Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLUA15-000039 3 of 3_Misc 2HALINEN LAW davidhalinen@halinenlaw.com • • Seattle• 206.443.4684 • Tacoma • 253.627.6680 • Fax • 253.272.9876 •Cell• 206.713.0992 Halinen Law Offices PS • 1019 Regents Blvd Ste 202 Fircrest. WA 98466-6037 • halinenlaw.com HAND-DELIVERED City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development 1055 S. Grady Way, Sixth Floor Renton, Washington 98057 Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator June 24, 2015 Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager Clark Close, Associate Planner RE: My client Pointe Heron LLC's Grade and Fill Permit application for a proposed filling, excavation, and grading project within a 14.12-acre project site portion of Lot 1 of the SR 900 L.L.C. Lot Line Adjustment (Rec.# 20040311900015}-LUA\5-000039 Errata Corrections Concerning My June 1, 2015 Letter Setting Forth Pointe Heron LLC's (1) Reiterated Request for a Modification Concerning the Proposed 1.SH: IV South-Edge Fill Slope and (2) Updated Justification for the Modification Request Dear Mr. Vincent, Ms. Dolbee, and Mr. Close: Please note the following corrections to two points ofmy above-referenced June 1, 2015 letter: First, the phrase at the end of the first paragraph of footnote 10 on page_ of June 1, 2015 letter currently states "(ii) the location of a portion of Monster Road SW is depicted (at the right edge of the sheet)." (Boldfacing added.) That phrase is hereby corrected to state: "(ii) the location of a portion of Monster Road SW is depicted (at the left edge of the sheet)." Second, on page 36 of the June 1, 2015 letter, a segment of indented text currently states: (3) Make the depth of the primary future developable area (a) totally inadequate for construction of capital-intensive buildings [ of a scale reasonable considering the massive scale of the ultimate overall contemplated financial investment for City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager, and Clark Close, Associate Planner June 24, 2015 Page 2 (i) the currently proposed filling, excavation, and grading and the associated stormwater-detention-pond relocation, (ii) the contemplated future road-and utility-infrastructure installation, and (iii) the future construction of buildings and associated parking areas, drive aisles, and landscaping that will be needed within the primary future developable area] along the approximately I OO-foot-deep-by-660-foot-long strip of that area that would lie south of the proposed stormwater detention pond (a strip of land that would cover 49 percent of the primary future developable area's entire length) and (b) only barely adequate to physically accommodate the scale of such future buildings in the 185-foot-deep portion of that area to the west of the proposed new detention pond. That indented text is hereby corrected to state as follows: (3) Make the depth of the primary future developable area (a) totally inadequate for construction of capital-intensive buildings [along the approximately IOO-foot-deep-by-660-foot- long strip of that area that would lie south of the proposed stormwater detention pond (a strip of land that would cover 49 percent of the primary future developable area's entire length)] of a scale reasonable considering the massive scale of the ultimate overall contemplated financial investment for (i) the currently proposed filling, excavation, and grading and the associated stormwater-detention- pond relocation, (ii) the contemplated future road-and utility- infrastructure installation, and (iii) the future construction of buildings and associated parking areas, drive aisles, and landscaping that will be needed within the primary future developable area and City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager, and Clark Close, Associate Planner June 24, 2015 Page 3 Please let me know if you have any questions concerning the above. cc: Pointe Heron LLC Attn: Jim Blais Sincerely, Y:\cf\2623\023\City\Dolbee LT4 (DI .H 06-23-2015 Modification Request Letter ERRATA 06-23-2015 ).doc .- HALINEN LAW davidhalinen@hal1nen!aw com Seattle • 206.443.4684 • Tacoma • 253.627.6680 • Fax • 253.272.9876 • Cell • 206.713.0992 Halinen Law Offices, P.S. • 1019 Regents Blvd Ste 202 Fircrest. WA 98466-6037 • halinenlaw.com HAND-DELIVERED City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development 1055 S. Grady Way, Sixth Floor Renton, Washington 98057 Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator June 24, 2015 Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager Clark Close, Associate Planner RE: My client Pointe Heron LLC's Grade and Fill Permit application for a proposed filling, excavation, and grading project within a 14.12-acre project site portion of Lot 1 of the SR 900 L.L.C. Lot Line Adjustment (Rec. # 20040311900015)---LUA 15-000039 Errata Corrections Concerning My June 1, 2015 Letter Setting Forth Pointe Heron LLC's (1) Reiterated Request for a Modification Concerning the Proposed 1.SH:lV South-Edge Fill Slope and (2) Updated Justification for the Modification Request Dear Mr. Vincent, Ms. Dolbee, and Mr. Close: Please note the following corrections to two points of my above-referenced June 1, 2015 letter: First, the phrase at the end of the first paragraph of footnote 10 on page_ of June 1, 2015 letter currently states "(ii) the location ofa portion of Monster Road SW is depicted (at the right edge of the sheet)." (Boldfacing added.) That phrase is hereby corrected to state: "(ii) the location of a portion of Monster Road SW is depicted (at the left edge of the sheet)." Second, on page 36 of the June 1, 2015 letter, a segment of indented text currently states: (3) Make the depth of the primary future developable area (a) totally inadequate for construction of capital-intensive buildings [of a scale reasonable considering the massive scale of the ultimate overall contemplated financial investment for , City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager, and Clark Close, Associate Planner June 24, 2015 Page 2 (i) the currently proposed filling, excavation, and grading and the associated stormwater-detention-pond relocation, (ii) the contemplated future road-and utility-infrastructure installation, and (iii) the future construction of buildings and associated parking areas, drive aisles, and landscaping that will be needed within the primary future developable area] along the approximately 1 OO-foot-deep-by-660-foot-long strip of that area that would lie south of the proposed stormwater detention pond (a strip of land that would cover 49 percent of the primary future developable area's entire length) and (b) only barely adequate to physically accommodate the scale of such future buildings in the 185-foot-deep portion of that area to the west of the proposed new detention pond. That indented text is hereby corrected to state as follows: (3) Make the depth of the primary future developable area (a) totally inadequate for construction of capital-intensive buildings [along the approximately 100-foot-deep-by-660-foot- long strip of that area that would lie south of the proposed stormwater detention pond (a strip of land that would cover 49 percent of the primaryfuture developable area's entire length)] of a scale reasonable considering the massive scale of the ultimate overall contemplated financial investment for (i) the currently proposed filling, excavation, and grading and the associated stormwater-detention- pond relocation, (ii) the contemplated future road-and utility- infrastructure installation, and (iii) the future construction of buildings and associated parking areas, drive aisles, and landscaping that will be needed within the primary future developable area and City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager, and Clark Close, Associate Planner June 24, 2015 Page 3 Please let me know if you have any questions concerning the above. cc: Pointe Heron LLC Attn: Jim Blais Sincerely, Y·\ct\2623\023\City\Oolbee I .T4 (T11 .H 06-2.1-2015 Modification Request Letter ER RAT A 06-23-2015 ).doc HALINEN LAW davidhalinen@halinenlaw.com • • Seattle• 206.443.4684 •Tacoma• 253.627.6680 • Fax• 253.272.9876 • Cell • 206.713.0992 Halinen Law Offices, PS • 1019 Regents Blvd Ste 202 Fircrest. WA 98466·6037 • hahnenlaw.com HAND-DELIVERED City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development 1055 S. Grady Way, Sixth Floor Renton, Washington 98057 Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator June 24, 2015 Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager Clark Close, Associate Planner RE: My client Pointe Heron LLC's Grade and Fill Permit application for a proposed filling, excavation, and grading project within a 14.12-acre project site portion of Lot 1 of the SR 900 L.L.C. Lot Line Adjustment (Rec.# 20040311900015}-LUA15-000039 Errata Corrections Concerning My June I, 2015 Letter Setting Forth Pointe Heron LLC's (I) Reiterated Request for a Modification Concerning the Proposed l.SH:IV South-Edge Fill Slope and (2) Updated Justification for the Modification Request Dear Mr. Vincent, Ms. Dolbee, and Mr. Close: Please note the following corrections to two points of my above-referenced June 1, 2015 letter: First, the phrase at the end of the first paragraph of footnote 10 on page _ of June I, 2015 letter currently states "(ii) the location of a portion of Monster Road SW is depicted (at the right edge of the sheet)." (Boldfacing added.) That phrase is hereby corrected to state: "(ii) the location ofa portion of Monster Road SW is depicted (at the left edge of the sheet)." Second, on page 36 of the June 1, 2015 letter, a segment of indented text currently states: (3) Make the depth of the primary future developable area (a) totally inadequate for construction of capital-intensive buildings [ of a scale reasonable considering the massive scale of the ultimate overall contemplated financial investment for City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager, and Clark Close, Associate Planner June 24, 2015 Page 2 (i) the currently proposed filling, excavation, and grading and the associated stormwater-detention-pond relocation, (ii) the contemplated future road-and utility-infrastructure installation, and (iii) the future construction of buildings and associated parking areas, drive aisles, and landscaping that will be needed within the primary future developable area] along the approximately I 00-foot-deep-by-660-foot-long strip of that area that would lie south of the proposed stormwater detention pond (a strip of land that would cover 49 percent of the primaryfuture developable area's entire length) and (b) only barely adequate to physically accommodate the scale of such future buildings in the 185-foot-deep portion of that area to the west of the proposed new detention pond. That indented text is hereby corrected to state as follows: (3) Make the depth of the primary future developable area (a) totally inadequate for construction of capital-intensive buildings [along the approximately 100-foot-deep-by-660-foot- long strip of that area that would lie south of the proposed stormwater detention pond (a strip of land that would cover 49 percent of the primary future developable area's entire length)] of a scale reasonable considering the massive scale of the ultimate overall contemplated financial investment for (i) the currently proposed filling, excavation, and grading and the associated stormwater-detention- pond relocation, (ii) the contemplated future road-and utility- infrastructure installation, and (iii) the future construction of buildings and associated parking areas, drive aisles, and landscaping that will be needed within the primary future developable area and City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager, and Clark Close, Associate Planner June 24, 2015 Page 3 Please let me know if you have any questions concerning the above. cc: Pointe Heron LLC Attn: Jim Blais Sincerely, Y:\cf\2623\023\City\Dolbee LT4 (OJ JI 06·23·2015 Modification Request Letter ERRATA 06·23·2015 ).doc r • • HALINEN LAW davidhalinen@halinenlaw.com Seattle• 206.443.4684 •Tacoma• 253627.6680 • Fax• 253.272.9876 • Cell • 206.713.0992 Halinen Law Offices. PS.• 1019 Regents Blvd Ste 202 Fircrest. WA 98466-6037 • halinenlaw com June 24, 2015 HAND-DELIVERED City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development 1055 S. Grady Way, Sixth Floor Renton, Washington 98057 Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager Clark Close, Associate Planner RE: My client Pointe Heron LLC's Grade and Fill Permit application for a proposed filling, excavation, and grading project within a 14.12-acre project site portion of Lot I of the SR 900 L.L.C. Lot Line Adjustment (Rec.# 200403 l l 900015}--LUA15-000039 Errata Corrections Concerning My June 1, 2015 Letter Setting Forth Pointe Heron LLC's (1) Reiterated Request for a Modification Concerning the Proposed 1.SH:lV South-Edge Fill Slope and (2) Updated Justification for the Modification Request Dear Mr. Vincent, Ms. Dolbee, and Mr. Close: Please note the following corrections to two points ofmy above-referenced June 1, 2015 letter: First, the phrase at the end of the first paragraph of footnote 10 on page _ of June 1, 2015 letter currently states "(ii) the location of a portion of Monster Road SW is depicted (at the right edge of the sheet)." (Boldfacing added.) That phrase is hereby corrected to state: "(ii) the location ofa portion of Monster Road SW is depicted (at the left edge of the sheet)." Second, on page 36 of the June I, 2015 letter, a segment of indented text currently states: (3) Make the depth of the primary future developable area (a) totally inadequate for construction of capital-intensive buildings [of a scale reasonable considering the massive scale of the ultimate overall contemplated financial investment for City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager, and Clark Close, Associate Planner June 24, 2015 Page 2 (i) the currently proposed filling, excavation, and grading and the associated storrnwater-detention-pond relocation, (ii) the contemplated future road-and utility-infrastructure installation, and (iii) the future construction of buildings and associated parking areas, drive aisles, and landscaping that will be needed within the primary future developable area] along the approximately 1 OO-foot-deep-by-660-foot-long strip of that area that would lie south of the proposed storrnwater detention pond (a strip of land that would cover 49 percent of the primary future developable area's entire length) and (b) only barely adequate to physically accommodate the scaJe of such future buildings in the 185-foot-deep portion of that area to the west of the proposed new detention pond. That indented text is hereby corrected to state as follows: (3) Make the depth of the primary future developable area (a) totally inadequate for construction of capital-intensive buildings [along the approximately 100-foot-deep-by-660-foot- long strip of that area that would lie south of the proposed storrnwater detention pond (a strip of land that would cover 49 percent of the primary future developable area's entire length)] of a scale reasonable considering the massive scale of the ultimate overall contemplated financial investment for (i) the currently proposed filling, excavation, and grading and the associated storrnwater-detention- pond relocation, (ii) the contemplated future road-and utility- infrastructure installation, and (iii) the future construction of buildings and associated parking areas, drive aisles, and landscaping that will be needed within the primary future developable area and City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager, and Clark Close, Associate Planner June 24, 2015 Page 3 Please let me know if you have any questions concerning the above. cc: Pointe Heron LLC Attn: Jim Blais Sincerely, u;:;;;~ David L. Halinen Y:\cf'l,2623\023\City\Dolbee 1 T4 (Dl JI 06·23-2015 Modification Request Letter ERRATA 06-23-2015 ).doc HALINEN LAW dav1dhalinen@ha!inentaw com • • Seattle~ 206.443.4684 ~ Tacoma • 253.627.6680 • Fax • 253.272.9876 • Cell * 206.713.0992 Halinen Law Offices. PS • 1019 Regents Blvd Ste 202 Fircrest. WA 98466-6037 • halinen!aw.com HAND-DELIVERED City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development 1055 S. Grady Way, Sixth Floor Renton, Washington 98057 Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator June I, 2015 Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager RE: My client Pointe Heron LLC's Grade and Fill Permit application for a proposed filling, excavation, and grading project within a 14.12-acre project site portion of Lot I of the SR 900 L.L.C. Lot Line Adjustment (Rec.# 20040311900015)-LUAl5-000039 (1) Request for a Modification Concerning the Proposed 1.SH:IV South-Edge Fill Slope and (2) Justification for the Modification Request Dear Mr. Vincent and Ms. Dolbee: In my August 18, 2014 letter to your attention, Ms. Dolbee, concerning my client Pointe Heron LLC's Grade and Fill Permit application (a copy of which letter, along with all of the exhibits attached thereto, is attached to this letter as Appendix I), as you will recall, I (I) summarized the existing fill slopes on the subject parcel and on the abutting property to the west [ and explained the lack of existing "Protected Slopes" within the project site in view of RMC 4- 3-050Jl a(i)], (2) summarized the proposed fill slopes within the proposed Grade and Fill Permit project site, and (3) explained why the proposed fill slopes should be approved by the City without either a modification or a variance. During the November 3, 2014 meeting that my client's representatives and I had with both of you and with Planning Director Jennifer Henning and Associate Planner Clark Close, you explained to me and my clients that (a) you agreed with my August 18, 2014 letter's analysis that there are no existing "Protected Slopes" within the subject project site but (b) my client needed to submit a request for a variance for the portions of the proposed slopes that would be steeper than 40 percent with a height of 15 feet or greater. For the reasons set forth in my above-referenced August 18, 2014 letter, my clients and I continue to maintain that neither a modification [ which may be granted per RMC 4-9-250D I for one of the circumstances listed in RMC 4-3-050N2a(ii) (Geologic Hazards -Modifications)] nor a variance is needed for the portions of the proposed 1.5H: IV south-edge fill slope that would be steeper than 40 percent with a height of 15 feet or greater. Nevertheless, as explained in detail in this letter, in view of RMC 4-4-060N6 and other applicable code criteria discussed in this letter, City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June 1, 2015 Page 2 the fill slope portion of the proposal qualifies for a modification per RMC 4-9-250D I for at least one of the circumstances listed in RMC 4-3-050N2a(ii) (Geologic Hazards -Modifications), a modification that will fully resolve the maximum slope issue stemming from RMC 4-4-060N6's second sentence). Accordingly, by this letter my client Pointe Heron LLC hereby respectfully requests a modification per RMC 4-9-250D I for the proposed fill slopes that are proposed to be steeper than 40 percent with a height of 15 feet or greater. Note that my client and I continue to contend that no variance is necessary for the proposal. However, because of your insistence that a variance application needed to be submitted, Pointe Heron LLC has already submitted to the City a request for a variance under Subsection 8.5 of RMC Section 4-9-250 by means of a letter from me to CED (with supporting attachments) dated April 24, 2015. On Pointe Heron LLC's behalf, I hereby request that: (I) The City process both the modification request and the variance request along with the application for the requested special grade and fill permit and (2) The Hearing Examiner render pursuant to RMC 4-8-080C 1 (Optional Process Resulting in a Single Open Record Public Hearing) and/or RMC 4-8-080C2 (Review Authority for Multiple Permit Applications) and the table set forth as RMC 4-8-0800 (LAND USE PERMIT PROCEDURES) the decisions for the requested modification, the requested variance, and the requested special grade and fill permit. The remainder of this letter constitutes Pointe Heron LLC 's justification for the requested modification. (Note that this letter and its attachments supersede my January 20, 2015 modification request letter and its attachments.) Renton Code Background Regarding Fill Slopes and Modifications Concerning Fill Slopes Steeper Than 40 Percent RMC 4-4-060N's Maximum Fill Slope Paragraph Subsection N (FILLS) of RMC Section 4-4-060 (GRADING, EXCAVATION AND MINING REGULA TIO NS) specifically addresses the subject of proposed fills. Paragraph 6 (Maximum Slope) of RMC 4-4-060N addresses proposed fill slopes and contains an express exception to a prohibition on approval of the creation of permanent slopes forty percent ( 40%) or greater which are fifteen feet (15') in height when a modification is granted per RMC 4-9-250DI for one of the circumstances listed in RMC 4-3-050N2a(ii) (Geologic Hazards -Modifications). Paragraph 6 (Maximum Slope) ofRMC 4-4-060N states: City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June I, 2015 Page 3 6. Maximum Slope: The slope of fill surfaces shall be no steeper than is safe for the intended use. Except in conjunction with a modification granted per RMC 4-9- 250D I for one of the circumstances listed in RMC 4-3-050N2a(ii) (Geologic Hazards -Modifications), fill operations associated with a plat, short plat, subdivision or dedication, or other permitted land development activity which would result in the creation of permanent slopes forty percent ( 40%) or greater which are fifteen feet (15') in height, i.e., protected slopes, shall not be approved. (Amd. Ord. 4835, 3-27-2000) (Boldfacing in the code text; italics and underlining added.) The Code Provisions Relating to Modifications That Are Cited in RMC 4-4-060N's Maximum Slope Paragraph, and Pointe Heron LLC's Qualification to Request a Modification Thereunder Two code provisions relating to modifications are cited in RMC 4-4-060N6 (Maximum Slope). The first one, RMC 4-9-250Dl, states: 1. Application Time and Decision Authority: Modification from standards, either in whole or in part, shall be subject to review and decision by the Planning/Building/Public Works Department upon submittal in writing of jurisdiction for such modification. (Amd. Ord. 4 777, 4-19-1999) The second one, RMC 4-3-050N2a(ii) (Geologic Hazards -Modifications), sets forth both (I) the circumstances and activities in which an applicant may request a geologic hazard modification and (2) the applicable procedures in regard to the requested activities for such modification. RMC 4-3-050N2a(ii) states: ii. Geologic Hazards -Modifications: An applicant may request that the Administrator grant a modification to allow: (a) Regrading of any slope which was created through previous mineral and natural resource recovery activities or was created prior to adoption of applicable mineral and natural resource recovery regulations or through 1 public or private road installation or widening and related transportation 1 In Webster "s Third New International Dictionary of the English language Unabridged, ( copyright 2002 by Merriam Webster, Incorporated), definition 2c of the listing of the word "through" as a preposition is "as a result of." In the context and sense in which "through" is used throughout above-and below-quoted paragraphs (a), (b), and (c) ofRMC 