The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutWWP273712Denis Law City Of titY O Mayor � • N August 19, 2014 Department of Community and Economic Development C.E."Chip"Vincent, Administrator John Hobson City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way, 5th FI Renton, WA 98057 SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL (SEPA) THRESHOLD DETERMINATION Central Renton Sewer Interceptor Reline & Upsize, LUA000968, ECF, CAE Dear Mr. Hobson: This letter is written on behalf of the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) to advise you that they have completed their review of the subject project and have issued a threshold Determination of Non -Significance -Mitigated with Mitigation Measures. Please refer to the enclosed ERC Report, for a list of the Mitigation Measures. Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m. on September 8, 2014, together with the required fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by RMC 4-8-110 and information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. If the Environmental Determination is appealed, a public hearing date will be set and all parties notified. If you have any further questions, please call me at (425) 430-7289. For the Environmental Review Committee, Kris Sorensen Associate Planner Enclosure cc: City of Renton / Owner(s) Renton City Hall . 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 . rentonwa.gov City °f DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY ` ; a AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE REPORT ERC MEETING DATE: August 18, 2014 Project Name: Central Renton Sewer Interceptor Reline and Upsize Project Number: LUA14-000968, ECF, CAE Project Manager. Kris Sorensen, Associate Planner Owner/Applicant/ City of Renton, Wastewater Utility Contact: Attn: John Hobson 1055 S Grady Way, 5th Floor Renton WA 98057 Project Location: Public right-of-way of N 4th St, between Sunset Blvd N at the east and Factory Ave N at the west. Project Summary: City of Renton Wastewater Division is requesting SEPA Environmental Review and Critical Areas Exemption for sewer interceptor reline and upsize within the right-of-way of N 4th St, between Sunset Blvd N at the east and Factory Ave N at the west. The area is approximately 46,000 sf and is located within the Aquifer Protection Area "2". The project would upsize and replace 122 linear feet of existing 12-inch concrete sewer pipe with 24-inch PVC pipe and rehabilitate 559 linear feet of 24-inch concrete pipe using cured -in -place pipe. The work area includes BNSF railroad area and a steep slope of approximately 40 percent slope across approximately 20 horizontal feet, between the flat area - next to Sunset Blvd N and BNSF railroad tracks. Pipe upsizing would be within the steep slope area. A manhole just west of the BNSF tracks would be replaced. A geotechnical engineering report has been submitted. The Critical Areas Exemption would be for the upsizing of the existing utility facility in the steep slope area. Exist. Bldg. Area SF: N/A Proposed New Bldg. Area (footprint): N/A, underground Proposed New Bldg. Area (gross): N/A, underground Site Area: 46,000 sf Total Building Area GSF. N/A, underground STAFF Staff Recommends that the Environmental Review Committee issue a RECOMMENDATION: Determination of Non -Significance - Mitigated (DNS-M). Project Location Map ERC Report 14-000968 t City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Environmental Review Committee Report CENTRAL RENTON SEWER INTERCEPTOR RELINE AND UPSIZE LUA14-000968, ECF, CAE Report of August 18, 2014 Page 2 of 6 PART ONE: PROJECT DESCRIPTION / BACKGROUND A. EXHIBITS: Exhibit 1: Staff Report (dated August 18, 2014) Exhibit 2: Geotechnical Engineering Report, Central Renton Sewer Interceptor Upsize Project - Final Draft; Prepared by Aspect Consulting; dated May 28, 2014 Exhibit 3: Project Plan and Profile Drawing; Central Renton Sewer Interceptor Upsize Project — Sewer Upsize; Prepared by BHC Consultants; dated June 2014 Exhibit 4: Zoning Map Exhibit 5: Aerial Photo Exhibit 6: Environmental Checklist Exhibit 7: City of Renton Maps — Sanitary Sewer System Lines, Printed August 12, 2014 Exhibit 8: Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation letter, dated August 11, 2014 Exhibit 9: Critical Areas Exemption Exhibit 10: City of Renton Maps - Steep Slope Maps B. GENERAL INFORMATION: 1. Owner of Record, Right -of -Way: 2. Zoning Designation: 3. Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation: 4. Existing Site Use: City of Renton Attn: Wastewater Utility 1055 S Grady Way, 5th Floor Renton WA 98057 Project is located in the public right-of-way which has no zoning designation. Commercial Corridor (CC) Improved and unimproved street right-of-way 5. Neighborhood Characteristics: North: PACCAR complex (IH) and vegetated slopes East: South: West: 6. Access: 7. Site Area: C. HISTORICAL/BACKGROUND: Action BNSF railroad tracks and Commercial uses (CA) Commercial uses (CA) Commercial uses and office (CA) N 4th St, Houser Way N, and Sunset Blvd N 46,000 sf Land Use File No. Ordinance No. Date ERC Report 14-000968 City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Environmental Review Committee Report v CENTRAL RENTON SEWER INTERCEPTOR RELINE AND UPSIZE LUA14-000968, ECF, CAE Report of August 18, 2014 Page 3 of 6 Comprehensive Plan N/A 5099 11/01/2004 Zoning N/A 5100 11/01/2004 Annexation N/A 156 05/23/1909 D. PUBLIC SERVICES: 1. Utilities: The project is installation of new sewer pipes by the City of Renton. 2. Streets: N 4th St right-of-way is the location of the proposal with access at the east portion of the subject work area from Sunset Blvd N and easterly access through Houser Way N and Factory PI N. A section of N 4th St near the steep slope is unimproved. 3. Fire Protection: Fire and emergency services for the project location is provided by the City of Renton Fire Department. PART TWO: ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW In compliance with RCW 43.21C.240, the following environmental (SEPA) review addresses only those project impacts that are not adequately addressed under existing development standards and environmental regulations. A. Environmental Threshold Recommendation Based on analysis of probable impacts from the proposal, staff recommends that the Responsible Officials: Issue a DNS-M with a 14-day Appeal Period. B. Mitigation Measures 1. The applicant shall comply with the conclusions and recommendations stated in the Geotechnical Engineering Report, prepared by Aspect Consulting, dated May 28, 2014 (Exhibit 2). 2. The applicant shall prepare an inadvertent discovery plan as requested by State Department of Archeology and Historic Preservation (Exhibit 8). C. Environmental Impacts The Proposal was circulated and reviewed by various City Departments and Divisions to determine whether the applicant has adequately identified and addressed environmental impacts anticipated to occur in conjunction with the proposed development. Staff reviewers have identified that the proposal is likely to have the following probable impacts: 1. Earth Impacts: The applicant has proposed to upsize and replace 122 linear feet of existing 12-inch concrete sewer pipe with 24-inch PVC pipe and rehabilitate 559 linear feet of 24-inch concrete pipe using cured -in -place pipe. Two alternative methods of pipe replacement were considered within the geotechnical report, both conventional open trench method and pipe bursting method. The geotechnical report provides conclusions and recommendations for conventional open trenching and newer pipe bursting.. Trenching is the report's preferred method for pipe upsizing. The report includes trenching work recommendations for excavation, the type and use of backfill, and setting ERC Report 14-000968 City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Environmental Review Committee Report CENTRAL RENTON SEWER INTERCEPTOR RELINE AND UPSIZE LUA14-000968, ECF, CAE Report of August 18, 2014 Page 4 of 6 of pipe, as well as replacement of one manhole. A small portion of the project has a slope of approximately 40% which is located between the existing manhole in Sunset Blvd N at the west and a manhole on the east side of the BNSF railroad tracks (Exhibit 10). The pipe would be upsized from 12-inch pipe to a 24-inch pipe. Clearing of blackberry bushes and shrubs would be conducted, primarily where the slope is located, of approximately 400 sf in area. The manhole near BNSF railroad tracks would be lowered outside of the slope area. Approximately 275 cubic yards of soil will be excavated to install the new sewer line and manhole. In the area where the 12-inch pipe would be replaced with the 24-inch pipe (Exhibit 3), there are a number of recommendations in the geotechnical report for open cut sewer replacement, and the upsizing of the pipe, and general earthwork recommendations. Other recommendations fall under "Ground Water" found below. For open -trench construction, the geotechnical report provides recommendations for temporary excavation work, pipe bedding, trench backfill, and trench and pavement restoration. Additionally, the report provides further recommendations for the manhole replacement near the BNSF tracks, construction work dewatering, and for earthwork and erosion control including work during wet weather. Based on the recommendations included in the provided Geotechnical Engineering Report, staff recommends as a mitigation measure that the applicant comply with these recommendations. Mitigation Measures: The applicant shall comply with the conclusions and recommendations stated in the Geotechnical Engineering Report, prepared by Aspect Consulting, dated May 28, 2014 (Exhibit 2). Nexus: SEPA, RMC 4-3-05012 "Special Studies required for work within sensitive and protected slopes." 2. Water a. Ground Water Impacts: Groundwater may be encountered as part of pipe trenching or manhole excavation as identified in the Geotechnical Report (Exhibit 2 page 4). Goundwater ranges from 29 to 34feet below grade and excavations for the project could extend as much as 5 feet below groundwater. Dewatering is anticipated to be required as part of the project. The recommendations state that temporary sumps and trash pumps would not sufficiently dewater the excavation although considering deep wells and the lowering of water over a large area could likely cause ground settlement over a large area including BNSF rail lines area. Well point dewatering methods are recommended. The site is located within the aquifer protection. Any fill would need to come from a clean source. Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation required. Nexus: Not applicable. b. Storm Water Impacts: Potential liquid spills during construction and possible wet weather and rain could create impacts during construction. The geotechnical report provides guidance and recommendations for work in wet weather. The Environmental Checklist, pages 5 and 6, mentions the use of Best Management Practices during construction to prevent potential liquid spills from entering either ground water or storm water. ERC Report 14-000968 City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Environmental Review Committee Report CENTRAL RENTON SEWER INTERCEPTOR RELINE AND UPSIZE LUA14-000968, ECF, CAE Report of August 18, 2014 Page 5 of 6 Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation required. Nexus: Not applicable. 3. Historic and Cultural Preservation Impacts: The State Department of Archeology and Historic Preservation provided background information that there may be artifacts in or near the work area and there is an archaeological site associated with the use of this trail approximately 2,500 feet from the project area (Exhibit 8). According to the letter, the project area is in proximity to the Cedar River Pack Trail an ethnographic period trail used by the Duwamish and Muckleshoot Indian Tribes as well as tribes from eastern Washington, such as the Yakima. Archaeological sites are protected from knowing disturbance on both public and private lands in Washington State. The state's RCWs require that a person obtain a permit from Department of Archeology and Historic Preservation before excavating, removing, or altering Native American human remains or archaeological resources in Washington. The replacement pipes are larger than existing pipe and the letter states the existing pipe system may have been placed within or near archaeological resources which may be disturbed by the new project. Staff recommends, as a mitigation measure, that a discovery plan be prepared. Mitigation Measures: The applicant shall prepare an inadvertent discovery plan as requested by State Department'of Archeology and Historic Preservation (Exhibit 8) and as recommended by staff. Nexus: SEPA, RCW 27.44 and RCW 27.53.060. D. Comments of Reviewing Departments The proposal has been circulated to City Department and Division Reviewers. Where applicable, their comments have been incorporated into the text of this report and/or "Advisory Notes to Applicant." ✓ Copies of all Review Comments are contained in the Official File and may be attached to this report. The Environmental Determination decision will become final if the decision is not appealed within the 14-day appeal period (RCW 43.21.C.075(3); WAC 197-11-680). Environmental Determination Appeal Process: Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing together with the required fee to: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, on or before 5:00 p.m. on September 5, 2014. RMC 4-8-110 governs appeals to the Hearing Examiner and additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the City Clerk's Office, Renton City Hall — 7th Floor, (425) 430-6510. ADVISORY NOTES TO APPLICANT The following notes are supplemental information provided in conjunction with the administrative land use action. Because these notes are provided as information only, they are not subject to the appeal process for the land use actions. Planning: 1. RMC section 4-4-030.C.2 limits haul hours between 8:30 am to 3:30 pm, Monday through Friday unless otherwise approved by the Development Services Division. 2. Commercial, multi -family, new single family and other nonresidential construction activities shall be ERC Report 14-000968 City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Environmental Review Committee Report CENTRAL RENTON SEWER INTERCEPTOR RELINE AND UPSIZE LUA14-000968, ECF, CAE Report of August 18, 2014 Page 6 of 6 restricted to the hours between seven o'clock (7:00) a.m. and eight o'clock (8:00) p.m., Monday through Friday. Work on Saturdays shall be restricted to the hours between nine o'clock (9:00) a.m. and eight o'clock (8:00) p.m. No work shall be permitted on Sundays. 3. Within thirty (30) days of completion of grading work, the applicant shall hydroseed or plant an appropriate ground cover over any portion of the site that is graded or cleared of vegetation and where no further construction work will occur within ninety (90) days. Alternative measures such as mulch, sodding, or plastic covering as specified in the current King County Surface Water Management Design Manual as adopted by the City of Renton may be proposed between the dates of November 1st and March 31st of each year. The Development Services Division's approval of this work is required prior to final inspection and approval of the permit. 4. The applicant may not fill, excavate, stack or store any equipment, dispose of any materials, supplies or fluids, operate any equipment, install impervious surfaces, or compact the earth in any way within the area defined by the drip line of any tree to be retained. 5. The applicant shall erect and maintain six foot (6') high chain link temporary construction fencing around the drip lines of all retained trees, or along the perimeter of a stand of retained trees. Placards shall be placed on fencing every fifty feet (50') indicating the words, "NO TRESPASSING Protected Trees" or on each side of the fencing if less than fifty feet (50'). Site access to individually protected trees or groups of trees shall be fenced and signed. Individual trees shall be fenced on four (4) sides. In addition, the applicant shall provide supervision whenever equipment or trucks are moving near trees. ERC Report 14-000968 t ) EXHIBIT 2 E� GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT Central Renton Sewer Interceptor Upsize Project Renton, Washington Prepared for: BHC Consultants and City of Renton Wastewater Utility Engineering Project No. 140013 • May 28, 2014 FINAL DRAFT pect CONSULTING N 0 n m O SeNIn F..I CS 0 Z > SCHEDULE -CURED IN PLACE PIPE FOR SANITARY SEWER STREET UPSTREAM APPRO%DEPTH TO DOWNSTREAM APPRO%DEPTH TO EXISTING PIPE APPRO%p MANHOLE PIPE INVERT MANHOLE PIPE INVERT MATERIAL PIPE SIZE RUN LENGTH LATERALS TO N 4TH ST 5011.185 11.3 FT 5311-16I 4,6 FT VITRIFIED CLAY 24' 358 FT REINSTATE J N 4TH ST $317.184 4.8 FT 5317.249 5.6 FT VITRIFIED CLAY 24' 203 FT 0 TOTAL 24- 669FT J CIPPN PLAN AND SCHEDULE PLA�\ aCUE. �' • 4oa' Aa.6 BI C^ =Rents, LLC N A u.o:o1;0 ULTAN7 NOTES: 1. CONTRACTOR SHALL DEVELOP AND SUBMIT A TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN FOR WORK IN N 4TH ST, THE TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN SHALL BE APPROVED BE THE ENGINEER PRIOR TO BEGINNING ANY WORK IN N 4TH ST. REPLACE TYPE C TRAFFIC CURB TO MATCH EX PER RENTON STD PLAN tW7 - CONSTRUCTION NOTES: O1 NEW SMH5J11-185SHALLBEINSTALED PRIOR TO BEGINNING CIPP WORK, REMOVE IY DIA MANHOLE TOP FOR INSTALLATION OF CIPP, REINSTALL AND ROTATE APPROX 135• CCW AS APPROVED BY THE CIT' THE FIELD APPRO% REPLACE YELLOW REPLACEMENT PAVEMENT MARKING REPLACE 4• WH LIMITS, TYP TO MATCH E% TYPE 1 LINE MN TO MATCH E% PI RENTON STD PL H00T AND 109.1. REMOVE ARD REPLACE 4 MIN CONC PANELS PER RENTON STD PLAN 111. APPRO% SIZE•10'x10k12- THICK EACH PANEL MANHOLE AND PAVEMENT RESTORATION (LOOKING WEST) DETAIL n NTS "O ED � CITY OF RENTON I�--� DA1uN Pu 11. w« D.Pt. LIE Preliminary Call 48 Hours 90% Review Set Bofors You 0 I8 Not For Construction �t-800-T24-5655 08-2014 u,oE.mo,w.rxrre CENTRAL RENTON SEWER INTERCEPTOR ANE 2014 RELINE 6 UPSIZE PROJECT SEWER RELINE PLAN d DETAILS 6 6 • N r0nv b�� REMOVE EX 72' DIA BRIC MH AND REPLACE WITH / b +� NEWea-DIASMHS]1T-1e5, p / PERDETAIL IIC-2 \ J 1 A STA 1.00 / � ppp / N p - / \ / P OFFSET V RT / + / /Z eIS EWEBE DWG RELNEOR / / Q REQUIREMENTS - A 44 - %Hc Con,uitent,, LLC ± [ M � w.Nwgbn Oal<1 ' SU A S y —J;', . ]5 PVC -T 1 AS REM E% n '_-'t --. 