61 36 . 00 44 .00 130 . 00 14.00 0 .00 8 .60 0 .00 146079 . 68 36 . 00 44 . 00 130 .00 14.10 0 .00 8 . 60 0.00 147534 .31 36 .00 44 .00 130 .00 14.20 0 .00 8 .60 0 .00 148976 . 83 36 . 00 44 .00 130 .00 1 , 14.30 0 . 00 8 .60 0.00 150407.54 36 . 00 44 .00 130 .00 14.40 0 . 00 8 . 60 0 .00 151826 . 75 36 . 00 44 .00 130 . 00 1.50 0 .00 8 .60 0 .00 153234 .75 36 .00 44 . 00 130 .00 4 .60 0 . 00 8 .60 0.00 154631. 82 36 . 00 44.00 130 .00 14 .70 0 . 00 8 . 60 0 .00 156018 .21 36 . 00 44 .00 130 . 00 14 . 80 0 . 00 8 .60 0 . 00 157394 .19 36 .00 44 . 00 130 .00 14 . 90 0 . 00 8 .60 0 . 00 158760 . 00 36 . 00 44 . 00 130 .00 15 .00 0 . 00 8 .60 0. 00 160115. 87 36 . 00 44 . 00 130 .00 15.10 0 . 00 8 . 60 0 .00 161462 . 02 36 . 00 44 .00 130 . 00 15.20 0 .00 8 .60 0 . 00 162798 . 69 36 . 00 44 .00 130 . 00 15 .30 0 . 00 8 . 60 0 .00 164126 . 07 36 . 00 44 .00 130 .00 i 15 .40 0 . 00 8 .60 0 .00 165444 .37 36 .00 44.00 130 .00 15.50 0 .00 8 .60 0 .00 166753 .78 36 .00 44 .00 130 .00 15.60 0 .00 8 .60 0 . 00 168054 .49 36 .00 44 .00 130 . 00 15.70 0 . 00 8 .60 0 .00 169346 . 68 36 . 00 44 .00 130 .00 15 .80 0 . 00 8 .60 0 .00 170630 .53 36 .00 44 .00 130 .00 15 . 90 0 . 00 8 . 60 0 . 00 171906 .19 36 . 00 44 . 00 130 . 00 16 .00 0 . 00 8 . 60 0 . 00 173173 . 85 36 . 00 44 .00 130 .00 • 16 .10 0 . 00 8 .60 0 .00 174433 . 65 36 . 00 44 . 00 130 . 00 I 1 1 Open Channel Flow Module, Version 3 .11 (c) Haestad Methods, Inc. * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708 i ' 9/14/98 7 :39 : 15 am Sverdrup Civil Inc page 3 THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT PRE SWMP, BSN A ROUTED TO SPRINGBROOK CR LEVEL POOL TABLE SUMMARY MATCH INFLOW -STO- -DIS- c-PEAK-> OUTFLOW STORAGE c DESICRIPTION cfs) (cfs) --id- --id- <-STAGE> id (cfs) VOL (cf) WQ, PRE SWMP A 0.00 0.21 DELTA PSTA 7.60 8 0.00 6984.20 cf 2YR, PRE SWMP A 0.00 2.00 DELTA PSTA 8.63 9 1.64 91244.70 cf 5YR, PRE SWMP A 0.00 2.90 DELTA PSTA 8.66 10 2.86 93500.70 cf 10YR, PRE SWMP A 0.00 4.13 DELTA PSTA 8.69 11 4.10 95776.42 cf 25YR, PRE SWMP A 0.00 5.39 DELTA PSTA 8.71 12 5.37 98119.36 cf 50YR, PRE SWMP A 0.00 5.51 DELTA PSTA 8.71 13 5.49 98353.65 cf 100YR, PRE SWMP A 0.00 6.67 DELTA PSTA 8.74 14 6.63 2 ac-ft II' II I D • File . Input Hydrograph Storage Discharge LPool Proj : SWMP 1eeeeeeeeeeeeeee6eeeeeeeeeeeRouting Comparison Tableeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeei' o MATCH INFLOW STO DIS PEAK PEAK OUT 1 ' o . DESCRIPTION PEAK PEAK No.No. STG OUT HYD 0 O WQ, PRE BSN 4-1&4-4 0 . 00 0. 88 4A PRE1&4 9 .22 0 . 88 8 • 2YR, PRE BSN 4-1&4-4 0 : 00 10 . 70 4A PRE1&4 11 . 05 7 . 08 9 5YR, PRE BSN 4-1&4-4 *0 14 .35 4A PRE1&4 11 .46 7 . 87 10 0 10YR,PRE BSN 4-1&4-4 0 . 00 19 . 07 4A PRE1&4 12 . 06 8 . 91 11 0 I 25YR,PRE BSN 4-1&4-4 0 . 00 23 . 90 4A PRE1&4 12 .44 9 .53 12 50YR, PRE BSN 4-1&4-4 0 '. 00 24 .38 4A PRE1&4 12 .49 9 . 59 13 0 100YR, PRE BSN4-1&4-4 0L00 28 . 77 4A PRE1&4 12 . 89 10 .21 14 0° 0 O O 0 O Done< Press any key to exit 0 aeeeeeee6eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee6eeeeeeef- Menu: Perform Level pool computations using input table instructions I I RE. - 40E:\) OP Iv\N T 5V) AC.E WA-cER 6 ANAGE. MEN T MI ELT 6ASNS ;H-' d y-y R0h'SE0 THR,OV GN M Nit.) RNLI- Sw(aL.F, Z - `(EA& I.‘J i 1 I 9/10/98 11 : 8 :59 am Sverdrup Civil Inc page 1 THE BOEING COMPANY r SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT PRE-DEV BSN 4-1&4-4 ROUTED THRU MAIN TRK STAGE STORAGE TABLE CUSTOM STORAGE ID No. 4A Description: POND4A I 1 STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (f ) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- 9.00 0.0000 0.0000 10.80 9487 0.2178 12.60 89682 2.0588 14.40 388057 8.9086 9.10 218.63 0.0050 10.90 10400 0.2388 12.70 97533 2.2391 14.50 414726 9.5208 9.20 437.26 0.0100 11!00 11313 0.2597 12.80 105384 2.4193 14.60 441394 10.133 9.30 655.88 0.0151 ii1110 14439 0.3315 12.90 113236 2.5995 14.70 468063 10.745 9.40 874151 0.0201 11J20 17565 0.4032 13.00 121087 2.7798 14.80 494732 11.357 I 9.50 1093 0.0251 11130 20691 0.4750 13.10 137117 3.1478 14.90 521401 11.970 9.60 1312 0.0301 11.40 23817 0.5468 13.20 153146 3.5158 15.00 548069 12.582 I I 9.70 1530 0.0351 11150 26943 0.6185 13.30 169176 3.8837 15.10 10493262 240.89 9.80 1749 0.0402 11'60 30069 0.6903 13.40 185205 4.2517 15.20 20438456 469.20 I 9.90 1968 0.0452 11170 33195 0.7621 13.50 201235 4.6197 15.30 30383649 697.51 10.00 2186 0.0502 11.80 36322 0.8338 13.60 217264 4.9877 15.40 40328842 925.82 10.10 3099 0.0711 11.90 39448 0.9056 13.70 233294 5.3557 15.50 50274035 1154 10.20 4012 0.0921 12.00 42574 0.9774 13.80 249323 5.7237 15.60 60219228 1382 10.30 4924 0.1130 12i10 50425 1.1576 13.90 265353 6.0917 15.70 70164421 1611 10.40 5837 0.1340 12.20 58276 1.3378 14.00 281382 6.4596 15.80 80109614 1839 10.50 6749 0.1549 121.30 66128 1.5181 14.10 308051 7.0719 15.90 90054807 2067 I 10.60 7662 0.1759 12.40 73979 1.6983 14.20 334719 7.6841 10.70 8575 0.1968 12i50 81830 1.8786 14.30 361388 8.2963 I I 9/10/98 11 : 8 : 54, .am Sverdrup Civil Inc page 2 THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT PRE-DEV BSN 4-1&4-4 ROUTED THRU MAIN TRK STAGE DISCHARGE TABLE CUSTOM DISCHARGE ID No. PRE1&4 Description: POND1&4 STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> ft) ---cfs ft) ---cfs ft) ---cfs ft) ---cfs 9.15 0.0000 10.95 6.8760 12.75 9.9980 14.55 12.446 9.25 1.3950 11.05 7.0795 12.85 10.147 14.65 12.570 9.35 2.0825 11.15 7.2785 12.95 10.295 14.75 12.693 9.45 2.6040 11.25 7.4730 13.05 10.440 14.85 12.815 9.55 3.0465 11.35 7.6630 13.15 10.584 14.95 12.936 9.65 3.4390 11.45 7.8495 13.25 10.726 15.05 13.056 9.75 3.7960 11.55 8.0320 13.35 10.866 15.15 13.175 9.85 4.1265 11.65 8.2110 13.45 11.005 15.25 13.293 9.95 4.4360 11.75 8.3870 13.55 11.143 15.35 13.410 10.05 4.7280 11.85 8.5595 13.65 11.279 15.45 13.526 10.15 5.0050 11.95 8.7290 13.75 11.413 15.55 13.642 10.25 5.2695 12.05 8.8960 13.85 11.547 15.65 13.756 10.35 5.5235 12.15 9.0605 13.95 11.679 15.75 13.870 I 10.45 5.7675 12.25 9.2225 14.05 11.810 15.85 13.984 10.55 6.0030 12.35 9.3820 14.15 11.940 15.95 14.096 10.65 6.2310 12.45 9.5390 14.25 12.068 16.05 14.208 10.75 6.4520 12.55 9.6940 14.35 12.195 16.15 14.263 10.85 6.6670 12.65 9.8470 14.45 12.321 i I I Page 1 of 3 Pressure Pipe Analysis & Design Circular Pipe orksheet Name: Bl&B4 ROUTED escription: BASIN B. SUB-BASIN B1&B4 ROUTED (MAIN TRACK) olve For Discharge iven Constant Data; , Pressure @ 1 0 . 00 Elevation @ 2 9 . 15 2',R -CfkIL`vA-rE1 sealfoC I ooK CP EK, Pi-essure @ 1 0 . 00 Discharge 806 . 63 Diameter 12 . 00 Length 101. 00 Hazen-Williams C 140 . 0000 Varia•le Input Data Minimum Maximum Increment By Elev-tion @ 1 9 . 00 16 . 00 0 . 10 I BASIN y'. DI5c14rtil6E: Ritz-cii..)Cv CkAvg CALCu..P VIo, S Fats 5v(3-- (Msi)5 4--1 -V LI—y Rourrga 74Ko 6H sA N i RAck SwPa.E • pRE— DEveLoPMEN'C SURFPcGE I./A--0k Miscn.)itGE M.E.VT PRcs-Eri I Q -YENE, -TPo.L\J TE1 = cl,kS i Open Channel Flow Module, Version 3 . 11 (c) Haestad Methods, Inc. * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708 1 1 I 1 i 1 Page 2 of 3 VARIABLE COMPUTED i Elev. Pressure Elev. Pressure Discharge Diameter Length Hazen-W C @ 1 @ 1 @ 2 @ 2 gpm in ft ft psi ft psi 9 . 00 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 -806 .63 12 . 00 101. 00 - 140 . 00 9 . 10 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 -445 .68 12 . 00 101. 00 140 . 00 9 .20 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 445 .68 12 . 00 101. 00 140 . 00 9.30 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 806 .63 12 . 00 101 . 00 .140 . 00. 9 .40 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 1062 . 85 12 . 00 101 . 00 140 . 00 9 .50 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 1274 .62 12 . 00 101 . 00 140 . 00 1 , 9 .60 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 1459 .88 12 . 00 101. 00 140 . 00 H1 9 .70 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 1626 .97 12 . 00 101. 00 140 . 00 9 . 80 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 1780 .56 12 . 00 101 . 00 140 . 00 9 . 90 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 1923 .61 12 . 00 101 . 00 140 . 00 I 10 . 00 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 2058 .12 12 . 00 101 . 00 140 . 00 10 . 10 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 2185 .52 12 . 00 101 . 00 140 . 00 10 .20 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 2306 .89 12 . 00 101 . 00 140 . 00 10 .30 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 2423 . 04 12 . 00 101. 00 140 . 00 10 .40 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 2534 .63 12 . 00 101. 00 140 . 00 10 .50 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 2642 .19 12 . 00 101. 00 140 . 00 1 10 . 60 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 2746 .14 12 . 00 101. 00 140 . 00 10 . 70 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 2846 .84 12 . 00 101 . 00 140 . 00 0 . 80 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 2944 .59 12 . 00 101. 00 140 . 00 0 . 90 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 3039 .66 12 . 00 101. 00 140 . 00 11. 00 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 3132 .25 12 . 00 101 . 00 140 . 00 11.10 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 3222 .57 12 . 00 101 . 00 140 . 00 11 .20 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 3310 .78 12 . 00 101 . 00 140 . 00 i 11 .30 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 3397 . 04 . 12 . 00 101 . 00 140 . 00 11.40 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 3481 .47 12 . 00 101 . 00 140 . 00 11 . 50 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 3564 . 19 12 . 00 101 . 00 140 . 00 11. 60 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 3645 .30 12 . 00 101 . 00 140 . 00 11 . 70 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 3724 . 91 12 . 00 101. 00 140 . 00 11 . 80 0 . 00 9 . 115 0 . 00 3803 .09 12 . 00 101. 00 140 . 00 11 . 90 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 3879 . 93 12 . 00 101 . 00 140 . 00 12 . 00 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 3955 .49 12 . 00 101 . 00 140 . 00 12 . 10 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 4029 .84 12 . 00 101 . 00 140 . 00 12 . 20 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 4103 . 04 12 . 00 101 . 00 140 . 00 12 . 30 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 4175 .15 12 . 00 101 . 00 140 . 00 12 .40 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 4246 .20 12 . 00 101 . 00 140 . 00 12 . 50 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 4316 .26 12 . 00 101 . 00 140 . 00 12 . 60 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 4385 .37 12 . 00 101 . 00 140 . 00 12 .70 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 4453 .56 12 . 00 101 . 00 140 . 00 12 . 80 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 4520 . 87 12 . 00 101 . 00 140 . 00 12 . 90 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 4587 .34 12 . 00 101 . 00 140 . 00 Open Channel Flow', Module, Version 3 . 11 (c) Haestad Methods, ;Inc. * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708 I i Page 3 of 3 V IABLE COMPUTED El v. Pressure Elev. Pressure Discharge Diameter Length Hazen-W C @1 @1 @2 @2 . gpm in ft f psi ft psi 1 13 . 0 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 4653 . 00 12 . 00 101. 00 140 . 00 13 . 10 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 4717 . 87 12 . 00 101 . 00 140 . 00 13 .20 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 4782 . 00 12 . 00 101. 00 140 .00 13 . 0 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 4845 .40 12 . 00 101. 00 140 . 00 13 . 40 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 4908 .11 12 . 00 101 . 00 140 . 00 13 . %0 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 4970 . 13 12 . 00 101 . 00 140 . 00 13 . 1.0 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 5031 . 51 12 . 00 101 . 00 140 . 00 13 . 70 0 . 09 9 .15 0 . 00 5092 . 25 12 . 00 101. 00 140 . 00 13 . :0 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 5152 .39 12 . 00 101 . 00 140 . 00 13 . "0 0 . 00 . 9 . 15 0 . 00 5211. 93 12 . 00 101. 00 140 . 00 14 . )0 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 5270 . 90 12 . 00. 101 . 00 140 . 00 14 . 0 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 5329 .31 12 . 00 101. 00 140 . 00 14 . 0 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 5387 . 18 12 . 00 101. 00 140 . 00 14 . : 0 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 5444 .52 12 . 00 101 . 00 140 . 00 14 . 40 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 5501 . 36 12 . 00 101. 00 140 . 00 14 . .0 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 5557 . 70 12 . 00 .101 . 00 140 . 00 14 . .0 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 5613 .55 12 . 00 101. 00 140 . 00 14 . 0 0 . 0 0 9 .15 0 . 00 5668 . 94 12 . 00 101 . 00 140 . 00 4 . :0 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 5723 . 87 12 . 00 101 . 00 140 . 00 4 . s0 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 5778 .36 12 . 00 101. 00 140 . 00 15 . .0 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 5832 .41 12 . 00 101 . 00 140 . 00 15 . 10 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 5886 . 04 12 . 00 101. 00 140 . 00 , 15 .'0 0 . 00 9 .15 ' 0 . 00 5939 .25 12 . 00 101. 00 140 . 00 15 . 0 0 . 00 9 . 15 . 0 . 00 5992 . 06 12 . 00 101 . 00 140 . 00 15 . 40 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 6044 .48 12 . 00 101 . 00 140 . 00 15 . 50 0 . 00 9 .15 ' 0 . 00 6096 . 52 12 . 00 101 . 00 140 . 00 15 . 60 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 6148 . 17 12 . 00 101. 00 140 . 00 15 . 70 0 . 00 9 . 15 ; 0 . 00 6199 .46 12 . 00 101. 00 140 . 00 15 . 80 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 6250 .40 12 . 00 101 . 00 140 . 00 15 . 90 0 . 00 9 . 15 , 0 . 00 6300 . 98 12 . 00 101 . 00 140 . 00 16 . 00 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 6351 .21 12 . 00 101. 00 140 . 00 , 16 . 10 0 . i0 9 . 15 0 . 00 6401 . 12 12 . 00 101 . 00 140 . 00 Open Clannel Flow Module, Version 3 . 11 (c) Haestad Methods, Inc. * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708 9/10/98 11 : 9 : 0 am Sverdrup Civil Inc page 3 THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT PRE-DEV BSN 4-1&4 '-4 ROUTED THRU MAIN TRK LEVEL POOL TABLE SUMMARY MATCH INFLOW -STO- -DIS- <-PEAK-> OUTFLOW STORAGE DESCRIPTION cfs) (cfs) --id- --id- c-STAGE> id (cfs) VOL (cf) WQ, PRE BSN 4-1&4-4 0.00 0.88 4A PRE1&4 9.22 8 0.88 470.09 cf I 2YR, PRE BSN 4-1&4-4 0.00 10.70 4A PRE1&4 11.05 9 7.08 12951.22 cf 5YR, PRE BSN 4-1&4-4 0.00 14.35 4A PRE1&4 11.46 10 7.87 25775.48 cf 10YR,PRE BSN 4-1&4-4 0.00 19.07 4A PRE1&4 12.06 11 8.91 47010.13 cf 25YR,PRE BSN 4-1&4-4 0.00 23.90 4A PRE1&4 12.44 12 9.53 77283.00 cf i 50YR,PRE BSN 4-1&4-4 0.00 24.38 4A PRE1&4 12.49 13 9.59 80662.15 cf 100YR,PRE BSN4-1&4-4 0.00 28.77 4A PRE1&4 12.89 14 10.21 3 ac-ft D • ile Input Hydrogaph Storage Discharge LPool Proj : SWMP eeee 'eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeRouting Comparison Tableeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee; MATCH INFLOW STO DIS PEAK PEAK OUT o DESCRIPTION PEAK ! PEAK No.No. STG OUT . HYD o IQ, P•E BASIN 4H 0 . 00 1 . 05 PONDB POND"B" 9 . 18 0 .40 1 2YR, 'RE BASIN 4-5 0 . 00 4 .37 PONDB POND"B" 9 .53 1 . 93 2 RE BASIN 4-5 0 . 00 5 .40 PONDB POND"B" 9 . 66 2 .23 3 L0R, PRE BASIN 4-5 0 . 00 . 6 . 68 PONDB POND"B" - 9 . 83 2 . 59 4 25YR, PRE BASIN 4-5 0 . 00 7 . 96 PONDB POND"B" 10 . 01 3 . 09 5 0 50YR, PRE BASIN 4-5 0 . 00 8 . 09 PONDB POND"B" 10 . 03 3 . 16 6 0 00YR, PRE BASIN 4-5 0 . 00 9 .25 PONDB POND"B" 10 . 16 3 . 70 7 0 O 0 0 O Done< Press any key to exit 0 eeee=eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeef I - 1 gnu: Perform Level pool computations using input table instructions I f RE - OE v;E LoP n EN 1 SV(kfokce tiJ/'t•tER PiftnJA(.ENIEN l PR.ciSECT BAsiN Lt-5 Roar-rao Tn-muo(caN #'oNQ "a " a . FINK. rz = 61.15 9/10/98 11 :19 :44 am Sverdrup Civil Inc page 1 -I THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT PRELDEV BASIN 4-5', ROUTED THRU POND "B" STAGE STORAGE TABLE CUSTOM STORAGE ID No. PONDB Description: POND "B" STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (;ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- 9.00 0.0000 0.0000 10.60 38566 0.8853 12.20 83763 1.9229 13.80 135034 3.0999 9.10 2297 0.0527 10.70 41165 0.9450 12.30 86850 1.9938 13.90 138355 3.1762 9.20 4594 0.1055 10.80 43764 1.0047 12.40 89938 2.0647 14.00 141676 3.2524 9.30 6891 0.1582 10.90 46363 1.0643 12.50 93026 2.1356 14.10 145238 3.3342 9.40 9188 0.2109 11.00 48962 1.1240 12.60 96114 2.2065 14.20 148801 3.4160 9.50 11486 0.2637 11.10 51825 1.1897 12.70 99202 2.2774 14.30 152363 3.4978 9.60 13783 0.3164 11.20 54687 1.2554 12.80 102289 2.3482 14.40 155925 3.5796 9.70 16080 0.3691 11.30 57550 1.3212 12.90 105377 2.4191 14.50 159488 3.6613 9.80 18377 0.4219 11.40 60412 1.3869 13.00 108465 2.4900 14.60 163050 3.7431 9.90 20674 0.4746 11.50 63275 1.4526 13.10 111786 2.5663 14.70 166612 3.8249 10.00 22971 0.5273 11.60 66137 1.5183 13.20 115107 2.6425 14.80 170174 3.9067 10.10 25570 0.5870 11.70 69000 1.5840 13.30 118428 2.7187 14.90 173737 3.9884 10.20 28169 0.6467 11.80 71862 1.6497 13.40 121749 2.7950 15.00 177299 4.0702 10.30 30768 0.7063 11.90 74725 1.7154 13.50 125071 2.8712 I 10.40 33367 0.7660 12.00 77587 1.7812 13.60 128392 2.9475 10.50 35967 0.8257 12.10 80675 1.8520 13.70 131713 3.0237 I I I I I 9/10/98 . 11 :19 :44iam Sverdrup Civil Inc page 2 THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT PRE-DEV BASIN 4-5, ROUTED THRU POND "B" STAGE DISCHARGE TABLE CUSTOM DISCHARGE ID No. POND"B" Description: PONDB! I I STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> ft) ---cfi ft) ---cfs ft) ---cfs ft) ---cfs 9.15 0.0000 10.45 4.2750 11.75 6.0465 13.05 22.903 I 9.25 0.9585 10'.55 4.4365 11.85 6.1620 13.15 23.719 9.35 1.3920 101.65 4.5925 11.95 6.2750 13.25 24.504 9.45 1.7125 10,.75 4.7430 12.05 6.6940 13.35 25.260 9.55 1.9805 101.85 4.8890 12.15 7.6740 13.45 25.990 9.65 2.2L60 101.95 5.0310 12.25 9.0735 13.55 26.698 9.75 2.4285 11.05 5.1690 12.35 10.772 13.65 27.385 9.85 2.6235 11.15 5.3030 12.45 12.719 13.75 28.054 9.95 2.805018i050 11.25 5.4340 12.55 14.884 13.85 28.704 10.05 3.2740 11'.35 5.5620 12.65 17.246 13.95 29.339 10.15 3.7490 111.45 5.6870 12.75 19.584 14.05 29.653 10.25 3.9320 11.55 5.8095 12.85 21.155 10.35 4.11070 11L65 5.9290 12.95 22.050 I I j I I I 1-- The Boeing Company Surface Water Management Project Pond"B"Control Structure with Springbrook Creek 2-Year Tailwater EL 9.15 Orifice 1,dia= 8.75 in. at EL 5.75(structure outlet pipe I.E.=9.00) Orifice 2,dia= 6.25 in. at EL 9.50(on 6°elbow) Orifice 3,dia= 4.75 in. at EL 9.80(on 6'elbow) Riser,dia= 24.00 in. at EL 12.00 Stage Area Area Area Area Tailwater Dif.Head Orifice Flowrate Flowrate Flowrate Flowrate- Total ft)(1) of Orifice 1 of Orifice 2 of Orifice 3 of Riser Elevation at Orifice Coefficient, Orifice 1 Orifice 2 Orifice 3 Riser Flowrate ft2)ft2)tt2)lib(It)C (cfs)( 2) ( cfs)( 2) ( cfs)( 2) ( cfs)( 3) (cfs)(1) 9.15 0.42 0.21 0.12 3.14 9.15 0.00 0.62 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 9.20 0.42 0.21 0.12 0.79 9.15 0.05 . 0.62 0.46 0.24 0.00 • 0.00 0.70 9.3 0.42 0.21 0.12 0.79 9.15 0.15 0.62 0.80 0.41 0.00 0.00 1.22 9.4 0.42 0.21 0.12 0.79 9.15 0.25 0.62 1.04 0.53 0.00 0.00 1.57 9.5 0.42 0.21 0.12 0.79 9.15 0.35 0.62 1.23 0.63 0.00 0.00 1.86 9.6 0.42 0.21 0.12 0.79 9.15 0.45 0.62 1.39 0.71 0.00 0.00 2.10 9.7 0.42 0.21 0.12 0.79 9.15 0.55 0.62 1.54 0.79 0.00 0.00 2.33 9.8 0.42 0.21 0.12 0.79 9.15 0.65 0.62 1.68 0.85 0.00 0.00 2.53 9.9 0.42 0.21 0.12 0.79 9.15 0.75 0.62 1.80 0.92 0.00 0.00 2.72 I 10.0 0.42 0.21 0.12 0.79 9.15 0.85 0.62 1.92 0.98 0.00 0.00 2.89 10.1 0.42 0.21 0.12 0.79 9.15 0.95 0.62 2.03 1.03 0.60 0.00 3.66 10.2 0.42 0.21 0.12 0.79 9.15 1.05 0.62 2.13 1.09 0.63 0.00 3.84 10.3 0.42 0.21 0.12 0.79 9.15 1.15 0.62 2.23 1.14 0.66 0.00 4.02 10.4 0.42 0.21 0.12 0.79 9.15 125 0.62 2.32 1.19 0.68 0.00 4.19 10.5 0.42 0.21 0.12 0.79 9.15 1.35 0.62 2.41 1.23 0.71 0.00 4.36 10.6 0.42 0.21 0.12 0.79 9.15 1.45 0.62 2.50 1.28 0.74 0.00 4.52 10.7 0.42 0.21 0.12 0.79 9.15 1.55 0.62 2.59 1.32 0.76 0.00 4.67 10.8 0.42 0.21 0112 0.79 9.15 1.65 0.62 2.67 1.36 0.79 0.00 4.82 10.9 0.42 0.21 0112 0.79 9.15 1.75 0.62 2.75 1.40 0.81 0.00 4.96 11.0 0.42 0.21 0:12 0.79 9.15 1.85 0.62 2.83 1.44 0.83 0.00 5.10 11.1 0.42 0.21 0112 0.79 9.15 1.95 0.62 2.90 1.48 0.86 0.00 5.24 11.2 0.42 0.21 0:12 0.79 9.15 2.05 0.62 2.97 1.52 0.88 0.00 5.37 11.3 0.42 0.21 0:12 0.79 9.15 2.15 0.62 3.05 1.55 0.90 0.00 5.50 11.4 0.42 0.21 0112 0.79 9.15 2.25 0.62 3.12 1.59 0.92 0.00 5.62 11.5 0.42 0.21 0112 0.79 9.15 2.35 0.62 3.19 1.63 0.94 0.00 5.75 11.6 0.42 0.21 0:12 0.79 9.15 2.45 0.62 3.25 1.66 0.96 0.00 5.87 11.7 0.42 0.21 0.12 0.79 9.15 2.55 0.62 3.32 1.69 0.98 0.00 5.99 11.8 0.42 0.21 0.12 0.79 9.15 2.65 0.62 3.38 1.73 1.00 0.00 6.10 I 11.9 0.42 0.21 0:12 0.79 9.15 2.75 0.62 3.45 1.76 1.02 0.00 6.22 12.0 0.42 0.21 0:12 0.79 9.15 2.85 0.62 3.51 1.79 1.03 0.00 6.33 12.1 0.42 0.21 0112 0.79 9.15 2.95 0.62 3.57 1.82 1.05 0.62 7.06 12.2 0.42 0.21 0.12 0.79 9.15 3.05 0.62 3.63 1.85 1.07 1.74 8.29 12.3 0.42 0.21 0:12 0.79 9.15 3.15 0.62 3.69 1.88 1.09 320 9.86 12.4 0.42 0.21 0:12 0.79 9.15 3.25 0.62 3.75 1.91 1.10 4.93 11.69 12.5 0.42 0.21 0:12 0.79 9.15 3.35 0.62 3.80 1.94 1.12 6.89 13.75 12.6 0.42 0.21 0.12 0.79 9.15 3.45 0.62 3.86 1.97 1.14 9.05 16.02 12.7 0.42 0.21 0.12 0.79 9.15 3.55 0.62 3.91 2.00 1.15 11.41 18.47 12.8 0.42 0.21 0:12 0.79 9.15 3.65 0.62 3.97 2.03 1.17 13.53 20.70 1 12.9 0.42 0.21 0!12 0.79 9.15 3.75 0.62 4.02 2.05 1.19 14.35 21.61 13.0 0.42 0.21 0.12 0.79 9.15 3.85 0.62 4.08 2.08 1.20 15.13 22.49 13.1 0.42 0.21 0:12 0.79 9.15 3.95 0.62 4.13 2.11 1.22 15.87 23.32 13.2 0.42 0.21 0.12 0.79 9.15 4.05 0.62 4.18 2.13 1.23 16.57 24.12 13.3 0.42 0.21 0:12 0.79 9.15 4.15 0.62 4.23 2.16 1.25 17.25 24.89 13.4 0.42 0.21 0:12 0.79 9.15 4.25 0.62 4.28 2.19 1.26 17.90 25.63 13.5 0.42 0.21 0:12 0.79 9.15 4.35 0.62 4.33 2.21 1.28 18.53 26.35 13.6 0.42 0.21 0.12 0.79 9.15 4.45 0.62 4.38 2.24 1.29 19.14 27.05 13.7 0.42 0.21 0.12 0.79 9.15 4.55 0.62 4.43 2.26 1.31 19.72 27.72 13.8 0.42 0.21 0.12 0.79 9.15 4.65 0.62 4.48 2.29 1.32 20.30 28.38 13.9 0.42 0.21 0.12 0.79 9.15 4.75 0.62 4.53 2.31 1.33 20.85 29.03 14.0 0.42 0.21 0.12 0.79 9.15 4.85 0.62 4.58 2.33 1.35 21.39 29.65 Notes: 1) Pond"B"cannot discharge flow below EL 9.0 due to design elevation of structure A22. Above EL 14.5,flow leaves Pond"B'via emergency overflow spillway. 2) Q=(C)(Area)(29H0112 3) Q=9.739(D)(H)3/2,wm`Fbw Q=3.782(D 2)(H)1/2.Orifice Flow Flow transitions from weir to orifice flow at 0.80 feet of head. 013E193\2220\engr Kbcalc19.xis[2-Year Tailwater] I 1 9/10/98 11 :19 :451am Sverdrup Civil Inc page 3 THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT PRE-DEV BASIN 4-5, ROUTED THRU POND "B" LEVEL POOL TABLE SUMMARY MATCH INFLOW -STO- -DIS- <-PEAK-> OUTFLOW STORAGE DESCRIPTION cfs) (cfs) --id- --id- <-STAGE> id (cfs) VOL (cf) WQ, PRE BASIN 4-5 0.00 1.05 PONDS POND"B" 9.18 1 0.40 4220.08 cf 2YR, PRE BASIN 4-5 0.00 4.37 PONDB POND"B" 9.53 2 1.93 12252.94 cf 5YR, PRE BASIN 4-5 0.00 5.40 PONDS POND"B" 9.66 3 2.23 15174.64 cf 10YR, PRE BASIN 4-5 0.00 6.68 PONDB POND"B" 9.83 4 2.59 19155.36 cf 25YR, PRE BASIN 4-5 0.00 7.96 PONDB POND"B" 10.01 5 3.09 23245.32 cf 50YR, PRE BASIN 4-5 0.00 8.09 PONDB POND"B" 10.03 6 3.16 23626.45 cf 100YR, PRE BASIN 4-5 0.00 9.25 PONDS POND"B" 10.16 7 3.70 27098.40 cf I i I h File Input Hydrograph Storage Discharge LPool Proj : SWMP Ieeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee'eeeRouting Comparison Tableeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeei o MATCH INFLOW STO DIS PEAK PEAK OUT DESCRIPTION PEAK PEAK No.No. STG OUT HYD 0 O 0, WQ, PRE BASIN 4 0 . 00 1 .24 P1&P4&P5 P1&P4&P5 9 . 17 1. 06 8 °, 2YR, PRE BASIN 4 Oi. 00 9 . 00 P1&P4&P5 P1&P4&P5 9 . 78 8 .31 9 0 5YR, PRE BASIN 4 0 . 00 10 . 03 P1&P4&P5 P1&P4&P5 9 . 95 9 .48 10 ° 10YR, PRE BASIN 4 0.. 00 11 .39 Pl&P4&P5 P1&P4&P5 10 . 16 10 . 76 11 °, 25YR, PRE BASIN 4 OLOO 12 . 29 Pl&P4&P5 P1&P4&P5 10 . 32 11. 65 12 ° 50YR, PRE BASIN 4 0 . 00 12 .40 P1&P4&P5 Pl&P4&P5 10 . 34 11 . 74 13 ° 100YR, PRE BASIN 4 0 . 00 13 .37 P1&P4&P5 P1&P4&P5 10 . 50 12 . 55 14 ° O o 0 O o 0 O Done< Press any key to exit 0 aeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeef Menu: Perform Level pool computations using input table instructions Re _ OEVEL.oc MEN j svRFA(.e. bJASE(k t4p,n1A(°stiaikrT 4Ro ec.11 gfas)rvs 9-1 y-4 d 9 ..5 Rov GD ;o PRAc.1 TR.A C. W P( ER = 9.15 9/10/98 11 :34 :56 am Sverdrup Civil Inc page 1 THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT PRE-DEV BASIN 4-1, 4-4, & 4-5 ROUTED STAGE STORAGE TABLE CUS TOM STORAGE ID No. Pl&P4&P5 Description: 24PI;PE STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> ft) ---cf-f-- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf:-- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- I I 9.00 0.0000 0.0000 101.50 42716 0.9806 12.00 120161 2.7585 13.50 326305 7.4909 9.10 2516 0.0578 10.60 46228 1.0612 12.10 131100 3.0097 13.60 345656 7.9352 9.20 5032 0.1155 10I.70 49740 1.1419 12.20 142039 3.2608 13.70 365006 8.3794 I 9.30 7547 0.1733 10.80 53251 1.2225 12.30 152979 3.5119 13.80 384357 8.8236 9.40 , 10063 0.2310 10.90 56763 1.3031 12.40 163918 3.7630 13.90 403708 9.2679 9.50 12579 0.2888 11,.00 60275 1.3837 12.50 174857 4.0142 14.00 423058 9.7121 9.60 15!095 0.3465 111.10 66263 1.5212 12.60 185796 4.2653 14.10 453289 10.406 9.70 17610 0.4043 11.20 72252 1.6587 12.70 196735 4.5164 14.20 483520 11.100 9.80 20126 0.4620 11.30 78241 1.7962 12.80 207674 4.7675 14.30 513751 11.794 9.90 22642 0.5198 111.40 84229 1.9336 12.90 218613 5.0187 14.40 543982 12.488 10.00 251158 0.5775 111.50 90218 2.0711 13.00 229552 5.2698 14.50 574214 13.182 10.10 28669 0.6582 111.60 96207 2.2086 13.10 248903 5.7140 14.60 604445 13.876 10.20 32181 0.7388 11.70 102195 2.3461 13.20 268253 6.1582 14.70 634676 14.570 10.30 35693 0.8194 11.80 108184 2.4836 13.30 287604 6.6025 14.80 664907 15.264 10.40 39204 0.9000 11.90 114173 2.6210 13.40 306955 7.0467 14.90 695138 15.958 I I I I 1 I I I 9/10/98 11 :34 :56 am Sverdrup Civil Inc page 2 THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT PRE-DEV BASIN 4-1:,4-4, & 4-5 ROUTED STAGE DISCHARGE TABLE II CUSTOM DISCHARGE ID No. Pl&P4&P5 Description: PND1&4&B 1 1 STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> ft) ---cfs ft) ---cfs ft) ---cfs ft) ---cfs I 9.15 0.0000 10.95 14.690 12.75 21.365 14.55 26.595 9.25 2.9800 11.05 15.125 12.85 21.685 14.65 26.860 9.35 4.4500 11.15 15.550 12.95 21.995 14.75 27.120 9.45 5.5650 11.25 15.965 13.05 22.305 14.85 27.380 9.55 6.5100 11.35 16.375 13.15 22.615 14.95 27.640 9.65 7.3500 11.45 16.775 13.25 22.920 15.05 27.900 9.75 8.1150 11.55 17.165 13.35 23.220 15.15 28.155 9.85 8.8200 11.65 17.550 13.45 23.515 15.25 28.405 9.95 9.4800 11.75 17.925 13.55 23.810 15.35 28.655 10.05 10.105 11.85 18.290 13.65 24.105 15.45 28.905 10.15 10.695 11.95 18.650 13.75 24.390 15.55 29.150 10.25 11.260 12.05 19.010 13.85 24.675 15.65 29.395 10.35 11.805 12.15 19.365 13.95 24.960 15.75 29.640 10.45 12.325 12.25 19.710 14.05 25.235 15.85 29.880 10.55 12.830 12.35 20.050 14.15 25.510 15.95 30.120 10.65 13.315 12.45 20.385 14.25 25.785 16.05 30.360 10.75 13.785 12.55 20.715 14.35 26.055 16.15 30.480 1 10.85 14.245 12.65 21.040 14.45 26.325 I I--1 I Page 1 of 3 Pressure Pipe Analysis & Design Circular Pipe orksheet Name: B1&B4&B2520 Description: BASIN B, SUB-BASIN B1 & B4 & B2520 ROUTED solve For Discharge iven Constant Data; Pressure @ 0 . 00 Elevation @ 2 9 . 15 k— 2%1R TAIL JATCR h'[ 5MA) RoDY. CAME S pressure @ 1 0 . 00 Discharge 1723 . 68 Diameter 24 . 00 Length 724 . 00 Hazen-Williams C 140 . 0000 Varia.le Input Data Minimum Maximum Increment By Elev-tion @ 1 9 . 00 16 . 00 0 . 10 BASIN y DISOHaI.GE R,v i to 6 CvRvE CALCv LA-Ti 6/ J5 PoA 5ve ..8ASuNS t _1 Jut-9 4L .5 Rov'CE0 --Ru i Dy" SccM' ib -CH E vfLptcZ ic.E TR.ALY, PRE— Oev G'L oPMl iG&I 5u0.FkcE wfONM. NANJAGE P'1,E, C PLO j e c.j Open Channel Flow Module, Version 3 . 11 (c) Haestad Methods, Inc . * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708 Page 2 of 3 I VARIABLE COMPUTED Elev. Pressure Elev. Pressure Discharge Diameter Length Hazen-W C I , @ 1 @ 1 @ 2 @ 2 gpm in ft ft psi ft : psi 9 . 00 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 -1723 . 68 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 9 . 10 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 -952 .38 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 9 . 20 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 952 . 38 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 9 .30 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 1723 . 68 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 9 .40 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 2271 .20 ' 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 9 . 50 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 2723 .73 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 9 . 60 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 3119 . 62 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 9 . 70 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 3476 . 67 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 9 . 80 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 3804 . 88 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 9 . 90 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 4110 .56 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 10 . 00 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 4397. 98 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 10 . 10 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 4670 .23 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 10 .20 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 4929 . 58 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 I 10 .30 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 5177 . 79 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 10 .40 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 5416 .25 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 10 . 50 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 5646 . 09 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 10 . 60 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 5868 . 22 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 10 . 70 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 6083 .40 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 0 . 80 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 6292 . 29 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 0 . 90 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 6495 .43 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 11 . 00 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 6693 .30 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 11 . 10 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 6886 .30 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 11 . 20 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 7074 . 81 24 . 00 724 . 00 140. 00 11 . 30 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 7259 . 12 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 11 .40 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 7439 . 54 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 11 . 50 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 7616 . 30 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 11 . 60 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 7789 . 64 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 11 . 70 0 . 00 9 . 15 , 0 . 00 7959 . 75 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 11 . 80 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 8126 . 81 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 11 . 90 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 8291 . 00 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 1 12 . 00 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 8452 .47 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 12 . 10 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 8611 .35 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 12 . 20 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 8767 . 77 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 12 . 30 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 8921 . 86 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 12 .40 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 9073 .70 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 12 . 50 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 9223 .41 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 12 . 60 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 9371 . 08 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 12 . 70 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 9516 . 80 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 I , 12 . 80 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 9660 .63 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 12 . 90 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 9802 .67 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 Open Channel Flow Module, Version 3 . 11 (c) Haestad Methods, Inc. * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708 Page 3 of 3 i V IABLE COMPUTED E1 v. Pressure Elev.i Pressure Discharge Diameter Length Hazen-W C @ 1 @1 @ 2 @ 2 gpm in ft fl psi ft psi 13 . 00 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 9942 . 97 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 1310 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 10081 . 61 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 001 13 . 0 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 10218 . 64 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 001 13 .30 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 10354 . 13 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 001 13 .0 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 10488 . 12 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 09 13 . 0 0 . 09 9 .15 0 . 00 10620 . 66 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 11 13 . 0 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 10751 . 82 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 13 . 0 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 10881. 62 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 13 . 0 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 11010 . 12 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 130 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 11137 .35 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 14 . 00 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 11263 .36 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 14 . 10 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 11388 . 18 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 14 . 0 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 11511. 84 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 14 .30 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 11634 . 38 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 14 . 0 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 11755 . 84 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 14 . 0 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 11876 . 23 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 14 . 0 0 . 0 0 9 . 15 0 . 00 11995 . 59 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 14 . 0 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 12113 . 95 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 4 . 80 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 12231 . 33 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 4 . 90 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 12347 . 76 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 15 . 00 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 12463 .26 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 15 . 10 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 12577 . 86 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 15 .20 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 12691 . 57 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 15 .30 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 12804 .42 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 15 .40 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 12916 .44 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 15 . 50 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 13027 . 63 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 15 . 60 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 13138 . 01 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 15 . 70 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 13247 . 62 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 15 . 80 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 13356 .45 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 15 . 90 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 13464 . 54 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 16 . 00 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 13571 . 89 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 16 . 10 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 13678 . 52 24 . 00 724 . 00 140 . 00 I 1 II i Open Channel Flow Module, Version 3 . 11 (c) Haestad Methods, IInc. * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708 i r 9/10/98 . 11 :34 :57 am Sverdrup Civil Inc page 3 THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT PRE-DEV BASIN 4-1, 4-4, & 4-5 ROUTED LEVEL POOL TABLE SUMMARY MATCH INFLOW -STO- -DIS- <-PEAK-> OUTFLOW STORAGE DESCRIPTION cfs) (cfs) --id- --id- <-STAGE> id (cfs) VOL (cf) WQ, PRE BASIN 4 0.00 1.24 P1&P4&P5 P1&P4&P5 9.17 8 1.06 4301.92 cf 2YR, PRE BASIN 4 0.00 9.00 P1&P4&P5 P1&P4&P5 9.78 9 8.31 19599.96 cf 5YR, PRE BASIN 4 0.00 10.03 P1&P4&P5 P1&P4&P5 9.95 10 9.48 23921.97 cf 10YR, PRE BASIN 4 0.00 11.39 P1&P4&P5 P1&P4&P5 10.16 11 10.76 30873.53 cf 25YR, PRE BASIN 4 0.00 12.29 Pl&P4&P5 P1&P4&P5 10.32 12 11.65 36478.54 cf SOYR, PRE BASIN 4 0.00 12.40 Pl&P4&P5 P1&P4&P5 10.34 13 11.74 37066.44 cf 100YR, PRE BASIN 4 0.00 13.37 Pl&P4&P5 P1&P4&P5 10.50 14 12.55 42542.46 cf II II D ile Input Hydrograph Storage Discharge LPool Proj : SWMP eeee=eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeRouting Comparison Tableeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee; MATCH INFLOW STO DIS PEAK PEAK OUT o DISCRIPTION PEAK PEAK No.No. STG OUT HYD 0 1 0 ad, P'E BASIN 4-610 . 00 0 .26 PONDC COMB02 10 . 00 0 . 26 1 0 2YR, PRE BASIN 4-6 0 . 00 1.26 PONDC COMB02 11. 31 0 . 38 2 0 SYR, PRE BASIN 4-6 0 . 00 1. 64 PONDC COMB02 11 .47 0 . 52 3 0 L YR, PRE BASIN 4-6 0 .100 2 . 12 PONDC COMB02 11 . 66 0 . 68 4 0 25YR, PRE BASIN 4-6 0 . 00 2 . 62 PONDC COMB02 11 . 88 0 . 87 5 0 50YR, PRE BASIN 4-6 040 2 . 67 PONDC COMB02 11 . 90 0 . 90 6 100Y* , PRE BASIN 4-6 0 . 00 3 . 13 PONDC COMB02 12 . 10 1. 04 7 0 0 o 1 0 I 0 1 0 O _ f Don!e< Press any key to exit 0 4Qeee=eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee'eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeef enu: Perform Level pool computations using input table instructions PRE _ OEveLo4ME01' 5L lLr ac-v. wA1 SK V%FvNA GE MS nJT PR oSG.:Ci r+Li, SirJ —(1,od-rap TH•RoJC,+4 Pon o dA CFRk bA«.WA'(FiC = 9.15 9/10/98 11 :45 :18 am Sverdrup Civil Inc page 1 THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT PRE-DEV BASIN 4-6, ROUTED THROUGH POND"C" STAGE STORAGE TABLE CUSTOM STORAGE ID No. PONDC Description: POND, "C" STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- 11.00 0.0000 0.0000 11.80 5293 0.1215 12.60 11559 0.2654 13.40 18761 0.4307 11.10 629.19 0.0144 11.90 6009 0.1379 12.70 12424 0.2852 13.50 19697 0.4522 11.20 1258 0.0289 12.00 6724 0.1544 12.80 13288 0.3051 13.60 20707 0.4754 11.30 1888 0.0433 12.10 7518 0.1726 12.90 14152 0.3249 13.70 21716 0.4985 11.40 2517 0.0578 12.20 8313 0.1908 13.00 15017 0.3447 13.80 22725 0.5217 11.50 3146 0.0722 12.30 9107 0.2091 13.10 15953 0.3662 13.90 23735 0.5449 11.60 3862 0.0887 12.40 9901 0.2273 13.20 16889 0.3877 14.00 24744 0.5680 11.70 4577 0.1051 12.50 10695 0.2455 13.30 17825 0.4092 1 i I I i I - I I 9/10/98 . 1 11 :45 :18, am Sverdrup Civil Inc page 2 1 THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT PRE-DEV BASIN 4-6 ROUTED THROUGH POND"C" 1 STAGE DISCHARGE TABLE 1 I COMBINATION DISCHARGE ID No. COMBO2 Description: POND I" C" COMBO STRUCTURE Structure: PONDC2 Structure: Structure: RISER . Structure : Structure: 1 STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAG E <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> ft) cfi ft) ---cfs ft) ---cfs ft) ---cfs 10.00 0.0000 10L80 0.2995 11.60 0.6469 12.40 1.2161 1 10.10 0.1059 101.90 0.3177 11.70 0.7101 12.50 1.2671 10.20 0.1498 11I.00 0.3349 11.80 0.7650 12.60 1.6236 10.30 0.1834 11'.10 0.3512 11.90 0.8955 12.70 2.2332 10.40 0.2118 111.20 0.3669 12.00 0.9747 12.75 2.6021 10.50 0.2368 11.30 0.3818 12.10 1.0431 10.60 0.2594 111.40 0.3963 12.20 1.1050 10.70 0.2802 11.50 0.5680 12.30 1.1623 I I I i 9/10/98 11 :45 :18 am Sverdrup Civil Inc page 3 THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT PRE-DEV BASIN 4-6 ROUTED THROUGH POND"C" STAGE DISCHARGE TABLE 1 MULTIPLE ORIFICE j ID No. PONDC2 Description: POND, "C" DISCHARGE STRUCTURE Outlet Elev: 10 . 00 Elev: 8 . 25 ft, Orifice Diameter: 3 . 5130 in. Elev: 11.40 fti Orifice 2 Diameter: 4 . 2890 in. Elev: 11. 80 ft: Orifice 3 Diameter: 3 . 0700 in. STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE c--DISCHARGE---> STAGE c--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> ft) ---cfs ft) ---cfs ft) ---cfs ft) ---cfs 10.00 0.0000 10.00 0.0000 10.00 0.0000 10.00 0.0000 9/10/98 11 :45 : 18. am Sverdrup Civil Inc page 4 THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT PRE-DEV BASIN 4-61ROUTED THROUGH POND"C" STAGE DISCHARGE TABLE RISER DISCHARGE ID No. RISER Description: POND ] "C" RISER Riser Diameter (in) : 12 . 00 elev: 12 . 50 ft Weir Coefficient . . . : 9 . 739 height : 12 . 75 ft Orif Coefficient . . : 3 . 782 increm: 0 . 10 ft STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> I ft) ---cfs ft) ---cfs ft) ---cfs ft) ---cfs 12.50 0.0000 12.60 0.3080 12.75 1.2174 12.75 1.2174 12.50 0.01000 12.70 0.8711 i I I i i I 9/10/98 11 :45 :19 am Sverdrup Civil Inc page 5 THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT PRE-DEV BASIN 4-6 'ROUTED THROUGH POND"C" LEVEL POOL TABLE SUMMARY MATCH INFLOW -STO- -DIS- <-PEAK-> OUTFLOW STORAGE DESCRIPTION cfs) (cfs) --id- --id- <-STAGE> id (cfs) VOL (cf) WQ, PRE BASIN 4-6 0.00 0.26 PONDC COMB02 10.00 1 0.26 0.00 cf 2YR, PRE BASIN 4-6 0.00 1.26 PONDC COMB02 11.31 2 0.38 1946.03 cf 5YR, PRE BASIN 4-6 0.00 1.64 PONDC COMB02 11.47 3 0.52 2983.94 cf 10YR, PRE BASIN 4-6 0.00 2.12 PONDC COMB02 11.66 4 0.68 4281.20 cf 25YR, PRE BASIN 4-6 0.00 2.62 PONDC COMB02 11.88 5 0.87 5858.61 cf 50YR, PRE BASIN 4-6 0.00 2.67 PONDC COMB02 11.90 6 0.90 6007.94 cf 100YR, PRE BASIN 4-6 0.00 3.13 PONDC COMB02 12.10 7 1.04 7484.70 cf 1 l D File Input Hydrograph Storage Discharge LPool Proj : SWMP eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeRouting Comparison Tableeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee; MATCH INFLOW STO DIS PEAK PEAK OUT 0 o DESCRIPTION PEAK PEAK No.No. STG OUT HYD o ft112, RE BASIN 4 0 . 