4-3-050N2a(ii), that "as a result of' definition seems to be the most logical and fitting of the definitions of "through" offered in that dictionary in regard to the use of "through" as a preposition. City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June 1, 2015 Page 4 improvements, railroad track installation or improvement, or public or private utility installation activities; (b) Filling against the toe of a natural rock wall or rock wall created through mineral and natural resource recovery activities or through public or private road installation or widening and related transportation improvements, railroad track installation or improvement or public or private utility installation activities; and/or ( c) Grading to the extent that it eliminates all or portions of a mound or to allow reconfiguration o( protected slopes created through mineral and natural resource recovery activities or public or private road installation or widening and related transportation improvements, railroad track installation or improvement, or public or private utility installation activities. The following procedures shall apply to any of the above activities: (]) The applicant shall submit a geotechnical report describing any potential impacts of the proposed regrading and any necessary mitigation measures; (2) All submitted reports shall be independently reviewed by qualified specialists selected by the City at the applicant's expense; (3) The Department Administrator may grant, condition, or deny the request based upon the proposal's compliance with the applicable modification criteria of RMC 4-9-250D; and (4) Any slope which remains forty percent (40%) or steeper following site development shall be subject to all applicable geologic hazard regulations for steep slopes and landslide hazards, in this Section. (5) In addition to the criteria o(RMC 4-9-250D. Modification Procedures, the following criteria shall apply: The proposed modification is based on consideration of the best available science as described in WAC 365-195- 905; or where there is an absence of valid scientific information, the steps in RMC 4-9-250F are followed. (Boldfacing in the code text; italics and underlining added.) Note that, in view of the grammatical structure of above-quoted paragraphs (a) and (c) of RMC 4-3-050N2a(ii) (especially the use of the disjunctive word "or" in each of those two paragraphs), nothing in either of those two above-quoted paragraphs ties the phrase "public or private road installation or City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June 1,2015 Page 5 widening and related transportation improvements" or the phrase "private utility installation activities" used in each of those two paragraphs to the phrase "mineral and natural resource recovery activities" used in each of those two paragraphs. In view of the phrase "private utility installation activities" that appears in each of paragraphs (a), (b), and (c) of above-quoted RMC 4-3-050N2a(ii), note that the definition of "utilities" in RMC 4-11-210 (DEFINITIONS U) states: UTILITIES: Utility lines and facilities related to the prov1s10n, distribution, collection, transmission or disposal of water, storm and sanitary sewage, oil, gas, power, and telephone cable, and includes facilities for the generation of electricity. This definition does not include sewage wastewater treatment plants, wireless communication facilities, or solid waste disposal/recycling facilities. (Boldfacing in the code text; italics and underlining added.) Because the phrase "facilities related to" ( emphasis added) is used in that definition, that definition is very broad and certainly encompasses each and every one of the seven Existing Sunset Bluff Private Utility Installations that are summarized on pages 7 to 8, below. Note also that RMC 4-7-190B (Utilities in Tracts) provides that stormwater ponds are included within the meaning of the word "utilities." That provision states: "Utilities, such a[s} stormwater vaults, ponds, or other structures, shall be located within designated tracts." (Emphasis added.) Thus, that provision provides further explicit code support for the conclusion that stormwater ponds are "utilities." Note that the "criteria ofRMC 4-9-250D, Modification Procedures" cited in item 5 of the list of RMC 4-3-050N2a(ii) procedures quoted on pages 3 to 4, above, are set forth in subsection 2 (Decision Criteria) of RMC 4-9-250D. The text of that subsection 2 is set forth on page 12, below, and is discussed and used on pages 12 through 52, below. Reasons Why the Reguested Modification Should Be Granted I. The Proposed Regrading/Recontouring of Existing Fill Slopes to Create Planned I.SH: 1 V Fill Slopes That Will Exceed 15 Feet in Height Falls within Circumstances of Above-Quoted Paragraphs (a) and (c) of RMC 4-3-050N2a(ii), Circumstances in Which the Code Explicitly Provides That an Applicant May Reguest a Modification. City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June I, 2015 Page 6 A. Background: Commenced Development Summary of Site Work Performed as Part of the Previously but Not Completed Sunset Bluff Residential Subdivision The Pointe Heron Grade and Fill Permit project site lies within an approximately 14.12- acre portion (the "Project Site" portion) of a 26.26-acre single parcel of land owned by Pointe Heron LLC: namely, Lot 1 of the SR 900 L.L.C. Lot Line Adjustment (King County Recording Number 20040311900015). A 65-lot residential subdivision contemplated by the previously approved Sunset Bluff Preliminary Plat was designed to lie within that parcel. (An l l-inch-by- 17-inch reduced-size copy of that preliminary plat is attached as Appendix 2.) Note that prior to the commencement of site work for the Sunset Bluff Residential Subdivision development in 2005, the slopes in the southern half of the west part of the current Project Site were relatively uniform. (See the predevelopment two-foot-interval elevation contours that are depicted on Appendix 2, elevation contours with generally even spacing due to the relatively uniform pre-Sunset Bluffpredevelopment slopes.) In contrast, the Sunset Bluff site development work created areas with much steeper slopes through the private utility installation activities for the Existing Sunset Bluff Private Utility Installations, including areas within and adjacent to the southern half of the currently proposed Grade and Fill Project Site. [See attached Appendix 3 (an 11-inch-by-17-inch color map exhibit 2), Appendix 4 (a set of l l-inch-by-17-inch reduced-sized copies of Sheets I and 2 of the Barghausen Topography Map, full-size versions of which were submitted to the City as part of the subject Grade and Fill Permit application), and Sheets XI, X2, XS, and X6 of the six-sheet set ofBarghausen cross-section exhibit sheets that accompany this letter as Appendix 5.3]. Note that Appendix 3 and Appendix 4 generally depict in "bunches" more narrowly spaced elevation contours than does Appendix 2 (such bunches reflecting the more steeply sloped areas that were created by the Sunset Bluff site work). Those narrowly spaced contour bunches are separated by 2 Appendix 3 was created on a base sheet comprised of spliced-together l l-inch-by-17-inch reduced-sized copies of (a) a portion of Sheet I and (b) a portion of Sheet 2 of the Barghausen Topography Map for the current filling, excavation, and grading project proposal. (Those Sheets I and 2 are attached as Appendix 4.) 3 For an explanation of (a) all of Sheets XI, X2, X3, X4, XS, and X6 of the Appendix 5 Barghausen cross- section exhibit and (b) numerous things that both (i) those exhibit sheets and (ii) the attached Appendix 3 Barghausen Topography Map sheets illustrate (including, among other things, the locations of several fill slopes that were constructed as part of the Sunset Bluff subdivision site development work), see attached Appendix 6 (for a copy oftbe cover sheet and a set of copies of pages 5 through 7 of Earth Solutions NW, LLC's August 13, 2014 Pointe Heron Geotechnical and Soil Engineering Report submitted to the City as part of Pointe Heron LLC's Grade and Fill Perrnit application) under the subheading "Previously Placed Fill," a subheading tbat appears in the middle of page 5 thereof. Note that (A) APPENDIX B attached to that report is the same as Appendix 5 attached to this letter and (B) APPENDIX C attached to that report is the same as Appendix 4 attached to this letter. (The portions of pages 5 through 7 of that report under the subheading "Previously Placed Fill" are incorporated herein by reference.) City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June 1, 2015 Page 7 more widely spaced elevation contours (with the more widely spaced contours reflecting the more flatly sloped areas that were also created by the Sunset Bluff site work). During the clearing, initial grading, and temporary erosion/sedimentation control construction phase of the Sunset Bluff project, extensive initial filling, excavation, and grading work was done. That work included creation of slopes (including steep slopes) in and adjacent to the southern part of what is now the proposed filling, excavation, and grading Project Site. Those slopes were created through private utility installation activities and private road installation activities in connection with and adjacent to the following seven Sunset Bluff facilities that were constructed: (1) The "Sunset Bluff Stormwater Detention Pond" (which on attached Appendix 3 is depicted and outlined in blue and has two associated orange-shaded labels, each numbered with a "I" in a red circle); (2) The "Detention Pond Maintenance Road" that serves the pond (a road that is located to the west of the Sunset Bluff Stormwater Detention Pond and is depicted on attached Appendix 3 with an associated orange-shaded label numbered with a "2" in a red circle); (3) The "Temporary Sediment Pond" constructed on the plateau area above and to the east of the Sunset Bluff Stormwater Detention Pond (a temporary sediment pond that is depicted on attached Appendix 3 with an associated label numbered with a "3" in a red circle); (4) The "Temporary Drainage Ditch/Swale" that is constructed along and near the toe of both the west portion and the east portion of Existing Interim Fill Slope I (as depicted and outlined in blue on attached Appendix 3 with an associated orange-shaded label numbered with a "4" in a red circle near each of those two portions of the ditch/swale ), a ditch/swale that drains into the north part of the Temporary Sediment Pond; (5) The "Temporary Drainage Ditch/Swale" constructed near the toe of Existing Interim Fill Slope 2 (as depicted on attached Appendix 3 with an associated orange-shaded label numbered with a "5" in a red circle), a ditch/swale that drains into the south part of the existing Temporary Sediment Pond; (6) "Access Road 1 to Temporary Sediment Pond Lying East of Sunset Bluff Storm water Detention Pond" ( an access road that is depicted on attached Appendix 3 with a "6" in a red circle near each of two associated labels referring to Access Road I); and City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June I, 2015 Page 8 (7) "Access Road 2 to Temporary Sediment Pond Lying East of Sunset Bluff Stormwater Detention Pond" (an access road that is depicted on attached Appendix 3 with a "7" in a red circle near the associated label referring to Access Road 2). [In this letter, (a) all seven of those existing storm water-control-related facilities are collectively referred to as "Existing Sunset Bluff Private Utility Installations" and (b) the Detention Pond Maintenance Road, Access Road I, and Access Road 2 are, in addition to being three of the Existing Sunset Bluff Private Utility Installations, collectively referred to as "Existing Sunset Bluff Private Road Installations."] 8. The Proposed Filling and Grading of the Project Site Contemplates Regrading/Reconfiguring of Existing Slopes Created through Private Road and Utilities Installation Activities and through Private Road Installation Activities to Achieve an Overall l.SH:1 V Fill Slope along the Site's South Edge Generally Higher Than 15 Feet. Pointe Heron LLC's overall filling, excavation, and grading proposal is (1) described (under the heading "Proposed use of the property and scope of the development") on pages 9 through 12 of the Project Narrative submitted to the City as part of the Grade and Fill Permit application (a copy of that Project Narrative is attached to this letter as Appendix 7) and (2) depicted on the August 2014 IO-sheet set of the Grading, Interim Drainage, E.S.C., and Rehabilitation Plans for the proposal prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. also submitted as part of the Grade and Fill Permit application (the "Barghausen Grading Plans," an l l -inch-by-17-inch reduced-size set of which is attached to this letter as Appendix 8). Of special relevance to the requested modification is the proposed regrading/reconfiguring of existing slopes (slopes that had been created on Lot I as part of Sunset Bluff project construction) in order to create the now-proposed I.SH: IV engineered fill slope [i.e., a proposed slope of approximately sixty-seven percent (67%)] using controlled aggregate material and geogrid reinforcing, a slope that almost in its entirety will exceed fifteen feet (15') in height. A cross-sectional view of the proposed slope's design prepared by ESNW and attached to the Soil Engineering Report as Plate 3 (see Appendix 9 for a copy of Plate 3) schematically depicts the slope's planned design. Plate 3 does all of the following: (I) It illustrates the proposed "buttress fill" zone along the fill's face (note that the specification of the buttress fill material set forth in the Soil Engineering Report at page 4 indicates that the material is "equivalent to coarse gravel and/or cobble"), (2) It notes in the last of the bullet points in the plate's upper left-hand corner that the "Buttress Fill shall taper from a minimum horizontal depth of 35 feet at base to 5 feet at top of slope" (which is a thick depth of buttress fill City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June I, 2015 Page 9 material that gets progressively thicker toward the slope's bottom, where structural load will be the greatest), (3) It illustrates the proposed "core structural fill" zone behind (i.e., to the north of) the "buttress fill" zone, and (4) It illustrates the proposed geogrid reinforcing of the subject slope's proposed face. Further, as can clearly be seen from an examination of (I) the plan view locations of Cross Sections J-J through P-P on Barghausen's Phase 2 Cross Section Plan View Exhibit4 (i.e., on Sheets X3 and X4 of the six-sheet cross-section exhibit included as APPENDIX B to the Soil Engineering Report and also included as Appendix 5 attached to this letter) in conjunction with (2) the corresponding section view depictions of Cross Sections J-J through P-P on Barghausen Sheets XS and X6 5 of the Appendix 5 cross-section exhibit, the proposed regrading/reconfiguring of existing fill slopes created as part of the Sunset Bluff development generally along a portion of Lot l's south edge will involve both (!) Placement of fill against the Sunset Bluff Stormwater Detention Pond's existing upper interior fill slopes (slopes that resulted from construction of that pond) and against the west and east portions of Existing Interim Fill Slope I [ a slope with both a west portion and an east portion that resulted from construction of both (a) the Temporary Drainage Ditch/Swale along and near the toe of both the west and east portions of Existing Interim Fill Slope I and (b) Access Road I to Temporary Sediment Pond Lying East of Sunset Bluff Stormwater Detention Pond-see either Appendix 3 or Sheets I and 2 of the Appendix 4 Barghausen Topography Map, and see Cross Sections M-M, N-N, and 0-0 on the attached Appendix 5 Barghausen Sheets X3, X4, XS, and X6], fill placement that will result in a regraded/reconfigured I.SH: IV engineered fill slope along a portion of the south edge of the Pointe Heron LLC parcel (with a top-of-slope elevation of approximately 128 feet) between (i) the existing I .SH: IV engineered fill slope to the west of the Sunset Bluff Stormwater Detention Pond and 4 Note that Sheets X3 and X4 of the overall six-sheet Appendix 5 cross-section exhibit (the two sheets that comprise Barghausen's Phase 2 Cross Section Plan View Exhibit) depict the same proposed elevations of the Project Site as are depicted on Sheets ES and E6 of the Appendix 8 Barghausen Grading Plans. 5 Note that Sheets X5 and X6 of the overall six-sheet Appendix 5 cross-section exhibit are the two sheets that comprise Barghausen's Phase 2 Cross Sections in section view. City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June I, 2015 Page 10 (ii) the existing I.SH: IV engineered fill slope to the east of the Sunset BluffStormwater Detention Pond and (2) Upward I .SH: IV engineered fill slope extensions of both (a) the existing south-edge I.SH:! V engineered fill slope lying to the west of the existing stormwater pond [ as Cross Section P-P on the attached Appendix 5 Barghausen Sheets X3 and X6 shows, this is to include placement of fill against the existing fill slope on the upper (north) side slope of the Detention Pond Maintenance Road, a slope that resulted from both the Sunset Bluff Stormwater Detention Pond construction and the Detention Pond Maintenance Road construction] and (b) the existing south-edge 1.5H: IV engineered fill slope lying to the east of the existing stormwater pond [ as Appendix 3 and Sheet 2 of the Appendix 4 Barghausen Topography Map combined with Cross Sections K-K and L-L on the attached Appendix 5 Barghausen Sheets X4 and XS together show, this is to include placement of fill against Existing Interim Fill Slope 2, which is a steep fill slope that resulted from construction of both (i) the Temporary Sediment Pond and (ii) the Temporary Ditch/Swale along and near the toe of Existing Interim Fill Slope 2]. Note that this proposed activity of regrading/reconfiguring of existing fill slopes would achieve a continuous top-of-fill-slope elevation of approximately 128 feet along the entire length of the proposed south-edge fill slope. That top-of-fill-slope elevation would be just a few feet higher than the proposed top elevation of the south edge of the proposed new stormwater detention pond planned to be created at the north edge of the plateau portion of the Project Site along much of the Project Site's north edge. The approximately 128-foot top-of-fill-slope elevation will enable a gentle downward slope to be created to the north, enabling surface-water runoff from the proposed plateau portion of the Project Site to drain into the new stormwater detention pond. In sum, in view of both (I) the proposed regrading/recontouring of existing fill slopes to create the proposed I .SH: IV south-edge fill slopes that will exceed 15 feet in height and (2) the factual circumstances that the existing slopes were created through private utility installation activities (resulting in the seven Existing Sunset Bluff Private Utility Installations) and through private road installation activities (resulting in the three Existing Sunset Bluff Private Road Installations), the proposed fill slopes clearly fall within the circumstances of above-quoted paragraphs (a) and (c) ofRMC 4-3-050N2a(ii). City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June 1, 2015 Page 11 That being the case, Pointe Heron LLC qualifies under RMC 4-3-050N2a(ii) to request that the Administrator ( or, in this case, the Hearing Examiner~for the reasons cited on page 2, above, and in the first paragraph of section IV on page 11, below) grant a modification to allow the proposed regrading/reconfiguration of existing slopes for the creation of permanent fill slopes that are to be forty percent ( 40%) or steeper in slope and fifteen feet (15') or more in height. II. The Applicant Has Submitted a Detailed Geotechnical Report Describing Any Potential Impacts of the Proposed Regrading/Reconfiguration of the South-Edge Fill Slopes and Any Necessary Mitigation Measures as Called for by Procedure 1 of RMC 4-3-050N2a(ii). See ESNW's August 13, 2014 Pointe Heron Geotechnical and Soil Engineering Report submitted as part of Pointe Heron LLC's Grade and Fill Permit application, especially the report's section under the heading "Critical Areas" that begins on page 15 and extends through the top of page 36. III. The Submitted Geotechnical and Soil Engineering Report Will Be Independently Reviewed at the Applicant's Expense by Qualified Specialists Selected by the City as Called for by Procedure 2 of RMC 4-3-050N2a(ii). The applicant is willing to pay for an independent review of ESNW's Pointe Heron Geotechnical and Soil Engineering Report by qualified specialists selected by the City. IV. Because the Applicant's Proposal Complies with the Applicable Modification Criteria of RMC 4-9-250D. in View of Both (A) Procedure 3 of RMC 4-3-050N2a(ii) and (B) RMC 4-8-080Cl and 2 and RMC 4-8-0SOG the Hearing Examiner Should Grant Pointe Heron LLC's Request for a Modification. As noted near the middle of page 4, above, Procedure 3 of RMC 4-3-050N2a(ii) states that "the Department Administrator may grant, condition, or deny the request based upon the proposal's compliance with the applicable modification criteria of RMC 4-9-2500." (Italics added.) However, in view of (I) RMC 4-8-080C 1 (Optional Process Resulting in a Single Open Record Public Hearing) and Pointe Heron LLC's request on page 2, above, that the Hearing Examiner render the decisions for the requested modification, the requested variance, and the requested special grade and fill permit, (2) RMC 4-8-080C2 (Review Authority for Multiple Permit Applications), and (3) the table set forth as RMC 4-8-080G (LAND USE PERMIT PROCEDURES), City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June 1, 2015 Page 12 in this case the Hearing Examiner is the appropriate official to make the decision on the requested modification rather than the Department Administrator. The modification criteria of RMC 4-9-250D are set forth in subsection 2 thereof as follows: 2. Decision Criteria: Whenever there are practical difficulties involved in carrying out the provisions of this Title, the Department Administrator may grant modifications for individual cases provided he/she shall first find that a specific reason makes the strict letter of this Code impractical, that the intent and purpose of the governing land use designation of the Comprehensive Plan is met and that the modification is in conformity with the intent and purpose of this Code, and that such modification: a. Substantially implements the policy direction of the policies and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element and the Community Design Element and the proposed modification is the minimum adjustment necessary to implement these policies and objectives; b. Will meet the objectives and safety, function, appearance, environmental protection and maintainability intended by the Code requirements, based upon sound engineering judgment; c. Will not be injurious to other property(ies) in the vicinity; d. Conforms to the intent and purpose of the Code; e. Can be shown to be justified and required for the use and situation intended; and f. Will not create adverse impacts to other property(ies) in the vicinity. (Ord. 4517, 5-8-1995; Ord. 4802, 10-25-1999; Ord. 5100, 11-1-2004; Ord. 5137, 4-25- 2005; Ord. 5369, 4-14-2008) (Emphasis added.) The applicability of these criteria to the subject circumstances, and