15'C0 SS 3' / An LRs]wc IrWT a war ay ENWRISE CAR RENTAL k / f7 \ I � E%60•DIA^ ql' N SMNS)1T-tee STA 2.27t PE .. . _.._.ryT._. — - STA 2.2Tt j� e'a• MIN w ``ce-1a l : 44 \� MIN 5 EX12•,VCPSSAND / SMHPLUGGED __ _-_ .._._,v 'j�N�ABAN00NEfT \ BELOW GRADE y I I Bj � � _ APPRO% EX FENCE LINE APPRO% FINISHED JUS GRADE AT CA STATIONING I I 8 — --- -- � — -- 141 O 11 �I aw IFY OF ( I _ UTILITIES. E%UTIUTIES, TYP EX I 1 1 E yJ11N 122s 1F' Y �_ EX 24' %12-VCP kIb•• VCP SS REMOVE FT S T S � I S=^ vhi � ryr - - G PIPE TRENCH OET K PER RENTON STDPL N 110 o o a a a o s NOTES: I 1. CONTRACTOR SHALL DEVELOP A. SUBMIT A TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN FOR MORN IN SUNSET BLVD N, THE TRAFFIC I CONTROL PLAN SHALL BE APPROVED BY THE ENGINEER PRIOR TO BEGINNING ANY WORK IN SUNSET N.VD N. SEE DWG G,2 FOR ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC CONTROL NOTES. / 2. SEE SPECIFICATIONSFORBYPASS PUMPING REQUIREMENTS. ' 0. REF ER TO GEOTECHNICAL - / ENGINEERING REPORT (AVAILABLE FOR REFERENCE ONLY) FOR INFORMATION ' ON PROJECT SOIL BORINGS A&I, AB-2, GB-14 AND GB-15. ' 4. ANY AND— WORK WITHIN 25' OF RAILROAD TRACK CENTERLINE REQUIRES A BNSF FUGGER ONSRE. ' THECONTRACTOR SIIALLPAYAND ARRANGE FOR A FUGGER ONE MONTH Imo[ PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES. b 5. ALL EXCAVATION WITHIN RAILROAD LOADING MUST HAVE AN ENGINEERED SHORING PLAN (PE SEALED) APPROVED Lbit BE BNSF PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT SHORING ' PLAN THREE WEEKS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION FOR ENGINEER AND BNSF APPROVAL. SEE MOOT SPEC ' SECTION 2-09 FOR STRUCTURAL SHORING REQUIREMENTS. I CONSTRUCTION NOTES: OREMOVE AND REPLACE AC PAVEMENT PER RENTON STD PLANS 110 AND 110.1. OREMOVE AND REPLACE SIDEWALK CURB AND GUTTER, AND AC PER RENTON STD PLANS 102 AND 103, AND PER Moor STD PLAN F-10.12-02. ]O REMOVE EXISTING B CMN LINK FENCE AS NECESSARY AND RE INSTALUREPLACE FENCE TO MATCH EXISTING, OX REMOVE AND REINSTALL DISTURBED RAILROAD TIES BETWEEN BARK AND GRAVEL LOT TO MATCH EXISTING. OS REMOVE SOIL IN Y LAYERS MOUND MH TO PREVENT SOIL LOADING ON ONE SIDE OF THE MM. OCUT UPSIZED PENETRATION WITH POWER SAW. NO HAMMERING ALLOWED. CONNECT NEW SEWER PIPING WITH NPC WATERSTOP GROUTING RING, OR EQUAL. FILL VOID WITH NON SHRINK GROUT. OREMOVE AND REPLACE MH CHANNEL PER SPECIAL PROVISIONS SPEC SECTION 7.25, EXCEPT EXTEND CHANNEL HEIGHT TO TOP OF N• SS. OREMOVE EXISTING SHRUBBERY AS NECESSARY MD REPLACE WITH SEED. FERTILIZER MD MULCH, PER WSOOT SPEC SECTION 8-01.3(2), OREMOVEANDREPLACE DISTURBED GRAVEL AND BARKTO MATCH EXISTING. 10 TRENCH BACKFILL SHALL BE CSTC FOR ALL SEWER UNDER PAVEMENT. NATIVE MA TERIALFORTRENCHBACKFILLMAY BE USED ELSEWHERE PROVIDED IT MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS OF GRAVEL BORROW PER MOOT SECTION Mll.(1). Preliminary Call 48 Hours 90% Review Set Before You Big Not For Construction 1-BOo- 0-12�-SSSB OS-2014 wac.unuoum+v CENTRAL RENTON SEWER INTERCEPTOR JUIIE 201 RELINE 6 UPSIZE PROJECT SEWER UPSIZE PLAN 8 PROFILE p C-, 6E W 1/2 UC- EXHIBIT 4 S 1 7 L= ' IH ..._:: .11 R-10 R-m R:,o R., k M� m cIL m ao -m R R-, R., ,( R-1a Q °� R-10 cc N G ,`V .c..i. IM rr c� A oc' °Q . co R= _ _.... . R8 ' - z R-10 °4 - �o R-8 .. CA CA g CA R 8 Mlvl Tu R '; U CA: -�—_ R-8 CD , x..__. RM-U CA .....__.... CD j w CD CD - CD s � mr�r vvvn PLANNING - TECHNICAL SERVICES PRINTED DATE: 10/02/2013 This document is a graphic representation, not guaranteed to survey accuracy, and is based on the best information available as of the date shown. This map is intended for City display Purposes only. Community & Economic Development G E -Clip- ke� Adrimm Ab-.i h im r ROMA Milan 11 WEIR"11 , t.;14VVLU IZ,5N K5t VV 1%L r(}VV Feet 1:9,390 17 T23N R5E W 1/2 Page 35 of 80 City Limits Q (COR) Commercial/Office/Residential Q (R-4) Residential 4du/ac r j RENTON Q (CV) Center Village Q (R-8) Residential 8du/ac =.PatemialAnnexation Area Q OH) Industrial Heavy Q (RC) Resource Conservation Zoning Designation Q (IL) Industrial Light Q (RM-F) Residential Multifamily Q (CA) Commercial Arterial Q OK Industrial Medium Q (RM-T) Resi. Multi -Family Traditional Q (CD) Center Downtown Q (R-1) Residential idu/ac Q (Rival) Resi. W15-Family Urban Center Q (CN) Commercial Neighborhood Q (R-10) Residential 10du/ac Q (RMH) Residential Manufactured Homes Q (CO) Commercial Office Q (R-14) Residential 14clu/ac Q (UC-NI) Urban Center North 1 Q (UC-N2) Urban Center North 2 'IF Ki, 4 EXHIBIT 6 SEPA ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST UPDATED T014 Purpose of checklist: Governmental agencies use this checklist to help determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant. This information is also helpful to determine if available avoidance, minimization or compensatory mitigation measures will address the probable significant impacts or if an environmental impact statement will be prepared to further analyze the proposal. Instructions for applicants: This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Please answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. You may need to consult with an agency specialist or private consultant for some questions. You may use "not applicable" or "does not apply" only when you can explain why it does not applv and not when the answer is unknown. You may also attach or incorporate by reference additional studies reports. Complete and accurate answers to these questions often avoid delays with the SEPA process as well as later in the decision - making process. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. Instructions for Lead Agencies: Please adjust the format of this template as needed. Additional information may be necessary to evaluate the existing environment, all interrelated aspects of the proposal and an analysis of adverse impacts. The checklist is considered the first but not necessarily the only source of information needed to make an adequate threshold determination. Once a threshold determination is made, the lead agency is responsible for the completeness and accuracy of the checklist and other supporting documents. Use of checklist for nonproject proposals: For nonproject proposals (such as ordinances, regulations, plans and programs), complete the applicable parts of sections A and B plus the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (part D) Please completely answer all questions that apply and note that the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "proponent," and "affected geographic area," respectively. The lead agency may exclude (for non -projects) questions in Part B - Environmental Elements —that do not contribute meaningfully to the analysis of the proposal. A. background 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Central Renton Sewer Interceptor Reline and Upsize Project 2. Name of applicant: City Of Renton Wastewater Utility Entire Document Available Upon Request SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Page 1 Of 14 Y� � • J 1� 1- r� y� E 7 'T TkC:. ^'�"i..f^�..y';4L fP�A' :',;.+�.`..-.....:li•.r"� I '•P�ti`„ �• • J' '��i J� 4 ��`tt .405 ai •r �.e'v!sw'K %y,. ro-.-. �-• •.,. �..-r.:.w.-+y' ::.�r-^"""' .... y �CJCCJ y-� tl .,F`�'�'"!'! 1,� jglj(� i 5' ��i r• `a.rw.�; �t'a Y✓.«'rST+i i'• y.'. � qa: � � 9 y � �� I �15 iji - •. r• �1'tlry �S ¢ •sr• x tid� 'i cs '. .. rnv �- yE �y'� f�.ti �� .•i� � I,t �f df _ S.' � %��! ti: 77 ow kg x J t eg. Ilk, h M1. r ijv \ �` • ' �' ) : (' � `�"`�:.-+'Art:nawa^rcccc:::raz.ow+mrc° . r�rx � •,�'� t h � s` `� .. . f,.#'�'., aQ 5 X t � • a-^t}!�..�._:.:. iu.f=. .lL -1 ___�x.�,Y __. � •\.'T.: ^'� �. r �iW' dm��J-. . v'f�� ` F.l ", / Ar _... hl�. EXHIBIT 8 JDEPARTMENT OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION ARCHAEOLOGY & August 11, 2014 Kris Sorenson Assistant Planner City of Renton Sixth Floor Renton City Hall 1055 S Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 In future correspondence please refer to: Log: 081114-62-KI Property: LUA14-000968 Sewer interceptor Reline and Upsize Re: Archaeology - Survey Requested Dear Sorenson: Allyson Brooks Ph.D., Director State Historic Preservation Officer We have reviewed the materials forwarded to our office for the proposed project referenced above. The area has a high potential for archaeological resources. The project area is in proximity to the Cedar River Pack Trail an ethnographic period trail used by the Duwamish and Muckleshoot Indian Tribes as well as tribes from eastern Washington such as the Yakima. The Yakima traveled to winter villages along the Black and Cedar Rivers to trade cured deerskins for dried clams and Black River salmon. Muckleshoot Indian also utilized the Cedar River Pack Trail to travel to salmon fisheries in Maple Valley. An archaeological site associated with the use of this trail is located approximately 2,500 feet from the project area. Please be aware that archaeological sites are protected from knowing disturbance on both public and private lands in Washington States. Both RCW 27.44 and RCW 27.53.060 require that a person obtain.a permit from our Department before excavating, removing, or altering Native American human remains or archaeological resources in Washington. Failure to obtain a permit is punishable by civil fines and other penalties under RCW 27.53.095, and by criminal prosecution under RCW 27.53.090. Chapter 27.53.075 RCW allows the Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation to issue civil penalties for the violation of this statute in an amount up to five thousand dollars, in addition to site restoration costs and investigative costs. Also, these remedies do not prevent concerned tribes from undertaking civil action in state or federal court, or law enforcement agencies from undertaking criminal investigation or prosecution. Chapter 27.44.050 RCW allows the affected Indian Tribe to undertake civil action apart from any criminal prosecution if burials are disturbed. ' Historic cemeteries and graves are also protected under RCW 68.60. The PVC replacement pipes are larger than the existing concrete pipe and this existing pipe system may have been placed within or near archaeological resources which may be disturbed by the new project. Therefore, we recommend an inadvertent discovery plan be prepared for the project. An example of such a plan is attached.. We also recommend consultation with the concerned Tribes' cultural committees and staff regarding cultural resource issues. STATg oA State of Washington • Department of Archaeology & Historic Preservation 0 4 P.O. Box 48343 • Olympia, Washington 98504-8343 • (360) 586-3065 z www.dahp.wa.gov �2 0 dy`C 1889 � If any federal funds or permits are involved Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, as amended, and its implementing regulations, 36CFR800, must be followed. This is a separate process from SEPA and requires formal government -to -government consultation with the affected Tribes and this agency. We would appreciate receiving any correspondence or comments from concerned tribes or other parties concerning cultural resource issues that you receive. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (360) 586-3088 or Gretchen.Kaehler@dahp.wa.gov. Sincerely, Gretchen Kaehler Local Governments Archaeologist (360) 586-3088 Rxetchen.kaehler@dahp.wa.gov cc. Laura Murphy, Archaeologist, Muckleshoot Tribe Cecile Hansen, Chair, Duwamish Tribe Dennis Lewarch, THPO, Suquamish Tribe 2 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY-� clh of�,� AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLANNING DIVISION CERTIFICATE OF EXEMPTION FROM CRITICAL AREAS REGULATIONS EVALUATION FORM & DECISION �/22 2df� DATE: / PROJECT NAME: Central Renton Sewer Interceptor Reline & Upsize Critical Areas Exemption PROJECT NUMBER: LUA14-000968, ECF, CAR PROJECT MANAGER: Kris Sorensen, Associate Planner OWNER/APPLICANT: City of Renton, Wastewater Utility Attn: John Hobson 1055 S Grady Way, 5th Floor Renton WA 98057 PROJECT LOCATION: Right-of-way of N 4th St between Houser Way N and Sunset Blvd N. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: City of Renton prooses a sewer interceptor reline and upsize within existing improved and unimproved right-of-way. The right-of-way area is approximately 46,000 sf. The project would replace and upsize 122 linear feet of existing 12-inch concrete sewer pipe with 24-inch PVC pipe and rehabilitate 559 linear feet of 24-inch concrete pipe using cured -in -place pipe. The work area includes BNSF railroad area and a steep slope where the right-of-way is not improved of approximately 40 percent slope over 20 feet, between the flat area along Sunset Blvd N at the east and the lower BNSF railroad tracks at the west. Pipe upsizing would occur within the steep slope area. CRITICAL AREA: Geological Hazard — Protected Slope EXEMPTION JUSTIFICATION: Pursuant to RMC4-3-050.C. "e.ii" & "g.ii", of the Critical Areas Regulations is hereby granted: EXHIBIT 9 City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Certificate of Exemption from Critical Areas Exemption Central Sewer Interceptor Reline & Upsize Critical Areas Exemption LUA14-000968 g. Maintenance and Construction — Existing Uses and Facilities ii. Maintenance and Repair —Any Existing Public or Private Use: Normal and routine maintenance and repair of any existing public or private uses and facilities where no alteration of the critical area and required buffer or additional fill X materials will be placed. The use of heavy construction equipment shall be limited to utilities and public agencies that require this type of equipment for normal and routine maintenance and repair of existing utility or public structures and rights - of -way. In every case, critical area and required buffer impacts shall be minimized and disturbed areas shall be restored during and immediately after the use of construction equipment. e. Roads, Parks, Public and Private Utilities ii. New Trails, Existing Parks, Trails, Roads, Facilities, and Utilities — Maintenance, Operation, Repair, and the Construction of New Trails: Normal and routine maintenance, operation and repair of existing parks and trails or the construction of new trails, streets, roads, rights -of -way and associated appurtenances, facilities and utilities where no alteration or additional fill materials will be placed other X than the minimum alteration and/or fill needed to restore those facilities or to construct new trails to meet established safety standards. The use of heavy construction equipment shall be limited to utilities and public agencies that require this type of equipment for normal and routine maintenance and repair of existing utility structures and rights -of -way. In every case, critical area and required buffer impacts shall be minimized and disturbed areas shall be restored during and immediately after the use of construction equipment. FINDINGS: The proposed development is consistent with the following findings pursuant to RMC section 4-3-050C.5: 1. The activity is not prohibited by this or any other chapter of the RMC or state or federal law or regulation. 2. The activity will be conducted using best management practices as specified by industry standards or applicable Federal agencies or scientific principles if submitted plans are followed and the conditions of approval of this exemption are met. 3. Impacts will be minimized and disturbed areas will be immediately restored, if submitted plans are followed and the conditions of approval of this exemption are met. DECISION: An exemption from the critical areas regulations is approved for upsizing and installation of 24-inch wide sewer pipe within the protected slope area of the N 4th St right-of- way. City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Certificate of Exemption from Critical Areas Regulations Central Sewer Interceptor Reline & Upsize Critical Areas Exemption LUA14-000968 Page 3 of 3 DATE OF DECISION ON LAND USE ACTION: SIGNATURE: Jennifer Henning, A/CP, Planning Director Date Department of Community & Economic Development The above land use decision will become final if the decision is not appealed within the 14- day appeal period (RCW 43.21.C.075(3); WAC 197-11-680). APPEALS: An appeal of this administrative land use decision must be filed in writing together with the required fee to the City of Renton Hearing Examiner, Ci of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, on or before 5:00 p.m., on 115 2014. RMC 4-8-110 governs appeals to the Hearing Examiner and additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. RECONSIDERATION: Within 14 days of the decision date, any party may request that the decision be reopened by the approval body. The approval body may modify his decision if material evidence not readily discoverable prior to the original decision is found or if he finds there was misrepresentation of fact. After review of the reconsideration request, if the approval body finds sufficient evidence to amend the original decision, there will be no further extension of the appeal period. Any person wishing to take further action must file a formal appeal within the 14-day appeal time frame. EXPIRATION: Five (5) years from the date of decision $ Z 2 2014. fV1*1 low ............. top Ail rhfl ILL I Im �z"®City of OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ISSUANCE OF A DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE - MITIGATED (DNS-M) POSTED TO NOTIFY INTERESTED PERSONS OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION PROJECT NAME: Central Renton Sewer Interceptor Reline & Upsize PROJECT NUMBER: LUA14-000968, ECF, CAE LOCATION: Rights -of -way of N 4th St. between Sunset Blvd N & Factory PI. N. DESCRIPTION: City of Renton Wastewater Division is requesting SEPA Environmental Review and Critical Areas Exemption for sewer interceptor reline and upsize within the right-of-way of N 4th St, between Sunset Blvd N at the east and Factory Ave N at the west. The area is approximately 46,000 sf and is located within the Aquifer Protection Area "2". The project would upsize and replace 122 linear feet of existing 12-inch concrete sewer pipe with 24-inch PVC pipe and rehabilitate 559 linear feet of 24-inch concrete pipe using cured -in -place pipe. The work area includes BNSF railroad area and a steep slope of approximately 40 percent slope across approximately 20 horizontal feet, between the flat area next to Sunset Blvd N and BNSF railroad tracks. Pipe upsizing would be within the steep slope area. A manhole just west of the BNSF tracks would be replaced. A geotechnical engineering report has been submitted. The Critical Areas Exemption would be for the upsizing of the existing utility facility in the steep slope area. THE CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE (ERC) HAS DETERMINED THAT THE PROPOSED ACTION DOES NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT. Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m. on September 8, 2014, together with the required fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of RMC 4-8-110 and information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. IF THE ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION IS APPEALED, A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE SET AND ALL PARTIES NOTIFIED. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY OF RENTON, DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AT (425) 430-7200. DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION. t, _ ! DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY 1' City of AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLANNING DIVISION CERTIFICATE OF EXEMPTION FROM CRITICAL AREAS REGULATIONS EVALUATION FORM & DECISION �/Z2 I2Df� DATE: PROJECT NAME: Central Renton Sewer Interceptor Reline & Upsize Critical Areas Exemption PROJECT NUMBER: . LUA14-000968, ECF, CAR PROJECT MANAGER: Kris Sorensen, Associate Planner OWNER/APPLICANT: City of Renton, Wastewater Utility Attn: John Hobson 1055 S Grady Way, 5th Floor Renton WA 98057 PROJECT LOCATION: Right-of-way of N 4th St between Houser Way N and Sunset Blvd N. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: City of Renton prooses a sewer interceptor reline and upsize within existing improved and unimproved right-of-way. The right-of-way area is approximately 46,000 sf. The project would replace and upsize 122 linear feet of existing 12-inch concrete sewer pipe with 24-inch PVC pipe and rehabilitate 559 linear feet of 24-inch concrete pipe using cured -in -'Place pipe. The work area includes BNSF railroad area and a steep slope where the right-of-way is not improved of approximately 40 percent slope over 20 feet, between the flat area along Sunset Blvd N at the east and the lower BNSF railroad tracks at the west. Pipe upsizing would occur within the steep slope area. CRITICAL AREA: Geological Hazard — Protected Slope EXEMPTION JUSTIFICATION: Pursuant to RMC4-3-050.C. "e.ii" & "g.ii", of the Critical Areas Regulations is hereby granted: City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Certificate of Exemption from Critical Areas Exemption Central Sewer Interceptor Reline & Upsize Critical Areas Exemption LUA14-000968 L UI 3 g. Maintenance and Construction — Existing Uses and Facilities ii. Maintenance and Repair — Any Existing Public or Private Use: Normal and routine maintenance and repair of any existing public or private uses and facilities where no alteration of the critical area and required buffer or additional fill X materials will be placed. The use of heavy construction equipment shall be limited to utilities and public agencies that require this type of equipment for normal and routine maintenance and repair of existing utility or public structures and rights - of -way. In every case, critical area and required buffer impacts shall be minimized and disturbed areas shall be restored during and immediately after the use of construction equipment. e. Roads, Parks, Public and Private Utilities ii. New Trails, Existing Parks, Trails, Roads, Facilities, and Utilities — Maintenance, Operation, Repair, and the Construction of New Trails: Normal and routine maintenance, operation and repair of existing parks and trails or the construction of new trails, streets, roads, rights -of -way and associated appurtenances, facilities and utilities where no alteration or additional fill materials will be placed other X than the minimum alteration and/or fill needed to restore those facilities or to construct new trails to meet established safety standards. The use of heavy construction equipment shall be limited to utilities and public agencies that require this type of equipment for normal and routine maintenance and repair of existing utility structures and rights -of -way. In every case, critical area and required buffer impacts shall be minimized and disturbed areas shall be restored during and immediately after the use of construction equipment. FINDINGS: The proposed development is consistent with the following findings pursuant to RMC section 4-3-050C.5: 1. The activity is not prohibited by this or any other chapter of the RMC or state or federal law or regulation. 2. The activity will be conducted using best management practices as specified by industry standards or applicable Federal agencies or scientific principles if submitted plans are followed and the conditions of approval of this exemption are met. 3. Impacts will be minimized and disturbed areas will be immediately restored, if submitted plans are followed and the conditions of approval of this exemption are met. DECISION: An exemption from the critical areas regulations is approved for upsizing and installation of 24-inch wide sewer pipe within the protected slope area of the N 41h St right-of- way. i City of Renton Deportment of Community & Economic Development Certificate of Exemption from Critical Areas Regulations Central Sewer Interceptor Reline & Upsize Critical Areas Exemption LUA14-000968 Page 3 of 3 DATE OF DECISION ON LAND USE ACTION: SIGNATURE: P1 A., Jennifer Henning, A/CP, Planning Director Date. Department of Community & Economic Development The above land use decision will become final if the decision is not appealed within the 14- day appeal period (RCW 43.21.C.075(3); WAC 197-11-680). APPEALS: An appeal of this administrative land use decision must be filed in writing together with the required fee to the City of Renton Hearing Examiner, Cit. of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, on or before 5:00 p.m., on 411,6 2014. RMC 4-8-110 governs appeals to the Hearing Examiner and additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. RECONSIDERATION: Within 14 days of the decision date, any party may request that the decision be reopened by the approval body. The approval body may modify his decision if material evidence not readily discoverable prior to the original decision is found or if he finds there was misrepresentation of fact. After review of the reconsideration request, if the approval body finds sufficient evidence to amend the original decision, there will be no further extension of the appeal period. Any person wishing to take further action must file a formal appeal within the 14-day appeal time frame. EXPIRATION: Five (5) years from the date of decision g 2 2014. Denis Law City Of ,t Mayor O� ® �j Z �'N'C� Community & Economic Development Department July 28, 2014 C.E."Chip"Vincent, Administrator John Hobson RECEIVED City of Renton JUL 2 9 2014 1055 South Grady Way, 5th FI Renton, WA 98057 CITY OF RENTON UTILITY SYSTEMS Subject: Notice of Complete Application Central Renton Sewer Interceptor Reline & Upsize, LUA000968, ECF, CAE Dear Mr. Hobson: The Planning Division of the City of Renton has determined that the subject application is complete according to submittal requirements and, therefore, is accepted for review. It is tentatively scheduled for consideration by the Environmental Review Committee on August 18, 2014. Prior to that review, you will be notified if any additional information is required to continue processing your application. Please contact me at (425) 430-6593 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Kris Sorensen Assistant Planner cc: City of Renton / Owner(s) Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov City of � �,--s•-, cry-". � --�. �(.�--. ` s> NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE -MITIGATED (DNS-M) A Master Application has been filed and accepted with the Department of Community & Economic Development (CED) — Planning Division of the City of Renton. The following briefly describes the application and the necessary Public Approvals. DATE OF NOTICE OF APPLICATION: July 28, 2014 LAND USE NUMBER: LUA14-000968, ECF, CAE PROJECT NAME: Central Renton Sewer Interceptor Reline & Upsize PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant, City of Renton Wastewater Division, is requesting SEPA Environmental Review and Critical Areas Exemption for sewer interceptor reline and upsize within the right-of-way of N 4th St, between Sunset Blvd N at the east and Factory Ave N at the west. The right-of-way area is approximately 46,000 sf. The project would upsize and replace 122 linear feet of existing 12-inch concrete sewer pipe with 24-inch PVC pipe and rehabilitate 559 linear feet of 24-inch concrete pipe using cured -in -place pipe. The work area includes BNSF railroad area and a steep slope of approximately 40 percent slope over 20 feet, between the flat area next to Sunset Blvd N and BNSF railroad tracks. Pipe upsizing would occur within the steep slope area. A geotechnical engineering report has been submitted. The Critical Areas Exemption would be for the upsizing of the existing utility facility in the steep slope area. PROJECT LOCATION: N 4`" St Right of Way between Houser Way N. and Sunset Blvd N. OPTIONAL DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE, MITIGATED (DNS-M): As the Lead Agency, the City of Renton has determined that significant environmental impacts are unlikely to result from the proposed project. Therefore, as permitted under the RCW 43.21C.110, the City of Renton is using the Optional DNS-M process to give notice that a DNS-M is likely to be issued. Comment periods for the project and the proposed DNS-M are integrated into a single comment period. There will be no comment period following the issuance of the Threshold Determination of Non - Significance -Mitigated (DNS-M), this may be the only opportunity to comment on the environmental impacts of the proposal. A 14-day appeal period will follow the issuance of the DNS-M. PERMIT APPLICATION DATE: July 17, 2014 NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: July 28, 2014 APPLICANT/PROJECT CONTACT PERSON: John Hobson/City of Renton/1055 S Grady Way, 5'h FI/Renton, WA 98057/425-430-7279/ jhobson@rentonwa.go v Permits/Review Requested: Environmental (SEPA) Review, Critical Areas Exemption Requested Studies: Geotechnical report Location where application may be reviewed: Department of Community & Economic Development (CED) — Planning Division, Sixth Floor Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 CONSISTENCY OVERVIEW: Zoning/Land Use: The subject site is within the public rights -of -way and designated Commercial Corridor and Employment Area Industrial on the City of Renton Comprehensive Land Use Map and Commercial Arterial and Heavy Industrial on the City's Zoning Map. If you would like to be made a party of record to receive further information on this proposed project, complete this form and return to: City of Renton, CED — Planning Division, 1055 So. Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Name/File No.: Central Renton Sewer Interceptor Reline & Upsize/LUA14-000968, ECF, CAE NAME: MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE NO.: City/State/Zip: Environmental Documents that Evaluate the Proposed Project: Environmental (SEPA) Checklist Development Regulations Used For Project Mitigation: The project will be subject to the City's SEPA ordinance, Critical Areas ordinance, and other applicable codes and regulations as appropriate. Proposed Mitigation Measures: The following Mitigation Measures will likely be imposed on the proposed project. These recommended Mitigation Measures address project impacts not covered by existing codes and regulations as cited above. • Follow recommendations found in the geotechnical report. Comments on the above application must be submitted in writing to Kris Sorensen, Associate Planner, CED — Planning Division, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, by 5:00 PM on August 11, 2014. If you have questions about this proposal, or wish to be made a party of record and receive additional notification by mail, contact the Project Manager. Anyone who submits written comments will automatically become a party of record and will be notified of any decision on this project. A copy of the subsequent threshold determination is available upon request. CONTACT PERSON: Kris Sorensen, Associate Planner; Tel: (425) 430-6593; Ernk ksorensen@rentonwa.gov PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION FINANCE AND INFORMATION SERVICES 'viR , DEPARTMENT M E M O R A N D U M DATE: July 17, 2014 TO: Casaundra Commodore, Finance & Information Services Department FROM: Kris Sorensen SUBJECT: Re: INTERFUND TRANSFER REQUEST Instructions: Please note that failure to provide all digits will result in processing delays. All Signatures and correct documentation must be included. Please prepare the following inter -fund transfer: Department Charged: Account Number Project, function, task, sub -task Description Amount 426.465500.018.594.35.63.000/U45497 Central Renton Sewer Reline & Upsize Environmental fee $1,000.00 426.465500.018.594.35.63.000/U45497 Central Renton Sewer Reline & Upsize Technology fee $30.00 Total $1,030.00 *ifI APPROVAL SIGNATURE: Printed Name David Christensen CREDIT: sa J'" 1-7 Date r2014 Account Number Project, function, task, sub -task Description Amount 000.000000.007.345.81.04.000 Central Renton Sewer Reline & Upsize Environmental fee $I,000.00 503.000000.004.322.10.00.000 Central Renton Sewer Reline & Upsize Technology fee $30.00 Total $1.030.00 Reason: Note: Documentation to support this transfer request must be attached and all signatures are required. Cash Transfer Form/Financeft Revised 01/09 City of Renton LAND USE PERMIT MASTER APPLICATION PROPERTY OWNER(S) NAME: City of Renton ADDRESS: 1055 South Grady Way CITY: Renton ZIP: 98057 TELEPHONE NUMBER: 425-430-7279 APPLICANT (if other than owner) NAME: COMPANY (if applicable): ADDRESS: CITY: Renton ZIP: 98057 TELEPHONE NUMBER: 425-430-7279 CONTACT PERSON NAME: John Hobson COMPANY (if applicable): City of Renton ADDRESS: 1055 South Grady Way, 5th Floor CITY: Renton ZIP: 98057 TELEPHONE NUMBER AND EMAIL ADDRESS: jhobson @ rentonwa.gov 425-430-7279 PROJECT INFORMATION PROJECT OR DEVELOPMENT NAME: Central Renton Sewer Interceptor Reline and Upsize PROJECT/ADDRESS(S)/LOCATION AND ZIP CODE: N. 41h St Right of Way between Houser Way North and Sunset Blvd North KING COUNTY ASSESSOR'S ACCOUNT NUMBER(S): N/A EXISTING LAND USE(S): Right of Way PROPOSED LAND USE(S): N/A EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: Commercial Corridor PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION (if applicable) N/A EXISTING ZONING: Commercial Arterial PROPOSED ZONING (if applicable): N/A SITE AREA (in square feet): Approximately 1,290 square feet (129' long x 10' wide trench SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PUBLIC ROADWAYS TO BE DEDICATED: N/A SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PRIVATE.ACCESS EASEMENTS: N/A PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DENSITY IN UNITS PER NET ACRE (if applicable) N/A NUMBER OF PROPOSED LOTS (if applicable) N/A NUMBER OF NEW DWELLING UNITS (if applicable): N/A H:\File Sys\WWP - WasteWater\WWP-27-3712 Central Renton Sewer Interceptor Reline & Upsize\SEPA\masterapp - Central Renton Interceptor Reline and Upsize.doc - 1 - 03/11 PROJECT INFORMA NUMBER OF EXISTING DWELLING UNITS (if applicable): N/A SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): N/A SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): N/A SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): N/A SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): N/A NET FLOOR AREA ON NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): N/A NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES TO BE EMPLOYED BY THE NEW PROJECT (if applicable): N/A TION continued PROJECT VALUE: $262,000 IS THE SITE LOCATED IN ANY TYPE OF ENVIRONMENTALLY CRITICAL AREA, PLEASE INCLUDE SQUARE FOOTAGE (if applicable): N/A ❑ AQUIFIER PROTECTION AREA ONE ❑ AQUIFIER PROTECTION AREA TWO ❑ FLOOD HAZARD AREA sq. ft. ❑ GEOLOGIC HAZARD sq. ft. ❑ HABITAT CONSERVATION sq. ft. ❑ SHORELINE STREAMS & LAKES sq. ft. ❑ WETLANDS sq. ft. LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY Attach legal description on separate sheet with the following information included SITUATE IN THE NE QUARTER OF SECTION 17, TOWNSHIP23, RANGE 05, IN THE CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON E AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP I, (Print Name/s) `J0N-1/ , declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that I am (please check one) the current owner of the property involved in this application or the authorized representative to act for a corporation (please attach proof of authorization) and that the foregoing statements and answers herein contained aA the information herewith are in all respects true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. Signat of O ner/Representative Date Signature of Owner/Representative Date STATE OF WASHINGTON SS COUNTY OF KING gER 0R ��4t, ♦PT'1P /M I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that 30 k,/\ 9 .)yS►'� Joi .o+ signed this instrument and acknowledge it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for theVB`IG t uses and purpose mentioned in the instrument. O?t1t9`1`8 , '� WA SN\� Dated Notary Public in and for the State of Washington Notary (Print): 1i�vv�,ln.ar _1Y`V LA__ My appointment expires: p_1, at - 1Q0 la HAFile Sys\WWP - WasteWater\WWP-27-3712 Central Renton Sewer Interceptor Reline & Upsize\SEPA\masterapp - Central Renton Interceptor Reline and Upsize.doc - 2 - 03/1 1 LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY Attach legal description on separate sheet with the following information included SITUATE IN THE NE QUARTER OF SECTION 17, TOWNSHIP23, RANGE 05, IN THE CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON E AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP I, (Print Name/s) `J0N-1/ , declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that I am (please check one) the current owner of the property involved in this application or the authorized representative to act for a corporation (please attach proof of authorization) and that the foregoing statements and answers herein contained aA the information herewith are in all respects true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. Signat of O ner/Representative Date Signature of Owner/Representative Date STATE OF WASHINGTON SS COUNTY OF KING gER 0R ��4t, ♦PT'1P /M I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that 30 k,/\ 9 .)yS►'� Joi .o+ signed this instrument and acknowledge it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for theVB`IG t uses and purpose mentioned in the instrument. O?t1t9`1`8 , '� WA SN\� Dated Notary Public in and for the State of Washington Notary (Print): 1i�vv�,ln.ar _1Y`V LA__ My appointment expires: p_1, at - 1Q0 la HAFile Sys\WWP - WasteWater\WWP-27-3712 Central Renton Sewer Interceptor Reline & Upsize\SEPA\masterapp - Central Renton Interceptor Reline and Upsize.doc - 2 - 03/1 1 SEPA ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST UPDATED 2014 Purpose of checklist: Governmental agencies use this checklist to help determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant. This information is also helpful to determine if available avoidance, minimization or compensatory mitigation measures will address the probable significant impacts or if an environmental impact statement will be prepared to further analyze the proposal. Instructions for applicants: This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Please answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. You may need to consult with an agency specialist or private consultant for some questions. You may use "not applicable" or "does not apply" only when you can explain why it does not apply and not when the answer is unknown. You may also attach or incorporate by reference additional studies reports. Complete and accurate answers to these questions often avoid delays with the SEPA process as well as later in the decision - making process. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. Instructions for Lead Agencies: Please adjust the format of this template as needed. Additional information may be necessary to evaluate the existing environment, all interrelated aspects of the proposal and an analysis of adverse impacts. The checklist is considered the first but not necessarily the only source of information needed to make an adequate threshold determination. Once a threshold determination is made, the lead agency is responsible for the completeness and accuracy of the checklist and other supporting documents. Use of checklist for nonproject proposals: For nonproject proposals (such as ordinances, regulations, plans and programs), complete the applicable parts of sections A and B plus the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (part D). Please completely answer all questions that apply and note that the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "proponent," and "affected geographic area," respectively. The lead agency may exclude (for non -projects) questions in Part B - Environmental Elements —that do not contribute meaningfully to the analysis of the proposal. A. background 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Central Renton Sewer Interceptor Reline and Upsize Project 2. Name of applicant: City Of Renton Wastewater Utility SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Page 1 of 14 ., 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: John Hobson, Project Manager, Wastewater Utility 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 425-430-7279 4. Date checklist prepared: July 2014 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Renton 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Summer/Fall 2014 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. No. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. None. 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. None known. 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. SEPA. BNSF crossing/temporary occupancy permit(s). City of Renton Right of Way permit. 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project description.) Relining (using cured in place pipe) approximately 560 linear feet of existing 24-inch diameter sewer located along N 4th St alignment/ROW between City sewer manhole SMH 5317-249 (near the intersection with N 3rd PI.) and SMH 5317-185 (east of the BNSF railroad tracks, near the intersection of Houser Way); and Upsizing (to 24-inch diameter) approximately 125 linear feet of existing 12-inch diameter sewer located along N 4th St. alignment/ROW between City sewer manholes SMH 5317-185 (east of BNSF railroad tracks, near the intersection of Houser Way) and SMH 5317-186 (in the center of the northbound lane of Sunset Blvd. N). In addition, SMH 5317-185 will be replaced with a new 84-inch diameter manhole. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Page 2 of 14 The project will also include temporary bypass sewer systems, traffic control, and site restoration. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. The project is located in the following areas: SW/SE 1/4 of Section 8 and NW/NE 1/4 of Section 17, Township 23N, Range 5E, in the City of Renton, and in King County, Washington. . The majority of project work will occur at the following locations: along N 4th St. and N 4th St. alignment, at the intersection of N 4th St. alignment and Sunset Blvd. N, adjacent to Houser Way between Factory PI. N and N 4th St. Temporary project work to establish bypass sewer systems will occur at the intersection of Sunset Blvd. NE and NE 7th St. and at the intersection of NE 7th St. and Aberdeen Ave. NE. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. Earth a. General description of the site (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other Generally flat, with one relatively short, steep slope. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? Approximately 40%. c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any agricultural land of long-term commercial significance and whether the proposal results in removing any of these soils. The general types of soil encountered on the site are fill, alluvium and glacial advance outwash (per project geotechnical engineering report). Fill is generally loose to medium dense, slightly silty, sandy gravel, and loose to medium dense silty to very silty, gravelly sand to sandy gravel. Alluvium is very loose to medium dense, clean to slightly silty, moist to saturated, gravelly sand to sandy gravel. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Page 3 of 14 No. e. Describe the purpose, type, total area, and approximate quantities and total affected area of any filling, excavation, and grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. Approximately 275 cubic yards of soil will be excavated to install the new sewer and manhole. Approximately 275 cubic yards of soil will be placed as trench backfill. The contractor will supply the backfill from licensed gravel pits. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. Minor erosion could occur during construction on the short sloped portion of the sewer alignment, however, will be minimized or mitigated by the implementation of TESC BMPs during construction. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? Approximately 80 percent of the project site is currently and will be covered with impervious surfaces after project completion. No new impervious surfaces are proposed. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: Typical erosion control measures such as silt fencing, catch basin inlet protection, hydroseeding, and replanting of the site should reduce and control any erosion from construction activities. 2. Air a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal during construction, operation, and maintenance when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. During construction, dust and exhaust from construction equipment will occur. After construction, no emissions are expected from the site. b. Are there any off -site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. No. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: Construction equipment will have mufflers and exhaust systems in good working order. Dust will be kept down by watering the work site as needed. 3. Water a. Surface Water: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. No. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Page 4 of 14 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. N/A 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. N/A 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No.' 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. No. 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. No. b. Ground Water: 1) Will groundwater be withdrawn from a well for drinking water or other purposes? If so, give a general description of the well, proposed uses and approximate quantities withdrawn from the well. Will water be discharged to groundwater? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. Based on geotechnical borings, ground water may be encountered in the bottom several feet of the pipe trench or manhole excavation. The ground water will be removed using standard dewatering techniques during construction. The dewatered ground water will not be discharged back to ground water, but disposed of by an approved method. 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals... ; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. None. c. Water runoff (including stormwater): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. N/A. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Page 5 of 14 Liquid spills during construction that could potentially enter either the ground or surface waters will be minimized or mitigated through the use of BMPs. 3) Does the proposal alter or otherwise affect drainage patterns in the vicinity of the site? If so, describe. No. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water, and drainage pattern impacts, if any: The Contractor will use best management practices to control runoff to ensure surface and ground water are not negatively impacted. 4. Plants a. Check the types of vegetation found on the site: deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other _X_shrubs grass pasture crop or grain Orchards, vineyards or other permanent crops. wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other _X_other types of vegetation (Blackberry Bushes) b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Approximately 400 square feet of vegetation including shrubs and blackberry bushes will be removed. c. List threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site. None known. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: All disturbed areas will be replaced to match existing which generally includes pavement and gravel. The removed vegetation will be replaced with hydroseed for erosion control. e. List all noxious weeds and invasive species known to be on or near the site. Blackberry bushes. 5. Animals a. List any birds and other animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site. Examples include: SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Page 6 of 14 birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other: mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: None fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other None b. List any threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site. None known. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. No. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: N/A. e. List any invasive animal species known to be on or near the site. None known. 6. Energy and natural resources a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. N/A. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: N/A. 7. Environmental health a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. During construction, fuel and oil spills could occur. 1) Describe any known or possible contamination at the site from present or past uses. None known. 2) Describe existing hazardous chemicals/conditions that might affect project development and design. This includes underground hazardous liquid and gas transmission pipelines located within the project area and in the vicinity. None known. 3) Describe any toxic or hazardous chemicals that might be stored, used, or produced during the project's development or construction, or at any time during the operating SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Page 7 of 14 life of the project. None. 4) Describe special emergency services that might be required. Typical emergency services by the Fire Department in case of fire, injury, or fuel spills. 5) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: The Contractor will be required to keep construction equipment in good operating condition, and will be responsible to cleanup any oil or fuel leaks and spills, and repair leaking equipment. b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? Traffic and train noise. 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indi- cate what hours noise would come from the site. Short-term: General noise from construction equipment may typically occur between the hours of 7 AM to 5 PM Monday through Friday. Noise from construction equipment may also less typically occur between the hours of 9 AM to 7 PM on Saturdays or Sundays during construction, in which the Contractor will be required to comply with City noise control requirements. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: The contractor will be required to keep the construction equipment's mufflers and exhaust systems in good operating condition. 8. Land and shoreline use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Will the proposal affect current land uses on nearby or adjacent properties? If so, describe. The current use of the site is an existing City right of way (both developed and undeveloped) for roadway, sewer and/or utilities. A BNSF railroad right of way is traversed by the project under agreement between the City and BNSF. Adjacent properties include commercial businesses. The Project will not affect current land uses on any properties. b. Has the project site been used as working farmlands or working forest lands? If so, describe. How much agricultural or forest land of long-term commercial significance will be converted to other uses as a result of the proposal, if any? If resource lands have not been designated, how many acres in farmland or forest land tax status will be converted to nonfarm or nonforest use? No. 1) Will the proposal affect or be affected by surrounding working farm or forest land normal SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Page 8 of 14 business operations, such as oversize equipment access, the application of pesticides, tilling, and harvesting? If so, how: 1►R•1 c. Describe any structures on the site. None. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? No. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? None. The site is Right -of -Way. The site is adjacent to Commercial Arterial. f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? None. The site is Right -of -Way. The site is adjacent to Commercial Corridor. g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? N/A. h. Has any part of the site been classified as a critical area by the city or county? If so, specify. It is classified as a "Regulated Slope" by the City of Renton. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? None. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: N/A. L. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: N/A. m. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with nearby agricultural and forest lands of long-term commercial significance, if any: N/A. 9. Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, mid- dle, or low-income housing. None. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Page 9 of 14 None. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: None. 10. Aesthetics a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? N/A b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? None. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: None. 11. Light and glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? None. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? No. c. What existing off -site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? None. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: None. 12. Recreation a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? None. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. No. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: None. 13. Historic and cultural preservation SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Page 10 of 14 a. Are there any buildings, structures, or sites, located on or near the site that are over 45 years old listed in or eligible for listing in national, state, or local preservation registers located on or near the site? If so, specifically describe. None known. b. Are there any landmarks, features, or other evidence of Indian or historic use or occupation? This may include human burials or old cemeteries. Are there any material evidence, artifacts, or areas of cultural importance on or near the site? Please list any professional studies conducted at the site to identify such resources. None known. c. Describe the methods used to assess the potential impacts to cultural and historic resources on or near the project site. Examples include consultation with tribes and the department of archeology and historic preservation, archaeological surveys, historic maps, GIS data, etc. Since the new sewer line will be installed in the exact location of the existing sewer line, we don't anticipate impacting anything historic or cultural. d. Proposed measures to avoid, minimize, or compensate for loss, changes to, and disturbance to resources. Please include plans for the above and any permits that may be required. None. 14. Transportation a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site or affected geographic area and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. The project site can be accessed from Sunset Blvd N, Houser Way N or N 4th St. b. Is the site or affected geographic area currently served by public transit? If so, generally describe. If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? Sunset Blvd N serves as a route for public transit, however, no bus stops exist within close proximity to the project site. The nearest transit stop is about % mile away. c. How many additional parking spaces would the completed project or non -project proposal have? How many would the project or proposal eliminate? None. d. Will the proposal require any new or improvements to existing roads, streets, pedestrian, bicycle or state transportation facilities, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). No. e. Will the project or proposal use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. No. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project or proposal? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur and what percentage of the volume would SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Page 11 of 14 be trucks (such as commercial and nonpassenger vehicles). What data or transportation models were used to make these estimates? None. g. Will the proposal interfere with, affect or be affected by the movement of agricultural and forest products on roads or streets in the area? If so, generally describe. No. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: None. 15. Public services a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, public transit, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. No. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. None. 16. Utilities a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. See description of proposal in A.11 above. Sewer system upgrades are proposed for the project. The sewer utilities are owned by the City of Renton. Construction and operation will be provided by the City of Renton through private contractors and the City Maintenance Department. The sewer system upgrades will generally require temporary bypass sewer systems, excavation, installation of new sewer pipe and manhole, cured in place pipe installation, and site restoration. C. Signature The above answers lead agency is rel it Signature: 4e and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the them to make its decision. Name of sigr/ '-,JC &o8se,c-/ Position and Agency/Organization Gi✓it. o5,c..