00 1.27 4C 4C 9 . 11 1. 02 8 2YR, PRE BASIN 4 0 . 00 10 . 06 4C 4C 9 . 21 10 . 06 9 0 iYR, PRE BASIN4 0 .100 11 . 63 4C 4C 9 . 22 11 . 63 10 0 OYR, PRE BASIN 4 0 . 00 13 .41 4C 4C 9 . 23 13 .41 11 25YR, PRE BASIN 4 0 . 00 14 . 99 4C 4C 9 .24 14 . 99 12 0 SOYR, PRE BASIN 4 0 . 00 15 .22 4C 4C 9 . 24 15 . 22 13 LOGY , PRE BASIN 4 0 . 00 17 .30 4C 4C 9 . 26 17.30 14 - 0 o 0 0 0 o - Done< Press any key to exit aeee=eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeef i I anu: Perform Level pool computations using input table instructions PRe -0EvE IILoPMfiN i 5v9,FAc.E WrztlE, N1PwAGE meArr Peo5t LT SAS in.) 9 Ns y I y- Li--3 1-!-41 ,-k-5 A 4-‘ 1 5 u Q-ate i i i i i OLE/NSE 2A1 5 c o 5P21,06 4RouK. CAFE SEAR. IAAL.wPTF_2 = 9,L5 9/10/98 12 :5 : 8 am Sverdrup Civil Inc page 1 THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT PRE-DEV BASIN 4, ROUTED TO SPRINGBROOK STAGE STORAGE TABLE CUSTOM STORAGE ID No. 4C Description: POND4C 1 STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- 6.00 0.0000 0.0000 8.30 25325 0.5814 10.60 63992 1.4691 12.90 150929 3.4649 6.10 952.40 0.0219 8.40 26627 0.6113 10.70 66270 1.5214 13.00 155909 3.5792 6.20 1905 0.0437 8.50 27929 0.6412 10.80 68549 1.5737 13.10 164079 3.7667 6.30 2857 0.0656 8.60 29231 0.6711 10.90 70827 1.6260 13.20 172248 3.9543 6.40 3810 0.0875 8.70 30533 0.7010 11.00 73105 1.6783 13.30 180418 4.1418 6.50 4762 0.1093 8.80 31836 0.7308 11.10 76405 1.7540 13.40 188588 4.3294 6.60 5714 0.1312 8.90 33138 0.7607 11.20 79706 1.8298 13.50 196758 4.5169 6.70 6667 0.1530 9.00 34440 0.7906 11.30 83006 1.9056 13.60 204927 4.7045 6.80 7619 0.1749 9.10 36028 0.8271 11.40 86307 1.9813 13.70 213097 4.8920 6.90 8572 0.1968 9.20 37617 0.8636 11.50 89607 2.0571 13.80 221267 5.0796 I 7.00 9524 0.2186 9.30 39205 0.9000 11.60 92907 2.1329 13.90 229436 5.2671 7.10 10713 0.2459 9.40 40793 0.9365 11.70 96208 2.2086 14.00 237606 5.4547 7.20 11903 0.2733 9.50 42382 0.9729 11.80 99508 2.2844 14.10 252061 5.7865 7.30 13092 0.3006 9.60 43970 1.0094 11.90 102809 2.3602 14.20 266517 6.1184 7.40 14282 0.3279 9.70 45558 1.0459 12.00 106109 2.4359 14.30 280972 6.4502 7.50 15471 0.3552 9.80 47146 1.0823 12.10 111089 2.5503 14.40 295427 6.7821 7.60 16660 0.3825 9.90 48735 1.1188 12.20 116069 2.6646 14.50 309883 7.1139 7.70 17850 0.4098 10.00 50323 1.1553 12.30 121049 2.7789 14.60 324338 7.4458 7.80 19039 0.4371 10.10 52601 1.2076 12.40 126029 2.8932 14.70 338793 7.7776 7.90 20229 0.4644 10.20 54879 1.2599 12.50 131009 3.0076 14.80 353248 8.1095 8.00 21418 0.4917 10.30 57158 1.3122 12.60 135989 3.1219 14.90 367704 8.4413 8.10 22720 0.5216 110.40 59436 1.3645 12.70 140969 3.2362 8.20 24022 0.5515 10.50 61714 1.4168 12.80 145949 3.3505 I I I - I 1 9/10/98 12 :5 : 8 am Sverdrup Civil Inc pag 2 THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT PRE-DEV BASIN 4, ROUTED TO SPRINGBROOK STAGE DISCHARGE TABLE CUSTOM DISCHARGE ID No. 4C Description: POND4C STAGE <--DILSCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> I I ft) -cfs ft) -cfs ft) -cfs ft) cfs 1 9.15 0.0000 10.95 136.53 12.75 198.59 14.55 247.32 9.25 16.126 11,.05 140.61 12.85 201.57 14.65 249.75 9.35 32.251 11.15 144.44 12.95 204.55 14.75 252.18 9.45 48.377 11.25 148.27 13.05 207.44 14.85 254.61 9.55 59.I910 11.35 152.09 13.15 210.25 14.95 257.04 9.65 66.850 11L45 155.92 13.25 213.06 15.05 259.43 9.75 73.790 11',.55 159.56 13.35 215.87 15.15 261.77 9.85 80.730 111.65 163.03 13.45 218.68 15.25 264.11 9.95 87.670 1111.75 166.49 13.55 221.41 15.35 266.45 10.05 93.726 111.85 169.95 13.65 224.08 15.45 268.79 10.15 98.898 11,.95 173.42 13.75 226.74 15.55 271.09 10.25 104.07 12.05 176.75 13.85 229.40 15.65 273.34 10.35 109.24 121.15 179.94 13.95 232.07 15.75 275.60 10.45 114.41 12.25 183.14 14.05 234.67 15.85 277.86 I 10.55 119.17 12.35 186.34 14.15 237.21 15.95 280.11 10.65 123.51 121.45 189.53 14.25 239.75 16.05 281.24 10.75 127.85 121.55 192.62 14.35 242.29 10.85 132.19 12..65 195.60 14.45 244.83 1 j I i I I I Page 1 of 3 Pressure Pipe Analysis & Design Circular Pipe Worksheet Name: Practice Track Description: Practice Track Outlet Solve For Discharge Given Constant Data; Pressure @ 1 0 . 00 Elevation @ 2 9 . 15e— 2`((' TA11-waTER At SPRINJG[iRoolc. CRGE1. Pressure @ 1 0 . 00 Discharge 0 . 00 Diameter 36 . 00 Length 45 . 00 Hazen-Williams C 100 . 0000 Variable Input Data Minimum Maximum Increment By Elevation @ 1 9 . 00 16 . 00 0 . 10 BA51N y D Sc.v4aRGE R TING GvrtvF CALCoLA oNS Fo( 5uB-6AsiNS `i—1 1.4-2/ -3 y-! '-{-5/ d. y-4, R 60 i NtioUGN MAC(' tc.E RAcK 7ti 5PR,INGc32OC . GKEEK ARE—Q'V ELoPmErj i 5 v 0.FAc.E w p.'(ER, !'lfjn)A6 E M.EN T Open Channel Flow Module, Version 3 . 11 (c) Haestad Methods, Inc. * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708 i I Page 2 of 3 V IABLE COMPUTED El v. Pressure Elev. ' Pressure Discharge Diameter Length Hazen-W C @ 1 @ 1_ @ 2 @ 2 gpm in ft f ps . ft psi 9 . 00 0 . 00 9 . 15 ' 0 . 00 -16031.45 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 9 .10 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 -8857 . 83 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 9 . 0 0 . 00 9 . 15 ; 0 . 00 8857. 83 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 9 . 0 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 16031 .45 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 9 . 0 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 21123 . 76 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 9 . 0 o . od 9 .15 0 . 00 25332 . 63 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 9 . 0 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 29014 .71 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00, 9 . 0 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 32335 .48 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 9 . 0 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 35388 . 06 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00, 9 . 0 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 38231. 08 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 10 . 0 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 40904 .37 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 10. 0 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 43436 .44 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 10 . 0 0 . 00 9 .15 ; 0 . 00 45848 .56 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 10 . 0 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 48157 . 10 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 10 . 0 0 . 00 9 . 15 , 0 . 00 50374 . 98 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 1 10 . 0 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 52512 .63 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 10 . 0 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 54578 . 58 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 10 . 0 0 . 00 9 .15 . 0 . 00 56579 .96 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 0 . :0 0 . 00 9 . 151 0 . 00 58522 . 77 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 0 . •0 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 60412 . 12 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00' 11. .0 0 . 00 9 . 15 . 0 . 00 62252 .42 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 .001 11. 0 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 64047.50 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 11. .0 0 . 00 9 . 15'0 . 00 65800 . 71 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 11 . 0 6 . 66 9. 151,0 . 00 67515 . 00 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 11. ,.0 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 69192 . 99 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 11. ^0 6 . 66 9 .15 0 . 00 70837 . 00 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 .00' 11 . :0 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 72449 . 13 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 11 . 0 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 74031.27 36 .00 45 . 00 100 . 00I 11. :0 0 . 00 9 . 15 , 0 . 00 75585 .12 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 1 11 . •0 o . od 9 . 15 ' . 0 . 00 77112 .21 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 001 12 . 00 6 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 78613 . 97 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 12 . 10 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 80091. 68 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 ' 12 .20 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 81546 . 52 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 12 .30 0 . 00 9 . 15 . 0 . 00 82979 .58 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 12 .40 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 84391. 85 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 12 .50 0 . 00 9 . 15 , 0 . 00 85784 .28 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 ! 12 . 60 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 87157 . 71 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 12 . 70 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 88512 . 95 36 . 00 . 45 . 00 100 . 00 12 . 80 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 89850 .74 36 .00 45 . 00 100 . 00 12 . 90 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 91171. 77 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 Open Channel Flow Module, Version 3 . 11 (c) Haestad Methods, Inc. * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708 I Page 3 of 3 VARIABLE COMPUTED Elev. Pressure Elev. Pressure Discharge Diameter Length Hazen-W C @ 1 @ 1 @ 2 @ 2 gpm in ft ft psi ft psi 13 . 00 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 92476 . 70 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 13 .10 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 93766.12 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 13 .20 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 95040. 61 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 13 .30 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 96300 . 71 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 13 .40 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 97546 . 92 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 13 .50 0 . 00 9. 15 0 . 00 98779. 70 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 13 . 60 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 99999 . 52 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 13 .70 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 101206 .79 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 13 . 80 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 102401 . 92 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 11 13 . 90 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 103585.29 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 1 14 . 00 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 104757.24 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 14 .10 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 105918 . 13 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 14 .20 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 107068 .29 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 14 .30 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 108208 . 01 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 14 .40 0 . 00 9.15 0 . 00 109337 . 60 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 14 .50 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 110457.33 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 14 . 60 0 . 00 9 .1,5 0 . 00 111567 .48 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 14 . 70 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 112668 .30 36 . 00 45 . 00 100. 00 4 . 80 0 . 00 9 . 1,5 0 . 00 113760 . 03 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 .00 4 . 90 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 114842 . 90 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 15 . 00 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 115917 . 15 36 . 00 ' 45 . 00 .100 . 00 15 . 10 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 116982 . 98 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 15 . 20 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 118040 . 60 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 15 .30 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 119090 .22 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 15 .40 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 120132 . 01 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 15 . 50 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 121166 .16 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 15 . 60 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 122192 . 84 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 15 . 70 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 123212 .23 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 15 . 80 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 124224 .49 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 1 15 . 90 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 125229 . 76 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 16 . 00 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 126228 .21 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 16 . 10 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 127219 . 98 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 Open Channel Flow Module, Version 3 . 11 (c) Haestad Methods, 1Inc . * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708 1 1 12 : 5 : 9 am Sverdrupa e 39/10/98 Civil Inc p 9 THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT PRE-DEV BASIN 4, ROUTED TO SPRINGBROOK LEVEL POOL TABLE SUMMARY MATCH INFLOW -STO- -DIS- <-PEAK-> OUTFLOW STORAGE DESCRIPTION cfs) (cfs) --id- --id- c-STAGE> id (cfs) VOL (cf) WQ, PRE BASIN 4 0.00 1.27 4C 4C 9.11 8 1.02 36228.57 cf 2YR, PRE BASIN 4 0.00 10.06 4C 4C 9.21 9 10.06 37813.24 cf 5YR, PRE BASIN 4 0.00 11.63 4C 4C 9:22 10 11.63 37968.31 cf 10YR, PRE BASIN 4 0.00 13.41 4C 4C 9.23 11 13.41 38143.14 cf 25YR, PRE BASIN 4 0.00 14.99 4C 4C 9.24 12 14.99 38298.56 cf 50YR, PRE B IN 4 j 0.00 15.22 4C 4C 9.24 13 15.22 38321.41 cf 100YR, PRE BASIN 4 0.00 17.30 4C 4C 9.26 14 17.30 38526.08 cf I I I I III t I I I I I I I D File. Input Hydrograph .Storage . Discharge LPool Proj : SWMP ieeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeRouting Comparison Tableeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee o - MATCH INFLOW STO DIS PEAK PEAK OUT o DESCRIPTION PEAK .PEAK No.No. STG OUT HYD 0 o 0 WQ, POST A-1 & A-2 0 . 00 6 . 70 CSTC V-WEIR 8 . 82 0 . 18 8 0 1 2YR, POST A-1 7 A-2 0 . 00 43 .21 CSTC V-WEIR 9 . 56 -5 . 02 9 0 - 5YR, POST A-1 & A-2 0 . 00 55 . 65 CSTC V-WEIR 9 . 71 6 . 93 10 10YR, POST A-1 & A-2 0 , 00 71 . 51 CSTC V-WEIR 9 . 89 9 . 79 11 25YR, POST A-1 & A-2 0 . 00 87 . 55 CSTC V-WEIR 10 . 05 12 . 98 12 O1 50YR, POST A-1 & A-2 0 . 00 89 . 16 CSTC V-WEIR 10 . 07 13 .29 13 0 100YR, POST A-1 & A-2 0 , 00 103 . 67 CSTC V-WEIR 10 . 20 17. 15 •14 o o o o o o --- 1 o Done< Press any key to exit aeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeef Menu: Perform Level pool computations using input table instructions eoS'C - OEvE>~oPMEVI SuckFPoLE ' WA'CER MAn)AGEMan,T PRoSEc T 6AsiNS A-\ a A-2 RoeVEQ 4-4Ro0 GN E FO.c.F0 CSt C PonJD OVER V^Na'Cc.N R Cv Pt REP% EAti 7A«wP%-veR IN CS-cc, 4)61v0 IS APPRoX. 6.15 (See 8AsiN5 p,--\ ,A-D, .i A=3 Roo-rED f hk R o oco4 'D c=LZA I 9/10/98 10 :18 :54 am Sverdrup Civil Inc p ge 1 THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT POST-DEV BSN A1&A2, CSTC ROUTED TO DELTA 1 STAGE STORAGE TABLE CUSTOM STORAGE ID No. CSTC Descripion: CSTC STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> I ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- I 8.50 0.01000 0.0000 9.70 502749 11.542 10.90 1116440 25.630 12.10 1865645 42.829 8.60 38363 0.8807 9.80 547168 12.561 11.00 1169821 26.855 12.20 1936568 44.457 8.70 76726 1.7614 9.90 591587 13.581 11.10 1232311 28.290 12.30 2007492 46.086 8.80 115089 2.6421 10.00 636006 14.601 11.20 1294801 29.725 12.40 2078415 47.714 8.90 1531452 3.5228 10,.10 689388 15.826 11.30 1357291 31.159 12.50 2149339 49.342 9.00 1911815 4.4035 10;.20 742769 17.052 11.40 1419781 32.594 12.60 2220262 50.970 9.10 236234 5.4232 101.30 796151 18.277 11.50 1482271 34.028 12.70 2291186 52.598 9.20 2801653 6.4429 10.40 849532 19.503 11.60 1544761 35.463 12.80 2362109 54.227 9.30 325072 7.4626 101.50 902914 20.728 11.70 1607251 36.897 12.90 2433033 55.855 9.40 369491 8.4824 10.60 956295 21.954 11.80 1669741 38.332 0.00 2503956 57.483 9.50 413911 9.5021 101.70 1009677 23.179 11.90 1732231 39.767 9.60 45830 10.522 10.80 1063058 24.404 12.00 1794721 41.201 II I I I If 9/10/98 10 : 18 :54 am Sverdrup Civil Inc page 2 THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT POST-DEV BSN A1&A2, CSTC ROUTED TO DELTA STAGE DISCHARGE TABLE CUSTOM DISCHARGE , ID No. V-WEIR Description: V-WEIR STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> ft) ---cfs ft) ---cfs ft) ---cfs ft) ---cfs 8.70 0.0000 9.50 4.2774 10.30 122.54 11.10 201.82 8.80 0.1450 9.60 5.4425 10.40 131.57 11.20 212.82 8.90 0.3801 9.70 6.7779 10.50 140.86 11.30 224.04 9.00 0.7102 9.80 8.2911 10.60 150.41 11.40 235.49 9.10 1.1534 9.90 9.9894 10.70 160.21 11.50 246.33 9.20 1.7218 10.00 11.880 10.80 170.25 9.30 2.4256 10.10 13.969 10.90 180.54 9.40 3.2746 10.20 16.264 11.00 191.06 I CSTC Discharge Structure to Delta Area 120°V-Notch Weir) Tailwater Elev.= 8.75 Stage Hyd.Head Hyd.Head Weir Coefficient Actual No.of sides Effective Free Submerged Added Flow Total ft) Upstream Downstream Height C1( 1) Width contracted Width Flowrate Flowrate from V-Notch Flowrate Hup(ft) Hdo.(ft) Y(ft)banaat(ft) N ball.(ft)( 2) Q(cfs)( 3) Q(cfs)( 4) Q(cfs)( 5) Q(cfs) 8.5 0.0 0.3 8.5 0.00 0 0.00 8.6 0.1 0.3 8.5 0.01 0 0.00 8.7 0.2 0.3 8.5 0.08 0 0.00 8.8 0.3 0.3 8.5 1 0.21 0 0.14 8.9 0.4 0.3 8.5 0.44 0 0.38, 9.0 0.5 I 0.3 8.5 0.77 1 0.71: 9.1 0.6 0.3 8.5 1.21 1 1.15 9.2 0.7 I 0.3 8.5 1.78 2 1.72 9.3 0.8 0.3 8.5 2.48 2 2.43, 9.4 0.9 0.3 8.5 I 3.33 3 3.27 9.5 1.0 0.3 8.5 4.33 4 4.28 9.6 1.1 0.3 8.5 5.50 5 5.44! 9.7 1.2 0.3 8.5 6.83 7 6.78 9.8 1.3 0.3 8.5 8.34 8 8.29, 9.9 1.4 0.3 8.5 10.04 10 9.99,. 10.0 1.5 0.3 8.5 I 11.93 12 11.88 10.1. 1.6 0.3 8.5 I 14.02 14 13.97 10.2 1.7 0.3 8.5 I 16.32 16 16.26 10.3 1.8 0.3 8.5 0.623 13.1 2 13.06 105 105 18 122.54 10.4 1.9 I 0.3 8.5 0.623 13.1 2 13.06 114 114 18 131.57 10.5 2.0 j 0.3 8.5 0.624 13.1 2 13.06 123 123 18 140.86 10.6 2.1 0.3 8.5 0.625 13.1 2 13.06 133 133 18 150.41 - 10.7 2.2 0.3 8.5 0.626 13.1 2 13.06 143 142 18 160.2',1 10.8 2.3 0.3 8.5 I 0.627 13.1 2 13.05 153 153 18 170.2;5 10.9 2.4 0.3 8.5 0.628 13.1 2 13.05 163 163 18 180.54 11.0 2.5 0.3 8.5 0.629 13.1 2 13.05 174 173 18 191.06 11.1 2.6 0.3 8.5 0.630 13.1 2 13.05 184 184 18 201.82 11.2 2.7 0.3 8.5 0.631 13.1 2 13.05 195 195 18 212.82 11.3 2.8 0.3 8.5 0.632 13.1 2 13.04 206 206 18 224.04 11.4 2.9 0.3 8.5 0.632 13.1 2 13.04 218 218 18 235.4:9 11.5 3.0 0.5 8.5 0.633 13.1 2 13.04 230 229 18 246.33 Weir transitions from V-Notch to Contracted Sharp-Crested Weir at a Stage of 10.26 For V-Notch Weir: 3) Q=2.5 tan(0/2) IH52 (Brater&King,Handbook of Hydraulics,eq.5-45) 3) If 0=120°,Q=4J33 H5'2(Brater&King,Hiandbook of Hydraulics,eq.5-48b) I 1 For Contracted SharpCrested Weir: I 1 1) C,=[0.6035+0.0813(H/Y)+(0.000295/Y)]'[1+(0.00361/H)]32 (Rehbock) 2) berc=bactuai-(0.1)(N)(H) 3) Q=2/3(C,)(bex)(2g)--(H)3'2 1 52 0 385 4) %„b=Qo-ee[1-(Hdom Hup) ] 5) Flow from V-Notch Weir is added to flow from rectangular weir. 1• 1 014002\2220\engr XBCALC12.XLS[V-Notch Weir(Submerged)] i 46e tioN .....yr.vivaxit, oix-p6T-.- 4, 04, POO" elitZy' r ' i1Y0 OI>>NI r.Th rra, It [rya fr, L'a'u 'r('d - r+o u adwvp °t tu ri"t to v"witlz flu --. i ref .t't L'1 + t{ r H:'..-.. Mo 1 . 410 ws 14 190-"is .,. r.,„ .2.w , ,,, iim s. qhl% tr. sw HZ Z' 9'4 y 4 1610 11 *44 V/ 4% •7 i Lid 1 i 5 lig priiin ,,,,.„, ACTti ;J 5 1 ,; r1 I . i; 0-1 il 4 .D1t p '' w N I 1 vArlD cope A-- WA a tl, ILA C1104' r f %'i Mph'' . A-t,3 ry ( oulA . pt Ll. ** q Za/T0'd LLSq Mki9911.0 Z0-90'96ST 00££ We 90 t 01 SEI1I1I s WOZld +' • 9/10/98 10 : 18 :55 am Sverdrup Civil Inc page 3 THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT POST-DEV BSN A1&A2i CSTC ROUTED TO DELTA LEVEL POOL TABLE SUMMARY MATCH INFLOW -STO- -DIS- <-PEAK-> OUTFLOW STORAGE DESCRIPTION cfs) (cfs) --id- --id- <-STAGE> id (cfs) VOL (cf) WQ, POST A-1 & A-2 0.00 6.70 CSTC V-WEIR 8.82 8 0.18 3 ac-ft 2YR, POST A-1 7 A-2 0.00 43.21 CSTC V-WEIR 9.56 9 5.02 10 ac-ft 5YR, POST A-1 & A-2 0.00 55.65 CSTC V-WEIR 9.71 10 6.93 12 ac-ft 10YR, POST A- & A-2 0.00 71.51 CSTC V-WEIR 9.89 11 9.79 13 ac-ft 25YR, POST A-1 & A-2 0.00 87.55 CSTC V-WEIR 10.05 12 12.98 15 ac-ft 50YR, POST A-L1 & A-2 0.00 89.16 CSTC V-WEIR 10.07 13 13.29 15 ac-ft 100YR,POST A-1 & A-2 0.00 103.67 CSTC V-WEIR 10.20 14 17.15 17 ac-ft D File Input Hydrdgraph Storage Discharge LPool Proj : SWMP ieeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeRouting Comparison Tableeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee; o MATCH INFLOW STO DIS PEAK PEAK OUT o DESCRIPTION PEAK PEAK No.No. STG OUT HYD 0 o WQ, POST BASIN A 0. 00 0 . 22 DELTA PSTA 7 . 80 0 . 00 1 2YR, POST BASIN A 0. 00 5 . 33 DELTA PSTA 8 . 71 5 .29 2 5YR, POST BASIN A 0. 00 7 . 33 DELTA PSTA 8 . 75 7 . 31 3 10YR, POST BASIN A 0. 00 10 . 36 DELTA PSTA 8 . 81 10 .32 4 25YR, POST BASIN A 0. 00 13 . 73 DELTA PSTA 8 . 89 13 . 72 5 0 50YR, POST BASIN A 0 . 00 14 . 08. DELTA PSTA 8 . 89 14 . 05 6 0 100YR, POST BASIN A 0i. 00 18 . 13 DELTA PSTA 8 . 97 17 . 85 7 O 0 o 0 0 0." o 1 o Done< Press any key to exit 0 aeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeef I Menu: Perform Level pool computations using input table instructions 1 Qb5"T - DEvEL.OPr\VNT 1 5v(kF P.cE y,;ick-c GR U\kr.AG /A'ENT QR,ole c.'t' ov-tav "V4R.o0C '4 tjAS NS A-1 A a, 4- A 3 1s OEL.TA 0150HP.R,DE VAVL.T co SQ .v'J 13(LotA C(1.6o. D- ' 6PI "TpoL t.IA1Fk s i?:). Go i I I 9/10/98 10 :23 :301am Sverdrup Civil Inc page 1 THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT POST-DEV BSN A,DELTA ROUTED TO SPRINGBRK STAGE STORAGE TABLE I I I CUSTOM STORAGE ID No. DELTA Description: DELTA 1 I I STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> ft) ---cf-i- --Ac-Ft- (f ) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- 1 7.50 0.0000 0.0000 840 70453 1.6174 9.30 157876 3.6243 10.20 265457 6.0940 7.60 6984 0.1603 8:50 79336 1.8213 9.40 169251 3.8855 10.30 279434 6.4149 7.70 13968 0.3207 860 88218 2.0252 9.50 180626 4.1466 10.40 293411 6.7358 7.80 20953 0.4810 870 97101 2.2291 9.60 192001 4.4077 10.50 307389 7.0567 7.90 27937 0.6413 8!80 105984 2.4331 9.70 203376 4.6689 10.60 321366 7.3775 8.00 34921 0.8017 8.90 114867 2.6370 9.80 214752 4.9300 10.70 335343 7.6984 I 1 8.10 43804 1.0056 9.00 123750 2.8409 9.90 226127 5.1912 10.80 349320 8.0193 8.20 52687 1.2095 9.10 135125 3.1020 10.00 237502 5.4523 10.90 363298 8.3402 8.30 61570 1.4134 9J20 146500 3.3632 10.10 251479 5.7732 1 i 9/10/98 10 :23 :30 am Sverdrup .Civil Inc page 2 THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT POST-DEV BSN A,DELTA ROUTED TO SPRINGBRK STAGE DISCHARGE TABLE CUSTOM DISCHARGE I ID No. PSTA Description: CSTC=OUT STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> ft) ---cfs ft) ---cfs ft) ---cfs ft) ---cfs 8.60 0.0000 10.00 41.370 11.40 81.054 12.80 128.54 8.70 4.8150 10.10 44.000 11.50 84.120 12.90 132.17 8.80 9.6300 10.20 46.630 11.60 87.378 13.00 135.80 8.90 14.445 1I0.30 49.260 11.70 90.636 13.10 139.61 9.00 19.260 10.40 51.890 11.80 93.894 13.20 143.42 9.10 21.378 10.50 54.520 11.90 97.152 13.30 147.23 9.20 23.496 10.60 57.374 12.00 100.41 13.40 151.04 9.30 25.614 10.70 60.228 12.10 103.86 13.50 154.85 9.40 27.732 10.80 63.082 12.20 107.31 13.60 158.83 9.50 29.850 1I0.90 65.936 12.30 110.76 13.70 162.81 9.60 32.154 11.00 68.790 12.40 114.21 13.80 166.80 9.70 34.458 11.10 71.856 12.50 117.66 13.90 170.78 9.80 36.762 11.20 74.922 12.60 121.29 14.00 174.76 9.90 39.066 11.30 77.988 12.70 124.92 1 I i CSTC Delta Area Discharge Vault Summary Basin A Discharge Structure to Springbrook Creek) Stage Vault Inlet Capacity Vault Interior Capacity Vault Outlet Capacity Actual Vault ft)(1) Contracted Broad- 18"RCP Total Inlet Broad-Crested Weir 36"DIP Outlet Release Rate Crested Weir(cfs)( 2) Inlet(cfs)( 3) Capacity(cfs)( 4) Stoplogs)(cfs)( 5) cfs)( 6) cfs)(7) 8.60 0 0 0 0 0 0 9:00 0 19 19 — - 67 80- 19 9.50 0 30 30 125 124 30 10.00 3 38 41 188 157 41 10.50 10 45 55 259 185 55 11.00 18 51 69 337 210 69 11.50 28 56 84 422 233 84 12.00 39 61 100 514 254 100 12.50 52 66 118 612 273 118 13.00 65 70 136 717 291 136 13.50 80 75 155 828 309 155 14.00 96 79 175 946 325 175 Notes: 1) 2-year tailwater in Springbrook Creek= 8.60 (Table 8-2, ESGRWSP, R.W. Beck, Dec 1996) 2) Refer to CSTC Delta Area Discharge Vault Element 1 for details. 3) Refer to CSTC Delta Area Discharge Vault Element 2 for details. 4) Total vault inlet capacity is sum of contracted broad-crested weir( 2) capacity and 18" RCP(3) capacity 5) Refer to CSTC Delta Area Discharge Vault Element 3 for details. 6) Refer to CSTC Delta Area Discharge Vault Element 4 for details. 7) Vault inlet capacity, internal capacity and outlet capacity were compared to determine the actual release rate from the vault. 013747\2210\engr\KBCALC15.XLS[Summary] 16•-0" 1 4-- NH OPENING MH STEP TVP 1\- L.3x3 63x GALV•TYP BILCO DOOR POINT OF TIMBER ' IDENTIFYING STOP• I I r 1 COORDINATES LOGS-N1 1 • 3r DIP CL 53 FLxPE II 1 1_0/ TO SPRINGBROOK CREEK 1 b N— n I ICe4 01 81(o) ter CONC-/ I i ( I• BOLTED FLANGED JOINT SD Ili L J CYLINDRICAL A. EENEBY SCREEN OVERFLOW 1 , IT-60 WITH _ OPENINGGW 1------1- r JOHNSON SCREENS OR APPROVED EQUAL s •.;:; b b NOTE: FOR DETAILS NOT SHOWNISEE1580(D)L f - . I • If PVC DRAIN DIP CAST INTO er ACCES•SCOVER CONCRETE Z YR FL?v,ze .S`r 4.`r PVC BALL VALVE EVEArr ON 5P,C[N(Blfoo/'- SPRINGBROOK CREEK • DETAIL OUTLET STRUCTURE C_/lEC/< -EL S. fp CASLE:!NONE 1C1Q I)) r a•-or tO NH OPENING 1 ;,•: \/\ J, ..\: • , DOOR OPENING L+// i_ OVIDE REMOVABLE GRAT I -- NOTE: W/ 1•• SMOOTH GALV STEEL BARS AT 6' OC VERTICAL EL. 12.0 EL.15.2 STOP LOG ANCHOR TO ORIENTATION CONSIST OR 5%8•4 BOOT' LOG ANGLE GUIO NUTS AND WASHERS PAS_ 1 THROUGH BOTH STOP L0 ANGLE GUIDES ON BOTH WILLOW PLANTINGS ov .ow Cr - SIDES I 4 36'6 OUTLET SPACING 1 E 9: STOP LOG ANCH• A`:_; v16• SO BEVEL TO ram. EL 7.5 MATCtt *LOPE. i*••i i••i•••• • I L•EL: 6. 1 I.E. EI- 5.9 P • i i:•`i i i i •%4•:•I.E. EL5.40 1 1 I.E. EL 5.4 0.42% I I' Y\ a I • PVC I i DRAIN LEVEL 1 3/4•0 EPDXY ANCHOR BOLTS. r• r NUTS AND WASHERS 6"•EMBEDMENT 4• O 12' O.C. 4 . • I 4 6•x12• TIMBER EL 1.0 STOP LOGS r'•4 • v /. N1 • ...I" • • • • • • Y .• r II .a • •, %• . N. SPRINGBROOK CREEK I SECTION OUTLET STRUCTURE SCALE: NONE I:0 0) SouKE : CSTc Sure:.r_ O?vELoPMENT STott1"\ ORAINM(E DETAILS -SHEET 5 DRA9W6 1C0yCW) i ' CSTC Delta Area Discharge Vault Element 1 2' x 3' Overflow Contracted Broad-Crested Weir) Stage Hydraulic Weir Coefficient Actual No.of sides Effective Flowrate 1) 3) ft)Head Height C1 Width contracted Width Q(cfs) H(ft) Y',(ft) bactual(ft) N belt.(ft)(2) 9.5 0.0 18.5 0.000 3.0 2 3.00 0 10.0 0.5 18.5 0.615 3.0 2 2.99 3 10.5 1.0 8.5 0.616 3.0 2 2.98 10 11.0 1.5 8.5 0.620 3.0 2 2.97 18 11.5 2.0 8.5 0.624 3.0 2 2.96 28 12.0 2.5 I 8.5 0.629 3.0 2 2.95 39 12.5 3.0 18.5 0.633 3.0 2 2.94 52 13.0 3.5 18.5 0.638 3.0 2 2.93 65 13.5 4.0 18.5 0.643 3.0 2 2.92 80 j 1 14.0 4.5 18.5 0.647 3.0 2 2.91 96 1 Notes: 1) C1=[0.6035+0.0813(H/Y)+(0.000295/Y)]*(1+(0.00361/H)] (Rehbock) 2) beff=bactuai-(0.1)(N)(H) 3) Q=2/3(C1)(beff)(2g)1t2(H)F2 CS,TC Delta Area Discharge Vault Element 3 Submerged Supressed Broad-Crested Weir, Stoplogs) Stage Hyd.Head Hyd Head Weir Coefficient Actual Flowrate Flowrate 1) 2) ft) Upstream Downstream Height C1 Width Free Flow Submerged Hup(ft) Hdown(ft) Y(ft) bactual(ft) Qfree(cfs)( 3) Qsub.(cfs)(4) 8.60 1.1 1.10 6.5 0.620 16.0 61 0 1 9.00 I 1.5 1.10 6.5 0.625 16.0 98 67 9.5 I 2.0 1.10 6.5 0.630 16.0 153 125 10.0 2.5 1.10 6.5 0.636 16.0 215 188 10.5 3.0 1.10 6.5 0.642 16.0 286 259 11.0 3.5 1.10 6.5 0.648 16.0 363 337 11.5 4.0 1.10 6.5 0.654 16.0 448 422 12.0 I 4.5 1.10 6.5 0.661 16.0 540 514 12.5 I 5.0 1.10 6.5 0.667 16.0 638 612 13.0 5.5 1.10 6.5 0.673 16.0 . 743 717 13.5 6.0 1.10 6.5 0.679 16.0 854 828 14.0 I 6.5 1.10 6.5 0.685 16.0 972 946 Notes: 1) 2-year tailwater in Springbrook Creek=8.60(Table 8-2, ESGRWSP, R.W. Beck, Dec 1996) 2) C1 1 [ 0.6035+0.0813(li/Y)+(0.000295m]*[1+(0.00361/H)] (Rehbock) 3) Qtre le=2/3(C1)(bactual)(29) 1( Hup) 4) Qsub=()free[1 -(Hdown/Hup) 3n]osas 013893122201engr\KBCALC15.XLS[E1andE3) Page 1 of 3 Pressure Pipe Analysis & Design Circular Pipe Worksheet Name: basin 3 pre-dev Description: Basin 3 Outlet 18" RCP Solve For Discharge ' Given Constant Data; Pressure @1 0 . 00 Elevation @ 2 8 . 60 — Z.iR "NJ Al SPAANCBMolc. cr ecy-• Pressure @, 1 0 .00 Discharge ; 45326 .53 Diameter 18 . 00 Length 24 . 00 Hazen-Williams C 140 . 0000 Variable Input Data Minimum Maximum Increment By Elevation @ 1 8 . 60 16 . 00 0 .10 I BAS1r " : 18 RCP INLET -co C.or.rnto STRV c-r RE. w z.\ka, Ac.Q ( , s 1f\olt. cw1'c FLEW N V Open Channel Flow Module, Version 3 .11 (c) Haestad Methods, Inc. * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708 Page 2 of 3 J IABLE COMPUTED i_ El v. Pressure Elev. Pressure Discharge Diameter Length Hazen-W C @ 1 @ 1 @ 2 @ 2 gpm in ft f1 psi ft psi U able to compute this instance. 8. 0 0 .00 8.60 0.00 4090 . 00 18 .00 24 . 00 140 . 00 8 . 0 0 .00 8 .60 0 . 00 5946 .75 18 . 00 24 . 00 , 140 . 00 8 . 0 0 . 00 8 .60 0 .00 7402 .34 18 . 00 24 .00 140 . 00 9 .00 0 . 00 8 . 60 0 .00 8646 .41 18 .00 24 . 00 140 . 00 9 . 0 0 .00 8 .60 0 . 00 9753 . 6.5 18 . 00 24 . 00 140 . 00 9 . ' 0 0 . 00 8.60 , 0 . 00 10762 .79 18 . 00 24 .00 140 . 00 9 . ' 0 0 . 00 8 .60 , 0 . 00 11697. 05 18 . 00 24 .00 140 . 001 9 . ' 0 0 . 00 8.60 ' 0 .00 12571. 64 18 . 00 24 . 00 140 . 00', 9. ' 0 0 .00 8 . 69 0 .00 13397.21 18 . 00 24 . 00 140 .00 9. .0 0 .00 8 .69 0 .00 14181.54 18 .00 24 .00 140.00 9. 0 0 . 00 8 .60 0.00 14930 .54 18 . 00 24 .00 140 . 00 9 . :0 0 . 00 8 .60 ' 0 . 00 15648 .81 18 . 00 24 . 00 140 . 00 9 . 10 0 .00 8 . 60 0 .00 16340 .03 18 . 00 24 . 00 140 . 001 10 . 60 0 . 00 8 .60 0 .00 17007.19 18 . 00 24 .00 140 . 001 10. 0 0 . 00 8 .60 0. 00 17652 .76 18 . 00 24. 00 140 . 00 10. ,0 0 .00 8 .60 0.00 18278 . 82 18 .00 24 .00 140 . 00 10 . : 0 0 . 00 8 .60 0 .00 18887.12 18 . 00 24 .00 140 .00 I.0. . 0 0 . 00 8 .60 0 .00 19479 .17 18 . 00 24 . 00 140 . 00 0 0 . 00 8 .60 0 . 00 20056 .28 18 .00 24 . 00 140 .00 0. •0 0 .00 8 .60 0 .00 20619 .57 18 . 00 24 .00 140 . 00 10 . 0 0 . 00 8 .60 , 0 .00 21170 .04 18 . 00 24 . 00 140 .00 10 . :0 0 . 00 8 .60 , 0 . 00 21708 .59 18 . 00 24 . 00 140 .00 10. :0 0 .00 8 .60 0 .00 22235. 99 18 . 00 24 . 00 140 . 0 11. 60 0 . 010 8 .60 0 . 00 22752 . 93 18 . 00 24 .00 140 .0 11. 10 0 . 0I0 8 . 60 , 0. 00 23260 . 07 18 . 00 24 . 00 140 . 00 11 . ' 0 0 . 00 8 .60 0 . 00 23757. 95 18 . 00 24 . 00 140 . 00 11 . :0 0 . 0I0 8 .60i 0 .00 24247.10 18 . 00 24 .00 140 . 0 11. . 0 0 . 00 8 .60 0. 00 24727 .98 18 . 00 24 .00 140 .0 1 11. .0 0 .00 8 .60 , 0 .00 25201. 03 18 .00 24 .00 140 .00 11. .0 0 . 00 8.60 0 .00 25666 .63 18 . 00 24 .00 140 .00 11. 0 0 .00 8 . 60 0. 00 26125 .14 18 .00 24 . 00 140 .00 11. :0 0 . 00 8 .60 0 .00 26576 . 90 18 . 00. 24 . 00 140 . 00 1 11. :0 0 . 00 8 . 60 0 .00 27022 .21 18 . 00 24 .00 140 .0 12 . 10 0 .00 8 .60 ' 0 . 00 27461.36 18 . 00 24 . 00 140 . 0 12 .60 0 . 00 8 .6b 0 . 00 27894 .60 18 . 00 24 .00 140 . 00 12 .+0 0 . 00 8 . 60 0 . 00 28322 . 18 18 . 00 24 . 00 140 .00 12 .c0 0 . 00 8 .610 0. 00 28744 .34 18 . 00 24 . 00 140 . 00 12 . . 0 0 . 00 8 . 6I0 140 . 000 .00 29161 .27 18 . 00 24 . 00 12 . 50 0 . 00 8 .610 0 .00 29573 . 19 18 . 00 24 . 00 140 .00 Open Channel FlovJ Module, Version 3 . 11 (c) Haestad Methods, Inc. * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708 I 1I i Page 3 of 3 VARIABLE COMPUTED Elev. Pressure E1evl. Pressure Discharge Diameter Length Hazen-W C @ 1 @ 1 @ 2; @ 2 gpm in ft ft psi ft psi 12 . 60 0 . 00 8 . 60 0 . 00 29980 .28 18 . 00 24 . 00 140 . 00 12.70 0 .00 8 .60 0 .00 30382 .72 18 . 00 24 . 00 140 .00 12 .80 0 . 00 8 .60 0 . 00 30780 .66 18 .00 24 .00 140 .00 12 .90 0 . 00 8 .60 0 .00 31174 .27 18 .00 24 . 00 140 . 00 13 .00 0 .00 8 . 60 0 .00 31563 .69 18 . 00 24 . 00 140 .00 13 .10 0 .00 8 .6';0 0 . 00 31949 . 06 18 . 00 24 . 00 140 . 00 13 .20 0 . 00 8 . 60 0 . 00 32330 .51 18 . 00 24 . 00 140 . 00 13 .30 0 .00 8 .60 0 . 00 32708 .17 18 . 00 24 . 00 140 . 00 13 .40 0 . 00 8 .60 0. 00 33082 .14 18 . 00 24 .00 140 . 00 13 .50 0 .00 8 .6,0 0 . 00 33452 .55 18 .00 24 . 00 140 .00 13 .60 0 . 00 8 . 60 0.00 33819 .50 18 .00 24.00 140 .00 13 .70 0 .00 8 .60 0 . 00 34183 .08 18 . 00 24 .00 140 .00 13 .80 0 . 00 8 . 60 0 . 00 34543 .41 18 .00 24 . 00 140 . 00 13 .90 0 .00 8 .60 0 . 00 34900 .55 18 . 00 24 .00 140 .00 14.00 0 . 00 8 . 60 0 .00 35254 .62 18 .00 24 . 00 140 .00 14 .10 0 .00 8 .60 0 . 00 35605 .67 . 18 .00 24 . 00 140.00 14 .20 0 . 00 8 .60 0 . 00 35953 . 81 18 .00 24 .00 140 . 00 14 .30 0 .00 8 .60 0 . 00 36299 .09 18 . 00 24 . 00 140 .00 14 .40 0 . 00 8 .60 0 . 00 36641.60 18 . 00 24.00 140 . 00 1 .50 0 .00 8 .60 0 .00 36981.41 18 . 00 24 . 00 140 .00 14 .60 0 . 00 8 .60 0 . 00 37318 .57 18 .00 24 .00 140 .00 14 .70 0 . 00 8 . 60 0 . 00 37653 . 16 18 . 00 24 .00 140 .00 14 . 80 0 . 00 8 .60 0 . 00 37985 .24 18 . 00 24 . 00 140 . 00 14 . 90 0 . 00 8 . 60 0 . 00 38314 .86 18 . 00 . 24 . 00 140 .00 15 . 00 0 . 00 8 .60 0 . 00 38642 . 08 18 .00 24 . 00 140 .00 15 . 10 0 . 00 8 . 60 0 . 00 38966 . 96 18 . 00 24 .00 140 . 00 15 .20 0 . 00 8 . 60 0 .00 39289 .55 18 . 00 24 . 00 140 . 00 15 .30 0 .00 8 . 60 0 . 00 39609 . 90 . 18 .00 24 . 00 140 .00 15 .40 0 .00 8 .60 0 .00 39928 . 06 18 . 00 . 24 .00 140 .00 15.50 0 .00 8 .60 0. 00 40244 .07 18. 00 24 .00 140 .00 15. 60 0 . 00 8 .60 0 .00 40557. 98 18 . 00 24 . 00 140 .00 15 .70 0 .00 8 .60 0 . 00 . 40869. 83 18 .00 24 . 00 140.00 15 .80 0 . 00 8 .60 0 .00 41179 .67 18 .00 24 . 00 140 .00 15 .90 0 .00 8 .60 0 . 00 41487.54 18 . 00 24 .00 140. 00 1 ! 16 . 00 0 . 00 8 .60 0 .00 41793 .47 18 . 00 24 . 00 140 .00 16 .10 0 .00 8 .60 0 . 00 42097.51 18 . 00 24 . 00 140 .00 i Open Channel Flow Module, Version 3 .11 (c) Haestad Methods,, Inc. * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708 i I i I Page 1 of 3 L Pressure Pipe Analysis & Design . Circular Pipe Worksheet ame: basin ' 3 pre-dev 36" mescriptian: Basin 3 Outlet 36" DIP Solve For Discharge Given Consitant Data; Pressure @ 1 0 . 00 Elevation @2 8 .60 Pressure @ 1 0 .00 Discharge 46869 .55 iameter 36 .00 Length 44 . 00 Hazen-Williams C 130 .0000 Varia•le Input Data Minimum Maximum Increment By Elev-tion @ 1 8 .60 16. 00 0 ..10 BASIN 3 : 3( DIP OUTLET FROM cor r o1 S TRJLT vita, OISc.NARGE To SPRINc3Roo S CREEt"-, CS-V 0eAko, NCeq D SLhargcvv1k- E Mct\ T Open Channel Flow Module, Version 3 . 11 (c) Haestad Methods, Inc. * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708 i I Page 2 of 3 VARIABLE COMPUTED Elev. Pressure Elev. Pressure Discharge Diameter Length Hazen-W C @ 1 @ 1 @ 2I @ 2 gpm in ft ft psi ft 1 psi Unable to compute this instance. 8 .70 0 .00 8 .60 0 .00 16947. 17 36 . 00 44 . 00 130 . 00 8 .80 0 . 00 8 .60 0 .00 24640.72 36 . 00 44 . 00 130 . 00 8 .90 0 . 00 8 .60 0 .00 30672 . 04 36 . 00 44 . 00 130 . 00 9. 00 0 . 00 8 . 60 0 . 00 35826. 93 36 . 00 44 . 00 130 . 00 9 .10 0 . 00 8 . 60 0 . 00 40414 . 85 36 . 00 44 . 00 130 . 00 9.20 0 .00 8 . 60 0 . 00 44596.30 36 .00 44 . 00 130 . 00 9.30 0 .00 8 .60 0 . 00 48467.44 36 . 00 44 . 00 130 . 00 9 .40 0 . 00 8 .60 0 . 00 52091.37 36 .00 44 . 00 130 . 00 9.50 0 .00 8.60 0 . 00 55512.16 36 . 00 44 . 00 130 .00 9 .60 0.00 8 .60 0 . 00 58762 .08 36 .00 44 . 00 130 . 00 9 .70 0 .00 8 .60 0 . 00 61865. 60 36 . 00 44 .00 130 . 00 9.80 0 .00 8 .60 0 .00 64841. 80 36 . 00 44 . 00 130 . 00 9 .90 0 . 00 8 . 6,0 0 . 00 67705. 91 36 . 00 44 . 00 130 . 00 10.00 0 .00 8 .60 0 . 00 70470 .33 36 .00 44 .00 130 . 00 10 .10 0 . 00 8 .60 0 .00 73145 .31 36 . 00 44 . 00 130 .00 10 .20 0 .00 8 .60 0 . 00 75739 .42 36 .00 44 .00 130 . 00 10 .30 0 . 00 8 .60 0 .00 78259 . 96 36 . 00 44 . 00 130 . 00 1.0.40 0 . 00 8 . 60 0 . 00 80713 .16 36 . 00 44 . 00 130 .00 50 0 . 00 8 .60 0 . 00 83104 .42 36 .00 44 . 00 130 . 00 0.60 0 . 00 8.6'0 0 .00 85438 .45 36 . 00 44 . 00 130 . 00 10.70 0 .00 8 .60 0 . 00 87719 .39 36 . 00 44 . 00 130 . 00 10 .80 0 . 00 8 .60 0 . 00 89950 . 88 36 . 00 44 . 00 130 . 00 10. 90 0 . 00 8 . 60 0 .00 92136 . 18 36 .00 44 . 00 130 . 00 1 ! 11 . 00 0 . 00 8 .60 0 . 00 94278 .19 36 . 00 44 . 00 130 . 00 11. 10 0 . 00 8 .60 0 . 00 96379 .53 36 . 00 44 . 00 130 . 00 11.20 0 .00 8 .60 0 . 00 98442 .54 36 . 00 44 . 00 130 . 00 11.30 0 . 00 8 .60 0 . 00 100469 .36 36 . 00 44 . 00 130 . 00 11.40 0 .00 8 .60 0. 00 102461.93 36 .00 44 . 00 130 . 00 11.50 0 . 00 8 .60 0 . 00 104422 . 02 36 . 00 44 .00 130 . 00 11.60 0 .00 8 .60 0 .00 106351.26 36 .00 44 . 00 130 .00 11.70 0 . 00 8 .60 0. 00 108251.14 36 . 00 44 . 00 130 . 00 11.80 0 . 00 8 .60 0 . 00 110123 .03 36 . 00 44 . 00 130 . 00 11. 90 0 . 00 8 . 60 0 . 00 111968 .20 36 . 00 44 . 00 130 . 00 12 . 00 0 . 00 8 .60 0 . 00 113787.83 36 . 00 44 .00 130 . 00 - ' ' 12 .10 0 .00 8 .60 0 . 00 115582 . 99 36 . 00 44 . 00 130 . 00 12 .20 0 . 00 8 .60 0 . 00 117354 .71 36 . 00 44 . 00 130 . 00 12 .30 0 . 00 8 .60 0 . 00 119103 . 94 36 . 00 44 .00 130 . 00 12 .40 0 . 00 8 . 60 0 .00 120831.54 36 . 00 44 . 00 130 . 00 12 .50 0 . 00 8 .60 0 . 00 122538 . 36 36 . 00 44 .00 130 . 00 Open Channel Flow Module, Version 3 . 11 (c) Haestad Methods, iInc. * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708 Page 3 of 3 h 1. J• 'IABLE i COMPUTED l El:v. Pressure Elev. : Pressure Discharge Diameter Length Hazen-W @1 @1 @2 ' .@2 gpm in ft f• psir ft psi 1. 12 . : 0 0 . 00 8 . 60 0 . 00 124225. 16 36 . 00 44 .00 130 . 00 12 . 0 0 . 00 8 . 60 0 . 00 125892 . 68 36 . 00 44 . 00 130 . 0 12 . : 0 0 .00 8 .60 , 0 .00 127541.58 36 . 00 44 . 00 130: 0 1. 12 . '0 0 .00 8 . 60 ; 0 . 00 129172 . 52 , 36 . 00 44 .00 130 . 0 13 . 10 0 . 00 8 . 60 , 0 . 00 130786 .11. 36 . 00 44 . 00 130 . 00 13 . 0 0 . 0c 8 . 60 ' 0 . 00 132382 . 91 36 . 00 ' 44. 00 130 . 0 6 13 ._.0 0 . 0 8 .60 0 .00 133963 .48 36 . 00 44 . 00 130 . 00 13 . 0 0 . 00 8 .60 , 0. 00 135528 .31 36 . 00 44 . 0.0 130 . 0 6 13 . ' 0 0 . 00 8 .60 ' 0 . 00 137077. 90 . 36 . 00 44 . 00 130 . 0013 . ' 0 0 .0Q 8 . 60 0.00 138612 .71 36 . 00 44 .00 130.. 00 13 . : 0 0 .00 8 . 60 ' 0 . 00 140133 .18 36 . 00 44 .00 130 . 010 13 . '0 0 .00 8 .60 ' 0.00 141639 . 73 36 . 00 44 . 00 130 . 0 0 13 . :0 0 . 00 8 .60 , 0 .00 143132 .74 36 . 00 44 .00 130 . 00 13 . ' 0 0 . 00 8 . 60 0. 00 144612 . 61 36 . 00 44 .00 130 .010 14. 00 0 . 00 8 .60 , 0 . 00 146079 . 68 36 . 00 44 . 00 130 . 00 14. 0 0 .00 8 .60 1 0 .00 147534 .31 36 . 00 44 . 00 130 . 00 14 . : 0 0 . 00 8 .60 0 . 00 148976. 83 36 . 00 44 .00 130 .00 14 . 0 0 . 00 8 . 60 . 0. 00 150407 .54 36 . 00 44 .00 130 . 0 14. ' 0 0 . 0 8 . 60 0 . 00 151826 .75 36 . 00 44.00 130 . 00 I . '0 0 . 0 8 .60 0 . 00 153234 . 75 36 . 00 44 . 00 130 . 00 4 . ..0 0 . 00 8 . 60 0 .00 154631. 82 36 . 00 44 .00 130 . 00 14 . '0 0 . 00 8 . 60 0 . 00 156018 .21 36 . 00 44 . 00 130 .00 14 . :0 0 . 00 8 . 60 : 0 . 00 157394 . 19 36 . 00 44 .00 130 . 00 14 . '-0 0 . 00 8 .60 ' 0 .00 158760 . 00 36 . 00 44 . 00 130 . 00i 15 . 00 0 . 00 8 . 60 . 0 . 00 160115 . 87 36 . 00 44 . 00 130 . 00 15. 0 0 . 00 8 . 60 : 0 . 00 161462 . 02 36 . 00 44 .00 130 . 0I0 15 . '0 0 .00 8 .60 , 0 .00 162798 . 69 36 . 00 44 .00 130 . 00 15 . . 0 0 . 00 8 .60 ' 0 . 00 164126 . 07 36 . 00 44 . 00 130 . 0I0 15. ' 0 0 . 00 8 .60 : 0. 00 165444 .37 36 .00 44 . 00 130 . 0I0 15. '.0 0 . 00 8 .60 ; 0 .00 166753 . 78 36 . 00 44 .00 130 .00 15 . . 0 0 .00 8 .60 . 0 . 00 168054 .49 36 . 00 44 .00 130 .00 15. ' 0 0. 00 8 .69 : 0 . 00 169346 , 68 36 .00 44.00 130 . 00, 15 . :0 0 . 00 8 . 60i 0 .00 170630 . 53 36 . 00 44 .00 130 . 00 15. :0 0 . 00 8 . 60 0 . 00 171906 . 19 36 . 00 44 .00 130 .00 16 . 40 0 . 00 8 .60 0 . 00 173173 . 85 36 . 00 44 . 00 130 .00 16 . 0 0 . 0 8 .66 0 . 00 . 174433 . 65 36 . 00 44 . 00 130 . 00i Open Ch nnel Flow Module, Version 3 . 11 (c) Haestad Methods, Inc. * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708 9/10/98 10 :23 :31 am Sverdrup Civil Inc page 3 THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT POST-DEV BSN A,DELTA ROUTED TO SPRINGBRK LEVEL POOL TABLE SUMMARY MATCH INFLOW -STO- -DIS- <-PEAK-> OUTFLOW STORAGE DESCRIPTION cfs) (cfs) --id- --id- c-STAGE> id (cfs) VOL (cf) WQ, POST BASIN /i 0.00 0.22 DELTA PSTA 7.80 1 0.00 20911.71 cf 2YR, POST BASIN A 0.00 5.33 DELTA PSTA 8.71 2 5.29 97980.51 cf 5YR, POST BASIN A 0.00 7.33 DELTA PSTA 8.75 3 7.31 2 ac-ft 10YR, POST BASIN A 0.00 10.36 DELTA PSTA 8.81 4 10.32 2 ac-ft 25YR, POST BASIN A 0.00 13.73 DELTA PSTA 8.89 5 13.72 3 ac-ft 50YR, POST BASIN A 0.00 14.08 DELTA PSTA 8.89 6 14.05 3 ac-ft 100YR, POST BASIN A 0.00 18.13 DELTA PSTA 8.97 7 17.85 3 ac-ft I I t i II D File Input Hydrograph Storage Discharge LPool Proj : SWMP eeee"8&888888888888868888,68Routing Comparison Tableeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee 'eeeeee ; MATCH INFLOW STO DIS PEAK PEAK OUT iESCRIPTION PEAK! PEAK No.No. STG OUT HYD 0 WQ, •OST BASINB-3 0 . 00 0 .26 PONDC COMBO2 10 . 00 0 .26 1 2YR, POST BAST B-3 0 . 00 1 .26 PONDC COMBO2 11 . 31 0 .38 2 0 SYR, POST BASIN' B-3 0 . 00 1. 64 PONDC COMBO2 11.47 0 . 52 3 j 0 10YR, POST BASIN B-3 0 . 00 2 . 12 PONDC COMBO2 11 . 66 . 0 . 68 4 0 2YR, POST BASIN B-3 0 . 00 2 . 62 PONDC COMBO2 11. 88 0 . 87 5 0 50YR, POST BASIN B-3 0 . 00 2 . 67 PONDC COMBO2 11 . 90 0 . 90 6 0 1100Y- , POST BASIN B-3 0 . 00 3 . 13 PONDC COMBO2 12 . 10 1 . 04 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 Done< Press any key to exit', Aeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee=eeeeeef enu: Perform Level pool computations using input table instructions Pos- - OEvEL.0 P MEI Sv RFiNLE caper MAn)AGE MI-'J V PR,ySG'-T BASIN $3 ROv-U=O -Nat\VolA Pon 0 a` epat -rfw..w KrE tt — c1,15 ii 9/10/98 7 :24 :43 . am Sverdrup Civil Inc page THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT POST-DEV BASIN B-3, ' ROUTED THRU POND "C STAGE STORAGE TABLE CUSTOM STORAGE ID No. PONDC Description: POND "C" STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (,ft.) