The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutLUA-06-014_MiscGeotechnical Engineering Water Resources Solid and Hazardous Waste Ecological/Biological Sciences Geologic Assessments DEVELOPMENT PLANNIN CITY OF RENTON G FEB l ~ 2006 RECEIVED Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, and Geotechnical Engineering Report PROPOSED· LE DEVELOPMENT Renton, Washington Prepared for Mr. Alex Le c/o Wu Architecture Project No. KE05869A December 14, 2005 December 14, 2005 Project No. KE05869A Mr. Alex Le c/o Wu Architecture Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. 8817 NE 116m Place Kirkland, Washington 98034 Attention: Subject: Dear Mr. Wu: Mr. Paul Wu Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, and Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Le Development NE 4m Street at Queen Avenue NE Renton, Washington We are pleased to present four copies of the subject report. This report summarizes the results of our subsurface exploration, geologic hazard, and geotechnical engineering studies and offers recommendations for the design and development of the proposed project. We have enjoyed working with you on this study and are confident that the recommendations presented ii:t this report will aid in the successful completion of your project. If you should have any questions or if we can be of additional help to you, please do not hesitate to call. ' Sincerely, ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. Kirkland, Washington · Bruce L. Blyton, P.E. Principal Engineer BLB/sn KE05869Al Projects\2005869\KE\WP Kirkland 9 ( I Fifth Avenue, Suite I 00 • Kirkland, 'NA, 98033 • Phone 425 827-7701 • Fax 425 827-5424 Everett 29111/2 HewittAve:,Suite 2, • Everett.'v\lA 98201 • Phone 425 259-0522 • Fax 425 252-3408 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION, GEOLOGIC HAZARD, AND GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT PROPOSED LE DEVELOPMENT Renton, Washington Prepared for: Mr. Alex Le c/ o Wu Architecture 8817 NE 116~ Place Kirkland, Washington 98034 Prepared by: Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. 911 S'h Avenue, Suite 100 Kirkland, Washington 98033 425-827-7701 Fax: 425-827-5424 December 14, 2005 Project No. KE05869A Proposed Le Development Renton, Washington Subsu,face Exploration, Geologic Hazard, and Geotechnical Engineering Report Project and Site Conditions I. PROJECT AND SITE CONDITIONS 1.0 INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of our subsurface exploration, geologic hazard, and geotechnical engineering study for the proposed Le development in Renton, Washington (see Vicinity Map, Figure 1). The approximate proposed building location and approximate locations of the explorations accomplished for this study are presented on the Site and Exploration Plan, Figure 2. Should the nature of the proposed site improvements change from those described herein, we recommend that our firm be provided the opportunity to review the plans in order to verify that the conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are appropriate for the design. 1.1 Purpose and Scope The purpose of this study was to provide subsurface data to be utilized in the design and development of the referenced project. Our study included a review of selected available geologic literature, excavating exploration pits, and performing geologic studies to assess the type, thickness, distribution, and physical properties of the subsurface sediments and shallow ground water. Geotechnical engineering studies were conducted to determine geotechnical parameters for temporary excavation support, the type of suitable foundation, allowable foundation soil bearing pressures, anticipated settlements, lateral earth pressures, floor support recommendations, drainage considerations, and pavement considerations. This report summarizes our current fieldwork and offers development recommendations based on our present understanding of the project. 1.2 Authorization Written authorization to proceed with this study was granted by Mr. Paul Wu of Wu Architecture on behalf of the owner, Mr. Alex Le. Our work was completed in accordance with our scope of work and cost proposal for the project dated November 18, 2005. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Mr. Alex Le, Wu Architecture, and their agents for specific application to this project. Within the limitations of scope, schedule, and budget, our services have been performed in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering and engineering geology practices in effect in this area at the time our report was prepared. No other warranty, express or implied, is made. 2.0 PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION Our understanding of the project is based on architectural drawings and a topographic site plan, dated September 25, 2005, by Wu Architecture. We understand that the project will December 14, 2005 E.JL/511-KE:05869111 -Projectsl2005869\KE\WP ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC Page 1 Proposed Le Development Renton, Washington Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, and Geotechnical Engineering Repon Project and Site Conditions consist of constructing a two-story, mixed-use building with at-grade parking. The lower level of the building will be partially below grade requiring cuts of approximately IO feet within approximately 10 feet of the south and east property lines. We understand that storm water runoff on the site will be appropriately discharged into the public storm water drain system. The subject site is a 0.76-acre, vacant, wooded lot located at the northeast corner of NE 4th Street and Queen Avenue NE in Renton, Washington (see Vicinity Map, Figure I). The site is currently undeveloped and moderately wooded with evergreen trees on the order of 8 to 40 inches in diameter. The northern half of the subject site is relatively level, but slopes up to a small east-west trending ridge on the southern half of the site. The ridge appears to have been cut on its south side on the order of 2 to 4 feet. A portion of the northern edge of the site extends east past the proposed building area and steps up several feet to a lawn-covered area under an overhead power transmission line easement. Overall topographic relief across the site is approximately 14 feet based on the provided topographic site plan. The subject site is bounded by NE 4th Street to the south, multi-family residential dwellings to the north, Queen Avenue NE to the west, and a small, two-story commercial building and parking lot to the east. 3.0 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION Our field study included excavating a total of six exploration pits to gam subsurface information about the site. The approximate locations are shown on Figure 2, Site and Exploration Plan. The various types of sediments, as well as the depths where characteristics of the sediments changed, are indicated on the exploration logs presented in the Appendix. The depths indicated on the logs where conditions changed may represent gradational variations between sediment types. The conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are based on the six exploration pits completed for this study. The number, locations, and depths of the exploration pits were determined to accommodate the site size and development type, and to avoid conflicts with underground utilities. Because of the nature of exploratory work below ground, extrapolation of subsurface conditions between field explorations is necessary. It should be noted that differing subsurface conditions may sometimes be present due to the random nature of deposition and the alteration of topography by past grading and/or filling. The nature and extent of any variations between the field explorations may not become fully evident until construction. If variations are observed at that time, it may be necessary to re-evaluate specific recommendations in this report and make appropriate changes. 3. I Exploration Pits The exploration pits were excavated with a backhoe. The pits permitted direct, visual observation of subsurface conditions. Materials encountered in the exploration pits were December 14, 2005 FJUsn -K£05869A! -Projects\2005869\KE\WP ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC Page 2 Proposed Le Development Renton, Wmhington Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, and Geotechnical Engineering Repon Pro;ecr and Site Conditions studied and classified in the field by a geotechnical engineer from our firm. All exploration pits were backfilled immediately after examination and logging, but may require recompaction if encountered in structural areas. Selected samples were then transported to our laboratory for further visual classification and testing, as necessary. Laboratory test results are included in the Appendix. 4.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Subsurface conditions at the project site were inferred from the field explorations accomplished for this study, visual reconnaissance of the site, and review of selected, available geologic literature. As shown on the field logs, the exploration pits generally encountered natural deposits consisting of loose to medium dense sand with various silt and gravel interpreted to be recessional outwash sands. The recessional outwash was in turn underlain by dense to very dense, silty sand with gravel interpreted as lodgement till. Minor surficial fill thicknesses were encountered in exploration pit EP-2 near the right-of-way for NE 4th Street. The following paragraphs describe our observations and interpretations of materials encountered in our exploration pits from shallowest (youngest) to deepest (oldest). 4.1 Stratigraphy Topsoil/Forest Duff Topsoil on the order of 6 to 8 inches thick consisting of a loose, moist, dark brown, silty fine to medium sand, moderate organics, and trace gravel was generally encountered in the explorations. The topsoil was typically mantled and mixed with forest duff or loose, fine, woody organic debris from the forest canopy. The topsoil and forest duff typically contain significant amounts of organics and are not considered suitable for structural fill, foundation, or pavement support. Fill/Disturbed Soils Fill and/or disturbed soils (those not naturally placed) were encountered in exploration pit EP- 2 to a depth of 2 feet below the existing ground surface. The composition of the fill was similar to the native soils and consisted of loose to medium dense, silty sand and few gravel. The placement of the fill or disturbance of the native soils is likely the result of past grading for right-of-way improvements for adjacent NE 4th Street. Because of the undocumented placement and low relative density, the existing fill is unsuitable for support of foundations and floors, in our opinion. December 14, 2005 £JL/s11 -KE05869Al -Project:,12005869\KE\WP ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC Page 3 Proposed Le Development Renton, Washington Recessional Outwash Subswface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, and Geotechnical Engineering Report Project and Site Condi/ions Below the copsoil/duff and fill soils, a loose to medium dense, stratified mixture of fine to coarse sand with few to trace silt and gravel was encountered, which we interpreted to be recessional outwash. The recessional outwash was deposited by meltwater streams that emanated from the retreating glacial ice during the latter portion of the Vashon Stade of the Fraser Glaciation approximately 13,000 years ago. The upper portion of the recessional outwash sediments encountered during our exploration typically contained substantial quantities of silt due to weachering. The weathered recessional outwash horizon was typically limited to the porcion of this unit located within approximately 5 feet of the ground surface. The recessional outwash soils are typically suitable for light foundation, floor, and pavement loads after stripping and recompaction. The typically low silt content of the unweathered portions allows the recessional outwash sands and gravels to be reused as structural fill in moderately wet conditions. Lodgement Till Beneath the recessional outwash deposits, we observed sediments consisting of dense to very dense, silty sand with gravel interpreted to be lodgement till. Lodgement till was deposited at the base of a continental ice sheet an<l compacted by the weight of the overlying ice. Lodgement till typically possesses relatively high strength and low compressibility characteristics favorable for structural support. Lodgement till soils are typically moisture- sensitive and are suitable for reuse in structural fills only during dry weather and site conditions when moisture conditions can be carefully controlled. Published Geologic Map Review Our geologic interpretations agree with published geologic mapping for the area as represented by United States Geological Survey (USGS) Map GQ-405, Geologic Map of the Renton Quadrangle, King County, Washington, by D.R. Mullineaux (1965). 4.2 Hydrology Ground water seepage was not observed in the explorations at the time of our site investigation. Ground water conditions should be expected to vary in response to changes in seasonal precipitation, on-and off-site land usage, and other factors. During and after the wet seasons, shallow ground water will often be found immediately above the lodgement till unit. This water typically originates as surface water that flows through the upper, more permeable recessional outwash unit and becomes trapped or "perched" on the underlying, low permeability lodgement till. December 14, 2005 E.JL/m -KE05869AJ -Projeml20058691KEI WP ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES. INC Page 4 Proposed Le Development Renton, Washington Subswface Exp/orarion, Geologic Hazard, and Geotechnical Engineering Report Geologic Hazards and Mitigations II. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS AND MITIGATIONS The following discussion of potential geologic hazards is based on the geologic, slope, and ground water conditions as observed and discussed herein. Because the site is relatively flat, the discussion will be limited to seismic and erosion hazards, including sediment transport. 5.0 SEISMIC HAZARDS AND RECOMMENDED MITIGATION Earthquakes occur in the Puget Lowland with great regularity. The vast majority of these events are small and are usually not felt by people. However, large earthquakes do occur as evidenced by the 1949, 7.2-magnitude event; the 1965, 6.5-magnitude event; and the 2001 6. 9-magnitude event. The 1949 earthquake appears to have been the largest in this area during recorded history. Evaluation of earthquake return rates indicates that an earthquake of the magnitude between 5.5 and 6.0 is likely within a given approximate 20-year period. Generally, there are four types of potential geologic hazards associated with large seismic events: I) snrficial ground rupture, 2) liquefaction, 3) seismically induced landslides, and 4) ground motion. The potential for each of these hazards to adversely impact the proposed project is discussed below. 5 .1 Surficial Ground Rupture Generally, the largest earthquakes which have occurred in the Puget Sound area are sub-crustal events with epicenters ranging from 50 to 70 kilometers in depth. For this reason, no surficial faulting or earth rupture as a result of seismic activity has been documented to date within at least 5 miles of the site. Therefore, it is our opinion, based on existing geologic data, that the risk of surface rupture impacting the proposed project is low, and no mitigations are necessary. 5. 2 Liquefaction Liquefaction is a process through which loose, cohesionless soil loses strength as a result of vibratory shaking, such as that which occurs during a seismic event. During normal conditions, the weight of the soil is supported by both grain-to-grain contacts and by the pressure within the pore spaces of the soil below the water table. Extreme vibratory shaking can disrupt the grain-to-grain contact, increase the pore pressure, and result in a decrease in soil shear strength. The soil is said to be liquefied when nearly all of the weight of the soil is supported by pore pressure alone. Liquefaction can result in deformation of the sediment and settlement of overlying structures. Areas most susceptible to liquefaction include those areas underlain by coarse silt and sand witl1 low relative densities accompanied by a shallow water table. December 14, 2005 £/Llsn -KE05869AJ -PtoJects\20058691KElWP ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC Page 5 Proposed Le Development Remon, Washington Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, and Geotechnical Engineering Report Geologic Hazards and Mitigations Ground water was not encountered within the loose to medium dense granular soils within the upper several feet. Furthermore, the lodgement till soils and underlying soils have been glacially consolidated, which makes them unlikely candidates for liquefaction even if ground water is encountered below the depths of the exploration pits. Therefore, the site soils are considered to have a low potential for liquefaction, and no mitigations are recommended. 