application to the subject circumstances of those criteria that are applicable, are discussed below. City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June 1, 2015 Page 13 A. Explanation of (1) Practical Difficulties in Carrying Out the Provisions of the Second Sentence of Paragraph 6 (Maximum Slope) of RMC 4-4-060N That the Applicant Suffers and (2) Specific Reasons That Make the Strict Letter of RMC 4-4-060N Impractical, Reasons Stemming from Special Circumstances Applicable to the Subject Parcel As explained below, Pointe Heron LLC suffers practical difficulties in carrying out the provisions of the second sentence of paragraph 6 (Maximum Slope) of RMC 4-4-060N and specific reasons make the strict letter of RMC 4-4-060N impractical in view of a combination of special circumstances applicable to the subject property, including, among other things, the property's shape, topography, location, and surroundings. In particular, special circumstances applicable to the subject parcel include, among others, the following: (1) The parcel's shape (highly irregular and long and narrow), (2) The parcel's topography [including (a) areas of steep slopes and an undulating ground surface across much of the subject parcel, (b) an extensive, varying topographic elevation differential between Sunset Boulevard's pavement surface to the north of the parcel and the parcel's south boundary, and ( c) an intermittent stream, extensive areas of steep slopes, and a Very High Landslide Hazard Area in the east part of the parcel], and (3) The parcel's location and surroundings [with a public street (Sunset Boulevard-aka SR 900) lying adjacent only to the parcel's north side and with certain streets extending north from Sunset Boulevard in locations that limit the location of a future primary entrance street into the subject parcel to a single location J. These special circumstances leave the 26.26-acre subject parcel with the following practical difficulties relating to Pointe Heron LLC's desire for future capital-intensive building development of a portion of the subject parcel consistent with the parcel's IL zoning: (a) Only a long, narrow 7.35-acre primary future developable area [an area that, together with much of (i) an approximately 2.55-acre area for a future approximately 1,664-foot-long entrance-street right-of-way and (ii) an approximately 0.54-acre area for a future front yard setback along the north edge of that future street right-of-way] would result from the applicant's proposed fill and grade project surface elevations suitable for future capital-intensive building development consistent with the subject parcel's IL zoning-for more details, see (A) subsection IV.A.4 (which City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June I, 2015 Page 14 begins on page 21, below), (B) footnote IO on pages 21 and 22, below, and (C) subsection IV.A.7 (from pages 30 to 40, below)]; (b) The locations of(and the design elevation range of 125-to-128 feet of the bulk of the area of) the above-mentioned primary future developable area, adjacent future public street, and adjacent future front yard setback are all essentially dictated by the special circumstances in combination-for more details, see subsections IV .A.2 and IV .A.3 ( from pages 15 to 20, below) and subsection IV .A.5 ( on pages 22 and 23, below); and (c) Only a single viable location for a future primary entrance street into the subject parcel (a future street contemplated to generally extend from northeast to southwest into the subject parcel from abutting Sunset Boulevard) and only a single viable location for an east-to-west extension of that entrance street through the parcel to serve future development in the planned primary future developable area-for more details, see subsection IV.A.6 (from pages 23 to 29, below). These special circumstances and these associated practical difficulties are discussed in more detail below. Also discussed in detail below ( especially in subsection IV.A. 7-see pages 30 to 40, below) are specific reasons stemming from these special circumstances that make the strict letter of RMC 4-4-060N impractical. 1. Explanation and Depiction of the Special Circumstances of (a) the Long, Narrow, Irregularly Shaped Subject Parcel and (b) the Irregularly Shaped Grade and Fill Project Site within a Portion of the Parcel The subject parcel, which is Lot I of the SR 900 L.L.C. Lot Line Adjustment,6 is a long, narrow parcel (more than half a mile long) with a highly irregular shape. The parcel's north edge lies just south of a long segment of SW Sunset Boulevard. Most of that segment of Sunset Boulevard consists of horizontal curves of varying radii. A very narrow open-space tract-Tract A of the SR 900 L.L.C. Lot Line Adjustment-lies to the north of and abuts the westerly combined 1,805.90-foot total length of the subject parcel's multiple north-boundary segments. (Tract A varies in width from a minimum of 5.00 feet to a maximum of 31.00 feet.) The remaining (easterly) series of the subject parcel's north-boundary segments (segments that are coincident with segments of the Sunset Boulevard right-of-way's south boundary) have a combined total length of 946.06 feet. The overall combined total length of all the subject parcel's north-boundary segments is 2,751.96 feet. (The detailed geometry of both the subject parcel and of Tract A is set forth on the reduced-size copy of the SR 900 L.L.C Lot Line Adjustment that is attached to this letter as Appendix I 0.) 6 The SR 900 L.L.C. Lot Line Adjustment is recorded under King County Recording No. 20040311900015. City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June I, 2015 Page 15 For an additional depiction of the subject parcel's overall layout, see attached Appendix 11, an l l-inch-by-17-inch color map exhibit that was created using as a base sheet an l l-inch- by-17-inch reduction of the black-and-white Sheet El (the Cover Sheet) of the Appendix 8 I 0- sheet set of Barghausen Grading Plans. The irregularly shaped Grade and Fill Project Site [ which is also referred to in this letter and in other portions of the Grade and Fill Permit application materials as the "Project Site" or "Project Site (Work Area Limits)"] is yellow-shaded on the Appendix 11 map exhibit. That color map exhibit illustrates that the Project Site encompasses much (although not all) of the west part of the subject parcel. In regard to the shape of what is referred to in this letter as the west part of the subject parcel, note that all but the west 253.73 feet (a length that is comprised of two straight line segments) of the westernmost approximately 1,607-foot total combined length of the subject parcel's north-boundary segments (i.e., the segments that lie north of the Grade and Fill Project Site and perpendicular to Sunset Boulevard) are comprised of curves. The south boundary of the west part of the subject parcel also is comprised of curves. That part of the subject parcel's south boundary is coincident with the north boundary of a long, curved segment of BNSF Railroad right-of-way that involves three curves of differing radii-see the map exhibits set forth in Appendix IO and Appendix 11. (An industrial railroad line is operated within that BNSF Railroad right-of-way.) In sum, the west part of the subject parcel (the part of the parcel within which the irregularly shaped Grade and Fill Project Site lies) is sandwiched between the predominantly curved Sunset Boulevard to the north and the curved BNSF Railroad right-of-way to the south. Because the railroad right-of-way curves are not concentric with the Tract A and Sunset Boulevard right-of-way curves, the relatively narrow width of that "sandwiched" west part of the parcel generally narrows from west to east. The easternmost portion of the subject parcel is generally triangular. (See map Appendices 2, IO (Sheet 3 of 3), and 11-) That portion of the parcel (I) abuts a segment of the Sunset Boulevard right-of-way's south boundary (but does not abut the BNSF Railroad right-of- way) and (2) tapers down to a needle point at the parcel's extreme east end. 2. Explanation and Depiction of the Topographic Special Circumstance of the Extensive, Varying Elevation Differentials That Exist in the Vicinity of the Grade and Fill Project Site across the Long and Relatively Narrow Area Extending South from Sunset Boulevard across the West Part of the Subject Parcel to the Parcel's South Boundary One of the subject parcel's significant topographic special circumstances is the existence of extensive, varying elevation differentials across the long, relatively narrow area extending south from Sunset Boulevard's pavement surface and across the west part of the subject parcel to City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June I, 2015 Page 16 the parcel's south boundary (i.e., to the BNSF Railroad right-of-way's north boundary). Those varying elevation differentials are evidenced by both of the following: (I) The existing elevation contours set forth on the two-sheet set of Barghausen's Topography Map sheets (sheets that have been submitted to the City as part of the subject Grade and Fill Permit application, l l-inch- by-17-inch reductions of which sheets accompany this letter as Appendix 1) and (2) Existing and proposed slopes across the west part of the subject parcel (the part within which the Project Site is located) that are depicted in several cross-sectional views on Sheets X5 and X6 of the six-sheet set of Barghausen cross-section exhibit sheets that accompanies this letter as Appendix 5 in relation to the corresponding locations ( of the cross sections) that are depicted in plan view across the west part of the parcel. As can be seen on the Appendix 4 Topography Map sheets, road-surface elevations along the segment of Sunset Boulevard lying immediately to the north of the subject parcel's Grade and Fill Project Site range from (I) an elevation of about 164 feet to the north of the Project Site's east end to (2) an elevation of about 222 feet to the north of the Project Site's west end, for an overall average Sunset Boulevard road-surface elevation of about 193 feet. Also based on the existing elevation contours set forth on those two Topography Map sheets, the existing ground- surface elevations of the south boundary of the subject Pointe Heron LLC parcel generally range from about 40 to 50 feet [(a) an elevation of about 40 feet at a location along the parcel's south boundary to the south of the Project Site's west end and (b) an elevation of about 50 feet at a location along the parcel's south boundary to the south of the Project Site's east end], for an average ground-surface elevation along the south boundary of about 45 feet. Along an imaginary line passing through the Project Site's east edge and extending perpendicularly approximately 538 lineal feet southwesterly from Sunset Boulevard's south pavement edge to the subject parcel's south boundary, (a) the elevation differential is about 114 vertical feet (i.e., from an upper elevation of about 164 feet to a lower elevation of about 50 feet) and (b) the overall average slope is about 21 percent [i.e., 114 vertical feet+ 538 horizontal feet "' 21 % ]. Along that imaginary line, that 114-vertical-foot elevation differential 1s extensive and the overall 21-percent average slope is substantial. City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June I, 2015 Page 17 Similarly, from the south edge of the Sunset Boulevard road surface extending south approximately 725 lineal feet along a northerly projection of the subject parcel's west boundary line 7 to the subject parcel's southwest corner, (i) the elevation differential is about 182 vertical feet (i.e., from an upper elevation of about 222 feet to a lower elevation of about 40 feet) and (ii) the overall average slope is about 25 percent [i.e., (182 feet -40 feet) + 725 feet"' 25%]. Along that 725-foot line, the 182-vertical-foot elevation differential 1s tremendous and the overall 25 percent average slope is quite substantial. Note that a comparison of (1) the above-calculated easl-edge elevation differential and overall average slope with (2) the above-calculated west-edge elevation differential and overall average slope makes obvious the varying nature of both the elevation differential and the overall average slope between (a) the south edge of the Sunset Boulevard road surface and (b) the subject parcel's south boundary line along the west part of the subject parcel. Further note that, especially to the north of roughly the west half of the Grade and Fill Project Site, a significant part of the above-explained overall varying vertical elevation differential between the south edge of the Sunset Boulevard road surface and the subject parcel's south boundary lies between (I) the south edge of the Sunset Boulevard road surface and (2) the subject parcel's north boundary. This existing special circumstance is the most pronounced where the existing ground is the steepest, which is to the north of the westernmost part of the Project Site. (See the very narrowly spaced existing ground contours depicted on Sheet I of 2 of the Appendix 4 Barghausen Topographic Map sheets.) For example, as can be seen from Sheet 1 of 2 of the Appendix 4 Topographic Map sheets, from (1) the parcel's northwest corner along only a 92-foot-long northerly extension of the subject parcel's west boundary south to (2) the south edge of Sunset Boulevard's south pavement edge, the elevation differential is about 62 vertical feet (from elevation 222 feet at Sunset Boulevard's south pavement edge down to elevation 160 feet at the parcel's northwest corner). Note that that 62-foot elevation differential along the 92-foot-long northerly extension of the parcel's west boundary equates with an average slope of 67 percent [i.e., 62 vertical feet+ 92 horizontal feet "' 67% ], which is a I .SH: IV slope. That rate of slope along the westernmost part of the south edge of the existing Sunset Boulevard south right-of-way margin is the same rate of slope as the 1.5H: 1 V south-edge fill slope that applicant Pointe Heron LLC proposes as part of the subject Grade and Fill Permit application. 7 Note that the Project Site's west end abuts a portion of the subject parcel's west boundary line. City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June 1, 2015 Page 18 The applicant suffers from these special circumstances of (I) extensive varying elevation differentials and (2) significant varying overall average slopes in at least three important ways. First, in order to create a relatively flat area suitable for both future IL-zone development and for future construction of a street to serve such development, the applicant suffers and will yet suffer the extensive costs and efforts of designing, obtaining approvals for, and constructing the overall proposed 495,500-cubic-yard fill ( only 18,500 cubic yards of which will be from materials excavated on-site, an excavation for the proposed new stormwater detention pond), including the proposed 1.5H: 1 V south-edge fill slope needed in conjunction with the proposed relatively flat area. (See subsection IV.A.5, which begins on page 22, below, for an explanation of the proposed surface elevation range and proposed location of that relatively flat mid-elevation area.) Second, because of (I) the extensive varying elevation differentials immediately south of Sunset Boulevard's road surface along and near the subject parcel's north edge (varying differentials that generally are progressively more severe from east to west) and (2) other special circumstances discussed below, the applicant suffers from the existence of only one viable location for a future primary entrance street into the subject parcel (a location just north of the east end of the Grade and Fill Project Site). For the relatively narrow subject parcel, those circumstances necessitate that, in order to serve a relatively flat primary future developable area of the parcel, a future primary entrance street must extend south from Sunset Boulevard and then curve to the west to an alignment slightly north of and extending from east to west to the subject parcel's west boundary, a street alignment that will only serve IL-zone development on one side (the north side). That is a big deal. The applicant suffers greatly under these circumstances, not only because of (a) the sheer expense of the tremendous length of that future street along the future development area's outer edge and (b) the fact that the street will only serve future development on one side (an economically highly inefficient situation) but also because the combination of (i) the width of the future street's right-of-way, (ii) the width of the setback from the top of the south-edge fill slope to the south edge of that future street's pavement, and (iii) the zoning setback from the north edge of that future street's right-of-way will take up a very substantial part of the subject parcel's proposed, relatively narrow, flat-graded width that is to be created by the subject filling and grading proposal, leaving only a relatively scant area of the parcel available for future IL-zone development. City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June 1,2015 Page 19 Third, in view of RMC 4-3-050N2a(ii)'s prohibition on creation of permanent slopes forty percent ( 40%) or greater that are fifteen feet (15') or more in height, unless the requested modification is approved and/or the separately requested variance is approved, the applicant will suffer unnecessary hardship in creating the proposed relatively flat future development area. Such hardship would be unnecessary because the geotechnical and soils engineering evaluation of the proposed slope' s design has demonstrated the safety of the design of the proposed I .SH: IV slope. See subsection IV .E, which begins on page 50, below. 3. Explanation and Depiction of the Special Topographic Circumstances of the Intermittent Stream, Extensive Areas of Steep Slopes, and a Very High Landslide Hazard Area in the East Part of the Subject Parcel Except for the narrow strip of the east part of the parcel that was previously graded as part of the 65-lot Sunset Bluff residential subdivision development project to serve as the previously planned sole access street from Sunset Boulevard to provide primary access to that previously planned development project, the combination of the circumstances of (I) an intermittent Class 4 stream that crosses the westerly portion of the east part of the subject parcel from north to south, (2) extensive areas of steep slopes in most of the east part of the parcel, and (3) a Very High Landslide Hazard Area in the east part of the parcel together severely limit the potential for future development and use of much of the east part of the subject parcel (i.e., much of the portion of the parcel lying east of the east end of the subject Grade and Fill Project Site). For a depiction of the location of the stream and steep-slope areas in roughly the west half of the east part of the subject parcel, see the color Wetlands and Stream Map exhibit attached to this letter as Appendix 12. For an indication of the location of development-constraining ex1stmg steep slopes throughout large portions of the entire east end of the subject parcel ( especially information on the east half of the east end of the subject parcel), see Appendix 13, a color map exhibit developed from a City of Renton GIS map that has both the boundaries of the subject parcel and the limits of the Project Site added to it (the legend on that map exhibit indicates that a substantial area of existing slopes in the east part of the subject parcel fall within a 40-to-90- percent range). (For a depiction of the existing steep topography to the southeast of the roadway entrance that had been planned for the Sunset Bluff residential development, see Appendix 2.) For the locations of (a) the Very High Landslide Hazard Area8 (an area that lies about 500 feet to the east of the east end of the Grade and Fill Project Site) and the location of the 50- 8 Note that the last two full paragraphs on page 18 of the August 13, 2014 GEOTECHNlCAL AND SOIL ENGINEERING REPORT IN SUPPORT OF PROPOSED FILL, EXCAVATION, AND GRADE POINTE HERON LLC PARCEL prepared by Earth Solutions NW state: City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June 1, 2015 Page 20 foot-wide buffer around that area and (b) the four areas of Protected Slopes within the subject parcel, see the previously mentioned Appendix 11 color map exhibit drawing and see Appendix .f.. In sum, in view of the special circumstances of the intermittent stream, its setbacks, the areas of steep slopes, and the Very High Landslide Hazard Area that together constrain most of the east part of the subject parcel, except for (1) possible future completion of a private road or driveway or a public street (along the previously graded street corridor that had been planned for the Sunset Bluff residential subdivision in the east part of the subject parcel) and (2) use of that private road or driveway or public street either as (a) access to possibly viable, narrow-depth building development along the north edge thereof ( development that, as a practical matter, would probably be contingent on vacation of excess Sunset Boulevard right-of-way along a stretch of Sunset Boulevard's south edge) and/or (b) possibly a secondary ingress-egress to the future primary entrance street and primary future developable area of the subject parcel (a secondary ingress-egress where outgoing left-tum movements onto Sunset Boulevard likely would be prohibited in view of the future Given our understanding of the conditions present on the subject parcel and the design of the proposed filling, excavation, and grading, from a functional perspective it is our opinion that the entirety of the proposed proiect site(!) is currently a low landslide hazard area and (2) will continue to be a low landslide hazard area with the proposed filling, excavation, and grading construction. Note that RMC 4-3-050Jlb(iv) defines the term Very High Landslide Hazards (LV) as "[a]reas of known mappable landslide deposits." An isolated area of the subiect parcel, an area located approximately 500 feet to the southeast of the most easterly portion of the proiect site, contains a known Very High Landslide Hazard area. That area of the subject parcel, an area that is approximately 39,960 square feet in size, is labeled "VERY HIGH LANDSLIDE HAZARD AREA (EX. SLIDE AREA)" and delineated on the overall site plan (Sheet EI) of the Barghausen Grading Plans along with an associated 50-foot-wide buffer required by RMC 4-3-070J7b. (That existing slide area straddles part of the easterlymost portion of the subject parcel's south boundary.) The existing slide area is totally separate from the proposed project site and has no bearing upon the proposed fill, excavation, and grade work contemplated by this report. (Italics and underlining added.) City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June I, 2015 Page 21 primary entrance street into the subject parcel expected southwesterly of and opposite to 80th Avenue South), very little, if any, opportunity for development appears to exist in the east part of the subject parcel. 