-, „a. ZT 7yoF,ekhrm-.,1 Date Submitted: SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Page 12 of 14 Proiect Narrative Central Renton Sewer Interceptor Reline & Upsize The project proposes to replace approximately 122 linear feet of existing 12" concrete sewer with 24" PVC pipe and rehabilitate 559 linear feet of 24" concrete pipe using cured -in -place -pipe. This construction will take place within the rights -of -way of North 4`h Street from Sunset Blvd N to Factory Pl North. The purpose of the project is to replace an old, undersized concrete sanitary sewer as well as rehabilitate other old concrete sewers. The project will be within existing right-of-ways (improved and unimproved) that are adjacent to commercial areas. There is one slope on the project site that is approximately 40%. This slope is 20 feet in length and separates the plateaued area adjacent to Sunset Blvd N with the flat area of the BNSF railroad adjacent to the improved portion of North 4`h St. The surrounding properties are zoned Commercial Arterial. The proposed project is estimated to cost $262,000. Project MitigationL Central Renton Sewer Interceptor Reline & Resize The project is scheduled to be constructed in the summer/fall of 2014. Construction will take place Monday through Friday between 7AM and 5PM. Construction within the roadway portion of Sunset Blvd North will take place Saturday and Sunday between 8AM and 5PM to minimize impacts to commuters. The contractor will be required to obtain a traffic control plan approved by the City's Transportation Department. A water truck will be used to minimize dust during construction. Central Renton Sewer Reline & Upsize Legend City and County Boundary Other r City of Renton l .. Addresses Parcels Notes None a] Information Technology - GIS This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and 136 0 68 136 Feet is for reference only Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be Ctty Of RentonMapSupport@Rentonwa gov accurate. current. or otherwise reliable Renton WGS_ 1984_Web_Mercator_Auxiliary_Sphere 07/17/2014 THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION Finance & IT Division GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT Central Renton Sewer Interceptor Upsize Project Renton, Washington Prepared for: BHC Consultants and City of Renton Wastewater Utility Engineering Project No. 140013 • May 28, 2014 FINAL DRAFT s pect CONSULTING �R� ct ING GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT Central Renton Sewer Interceptor Upsize Project Renton, Washington Prepared for: BHC Consultants and City of Renton Wastewater Utility Engineering Project No. 140013 • May 28, 2014 FINAL DRAFT Aspect Consulting, LLC Erik O. Andersen, P.E., P.Eng. Senior Associate Geotechnical Engineer eandersen@aspectconsulting.com WA—GEOTECH\140013 Central Renton Interceptor Reline-Upsize\Deliverables\Geotechnical Report\Draft\Central Interceptor Geotechnical Report DRAFT.docx ;` Aspect Consulting, LLC 401 Znd Aven a S. Suite 201 Seattle, WA 9&10 Z06:328.7443 www.a— fficonsultingmorn ASPECT CONSULTING Contents 1 Project Description and Scope of Work....................................................1 2 Surface and Subsurface Conditions..........................................................2 2.1 Surface Conditions.....................................................................................2 2.2 Subsurface Conditions...............................................................................2 2.2.1 Geologic Mapping.................................................................................2 2.2.2 Previous Explorations by Others...........................................................2 2.2.3 Subsurface Conditions in Aspect Explorations......................................2 2.2.4 Groundwater Conditions....................................................................... 3 3 Conclusions and Recommendations.........................................................4 3.1 General.......................................................................................................4 3.2 Open Cut Sewer Replacement...................................................................4 3.2.1 General.................................................................................................4 3.2.2 Temporary Excavations........................................................................4 3.2.3 Pipe Bedding...............................:........................................................5 3.2.4 Trench Backfill......................................................................................6 3.2.5 Trench and Pavement Restoration.......................................................7 3.3 Pipe Bursting Sewer Replacement.............................................................7 3.3.1 Pipe Bursting Process..........................................................................8 3.3.2 Implications of Existing Trench Backfill.................................................8 3.3.3 Possible Ground Displacements...........................................................9 3.3.4 Required Excavations...........................................................................9 3.3.5 Implications of Existing Sags/Deviations on Pipe Bursting ....................9 3.3.6 Maintenance of Existing Grade.............................................................9 3.4 Replacement Manhole Structure..............................................................10 3.5 Construction Dewatering..........................................................................10 3.6 Earthwork and Erosion Control.................................................................11 3.6.1 Structural Fill and Compaction............................................................11 3.6.2 Wet Weather Earthwork......................................................................12 3.6.3 Temporary and Permanent Erosion and Sediment Control Considerations....................................................................................13 4 References.................................................................................................14 5 Uncertainty and Limitations.....................................................................1.5 PROJECT NO. 140013 • MAY 28, 2014 FINAL DRAFT ASPECT CONSULTING List of Figures 1 Site Location Map 2 Site and Exploration Plan 3 Design Earth Pressures for Temporary Shoring 4 Typical Trench Pavement Reconstruction Detail List of Appendices A Previous Geotechnical Data (by others) B Subsurface Exploration Methodology and Boring Logs (Current Study) C Geotechnical Laboratory Test Results (Current Study) ii FINAL DRAFT PROJECT NO. 140013 • MAY 28, 2014 ASPECT CONSULTING 1 Project Description and Scope of Work This report presents the results of a geotechnical engineering study by Aspect Consulting LLC (Aspect) in support of improvements to a section of the Central Renton Sewer Interceptor Sewer in Renton, Washington. A vicinity map showing the project location within the City of Renton is presented in Figure 1. Figure 2 is a Site and Exploration Plan. The project includes upsizing of approximately 125 lineal feet of existing 12-inch vitrified clay pipe (VCP). The limits of this portion of the project start at the existing manhole in Sunset Boulevard N, and extend west toward N. 4`h Street to a manhole on the east side of the BNSF railroad. This section of pipe was originally anticipated to be replaced with nominally 18-inch diameter pipe for increased flow capacity, however, at the time of finalizing this report, it was decided to upsize to 24-inch diameter pipe to improve flow characteristics. Conventional open -trench replacement methods are considered in this report. Upsizing by in -situ (pipe bursting/reaming) is also discussed, however in -situ upsizing by more than 50% of the original pipe diameter is generally not recommended. . Jack and bore construction methods were also considered initially, however, these construction methods were eliminated as a feasible alternative during preliminary design and therefore are not discussed as a potential alternative in the report. The western (i.e., downstream) manhole will be replaced as part of this project. The purpose of our work is to provide geotechnical recommendations in support of these improvements. Our scope included reviewing existing subsurface information in the project area; drilling and sampling exploratory borings; performing laboratory testing; completing engineering analyses to develop geotechnical conclusions and recommendations for design and construction; and preparing this report. PROJECT NO. 140013 • MAY 28, 2014 FINAL DRAFT ASPECT CONSULTING 2 Surface and Subsurface Conditions 2.1 Surface Conditions The site area includes Sunset Boulevard North and City -owned undeveloped Right of Way to the west. Adjacent property to the west is an active BNSF railroad spur. Sunset Boulevard (State Route 900) is a heavily used 7-lane arterial. Existing pavement surface is at approximate Elevation +55 feet at the eastern (upstream) manhole. The existing undeveloped Right of Way to the west includes a gravel -surfaced gently sloping (less than 10%) area immediately adjacent to Sunset Blvd.; this area appears to be occasionally used as overflow parking. The west side of the gravel -surfaced area is bordered by a chain link fence, west of which is a 10-foot high slope extending down toward the railroad tracks at an average inclination of about 1.7H:IV. Vegetation on this slope consists of blackberry bushes and small saplings. The toe of this slope is at approximate Elevation +43 feet. To the west of this, the ground is relatively flat. The western (downstream) manhole is near the toe of this slope, at approximate rim Elevation +42.5 feet. The BNSF railroad right of way is just west of the toe of the slope. 2.2 Subsurface Conditions 2.2.1 Geologic Mapping The project area is situated near the edge of a low-lying valley floor at the toe of an upland slope. The geologic map for the site area (Mullineaux, 1965) indicates the site area to be underlain by recent alluvium on the low-lying valley floor to the west and undifferentiated glacial sediments on the upland slope. 2.2.2 Previous Explorations by Others We were provided with a previous geotechnical engineering report by Golder Associates Inc. (Golder, 2003). The Golder study included two borings in close proximity to the subject project. Boring GB-15 was drilled near the intersection of Houser and 41h to the west of the BNSF railroad tracks; and boring GB-14 was drilled near the upstream manhole in Sunset Blvd North. Site data from these borings are provided in Appendix A of this report. The Golder borings reported loose to medium dense granular fill and recent alluvium. 2.2.3 Subsurface Conditions in Aspect Explorations Aspect completed two exploratory soil borings at the locations shown on the Site and Exploration Plan (Figure 2). Soil boring AB-1 was drilled above the existing sewer line to explore and sample existing trench backfill soil. Soil boring AB-2 was drilled and sampled about 20 feet north to explore and sample "native soil". Boring AB-2 was completed as 2-inch-diameter piezometer to monitor ground water during the design period. This piezometer is the property of the City of Renton and as such it available for use prior to and during construction. Ultimately the piezometer will need to be abandoned in accordance with Ecology requirements. FINAL DRAFT PROJECT NO. 140013 • MAY 28, 2014 ASPECT CONSULTING Summary boring logs of the completed explorations, and more detailed descriptions of the subsurface exploration methodology, are included in Appendix B. A summary of the completed laboratory test methodology and results are included in Appendix C. In our borings we encountered fill, alluvium, and glacial advance outwash. Each of the soil units are described in more detail below. Fill: Fill was encountered in each boring. Trench backfill was encountered (intentionally) in boring AB-1 which was drilled and terminated above the crown of the existing sewer line; this material consisted of loose to medium dense, slightly silty, sandy GRAVEL. In boring AB-2, fill consisting of loose to medium dense silty to very silty, gravelly SAND to sandy GRAVEL, was encountered down to about 14 feet below existing ground surface. Alluvium: Below the fill in boring AB-2 we encountered very loose to medium dense, clean to slightly silty, moist to saturated, gravelly SAND to sandy GRAVEL. Based on its elevation, color, density, and composition, we interpreted this soil to be alluvium associated with the Cedar River. Advance Outwash: At a depth of about 23'/z feet below ground surface, we encountered very dense, gray, gravelly SAND. Based on its color and density, we interpreted this material to be glacially overridden advance outwash. Boring AB-2 was terminated in advance outwash at a depth of 31'/z feet below ground surface. 2.2.4 Groundwater Conditions At the time of drilling (March 20, 2014), we encountered wet soil and possible standing groundwater in boring AB-2 at a depth of 19 feet, or Elevation +34 feet. A subsequent water level reading taken on April 7, 2014 encountered groundwater at a depth of 21.2 feet below top of casing, or corresponding Elevation +32.1 feet. In the Golder (2003) report, ground water was reported and subsequently measured in their boring/piezometer GB-15 near the intersection of Houser and 4'h, at approximate Elevation +29 feet in May 2003. Groundwater conditions reported are for the specific location and date indicated. Groundwater levels will vary by location, local precipitation, local subsurface conditions, and other factors. PROJECT NO. 140013 • MAY 28, 2014 FINAL DRAFT ASPECT CONSULTING 3 Conclusions and Recommendations 3.1 General From a geotechnical engineering perspective, conventional open -trench construction is the most suitable method of pipe replacement for this project. We encountered ground water during drilling our boring/piezometer AB-2 at approximate Elevation +34 feet; we subsequently measured groundwater in this piezometer at approximate Elevation +32 feet. Golder (2003) reported ground water in their piezometer GB-15 at approximate Elevation +29 feet. At the downstream manhole, the existing sewer is at approximate invert Elevation +31 feet. Replacement of this downstream manhole structure will likely extend about 2 feet below the invert elevation, or approximate Elevation +29 feet. With groundwater ranging from Elevation +29 to +34 feet, excavations could extend as much as 5 feet below groundwater, thus construction dewatering is anticipated to be required. The following sections of this report provide detailed recommendations for open cut sewer replacement, in situ upsizing, and general site earthwork considerations. 3.2 Open Cut Sewer Replacement 3.2.1 General In our opinion and based on our experience, conventional open trench construction will likely be the fastest, and therefore potentially the most economical method of completing this upsizing project. The disadvantage of this method is the necessary temporary closure of Sunset Blvd. This section presents geotechnical design considerations and recommendations pertaining to open cut trench construction. 3.2.2 Temporary Excavations Maintenance of safe working conditions, including temporary excavation stability, is the responsibility of the contractor, and all excavations must comply with current federal, state and local requirements. Cuts greater than 4 feet in height should be sloped or shored in accordance with Part of WAC 296-155 (Washington Administrative Code) or properly shored. The existing fill and alluvial soils classify as Type C Soil, and temporary, unsupported, cut slopes in these materials should be inclined no steeper than 1.5H:1 V (horizontal vertical). Where the temporary excavations extend below groundwater (i.e., along the part of the project), flatter side slopes and/or shoring will be required. Temporary slopes should be protected from erosion, as necessary, by covering the cut face with well -anchored plastic sheets. Heavy construction equipment, construction materials, excavated soil, and vehicular traffic should not be allowed any nearer to the slope crest than half the height of slope, measured from the top edge of the excavation, unless there is a shoring system that has been designed for support of the additional lateral pressure. FINAL DRAFT PROJECT NO. 140013 • MAY 28, 2014 ASPECT CONSULTING Exposure of personnel beneath properly prepared temporary cut slopes should be kept to a minimum. Where trench excavations are deep and/or spatial limitations do not permit sloping of the excavation, temporary shoring will be required. Design and construction of such shoring systems should be the responsibility of the contractor, who should be required to present a submittal of the design details for review by the Engineer prior to construction. However, general recommendations for design and implementation of trench shoring systems are presented below. • Shoring should be designed and constructed to support lateral soil loads, and any surcharge loads from construction equipment, construction materials, excavated soils, and vehicular traffic. Anticipated lateral soil loads are presented for design guidance in Figure 3 of this report. • Precautions should be taken during removal of the shoring or sheeting materials to minimize disturbance of the pipe, underlying bedding materials, adjacent structures/utilities and surrounding soils. • Trench boxes, if used, should be adequately reinforced to withstand the lateral forces to which they will be subjected. • Trench boxes should be of sufficient dimension, both vertically and laterally, to support the excavation without excessive deformation of the natural soils adjoining the open excavation. However, by their very nature, trench boxes normally are incapable of positive support of the trench walls and some deformation and possible spalling of the excavated slopes should be anticipated if trench boxes are employed. The contractor should be held responsible for repair of any deformation or damages occur to adjoining facilities where trench box methods have been used. • The open trench excavation should be backfilled immediately after the trench box has been moved. • Trenches must be shored when heavy construction equipment and excavated soils are allowed within a lateral distance, measured from the edge of the excavation, equal to half the depth of the excavation. 3.2.3 Pipe Bedding General recommendations relative to pipe bedding and subgrade are presented below: Pipe bedding material, placement, compaction, and shaping should be in accordance with the project specifications and the pipe manufacturer's recommendations. As a minimum, the pipe bedding should meet the gradation requirements for Gravel Backfill for Pipe Zone Bedding, Section 9-03.12(3) of the PROJECT NO. 140013 • MAY 28, 2014 FINAL DRAFT 5 ASPECT CONSULTING WSDOT Standard Specifications. • Pipe bedding materials should be placed on relatively undisturbed native soils, or compacted fill soils. If the subgrade soils are disturbed, the disturbed material should be compacted in place or removed and replaced with additional compacted bedding material. • In areas where the trench bottom encounters very soft or organic - rich subgrade soils, it will be necessary to over -excavate the unsuitable material and backfill with pipe bedding material. However, the depth of over- excavation should generally be limited to a maximum of 2 feet, and should be confirmed by the geotechnical engineer. If necessary, and as determined by the geotechnical engineer, a soil separation -grade geotextile may be utilized to limit trench base over -excavation requirements. • Pipe bedding should provide a firm, uniform cradle for the pipe. We recommend that a minimum 4-inch thickness of bedding material beneath the pipe be provided. Larger thicknesses of bedding may be necessary to prevent loosening and softening of the natural soils during pipe placement. The pipe bedding should extend to a level at least 6 inches above the pipe crown, as indicated on Figure 4, or such greater thickness as may be required by the pipe manufacturer and/or the City of Renton. • Pipe bedding material and/or backfill around the pipe should be placed in layers and tamped to obtain complete contact with the pipe. 3.2.4 Trench Backfill We recommend that trench backfill meet the specifications for structural fill, as described in Section 3.6.1 of this report. During placement of the initial lifts, the trench backfill material should not be bulldozed into the trench or dropped directly on the pipe. Furthermore, heavy equipment should not be permitted to operate directly over the pipe until a minimum of 2 feet of backfill has been placed in order to prevent deformation or breakage of the new lines. Trench backfill should be placed in 8-inch (maximum) lifts and compacted using mechanical equipment to at least 95 percent of its maximum dry density, as determined by testing in general accordance with ASTM D 1557 (Modified Proctor). As an alternative to compacted granular backfill, controlled density fill (CDF) or controlled low strength material (CLSM), per WSDOT Standard Specification 2-09.3(1)E, may be used. The advantage of this material is that compaction is not required, a disadvantage is that the material must be given sufficient time (several days) to cure before it can be exposed to traffic. 