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- 11.00 0.0000 0.0000 11.80 5293 0.1215 12.60 11559 0.2654 13.40 18761 0.4307 11.10 629.19 0.0144 11.90 6009 0.1379 12.70 12424 0.2852 13.50 19697 0.4522 11.20 1258 0.0289 12.00 6724 0.1544 12.80 13288 0.3051 13.60 20707 0.4754 11.30 1888 0.0433 12.10 7518 0.1726 12.90 14152 0.3249 13.70 21716 0.4985 11.40 2517 0.0578 12.20 8313 0.1908 13.00 15017 0.3447 13.80 22725 0.5217 11.50 3146 0.0722 12.30 9107 0.2091 13.10 15953 0.3662 13.90 23735 0.5449 11.60 3862 0.0887 12.40 9901 0.2273 13.20 16889 0.3877 14.00 24744 0.5680 11.70 4577 0.1051 12.50 10695 0.2455 13.30 17825 0.4092 I II I I ' i I 9/10/98 7 :24 :43 , a•m Sverdrup Civil Inc page 2 THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT POST-DEV BASIN B-3, ROUTED THRU POND "C STAGE DISCHARGE TABLE COMBINATION DISCHARGE ID No. COMB02 Description: POND "C" COMBO STRUCTURE Structure: PONDC2 Structure: Structure: RISER Structure: Structure : I STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> ft) ---cfs ft) ---cfs ft) ---cfs ft) ---cfs I 10.00 0.0000 1080 0.2995 11.60 0.6469 12.40 1.2161 I 10.10 0.1059 10L90 0.3177 11.70 0.7101 12.50 1.2671 10.20 O.1I498 11.00 0.3349 11.80 0.7650 12.60 1.6236 10.30 0.1834 11.10 0.3512 11.90 0.8955 12:70 2.2332 10.40 0.2118 1120 0.3669 12.00 0.9747 12.75 2.6021 10.50 0.2368 11.30 0.3818 12.10 1.0431 10.60 0.2794 11.40 0.3963 12.20 1.1050 10.70 0.2802 11!50 0.5680 12.30 1.1623 I p page 3SverdruCivilInc9/10/98 7 :24 :43 am THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT POST-DEV BASIN B-3, ROUTED THRU POND "C STAGE DISCHARGE TABLE MULTIPLE ORIFICE ID No. PONDC2 Description: POND "C" DISCHARGE STRUCTURE Outlet Elev: 10 . 00 Elev: 8 .25 ft Orifice Diameter: 3 . 5130 in. Elev: 11.40 ft Orifice 2 Diameter: 4 . 2890 in. Elev: 11. 80 ftl Orifice 3 Diameter: 3 . 0700 in. STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> ft) ---cfs ft) ---cfs ft) ---cfs ft) ---cfs 10.00 0.0000 10.00 0.0000 10.00 0.0000 10.00 0.0000 i 1 I I 9/10/981 7 :24 :431am Sverdrup Civil Inc page 4 THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT POST-DEV BASIN B-3, ROUTED THRU POND "C STAGE DISCHARGE TABLE RISER DISCHARGE ID No. RISER Descripion: POND"C" RISER Riser Diameter (in) : 12 . 00 elev: 12 . 50 ft Weir Coefficient . .' . : 9 . 739 height : 12 . 75 ft Orif Coefficient . 3 . 782 increm: 0 . 10 ft STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> ft) cfis ft) ---cfs ft) ---cfs ft) ---cfs i I 12.50 0.01000 12.60 0.3080 12.75 1.2174 12.75 1.2174 12.50 0.0000 1200 0.8711 i I I j I 9/10/98 7 :24 :44. am Sverdrup Civil Inc page 5 THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT POST-DEV BASIN B-3, ROUTED THRU POND "C LEVEL POOL TABLE SUMMARY MATCH INFLOW -STO- -DIS- <-PEAK-> OUTFLOW STORAGE jl DESCRIPTION cfs) (cfs) --id- --id- <-STAGE> id (cfs) VOL (cf) WQ, POST BASIN B-3 0.00 0.26 PONDC COMB02 10.00 1 0.26 0.00 cf 2YR, POST BASIN B-3 0.00 1.26 PONDC COMB02 11.31 2 0.38 1946.03 cf 5YR, POST BASIN B-3 0.00 1.64 PONDC COMB02 11.47 3 0.52 2983.94 cf 10YR, POST BASIN B-3 0.00 2.12 PONDC COMB02 11.66 4 0.68 4281.20 cf 25YR, POST BASIN B-3 0.00 2.62 PONDC COMB02 11.88 5 0.87 5858.61 cf 50YR, POST BASIN B-3 0.00 2.67 PONDC COMB02 11.90 6 0.90 6007.94 cf 100YR,POST BASIN B-3 0.00 3.13 PONDC COMB02 12.10 7 1.04 7484.70 cf I I I D File Input Hydrograph Storage Discharge LPool Proj SWMP 5eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeRouting Comparison Tableeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee"eeeeeep MATCH. INFLOW STO DIS PEAK PEAK OUT DESCRIPTIOI PEAK PEAK No.No. STG OUT HYD o WQ, OST BASIN B 0 . 06 0 .44 4C 4C 7 .27 0 . 00 8 2YR, POST BASIN B 0 . 00 3.. 37 4C 4C 9 . 12 1 .59 9 0 SYR, POST BASIN B 0 . 00 4 .45 4C 4C 9 . 14 2 . 90 10 10YR POST BASIN B 0 . 00 5 . 87 4C 4C 9 .16 4 .52 11 i 2YR POST BASIN B 0 . 00 7 .48 4C 4C 9 .20 7 .48 12 0 50YR POST BASIN B 0 . 00 7 . 64 4C 4C 9 . 19 7 .63 13 0 100Y , POST BASIN B 0 . 06 9 . 05 4C 4C 9 .21 9 . 05 14 0 0 0 0 Done< Press any key to exit 0 Aeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeef 7,enu: Perform Level pool computations using input table instructions Sv fZFAce W AT E tL MAN)AGE M BN i PRo-SecT sINs e- , a-2 „A- 4^3 R.0V'TEfD 1-1+Ro V G1- i I Zae,'ee.E iRPte.t., To SpRiNIC, ocA, CREAK p_ SEAR "TP.‘c we‘-rea, = 61,15 I i1 9/10/98 10 :31 :26 am Sverdrup Civil Inc page 1 - THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT POST-DEV BASIN B, ROUTED TO SPRINGBROOK STAGE STORAGE TABLE i CUSTOM STORAGE ID No. 4C Description: POND4C STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf•--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- 6.00 0.0000 0.0000 8.30 25325 0.5814 10.60 63992 1.4691 12.90 150929 3.4649 6.10 952.40 0.0219 8.40 26627 0.6113 10.70 66270 1.5214 13.00 155909 3.5792 6.20 1905 0.0437 8.50 27929 0.6412 10.80 68549 1.5737 13.10 164079 3.7667 6.30 2857 0.0656 8.60 29231 0.6711 10.90 70827 1.6260 13.20 172248 3.9543 6.40 3810 0.0875 8.70 30533 0.7010 11.00 73105 1.6783 13.30 180418 4.1418 6.50 4762 0.1093 8.80 31836 0.7308 11.10 76405 1.7540 13.40 188588 4.3294 6.60 5714 0.1312 8.90 33138 0.7607 11.20 79706 1.8298 13.50 196758 4.5169 6.70 6667 0.1530 9.00 34440 0.7906 11.30 83006 1.9056 13.60 204927 4.7045 6.80 7619 0.1749 •9.10 36028 0.8271 11.40 86307 1.9813 13.70 213097 4.8920 6.90 8572 0.1968 99.20 37617 0.8636 11.50 89607 2.0571 13.80 221267 5.0796 1 7.00 9524 0.2186 9.30 39205 0.9000 11.60 92907 2.1329 13.90 229436 5.2671 7.10 10713 0.2459 19.40 40793 0.9365 11.70 96208 2.2086 14.00 237606 5.4547 7.20 11903 0.2733 19.50 42382 0.9729 11.80 99508 2.2844 14.10 252061 5.7865 7.30 13092 0.3006 9.60 43970 1.0094 11.90 102809 2.3602 14.20 266517 6.1184 7.40 14282 0.3279 9.70 45558 1.0459 12.00 106109 2.4359 14.30 280972 6.4502 7.50 15471 0.3552 9.80 47146 1.0823 12.10 111089 2.5503 14.40 295427 6.7821 7.60 16660 0.3825 9.90 48735 1.1188 12.20 116069 2.6646 14.50 309883 7.1139 7.70 17850 0.4098 10.00 50323 1.1553 12.30 121049 2.7789 14.60 324338 7.4458 7.80 19039 0.4371 10.10 52601 1.2076 12.40 126029 2.8932 14.70 338793 7.7776 7.90 20229 0.4644 10.20 54879 1.2599 12.50 131009 3.0076 14.80 353248 8.1095 8.00 21418 0.4917 10.30 57158 1.3122 12.60 135989 3.1219 14.90 367704 8.4413 8.10 22720 0.5216 10.40 59436 1.3645 12.70 140969 3.2362 8.20 24022 0.5515 10.50 61714 1.4168 12.80 145949 3.3505 1 ' I i I III 9/10/98 10 :31 :26 am Sverdrup Civil Inc page 2 THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATERMANAGEMENT PROJECT POST-DEV BASIN B, ROUTED TO SPRINGBROOK I STAGE DISCHARGE TABLE I CUSTOM DISCHARGE ID No. 4C Description: POND4C STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> ft) ---cfs ft) ---cfs ft) ---cfs ft) ---cfs 9.15 0.0000 10.95 136.53 12.75 198.59 14.55 247.32 9.25 16.126 11.05 140.61 12.85 201.57 14.65 249.75 9.35 32.251 111.15 144.44 12.95 204.55 14.75 252.18 9.45 48.377 11.25 148.27 13.05 207.44 14.85 254.61 9.55 59.910 11.35 152.09 13.15 210.25 14.95 257.04 9.65 66.850 11.45 155.92 13.25 213.06 15.05 259.43 9.75 73.790 111.55 159.56 13.35 215.87 15.15 261.77 9.85 80.730 11.65 163.03 13.45 218.68 15.25 264.11 9.95 87.670 11.75 166.49 13.55 221.41 15.35 266.45 10.05 93.726 11.85 169.95 13.65 224.08 15.45 268.79 10.15 98.898 111.95 173.42 13.75 226.74 15.55 271.09 10.25 104.07 121.05 176.75 13.85 229.40 15.65 273.34 10.35 1091.24 12.15 179.94 13.95 232.07 15.75 275.60 10.45 114.41 12,.25 183.14 14.05 234.67 15.85 277.86 10.55 119.17 12.35 186.34 14.15 237.21 15.95 280.11 10.65 123.51 12.45 189.53 14.25 239.75 16.05 281.24 10.75 127.85 12.55 192.62 14.35 242.29 10.85 132.19 12.65 195.60 14.45 244.83 i I Page 1 of 3 Pressure Pipe Analysis & Design Circular Pipe i Worksheet Name: Practice Track Description: Practice Track Outlet I Solve For Discharge ' Given Constant Data; Pressure @ , 1 0 . 00 Elevation @ 2 9 .15 — 2'((t TA11-`^'aMER At SPRI.JG 8RootS (REEY Pressure @11 0 . 00 Discharge 0 . 00 Diameter 36 . 00 Length 45 . 00 Hazen-Williams C 100 . 0000 Variable Input Data Minimum Maximum Increment By Elevation @ 1 9 . 00 16 . 00 0 . 10 i e•1:61n' 6 :i Q15C. ARGC 1203CTiNG CvRVE CAL Cvi.ATIONS .o(Z. Sue- 8PrSiN5 el.\ B-2 a 4,- 6-3 "t'H Rov6H J f lutc 11 C E "C.Prc.`f, 'To SPruwg, 642.01*- cAaeY, 1 I eJC ,.0 P ME 0-1.S u RFAL.v. 1,.wtg?ER MP J 4GENtENT pos-c - 9 PnoZEL Open Channel Flow Module, Version 3 . 11 (c) Haestad Methods, Inc. * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708 1 Page 2 of 3 I V IABLE COMPUTED Elev. Pressure Elev. Pressure Discharge Diameter Length Hazen-W C @ 1 @ 1 @ 2@ 2 gpm in ft f1 psi ft psi 9 .0 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 -16031 .45 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 9.10 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 -8857 . 83 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 9 .20 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 8857 . 83 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 9 . 0 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 16031 .45 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 19 .40 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 21123 . 76 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 9 .50 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 25332 . 63 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 9 . 60 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 29014 . 71 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 9 .70 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 32335 .48 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00, 9 . q0 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 35388 . 06 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 19 . 0 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 38231 . 08 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 10 . c0 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 40904 .37 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 10 .10 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 43436 .44 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 10 .20 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 45848 . 56 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 10 .30 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 48157.10 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 10 . 0 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 50374 . 98 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 10 .50 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 52512 . 63 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 10 . 0 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 54578 .58 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 10 . 70 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 56579 . 96 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 001 0 .80 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 58522 . 77 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 0 . 90 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 60412 . 12 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 11 . Q0 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 62252 .42 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 11 . 10 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 64047 . 50 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 11. 0 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 65800 . 71 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 11. 0 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 67515 . 00 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00, 11 . 0 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 69192 . 99 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 001 11 . 50 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 70837. 00 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 11 . 60 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 72449 . 13 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 11 . '0 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 74031. 27 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 11 . 80 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 75585 . 12 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 11 . 0 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 77112 . 21 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 12 . 0 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 78613 . 97 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 12 . 10 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 80091 . 68 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 12 .20 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 81546 .52 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 12 . 0 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 82979 . 58 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 12 .40 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 84391. 85 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 12 . 0 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 85784 .28 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 12 . g0 0 . 09 9 . 15 0 . 00 87157 . 71 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 12 . I0 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 88512 . 95 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 12 . 10 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 89850 . 74 36 .00 45 . 00 100 . 00 12 . '0 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 91171 . 77 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 I i Open Channel Flow Module, Version 3 . 11 (c) Haestad1Methods, Inc. * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708 I i Page 3 of 3 VARIABLE i COMPUTED Elev. Pressure Elev. Pressure Discharge Diameter Length Hazen-W C @ 1 @ 1 @ 2 @ 2 gpm in ft ft psi ft 1 psi I 13 . 00 0 . 00 9.15 0 . 00 92476 . 70 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 13 . 10 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 93766 . 12 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 13 .20 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 95040 . 61 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 13 .30 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 96300 .71 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 13 .40 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 97546 . 92 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 13 .50 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 98779 . 70 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 13 . 60 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 99999 .52 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 13 . 70 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 101206 .79 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 13 . 80 0 .00 9.15 0 . 00 102401. 92 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 13 . 90 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 103585 .29 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 14 . 00 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 104757 .24 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 .00 14 .10 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 105918 .13 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 14 .20 0 . 00 9.15 0 . 00 107068 .29 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 14 .30 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 108208 . 01 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 14 .40 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 109337. 60 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 14 . 50 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 110457.33 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 i 14 .60 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 111567 .48 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 1 14 .70 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 112668 .30 36 . 00 45. 00 100 . 00 4 . 80 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 113760 . 03 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 .,00 4 . 90 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 114842 . 90 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 15. 00 0 . 00 9.15 0 . 00 115917 .15 36 . 00 45 . 00 .100 . 00 15 . 10 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 116982 . 98 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 15 .20 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 118040 . 60 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 15 .30 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 119090 .22 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 15 .40 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 120132 . 01 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 15 . 50 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 121166 . 16 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 I 15 . 60 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 122192 . 84 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 15 . 70 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 123212 .23 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 15 . 80 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 124224 .49 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 i 15 . 90 0 . 00 9 . 15 0 . 00 125229 .76 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 16 . 00 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 126228 .21 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 16 .10 0 . 00 9 .15 0 . 00 127219 . 98 36 . 00 45 . 00 100 . 00 I Open Channel Flew Module, Version 3 . 11 (c) Haestad Methods, Inc. * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708 1 ' 9/10/98 10 :31 :27 am Sverdrup Civil Inc page 3 THE BOEING COMPANY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT POST-DEV BASIN B, ROUTED TO SPRINGBROOK I I LEVEL POOL TABLE SUMMARY MATCH INFLOW -STO- -DIS- <-PEAK-> OUTFLOW STORAGE DESC'RIPTION cfs) (cfs) --id- --id- c-STAGE> id (cfs) VOL (cf) WQ, POST BASIN B 0.00 0.44 4C 4C 7.27 8 0.00 12709.85 cf 2YR, POST BASIN B 0.00 3.37 4C 4C 9.12 9 1.59 36340.61 cf 5YR, POST BASIN B 0.00 4.45 4C 4C 9.14 10 2.90 36600.22 cf 10YR, POST BIASIN B 0.00 5.87 4C 4C 9.16 11 4.52 36919.35 cf 25YR, POST BASIN B 0.00 7.48 4C 4C 9.20 12 7.48 37559.19 cf 50YR, POST BASIN B 0.00 7.64 4C 4C 9.19 13 7.63 37531.40 cf 100YR,POST BFSIN B 0.00 9.05 4C 4C 9.21 14 9.05 37713.42 cf I j I I I it APPENDIX E Surface Water Management Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 014002\2220\wp\dmrpt01.doc Appendix E September 1998 i j I I APPENDIX E WATER QUALITY EVALUATIONS This appendix contains information related to water quality at both the Longacres Office Park Site and the CSTC Site. Information included consists of: I i Site Map of Water Quality Collection Points,Figure E.1 Laboratory Analysis of Springbrook Creek Water Laboratory Analysis of Site#3 Water Laboratory Analysis of North Infield Creek Water Laboratory Analysis of South Marsh Outlet Water I I I i I Surface Water Management Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 014002\2220\wp\dmrpt01.doc Appendix E-1 September 1998 I I s-.,` IAP .: \SCALE: NONE SPRINGBROOK CREEK PROJECT SI E j . • on% ; ,,,-- / 1 i 7---'7z'' -N cli>--1 tr/ q O ilw.r. 4 CO IRA r — 1 1.dn La n Z. J. f . C'3 O 3iiti E1 d ill1 (47---- ‘-' ''l d Her + I P+e i S ti'MARSH Zr 0)m BASIN 4 1. '.:- WETLANDS O p7ca lat:. `BASIN 3 I co i co y r `. .o fy F If , r I. ji III i BASIN 6 SW i stn sT 1tikZJaOMB'-., ' OW I ill/ I il Il I ter^^ rt, r t 1\ 10pnail • ":), ' =--------:---" -----3-- ...--, 4"" t 1 •11.AT j fir IC-)r BNRR UPRR r - ji t , o i ). 'i Y- „.,>c,0 ril i , - 1 . r ... r 12 : 'l 2 w.._- -_,j). H WAY s Z_Lej 1 L, i WEST VAl1 a GREEN RIVER t ii. , 7e. t I..rd z. w w r Alm . w r s ACCEPGtJw at7A i o i.r,=11.4117P.` n WATER QUALITY MONITORING $ MAW AVMLAWN:YAW r SURFACE PROECTMANAGEMENT FIG. E. I O1.OQ2URN( CM) 000wc LOMCAaRES UnCE PARK Longacres Park On-Site Water Quality Monitoring Laboratory-Analysis--and-Meld Testing Report Springbrook Creek March 31, 1992 Field Data Lab Analysis Stage Gage Air Temp Water C.Cond. Date Time Reading*C) Temp(•C) pH DO(mg/1) (umhoa/cm) TOC(mg/1) TSS(mg/1) Comments 06/18/91 N/A N/A 18 15.0 6.97 2.80 350- 8.5 10 06/24/91 16:00 3.86 29 17.9 7.10 2.68 335 7.5 13 07/01/91 11:15 3.85 24 19.0 7.16 2.28 374 8.2 18 07/08/91 11:10 3.77 24 16.5 7.49 3.59 319 6.5 13 07/15/91 10:00 3.79 15 16.2 6.63 3.52 364 5.4 14 07/23/91 11:05 3.77 22 16.9 7.26 2.97 343 7.4 15 07/29/91 15:00 3.76 25 20.1 7.26 3.25 389 7.9 11 08/05/91 14:10 3.71 24 19.3 7.00 1.68 - 404 - 8:5 08/12/91 14:30 3.81 26 19.7 7.25 4.26 61 13.0 11 08/19/91 10:00 3.81 23 18.2 7.45 2.70 57 7.8 12 08/26/91 10:35 3.87 17 14.5 7.14 4.25 271 7.2 7 09/02/91 10:30 3.81 22 18.2 7.32 5.42 212 7.2 7 09/10/91 13:30 3.91 23 15.6 7.14 5.48 290 5.3 8 09/16/91 10:20 4.06 23 13.4 7.19 4.90 322 6.5 9 09/23/91 11:30 4.51 22 14.6 7.16 5.44 3 5.2 4 Suspect C.Cond. 09/30/91 10:00 4.56 20 17.8 6.28 5.20 345 4.7 9 10/07/91 10:20 4.55 15 12.7 7.02 5.76 316 3.7 8 37 days no rain 10/15/91 08:40 4.51 13 11.1 6.93 5.05 344 4.6 8 10/21/91 17:20 4.41 10 12.5 7.06 4.42. 347 5.8 6 10/28/91 10:30 4.32 7 8.4 7.25 4.21 272 6.2 11 11/04/91 13:25 4.96 7 8.9 6.99 6.98 159 5.4 18 11/11/91 13:15 5.31 12 11.9 6.68 8.40 129 6.3 42 first flush rain 11/18/91 10:30 4.81 7 9.4 6.69 6.75 156 15.0 9 11/25/91 12:30 4.71 8 10.5 7.20 6.51 134 5.1 14 12/02/91 10:40 3.96 6 8.3 7.18 5.14 287 10.0 15 12/09/91 10:25 4.62 10 8.8 6.75 7.56 139 5.8 28 12/16/91 10:05 3.92 0 4.9 7.07 4.84 307 8.0 19 12/22/91 10:00 4.13 S 7.0 7.10 6.52 230 6.0 8 12/30/91 11:45 4.36 10 8.7 7.12 6.75 272 5.6 17 01/06/92 N/A 4.07 N/A 5.8 7.39 7.51 287 6.7 10 01/14/92 11:40 3.89 7 7.7 7.65 5.14 335 7.9 10 01/20/92 10:20 3.96 4 5.0 7.29 5.91 315 7.0 23 01/27/92 12:00 5.41 9 8.1 7.01 6.98 177 6.7 35 02/02/92 14:30 6.59 10 8.3 6.75 7.32 139 7.5 50 02/10/92 12:00 4.26 9 8.9 6.80 6.00 300 7.9 13 DO&Cond from lab 02/17/92 09:30 4.19 6 8.0 7.24 9.09 346 78.0 19 02/24/92 11:05 4.55 8 9.2 7.41 6.24 176 7.4 8 03/02/92 1-1:40 4.09 10 9.8 7.51 N/A 327 7.1 18 bad DO reading 03/09/92 12:25 4.01 13 10.3 8.01 5.18 332 6.9 13 03/16/92 10:30 4.25 10 9.6 6.78 6.18 234 Springbrook Creek water surface elevation-Stage Gage Reading+0.71 feet Longacres Park On-Site Water Quality Monitoring Laboratory Analysis and Field Testing Report Site #3 March 31, 1992 Field Data Lab Analysis if Samples Stage Gage Air Temp Water Temp C.Cond. ` Compositcd Date Time Reading C) C) pH DO(mg/I) (umhoa/cm) TOC(mg/1) TSS(mg/1) Comments 1 06/18/91 10:50 N/A 18 15.9 6.94 0.55 613 20.0 240 init.baseline,no rain 06/24/91 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 07/01/91 11:50 N/A 24 20.3 7.31 0.58 542 07/08/91 10:45 N/A 24 17.6 7.62 1.33 448 07/15/91 10:45 6.33 15 16.9 7.04 0.83 467 07/23/91 11:05 6.29 22 18.4 7.23 1.60 468 30.0 1300 Very high TSS 1-- - 07/29/91-- ----15:20---- -- 6.25----- ----25 ---21.8_ _ _--7.62__ -----3.13-- - --- -456 08/05/91 14:30 6.25 24 21.2 7.49 0.87 522 1 08/12/91 14:50 6.25 28 20.4 7.70 1.97 74 30.0 32 08/19/91 10:25 6.21 24 19.5 7.74 1.69 70 08/26/91 11:05 6.29 17 15.0 7.38 1.53 326 29.0 100 09/02/91 11:15 6.29 22 18.5 7.89 1.40 332 18.0 84 09/10/91 14:05 6.33 23 16.2 7.64 0.82 489 09/16/91 11:10 6.42 23 13.5 7.30 1.36 327 09/23/91 12:10 6.33 22 14.0 7.23 0.08 13 Suspect C.Cond. 09/30/91 12:45 6 20 18.8 6.43 3.00 392 10/07/91 N/A 6.00 15 10.9 7.45 3.23 358 37 days no rain 10/15/91 09:30 5.92 15 18.4 7.21 2.91 397 1 10/21/91 16:30 5.67 10 11.8 6.81 4.12 342 24.0 20 2 10/28/91 11:15 5.67 7 6.6 7.14 1.08 268 20.0 40 11/04/91 12:50 6.58 7 9.3 6.82 7.05 195 4 11/11/91 13:55 7.10 12 12.8 7.01 10.06 98 10.0 110 first flush rain 11/18/91 11:10 6.42 7 8.7 7.12 6.51 171 11.0 230 2 11/25/91 13:00 6.42 8 10.2 7.21 5.57 185 11.0 95 2 12/02/91 11:25 6.42 6 7.3 7.27 2.77 312 9.6 68 Heavy sedimentation 9 12/09/91 11:10 6.85 10 , 8.6 7.27 8.61 149 12.0 50 12/16/91 11:00 6.42 0 4.4 7.15 1.62 565 21.0 110 12/22/91 11:00 6.50 5 6.9 7.11 3.85 542 23.0 60 12/30/91 12:30 6.50 10 7.8 7.58 8.79 211 7.4 150 01/06/92 N/A 6.42 N/A 5.3 7.64 4.68 649 01/14/92 12:20 6.42 7 8.3 7.49 2.80 552 01/20/92 10:50 6.42 4 4.1 7.61 3.35 556 2 01/27/92 12:40 7.20 9 8.1 7.42 - 8.53 108 18.0 120 2 02/02/92 15:15 7.04 10 8.6 6.80 7.99 173 25.0 3600 very high TSS 4 02/10/92 12:30 6.67 9 9.8 7.00 1.50 830 26.0 41 DO It Cond from lab 02/17/92 10:15 6.60 6 8.3 7.17 4.20 779 4 02/24/92 11:50 6.68 8 9.8 732 4.58 392 28.0 200 03/02/92 12:20 6.50 10 11.5 731 N/A 673 Bad DO reading 03/09/92 13:10 630 13 11.4 7.70 2.08 650 4 03/16/92 11:15 6.30 10 9.7 7.27 3.52 463 Lab analyses N/A Longacres Park On-Site Water Quality Monitoring Laboratory-Analysis North Infield Creek At Abandoned Pumphouse March 31, 1992 Date Time TOC(mg/1) TSS(mg/1) Comments N A Very ow ow 1-1/04/91 12:30 13-.0 49 11/11/91 14:50 13.0 120 first flush rain 11/18/91 11:40 8.0 73 Longacres Park On-Site Water Quality Monitoring Laboratory Analysisysis South Marsh Outlet (Site #6) Date Time TOC(mg/1) TSS(mg/1) I Comments 11/11/91 08:30 14.0 9 first flush rain 11/18/91 12:15 14.0 15 11/25/91 17:00 20 4 Longacres Park On-Site Water Quality Monitoring Storm Event Monitoring Laboratory and Meld Testing Report March 31,1992 Field Data Air Temp Water Temp C.Cond. Site Date Time Gage Elev. (•C) C) pH DO(mg/I) (umhos/cm) Comments Springbrook 12/05/91 14:50 6.10 9 9.7 7.35 8.9 124 Storm event 1 North Infield Creek 12/05/91 15:40 9 10.1 7.06 9.8 47 Storm event 1 South Marsh Inlet 12/05/91 16:25 12.03 9 9.1 6.44 6.3 44 Storm event 1 Site ff7) Springbrook 01/29/92 12:40 6.65 10 10.0 6.90 8.7 84 Storm event 2 North Infield Creek 01/29/92 13:10 10 10.0 6.60 9.6 71 Storm event 2 South Marsh Inlet 01/29/92 13:30 12.09 10 10.5 6.60 5.1 85 Storm event 2 Site N7) Lab Analysis Biochemical Chemical Nitrate T-Org Total Total Oil Total Total Total Oxygen Oxygen +Nitrite Halogens ICeldahl &Grease Organic Phosphate Suspended Demand Demand as N (SW 9020) Nitrogen (413.1) Carbon as P Solids Site Date Time' (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/I) (mg/1) N(mg/1) (mg/I) (mg/I) (mg/1) (mg/I) Comments Springbrook 12/05/91 14:50 10 12 0.15 0.02 0.53 5 5.6 0.33 87 Storm event 1 North Infield Creek 12/05/91 15:40 10 20 0.22 0.11 0.65 5 12 0.38 92 Storm event 1 South Marsh Inlet 12/05/91 16:25 10 16 0.03 0.02 0.50 5 11 0.17 4 Storm event 1 Site//7) Springbrook 01/29/92 13:10 10 24 0.78 0.02 0.66 9 4.8 0.18 67 Storm event 2 North Infield Creek 01/29/92 12:40 10 31 0.31 0.02 0.88 5 7.7 0.26 100 Storm event 2 South Marsh Inlet 01/29/92 13:45 10 34 0.11 0.02 0.71 8 8.8 0.16 3 Storm event 2 Site#7) I ' APPENDIX F I I I I I I I Surface Water Management Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, ino. 014002\2220\wp\dmrpt01.doc Appendix F September 1998 APPEN D IX F WATER QUALITY DESIGN This appendix contains calculations completed for design of the project water quality wetpond located south If the enlarged CSTC pond. I Surface Wa er Management Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, leo. 014002\222 \wp\drnrpt0l.doc Appendix F-1 September 1998 Sverdrup JOB NUMBER BY THE BOEING COMPANY SHEET 014002 KJB SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT 1 DATE CHECKED STORM DRAINAGE DESIGN OF 09/02/98 JJS WETPOND SIZING SCOPE Determine the size including surface area and volume requirements for a wetpon., constructed to replace Pond `B". REFS NCES City of Renton Building Regulation, Chapter 22 "Storm and Surface Water Drainage" King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM) Waterworks, Basin Summary City of Renton Planning, Building, Public Works Memorandum from Scott Woodbury dated May 28, 1997 (review of Boeing 25-20 Building Drainage Report.) Area Weighted Runoff Coefficient for Drainanage Basin 4, Subbasin 4-5 ASSUMPTIONS Pond "B" will be fille in and all stormwater flowing to Pond "B" will be re-directed to a new wetpond(Pond"D"). Assume all treatment will be provided for in a single cell pond, similar to the CSTC project. Buildin roof areas will not be included in the wetpond sizing calculations, similar to th CSTC roject. It is also assumed that runoff from building roofs does not require wate quality treatment. Biofiltration is not required if the treatment facility has twice the volume and surface are required by the KCSWDM per Scott Woodbury's review comment #1 in City of Rento Memo, dated May 28, 1997. PROCEDURE This pr ject will not create more than 1 acre of new impervious surface subject to vehicular use; ho ever, Pond "D" will be constructed to replace Pond `B" which currently has mo than 1 acre of impervious surface area routed through it. Therefore, per Special Requirement 5 of the KCSWDM, this project must provide Special Water Quality Controls. 1. Determine Required Wetpond Surface Area: r Per KCSWDM page .3.5-1, the required design water surface area shall be 1% of the imperv.lous surface area in the drainage subbasin contributing to the facility: SA = 0.01*Aimp 014002\2220\engr\kbca1cl121.doc Sverdrup JOB NUMBER BY 1 THE BOEING COMPANY SHEET 014002 KJB SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT 2 DATE CHECKED I STORM DRAINAGE DESIGN OF 09/02/98 JJS WETPOND SIZING where, SA = surface area required Aimp = impervious contributing area Aimp = 382,171 ft2 (see attached basin summary), includes building roof Building roof area= 67,900 ft2 (see Area Weighted Runoff Coefficient for Drainanage Basin 4, Subbasin 4-5), deduct from total imperviuos area: Aimp = 382,171 ft2 - 67,900 ft2 Aimp = 314,271 ft2 therefore, SA = 0.01*314,271 SA = 3,143 ft2 This surface area musi be multiplied by 2 since no biofiltration is being provided. SA= 3143*2 SA= 6,286 ft2, (Pond"D"provides 68,800 ft2) 2. Determine Required Wetpond Volume: Per KCSWDM page ;1.3.5-1, the required design volume shall be a minimum of the total volume of runoff from the tributary subbasin proposed development conditions using a water quality design storm event (P2/3). The volume of the water quality storm is: P2/3 storm volume= 16,180 ft3 (see attached basin summary) Volume must be multiplied by 2 since no biofiltration is being provided(per Scott Woodbury, City of Renton). i Volume= 16,180*2 Volume= 32,360 ft3 (261,806 ft3 provided) 014002\2220\engr\kbcalcl2.doc 1/30/98 8 :5 :10 am;Sverdrup Civil Inc pag 3 BCAG HEADQUARTERS BUILDING 25-20 POST-DE LOPMENT BUILDING 25-20 BASIN B SUB-BASIN B2520 BASIN SUMMARY BASIN I : B4SB-25 . NAME: BSN 4, SUB-B2520, POST, 25YR SBUH ME'$'HODOLOGY TOTAL EA 11. 03 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERV IMP PRECIPIZATION i 3 .40 inches AREA. . : 2 . 26 Acres . 8 . 77 Acres TIME IN_ERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 00 98 . 00 TC 13 . 00 min 13 . 00 min I ABSTRAC ION COEFF: : 0 . 20 PEAK RA E: 7 . 96 cfs VOL: 2 . 76 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN I : B4SB-5 NAME: BSN 4, SUB-B2520, POST, 5YR SBUH ME HODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 11. 03 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERV IMP PRECIPI' 'ATION 2 .40 inches AREA. . : 2 . 26 Acres 8 . 77 Acres TIME INTERVAL. . . . 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 00 98 . 00 TC 13 . 00 min 13 . 00: min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 PEAK RA E: 5 .40 cfs VOL: 1. 86 Ac-ft ' TIME: 480 min BASIN I : B4SB-50 NAME: BSN 4, SUB-B2520, POST, 50YR SBUH M#HODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 1 11. 03 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE USER1 PERV IMP PRECIPI ATION 3 .45 inches AREA. . : 2 .26 Acres 8 . 77 Acres TIME IN ERVAL. . . . • 10 . 00 min CN 90 . 00 98: 00 TC 13 . 00 min 13 . 06 min ABSTRAC ION COEFF: ' 0 .20 PEAK RA E: 8 . 09 cfs. VOL: 2 . 80 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: B4SB-WQ• P-40 NAME: BSN 4, SUB-B2520, POST, WQ SBUH METHODOLOG?' ' t, 2, TOTAL AEA 11 . 03 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs i RAINFALl TYPE USER1 PERV IMP PRECIPI ATION 0 .67 inches AREA. . : 2 . 26 Acres 8 . 7,7 Acres TIME IN ERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • • 90 . 00 98 . 00 TC 13 . 00 min 13 . 00, min ABSTRAC ION COEFF: 0 . 20 PEAK E: 1. 05 cfs VOL: 37 Ac-ft) TIME: 480 min I Ii Surface Water Management Project I Pond "D" Elevation Area(ft2) Area(acres) Volume (ft3) 2 22,607 0.52 3 28,620 0.66 4 35,091 0.81 31,856 5 41,932 0.96 70,367 6 49,053 1.13 115,860 7 56,357 1.29 168,565 8 63,817 1.47 228,651 8.5 68,801 1.58 261,806 9 73,785 1.69 297,453 10 84,007 1.93 376,349 11 94,124 2.16 465,414 12 104,446 2.40 564,699 13 114,974 2.64 674,409 14 137,071 3.15 800,432 I ' i- I I i i I I I I I I 014002\2220\engr\pond-vol.xls[Pond"D"] Sverdrup Civil, Inc. CITY OF RENTON PLANNINGBUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS MEMORANDUM DATE:May 28, 1997 TO: Clint Morgan FROM: Scott Woodbury5O SUBJECT:Review of Boeing 25-20 Building Plans and Drainage Report Storm Drainage Report 1. Since no biofiltration swale is being provided, the wetpond volume and surface area must be oversized by a factor of 2 to compensate. 2. The total areas for basins 3/4 and AB for the baseline,post-CSTC,and post-25-20 development scenarios are not equal as I would expect. Based on my calculations, the total areas for these scenarios(from the report are as follows:tr- Pre-CSTC(baseline)= 159.26 acres Post-CSTC= 164.64 acres Post 25-201= 161.28 acres. The discrepancy needs to be addressed. 3. Please document in the report how was the discharge in the rating curve for the main track and practice track(Basin B)release rates were determined. In routing flows from Basin 4/B through the practice track, the rating curve for the release rate from-the practice track into Springbrook Creek should assume a 2-year current condition tailwater in Springbrook Creek of•9.0 feet NGVD). Therefore, there would be no outflow below elevation 9 and the release rates above elevation 9 would be based on outlet control conditions for the 36" outlet from the practice track. The stage-storage should assume no available storage below the elevation 9. f,4. The report was not consistent in labeling the three development scenarios and basin areas baseline post-CSTC, post-25-20). The terms pre-development and post-development were P used many times without qualifying which pre- and post-development case was meant. I think it would be helpful for the consultant to do a thorough review of the entire report to ensure consistency and clarity in these areas. Ji 5. Please include a brief explanation in the report of how the total release rates from Basin 4/B listed in Table D.1 were determined (i.e., for the pre-25-20 cases, the output hydrograph from routing Basins B 1 &B4 through main track were added to hydrographs from Basins B2 and B3. The combined hydrographs were then routed through the practice track to determine the total release rate for Basin B)., 6. Other comments are alsoI noted within the text of the report. i I I The Boeing Company Surface Water Management Project(SWMP) Area Weighted Runoff Coefficient Pre-Development SWMP Drainage Basin B South Main Track Basin) Sub-Basin 4-5 Soil Hydrologic Curve Land Use Area Weight • Weighted Group Group Number Description st7 Curve Number Ur D 1 98 Building Roofs 67,900 14%13.84 Ur D 98 Pavements 314,271 65%64.07 Ur D 1 90 Landscaping(good) 98,495 20%18.44 TOTALS 1 480,666 100% 96.36 Notes: 1. Soil groups estimated from Soil Survey of King County Area, Washington,Des Moines Quadrangle 1973 2. Hydrologic groups determined from King County Surface Water Design Manual, Figure 3.5.2A 3. Curve Numbers determined from King County Surface Water Design Manual,Table 3.5.2B Impervious area(curve number>=98) 8.77 Acres Impervious area curve number 98.00 Pervious area(curve number<98) 2.26 Acres Pervious area curve number 90.00 Basin Composite Curve Number 96.36 Basin Total Area 11.03 Acres 1 I I 013747/2210/engr/-Kbcalcl6.xls[Pre-Basin 4-5] 9/10/98 Sverdrup Civil,Inc. APPENDIX G Surface Water Management Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Mo. 014002\2220\wp\dmrpt0l.doc Appendix G September 1998 APPEN IX G CONVEYANCE SYSTEM DESIGN This appendix contain calculations detailing the design of the project conveyance systems. This information is not required for the Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan, but will be provided in the final drainage report. Surface Water Management Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 014002\2220\wp\dmrpt0l.doc Appendix G-1 September 1998 APPENDIX H I I i l I 1 Surface Water Management Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 014002\2220\wp\drnrpt0l.doc J Appendix H September 1998 I I APPE IX H GROUNDWATER INFORMATION This appendix contains information related to the Longacres Office Park groundwater conditions. This information was produced by GeoEngineers, Inc., and is taken from Report, Geotechnical Engineering and Hydrogeological Services, CSTC Pond Expansion Boeing LongacreIs Park, Renton,; Washington, dated April 23, 1998. Information included consists of: 1V{onitor Well Location Site Plan, 1998, Figure H.1 Cross Section of Site, 1998, Figure H.2 Monitor Well Water Level Measurements, 1998,tabulated information Additional information related to the CSTC Main Pond was produced by GeoEngineers, Inc., anci reported in Geotechnical Consultation Potential Lake Impacts, Boeing Longacres Park, Renton, Washington for Boeing Support Services, dated December 9, 1991. i I Surface Water Management Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 014002\2220\wp\drnrpt01.doc Appendix H-1 September 1998 11 fto JLr s ; F'q 49,. Alk.<' E CED 54,31 Fi`•`` :E NWiif DIVERSE (REPL4 E ENT) 89,55 F L: ', OFEN WATER (RE?LA E ENT) \ 65,41 — F r n3_ A.°i. , ,<.:,,N;• •1•:' ••• ,s 1 M NT AREA = 154,97 F 1 / I/• AWc•-Or:. `'``' \.`;; ;< „_ 1 TOTAL MEASURED W TL ND AREAEe.::'• it jam//!.- •c1. 'i. : a\.'.YS:a:',.a•\\\it.;.>w i•\\ \\\'.` LI, i t.r ,'? ems.„z\•4\\'a C‘I/,_ • I"...sit 4u,..%,,,s,.5-4.;,,k.m ..)::. ,.T :ii.. ,,,,•:;,.*.-iii,-,ik-k•,...,,,,,.., il. I iII: i. T tY', v o l\\ $::xis:\ 4 \\:..\\ i, 1. +\ \h \` ::\\ \`\i:.\,. a; I I' '' MW 25 • \, .,\`, `' '' \ `,; , , B— 5 .,i( k\'' • ` '' s•\\ •'''' •" ." t. '\'''s'`...•• y R MW-2:C:11..:7 j MW-38 , `:\\\ • \\ ,.'A t iMW-39 A• , \ ems 7,,,-.7r.•,e„..seeedt.,--'--••---'—• ri7-......„ 44• 1 1 fig`\ i, i h .. O Q MW-23 \ .,c'^.w` i,„.1v.\- 7.,,$.;-•;„. 7....:.\i, r i•,` '..,; t e 1 rF ss,. .. y-• l'! ti.;a'oa\ 1 4.:,:'i'r •.t";•.::•_ k, -y. ,'?t r 1, tf L: e„\,,.:,- f. Fvn• s:• ;s r ri L• T ) T t I t..•.1. a,\'?';i..:.,::;rll\ tq i:•,,?iYrltry(i•,'Y:-V,,V a,r" sat-` L•- r' p'• la/''L •,!' .. • , !bcMW 20 O ;:.:.,t •\ft,.:,,,. ., MW-41 Y : t rS a._t' I 9. J'. !'•'r; f:^i•,....,,:;:-.- i' i J fir:'a1,:,l.,'t•:,\. L° ttl - f •• M — Q /14 / l', 6 a is s?.:,:.- ' c' ,a::;: rI • :\., •h!• r' r.. J f. i•.. r!t . 1. I-: ie.. '. y..•,;< ` . : 1 MW r,`F a.: ? MW 45 '`v s r I .r l ui r.%% :'s.C••,z: 1\`a \,\\ r:: ejam , t :y}y• -.,\w: 36 4,4• s 'tl t. r';,i•1i' ..- i• o.5rr ,1:`:.. d Ar.'s^- e .e .a.. • r • t,'. l\ \a _.?. t:i•' -1% .\\,.,• \. v::•,• :'•;,• \ \ 'D \\ l. .,• 1`:,:.o-..'^ r+'S+ •V 9- r W-44 MW-37 ` i 1` I i /:: "secs>. v•. k a o a t• yr'=•'T'.----' M r" mot.•l I0c 1 l ice`, v\\\, `:` i'n,,,. v. r 1 M \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ i i . 7`' ham t ~" r>,.,.. may'__is T-, — ._ 2....._ 7.,..„. i31 co rn \11... I•' r . Alli o- f- gh=,) — K -M Nl DEI1 I 1 I • 1 J I I I I I ,I ,I o EXPLANATION: I N MW-38 • MONITORING WELL (1998) o M A - 0—MONITORING—WELL-t1S9T) iE' 7 Z B-35---BORING (1991) 0 150 300 Al IA' SOIL PROFILE SCALE IN FEET 1 SITE PLAN 1 z Note: The locations of all features shown are approximate. 4,Geo Engineers FIGURE H•o Reference: Plan entitled "Preliminary Wetlands. Area, Longacres Office Park" by Bruce Dees & Associates, 03/30/98. ill I 0.. 3 CD in in ID N1U33 0 a)in rn o a co N N a) r- O 1 O 33 N0 CD N A'A 4-N MM i vo wu7o I20 — o N I. M CO 20 NN mW 0 CO 33 33 N co M 3 m Ground Surface 2 2 2 Existing — 2 2 2 2 Silt and organic silt with occasional layers i 10 — Pond of silty sand (ML to OL) I 100 vZ1- 0 W N N 10 — Fine to medium sand with 10 varying -amounts of silt- (SP-to SM) — c, a ai co N N- -- O N r- O 0 N N O N_ O a — HORIZONTAL SCALE: 1" = 100' VERTICAL SCALE: 1" = 10' VERTICAL EXAGGERATION: 10X Notes: 1. The subsurface conditions shown are based on interpolation between SOIL PROFILE A-A' widely spaced explorations and should be considered app 49actualsubsurfaceconditionsmayvaryfromthoseshown. Georoximate; 0Engineers02. Refer to Figure 2 for location of Profile A—A'. i FIGURE \-k. n A TABLE 1 GROUND WATER ELEVATION MEASUREMENTS CSTC POND EXPANSION BOEING LONGACRES PARK RENTON,WASHINGTON Ground i Depth to Surface Top of Casing Ground Water Ground Water Monitoring Elevation Elevation Top of Casing) Elevation Well (feet) feet) Date Time feet) feet) MW-38 11.07 I 13.07 04/09/98 3.58 9.49 04/16/98 4.05 9.02 04/21/98 4.26 8.81 05/21/98 5.22 7.85 I 06/10/98 5.25 7.82 06/24/98 11:30 AM 5.49 7.58 12:41 PM 5.50 7.57 r 2:31 PM 5.48 7.59 4:02 PM 5.50 7.57 07/20/98 6.47 6.60 08/27/98 8.45 4.62 09/18/98 9.02 4.05 MW-39 10.93 13.13 04/09/98 6.15 6.98 04/16/98 6.40 6.73 04/21/98 6.40 6.73 05/21/98 6.65 6.48 06/10/98 6.80 6.33 06/24/98 11:29 AM 6.74 6.39 12:40 PM 6.74 6.39 2:30 PM 6.73 6.40 2:01 PM 6.73 6.40 07/20/98 6.89 6.24 08/27/98 7.01 6.12 09/18/98 7.07 6.06 MW-40 12.76 14.64 04/09/98 4.10 10.54 04/16/98 4.59 10.05 04/21/98 4.96 9.68 05/21/98 6.51 8.13 06/10/98 6.93 7.71 06/24/98 11:26 AM 7.41 7.23 12:38 PM 7.41 7.23 2:28 PM 7.39 7.25 4:00 PM 7.40 7.24 07/20/98 8.52 6.12 08/27/98 Dry 09/18/98 Dry MW-41 12.39 14.99 04/09/98 7.65 7.34 04/16/98 7.94 7.05 04/21/98 7.89 7.10 05/21/98 8.13 6.86 06/10/98 8.38 6.61 06/24/98 11:24 AM 8.29 6.70 12:37 PM 8.28 6.71 2:27 PM 8.26 6.73 3:59 PM 8.27 6.72 07/20/98 8.44 6.55 08/27/98 8.53 6.46 09/18/98 8.62 6.37 MW'42 15.44 18.09 04/09/98 7.02 11.07 04/16/98 7.20 10.89 04/21/98 7.29 10.80 05/21/98 8.57 9.52 06/10/98 9.00 9.09 I P:\000to099\0120226\021finals\012022602-t1 Ground Depth to Surface Top of Casing Ground Water Ground Water Monitoring Elevation Elevation Top of Casing) Elevation Well (feet) feet) Date Time feet) feet) 06/24/98 11:21 AM 9.31 8.78 12:35 PM 9.31 8.78 2:25 PM 9.30 8.79 3:58 PM 9.30 8.79 07/20/98 10.62 7.47 08/27/98 11.30 6.79 09/18/98 11.56 6.53 MW-43 17.21 19.16 04/09/98 7.35 11.81 04/16/98 7.75 11.41 04/21/98 7.86 11.30 05/21/98 8.96 10.20 06/10/98 9.35 9.81 06/24/98 11:19 AM 9.74 9.42 12:33 PM 9.74 9.42 2:23 PM 9.74 9.42 3:56 PM 9.75 9.41 07/20/98 10.59 8.57 08/27/98 11.62 7.54 09/18/98 12.02 7.14 MW-44. 16.51 18.96 04/09/98 7.15 11.81 04/16/98 7.45 11.51 I 04/21/98 7.52 11.44 05/21/98 8.75 10.21 06/10/98 9.05 9.91 06/24/98 11:17 AM 9.43 9.53 12:31 PM 9.43 9.53 2:20 PM 9.41 9.55 3:54 PM 9.43 9.53 07/20/98 10.20 8.76 08/27/98 Dry 1_ 09/18/98 Dry MW-45 16.69 19.25 04/09/98 7.54 11.71 04/16/98 7.84 11.41 04/21/98 7.92 11.33 05/21/98 9.13 10.12 06/10/98 9.45 9.80 06/24/98 11:16 AM 9.83 9.42 12:30 PM 9.83 9.42 I 2:20 PM 9.84 9.41 3:53 PM 9.85 9.40 07/20/98 10.62 8.63 8/27/98 11.63 7.62 09/18/98 12.04 7.21 MW-46 15.59 18.49 04/09/98 7.56 10.93 04/16/98 7.72 10.77 04/21/98 7.71 10.78 05/21/98 8.74 9.75 06/10/98 9.05 9.44 06/24/98 11:12 AM 9.32 9.17 12:27 PM 9.33 9.16 2:17 PM 9.32 9.17 3:50 PM 9.32 9.17 07/20/98 10.17 8.32 08/27/98 10.94 7.55 09/18/98 11.29 7.20 P-1 11.22 06/24/98 11:49 AM Dry 12:49 PM Dry 2:50 PM Dry I 4:13 PM Dry 07/20/98 Dry 08/27/98 Dry P-2 12.19 06/24/98 11:52 AM 3.57 8.62 P:\000to099\0120226\02\finals\012022602-t1 I Ground Depth to Surface Top of Casing Ground Water Ground Water Monitoring Elevation Elevation Top of Casing) Elevation Well (feet) feet) Date Time feet) feet) 12:52 PM 3.57 8.62 2:47 PM 3.59 8.60 4:09 PM 3.63 8.56 07/20/98 Dry 08/27/98 Dry P-3 11.38 06/24/98 11:42 AM 3.51 7.87 12:49 PM 3.42 7.96 2:44 PM 3.13 8.25 4:07 PM 3.04 8.34 07/20/98 0.50 10.88 P-4 13.19 06/24/98 11:36 AM Dry 12:47 PM Dry 2:40 PM Dry 4:05 PM Dry 07/20/98 Dry P-5 12.98 06/24/98 11:39 AM Dry 12:45 PM Dry 2:40 PM Dry 4:04 PM Dry 07/20/98 Dry Note: Ground surface elevations provided by W&H Pacific 000to099\0120226\02 finals\012022602-0 APPENDIX I i I I I I I. i I I I I I i I I Surface Water Management Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 014002\2220\wp\dmrpt01.doc Appendix I September 1998 APPENDIX I TEMPORARY EROSION/SEDIMENTATION CONTROL TESC) This appndix contains;information related to the TESC system and is organized as follows: TESC Sheet 1 - General Notes Figure I.1 TESC Details - Sheet 2 Figure I.2 1 1 1 1 1 I I Surface Water Management Drainage Report for Conceptual Drainage Plan Sverdrup Civil, Inc. 014002\222I\wp\dmrpt0l.doc Appendix I-1 September 1998 I I 9L801 C8100684.DWG m 1 S li m 00 C'I GENERAL DEMOLITION NOTES: GENERAL TEMPORARY EROSION/SEDIMENTATION CONTROL (TESC) NOTES: I_ fca_m__ `nI_DRAWINGS 9L THROUGH 9L45. THESE NOTES APPLY TO TEMPORARY EROSION/SEDIMENTATION CONTROL (TESC) PLAN DRAWINGS 9L THROUGH 9L802.2 GENERAL INFORMATION ONLY. 1--EXISTIN =F3TtLtT1 1 5 HAV =, N OGATC D=BY_SE-VEBAL_-METHODS 19. A TEMPORARY STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE, 24' X 100' X 12" OF 4 TO 8 INCH Y 1. THE DEMOLITION DRAWINGS ARE FORAND MEANS. REFER TO NOTE 10 OF THE G'ENERAC DEKAOL7TiON 30IE5 AF InrnTF1) AT ALL POINTS_OF VEHICULAR INGRESS AND EGRESS 6IoTHECONTRACTORSHALLDETERMINETHEACTUALNATUREANDTOTHEPTi07ECT-SIT wHt'2rE=iitcnrric Tri c kit tEAStf1,1G' 0G51TANET=Tt2AVE Q J W EXTENT OF WORK REQUIRED THROUGH HIS OWN ON-SITE INVESTIGATION.2. BEFORE ANY CONSTRUCTION OR DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY OCCURS, A PRECONSTRUCTION TONO PAVED AREAS WITHIN 1300ERE- FEET OF THE SITE (SEE DETAIL 1, SHEET 9L802. W w F- IE Z 2. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE ALL ABOVE GROUND FEATURES MEETING MUST BE HELD WITH THE CITY OF RENTON DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION, THESE ENTRANCES SHALL BE INSTALLED AT THE BEGINING OF CONSTRUCTION AND 4 A8 L w O J WITHIN THE LIMITS OF DEMOLITION (UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED) AS PLAN REVIEW PROJECT MANAGER.MAINTAINED FOR THE DURATION OF THE PROJECT. ADDITIONAL MEASURES, SUCH AS WASH PADS, MAY BE REQUIRED TO ENSURE THAT ALL PAVED AREAS ARE KEPT CLEAN q w U SHOWN ON DRAWINGS 9L THROUGH 9L45. 3. ALL LIMITS OF CLEARING (PROJECT LIMITS) AS PRESCRIBED ON THE PLAN FOR THE DURATION OF THE PROJECT. W W 3. ALL MATERIALS NOT OTHERWISE NOTED SHALL BECOME THE SHALL BE CLEARLY MARKED AS INDICATED) IN to Q Z PROPERTY OF THE CONTRACTOR AND SHALL BE DISPOSED OF IN THE FIELD AND OBSERVED DURING CONSTRUCTION. THE FENCING SHALL 20. WETLANDS SHOWN WERE DELINEATED BY SHAPIRO AND ASSOCIATES, INC. (JULY, 1998) ACCORDANCE WITH THE SPECIFICATIONS. BE MAINTAINED BY THE CONTRACTOR FOR THE DURATION OF THE PROJECT. IN ACCORDANCE WITH METHODS SUGGESTED IN THE "FEDERAL MANUAL FOR i+ U O IDENTIFYING AND DELINEATING JURISDICTIONAL WETLANDS" (FEDERAL INTERAGENCY Z I 4. NO FLAMMABLE LIQUIDS, WELDING/CUTTING EQUIPMENT, OR 4-___TESC FACILITIES SHALL BE INSPECTED DAILY BY THE CONTRACTOR AND MAINTAINED COMMITTEE FOR WETLAND DELINEATION, 1987). Z w O COMPRESSED GASES SHALL BE USED BY THE CONTRACTOR EXCEPT AS NECESSARY TO ENSURE THEIR COhYT1NUED PROPER EUNCILOfG. 21_.-ACCEPTABLE TEMPORARY EROSION/SEDIMENTATION CONTROL DRAINAGE PIPE OJ F- F- UNDER SPECIFIC BOEING FIRE DEPARTMENT PERMIT. 5. TESC FACILITIES ON INACTIVE SITES SHALL BE INSPECTED AND MAINTAINED A MATERIALS FOR TESC USE ARE DESCRIBEOIN SECTION 02771 OF THE SP-ECIFICATIONS. J MINIMUM OF ONCE A MONTH OR WITHIN 48 HOURS FOLLOWING A STORM EVENT (WHEN MINIMUM COVER FOR PIPE SHALL BE 1 FOOT MINIMUM OR AS REQUIRED FOR 9 ; ' O w 5. AFTER DEMOLITION, THE SITE SHALL BE LEFT CLEAN AND READY PRECIPITATION EXCEEDS 1" IN 24 HOURS AS MEASURED BY NOAA AT SEA-TAC ANTICIPATED LOADS. U z w wAIRPORT STATION). Z w U L,.1 2 FOR GRADING. SEE GENERAL TEMPORARY 22. AT NO TIME SHALL MORE THAN ONE FOOT OF SEDIMENT BE ALLOWED TO Y 1- Q p (I) CONTROL (TESC) NOTES FOR PROTECTION OF DISTURBED AREAS. 6. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONSTRUCT FENCING AS DETAILED ACCUMULATE WITHIN AN EXISTING CATCH BASIN OR SEDIMENT TRAP. ALL 1 •j 6 6. BOEING HAS CONDUCTED A LIMITED SURVEY FOR ASBESTOS PRIOR TO ANY SURFACE DISTURBANCE OR SITE WORK ACTIVITIES TO ENSURE PERMANENT CATCH BASINS AND CONVEYANCE LINES SHALL BE CLEANED PRIOR NO V) CONTAINING MATERIALS AND HAS REMOVED ALL VISIBLE ASBESTOS THAT SEDIMENT-LADEN WATER DOES NOT ENTER THE NATURAL DRAINAGE SYSTEM. TO PAVING. THE CLEANING OPERATION SHALL NOT FLUSH SEDIMENT-LADEN WATER a 0 COVERED MATERIAL. IT SHALL BE THE CONTRACTORS RESPONSIBILITY INTO THE DOWNSTREAM SYSTEM. TO DETERMINE IF ANY OF THE MATERIALS UNCOVERED DURING 7. TESC CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE COMPLETED AS DEFINED IN THE CONSTRUCTION 23. BEFORE FINAL CONSTRUCTION IS APPROVED, THE SITE SHALL BE STABILIZED AND DEMOLITION CONTAIN ASBESTOS. IF THE REMAINING MATERIALS SPECIFICATIONS. THE STRUCTURAL TESC MEASURES SUCH AS FILTER FABRIC FENCES AND SEDIMENT 6 CONTAIN ASBESTOS, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL IMMEDIATELY STOP d WORK IN THAT AREA AND NOTIFY THE OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE. 8. APPROVAL OF THIS TESC PLAN DOES NOT CONSTITUTE AN APPROVAL OF PERMANENT TRAPS REMOVED, AND THE DRAINAGE FACILITIES CLEANED. ADDITIONAL ASBESTOS REMOVAL WILL BE HANDLED AS A CHANGED ROAD OR STORM DRAINAGE DESIGN, SIZE NOR LOCATION OF PIPES, RESTRICTORS, 1- 10 Z Y-`- CONDITION. CHANNELS OR RETENTION FACILITIES. O 3$ F' u _ 7. PROTECT ALL UTILITIES AND MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS DESIGNATED 9. THIS TESC PLAN REPRESENTS THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR ANTICIPATED SITE z aw TO REMAIN. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR CONDITIONS.AS CONSTRUCTION PROGRESSES AND UNEXPECTED OR SEASONAL W OR REPLACE DAMAGED ITEMS AT NO ADDITIONAL COST TO BOEING. CONDITIONS DICTATE, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ANTICIPATE THAT ADDITIONAL TESC C.)a' c FACILITIES WILL BE NECESSARY TO ENSURE COMPLETE EROSION CONTROL ON THE SITE. s; a E; 8. WATER SUPPLY TO THE EXISTING FIRE HYDRANTS ON AND THE CONTRACTOR MAY PROPOSE A DIFFERENT ARRANGEMENT OR MAY MOVE PONDS 5' E ADJACENT TO THE SITE SHALL BE CONTINUOUSLY MAINTAINED AND TRAPS PER CHAPTER 5 KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN DURING CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES. MANUAL (KCSWDM). ANY CHANGE REQUIRES A COMPLETE SUBMITTAL BY THE CONTRACTOR, AS WELL AS REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE 4 11 o u 9. ALL LOCATIONS OF EXISTING UTILITIES SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE AND THE CITY OF RENTON. air AND IT SHALL BE THE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY TO VERIFY THE TRUE AND CORRECT LOCATION SO AS TO AVOID DAMAGE 10. THIS TESC PLAN IS DESIGNED FOR EXISTING, PRE-GRADING CONDITIONS. AS GRADING OR DISTURBANCE. FOR UTILITY LOCATION CALL 1-800-424-5555 PROGRESSES, CHANGES IN THE TESC SYSTEM INCLUDING POND AND SEDIMENT TRAP l3 48 HOURS PRIOR TO START OF DEMOLITION. LOCATION, WILL BE REQUIRED. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR IDENTIFYING WHEN CHANGES ARE TO BE MADE, WHAT CHANGES ARE NEEDED, AND HOW TO IMPLEMENT 11y 10. EXISTING UTILITIES AND STRUCTURES HAVE BEEN LOCATED BY THEM. TESC FACILITIES SHALL NOT BE LOCATED WITHIN THE FOOTPRINT OF PLANNED A SEVERAL METHODS AND MEANS INCLUDING THE FOLLOWING:BUILDINGS. A) FIELD TOPO SURVEY DATED JULY 1998, BY 11. TESC SUBCATCHMENT AREAS DELINEATE SUGGESTED CONTRIBUTING AREAS FOR TESC W & H PACIFIC. PONDS AND TRAPS. IN NO CASE SHALL TESC SUBCATCHMENT AREAS BOUNDARIES z BE ALTERED OR GRADING COMPLETED IN SUCH A WAY THAT MORE THAN 3 ACRES N k B) FIELD TOPO SURVEY AND OBSERVATIONS DATED AUGUST 21, 22, OF DISTURBED, UNCOVERED AREA WILL CONTRIBUTE TO A SEDIMENT TRAP OR MORE 0 27 AND 28, 1997, BY W & H PACIFIC. THAN 10 ACRES TO A TESC POND. 9a Y C) FIELD TOPO SURVEY DATED NOVEMBER-DECEMBER 1996, BY 12. TRAPS AND PONDS SHALL HAVE 3:1 SIDESLOPES. W & H PACIFIC, SUPPLEMENTED WITH RECORD DOCUMENTS. 13. TO MINIMIZE WIND TRANSPORT OF SOIL, WATER SHALL BE USED TO CONTROL DUST. e. D) AERIAL PHOTO SURVEY DATED SEPTEMBER 1, 1990. MAPPING 14. ALL ROUGH GRADING SLOPES SHALL BE GRADED TO DRAIN TOWARD A TESC POND OR y-- PERFORMED_BY DEGROSS AERIAL MAPPING______ TRAP. ANY STOCKPILES OF EARTHEN MATERIALS SHALL BE COVERED WITH 6 MIL i POL-YVINYI SHEETING__TO__PREVENT EROSION. _ _ E) FIELD TOPO SURVEY DATED AUGUST-SEPTEMBER, 1991 BY 9 i W&H PACIFIC. 15. DURING THE TIME PERIOD OF OCTOBER 1 THROUGH MARCH 31, ALL PROJECT DISTURBED ce A F) CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS FROM CITY OF RENTON AND SOIL AREAS GREATER THAN 5,000 SQUARE FEET THAT ARE TO BE LEFT UNWORKED FOR MORE THAN TWELVE (12) HOURS SHALL BE TEMPORARILY COVERED WITH 6 MIL POLYVINYL O. VARIOUS UTILITIES. SHEETING, MULCH, OR SODDING. SHEETING SHALL BE "TOED-IN" AT THE TOP OF SLOPES a G) FIELD VISITS CONDUCTED AT THE SITE. 2 FEET IN ORDER TO PREVENT SURFACE WATER FLOW BENEATH THE SHEETS. WHERE w STRAW MULCH FOR TESC IS REQUIRED, IT SHALL BE APPLIED AT A MINIMUM THICKNESS g_ 1-1. P-ERFORM_4YORK BETWEEN THE HOURS OF 6:00 A.M. TO 11:00 P.M.OF 2"-3" PER CHAPTER 5 OF KCSWDM. 7 DAYS A WEEK. 16. IN-ANY--AREA-WHICH HAS BEEN STRIPPED OF VEGETATION AND WHERE NO FURTHER WORK co 12. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING IS ANTICIPATED FOR A PERIOD OF 30 DAYS-OR-MORE ALL-DISTURBED-AREAS_dUST BE ADEQUATE SAFEGUARDS, SAFETY DEVICES, PROTECTIVE IMMEDIATELY STABILIZED WITH MULCHING, GRASS PLANTING OR OTHER APPROVED EROSION EQUIPMENT, FLAGGERS, AND ANY OTHER NEEDED ACTIONS TO CONTROL TREATMENT APPLICABLE TO THE TIME OF YEAR IN QUESTION. SEEDING MUST I PROTECT THE LIFE, HEALTH, AND SAFETY OF THE PUBLIC AND BE AUGMENTED WITH MULCH DURING THE WINTER MONTHS OF NOVEMBER THROUGH MARCH TO PROJECT PROPERTY IN CONNECTION WITH THE PERFORMANCE AND DURING THE SUMMER MONTHS OF JULY-AND AUGUST. o OF WORK COVERED BY THE CONTRACTOR.17. ALL SLOPES STEEPER THAN 3:1 SHALL RECEIVE SPECIAL TREATMENT INCLUDING a 13- THESE APPROVED PLANS MUST BE ON THE JOB SITE JUTE MATTING, MULCHING AND SEEDING, OR ROCK LINING WITH BIOENGINEERING WHENEVER DEMOLITION OGRESS.0o SLOPE PROTECTION PLANTINGS. o I z 18. CONTRACTOR SHALL UTILIZE EXISTING ROADS FOR CONSTRJUGTION TRAFFIC WHEREVER I, ! POSSIBLE. ANY POTHOLES OR MUDHOLES SHALL BE FILLED WITH COARSE ROCK TOIP_REVENT_EROSION/SEDIMENTATION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE i 3 A COARSE ROCK OVER1 FOR-ANY-ROARING-REQUIRED-OFF-OF XI -L_ 0 ESTABLISHED TRAFFIC AREAS. o N FIGURE NOo 1.1 O i i d r 2 z 11 Il I fix' m o 0a 9__I0 q Y XIw5. BALING WIRE 9L;0 02 FILTER FABRIC FENCE O SURVEY FLAGGJZIGa t.4 U~ V N N $ W WF_1I1, 1f1It p1 I \.1 1 IZIVI1i111I1 3L 0 01 _ EXISTINGG o wZ N e leu GRADELS'Z M mvb 1 T=1 1=1 T-T-T1-1T11iT T1=ITl="1fT-T172--17TiT11T=171`-11T1T=1TI ir i F-r —1 17 w IL 1 1-111 11 1E11 - 1 1=111-111E-71 1 1;II 111 1 1 7111 11 11 w Z 1 I 11 1 1 11 1 , iL POSTS SHALL BE DRIVENm OR DRILLED (TIP) 115 2" X 4" WOOD POSTS OR STEEL gi O FENCE POSTS DRIVEN - (TYP) i a o I00oNial wzas M/ 0 O 12-2 E aa" DETAIL SILT FENCE/CLEARING LIMIT FENCE Q p i' a°Ci3 SCALE: NONE 9 12 9L 02Oaao.a 9L17• r' . n i.i r'C aG R a oa a 9L37Wa c F 9L38 ea j 1 a. i E MATCH EXISTING GRADE MATCH EXISTING C 11 P ROAD GRADE oy is in PGSi6'o - PROJECT SIDE OF FENCE 6.00aa a a80, GRADE ENTRANCE TO II aQ&a Qa C1 Goa•at TESC PONDS OR TRAPSa o a ° ` a °ate'•o aai a \\ \/\ BALING WIRE i- ae /\\j\/41 _a•a• / /,\//. R=25' MIN a•//\/i\'2 X 4 WOOD POST z — - OR STEEL FENCE POST _ m g6 12" MIN THICKNESS FILTER FABRIC FENCE OVER GEOTEXTILE a•agf a•aa• •1 i is ao:i 0.4 Z aaa.a a'oar ri-/` r o 1aa•a• BACKFILL TRENCH WITH D 0 u er• 3/4"-1 1/2" I m 1 a 4" - 8" QUARRY SPALLS-- WASHED GRAVEL N i , GRADE G f PROVIDE FULL WIDTH OF 1 l T1TI=..booas= —I 11— I I 1 u a INGRESS/EGRESS AREA N I I I--i I• ° 5° E 11 1—I1 1 11= El11:-a°.ga l 111111Ii11' 11. w DETAIL STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE 1 11 III— III SCALE: NONE 9 24 2 9L802 8" X 12" 1_I—III I I I-11 1 c )- 9L2 CONTINUOUS II1= - III o s 34 TRENCH— 37 1 III 1 1= 9L38 I I1i1 1i H 1 1 ui oSECTION SILT FENCE/CLEARING UNIT FENCE m_ 9L 02 9L 02 j z 3 I LT) I 12..•1`— y. O o ¢ E O:N Z N 8 o g a N FIGURE 1.2 s, ' SiZ jT Ii II I I t P (.(-1 ) I i I I Report Geotechnical Engineering and Hydrogeologic Services CSTC Pond Expansion Boeing Longacres Park Renton, Washington April 23, 1998 i I I I I I I I I I I I I i I I I For Sverdrup Civil, Inc. I I i G e o E n g i n e e r s File No. 0120-226-02-1130/042398 I I Geo40Engineers April 23, 1998 Consulting Engineers and Geoscientists Offices in Washington, Sverdrup Civil, Inc. Oregon,and Alaska ie 600- 108th Avenue Northeast, Suite 700 Bellevue, Washington 98004 Attention: Jeff Schutt, P.E. We are pleased; to submit six copies of our "Report, Geotechnical Engineering and Hydrogeologic Services, CSTC Pond Expansion, Boeing Longacres Park, Renton, L Washington." Our 'services were completed in general accordance with our revised proposal dated March 27, 1998. Preliminary conclusions and recommendations were provided to you as our geotechnical and hydrogeologic evaluations progressed. The conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are consistent with those given previously. 4 + We appreciate the opportunity to provide these services to you on this project. Please contact us if you have any questions regarding this report or if we can provide further assis . ce. Yours very truly, GeoEngineers, Inc. 617.4 Gordon M. Denby, P.E. Principal SDS:JGR:GMD: I p:\000to099\0120226\02\finals\012022602r.doc GeoEngineers.Inc. 8410 154th Avenue N.E. DEVELOPMENT PLAN ING CITY OF RENTON • Redmond.WA 98052 I AUG 18 1998 Telephone Q425)861-6000 Fax(425) 61-6050 RECEIVEDEu' www.geoe gineers.com CONTENTS 1 I Pa•e No. INTRODUCTION 1 SCOPE OF SERVICES 1 SITE CONDITIONS 2 SURFACE CONDITIONS 2 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 3 Explorations 3 Subsurface Soli; Conditions 3 Ground Water Conditions 3 CONCLUSIONS AND!RECOMMENDATIONS 5 I CSTC POND EXPANSION HYDROGEOLOGY 15 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR POND CONSTRUCTION 5 DEWATERING ANALYSIS 6 General 6 Excavation Dewatering 17 Preliminary construction Dewatering Cost Estimate 18 DEWATERING RECOMMENDATIONS 8 SHEET PILE DESIGN 9 DDITIONAL SERVICES 0 LIMITATIONS 10 TABLES Table NO. Ground Water Elevation Measurements 1 FIGURES Figure No. Vicinity Map 1 Site 'Ian 2 Soil Profile A-A' 3 i I I G e o E n g i n e e t s I File No. 0120-226-02-1130/04'398 CONTENTS (continued) APPENDICES Page No. APPENDIX A — FIELD EXPLORATIONS AND LABORATORY TESTING A 1 FIELD EXPLORATIONS A LABORATORY TESTING A-2 PPENDIX A FIGURES Soil Classification System A-1 Key to Boring Log Symbols A-2 Logs of Monitoring Wells A-3 ... A-11 Gradation Curves A-12 APPENDIX B — DEWATERING COST ESTIMATE II G e o E n g i n e er s 11. File No. 0120-226-02-1130/042398 1 REPORT GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING AND HYDROGEOLOGIC SERVICES CSTC POND EXPANSION 1 ' BOEING LONGACRES PARK RENTON, WASHINGTON i i INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of our geotechnical engineering and hydrogeologic service s for the planned CSTC (Customer Services Training Center) Pond Expansion at Boeing Longacres Park in Renton, Washington. The site is shown relative to surrounding physical features on the Vicinity Map, Figure 1 and the Site Plan, Figure 2. We previously provided geotechnical engineering and hydrogeologic services for the CS C' Pond, the results of which were presented in our report dated December 9, 1991. We have al o provided geotechnical engineering services for the Longacres Park site, the CSTC development, and t ee BCAG 25-20;and 25-10 Building developments. We understand that the pond expansion will consist of two lobes separated by a dike. The 1. first lobe will be designed as a wetland and will be connected into the existing CSTC pond. The second lobe is currently planned as a stormwater pond. It is expected that the expansion I I will l)e excavated with 5H:1V to 10H:1V (horizontal to vertical) side slopes. The water level in the CSTC pond is currently at Elevation 8.5 feet while the bottom of the pond is at Elevation 2.5 feet. The bottom of the pond expansion is also expected to be at Elevation 2.5 feet; however, it is desired to raise the bottom, if possible, to reduce excavation costs. i SCOPE OF SERVICES The purpose of our services is to explore the subsurface soil and ground water conditions in the 1 ici ity of the pond expansion to evaluate if the conditions are consistent with those encoentered at the CSTC pond and to provide design criteria for the pond expansion to evaluatel construction methods ,and to develop an estimated cost for construction dewatering. Our i specfific scope of services includes the following tasks: 1. Review and compile existing subsurface soil and ground water information completed a or djacent to the existing CSTC pond; also review our records and discuss with the contra for the construction of the CSTC pond. i2. Supplement the(existing subsurface information by installing monitoring wells at the p nd el xpansion location. We completed six monitoring wells to depths of 16.5 feet and three Monitoring wells to depths of 8.5 to 9 feet. 3. Perform four gradation analyses on samples obtained during installation of the monitoring fwells. 4. Measure ground water levels in the monitoring wells three times over a period of one month. G e o E n g i n e e r' s 1 File No.0120-226-02-1130/ 2398 1 r , i 1 I 5. S arize grou I d 1 water levels measured and evaluate seasonal ground water fluctuations b1 ed on readings of the previous monitoring wells for the CSTC pond. i 6. valuate the ability of ground water to recharge the lake and maintain a water level at Elevation 8.5 feet.. Provide recommendations on how to maintain the Elevation 8.5 f et 4ater surface elevation. 7. Evaluate the possibility of raising the bottom of the pond expansion above Elevation 2.5 fet with regard to recharge and exfiltration considerations. 8. Comment on the feasibility of using a sheet pile cofferdam to separate the existing lake area from the excavation area. Provide an estimated depth of penetration for a sheet pile 9. Evaluate dewatering methods for the pond area prior to excavation. Develop an estimated Cost for construction dewatering. This will include developing a design and a range of 1 1 dewatering flows. 10. Provide a written'scope of services, including schedule and cost estimate for providing i ; geotechnical services during fmal design. 11. Present our fmdings and recommendations in a written report along with supporting data. SITE CONDITIONS SURFACE CONDITIONS The Boeing Longacres Park site is approximately rectangular in shape and situated on the floor of the Green River valley. The existing CSTC pond is located in the northwest corner of the ite, at the north end of the former racetrack infield. The CSTC pond expansion will'be loca ed directly south of the existing pond. The expansion will extend approximately 1100 feetsouthoftheexistingpond, as shown on the Site Plan, Figure 2. The ground surface at the pond expansion site slopes gently down to the north towards ithe existing CSTC pond. The ground surface varies in Elevation from about 16 feet at the south end of the pond expansion to about 8.5 feet at the existing CSTC pond. This area was prellriously the infielld of the former racetrack. An arc-shaped 'shallow channel is present across the southeast portion of the racetrack infield,directly east of the proposed southern pond lobe. This depression is the remnant o an old channel of the Green River. A gravel and cinder surfaced trail follows the channel across the infield. Old concrete walkways, slabs, and foundations from a former residence, the racetrack scoreboard,;and the starting gate area are also present west of the channel and trail. Vegetation at the site generally consists of tall grasses and weeds and scattered berry busbies. Adjacent to,the existing CSTC pond, vegetation consists of various wetland sp-cies and scattered deciduous trees. 1 1 G e o E n g i n e e 1 r s 2 File No.0120-226-02-1130/ 2398 1 1 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Explorations The subsurface conditions at the site were evaluated based on explorations completed by GeoEngineers for this study and on previous explorations completed by GeoEngineers for the existing CSTC pond.1 For this study, we completed nine monitoring wells (MW-38 throu If h MW-46) to depths ranging from 8.5 to 16.5 feet. The locations of the explorations complet d for this study and previous studies are shown on the Site Plan, Figure 2. A description of the field exploration and laboratory testing program completed for this study, together with the to s of the explorations and laboratory test results, is presented in Appendix A. Subsurface Soil Conditions The subsurface soils encountered in the explorations for this study are relatively uniform across the site and are consistent with the previous explorations. The near-surface soils consist of a 3 to 6 inch topsoil layer overlying native soils. The topsoil is underlain by native soils consisting of very soft to medium stiff silt, sandy silt and organic silt to depths ranging from 6 feet o 15 feet. Although not encountered in our explorations for this study, minor amounts of fill re likely present, across the infield. Fill should be expected near where the fo er residence, scoreboard and starting gate area were located. The silt layers are typically thickest at the north and south ends of the pond expansion, d are thinnest near the central portion of the southern lobe. The silt layers are underlain by Try loose to medium dense fine to medium sand with varying amounts of silt. Soil Profile A- ', presented in Figure 3, illustrates the generalized subsurface soil conditions across the site. Based on previous' explorations completed north and east of the CSTC pond (boring B-2, B-3, and B-5), a sandy gravel/gravelly sand layer, referred to as the gravel aquifer in this report, was encountered at the CSTC site. The thickness and depth to this layer varies significantly, based on the explorations. At B-3, located approximately 1100 feet northeast of the north end of the! pond expansion, the gravel is approximately 16 feet thick and I as encountered at a depth of 22 feet. At B-2, located approximately 800 north of the north en of the pond expansion, the gravel aquifer is approximately 7 feet thick and was encountered at a depth of 31 feet. At B-5, located approximately 600 feet east of the north end of the pbnd expansion, the gravel aquifer is approximately 8 feet thick and was encountered at a depthdepdi of 50 fi et. The gravel' aquifer was not encountered in B-35 on the east side of the pond expansion. B-35 was completed at a depth of 39 feet as shown in Figure 2. Based on these expirations, it appears that the gravel aquifer will be below the dewatering wells installed for the pond expansion,i as discussed in a subsequent section of this report. Ground Water Conditions General. Ground water conditions across the site were evaluated by measuring ground water levels in nine monitoring wells installed for the current study and by reviewing 1991 ground water level;measurements in the previous wells. Three of the monitoring wells were GeoEngineers 3 File No.0120-226-02-1130/042398 i installed to depths of 8.5 to 9 feet and six of the monitoring wells were installed to depths of 16.5 feet. The purpose of the shallower wells is to evaluate the possible presence of perched water or separate ground water aquifers. Ground water levels were measured three timer between April 9, 1998 to April 21, 1998. Ground water level measurements are presented in Table 1. C rrent Study. Monitoring wells MW-38, MW-40, and MW-44 were installed to depths of 8.5 to 9 feet. All Hof these wells, with the exception of MW-44 encountered silt to the full depth of the well. Monitoring well MW-44 encountered sand at a depth of about 6 fee. Grou Id water levels measured in these wells range from a low of Elevation 7.98 near the existing CSTC pond to a high of Elevation 10.06 feet near the central portion of the southern lobe. With the exception of MW-44, these shallow wells may reflect a perched ground water table that is influenced by the existing CSTC pond and is independent of the aquifer in tile underlying sand deposit. Monitoring wells MW-39, MW-41, MW-42, MW-43, MW-45 and MW-46 were install Id to depths of 16.5 feet. All of these wells, with the exception of MW-46 extend into the said layer underlying the 1 silt layers. Ground water levels in these wells vary from a low of Elevation 5.39 feet near the existing CSTC pond to a high of Elevation 10.06 feet near the central portion of the'southern lobe. The ground water ;measurements to date show that there is a downward flow gradient betwen the upper silt and underlying sand. Blpsed on the previous ground water level measurements completed in 1991 (see summa belov 3vou1d we expect that the ground water levels will fluctuate between 3.5 to 4.5 feet annuall . This result in an estimated high ground water level of about Elevation 10 feet in April o a loud of about Elevation 2 feet in October. However, these estimates do not take into acco t the presence of the existing CSTC pond. We would expect that the existing pond would have' a small effect on the ground water levels at the site. Additional ground water level measureme is should be completed throughout summer and fall months to determine ground water levels m re accurlIIately during this period. Pfrevious Study. Ground water levels were measured in 17 shallow monitoring we is between January 4, 1991 and November 6, 1991 during our previous study. Deep wells w 're also Ytlonitored during' the above period. The shallow wells were only monitored between Aug ist 13, 1991 and November 6, 1991. The shallow wells located in the racetrack infield d embedded fully within the silt layer generally indicated a high ground water Elevation of 6.94 feet (600 feet north of the proposed pond expansion) in November to a low of Elevation 3.37 feet (400 feet northeast of the pond expansion) in October. Ground water measurements in the deep wells near the pond expansion indicated the highest ground water levels in April. At that time, the ground water levels ranged from a high,of j ! Elevation 13.57 feet (500 feet southwest of the proposed pond expansion) to a low of Elevation 10.72 feet (800 feet north of the pond expansion). The lowest ground water level I G e o E n g i n e e r'1 s 4 File No.0120-226-02-1130/042398 I I I I I i p measurements were collected in October, 1991. At that time, the ground water levels rang from a high of Elevation 9.98 feet (500 feet southwest of the proposed pond expansion) to a low of 6.94 feet (800 feet north of the pond expansion). Based on these readings, seasonal ground water fluctuations varied from 3.5 to 4 f et between the wet and dry seasons. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS CSTC POND EXPANSION HYDROGEOLOGY Our analysis of the hydrogeology of the CSTC Pond Expansion is based on the soil d ground water conditions encountered in the nine monitoring wells that were completed for this study) and several borings and monitoring wells that were completed in 1991 prior to construction of the xisting CSTC pond. We understand that Boeing intends to maintain the water level in the expanded pond at Elevation 8.5 feet and would like to minimize the quantity of m keup water that is added during the dry summer and fall months. The sand aquifer that underlies the shallow silt and silty sand soils is a potential source of ground water recharge,to the expanded CSTC pond. The top of this aquifer rises up toward the ground surface in the central portion of the southern expansion lobe to Elevation 6 to 7 f et. The ground water level in this portion of the aquifer was at approximately Elevation 10 as measured in the.piezometers in April 1998. This aquifer could be a significant source of recharge to the pond,in the wet winter and spring months if it was exposed in the bottom of e ponci. However, makeup water is generally not needed to maintain the pond surface'' at I Elevation 8.5 during the winter and spring months because of abundant precipitation d stormwater runoff tliat'enters the pond. Based on ground I water measurements made throughout 1991, we anticipate that water levels in the sand aquifer will drop 3.5 to 4.5 feet to approximately Elevation 6 to 7 feet in late summer and early fall: This would likely result in a situation where the sand aquifer acts als a drain to the pond water. A large volume of makeup water would be required to maintain the pondI surface at Elevation 8.5 feet. We also anticipate that the perched ground water levels in the ,shallow silty soils,will drop several feet below the design pond surface (Elevation 8.5i in the late summer and fall months. This will likely result in a net outflow (exfiltration) of pnd water via seepage through the sides and bottom of the pond. We expect seepage volumes through the bottom and the sides of the pond to decrease as the pond silts up over time. i RECOMMENDATIONS FOR POND CONSTRUCTION Because the shallow, perched ground water and the underlying sand aquifer do not ap ear to ble a viable source of ground water recharge to the pond in the summer and fall months, we rec•mmend raising ithe bottom of the pond to Elevation 4.5 feet. We understand that Eleva ion 4.5 is the highest elevation for the pond bottom because regulations governing stormv)ater G e o E n g i n e e i s 5 File No.0120-226-02-1130/042398 1 detenion require a minimum of 4 feet of dead storage. Raising the bottom of the expansion pond by two feet will reduce the amount of soil that is excavated by approximately 30,000 in-pla7 cubic yards, resulting in significant savings to Boeing during construction. We also recommend overexcavating the fme to medium sand that will be encountered in tie central portion of the southern lobe (and possibly other areas of the pond expansion) to approximately Elevation 3.5 feet. The overexcavated, area should be brought back up to Elev !ion 4.5 feet by!placing and compacting approximately 1.0 foot of low permeability natii e II silt a cavated from the north and central portion of the pond expansion. This will minimize pond seepage losses and the quantity of makeup water that is required during the summer a id fall months. We recommend measuring ground water levels in the nine monitoring wells on a monthly basis from May 1998 to April 1999 to evaluate ground water level fluctuations in the shallolw silt and silty sand sods and the underlying sand aquifer. The design elevation of the bottom of the pond may need to be modified based on the ground water level data that are obtained over the nxtl year(particularly the dry summer and fall months). Based on our interview of Steve Goetz (Pacific Resources Group), accurate data regarding the rate of seepage and evaporative losses from the existing CSTC pond are not available. WAe estitnlate that seepage losses from the base and sides of the proposed pond expansion could be on the order of 90,000 gallons/day (0.27 acre-feet/day) during the late summer and early !all months when ground ;water levels are lowest. Our estimate of seepage losses assumes the expansion pond will occupy approximately 9.8 acres and the sides and bottom will be silt with a permeability of approximately 1.0 x10-5 centimeters per second (cm/s). An I additional ''15 acre feet (approximate) of expansion pond water will be lost to evaporation between May d September when potential evaporation exceeds precipitation by approximately 18 inches. Water losses related to seepage and evaporation from the expansion pond will be part! 1 ly offset by recharge to the pond from stormwater runoff and any runoff related to lawn/landsc I pe irrigtion. One recommendation for reducing the quantity of makeup water required is to raise the Elevation of the V-notch weir at the downstream end of the existing CSTC pond freIm Elevation 8.5 to approximately Elevation 9.0 from approximately May to October. This world allow water from intermittent precipitation and stormwater runoff to temporarily raise the pond level 0.5 foot above the design Elevation of 8.5 until pond seepage losses and evaporatiion combine to lower the water surface. This recommendation assumes that the wetland plants are capable of adapting to:the higher pond water level on an intermittent basis. DEyVATERING ANALYSIS General Our dewateringi analysis for the CSTC Pond Expansion is based on the soil and gro}ind water conditions encountered in the monitoring wells that were completed for this study, ll several deep borings that were completed in 1991 prior to construction of the existing C TC G e o E n g i n e e i s 6 File No.0120-226-02-1130/ 2398 I , It pond, and interview's of the general contractor (Segale Construction) and the dewatering contactor (Slead Construction) for the existing CSTC pond. The construction dewatering systeip for the pond excavations will need to remove ground water from both the kw perm?ability shallow] silt and silty sand soils and the underlying, higher permeability said aquifer. For the purpose of this analysis, we assumed that the static (pre-pumping) ground water level during construction will be approximately Elevation 9. The elevation of the ground. water) surface during operation of the dewatering system was assumed to be Elevation 0IFI approximately 3 to 4 feet below the base of the overexcavated sand areas that we recommended earlier in this report). This scenario therefore assumes a water level drawdown of approximately 9 feet during construction. Exc vation Dewatering Based on our recent discussions with Segale Construction and Slead Construction, the d ep well dewatering system that was operated during construction of the existing CSTC pond in 1993 was continuously pumped at a rate of about 1,500 gallons per minute (gpm) for sev ral months to maintain a ground water level at about Elevation 0. The dewatering system consisted of approximately 14 perimeter wells and 5 interior wells that were about 40 feet deep. We anticipate encountering similar soil and ground water conditions during construction of the pond expansion. The top of the pierineable sand aquifer is encountered at Elevations ranging from +7 to'-5 feet along the expansion pond alignment. The base of the sand aquifer extends to at least Elevlation -30 based on borings completed in 1991. Because of the nature of the soils and the depth of the excavation, we expect that a dewatering system consisting of multiple deep w lls located along the perimeter of the pond excavation will be needed to effectively dewater the excavation to Elevation 0. We anticipate that several wells will need to be installed in the center of the pond lobe that is adjacent to the existing CSTC pond because this excavation IIill be lip to 250 feet across in some areas. The south lobe likely will not require interior Wells because the maximum width of the excavation is about 150 feet. The wells will need to be about 40 to 45 feet deep to provide sufficient drawdown. We estimate that approximately 25 wells installed at about 150 foot intervals will be necessary to provide relatively stable working conditions at the bottom of the pond excavation. We estimate that the deep well dewatering system will need to be pumped continuously during construction at approximately 1,500 to 3,000 gpm to maintain the ground water surface at about Elevation 0. This pumping rate assumes that the entire excavation for the pond expansion (both pond lobes) are dewatered simultaneously. Our dewatering flow rate estimate is based on the results f a numerical ground water model (MODFLOW). The model incorporates aquifer properties, including hydraulic'conductivity and thickness, that we obtained from our site explorations and interpolations from itlie previous dewatering program that was carried out in 1993. A hydraulic conductivity of appI oximately 1x10 cm/s was assumed for the shallow silt and silty sand units. II G e o E n g i n e e r s 7 File No.0120-226-02-1130/042398 1 Hydr ulic conductivities ranging from approximately 2.5x10-2 to 5.0x10-2 cm/s were assumed for the permeable sand aquifer that underlies the site. The hydraulic conductivity of the sail d aquifr is back-calculated from the 1993 dewatering program at the existing CSTC pon . Becatre estimates of dewatering system pumping rates are highly dependent on estimates f hydraulic conductivity, we recommend completing a test dewatering well and pumping test at the pond expansion sllteIto verify our dewatering system flow estimate. Preliminary Construction Dewatering Cost Estimate 71 e contacted Slead dewatering to obtain a preliminary cost estimate for installing d opering a 25 well dewatering system for a period of 3 months. Slead's cost estimate f 146 452 is presented in Attachment B for review by Boeing and members of the design team DEVATERING RECOMMENDATIONS e recommend t'‘.re the excavation for the pond expansion be dewatered to at least 3 f II' et below the bottom of the excavation, which corresponds to about Elevation 0 feet. VVe estimate that a !combined pumping rate of 1,500 to 3,000 gpm will be required to adequately dewater the excavation. We expect that 4 dewatering system consisting of multiple deep wells will be required 'to provide a stable„relatively dry excavation base. The wells will need to be approximately 40 to 45 feet deep and should be located at the toe of the excavation slope if possible. We anticipate that several wells will be installed in the center of the north pond lobe. It may bile necessary to install shallow sumps connected to drainage ditches to enhance removal Id seepage from the shallow, interbedded silt and silty sand units. c • We recommend! that a number of piezometers be installed at the center of the pond excavationI to monitor the ground water levels during dewatering. Wells may be added to the dewatering system if the piezometer measurements indicate that additional drawdown is r!equired. The dewatering system should be pumped at least three weeks prior to the s of excavation t'o ;allow time for gravity drainage of water from the shallow, 1 w p er ea imblity silt'and silty sand units. lVe recommend that backup power be available for the dewatering system in the event o a plower outage. We recommend that the contractor be responsible for performance of the dewatering system r eeded to complete the work. The contractor should be experienced in dewatering in Elie l ubsurface conditions encountered at the site. We recommend that details of the dewatering system be reviewed by GeoEngineers prior to construction. This will allow us to evaluate the design is 'consistent with the intent of our recommendations, and to provide lupplemental recommendations in a timely manner. Appropriate discharge points, such as the existing stormwater detention pond, should be i designated by Being. A discharge permit will need to be obtained from the Departnent f Ecology for discharge to the stormwater detention system. Ecology typically requires 1 G e o E n g i n e e rj s 8 File No.0120-226-02-1130/04 398 I periodic water quality sampling as a condition of the discharge permit. Based on our recTt experience, one to two months should be scheduled for obtaining the dewatering discharge prmits. j SHEET PILE DESIGN Temporary shoring,will be necessary to construct the first lobe of the wetland adjacent to the a istin CSTC ond. We anticipate that driven sheetpiles will be suitable for temporgP, P P jl shoring. In our opinion, a single row of sheets will be suitable for temporary shoring. Because of the diversity of available sheet pile systems and construction techniques, the desin of the temporary shoring is most appropriately left up to the contractor proposed to complete the installation. However, we recommend that the shoring be designed by an engineer licensed in VYashington, and 'the PE stamped shoring plans and calculations be submitted to GeoEngineers for review prior to construction. The following paragraphs pres nt recommendations for design parameters that we conclude are appropriate for the subsurface conditions at the project. Two options are 'available for installing and locating the sheet pile shoring. The first optilon would consist of installing the sheet piles along the shoreline of the existing CSTC pond. The grou nd surface at this location would be approximately Elevation 8.5 feet. Once the sheet piles are iI istalled, the soils in the existing pond could be excavated to Elevation 4.5 feet using a large1 backhoe. This method would result in significant sediment loading of the pond aid possible damage to existing wetland vegetation. The second option would be to install the sh et piles in the existing (CSTC pond where the ground surface is at Elevation 4.5 feet. The sheet piles could be installed using a pond bottom on-shore crane with a long boom or using a crane located on a barge. !Based on construction records, the side slopes of the existing CSTC pond vary from 5H:1V (horizontal:vertical) to 10H:1V. Soundings should be completed by the contractor to determine the crane boom needed to install the sheet piles. We recommend t iat the second option bp used to install the sheet piles because less disturbance to the exist_ng CSTCI pond will occur with this method. The design of the sheet piles should allow for lateral pressures exerted by the water in the existing CSTC pond; and by the adjacent soil. We recommend that the sheet piles be designed using)) a lateral fluid,pressure equivalent to 62.4 pcf (pounds per cubic foot) for the portio of pile above the pond bottom (Elevation 4.5 feet) and a lateral pressure equal to an equivalent fluid density of 80 pcf,below the pond bottom. Lateral resistance will be mobilized by passive pressures on the sheet pile that extends below, the bottom of the pond (bottom of the excavation). The passive soil pressure on the embedded portion of'the sheet piles can be evaluated using a lateral pressure equal to an equivalent fluid density of 120 pcf. This passive earth pressure includes a factor of safety of 1.5. I i G e o E n g i n e e ri s 9 File No.0120-226-02-1130/04 398 I i I t We recommend that the sheet piles extend a minimum of 15 feet below the bottom of the j excavation to prevent the possibility of piping or heaving that could potentially destabilize tfle base of the excavation. The shoring should also have a minimum 2 foot of freeboard. This will result in a minimum sheet pile length of 20 feet. Longer sheet piles may be requir I , depe c ding on the design lateral earth pressures. ADDITIONAL SERVICES 11 Additional geotechnical will be required during final design of the pond expansi 'n. Addi ional dewatering evaluation should also be considered. We recommend that the follow'' g 11 additional services be included: 1. Measure ground water levels in the monitoring wells on a monthly basis between May, i998 and April,' 1999 to evaluate seasonal fluctuations in the ground water table (total of 12 measurements). 2. Review the geotechnical aspects of the final sheet pile shoring design 3. Review the proposed construction dewatering plan. 4. Provide consultation regarding shoring and dewatering of the pond expansion, as require . 