4. Explanation of the Primary Purpose of the Proposed Filling, Excavation, and Grading Project Note that the primary purpose that Pointe Heron LLC has for the proposed filling, excavation, and grading project is the creation of a relatively flat area within the subject parcel comprised of the following two main elements for planned future uses: 9 (I) An element that will be suitable for construction of a future east-west street along and approximately 20 feet to the north of the top edge of the proposed south-edge fill slope (with the east end of that street to connect by means of a street curve and a 200-foot-long straight street segment with SW Sunset Boulevard opposite 80th Avenue South to the north-northeast) and (2) An adjacent element to the north of the element planned for the future east-west street's right-of-way [with the portion of that adjacent element that would extend north of the 15-foot-wide front yard building setback from the future street right-of-way being of adequate width and size for future construction of capital-intensive buildings consistent with the subject parcel's Light Industrial (IL) zoning classification]. [See the first of two map exhibits included in Appendix 14 prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Map Exhibit I, for a depiction of the contemplated layout of (a) a future street and future street right-of-way within the subject parcel, (b) the above-mentioned 15-foot-wide front yard setback from that future street right-of-way, and (c) the primary future developable area 10 that would lie within the subject parcel to the north of that setback.] 9 In addition to the desired creation of the proposed relatively flat area, a supporting purpose of the subject proposed filling, excavation, and grading project is replacement of the existing storm water detention and water quality pond with a new pond. Specifically, (a) the existing pond, which is located at the lower (south) edge of the project site, is proposed to be filled and (b) a new stormwater detention and water quality pond is proposed to be constructed along much of the proposed mid-elevation plateau's northern edge. That new pond is intended to serve as a drainage support facility for the future development of the parcel. That proposed new pond is important because it will afford much easier access for pond maintenance than does the existing, difficult-to-access storm water and water quality pond at the base of some of the existing slopes constructed in the southern portion of the west part of the subject parcel as part of the not-completed Sunset Bluff project. ' 0 The term "primary future developable area" refers to the area within which future buildings may be constructed-Le., the area lying outside of (a) the 15-foot-wide front yard setback from the planned future City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June I, 2015 Page 22 The types of capital-intensive buildings consistent with IL zoning that Pointe Heron LLC contemplates for the primary future developable area of the subject parcel necessitate a relatively flat area. The proposed changes to the Project Site's existing grades will eliminate undulating terrain remaining from the Sunset Bluff grading in the Project Site portion of the subject parcel. Creation of site grades suitable for both (I) the primary future developable area in order to accommodate such buildings and (2) future construction of a street to serve the primary future developable area within the long, narrow subject parcel is the ultimate goal of the subject filling, excavation, and grading proposal. 5. Explanation of How the Combination of the Special Circumstances of (A) the Subject Parcel's Topography, (B) the Topography of Adjacent Sunset Boulevard, and (C) the Locations of Streets North of and Connecting with Adjacent Sunset Boulevard Essentially Dictates the Locations and Design Elevations of Both the Parcel's Primary Future Developable Area and Future Primary Public Street, Necessitating the Requested Modification The proposed overall relatively flat area (a plateau) is designed to generally extend south from (I) roughly the toe of the existing steep slope that extends downward from SW Sunset Boulevard's south edge to (2) the top edge of the proposed 1.5H: IV south-edge fill slope. The 125-to-128-foot elevation range of the proposed, overall relatively flat area is a roughly mid- level elevation range between (a) The average of the existing road-surface elevations (an average elevation of about 193 feet) along the segment of Sunset Boulevard lying to the north of the Grade and Fill Project Site, elevations that range from (i) about 164 feet to the north of the Project Site's east end to (ii) about 222 feet to the north of the Project Site's west end, and (b) The average of the existing ground-surface elevations (an average elevation of about 45 feet) of the south boundary of the Pointe Heron LLC street, (b) the proposed new storrnwater detention pond and a 10-foot-wide area around the pond's top edge, and (c) a 10-foot setback from two segments of existing storm drainpipe near and roughly parallel to the parcel's north boundary to the west of80th Avenue South (see attached Appendix l4's Map Exhibit l). In this letter, the modifier "primary" is used in the term "primary future developable area" to distinguish that area from a relatively tiny potential future development area along the northeast side of the original Sunset Bluff entrance street that was planned and graded to the southeast of a southwesterly projection of Oakesdale A venue SW from the north. Whether that tiny potential future development area will be able to support development of even a small future building is uncertain and is likely contingent upon securing a vacation of an abutting area of what might be excess street right-of-way along Sunset Boulevard's south edge. Street/driveway and utility infrastructure for that tiny area will undoubtedly be expensive. Currently, development of that tiny area certainly cannot be counted on to generate future revenue. City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June 1, 2015 Page23 parcel along or to the south of the Project Site (elevations that generally range from about 40 to 50 feet). The 125-to-128-foot elevation range of the proposed, relatively flat mid-elevation plateau is a grade range that not only is a reasonable compromise of (1) the road-surface elevations of Sunset Boulevard to the north in relation to (2) the ground-surface elevations of the subject parcel's south edge but is a grade range that will make possible future construction of a reasonably sloped entrance street extending southwest into the subject parcel from Sunset Boulevard ( at a location opposite 80th A venue South, a side street that lies to the north-northeast of Sunset Boulevard) in order to serve future development within the subject parcel's primary future developable area. (See Map Exhibit I in Appendix 14.) For the reasons explained in subsection IV .A.6, which begins below on this page, that entrance-street location is the only viable location for an entrance street from Sunset Boulevard that could serve as a primary access street to serve traffic volumes and vehicle types expected to be generated by future capital- intensive IL buildings constructed within the contemplated primary future developable area. Note that in order to vertically transition between (1) the planned approximately 128-foot elevation along the south edge of the overall relatively flat area proposed to be created and (2) the lower existing elevations south of the proposed relatively flat area, Pointe Heron LLC proposes a 1.5H: 1 V engineered fill slope with a buttress fill face in order to extend surface grades up from both (a) A portion of the parcel's south boundary (along the central part of that boundary, south of the vicinity of the existing stormwater detention pond) and (b) The top edge of the existing I .SH: IV engineered fill slopes constructed as part of the Sunset Bluff project to both the west and east of the central part of the parcel's south boundary (i.e., west and east of the existing stormwater detention pond). This is more fully explained on page 9 through the top half of page I 0, above. 6. Explanation of Why, in Order to Serve Desired Future IL-Zone Development of the Subject Parcel, There Is (A) Only One Viable Location for a Future Primary Entrance Street into the Subject Parcel from Sunset Boulevard and (B) Only One Viable Location for the Continuation of That Future Street through the Parcel to the Parcel's West End For volumes of traffic that are reasonably expected in connection with Pointe Heron LLC's desired future IL-zone development and use of the subject parcel, (1) the only entrance- street location that appears to be viable to serve as a primary entrance street to the subject parcel City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June I, 2015 Page 24 from Sunset Boulevard l l is one that would be constructed stemming southwest from Sunset Boulevard at a location opposite 80th Avenue South to the northeast of Sunset Boulevard and (2) the only location for an east-to-west extension of that entrance street is along and near the top edge of the proposed south-edge fill slope. There are at least four main reasons why. First, in regard to the topic of the location of the future entrance street's connection with Sunset Boulevard, note that the location of the entrance-street connection with Sunset Boulevard that had been planned in 2003 to 2004, approved by the City, and preliminarily graded for the 65-lot Sunset Bluff residential development is not viable as the location of a primary entrance street for IL-zone development of the subject parcel. The reason why involves an expected substantial difference between (I) the volumes and types of traffic anticipated for IL-zone development and use of the subject parcel and (2) the volumes and types of traffic that had been anticipated for the previously planned Sunset Bluff single-family residential subdivision development. Note that the design of the entrance street for the previously planned Sunset Bluff residential development specified the street stemming into the subject parcel from Sunset Boulevard at a location approximately 535 feet to the southeast of the now-planned future entrance-street location. 12 Unlike the currently planned entrance-street location, which is across from a public street (80th Avenue South) that stems to the northeast from Sunset Boulevard's northeast edge, the entrance-street location planned for the Sunset Bluff residential development 11 Note that primary street access for the subject parcel must come from Sunset Boulevard because (a) no access streets are available to the south or southeast of the subject parcel and (b) the nearest public street to the west is Monster Road SW, a street that is located half a mile southwest of the subject parcel's west boundary. See Appendix 11 for a color-marked copy of Sheet El of 10 of the reduced-size IO-sheet set of the Barghausen Grading Plans, on which (i) the subject parcel is outlined in red and (ii) the location of a portion of Monster Road SW is depicted (at the right edge of the sheet). Note that construction of an emergency vehicle access road from the subject parcel's west boundary to Monster Road is expected to be required in conjunction with future construction of buildings within a part of the subject parcel's primary future developable area that would exceed a distance that, under applicable Renton code provisions, the Renton Fire Department would be willing to serve from a single entrance street from Sunset Boulevard. (The now-expired preliminary plat approval issued by the City for the Sunset Bluff residential development of the subject parcel had required construction of an emergency vehicle access road within an easement across some of the Stoneway Black River Quarry parcels that lie between the subject parcel's west end and Monster Road SW.) 12 That entrance-street location for the Sunset Bluff residential development had been chosen in order to both (a) provide more street length so as to be able to slope the street down from the entrance-street intersection elevation at Sunset Boulevard to achieve lower design elevations for the then-planned residential lots (the easterlymost of which were located about 500 feet west of the entrance-street location) and (b) avoid having to forgo creation of several residential lots (as would have been necessary if the street entrance for the residential subdivision project had been designed to extend into the subject parcel from Sunset Boulevard directly opposite 80th Avenue South, which is a residential access street that lies to the northeast of Sunset Boulevard). City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June 1,2015 Page 25 was not opposite any roadway on Sunset Boulevard's north side but, instead, was offset only about 185 feet to the southeast of Oakesdale Avenue SW, which is a residential access street stemming to the northeast from the northeast side of Sunset Boulevard. 13 With the relatively light volumes of residential traffic contemplated for the Sunset Bluff residential development, the potential for tum-movement conflicts between the Sunset Boulevard-Sunset Bluff residential development entrance-street intersection and the nearby Sunset Boulevard-Oakesdale Avenue intersection was not great enough to make the traffic situation inappropriate. (This was evaluated as part of the traffic analysis performed by Transpo Group for the Sunset Bluff residential development.) Although no specific IL-zone development project is currently being contemplated for the subject parcel, a business/technology campus or light industrial and/or office development of the site are likely types of future development, any of which would likely involve both (a) substantially higher volumes of overall traffic than the volumes that had been expected for the Sunset Bluff residential development and (b) more delivery and/or heavy truck traffic than the Sunset Bluff residential development would have involved. Thus, with substantially greater traffic volumes expected from use of IL-zone development of the subject parcel than the volumes that had been expected with the residential development, the potential for tum-movement conflicts between (i) the Sunset Boulevard-Sunset Bluff residential development street-entrance intersection and (ii) the Sunset Boulevard-Oakesdale Avenue intersection would be substantially greater if the sole street entrance into the subject parcel from Sunset Boulevard is located where the Sunset Bluff residential development street-entrance had been planned. Such conflicts would render that earlier planned entrance location untenable as the sole entrance for the hoped-for future IL-zone development of the subject parcel. Also note that, in regard to the Sunset Bluff residential development project, the very- tight-radius (55-foot-centerline-radius) entrance-street layout curve designed for the Sunset Bluff residential project was chosen in order to avoid both(!) the 50-foot-wide buffer for the existing Very High Landslide Hazard Area to the south and southeast of the street's nearly immediate 90- degree tum to the northwest just southeast of the Sunset Boulevard right-of-way and (2) an open- space tract that had been proposed as part of the Sunset Bluff project as "Tract C." 14 That very- 13 See as part of Exhibit D-5 to Appendix I attached to this letter the reduced-size ( I l-inch-by-17-inch) copies of sheets CI and C3 of 7, an exhibit consisting of the seven sheets of the Clearing, Initial Grading, and TESC Plans prepared by Barghausen Engineers for the Sunset Bluff residential development project. Those two sheets depict the location of the previously proposed Sunset Bluff project's access street (a then-proposed street that is labeled on those plans as "Road A") and its connection with Sunset Boulevard about 185 feet southeast of Oakesdale Avenue SW (a residential access street that lies to the northeast of Sunset Boulevard) and northwest of the unimproved Powell Avenue SW right-of-way (which is also northeast of Sunset Boulevard). The location of80th Avenue South (which is located about 350 feet to the northwest of Oakesdale A venue) is also depicted on those two sheets. 14 See Sheet C3 of 7 of the Sunset Bluff Clearing, Initial Grading, and TESC Plans, a plan set that is included as Exhibit D-5 in Appendix I to this letter, for a depiction of (a) the layout of that previously planned road's connection with the tight-radius 90-degree turn to the west off of Sunset Boulevard, (bl the location of the City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June 1, 2015 Page 26 tight-radius street entrance planned as a primary street entrance to the subject parcel for the Sunset Bluff residential development simply is not expected to reasonably accommodate the volumes of overall traffic and larger numbers of delivery trucks and/or heavy trucks contemplated to be associated with future IL-zone development of the parcel's primary future developable area. Second, the location of a future entrance street from Sunset Boulevard opposite 80th Avenue South is the optimum and only viable location for both (a) minimizing turning-movement conflicts with traffic to and from the streets to the northeast of Sunset Boulevard and (b) having an intersection elevation suitable for extending into the subject parcel from Sunset Boulevard a future entrance street with a reasonable downward slope that will work well with the proposed 125-to-128-foot grade range of the proposed, relatively flat mid-elevation plateau portion of the west part of the subject parcel. Note that shifting the location of a future street entrance from Sunset Boulevard to the southeast of 80th Avenue South would not allow a viable primary entrance street to be constructed. Due to steep existing slopes immediately to the southwest of such a street entrance within the subject parcel, the street's on-site layout would have to begin with the same type of very-tight-radius turn to the northwest as did the street layout originally designed for Sunset Bluff (a layout that would not reasonably accommodate traffic volumes and truck volumes for the subject parcel to support desired future IL-zone development in the subject parcel's primary future developable area). Also, note that shifting a future street entrance from Sunset Boulevard to the west- northwest of 80th Avenue South would not be viable because (I) the elevation of a street intersection point with Sunset Boulevard gets progressively higher as a proposed street entrance location is so shifted and (2) the parcel's north-edge slopes as well as slopes between the parcel's north boundary and the south edge of the Sunset Boulevard pavement become correspondingly more extensive as a proposed street entrance location is so shifted. Those topographic conditions make an entrance street into the subject parcel from Sunset Boulevard to the west-northwest of 80th Avenue South impossible from a grade perspective. Third, with the relatively flat mid-elevation plateau space that would be afforded by the proposed 1.5H: IV south-edge fill slopes (and unlike the case with the very-tight-radius entrance- street layout that had been designed immediately to the southwest of Sunset Boulevard for the mentioned 50-foot-wide buffer for the existing Very High Landslide Hazard Area (an area labeled "EX. SLIDE AREA" on said Sheet C3 of 7), and (c) the previously planned Tract C open-space tract. [On the Appendix 11 11-inch-by-17-inch color map exhibit, that same Very High Landslide Hazard Area is labeled VERY HIGH LANDSLIDE HAZARD AREA (EX. SLIDE AREA)."] City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June I, 2015 Page 27 Sunset Bluff residential subdivision development), drivers of the expected future significantly- higher-than-Sunset-Bluff-volumes of incoming passenger vehicles and large trucks from Sunset Boulevard associated with use of a future IL-zone development of the subject parcel would greatly benefit from having an approximately 200-foot-long straight stretch of on-site street directly in front of them (in an orientation perpendicular to Sunset Boulevard) before reaching a roughly 75-degree sweeping curve to the west with an approximately 200-foot-long centerline radius-see Map Exhibit I included as part of Appendix 14 to this letter. The approximately 200-foot-long straight stretch of the future entrance street would be long enough to efficiently allow such volumes of incoming traffic to enter the subject parcel from Sunset Boulevard without causing traffic slowdowns and backups onto Sunset Boulevard. Fourth, the length of the approximately 200-foot-long straight stretch of future on-site street and the length of the approximately 200-foot-long centerline radius curve to the west of that street's continuation would be optimal to both (a) Accommodate incoming traffic without forcing an immediate, tight turning movement to the west and (b) Appropriately transition the generally northeast-to-southwest future entrance street to the location of a future east-to-west extension of that street that would be located along and near the top edge of the proposed 1.5H: IV south-edge fill slope. Note that a shorter straight stretch of the future entrance street and/or a shorter radius of the street curve to the west than the straight and curved street segments depicted on Map Exhibit I would not only (i) impair the efficiency of the entrance street in accommodating incoming vehicles without slowdown and backup but would (ii) result in a street curve to the west at a location where the street's extension to the west would result in an even narrower primary future developable area than the only-barely-adequate-width primary future developable area that would result from the proposed I .SH: IV south-edge fill slope. (For an explanation of the only barely adequate width of the primary future developable area expected even with the proposed l.5H:IV south-edge fill slope, see the next subsection, subsection IV.A.7, which begins on page 30, below.) Note that in the middle of page 14 of the August 13, 2014 Pointe Heron Geotechnical and Soil Engineering Report submitted as part of the subject Grade and Fill Permit application, ESNW (the grade and fill project's geotechnical and soil engineering consulting firm) 1 • recommends a vehicular traffic setback of 20 feet from the top of the proposed new fill slope. ' 15 In regard to a roadway vehicular traffic setback, the third sentence of the section entitled "Future Slope Setback Recommendations" on page 14 of that report specifically states: A building foundation and/or roadway vehicular traffic setback of20 feet from the top of the new fill slopes should be incorporated into future site layout plans. City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June 1, 2015 Page 28 That recommendation means that the face of the street's south curb would need to be located a minimum of 20 feet from the top of the proposed new fill slope. Such a location for a generally east-to-west future street along the top edge of the proposed I.SH:! V south-edge fill slope would (i) Appropriately connect it with the above-noted combination of an approximately 200-foot-long straight stretch of future entrance street and an approximately 200-foot-long centerline radius street curve that would connect with the straight stretch of the street's south end and (ii) Locate the future street within the subject parcel in a logical position for future extension to the west beyond the subject parcel (i.e., west through the Stoneway Black River Quarry parcels to Monster Road SW) as either a future emergency-access roadway or a future street. 