5 .3 Seismically Induced Landslides The small slopes present on the site are limited in height to approximately 4 feet and will be regraded to a relatively flat topography as part of the development. Therefore, the already low potential risk of seismically induced landslides affecting the proposed strucmre will be eliminated. No mitigations are recommended regarding seismically induced landslides. 5.4 Ground Motion Based on the site stratigraphy and visual reconnaissance of the site, it is our opinion that any earthquake damage to the proposed strucmre when founded on a suitable bearing stramm would be caused by the intensity and acceleration associated with the event and not any of the above-discussed impacts. Strucmral design of the building should follow 2003 International Building Code (IBC) standards using Site Class "C" as defined in Table 1615.1.1. The 2003 IBC seismic design parameters for short period (Ss) and I-second period (St) spectral acceleration values can be computed using the USGS National Seismic Hazard Mapping Project website (http://earthguake.usgs.gov/hazmaps/). Using the 2002 data, the USGS website computed ground motions at the project site to be 1.40g and 0.48g for building periods of 0.2 and 1.0 seconds, respectively, with a 2 percent chance of exceedence in 50 years. 6.0 EROSION HAZARDS AND MITIGATION As defined by the City of Renton, "Erosion hazard areas are identified by the presence of vegetative cover, soil texture, slope, and rainfall patterns, or human-induced changes to such characteristics which create site conditions which are vulnerable to erosion. Erosion hazard areas are classified as having moderate to severe, severe, or very severe erosion potential by the Soil Conservation Service, United States Depanment of Agriculture (USDA)." Soils in the vicinity of the project are mapped by the USDA as "AgC" or Alderwood gravelly sandy loam on slopes of 6 to 15 percent. Site-specific information from explorations is in general agreement with USDA mapping. According to the USDA's Soil Survey of King County, Washington, the surface runoff is slow to medium and the erosion hazard is moderate for AgC soils. Based on these classifications, the City of Renton's definition, and the proposed development of the site with hardscape and landscaping, the site should not be considered an erosion hazard area, and no permanent mitigations are recommended. However, December 14, 2005 E1Us11 -KE05869AJ -Projeasl20058691KE\WP ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC Page 6 Proposed Le Development Renton, Washington Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, and Geotechnical Engineering Report Geologic Hazards and Mitigations during grading of the site, temporary erosion control measures should be implemented. These temporary erosion control measures should include the following: 1. To reduce the amount of sediment transport from the proposed construction area, silt fencing should be placed along the lower elevations of the cleared areas. 2. Temporary sediment catchment facilities, interceptor drainage swales, and surface conveyance swales should be installed to intercept runoff and eroded sediment prior to site work. Check dams should be installed, as necessary. 3. All devices used to collect surface runoff should be directed into a tightline or swale system designed to convey the collected drainage to discharge within an approved storm drain system. 4. Soils that are to be reused around the site should be stored in such a manner as to reduce erosion. Protective measures may include, but are not necessarily limited to, covering with plastic sheeting, the use of low stockpiles in flat areas, or the use of straw bales/silt fences. 5. At the end of each workday, disturbed areas should be sloped to drain into a storm conveyance and seal-rolled to promote surface drainage. 6. A temporary, rock-surfaced construction entrance and staging areas should be established early in the project sequence. 7. Erosion control measures should be inspected regularly and maintained/improved, as necessary, to maintain function until permanent erosion control is established. Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. (AES!) would be available to provide site-specific recommendations upon request. We recommend that an erosion control inspector or the geotechnical engineer make on-site inspections, as needed, to monitor performance of the erosion control system. In this way, site-specific recommendations, modifications, and construction sequencing decisions can be made during the construction phase. December 14, 2005 FJUs11-KE05869Al -Projectsl20058691KEIWP ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC Page 7 Proposed Le Development Renton, Washingron Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, and Geotechnical Engineering Report Design Recommendations III. DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS 7.0 INTRODUCTION Our exploration indicates that, from a geotechnical standpoint, the subject site is suitable for the proposed development. Critical geotechnical engineering issues for the design and construction of the project will include temporary and permanent support of excavations and adjacent structures on neighboring properties, adequate temporary and permanent excavation drainage, and preparation of foundation subgrades that consist of suitable, medium dense to very dense native sediments below surficial fill and loose sediments. 8.0 SITE PREPARATION Site preparation for building and pavement areas should include removal of all trees, brush, debris, and any other deleterious materials. The existing topsoil and forest duff should be stripped from areas where the new building, paving, or other structures are planned. After stripping, remaining roots and stumps should be removed from structural areas. All soils disturbed by stripping and grubbing operations should be compacted as described below for structural fill. Once excavation to subgrade elevation is complete, the resulting surface should be proof-rolled with a loaded dump truck or other heavy, rubber-tired equipment. Any soft, loose, or yielding areas should be excavated to expose suitable bearing soils. The subgrade should then be compacted to a firm and unyielding condition, as determined by the geotechnical engineer or his representative. Structural fill can then be placed to achieve desired grades, if needed. Backfill in footing subgrade areas may require use of controlled density fill (CDP) or lean-mix concrete, as described in the Foundations section of this report. 8.1 Temporary and Permanent Cut Slopes In our opinion, the stability of temporary construction slopes should be the responsibility of the contractor and should be determined during construction. For estimating purposes, we anticipate that temporary, unsupported cut slopes in the loose to medium dense, recessional outwash and fill soils can be planned at l\/2H:lV (Horizontal:Vertical) or flatter. Temporary, unsupported cut slopes in dense to very dense, unweathered lodgement till can be planned at 1hH: IV or flatter. Permanent cut or fill slopes should not be steeper than 2H: lV. These slope angles are for areas where ground water seepage is not encountered and assume that surface water is not allowed to flow across the temporary slope faces. If ground or surface water is present when the temporary excavation slopes are exposed, flatter slope angles will be required. As is typical with earthwork operations, some sloughing and raveling may December 14, 2005 EJL/sn -KE05869Al -Pro)tCJS\2005869\KEIWP ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC Page 8 Proposed Le Development Remon, Washington Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, and Geotechnica/ Engineering Repon Design Recommendations occur and cut slopes may have to be adjusted in the field. In addition, WISHA/OSHA regulations should be followed at all times. 8. 2 Site Disturbance Most of the on-site, weathered recessional outwash and lodgement till soils contain substantial fine-grained material, which makes them moisture-sensitive and subject to disturbance when wet. The contractor must use care during site preparation and excavation operations so that the underlying soils are not softened. If disturbance occurs, the softened soils should be removed and the area brought to grade with structural fill except in footing subgrade areas. The footing subgrade areas should be excavated with a smooth-edge bucket and protected from future disturbance by placement of a thin mat of crushed rock, CDP, or lean-mix concrete after the subgrade is verified by the geotechnical engineer. 8.3 Winter and Wet Site Construction Our explorations indicated that the site soils were generally well-drained and suitable for moderately wet weather construction. Most of the grading will involve excavations, and the use of structural fill will likely be limited to subgrade wall backfill and pavement subgrades. If construction takes place in winter and the site soils become too wet for reuse, drying is not expected to be feasible, and we anticipate that most or all of the site soils will be unsuitable for structural fill applications. Therefore, moisture protection of excavated materials for reuse as structural fill should be performed by covering stockpiles with plastic sheeting and should be the responsibility of the contractor. If winter construction is expected, crushed rock fill could be used to provide construction staging areas. The stripped subgrade should be observed by the geotechnical engineer or his representative, and should then be covered with a geotextile fabric, such as Mirafi 500X or equivalent. Once the fabric is placed, we recommend using a crushed rock fill layer at least 10 inches thick in areas where construction equipment will be used. If desired, planned parking areas can be paved with asphalt treated base (A TB) for construction staging, and then finished- paved after construction has been completed. The use of powdered cement or kiln dust soil admixtures may also be used if allowed by the City. For summer construction, some soils may need moisture added and conditioned to bring them near optimum moisture. Dry and damp soils, which are drier to slightly drier of optimum moisture content, were encountered below the topsoil/forest duff and weathered zones in the explorations and may require moisture conditioning prior to use as structural fill during drier weather periods. However, these near-surface soils are heavily influenced by precipitation events, particularly once the forest canopy and surface brush are removed, and their moisture contents may be higher when encountered during construction. Care should be taken to seal all earthwork areas during grading at the end of each workday by grading all surfaces to drain and sealing them with a smooth-drum roller. December 14, 2005 FJL/m -KE05869AJ -Projem\2005869\KE\WP ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC Page 9 Proposed Le Developmelll Renton, Washington 9.0 STRUCTURAL FILL Subswface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, and Geotechnical Engineering Report Design Recommendations Structural fill will be required for backfill of buried utilities, foundations, subgrade walls, pavement subgrades, and in other situations. All references to structural fill in this report refer to subgrade preparation, fill type, placement, and compaction of materials as discussed in this section. If a percentage of compaction is specified under another section of this report, the value given in that section should be used. All areas that will support structural fill should be stripped and overexcavated to expose suitable materials for support of the planned structural fill. After stripping and overexcavation has been completed to the satisfaction of the geotechnical engineer, the upper 12 inches of exposed ground should be recompacted to 90 percent of the modified Proctor maximum density using American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM):D-1557 as the standard. If the subgrade contains too much moisture, adequate recompaction may be difficult or impossible to obtain and should probably not be attempted. In lieu of recompaction, the area to receive fill should be blanketed with washed rock or quarry spalls to act as a capillary break between the new fill and the wet subgrade. Where the exposed ground remains soft and further overexcavation is impractical, placement of an engineering stabilization fabric may be necessary to prevent contamination of the free-draining layer by silt migration from below. After recompaction of the exposed ground is tested and approved, or a free-draining rock course is laid, structural fill may be placed to attain desired grades. Structural fill is defined as non-organic soil, acceptable to the geotechnical engineer, placed in maximum 8-inch loose lifts with each lift being compacted to 95 percent of the modified Proctor maximum density using ASTM:D-1557 as the standard, In the case of roadway and utility trench filling, the backfill should be placed and compacted in accordance with current municipal codes and standards. The top of the compacted fill should extend horizontally outward a minimum distance of 3 feet beyond the locations of perimeter footings or roadway edges before sloping down at an inclination of2H:IV or flatter. The contractor should note that any proposed fill soils must be evaluated by AESI prior to their use in fills. This would require that we have a sample of the material 72 hours in advance to perform a Proctor test and determine its field compaction standard. Soils in which the amount of fine-grained material (smaller than the No. 200 sieve) is greater than approximately 5 percent (measured on the minus No. 4 sieve size) should be considered moisture-sensitive. Use of moisture-sensitive soil in structural fills should be limited to favorable dry weather conditions. The on-site soils contained significant amounts of silt and are considered moisture- sensitive. In addition, construction equipment traversing the site when the soils are wet can cause considerable disturbance. If fill is placed during wet weather or if proper compaction cannot be obtained, a select, import material consisting of a clean, free-draining gravel and/or sand should be used. Free-draining fill consists of non-organic soil with the amount of fine- grained material limited to 5 percent by weight when measured on the minus No. 4 sieve fraction. December 14, 2005 £!Um -KE05869AI -Pro)rc/s\2005869\KE\WP ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC Page 10 Proposed Le Development Renton, Washington Subsuiface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, and Geotechnical Engineering Report Design Recommendations A representative from our firm should inspect the stripped subgrade and be present during placement of strucmral fill to observe the work and perform a representative number of in- place density tests. In this way, the adequacy of the earthwork may be evaluated as filling progresses and any problem areas may be corrected at that time. It is important to understand that taking random compaction tests on a part-time basis will not assure uniformity or acceptable performance of a fill. As such, we are available to aid the owner in developing a suitable monitoring and testing frequency. 