5. install a test dewatering well and perform an 8-hour pumping test to validate hydraulic onductivity used in our dewatering flow estimate. 6. Prepare a letter report summarizing the results of our services. We estimate that our fee for the various tasks outlined above will be as follows: I 1. Ground Water Measurements 3,100 2. Sheet Pile Design Review 600 3. Dewatering Plan Review 600 ` 4. Consultation 1,000 5. Dewatering Well and Pump Test 10,000 6. eport 1.200 Total 16,500 e will not exceed this estimated budget unless conditions are encountered that req ire modification to the',scope of services. We will not proceed with any modification without rou prior authorization.' I , LIMITATIONS We have prepared this report for use by The Boeing Company, Sverdrup and other members of the design team for use in design of a portion of this project. This report is not intehded for use by' others and the information contained herein is not applicable to other sites. The data and report should. be provided to prospective contractors for their biddin : or i I G e o E n g i n e e r s 10 File No.0120-226-02-1130/042398 estimating purposes, but the report, conclusions and interpretations should not be construed a a warranty of the subsurface conditions. Final design details of the pond were not known at the time of the writing of this report. When the design is finalized, we recommend that we be retained to review the final design drawings and specifications to see that our recommendations have been interpreted and implemented as intended. variations in subsurface conditions are possible between the explorations and may a so occur with time. A contingency for unanticipated conditions should be included in the,bud et and Schedule. Sufficient monitoring, testing and consultation by our firm should be provided during construction I to confirm that the conditions encountered are consistent with those f indicated by the explorations, to provide recommendations for design changes should e conditions revealed during the work differ from those anticipated, and to evaluate whether or not earthwork and foundation installation activities comply with the contract plans ` d specifications. The scope of our services does not include services related to construction saf1 ty preca utions and ()Ili recommendations are not intended to direct the contractor's methos, techniques, sequences or procedures, except as specifically described in our report or consideration in design. Within the limitations of scope, schedule and budget, our services have been execute in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical practices in this area at the time the report as prepared. No warranty or other conditions, express or implied, should be understood. 4 + I I I ' G e o E n g i n e e it s 11 File No.0120-226-02-1130/042398 We appreciate this opportunity to be of continued service to you on this project. If you have any questions concerning this report or if we can be of additional service, please call. Yours very truly, 1 GeoEngineers, Inc. 1 I Shaun D. Stauffer, P.E. Project Engineer 69-""-----7- 1, o ,-c-WAsi:.C-4,, James G. Roth C'c, .,d 0 :c a: v r Project Hydrogeologist es O .Vy,. lido,00ee dify %,, STsT-I L t ? 3.9$ ordon M. Denby, P.E. Principal EXPIRESI 3 j//7CO j SDS:7GR:GMD:cp 00p:\ II0to099\0120226\02\finals\012022602r.doc i I I 1 i 1 i I I G e o E n g i n e ejr s 12 File No.0120-226-02-1130/I•2398 l I TABLE 1 GROUND WATER ELEVATION MEASUREMENTS CSTC POND EXPANSION BOEING LONGACRES PARK RENTON, WASHINGTON Ground Depth to Surface Top of Casing Ground Water Ground Water Monitoring Elevation Elevation Top of Casing) Elevation Well feet) feet) Date feet) feet) MW-38 10.2 12.24 04/09/98 3.58 8.66 04/16/98 4.05 8.19 04/21/98 4.26 7.98 MW-39 10.1 12.57 04/09/98 6.15 6.42 04/16/98 6.40 6.17 04/21/98 6.40 6.17 MW-40 11.0 13.05 04/09/98 4.10 8.95 04/16/98 4.59 8.46 04/21/98 4.96 8.09 MW-41 11.0 13.33 04/09/98 , 7.65 5.68 04/16/98 7.94 5.39 04/21/98 7.89 5.44 MW-42 13.5 16.07 04/09/98 7.02 9.05 04/16/98 7.20 8.78 04/21/98 7.29 8.69 MW-43 15.3 17.28 04/09/98 7.35 9.93 04/16/98 7.75 9.53 04/21/98 7.86 9.42 MW-44 14.9 17.21 04/09/98 7.15 10.06 04/16/98 7.45 9.76 04/21/98 7.52 9.69 MW-45 15.0 17.60 04/09/98 7.54 10.06 04/16/98 7.84 9.76 04/21/98 7.92 9.68 MW-46 14.4 17.03 04/09/98 7.56 9.47 04/16/98 7.72 9.31 04/21/98 7.71 9.32 1 000to099\0120226\02\finals\012022602-tl.xls I I a•• .1, K.-. 1 ' \... . diro• --- m,--_::_h____•:—__ ___!...,.—hitgii...--....arwpfz._ „...... N.-1.a.7.I *). ; a5eeal ' L-....."-----,• stmt. 1 -..,,..„....--,..,,... 1 .. - • •IFigir 1-- d'i i •• 14... ___ • ...41 7' -;' .--."---1--. _..,_/ . - -..- Cwilidari,41LI lik-ler.dif: :: 18 it:W:1am (gii •::_•.:-.-..4, _ 71 •alm-rtntlA ,zh //,---._2---- 74*-----A1_,‘,......_,1,47*, •• ,-. ..•.:..., • • i• 51!.744tp-icg.' -- ----- 1- ,--,"•7 ..._ iflOPri,o)04,- . ..•/ !• '--.- 1, 1". , h.k.•1 7.-<•:7,.A->5751:, 4‘-o'' LROAD ' '\.. 7.)) \ ''''.- .441-11 °' . '..":*"'f';'. ''''''''"' 411 it-A-••.“e r,':"" oppoor---7,:,itiiii - ifiK I' • 4, •-: -'--_, -"*.•-•,1 i ,.-•-,7.4„-• . <0 _ 52.'1.------..L.0,,, ' 3., ----..-;--ratil _._ CV.N. ..0k gal;,, ,,IIII:Itti r l 't,:mt,k-e,-,ve, •:,'N.:•,,„ /91:-- ., e,1'.2 1 -,,'4q-`Z_ : __7° r, --, :. : \, f,.-t.:, '.,\:,: ; • :,,-- a- - I!.; - I I l'ia. ,-_'!;,•'--)'. ,4,,,V%k:•••.- 7 ,-- 1;_,y---- It% -.. :2'• •s.\_-:72:-5 •111111 l': pp j. i' j1k__ _-;`,'S,7_ Nr07.!.,e.. -vita 1 -,..„ J• —-----"--:—.-6-a% 6:— • • i)1 in ,.Min I A1... ..„..1 lik411r I ..: 4a.lii_ A B 11 A13 i ' • 1 III ' ,li. 1 !MI 1____,11... L:‘,. . 1 1.1, 7 i gi , :ill ri.f, , 11 5 I, ..' I '',‘‘ I I I.t II 1., I 1, '..•.,-..r. -!----..i...--.06o•-- •- 1,:, NOP.. 22.1. SewageN .1:4 -fl'k.. \.• Iiit-,-..L.,---.. ralu13-' -----"" 1i.:11 /rN ....--- '1 I I ..'•-•--- . 5---- - .--- ------ d. ---\\ A• - set 2 is\\ iNy .I l' -• • ' i....-if 6./ A.EMISAII11631_ , A • ,_._ -.„7,- \ / . i .. 1 _ I-•!AIIIE••• • • m • " -1 • • . r4:. :":" Vitifik , •r',:-...... 11:. .. ; 141" "'-n's ' ' ,•4°11ji!Z:6. 1 1 k 1.••• jilt 1 1 ,dc it \ L.04' I f jff rigi I III • I'1 ilir:;;":•494 \ s,-- kz.lri.1: II\ a) .s. , • •• --s. ...,, :••• AI Cim.1 I Iii .?.. . 1 \.\_, ...____:_ s ls,;--' / '''''i 11 if • ••• l'i'.11., 1 .. rjr: 4° ---!"' . • 1 SITE 1 7III ". Al wi' -•1 ii 1 .\\ qi'. •""lrl'i Y----) ,'"ill 'e ------ 1 1 • !. .,,.,, - , 6.-11 • \ 1 N I UM Inim•-II • 1\,- 'q..v.E•2•1•ff f_s IAA lii 1, s •-•;,,t,v,i .:Li oi J., i.:1 !___—:Reservoir4ii z , i• r Z 1.Nii, -6 1 z .\. 5!,..- 4 -;.- -1-1-1 ' . .. 11: ) j 4. --:'.. ki...''WI ' •1..-----., ,/ 1 I C.5 •./M-77 rti I r.. 2.• I W.-Ec01icoli,.,CI ! '::— NI_ E.__ _1' •-' 1::... i I`1,.. 111 kli •• ••N 1 i i:;.iiii i . n 1 1 1 111,111lik —I i 1zi- ji - 1 .-- et 1 1 t I !I' ' C.-Z.ilt 1 E; i 1 C] 7• 11 I I../.11111 14 .t . A dictio .! • i•Z 1 1 i 1• 11..WVAI7: 1 1 I A - i ti 1....i! 1-••. 1 \ 94\ P :, • 1: f I fsi !;.W.: i I' .•.:.% 1..._.) - kr ..1 (Pt.\ . • g: i:.IF;40..5.: I - .„. 1 ''-----"--• .111 .'-..---/ N 0 1 0 2000 4000 APED I N imosimmit imminumm N immim SCALE IN FEET N o N CONTOUR INTERVAL 20 FEET o Reference: 1USGS 7.5' topographic quadrangle map "Renton, Wash." photorevised 1973. I VICINITY MAP 4 Geoor,Engi'neers Cr) 41410. FIGURE 1 o v) r b., _____ , ._....,.. .__..Nimpluitir i:V°7-..., iiiirtiv,;; Akerdik' s- .... 'Pl.: 1111.4)....' hi -----. ..‘ FE'E-X''\11.111-- 7•_ _- _ __-___. , __ __ __ __ _ _. • 4 irt!,:ZT..„..4a,,.., . it.. , 1 _.f .,....*. 4.44.,.: 46.- _ ---.._1_-1__1 ----_-----'-- _-. 7-_-__-__-_—____.7-_ ---_____=_ . :-_-,-----'--=-- - _ --7.1------— - __- L__=__ r ENHA dCED 54,31 ) Sr lir DIVERSE (REPLACEMENT)1ENT 89,553 SF i :11s 1i=' OFEN WATER (RE• AL GErtIENT) \ 65,41 7 SF r ' a • .;54 97 5 SFI- 44 i.\.\ :\+c• •,.* \ ,\: M REP C_M=NT AREA - 1 a o\\\:\ ia:.. .i .•: \: \.\\ AND AREA = 207 62 I rr 70,,i-••.'(-;?`i`< \ \ TOTAL MEASURE[? JETL REyfr' R a ' • \ \\\\•', 7 9\\\ \ •\ y cam'•\`\`' ::\ 1` ti 1 q4 '144 at"I., c. \ i,3, ;)a \ \.` \\ \ kii;,.:\\\ue0.\e. CL , \ \ 0Q al..am:\ t• 0w,; \: . MW-25 a \ • ,\,,; .:: .... . • ` J`.- 1 B-35 r N D 1 1 2;;;;•;-•• •• ;•••„0d • •i' a O \,- \; y \\\:\\ 1-".\ v`\.:,i,:\.\•1 \ w?F:':.: y 1 fin •-• s_S"?-- K.. MW-24 • •; MW-38 \;\` \\,..:\ : 1 ' .<<: . ._ Wit, ! \ \ o.: C.., .\.. ,s:sue. ...-"''\// i I J/i-/ .I'+ A !\. .tl 1' . i'I•',...\t „f r •r:.„..:..../„..,,...„::,:fesi::,..,..., w,....,,.."....:_,: i„..: 4..,: i...,..,, 6,.: e e?` f, ;. ;_ c .MW 0 K MW-41 E• ,. •,. Ii,x• 1 .I, v.:1,7i :4:1• it:..\\\ 1 1 T• '• ti:'.;,r• !: i'-.- ."'rx .nafi;,i- r%.\ SA.'.;>;. \ : g' . d ''. ii!i-'•- r st, ' . I i'' .i•'. • • 1.J,!. " t:' `s., \, \\3,_ _e45 r r; r,,c y: . 1:".-` -;,•aav-w.,::aS•r=s\ \\ .\j'c=... \'•\.'42 (••- _1i":•t. I..tr• x. 1 MW-36'. aw'' mot:„•:,,\,UW Al 1j.t F". • k%i'• a N:4'>..•:5P".- t tt^"ate. e_ y!//y/// i ox+ In i•v'\\\,• l.:y`-\e:'c \ \ .Jss.;...&=,...-..-&-- sw.,-.7-- --rwarr•rv,-.krr.m....;:rs-,•- vw:.c :•`e:d•;> e;' r. _ f c\. A •;.>3`.' sit , ii "• to a r 7 /s te ` y MW 44 ; r: MW 3 bars. 1 ..\ \ • • I a\:u'Sr a:a:- 4`.Ye. L°t P.._ T\.....i.; TilAtictia' rr> e....... - .„.„..•-5c. x re- .. t t 1' sA.'. G. '1 = t' co 1 lJl - - __ '-'!"_-.+i.-i-.F.:'.Y::+''X•-c••ar+". r+ y-V D TTTCCC_- r aow:. I r N \ V• • 1 t1 j/}' 11 ' - I—pF- I- ri',ISItimomple,---,,-. i tf roomomme,..,,,,-1.;;;..-,----•,,----- I L__ II N EXPLANATION: o 1 N MW-38 • MONITORING WELL (1998) I N N M W-21 ® MONITORING WELL (1991) w&Z mw_ B-35 -* BORING (1991)0 150 300 AI IA' SOIL PROFILE SCALE IN FEET tea: I fig y SITE PLAN g Note: The locations of all features shown are approximate. Geo En sneers o Reference: Plan entitled "Preliminary Wetlands Area, Longacres Office Park" by Bruce Dees & Associates, 03/30/98.FIGURE 2 v, cn 0 3 ca 0 o a) o in in in ai aui o 0 in N 3 3 a, o 4 A , A o o N A cD N 1 r) N O O 4- can i ° 4 CO d 20 - o N v mti m 20 I in MM d O r O 2 N M CO m Ground Surface 2 2 3 3 33 2 2 2 2 Silt and organic silt Existing 2 2 with occasional layers a) 10 - Pond of silty sand (ML to OL) 10 a9 4 O f- _ ZO Q Q> C I J' 10- - Fine to medium sand with 10 varying amounts of silt (SP to SM) ca 0 ai- ca NN 0 0 cD N I N 0 N I 0 HORIZONTAL-SCALE--1" =-1-Oa' VERTICAL SCALE: 1" = 10' VERTICAL EXAGGERATION: 10X Notes: 1. The subsurface conditions shown are based on interpolation between SOIL PROFILE A-A' widely spaced explorations and should be considered approximate; actual subsurface conditions may vary from those shown. GeoNOEngineers eii 2. Refer to Figure 2 for location of Profile A-A'. FIGURE 3 0 I I i I I I I V XICIN3ddV I i I I ! APPENDIX A FIELD EXPLORATIONS AND LABORATORY TESTING FIELD EXPLORATIONS Subsurface soil and ground water conditions at the project site were explored by drilling nine monitoring wells' (borings in which a 1-inch-diameter piezometer is installed) to depths ranging from 9 to 16.5 feet below the existing ground surface. The monitoring wells were j !com leted by Holocene Drilling between April 8 to April 9, 1998 using a hollow-stem auger track-mounted drill rig. Ground surface elevations at the monitoring well locations w IIre determined by surveying from the existing CSTC pond surface (assumed to be at Elevation 8.5 feet). The locations of the explorations were determined in the field by measuring distances from site features. The locations of the explorations are shown on the Site Plan, Figure 2. The monitoring wells were continuously monitored by a geologist from our firm w,llho examined and classified the soils encountered, obtained representative soil samples, observed ground water conditi1l ns and prepared a detailed log of the exploration. Samples were obtained from the monitoring wells by driving a 2.4-inch-inside-diameter split spoon sampler with a 3 - pound winch-driven hammer. The number of blows required to drive the sampler 12 inches, or jothe indicated distance, is recorded on the monitoring well log. foils were visually classified in general accordance with the classification system described in Figure A-1. A key'to the symbols on the monitoring well logs is presented in Figure A-2. The logs of the moil itoring wells are presented in Figures A-3 through A-11. The logs are based on our interpretation of the field and laboratory data and indicate the various types of I soils kncountered. It also indicates the depth at rwhich the soils or their characteristics change, although the change might actually be gradual. If the change occurred between samples, it as interpreted. The densities noted on the monitoring well logs are based on the blow count to obtained in the monitoring wells and judgement based on the conditions encountered. Observations of ground water conditions were made as the explorations were completed. Piezometers were alsoI installed in all of the monitoring wells following completion of the drilling. The piezometers consist of 1-inch diameter schedule 40 PVC pipe. The lower 2 fet of the pipe was machine slotted (0.02-inch slot width) to allow entry of water into the piezoml Clean sllaild was placed in the borehole annulus surrounding the slotted portion °f the F1VC pipe. Bentonite chips were placed above the sand pack to form a surface se 1. Ground water levels and seepage zones encountered during drilling are recorded on the monitoring well logs] Ground water levels measured in the monitoring wells are presented in Table 1. G e o E n g i n e e r s . A-1 File No.0120-226-02-1130/0423'8 1 L J LABORATORY TESTING ILhe soil samples obtained from the explorations were brought to our laboratory to conf field classifications. elected samples were tested to determine their moisture content, d density and gradation characteristics. Results of the moisture content and dry density tests are presented on.the monitoring logs. The results of the gradation tests are summarized in Fi. re A-12 1 I I I fl G e o E n g i n e e r s A-2 File No.0120-226-02-1130/042398 SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM GROUP MAJOR DIVISIONS SYMBOL GROUP NAME GRAVEL CLEAN GW WELL-GRADED GRAVEL,FINE TO COARSE GRAVEL COARSE GRAVEL GRAINED GP POORLY-GRADED GRAVEL SOILS More Than 50% of Coarse Fraction GRAVEL GM SILTY GRAVEL Retained WITH FINES on No.4 Sieve GC CLAYEY GRAVEL More Than 50% Retained on SAND CLEAN SAND SW WELL-GRADED SAND,FINE TO COARSE SAND No. 200 Sieve SP POORLY-GRADED SAND More Than 50% of Coarse Fraction SAND SM SILTY SAND IPasses WITH FINES No. 4 Sieve SC CLAYEY SAND FINE SILT AND CLAY ML SILT GRAINED INORGANIC SOILS CL CLAY Liquid Limit Less Than 50 ORGANIC OL ORGANIC SILT,ORGANIC CLAY More Than 50% SILT.AND CLAY MH SILT OF HIGH PLASTICITY, ELASTIC SILT Passes INORGANIC No. 200 Sieve CH CLAY OF HIGH PLASTICITY, FAT CLI Y Liquid Limit 50 or More ORGANIC OH ORGANIC CLAY,ORGANIC SILT HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT PEAT NOTES: SOIL MOISTURE MODIFIERS: 1. Field classification is based on visual examination of soil Dry- Absence of moisture, dusty, dry to tle touch in general accordance with ASTM D2488-90. Moist- Damp, but no visible water 2. Soil classification using laboratory tests is based on ASTM D2487-90. Wet- Visible free water or saturated, usually soil is obtained from below water table 3. Descriptions of soil density or consistency are based on interpretation of blow count data,visual appearance of soils, and/or test data. a 0 Imo SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM Geo., E o eers FIGURE A-1 I LABORATORY TESTS: SOIL GRAPH: AL Atterberg limits CP Co Impaction I SM Soil Group Symbol CS Co solidation See Note 2) DS Direct shear 1 GS Grain-size I Distinct Contact Betw-en F Percent fines Soil Strata HA Hydrometer analysis SK Permeability Gradual or Approxima e SM Moisture content Location of Change9 MD Moisture and density Between Soil Strata SP Swelling pressure 1 TX Triazial compressio V Water Level UC Unconfined compression CA Chemical analysis 1 Bottom of Boring BLOW COUNT/ AMPLE DATA: 22 II Location of relatively undisturbed sample Blows required to drive a 61-millimeter I.D. 1 split-barrel sampler 305 millimeters or other 12 N Location of disturbed sample indicated distances using a 1,334-newton hammer falling 762 millimeters. 17 0 Location of sampling attempt 1 with no recovery 1 1 10 v Location of sample obtained Blows required to drive a 28-millimeter I.D. in general accordance wit SPT) split-barrel sampler 3015 millimeters or Standard Penetration Tes other indicated distances using)a 623-newton ASTM D 1586) procedures hammer falling 762 millimeters. 26 m Location of SPT sampling attempt with no recovery Location of grab sample P" indicates sampler pushed with weight of hammer or against weight of drill rig. 1 NOTES: 1. The re der must refer to the discussion in the report text, the Key to Boring Log Symbols and the exploration logs for a proper understanding of subsurface conditions. 2. Soil classification system is summarized in Figure A-1. 0 1 0 Np c, p KEY TO BORING LOG SYMBOLS co Geo,En ' eers FIGURE A-2 1 TEST DATA MONITORING WELL MW-38 DESCRIPTION Moisture Dry Content Density Blow Group Surface Elevation(ft.): Approximately 10.2 Lab Tests (%) (pct) Count Samples Symbol OL 3-to 4-inch topsoil layer 0 ML Brown silt(soft,moist to wet) 3 - MD,GS 56 66 5 t 1 ML Gray silt with or-r-Rsional organics(very soft,wet) 2 7 - 2 co w U w w I— z - i Boring completed at 9.0 feet on 04/08/98 2 t- Ground water encountered at 6.5 feet during drilling 0 1°— 1-inch diameter piezometer installed to 9.0 feet 3 a w 1 - 1 - 1 - 4 I 1• - 1 — 1 - 5 1: - 1- - 3 6 2'— i Note:See Figure A2 for explanation of symbols LOG OF MONITORING WELL Geo Engineers FIGURE A-3 I I 1 I I TEST DATA MONITORING WELL MW-39 DESCRIPTION Moisture Dry Content Density Blow i Group Surface Elevation(ft.): Approximately 10.1 0— Lab Tests (%) (pcf) Count Samples Symbol 1 OL 2-inch topsoil layer 0 ML Brown and gray silt with occasional fine sand and organics(soft, 1 - moist to wet) 1 2 - 3 - I 1 4 - 5—1 6 - 4 . I r 21 7 - 1 II 8 - • i— cotiiccalIlio- i— z1.- 0 1•—, w MD 65 54 4 1 1 ppm"OL Dark brown organic silt(soft,wet) II - 00101it 0011k1, - NOM MOM ONO1 - Oglik 4 001011 1• - I ONOI. OWN 1 — I 001001 I- SP Black fine to medium sand(medium dense to dense,wet) 22 1" - MD,GS 26 92 Boring completed at 16.5 feet on 04/08/98 Ground water encountered at 15.0 during drilling 1-inch diameter piezometer installed to 16.5 feet I 1 - 18 - 1 19 - 1 6 20— I Note:See Figure A-2 for explanation of symbols I LOG OF MONITORING WELL Geo Engineeislikvier FIGURE A-4 TEST DATA MONITORING WELL MW-40 DESCRIPTION Moiture Dry Content Density Blow Group Surface Elevation(ft.): Approximately 11.0 Lab Tests (%)I (pcf) Count; Samples Symbol 0 i OL 3-to 4-inch topsoil layer 1 — 0 ML Brown silt with occasional organics(medium stiff moist to wet) _ 1 2 - 3 6 1 4 - 5— 1 I ML Gray silt with occasional fine sand(soft,wet) 6 - 2 7 - MD,GS 42 78 3 I 8 u) w n: 1- z g - w Boring completed at 8.5 feet on 04/08/98 2 I— Ground water encountered at 3.0 feet z p 10— 1-inch diameter piezometer installed to 8.5 feet 3 H o_w 0 11 - 1 1 - 4 I 1 - 1 — 1 - I 5 1 - 1 i I 1 3 6 20— Note:See Figure A 2 for explanation of symbols LOG OF MONITORING WELL Geo Engineers FIGURE A-5 1 I I I TEST DATA MONITORING WELL MW-41 DESCRIPTION Moisture Dry Content Density Blow Group Surface Elevation(ft.): Approximately 11.0 Lab Tests (%) (pcf) Count Samples Symbol 0 a x titi OL 6-inch topsoil layer 0 ML Brown silt with occasional organics(soft,moist) 1 2 - i 3 - 1 4 - 5— 4 SM Gray silty fine sand(very loose to loose,wet) 6 - MD 42 ' 72 7 2 ML Gray silt with organics(soft,moist) 8 w a z 9 - a p 10- 3 a I w 3 I 11 - 12 - I 13 - 4 1 SP Black fine to medium sand(loose to medium dense,wet) 1 11 1 - i , 5 17 Boring completed at 16.5 feet on 04/08/98 Ground water encountered at 5.0 feet during drilling 18 - 1-inch piezometer installed to 16.5 feet 19 - 6 20— Note:See'Figure A 2 for explanation of symbols LOG OF MONITORING WELL Geo\pl Engineers FIGURE A-6 TEST DATA MONITORING WELL MW-42 Moisture DESCRIPTION Content DensityDe Blow ! Group Surface Elevation(ft.): Approximately 13.5LabTests (%) (pcf) Count;Samples Symbol OL 4-inch topsoil layer I 0 ML Brown silt with occasional fine sand(very soft,moist) c - 1 2 2 ML Gray silt with fine sand(very soft to soft,wet) w Z - n_ 3 =0 1,—IWa. I O 2 1 - MD 44 76 1. 1` OL Dark brown organic silt(soft,wet) 4 1• 1' SP Black fine to medium sand(loose,wet) 1 8 i 1- 5 1 Boring completed at 16.5 feet on 04/08/98I1Groundwaterencounteredat10.0 feet during drilling 1= 1-inch diameter piezometer installed to 16.5 feet 1 - 4 2I— Note:See Figure A2 for explanation of symbols LOG OF MONITORING WELL Geo\OEngineers FIGURE A-7 TEST DATA MONITORING WELL MW-43 DESCRIPTION Moisture Dry Content Density Blow Group Surface Elevation(ft.): Approximately 15.3LabTests (%) (pcf) Count:Samples Symbol 0 OL 6-inch topsoil layer 0 ML Brown silt(soft,moist) 1 - ML Brown fine sandy silt(soft,moist) 2 - - 3 - 1 4 - 5- 6 - 3 ! 2 7 - w 8 - co w SM Black silty fine sand(very loose to loose,wet) z 9 - n- w 10— 3 I--o- 11 - MD,GS 40 i 12 - 13 - 4 14 - 15— 2 ' i ,ML Gray silt(very soft,moist) 16 - 5 17 - Boring completed at 16.5 feet on 04/08/98 Ground water encountered at 10.0 feet during drilling 16 - 1-inch diameter piezometer installed to 16.5 feet i 19 - I 6 20— Note:See Figure A 2 for explanation of symbols LOG OF MONITORING WELL Geo\Engineers4k / FIGURE A-8 TEST DATA MONITORING WELL MW-44 I DESCRIPTION Moisture Dry Content Density Blow Group Surface Elevation(ft.): Approximately 14.9 Lab Tests (%) (pcf) Count I Samples Symbol ML 5-to 6-inch topsoil layer 0 Brown sih with occasional fine sand(soft,moist) 1 I 4 1 i I , I I l ''' SP Black fine sand(very loose,wet) 2 j w - 3 co w I , w z - a Boring completed at 9.0 feet on 04/09/98 3p1n— Ground water encountered at 6.5 feet during drilling 1-inch diameter piezometer installed to 9.0 feet 1 - 1 4 1' - 1' — 1a - 5 1 - 18 - 19 - I 6 20— Note:See Figure A 2 for explanation of symbols Pgr LOG OF MONITORING WELL Geo E ngineerS FIGURE A-9 I TEST DATA MONITORING WELL MW-45 DESCRIPTION Moisture Content Density Blow Group Surface Elevation(ft.): Approximately 15.0 Lab Tests (%) (pcf) Count, Samples Symbol 0 r OL 5-to 6-inch topsoil layer 0 ML Brown silt with fine sand and organics(very soft to soft,wet) 1 - c - 1 2 SP Black fine sand(loose to medium dense,wet)2 w co w u_ w z - 2 z 0 14— 3 a- 10 1 MD 33 84 1 - 1 - 4 1 — 3 1 - 5 1 Boring completed at 16.5 feet on 04/09/98 Ground water encountered at 5.0 feet 1-inch diameter piezometer installed to 16.5 feet1: - 6 20 Note:See Figure A 2 for explanation of symbols 00f Imo LOG OF MONITORING WELL Geo Engineers FIGURE A-10 TEST DATA MONITORING WELL MW-46 DESCRIPTION Moisture Dry Content Density Blow Group Surface Elevation(ft.): Approximately 14.1LabTests (%) (pcf) Count Samples Symbol 0 ML 5-to 6-inch topsoil layer 0 Brown silt with fine sand(soft,moist to wet) c 1 4 - 4 2 ML Gray silt with fine sand(very soft,wet) w co u_ z - w 2 o z a io 1*— 3 a_ 1 1 - MD 40 81 1. - 1 4 1 ML Gray silt with organics(medium stiff;wet) 15— 16 - 7 5 7 -1 Boring completed at 16.5 feet on 04/09/98 Ground water encountered at 5.5 feet during drilling 18 1-inch diameter piezometer installed to 16.5 feet I I 6 20— Note:See Figure A 2 for explanation of symbols gm. LOG OF MONITORING WELL Geo Engineers FIGURE A-11 0120 226-02-JWK-:SDS:pdr-4F2-If9${seive.ppt) U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZE 100 3" 1.5" 3/4" 3/8" #4 #10 #20 #40 #0 #100 00 11 J 61[ j• 0 90 III' 111Nl\\- 80 70 Cg•0 CC4 z 50 5; co a 40 30 - 20 10 --- 0 0 0 'n 1000 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 O 7 m GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS z o I*GRAVEL SAND C =_ COBBLES SILT OR CLAY N COARSE I FINE COARSE MEDIUM FINE m SYMBOL BORING SAMPLE SOIL CLASSIFICATION NUMBER DEPTH(FEET) MW-38 3 Brown silt(ML) O MW-39 15 Black fine to medium sand(SP) - - A MW-40 8 Gray silt with occasional fine sand(ML) X MW-43 11 Black silty fine sand(SM) r t f \` 1, j I'• /: a" / 1 _J. fly-- \ r , • r. — .` / ? - ci' •_L ,.. r i-- r-- j 1• `ri ,i -` 1: 1:• l l APPENDIX B 1:: r r :'/•;- i fi r+.DEW TERING`COST EST MA E' Zvi': 5- ./ rJ: I f:: r I-II „ 4 1 I'h• \. i l N( ',' l (F - i F[ /•. - "/; .I`fir,.,\.. a /, e. I. I r 1. 1. , , ,J '1:l_•:.,1;'',. ,,J:• ;T.• .: i._ .} I,,;.. '.\ I i / fit. -. ",,,: II 12 J.. 1 1 f:: 4 1,\ . ,I° ;.. /- j- 1 r- G e :o E•In`g i n; a e;r s I FileNo;0120 226-OT1130/042398 I f[ I}`'' 1, 1i '' 7 {` r:/ _ I ' I ): ''/.L`1.::.:' I a. I • 1- I ONSTRUCTION INC. April 22, 1998 Geo Engineers 8410 154th Ave. NE Redmond, WA 98052 ATTN: Jim Roth PROJECT: Boeing /Longacres -Pond#1 &Pond #2 LOCATION: City of Tukwilla RE: De-watering Scope of Work/Quotation Dear Jim. We are prepared Ito: furnish, install, pump, maintain, remove and abandon a complete deep well dewatering system for the above referenced project. Our installation will include twenty five (25) wells approximately 40-45 feet in depth placed on each side near the toe of slope within the proposed excavation(s), or as directed by GEO ENGINEERS. Piezometers should be placed in or near by the excavation. Preferably located near the center of the proposed ponds. These piezos will help you monitor the ground water level and draw down. We will develop the wells the same day as installation. The discharge pipe and power cord will be configured to accommodate the excavation plan. We are basing our price on a one month pumping period with a monthly maintenance fee there after. Our price for the installation of Twenty Five wells (on a one month pumping period) is $80,000.00 Any and all piezometers will be $1,500.00 each. Discharge of water from each well will include 300 LF only. We will provide temporary generator power for $2,800.00 per month plus fuel. Our generators are Multi Quip Whisper Watt. If additional wells are needed add $3,350.00 each (including one month pumping period). Our monthly maintenance price per well will be $485.00, including all De-watering components. When the wells are no longer needed, we will disconnect, remove and abandon the system. BASE BID Twenty Five De-watering Wells @ $3,200,00 each 80,000.00 Three piezometers I monitoring Wells $1,500.00 each 4,500.00 Monthly Maintenance 25 EA ((p $485.00 (Three Months) 36,375.00 MQ Whisperwatt-W/550 gal Diked Tank (if no power) $2,800.00 3 months 8,400.00 Labor(reconfigure system during excavation) 2 Men ($45.00 ea. per HR Estimated 62 Hrs 5,580.00 TOTAL 134,855.00 1r-TAX ADD (if needed) I Additional wells (if needed) $3,350.00 each j5i6j Additional Mob (if needed) $ 600.00 each (drilling) The following is a list of equipment which could be used as needed to perform the above scope of work PAGE 1 of 4 DRILLING • DEWATERING SYSTEMS - CASINGS • PUMP AND GENERATOR RENTALS AND REPAIRS 9021 Waller Road East • Tacoma. WA 98446-2531 • Office: (253) 531-2409 • Fax: (253) 531-6113 Contractor License#SLEADSC-325K0 1 i ! i ONSTRUCTION INC. 1 Page_of_ ADDENDUM 'A' 1I PROJECT: JOB NO. 1, Steads v'ill not be respousililelfor the drilling or pumping of any contaminated materials. 2. Removal of all spoil piles to be the responsibility of the General Contractor,including but not limited to clean up,sweeping and coutaitunenl;of water during drilling. 3. This is not an engineered system,Slead's has no licensed geologists or hydrogeulugists in their employ. Thereto ie,Slead's does not guarantee dewatering to be 100%effective. Slead's makes no guarantees of any kind as to the results of each jab. 4. Retainae to be paid within'30 clays after removal of system. 5. Slcad's will not be responsible for settlement of any type. 6. Any relocation of or damage la SIead's equipment,once Installed,will be billed to the Owner or General Contractor an a time and materials basis. 7. Prices bused upon above ground discharge pipc installation. 8. Pumping period not to exceled13U days unless otherwise noted. Should pumping be required after the first 30 days,a hinitntun monthly ruLc will apply. 9. Well locations to be determined by mutual agreement between Slead's and Owner or General Contractor. 10. General Contractor to provide'suitable access and egress for equipment to well locations. 11. Discharge location to be provi]ed by Owner or General Contractor. 12. Discharge permits to be the responsibility of the Owner. 13. Location,protection and marking(fall underground,above ground,and overhead utilities to be the responsibility of the Owner or General Contractor. 14. Wells tc be abandoned by Slead's licensed driller according to Department of Ecology Standards. 15. Slead's will provide a drilling'safety plan'to General Contractor upon request.16. Slead's will provide a Certificate of Insurance to the General Contractor upon request 17. Unless otherwise noted,a required Department of Ecology start card to be acquired by Slead's: However, submitting to Slead's the legal description of the property within three(3)days prior to drilling is the responsibility of the Owner or,General Contractor. 18. General Contractor may,litany time prior to completion,by written order request changes in the Work specified ' in Slead's proposal. Said climes shall not become part of this Contract unless agreed upon(including any resulting additional charges)try Slead's. My other written order or oral order(including directions, instructions,interpretations or determinations)from General Contractor,which causes any such changes,may be ' treated as a change order,Provided that Slead's gives General Contractor notice within ten(10)days of such ardor stating that Slead's regards the order as a Change Order. lithe work resulting from any Change Order causes an tincreaseinthetune required for the performance of any part of the Work under this Contract,Slead's shall be entitled to an equittable extension of the lime and compensation for performance and materials. 19. All water pumped from wells are the sole responsibility of General Contractor or Owner. Any testing or treatment of water or special handling is not included in price quoted. 20. Any performance bond,permits,special licenses at Contractor or Owner's expense. 21. All breaking out of concrete,asphalt or obstruction of other materials is the responsibility of General Contractor or Owner. 22. All bart}cades,flagging and traffic control is to be provided by the General Contractor or Owner. IN WITNESS WHEREOF,1 the parties hereto,acting through duly authorized persons,have executed this Contract as of the day and year set forth below: SLEAD'S CONSTRUCTION;INC. : GENERAL CONTRACTOR: I ! C _ By: c: Vice President Title: Date: I , Date: DRILLING DEWATERING(SYSTEMS - CASINGS - PUMP AND GENERATOR RENTALS AND REPAIRS 2703 96th Street East •;Tacoma,WA 98445.5733 - Office. (206)531-2409 • Fax: (206)531-6113 Contractor License MSLEAPSG'325K0 TOTAL P.05 j 11 I r.•? l kl it '`°''' .'' iAyr;, ::.. BEFORE THE CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNINGBUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS OFFICE OF HEARING EXAMINER IN I' MATTER OF THE APPLICATION THE BOEING COMPANY'S FOR A SPECIAL G' 1• DE AND FILL MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF PE' I T FOR THE LONGACRES OFFICE SPECIAL GRADE AND FILL PERMIT PARK SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT, LUA-098-127, SP, ECF I 1 I I i A. BACKGROUND I.INTRODUCTION - I ongacres Office Park("LOP") is a corporate office complex owned and developed by The Boeing Company on the site of the former Longacres Park Racetrack. The 1994 Enviro ental Impact Statement("EIS")prepared by the City of Renton("City") analyzed a preferr d alternative Master Plan for LOP. Boeing's principal objective for LOP is the establis ent of a site i hat can be rapidly developed on an incremental basis in response to changi g market condiiions, corporate organization, and employee population. rinl The preferred Alternative Master Plan proposes the construction of approximately 15 buildin s on the 164 acre site over 15-20 years. To date, property immediately north of the LOP site has been devel ped by Boeing for its Customer Services Training Center(1993). Within Ithe LOP campus itself, the Boeing Commercial Airplane Group Headquarters building I is now complete and the Boeing-Renton Family Care Center(a day care facility for children o f j1 THE B EING COMPANY'S MEMORANDUM IN jSUPPORT OF SPECIAL GRADE AND FILL PERMIT - 1 03003-01 9/SB982790.207] I is-on: A I I I 1 Boeing employees) is scheduled for completion in November of this year. In addition, the City has recently completed construction of an extension of Oakesdale Avenue, which serves as a major access to LOP. 11 B. ROPOSED ACTION The preferred alternative Master Plan includes a centralized surface water management project ("SWMP") desligned to support full LOP buildout. Boeing proposes to construct the1 SWMP as the next phase of the LOP so that additional buildings on the site can be permitted and constructed on a relatively rapid and efficient basis, consistent with Company objectives. The project invlolves construction of an open water wetland ("LOP Open Water Wetland")which will expand the southern boundary of the existing CSTC pond. See, E IT A attached. South of the open water wetland and connected to it by culverts, the project includes a combi o ed wetpond/detention pond ("Second Stage Pond"). In keeping with the drainage design concept of the adjacent CSTC system, LOP stormwater will be routed from p rking areas to first stage facilities (grit removal vaults), then to the Second Stage Pond, t en to the LOP Open Water Wetland and finally to the CSTC Pond, channel and delta areas. See, EXHIBIT IAI. Later phases of the surface water management system will include installa ion of piping and other infrastructure necessary for construction of individual I buildings. I ndividual components of the SWMP include: ading: l Grading for storm water ponds and wetland mitigation. P nds: I Construction of open water wetland and wetpond/detention pond, connected by culverts. Irrigation: Extension of the existing Boeing irrigation system to support new wetlands and upland plantings surrounding the ponds. 1 1 1 THE B EING COMPANY'S MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF SPECIAL GRADE AND FILL PERMIT - 2 03003-0149/SB982790.207] I 1 I 1 I 1 I i Lake Aeration arid; lecirculation Sytems: Extension of existing Boeing aeration and recirculation systems 1 to provide lake water mixing and aeration. iI etlands Filling I, 1 a 1 d Mitigation: 1 Creation and restoration of wetlands to mitigate for filling of 1 some Category 3 wetlands, resulting in a total of approximately 1 5.0 acres of Category 2 wetlands at the completion of the project. I Erosion Control:I Major earthwork activities will be scheduled during the dry I season, a sediment pond(s)will be implemented if necessary and clearing limits and perimeter protection will be installed. Areas outside permanent landscape limits will be stabilized. C. REQUIRED PERMITS AND APPROVALS 1. Permits and Approvals Issued Pursuant to Hearing Examiner Approval Construction of the SWMP is subject to a Special Grade and Fill Permit issued by the Hearin. Examiner pursuant to Chapter 4-10 of the Renton Municipal Code ("RMC"). 2. Permits and Approvals Issued by the Department of Planning Building/Public Works ("Department") In addition to the Special Permit issued by the Hearing Examiner, the SWMP will require an annual grading license issued by the Department pursuant to RMC 4-10-5 (A). It I will also require Departmental approval of wetland filling and mitigation proposed as part of the pro ect pursuant to Ch. 32 RMC. H. PROJECT COMPLIANCE WITH SEPA MITIGATION MEASURES On September 22, 1998, the Department's Environmental Review Committee issued a mitigated determination of nonsignificance DNS-M for the SWMP. No appeals of that I , determination were filed.' THE BOEING COMPANY'S MEM()RANDUM IN I SUPPORT OF SPECIAL GRAD AND FILL PERMIT - 3 03003-0149/SB982790.207] 1 The DNS-M establishes three project conditions designed to mitigate adverse impacts. Boeing will implement each condition as part of the project III. PROJECT COMPLIANCE WITH SPECIAL PERMIT I REQUIREMENTS A. THE SWMP IS CONSISTENT WITH SPECIAL PERMIT CRITERIA ESTABLISHED BY RMC 4-10-3(B)(2) Pursuant to RMC 4-10-3(A)(2)(b) and RMC 4-10-3(B)(1), excavation or grading in excess of 500 cubic yards requires a Special Permit granted by the Hearing Examiner. Becaus the SWMP wllirequire excavation of approximately 80,000 cubic yards of soil and the use of approximately 14,000 cubic yards of fill, the project requires a Special Permit. I To grant a Special Permit, the Hearing Examiner must make a finding that the project propos-d will not be "unreasonably detrimental to the surrounding area." RMC 4-10-3(B)(1 . Factor- that the Examiner must consider in making this determination include: I a.Size and location of the activity; b.Traffic vglumes and patterns; c.Screening, landscaping, fencing and setbacks; d. Unsightliness, noise and dust; and e.Surface drainage. RMC -10-3(B)(2).1 1, Consideration of these factors indicates that the SWMP will be an asset, not a II detrim nt, to the LOP!site and surrounding area. 1 II 1 Because the SWMP is not an"existing operation,"factor(f)under RMC 4-10-3(B)(2), which requires Hearing Examiner consideration'of"the length of.time the application of an existing operation has to comply With nonsafety provisions of this Ordinance," does not apply. I1 1 THE BOEING COMPANY'S MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF SPECIAL GRADS AND FILL PERMIT - 4 03003-0149/SB982790.207] 1 , 1. The Size11and Location of the SWMP Will Not Have an Adverse Impac$on the Surrounding Area The SWMP is the surface water management component of the preferred alternative I Master Plan for LOP. It will also serve to mitigate the filling of several low-quality, Category 3 wetlands currently located on the LOP site. The specifications for these combined functio s- surface water management and wetland mitigation- are established by the Renton Munici al Code and irifi ence both the size and location of the SWMP. In particular, the jSecond Stage Pond has been sized to provide water quality treatment and a portion of the detention for future LOP buildout under the preferred alternative Master Plan. The size of the Second Stage Pond is consistent with the City's requirement II RMC 4-22-8(A)) of doubled surface area and doubled dead storage volume to eliminate the need f r biofiltration. i The wetland mitigation component of the SWMP project (including the open water wetland and surrounding vegetated wetland areas)will result in increased (Category 2) wetland functions and values and has been sized in accordance with the City's wetland mitigation requirements,(which require no net loss of existing wetlands. I SWMP is centrally located on the LOP site--approximately 425 feet from LOP's western boundary, 900 feet from Oakesdale Avenue, and 2,200 feet from the southern I bound . . This locationlcreates sufficient buildable area on the remainder of the site to suppori the preferred alternative Master Plan and enables restoration and enhancement(rather than filing) of significant portions of a relatively large Category 3 wetland just south of the I existing CSTC pond. The project will improve the habitat value of the LOP site and will not be a de riment to the surrounding area. j 1I THE B i EING COMP ANY'S MEMORANDUM IN I SUPPORT OF SPECIAL GRADE AND FILL PERMIT - 5 03003-01 9/SB982790.207] i 1 1 l 1 I I 1 1 1 1 I 2. Traffic Volumes and Patterns Required for Construction of the SWMP Will Not Have an Adverse Impact on the Surrounding Area The SWMP will not generate traffic following construction. During construction, the project will generate construction traffic, primarily to export approximately 70,000 cubic yards o excavated material to Cedar Mountain Sand and Gravel and to import approximately 7,000 cubic yards of strutctural fill. Over its estimated 3.5 month excavation period, the project will generate approximately 42 truck trips per day during the hauling hours required by City Code(8:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m.). The constructiC8 haul route has been designed to avoid travel through residential l areas. The route will access the project area through the SW 27th Street entrance at the south end of:he LOP site. Trucks will follow SW 27th to Lind Avenue SW, then follow Lind to 180th treet and turn left on 180th. Trucks would continue on 180th to State Route 167 northbound to I-405. Trucks would continue north on 405 to State Route 169 (Maple Valley Highw y), then follow Jones Road SW to Cedar Mountain Sand and Gravel. 3. Project Landscaping Will Improve the Habitat Value and Aesthetics of the LOP Site SWMP serves to mitigate impacts of filling a number of Category 3 wetlands with th- creatio of a large(approximately 5 acre) Category 2 wetland. Landscaping with native 1 wetland plant species is, therefore, a major component of the project. Emergent wetland 1 plantings will include common spike rush, small-fruited bulrush, slough sedge, dagger-leaf rush, a d false Solomon's seal. Seeded grasses will include tufted hairgrass, red fescue, rice cutgra s, mannagrass, ;arid western reedgrass. Tree species will include black cottonwood, r-d alder and western red 'cedar. Shrubs will include red-osier dogwood, clustered wild rose, re U 1 elderberry, showberry arid Indian plum. 1 THE BIOEING COMPANY'S MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF SPECIAL GRAD AND FILL PERMIT - 6 03003-01 9/SB982790.207] 1 II 1 1 i For visual coniinuity and to increase overall habitat value, the same native landscaping Jj program will be used Within the fringes and around the LOP Open Water Wetland and the Second Stage Pond. See. EXHIBITS A and B, attached. SWMP landscaping will be an ass t to both the LOP site and the surrounding area. 4. The SWMP Will Not Cause Unsightliness, Noise or Dust Following the End Iof the Construction Period Noise generatIed Iby SWMP construction activity will be caused by equipment used for earth virork and to haul excavated materials (i.e., backhoes, truck/trailers, landers and I bulldozers). Construction noise should not exceed standards established by the Renton Code. Dust generated by SWMP construction will be controlled as required by all applicable standa ds including, as required, those established by PSAPCA and DOE. The construction I area will be sprinkled on an as-needed basis and off-site hauling equipment will be washed to control dust during construction. Following completion of grading activity, all graded areas II will be landscaped or hydroseeded to control dust and erosion. Unsightliness will be limited to the construction period. Following construction, the projec will be heavily'landscaped with native wetland species with an appearance similar to 1 the CSTC landscape program directly to the north. 