16 In sum, the combination of the special circumstances of the subject parcel's (I) topography [ extensive elevation differentials, areas of steep slopes, and (in the east part of the parcel) an intermittent stream and a Very High Landslide Hazard Area], (2) tremendous length and relatively narrow width, (3) highly irregular shape (with lots of curved and straight boundary-line elements), and (4) surroundings [with (a) a public street only along the parcel's north-northeast edge, (b) off-site grade differentials and steep slopes between the parcel's north edge and the south pavement edge of Sunset Boulevard, and ( c) the location of streets to the northeast of Sunset Boulevard connecting with that boulevard's northeast edge] pose the applicant with a myriad of practical difficulties in carrying out the provisions of the second sentence of Paragraph 6 (Maximum Slope) of RMC 4-4-060N in conjunction with the applicant's contemplated post-filling, excavation, and grading of the subject parcel. As a practical matter, those listed special circumstances (as described in more detail from pages 13, above, to the top of this page) leave the applicant with: (a) A need to plan for a future primary street entrance off of Sunset Boulevard to provide primary future street access to the subject parcel; (b) A need to plan grading of the subject parcel in view of the single viable location for a future-primary-entrance-street connection with Sunset Boulevard (i.e., opposite 80th Avenue South, which is to the northeast of Sunset Boulevard); ( c) A need to create a relatively flat range of surface elevations between elevation 128 feet and elevation 125 feet as a mid-level plateau between the elevations of Sunset Boulevard (to the north of the Grade and Fill Project Site) and the subject parcel's south boundary (south of the Grade 16 See Map Exhibit I (part of Appendix 14 to this letter), and (for the location of Monster Road SW in relation to the subject parcel) see Appendix 11. City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June 1,2015 Page 29 and Fill Project Site), a mid-level plateau that the applicant seeks in order to meet the applicant's goal of accommodating future construction of both (i) capital-intensive buildings within the primary future developable area depicted on Appendix 14' s Map Exhibit 1 consistent with the parcel's IL zoning and (ii) a future east-to-west Commercial-Mixed Use & Industrial Access classification street along and near the top of a proposed south- edge fill slope (as depicted on Appendix 14's Map Exhibit I) in order to provide street access along the tremendous length of the contemplated relatively narrow primary future developable area; and ( d) A need to extend the relatively flat mid-level plateau area sufficiently far south to both (i) provide space generally from north to south that will be adequate for an appropriate combination of a future straight segment of the entrance street extending southwest from Sunset Boulevard and a sufficient radius of a future street curve to the west to make sure the entrance street and its curve to the west can both (A) Accommodate volumes and types of incoming future traffic expected to be generated by future IL-zone development of the subject parcel and (B) Be consistent with the location of the future east-to- west street segment ( a future segment extending west from the west end of that future street curve) along and near the top edge of the proposed I .SH: 1 V south-edge fill slope in order to serve capital-intensive future building development of the parcel's primary future developable area and (ii) Create a wide enough and large enough primary future developable area to provide sufficient potential for adequate future revenues from future construction and use of capital-intensive buildings consistent with the subject parcel's IL zone to make economically viable for the applicant both (A) the expenditure of anticipated upfront costs of the proposed filling, grading, and excavation project and of the future street and associated utilities construction to follow and (B) other future costs of development. City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June I, 2015 Page 30 7. Demonstration That (A) the Primary Future Developable Area Is Barely Wide Enough to Make Viable Its Contemplated Future Development Even with a South-Edge Fill Slope as Steep as the Proposed 1.SH:lV Maximum South-Edge Fill Slope and (B) a Flatter Maximum South-Edge Fill Slope Than the Slope Proposed Would Be Impractical The proposed primary future developable area (see its definition in the first paragraph of footnote 10 on page 21, above) of the subject parcel is a relatively long, narrow area of the west part of the subject parcel with a primary axis that runs generally from east to west. That area (1) will be barely wide enough for contemplated future development of the subject parcel to be viable even with a south-edge fill slope as steep as the proposed 1.5H: 1 V maximum south-edge fill slope and (2) any flattening of the south-edge fill slope would be impractical because it would make the barely-wide-enough primary future developable area too narrow to function for its intended purpose. To (a) illustrate key points concerning the proposed primary future developable area in view of the proposed I.SH: 1 V south-edge fill slope and (b) compare and contrast those points with analogous points that would be involved if a 2.5H: 1 V maximum fill slope [i.e., a 40 percent slope, which would be consistent with the second sentence of above-quoted RMC 4-4-060N.6 (Maximum Slope)] was to be used instead ofa l.SH:IV south-edge fill slope, I have prepared the table (Table 1) set forth on pages 34 to 35, below, a table that is based on dimensional and acreage information taken from two accompanying color map exhibits (Map Exhibits 1 and 2, 11-inch-by-17-inch reductions of which are included in Appendix 14 to this letter), map exhibits that Barghausen Consulting Engineers has developed from overlays of the plan view of the proposed grading design depicted on Sheets ES and E6 of the 10-sheet set of Barghausen Grading Plans. 17 A comparison and contrast of those two Appendix 14 map exhibits illustrates both (1) the extreme development-constraining effect of flattening the proposed south-edge fill slope to a 2.SH: 1 V slope and (2) the impracticality of a south-edge fill slope any flatter than the I .SH: IV fill slope that is proposed. Please examine and compare those two maps carefully. The first of those two exhibits (Map Exhibit 1) depicts the approximate estimated location of a future 69-foot-wide public street right-of-way 18 in relation to the location of the 17 Note that because of both (a) the 22-inch-by-34-inch sheet-size limitation of the Barghausen Grading Plans and (b) the extreme length of the subject parcel from east to west, the Grade and Fill Project Site and the portion of the subject parcel boundary relevant to the Project Site were split into two sheets within the IO-sheet set of the Barghausen Grading Plans. (See Sheets E2, E3, E5, and E6 of Appendix 8.) However, Barghausen created a single oversize base sheet for use in creating Map Exhibits 1 and 2 so that the entire relevant portion of the subject parcel can be seen on each of those two exhibits for ease of analysis. 18 For purposes of Map Exhibit l and this analysis, a future "Commercial-Mixed Use & Industrial Access" public street is assumed based on (a) the City ofRenton's Minimum Design Standards Table for Public Streets City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June 1, 2015 Page 31 proposed 1.5H: 1 V south-edge fill slope, as well as the layout of a public street from curb to curb lying within that future right-of-way. (For purposes of that map exhibit, sidewalk depiction is intentionally omitted.) The location of the right-of-way's centerline is based on (a) the assumed 36-foot face-of-curb-to-face-of-curb paved street width and (b) the face of the street's south curb being set back to the north a minimum of 20 feet from the proposed south-edge fill's top of slope. (That minimum 20-foot-wide setback is consistent with the setback recommendation in ESNW's 2014 Pointe Heron Geotechnical and Soil Engineering Report.19) Also depicted on Map Exhibit 1 is the apparently applicable, code-specified minimum 15-foot-wide front yard setback 20 from the north edge of such a future street right-of-way. In addition, Map Exhibit 1 illustrates (i) the approximate limits of (and notes the acreage of) the subject parcel's anticipated primary future developable area, (ii) the approximate length of the primary future developable area down its long axis (generally from east to west), (iii) the depth of the primary future developable area (perpendicular to the assumed future street at three representative locations), and (iv) other information. and Alleys set forth in RMC 4-6-060F and (b) an assumption of two IO-foot-wide travel lanes (thus the corresponding 69-foot-wide right-of-way) and an eight-foot-wide parking lane on each side of the street. 19 The third sentence of the Geotechnical and Soil Engineering Report's subsection entitled "Future Slope Setback Recommendations" (on page 14 of the report) states: A building foundation and/or roadway vehicular traffic setback of 20 feet from the top of the new fill slopes should be incorporated into future site layout plans. (Emphasis added.) ' 0 Because the anticipated future street will not be a principal arterial, for the IL zoning designation, RMC 4-2- l 30A (Development Standards for Industrial Zoning Designation) states as follows for Minimum Front Yard for "other streets": Other streets: l.1..11,_ provided that 20 ft. is required if a lot is adjacent to or abutting a lot zoned R-1, R-4, R-8, RMH, R-10, R-14, or RM. (Emphasis added.) Note that although both (a) the extreme southeast end of the subject parcel (lot) abuts a lot to the southeast that is zoned RM (a lot that lies more than 200 feet away from the anticipated road on the other side of the subject parcel's stream buffer and wetland buffer) and (b) the north part of the subject parcel lies east-southeast of 80th Avenue South and across Sunset Boulevard from lots to the north zoned R-8, the 20- foot-wide front yard setback from the future anticipated street right-of-way should be deemed inapplicable because the anticipated primary future street within the subject parcel will neither front along nor lie between either of those RM-or R-8-zoned parcels. (See the definitions of "abutting" and "adjacent," including the diagram in each of those definitions, set forth in RMC 4-11-0IO.) City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June 1, 2015 Page 32 Map Exhibit 1 also includes the following items (items that were not included on the earlier version of Map Exhibit I included in Attachment 4 to my January 20, 2015 modification request letter): (I) Callouts of the beginning station and end station of the depicted future street's centerline at (a) its connection with the south edge of Sunset Boulevard and (b) at the subject parcel's west boundary, from which stationing callouts the 1,654-foot length (0.313-mile length) of the future street is known, and (2) Depiction of the following data at the map exhibit's lower right-hand comer: (a) The 2.55-acre approximate area of the 69-foot-wide future street right-of-way, (b) The 1. 90-acre approximate area of the proposed new storm water detention pond (including an assumed 10-foot-wide area around its top-of-bank edges), (c) The 0.54-acre approximate area of the IS-foot-wide front yard setback along the north edge of the future public street, and (d) The 2.97-acre approximate area of the l.SH:IV south-edge fill slope that is proposed to be created under the requested Grade and Fill Permit. The other one of those two exhibits (Map Exhibit 2) depicts (for comparison and contrast purposes) the location of a top-of-south-edge-fill-slope line based on a 2.SH: IV (i.e., 40 percent) south-edge fill slope and the approximate location of a 69-foot-wide public street right-of-way north of and parallel to that line, as well as the layout of a public street with an assumed 36-foot- wide paved street (from curb to curb) lying within that future right-of-way. (For purposes of this exhibit, sidewalk depiction is intentionally omitted.) Map Exhibit 2 also depicts a 15-foot front yard setback from that right-of-way location. In addition, Map Exhibit 2 illustrates (a) the approximate limits of (and notes the acreage of) the subject parcel's primary future developable area that would exist with a 2.SH: 1 V top-of-south-edge-fill-slope line, (b) the approximate location of a 69-foot-wide street right-of-way north of and parallel to that line, (c) the approximate length of a corresponding primary future developable area down its long axis (generally from east to west), (d) the depth of the primary future developable area (perpendicular to the assumed future street at three representative locations), and (e) other information.21 21 Note that on Map Exhibit 2, the size of the proposed new stonnwater detention pond is depicted as being the same size as depicted on Map Exhibit I. That is because, even though on Map Exhibit 2 there is a smaller City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June I, 2015 Page 33 The version of Map Exhibit 2 included in Appendix 14 to this letter also includes the following items (items that were not included on the earlier version of Map Exhibit 2 included in Attachment 4 to my January 20, 2015 modification request letter): (I) Callouts of the beginning station and end station of the depicted future street at (a) its connection with the south edge of Sunset Boulevard and (b) the subject parcel's west boundary, from which stationing callouts the 1,664-foot-length (0.315-mile length) of the future street is known, and (2) Depiction of the following data at the map exhibit's lower right-hand comer: (a) The 2.56-acre approximate area of the 69-foot-wide future street right-of-way, (b) The I. 90-acre approximate area of the proposed new stormwater detention pond (including an assumed IO-foot-wide area around its top-of-bank edges), (c) The 0.54-acre approximate area of the 15-foot-wide front yard setback along the north edge of the future public street, and (d) The 4.98-acre approximate area of the l.5H:1 V south-edge fill slope (if such a fill slope was to be created). The table on the next two pages (Table I) summarizes and analyzes key information illustrated by and/or derived from Map Exhibits I and 2. primary future developable area (and thus less future impervious surface) that will need detention than the primary future developable area depicted on Map Exhibit 1, the area encompassed by the south-edge fill slope would be substantially greater under a 2.5H: IV south-edge-fill-slope design than under the proposed I .SH: 1 V south-edge-fill-slope design. Note also that runoff from the south-edge-fill-slope area will not be tributary to the proposed new stormwater detention pond. Because of that, the permitted flow discharge rate from the stormwater detention pond would have to be lower under a 2.SH: 1 V south-edge-fill-slope design than under the proposed I .SH: 1 V south-edge- fill-slope design. With a lower permitted flow discharge rate from the stormwater detention pond corresponding to a 2.SH:1 V south-edge-fill-slope design, the pond would require relatively more detention volume per unit of primary future developable area, which (a) likely would require the pond to be larger under a 2.5H: 1 V south-edge-fill-slope design than under a I.SH: 1 V south-edge-fill-slope design (and thus take up even more space than the proposed pond depicted on both Map Exhibit 1 and Map Exhibit 2) or (b) might even make adequate stormwater detention impossible to achieve. City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June I, 2015 Page 34 TABLE I (I) Analysis of the Effect of Constructing a Maximum 2.SH:I V South-Edge Fill Slope Rather Than the Proposed I.SH:IV South-Edge Fill Slope on (A) the Primary Future Developable Area and (B) the Range of Buildable Parcel Depth and (2) Analysis of Other Matters Relating to Whether the South-Edge Fill Slope's Maximum Slope Rate is 2.SH:IV Rather Than the Proposed I.SH:! V Parcel Feature With 1.SH:IV With 2.SH:IV Primary Future Developable Area ("PFDA") Ratio of the PFDA based on a 2.5H:IV fill slope to the PFDA based on the proposed I.SH: l V fill slope Typical range (in feet) of the horizontal dimension from the front yard setback line to the north line of the PFDA Ratio of ( l) the upper end of the typical range of the depth of the PFDA based on a 2.5H: l V fill slope to (2) the !!J2J2§!. end of the typical range of the depth of the PFDA based on the proposed I.SH: IV fill slope Ratio of (I) the lower end of the typical range of the depth of the PFDA based on a 2.5H:IV fill slope to (2) the lower end of the typical range of the depth of the PFDA based on the proposed I .SH: IV fill slope Approximate length of the PFDA down its long axis (generally from east to west) Approximate average depth of the PFDA----<:alculated as the acreage of the PFDA x 43,560 square feet/acre+ approximate length of PFDA Ratio of(l) the approximate average depth of the PFDA based on a 2.5H: IV fill slope to (2) the approximate average depth of the PFDA based on the proposed I.SH: IV fill slope Area of the new storm water detention pond Ratio of the area of the new storm water detention pond to the PFDA Ratio of(l) the ratio of the area of the new stormwater detention pond to the PFDA with a 2.5H: l V south-edge fill slope to (2) the ratio of the area of the new stormwater detention pond to the PFDA with a I .SH: IV south-edge fill slope Area of the 69-foot-wide future street right-of-way Area of the 15-foot-wide front yard setback Area of the new south-edge fill slope Proposed Fill Slope (see Map Exhibit I included in Appendix 14 to this letter) 7.35 acres 1,353 feet 7.35 X 43,560 + J,353 -237 feet 2.55 acres 0.54 acres 2.97 acres Maximum Fill Slope (see Map Exhibit 2 included in Appendix 14 to this letter) 5.47 acres 74% I 03-245 feet (see Map Exhibit 2) 103/178 ~ 58% 1,356 feet 5.47 X 43,560 + J,356 ~ 176feet 176 + 237 -74% l.90 acres minimum* 1.90 + 5.47 = 34.7% minimum* 34.7% + 26.9% = 129o/o minimum* 2.56 acres 0.54 acres 4.98 acres City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June I, 2015 Page 35 Total new constructed support area comprised of(l) a replacement stormwater pond, (2) future street right-of- way improvements, (3) a future front yard setback area, and (4) new south-edge fill slope ("Total New Constructed Support Area") Ratio of the Total New Constructed Support Area to the PFDA Length of the future street Ratio of the length of the future street to the PFDA Ratio of(l) the ratio of the length of the future street to the PFDA with a 2.5H: 1 V south-edge fill slope to (2) the ratio of the length of the future street to the PFDA with a 1.5H: IV south-edge fill slope Adequacy of the depth of the PFDA [i.e., the dimension north of and perpendicular to the front yard setback line from (1) the future street right-of-way depicted on Map Exhibit l and (2) the future street right-of-way depicted on Map Exhibit 2] for construction of capital-intensive buildings of a scale reasonable considering the massive scale of ultimate overall contemplated investment for ( l) the currently proposed filling, excavation, and grading and the associated stormwater-detention-pond relocation, (2) the contemplated future road-and utility- infrastructure installation, and (3) the future construction of buildings and associated parking areas, drive aisles, and landscaping that will be needed within the PFDA 7.96 acres 108.3% 1,654 feet 225 lineal feet of street per acre of PFDA Adequate, but only barely so, especially along the approximately l 78- foot-deep-by-660-foot- long strip of the PFDA south of the proposed stormwater detention pond (a strip ofland that covers 660-"-1,353 ~ 49 percent of the PFDA's entire length}---note that that 178-foot depth is only 2.58 times the 69-foot-width of the contemplated future street right-of-way, a very narrow relative depth in relation to the future right-of-way width 9.98 acres minimum* 182.4% minimum* 1,664 feet 304 lineal feet of street per acre of PFDA 304-"-225 ~ 135 percent (I) Totally inadequate along the approximately lOO-foot- deep-by-660-foot-long strip of land south of the proposed stormwater detention pond (a strip of land that covers 660 -"- 1,356 -49 percent of the PFDA's entire length) and (2) only barely adequate to physically accommodate the scale of such future buildings in the 185-foot-deep portion of the PFDA to the west of the proposed new detention pond * See the second paragraph of footnote 21, a footnote that begins on page 32, above. As can be seen from Map Exhibit I and Table I, using a 2.5H:IV south-edge-fill-slope design rather than the proposed I .SH: IV south-edge-fill-slope design would (I) Reduce the subject parcel's primary future developable area by about 26 percent; City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June I, 2015 Page 36 (2) Reduce the typical range of the depth of the primary future developable area (i.e., the range of the horizontal dimension of that area as measured north of and perpendicular to the front yard setback line from the future street depicted on Map Exhibit I by 15 percent at the range's upper end and by about 42 percent at the range's lower end; and (3) Make the depth of the primary future developable area (a) totally inadequate for construction of capital-intensive buildings [ of a scale reasonable considering the massive scale of the ultimate overall contemplated financial investment for (i) the currently proposed filling, excavation, and grading and the associated stormwater-detention-pond relocation, (ii) the contemplated future road-and utility-infrastructure installation, and (iii) the future construction of buildings and associated parking areas, drive aisles, and landscaping that will be needed within the primary future developable area] along the approximately IOO-foot-deep-by-660-foot-long strip of that area that would lie south of the proposed stormwater detention pond (a strip of land that would cover 49 percent of the primary future developable area's entire length) and (b) only barely adequate to physically accommodate the scale of such future buildings in the 185-foot-deep portion of that area to the west of the proposed new detention pond. 22 Because the primary future developable area is the only portion of the west part of the subject parcel within which rent-paying buildings can ever be constructed (and may well be the only part 22 For the type of substantial capital-intensive future buildings (consistent with the subject parcel's lL zoning) that Pointe Heron LLC contemplates for the primary future developable area, the approximately l 78-foot- deep-by-660-foot-long strip of primary future developable area south of the proposed stonnwater detention pond depicted on Appendix 14 's Map Exhibit 1 cannot be made any narrower (narrowing would be the result of flattening the proposed 1.SH: 1 V south-edge fill slope) and physically accommodate the scale of such future buildings necessary to make the development viable in view of the ultimate overall contemplated financial investment in the development. Note that that 178-foot depth is only 2.58 times the 69-foot-width of the contemplated future street right-of-way, a very narrow relative depth in relation to the future street right-of- way width. City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June I, 2015 Page 37 of the entire subject parcel within which rent-paying buildings can ever be constructed2\ these above-described reductions in the size and depth and usability of the primary future developable area for construction of capital-intensive buildings of a scale reasonable considering the massive scale of the ultimate overall contemplated financial investment in the development are some of the major practical difficulties that the applicant would face if the grading design was modified to carry out the 2.5H:l V maximum slope called-for in the independent clause of the second sentence of RMC 4-4-060N.6 (Maximum Slope). Those reductions, which would result from such flattening of the proposed 1.5H: IV south-edge fill slope, are some of the important specific reasons that would make following the strict letter of that second sentence from the Code impractical here. However, for at least three additional main reasons, the above descriptions of the reductions in the size and depth and usability of the primary future developable area severely understate the impracticality of using a 2.5H: IV slope design (rather than the proposed 1.5H: 1 V slope design) on the feasibility of the parcel for construction of a future street and future capital- intensive buildings. First, a narrower permitted primary future developable area north of the east-to-west segment of the future street (which would result from any flattening of the south-edge fill slope) would render future street construction and future construction of associated underground utilities financially infeasible. Even with the proposed 1.5H: 1 V south-edge fill slope, street length would amount to 225 lineal feet of street per acre of primary future developable area (a high ratio in view of the fact that no buildings could be constructed on the street's south side). However, with the much narrower (and much smaller) permitted primary future developable area that would result from construction of a 2.5H: IV south-edge fill slope, there would nevertheless be (1) 1,664 lineal feet of street, slightly more lineal footage (10 more lineal feet) than the 1,654 lineal feet of street contemplated with the proposed l.5H:1V south-edge fill slope (and correspondingly more expense), (2) slightly more corresponding length of utilities along the future street (and correspondingly more linear utilities expense along the future street) than with the 1,654 lineal-foot-long street contemplated with the proposed 1.5H: 1 V south-edge fill slope, and (3) a new stormwater detention pond of at least the same size as (and perhaps much larger than 24 ) as the new stormwater detention pond planned with 23 See footnote 10, which begins on page 21, above. 