10.0 FOUNDATIONS Spread footings may be used for building support when founded on the medium dense to very dense, recessional outwash or lodgement till soils. Foundations supported as described can be designed for an allowable foundation soil bearing pressure of 3,000 pounds per square foot (psf). Loose, dismrbed, or otherwise unsuitable subgrade soils should be overexcavated as determined by the geotechnical engineer. The overexcavated soils should be recompacted, if moismre conditions allow, or replaced with structural fill. An increase of one-third may be used for short-term wind or seismic loading. Perimeter footings should be buried at least 18 inches into the surrounding soil for frost protection; interior footings require only 12 inches of burial. However, all footings must penetrate to the prescribed bearing stratum, and no footing should be founded in or above loose, organic, or existing fill soils. All main structure footings should have a minimum width of 18 inches for this project. Higher allowable foundation soil bearing pressures of 4,000 psf could be achieved on the dense to very dense lodgement till soils observed in our exploration pits, but would require that overexcavated areas be backfilled with CD F or lean-mix concrete with a minimum cement content of 1 sack per cubic yard or a minimum compressive strength of 300 pounds per cubic inch (psi). Alternatively, the footings could be extended down to bear directly on the dense to very dense lodgement till. We recommend the use of the 3,000 psf allowable bearing pressure to allow the contractor the most flexibility in footing subgrade preparation and reduce overexcavation/replacement charges to the owner. The very dense, lodgement till soils are anticipated to be present at or near the bottom of footing elevations for most of the building footprint, based on the explorations accomplished for this study. Table 1 lists the anticipated bearing elevation at the exploration locations. However, variations in subsurface conditions may exist and some overexcavation may be required. December 14, 2005 £/Um -KE05869AJ -Projecrsl2005869\KE\WP ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC Page 11 Proposed Le Development Renton, Washington Table 1 Supswface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, and Geotechnica/ Engineering Repon Design Recommendations Approximate Elevation of Foundation Bearing Layer Approximate Ground Approximate Foundation Exploration Surface Elevation Bearing Elevation No. (feet) (feet) EP-1 371 365 EP-2 372 377 1/2 EP-3 366 361 EP-4 3631/2 3681/2 EP-5 3631/, 368 1h EP-6 367 364 It should be noted that the area bounded by lines extending downward at lH: l V from any footing must not intersect another footing or intersect a filled area which has not been compacted to at least 95 percent of ASTM:D-1557. In addition, a 1.5H: lV line extending down from any footing must not daylight because sloughing or raveling may eventually undermine the footing. Thus, footings should not be placed near the edge of steps or cuts in the bearing soils. In the case of the existing building adjacent the east side of the proposed building footprint, we recommend that no excavation be completed below a line that begins at least 2 feet from the foundations, and is projected downward and away from the existing structure at an inclination of lH: 1 V to prevent undermining support for that structure. Anticipated settlement of footings founded as described above should be approximately 1 inch or less. However, disturbed soil not removed from footing excavations prior to footing placement could result in increased settlements. All footing areas should be inspected by AESI prior to placing concrete to verify that the design bearing capacity of the soils has been attained and that construction conforms to the recommendations contained in this report. Such inspections may be required by the governing municipality. Perimeter footing drains should be provided, as discussed under the section on Drainage Considerations. 11.0 LATERAL WALL PRESSURES All backfill behind walls or around foundation units should be placed as per our recommendations for structural fill and as described in this section of the report. Horizontally backfilled walls that are free to yield laterally at least 0.1 percent of their height may be designed using an equivalent fluid equal to 35 pounds per cubic foot (pct). Fully restrained, horizontally backfilled, rigid walls that cannot yield should be designed for an equivalent fluid of 50 pcf. If roadways, parking areas, or other areas subject to vehicular traffic are adjacent to walls, a surcharge equivalent to 2 feet of soil should be added to the wall height in determining lateral design forces. Walls that retain sloping backfill at a maximum angle of 2H:IV should December 14, 2005 Elllm -KE05869AJ -Projecis\W05869\KE\WP ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC Page 12 Proposed Le Development Renton, Washington Subswface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, and Geotechnical Engineering Repon Design Recommendations be designed using an equivalent fluid pressure of 55 pcf for yielding conditions or 75 pcf for fully restrained conditions. The lateral pressures presented above are based on the conditions of a uniform horizontal backfill consisting of the on-site natural sediments or imported sand and gravel compacted between 90 to 92 percent of ASTM:D-1557. A higher degree of compaction is not recommended as this will increase the pressure acting on the walls. Footing drains must be provided for all retaining walls (including detention vaults), as discussed under the section on Drainage Considerations. It is imperative that proper drainage be provided so that hydrostatic pressures do not develop against the walls. This would involve installation of a minimum, !-foot-wide blanket drain to within 2 feet of the ground surface using imported, washed gravel against the walls placed to be continuous with the footing drain. 11.1 Passive Resistance and Friction Factors Lateral loads can be resisted by friction between the foundation and the natural sediments or supporting structural fill soils, and/or by passive earth pressure acting on the buried portions of the foundations. The foundations must be backfilled with compacted structural fill to achieve the passive resistance provided below. We recommend the following design parameters. • Passive equivalent fluid = 350 pcf • Coefficient of friction = 0.35 The above values include a factor of safety of at least 2.0. 12.0 FLOOR SUPPORT Slab-on-grade floors may be constructed either directly on the medium dense, native sediments or on approved structural fill placed over these materials. Areas of the slab subgrade that are disturbed (loosened) during construction should be recompacted to an unyielding condition prior to placing the pea gravel as described below. It may also be necessary to scarify the existing surface beneath the slab and remove any cobbles or boulders greater than 6 inches so a uniform surface can be compacted. If moisture intrusion through slab-on-grade floors is to be limited, the floors should be constructed directly over a vapor barrier atop a capillary break consisting of a minimum thickness of 4 inches of free-draining pea gravel, clean crushed rock, or other suitable material approved by the geotechnical engineer. If clean crushed rock or other angular material capable of puncturing the vapor barrier is used, the gravel points should be turned down with a smooth-steel compactor, and a minimum IO-mil-thick plastic vapor barrier or other puncture December 14, 2005 EJL!m -K£05869A! -Projew',2005869\KE.\WP ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC Page 13 Proposed Le Development Renton, Washington Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Ha:wrd, and Geotechnical Engineering Report Design Recommendations resistant product should be used. Additional moisture protection details should be considered by the architect and owner, if necessary. 13.0 DRAINAGE CONSIDERATIONS All retaining and perimeter footing walls should be provided with a drain at the base of the footing elevation. Drains should consist of rigid, perforated, polyvinyl chloride (PVC) pipe surrounded by washed pea gravel. The level of the perforations in the pipe should be set approximately 2 inches below the bottom of the footing, and the drains should be constructed with sufficient gradient to allow gravity discharge away from the building. In addition, all retaining walls should be lined with a minimum, 12-inch-thick, washed gravel blanket that extends to within 1 foot of the surface and is continuous with the footing drain. Roof and surface runoff should not discharge into the footing drain system, but should be bandied by a separate, rigid, tightline drain. In planning, exterior grades adjacent to walls should be sloped downward away from the building to achieve surface drainage. 14.0 PAVEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS Based on our understanding of the project as a small office and retail structure, we anticipate that the majority of traffic loads will consist of passenger vehicles with only several medium to heavy truck loads per day. The first pavement section described below will be applied to the traffic lanes and parking areas for lightweight vehicles and will be surfaced with a flexible, asphalt concrete pavement (ACP). The second pavement section described below will be applied to fire lanes, dumpster storage areas, and other heavy duty areas and will be also be surfaced with ACP. Both pavements should provide a service life of 10 to 15 years. Our recommendations are based on the above-described traffic volume estimates. Therefore, should there be any change to these traffic volume estimates, AES! should be contacted immediately in order to revise our pavement recommendations. The pavement sub grades must be firm, unyielding, and compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of the modified Proctor maximum density using ASTM:D-1557 as the standard. Preparation of paved areas should proceed as discussed in the Site Preparation section of this report in order to remove unsuitable fill, vegetation, debris, and root mat. Any other deleterious materials that may be uncovered should be removed. Next, the upper 12 inches of existing soil should be recompacted with a heavy, self-propelled, vibratory roller to a minimum of 95 percent of their maximum density as defined by ASTM:D-1557. Following the compactive effort, the entire area should be proof-rolled with a fully loaded, tandem-axle dump truck to identify any soft or "pumping" areas. If loose or pumping soils are detected during the proof-roll, these soils should be further compacted. If such areas cannot be recompacted to the appropriate density for any reason, these areas should be overexcavated and December 14, 2005 EJL!m -K£05869Al -Projects\2{)()S869\KE\WP ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC Page 14 Proposed Le Development Renton, Washington Subsu,face Exploration, Geologic Hazard, and Geotechnical Engineering Repon Design Recommendations backfilled with compacted, free-draining structural fill or 2-inch minus crushed rock. Flexible and rigid pavement sections should then be placed as recommended in the following sections. Upon completion of the subgrade preparation as described above, the crushed base course, the leveling course, and surface pavement may be placed. The recommended flexible pavement sections for this site are as follows: Standard Duty: 2 inches -Washington State Class "B" asphalt concrete pavement 4 inches -Compacted, 5/8 inch minus crushed surfacing top course Heavy Duty: 3 inches -Washington State Class "B" asphalt concrete pavement 3 inches -Compacted, 5 /a-inch minus crushed surfacing top course 3 inches -Compacted, 1 \4-inch minus crushed surfacing base course The base course and top course materials should be compacted to 95 percent of maximum dry density as defined by ASTM:D-1557. 15.0 PROJECT DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION MONITORING We are available to provide additional geotechnical consultation as the project design develops and possibly changes from that upon which this report is based. We recommend that AESI perform a geotechnical review of the plans prior to final design completion. In this way, our earthwork and foundation recommendations may be properly interpreted and implemented in the design. We are also available to provide geotechnical engineering and monitoring services during construction. The integrity of the foundation depends on proper site preparation and construction procedures. In addition, engineering decisions may have to be made in the field in the event that variations in subsurface conditions become apparent. Construction monitoring services are not part of this current scope of work. If these services are desired, please let us know and we will prepare a cost proposal. December 14, 2005 FJL/511 -KE05869Al -Proju:ts\20058691KE\WP ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC Page 15 Proposed Le Development Renton, Washington Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, and Geotechnical Engineering Report Design Recommendations We have enjoyed working with you on this study and are confident that these recommendations will aid in the successful completion of your project. If you should have any questions or require further assistance, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. Kirkland, Washington / Eric J. Lim, Project Engin Attachments: December 14, 2005 Figure 1: Figure 2: Appendix: Vicinity Map Site and Exploration Plan Exploration Logs Laboratory Test Results EJWn -KE05869AJ -Projectsl2005869\KE\WP Bruce L. Blyton, P.E. Principal Engineer ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES. INC Page 16 APPENDIX ... 1-·-v, o' ~{ i §~"JGJ-~---; wl ~: -..... : i~: w ~ "' 0 z w 0: ::, '-" LL u C • • u C • u .. ,: ~ L • w " • ~ • u 0 • • <( "' ;Ji ~ <O ., "' UJ 0 I,: w " 0 ci z -; 0 0: (l_ APPENDIX 1 - 2 - LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP-1 This log is part of the report prepared by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. (AESI) for the named project and should be read together with that report for complete interpretation. This summary applies only to the location of this trench at the time of excavation. Subsurface conditions may change at this location with the passage of time. The data presented are a simplfication of actual conditions encountered. DESCRIPTION Topsoil/Forest Duff Weathered Recessional Outwash Loose, moist, brown, SAND, with gravel, few silt. (Sample S-1 at 2') 3 +--------------~R~e_c_e_s_s7io_n_a·1~o~u~tw-a-s7h ______________ _ 4 -Becomes medium dense, damp, gray, GRAVELLY SAND, trace silt. (Sample S-2 at 5') 5 +~-~---~--------.L-o'dg_e_m_e_nt'""'T'"'i"'II _______________ _ 6 -Dense to very dense, damp to moist, gray, silty fine to medium SAND, few gravel. 7 - (Sample S-3 at 7 1/2') 8 - 9 10 - 11 - 12 - 13 - 14 - 15 - 16 - 17 - 18 - 19 - Bottom of exploration pit at depth 9 feet No ground water. No caving. ~ ~------,2&------------------------------------------- ... --------------------------------------------- ~ ~ Logged by: EJL Approved by: Le Renton Development Renton, WA Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. mi~lffl~~ Project No. KE05869A 12/1/05 ~--------------------------------------------- LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP-2 §: This log ls part of the report frepared by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. (AESl) for the named ftroject and should be £ read together with that repo for comnlete interpretation. This summary a~plies only to the loca ion of this trench at the a. time of excavation. Subsurface condi ions may change at this location wit the passage of time. The data presented are ID " a simplfication of actual conditions encountered. DESCRIPTION Topsoil/Duff 1 - Fill Loose to medium dense, moist, gray and brown, silty SAND, few gravel. 2 Weathered Recessional Outwash 3 -Loose to medium dense, moist, orange-brown, SAND, few silt and gravel, cinders. 4 Recessional Outwash \Medium dense. damn arav. fine to coarse SAND with aravel trace silt. r 5 -Lodgement Till 6 - Very dense, damp, gray, silty fine to medium SAND and gravel. 7 - 8 - 9 - 10 -Becomes fine SAND with silt and few gravel at 10'. 11 - 12 13 -Bottom of exploration pit at depth 12 feet No ground water. No caving 14 - 15 - 16 - 17 - 18 - 19 - ~----,<6------------------------------------------~ ::!--------------------------------------------- ii ! 0 ;c " I ~ ~ ~ Logged by: EJL Approved by: Le Renton Development Renton, WA Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. ~~~[!j~ Project No. KE05869A 1211/05 :. ____________________________________________ _ LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP-3 g This log Is part of the report xrepared by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. (AESI) for the named ftroject and should be cg_ read togetlier with that repo for comflete interpretation. This summary a~plies only to the loca ion of this trench at the " time of excavation. Subsurface condt ions may change al this location wit the passage of time. The data presented are 0 a simplfication of actual conditions encountered. DESCRIPTION Topsoil/Duff Weathered Recessional Outwash 1 -Loose, moist, orange-brown, SAND, few silt and gravel. 2 Recessional Outwash 3 -Medium dense, damp, gray, fine to coarse SAND with gravel, trace silt. 4 - 5 Lodgement Till 6 -Very dense, moist, gray, silty SAND with gravel. 7 - 8 -Becomes gravelly at 8'. 9 -Slightly wet, fine sand layer at 9'. 10 11 -Bottom of exploration pit at depth 1 O feet No ground water. No caving. 