5. The SWMP Will Centralize and Improve Surface Drainage From the LOP Site Through the CSTC Site to Springbrook Creek As described above and illustrated by EXHIBIT A, SWMP will create a centralized surfac water management system, routing surface drainage from grit removal vaults to the Second Stage Pond, through the LOP Open Water Wetland, then through the CSTC Pond, chann 1 and delta areas. Later phases of the system will include the infrastructure necessary to suppo individual buildings. Implementation of the SWMP will not increase the rate or i i THE OEING COMPANY'S MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORTUPPORT OF SPECIAL G' ' t E AND FILL PERMIT - 7 03003-0149/SB982790.207) ' I 1 1 i volume of water that 4uently runs off the site to Springbrook Creek, increase temperature, or dec ease oxygen con lent of the outfall. The SWMP is designed to improve the water quality of runoff from activity and time of retention. B. THE SWMP IS CONSISTENT WITH RELEVANT SPECIAL PERMIT CRITERIA F7t LAKES, SLOPES, SETBACKS, CUTS AND FILLS RMC 4-10-13 establishes criteria for created lakes. In particular, RMC 4-10-13(A) states 'hat: The restoration of any site which results in the formation of a lake shall be the result of careful planning and shall take into consideration all factors which contribute to the ultimate ecology of the site.2 Becau e the SWMP increases wildlife habitat on the LOP site and is designed to improve the water a uality of site runoff, it meets this criterion. RMC 4-10-13, 114, 15 and 16 include criteria for slopes, setbacks, cuts and fills. In genera, these criteria(provide for the safety of cuts and fills by requiring appropriate grades II for cuts, fills, and finished slopes and adequate setbacks from surrounding structures. The project i meets all such relevant criteria. In particular, lake bank slopes and cuts are a maximum of one vertical: three horizontal; setbacks from existing and future Boeing buildings will exceed those required by RMC 4-10-14(B)(2); and fills necessary for the project which does not inclu I e any buildings)will be at slopes not to exceed one vertical: three horizorttal. 1 I 1 I 2 RMC 4-10-13(3)also requires measures to inhabit growth of vegetative matter in recreational lakes. As thel SWMP includes no recreational lakes,this criterion does not apply. I 1 1 THE OEING COMPANY'S MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF SPECIAL G E AND FILL PERMIT - 8 1 03003-0 49/SB982790.207] I IV. CONCLUSION For the reasons set forth above, the Hearing Examiner should approve issuance of a Special Grade and Fill Permit for the SWMP. DATED: Octobler 20, 1998. PERKINS COTE u By "JIM Laura N. Whitaker, WSBA#19110 Attorneys for The Boeing Company Ii II THE BOEING COMPANY'S MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF SPECIAL GRADE AND FILL PERMIT - 9 03003-0_49/SB982790.207] I I L .. j • 11,1 ; PROPOSED LEdEND I THE D. W 1901IHf RNNFR GIja, E I - ---1 11 ,i I 1• N i:. I I I WESTERN Rm CMAR1 r RED.um I Ir 2' •I 9M AM1 471 RIIFFF 1•(ELEV.11.0 m 160) UNDERSTOOD'TREES BLD(3HRUBS2S01f- L •'% I:-• BLDG 25+30 1 . . . . ,«,ems f'._ '1 ;IL GRgRcwvERS/FERNS MBEEELLyE6.Bt 10.0 TO 11.0) UNDDERORY 1 CIttiSSES/Utd1N000VER5/EEIOS o1`RIIR/ANTAIR wmator(ELEV.90 10 10.0) NCH SHRUBS WINO GRASSES 1 :• q9:^.'i7 i.. ..........(ELEV.DO M 9.0) V •/ we-wE1LAN0 L7tAS5E5 f'C ; r:`E•,f F O T=A0UARC WFRAIDD(ELEV.Ss TO S0) ti. .'Fir''f•-: RfHIING NOINTNS r:.... OPEN WA1FR wERArGy(E1F/.13-) v,_ l Ho RANRIfS i .. / V i •'.;'YG ,tt 'ice; f,r. MEA o6TURRF Br NEW CONSTRUCTIONs../ , •.„i • a\NIOROSEEDN6 1 14..y.-4,--.wis,..(tAk ..-‘....:'-',....1.:',!:"i :. / / / ,. il. i.;/-0'' 4-4' --•`4- 2•414,--„V—If,...:.--.::•:,,,,it•- •----%.4':::?:',..;:::„-----_-,--zEccIFZI BYs ' xitt : BED_ -, w r';o 4.,. .'FC tit€ -:.;•::.,f- STORMWATER I .• I IVY`;''r.'::'..'`'.n'',':'. i'y.ai'x.: --2 1•.6x7i:-•....\ t TREATMENT POND 1 CSTC.AN'DSCAPE \ PR61ECf u1RLs xk._,.c.z<:,v' ";;-;!,./o•;,,, `... i -µ•1G. s1ilii,l i 4,-.:A.?;:.`v°:. _ .,:„.O i z- z....•..+ L'' ,r,r.+{ '.: 3.:?'... ,.-i+•.1-nd mar OF utFw 'if: e,a,-zhr.:: - _ •,I e iY" i•'?:• .y.s,T".. ..,.... ..---. ..:. .."11OISIIIRBFDBY': 4,1 SA 0, % .•tiny \ S•+ •rryek'.,.+,'..x.< A.41,4.,-..7.!? 14.-: .r••••'+:of.. /ii a r'1 COESIRUCIWN v, .." A.7w-^cr 4,,y 4tjr. ,,: ' '-4Y. J t:tua_ 7a:°l.:••.....r +..•-:':a, rT.. j/o,. Li 1ri• i'linn., . '`.: - . R/ - ""w:: ., iiiiii ///%/// ,/ ////// i/I;;1, i i' EXISTING PROPOSED' 41-::- Y/ .a„•., .4.:_\ ii/ ///%/////// ///, ;„ ',;;' ? ;JJ(h%;;. ail:'/Y:. ilMAINPONDMAIN'EOND l .:.4/,: // e.__ o.'p . :: . V.•,/ r. .w.,.:" 1,0 /1.. 1 v'. max. :I .,,,Z.,..,,/_%/ r 0 I f:a ..... ;.P, J• / IIArIf/Ytl i///i0/Bill.....•. i•iii. w....._.: .,^, lu'. i.-,•'. ii/-////i/!I/ y- k. n,. . _fx am`a-x: ...1•..l iii 'n..,s, rYYN IIL.IIII wr.+:..-caw rcwz _ i 4. i: lily,, >,iii.-.. •a. =_ 1 Y // /! /J/„ s. F _...__r-.sue- _..., y-....__ - _- _ ..__ HiWFLT win P. .;:: /%!•y ... -__ ca^.-rM^.+.- OLSNRBED BY 1 y y.. 1 LIIYIS ply.:.. ... UYR OF AREA i _ WESIRUORON) wEILNro MRIGARON AREA STORMWATER TREATMENT AREA o so' uo' 180• BRUCE' BSESk W- ASSOCI ESo_ ra• Iw ago' j'//\ GRAPHIC SCALES We —IC 9. moo. Fr rm. OR pm Nog. a re DM ACCFPT. UT LE/60I 01,1,8 W.". ' FIGURE 3Lgym ° R)S19E, BOE/A/G o. PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN 9r9IZI m-b OWL NOSIER L!#lUCRES oR%E RAM(--. tiTD- L I I Ate,EED UPIA D VEGETATED WETLANDS 9 aPEN WATER 9 S E7DSIDq - YE zs-2o DIiFER vrE) ELEV.11.0-1+ E1EV.3-0-20) Vg A7E WEILAN IJPVV10fEJ(13, LANDSCAPEAREA3PNUSTRICAI6A ECgtS,ED(Pro) l*a\71'' PSS) .4 (PEN) 9 (PA9)P PAL B (Elfll.10.0-11.0) P LT3TRPIE AQUATIC)PAlk; EL 4; LY.6. f(PETIT FIEND(PS51 E EV.DS-60) 01E6 aD-Y-0) (ELEV.9.0-LTA) Af'-f;ria i 25 cs`^ `.., n odd oKn ylic--,4 25 diarolemarr io . r• 3EATIG WATER 1'•1. 1: c-:Slf_" I -_i•P. C_.. r FI. r.•1f , .. __ 13 S SPA T-.--,.. .. m .• Y i _ _1w..r c •a. s-o-- u*u,sa;-.n,. PDHDDOTiGY"F1Fl.• a. T PATH... .. .. .. Oa CROSS SECTION CALE 1 GRAPHIC D TVEROT 2t 37 SC.ALES:0 20• IV m HORIZONTAL SLOE aci 1 I I BRUCE g;L 1 - DEES& A -— ASSOCIATES ACCEPIA9ILIIY SS.Med a 9B N. o obrt 4.nwi rd. utter• 1BOE N FIGURE 4d. LANDSCAPE CROSS SECTION da 979121 m-. I 1 7,- 41:i., gip '•;!..i • '. . çi It7,74: - 4.,, Z4r:: t • in • 4' -• k. ,, .la I, 4:et• WV \Mt I,* . .; . 1*-. 1' 4 s 1 II' •• '-,''''.:41 ' '•4' a adaamanma•amm..........a......-... raw•- CU) EE 4 v 4 ji II 0 f C4ll!" .r laaI• . 04 C4C4I. Atv-1040- 1 b • - • 1.. ,........ z ... , ,.. . Ik.• ••,1 7.' / L--. - 4,,,t. • • i::)-. . i Li .11'1 i _ .," , , 4. .,,',.' II. W• 74. )„, i t -t L 1 i i•-••• --- 4,•••- i ll.61 • t . Ims' -1110, ill 4 A e 1 . , V' 111 I Ili,,abo..44, •,4-wii . . -",,Ilk ....'', '..1 -_ ---,, 4r , — .1V•••••• '41.4 I a .' 4'(.. :...-1 IMt. .....;....„ -• -lel .A' ''' • '0..i 15174. Oa. 11111 s - . . ,I 4 _ ,4.••••,.. 0t1 \ .. si.lit / 4 w_ 1 - — N 7 . . It— . -,' ,•• itaiii.. 4* 4= 1........ r 1 4 •max 1 \- • i. - - 4,. , T—TIP 4I - 4111P: 2 911164.•7, 006: 11, c0.,,1 ,,;,. • '''' o**.*.- -...... - :, •••••- „" 4.7-•-•_\eilkw-----"Vi 1 rt r„ 40,s-:..;--.., \caort T$•• k ' 11 ....on Ir.,. ,, .,_t r'-- t•• .IN' • 4.' ir1fliilaria.le •c.-:.-.•••-•-•,,-: ' 11,P•It•-_, :i istaraimma A, .4. - 41/i ,if - s' .........-•••••,-`'*---- S.' ri, t, •- t,. P• 4: ... ! •,- c 4..;* 4 lif - v'' if i-. • . ' .. --,- i 4, 14811AW • 4,,,i0r,; . 9 -. •,... . 4 ( . if 4 ' ' • 4110440aaaalar•• -._._ L. F-tF - 1 - :,', - 21 ' 1.1010111 at ,. :-• I . - C 1 • a•‘• e A', ni .• I 6 ' ilt 4.4 ,\-• ".,,, „ f .4•••-" 111111 1' 4"., ,- . __-, .. tt -,9 pi* AI • Tr---...... 3 it.i. •• I__ , ' ,-- 15. i ,T riAl ilQ •' ' ittP). .% 4 " . 140, 111.1. 7p. ''.---- 414MENVII airp. ' % A 1 4 i •° e.--•-- .?'; 11/11. • 4,* j.*!Ilit...iii-e- ' •0 4. N.N,C 4'•• - 4,/,• • —'' '.2 . :ifs . * ' 4 ''..,.. ..-_,,` ' ' .r, . • . ..„, . r, '( rV , , r- irs 4, ,,, .• ..,..i. •.• . ,...---/ i., 11---. ..ve z.417 •• • ,,•),% \\.,.•.. A', 4.,_--,.:•,5 l••- I.,'Ssa ea- is. . .,\"l.,.. i.k•'I3 l/• f • ", 4 1. " i, 9.. I•. y.t ii \ lk S. e-t--.,''', 4•.'\.•' 6. r[-•• '. i1i i: i.•:. 41,-.. s . •‘•. l i•./ 1 AI-. 1 t• r ' ft, .N ' / . --..-- ••/':e r.V.411c1 - ' . illii''' e 2....., y . . 7 1 I ,St vii .. 1 14 7th St mcult.I oliday Inn 9 N co W N 01° co m o AICa a m, 9 a ritgdilim tri L m SW 1 fith qS • 1\ 44, Ho od ore i, -- oSuitesSef s 9t* f( Tukwi:) u, PRo7Ec-T M- 618[ ,11 S 1 E IkliT 1 1 etarr<11 aos• • AT lit Qo s• A Sara t r SW 27th t Li d of I rr,, n( lrniirtle- er81v• y 4th St Suites- m r let Seattle uc. ernt2r o Q m h hampt6n Inn- ts 616 co , Q 16 Sea tile aS17thStouth;enter) Q h w 5 coi W c 9h in m wca o 4 r . In erfill al ac : i; o.) 4 ui N x c 0 SW 41st St Gs.ft a) 1I@tn St_ r Q s 180t St 5 8o?sT 416.110 o co h Q a 7 a 7n.c Q co 1 BOE/NG Longacres Office Park Surface Water Management Project CD Excavated-Materi-aiiiaul-Routeh cs A r. n'K RI f`NF;tC""`:..;''`ter-..:y; ::•:. Z O co v a. ;.:..K:.: ,;:>: .Z.,.,;:• a.NBC a Co cO St w v.>M1. ' `°COY: ;S. 4. 0 sss k JfD.A ..?.<.;:;.. >i'm t••••:A„,;?,c,›':•-:11 i . 3rd SE 1281h St tu 1J;; is 5:k •:s yrZ` w'h'iFi; lea v,i• fray-' `:}:icy.; 'r T;•t" `...;i`*''`,ri..,:.. q.` ,„,-I.r,:````•.gl". ,- ,S' lLa, t" ?yY i;•'::^ .. ':` / i > net n `"x<};, .>::. 1110 Jones Rd 98058 35 y.,i. <. ::' 19840 SE Jones Rd Renton WA M..Wiz:.. l S T Pi`i ^; Or A v•ry-.gin'v wZ ,\"',', .t-•,Sys; _•i;'}'. :zet. t ova. Kett k hr:`. ice(.: a3 ll f iµ'.`V i;c yf W i< LU 31 il 169) r; 6 76th16 i Y.Aiiii...........:•:"..4. i___., 0%- 8-.._ _. . __ 4\ a 521 ... 1' t BOE/NG Longacres Office Park Surface Water Management Project fi xcavated Material Haul Route s IIirir1: f O PROPOSED LEGENDN n MOUNT RAINIER GRID; II III 1 1i Nr , Cj ICED jLLDER rCEDAR I 1 tJD/1ME7LAND SUFFER: (EIEV. 11.0 TO 16.0) BLDG. 2S•Ol tIUNOERS'TORY TREES 0. BLDG' 25.20 HIGH SHRUBMAPS I. T. r 4 r'I r O 4 LOW SHRUBS r i-, 1 " -, .I eg II,, r GRIlSS6/GROUNDCOVERS/FERNS i'Di' a... 10.0FORESTEDTO11 ) r II UNDERSTORII'TR A r LHIGHOW SHRUBS cs., . 7 r:; J ). z i Low SHRUBS r GRASSES/GROUNDCOVERS/FERNS r •l c, r.scae/SHRUB wETAND; (ELEV. 9.0 To 10.0) f.) lezi . itooritub.,, v i 'I, . •, - -• • . •---',•• . r HIGH SHRUBS WETLAND GRASSES v t `- •Q' o r• +„ EMERGENT WETLAND; (ELEV. 8.0 TO 8.0) r J 1 •W (rt— n ' it C} •d 4} 1 r er; q.,' :-,,,,45. 7' ..(' / ,,-- - ,.. -- 2.._....,, „ J, / jt \` r^ 1• a=mlauf ,aa...,\, >y " .,.,1 AREA DISTURBED BY NEW CONSTRUCTION i ii7/,' J : , 1 ', y.i Jr-A4e.in., !r•'-tii 'r'1'`- ) HYDROSEIDWG 6 N,‘N.,-,'\•I ‘. ..:-.'....'•; .' '. nc, •-' -.1k-'•71%• %NV' • '' r Is;• r ECT LIMITS7 ' 1 ! 0 st 1, E r •' f 4e a M(t AREA i ';'r'• r \ Ate)'-. ;°"'ZA ;,p:• '' z:; i ' NS TRUCi1O! 1 o I I `ili' s: a \"y11i.. j) s;,'4fllfl,/r ,'-`,.:) pQ Fri t i `: I!F"` ' TREATMENT', r. „t a .:,\ • POND r,' CSTC LANDSCAPE i, : PRaEcr ulMrrs I .,,,,J z; .+r4- -0140 ,,- ``,1, • 6 ':;\ ., T -, r+ .. ''•• 11 I:' UNIT OF AREA bt 3•i' • /.. I • ( f' I tfi, A. v . t+b v . 11y BISTURBm eY l a, fig G .h • fi' r, '`(; 1... CONSTRUCTION) _: ' M . J41:, r,, o Y j l Eli / ¢ .'..-! t, .7q 7''` 1 \'••,t- p.S .. !0-.!jot, Syr" f, ,.jt;'tq, y r', ' lovor: i 411..r wQ•'\ -i•,• t N a 1 V,ri is t,I r 1, t' ` , i6`T- _ wA „! A.f I, - r' J 1 t I1 .'; t , yh`• ' •A` *r`r' -:,<' I ' ' r ro Ar G i' ice'' i I!, ate • `'ef '. E j,..4 !tPs„.• 4\•s +• + n ?1S ,. t• 4 c Q I- l E er ,e ' A ' I' , R ' mr 0 O t r - n./,. -xb y.' ," d' , -,•-i,li- ( 0.; i t , /1•'+' ., .pS 1 G I' i-- -- --- EXISTING yam_/ 7' J; t j){ . ld •RO ' S D ~,; 1; ' j 3A i; r _ , xs,t.,,;.,• 1 ;, _ 'r j 1' i!f J/)/ 7 ;' • _ y,• e.y,_. -. •"w, .I,' i• /,, fi l'/`•. r/. ,. i..H'N, w F .,,'.' -` it '_ ;• ';, :t I'- lh 1 S3 MAIN POND f:r y" rP 4. tM•Y%fl r',,( r `Il li• `•, a v'•. M,•, ~•• i J .- ok 1 •'. f,'_j 'i;l % s ll i t i • s 41 ` i''.(',I t .4'I , (I ( • \.`Z -;•1 It...-•!:. 'v ._.. _ t'y y -` i .` //r, /y 1`I p l.:ram-. -- '..._ --."-"_. _It 1 I; I + 7744.- -\:.,\ , a.l_ H•'1! o,l•' '7/ .•- / 3iP i ate, as- i4 1 ( <Ii/i I or d •,„i tri: .__: _.: - - -.••,- /,•:.I./..Y,;r! ''f r r/l' J T' I I'r i lip Lam' tr 'aal`'.'. ti".' flt . a°`..." ' mil^' .rL Lai IM .ii •E4FF y, I , I• ., •/.Jf b \i ( / fit T"_u r. . o' A/'/J, . / I \ Y' .-•, t_d ti p v„ -C .. - -•F'.'ae Q +l Y. ' 1, '4 ¢ • C' an ••, _ - 4 }.,p,u6,. ! , c/ , • 1 . / 1 a: V$',i .w. •.=-t.z';...,.;..-, ;t . f /Il.f I I. f7 i F+•-:` z.,. .\,` •. SG r Grp-,,iM„ ji.I I I 7 i.`f i%.!' .,'. :'tw« C f kt.r .... ..„"--- / .• L•• e. 'Ili I •ill.e4• •S •.,• e-a: -`. 'ti.. vFaf ;•:,uSVGI, • --'" -..i-. ;jam../l'*• /' ' Y':' P / %s+ia tl: ,•'+' p P o 1.. ..,111 U, [ry'i' y" • ,j '.'.',''.a'rI,/,r''N'c'!' r..,r ••ft' f' i r 4--_p '- 'i•It.. I I:.tl III i 11 I4 .. r ' 4.. 1 / / S` i' ''a#,. , q•...w+5r4 v-t V r ."^t w.!' S 3a d,n.I.L• + A 1 I,., r y.. /y ry,r`!tL t... t: •rv> ra,1. .',^ r M f s! h.U'' i t, ;i I'._ •-.i_ mile-` /./' / /l i s ',iC 1.::c iva• r'lyY w i st•!! •"•,. rJ,t v c'r/} r •al .^j' aif¢j• 1 jr 75}' M} n ,0' 1 dsu«t r.,a_..r i//f' / •A7,.r;' '_:t'..: .°iy°1....'40.T-'. s1'z1i.; --i ry.G.-'wa_ . '\' ' z• 4^' - r"'.1'/ /I-. ;' • st..;`•r.a`_..._.- ,'; 444_• r'? ' '-7 /'' %Y v.::i`IS It w t: l i/ e y.'% ; -rJ ::r'' e a ice-$'f'f1a'` ,-.. C7 1+ - C ' At f U j'' iff ek* r.w n. 17.=-'w wti>>-.., '^ajw-.' 4:•4 pl 4 t.. .',Jl' r` F !' i •// 4_ = n`-•^ ii w•K"".=i - '`.•`.:!_), si:• y rjt'y.l M•,dyI T. "'C.4. /74• may` f /--G w! l' '''`, `.. at..__! ........- ..__ OW" i ..n..- - _ aft"........"' ra... `s&. ,W '+aa..; +}.ul)t''t v i,.,• Is','" r ri Y` 73. - f' r'.` -.,r., r +s:''. Cw•r-'ter-, y gyp( f ?>i: ~lt y, -`• , / L' ir' y- H4'. .. a a;'.. i•.+ u: t r.a 1 l o . ' wt..-_- 4 tr!%rn v:- ---/r tr;.•..:...,. t• 'L ...,.., i- •, /. //. 1..` yr ryr..C. • 1,,.r... w..14 p6,' II-O l-o 4:• l lJ'Q• •/UK!/Yr'4 yN I.'• .(i`4`., . r-' T---•-.— .. w Ft7 s ' imay.14'd°',,ayA v: ... Jr-- •-..:,.+, n, c.,W if....„- --,.=II..., A' c .._ -Sir3-_,. •:i=ram- 47Z=7 .,.!' I\. i-=' .*, : 1.SJ ,S3a 2 _wait_1a '•T \-.- .. - p+ . i ii"-s' ,a. 3-s_=•—__".___ _..e.t_.h, iWrrr4-r..w. in.+.®.t40 T`t L=S...r mow a 8 M It. ISTURBED BY Ir,i i Q' r,,,;"'.., -• ,'- a aays = 1; a rQ =: 4 'Q! *e LAW of AREA f I irr L i;'_-V fir" CONSTRUCTION) r ' 1'I I. PROJECT. I C L 1MTr r , - CONSTRUCTION) BMOEZ/V ® SURFACE WATER September,1998 o so Ito isa BRUCE 0 70'140•210' C ASSOCMANAGEMENTPROJECTSchematicLandscapePlan ' ASSOCIATES LO \ GACRES OFFICE PARKH1C5C I HYDROA 6 IX 20 UPLAND/WETLAND VEGETATE) WETLANDS OPEN WATER VEGETATED WETLANDS EIISTING BUFFER (25'MIN.) ELEV. 11.0 - 5.5)ELEV. 5.5 - 2.0) BUFFED f25 APE ELEV. 5.5 - 11.0 BUFFER 25'MIN. AREA o PALUSTRINE PFO - F FORESTED-(PFO) PA USTRINE PAL (SCRUB ELEV. 10.0 - 11.0) PSS) o (PEM) PAD) _ P EMERELEV. •08 069.0) 4( ELEV Ra o C 1i.o) r f . ELEV. 5.5 - 8.0) i a az.. . r 125 iirt...- 1- ii„;.,-. ..„""V.20 illilk •.N! . 11' M.'• w . niv`r..'ti. w'.i's%'+ F y,iIMEN. i 15kaliF i.l15j- i 'j EXISTING GRADE I T/ _ . t . h^' =4n!• tha, H. -.l.''[.-,•'-w.e li rs 1. .r,.,IS 1'^': . r/, ! r a 4 'r Y 21i;Z:67•t:. :i:ee,,'i-kl'.. `'1' V,1;I'i14ri TIT IIOt. 1.70,1 1•i. 'IO li hi11.11.1 11':Urs:,l i,•rtirr a T.T r.-.-:r r±rs! .nstt(!'v:!.ai!%+r ra.G_h.ali re.tT u".s,s 't'sai1j+r '' C . ' - '.5-•F; '' M!'}%ri1 SOI4R,1n -,r 7 tJLr:r,'— "s ",._ e:1- T` r 1'.,••7 iMf l r 7 ' ' .:: I, 10 ii tr a;, > :,x:r. nb: a i$:i ro 73c.. sl• 1 t yam'' " r ? . t :i ir-> -.-- 1• 1...,•I c?f '4p L 8' PATH' s e PATH Y tr r 1/i f+ .r;-.¢;..Sp^`.:r•' M ,c.(' k ? E r.`^ . •- }_ f'` '' { ` s 5 4•4kiik.,1; ice: .POND BOTTOM•ELEV.4.2. r gip} lf',ttjYpr. , ,` r`4,','r` i)'' .. •I I t 1F r+- IT: 175i7";1-ii<s!-14'-'.111a r-.. •e". r--:-1 >7•:L,n-•:_ 9-;5• j ' c“ Alf',_rt a. 5H; :tii 1 i 03UcL. ,:_ r • . .5: 'e__ 1t E: a ccri_ - " 0 CROSS SECTION VERTICAL SCALE 0' 30'GRAPHIC ., ..10' SCALES: 0 "" 0' 0 HORIZONTAL SCALE r i 1 le)i.._...eT _V* 1 schematic n scaneY BRUCEDEES& O N G A C' R E S OFFICE PARK MANAGEMENT PROJECT Cross-Section L,(k,, 9 ASSOCIATE Ms. Jill Ding 29 April 2022 Page 33 of 38 ATTACHMENT 9 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT AND CRITICAL AREAS STUDY, TERRACON CONSULTANTS INC., 2015 Biological Assessment Critical Areas Study Longacres Business Center Phase II SW 27th Street and Naches Avenue SW Renton, King County, Washington December 4, 2015 Terracon Project No. 25157225 Ryan Companies US, Inc. Minneapolis, Minnesota Terracon Consultants, Inc. Wheat Ridge, Colorado Mount Lake Terrace, Washington BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT / CRITICAL AREAS STUDY LONGACRES BUSINESS CENTER PHASE II SW 27TH STREET AND NACHES AVENUE SW RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON PREPARED FOR: RYAN COMPANIES US, INC. MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA PREPARED BY: TERRACON CONSULTANTS, INC. WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO MOUNTLAKE TERRACE, WASHINGTON December 4, 2015 Project Number: 25157225 This report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision. Draft Draft This page intentionally left blank TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.0 INTRODUCTION 2.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION 2.1 Location ............................................................................................................................... 1 2.2 Project Description .............................................................................................................. 1 2.3 Applicant ............................................................................................................................. 3 3.0 PROJECT VICINITY 3.1 Streams and Stream Crossings .......................................................................................... 3 3.2 Wetlands ............................................................................................................................. 4 3.3 Project Action Area ............................................................................................................. 4 3.4 Environmental Setting ......................................................................................................... 4 4.0 SPECIES THAT COULD OCCUR IN KING COUNTY 5.0 SPECIES AND HABITAT 5.1 Species Selection ................................................................................................................ 6 5.2 Chinook Salmon .................................................................................................................. 9 5.2.1 Status ..................................................................................................................... 9 5.2.2 Ecology .................................................................................................................. 9 5.2.3 Distribution ............................................................................................................. 9 5.2.4 Threats ................................................................................................................... 9 6.0 EFFECTS OF THE ACTION 6.1 Definitions ......................................................................................................................... 10 6.2 Direct Effects ..................................................................................................................... 10 6.3 Indirect Effects .................................................................................................................. 11 6.4 Cumulative Effects ............................................................................................................ 11 6.5 Interrelated and Interdependent Actions ........................................................................... 12 7.0 MINIMIZATION MEASURES 8.0 EFFECT DETERMINATIONS 9.0 COMPLIANCE WITH SECTIONS 7 AND 9 OF THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT 10.0 LIST OF PREPARERS 11.0 REFERENCES TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) APPENDIX E SITE PHOTOGRAPHS Biological Assessment / Critical Areas Study Longacres Business Center Phase II Renton, WA December 4, 2015 Terracon Project No. 25157225 Responsive Resourceful Reliable i with Terracon Proposal No. P25151119, dated November 5, 2015, and A summary of findings is provided below. It should be recognized that details were not included or fully developed in this section, and the report must be read in its entirety for a comprehensive understanding of the items contained herein. The purpose of this biological assessment is to review the proposed 17.38-acre Longacres Business Center Phase II development project (the Proposed Project) located near the intersection of SW 27th Street and Naches Avenue SW, Renton, King County, Washington Project Site) to assess to what extent the project may affect threatened, endangered, or proposed species and designated or proposed critical habitats. It is being prepared at the request of the City of Renton, Washington to comply with conditions established in a National Marine Fisheries Service Biological Opinion on implementation of the National Flood Insurance Program in the Puget Sound Region and in compliance with the City of Renton Municipal Code. The Proposed Project would include the construction of two stand-alone general office buildings totaling 260,000 square feet, 1,063 parking stalls, driveways, sidewalks, walls, drainage system and detention pond, landscaping, recreational amenities, and utilities. There are 12 species listed as threatened or endangered that could occur in King County, Washington and critical habitat has been designated for seven of these species in the County. One threatened aquatic species, Chinook salmon, could occur in the action area (which is the geographic area potentially affected by the Proposed Project and not merely the immediate area involved in the Proposed Project) in Springbrook Creek near the Project Site. A short section of Springbrook Creek is included in the action area because the stormwater detention system, which includes three ponds, would outflow into the creek if over base flow conditions. The creek is but is not likely to adversely affect, Chinook salmon and is not likely to destroy or adversely modify critical habitat. Proposed Project would have no effect on any other threatened or endangered species or critical habitat because there is no suitable habitat in the action area. Minimization measures recommend include items already required for other reasons: a temporary Erosion and Sediment Control Plan, a Construction Storm Water Permit, and a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan. Biological Assessment / Critical Areas Study Longacres Business Center Phase II Renton, WA December x, 2015 Terracon Project No. 25157225 Responsive Resourceful Reliable ii Terracon services were performed in a manner consistent with generally accepted practices of the profession undertaken in similar studies in the same geographical area during the same time period. Terracon makes no warranties, express or implied, regarding the findings, conclusions or recommendations. Please note that Terracon does not warrant the work of regulatory agencies or other third party resources supplying information used in the preparation of the report. These services were performed in accordance with the scope of work agreed to with our client. Findings, conclusions, and recommendations resulting from these services are based upon information derived from the on-site activities and other services performed under this scope of work; such information is subject to change over time. Responsive Resourceful Reliable 1 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT LONGACRES BUSINESS CENTER PHASE II SW 27th Street and Naches Avenue SW Renton, King County, Washington Terracon Project No. 25157225 December 4, 2015 The purpose of this Biological Assessment (BA) is to review the proposed Longacres Business Center Phase II development project (the Proposed Project) located near the intersection of SW 27th Street and Naches Avenue SW, Renton, King County, Washington (Project Site) to assess to what extent the project may affect threatened, endangered, or proposed species and designated or proposed critical habitats. This BA is prepared in accordance with legal requirements set forth under regulations implementing Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act 50 CFR 402; 16 USC 1536 (c)). It is being prepared at the request of the City of Renton, Washington to comply with conditions established in a National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) Biological Opinion (BO) on implementation of the National Flood Insurance Program in the Puget Sound Region (NMFS 2008) and in compliance with the City of Renton Municipal Code. The Proposed Project is located in parcels APN088670- 0090, -0100, -0380, -0150, -0190, and - 0370 and partial parcels APN088670- 0160 and -0180, north of the intersection of SW 27th Street and Naches Avenue SW, and west of Oakdale Avenue SW, in the City of Renton, King County, Washington, hereafter (Exhibits 1 and 2). The Proposed Project would include the construction of two stand-alone general office buildings C and D) totaling 260,000 square feet (sq ft) and 1,063 parking stalls (Exhibit 3). The 17.38-acre Project Site is currently vacant (see Appendix B, Alta Survey). Buildings C and D would be three- story general office use buildings, 113,000 and 147,000 sq ft respectively. The two buildings would incorporate tilt-up concrete panels in conjunction with steel framing and light gauge metal construction with building heights of approximately 47 feet. The Proposed Project is within the City of Renton 196 pressure zone water service area. There is an existing 12-inch water main in Naches Avenue SW that ends at the cul-de-sac. There is also an existing 12-inch water main that runs north south near the project east boundary line. Sewer Biological Assessment / Critical Areas Study Longacres Business Center Phase II Renton, WA December 4, 2015 Terracon Project No. 25157225 Responsive Resourceful Reliable 2 service is provided by the City of Renton. There is an existing 8-inch diameter sewer main along Naches Avenue SW. Water and sanitary sewer would connect to these systems (see Appendix D, Utility Overall Plan). Project Site access would be from either Oakesdale Avenue SW or Naches Avenue SW via a private access roadway. The Project Site is located in the Employment Area Valley (EAV) land use designation and the Commercial Office (CO) zone and includes high seismic hazards, low erosion hazards and low landslide hazards. A portion of the Project Site is within the 100-year flood zone (Exhibit 4). No wetlands, streams, lakes or steep slopes are on the Project Site (Exhibit 5). The Proposed Project would include a detention wetpond for water quality treatment and detention. The Project Site would be graded and stripped of all topsoil, which would be exported off-site (see Appendix D, Grading and Drainage Overall Plan). The detention pond would be excavated, and this material would be used on-site. The overall grade would be raised approximately 1-2 feet. Clean backfill would be brought in from off-site for the building pads. A portion of the trees on the site would be removed (see Appendix D, Tree Retention / Land Clearing Plan). Grading is scheduled to start in mid- to late-December 2015. The Project Site is within the Black River drainage basin. A pipe network would be used to convey the onsite storm water from the building footing drains, roof drains and parking lot to a proposed detention/wet pond in Tract B (Coughlin Porter Lundeen 2015) (see Appendix D, Grading and Drainage Overall Plan). Compensatory storage would also be provided in the Tract B detention/wet pond. From Tract B, the runoff would discharge into the managed storm water system belonging to the Boeing Company that was previously developed as part of the Longacres Office Park project. This system consists of an additional two ponds. The runoff would discharge from the Boeing existing storm facility via a pump station, if all three ponds filled, into Springbrook Creek and ultimately into the Duwamish River. The Proposed Project would include 12.09 acres of impervious (buildings and pavement) area and 3.87 acres of pervious (landscape) area (see Appendix D, Paving Overall Plan, Tree Retention / Land Clearing Plan, Landscape Plan). There is some portion of the Pollution Generating Impervious Surface PGIS) that would bypass the proposed system and be treated by a cartridge system. The water quality and detention pond design requirements of the existing and proposed storm water facilities are designed to meet the 1990 King County Surface Water Design Manual KCSWDM). A Construction Storm Water Permit (NPDES) and a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) would be completed prior to construction. The Project Site would be landscaped including driveways, hard surface trail, sidewalks, walls, curbs, bicycle parking, trash enclosure, croquet court, bocce court, lawns, and planted trees, shrubs, and gardens (see Appendix D, Landscape Plan). Biological Assessment / Critical Areas Study Longacres Business Center Phase II Renton, WA December 4, 2015 Terracon Project No. 25157225 Responsive Resourceful Reliable 3 The applicant is Ryan Companies US, Inc. Contact information is: Jon Blaha, CHMM Environmental Manager Ryan Companies US, Inc. 612-492-4430 jon.blaha@ryancompanies.com The Project Site is in the Green/Duwamish and Central Puget Sound Watershed, Lower Green River Subwatershed. One tributary to the Green River is in the action area. Springbrook Creek is a small creek, which has been manipulated as a result of surrounding development. Springbrook Creek is approximately 12 miles long and is formed by four east valley tributaries near Kent and flows north into the Black River approximately 0.6 miles upstream of the Green River (Herrera 2007). Springbrook Creek Basin land use consists of low to high density development (Herrera 2007). Springbrook Creek has been known to contain limited spawning populations of coho salmon, cutthroat trout, and winter steelhead (King County Undated). However, the creek has limited ability to provide spawning habitat for Chinook due to several fish passage barriers including water quality, invasive plant species, and man-made barriers (Anchor Environmental 2004). The most significant fish passage barrier in this system is the presence of the Black River Pump Station BRPS). The facility is not equipped to handle downstream migrating adult steelhead or Chinook. Adult steelhead and Chinook that move upstream past the BRPS cannot exit the Springbrook Creek subbasin, and once there are believed to experience high levels of stress or die prior to successful spawning. King County Undated). The creek is on the 2012 303(d) list for violation of dissolved oxygen and fecal coliform bacteria standards (Category 5). Water quality conditions in Springbrook Creek have historically been characterized as poor with low dissolved oxygen concentrations, high temperatures, high fecal coliform bacteria, high turbidity, high total phosphorus and ammonia, and high conductivity. Biological Assessment / Critical Areas Study Longacres Business Center Phase II Renton, WA December 4, 2015 Terracon Project No. 25157225 Responsive Resourceful Reliable 4 The Green River is located approximately 1,500 feet west of the Project Site and Springbrook Creek is located approximately 1,300 feet east of the Project Site. The two detention ponds, located on the north adjoining property, overflow into Springbrook Creek (Appendix A, Exhibit 5). Springbrook Creek flows into the Green River approximately 2.5 miles downstream of the site. The Green River becomes the Duwamish River, which flows into the Puget Sound approximately 12 miles downstream of the Springbrook Creek confluence. The Lower Green River is used for the upstream and downstream migration and rearing for all native salmon species. It has limited spawning habitat for Chinook, pink, sockeye, chum, and steelhead (King County 2011). The National Wetland Inventory (NWI) (US Fish and Wildlife Service [USFWS] 2015) depicts wetlands to the south, east and west of the Project Site. The detention ponds immediately north of the Project Site are likely wetlands as well (constructed after NWI mapping) (Exhibit 5). Due to the relatively urban location, several of the wetlands are predominately surrounded by development and impervious surfaces. According to the Longacres Office Park Surface Water Management Project Conceptual Wetland Mitigation Plan (Shapiro and Associates 1998) the entire 154-acre Longacres property (which includes the area of the Project Site) includes 14.8 acres of wetlands. No wetlands have been mapped within the Project Site area for Longacres Business Center Phase II. The action area is the geographic area potentially affected by the Proposed Project and not merely the immediate area involved in the Proposed Project. The aquatic portion of the action area for the Proposed Project is a short stretch (approximately 500 feet) of Springbrook Creek downstream of the detention pond outflow into this creek. There is potential for sediment mobilization and contaminants associated with stormwater outflow into Springbrook Creek during storm events if the detention ponds fill. Terracon assumes that any sediment or contaminants would not be detectable farther than 500 feet because of the likely small quantity plus dilution from the creek. The terrestrial portion of the action area is the Project Site itself plus a buffer of a quarter mile in all directions to capture potential effects of habitat fragmentation, disruption of travel corridors, noise, dust, increased traffic, human presence, and visual disturbances during construction and throughout the operational life of the Proposed Project. The majority of the action area consists of a relatively flat mosaic of urban and mixed environment, lowland mixed conifer-hardwood forest, grassland, and riparian woodlands. The Project Site is disturbed with concrete and dirt paths historically used as horse stables and a parking lot for the Longacres Racetrack from approximately 1933 until 1992. Once the racetrack closed, the majority Biological Assessment / Critical Areas Study Longacres Business Center Phase II Renton, WA December 4, 2015 Terracon Project No. 25157225 Responsive Resourceful Reliable 5 of the site naturally revegetated while the east portion and portions of Tract B were manually revegetated. The west portion of the Project Site primarily consists of an upland grassland with scattered patches of Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus ). The remainder of the site is dominated by shrubs and trees, including boxelder (Acer negundo), black cottonwood (Populus trichocarpa), Himalayan blackberry, English ivy (Hedera helix ), Scotch broom (Cytisus scoparius ). Other non- dominate species within the site include western redcedar (Thuja plicata ), vine maple (Acer circiratum), Indian plum (Oemleria cerasiformis ), lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta) and willows Salix spp.). Understory vegetation on the site includes sedges (Carex spp.), grasses (Bromus spp), Canada thistle, (Cirsium arvense), tansy ragwort (Senecio jacobaea Hypericum perforatum) and curly dock (Rumex crispa). The Project Site is surrounded by graded and commercial development construction to the south; a railroad track followed by commercial development and the Green River to the west; Oakesdale Avenue followed by patches of upland and riparian forests, commercial development, and Springbrook Creek to the east; and two detention ponds densely surrounded by shrubs and deciduous trees, upland habitat with scattered patches of shrubs and trees, including boxelder, black cottonwood, and Himalayan blackberry followed by commercial development to the north. There are 12 species listed as threatened or endangered under the US Endangered Species Act that could occur in King County, Washington (USFWS 2015a, NMFS 2015a) (Table 4-1). Seven of these species have designated critical habitat in the county and one, Chinook salmon, within the action area (USFWS 2015b). Table 1 Federal Threatened and Endangered Species That Could Occur in King County, Washington Species Status Agency Critical Habitat Mammals Canada lynx Lynx canadensis) T USFWS Final designated, but not in King county. Gray wolf Canis lupus) E USFWS None designated Grizzly bear Ursus arctos horribilis) T USFWS None designated Biological Assessment / Critical Areas Study Longacres Business Center Phase II Renton, WA December 4, 2015 Terracon Project No. 25157225 Responsive Resourceful Reliable 6 Table 1 Federal Threatened and Endangered Species That Could Occur in King County, Washington Species Status Agency Critical Habitat Killer whale Orcinus orca) E NMFS Final designated in King County, but not in action area. Birds Marbled murrelet Brachyramphus marmoratus) T USFWS Final designated in King County, but not in action area. Northern spotted owl Strix occidentalis caurina) T USFWS Final designated in King County, but not in action area. Streaked horned lark Eremophila alpestris strigata) T USFWS Final designated in King County, but not in action area. Yellow-billed cuckoo Coccyzus americanus) T USFWS Proposed, but not in King County. Amphibians Oregon spotted frog Rana pretiosa) T USFWS Proposed, but not in King County. Fish Bull trout Salvelinus confluentus ) T USFWS Final designated in King County, including nearby Green River, which is not in action area. Chinook salmon Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) T NMFS Final designated in action area. Plants Golden paintbrush Castilleja levisecta) T USFWS None designated Source: USFWS 2015a,b; NMFS 2015a One species, Chinook salmon, has potentially suitable habitat and designated critical habitat in the action area and is carried forward for analysis in the BA. All the other species have no or discountable potential to occur in the action area (Table 2). Biological Assessment / Critical Areas Study Longacres Business Center Phase II Renton, WA December 4, 2015 Terracon Project No. 25157225 Responsive Resourceful Reliable 7 Table 2 Habitat Requirements and Assessment of Habitat Suitability in Action Area by Species Species Habitat Requirements Suitable Habitat in the Action Area? Mammals Canada lynx Lynx canadensis) Landscapes with high snowshoe hare densities, which are primarily moist, cool, boreal spruce-fir forests with dense understory vegetation (USFWS 2013). No No forest, urban Gray wolf Canis lupus) Wolves are habitat generalists and used to occur across all of North America. They require ungulates (hoofed mammals) as prey (USFWS 2015e). No No forest, urban Grizzly bear Ursus arctos horribilis) Very large home ranges including diverse forests interspersed with moist meadows and grasslands in or near mountains. No No forest, urban Killer whale Orcinus orca) Found in all parts of the oceans but most abundant in colder waters (NMFS 2015b). The southern-resident killer whales in Puget Sound feed primarily on Chinook salmon. No Nearby in Puget Sound but outside of action area Birds Marbled murrelet Brachyramphus marmoratus) Spends majority of time on the ocean, but nests in forest stands with old growth forest characteristics (USFWS 2011). No No mature forest Northern spotted owl Strix occidentalis caurina ) Mature or old growth habitat with multi- layered canopies of several tree species (USFWS 2015c). No No mature forest Streaked horned lark Eremophila alpestris strigata) Large, flat, open, treeless areas that are frequently disturbed and have sparse, short vegetation, and lots of open ground (Anderson, and Pearson 2015). No Vegetation too dense and tall Yellow-billed cuckoo Coccyzus americanus) Dense willow and cottonwood stands in river floodplains (USFWS 2014a). None Generally considered extirpated in Washington. Nearby rivers do not include willow or cottonwood stands Biological Assessment / Critical Areas Study Longacres Business Center Phase II Renton, WA December 4, 2015 Terracon Project No. 25157225 Responsive Resourceful Reliable 8 Table 2 Habitat Requirements and Assessment of Habitat Suitability in Action Area by Species Species Habitat Requirements Suitable Habitat in the Action Area? Amphibians Oregon spotted frog Rana pretiosa) Perennial bodies of water, generally larger than 9 acres, which include zones of shallow water and abundant emergent or floating aquatic plants USFWS 2014). None Detention ponds on adjacent property in the action area are too small and not suitable habitat. Potential presence is discountable because the closest known population is approximately 100 miles away in the Black River Drainage. Fish Bull trout Salvelinus confluentus ) Relatively pristine stream and lake habitats (USFWS 2014b). None Critical habitat 1,500 feet west of site on the Green River but not within the aquatic action area. Site would drain to the north and east to Springbrook Creek. Site is separated from river by railroad tracks, a highway, and commercial development. Bull trout critical habitat farther downstream on the Duwamish River is outside of action area. Chinook salmon Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) Juvenile Chinook prefer streams that are deeper and larger than those used by other Pacific salmon species (NMFS 2015c). Yes Critical habitat on Springbrook Creek in the Action area. Stormwater outflow is into Springbrook Creek. Plants Golden paintbrush Castilleja levisecta) Occurs in upland prairies, on generally flat grasslands. Low deciduous shrubs are commonly present as small to large thickets. All of the extant populations are on soils derived from glacial origins USFWS 2015f). None No prairie habitat or appropriate soils. Biological Assessment / Critical Areas Study Longacres Business Center Phase II Renton, WA December 4, 2015 Terracon Project No. 25157225 Responsive Resourceful Reliable 9 The Puget Sound evolutionally significant unit (ESU) Chinook salmon was listed as a threatened species and critical habitat designated in 2005 (NMFS 2005a, b). Chinook salmon is an anadromous fish. This species migrates from streams to the ocean where they mature and return to the same stream where they were hatched to spawn. Fry may migrate to estuarine areas after as few as three months or as many as three years (usually one year) as smolts and then into the ocean to mature for one to six years (NMFS 2015c, USGS 2015). same river. Adult female Chinook build a redd (or nest) in a stream area with suitable gravel type composition, water depth and velocity. The adult female deposits eggs in four to five "nesting pockets" within a single redd. Spawning sites have larger gravel and more water flow up through the gravel than the sites used by other Pacific salmon. After laying eggs in a redd, adults will guard it from a few days to nearly a month before dying. Eggs will hatch, depending upon water temperature in three to five months. Fry hatch during the following spring (NMFS 2015c, USGS 2015). In streams, Chinook feed mainly on macroinvertebrates. After migrating from the stream, they feed primarily on small forage fish. This species prefers streams that are deeper and larger than those used by other Pacific salmon species (NMFS 2015c, USGS 2015). In the US Chinook salmon are found from the Bering Strait area off Alaska south to Southern California. Historically, they ranged as far south as the Ventura River, California. There are 18 evolutionary significant units (ESU). The Puget Sound ESU includes numerous rivers and stream systems that flow into Puget Sound. Habitat throughout the ESU has been degraded or passage blocked. Forest practices generally impact upper tributaries, and agriculture and urbanization impact lower tributaries and mainstems. Specific issues that have contributed to the decline of the species and its habitat in the past, and continue to be issues, include: Diking for flood control; Biological Assessment / Critical Areas