24 See the second paragraph of footnote 21, a footnote that begins on page 32, above. City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager Junel,2015 Page 38 the proposed I.SH: 1 V south-edge fill slope ( and thus the same or greater corresponding construction and maintenance costs). As Table 1 shows, the ratio of (a) the ratio of length of future street to primary future developable area with a 2.5H: 1 V south-edge fill slope to (b) the ratio of length of future street to primary future developable area with a l.5H:1 V south-edge fill slope is 135 percent, which means that the cost is expected to be correspondingly higher per unit area. Similarly, as Table I also shows, the ratio of (1) the ratio of new stormwater detention pond area (and, thus, construction and maintenance costs) to primary future developable area with a 2.5H:1 V south- edge fill slope to (2) the ratio of new stormwater detention pond area (and, thus, construction and maintenance costs) to primary future developable area with a l.5H:1 V south-edge fill is at least 129 percent (and perhaps much larger 25 ). Those cost differentials are huge. Second, in addition to the crushing extra burden of street, stormwater detention pond, and other utility costs per acre of primary future developable area that would result from a 2.5H:1V south-edge fill slope in contrast to a I.SH: 1 V south-edge fill slope, compare in Table 1 (I) the ratio of (a) the total new constructed support area comprised of (i) a replacement stormwater pond, (ii) future street right-of-way improvements, (iii) a future front yard setback area, and (iv) new south- edge fill slope ("Total New Constructed Support Area") (based on a 2.SH: IV south-edge fill slope) to (b) the primary future developable area (based on a 2.SH: IV south-edge fill slope )-which is a ratio of at least 182. 4%26-with (2) the ratio of(a) Total New Constructed Support Area (based on a l.SH:JV south-edge fill slope) to (b) the primary future developable area (based on a l.SH:IV south-edge fill slope}--which is a much smaller (although very high) ratio of 108.3%27 . Comparison of those 182.4% and 108.3% ratios makes clear that (1) a 2.5H:IV slope would be tremendously more burdensome upon the applicant in terms of land consumption for Total New Constructed Support Area than would a 1.5H: IV slope, nearly doubling the ratio of such land consumption, and (2) any flattening of the proposed I .SH: IV south-edge fill slope would make 25 See the second paragraph of footnote 21, a footnote that begins on page 32, above. 26 The actual ratio could be much larger in view of the second paragraph of footnote 21, a footnote that begins on page 32, above. 27 The I 08.3% ratio is a very high ratio because it means that the acreage that would be devoted to the combined new support areas of the new pond, the street right-of-way. the front yard setback, and the new south-edge fill slope would exceed the primary future developable area's en/ire acreage. City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June I, 2015 Page 39 the already very high 108.3% ratio of (a) the Total New Constructed Support Area to (b) the primary future developable area even higher. Third, note that because of the subject parcel's special circumstances discussed from the start of subsection IV.A through subsection IV.A.6 (from pages 13 through 29, above) and in the portion of this subsection IV.A.7 (from page 30, above, through this page) (circumstances that severely constrain development on the subject parcel), and as is obvious from even a quick review of Appendix 14's Map Exhibit 1, there is simply not enough usable space within the mid- elevation plateau that is proposed to be created by filling and grading for an east-to-west street to run down the middle of the plateau and thereby serve substantial future development on both the north and south sides of the street. Instead, a future east-to-west street will have to be located, as proposed, along and to the south of the south edge of the parcel's primary future developable area, generally as depicted on Map Exhibit 1. That means the street can only serve development on one side (the north side), a fact that will limit economic benefit to the applicant of the future construction of the street and street-related utilities installed within the subject property. Thus, in view of the combination of (1) The need to maintain as a minimum depth along the length of the primary future developable area a 178-foot depth (which is the depth of the approximately 178-foot-deep by 660-foot-long strip of that area south of the proposed stormwater detention pond-a depth that is only 2.58 times the 69-foot-width of the contemplated future street right-of~way and a strip that is nearly half the length (49 percent) of the entire primary future developable area-in order to physically accommodate the scale of future buildings necessary to make the development viable in view of the ultimate overall contemplated financial investment to be made in the development-see footnote 22 on page 36, above, (2) The massive expense of the proposed grading, excavation, and filling project [including the replacement of the existing stormwater detention pond with a massive new pond at a more maintainable location along part of the proposed mid-elevation plateau-a pond that will cost as much or more than the pond that is currently planned for the proposed 1.5H: IV south-edge fill slope if the proposed south-edge fill slope is required to be any flatter than currently proposed 28 ( even though the primary future developable area would be reduced in size by any flattening of that proposed slope)], (3) The massive later expense of constructing a street and associated utilities along the street right-of-way to serve development on only one side of the 28 See the second paragraph of footnote 21, a footnote that begins on page 32, above. City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June 1, 2015 Page 40 street [with (a) the ratio of the length of the future street to the primary future developable area already high at 225 lineal feel of street per acre of such primary future developable area even with the proposed l.5H:IV south-edge fill slope and (b) the street and associated utilities along the street to be no shorter or to have no less a total cost if the proposed south- edge fill slope is required to be any flatter than is currently proposed even though the primary future developable area would be reduced in size by any flattening of that proposed slope], and (4) The additional land consumption for the Total New Constructed Support Area associated with making the south-edge fill slope any flatter than the I.SH: IV design that is proposed [ additional land consumption that would increase the already-very-high 108.3% ratio of (a) the Total New Constructed Support Area (based on a l.SH:IV south-edge fill slope) to (b) the primary future developable area (based on a I.SH: IV south-edge fill slope) to an even higher ratio], if the proposed south-edge fill slope is required to be any flatter than the I .SH: IV design that is proposed, the applicant's contemplated future development of capital-intensive future buildings within the parcel's primary future developable area and with an adjacent public street for access would be rendered financially infeasible and impractical. Note that not only would a requirement that the south-edge fill slope be any flatter than the proposed I.SH: IV south-edge fill slope pose an enormous practical difficulty (arising from the several clear and specific reasons addressed above), such a requirement would be unnecessary and unreasonable because the very careful geotechnical design and analysis of the proposed grade and fill proposal performed by Earth Solutions NW demonstrates that the I .SH: IV slope design proposed will be safe-see subsection IV .C. l (Safety of the Proposed Fill Slopes and the Protection of Areas and Uses in the Vicinity of Those Slopes), which begins on page 42, below. B. The Intent and Purpose of the Governing Land Use Designation of the Comprehensive Plan Will Be Met with the Requested Modification for the Proposed Slope. The subject parcel is located within the Employment Area-Valley (EA V) land use designation. The Comprehensive Plan's purpose statement for the EA V designation states: Purpose Statement: The purpose of the Employment Area-Valley designation is lo allow the gradual transition of the Valley from traditional industrial and warehousing uses lo more intensive retail service and office activities. The intent is to allow these new activities without making industrial uses non-conforming and without restricting the ability of existing businesses lo expand. City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June I, 2015 Page 41 (Boldfacing and italics in the original; underlining added.) By both (I) making possible a primary future developable area of a size large enough to reasonably support office activities and the needed street and utilities infrastructure and (2) thus allowing these new activities without making any industrial uses non-conforming and without restricting the ability of existing businesses to expand, the intent and purpose of the governing land use designation of the Comprehensive Plan as stated in the above-quoted purpose statement will be met with approval of the requested modification for the proposed slope. C. The Requested Modification for the Proposed Slope Is in Conformity with the Intent and Purpose of the Code. As pointed out on page 2, above, the provision of the Renton Municipal Code that bears on maximum fill slopes (and that is thus relevant to the subject proposed south-edge fill slope) is paragraph 6 (Maximum Slope) of subsection N (Fills) of RMC 4-4-060 (Grading, Excavation, and Mining Regulations). That paragraph states: 6. Maximum Slope: The slope of fill surfaces shall be no steeper than is safe for the intended use. Except in conjunction with a modification granted per RMC 4-9- 250DI for one of the circumstances listed in RMC 4-3-050N2a(ii) (Geologic Hazards -Modifications), fill operations associated with a plat, short plat, subdivision or dedication, or other permitted land development activity which would result in the creation of permanent slopes forty percent ( 40%) or greater which are fifteen feet ( 15') in height, i.e., protected slopes, shall not be approved. (Amd. Ord. 4835, 3-27-2000) (Boldfacing in the code text; italics and underlining added.) In view of that paragraph's first sentence, the intent and purpose of that paragraph obviously is that the slope of fill surfaces be no steeper than is safe for the intended use. 29 Further, the purpose statement of RMC 4-4-060 is set forth in subsection A (Purpose). Subsection A states: 29 The subject parcel's intended use that ESNW considered in preparing the Geotechnical and Soil Engineering Report is set forth in the Background section on page 3 of that report, a section that states: We understand the scope of the project includes filling and grading portions of the Pointe Heron LLC parcel in preparation for future development and includes excavating and constructing a new stormwater detention and water quality pond within the parcel to replace the existing pond. We also understand that Pointe Heron LLC anticipates later development of the parcel consistent with applicable City of Renton zoning and other development regulations. Such later development may include construction of roadways, single-story and/or multistory buildings, parking areas, driveways, landscaping, and utilities. City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June I, 2015 Page 42 A. PURPOSE: It is the purpose of this Section to: I. Provide a means of regulating mining, excavation and grading to promote the health, safety. morals, general welfare and esthetics in the City of Renton. 2. Promote the progressive rehabilitation of mining, excavation and grading sites to a suitable new use. 3. Protect those areas and uses in the vicinity of mining, excavation and grading activities against detrimental effects. 4. Promote sale, economic, systematic and uninterrupted mining, excavation and grading activities within the City of Renton. 5. Minimize adverse storm water impacts generated by the removal of vegetation and alteration of landform in order to comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Phase II Municipal Stormwater Permit. 6. Protect water quality from the adverse impact associated with erosion and sedimentation in order to comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Phase II Municipal Stormwater Permit. (Ord. 5526, 2-1-2010) (Emphasis added.) The topics of (I) safety and of protection of areas and uses in the vicinity, (2) promotion of the progressive rehabilitation of grading sites to a suitable new use, and (3) promotion of economic, systematic, and uninterrupted grading activities are discussed below. 1. Safety of the Proposed Fill Slopes and the Protection of Areas and Uses in the Vicinity of Those Slopes Let me begin addressing both (I) the safety of the proposed I.SH: IV fill slopes and (2) the protection of areas and uses in the vicinity of those proposed slopes against detrimental effects by pointing out several things from ESNW's extensive August 2014 Pointe Heron Geotechnical and Soil Engineering Report concerning the proposed filling, excavation, and grading project. First, ESNW's report clearly demonstrates that the proposed filling, excavation, and grading proposal overall and the proposed I .SH:\ V fill slope in particular are designed to be safe for the intended use. Please carefully review that report, five copies of which have been submitted in support of the overall Grade and Fill Permit application. Note that the report's Slope Stability Evaluation section ( on pages IO through 12 of the report) explains the slope stability analysis that ESNW performed and sets forth ESNW's opinion that the proposed fill slopes will be stable. Further, on page 44 of the report, ESNW states that "[t]he slope of the proposed fill surfaces is certainly not steeper than will be sale for the intended use of supporting fill to the north for future development .... " (Emphasis added.) City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June 1, 2015 Page 43 Second, pages 21 through 36 of ESNW's report (together with the materials quoted and cited therein) explain why (I) the proposal will not increase the threat of geological hazard to adjacent or abutting properties beyond predevelopment conditions, (2) the proposal will not adversely impact other critical areas, and (3) construction of the proposed filling, excavation, and grading contemplated by the Barghausen Grading Plans in accordance with the specifications set forth in that report and noted on the Barghausen Grading Plans can be safely accommodated on the Project Site. 30 Third, on page 36 of ESNW's report (in the first paragraph of the report's 20-page section concerning the filling, excavation, and grading proposal in relation to the extensive provisions of RMC 4-4-060), as an overall summary related to the analysis of the proposal in relation to RMC 4-4-060's many provisions addressed in that 20-page section of the report, ESNW explains that: In our opinion, the proposed work in general performed in accordance with the Barghausen Grading Plans and in accordance with the specifications set forth in this report [including (I) the proposed filling of the existing stormwater pond and other adjacent areas of the site to raise grades, (2) the construction of the proposed J.5H:1 V permanent structural fill slope along the southerly and easterly portions of the work area, and (3) the construction of the associated Interim Stormwater Pond, the Permanent Stormwater Pond, and other drainage and site rehabilitation improvements] will be reasonable, acceptable, and safe from a geotechnical and soil engineering standpoint. (Emphasis added.) 30 On page 36 ofESNW's August 2014 Pointe Heron Geotechnical and Soil Engineering Report, ESNW explains: Based on (I) the results of our reviews and evaluations of (a) the EC! reports of pre-Sunset Bluff geologic conditions, (b) ECl's observation records of the previous filling within the proposed work area, and ( c) the proposed filling, excavation, and grading depicted on the Barghausen Grading Plans, (2) the above-stated analysis of Criteria I and 2, above, (3) our site reconnaissance visits to evaluate existing site conditions, ( 4) our on-site interview of a representative of Gary Merlino Construction Co., Inc. (GMCC) who personally worked on previous fill and grade operations on the Pointe Heron LLC parcel, and (5) the slope stability modeling and slope stability analyses that we performed (see APPENDIX D and see the discussion of the slope stability analyses on pages 10 to 12, above), in our opinion construction of the proposed filling, excavation, and grading contemplated by the Barghansen Grading Plans in accordance with the specifications set forth in this report and noted on the Barghausen Grading Plans can be safely accommodated on the project site. (Emphasis added.) City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June 1, 2015 Page44 Fourth, one of the important and noteworthy features of the design of the proposed new 1.5H: 1 V engineered fill slopes relating to the slope stability and integrity is the specification of a proposed crushed aggregate buttress fill along the face of the slopes. The design of that buttress fill is graphically illustrated on ESNW's Plate 3 (a typical cross section of the proposed fill), which is one of three ESNW plates ( drawings or figures) included in the Geo technical and Soil Engineering Report immediately following the report's main text and preceding the report's attached appendices. Please examine Plate 3 (see Appendix 9 for a copy of Plate 3). In addition to depicting both (a) the proposed crushed aggregate buttress fill along the slope's face and (b) the core structural fill that is proposed behind the buttress fill, Plate 3 depicts proposed geogrid reinforcing of the fill slope. Fill material specifications (both for the buttress fill material and for the fill material to be used for the fill's core behind the proposed buttress fill zone) are set forth on pages 8 and 9 of the Geotechnical and Soil Engineering Report. Placement and compaction specifications for the proposed fill are set forth on pages 9 and 10 of the report. While the buttress fill is explained and addressed in several portions of the Geotechnical and Soil Engineering Report, the following excerpt from page 34 of the report summarizes several of the important benefits of the proposed buttress fill slope face (slope stability and resistance to erosion, as well as other benefits): The proposed crushed aggregate buttress fill along the slope face [ a fill proposed to taper in horizontal depth from (1) a 35-foot depth at the toe of the proposed new l.5H:IV engineered fill slope tapering to (2) a 5-foot depth at the top of the slope] will not only be excellent for providing slope stability and preventing slope erosion, it will also provide a porous, nonerosive aggregate facing of the proposed slope face (see Plate 3), a facing that will be excellent for vertically transmitting and dispersing through the crushed aggregate buttress zone both (a) rainwater that strikes the slope's face and (b) any hillside perched groundwater that may seep into the buttress fill zone from the fill core. This will eliminate any need for terracing the slope. Because of the porous, nonerosive characteristics of the proposed fill slope face, vegetation of the slope face will not be needed to prevent erosion and, because the facing will not be conducive to landscaping, other plantings, or hydroseeding, vegetation of the slope face will not be appropriate and is not being proposed. (Emphasis added.) 2. Promotion of the Progressive Rehabilitation of Grading Sites to a Suitable New Use The requested modification concerning the proposed 1.5H: 1 V maximum fill slopes would make possible the creation of a large enough primary future developable area to make City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June 1, 2015 Page 45 feasible the construction of a public street and utilities infrastructure within the parcel and construction of capital-intensive buildings and uses on the existing partially graded site. (The primary grading of the subject parcel took place in relation to the Sunset Bluff residential project, which was halted as a result of the collapse of the housing market during the recent nationwide recession. Due to that housing-market collapse, the subject parcel was rezoned to IL-Light Industrial during December 2010.) The requested modification would thus promote progressive rehabilitation of the subject grading site to a suitable new use, which is a purpose consistent with RMC 4-4-060.A.2. 