12 - 13 - 14 - 15 - 16 - 17 - 18 - 19 - ~ ;:;--------------------------------------------- " " I 0 M " ~ Logged by: EJL Approved by: Le Renton Development Renton, WA Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. ~~~~~ Project No. KE05869A 1211/05 ------------------------------------ 1 - 2 LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP-4 This log is part of the report prepared by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. (AESI) for the named project and should be read together with that report for complete interpretation. This summary applies only to the location of this trench at the time of excavation. Subsurface conditions may change at this location with the passage of time. The data presented are a simplfication of actual conditions encountered. Loose, moist, orange-brown, DESCRIPTION Topsoil/Duff Weathered Recessional Outwash SAND, few silt and gravel. Recessional Outwash Medium dense, moist to slightly wet, gray, gravelly fine to coarse SAND, trace silt. 3 - 4 - 5 6 7 - 8 - g - 10 - 11 - 12 - 13 - 14 - 15 - 16 - 17 - 18 - 19 - Lodgement Till Very dense, moist, gray, silty SAND with gra_v_e_l. __________________ _ Bottom of exploration pit at depth 6 feet No ground water_ No caving. ~--rfl------------------------------------------- Ji ~ 0 • C) I ~ g Logged by: EJL Approved by: Le Renton Development Renton, WA Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. mim~l!iio Project No. KE05869A 12/1/05 ~--------------------------------------------- LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP-5 g This log is part of the reportJrepared by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. (AESI) for the named ftroject and should be ~ read together with that repo for comftlete interpretation. This summary a~J?lies only to the Joca ion of this trench at the " time of excavation. Subsurface condi ions may change at this location wit the passage of time. The dala presented are 0 a simplfication of actual i:onditions encountered. DESCRIPTION Topsoil/Duff Weathered Recessional Outwash 1 -Loose, moist, orange-brown, SAND, few silt and gravel. Recessional Outwash 2 - Medium dense, damp, fine to coarse SAND with gravel, grading to very gravelly at 4'. 3 - 4 - 5 Lodgement Till 6 -Very dense, dry, white-gray, silty fine SAND with gravel (very difficult digging). 7 8 -Bottom of exploration pit at depth 7 feet No ground water. No caving. 9 - 10 - ' 11 - 12 - 13 - 14 - 15 - 16 - 17 - 18 - 19 - ~ ~ <;i--------------------------------------------- 1 j • ~ I M • ~ Logged by: EJL Approved by: Le Renton Development Renton, WA Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. ~im~~~ Project No. KE05869A 1211/05 --------------------------------------------- 1 - 2 - 3 LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP-6 This log is part of the report prepared by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. (AESI) for the named project and should be read togetlier with that report for complete interpretation. This summary applies only to the location of this trench at the time of excavation_ Subsurface r..onditions may change at this location with the passage of time. The data presented are a simplfication of actual conditions encountered. DESCRIPTION Topsoil/Duff Recessional Outwash Medium dense, moist, gray, fine to medium SAND, few gravel, trace silt. Lodgement Till Very dense, moist, gray, silty fine to medium SAND with gravel. 4 - 5 - 6 - 7 - 8 9 - 10 - 11 - 12 - 13 - 14 - 15 - 16 - 17 - 18 - 19 - Bottom of exploration pit at depth B feet No ground water. No caving. ~--9&------------------------------------------ g Logged by: EJL Approved by: Le Renton Development Renton, WA Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. ~~~[!I~ Project No. KE05869A 12/1/05 ~--------------------------------------------- GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS MECHANICAL Project Date 12/6/2005 Le Develo ment Tested By Location CAH Renton, Wa Wt. Of wet sample+ Tare .. "" Sieve No. Diam. tmm\ 3.5 90 3 76.1 2.5 64 2 50.8 1.5 38.1 1 25.4 3/4 19 3/8 9.51 #4 4.76 #8 2.38 #10 2 #20 0.85 #40 0.42 #60 0.25 #100 0.149 #200 0.074 3" 3/4" 100 80 ~-- :. 60 ~ ii: :,--~ ~ " e 40 " 0.. 20 0 ~~ 100 10 1186.9 1132.6 296.9 835 7 Wt. Retained In\ 0 0 0 0 0 32.1 79.7 129.4 183.4 232.1 242.4 306.8 478.4 618.9 706 743.1 Project No. KE05869A EB/EP No EP-1 S-1 % Retained 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.8 9.5 15.5 21.9 27.8 29.0 36.7 57.2 74.1 84.5 88.9 Depth 2' Soil Description SAND, with gravel few silt Moisture% 6.5 Snecification Reauirements % Passinn Minimum Maximum 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 96.2 90.5 84.5 78.1 72.2 71.0 63.3 42.8 25.9 15.5 11.1 US STANDARD SIEVE NOS. N04 -~ ' r-+= 1--+i- I N0.16 N040 NO 200 --, .. ,r-,--r--r---r--m,-c,: -,-,,-,,---,--- : -' ' . 0.1 Grain Size, mm I I '· 1--------- --~ 0.01 ASSOC/A TED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. 911 5th Ave., Suite 100 Kirkland, WA 98033 425-827-7701 FAX 425-827-5424 Date 12/6/2005 Tested By CAH Sieve No. 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 3/4 3/8 #4 #8 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200 100 BO :;; C 60 ii: -C ~ ~ 40 ~ 0. 20 I 3" oL- 100 GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS MECHANICAL Project Le Develo ment Project No. KE05869A Soil Description Diam. Imm) 90 76.1 64 50.8 38.1 25.4 19 9.51 4.76 2.38 2 0.85 0.42 0.25 0.149 0.074 3/4" 2713 2559.6 297.3 2262 .. 3. , Wt. Retained /o\ 0 0 0 0 158.1 203.2 213.6 253.7 289.4 319.7 328.8 389.6 797.6 1377.2 1675.9 1767.6 EB/EP No EP-1 S-3 % Retained 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.0 9.0 9.4 11.2 12.8 14.1 14.5 17.2 35.3 60.9 74.1 78.1 Depth 7.5' Silty fine to medium SAND, few ravel Moisture % 6.8 Soecification Reauirements % Passinn Minimum Maximum 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 93.0 91.0 90.6 88.8 87.2 85.9 85.5 82.8 64.7 39.1 25.9 21.9 US STANDARD SIEVE NOS. N04 N0.16 N040 NO 200 ' _ _______j ' ~: ~ j : ' ' •I :I ·I 10 0.1 0.01 Grain Size, mm ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. 911 5th Ave, Suite 100 Kirkland, WA 98033 425·827-7701 FAX 425-827-5424 ... .. 0 0 0 ..... COIUU\CTED l>IIEcTOR llt0011041 & ELECTIONS KINQ CCUNTy, WASH, Statutory Warrcmly Deed -- DEVELOPMENT PLANNIN r,JTY OF RENTON FEB 1 4 2006 RECEIVED FORM L58F TIIE Gl!M.O. GEal'R.UDB TOB.GINE CASPll:R.SOO, widow of Herve G, Casperson, in her sole capacity and as to her separate estate, ror..tMIWAlidaatioaof ** Ten Dollars and other valuable consideration ** H. LEE HEATH and NORMA L. HEATH, his wife; and ., ...,. poNI. """"7• and.._,. to JAMES W, .HcCANN and THELMA McCANN, his wife, each r.arital coummity acouirini, an undivided one-half interest tlw fa11Dwiaa dtttribed real alale, 111.Wt•flii 1-'"County or la.NG , Slalt ol w....,..., The South 180 feet of the West half of the southwest quarter of the southeast quarter of the s,utheaat quarter of Section 9, Twp, 23 N,, R.snge 5 E.,w.M., in King County, Washington; :U:SS county road and subject to easements, restrictions and reservations of record, and subject to Grantor's reservation of a 30 foot easement alon~1 ~he easterly boundary of the above described tract for ingress and egress to"'"property reoaining subject to the contact for which this Deed is given in partial fulfillment Tbl• deed la clna ln rultil_laent of tb&l certain rea.l e1\ale contract betweea the parUea bento. dated May 26 1 19 66 • &nd 'l-ondltloned tor tbe conve1ance of the 1.bowe deacrltled propert,,•nd the .. covenanL9 of warranty herein contained ab1.U not 1.pplJ' to H7 Utle, !DWtHt or eacaabra.nce arlsln1 bJ, uarouch or und~T tbe purcbaaer in said contract.. and ~hll not appl7 to any taua. ·aHuam.eata or other .charcea In led. aaaened or beco11ln.: due subaequeat •• Ille date or .. Id conlrac.,. This deed given to correct deed dated 5-25-71 and recorded 5•28• 71 under Auditor's File No, 7105280500, a...1 latate lbcbe Tax vaa paid." on thh Nh o~ ata111p1!d exea,pt on • Rec. No. E702523 OC.TC>Bll,e, ol S , I l r, 1972 1 .... 1 .~~~~~~~~~~~~•(IIAt) I l l 1 ! ! t •• 1.:.E.,0.0: •• .,P...l.:= ===~. .. ... CERTIFICATE WHEN RECOROEO RET1JRN 10: I, the u~'::rsigned, {!,,(;rt/ Clerk of the City of Renton, Wa::hlngton, certify tllat this Is a true Offi01 of the c: ty ,_ ! =-rk Raton ~-[uni,:i;-~I b1Jildil'lg 200 M~venue South Rentoo,,j,V A 9!!0~ "' and correct copy of_ /, Q "'" t._:-..: Subscribed and Seal 92/, . ~ C: L~ :;-.. = .. _, ... ~ .. .... ..... = -- -;:.--CITY OF RENTON; WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 4612 AN ORD'.WANCE 01' THE CITY OF RENTOl>T, WASRDrG'l'OW, ESTABLISEING All ASSESSMliliT DIS'l'RICT FOR S1JIITAKT SRIIER SDVICB m JI. PORTION OF THE SOUT.EI HIGHLANDS, IIEATIIKR DO!OTS, Alm KAPLBWOOD SUB-BASINS l\llD ESTABLISEDKI TBS AMOtlllT OJ' THE CHA:R.GB Ul'OH CONNECTION TO TBII: Fll.CILITIES • Tl!B CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SBCTIQN I. There is hereby created a Sanitary Sewer Service Special Assessment District for the area served by.the East Renton Sanitary Sewer Interceptor in the northeast quadrant of the City of Renton and a portion of its urban growth area within unincorporated King County, which area is more particularly described in Exhibit ~A" attached hereto. A map of the service area is attached as Exhibit "B.• 'I1le recording or this document is to provide notification of potential connection and interest charges. While this connection charge may be paid at any time, the ' City does not require payment until. such time as the parcel is connected to and thus benefiting from the sewer facilities. The property may be sol.d or in any other way change hands without triggering the requirement, by the City, of payment of the charges associated with this district. SECTION II. Persons connecting to the sanitary sewer facilities in this Special Assessment District and which properties ~ f -6 ~ g: --= = iii !:. ~ -= ~ I -< ;i: 8 ~ Ill 0 = ... !; J ~ f • ~ I g r l I ! l 1 t. t .. l'------------------------------------- 1 • j ORDINANCE 4612 have not been charged or assessed with all costs of the East Renton Sanitary Sewer Interceptor, as detailed in this ordinance, shall pay, in addition to the payment of the connection permit fee and in addition to the system development charge, the following additional fees: A. Fer unit Charge. New connections of residential dwelling units or equivalents shall pay a fee of $224.52 per dwelling unit and all other uses shall pay a unit charge of $0. 069 per square foot of property. Those properties included within this Special Assessment District and which may be assessed a charge thereunder are included within the boundary legally described in Exhibit "A» and which boundary is shown on the '1n<.p attached as Exhibit "B.· SECTION III. In addition to. the aforestated charges, there shall be a charge of 4.11\ per annum added to the Per Unit Charge. The .interest charge shall accrue for no more than ten (10) years from the date this ordinance becomes effective. will be simple interest and not compound interest. Interest charges SECTION IY, This ordinance shall be effe.ctive upon its passage, approva1, and thirty (30) days after publication'. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 1.QS.h day of.~.....>,1.J~unnee~~---1996 . City Clerk 2 ORDINANCE 4612 APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this 10th day of June 1996. Appro~as to fonn: oe~~~Q·- Lawrence J, Warren, City Attorney Date of Publication: 6/14/96 ORD.576:5/20/96:as. l I ! l 1 J 3 f I I J, ____________________________ ., I l 1 J i t J Exhibit A LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DISffllCT FOR THE CITY OF RENTON -EAST RENTON INTERCEPTOR PortionsofSections8,9, 10, 1l, 14.15, 16.17,21 and22allinTownship23N, Range SE W.M. in King County, Washington Section B, Township 23N, Range 5E W.M. All of that portion of Section 8, Township 23N, Range 5E W.M. lying East of the East right-of-way line of SR-405 and South of the following described line: Beginning at the intersection of the East line of said Section 8 with the centerline of NE 7th Street; thence Westerly along said centerline of NE 7th Street to Its intersection with the centerline of Sunset Boulevard NE; thence Northerly along the centerline of Sunset Boulevard NE to the North line of the Southeast 1/4 of said Section 8; thence West along said North line to the East right-of-way line of SR-405 and the terminus of said line. · Section 9, Township 23N, Range 5E W.M. All of that portion of Section 9, Township 23N, Range SE W.M. lying South and East of the following described line: Beginning on the centerline of NE 7th Street at its intersection with the centerline of Edmonds Avenue NE; thence Easterly along the centerline of NE 7th street to its intersection with the centerline of Monroe Avenue NE; thence North along said centerline to the South line of the Northeast 1,4 of said Section 9; thence East along said South line to its intersection with the centerline of Redmond Avenue NE; thence Northerly along said centerline to its intersection with the centerline of NE 10th Street; thence East along said centerllne to the East line of said Section 9 and the terminus of said line. Section 10, Township 23N, Range 5E W.M. All of that portion of Section 10, Township 23N, Range 5E W.M. lying Southerly and Westerly of the following described line: Beginning on the West line of Section 1 O at its intersection with the North line of the South 'h of the North 'h of said Section 10; thence East along said North line to its Intersection with the centerline of 142nd Avenue SE; thence Southerly along said centerline to its intersection with the North line of the Southeast 1.4 of said Section 10; thence East along said North line to Its intersection with the East line of said Section l O and the tennlnus of said line. 1 ! Legal Description of the Special Assessment District for the City of Ren/en-East Renton Interceptor Section 11, Township 23N, Range SE W.M. All of the Southwest !4 of Section 11, Township 23N, Range 5E W.M.. Section 14, Township 23N, Rang11 SE W.M. Page2of3 All of that portion of Section 14, Township 23N, Range SE. W.M. descn1>ed as follows: All of the Northwest '4 of said section, together with the Southwest \4 of said section. except the South 1h of the Soutlleast \4 of said Southwest V.. and except the plat of McIntire Homesites and 1h of streets adjacent as recorded in the Book of Plats, Volume 58, Page 82, Records of King County, Washington, and except the South 151.55 feet of the East 239.435 feet of Tract 6, Block 1 of Cedar River Five Acre Tracts as recorded tn the Book of Plats, Volume 16, Page 52, Records of King County, Washington, less lh of the street abutttng said portion of Tract 6, Block 1, and less Tract 6, Block 2 of said Cedar River FiVe Acre Tracts. less 1h of the street adjacent to said Tract 6, Block 2, and except the South 82.785 feet of the East 150 feet of Tract 5, Block 2 of said Cedar River Five Acre Tracts and less 1h the street adjacent to said portion of Tract 5, Block 2. Section 15, Township 23N, Range SE W.M. All of that portion of Section 15, Tovmship 23N, Range SE. W.M., except the Southwest '4 of the Southwest V.. of the Southwest !4 of said section. Section 16, Township 23N, Range SE W.M. All of that portion of Section 16, Township 23N, Range SE W.M., except that portion of the Southeast 1A of the Southeast '4 of the said Section 16 lylng East of the East line of the Plat of Maplewood Division No. 2 as recorded in the Book of Plats Volume 39, page 39, Records of King County Washington and its Northerly extension to the North line of said Southeast 14 of the Southeast 14 of the said Section 16 and except that portion of said section lying Southerly of the Northerly right-of-way line of SR-169 [Maple Valley Highway). ' Section 17, Township 23N, Range SE W.M. ' All of that portion of Section 17, Township 23N, Range 5E W.M., lying Northeasterly of the Northeasterly ri.ght-of-way of SR-169 (Maple Valley Highway) and Easterly of the East right-of-way line of SR-405 less that portion lying generally West of the East and Southeasterly line of Bronson Way NE lying '·-------------------------------------- Legal Description of the Special Assessment District for the City of Renton -East Renton Imerceptor Page 3 of 3 between the South line of the NE 3rd Street and the Northeasterly margin of SR- 405. section 21, Township 23N, Range 5E W.M. All that portion of Section 21, Township 23N, R 5E W.M. lying Northeasterly of the Northeasterly right-of-way line of SR-169 (Maple Valley Highway) and West of the East line of the Plat of Maplewood Division No. 2 as recorded In the Book of Plats, volume 39, page 39, Records of King County, Washington Section 22, Township 23N, Range 5E W.M. All of that portion of Section 22, Township 23N, Range SE W.M. described as follows: All of the Northwest 1,4 of the Northeast 1A of said Section 22 lying Northerly of the Southerly line of the Plat of Maplewood Heights as recorded In the Book of Plat!:!, volume 78, pages 1 through 4, Records of King County, Washington. • Together with the North 227, 11 feet of the West 97.02 of the Northeast l,4 of the Northeast 1A of said Section 22. I l ' i ' I l ! l Exhibit B EAST RENTON INTERCEPTOR Special Assessment District Boundary e SANITARY SEWERS Plmnlng/B~ Wom christ..,.en,MacOnie, V!lnedd 20 Moy 1996 · 1:24,000 -------City Llmirs CZT.Z.2] Special Assessment Di1trld J, ________________ -i f ,a• -·"t /-~ . </). re;,,· ;J/ <.