Study Longacres Business Center Phase II Renton, WA December 4, 2015 Terracon Project No. 25157225 Responsive Resourceful Reliable 10 Blockages by dams, water diversion and shifts in flow regime due to hydroelectric development and flood control projects; Draining and filling of freshwater and estuarine wetlands; Sedimentation due to forest practices; and Urban development. The effects of the Proposed Project can be categorized into direct, indirect, and cumulative effects. These effects must be analyzed on the proposed action as well as interdependent and interrelated actions. These terms have specific definitions under the Endangered Species Act ESA). Direct effects are those that are caused by the proposed action and occur at the time of the action. Indirect effects are those that are caused by the proposed action and occur later in time, but are reasonably certain to occur. Cumulative effects include the effects of future state, tribal, local or private actions that are reasonably certain to occur in the action area considered in this BA. Future federal actions that are unrelated to the proposed action are not considered in cumulative analysis because they will be subject to separate consultation pursuant to Section 7 of the ESA. Interdependent actions have no independent utility apart from the primary action. An example of an interdependent action for a residential development may include the construction, maintenance, and use of a road required to access the development. Interrelated actions are part of the primary action and dependent upon that primary action for their justification. An example of an interrelated action for a residential development may include the power line. No direct effects are anticipated on Chinook salmon from construction or operation of the Proposed Project. The action area potentially containing Chinook is approximately 1,300 feet from Springbrook Creek with a street and commercial development between. Noise, dust, traffic, human presence, and physical disturbance of the Project Site footprint during construction would have no effect at the time of the action (construction) on fish in Springbrook Creek. Biological Assessment / Critical Areas Study Longacres Business Center Phase II Renton, WA December 4, 2015 Terracon Project No. 25157225 Responsive Resourceful Reliable 11 Instream sedimentation resulting from human activities such as timber harvest, agriculture, urban and rural development, and road construction is one form of habitat degradation threatening the continued existence of salmon species (Jensen et al. 2009). Fine sediment in spawning gravels has been shown to decrease survival of salmonid eggs to emergence. The overflow for the stormwater detention ponds is into Springbrook Creek, which supports Chinook salmon and is designated critical habitat. Therefore, major storm events potentially could cause sediments to flow into the creek, which could cover spawning beds and thus could decrease survival of Chinook eggs if present. The frequency of the detention ponds flowing into the creek would likely be rare, as three detention ponds would have to fill first, thus limiting this potential. Because the area being drained would be vegetated or hardscape, the potential for significant sediment to flow into the creek is relatively low. This potential would be highest while the Project Site is being constructed prior to paving and landscaping, but minimization measures listed below in Section 7.0 would minimize this potential. Terracon anticipates that effects of sedimentation in the creek, if any, etectable for more than 500 feet downstream due to likely small quantity relative to large volumes of water from numerous sources. Roadways and parking lots are impervious and accumulate a mixture of contaminants, including metals; petroleum-derived compounds from oil, grease, and vehicle exhaust; and detergents NMFS 2012). During rainfall events, stormwater collects these contaminants and transports them to streams. In addition, agricultural practices and landscape maintenance that use pesticides, such as insecticides, herbicides, and fungicides, can also contaminate runoff and compromise the health of watersheds. When toxics enter waterways via stormwater runoff, they can cause a variety of adverse effects to aquatic species. In addition to directly impacting salmon, toxics can harm or kill the aquatic insects that salmon eat. Pollution risks vary depending on the chemical, the quantity, and environmental persistence. Common contaminants can impair salmon health in a variety of ways. Some metals and pesticides are toxic to the salmon nervous system, thereby disrupting feeding and predator avoidance. Pesticides and petroleum-derived compounds suppress the immune system. Petroleum compounds can depress growth rate of juvenile salmon, which can affect their survival. Other compounds affect the cardiovascular system. As described in Section 3.1, the creek has very limited potential to support Chinook, so that the probability of sediments or contaminants from the proposed project adversely affecting Chinook while they are present downstream of the outflow is very limited. Future non-federal projects, including urban development, transportation, water resources projects, park projects, and changes in management plans and regulations, not subject to a federal nexus will continue to affect Chinook salmon, both adversely and beneficially, in the action Biological Assessment / Critical Areas Study Longacres Business Center Phase II Renton, WA December 4, 2015 Terracon Project No. 25157225 Responsive Resourceful Reliable 12 area, Springbrook Creek and the drainage basin. Major issues include barriers to fish passage, sedimentation, and water quality. There are no interrelated or interdependent actions associated with the Proposed Project. All elements of the Proposed Project are included in the project description in Section 2.2. Either Phase I or Phase II of the Longacres Business Center development projects could have been built without the other project being constructed (Blaha 2015). A temporary Erosion and Sediment Control (TESC) plan will be implemented to minimize water quality impacts during construction. A Construction Storm Water Permit (NPDES) and a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) will be completed prior to construction. the Proposed Project may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect, Chinook salmon and is not likely to destroy or adversely modify its critical habitat. The Proposed Project may affect Chinook salmon and its critical habitat because the overflow for the stormwater detention ponds is into Springbrook Creek, which supports Chinook salmon and is designated critical habitat. Sediment and contaminants, as described in Section 7.0, could potentially affect salmon. However, the Proposed Project is unlikely to adversely affect Chinook for the reasons described in Section 6.0.Proposed Project would have no effect on any other threatened or endangered species for the reasons outlined in Section 5.0. This BA is prepared in accordance with legal requirements set forth under regulations implementing Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (50 CFR 402; 16 U.S.C. 1536 (c)). It is being prepared at the request of the City of Renton, Washington to comply with conditions established in a NMFS BO on implementation of the National Flood Insurance Program in the Puget Sound Region (NMFS 2008). harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt to engage in any Biological Assessment / Critical Areas Study Longacres Business Center Phase II Renton, WA December 4, 2015 Terracon Project No. 25157225 Responsive Resourceful Reliable 13 such conduct. threatened or endangered species for the reasons outlined in this biological assessment for lack of adverse effects. Craig Miller Project Manager, Primary Author Years of Experience: 25 MS, Aquaculture, Fisheries, and Wildlife Biology, Clemson University BS, Wildlife and Fisheries Biology, University of Vermont Jim Baxter Approved Project Reviewer Years of Experience: 15 MS, Forest Resources, University of Georgia BS, Natural Resources, University of the South Sara Copp Botany, Maps Years of Experience: 6 MS, Environmental Science and Management, Portland State University BS, Agriculture, Truman State University Caitlin Price Project Coordination BA, Environmental Studies, University of California at Santa Barbara Years of Experience: 4 Taylor Blackbourn Site Photographs BA, Environmental Studies, Gonzaga University Years of Experience: 1 Anchor Environmental, LLC. 2004. Lower Green River Baseline Habitat Suitability Report. Prepared for Green / Duwamish and Central Puget Sound Watershed and King County Natural Resources and Parks. Biological Assessment / Critical Areas Study Longacres Business Center Phase II Renton, WA December 4, 2015 Terracon Project No. 25157225 Responsive Resourceful Reliable 14 Anderson, H.E. and S.F. Pearson. 2015. Streaked Horned Lark Habitat Characteristics. Center for Natural Lands Management and Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife. Internet Web site:http://cascadiaprairieoak.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Streaked-horned- lark-habitat-characteristics_April-2015.pdf. Blaha, J. 2015. Ryan Companies US, Inc., Personal communication with Craig Miller, Terracon. December 2, 2015. Coughlin Porter Lundeen. 2015. Longacres Business Center Grading and Overall Drainage Plan. Prepared for Ryan Companies US, Inc. by Coughlin Porter Lundeen, Seattle, Washington. FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency). 2012. Community Checklist for the National Flood Insurance Program and the Endangered Species Act. FEMA, Region 10, January 2012. Internet Web site:http://www.fema.gov/media-library-data/1383597499829- c4d2a589c8ae1463357c1cac8d043ce7/NFIP_ESA_Biological_Opinion_Checklist.pdf. Green/Duwamish and Central Puget Sound Watershed. 2011. Salmon Conservation and Restoration, Lower Green River Subwatershed. Internet Web site: http://www.govlink.org/watersheds/9/activities-partners/lowergreen.aspx. Herrera (Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc.). 2007. Water Quality Statistical and Pollutant Loadings Analysis. Green-Duwamish Watershed Water Quality Assessment. Prepared for King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks. January 2007. Internet Web site: http://your.kingcounty.gov/dnrp/library/2007/kcr1972/Green_Duwamish_Loading_Report Final.pdf. Jensen, D.W., E.A. Steel, A.H. Fullerton G.R. Pess. 2009. Impact of Fine Sediment on Egg-To- Fry Survival of Pacific Salmon: A Meta-Analysis of Published Studies. Reviews in Fisheries Science, 17:(3)348-359. King County. Undated. Stream Report for Springbrook Creek-0317. King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks. Internet Web site: http://green2.kingcounty.gov/streamsdata/watershedinfo.aspx?locator=0317 . NMFS (US Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service). 2005a. Endangered and Threatened Species: Final Listing Determinations for 16 ESUs of West Coast Salmon, and Final 4(d) Protective Regulations for Threatened Salmonid ESUs. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Portland, Oregon. Federal Register Vol. 70, No. 123. pp. 37160-37204. Biological Assessment / Critical Areas Study Longacres Business Center Phase II Renton, WA December 4, 2015 Terracon Project No. 25157225 Responsive Resourceful Reliable 15 NMFS. 2005b. Endangered and Threatened Species; Designation of Critical Habitat for 12 Evolutionarily Significant Units of West Coast Salmon and Steelhead in Washington, Oregon, and Idaho. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Portland, Oregon. Federal Register Vol. 70, No. 170. pp. 52630-52858. NMFS. 2008. Endangered Species Act Section 7 Consultation Final Biological Opinion and Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act Essential Fish Habitat Consultation Implementation of the National Flood Insurance Program in the State of Washington Phase One Document Puget Sound Region. September 22, 2008. NMFS Tracking No.: 2006-00472. NMFS. 2012. Water Quality, How Toxic Runoff Affects Pacific Salmon & Steelhead. Internet Web site: http://www.westcoast.fisheries.noaa.gov/publications/habitat/fact_sheets/stormwater_fac t_sheet.pdf. NMFS. 2015a. Endangered and Threatened Marine Species under NMFS' Jurisdiction. Internet Web Site:http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/esa/listed.htm . NMFS. 2015b. Killer Whale (Orcinus orca ). Internet Web site: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/mammals/whales/killer-whale.html#habitat. NMFS. 2015c. Chinook Salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha ). Internet Web site: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/fish/chinook-salmon.html. Shapiro and Associates, Inc. 1998. Longacres Office Park Surface Water Management Project Conceptual Wetland Mitigation Plan. Prepared for Boeing Commercial Airplane Group, Seattle, Washington. USFWS (U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service). 2007a. Gray Wolf (Canis lupus ).Internet Web site: http://www.fws.gov/redwolf/Images/graywolf.pdf . USFWS. 2007b. Grizzly Bear (Ursus arctos horribilis). Internet Web site: http://www.fws.gov/mountain-prairie/species/mammals/grizzly/grizzly_bear.pdf. USFWS. 2011. Species Fact Sheet Marbled Murrelet Brachyramphus marmoratus. Internet Web site:http://www.fws.gov/oregonfwo/Species/Data/MarbledMurrelet/. USFWS. 2013. Canada Lynx Lynx canadensis . Internet Web site:http://www.fws.gov/mountain- prairie/species/mammals/lynx/CandaLynxFactSheet_091613.pdf. This page intentionally left blank US Fish & Wildlife Service Official Species List IPaC Trust Resource Report A Biological Assessment is required for construction projects (or other undertakings having similar physical impacts) that are major Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the human environment as defined in the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332(2) c)). For projects other than major construction activities, the Service suggests that a biological evaluation similar to a Biological Assessment be prepared to determine whether or not the project may affect listed or proposed species and/or designated or proposed critical habitat. Recommended contents of a Biological Assessment are described at 50 CFR 402.12. If a Federal agency determines, based on the Biological Assessment or biological evaluation, that listed species and/or designated critical habitat may be affected by the proposed project, the agency is required to consult with the Service pursuant to 50 CFR 402. In addition, the Service recommends that candidate species, proposed species, and proposed critical habitat be addressed within the consultation. More information on the regulations and procedures for section 7 consultation, including the role of permit or license applicants, can be found in the "Endangered Species Consultation Handbook" at: http://www.fws.gov/endangered/esa-library/pdf/TOC-GLOS.PDF Please be aware that bald and golden eagles are protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 668 et seq.). You may visit our website at information on disturbance or take of the speciesandhttp://www.fws.gov/pacific/eagle/for information on how to get a permit and what current guidelines and regulations are. Some projects affecting these species may require development of an eagle conservation plan: ( Additionally, wind energyprojectshttp://www.fws.gov/windenergy/eagle_guidance.html should follow the wind energy guidelines () forminimizinghttp://www.fws.gov/windenergy/ impacts to migratory birds and bats. Also be aware that all marine mammals are protected under the Marine Mammal Protection Act MMPA). The MMPA prohibits, with certain exceptions, the "take" of marine mammals in U.S. waters and by U.S. citizens on the high seas. The importation of marine mammals and marine mammal products into the U.S. is also prohibited. More information can be found on the MMPA website:.http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/laws/mmpa/ We appreciate your concern for threatened and endangered species. The Service encourages Federal agencies to include conservation of threatened and endangered species into their project planning to further the purposes of the Act. Please include the Consultation Tracking Number in the header of this letter with any request for consultation or correspondence about your project that you submit to our office. Related website: National Marine Fisheries Service: http://www.nwr.noaa.gov/protected_species/species_list/species_lists.html Attachment 2 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Longacres 2nd Phase IPaC Trust Resource Report Generated November 02, 2015 01:03 PM MST This report is for informational purposes only and should not be used for planning or analyzing project-level impacts. For projects that require FWS review, please return to this project on the IPaC website and request an official species list from the Regulatory Documents page. 4ZZPY-Z6IZN-E47HE-CHFBS-RTLG2EIPaCTrustResourceReport 11/02/2015 01:03 PM Page 2InformationforPlanningandConservationIPaC Version 2.2.8 US Fish & Wildlife Service IPaC Trust Resource Report Project Description NAME Longacres 2nd Phase PROJECT CODE 4ZZPY-Z6IZN-E47HE-CHFBS-RTLG2E LOCATION King County, Washington DESCRIPTION No description provided U.S. Fish & Wildlife Contact Information Species in this report are managed by: Washington Fish And Wildlife Office 510 Desmond Drive Se, Suite 102 Lacey, WA 98503-1263 360) 753-9440 4ZZPY-Z6IZN-E47HE-CHFBS-RTLG2EIPaCTrustResourceReport 11/02/2015 01:03 PM Page 3InformationforPlanningandConservationIPaC Version 2.2.8 Threatened Threatened Threatened Threatened Threatened Endangered Species Proposed, candidate, threatened, and endangered species that are managed by the and should be considered as part of an effectanalysisEndangeredSpeciesProgram for this project. This unofficial species list is for informational purposes only and does not fulfill the requirements under of the Endangered Species Act, which states thatFederalSection7 agencies are required to "request of the Secretary of Interior information whether any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area of a proposed action." This requirement applies to projects which are conducted, permitted or licensed by any Federal agency. A letter from the local office and a species list which fulfills this requirement can be obtained by returning to this project on the IPaC website and requesting an official species list on the Regulatory Documents page. Amphibians Oregon Spotted Frog Rana pretiosa CRITICAL HABITAT There is critical habitat designated for this species.proposed https://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=D02A Birds Marbled Murrelet Brachyramphus marmoratus CRITICAL HABITAT There is critical habitat designated for this species.final https://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=B08C Northern Spotted Owl Strix occidentalis caurina CRITICAL HABITAT There is critical habitat designated for this species.final https://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=B08B Streaked Horned Lark Eremophila alpestris strigata CRITICAL HABITAT There is critical habitat designated for this species.final https://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=B0B3 Yellow-billed Cuckoo Coccyzus americanus CRITICAL HABITAT There is critical habitat designated for this species.proposed https://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=B06R 4ZZPY-Z6IZN-E47HE-CHFBS-RTLG2EIPaCTrustResourceReport 11/02/2015 01:03 PM Page 4InformationforPlanningandConservationIPaC Version 2.2.8 Threatened Endangered Threatened Threatened Threatened Candidate Conifers and Cycads Whitebark Pine Pinus albicaulis CRITICAL HABITAT has been designated for this species.No critical habitat https://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=R00E Fishes Bull Trout Salvelinus confluentus CRITICAL HABITAT There is critical habitat designated for this species.final https://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=E065 Flowering Plants Golden Paintbrush Castilleja levisecta CRITICAL HABITAT has been designated for this species.No critical habitat https://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=Q26U Mammals Canada Lynx Lynx canadensis CRITICAL HABITAT There is critical habitat designated for this species.final https://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=A073 Gray Wolf Canis lupus CRITICAL HABITAT has been designated for this species.No critical habitat https://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=A00D Grizzly Bear Ursus arctos horribilis CRITICAL HABITAT has been designated for this species.No critical habitat https://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=A001 4ZZPY-Z6IZN-E47HE-CHFBS-RTLG2EIPaCTrustResourceReport 11/02/2015 01:03 PM Page 5InformationforPlanningandConservationIPaC Version 2.2.8 Critical Habitats Potential effects to critical habitat(s) within the project area must be analyzed along with the endangered species themselves. Bull Trout Critical Habitat Final designated https://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=E065#crithab Chinook Salmon Critical Habitat Final designated https://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=E06D#crithab Killer Whale Critical Habitat Final designated https://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=A0IL#crithab Marbled Murrelet Critical Habitat Final designated https://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=B08C#crithab Northern Spotted Owl Critical Habitat Final designated https://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=B08B#crithab 4ZZPY-Z6IZN-E47HE-CHFBS-RTLG2EIPaCTrustResourceReport 11/02/2015 01:03 PM Page 6InformationforPlanningandConservationIPaC Version 2.2.8 Bird of conservation concern Bird of conservation concern Bird of conservation concern Bird of conservation concern Bird of conservation concern Bird of conservation concern Bird of conservation concern Bird of conservation concern Bird of conservation concern Bird of conservation concern Bird of conservation concern Bird of conservation concern Migratory Birds Birds are protected by the andtheMigratoryBirdTreatyAct Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act Any activity which results in the of migratory birds or eagles is prohibitedunlesstake authorized by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ( ). There are no provisionsfor1 allowing the take of migratory birds that are unintentionally killed or injured. You are responsible for complying with the appropriate regulations for the protection of birds as part of this project. This involves analyzing potential impacts and implementing appropriate conservation measures for all project activities. Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus Year-round https://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=B008 Black Swift Cypseloides niger Season: Breeding https://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=B0FW Brewer's Sparrow Spizella breweri Season: Breeding https://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=B0HA Calliope Hummingbird Stellula calliope Season: Breeding https://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=B0K3 Caspian Tern Hydroprogne caspia Season: Breeding Cassin's Finch Carpodacus cassinii Year-round Eared Grebe Podiceps nigricollis Season: Breeding Flammulated Owl Otus flammeolus Season: Breeding https://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=B0DK Fox Sparrow Passerella iliaca Year-round Lewis's Woodpecker Melanerpes lewis Season: Breeding Loggerhead Shrike Lanius ludovicianus Season: Breeding https://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=B0FY Long-billed Curlew Numenius americanus Season: Breeding https://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=B06S 4ZZPY-Z6IZN-E47HE-CHFBS-RTLG2EIPaCTrustResourceReport 11/02/2015 01:03 PM Page 7InformationforPlanningandConservationIPaC Version 2.2.8 Bird of conservation concern Bird of conservation concern Bird of conservation concern Bird of conservation concern Bird of conservation concern Bird of conservation concern Bird of conservation concern Bird of conservation concern Bird of conservation concern Bird of conservationconcernOlive-sided Flycatcher Contopus cooperi Season: Breeding https://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=B0AN Peregrine Falcon Falco peregrinus Year-round https://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=B0FU Purple Finch Carpodacus purpureus Year-round Rufous Hummingbird selasphorus rufus Season: Breeding https://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=B0E1 Sage Thrasher Oreoscoptes montanus Season: Breeding https://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=B0ID Short-billed Dowitcher Limnodromus griseus Season: Wintering Short-eared Owl Asio flammeus Year-round https://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=B0HD Swainson's Hawk Buteo swainsoni Season: Breeding https://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=B070 Vesper Sparrow Pooecetes gramineus ssp. affinis Season: Breeding https://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=B0F9 Willow Flycatcher Empidonax traillii Season: Breeding https://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=B0F6 4ZZPY-Z6IZN-E47HE-CHFBS-RTLG2EIPaCTrustResourceReport 11/02/2015 01:03 PM Page 8InformationforPlanningandConservationIPaC Version 2.2.8 Refuges Any activity proposed on lands must undergo a 'CompatibilityNationalWildlifeRefuge Determination' conducted by the Refuge. If your project overlaps or otherwise impacts a Refuge, please contact that Refuge to discuss the authorization process. There are no refuges within this project area 4ZZPY-Z6IZN-E47HE-CHFBS-RTLG2EIPaCTrustResourceReport 11/02/2015 01:03 PM Page 9InformationforPlanningandConservationIPaC Version 2.2.8 Wetlands Impacts to and other aquatic habitats from your project may be subjecttoNWIwetlands regulation under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, or other State/Federal Statutes. Project proponents should discuss the relationship of these requirements to their project with the Regulatory Program of the appropriate .U.S. Army Corps of Engineers District DATA LIMITATIONS The Service's objective of mapping wetlands and deepwater habitats is to produce reconnaissance level information on the location, type and size of these resources. The maps are prepared from the analysis of high altitude imagery. Wetlands are identified based on vegetation, visible hydrology and geography. A margin of error is inherent in the use of imagery; thus, detailed on-the-ground inspection of any particular site may result in revision of the wetland boundaries or classification established through image analysis. The accuracy of image interpretation depends on the quality of the imagery, the experience of the image analysts, the amount and quality of the collateral data and the amount of ground truth verification work conducted. Metadata should be consulted to determine the date of the source imagery used and any mapping problems. Wetlands or other mapped features may have changed since the date of the imagery or field work. There may be occasional differences in polygon boundaries or classifications between the information depicted on the map and the actual conditions on site. DATA EXCLUSIONS Certain wetland habitats are excluded from the National mapping program because of the limitations of aerial imagery as the primary data source used to detect wetlands. These habitats include seagrasses or submerged aquatic vegetation that are found in the intertidal and subtidal zones of estuaries and nearshore coastal waters. Some deepwater reef communities (coral or tuberficid worm reefs) have also been excluded from the inventory. These habitats, because of their depth, go undetected by aerial imagery. DATA PRECAUTIONS Federal, state, and local regulatory agencies with jurisdiction over wetlands may define and describe wetlands in a different manner than that used in this inventory. There is no attempt, in either the design or products of this inventory, to define the limits of proprietary jurisdiction of any Federal, state, or local government or to establish the geographical scope of the regulatory programs of government agencies. Persons intending to engage in activities involving modifications within or adjacent to wetland areas should seek the advice of appropriate federal, state, or local agencies concerning specified agency regulatory programs and proprietary jurisdictions that may affect such activities. Wetland data is unavailable at this time. Fisheries Home About Us Programs Regions Science Centers Partners News & Multimedia Fisheries Resources Congress Educators and Students Get Involved Forms FOLLOW US: Stay connected with us around the nation » ESA Fact Sheet How does the ESA define species"? Endangered and Threatened Marine Species under NMFS' Jurisdiction Approximately 2,215 species are listed as endangered or threatened under the ESA. Of these species, about 650 are foreign species, found only in areas outside of the U.S. and our waters. We have jurisdiction over 129 endangered and threatened marine species, including 42 foreign species. We work with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) to manage ESA-listed species. Generally, we manage marine species, while USFWS manages land and freshwater species. Marine Mammals Sea Turtles & Other Marine Reptiles Fish (Marine and Anadromous) Marine Invertebrates and Plants Marine Mammals (27 listed "species") Manatees and sea otters are also listed under the ESA, but fall under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. E ="endangered"; T ="threatened"; F ="foreign"; n/a = not applicable) Species Year Listed Status Critical Habitat* Recovery Plan* Cetaceans dolphin, Chinese River / baiji Lipotes vexillifer) 1989 E (F)n/a n/a dolphin, Indus River Platanista minor) 1991 E (F)n/a n/a porpoise, Gulf of California harbor / vaquita Phocoena sinus) 1985 E (F)n/a n/a whale, beluga (1 listed DPS) Delphinapterus leucas) Cook Inlet 2008 E final draft whale, blue Balaenoptera musculus) 1970 E n/a final whale, bowhead Balaena mysticetus) 1970 E n/a n/a whale, false killer (1 listed DPS) Pseudorca crassidens) Main Hawaiian Islands Insular 2012 E no no whale, fin Balaenoptera physalus) 1970 E n/a final whale, gray (1 listed DPS) Eschrichtius robustus ) Western North Pacific 1970 E (F)n/a n/a whale, humpback Megaptera novaeangliae) 1970 E n/a final whale, killer (1 listed DPS) Orcinus orca) Southern Resident 2005 E final final whale, North Atlantic right Eubalaena glacialis) original listing as "northern right whale" - 2008 1970 E E final final whale, North Pacific right Eubalaena japonica) original listing as "northern right whale" - 2008 1970 E E final final whale, sei Balaenoptera borealis) 1970 E n/a final Fisheries Home »Protected Resources »Species NOAA HOME WEATHER OCEANS FISHERIES CHARTING SATELLITES CLIMATE RESEARCH COASTS CAREERS Search NMFS Site . . . Sign up for FishNews GO OPR Home Species Health & Strandi ng Permits Laws & Policies Conservation & Recovery Publications About OPR Page 1 of7EndangeredandThreatenedMarineSpeciesunderNMFS' Jurisdiction :: NOAA Fisheries 12/2/2015http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/esa/listed.htm whale, Southern right Eubalaena australis) 1970 E (F)n/a n/a whale, sperm Physeter macrocephalus) 1970 E n/a final Pinnipeds sea lion, Steller (1 listed DPS) Eumetopias jubatus) Western original listing - 1997 1990 E T final final seal, bearded (1 listed DPS) Erignathus barbatus) Okhotsk 2012 T (F)n/a no seal, Guadalupe fur Arctocephalus townsendi) 1985 T n/a n/a seal, Hawaiian monk Neomonachus schauinslandi) 1976 E final final seal, ringed (5 listed subspecies) Phoca hispida) Arctic Phoca hispida hispida) 2012 T no no Baltic Phoca hispida botnica) 2012 T (F)n/a no Okhotsk Phoca hispida ochotensis) 2012 T (F)n/a no Ladoga Phoca hispida ladogensis) 2012 E (F)n/a no Saimaa Phoca hispida saimensis) 1993 E (F)n/a n/a seal, Mediterranean monk Monachus monachus) 1970 E (F)n/a n/a seal, spotted (1 listed DPS) Phoca largha) Southern 2010 T (F)n/a n/a Sea Turtles & Other Marine Reptiles (17 listed "species") E ="endangered"; T ="threatened"; F ="foreign"; n/a = not applicable) Species Year Listed Status Critical Habitat* Recovery Plan* Sea Turtles turtle, green (2 listed populations^) Chelonia mydas) Florida & Mexico's Pacific coast breeding colonies 1978 E final final all other areas 1978 T final final turtle, hawksbill Eretmochelys imbricata) 1970 E final final turtle, Kemp's ridley Lepidochelys kempii) 1970 E n/a final turtle, leatherback Dermochelys coriacea) 1970 E final final turtle, loggerhead (9 listed DPSs) Caretta caretta) original listing - 1978 no final Page 2 of7EndangeredandThreatenedMarineSpeciesunderNMFS' Jurisdiction :: NOAA Fisheries 12/2/2015http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/esa/listed.htm Mediterranean Sea 2011 E (F) n/a n/a North Indian Ocean 2011 E (F)n/a n/a North Pacific Ocean 2011 E no final Northeast Atlantic Ocean 2011 E (F)n/a n/a Northwest Atlantic Ocean 2011 T final final South Atlantic Ocean 2011 T (F)n/a n/a South Pacific Ocean 2011 E (F)n/a n/a Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean 2011 T (F)n/a n/a Southwest Indian Ocean 2011 T (F)n/a n/a turtle, olive ridley (2 listed populations^) Lepidochelys olivacea) Mexico's Pacific coast breeding colonies 1978 E n/a final all other areas 1978 T n/a final Other Marine Reptiles sea snake, dusky Aipysurus fuscus) 2015 E (F)n/a no These populations were listed before the 1978 ESA amendments that restricted population listings to "distinct population segments of vertebrate species." Fish (Marine & Anadromous) (57 listed "species") E ="endangered"; T ="threatened"; F ="foreign"; XN ="nonessential experimental population"; n/a = not applicable) Species Year Listed Status Critical Habitat* Recovery Plan* bocaccio (1 listed DPS) Sebastes paucispinis) Puget Sound/ Georgia Basin 2010 E final no eulachon, Pacific / smelt (1 listed DPS) Thaleichthys pacificus) Southern DPS 2010 T final no rockfish, canary (1 listed DPS) Sebastes pinniger) Puget Sound/ Georgia Basin 2010 T final no rockfish, yelloweye (1 listed DPS) Sebastes ruberrimus) Puget Sound/ Georgia Basin 2010 T final no salmon, Atlantic (1 listed DPS) Salmo salar) Gulf of Maine original listing - 2009 expanded) 2000 E final final salmon, Chinook (9 listed ESUs & 1 XN) Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) California coastal 1999**T final draft Central Valley spring-run 1999**T final final Central Valley spring-run in the San Joaquin River, CA 2013 XN n/a - Lower Columbia River 1999**T final final Upper Columbia River spring-run 1999**E final final Puget Sound 1999**T final final Sacramento River winter-run 1994**E final final Snake River fall-run 1992**T final draft Snake River spring/ summer-run 1992**T final in process Upper Willamette River 1999**T final final Page 3 of7EndangeredandThreatenedMarineSpeciesunderNMFS' Jurisdiction :: NOAA Fisheries 12/2/2015http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/esa/listed.htm salmon, chum (2 listed ESUs) Oncorhynchus keta) Columbia River 1999**T final final Hood Canal summer-run 1999**T final final salmon, coho (4 listed ESUs) Oncorhynchus kisutch) Central California coast original listing - 2005** 1996** E T final final Lower Columbia River 2005**T proposed final Oregon coast 2008 T final draft Southern Oregon & Northern California coasts SONCC) 1997**T final final salmon, sockeye (2 listed ESUs) Oncorhynchus nerka) Ozette Lake 1999**T final final Snake River 1991**E final final sawfish, dwarf Pristis clavata) 2014 E (F)n/a no sawfish, green Pristis zijsron) 2014 E (F)n/a no sawfish, largetooth Pristis pristis)(formerly P. perotteti, P. pristis, and P. microdon) 2014 E no no sawfish, narrow Anoxypristis cuspidata) 2014 E (F)n/a no sawfish, smalltooth (2 listed DPSs) Pristis pectinata) U.S. portion of range 2003 E final final Non-U.S. portion of range 2014 E (F)n/a no shark, scalloped hammerhead (4 listed DPSs) Sphyrna lewini) Central & Southwest Atlantic 2014 T no no Eastern Atlantic 2014 E (F)n/a no Eastern Pacific 2014 E no no Indo-West Pacific 2014 T no no sturgeon, Adriatic Acipenser naccarii)2014 E (F)n/a no sturgeon, Atlantic (5 listed DPSs) Acipenser oxyrinchus oxyrinchus) Gulf of Maine 2012 T no no New York Bight 2012 E no no Chesapeake Bay 2012 E no no Carolina 2012 E no no South Atlantic 2012 E no no sturgeon, Chinese Acipenser sinensis)2014 E (F)n/a no sturgeon, European Acipenser sturio)2014 E (F)n/a no sturgeon, green (1 listed DPS) Acipenser medirostris) Southern DPS 2006 T final in process sturgeon, Gulf Acipenser oxyrinchus desotoi ) 1991 T final final sturgeon, Kaluga Huso dauricus)2014 E (F)n/a no sturgeon, Sakhalin Acipenser mikadoi) 2014 E (F)n/a no Page 4 of7EndangeredandThreatenedMarineSpeciesunderNMFS' Jurisdiction :: NOAA Fisheries 12/2/2015http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/esa/listed.htm sturgeon, shortnose Acipenser brevirostrum) 1967 E n/a final totoaba Totoaba macdonaldi) 1979 E (F)n/a n/a trout, steelhead (11 listed DPSs & 1 XN) Oncorhynchus mykiss) Puget Sound 2007 T proposed no Central California coast 1997**T final draft Snake River Basin 1997**T final in process Upper Columbia River original listing - change in status - court reinstated status - 2009+ 1997** 2006** 2007+ T E T E final final reinstated to endangered status per U.S. District Court decision in June 2007;reclassified to threatened [pdf] per U.S. District Court order in June 2009 Southern California 1997**E final final Middle Columbia River 1999**T final final Middle Columbia River 2013 XN n/a Lower Columbia River 1998**T final final Upper Willamette River 1999**T final final Northern California 2000**T final draft South-Central California coast 1997**T final final California Central Valley 1998**T final final All Pacific salmonid listings were revisited in 2005 and 2006. Only the salmonids whose status changed as a result of the review will show the revised date; for all others, only the original listing date is shown. For more information on the listing history, please click on the link for each ESU/DPS. Marine Invertebrates (27 listed "species") E ="endangered"; T ="threatened"; F ="foreign"; n/a = not applicable) Species Year Listed Status Critical Habitat* Recovery Plan* Abalone abalone, black Haliotis cracherodii) 2009 E final no abalone, white Haliotis sorenseni) 2001 E not prudent [pdf] final Corals coral, [no common name] Acropora globiceps)2014 T no no coral, [no common name] Acropora jacquelineae)2014 T no no coral, [no common name] Acropora lokani)2014 T (F)n/a no coral, [no common name] Acropora pharaonis)2014 T (F)n/a no coral, [no common name] Acropora retusa)2014 T no no coral, [no common name] Acropora rudis)2014 T (F)n/a no coral, [no common name] Acropora speciosa)2014 T no no coral, [no common name] Acropora tenella)2014 T (F)n/a no coral, [no common name] Acropora spinosa)2014 T (F)n/a no 2015 E (F)n/a no Page 5 of7EndangeredandThreatenedMarineSpeciesunderNMFS' Jurisdiction :: NOAA Fisheries 12/2/2015http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/esa/listed.htm coral, [no common name] Cantharellus noumeae) coral, [no common name] Euphyllia paradivisa)2014 T no no coral, [no common name] Isopora crater iformis )2014 T no no coral, [no common name] Montipora australiensis)2014 T (F)n/a no coral, [no common name] Pavona diffluens)2014 T (F)no no coral, [no common name] Porites napopora)2014 T (F)n/a no coral, [no common name] Seriatopora aculeata )2014 T no no coral, [no common name] Siderastrea glynni)2015 E (F)n/a no coral, [no common name] Tubastraea floreana)2015 E (F)n/a no coral, boulder star Orbicella franksi)2014 T no no coral, elkhorn Acropora palmata) 2006 T final final coral, lobed star Orbicella annularis)2014 T no no coral, mountainous star Orbicella faveolata)2014 T no no coral, pillar Dendrogyra cylindrus)2014 T no no coral, rough cactus Mycetophyllia ferox)2014 T no no coral, staghorn Acropora cervicornis) 2006 T final final Marine Plants (1 listed "species") E ="endangered"; T ="threatened"; F ="foreign"; n/a = not applicable) Species Year Listed Status Critical Habitat* Recovery Plan* Johnson's seagrass Halophila johnsonii) 1999 T final final NOTE: Critical habitat cannot be designated in foreign waters; critical habitat is also not required for species listed prior to the 1978 ESA amendments that added critical habitat provisions. Recovery plans for sea turtles are developed and implemented by NMFS and USFWS; the plans have been written separately for turtles in the Atlantic and Pacific oceans (and East Pacific for the green turtle) rather than for each listed species. Bowhead whales are exempt from recovery planning. Endangered and Threatened Species Under NMFS' Jurisdiction: All Endangered and Threatened Species under NMFS Jurisdiction Marine Mammals Sea Turtles & Other Marine Reptiles Fish (Marine & Anadromous) Marine Invertebrates & Plants Additional Species: Species Petitioned for Listing under the ESA (awaiting 90-day findings) Candidates for ESA Listing Species Proposed for ESA Listing Species with "Not Warranted" 12-month findings (we reviewed the status, but determined that listing was not warranted) Delisted Species and Species Under Review or Proposed for Delisting Updated: November 19, 2015 Page 6 of7EndangeredandThreatenedMarineSpeciesunderNMFS' Jurisdiction :: NOAA Fisheries 12/2/2015http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/esa/listed.htm Fisheries Service Home Information Quality Exit Disclaimer Linking Policy Privacy Policy Copyright Policy USA.gov FOIA Search Inside NOAA Fisheries Our Mission Frequently Asked Questions Contact Us Work for NOAA Fisheries EEO & Diversity Page 7 of7EndangeredandThreatenedMarineSpeciesunderNMFS' Jurisdiction :: NOAA Fisheries 12/2/2015http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/esa/listed.htm Longacres Biological Assessment Phase II Terracon Project No. 25157225 View from the northwest corner of the site. View to the southwest. View along the southern boundary of the site. View to the east. Longacres Biological Assessment Phase II Terracon Project No. 25157225 View from the center of the site. View to the east. Photo #3 View from the southern boundary. View to the north. Longacres Biological Assessment Phase II Terracon Project No. 25157225 View from the southern boundary. View to the north. View from the northern boundary. View to the west. Longacres Biological Assessment Phase II Terracon Project No. 25157225 View from the northern boundary. View to the south. View from the southern boundary of Tract B. View to the east. Longacres Biological Assessment Phase II Terracon Project No. 25157225 View from the northwestern corner of Tract B. View to the south. View from the western boundary of Tract B. View to the southeast. Longacres Biological Assessment Phase II Terracon Project No. 25157225 View from the northern boundary. View to the east. View of the storm drain located on the north adjoining property. View to the north. Longacres Biological Assessment Phase II Terracon Project No. 25157225 View of the north adjoining property. View to the north. View of the south adjoining property. View to the south. Ms. Jill Ding 29 April 2022 Page 34 of 38 ATTACHMENT 10 WETLANDS DELINEATION AND REGULATORY ANALYSIS MEMORANDUM, AMEC FOSTER WHEELER, 2016 Amec Foster Wheeler Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. 