3. Promotion of Economic, Systematic, and Uninterrupted Grading Activities By approving the modification and thereby making possible the creation of a large- enough primary future developable area to make feasible the construction of a public street and utilities infrastructure within the subject parcel and construction of capital-intensive buildings and uses on the primary future developable area, economic, systematic, and uninterrupted grading activities would be promoted, which is a purpose consistent with RMC 4-4-060.A.4. D. The Requested Modification for the Proposed Slope Will Substantially Implement the Policy Direction of the Policies and Objectives of the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element and the Community Design Element, and the Proposed Modification is the Minimum Adjustment Necessary to Implement These Policies and Objectives. 1. Substantial Implementation of the Policies and Objectives of the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element and the Community Design Element Although constructed slopes are not specifically addressed in the Policies and Objectives of either the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element or the Community Design Element, as explained below approval of the requested modification will nevertheless substantially implement several of the following policies and objectives. First, the requested modification will substantially implement Policy LU-290, Objective LU-HHH, and Policy LU 303, which state: Policy LU-290. The City should endeavor to expand its present economic base, emphasizing new technologies, research and development facilities, science parks, and high-technology centers, and supporting commercial and office land uses. City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June 1, 2015 Page 46 Objective LU-HHH: Provide for a mix of employment-based uses, including commercial, office, and industrial development to support the economic development of the City of Renton. Policy LU-303. Develop the Green River Valley ('The Valley") and !he Black River Valley (located between Sunset Blvd and SW Grady Way) areas as places for a range and variety of commercial, office, and industrial. (Italics and underlining added.) Because the aesthetic setting and privacy of the subject parcel in the Black River Valley and the parcel's overlook of the forested area and Valley to the south would be highly conducive to research and development facilities, a science park, a high-technology center, and various commercial and otlice uses, as well as to various light industrial uses, the modification will substantially implement Policy LU-290, Objective LU-HHH, and Policy LU-303 by allowing the size and geometry of the proposed, nearly flat plateau portion of the parcel to be adequate to support construction of a street and utilities and capital-intensive buildings that would be conducive for such land uses. Second, the requested modification will substantially implement Objective LU-FFF and Policy LU-306, which state: Objective LU-FFF: Promote the development of low impact, light industrial uses, particularly those within the high-technology category, in Employment Area-Valley and Employment Area-Industrial designations where potentially adverse impacts can be mitigaled. Policy LU-306. Uses such as research, design, and development facilities should be allowed in office designations and industrial designations when potential adverse impacts to surrounding uses can be mitigated. (Italics and underlining added.) Because (1) approval of the requested modification would help provide opportunity for development of low impact light industrial land uses, including those within the high-technology category and including research, design, and development facilities in the Employment Area-Valley designation and (2) the proposed filling, excavation, and grading project has been designed to avoid and mitigate potential adverse impacts [see the following documents submitted as part of and in support of Pointe Heron LLC's Grade and Fill Permit application: (a) ESNW's August 13, 2014 Pointe Heron Geotechnical and Soil Engineering Report (especially pages 21 to 36), (b) Raedeke Associates, Inc.'s QIP!Virtu!Sunset Bluff (MLDC) Properties Wetland & Stream Delineation Update 2014 technical memorandum, and (c) Raedeke Associates, Inc.'s 2014 Great Blue Heron & Wildlife Habitat Update technical memorandum], approval of the requested modification would promote the types of development and facilities advocated by Objective LU-FFF and Policy LU-306. City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June 1, 2015 Page 47 Third, the requested modification will substantially implement four portions of Policy LU-308, a policy: that states: Policy L U-308. Changes from one zone to another should be considered to achieve a balance of uses that substantially improves the City's economic I employment base. Factors such as increasing the City's tax base. improving efficiency in the use of the land and the ability of a proposed land use to mitigate potential adverse land use impacts should be considered. (Italics and underlining added.) It is certainly true that consideration of the topic of"[c]hanges from one zone to another" is the particular context in which Policy LU-308 is framed. However, Policy LU-308 sets forth four broader underlying policy directions and/or considerations that are implicated by the requested modification: namely, (1) the desirability of achieving a balance of uses that substantially improves the City's economic/employment base, (2) the desirability of increasing the City's tax base, (3) the desirability of improving efficiency in the use o(the land, and ( 4) consideration of the ability of a proposed land use to mitigate potential adverse land use impacts. As noted above, the proposed filling, excavation, and grading project has been designed to avoid and mitigate potential adverse impacts. That being the case, because, by allowing the size and geometry of the proposed nearly flat plateau portion of the subject parcel to be adequate to support construction of both a street and capital-intensive buildings that will be conducive for land uses that may help the City achieve a balance of uses that will (a) substantially improve the City's economic/employment base, (b) increase the City's tax base, and (c) especially improve efficiency in the use o(the Pointe Heron LLC land, approval of the requested modification will substantially implement Policy LU-308. Fourth, the requested modification will substantially implement Policy CD-30, Policy CD-33, and Policy CD-50. Those three policies state: Policy CD-30. Non-residential development should have site plans that provide street access from a principal arterial, consolidate access points to existing streets, and have internal vehicular circulation that supports shared access. Curb cuts and internal access should not conflict with pedestrian circulation. Policy CD-33. Site design for office uses and commercial and mixed-use developments should consider weys of improving transit ridership through siting, locating of pedestrian amenities, walkways, parking, etc. Ground floor uses and design should be pedestrian-oriented. Policy CD-50. Support site plans that transition to and blend with existing development patterns using techniques such as lot size, depth and width, access points, building location setbacks, and landscaping. Sensitivity to unique features and differences among established neighborhoods should be reflected in site plan design. Interpret development standards to support ground-related orientation, City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June 1, 2015 Page 48 coordinated structural design, and private yards or substantial common space areas. (Italics and underlining added.) Relevant to Policy CD-30, the design grades proposed to be constructed in the Grade and Fill Project Site are conducive to future street access from Sunset Boulevard, which is a Renton principal arterial. In view of that fact, approval of the requested modification will enable the design grades to be constructed and, thus, substantially implement Policy CD-30. Relevant to Policy CD-33 is the fact that the proposed fill will raise elevations in much of the primary future developable area up to a 125-to-128-foot grade range of the proposed, relatively flat developable area of the parcel, which (as mentioned on pages 22 and 23, above) is a roughly mid-level grade range between (a) The average of the existing elevations (an average elevation of about 193 feet) along the segment of SW Sunset Boulevard lying to the north of the Project Site, elevations that range from (i) about 164 feet to the north of the Project Site's east end to (ii) about 222 feet to the north of the Project Site's west end, and (b) The average of the existing elevations (an average elevation of about 45 feet) of the south boundary of the Pointe Heron LLC parcel along or to the south of the Project Site ( elevations that generally range from about 40 to 50 feet). Such flattening of the proposed plateau portion of the Project Site and such raising of some of the parcel's elevations will create a much more readily walkable trip to and from bus stops along Sunset Boulevard (bus stops near the boulevard's intersection with the future Pointe Heron primary access street) for employees of future businesses on the Pointe Heron parcel. Thus, by encouraging future transit ridership, approval of the requested modification will substantially implement Policy CD-33. Relevant to Policy CD-50 is the fact that the proposed modification request is for a l.SH:1 V south-edge fill slope, which is a fill slope similar to the l.SH:1 V south-edge fill slopes that were constructed under permits issued by the City of Renton for both (I) the portions of the subject parcel itself that abut the west and the east edges of the proposed 1.5H: IV south-edge fill slope and (2) the eastern portion of the Stoneway Black River Quarry property that abuts the west end of the subject Pointe Heron LLC parcel. The proposed modification request is for a I.SH: IV south-edge fill slope that will transition to and directly blend with those abutting existing I.SH: IV fill slopes. Under Policy CD-50, that transitioning and blending should be supported by approval of the requested modification, which will substantially implement that policy. City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June I, 2015 Page 49 2. The Proposed Modification Is the Minimum Adjustment Necessary to Implement the Above-Quoted Policies and Objectives. This letter's subsection lV.A.7 [Demonstration That (A) the Primary Future Developable Area Is Barely Wide Enough to Make Viable Its Contemplated Future Development Even with a South-Edge Fill Slope as Steep as the Proposed l.5H:IV Maximum South-Edge Fill Slope and (B) a Flatter Maximum South-Edge Fill Slope Than the Slope Proposed Would Be Impractica[j-see pages 30 through 40, above-and the Appendices cited therein demonstrate that the proposed modification is the minimum adjustment necessary to implement the above- quoted and -discussed Comprehensive Plan policies and objectives. Note in particular from pages 39 to 40, above, that in view of the combination of (I) The need to maintain as a minimum depth along the length of the primary future developable area a 178-foot depth (which is the depth of the approximately 178-foot-deep by 660-foot-long strip of that area south of the proposed stormwater detention pond-a depth that is only 2.58 times the 69-foot-width of the contemplated future street right-of-way and a strip that is nearly half the length (49 percent) of the entire primary future developable area-in order to physically accommodate the scale of future buildings necessary to make the development viable in view of the ultimate overall contemplated financial investment to be made in the development-see footnote 22 on page 36, above, (2) The massive expense of the proposed grading, excavation, and filling project [including the replacement of the existing stormwater detention pond with a massive new pond at a more maintainable location along part of the proposed mid-elevation plateau-a pond that will cost as much or more than the pond that is currently planned for the proposed I.SH: 1 V south-edge fill slope if the proposed south-edge fill slope is required to be any flatter than currently proposed 31 ( even though the primary future developable area would be reduced in size by any flattening of that proposed slope)], (3) The massive later expense of constructing a street and associated utilities along the street right-of-way to serve development on only one side of the street [with (a) the ratio of the length of the future street to the primary future developable area already high at 225 lineal feet of street per acre of such primary future developable area even with the proposed 1.5H: IV south-edge fill slope and (b) the street and associated utilities along the 31 See the second paragraph of footnote 21, a footnote that begins on page 32, above. City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June I, 2015 Page 50 street to be no shorter or to have no less a total cost if the proposed south- edge fill slope is required to be any flatter than is currently proposed even though the primary future developable area would be reduced in size by any flattening of that proposed slope], and (4) The additional land consumption for the Total New Constructed Support Area associated with making the south-edge fill slope any flatter than the I.SH: IV design that is proposed [ additional land consumption that would increase the already very high I 08.3% ratio of (a) the Total New Constructed Support Area (based on a I.SH: 1 V south-edge fill slope) to (b) the primary future developable area (based on a I.SH:! V south-edge fill slope) to an even higher ratio], if the proposed south-edge fill slope is required to be any flatter than the I.SH: IV design that is proposed, the applicant's contemplated future development of capital-intensive future buildings within the parcel's primary future developable area and with an adjacent public street for access would be rendered financially infeasible and impractical. E. The Requested Modification Will Meet the Objectives and Safety, Function, Appearance, Environmental Protection, and Maintainability Intended by the Code Requirements, Based on Sound Engineering Judgment. Pages 40 through 51 of ESNW's August 2014 Pointe Heron Geotechnical and Soil Engineering Report demonstrate that the now-proposed I .SH: IV south-edge engineered fill slope greater than 15 feet in height is designed to fully address and conform to all applicable provisions of Subsection N (FILL) of the applicable section of the code, RMC Section 4-4-060 (except for above-quoted RMC 4-4-060N6's second sentence, the sentence regarding modifications in relation to fill-slope steepness). Furthermore, the entirety of the ESNW report demonstrates that the now-proposed I.SH: 1 V engineered fill slope is designed to fully meet the objectives and safety, function, appearance, environmental protection, and maintainability intended by the code requirements, based on sound engineering judgment. As explained in detail in my August 18, 2014 letter to you, Ms. Dolbee (a copy of which letter, along with all of the exhibits attached thereto, is attached to this letter as Appendix 1 ), in 2004 the City approved the design of a then-proposed I .SH: IV engineered fill slope greater than 15 feet in height along the south edge of most of the east half of the Stoneway Black River Quarry property (property that lies west of and abuts roughly the southern half of the subject parcel's west boundary). As also explained in detail in my August 18, 2014 letter to you (and supported by the exhibits attached thereto and included in this Appendix I), in 2004 and 2005 the City approved 1.5H: 1 V engineered fill slopes greater than 15 feet in height both (I) along the south edge of the subject parcel (to both the west and the east of the area that became the Sunset Bluff Stormwater Detention Pond) and (2) within the easternmost end of the Stoneway Black River Quarry property. City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June 1,2015 Page 51 Now, in order to fill in the gap along the south boundary between those previously- approved and -constructed I.SH: IV engineered fill slopes, and in order to extend upward the portions of the existing fill slopes to the east and west within the subject parcel in accordance with the design grades set forth on the Barghausen Grading Plans submitted as part of the subject Grade and Fill Permit application, it is appropriate that the requested modification be approved because the proposed engineered fill design is similar to the design and construction of the existing engineered fill and will have the same basic appearance as the slopes that were previously approved and have now existed for many years on the subject parcel. F. The Requested Modification Will Not Be Injurious to Other Property(ies) in the Vicinity. See subsection IV .C. l (Safety of the Proposed Fill Slopes and the Protection of Areas and Uses in the Vicinity of Those Slopes), which begins on page 42 and ends on page 44, above, and the materials cited therein. G. The Requested Modification Conforms to the Intent and Purpose of the Code. See subsection IV.C (The Requested Modification for the Proposed Slope Is in Conformity with the Intent and Purpose of the Code), which begins on page 41 and ends on page 45, above, and the materials cited therein. H. The Requested Modification Can Be Shown to Be Justified and Required for the Use and Situation Intended. See subsection IV.A, a subsection that begins on page 13 and ends on page 40, above, and the materials cited therein. I. The Requested Modification Will Not Create Adverse Impacts to Other Property(ies) in the Vicinity. See subsection IV .C. I (Safety of the Proposed Fill Slopes and the Protection of Areas and Uses in the Vicinity of Those Slopes), which begins on page 42 and extends into page 44, above, and the materials cited therein. V. In View of Procedure 4 of RMC 4-3-0SON2a(ii), Pointe Heron LLC Recognizes That That Procedure Contemplates That Any Proposed Fill Slope Created Which Remains Forty Percent (40%) or Steeper following the Proposed Site Development Shall Be Subject to All Applicable Geologic Hazard Regulations for Steep Slopes and Landslide Hazards in RMC Section 4-3-050. City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June 1, 2015 Page 52 Pointe Heron LLC recognizes that Procedure 4 of RMC 4-3-050N2a(ii) contemplates that any proposed fill slope created pursuant to the Pointe Heron Grade and Fill Permit that remains forty percent ( 40%) or steeper following the proposed site development shall be subject to all applicable geologic hazard regulations for steep slopes and landslide hazards in RMC Section 4- 3-050 (Critical Areas Regulations). VI. The Requested Modification Is Based on Consideration of Best Available Science as Described in WAC 365-195-905 as Called for in Procedure 5 of RMC 4-3-050N2a(ii). As a compilation of modeling, assessment, and expert opinion by Scott S. Riegel, a licensed geologist and licensed engineering geologist, and Kyle R. Campbell, a registered professional engineer, under Table 1 set forth in subsection (5)(a)6(b)(Common sources of scientific information) of WAC 365-195-905, ESNW's August 2014 Geotechnical and Soils Engineering Report constitutes Best Available Science as described in WAC 365-195-905. Please let me know if you or your colleagues have any questions concerning this request. Respectfully Submitted, HALINEN LAW OFFICES, P.S. ~/f'11~ David L. 1¥tlinen J Attachments: See Table of Appendices (next page), which lists and describes all of the 14 Appendices in the three-ring binder that this letter is a part of cc: Pointe Heron LLC Attn: Jim Blais (with copies of Appendices) Y:\ct\2623\023\City\Dolbcc L T3 (DLH 06-01-2015).doc Table of Appendices Appendix Description of Appendix Number I A copy of David Halinen's 8/18/2014 letter to Renton CED (Attn: Vanessa Dolbee) concerning Pointe Heron LLC's Grade and Fill Permit Application (along with all of the exhibits attached thereto) 2 An 11-inch-by-17-inch reduced-size copy of the previously approved 1/16/2004 Sunset Bluff Preliminarv Plat 3 An l l-inch-by-17-inch color map exhibit dated 2/25/2015 depicting Existing Sunset Bluff Private Utility Installations (Appendix 3 was created on a base sheet comprised of spliced-together l l-inch-by-17-inch reduced-sized copies of a portion of Sheet I and a portion of Sheet 2 of the Barghausen Topography Map for the current filling, excavation, and grading project proposal) 4 A set of l l-inch-by-17-inch reduced-sized copies of Sheet I (updated 1/13/2015) and Sheet 2 (updated 5/15/2015) of the Barghausen Topography Map, full-size versions of which were submitted to the City as part of the subject Grade and Fill Permit Application 5 A six-sheet set of 8/13/2014 Barghausen cross-section exhibit sheets 6 A copy of the cover sheet and a set of copies of pages 5 through 7 of Earth Solutions NW, LLC's 8/13/2014 Pointe Heron Geotechnical and Soil Engineering Report submitted to the City as part of Pointe Heron LLC's Grade and Fill Permit Aoolication 7 Project Narrative submitted to the City on 8/18/2014 as part of the Grade and Fill Permit Annlication 8 An l l-inch-by-17-inch reduced-size set of the 8/2014 IO-sheet set of the Grading, Interim Drainage, E.S.C., and Rehabilitation Plans for the proposal prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. also submitted as part of the Grade and Fill Permit Anolication (the "Barghausen Grading Plans") 9 A copy of an l l-inch-by-17-inch color Plate 3 cross-sectional view of the proposed slope' s design prepared by Earth Solutions NW, LLC taken from Earth Solutions NW, LLC's 8/13/2014 Pointe Heron Geotechnical and Soil Engineering Report 10 An ll-inch-by-17-inch reduced-size copy of the SR 900 L.L.C. Lot Line Adjustment recorded under King County Recording No. 20040311900015 II An l l-inch-by-17-inch color map exhibit that was created using as a base sheet an ll-inch-by-17-inch reduction of the black-and-white Sheet El (the Cover Sheet) of the IO-sheet set of the 8/2014 Barghausen Grading Plans 12 An l l-inch-by-17-inch reduced-size copy of the color Pointe Heron Wetlands and Stream Mao exhibit 13 A color map exhibit developed from a City of Renton GIS map that has both the boundaries of the subject parcel and the limits of the Project Site added to it 14 Two l l-inch-by-17-inch reduced-size color map exhibits (Map Exhibit I and Mao Exhibit 2) updated by Barghausen Consulting Engineers on 4/24/15 ... Table of Aooendices r•• ... . ..