6 FINAL DRAFT PROJECT NO. 140013 • MAY 28, 2014 ASPECT CONSULTING 3.2.5 Trench and Pavement Restoration In order to minimize the potential for undermining the existing pavement section, and to reduce the potential for reflective cracking above proposed utility trenches, the following recommendations should be implemented during construction: • No trench excavation should be advanced greater than 4 feet without implementing a positive shoring system. Requiring excavation inside a temporary shoring system will reduce the extent of soil relaxation adjacent to the excavation. As discussed previously, normal trench box systems do not provide positive support for the trench walls and are intended primarily to provide for worker safety. Limiting the extent of trench wall relaxation is key to maintaining proper support for adjacent pavements. • All saw cuts associated with trenching excavations should be made 1.5 to 3 feet back from the anticipated top of trench depending on proposed trench excavation depth. The recommended trench geometry is presented in Figure 4 of this report. • If during excavation of any trench, the existing pavement section is undermined at any location, the undermined pavement should be sawcut and removed prior to pavement reconstruction. • A minimum 6-inch thick layer of Crushed Surfacing Base Course (CSBC) should be placed and compacted to 95 percent of its maximum dry density, as determined using ASTM D 1557 (Modified Proctor), below all reconstructed pavement sections. • The reconstructed pavement section should consist of Hot Mix Asphalt (HMA) or Portland Cement Concrete Pavement (PCCP). The HMA or PCCP should be installed in accordance with City of Renton Standard Plans. 3.3 Pipe Bursting' Sewer Replacement At the time of our initial studies, it was anticipated that the new pipe would be upsized from 12 inches to 18 inches. Based on the observed trench backfill conditions over the existing vitrified clay pipe (VCP) we concluded that pipe bursting would be a feasible method of pipe replacement. However, at the time of this final draft report, it has been decided that the new pipe will be 24 inches in diameter. In -situ upsizing by more than 50% of the original pipe diameter has not been proven to be effective in the industry and is considered "experimental". Therefore, we no longer advocate pipe bursting for this project. The following discussion is for reference and information purposes. PROJECT NO. 140013 • MAY 28, 2014 FINAL DRAFT ASPECT CONSULTING 3.3.1 Pipe Bursting Process The pipe bursting process consists of in -situ fragmentation, displacement, and replacement of the existing pipe typically with new polyethylene pipe of equal or larger diameter. Typically, the existing pipe is split by a hydraulic, static, or pneumatic bursting -head or nosecone to which the new polyethylene pipe is attached. As the existing pipe is burst, the new polyethylene pipe is pulled into position along the alignment of the old pipe. A chain or cable towline attached to a hydraulic jacking or winch system is used to advance the bursting head. Typically, the polyethylene pipe installed during the pipe bursting process consists of 20- to 40-foot long sections that are welded together on site. Pipe bursting is conducted between two points of access; i.e., station —to -station with stations consisting of existing manholes, or insertion and extraction pits. Information regarding the proximity of other service lines or underground structures, and the location of any documented prior service repairs that reinforce the existing pipe should be evaluated for their potential impact on the proposed undertaking. Such information is utilized to select the most appropriate pipe bursting methods and tools, and to evaluate the potential effects of vibrations and ground displacements, associated with the bursting operations. In general, pipe bursting should not be used when the bursting head will pass within 2.5 feet of other buried pipes and within 8 feet of sensitive surface structures (TTC, 2001). Where distances are less than these, special provision should be made to protect the existing structures, such as excavating (daylighting) at the crossing point to relieve potential induced -stress on the existing features (TTC, 2001). 3.3.2 Implications of Existing Trench Backfill Favorable ground conditions for pipe bursting are reportedly within soils that can be moderately compacted such that the enlarged hole behind the bursting head does not cave in before the replacement pipe is installed. This scenario results in minimal lateral extent of outward ground movement because the volume change is accommodated by the local soils. In addition, the absence of caving behind the bursting head will result in lower drag and reduced tensile stress on the pipe during installation. The magnitude of the drag force on the pipe during installation is highly dependent on the contractor's equipment and procedures. Less favorable ground conditions include densely compacted soils or fills, and soils below the water table. These ground conditions tend to increase the force required for the bursting operation. For pipe bursting to be successful at the project site, information regarding the density of the existing soil backfill and adjoining native materials was required. Our boring AB-1 indicates that the trench backfill is relatively loose. Therefore, it is our opinion that pipe upsizing by means of pipe bursting is feasible along the proposed alignment. However, the contractor should anticipate that variation in local fill soil conditions, and the presence or absence of ground water, will affect the amount of force required to burst and pull replacement pipe. Much of the pipe alignment is above groundwater, but the west end will likely dip below the groundwater table. FINAL DRAFT PROJECT NO. 140013 • MAY 28, 2014 ASPECT CONSULTING 3.3.3 Possible Ground Displacements Some ground displacement should typically be expected as a result of a pipe bursting procedures. Displacements tend to be localized and develop in the direction of least resistance. The magnitude and orientation of the displaced soil is largely dependent upon the degree of pipe upsizing, the type and compaction level of the soil surrounding the pipe, and the depth of the pipe. Typically, loose soils will undergo uniform displacement where more densely compacted soils at the same depth will most likely exhibit vertical (heave) expansion. The localized restraining effect of strong soils along trench sides and bottom also serves to direct ground movement upward above the pipe. Conversely, if the existing pipes are founded on weak soil, displacement would be directed downward. Generally, ground movement (heaving) that may distort the existing road surface is observed during pipe bursting conducted on pipes shallower than about eight (8) feet, and bursting of pipes located deeper than about ten (10) feet does not typically cause surface heaving problems. Survey elevation information indicates the existing pipe cover is greater than 10 feet at all locations along the subject project alignment. 3.3.4 Required Excavations Invariably, some surface disturbance along the existing alignment is necessary for the excavation of jacking/receiving pits. These excavations can require an area on the order of 24 feet by 12 feet. Given the depth of the sewer line we anticipate that temporary shoring will be required at all jacking and receiving pits. Internally braced temporary shoring should be utilized for this project. Recommended design earth pressures for temporary braced shoring are presented in Figure 3. However, the contractor should be responsible for the temporary shoring system design, which should be performed by a licensed engineer skilled and experienced in the design of such systems. Shoring system designs should be submitted for review and approval of the engineer prior to construction. Notwithstanding, successful installation and removal of the temporary shoring system is the responsibility of the contractor. 3.3.5 Implications of Existing Sags/Deviations on Pipe Bursting Experience has shown that localized sags larger than one half the pipe diameter can be problematic for pipe bursting operations. If sags exist along this section, this would be another factor to consider. 3.3.6 Maintenance of Existing Grade As with any gravity system, maintaining the established grade is very important. However, because the bursting head has a larger diameter than the replacement pipe, a cavity is developed in the soil, allowing the replacement pipe to take up different positions within the cavity. Depending upon the local soil conditions, site conditions, and installation procedures the following outcomes are generally anticipated: PROJECT NO. 140013 • MAY 28, 2014 FINAL DRAFT ASPECT CONSULTING • If soil displacements are predominately upward, a larger new pipe will most likely be situated with its centerline higher than the original pipe, but with a matching invert elevation. • If the soil displaces uniformly, the centerline of the larger new pipe will match the centerline of the original pipe. • If the soil displacements are predominately downward, the larger new pipe will most likely be situated with its crown matching the original pipe crown position, but with a lower invert elevation. • Asymmetrical soil displacement, resulting from the restraining effects of adjacent buried structures, can result in a lateral shift in new pipe position relative to the original. Case histories suggest that, with careful planning, maintenance of the existing pipe grades is achievable when close attention and frequent surveys are conducted. Sometimes, the presence of unforeseen large boulders, existing concrete pipe collars, CDF backfill, adjacent utilities, etc., will prevent the advancement of the pipe bursting head or cause it to deflect above or below the design invert level. These types of obstructions occur quite commonly despite the amount of available subsurface data and/or as -built and maintenance records, and it is recommended that contingencies be provided in the contract to deal with such problems if they occur. 3.4 Replacement Manhole Structure The replacement manhole structure will be subjected to buoyancy due to being partially below ground water. We recommend this manhole be designed assuming that ground water could potentially rise as high as Elevation +35 feet during an extreme high ground water condition. With this manhole structure in close proximity to the existing active BNSF railroad, temporary shoring will be required to facilitate construction. In our opinion, temporary shoring could be accomplished using internally braced interlocking steel sheet piles. An advantage to this type of shoring is that ground water can be more easily controlled. It would also be possible to utilize a 4-sided trench box, in combination with a construction dewatering program. Recommended earth pressures for design of temporary shoring are presented in Figure 3. 3.5 Construction Dewatering A temporary excavation for the replacement manhole structure at the west (downstream) end of the project could extend as much as 5 feet below ground water. Construction dewatering will likely be necessary. It should ultimately be the contractor's responsibility to select and implement an appropriate dewatering system. However, in our opinion, temporary sumps and trash pumps will not sufficiently dewater the excavation. On the other hand, use of deep wells, resulting in water lowering over a large area, is likely to cause ground settlement over a relatively large area including the BNSF 10 FINAL DRAFT PROJECT NO. 140013 • MAY 28, 2014 ASPECT CONSULTING railroad tracks. The magnitude of the settlement and its areal extent would depend on the amount of change in the water level, the length of time the water level was lowered, and the compressibility and thickness of the underlying soils. To limit potential dewatering-induced settlement to the area immediately adjacent to the trench and downstream manhole area, we recommend a well point dewatering system be utilized. Well points, or eductor wells, consist of a series of closely spaced, small diameter, screened pipes that are driven or drilled in place, and connected to a manifold which in turn is connected to large vacuum pump operating on the ground surface. A properly designed, installed, and operated wellpoint system can draw down the ground water level within the work area, without causing a large drawdown cone, such as occurs with deep dewatering wells. We recommend the contractor retain an experienced wellpoint specialist to install and operate the dewatering system. We recommend the contractor be required to submit a dewatering plan for review by Aspect to evaluate other potential impacts. We recommend the plans and specifications include provisions requiring contractors to maintain a minimum and maximum draw -down from dewatering. The contractor could utilize existing monitoring wells to aid in the determination of the effectiveness of the dewatering system. However, design and implementation of any dewatering system should remain the responsibility of the contractor. Water produced by construction dewatering could potentially be discharged to the local storm or sanitary sewer. Discharge water quality must meet Ecology's Water Quality Standard for Surface Waters requirements prior to discharge to the storm sewer system. If the dewatering effluent does not meet Ecology standards, it could likely be discharged into the sanitary sewer. 3.6 Earthwork and Erosion Control 3.6.1 Structural Fill and Compaction For purposes of this report, material placed under pavement structures or sidewalks, used as trench backfill, or used as backfill behind below -grade structures such as catch basins, infiltration galleries, or pipes, is classified as structural fill. Imported structural fill (Gravel Borrow) should consist of clean, non -plastic, relatively free -draining, sand and gravel free from organic matter or other deleterious materials. Such materials should contain particles of less than 4 inches maximum dimension, with less than 7% fines (material passing the #200 sieve; based on the'/4-inch fraction), as described in Section 9-03.14(1) of the WSDOT Standard Specifications (WSDOT, 2014). Fines should be non -plastic. Imported structural fill placed as base course below asphaltic pavement should meet the requirements of Crushed Surfacing Base Course (CSBC), as described in Section 9- 03.9(3) of the WSDOT Standard Specifications (WSDOT, 2014). PROJECT NO. 140013 • MAY 28, 2014 FINAL DRAFT 11 ASPECT CONSULTING In general, much of the existing on -site fill and trench backfill material is predominantly granular with variable fines (clay and silt) content. Providing earthwork is completed during dry weather conditions, much of the on -site soil will be suitable for re -use as structural backfill. However, based on recent similar utility project experience, it is probable that WSDOT will discourage the re -use of on -site soils as structural trench backfill within the travel lanes of State Route 900. Structural fill should be placed in loose, horizontal, lifts of not more than 8 inches in thickness and compacted to at least 95 % of the maximum dry density, as detennined using test method ASTM D 1557 (Modified Proctor). At the time of placement, the moisture content of structural fill should be at or near optimum. The procedure required to achieve the specified minimum relative compaction depends on the size and type of compaction equipment, the number of passes, thickness of the layer being compacted, and the soil moisture -density properties. When the first fill is placed in a given area, and/or anytime the fill material changes, the area should be considered a test section. The test section should be used to establish fill placement and compaction procedures required to achieve proper compaction. The geotechnical consultant should observe placement and compaction of the test section to assist in establishing an appropriate compaction procedure. Once a placement and compaction procedure is established, the contractor's operations should be monitored and periodic density tests performed to verify that proper compaction is being achieved. 3.6.2 Wet Weather Earthwork The existing site soil's are not particularly moisture sensitive, but may prove to be difficult to handle or traverse with construction equipment during periods of wet weather. Therefore, general recommendations relative to earthwork performed in wet weather or in wet conditions are presented below. These recommendations should be incorporated into the contract specification and should be required when earthwork is performed in wet conditions: • Site stripping and fill placement should be accomplished in small sections to minimize exposure to wet weather. Excavation or removal of unsuitable soil should be followed promptly by placement and compaction of a suitable thickness of clean structural fill. The size and type of construction equipment used may have to be limited to prevent soil disturbance. • Material used as structural fill should consist of clean granular soil, of which not more than 5% passes the U.S. Standard No. 200 sieve, based on wet sieving the fraction passing the 3/4-inch sieve. The fine-grained portion of structural fill soils should be non - plastic. • No soil should be left un-compacted so it can absorb water. 12 FINAL DRAFT PROJECT NO. 140013 • MAY 28, 2014 ASPECT CONSULTING Stockpiles of excavated soil should either be shaped and the surface compacted, or be covered with plastic sheets. Soils that become too wet should be removed and replaced with clean granular materials. Excavation and placement of fill should be monitored by someone experienced in wet weather earthwork to determine that the work is being accomplished in accordance with the project specifications and the recommendations contained herein. 