11810 North Creek Parkway N Bothell, Washington 98011 (425) 368-1000 Phone (425) 368-1001 Facsimile www.amecfw.com Memorandum To Darrel DeNune The Boeing Company File no SE15161530.00003.**** Cc: Leah Krider, Boeing John Long, LHg., Amec Foster Wheeler From Melinda Gray, MS Theresa Price, MS Amec Foster Wheeler Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. Date August 9, 2016 Revised September 8, 2016 Subject Boeing Longacres Park: North and South Pond Wetlands Delineation and Regulatory Analysis INTRODUCTION The Boeing Company (Boeing) requested Amec Foster Wheeler Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. (Amec Foster Wheeler) to perform a wetland delineation and regulatory review of the Longacres Business Park in Renton, Washington (Figure 1). The Longacres Business Park was developed from a previous development starting in the 1990s. As part of the wetland mitigation for the development, an existing pond was expanded (North Pond) and a stormwater treatment pond was created (South Pond). The North and South Ponds have been successful in meeting their mitigation objectives, and the vegetation has matured over the last 17 years; however, wetland conditions have not been delineated recently. In addition, recent adjacent development and future operations of the anticipated development have resulted in stormwater discharge to the South Pond. To allow for management decisions for the long-term protection of the North and South Ponds, Amec Foster Wheeler conducted a wetland determination and delineation of the South Pond, and of the southern boundary of the North Pond. The objectives of Amec Foster Wheeler’s scope of work were to: 1. Determine the location of wetland boundaries based on contemporary field indicators. 2. Perform a wetland functional assessment, including assessment of critical wildlife habitat. 3. Conduct a regulatory review of the jurisdictional status of the North and South Ponds. based on current regulations. 4. Provide the required offset for regulatory buffers for the North and South Ponds. Darrel DeNune The Boeing Company September 8, 2016 Page 2 of 17 This memorandum provides a brief history of the development of the ponds and a description of the methodology and results of the field investigation to delineate the conditions of the North and South Ponds. We provide a summary of the regulations that are applicable to the North and South Ponds. Development of Longacres Business Park The Longacres Business Park was constructed over two rounds of development, which resulted in the pond configuration seen today. The first round of development was in the early 1990s, and consisted of wetland restoration and creation in the north part of the area. The most recent development occurred in 2000. Boeing obtained authorization from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) under the Clean Water Act (Permit No. 93-4-00059). The Corps Permit required mitigation of wetland impacts as outlined in the Longacres Office Park Surface Water Management Project Conceptual Wetland Mitigation Plan, prepared by Shapiro and Associates in December 1998, and revised January 1999 (Shapiro, 1999; Mitigation Plan). The Mitigation Plan included enlarging the existing pond (the North Pond) and creation of a stormwater pond (the South Pond). The North Pond included several classes of wetland vegetation and resulted from both wetland creation and enhancement actions. The South Pond, which lies immediately south of the North Pond, was designed to function as water quality treatment and storage. It was landscaped in a manner similar to the north pond with “open water, floating leaved, emergent, scrub-shrub, and forested components” (Shapiro, 1999). The South Pond was also designed to provide wildlife habitat and serve as a portion of the wildlife corridor connecting other wetlands and mitigation areas lying to the south to the North Pond. The South Pond drains to the North Pond, which drains to Springbrook Creek. Currently, stormwater enters both the South and North Ponds through overland flow, as well as via several pipelines. Our review of historic aerial imagery (Google Earth 2016) created since construction indicated the presence of surface water year-round in both ponds. Regulatory Context Pursuant to the Clean Water Act of 1972 and through the Section 404/401 permitting process, the Corps has the responsibility of regulating the discharge of dredged or fill material into Waters of the United States, including wetlands. Wetlands that have a significant nexus with a traditional navigable water are regulated by the Clean Water Act. In addition, any aquatic system resulting from compensatory actions permitted under the Clean Water Act are protected in perpetuity. Wetlands are protected by two state laws: the State Water Pollution Control Act and the Shoreline Management Act, both implemented by the Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology). Ecology defines waters of the State in the same manner as the Corps, and includes isolated wetlands as well. Any wetland created, enhanced, or preserved as part of a mitigation plan is protected by the State in perpetuity. Aquatic system and habitat protection is provided by the City of Renton’s Critical Areas Regulations (CAR) 4-3-050. These regulations were updated in 2015. According to the CAR, the objectives are to Darrel DeNune The Boeing Company September 8, 2016 Page 3 of 17 prevent the loss of critical areas acreage, as well as protect aquatic functions, and strive for a net gain over present conditions. The CAR applies to Categories I, II, III, or IV wetlands, or on sites within 200 feet of Category I, II, III, and IV wetlands. In addition, all wetlands created or restored as a part of a mitigation project are regulated wetlands under the City’s code (4-3-050(1)(f). The code also states that artificial wetlands created as detention facilities are not regulated wetlands. WETLAND DELINEATION We delineated the southern extent of the North Pond and the entire South Pond. In addition, Amec Foster Wheeler staff reviewed and analyzed available site information and previous field investigations to identify previously documented wetlands and obtain background information about the study area. Amec Foster Wheeler staff conducted a field investigation on July 8 and July 19, 2016. The study area in the field was defined as the area interior to a paved pedestrian trail encircling the South Pond, and the area internal to a pedestrian trail encircling the North Pond to a point approximately one-third of the extent of the North Pond (see Figure 2). The pending development (by others) is to be located south and southwest of the South Pond. No development is known to be planned north of the North Pond at this time, and thus this area was not included in the delineation. Background Information Review Available site information was reviewed to identify any documented wetlands, streams, or other site characteristics (e.g., vegetation patterns, topography, soils, or water courses). In addition, surface water management and wetland mitigation documents were reviewed for the area. Documents reviewed include the following:  United States Geological Survey (USGS) Topographic map, Renton, WA 7.5 minute quadrangle map, (USGS, 2011)  National Wetlands Inventory (USFWS, 2016)  Soils map from the United States Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS, 2016)  Sensitive Areas mapping by City of Renton Department of Planning (City of Renton, 2016)  Surface Water Management Plan Year 4 Monitoring Report (Shapiro, 2004)  Critical Areas Report (Landau Associates, 2013)  Conceptual Wetland Mitigation Plan (Shapiro, 1999)  Corps Permit reference number 93-4-00059 (Corps, 1999) Methods Wetland Delineation Amec Foster Wheeler staff conducted a field investigation on July 8 and July 19, 2016, using the three-parameter approach detailed in the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory, 1987) and the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast Region, Version 2.0 (Corps, 2010). In general, to qualify as a wetland, specific vegetation, soil features, and hydrologic characteristics must be present. The two Corps delineation manuals referenced in the previous paragraph require Darrel DeNune The Boeing Company September 8, 2016 Page 4 of 17 positive evidence of all three wetland parameters for a determination that an area is functioning as a wetland. The Corps Wetland Determination Data Form was used to document site conditions at paired data point locations in the study area. Data points included documenting the vegetation community, soil profiles, and signs of wetland hydrology. A total of eight test plots were used to describe the wetland and upland characteristics. Test plots consist of a field-estimated 10- by 30-foot rectangular plot centered on a newly excavated 12- to 18-inch-deep soil pit. Vegetation was characterized at each test plot in the following manner: trees within a 10-foot by 30-foot rectangular plot, shrubs within a 10-foot by 10-foot rectangular plot, and non-woody herbaceous plants within a 2-foot by 2-foot plot were identified and recorded on wetland field data forms (see Appendix A for results). A hydrophytic plant community is determined by the presence of an assemblage of plant species typically adapted to saturated soils and anaerobic soil conditions. The presence of wetland hydrologic indicators also was determined at each test plot. Wetland hydrologic conditions are present when an area is either permanently or temporarily inundated, or when the soil is saturated for a significant period (usually two weeks or more) during the growing season, under normal conditions. Hydric soils are defined as being saturated, flooded, or ponded long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper part of the soil profile (Environmental Laboratory, 1987). Hydric soils exhibit certain characteristics that can be observed in the field. Soil samples were obtained at representative test plots by hand digging a pit down to a depth of 12 to 18 inches. Soils were then examined in the field for hydric indicators. Delineated and surveyed wetland boundaries are subject to verification and approval by jurisdictional agencies. Wetland boundaries were numbered and flagged in the field. Pink flagging, marked “WETLAND DELINEATION,” was used to indicate wetland boundaries, and blue flagging was used to mark locations of test plots. The location of field flagging was surveyed using conventional survey methods and mapped. Wetland Rating and Buffer Width Determination The Washington State Wetlands Rating System for Western Washington: 2014 Update (Hruby, 2014) was used to rate the wetlands. Wetland buffers are established following City of Renton Municipal Code (RMC) Section 4-3-050(G). Field Investigation Topography throughout the study area is relatively flat (Figure 3) and the elevation is approximately 15 to 20 feet in elevation (North American Vertical Datum of 1988) throughout most of the site. The site gradually slopes down toward the north and east. The National Wetlands Inventory does not show wetlands within the study area, but does indicate nearby wetland habitats (Figure 4). The study area is located in the Black River drainage basin, specifically in the Springbrook Creek drainage basin, within the Duwamish-Green watershed (Water Resource Inventory Area 9). The Springbrook Creek sub-basin enters the main stem Green River via the Black River at river mile 11.0. Darrel DeNune The Boeing Company September 8, 2016 Page 5 of 17 Springbrook Creek is the largest sub-basin in the lower Green River Basin, with approximately 12 miles of mainstem and approximately 22.9 miles of tributary streams and drainage ditches (Kerwin and Nelson, 2000). The study area lies almost entirely within the 100- and 500-year floodplains as mapped by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (Figure 5). Springbrook Creek provides habitat for a variety of wildlife, including salmonids. Surface waters in the study area generally drain to the north and east into Springbrook Creek (east of Oakesdale Avenue SW), which flows northward from the study area, draining to the Black River pump station north of the study area. Water quality is an ongoing concern for the watershed, and for areas on and surrounding the study area. The segment of Springbrook Creek just east of Oakesdale Avenue SW and south of SW 16th Street has been listed as a Category 5 (303d) water (Ecology, 2016). The stream scores low on bioassays (benthic index of biotic integrity) and has periodic low dissolved oxygen concentration and high levels of problematic bacteria (including fecal coliform bacteria). The local area maps demonstrate the relative richness of wetland and wildlife habitat lying within 0.5 mile of this otherwise industrial/office park area (Figure 4). Wetlands in the area are associated with Springbrook Creek. The nearest adjacent wetland habitat is mapped approximately 950 feet southwest of the study area and includes a palustrine forested wetland adjacent to the west side of the railroad tracks. Palustrine emergent wetlands are mapped near this forested wetland, approximately 1,100 feet southwest of the study area. Additional wetlands mapped in the study area vicinity include an emergent wetland located approximately 1,500 feet south and southeast of the study area. This wetland is associated with the 10.9-acre South Marsh area that was preserved under a conservation easement as required by Corps Permit No. 93-4-00059. In addition, the Springbrook Creek Mitigation Bank wetlands are approximately 0.2 mile to south and southeast, and one portion of the Springbrook Creek Mitigation Bank abuts the South Marsh conservation area. According to the Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey, the soil series in the study area are mapped as urban land. Urban soils are those that have been modified or obscured by development or disturbance of the natural soil horizons with additions of fill material. The presence of fill materials is a result of development prior to the Longacres Business Park. Urban soils in King County, Washington are not classified as hydric in the National Hydric Soils list (NRCS, 2015). Soils surrounding the study vicinity are mapped as Woodinville silt loam (475 feet to the west and 850 feet to the south), Newberg silt loam (970 feet to the southwest), and Puyallup fine sandy loam (1,400 feet to the east). Woodinville silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slope, is a naturally poorly drained, hydric soil, with a depth to water table of approximately 6 inches. Newberg silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slope, and Puyallup fine sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slope, are well drained non-hydric soils with depths to water table of approximately 42 inches and 54 inches, respectively. Field Results Based on the presence of field indicators, the North and South Ponds have the characteristics of functioning wetlands. A wetland boundary was delineated in the field. The boundary is the location Darrel DeNune The Boeing Company September 8, 2016 Page 6 of 17 where wetland indicators are present and beyond which upland conditions become dominate. Field data was recorded with wetland plots 1, 2 and 3 representative of the South Pond, and with data at Wetland Plot 1N representative of the North Pond. Data plots from the adjacent upland area was collected to evaluate upland conditions for comparison (South Pond: UP1, UP2, and UP3; North Pond: UP1N – see Appendix A). The wetland boundary is shown on Figure 6. Vegetation Both the North and South Ponds were vegetated by planted forest communities with open water/fringe wetland communities in the center. Current vegetation reflects the original planting plan, with most plants being common facultative wetland species. We assumed that the mature overstory vegetation was established in its planted location, while herbaceous and shrub understory plants may have been planted or might be volunteer plants. We assumed the herbaceous and shrub understory would be most indicative of actual soil saturation conditions. The overstory comprised red alder (Alnus rubra), Pacific willow (Salix lucida), and Sitka willow (Salix sitchensis). Understory species included dogwood (Cornus sericea), twinberry (Lonicera involucrata), salmonberry (Rubus spectabilis), slough sedge (Carex obnupta), and creeping buttercup (Ranunculus repens). Invasive Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus), along with (likely planted) Indian-plum (Oemleria cerasiformis) and rose bushes, were located along the wetland boundary on the upland side. In light gaps and near the open water, herbaceous vegetation consisted of slough sedge, mannagrass (Glyceria sp.), horsetail (Equisetum arvense), and reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea). Spatterdock (Nuphar lutea ssp. polysepalus), cattail (Typha latifolia), and yellow-flag iris (Iris pseudacorus) were observed in the water at water’s edge and within the ponded areas of the North and South Ponds. As anticipated, the area supports a wetland plant community, as more than 50 percent of the dominant plant species had an indicator status of obligate, facultative, or facultative wetland (Table 1 and Appendix A). Upland habitat was indicated by red alder, cottonwood, and aspen-dominated overstory with very limited numbers of Sitka willow, along with a shrub layer of Indian plum, Himalayan blackberry, snowberry, and rose. The upland had a very limited herbaceous cover primarily of sedge, horsetail, and creeping buttercup. Table 1 lists plant species observed within the study area, including upland and wetland-type areas. Some invasive species were observed within the North and South Ponds and along the water margins during the field investigation. These species included purple loosestrife (Lysimachia salicaria), field bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis), and yellowflag iris (Iris pseudacorus). At the time of the field investigations, these species were individually observed in limited areas and none were a predominant vegetation component in any area. Boundary delineation for the South Pond in particular was supported by the transition in vegetation from Pacific willow and red osier dogwood (characteristic of wetland habitat) to the presence of rose Darrel DeNune The Boeing Company September 8, 2016 Page 7 of 17 (Rosa nutkana) and Indian plum (more characteristic of upland habitat). For the North Pond, delineation of the wetland boundary was guided by the plant community of Pacific willow, Douglas spirea (Spiraea douglasii), and red osier dogwood in the wetland, with a rose and snowberry (Symphoricarpos albus) understory in the upland. Soils We anticipated that soils in the North and South Ponds would not necessarily demonstrate hydric soil indicators, because it is generally understood that hydric soil indicators take some time to develop and may not be present in soils of constructed sites. Further, based on knowledge of the previous development along with information from the soil survey, both North and South Ponds were likely constructed in old imported soil material of unknown origin. Strong, clear indicators of hydric soils (depleted matrix, organic matter accumulation) were observed at the edge of standing water at all locations investigated. This is where soils have likely been continuously saturated since the time of construction. However, soils at slightly higher elevations, which likely have been seasonally saturated, had weaker indicators. These “young” hydric soils did show indications of periodic saturation. They had surface layers that were relatively darker in color with lighter matrices in lower layers. Soils within and close to the wetland boundary exhibited a duff/leaf debris layer, much of which was water- stained, while adjacent upland soils had minimal accumulation of duff. However, the development of these characteristics did not always meet the definitions for indicators of hydric soil. The soils generally did not meet the criteria for depleted matrix. In some portions of the wetland boundary area where hydric soil indicators were lacking, geomorphic location was used as an indicator. In these locations, positive indicators in support of the determination were observed for the wetland vegetation and wetland hydrology. Table 1 Plant Species Observed in the Study Area on July 8 and July 19, 2016 Cover Class Common Name Scientific Name Wetland Indicator Status Trees Red alder Alnus rubra FAC Black cottonwood Populus balsamifera ssp. trichocarpa FAC Trembling aspen Populus tremuloides FACU Douglas-fir Pseudotsuga menziesii FACU Pacific willow Salix lucida FACW Sitka willow Salix sitchensis FACW Shrubs Vine maple Acer circinatum FAC Red Osier dogwood Cornus sericea FACW Black twinberry Lonicera involucrata FAC Indian-plum Oemleria cerasiformis FACU Red-flowering currant Ribes sanguineum FACU Nootka rose Rosa nutkana FAC Himalayan blackberry Rubus armeniacus FAC Salmonberry Rubus spectabilis FAC Darrel DeNune The Boeing Company September 8, 2016 Page 8 of 17 Cover Class Common Name Scientific Name Wetland Indicator Status Pacific willow Salix lucida FACW Sitka willow Salix sitchensis FACW Red Elderberry Sambucus racemosa FACU Douglas spirea Spiraea douglasii FACW Snowberry Symphoricarpos albus FACU Herbs Slough sedge Carex obnutpa OBL Field bindweed Convolvulus arvensis NA Field horsetail Equisetum arvense FAC Mannagrass Glyceria sp. NA Yellowflag iris Iris pseudacorus OBL Purple loosestrife Lysimachia salicaria OBL Spatter-dock Nuphar lutea ssp. polysepala OBL Reed canarygrass Phalaris arundinacea FACW Creeping buttercup Ranunculus repens FAC Hardstem bulrush Schoenoplectus acutus OBL Cattail Typha latifolia OBL Abbreviations: FAC - Facultative. Species that are equally likely to occur in wetlands or uplands (estimated probability 34 to 66%). FACU – Facultative upland. Species that usually occur in non-wetlands but are occasionally found in wetlands. FACW - Facultative wetland. Species that usually occur in wetlands (estimated probability 67 to 99%), but occasionally are found in uplands. NA – not applicable OBL - Obligate. Species that almost always occur in wetlands (estimated probability >99%) under natural conditions. Hydrology Primary indicators of wetland hydrologic conditions were observed, including surface water within both ponds, high water table (less than 12 inches below the surface) at several test plots, and saturated soils within test plots. Additional field indicators of wetland hydrology included water-stained leaves, inundation visible on aerial imagery, and geomorphic position. Wetland Rating Both the North and South Ponds are classified as palustrine, forested broad-leaved deciduous/unconsolidated bottom/depressional wetlands. There is a man-made, controlled, surface water connection between the North and South Ponds, with the South Pond flowing into the North Pond. According to Ecology’s 2014 wetland rating system implementation guidance, the two ponds are evaluated as a single functional aquatic unit. The system rated as a Category II wetland with a total Darrel DeNune The Boeing Company September 8, 2016 Page 9 of 17 score of 21 (see Appendix B). Highest scores were earned for water quality functions along with other hydrologic functions (e.g., storage, flood attenuation). Category II wetlands have significant value based on their functions and have qualities that are difficult to replace if altered, and thus are highly valued in the landscape for their services. According to RMC Section 4-3-050(G), wetland categories for the purposes of determining buffers utilize Ecology’s wetland rating system scores. Thus, the wetlands are rated as Category II with a moderate habitat function (score of 6) under RMC requirements. Buffer offset widths are based on the wetland rating category, along with the intensity of the adjacent land use. Two broad categories of land use are used: low impact land uses and all other land uses. The RMC defines low intensity land uses to include unpaved trails, low intensity open space (hiking, bird-watching, preservation of natural resources, etc.) and utility corridors without a maintenance road and little or no vegetation management. If we assume the Longacres Business Park would not be considered low impact, under RMC Section 4-3-050(G), a Category II wetland requires a buffer of 150 feet. In addition, a 15-foot setback from buildings from the outer edge of the buffer would be required. WETLAND FUNCTIONS AND WILDLIFE HABITAT The development of the North and South Ponds as proposed in the 1999 Conceptual Wetland Mitigation Plan had a goal of creating a wildlife corridor linking the area to Springbrook Creek and other wetlands lying to the south and east, some from other mitigation actions. One important objective of the wetland mitigation was to create, restore, and enhance habitat suitable for waterfowl, passerine birds, small mammals, and raptors and serve as a component of a wildlife corridor (Shapiro, 1999). During the field investigation, wildlife species or evidence of their presence were observed, but a full species inventory was not recorded. Songbirds, raptors, and waterfowl were observed in the study area. Field observations, as well as those reported by Boeing staff monitoring the site, were incorporated into an existing list of wildlife species known to use or occupy the site (Appendix C). Recently, four additional wildlife species were newly identified as utilizing the system, which reflects the area’s continuing development into valuable wildlife habitat. The additional species were black phoebe, long-eared owl, Cooper’s hawk (nesting), and long-tailed weasel. Habitat within and immediately adjacent to the North and South Ponds is forested with shrub understory and herbaceous cover suitable for many species. Approximately 1,200 feet to the east, riparian habitat along Springbrook Creek supports black cottonwood, willow, red alder, and Himalayan blackberry (Kerwin and Nelson, 2000). Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife’s SalmonScape online tool (WDFW, 2016) indicates salmon species (fall chinook, Coho, fall chum and winter steelhead) occurring, breeding, or migrating along Springbrook Creek east of the study area (on the east side of Oakesdale Avenue SW and south of SW 16th Street). Spawning has been documented for Coho salmon, cutthroat trout and winter steelhead adults in Springbrook Creek (Kerwin and Nelson, 2000). The only potential barrier to fish Darrel DeNune The Boeing Company September 8, 2016 Page 10 of 17 migration in the Springbrook Creek system is the Black River Pump Station near the confluence of the creek with the Black River. At that location, a fish passage system is in operation that utilizes a combination of fish ladder and fishway chute for upstream passage, while fish migrating downstream are diverted around the pumps via an air-lift pump to raise the fish to downstream water levels (Kerwin and Nelson, 2000). The North and South Ponds are not accessible to fish due to a barrier at the outlet to Springbrook Creek. Nonetheless, functions in the South and North Ponds contribute directly to habitat conditions that support critical species in Springbrook Creek, especially water quality. Habitat Conservation Area Because Springbrook Creek has documented existence of salmonid species (fall chinook, Coho, fall chum, and winter steelhead) and is hydrologically associated with the North and South Pond, the North and South Ponds would be considered to be Critical Habitat and regulated as a Habitat Conservation Area per Renton’s CAR Section 4-3-050(G). This determination is further supported by the documented nesting of Cooper’s Hawk on site and within the mitigation area, as well as the use of the mitigation site by a number of sensitive avian species. REGULATORY STATUS EVALUATION Under the 1999 Mitigation Plan, the South Pond was designed and constructed to meet the City of Renton’s water quality standards for stormwater runoff and detention (Shapiro and Associates, Inc. 1999). The South Pond was also designed to provide habitat as a part of the wildlife corridor that links other wetlands in the Springbrook Creek Watershed. While the South Pond’s created footprint was not used to calculate the acreage sufficiency of the 1999 Mitigation Plan, the South Pond’s functions (including providing water quality treatment) were identified as integral to meeting the objectives of the mitigation plan (Shapiro, 1999). The North and the South Ponds have largely succeeded in achieving the objectives set out by the 1999 Mitigation Plan. The field evaluation showed that positive wetland indicators were present and the area met the definition for wetland. Wetland boundaries were successfully delineated in the field and mapped. Because both the North and South Ponds were created under a permitted and approved mitigation plan they are therefore protected in perpetuity under Corps and Ecology rules. Local code protects the mitigation area under the City of Renton CAR as regulated wetlands (4-3-050). The local code also states that wetlands created for stormwater detention are not regulated wetlands. However, because the South Pond was constructed under the requirement of a wetland mitigation plan, it is our belief that the South Pond is included in the regulated wetland system. The North and South Ponds are rated as a Category II wetland. Category II wetlands have significant value based on their functions and have qualities that are difficult to replace if altered, and thus are highly valued in the landscape for their services. As stated the documented occurrence of salmonid species in Springbrook Creek, which is the receiving body for water from the system, along with documented occurrence of sensitive avian species, this system is defined and protected as Critical Habitat by City of Renton CAR. Darrel DeNune The Boeing Company September 8, 2016 Page 11 of 17 Therefore, under the RMC Section 4-3-050(G), a buffer of 150 feet is required for this system. Based on field observations and using the Ecology rating system, this wetland received a habitat score of 6 points out of 9 possible points. Per RMC Section 4-3-050(G)(9)(d)(4), an applicant may request an increased wetland buffer width if the wetland is used by species listed by the Federal or State government as threatened, endangered, and sensitive species and State-listed priority species, essential habitat for those species or has unusual nesting or resting sites such as raptor nesting trees. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF REGULATORY FRAMEWORK We make the following recommendations: 1. Consistent with [Renton Code, Fed Law, State Law, etc.] A 150-foot buffer should be formally established for the system on the property. The buffer should be located, marked, and maintained on the property. 2. Current maintenance, including the monitoring and removal of invasive species and other management of the system should be continued. 3. Additional focus on management of the buffer area should be considered. Specifically, buffer vegetation conditions should be evaluated and enhanced or maintained. 4. According to the RMC, any new construction and/or development within 300 feet of the system will require a Critical Areas review because any potential direct or indirect impacts to the hydrology, soils, or vegetation of the regulatory buffer or to the aquatic system itself require approvals at all jurisdictional levels. 5. Release of stormwater to the South Pond from the new adjacent development has the potential to alter the functions of the system; thus, an evaluation of the potential impact should be performed. 6. The area should be placed in a conservation easement which will allow the area to be recorded as protected area. Placing the area in a conservation easement with clear guidelines for performance and management will protect the site and its current functions, both in terms of wildlife and stormwater management, in perpetuity. LIMITATIONS The boundaries, ratings, and recommendations described herein are the professional opinion of Amec Foster Wheeler staff based on the circumstances and site conditions at the time of this study. These professional opinions have been developed in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill normally exercised by members of the environmental science profession currently practicing under similar conditions in the area, and in accordance with the terms and conditions set forth in our signed proposal. These findings are considered preliminary until local, state, or federal jurisdictions make verification of jurisdiction and confirm the wetland determination, boundary locations, and classifications. REFERENCES City of Renton. 2016. Maps and GIS Data. Available online at: http://rentonwa.gov/living/default.aspx?id=27497, accessed July 2016. Corps – see United States Army Corps of Engineers Darrel DeNune The Boeing Company September 8, 2016 Page 12 of 17 Ecology – see Washington State Department of Ecology Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Wetlands Research Program Technical Report Y-87-1. Hruby, T. 2014. Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington: 2014 Update. (Publication # 14-06-029). Olympia, WA: Washington State Department of Ecology. Kerwin, John and Tom S. Nelson (Eds.). 2000. “Habitat Limiting Factors and Reconnaissance Assessment Report, Green/Duwamish and Central Puget Sound Watersheds (WRIA 9 and Vashon Island).” Washington Conservation Commission and the King County Department of Natural Resources. December. Landau Associates. 2013. Critical Areas Report, Longacres Park Sounder Path Lighting Study, Renton, Washington. Prepared for The Boeing Company. April 16. Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2014. Web Soil Survey. United States Department of Agriculture. Available online at: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/, accessed July 2016. NRCS. 2015. National Hydric Soils List. United States Department of Agriculture. December 2015. Available online at: http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/main/soils/use/hydric/, accessed July 2016. Shapiro and Associates, Inc. (Shapiro). 1999. Longacres Office Park Surface Water Management Project Conceptual Wetland Mitigation Plan. Prepared for Boeing Commercial Airplane Group. December 1998. Revised January. Shapiro. 2004. Boeing Surface Water Management Plan, Year 4 Monitoring Report. Prepared for Boeing Shared Services Group. November. United States Army Corps of Engineers (Corps). 1999. Reference 93-4-00059, The Boeing Company permit modification letter. Corps. 2010. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast Region, Version 2.0. May. United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2016. National Wetlands Inventory Mapper. United States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C. Available online at http://fws.gov/wetlands/index.html, accessed July 2016. United States Geological Survey (USGS), 2011, Renton, WA 7.5 minute topographic quadrangle map. Washington State Department of Ecology. 2016. Water Quality Assessment and 303(d) List. EPA list approved July 22, 2016. Available online at: http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/wq/303d/currentassessmt.html. Accessed August 2016. Darrel DeNune The Boeing Company September 8, 2016 Page 13 of 17 Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW). 2016. SalmonScape. Available online at: http://apps.wdfw.wa.gov/salmonscape/, accessed 2016. Figures LongacresBusiness Park STUDY AREA K:\AMEC US OFFICES\Bothell\SE15161530 - Boeing Longacres Renton\Figure 1 - Vicinity and Study Area.mxd - stephane.descombes - 8/5/2016 - 1:16:16 PM LONGACRES BUSINESS PARK WETLAND DELINEATION & REGULATORY EVALUATION RENTON, WASHINGTON AUGUST 2016 SE15161530.0003.**** 1 VICINITY & STUDY AREA THE BOEING COMPANY DRAWN BY: SD CHECKED BY: TP1 " = 2,000 feet 0 2,0001,000 Feet Amec Foster Wheeler Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. 11810 North Creek Parkway N Bothell, WA 98011 DATE SCALE PROJECT NO. FIGURE Springbro o k CreekWASHINGTON OREGON BRITISH COLUMBIA PropertyArea Seattle Olympia Portland Vancouver Bellingham North Pond South Pond Location of connection between North & South Pond Walking Trail Walking Trail Outlet draining to Springbrook Creek K:\AMEC US OFFICES\Bothell\SE15161530 - Boeing Longacres Renton\Figure 2 - Study Area.mxd - stephane.descombes - 8/5/2016 - 1:25:16 PM AUGUST 2016 SE15161530.0003.**** 2 STUDY AREA DRAWN BY: SD CHECKED BY: TP1 " = 200 feet 0 200100 Feet Amec Foster Wheeler Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. 11810 North Creek Parkway N Bothell, WA 98011 DATE SCALE PROJECT NO. FIGURE LEGEND: Study Area LONGACRES BUSINESS PARK WETLAND DELINEATION & REGULATORY EVALUATION RENTON, WASHINGTON THE BOEING COMPANY Springbr oo k Creek K:\AMEC US OFFICES\Bothell\SE15161530 - Boeing Longacres Renton\Figure 3 - USGS Topographic Map.mxd - stephane.descombes - 8/5/2016 - 1:30:57 PM AUGUST 2016 SE15161530.0003.**** 3 USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP DRAWN BY: SD CHECKED BY: TP1 " = 1,000 feet 0 1,000500 Feet Amec Foster Wheeler Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. 11810 North Creek Parkway N Bothell, WA 98011 DATE SCALE PROJECT NO. FIGURE LEGEND: Study Area SOURCE: USGS Topographic Map obtained from National Geographic Society, i-Cubed, 1976. LONGACRES BUSINESS PARK WETLAND DELINEATION & REGULATORY EVALUATION RENTON, WASHINGTON THE BOEING COMPANY B l a c k R i v e r Gree n R i v e r K:\AMEC US OFFICES\Bothell\SE15161530 - Boeing Longacres Renton\Figure 4 - NWI Map.mxd - stephane.descombes - 8/5/2016 - 1:32:53 PM AUGUST 2016 SE15161530.0003.**** 4 NATIONAL WETLAND INVENTORY (NWI) MAP DRAWN BY: SD CHECKED BY: TP1 " = 1,000 feet 0 1,000500 Feet Amec Foster Wheeler Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. 11810 North Creek Parkway N Bothell, WA 98011 DATE SCALE PROJECT NO. FIGURE LEGEND: NWI Wetland Type: Freshwater Emergent Wetland Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland Freshwater Pond Riverine Study Area SOURCE: Wetland data obtained from U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service National Wetlands Inventory: http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/ LONGACRES BUSINESS PARK WETLAND DELINEATION & REGULATORY EVALUATION RENTON, WASHINGTON THE BOEING COMPANY Springbrook Creek Gree n R i v e r K:\AMEC US OFFICES\Bothell\SE15161530 - Boeing Longacres Renton\Figure 5 - FEMA Map.mxd - stephane.descombes - 8/5/2016 - 1:35:37 PM AUGUST 2016 SE15161530.0003.**** 5 FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY (FEMA) MAPDRAWN BY: SD CHECKED BY: TP1 " = 1,000 feet 0 1,000500 Feet Amec Foster Wheeler Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. 11810 North Creek Parkway N Bothell, WA 98011 DATE SCALE PROJECT NO. FIGURE LEGEND: 100-Year Flood Plain (Preliminary) 500-Year Flood Plain (Preliminary) Study Area SOURCE: Flood Plain data obtained from King County: http://www5.kingcounty.gov/gisdataportal/ LONGACRES BUSINESS PARK WETLAND DELINEATION & REGULATORY EVALUATION RENTON, WASHINGTON THE BOEING COMPANY Wetland ContinuesWetland Buffer ContinuesWetland Buffer ContinuesWetland ContinuesWetland Continues150 f e e t 150 feet 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 1 2 3 4 5 5 7 9 14 16 5453 10N 9N8N 7N 6N 5N 4N 3N 2N 1N 55 56 57 13N12N11N 14N 15N 23N 22N 21N 20N 19N 18N 17N 16N 10 11 12 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 36 35 7 15 K:\AMEC US OFFICES\Bothell\SE15161530 - Boeing Longacres Renton\Figure 6 - Wetland Boundary & Buffer Location.mxd - stephane.descombes - 8/5/2016 - 3:21:49 PM AUGUST 2016 SE15161530.0003.**** 6 WETLAND BOUNDARY & BUFFER LOCATION DRAWN BY: SD CHECKED BY: TP1 " = 150 feet 0 15075 Feet Amec Foster Wheeler Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. 11810 North Creek Parkway N Bothell, WA 98011 DATE SCALE PROJECT NO. FIGURE LEGEND: Delineated & Surveyed Wetland Survey Flag Delineated & Surveyed Wetland Boundary 150ft. Wetland Buffer (Renton Municipal Code 4-3-050G) LONGACRES BUSINESS PARK WETLAND DELINEATION & REGULATORY EVALUATION RENTON, WASHINGTON THE BOEING COMPANY APPENDIX A Wetland Determination Data Forms US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30' x 10') Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Dominance Test Worksheet: 1. Populus tremuloides 50 yes FACU Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A) 2. Alnus rubra 40 yes FAC 3. Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 4 (B) 4. 50% = 45, 20% = 18 90 = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 50 (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 10' x 10 ') 1. Lonicera involucrata 30 yes FAC Prevalence Index worksheet: 2. Oemleria cerasiformis 30 yes FACU Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 3. Rubus armeniacus 10 no FAC OBL species x1 = 4. Rubus spectabilis 5 no FAC FACW species x2 = 5. Acer circinatum 5 no FAC FAC species x3 = 50% = 40, 20% = 16 80 = Total Cover FACU species x4 = Herb Stratum (Plot size: 3' x 3') UPL species x5 = 1. n/a 0 n/a* - Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. Prevalence Index = B/A = 3. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4. 1 – Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 5. 2 - Dominance Test is >50% 6. 3 - Prevalence Index is <3.01 7. 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 8. 9. 5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 10. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 11. 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 50% = , 20% = 0 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) 1. n/a 0 n/a* - Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No 2. 50% = , 20% = 0 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 100 Remarks: Project Site: Boeing Longacres Park City/County: Renton/King Sampling Date: 7/8/2016 Applicant/Owner: Boeing Corporation State: WA Sampling Point: UP1 Investigator(s): Kristie Dunkin, Melinda Gray, Theresa Price Section, Township, Range: Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Terrace Local relief (concave, convex, none): none Slope (%): 3 Subregion (LRR): LRR A Lat: Long: Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: Ur - Urban Lands NWI classification: n/a Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology , significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology , naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Remarks: Pond was constructed as part of wetland mitigation/stormwater function in 1999.