~ ./) EASEMENT THrS AGREEMENT made and entered into by and between PRESIDENT PARK DEVELOPMENT CO., a limited partnership, owner of the following described r:,al estate, situated in the County of King, State of Washington; The .muth t'lalf of the northwest quarter of the southeast quarter of the southeast quarter of S5Ction 9, TO",mship 23 North, Range 5 East, W. M,, EXCEPT the West 15 feet thereof; ana ~~¥~iit6ncW35&~au~-1:;;~~ H. LEE HEATH and NORMAL. HEATH, his wife: and JAMES W. McC/\NN and THELMA McCANN, his wife; owners of the followJ.ng descnbed real estate, situated in the County of King, State of Washington: The west half of the southwest quarter of the southeast quarter of the southeast quarter of Section ~\. Town$hiP 23 North, .Range 5 East, W. M. f SUBJECT tQ eJd:..ttng reservation$, a1;1.s~nnents, or restrtcttons of rei;on;l; less Count)' Road: WJTNESSETH: That WHEREAS, tho abovo described poreels of l<lnd e!thor lie within or abut the following described tract which is known as the "Casement Strip", to-wit: and That portion of tho west 15 feet of the south half of the northwest quarter of the southeast quarter of the southeast quarter, and of the west 15 feet of the west half of the southwast quarter of the so ... theast quarter of the southeast quarter of Section 9., Town- ship 23 North, Range 5 East, W. M,. King County, Washington, lying north of the south 30 feet ther~of; WHEREAS, at the time of the initial conveyanco of said land, it was the inte.1tion of the common grantors to establish an easement for utility and rvc1d purposes over and across the west 15 feet of the respectiYe parcels of land so that all parcels would have access to the county roads; and WHEREAS, in some instances the parcels were conveyed reserving such easement and some were conveyed excepting the west 15 feet: and WHEREAS, it now appears that the tctx statements of each of the "'""'·· of the parties include said strip, and U.> WHEREAS, the parties are desiro1,1s of clearing up any aJ!"!hi:""l .. i': "' ,.,.., o that may relate to the easement sought to be Cl""l;'la.ted and to carry out the I./) ~ original intent of the common grantors and to afford au the parcels access .::::, l-., to public road~. r- NOW. the parties hereto do hereby mutually a.gree as fo1lows: 1). That each of -.:he parties do hereby give and grant unto each ilnd every other party hereto an easement tor egress and inoress and !or road and utilities over and across that i,..:x-u ... n of the above described property that lies Within the tract of land owned by them as set forth herein or is immediately adjacent thereto. 2), That sc1id eqsement ~MH N perpetual and ~h4H run with the parcels of land as dl;l;sctibe:d herein~ 3), The easem1mt herein 9rant$d $hall include the: right I.Jo i~ part of any of the parties to construct said roadway and thosQ ponies using the sama shall have the responsibility of maintenance. DATED this~ day of July , 1973. '· PRESIDENT PARK DEVELOPMENT CO. , a limited partnet~hip~ By ORCHARD PARK HOMES, INC. , general partner, '-. . . By ·~' a·-_;;:r; .. ~ ....... ,,,,.:......__... -· --Vice Presid :1t By -If,-,. c' { A' ,Azt k4:· ti.! s,;l' tary ~i.x>&il- J!r.,,z-/,, ,4.;J,. '-<!'··...,_ 1·4 f' ,_ ~ ·· -- Gertrude Targine Casl'\8tson /.I. 8, U4!, H ._ Lee Heath ----r' I / _;;; ~ rf. JJPf!!lt No iii.Heath -2- STATE OF WASHINGTON) )ss. County of King ' Onthis~dayof J,:11/ , 1973, beioreme, the undersigned. a Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, rluly commissioned and sworn personally appeared Neil D. Bannon and Ethel V. Madigan, to me known to ba tha Vi:::o President and Secretary, respectively, of Orchard Park Hornes, Inc. 1 the corporation thdt executed th@ foregoing instn,unent s the general partner o! Pre5ident Parle Development Co •. , a l,Wljt~d panru;~rship, ,·nd acknowledged the said instrur,ient to b!I th~ free an<! 1>0lunt.rv <-~I ;,nd deed of sa.1d corporaUon, as sci.id gt)nerol partner, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, o.nd on oath stated th~t they were author.ited to execute the said instrument and that the seltl affixed ls the Co!"pora'.:e of said corporation. itness my hand and official seal hereto affixed the day and year m \ncate above written. STATE OF WASHINGTON) ) ss. County of King ) On this day personally appeared before me ~ Gertrude Tcrgine Casperson, to me known to be the individuals described in and who executed the within and foregoing instrument and acknowledged to rne thatithey signed the same as their free and voluntary act and deed for the purposes therein mentioned. -3- TATE or WASHINGTON) ·, } ss nty of King J On this day person&lly appeared H. Lee Heath qnQ Normit L. He,Htl. and foregoing instrument and acknowled9Qd to ie that they signed the same as their free and voluntary act and deed for the purposes therein STATE or WASHINGTON) J ss. County of King } Jo t'.tis: da7 personally appeared James W. lS:'~. McCann, to me known to be the indicuals described in and who executed the within and foregoing instrument and acknowledged to me that they signed the same as their free and voluntary act and deed for the purposes therein mentioned. Given under my ha.-ad and offi"'al seal this _:l_ day of ~· 1973. ,·'\..-(.. -......f-t- No · biic in and for the Washington, residing at /5 -4- j f tt. -\ •. I I ' •'.' I' ' f, .• t ,. . .ii .. ' ~~ri'&ft,;et~?~~~" MAIL TO: ·' ··1. . *::· , ··,,.-;·:1!1:. .• :,·· -.:R~~1~~~1-~i PASCO REALTY, INC. 423 South ]rd Street Renton, Wash. 98055 tol8ll N01!JIIIH5V"' ']'W.ffi ']AV QN0:>3S ell 'o:) '1NI :nlU ,.1VN 1!:l3NOld ""' &~M1M lY nlt{ti1~ )lo.t ffl'1to1 A.L.r.J3'J ··-~-- ltt 'o:, :.),1;; ': • ' -, :,-:J '? ... ..;..11 ):;,..::'lf .. :; .. 1 • : ~ : "!{' 00 & ill ~ d.i!S J.iii Jo JSJno;i. ...... •· · • • · 1, ··~ ·~ .................. h •.. '030iJUJ:1tl . ' ' ,, r,, ' --.J w C ..{) ,N u, 0 <..: a-- Ol af 12-..i *"' ~:,; " .. ~ ~ ., ~ Ii~~ g :e ~ : ,; ~ ~ '·· . :r ~· . -{ f . ~ ~ 7 '.:,3 i~0t,j ·. e~ a.. I : ,~'o,&·:te:r•'l''"'#Jft'if\iff :,iflii\'-JW£hil'46?fr, ;;;; .... .i .. __ AECtnlait,HJl.•.'CERTI ... ICA.;.. ,fl IH ,.,;:"'"'°'' ·~'IIJ• /}. M• of .Ar~,_ U!.;·1~,,,,:.(t~\ ... '.~,,."'.'Z:.!:,:~ DOD'o.l•.,lNGtllEEils;:•lfl(, , '.' '. i,i.-,&10,, OI' ~roi.iO;< I IUCTl<JM ''·•~~. //AGU•t!, -~. ™ BUAVl!YOA'B CEATl,..ICATI! "''" .,.~ ,.,,,...,..,h ,..r,,_ .. ..,,. • >ur,,..• .,.<1,, b.t -o, -·r.., <fl~,;-lo .-t .. -nr,• .,,,h ,,.. ,...,.;,,......,I•"' ,,... si'l!•u MrtNm•c Jin ••........ ., .... , .. ,. _____ _ ··-.. ' ! : ,';..&"' .. ,.... r-"'ff/.,.,..., •• ,. CRtfWN PT. lf'() l'Alll/ER.!Nt. :1~1~:t;~~~ Cl'(Jfl/A/ )•1:cji/l'T.!. REC(JRIJ di' '$VR//FY - 8 " ; ,. AFrER RECORDING MAIL TO: Name NORTHWEST CORPORATE REAL ESTATE Address HMS W. lAMES, SUITE 104 C.ty/S"" KENT, W ASHINOOTN 98032 ATIN: HAROLD QAMBINI Ilommmt ntle(,): (or """""""" contained lh=in) I. STAlllTORY WARRANI'Y DEED 2. 3. 4. Reference Namber{s) of Jloam,mlJ Ullp,d or rdtued: _ Additiooal numben 011 paae of document Grantur(s): (Last IWflt lint, lhc:n fim name a:od initials) l. BEAm, R. LE£ %. BEATH, NORMAL. 3. MCCANN, JAMES W. 4. MCCANN, THELMA .5. _ Addilionll 111!1a on page: of 4oeum!m G-..(1): (Lui ...,,, !Im, lhcn !Im IIIIDO and lnitlds) I, TASCA, EDWARD L. 2. TASCA, SUSAN W. 3. 4. S. _ Addilionll mmtl Oil pqe: of doc:wncnl : I· • Abbrmated Lepl Doocripdoll II loliowl, (i.e. lotlbkalplll or -IOWllsllip/nmge-/-,.r) SWSESE9-23-5 eo.i,1 ... lepl daalpl;oo ~ OD paae 2 of cloomlenl -· PropeltJ,... --"""""'1tl: IJ9230S.9231--01 ·- /.' ~·.-.. ,.,:~x: ···~··.-· - • IJ PIONEER NATIONAl Tffl.E INSURANCE 1Hl$ SPACE tt:SiMO fOI lf:COUl{l'S 115,[ • -- • TlCCIO """""" Fil<'d for Record at Request of AFTER RECORDING MUL TO 1 Statutory Warranty DMd R, LEE HEATH and NORMA L, HEATH, hie wife ;· THE GRANTOR JAMES W. KcCANN and THEI.XA McCANN, hia rlh: for and in c:omidcraUoa of $10.0~ -~nd other valuable considerations ktJ~,il£F~ I l iJ ia 1land p&ld, CDIIYfYI ud nmDtl ~ EDWAIU> L. TA SCA and SUSAN W. TASCA I a, • ,;, ~, tbr f~ dacribed real e1t11a. alt..ud hi lb! County of King I a.. or \)Wulomatm: 1'.. The South 180 feet of the 'West Ralf of the Southveat Quarter of the Southeast ·lllf Quarter of the Southeast Qu&rtcr of Section 9 1 Township 23 North, Range 5 East, ~ 'w.H., records of said county: EXCEPT County Road and EXCEPT East 165 feet of the .-4 South 130 feet of said West Half of Southwest Quarter of Southeast Quarter of ~ Southeast Quarterx I Tb11 dud h 1hH 111 fulnllmeat of U.al c.,t&la rnl utah ooni,Jrrt, bit•••• l)e parUH ller,oto. dated January 6 , li 77 , 111d cODdlUolltld for u., coanruct or lb• abolf1 deacrlbed propertJ,&nd Clie connaah of warraaty b•r•t• o.oataiNd abl.ll aot. applJ to u7 UUt. lnlerut or .ae1abn.11ct lflaln1 b1. uaro11II or and•: Ult parollaaer Ill Hld eoatracS. Hd 1lla.ll aot 1.pplJ to uy tuea, HHHmeau or otlltr cb1.ru1 liTltd., aH111td or Hooalas d.H nb•ttH•t to the d.1te or 11.ld. contraci.. lu.l !it.ate !.xciH Tax vu paid Oft thl• Hl• OT 1tampad nampt cm t IH. llo. 6 &.7 ol January, 1977 ;t or __ o= ____ _ }-CormcY of (/}Sifl/1../(?MII ~ tl,ia //} ~ de• oLf_J_a_o_uar_~Y _______ A D 1977 ._I V'n ·---., --• • --. oe ore me. tlt.e ua.deniped, • Nolllry Public in and for the Slate of Oregon duly conuniaio11.d ud sworn pencnally appeared H. Lee Heath IDd NoOM ]. Re,tb to me tknown to be the indmdual.a._ de.en'bed in a.ad who e.ucuted the foreaoins bt.1trume11t. and aaDOW1edied to me that~ llip,ed and .ealed du! la.Id ibmamen.t Pl their~ and voluntary Kt and deed for tLe u.. and purpo..., meta mm1;..ed. j WllNE.SS ..,. ~ ' " •1-~· fr ~· . .ti ;) . ... . ,· .. . ·,..,.;, , ..... _ ...... .... ' "•l PIONEER NATIONAL TlTI.E INSURANCE A T1COO «>MNIY ~'ili·d !or Record at Requeat of Af"TER RECORDING MAIL TO, - Statutory Warranty DHd THE GRANTOR H. LEE HEATH and NORMA L. HEATH, hia wife JAKES \l. McCANN end THEU1h &CANN, his wife fur ud UI CllftlNknlXIII al $10, 00 and other valuable consideration.a in band paid, mnftJI ud ...arraots to EDWARD L, TASCA and SUSAN W. TASCA 1 his wife tllt followinc detcribed ral ncaw, lltuated la I.he Ct11t1My of King 'Wadib\atOD: J'ORK LDIF ,SO..ol 'nle South 180 feet of the West Half of the South~st Quarter of the Southeast rie" Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 9, Town,hip 23 North, Range 5 East .. ~ W.M .• records of said county: EXCEPT County Road and EXCEPT East 165 feet of the ..e South 130 feet of said West Ralf of Southwest ~uarter of $outheast Qua~ter of ~ Southeast Quarter oC' i ~ Thh deed la 1Lve1 11 r11JtUlme11t of tbat cartala Teal ~,tat, 99ntncl l>ttweea Ult pan:ltt hlftt.o, da!.ed January 6 , 1f 77 , and co1ul1Uon1dl for Ult cnnraece of Ute aboH duerlbed prop.,tJ,and &.be covenant.I or warrant,. be11ln CD1lalaed all&U DOl appJI to u1 UUe, lnt<111T11•t or 11ncu1br11c, lri•lftl by, uiro111II or nd•r t.b• p11.-olt.aee1 I• 11&11 eoatn.et. aatl tbalJ aot apply to &nJ tax.ea, nnsament.a at o\her charu• l9wied, ,Hneed o, HooalH dae aabn111.11eal. ~o tbe d&tt of aald coaLracL , he. No. 6 day of January, 1977 An: OF WASH!l'IGTON, I· Cowty of King CIDaildaypmou!IJapparedbdOffmt James w, Mctann and Thelma Mccann to me knon to bt dit lbdMdlllP daaibeill la ud who ~ * wltMa .. 'Of'tlfllll .... :, ... o<l:ooolcdaed lhal they ,i.,..s die ...,. u their lne ... -,, Id ...... ftr ,.. -""'---day ol Je.nuary, 1977 ,,~::t;.?1:..~1~ rui6ti • Seattle .. •. ~ ... l ! ' ' Trans Lina :.Ssat J"1u1 l-44 A.Pr 20-44 tl);, .55 irsx Harr~ E,clotel1ert and MarY -Schb.:..lart, llw toDetenao Plant Ccaporation, a co~ unde-r the~~ a.P proved J:an 22-'32 as a111ended lp oy and wrr tv ap ---sm as 334040) --- ot Congress ~ht ,11t11 ot the Wi SW! SE! SE* t'leo 9 T.P·23 nr 5 :,1111, kow wch lies "1.thin a st1·-~p ot .l.d 200 tt '-n width, the bounuaries or ad strip lyii::.g 62.5 f'G diet wl)' :rrc;a anil 137.5 ft dist ..!J.Y rrcm and plt the SIU"V\!f ln ot tbt relooated Diablr 3attle"Jrims ln as now si;akect 011 the grou.12, onir, aoross t1 po.11 aoii/or adjaoen.toto the abo'f'e dell prop sd s11ney 3aa line being partio d 1'; · Beg at survey ata 37+19~9 a pt on the N ln of Seo 4 Tp 2J nr 5 e1111 11d ~ · being S 88"25' E a dist Qf 667. 5 rt trca the quarter Bee oor en the N ln of sd Sac 4 th s 9°47' E a dist ot 6995.1' ft to survey sta 107+15.0; th S 5°49: W a dist -,:r JJJ9.5'"ft to suney sta l40t54.~ a pt on the ff ln of Seo 9 1'p 23 nr 5 ewa, ad pt being N 899 07' W. 111 dist o t 1042, 7 rt trai,. the sa o or 01' sd ~eo 9. The abo,e des pliroel of l d ha::, a le1g th ot 510 f't a:::1 eonte.ins J.42 ao llll'l . . . · SgtlJ .b.cwe,er to the rta ot t~11b in am to all pub roadS!J and su 1,J aisci to ~:xist1ng pipes afti~ u1ts. irl'ir and dratM.p lines, bridges 'a.ad oe.oal s ano. esmta a~ rts or way of p11b 11t111t.1e•. Pro,A flU'tler' tbt ii well 6 ft in diameti:'r loo n9ar engra eta 137.,57 ehll.l r..ililain undisturbed and gtors sha.11 be permitv.a t<1 1111e a111: 'l'b.a afCresd esmt ---bal fol".lil to sig --· :wary M._sohellert . . , . Harrf1/:.Sohellert k.~ Apr 20•44 bJ 'Harry E'.Sehellcrt Bild Mary Sohelle:rt, h'W bet P .Jr. Br;i.l!i>,flllle.h np tot' s• ·res at .lieut on n• Apr 9-47 !W. a) 410 D H Bld fl4 )),)' STGo) · D Jun 1•44 . ~l':' 16-~ $10. $8.25 irsx $7 .50 s-t Edge ~LeBlolld aJ:d Helene M,LeBlond, hw to Ed91r Bing and Blanche Bing, b&w ll'p o:, and wrr to sp th, fd:re in kow 3391114 ,, Lot v Blk 60 l:Qrk e• s Seo ond ...,dd to the C at si(I aoo to plat thot rec. in vo1·1 of' plats pg 248 reo ot sd Qo, except the W 15 :rt t)lo~-ooild. in ko aupr' ooux-t 1.lause No 62280 tor the widl.'lning at )4th Ave. So u· ,Pl'O'i'd by Urd Mo 17842 or the v of s, Togthr with any p to. ot Atlanti(! St wch IIU!J.1 be hei'ter vao ai\ upon sooh vacation will revert to ad P~• i by operation of law. · Suoj to 1944 genl t:a adjustment thot' having : b"en -,4• betw the partiu'l hto as of .llpr 1•44 agreed date ot · posaeeaion. Edgar K,LaBlond Rel sna M .Lelilond kc• Mal'_ 2~44 by idlll!r K,:t.eBlond and Helene M.LeBlond, ~1'1 bal.' Homer il:.Bailey np for sw res at s .us Sep :' ··46(Ml STOo) D J11.n 1 • 44 !.ay )~44 $1100. $1.65 irsx ~l,5U s"t The Uity of' Seattle, a muni oorp ot' .:ita t.e of Wn to O,A,Gordon !'p hby oy and qo to sp all rt ti an iJlt in end to the tdre in tow All ot Lota 3 anll i.. Blk 10 or ttun"81"s J..ak• Union "'dd ~o the C of' d ... .,,, r ii.v ~c<:> Trans Ln Ji.:smt Oat 8-43 i~1 I ~T · SGp 1•4-3 t25. / ~ J.J • .Sluma.r and Nellie Blumer, uwand~•'.;.Moft.at a!li Carrie Mo:f'tat,hw to DetensQ Plant Corporation, a oorp under laws r:£ US as amended F.P oy 9.nd i>1rr to sp a P"""'.'m:lnent esmt and il1't of way over, upon nn across the tdre in kC'll Tht P.'"'c;. of Lot "/ or tho Cedar R:l.ver Sumner Home Sites, aoo to plat -ra~_,,:·Av-"tj}lql,., ill. Go:v:.,Lota /+. anl'i 6 or Seo 16 Tp 2J ~r 5: 9wn \ ' how ilch lies wit~~ a s.trit~ or· .J."d' 20tt ft i'n widt.:.:,. t!ie :))Gundaries 01' sd s tri.P lying1 ·62 ;5 t't di~t wi'y 'i'i'~a1.:' a.rti· 137 .5 tt:" ·iil'S-i'. ely from and .i.;,lt the surv,;,y ln ot the reloo:ated .Uiablo-Saattle trans ln as now staked on the ground, over, across upon am/or adjaoent to the " abo•e ues wop; sd survey ln being partio d r; J Beg at survey sta 140+;4-. 5 a pt on tilt N 1n af' -eo 16 Tp 2) nrb J 5 e~ sd pt being N 89° 07' W a dist of l 042. 7 :f'fl rran the ne oor I of. sd Seo 16 1 th S 5°49' W a dist ... ~ 4083.9 ft to survey ·s.ta l8l+38.4;i'j, th S 52°02 1 W a dist of 1933.1 ft to SU4"\7~ sta 200+71.5 a pt on the S 1n of sd Seo 16, sd pt beinE, N 89°00 1 ii' a dist 01' 2889.6 ft ·: !'rem the se oor cf sd Seo 16. . . . / . ·he .above des paroel cf ld cont 0,1 ac mrl . . . · · · .. . · •, Sjabj however to the rts. of the. pub in and. to all pub roads, and subj· also to existing pipes and oonduits, irrig ani drainage lines, · ·•:r,tclgi;,smd canals and esmts ani rts·r:£ way of pub utilities. Tli,f .aforesd esmt and rt of viay is' for thil tol purp; ·.· . . !1a.lil9ly°, the perpetual rt to enter and toereot, maintain, rpp~r, i'ebu.il<l, operate and patrol one or more elect po.,er tr.,aDS lill!ilS .and appurt sigaal linmr, ino the rt to erect suoh trans ln 1ttrU1Jtu1'ts,· · ~I · wires, oables, · guys, anohors and other appu.rt aw are neo thto; trie i · £Wither rt to clear sd rt ~ · way and :.eep the .sm ol ear, ot brush, . , til!lber, all bld.gs, aril all. fire l!lz:irds; an! the rt to remove dettge:t' , ·tr-•. '!!,,. !