3.6.3 Temporary and Permanent Erosion and Sediment Control Considerations Soil erosion can be minimized by careful grading practices, the appropriate use of silt fences and/or straw bales and by implementing the recommendations in the Wet Weather Earthwork section of this report. Surface runoff control during construction should be the responsibility of the contractor. All collected water should be controlled and discharged in accordance with local regulations. Grading measures, slope protection, ditching, sumps, dewatering, and other measures should be employed as necessary to permit proper completion of the work. Permanent control of surface water should be incorporated in the final grading design. Water should not be allowed to pond immediately adjacent to foundations or paved areas. PROJECT NO. 140013 • MAY 28, 2014 FINAL DRAFT 13 ASPECT CONSULTING 4 References Mullineaux, D.R., 1965, Geologic Map of the Renton Quadrangle, King County, Washington, USGS Geologic Map GQ-405. Trenchless Technology Center (TTC), 2001, Guidelines for Pipe Bursting, TTC Technical Report 2001.002, March 2001. Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT), 2014, Standard Specifications for Road Bridge and Municipal Construction, Manual M 41-10. 14 FINAL DRAFT PROJECT NO. 140013 • MAY 28, 2014 ASPECT CONSULTING 5 Uncertainty and Limitations Work for this project was performed for BHC Consultants and City of Renton Utilities (Client), and this report was prepared in accordance with generally accepted professional practices for the nature and conditions of work completed in the same or similar localities, at the time the work was performed. Experience has shown that subsurface soil and groundwater conditions can vary significantly over small distances. Inconsistent conditions can occur between explorations and may not be detected by a geotechnical study. Further geotechnical evaluations, analyses and recommendations may be necessary for the final design of this project. This report does not represent a legal opinion. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. If there is a substantial lapse of time between the submission of this report and the start of construction, or if conditions have changed due to construction operations at or near the site, it is recommended that this report be reviewed to determine the applicability of the conclusions and recommendations considering the changed conditions and time lapse. All reports prepared by Aspect Consulting for the Client apply only to the services described in the Agreement(s) with the Client. Any use or reuse by any party other than the Client is at the sole risk of that party, and without liability to Aspect Consulting. Aspect Consulting's original files/reports shall govern in the event of any dispute regarding the content of electronic documents furnished to others. PROJECT NO. 140013 • MAY 28, 2014 FINAL DRAFT 15 FIGURES � i \y� � - e!Pi1!llnSl f'iIl y �o A. k In?-5r NE'Aio:m _ not • - ' _ _ ` IMF 1�9n S1 I '•..Qe 121ha - 'IF Ipn 91 '•s A ( lam. ��`w ��06 E �LLyS iR 1 HC;I -hC r , N ,(:a n fit•! � II�SI r r 9� b rn a� ' o R- .r �- I-vpl i III Yf. •� {'1 f IF I, 51. q ;Site Location gal` , T1 r - _ ••M � _ _ S 7 e4v a:,l a- _"": t. pri' c d• '� d a < 3 in Jn,. � r : �. a: 1 a=s• tpn.7 ;, - cPma_..y ,. , hE _ i 90 v.+-s a rws—u •Jra Sr1—WA•900•Ew.a�,.� SE Re it 11 1 �a l !F N•1`Y )4 0 2,000 4,000 Feet Site Location Map Central Renton Sewer Interceptor Upsize Renton, Washington %Aspect MAY-2014 PROJECT N0. CONSULTING 140013 9e FIGURE NO. A/SCC RE— 1 SCC Basemap Layer Credits I I Sources: Esti, DeLorme, NAVTEQ, TorrTom, Intermap, WC. USGS, FAO, NPS, NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN, Kadaster NL, Ordnance Survey. Esri Japan. METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), and the GIS User Community NSDOT P 3 AC oowrvs�eAM / /. / • Yp:a,'sa.a �s • ' -HOLE oe o t /� � 1 � UPSiREPM M4NHOLE c 1 T AC AC AC t II m r F PROPOSED UPSIZE EXTENTS d Reference Base map p�oneee M'BHC Consultans Site and Exploration Plani Central Renton Sewer Interceptor Upsize x83�Renton, Washington 8 Aspect Exploration Designation and Location 4 00.14 Previous Boring (Golder, 2003) %PSDed.t MAV.2011 2ro ryV ` 0013 I-- B X --I CONSTRUCTION EXISTING SURCHARGE = q GROUND F--71 SURFACE1 X/2 E BRACED SHORING WALL 0 BOTTOM OF H EXCAVATION 1.56 0 ASSUMED GROUNDWATER LEVEL 0 m 3 D m 0 0.4(i)(1-X/B)q E SURCHARGE PRESSURE - 28H 105D U FOR: x>_H: i=0 RETAINED NET PASSIVE PRESSURE r SOIL EARTH PRESSURE - 0 H/2>x>H/4: i=0.75 m H/4 >x: i=1.0 NOTES: 0 1. ASSUMED SOIL CONDITIONS: % = 120PCF, 4) = 281, Ka= 0.36, Kp= 2.8 2. CONSTRUCTION SURCHARGE PRESSURE SHOULD BE ADDED USING THE FORMULA ABOVE. 3. SHORING EMBEDMENT (D) SHOULD BE DETERMINED BY SOLVING FOR MOMENT EQUILIBRIUM ABOUT THE LOWEST BRACE. D SHOULD BE NOT LESS THAN 10 FT. 4. A FACTOR OF SAFETY OF 1.5 HAS BEEN APPLIED TO THE NET fo PASSIVE PRESSURE SHOWN. U 5. DISTANCES ARE IN UNITS OF FEET; PRESSURES ARE IN UNITS O OF POUNDS PER SQUARE FOOT. DIAGRAM IS NOT TO SCALE. Design Earth Pressures for Temporary Shoring Central Renton Sewer Interceptor Upsize Renton, Washington J oAspect MAY-2014 �Y FIGURENO. m S�C PROJECT NO REV BY. oQ CONSULTING 140013 sl EXISTING ASPHALT EXISTING ASPHALT NEW HMA PAVEMENT CSBC X PIPE BEDDING MATERIAL VARIES NOTES: VARIES 1. TRENCH EXCAVATIONS LESS THAN 6 FEET DEEP, X = 1.5 FEET. 2. TRENCH EXCAVATIONS GREATER THAN 6 FEET DEEP, X = 3 FEET. APPENDIX A Previous Geotechnical Data (by others) _ ry , J9G&15 .•� r / �f iaj -`�` t—_— �'"��'�-''Oi'TJ \ "�`.��= '// ' I rV. 6 it f I J �Y,: o w 12o o GO 120 7 FEET FEET w E S N �o _ a 0 o�f _ —� - — — 9.5p 9ro0 vt r0 rp.00 ro.59 rr.oJ n.fp t1.0o INSp NW 11�50 ,crop Ia.50 ,�.po -m t8.0p —so ITaro 0 20 SPECIAL NOTE: 80 Data mnceming the rarlous strata have been FEET obtained at exploradon lomlions only. The 2X VERTICAL EXAGGERATION �� interpretation between these lomfions has been FIGURE inferred from geologiml evidence and so my vary from that shown. PLAN AND PROFILE HOR5UNSEr ALIGNMENT 9TVDYNJA pm rq . OJtSo,oppiot. v An 1-/, ]oCil - 11,12— Golder Associates r,1 I I I RECORD OF BOREHOLE GB-14 SHEET 1 of 1 PROJECT: HDR/Sunset Interceptor/WA DRILLING METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger DATUM: MSL ELEVATION: 55.87 PROJECT NUMBER: 033-1504.000 DRILLING DATE: 5/22/03 AZIMUTH: N/A INCLINATION: -90 LOCATION: Sunset Blvd Renton WA DRILL RIG: Mobile B-59 COORDINATES: not surve ed O SOIL PROFILE SAMPLES PENETRATION RESISTANCE BLOWS / ft a cc to zo 30 40 NOTES WATER LEVELS O v 2 DESCRIPTION N �j =ELEV. ��ryry ¢ p to w BLOWS 6 in N v GRAPHIC WATER CONTENT (PERCENT) m DEPTH IK) z t4o It, hammer a:t''r, 6� W, ao Imh drop ° o.o • o.s ASPHALT 55.4 'r •4: 959 0.5.0.8 0.8 0.8 • 7.0 Compact, olive brown, nonstratified, fine to coarse SAND, little silt, trace fine to coarse gravel, trace asphalt fragments,dry. (FILL) SW-S 5 1 SS 4.5-5 10 02 - 15 . 48.9 7.0.21.5 _X11 7.0 Compact to dense, brownish gray. 8 nonstratifled, fine to coarse SAND, some E fine to coarse subangular to rounded gravel, m trace silt, dry to damp. (ALLUVIUM) 5 m 10 0 v L Backftlled with 09 Bentonile $, 2 SS 5.10-10 20 Chips and <' Cuttings E o N 3 0 x u c N N Q SW 15 3 SS B-15-15 30 Q 1.5 3 20 d 4 SS 6-11-12 23 10 1.5 34.4 21.5 5 No groundwater encountered. Boring completed at 21.5 ft. 7 d 7 z D r L j 25 L L 1 into 3 ft LOGGED: C. Allen L DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Holt Drilling CHECKED: D. Findley GOIdu dssocmtes DRILLER: M. Sharp DATE: 5/27/03 n RECORD OF BOREHOLE GB-15 SHEET 1 of 1 PROJECT: HDR/Sunset Interceptor/WA DRILLING METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger DATUM: MSL ELEVATION: 40.89 PROJECT NUMBER: 033-1504.000 DRILLING DATE: 5/22/03 AZIMUTH: N/A INCLINATION: -90 LOCATION: Sunset Blvd Renton WA DRILL RIG: Mobile B-59 COORDINATES: not surve ed O SOIL PROFILE SAMPLES PENETRATION RESISTANCE x BLOWS / ff ■ cn U = ELEV. a[ w BLOWS a H� 10 20 3o 40 NOTES WATER LEVELS WATER CONTENT (PERCENT) p v ¢ DESCRIPTION ¢ w per 6 in N GRAPHIC Om C7 DEPTH (ft) Z f4o 6 hammer w ¢ w, W. 30Imh drop � 0..5 0-0 •4 40.4 Concrete and Monument 0.5 - 0.7 q 0.7 0.7-5.1 •:��' Gray, fine to coarse SAND and fine to coarse GRAVEL, damp observed in cuttings. (FILL)'®' W-G .�'-0. ®: Bentonite Chips 5 •. ° 35.8 ■ 1 inch PVC 5.1 - 6.0 5.1 riser Soft, dark brown to gray, iron oxide mottled, CL 1-0SILTY CLAY, trace fine sand, trace roots, 34.9 1 SS 0-1-2 3 1 5 I tram twigs. m V 6.0 6.0 - 21.5 '•;�•: Very loose to dense, yellowish brown to brownish gray to gray, Interbedded, fine to medium SAND, trace silt and fine to coarse SAND and fine to coarse GRAVEL, trace Eslit, trace fine sandy sill laminae and fine to l�R m coarse subrounded GRAVEL, some fine to J� coarse sand, trace silt, moist to wel. (ALLUVIUM) b• �' b. Qo 10 _ L • !.� •4. 2 SS 5.14.18 32 1_1 1.5 m •40. in 3 -b' s o: 0 5 N O S SP !•`•' Silica Send 0 'IIt. 15 •®' • ® I inch PVC screen o' b. 3 SS 3.7.10 17 10 1.5 •V.: •b. • 46 O 1. ®" A 1. • 3 n 20 ■ 91. 4 SS 10-19.25 44 5 19.4 3 Boring completed at 21.5 ft. 21.5 7 7 d 9 C 0 C j 25 u g 1 In to 3 ft LOGGED: C. Allen DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Holt Drilling CHECKED: D. Findley 7 DRILLER: M. Sharp DATE: 5/27/03 Assoclate5 0 APPENDIX B Subsurface Exploration Methodology and Boring Logs (Current Study) ASPECT CONSULTING B. Field Exploration Program B.1. Geotechnical Borings Geotechnical borings AB-1 and AB-2 were drilled using hollow stem auger drilling methods by Environmental Drilling Inc., of Snohomish Washington under subcontract to Aspect. The locations of the four borings, two performed by Aspect and two performed by Golder Associates, are shown on Figure 2 in the main body of the report. Boring logs of the completed explorations, and a key to the symbols and terms used in the boring logs, are found at the end of this appendix as Figures B-1 through B-3. At selected intervals, disturbed samples were recovered using the Standard Penetration Test (SPT) in general accordance with ASTM Method D1586. This involves driving a 2-inch outside -diameter split -barrel sampler a distance of 18 inches into the soil with a 140-pound hammer free -falling from a distance of 30 inches. The number of blows for each 6-inch interval is recorded and the number of blows required to drive the sampler the final 12 inches is known as the Standard Penetration Resistance ("N") or blow count. The resistance, or N-value, provides a measure of the relative density of granular soils or the relative consistency of cohesive soils. An Aspect geotechnical engineer was present throughout the field exploration program to observe the drilling procedure, assist in sampling, and to prepare descriptive logs of the exploration. Soils were classified in general accordance with ASTM D-2488, Standard Practice for Description and Identification of Soils (Visual -Manual Procedure). The summary exploration log represents our interpretation of the contents of the field logs. The stratigraphic contacts shown on the individual summary logs represent the approximate boundaries between soil types; actual transitions may be more gradual. The subsurface conditions depicted are only for the specific date and locations reported, and therefore, are not necessarily representative of other locations and times. B.2. Piezometer A standpipe piezometer was installed in boring AB-2 for periodic measurement of groundwater levels. The piezometer consists of schedule 40, 2-inch inside diameter (ID) PVC pipe, with a 10-foot long PVC -screened section. The annular space around the piezometer screen zone was backfilled with Colorado 10/20 silica sand, above which 3/8- inch bentonite chips were placed to form an annular seal to the ground surface. A concrete surface seal was installed at the ground surface and secured a bolted, watertight, steel, flush -mount surface casing. A schematic diagram of the piezometer installation is shown on the summary log of boring AB-2. The static groundwater level in the piezometer was determined by making groundwater level measurements shortly after piezometer installation. PROJECT NO. 140013 • MAY 28, 2014 FINAL DRAFT A-1 I Classifications of soils in this report are based on visual field and/or laboratory observations, which include density/consistency, moisture condition, grain size, and plasticity estimates and should not be construed to imply field or laboratory testing unless presented herein. Visual -manual and/or laboratory classification methods of ASTM D-2487 and D-2488 were used as an identification guide for the Unified Soil Classification System. PROJECTNO. 140013 Tect %CLTING Exploration Log Key ^e°° FIGURE NO. B-1 , o Well -graded gravel and Terms Describing Relative Density and Consistency o � o o' o o GW gravel with sand, little to Density SPT(zlblows/foot v c , , q no fines Very Loose 0 to 4 Test Symbols LL a) " Borin LopProject %�sect Number Boring Number Sheet NSULTING 140013 AB-1 1 of 1 Project Name: Central Renton Sewer Interceptor Upsize Ground Surface Elev 52.1 Location: Renton, WA Driller/Equipment: Environmental Drilling Inc. / HSA Depth to Water (ft BGS) Not encountered Drilling Method/Hammer:SPT/140 lb Autohammer Start/Finish Date 3/20/2014 Depth / Elevation Borehole Completion Sample Type/ID Tests Blows/ N-value water Content % Material Type Description Depth (feet) 6,. 0 10 20 30 40 5 (ft) 6 o Surface condition is gravel. backfilled with soil 0 to 5 o Loose to medium dense, moist, brown to olive 0.5' bgs s-, (0-,.5 ft 5 o brown, slightly silty to silty, sandy to very sandy, ° GRAVEL (GP -GM); fine to coarse gravel, fine to °o coarse sand. I o 50 I I o o cc (TRENCH BACKFILL) Backfilled with 6 I I I o ° bentonite chips 0.5' to 7.6 bgs g I o ' 5-2 (34.5 ft 8 is * OCI o O I o 'o ° I I o 5 I o 5 I I o ° I 0 oCC GSA 5 5 I I o oCC O S-3 (6-7.5 ft 7 ° O ° 45 'o Bottom of boring at 7.5 ft. bgs. Groundwater not encountered. Borehole was backfilled with bentonite chips. 10 10 40 15 15 i i i 35 i Sampler Type: Drilling Method: Logged by: EA No Recovery HSA: Hollow Stem Auger Standard Penetration Test Approved by: EA (ASTM D1586) MR: Mud Rotary Figure No. B- 2 Borin LoBoring %�spect Project Number Number Sheet NSULTING 140013 AB-2 1 oft Project Name: Central Renton Sewer Interceptor Upsize Ground Surface Elev 53.3 Location: Renton, WA Driller/Equipment: Environmental Drilling Inc. / HSA Depth to Water (ft BGS) Drilling Method/Hammer:SPT/140 lb Autohammer Start/Finish Date 3/20/2014 Depth / Elevation Borehole Completion Sample Tests Blows/ N-value Water Content % Material Type Description p Depth (feet) Type/ID 6,. 10 20 30 40 5 (ft) 10-infushmount Surface condition is gravel. monument, thermos Medium dense, moist, brown, silty, gravelly cap, concrete surface SAND (SM) seal(0-1 ft) (FILL) 11 17 50 11 3/8-in hydrated / bentonite chips (1-16 / ft) 5 4 / 5 GSA 5 / - s-2(s5ft 8 TI I 27 I I I ) - S3 (]5-9 ft) 2-in diameter PVC 11 45 blank (0-16 ft) 5 s-3b (8-9 ft. I O I I I 0 Loose, moist, brown, verysilty, sandy, GRAVEL 10 (GM); 10 4 GSA 3 5 I Al 0 O II C o 0 5 II 0 5 40 s-s n2s,an 8 I I I 0 I Medium dense, moist, mottled brown and gray 15 II brown, slighty silty, gravelly SAND (SP-SM); 15 5 trace roots, fine to medium sand, fine gravel 6 I s-ersssre 11 • ♦ (ALLUVIUM) silica sand filter / i - pack (16 - 31.5 ft) / ° 0 .7 Very loose, moist to wet, clean to slightly silty, / p sandy, GRAVEL (GW); fine to coarse gravel, 6 0000 medium to coarse sand 1 35 s-inssn 1 O p O I �0�0 3/20/2014 ( CJ q 2-in diameter PVC ( 0 ° 0 Wet at 19 ft. bgs pre -packed 10 slot screen (19.5 - 29.5 ft) I ( ° o ° Sampler Type: Drilling Method: Logged by: EA No Recovery HSA: Hollow Stem Auger Standard Penetration Test Approved by: EA (ASTM D1586) MR: Mud Rotary Figure No. B- 3 Boring Log %qspect Project Number Boring Number Sheet CONSULTING 140013 AB-2 2of2 Project Name: Central Renton Sewer Interceptor Upsize Ground Surface Elev 53.3 Location: Renton, WA Driller/Equipment: Environmental Drilling Inc. / HSA Depth to Water (ft BGS) Drilling Method/Hammer:SPT/140 lb Autohammer StarUFinish Date 3/20/2014 Depth / Elevation Borehole Completion Sample Type/ID Tests Blows/ water NContent % Material Type Description Depth (feet) 6.. 0 10 20 30 40 5 (ft) 6 a° Loose, wet, brown, clean to slightly silty, very GSA 4 ) o gravelly SAND (SW), fine to coarse gravel, fine to s-e rzan sn 5 coarse sand - _Y 4/7/2014 O \ \ 10/20 silica sand filter , - - pack (16 - 31.5 ft) \ 30 \ Very dense, wet, gray, clean to slightly silty, very \ e gravelly SAND (SW); fine to coarse sand \ (ADVANCE OUTWASH) 25 2-in diameter PVC 10 9 \ 25 - slot screen (19.5 - 29.518 \ n) s-ensze.5n 30 I I I I 25 I I I I I I 30 30 7 St0 �la3L51p O 4 50+ Bottom of Boring at 31.5 ft. bgs. Monitoring well installed. Groundwater encountered at 19 ft. bgs during drilling. Groundwater level measured at 21.2 ft. bgs on April 7, 2014. 20 35 35 i i 15 Sampler Type: Drilling Method: Logged by: EA ® No Recovery HSA: Hollow Stem Auger Standard Penetration Test Approved by: EA (ASTM D1586) MR: Mud Rotary Figure No. B- 3 APPENDIX C Geotechnical Laboratory Testing Results (Current Study) ASPECT CONSULTING C. Geotechnical Laboratory Testing Laboratory tests were conducted on selected soil samples to characterize certain engineering (physical) properties of the soils within the Study Area. Laboratory testing included determination of grain -size distribution and natural moisture content. The laboratory tests were conducted in general accordance with appropriate ASTM test methods. Test procedures are discussed below. The grain size distribution of selected samples was analyzed in general accordance with ASTM D-422, Standard Test Method for Particle -Size Analysis of Soils. Results of the grain size distribution testing are presented in this appendix. The moisture content of selected samples was analyzed in general accordance with ASTM D-2216, Standard Test Methods for Laboratory Determination of Water (Moisture) Content of Soil and Rock by Mass. Moisture content test results are plotted on the boring logs at the appropriate intervals. PROJECT NO. 140013 • MAY 28, 2014 FINAL DRAFT B-1 WC Materials Testing & Consulting, Inc. Geotechnical Engineering • Special Inspection • Materials Testing • Environmental Consulting p sue. Sieve Report Project: Central Renton Sewer Interceptor Date Received: 20-Mar-14 ASTM D-2487 Unified Soils Classification System Project 9: 14B058 Sampled By: Client GP -GM, Poorly graded Gravel with Silt and Sand Client: Aspect Consulting Date Tested: 24-NIar-14 Sample Color: r�CCR'EDITTIEE61 Source: AB S-3, 6 - 7.5 Tested By: C. Meredith Brown Sam left: B14-1406 ASTM D-2216, ASTM D-2419 ASTM D-4318, ASTM'D-5821 D,<,= 0.051 mm ",6 Gravel = 48.2% Coeff. of Curvature, C',; - 0.76 Specifications D,,,,,= 0.149 mm %Sand= 44,4% CoctT o'Unitbnnity, G; = 64.20 No Specs D,,= 0.374 mm % Silt ,C Clav = 7.4% Fineness Modulus = 4.87 Sample fleets Specs P D;,,,,= 1.042 mm Liquid Limit =n/a Plastic Limit = n/a D,i,W= 4.128 mm Plasticity Ill = n/a Moisture %,, as sampled = 3.7% D„�,= 9.560 mm Sand Equivalent = n/a Fracture%= n/a - 21.962 mm Ke<j d Sand Equivalent = Req'd Fracture'l - - - ASTM C-136, ASTM D-6913- - -' - - Actual Interpolated Cumulative Percent Cumulative Percent Grain Siie DislnbNbn _? --• o ag=og Sieve Size Specs Specs U$ �IetrlC Pnssine Passing 31A: IIIII +oox Inr!•4��'.�'�:•; �•tT�1�'�i+n n-I-llttlT rr" IIIIII IIIIIII 'IIIIII IIIIIII I IIIIIII IIIIII I ox 12.00" I 300.00 100% 100,10 0.0% I0.00" 250.00 100% 100.00/1 0.0% Ill II I I I IIIIII I IIIIII IIIIIII I IIIIII 'IIIII I $.00" 200.00 I00% IO0.0% O.Oa,/a yo% IIIIII _ IIIIIII I_ _ _IIIIII IIIIIII 1 _IIIIIII _ IIIIII I_ I_ Tit III I I ,IIIIIII IIIIII I I !IIIIII I I "I'll,I I IIIIII I I m00% 6.00" 150.00 100% 100.0% 0.0% Hill I I I IIIIII 11 IIIIII I I IIIIIII I I 'IIIIII I I IIIIII I I 4.00" IWOO 100% 100.0a/ 0.0% 1111111 I IIIII I I IIIIII I I :IIIII I I I null I I IIIIII I I 3.00° 7$.00 I00% 100.0% 0.0° eo x 1411--- - IIII0111--I1'1I1-1 --�nH I�1� -1I -+III+II-JIlul�I-I e00x 2.50" 63.00 100% 100.0% 00% uIIll 1 Il1n 111 1• ',IIIII I I I1111111 1 111111 1 1111111 1 2,00" 50.00 100% 100.0% 0.0% o x IIIInIII IIII I t III I I I I III I, I I I HIM 1 1 11111) 1 1 n - I I II I T r l I n l r l r T I m 17 1-1 1- T11 n r 1 1 11 FT17 r 1 0% 1.75" 45.00 100% 100.0% 0.0% IIIIII 'IIIIII 1 •'l IIIIII IIIIII I 'IIIIII .1111111 1 1 .50" 3T50 100% 100.0% 0.0% IIII Ilan \IIIIII 1 :IIIIII gull IIIIIII I I I 1.25" 3L50 100% 100.0% 0.0% �x lull Ll_I_InLui LI__'I I It L_uL11y IJJ _'LU LI LI_1_�11W 1_1_ so ox lull) I I IIIIII I I II I I :IIIIII 1 I dun 1 1 IIIIII I I I x." 1.001, 25.00 100% 100.0% 0 0% IIIIII IIIIIII IIIIIII 1 IIIIII IIII 1 1 3/4" 1900. 80% 80% 100.0°%u 0.0% IIIIII IIIIII ill N11 I 'ill III I I .IIIIII I 11111111 5/8" 16.00 74% 100.0% 0.0% Sox IHf-I--iIH+1-H-..11+11�++-Hil+li-+-H1H FI-I-HI�i1+rH u1I111 u1n11 1 IIII 11 1 IIIIII ,IIIIII .IIIIII I soox K 1/2" 12.50 66% 66% 100.0% 0_O% un11 I I IIIIII I I IIIIII 1% 'IIIIII I I 'IIIIII I I IiIIII I I 3/8" 9.50 60% 60% 100.0% 0.0% as x IIIIII IIIIII IFIIIIII 'IIIIII 1 IIIIII 1 IIIIII 1 1 amTn�-nlnn-r�1nlTrr Inn-1-�1n1-rrr-lrnrlrNIX, ox 1/4" 6.30 54% 100.0% O.M/1 IIIIII 11 .111111 1 1 I1111I 1 II11111 1 1 '111111 1 1 IIIIII 1 1 #4 4.75 52% 52% 100.0% 0.0% 1111111 1 'III1111 1 1u1111 IIIII I I 1 1111111 1 "I'll 1 1 #8 2.36 45% 100.0% 0.0% �% ILI LI_l_ JILII LI__ILLILI I L!I. 11J J_ 111L1 LI_1_ JILLII LI_ un 11 1 Ili III 1 'Iu111I I `Iu 111 I Mill 1 1 111111 I wox 910 2.00 44% 44% 100.0% 00% 111111 1.IIIIII lull q�ll l IIIIII II I111 #16 1.18 32% 100.0% 0.0% 1111111 1 uillI I I ,9111111 'lI IIII IIIIII I 1 .II I1111 1 m % -I1 -I1 -HIn IY 1lIH rI-I-+IHI+I-I- ox 420 0.850 27% 27% 100.0% 0:0% IIIIliI-1,I 1 l,I I IllI I I IIIIIII 1 1 Mill I I 930 0.600 21% 100.0% 0.0% HIM I 1 111111 1 IIIII l I I IIIIII \ 1 911111 1 ,IIIII I 940 0.425 16% 16% 100.0% 0.0% sox 1Ill I11 1 11HI I I 1111111 I I III III 11•4,-111111 1 'II IIII l 11111 I I I III I I I I 'IIII F111 I I •x•�I III I IIIIII ox #50 0.300 13% 100.0% U% 11,11,11 Ill - II I Iull,I I ulnlll nrulI 1 IIIIIII 1 #60 0,250 12% 100.0% 0.0% 11111) 1 1-II111, 1 1 IIIIII I I n11n 1 I I IIIII I I I n1n111 1 480 0.180 II% 1000% 0.0% ,�� ,�� waaa ,000 o,m oaro om1 9100 0.150 10% 10% 100.0% 0.0% #140 0.106 8% 100.0% 0.0% Pamde szc lmml 4170 0.090 8% IWO% 0.0% #200 0.075 1 7.4% 1 7.4% 100.0% 0.0% C.P . Spr.n Fn m-,,e k -i. 1 %cni.n PS. -98 •Ul-0.a NP-9 our unncn y,Pror'd. Comments: Reviewed by: Corporate - 777 Chrysler Drive • Burlington, WA 98233 • Phone (360) 755-1990 • Fax (360) 755-1980 NW Region - 805 Dupont Street. Suite 5 Bellingham- WA 98225 • Phone (360) 647-6061 • Fax (360) 647-8111 SW Region - 2118 Black Lake Blvd. SW Olympia. WA 98512 • Phone (360) 534-9777 • Fax (360) 534-9779 Kitsap Region - 5451 NW Newberry Hill Road. Suite 101 • Silverdale. WA 98383 • Phone (360) 698-6787 • Fax (360) 692-1919 Visit our website: www.mtc-irl MTC Materials Testing & Consulting, Inc. Geotechnical Engineering • Special Inspection • Materials Testing • Environmental Consulting y sue. Sieve Report Project: Central Renton Sewer Interceptor Date Received: 20-Mar-14 AS'I1\I D-2487 Unified Soils Classification System Project #: 14B058 Sampled By: Client SM, Silly Sand with Gravel Client: Aspect Consulting Date Tested: 24-Mar-14 Sample Color: ccn otr�ol Source: AB2 S-2, 5 - 6.5 Tested By: C. Meredith Brown Grey Sam le#: B14-1407 ASTM D-2216, ASTM D-2419, ASTM.D-4318, ASTM D-5821 Dt,l= 0.018 mm % Gravel = 27.2% Corte. ,f Cun'ature, C,. = 0.99 Specifications D(,,t, = 0.037 mm °'o Sand = 52.3 % C neff, of Uniformity. C = 46,24 No Specs DIL)= mm 90 Silt S Clay = 20.5% Fineness Modulus= 3.33 Sample Meets Specs " U;,,,1=: 0.249 mm Liquid Limit -n/a Plastic Limit = n/a 1),,t„= 0.887 mm Plasticity Index = n/a Moisture as sampled = 9.1 % I mm Sand Equivalent = n/a Fracture ° o = n/a 16.771 mm Rrtj d Sand Equivalent = Rerj d Fracture"o = ..... .. ;, .. ., - --• ASTMC736,ASTMD-6913.a .• -. _.. .... ,, ;,. Actual Interpolated Cumulative Percent Cumulative Percent Specs Specs cram see oig�Ixaio° Sieve Size US Metric I'ossinfl PassingMax 11fin 1 oox 016 mr'•'m'-',"'TP4Mt#ir# ##,##�#�Mtn rn-nlnlT rr llllll IIIIIII I� �I IIIII 'llllll) III llllll ,null I f000% 12.00" 300.00 100% 100.0% 0.0% 10.00" 250.00 100% 100.0% IIIII 'llllll 1 • .IIIII llllll I IIIII 'lull I I I 8.00" 200.00 100% 100.0% 0.0% wx n1ilL l_1_ dli ul Ll3 _'ln1Ll1 _n1111111 _;nlJll 1_I_ cu 11111_I_ °% 6.00" 150.00 100°0 100.0% 0.0% IIIII 'llllll I• II11111 llllll 1 1 JIIII ❑IIIII IIIIIII IIIIIII 1`11111111 ')llllll IIIIIIII 1111111 I 4.00" 100.00 100% 100.1 0.0% °°% u1u11 1 nnn1l `-llllll 1 n1nl anal l 1 ,nlul 1 IJ-IHI-I--iIN 1+titi-.1�1'a++-Iu11+1-1 -++Ira �1-1--Elul+l-I- ea°x 3.00" 75.00 100% loo'l '0 0.0% llllll I I 'IIIII I I I 'll III I I 'llllll I I llllll I llllll I I I 2.50" 63.00 100% 100.00/1 0.0% lullll 1111111I Iln r�lll Iu1nII aural l nlnll l 2,00" 50.00 100% 100.0% 0.0°o vox llllll 1 'llllll l inn' I lllmllnl l n11 -lnlllmlI-! il 1 llllFTl!I lnrrrmnl�rr-lr lI, m ox 1.75" 45.00 100% 100.0% 0.0% mull I Imul1 null,r-Ianalnnlll 1nlnll 1 1.50" 1.25" I 37.50 31.50 I 100% 100% 100 o% 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% uull l moll ) mul l'• d1nn 1 1 vn11 I mn111 uILl L1-1- J11111_1- _d 111-11 _droll 1 J _ lu LI LI-I- JIIi111_I_ cull I I 'llllll I I II IIIII I I n1u111 I llllll) I I '1111111 1 1.00" 25.00 100% 100.0% 0.0% IIIII 'llllll IIIII IIIII IIIII IIIII 3/4" 19.00 93% 93% 100.0% 0.0°,0 llll Ii 11 Vl+l- 9 5/8" 16.00 89% 100.0% 009 1l 11 - dI-I-1- -1-!a -Iy 111 IIIIIII IIIIIII 1 -0IIIIII IIII IIIIIIII tlllllll 1/2" 12.50 85% 85% 100.0% 0.0% IIIII llllll l 9111111 III 'llllll l IIIII 3/8" 9.50 83% 93% 100.0% 0,0% I11111 11 lull l I 1 I1111I 1 1 IiX 11 i111111 1 1 111111 1 -11:IF-1l1117 ri -IRI r1Tr-ml ran-'nln n-l-n1❑1Trr <0°% 1/4" 6.30 - 76% 100,10 0.0°/ IIIII JIIII IIIII Ilnn'V\Illllll tlllll l 94 4.75 73% 73% 1 0.0% IIIII 'llllll llllll I I Allll l: I llllll 1 911111 1 ]°x ILI LI_I_JILT 11 LI__I1I L11 L_'1111��1_ B1LJ LIIJIUIl I_I_ - - #8 2.36 65% 100.0% 0.0% IIII I I I I 1111111 1 I glll I I I 1 .Ill) 1 1 1 \• llllll l l I �111111 #l0 1 2,00 64% 64% 100.0% 0.0% llllll ulnl lullll °IIIII I•V'llllll 'llllll #16 1.18 54% 1 0.0% IIIII gull l Ilnlll l IIIII 1 •IIIII IIIII #20 0.850 50% 50% 100.0% 0.p% 20x 1++rrl-�Inl-+rr-lul rl++-•ml+r1�-+•m rl-l-�lKl, rl-, IIIII �111111 III 1 IIIII 'IIIII IIIII mox 430 0.600 42% 100.0% 0.0% IIII 'llllll 911111 1 1 .Ian l l 1 1111111 III I111 1 #40 0.425 37% 37% 100.0% 0.0% lox IIIII I I 11111I 1 IIIII I I I 11111I I I I aHIM 11 IIIIII I I ulT1i1-1- nllili-,u71i1 T T-IITn71 i -:Turf it-I-'il ill7F 0x 450 0.300 32% 100.0% 0.0% llllll !llllll 911II Ilnlll .nlnl IIIIIII 960 U50 30% 100.0% 0.0% I$1111 1 1 Hill I I I '11III11 1 11111111 1 JIIIII I llllll #80 0.180 27% 100.0% 0.0% #100 O. 150 26% 26% 100.0% 0.0% # 140 0.106 23 % 100.0% 0.0% coma• sxe lmml 9170 0.090 22% 100.01/6 0.0% 9200 0.075 20.5% 20.5% 100.0% 00% Cupangal Spears 1n6 -ing k TecL-l.S-i-M,1 -98 ,u appn' omr w aatuu Ircv,om v,a mvcnvs 1.3,cu. ,ia a mmuv prmen,nn,u cl,rn,s, me puol,c ana o,uaelvrs. vI rep"rta are awmmeu v u,e cam,arn„v prnpma' a, cl,rn,s. ana aum,mxumn,or pw„ea„on appru 'il. Comments: Reviewed by: Corporate -777 Chrysler Drive • Burlington, WA 98233 • Phone (360) 755-1990 • Fax (360) 755-1980 M11V Region - 805 Dupont Street, Suite 5 Bellingham, WA 98225 • Phone (360) 647-6061 • Fax (360) 647-8111 SW Region - 2118 Black Lake Blvd. SW Olympia, WA 98512 • Phone (360) 534-9777 • Fax (360) 534-9779 6itsap Region - 5451 NIA' Newberry Hill Road. Suite 101 • Silverdale, WA 98383 • Phone (360) 698-6787 • Fax (360) 692-1919 Visit our website: wssw.mtc-inc.ne MTC Materials Testing & Consulting, Inc. TE I ff Geotechnical Engineering • Special Inspection • Materials Testing • Environmental Consulting y sue. "^rg4 TeyigY � r..wn'"s' Sieve Report Project: Central Renton Sewer Interceptor Date Received: 20-Mar-14 ASIlliI D-2487 Unified Soils Classification System Project #: 14BO58 Sampled By: Client GM, Silty Gravel with Sand Client: Aspect Consulting Date Tested: 24-Mar-14 Sample Color: ACCREDITED1 >„a Source: AB2 S-4, 10 - I I.5 Tested By: C. Meredith Brown Grey• Sam Ie#: B14-1408 ASTM D-2216, ASTM.D-2419, ASTM D=4318, ASTM D-5821 D,;;= 0.011 mm ",o Gravel = 36.5% CoetT. of C'un•ature, C, _ 0.07 Specifications D_,=0.022 mm o,6 Sand =29.3% C'.oetT. of Ihnitonnity, C-=138.15 No Specs D,1,� = 0.033 mm % Silt .- ( tty = 34.3% Fineness Modulus = 3.31 Sample Meets Specs ° D;yo1= 0.066 mm Liquid Limit =n/a Plastic Limit = n/a 0.724 mm Plasticity Index = n/a ,Moisture%, as sampled = 10.2% = 3.024 mm Sand Equivalent = n/a Fracture ° o = n/a D,,,= 18.335 mm Keq'd Sand liquivalent= Reild Fracture ASTMC-136,ASTMD-6913 Actual Interpolated CuumlaIive Percent Cumulative Percent c,- sag olstrilmnmo s, x, o Sieve Size Specs Specs DS i,lelrlr Passln_ PBSSIn Max \lln Imo% 'P _ a m R9AS`a8 1rl r'•'m'-'n•.' •T•.•(fs**10*1 TAR ' n rl-I- 11RIT r r I111 1 1 1 1 II I I 1, I u 1111 1 I 1 1 IIIII I I I 1• 1111111 1 1 hill 1 l I tW a% 12.00' 300.00 100% 100.0% 0.0% 10.00" 250.00 100% 100.0% 0.0% I1,11, 1 1 IIIIII I {{1I IIIIII I 1 Inn111 1 lulu l 1 IIIIII I 1 8.00" 20000 100% 100.0% 0.0% go% IIIII I 1-I_ Will I_ IIIIII I Till I l l I _ will 1_1_I- IIIIII I_ 1- III11111 IIIIIII lullll.IIIIIII IIIIIII IIIIIII ax 6,00" 150.00 100% 100.0% 0-0% IIIIII .IIIIII IIIII 'lull 'IIIIII IIIII I 4.00" 100.00 100% 100.0% 0.0% IIIIII 'IIIIII 1 I• 'I IIIII IIIIII I IIIIII 1 111II11 I 3.00" 75.00 100% 100.0% 0.0% Wx 1411-I-I- �IHH L H -1 NH+ ✓- - V�11i 1� -� - i11H LI-I- -11H1+ L 1- IIIIII 1 IIIIII I 1 'IIIIII I IIIIII IIIIII 1 IIIIII 1 ax 2.50" 63.00 100% 100.0% 0.0% IIIIII 1 auu11 1 �iu1111 1 �Iu1111 1 ,IIIIII 1 'IIIIIII 1 ? 00" 50.00 100% 100.0% 0.0% ro 11111111 1,1111I1 1111II JIIIIII IIIIIII IIIIIII Inn-r rinn rr -�.1 1nr r -m1Tn � -non-1- �llmi rr � ro ox 1.75" 45.00 100% 100.0% 0.0% IIIIII 91111 1 1 11! I I I I .IIIII 1 1 I HIM l l I I u I 1 1 I I 1.50" 37.50 100% 100.0% 0.0% IIIIII I I 'IIIII I I I d111i11 I Hill l l I IIIIII I I III I111 1 1 1.25" 31,50 100% 100.0% 0.0% sox n1LI LI-1_ fn Li I I l_1d1IIL 1_aloft J_.inL1 LI_I_J1n 111_1_ IIIII I,I 'IIIIII III1111•: nut 11 1 i111111 1 wolf l I wox 1.00" ' 25.00 100% 100.0% 0-0% IIIIII IIIIIII IIIIII I\'lllll IIIIII IIIIII 3/4" 19.00 92% 92% 100.0% Q0% IIIIII 1 'IIIIII 1 1 HIM I I 1 •'91111 1 IIIIII I I IIIIIII 11 3 IH}I-1--tlHH 1-�-lnH}r-'1751{I�-I-«IN I-I-I--11HI+r1- mo% 5/8" 1&00 84% 100.0% 0.0% IIIIII I I IIIIII I I 1 IIIIII 1 1 'lll�\I 1 I 'IIIII l I 1 •IIIIII I I 1/2" 12.50 75% 75% 100.0% 0.0% 111111 1 1 HIM I I IIIIII I 9111N I 'IIIII I I 'IIIII l l 3/8" 950 72% 72% 100.0% 0.0% wx IIIIIII .IIIIIII IIIIIII 1111111y1 L11I11 .IIIIIII nn-1-1m1rrr-Innrr-Irnrn'•.-Inl1F 1 �1mTr a0a% 1/4" l 6.30 66% 100.0% 0.0°/g IIIIII .null IIIIII IIIIIII 1 �;Inl l IIIII I 44 475 64% 64% 1000% 0.0% IIIIII IIIIII 1 IIIIII 1 IIIIII �F'r111 1 I IIIIII #$ 2.36 59% 100.0% Q0% lax ILI LI_I_ J1111J L I_ -1 LL1 L11 1 _ WIJIJ J _ 111ll L1_I _ JIUIJ I_ I_ IIIII l l III I11 I 'IIIIII I I 'IIIIII 1 I IIIIII 11 IIIIII 11 ox #10 200 58% I 58% 1000% 0.0% IIIIII 11 1nn11 1 II1111 I I IIIIII I I lulu I I Hull I I 916 1.is 54% 100.0% 0.0% IIIIII IIIIII IIIIII I 1 11111I 1 IIIIIII 1 1 IIIII I I 420 0.850 52% 52% 100.0% 0-0% IOK IN rl-I- -11f1 H I- r -.I Ii H Y } -'IHIY ly y -MIN FI-I - y11, 1+ r l- IIIII I I I III111 11 IIIIII 1 1 1111111 1 111111 1 1 IIIIII 1 1 430 0.600 48% 100.0% 0.0% 111111 1 1-111111 1 1 11111, 1 1 IIIIII I I I IIIIII I I IIIIII 1 1 #AO OA25 46% 46% 100.0% 0.0°/g 10R IIIIIII 1 IIIIII 1 '�I111111 1 IIIIII 11 IIIIIII 1 1 IIIIIII mil it -I -'nil IT i i -'11i1 1 T T - 1T1111 1 1 - Tni1 i1-1- -n ITIT 450 0,300 42% 100.0% 0.0% IIIIII I 1 1nu11 1 1111111 1 IIIIII I I tll11111 IIIIII I #60 0.250 41% 100.0% 0.0% HIM I I IIIII I 1 IIIIII I I nun11 I IIIIIII I .IIIIIII I 980 0.180 39% 100.0% 0.09'o Ins o ox 000 ,aoo aIm aow too om ,0000 oola 4100 0.150 39% 39% 100.0% 0.0% 4140 1 0.106 36% 100.0% 0056 ag,�Ig saglmml #170 0.090 35% IWO% 0.0% #200 0.075 34.3% 34.3% IM10 0.0% . sK.a s�� -..- In.Ss -�- M. spa. --sag ae:•�. Cnp,rigN Spcvs ingin..+ing d TccM;", Series P1. 19'X.9% I na aFFt�'nnnn�utuuln.wn,u wu macr,a,s,c�,w.,rsamwl,.0 pro,cni�m,a<Ilrnv.lac panne vu owscl.cs.an«P,n,su<swm,ncu a.,nc cau,gmna prnpm�o,.nmu. ang auvumzvwn,m Fwuauw apWu, il. Comments: Reviewed by: Corporate - 777 Chrysler Drive • Burlington. WA 98233 • Phone (360) 755-1990 • Fax (360) 755-1980 NW Region- 805 Dupont Street. Suite 5 Bellingham, WA 98225 • Phone (360) 647-6061 • Fax (360) 647-8111 SW Region - 2118 Black Lake Blvd. SW Olympia, WA 98512 • Phone (360) 534-9777 • Fax (360) 534-9779 6itsap Region - 5451 NW Newberry Hill Road, Suite 101 • Silverdale. WA 98383 • Phone (360) 698-6787 • Fax (360) 692-1919 Visit our website: www,.mtc-inc.ne MTC Materials Testing & Consulting, Inc. -=a Geotechnical Engineering • Special Inspection • \gaterials Testing • Environmental Consulting Sieve Report Project: Central Renton Sewer Interceptor Date Received: 20-Niar-14 AST,,\I D-2487 Unified Soils Classification System Project #: 14B058 Sampled By: Client SP, Poorly graded Sand with Gravel Client: Aspect Consulting Date Tested: 24-Mar-14 Sample Color: (A wCCRY DITTE61 Source: A132 S-8. 20 - 21.5 Tested By: C. Meredith Brown Grey Sam le#: B14-1409 ASTM D-2216, ASTM' D-2419, ASTM D-4318, ASTM:'D-5821: D,;; = 0.130 mm "ro Gravel = 42.3% Coef(. of Cunature. C,. = 0.70 Specifications Di1„, = 0.275 mm % Sand = 53.9% C'.oeff of th itbnnin'. CI = 19.61 No Specs D,I<,= 0.411 mm %Silt & Clay= 3.8% Finenes>Modulus = 4.66 Sample Meets Specs ? D,,,,,-_- 1.017 mm Liquid Until: =n/a Plastic Limit -° n/a 1),,,,1= 3.420 mm Plasticity Ind- - n/a Moisture %, as sampled = 8.3% D(s„-=5.386 mm Sand Equivalent== n/a Fracture °o=n/a 1)", - 19,999 mm Req'd Sand Equivalent = Rey'd Fracture -'ASTM C-136, ASTM D-6913 Actual Interpolated Cumulative Percent Cumulative Percent crab size 0,-b - m"; Sieve Size Specs Specs US Metric I':Lssin¢ Passing Max blin 1 =a"aX�>` itz ,In r'•--•:•.-1S �', 4• >tii k##t+leR4n n-1-:71 n1T rr IIIIII IIIIII 1 1 IIIIIII IIIIII IIIIIII .IIIIII I 12.00" 300.00 I 100% 100.0% 0.0% 10001, 25000 I 100% 100.0% 0.0% IIIIII III III IIIIIII .III IIIII I 8.00„ 200.00 I l00% 100.0% 0.0% m% Ill l I 1 I_I _ ,IIIII I 1 _IIIIIII 1 _'llll 1 _ :IIIIII I_I _ ,ll I111 I_ 1_ IIIIII IIIIII I ,IIIIII 1 IIIIIII IIIIII 'IIIIII a% 6.00" 150.00 ( 100% 100.0% 0.0% uun 1 1 .n1111 I\ duu 1 1 1 Iola 1 1uu 1 1 1 11n11 1 1 4.00" 100.00 100% 100.0% 0.0% IIIIII I IIII 1• IIIIIII IIIIIII ,IIIII -IIIIII 1I,I 3.00" 75.00 100% 100.0% 0.0% BO% IH HI-1I-Ii LH\-InH+J--lµ+li l��-iJ1H F----IIHI�Lti IIIIII 1 1 .IIIII I 1 �Iu11 IIIIII I IIIIII IIIII I OX 2,50" 63,00 100% 100.0% 0.0% IIIIII I IIIIII I IIIII I I lilt II 11 ulnl I I IIIIII I I 2.00" 50,00 100% 100.0% 0.0°/P ,a III 111 IIIIII AI IIIII 11 'IIIIII 1 1 IIIIII In rl-I- :Iln 1-tryr1r r-mlTn 7-n n1. 9l n T r�1.75" mox 45.00 100/ l 100.0% 0.0% IIIIIII11 .IIIIIII IIIIIII IIIII I 1.50" 37.50 100% 100.0% 0.0% IIIIII !IIIIII 1 dl:I .IIIIIII IIIIIII 411111 1 1.25" 31.50 100% 100.0% 0.0% sox 1111 11_1_ 1110111_1_ _111,1.111 _'M1 J1 I1 _ 1nL111 _1_ J11n11_1- IIIIIII I 'IIIII I I I I III•I I I .IIIIII I I �III1111 I IIIIIII I I ax 1.00" 25.00 100% 100.0% 0.0% IIIIII gull l l uln 1 IIIIIII .IIIIII IIIIII 3/4" 19.00 88% 88% 100.0% 0.0% IIIIII :IIIIII 1 IIIII 1 'IIIIIII Allll lIIIII l 5/8" 16,00 84% 100.0% Q_�% % I ii IH I-I-I--11H1+1-I- IH FI---IIHHFH-.IHIH III If IIII I I I I III I11 1 I IIIIII 1 n1n 1 1 I 'llll I I I I IIIIII 1 1 � ax 1/2" 12.50 78% 78% 100.01 0.0% IIIIII ,nulll IIIIII I•I 'IIIIII l 911III IIIIII 3/9" 9.50 75% ( 75% 100.0% 0.0°/P ao %loon-rnlnlTrr-lulrlr IIIIII IIIIIII (IIIIIII 9111111 IIIIII IIIIII arum �-:mnn-r�1nlrrr aax 114' 630 63% 100.0% ( 0.0% 11,11, 1 1 (Mill I 1 1111111 II1111 1 1111111 IIIIII 1 #4 4.75 $8% 58% 100.0% 0.0% 'IIIIII IIIIIII J11111 1 1 IIIIII I I Ili 48 2.36 I 44% 1000% 0.0% wx IL1 L1_I_ JIL111 L L _'I LLI U 1 L _W(1J J _ LIU LI-1- 1111 L-_ IIIIII I I 'IIIIII I I IIIIII I I II11I �II I IIIIII I I IIIIII I I a% #10 2.00 42% 42% I 100.0% 0.0% IIIIII IIIIII I IIIIII I I I IIIIII IIIII I IIIIII I 'IIIIII I illll l 1 II .IIIIII IIIIII 416 1,18 32% 100.0% 0.0% o X I H 1=1 1- r -I M H+ t -: FH• l yI- 0% #20 0,850 28% 28% I00.0% 0.0°o "111 1 1 IIIIIII dull I IIIIxI IIIIIII IIIII I #30 0.600 21% 1000% ( QI)% IIIIII I 1 u1u11 IIIIII IIIIII\I 1 ,1u 1111 11n 111 1 1111111 111 1 nut 11l 1 'u1nI I n1111I 1 IIn111 1 #40 I 0.425 16% 16% 100.0% 0.0% , ox .un IIIr11 1 1 -IIIIII IIIIIII IIIII I �.� IIIIIII 1 i111111 1 1 ax 950 0.300 11% 1000% 0.0% 1u111 I I IIIIIII I I IIIIIII 1 IIIII `•, IIIIIII 1 'IIIII I #60 0.250 9% 100.0% 0.0% IIIIII 1 'IIIIII 111I 11 1 till III •"Su 1 1 III #80 0.180 7% 100.0% I 0.0% 0% 000lm n �% Im000 IJ000 ,000 olm polo aao, 4100 0,150 5% 5% 100.090 0.0% 9140 0.106 4% l 100.0% 0.0% Pamde sue. tmml #170 0,090 4% 100.0% 0.0% #200 0.075 3.8% 3.8% 100.1) 0.0% CUP right Span F:ngia,eerin4& TecMical Senic.� PS. IY'N.9B .VI rnu14 appF "nl� to wival Iw-atiom and mv:nals rst d. As a mutual pdenim I" clirn�a. Ne public aM o,o�:lr'.s. all repms are submin.d ss the coNiJrnrial prapm,' of clirn�., and aulb,vizaion 1'or publicviun of au,.-mmta..roncluaions ur.�vacu fmm or regvdin& �rw rcpwt� i> rettrreJ prnJiny wr xnnen appru�al. Comments: Reviewed by: Corporate - 777 Chrysler Drive • Burlington, WA 98233 • Phone (360) 755-1990 • Fax (360) 755-1980 NN' Region - 805 Dupont Street, Suite 5 Bellingham, WA 98225 • Phone (360) 647-6061 • Fax (360) 647-8111 SW Region - 2118 Black Lake Blvd. SW Olympia, "'A 98512 • Phone (360) 534-9777 • Fax (360) 534-9779 6itsap Region - 5451 NW Newberry Hill Road, Suite 101 • Silverdale, WA 98383 • Phone (360) 698-6787 • Fax (360) 692-1919 Visit our website: www.mtc-inc.ne Materials Testing & Consulting, Inc. � c Geotechnical Engineering • Special Inspection • Materials Testing • Environmental Consulting y �. Tn g 6 Cn„�o11in4 Project: Central Renton Sewer Interceptor Client: Aspect Consulting Project #: 14BO58 Date Received: March 20, 2014 Sampled by: Client Date Tested: March 21, 2014 Tested by: C. Meredith Moisture Content - ASTM C-566, ASTM D-2216 & AASHTO T-265 FS•!!� ' � S2fS� eta �� FFa•lceel� • t2i��i6a " i�t6��' i� FF>•eF[� ' ' �a��aa��Zi� Reviewed by: Corporate — 777 Chrysler Drive • Burlington, WA 98233 • Phone (360) 755-1990 • Fax (360) 755-1980 NW Region — 805 Dupont Street, Suite 5 Bellingham, WA 98225 • Phone (360) 647-6061 • Fax (360) 647-81 1 1 SNY Region — 2118 Black Lake Blvd. Olympia, WA 98512 • Phone (360) 534-9777 • Fax (360) 534-9779 Kitsap Region — 5451 NW Newberry Hill Road, Suite 101 • Silverdale, WA 98383 • Phone (360) 698-6787 • Fax (360) 692-1919 Visit our website: %v%v%v.mtc-inc.net