°!"an§, .1.Cro beyond the limi\lS Of sd rt Of Wa.J'• . . ' All 'bmsh. timber or bldgs rEllD.oved pursuant to ""l'.l.,.tems hot .•..... ·.· ·. are the prop 01' the Dei'ans<1 Plant Oorp or its asns aixl may be 111,s\ll;~;~t .. ot by 11$.le, blll"ning or otb:l rwisa, · · · . . · · . · · ,{,:,;;fJ'.i,1;!?/, ·· To have and to· hold the sd esmt and rt of way unto sp 1 ts aif~J{;t/i:'::}{ . ror;v:· further Wld.erstood and agreed by the unciarsigned tht t~:1\:iJJ ot sueh pp is acoep..ed in full compensation for all dMages ·.. ·· · · .,;.' ineidentaJ. to the exeroise or any of tha rts above dlils. J .J.Blum.er " Nellii.l ~lumer -~ w.R.Mottat 1 Garrie Mot'fat I 1eow)3ep 1-43 qy J, J. Blwner and Nellie Blumer, h w bet Allen Orto!'·,:· I np tor aw res at s DS Deo 22-45 (Ml sp D H Bld f'ld · by SECo) 1 (~) q ./ ~ l TJ:ane Lina .JJ;srat Cot 8-43 ~;7 ~ JJJl}lt,04c,.t/ ~.', J Se!) l 3 .. t~) ~25, .5 ~ 1rsx '\J.;,t J -·'--·-"·-,, ,.. __ ,. --•""--· ..,....__"--~-".trn •• -.,-o_,...-."11r'l"\ .... ,..,..._1"'1 .T-m.,,...nltr ~j fl~l'(ilt••11tlllin :J · 12 IC}i,J'. J5Y . . ·· .. -:,_, .. -.·,. '.:'., ' ' .· , · l1ii~ilit / ;tw, 5 46 · · · a-a.11.:23 46 itk, . ni~i-i.-1 l-"r nc'i t(~it.-n·i>-:-.-.· ;;!nrunt xq:d:4:ic~z.run 5 l+f ;1,,.y 14 46 )5 T:ia Ulldrsg.o.d . i;o The l:e.ci1·io 'l'0lephone t'll<~ BJJ0gra;.·h ,;c,,11pa;..y, & G· 11' ~-:-p ::l'J, s.rrn.t.s a p"'1-petue.l e1:1sci1t to .i_v w:i. th the .1·id1t to flface, OOA$:t • 'l't :f n the SW~ o.f seo 12 twp 23 .Ill' 5 ewm towi t: That part u l' the< : S'Vlt; offrltf dt SW{ ~>i' ,d seo 11 l\ilv -·f the l7SP&L Co '!:/ll . · .. ·.· .. · --~ .. ~ .-: --, -, :· ' ' ~'.6-i,; ..... ;~ •, 'i: •=-k~ ..... ·····..-=--·· ,-.. ---·-· ~/f·<I·/"' ' ,. H1• ~•~HJI~\~ ";{-/i-_,_iJdi_ ~'A .. ·t. J,L!!J..i./,G/fl. _,;-~iJi"tlcLJ..,'li.. • #.~~-~~[A 81_.1111110 f,UQfr s()(1t4:".l ~W'tU a. LIUl"II t 111.1t·•"'NY. 1ht-;1~1,1 i~ 1i1n1u1I_ .. , .. 1111"'" '"tili,,11; ,~rnttip -;,;1·f t,J• ~" :t.r .. .-,,1. li111 1 ltWl~l~-·~~--~ ... .,a,, _ioi;lo tiil'h, ... ~r, . .irlt•111 -J1•!!t fl!'il~-,~.--u·;,~ ,'l li11tp 1h11 1. .. 111 hH lif-1.,;,,i1,~t1icf"';,",-.. ·,.-.""" -,1hi11 ,-}' ,-,-,.,...,._, '' \ '. . ' .. · ·. ,• : . _ "MU ·i."J,rn,4h~itf11/!'-~ ... ....,_.llM ·.t _Ifill 1led,l1 I~ Ki lie IHM 11~ ffUF tM11\t1111 H .. ~ifitl't, 1r· _ dtsl~ t'ird ,-## - ·-tl\fll i.o.. ...... to, 1M ,.... ............ ,i,,,1, .......... ,lille ,_ ·-....... W, ........... i,f ' it Afr i1I' W"*HIHOfON I .. COUNTY Ofi fflN.i. -~tM11--,..., ... ,1y-......,w..·. hi Yi &sN.iu tf". &nrv-acr:ncN«: .. .-.-··· I<""···-·th li!o IMM4ooll'Nl!'tlW It!,.""° -""4 1t!O with .. l!"li '"'""1W ltli_, ... HI-~: t,i / 111o1 ~·"""' ..... _ .. ;-..-"" ... ~ ... ..,. _,., .... -· ~ -llio!ei,i·--. --' ' -.. 04VIM.,..;;.., hoMW ollt.>lol tMl!lihti .. ,,,., ti -8ai::stttf , It r..L.. . ·-~z~'1e!t_ ITAUCll' W,\SHIHOTON I ;, . COUNTY OI' . .. .. I . ·:o. "''~.~~~ ..• ·-'--------'--,-·It ~f M!~----1h11 ,. It ·1{ .·::r-~.,.lfr i~· ·'j(·~;~::i ----'---~ .;_ _______ ...._,o;d --_ . ...;.,._:.:.,.. __ ,...-_______ _ ,_. ~ llt1•ri •• k tM •· _ . ..:...--""'-~.,. _ ~._.·,.....~~ ... __ ...... __ .... __ _ ...... "''""111111, lo . JI' II 4 •t-i .. Mi"°'¥ P,&11~ io i/,f i,n,;, 11;, ol Mt,,.,iil, ' ,~1,1r,1 .. -. I r I I ' ' I '. -• , .. I \ I , ' t1GHT OF WAY rHi: STA"I E OF WASHINGTON Count;,· of--~-~ ,'j,..:_' ------ ,· '' • • • II ' 4/"l ,~---rJ.~.A.'.:.,,' 1.L,, i:t;.'' .. ., ,_.,,.. J,• .7 .f),J y~:=;-Ef . ' ~-·· \i1l:\W· - : UP. ANDJNCONSIDERAT10Nof1hrsumot_1f_1· @h·fL) a1·,d &::,,/1 ,,cQ a/i T ~I . / :Dollars (L':i.L:~-· ), the rrceipt of whief, ia hereby acknowlr.:dsed, H&rv• G. c ... person AQd Oertru,e T. Caepereon aka ti•rtrude Caeperaon 1 bueba.nd and wire h('u:•:..,ahf'r rdured to u GRANTOR (wMther one or mOl"e), doc• hereby lf&DC and convey to OLYMPIC PIPE 1.iNE LfJMPANY, a Delaware .'.:orpotation, with ll p:rmit to do ~&Kn in die Srate of 1Va1hi111,1tOA, ira •~craaon .,nd aui,gns, btceinafter refrrred to u GR/i~r.:..EE, the ri1hts ol W111Y, C'Ht'mt:nts and r ·-::tr.:&'l:s .;c c~nstruct, m11.in1•in, o~rue, repair, replace, ch.nae rM •iz.e (:Of, and remow in whollo or io p.,t, a pipe liae « pip,. Uou, for tbt" uansportadon of oil artd gas, and the JKoducts thereof, water, cs aay other flu.id or aub.taace, witlo the ne-ceu,ary firtin3s, fi.uures, val Tu, appurtc-nancu, and carhodir prottctioa de-Tkes, and th. dghr 'tu JD&in"',in 1he riaht of way clear of trees, underbrush, building•, aod odw,r obetn1etioas 1 alun, a retttte to be selected by Gl1,n1ee, on, our, acrou and throu,:h the foJlo..,.fo3 described prGpfftJ •inwled in the County ~-! ------ !Ung , Stat< ol Wuh;ngton, 'J.'.he Weet H•l! of the Soutbweet ~arter of the Sout.beut Qu.a.rter ot t.be Soutbel'.•f:. ~arter of Section 9, Township 23 1~orth 1 kange 5 .E.a•t, •. 14., EXCEP't 1, feet o.n Weat aid• reeer~~d for road purpose• l Tbe North H&l.f o:f .the horth lia.l! (!of the 11orthea,-t Qnttt•r ~r the riorth•ut Ql,l.arter ot Sec,t.!.on 16, 1'own.eh..1..p 2,; ~orth, aange:, A&8t, ;;.:. M., EXC&P'f the last 237 feet aDd tbe ~eat 264 feet thereo~ ·IH·~ar,f<>C, ~r•c~-r~-..+ ;n-rh.:.. ,.;o.,,-j an,,t .... '"';1c1, •, ,A ... _,,,,,.,... l,~J.i!/;1 /'C. t:.,,,:, .,-;,~r Gl-ra-,,1,',"' .,;,1 i., ""·'l',.,,,1/,&t_ JP,.- ,, , • ,t, /if"-1.--,,e., . ••.,•,-••, ,171_ lff'. 1" /7 ~.:,.J J,y ·re•.<,.-. •f OrnfT'tfLcli•-,~ .,f i;, 'j (!-I ' I l I I i TERRAFORMA DESIGN GROUP STORM DRAINAGE REPORT LE DEVELOPMENT LOCATION: 37XX NE 4 TH STREET RENTON, WA ISSUE DATE: January 20, 2006 PREPARED FOR: Le Development PREPARED BY: Terraforma Design Group, Inc. 5212 37th Avenue SW Seattle, WA 98126 TDG No. 05034 ! EXl~l!CS U6/1",/ O(a ~-------------- 41~ C!VlL ENGINEERING Q(o & LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE 5212 37TH Avenue SV,/ Seattle WA 98126 phone 206.923 0590 fax 20(>.923.3507 e-mail office@tcrrafonnadesigngroup.com LE DEVELOPMENT TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Project Overview 11. Conditions and Requirements Summary 111. Off-Site Analysis IV. Flow Control and Water Quality Facility Design V. Conveyance System Design VI. Special Reports & Studies VII. Other Permits VIII. Erosion/Sedimentation Control Design IX. Bond Quantities, Facilities Summaries, and Declaration of Covenant X. Operation and Maintenance Manual AppendixA - Appendix B - Operations and Maintenance Manual Civil Plans Terraforma Design Group, Inc. I -- I 'O 8 Io '2./ 21f 21./ -- l'f 27 30 LE DEVELOPMENT I. PROJECT OVERVIEW The proposed development consists of a new 5000 sf (footprint) retail building on a 0. 76 acre site. The site is located at 37XX NE 4th Street, in Renton, Washington. The proposed commercial construction requires a site development permit from the City of Renton compliance with the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM) as its storm drainage criteria. The site undeveloped with primarily 2"d growth forest. Existing grades drain to the west alley at varying slopes. This drainage appears to continue north along the alley. We propose to discharge to the existing 27" storm drain stub provided by the NE 4th Street storm system. The site is part of the Lower Cedar River Drainage Basin. Soil in this area are classified as glacial till. Level 1 flow control and Basic water quality measures will be required per City requirements. This criteria will be met via the proposed wet/ detention vault. Design of the stormwater conveyance, erosion control facilities and storm maintenance are also provided within this report. Terraforma Design Group, Inc. I 169 VICINITY MAP SCALE NlS. I w z w > <( w 0 °" z 0 ::,c z 0 z ::::, I King County Department of Development and:Environmental Services TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET Part 1 PRQJECT OWNER AND PRO.JEC'T ENGlNEER Project Owner L-i::. DEvE l-0 i'Met-JT Address 10&02.. COi'-"' cl..-'-,+ve-SoU'Tl-1 50'!'TTL-E Phone 9~176 c ur.z ) 7.-1 <f -5/7 'f Project Engineer ~o (2c:lb<i Z."f '*"-', PE Company 1"'R41.A f>oll.MA ~l<oN (ol/.()JP;tVC-. Address/Phone ,uz ~ 7"" ,41,e: ,._, 5a!-7'1"<.c n I Part 2. PROJECTLOCATJON AND /DESCRIPTrON Project Name le Pev€u;,,<'McNT Location 37 XI< NE. 4.,... 5Tllc:E:T e.z,,r/lJN . I Township ...:Z:...'>:_tJ ___ _ Range.......;:5:..:t:;.__ ___ _ .'.':~ .. ~(f .Section~<)'------- v.L_ ___________ ____, "P~rt,3 "!¥PE OFiPERMIT APPUSATISN Part4 OTHERREVIEWSANDPERM!TS Subdivison Short Subdivision Grading /Commercial Other ________ _ DFW HPA Shoreline Management COE 404 Rockery DOE Dam Safety /Structural Vaults FEMA Floodplain Other COE Wetlands Part 5 S1Ti:COMMUNITY ANJ}DRAINAGEBASIN Drainage Basin LOW er?, Ge M£ /<. / v en_ Part 6. · SITE .CHARACTERISTICS ( NoAJE) River Stream----------- Critical Stream Reach Depressions/Swales Lake __________ _ Steep Slopes--------- Floodplain--------- Wetlands --------- Seeps/Springs High Groundwater Table Groundwater Recharge Other __________ _ P.art7 . SOILS Soil Type T/t-L . Slopes < /DI. Additional Sheets Attached Ba:rt 8 DEVEtOPMENTLIMITATfONS REFERENCE Ch. 4 -Downstream Analysis Additional Sheets Attached :Part.i9;iE$GiElsQIJJREMENTS .. MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS DURING CONSTRUCTION ./ Sedimentation Facilities V Stabilized Construction Entrance ,/Perimeter Runoff Control ..,. Clearing and Graing Restrictions vCover Practices v Construction Sequence Other Erosion Potential L.O<.,J Erosive Velcoties '-t)c.,v LIMITATION/SITE CONSTRAINT MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS AFTER CONSTRUCTION v' Stabilize Exposed Surface ..,, Remove and Restore Temporary ESC Facilities v Clean and Remove All Silt and Debris ~ Ensure Operation of Permanent Facilities Flag Limits of SAO and open space preservation areas Other 4 ' 'Part TO SIJRFAGEWATER ,SYSTEM ' ' Grass Lined Tank Infiltration Method of Analysis Channel /(c.R.r:5 v'Vault Depression Pipe System Energy Dissapator Flow Dispersal Compensation/Mitigati Open Channel on of Eliminated Site Wetland Waiver Storage Dry Pond Stream Regional N/._11, Wet Pond Detention Brief Description of System Operation l,J "ET I o "'' a,..i T7 oAJ VA--i-, <--1 Fore. /!,~c ~-.2),,.. Q..., A--.< 1'-7 LcvE:""L J (=t.&<..-J Facility Related Site Limitations Reference Facility Limitation v Cast in Place Vault Pt:,t'-N /8111'-o v Retaining Wall Rockery> 4' High Structural on Steep Slope , Other c.,,._ m..,J/... 0JClf ~ti' n Nii 4"" :iT. (N D,',1 £, 7 Parr12,,,,.EASEMENTSiTRACTS Drainage Easement Access Easement Native Growth Protection Easement Tract Other Part 13, SIGNATURE OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER I or a civil engineer under my supervision my supervision have visited the site. Actual site conditions as observed were incorporated into this worksheet and the attachments. To the best of my knowledge the information provided here is accurate. Si ned!Date /?e 5 LE DEVELOPMENT II. CONDITIONS AND REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY The proposed storm drainage system must comply with the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM), as adopted by the City of Renton. This storm drainage report will provide a preliminary review of the 8 core and 5 special requirements of the KCSWDM, including a Level 1 downstream analysis. Core Requirement #1 -Discharge at the Natural Location Existing grades drain to the west alley at varying slopes. This drainage appears to continue north along the alley. We propose to discharge to the existing 27" storm drain stub provided by the NE 4th Street storm system. The site is part of the Lower Cedar River Drainage Basin (site is NOT a part of the Maplewood Creek Drainage Basin). Core Reguirement #2 -Off-site Analysis The property is a part of the Lower Cedar River drainage basin. The site will discharge to the existing 27" storm drain stub within the alley. This 27" storm drain continues westward within NE 4th Street. Approximately 2000 feet west of the site, the storm drain follows under NE 3'd Street. Core Requirement #3 -Flow Control According to the City, Level 1 flow control measures will be required to match the developed peak discharges to the existing site conditions peak discharge rates for the 2-and 10-year return periods. Existing land cover is primarily 2'' growth forest except for the west access alley. Flow control will be provided with the wet/ detention vault. See Section 4 of this report. Core Requirement #4 -Conveyance System The storm drainage system will be designed to accommodate the 25yr/24hr storm event. See Section 5 of this report. Terraforma Design Group, Inc. LE DEVELOPMENT Core Requirement #5 -Erosion and Sediment Control Erosion and Sedimentation Control measures will be provided during construction to prevent silt- laden runoff from discharging off-site. See Section 8 of this report. Core Requirement #6 -Maintenance and Operations An Operations and Maintenance Manual for Storm Drainage Facilities will be provided to the property owner use after site construction. See Section 10 of this report. Core Requirement #7 -Financial Guarantees and Liability See Section 9 of this report. Core Requirement #8 -Water Quality Site is within a "Basic" Water Quality zone. Storm treatment will be provided by the wet/ detention vault. Special Requirement #1 -Other Adopted Area Specific Requirements We do not know of any area specific requirements for our immediate vicinity. Special Requirement #2 -Floodplain/Floodway Delineation Not applicable. Site is not within a floodplain or floodway. Special Requirement #3 -Flood Protection Facilities Not applicable. Site is not within a floodplain or floodway. Special Requirement #4 -Source Control See Section 10 of this report. Special Requirement #5 -Oil Control Not applicable. Development will not be classified as a "high use" site. Terraforma Design Group, Inc. 1 LE DEVELOPMENT Ill. OFF-SITE ANALYSIS The property is a part of the Lower Cedar River drainage basin. The site will discharge to the existing 27" storm drain stub within the alley. This 27" storm drain continues westward within NE 4th Street. Approximately 2000 feet west of the site, the storm drain follows under NE 3'd Street. We do not know of any existing drainage problems associated with this system. See attached Downstream Drainage Basin Map. Terraforma Design Group, Inc. -·-<..Z = - Lynnwood - - • OA ~ "EMV ua .re!) N ·aAy uapJv. en s "d JI ••• z Cj aA ·,u..v LE DEVELOPMENT IV. FLOW CONTROL AND WATER QUALITY FACILITY DESIGN According to the City, Level 1 flow control measures (Core Requirement #3) will be required to match the developed peak discharges to the existing site conditions peak discharge rates for the 2-and 10-year return periods. Existing soils as classified as "till". Existing land cover is primarily 2nd growth forest except for the west access alley. Flow control will be provided with the wet/ detention vault. Runoff will be discharged to the existing storm system within NE 4th Street. Site is within a "Basic" Water Quality zone. Stormwater treatment will be provided via a wetvault, as combined with the detention vault. See attached design calculations. Terraforma Design Group, Inc. If LE DEVELOPMENT 37XX NE 4TH STREET, RENTON by: Pedro DeGuzmon, PE Terroformo Design Group, Inc. BASIN DATA Aforest, 2nd growth= 0.70 ac Aimperv= 0.06 ac Atotal= 0.76 ac (till soil) 0 50 1 inch 50 ft. DRAINAGE BASIN MAP EXISTING CONDITIONS DA TE: 1 /19/06 I j I 0 I l ;, l l l l 0 I 0 I l 0 I I I L .oc,, ...... "'""' .-1" ·~---. LE DEVELOPMENT 37XX NE 4 TH STREET, RENTON I I ( I• I. - I .I , . I I ,_ I --~ I '·1---- A311V \ \ -·-I' - by: Pedro DeGuzman, PE Terrafarma Design Group, Inc. BASIN DATA Alandscape= 0.08 ac Aimperv= 0.68 ac Atotal = 0. 71 ac (till soil) 0 50 1 inch 50 ft. DRAINAGE BASIN MAP DEVELOPED CONDITIONS DATE: 1/19/06 \~ STORMWATER HYDROGRAPH DATA Project Name: LE DEVELOPMENT By: Project Number: 05034 Date: DRAINAGE CRITERIA RAINFALL METHOD: City of Renton: 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual King County Runoff Time Series (KCRTS) Step 1) Site Data 1) General characteristics: Development type commercial Area (on-site) 0.71 Location Lower Cedar River (not a part of Maplewood Creek Basin) Flow Control Requirement Level 1 Rainfall region Seatac Regional scale factor 1.0 Soil type till Pre-developed vegetation 2nd growth forest Sensitive areas no Bypass flows yes Detention/Retention detention 2) Pre-developed characteristics: Pervious Area 2nd growth forest pasture/grass Impervious Area Total 3) Developed characteristics: Pervious Area forest pasture/grass Impervious Area Total Step 2) Hydrograph Results 1) Pre-developed site discharges: Existing runoff, 2-yr Existing runoff, 10-yr 0.70 acres 0.70 acres acres 0.06 acres 0.76 acres 0.08 acres acres 0.08 acres 0.68 acres 0.76 acres 0.029 cfs 0.048 cfs Step 3) Developed stormwater discharge criteria P.A.D. 1119106 LEVEL 1 FLOW CONTROL -RESTRICT DEVELOPED RUNOFF TO MATCH EX. 2 & 10 YR RUNOFF RATES. USE "POINT OF COMPLIANCE" IN KCRTS TO ACCOUNT FOR ON-SITE BYPASS. 14 05034-STMCLC.xls 1/19/2006 1141 AM ST 1.1 0.54" (0.045') !ZZJ Incorporated Area ....-River/Lake Major Road 0.4 7" (0.039') -TE: Areas east of the easternmost isopluvial should use 0.65 1es unless rainfall data is available for the location of interest 24 The mean annual storm is a conceptual storm found by dividing the annual precipitation by the total number of storm events per year 0.52" (0.043') 0.56" (0.047') LA 1.0 LA 1.2 SNOHOMISH COUN KING COUNIY PROJECT: LE DEVELOPMENT STORM DRAINAGE DETENTION CALCULATIONS • Calculations generated from the King County Runoff Time Series (KCRTS) program. TIME SERIES DATA-EXISTING CONDITIONS Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:ex.tsf Project Location:Sea-Tac ---Annual Peak Flow Rates--------Flow Frequency Analysis------- Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak - (CFS) 0.053 2 2/09/01 15:00 0.024 7 1/05/02 16:00 0. 048 3 2/28/03 3:00 0.015 8 8/26/04 2:00 0. 029 6 1/05/05 8:00 0.046 4 1/18/06 16:00 0.043 5 11/24/06 4:00 0.080 1 1/09/08 9:00 Computed Peaks TIME SERIES DAT A -DEVELOPED CONDITIONS Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:dev.tsf Project Location:Sea-Tac -Peaks Rank Return Prob (CFS) Period 0.080 1 100.00 0.990 0.053 2 25.00 0.960 0.048 3 10.00 0.900 0.046 4 5.00 0.800 0.043 5 3.00 0.667 0.029 6 2.00 0.500 0.024 7 1.30 0.231 0.015 8 1.10 0.091 0.071 50.00 0.980 ---Annual Peak Flow Rates--------Flow Frequency Analysis------- Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak -Peaks Rank Return Prob (CFS) (CFS) Period 0 .172 6 2/09/01 2:00 0.338 1 100.00 0.990 0. 149 8 1/05/02 16:00 0.249 2 25.00 0. 960 0.208 3 12/08/02 18:00 0.208 3 10.00 0.900 0.171 7 B/26/04 2:00 0.203 4 5.00 0.800 0.203 4 10/28/04 16:00 0.184 5 3.00 0.667 0.184 5 1/18/06 16:00 0.172 6 2.00 0.500 0. 249 2 10/26/06 o,oo 0.171 7 1. 30 0.231 0.338 1 1/09/08 6:00 0 .149 8 1.10 0.091 Computed Peaks 0.308 50.00 0.980 Terraforma Design Group, Inc. 050J4-s·1·MOUTPUT.doc PROJECT: LE DEVELOPMENT STORM DRAINAGE DETENTION CALCULATIONS (CONT.) DETENTION FACILITY DATA Type of Facility, Facility Length: Facility Width: Facility Area: Effective Storage Depth: Stage O Elevation: Storage Volume: Riser Head: Riser Diameter: Number of orifices: Detention Vault 42.05 ft 42.03 ft 1768. sq. 4.00 ft 354.00 ft 7073. cu. 4.00 ft ft ft 8.00 inches 2 Full Head Pipe Orifice# Height (ft) 0.00 3.00 Diameter Discharge Diameter 1 2 Top Notch Weir: Outflow Rating Curve: (in) 0. 80 0 .69 None None STAGE/ DISCHARGE/ STORAGE DATA (CFS) (in) 0.035 0.013 4.0 Stage Elevation Storage Discharge (ft) (ft) (cu. ft) {ac-ft) (cfs) 0.00 354.00 0. 0.000 0.000 0.01 354.01 18. 0.000 0.002 0.02 354.02 35. 0.001 0.002 0.03 354.03 53. 0.001 0.003 0.04 354.04 71. 0.002 0.004 0.05 354.05 88. 0.002 0.004 0.06 354.06 106. 0.002 0.004 0.07 354.07 124. 0.003 0.005 0.17 354.17 3 01. 0.007 0.007 0.27 354.27 478. 0. 011 0.009 0.37 354.37 654. 0.015 0. 011 0.47 354.47 831. 0.019 0.012 0.57 354.57 1008. 0.023 0. 013 0.67 354.67 1185. 0.027 0. 014 0.77 354.77 1362. 0.031 0.015 0.87 354.87 1539. 0.035 0.016 0. 97 3 54. 97 1715. 0. 039 0.017 1. 07 355.07 1892. 0.043 0.018 1.17 355.17 2069. 0.047 0.019 1. 27 355.27 2246. 0.052 0.020 1. 37 355.37 2423. 0.056 0.020 1.47 355.47 2600. 0.060 0.021 1. 57 355.57 2776. 0.064 0.022 1. 67 355.67 2953. 0.068 0.023 1. 77 355. 77 313 0. 0.072 0.023 1.87 355.87 3307. 0.076 0.024 1. 97 355.97 3484. 0.080 0. 025 2.07 356.07 3661. 0.084 0.025 2.17 356.17 3837. 0.088 0.026 Terraforma Design Group, Inc. o::;O;t.4"STt'v10CTPUT.doc Percolation (cfs) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 t1 I PROJECT: LE DEVELOPMENT STORM DRAINAGE DETENTION CALCULATIONS (CONT.) 2.27 356.27 4014. 0.092 0.026 0.00 2.37 356.37 4191. 0. 096 0.027 0.00 2.47 356.47 4368. 0.100 0.027 0.00 2.57 356.57 4545. 0.104 0.028 0.00 2.67 356.67 4722. 0.108 0.029 0.00 2.77 356.77 4898. 0 .112 0.029 0.00 2.87 356.87 5075. 0 .117 0.030 0.00 2.97 356.97 5252. 0.121 0.030 0.00 3.00 357.00 5305. 0.122 0.030 0.00 3.01 357.01 5323. 0.122 0.031 0.00 3. 02 357.02 5340. 0.123 0.031 0.00 3.03 357.03 5358. 0.123 0.032 0.00 3. 04 357.04 5376. 0.123 0.033 0.00 3. 05 357.05 53 93. 0 .124 0.034 0.00 3. 06 357.06 5411. 0. 124 0.034 0.00 3 .16 357.16 5588. 0.128 0.036 0.00 3.26 357.26 5765. 0.132 0.038 0.00 3.36 357.36 5942. 0.136 0.040 0.00 3.46 357.46 6119. 0.140 0.041 0.00 3.56 357.56 6295. 0 .145 0.043 0.00 3.66 357.66 6472. o .149 0.044 0.00 3.76 357.76 6649. 0.153 0.045 0.00 3.86 357.86 6826. 0.157 0.047 0.00 3. 96 357.96 7003. 0.161 0.048 0.00 4.00 358.00 7073. 0.162 0.048 0.00 4.10 358.10 7250. 0.166 0.254 0.00 4.20 358.20 7427. 0.171 0.631 0.00 4.30 358.30 7604. 0.175 0.972 0.00 4.40 358.40 7781. 0.179 1.120 0.00 4.50 358.50 7958. 0.183 1. 240 0.00 4.60 358.60 8134. 0.187 1. 360 0.00 4.70 358.70 8311. 0.191 1. 460 0.00 4.80 358.80 8488. 0.195 1. 560 0.00 4.90 358.90 8665. 0.199 1.650 0.00 5.00 359.00 8842. 0.203 1.740 0.00 5.10 359.10 9019. 0.207 1.820 0.00 5.20 359.20 9195. 0 .211 1.900 0.00 5. 30 359.30 93 72. 0.215 1.980 0.00 5.40 359.40 9549. 0.219 2.050 0.00 5.50 359.50 9726. 0.223 2.120 0.00 5.60 359.60 9903. 0.227 2.190 0.00 5.70 359.70 10080. 0.231 2.250 0.00 5.80 359.80 10256. 0.235 2.320 0.00 5. 90 359.90 10433. 0.240 2.380 0.00 6.00 360.00 106l0. 0.244 2.440 0.00 \~ Terraforma Design Group, Inc. 05034-STMOlJ·t·PUT.doc PROJECT: LE DEVELOPMENT STORM DRAINAGE DETENTION CALCULATIONS (CONT.) DETENTION FACILITY ROUTING RESULTS Hyd Inflow Outflow Peak Storage Target Cale Stage Elev (Cu-Ft) (Ac-Ft) 1 0.34 ******* 0.27 4.10 358.10 7255. 0.167 2 0.17 ******* 0 .11 4.03 358.03 7131. 0.164 3 0.18 0.05 0.05 4.00 358.00 7068. 0.162 10 4 0.18 ******* 0.04 3. 66 357.66 6475. 0 .149 5 0.21 ******* 0.04 3.32 357.32 5868. 0 .135 6 0.11 0.03 0.03 2 . 55 356.55 4504 . 0.103 2 7 0.15 ******* 0. 02 l. 70 355.70 3 008. 0. 069 8 0.17 ******* 0.02 1.60 355.60 2831. 0.065 CONCLUSION Developed 2yr & 1 Oyr peak discharges match existing condition 2yr & 1 Oyr peak discharges. Level 1 Flow Control criteria is met. Terraforma Design Group, Inc. 05034-STMOUTPUT.doc YR YR le; WETVAULT CALCULATIONS Project Name: LE DEVELOPMENT By: Project Number: 05034 Date: DRAINAGE CRITERIA: RAINFALL METHOD: City of Renton; 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual King County Runoff Time Series (KCRTS) METHOD OF ANALYSIS: Step 1 l Determine volume factor f. f = 3 Basic: f = 3, Large: f = 4.5 Step 2) Determine rainfall R for mean annual storm R = 0.039 ft See Figure 6.4.1.A Step 3} Calculate runoff from mean annual storm V, = (0.9A, + 0.25A,9 + 0.10 Au+ 0.01 A,9) • R A= ' Area of impervious surface A1 9 = Area of till grass A•= Area of ti II forest Aog = Area of outwash grass R= Rainfall from mean annual storm V = ' Vol. runoff from mean annual storm Step 4) Calculate wetpool volume vb= fV, f= Volume factor V = ' Vol. runoff from mean annual storm Vb= Volume of wetpool Step 5) Determine wetpool dimensions a) Determine geometry of first cell Volume in first cell Depth h (1st cell, excl. sed. storage) Required surface area Provided 1st cell dimensions: width length Provided 1st cell surface area b) Determine geometry of second cell Volume in second cell Depth h (2nd cell, excl. sed. storage) Required surface area Provided 2nd cell dimensions: width length Provided 2nd cell surface area c) Length to width ratio 29621 sf 3485 sf O sf O sf 0.039 ft 1074 cf 3 1074 cf 3221 cf 966 cf 3.0 ft 322 sf 20 ft 30 ft 600 sf 2255 cf 3 0 ft 752 sf 20 ft 60 ft 1200 sf 4.50 :1 PAD. 1119106 From Step 2 From Step 1 From Step 3 25-35% of total vol., try 30% 3 to 6 feet Aprov'd > Areq'd 65-75% of total vol., try 70% 3 to 6 feet Aprnv'd > Areq'd Must exceed 3: 1 !2.0 LE DEVELOPMENT V. CONVEYANCE SYSTEMS ANALYSIS AND DESIGN The storm drainage system will be designed to accommodate the 25yr/24hr storm event. See attached calculations. ------------------------2-1 Terraforma Design Group, Inc. CONVEYANCE SYSTEM DESIGN Project Name: LE DEVELOPMENT I By: IP.A.D. Project Number: 05034 I Date: I 1120106 DRAINAGE CRITERIA: City of Renton; 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual RAINFALL METHOD: King County Runoff Time Series (KCRTS) DESIGN STORM: 25YR /24HR I P25(in) =!34 I aR=!2.66 b"=!oss iR =a"• Tc'(-bR) and I= P • iR FROM TO A C CA CAtot Tc I Q DIA CB13 VAULT 0.12 0.90 0.11 0.11 6.0 2.8 0.30 6 CB6 CB5 0.05 0.90 0.05 0.05 6.0 28 0.13 8 SDC09 CBS 0.12 0.90 0.11 0.11 6.0 2.8 0.30 6 CB17 CBS 0.17 0.85 0.14 0.14 6.0 2.8 0.41 8 CB8 CB? 0.07 0.85 0.06 0.31 6.0 2.8 0.88 8 CB7 CB5 0.04 0.85 0.03 0.35 6.0 2.8 0.98 8 CB5 VAULT 0.05 0.90 0.05 0.44 6.0 2.8 1.23 12 CB4 VAULT 0.14 0.90 0.13 0.56 6.0 2.8 1.59 12 VAULT CB3 -0.90 0.00 1. 11 6.0 2.8 3.12 12 CB3 CB2 -0.90 0.00 1.11 6.0 2.8 3.12 12 CB2 CB1 -0.90 0.00 1.11 6.0 2.8 3.12 12 TOTAL AREA= 0.76 N N 05034-STMCLC.xls,CONVEY (2) n s Qf Vf Q/Qf 0.022 0.0200 0.47 2.4 0.64 0.022 0.0186 0.99 2.8 0.13 0.022 0.0200 0.47 2.4 0.64 0.012 0.0681 3.46 9.8 0.12 0.012 0.0100 1.33 3.8 0.66 0.012 0.0100 1.33 3.8 0.74 0.012 0.2338 18.89 23.8 0.07 0.012 0.0857 11.44 14.4 0.14 0.022 0.0100 2.13 2.7 1.46 0.022 0.0100 2.13 2.7 1.46 0.022 0.0633 5.36 6.8 0.58 IF Q/Qf < 1.0 => OK 1/20/2006,7:47 AM 3.2.! RATIONAL METHOD . TABLE 3.2.1.A RUNOFF COEFFICIENTS· "C' VALUES FOR THE RATIONAL METHOD General Land Covers Single Family Residential Areas Land Cover C Land Cover Density C Dense forest 0.10 0.20 DU/GA (1 unit per 5 ac.J 0.17 Light forest 0.15 0.40 DU/GA (1 unit per 2.5 ac.J 0.20 Pasture 0.20 0.80 DU/GA (1 unit per 1.25 ac.J 0.27 Lawns 0.25 1.00 DU/GA 0.30 Playgrounds 0.30 1.50 DU/GA 0.33 Gravel areas 0.80 2.00 DU/GA 0.36 Pavement and roofs 0.90 2.50 DU/GA 0.39 Open water (pond, 1.00 3.00 DU/GA 0.42 Jakes, wetlands) 3.50 DU/GA 0.45 4.00 DU/GA 0.48 4.50 DU/GA 0.51 5.00 DU/GA 0.54 5.50 DU/GA 0.57 6.00 DU/GA 0.60 . Based on average 2,500 square feet per lot of impervious coverage. For combinations of land covers listed above, an area-weighted "Cc:x A," sum should be computed based on the equation Cd, x A,= (C1 x A 1) + (C2 x A2 ) + ... +(C. x A.), where A,= (A, +A,+ ... +A.), the total drainage basin area. TABLE 3.2,l.B COEFFICIENTS FOR THE RATIONAL METHOD "i/' EQUATION Design Storm Return Frequency aR bR 2 years 1.58 0.58 5 years 2.33 0.63 10 years 2.44 0.64 25 years 2.66 0.65 50 years 2.75 0.65 100 years 2.61 0.63 ' TABLE 3.2.1,C k, VALUES FOR T, USING THE RATIONAL METHOD Land Cover Category kR Forest with heavy ground litter and meadow 2.5 Fallow or minimum tillage cultivation 4.7 Short grass pasture and lawns 7.0 Nearly bare ground 10.1 Grassed waterway 15.0 I Paved area (sheet flow) and shallow gutter flow 20.0 21 ------------------------------------ LE DEVELOPMENT VI. SPECIAL REPORTS AND STUDIES No special reports or studies are necessary. VII. OTHER PERMITS Not Applicable. VIII. EROSION/SEDIMENTATION CONTROL DESIGN Erosion Control BMP's shall consist of a rock construction entrance, silt fencing, and soil stabilization measures. Additional erosion control measures will be required to ensure that sediment-laden runoff is not discharged to adjacent properties. Terraforma Design Group, Inc. SEDIMENT TRAP DESIGN Project Name: Project Number: LE DEVELOPMENT 05034 By: Date: DRAINAGE CRITERIA: RAINFALL METHOD: CITY OF RENTON: 1998 KING COUNTY SWDM Santa Barbara Unit Hydrograph (SBUH) Steo 1 l Reau ired Sediment Pond Surface Area Tributary area= Q2 a 0100= H = Storage depth = Z = Sideslope = T = Dewatering time = G =Gravity= 0.76 0.28 0.46 ac cfs cfs 2 ft 3 ft/ft 24 hr 32.2 ftls'2 A,= Req'd surface area= 0 2 • 2080 sf/els = 582 sf Step 2) Provided Sediment Pond Surface Area Provided pond dimensions: bottom= water surface = top= width (ft) 10 22 28 length (ft) 18 1 30 36 Step 3) Dewatering Orifice A0 = Orifice area = = [As·(2·H)'O. 5 )/( 1 0. 5•35oo·T·G·o .5)] 0.0002 sf D = Orifice diameter= 24.(Ao/3. 14)'0.5 = Step 4) Emergency Overflow Spillway h0 = Overflow depth = 0.20 in, USE 0.25 ft L0 = Bottom width = (Q100/(3.21.h,'1.5)) -z.4•h 0 ---- 0.5 ft, USE I 6IFT Provide: 6" min. freeboard: 6.0' min. bottom width AREA= PAD. 1/19106 660 sf, OK! PROJECT: LE DEVELOPMENT EROSION CONTROL SEDIMENT TRAP-BASIN DATA BASIN DATA infall type IHyd lntv I 10.00 min 'Ra Pe aking Factor Ab straction Coeff fF'ervious Area f 0.70 ac !DC IA ri,;;-,.;,io;:;~CN---____ 1 _____ 9.iioo I DC CN IPervious TC I 6.00 min iDC TC . , ,,-,··· -"" Pervious CN Cale .. I SubArea r Description _, I 0.70 ac I DISTURBED SOIL Ir----------·····-··-- Pervious Composited CN ( AMC 2) .. ·- • TYPE1A ! 484.00 I 0,20 I 0.06 ac I 98.00 . ! 6.00 min I ! Sub en I I 94.00 : 94.00 --. I Pervious TC Cale I' r:rr-rr~;;UR~i6c:6t~_n_ .. ; Length ]stoP_~ _ fcoeff_ -~ Misc ~o: .. Ii Pervious TC I 6.00 min . r;:I II ===========D=ir~~l;;~~~;=ct=e=d=C=N=C=a=lc==========-=-=-='iJI I Descripti~n I SubArea !Sub cn-i I 1··-··· lmpeivious·s~rface-s(pa~ements, roofs,etc)----·-··--1 · ··o:oElac ,.,,.,,.1-·ga:oo i I I DC Composited CN (AMC 2) I 98,00 J I Directly Connected TC Cale I Type IFixed r·-Desc:-ription ____ i_Length Slope fcoettr Misc TT !PAVING , ··· -----------·--·-··-·-----16:ocirnrn ____ _ Directly Connected TC 6,00min Licensed to• Terraforma Design Group LLC BASIN FLOWRATE DATA I Event ]Peak Q (cfs) IPeak T (hrs) [Hyd Vol (acft) [Area (ac) !Method iRaintype I other 0.1444 18.00 ·1 0,0478 0.7600 I SCS [TYPE1A I 2 year 0.2760 I 8.00 1 · · 0,0898 0.7600 I SCS I TYPE1A I 1oyear j 0.4622 ,~--r 0,1510 0.7600 I scs ITYPE1A Rao ye;-r·DM~I 8.00 r··o2130 0.7600 I scs -fTYPE1A Terraforma Design Group, Inc, O."iXXXwwkclc-NEW.doc LE DEVELOPMENT IX. BOND QUANTITIES, FACILITY SUMMARIES AND DECLARATION OF COVENANT Bond Quantities Worksheet to be provided upon request. Facility Summaries attached. Declaration of Covenant to be provided upon request. Terraforma Design Group, Inc. '21 KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL STORMW'ATERFACILITYSUMMARYSHEET Development. __ L_E. __ O_f:V_A_o-'-'p~=~e,,.J"""-,--_Date __ 1~/_:z.._o~/~O~i;,~- Location "31 X. X NE: 4 .,...._ S,n...,.----e., T (2..e-,vro,J Finn - Address c.,e; l,..J'A Phone ~(p .92-~ -c:> S..5>"0 Developed Site: Acres O, 7 b Number of detention facilities on site: ___ ponds -~-vaults ___ tanks PE: Name 'fl z_,,(.p Phone Number of lots, ____ _ Number of infiltration facilities on site: _£._ponds __J_ vaults __ · II-_ tanks c)V7>1 Flow control provided in regional facility (give location) __ ,.J'-'-~A~-------------- No flow control required .JtA Exemption number ______________ _ D D . B . ownstream ramage as1ns Immediate Basin A 1->c. <1.d-,. -srn _/ Basin B / Basin C / Basin D Number & type of water quality facilities on site: ___ biofiltration swale (regular/wet/ or continuous inflow?) ___ combined detention/WQ pond (WQ portion basic or large?) ___ combined detention/wetvault ___ compost filter ___ filter strip ___ flow dispersion ___ farm management plan ___ landscape management plan l MaiorBasin Lo~ Ce>:J~ R.,~ __ sand filter (basic or large?) __ sand filter, linear (basic or large?) __ sand filter vault (basic or large?) stormwater wetland __ wetpond (basic or large?) __ !_ wetvault ___ oil/water separator (baffle or coalescing plate?) ___ catch basin insertS: Manufacturer __________________ _ ___ pre-settling pond ___ pre-settling structure: Manufacturer _________________ _ ___ fl""-'-splitter catctibasin DESIGN INFORMATION INDMDUAL BASIN A . B C D Water Ouality design flow -----__..,-------Water Oualitv treated volwne or wetnond V r /D7't c-f'-__..,--__..,--__..,-- 1998 Surface Water Design Manual KrNG COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL DESIGN TOTAL INDMDUAL BASIN INFORMATION, cont'd >rainage basin(s) A B C D Onsite area ,:J, 7(p 4< I Offsite area -f I I T=e of Stora~e Facilitv v,.., L-/ I I I Live Storaee Volume "72Do Gf 7 I I Predevelnn.-.rl Runoff Rate 2-vear t),62.9 I I I 10-vear o.ov3 I I I 100-vear o.oe>o -1 I I Develone.rl runoff rate 2-vear a. 172_ I I I 10-vear o. zoE> I I I 100-vear 0,338 I I I Tvne of restrictor OfL.1P1~ I I I Size of orifice/restriction No. l O.bO ,,., I I I No.2 0. (oJ 11\l I I I No.3 -1 I I No.4 - FLOW CONTROL & WATER QUALITY FACILITY SUMMARY SHEET SKETCH All detention, infiltration and water quality facilities must include a sketch per the following criteria: I. Heading for the drawings should be located at the top of the sketch (top right-hand corner). The heading should contain: • North arrow (point up or to left) • D9# __ • Plat name or short plat number • Address (nearest) • Date drawn (or updated) • Thomas Brothers page, grid number Label the control structure in writing or abbreviate 2. Label CBs and MHs with the plan and profile designation. with C.S. Indicate which structures provide spill control. 3. Pipes--indicate: Pipe size Pipe length Flow direction {rff&"/)/ ~? Q 1/1 v j?i Use s single heavyweight line 4. Tanks-use a double, heavyweight line and indicate size (diameter) 5. Access roads • Outline the limits of the road • Fill the outline with dots if the road is gravel. Label in writing if another surfac . 6. Other Standard Symbols: • Bollards: • • • • • • • • • Rip rap 000000 000000 Fences --x--x--x--x---x---x-- • Ditches -D--..... D--..... D---+--D 7. Label trash racks in writing. 8. Label all streets with the actual street sign designation. If you don't know the actual street name, consult the plat map. 9. Include easements and lot lines or tract limits when possible. 10. Arrange all the labeling or writing to read from left to right or from bottom to top with reference to a properly oriented heading. Indicate driveways or features that may impact access, maintenance or replacement. 9/1/98 --c.· ..::: / \ LE DEVELOPMENT X. OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE MANUAL See Appendix A -Operations and Maintenance Manual Terraforma Design Group, Inc. LE DEVELOPMENT APPENDIX A -OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE MANUAL Terraforma Design Group, Inc. LE DEVELOPMENT APPENDIX B -CIVIL PLANS Terraforma Design Group, Inc. .J KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE STANDARDS FOR PRIVATELY MAINTAINED DRAINAGE FACILITIES NO. 1 -DETENTION PONDS Maintenance Component General Defect Trash & Debris Poisonous Vegetation Pollution Unmowed Grass/ Ground Cover Rodent Holes Insects Tree Gro'Nth Side Slopes of Pond Erosion Storage Area Sediment Pond Dikes Emergency Overflow/Spillway Settlements Rock Missing 1998 Surface Water Design Manual Conditions When Maintenance Is Needed Any trash and debris which exceed 1 cubic foot per 1,000 square feet (this is about equal to the amount of trash ii would take to fill up One standard size office garbage can). In general, there should be no visual evidence of dumping. Any poisonous or nuisance vegetation which may constitute a hazard to County personnel or the public. Oil, gasoline, or other contaminants of one gallon or more or any amount found that could: 1) cause damage to plant, animal, or marine life; 2) constitute a fire hazard; or 3) be flushed downstream during rain storms. Jf facility is located in private residential a,ea, mowing is needed when grass exceeds 18 inches in height. In other areas, the general policy is to make the pond site match adjacent ground cover and terrain as long as there is no interference with the Junction of the facility. Any evidence of rodent holes if facility is acting as a dam or berm, or any evidence of water piping through dam or berm via rodent holes. When insects such as wasps and hornets interfere with maintenance activities. Tree growth does not allow maintenance access or interferes with maintenance activity {i.e., slope mowing, silt removal, vactoring, or equipment movements}. If trees are no! interfering with access, leave trees atone. Erodetl damage over 2 inches deep where cause of damage is still present or where there is potential for continued erosion. Accumulated sediment that exceeds 10% of the designed pond deph. Any part of dike which has settled 4 inches lower than the design elevation. Only one layer of rock exists above native soil in area five square feet or larger, or any exposure of native soil at tne top of out flow path of spillway. Rip-rap on inside slopes need not be replaced. A·l Results Expected When Maintenance Is Performed Trash and debris cleared from site. No danger of poisonous vegetation where County personnel or the public might normally be. (Coordination with Seattle·King County Health Department) No contaminants present other than a surtace film. (Coordination with Seattle/King County Health Department) When mowing is needed, grass/ground cover should be mowed to 2 inches In height. Mowing of selected higher use areas rath~r than the entire slope may be acceptable for some situations. Rodents destroyed and dam or berm repaired. {Coordination with Seattle/King County Health Department) lnsects destroyed or removed from site. Trees do not hinder maintenance activities. Selectively cultivate trees such as alders for firewood. Slopes should be stabilized by using appropriate erosion control measure(s); e.g., rock reinforcement, planting of grass, compaction. Sediment cleaned out to designed pond shape and depth; pond reseeded if necessary lo control erosion. Dike should be built back to the design elevation. Replace rocks to design standards. 9/1/98 APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FLOW CONTROL, CONVEYANCE, AND WQ FACILITIES NO. 3-DETENTION TANKS AND VAULTS Maintenance Defect or Problem Conditions When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Component Maintenance is Performed · .. .....,.....· Storage Area Plugged Air Vents One-half of the cross section of a vent is blocked Vents free of debris and sediment at any point with debris and sediment. Debris and Sediment Accumulated sediment depth exceeds 10% of A!I sediment and debris removed the diameter of the storage area for% length of from storage area. storage vault or any point depth exceeds 15% of diameter. Example: 72-inch storage tank would require cleaning when sediment reaches depth of 7 inches for more than Y:i length of tank. Joints Between Any crack allowing material to be transported into All joint between tank/pipe sections Tank/Pipe Section facility. are sealed Tank Pipe Bent Out of Arr,; part of tank/pipe is bent out of shape more Tank/pipe repaired or replaced to Shape than 10%, of its design shape. design. Vault Structure Damage to Wall, Cracks wider than Yi-inch and any evidence of Vault replaced or repaired to design Frame, Bottom, soil particles entering the structure through the specifications. and/or Top Slab cracks, or maintenance inspection personnel detennines that the vault is not structurally sound. Damaged Pipe Joints Cracks wider than %-inch at the joint of any No cracks more than X-inch wide at inteVoutlet pipe or any evidence of soil particles entering the vault through the walls. the joint of the inleVoutlet pipe. Manhole Cover Not in Place Cover is missing or only partially in place. Any Manhole is closed. open manhole requires maintenance. Locking Mechanism Mechanism cannot be opened by one Mechanism opens with proper tools. Not Working maintenance person with proper tools. Bolts into frame have less than l'.i inch of thread (may not apply to self-locking lids.) ··--·' Cover Difficult to One maintenance person cannot remove lid after Cover can be removed and Remove applying 801bs of lift. Intent is to keep cover from reinstalled by one maintenance sealing off access to maintenance. person. Ladder Rungs Unsafe King County Safety Office and/or maintenance Ladder meets design standards. person judges that ladder is unsafe due to Allows maintenance person safe missing rungs, misalignment, rust, or cracks. access. Large access Gaps, Doesn't Cover Large access doors not flat and/or access hole Doors closes flat and covers access doors/plate Completely not completely covered. NOTE however that hole completely. grated doors are acceptable. lifting Rings Missing, Lifting rings not capable of lifting weight of door Lifting rings sufficient to remove lid. Rusted or lid. I/24/2005 2005 Surface Water Design Manual -Appendix A APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE STANDARDS FOR PRN A TELY MAINTAINED DRAINAGE FACILITIES NO. 4 • CONTROL STRUCTURE/FLOW RESTRICTOR Maintenance Defect Component General Trash and Debris (Includes Sediment) structural Damage Cleanout Gate Damaged or Missing Orifice Plate Damaged or Missing Obstructions Overflow Pipe Obstructions Manhole Catch Basin 9/1/98 Condition When Maintenance is Needed Distance between debris build-up and bottom of orifice plate is less than 1·1/2 feet. Structure is not securely attached to manhole wall and outlet pipe structure should support at least 1,000 lbs of up or down pressure. Structure is not in upnght position (allow up to 10% from plumb), Connections to outlet pipe are not watertight and show signs of rust. Any ho!es-other than designed holes-in the structure. Cleanout gate is not watertight or ls missing. Gate cannot be moved up and down by one maintenance person. Chain leading to gate is missing or damaged. Gate is rusted over 50% of its surface area. Control device is not working properly due to missing, out of place, or bent orifice plate. Any trash, debris, sediment, or vegetation blocking the plate. Any trash or debris blocking (or having the potential of blocking) the overflow pipe. Results Expected When Maintenance is Performed All trash and debris removed. Structure securely attached to wall and outlet pipe. Structure in correct position. Connections to outlet pipe are water tight; structure repaired or replaced and works as designed. Structure has no holes other than designed holes, Gate is watertight and works as designed. Gate moves up and down easily and is watertight. Chain is in place and works as designed. Gate is repaired or replaced to meet design standards .. Plate is in place and works as designed. Plate is free of all obstructions and works as designed. Pipe is free of all obstructions and works as designed. See "Closed Detention Systems" Standards No. 3 See "Closed Detention Systems' Standards No, 3 See "Cat:::h Basins" Standards No. 5 See 'Catch Basins" Standards No. 5 1998 Surface Water Design Manual A-4 .__,,, APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE STANDARDS FOR PRIVATELY MAINTAINED DRAINAGE FACILffiES NO. 5-CATCH BASINS Maintenance Ccmponent General Defect Trash & Debris (Includes Sediment) Structure Damage to Frame and/or Top Slab Cracks in Basin Walls/ Bottom SedimenV Misalignment 1998 Surface Water Design Manual Conditions When Maintenance is Needed Trash or debris of more than 1/2 cubic toot which is located immediately in froDt of the catch basin opening or is blocking capacity of the basin by more than 10% Trash or debris (in the basin) that exceeds 1/3 the depth from the bottom of basin to invert the lowest pipe into or out of the basin. Trash or debris in any inlet or outlet pipe blocking more than 1 /3 of its height. Dead animals or vegetation that could generate odors that could cause complaints or dangerous gases (e.g., methane). Deposits of garbage exceeding 1 cubic foot in volume Corner of frame extends more than 3/4 inch past curb face into the street (If applicable). Top slab has holes larger than 2 square inches or cracks wider than 1/4 inch (intent is to make sure all material is running into basin). Frame not sitting flush on top slab, i.e., separation of more than 3/4 inch of the frame from the top slab. Cracks wider than 1/2 inch and longer than 3 feet, any evidence of soil particles entering catch basin through cracks, or maintenance person judges that structure is unsound. Cracks wider than 1 /2 inch and longer than 1 foot at the joint of any inlet/ outlet pipe or any evidence of soil particles entering catch basin through cracks. Basin has set11ed more than 1 inch or has rotated more than 2 inches out of alignment. A-5 Results Expected When Maintenance is performed No Trash or debris located immediately in front of catch basin opening. No trash or debris in the catch basin. Inlet and outlet pipes free of trash or debris. No dead animals or vegetation present within the catch basin. No condition present which would attract or support the breeding of insects or rodents. Frame is even with curb. Top slab is free of holes and cracks. Frame is sitting flush on top slab. Basin replaced or repaired to design standards. No cracks more than 1 /4 inch wide at the joint of inleVoutlet pipe. Basin replaced or repaired to design standards. 9/1198 APPENDIX A MAIN'IENANCE STANDARDS FOR PRIVATELY MAINTAINED DRAINAGE FACILlTIES NO. 5-CATCH BASINS (CONTINUE[JJ Maintenance Component Defect Fire Hazard Vegetation Pollution Catch Basin Cover Cover Not in Place, Ladder Metal Grates (If Applicable) Locking Mechanism Not Working Cover Difficult to Remove Ladder Rungs Unsafe Trash and Debris Damaged or Missing. Conditions When Maintenance is Needed Presence of chemicals such as natural gas. oil and gasoline. Vegetation growing across and blocking more than 10% of the basin opening. Vegetation growing in inleVoutlet pipe joints that is more than six inches tall and less than six inches apart. Nonflammable chemicals of more than 1 /2 cubic foot per three feet of basin length. Cover is missing or only partially in place. Any open catch basin requires maintenance. Mechanism cannot be opened by on maintenance person with proper tools. Bolts into frame have less than 1/2 inch of thread. One maintenance person cannot remove lid after applying 80 lbs. of litt; intent is keep cover from sealing off access to maintenance. Ladder is unsafe due to missing rungs, misalignment, rust, cracks, or sharp edges. Grate with opening wider trian 7/8 inch. Trash and debris that is blocking more than 20% of grate surface. Grate missing or broken member(s) of the grate. NO. 6 DEBRIS BARRIERS (E.G., TRASH RACKS) Maintenance Components Defect Condition When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Maintenance is performed No flammable chemicals present. No vegetation blocking opening to basin. No vegetation or root growth present. No pollution present other than surface film. Catch basin cover is closed Mechanism opens with proper tools. Cover can be removed by one maintenance person. Ladder meets design standards and allows maintenance person safe access. Grate opening meets design standards. Grate free of trash and debris. Grate is in place and meets design standards. General Trash and Debris Trash or debris that is plugging more than 20':>/,;i of~~-~· Metal 9/1198 Damaged/ Missing Bars. the openings in the barrier. Bars are bent o_ut.of-'Sfiape more than 3 inches. -· Bars are missing or entire barrier missing. Bars are loose and rust is causing 50% deterioration to any part of barrier. A-6 Bars in place with no bends more than 3/4 inch, Bars in place according to design. Repair or replace barrier to design standards. 1998 Surface Water Design Manual APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE STANDARDS FOR PRIVATELY MAINTAINED DRAINAGE FACILITIES N0.10-CONVEYANCE SYSTEMS {PIPES & DITCHES) Maintenance Component Pipes Defect Sediment & Debris Vegetation Damaged Conditions When Maintenance Is Needed Accumulated sediment that exceeds 20% of the diameter of the pipe. Vegetation that reduces free movement of water through pipes. Protective coating is damaged; rust is causing more than 50% deterioration to any part of pipe. Results Expected When Maintenance ls Performed Pipe cleaned of all sediment and debris. All vegetation removed so water flows freely through pipes. Pipe repaired or replaced. Any dent that decreases the cross section area of Pipe repaired or replaced. Open Ditches Catch Basins Debris Barriers (e.g., Trash Rack) Trash & Debris Sediment Vegetation Erosion Damage to Slopes Rock Lining Out of Place or Missing (If Applicable). pipe by more than 20'%,. Trash and debris exceeds 1 cubic foot per 1,000 square feet of ditch and slopes. Accumulated sediment that exceeds 20 % of the design depth. Vegeta~on that reduces free movement of water through ditches. See "Ponds" Standard No. 1 Maintenance person can see native soil beneath the rock lining. See "Catch Basins: Standard No. 5 See "Debris Barriers" Standard No.6 N0.11-GROUNDS (LANDSCAPING) Maintenance Component General Trees and Shrubs Defect Weeds (Nonpoisonous) Safety Hazard Trash or Litter Damaged 1998 Surface Water Design Manual Conditions When Maintenance Is Needed Weeds growing in more than 20% ot the landscaped area (trees and shrubs only). Any presence of poison ivy or other poisonous vegetation Paper, cans, bott1es, totaling more than 1 cubic foot within a landscaped area (trees and shrubs only) of 1,000 square feet. Limbs or parts ol trees or shrubs that are split or broken which attect more than 25% of the total foliage of the tree or shrub. Trees or shrubs that have been blown down or knocked over. Trees or shrubs which are not adequately supported or are leaning over, causing exposure of the roots. A-9 Trash and debris cleared from ditches. Ditch cleaned/ flushed of all sediment and debris so that it matches design. Water flows freely through ditches. See "Ponds" Standard No. 1 Replace rocks to design standards. See MCatch Basins" Standard No.5 See MDebris Barriers" Standard No.6 Results Expected When Maintenance is Performed Weeds present in Jess than 5% of the landscaped area. No poisonous vegetation present in landscaped area. Area clear of litter. Trees and shrubs with less than 5% of total foliage with split or broken limbs. Tree or shrub in place free of injury. Tree or shrub in place and adequately supported; remove any dead or diseased trees. 9/l/98