-, ::·-~ ·.: '• ' Appendix Description of Appendix Number I A copy of David Halinen's 8/18/2014 letter to Renton CED (Attn: Vanessa Dolbee) concerning Pointe Heron LLC's Grade and Fill Permit Application ( along with all of the exhibits attached thereto) 2 An l l-inch-by-17-inch reduced-size copy of the previously approved 1/16/2004 Sunset Bluff Preliminarv Plat 3 An l l-inch-by-17-inch color map exhibit dated 2/25/2015 depicting Existing Sunset Bluff Private Utility Installations (Appendix 3 was created on a base sheet comprised of spliced-together l l-inch-by-17-inch reduced-sized copies of a portion of Sheet I and a portion of Sheet 2 of the Barghausen Topography Map for the current filling, excavation, and grading project proposal) 4 A set of l l-inch-by-17-inch reduced-sized copies of Sheet I (updated 1/13/2015) and Sheet 2 (updated 5/15/2015) of the Barghausen Topography Map, full-size versions of which were submitted to the City as part of the subiect Grade and Fill Permit Annlication 5 A six-sheet set of8/13/2014 Barghausen cross-section exhibit sheets 6 A copy of the cover sheet and a set of copies of pages 5 through 7 of Earth Solutions NW, LLC's 8/13/2014 Pointe Heron Geotechnical and Soil Engineering Report submitted to the City as part of Pointe Heron LLC's Grade and Fill Permit Annlication 7 Project Narrative submitted to the City on 8/18/2014 as part of the Grade and Fill Permit Application 8 An ll-inch-by-17-inch reduced-size set of the 8/2014 IO-sheet set of the Grading, Interim Drainage, E.S.C., and Rehabilitation Plans for the proposal prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. also submitted as part of the Grade and Fill Permit Application (the "Barghausen Grading Plans") 9 A copy of an l l-inch-by-17-inch color Plate 3 cross-sectional view of the proposed slope's design prepared by Earth Solutions NW, LLC taken from Earth Solutions NW, LLC's 8/13/2014 Pointe Heron Geotechnical and Soil Em!ineering Report 10 An l l-inch-by-17-inch reduced-size copy of the SR 900 L.L.C. Lot Line Adiustment recorded under King County Recording No. 20040311900015 11 An l l-inch-by-17-inch color map exhibit that was created using as a base sheet an l l-inch-by-17-inch reduction of the black-and-white Sheet El (the Cover Sheet) of the IO-sheet set of the 8/2014 Ban,hausen Grading Plans 12 An l l-inch-by-17-inch reduced-size copy of the color Pointe Heron Wetlands and Stream Map exhibit 13 A color map exhibit developed from a City of Renton GIS map that has both the boundaries of the subject parcel and the limits of the Project Site added to it 14 Two l l-inch-by-17-inch reduced-size color map exhibits (Map Exhibit I and Map Exhibit 2) updated by Barghausen Consulting Engineers on 4/24/15 APPENDIXl HALINEN LAW davidhalinen@haliner,law.com Seattle• 206.443.4684 ·Tacoma· 253.627.6680 · Fax· 253.272.9876 • Cell · 206.713.0992 Halinen Law Offices. PS' 1019 Regents Blvd Ste 202 Fircrest WA98466-6037'" ha/inenlaw.com HAND-DELIVERED City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Planning Division 1055 S. Grady Way, Sixth Floor Renton, Washington 98057 August 18, 2014 Attn: Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager RE: My Client Pointe Heron LLC's Grade and Fill Permit Application for a Proposed Filling, Excavation, and Grading Project within a 14.12-Acre Project Site Portion of Lot 1 of the SR 900 L.L.C. Lot Line Adjustment (Rec.# 20040311900015) Explanation of (1) the Existing Fill Slopes, (2) Proposed Fill Slopes within the Project Site, and (3) Why the Proposed Fill Slopes Should Be Approved by the City without Either an Exception through Modification or a Variance Dear Ms. Dolbee: In follow-up to previous discussions that Pointe Heron LLC's Jim Blais and I have had with you, I am writing to address certain slope matters relating to my client Pointe Heron LLC's Grade and Fill Permit application for a proposed filling, excavation, and grading project, and specifically to address certain provisions of RMC 4-3-050J and RMC 4-4-060. Let me start by both (1) describing the parcel of land that encompasses the proposed 14.12-acre project site and (2) explaining (in view of RMC 4-3-050Jla(i)) the lack of existing "protected slopes" within the project site. Comments Concerning the Parcel of Land that Encompasses the Proposed Grade & Fill Permit Project Site The Pointe Heron Grade and Fill Permit project site lies within an approximately 14.12- acre portion of a single parcel of land, Lot 1 of the SR 900 L.L.C. Lot Line Adjustment (King County Recording Number 20040311900015). That parcel encompasses approximately 26.26 acres. As you know, the 65 residential lots contemplated by the previously approved Sunset Bluff Preliminary Plat were all designed to lie within that parcel. During the clearing, initial grading, and temporary erosion/sedimentation control phase of the Sunset Bluff residential subdivision development project, the currently existing stormwater detention and water quality pond was constructed along the west-central part of Lot l's south edge. City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Planning Division Attn: Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner August 18, 20 l 4 Page 2 The Lack of Existing "Protected Slopes" within the Project Site in View of RMC 4-3-0SOJla(i) On May 28, 2014, I had my legal assistant use the City of Renlon·s publicly available GIS mapping site to create a ·'Regulated Slopes Overlay" exhibit encompassing the above- referenced single parcel of land within which the subject Point Heron Filling, Excavation, and Grading Project site lies. (Sec attached Exhibit A-1.) Subsequently, on August 12, 2014, l had my legal assistant create a similar map exhibit (see attached Exhibit A-JJ, one that (1) utilizes everything that is shown on Exhibit A-l as base infonnation and (2) has superimposed on it a dashed line outlining the limits of the Pointe Heron LLC Grade and Fill Project Site. Those limits are consistent with the pro_ject site limits depicted on Sheets El, E2, E3, E5, and E6 of Barghausen Consulting Engineers, lnc.'s ten-sheet Au1,,ust 2014 Grade and Fill Penni! application set of Grading, Interim Drainage, E.S.C., and Rehabilitation Plans. (In this letter, l refer to that ten-sheet set of plans as the "Barghausen Grading Plans.") In view of the City's G!S map legend of the various-listed slope ranges on the Exhibit A- l G!S base map that my legal assistant downloaded from tl1e Renton GIS mapping site (with the map legend indicating that red-shading denotes slopes greater than 40% and less than or equal to 90% as '·protected slopes" and that purple-shading denotes slopes greater than 90% also as "protected slopes"), the clear absence of any red-or purple-colored areas within the Project Site outlined on Exhibit A-J indicates that no areas of·'protected slopes'" lie within the Project Site. ~ote that Section l (Applicability) of RMC 4-3-0501 (Geologic Hazards) states in its entirety: l. Applicability: The geologic hazard regulations applv to all nonexempt activities on sites containing sleep slopes, landslide hazards. erosion hazards, seismic hazards, and/or coal mine hazards classified below or on sites within fifty feet (50') of steep slopes, landslide hazards, erosion hazards. seismic hazards. and/or coal mine hazards classified below which are located on abutting or adjacent sites. a. Steep Slopes: i. Steep Slope Delineation Procedure: The boundaries of a regulated steep sensitive or protected slope are determined to be in the location identified on the City of Renton 's Steep Slope Atlas. An applicant's qualified professional may substitute boundaries indcpendentlv derived from survey data for the City's consideration in determining the City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Planning Division Attn: Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner August 18, 20 l 4 Page 3 boundaries of sensitive or protected steep slopes. All topographic maps shall utilize two foot (2') contour intervals or the standard utilized in the City of Renton Steep Slope Atlas. it Steep Slope Types: (a) Sensitive slopes. (b) Protected slopes. (Boldfacing in the code text; underlining and italics added.) Above-quoted R.'v1C 4-3-050Jla(i) provides a permit applicant with a very dear option of having the applicant's project application reviewed based on either (1) utilizing the boundaries of protected slopes in the location(s) identified on the City of Renton's Steep Slope Atlas or (b) having the applicant's qualified professional substitute boundaries independently derived from survey data for the City's consideration in determining the boundaries of sensitive or protected sieep slopes. Pointe Heron LLC hereby opts for the former. Because (1) Poini Heron LLC opts to have the "the boundaries of ... regulated protected slopes ... determined to he in the location identified on the City of Renton 's Steep Slope Atlas" and (2) the accompanying Exhibit A-2 map (a map that is a City of Renton GIS-based illustration of the City of Renton's Steep Slope Atlas) depicts no '"protected slopes" anywhere within the Pointe Heron Project Site, the geologic hazard regulations concerning protected slopes do nor apply to the Project Site.1 That being the case, RMC 4-3-050J5a's prohibition on development of protected slopes is inapplicable to any of rhe Project Site portion of the Pointe Heron LLC parcel. 1 The Exhibit A-2 map makes clear that no protected slopes lie within the Project Site. although the map depicts in red four areas of protected slopes within the portion of the subject parcel to the cast of the project site. Sheet El of the above-ref'erenced set of Barghausen Grading Plans for the proposed project depicts those four areas of protected slopes and their approximate respective square footages: namely, from west to east, Protected Slope Area 1 (which Barghauscn determined encompasses approximately 5,299 square feet), Protected Slope Arca 2 (which Barghausen detennined encompasses approximately 68,936 square feet), Protected Slope Area 3 ( which Barghausen detennined encompasses approximately 2,241 squar~ feet), and Protected Slope Area 4 (which Barghausen detennined encompasses approximately 1,532 square feet). Sheet EI also depicts the minimum distance ( 110 feet) between the westerlymost protected slope area (Protected Slope Area 1) and the nearest eastern edge of the Projecr Site. City of Renton Depaitment of Community and Economic Development Planning Division Attn: Vanessa Dolbee. Senior Planner August 1 8, 2014 Page 4 Pointe Heron LLC's Proposal to Create Certain Areas of Permanent I.SH: 1 V Engineered Fill Slopes That Will Exceed Fifteen feet (15') in Height within and along the Southerly Part of the Project Site Pointe Heron LLC proposes to create within and along the southerly and southeasterly part of the Project Site a permanent 1.5H: l V engineered fill slope using controlled aggregate material [i.e., a slope of approximately sixty-seven percent (67%)], a slope that for the most part will exceed fifteen feet ( 15') in height. A cross-sectional view of the proposed slopc's design prepared by the Pointe Heron project's geotcehnical and soil engineering firm, Earth Solutions '.'JW, LLC ("ESNW''), as Plate 3 to ES:-IW's August 13, 2014 Geotechnical and Soil Engineering Report in Support of' Proposed Fill, Excavation, and Grade, Poinle !feron LLC Parcel (referred to herein as the ''Geotechnieal Report" or the ''Soil Engineering Report'') is attached to this letter as Exhibit B to give you a clear idea of the slope's planned design. As highlights of the design, please note: (I) That Plate 3 (Exhibit B) illustrates the proposed "buttress fill" zone along the fill's face (the specification of the buttress fill material set forth in the Soil Engineering Report at page 4 indicates that it is "equivalent to coarse gravel and/or cobble"); (2) The last of the bullet point notes in the upper-left-hand comer of Plate 3 (Exhibit B) states that ·'Buttress Fill shall taper from a minimum horizontal depth of 35 teet at base to 5 feet at top of slope" (which is a thick depth of material progressively thicker toward the bottom of the slope); (3) The proposed ·'core structural fill" zone behind the "buttress fill" zone; and ( 4) The proposed geogrid reinforcing. With the 1.5H: IV rate of slope and the gcogrid reinforcing, the design of the proposed slope is comparable to the design that the City approved in 2004 and 2005. For important context, 1 explain below the following four things: City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Planning Division Attn: Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Plairner August 18, 2014 Page 5 (1) The existing, similar adjacent l.5H:1V engineered fill slopes to the west and east that the proposed fill slope is intended tc, cormect to and extend ' up from-; (2) The permits that the City issued for those existing slopes; (3) The desib'Tl drawings and soil engineering reports that the City approved for those existing slopes: and (4) That, due lo RMC 4-4-060N1 's first sentence, neither any exceptions through modification nor any variances (a) were needed from the City in order to obtain the construction/building permits for the previously approved and constructed 1.5H: 1 V slopes to the west and east of the proposed slope or (b) are needed from the City now. As I elaborate below, in view of the effect of R\1C 4-4-060N 1 's first sentence, neither any exception through modification nor any variance is needed from the City in order to obtain the construction permit for the now-proposed infill slope if the ultimately approved soil engineering report for the proposed slope recommends the slope' s proposed design, Summarv of the Existing Engineered Fill Slopes That Were Constructed to the West and East of the Now- Proposed Infill Slope under Renton Construction and Building Permits and That the Proposed Slope Is Now Intended to Connect To The proposed new 1.5H: IV fill slope south of the existing Sunset Bluff detention pond is designed to connect to the following existing adjacent fill slopes to the west and east of the planned location of the proposed new slope: ( l) The similar 1.5H: 1 V engineered fill slope [ a 1.5 H: IV slope that is greater than fifteen feet (15') in heightl created to the west of the existing Sunset Bluff detention pond-(a) the first portion of that slope was authorized along the south edge of an easterly portion of the Stoneway Black River Quarry under Renton Construction Permit Number U040257 issued July 23, 2004 3 and (b) 2 The proposed slope is an in.fi!l slope that) at its base, will be approximately 700 feet long along the project site's south boundary between the existing engineered slope to the west and the existing engineered slope to the east The proposed slope is intended to essentially fill in the space between the existing slope to the east and the existing slope to the west. 3 In regard to the portion of the similar, existing I.SH: 1 V engineered fill slope that was first created (created during 2004 aiong some of the southerly edge of the easterly part of tl1e Stoneway Black River Quarry City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Planning Division Attn: Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner August 18, 20 l 4 Page 6 the second portion of that slope (as part of the Sunset Bluff project construction) was authorized alcmg (i) the south edge of the easterly portion of the Black River Quarry and (ii) the south edge of the westerly portion of the Sunset Bluff site under Renton Building Permit Number B050337 issued July 29, 2005 and Renton Construction Permit Number U050099 issued July 26, 2005 4 and property) and that was authorized under Renton Construction Pennit Number L:040257, please see the following five attached exhibits: (a) Exhibit C-1, which is a copy of Renton Construction Permit Number U040257; (b) Exhibit C-2, which is a copy of the May 26, 2004 soil engineering report in support of the slope design prepared by Eanh Consultants, Inc.; ( c) Exhibit C-3, which is an 11 ·• by I 7" reduced-size copy of the Site Plan Jar the Black River Quarry's Son th Edge Ecologv. Block Wall and Geogrid-ReinfOrced Fill Slope dated June 29, 2004 prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc.; (d) Exhibit C-4, which is a copy of the building pem1it (Renton Building Pcnnit Number B040386) issued July 20, 2004 by the City for the geogrid-reinforced ecology block wall located aiong and beneath a portion of the lower edge of the 1.5H: l V gcogrid- reinforced fill slope: and (e) Exhibit C-5, which is a copy of the June 22, 2004 supplemental soil repott (a report of calculations) prepared by Earth Consultants, Inc. in support of the design of the geogrid-reinforced ecology block wall. <1 In regard to the portions of the similar existing 1.SH: 1 V engineered fill s'.ope constructed as part of the S'J.nsct Bluff project [including (1_) the portion lying along the southerly edge of the easternmost part of the Stoneway Black River Quan-y property1 (2) the portions lying along the south edge and west edge of the subject Pointe Heron LLC parcel to the west of the now-existing storm water detention pond, and (3) the portions now lying to the east of the now-existing stonnwater detention pond along the south edge and east edge of the subject Pointe Heron LLC parcel west of the existing Class 4 stream)], portions that were authorized as part of the Sunset Bluff project construction under Renton Bui:ding Permit Number B050337 issued July 29, 2005 and Renton Construction Permit Number U050099 issued July 2/J, 2005 (for clearing, initial grading and TESC for Sunset Blu±l). please see the following seven attached exhibits: (a) Exhibit D-1, which is a copy of Renton Building Permit Number 8050337 issued July 29, 2005: (hi Exhibit D-2, which is a copy of the May 26, 2005 (Revised June 6, 2005) soil engineering report prepared by Earth Consultants, Inc. for the proposed Sunset Bluff I H: IV and 1.5H: 1 V geogrid-reinforced fill slopes and geogrid-reinforced ecology block wall: City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Planning Division Attn: Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner August 18, 2014 Page 7 (2) The similar, existing engineered fill slope [ a slope ranging from 1.5H: 1 V to 2H: 1 V that is greater than fifteen feet (15') in height] created along a pottion of the south edge of the Sunset Bluff site just to the east of the Sunset Bluff stormwater detention pond, a slope that also was authorized under Renton Building Permit ',iumber B050337 issued July 29, 2005 and Renton Construction Permit Number U050099 issued July 26, 2005 and extended further east by virtue of the revised Barghausen drawing set that was approved by the City on October 9, 2005. The attached exhibits described in above footnotes 2 and 3 provide copies of the construction and building permits, soil enginceing reports, and design drawings for the existing adjacent fill slopes to trre east and west of the planned location of the proposed slope. (c) Exhibit D-3, which is an 1 I'' by 17" July 11, 2005 reduced-si,e three-sheet set oC design cross-sections, details, and notes prepared by Earth Consullants, lnc. for the proposed Sunset l3luff i H: IV and 1.5H: 1 V geogrid-reinforced fill slopes and gcogrid-reinforced ecology block; (d) Exhibit DA, which is a copy of the construction permit (Renton Construction Permit Number U050099) issued July 26. 2005 by the City for clearing, initial grading, and TESC for Sunset Bluff; (c) Exhibit D-5, which is an 11" by 17" October 7, 2005 reduced-size seven-sheet set of the clearing. initial grading, and TESC drawings for Sunset Bluff prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, [nc. (this set, which bears a City approval signature dated October 9, 2005! was, to my know\c<lgc~ the latest set of those drawings to be approved by the City, and it superseded an earlier set of clearing, initial grading, and TESC drawings dated July 2 i, 2005 and signed on the City· s behalf on July 22, 2005); (f) Exhibit 0-6, which is a copy of the July 8, 2005 supplemental soil engineering report (of design calculations) prepared by Earth Consultants, lnc. in support of the design of the !H: [ V geogrid-rcinforced fill slopes, slopes that were designed for portions of the Sunset Bluff entrance road and lie outside of the currently proposed Work Area Limits (note that the City did not require a supplemental report of design calculations prepared by Earth Consultants, Inc. in support of the design of the l H: 1 V geogri<l- reinforced fill slopes; and (g) Exhibit D-7, which is a copy of the July 8, 2005 report of design calculations prepared by Earth Consultants, Inc. in support of the design of the geogrid-reinforced ecology block r~taining waU along thi;: north edge of the storm water detention pond. City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Planning Division Attn: Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner August 18, 2014 Page 8 In View of R:vIC 4-4-060Nl 's First Sentence, neither Modifications nor Variances Arc Needed from the City to Obtain the Construction/Building Permits for the Now- Existing Geogrid-Reinforced Slopes, ft is important to note that because of the first sentence of paragraph 1 (Applicability and Exemptions) of subsection N (F!LLS) of RMC Section 4-4-060 (GRAD!NG, EXCAVATION AND M!NING REGL:LAT!ONS), neither modifications [under RMC 4-9-25001 for one of the circumstances listed in RMC 4-3-050N2a(ii) (Geologic Hazards -Modifications)] nor variances were needed in order to secure the building/construction permits issued during 2004 and 2005 for the above-referenced, similar engineered fill slopes that were greater than 40 percent (40%) in slope and greater than fifteen feet (15') in height constructed under those permits. Paragraph 1 of RY!C 4-4-060N states: 1. Applicability and Exemptions: Unless otherwise recommended in the approved soil engineering report. fills shall conform ta the provisions o/° this Section. In the absence of an approved soil engineering report, these provisions may be waived for minor fills not intended to support structures. For minor fills or waste areas, humps, hollows or water pockets shall be graded smooth with acceptable slopes. (Boldfacing in the code text; underlining and italics added for emphasis.) Please bear in mind that the phrase ·'this Section" at the end of the first sentence in Paragraph 1 of RMC 4-4-060"\' refers to RMC Section 4-4-060 in its entirety. The existing south-edge slope to the west and the existing south-edge slope east of the now-proposed new Pointe Heron 1.5 H: 1 V fill slope south of the existing Sunset Bluff detention pond-existing slopes that were authorized by the City and constructed under Construction Pennit Number C040257, Building Permit Number B050337, and Construction Permit Number U050099-were all recommended in the soil engineering reports prepared by Earth Consultants, Inc. TI10se reports were ( 1) submitted to the City for review as part of the subject construction and building permit application submittals and (2) (by virtue of the City's issuance of the construction and building pem1its for the slopes) appro\'cd by the City. ln view of the fact that the approved soils engineering reports recommended the 1.51-I: l V slopes to the west and east of the now-existing detention pond (slopes much steeper than 40 percent and higher than 15 feet), the second sentence of RMC 4-4-060N6 5-a sentence ' RMC 4-4-0601\6 states: City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Planning Division Attn: Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner August 18, 2014 Page 9 ordinarily calling for a modification per RMC 4-9-25001 for one of the circumstances listed in RMC 4-3-050l\2a(ii) (Geologic Hazards -V!odifications) in order to qualify for approval of the creation of permanent slopes forts; percent (40%) or greater which are Jz:fieen feet (15') in height~did not applv to those slopes. That being the case, a modification was not necessary for the construction of the slopes to the west and east that were constructed under those permits. "!either a Modification nor a Variance Will Be Needed in Order to Obtain the Grade and Fill Permit and Construction/Building Permit(s) for the Similar Proposed Engineered Fill Slope Because the Soil Engineering Report for the Proposed Slope Supports and Recommends the Proposed Design and, in All Fairness, That Soil Engineering Report Should Be Approved as Were the Reports for the Earlier Slopes to the West and East As was the case with the City's approval of the originally approved and constructed structural fill slopes to the west and east of the now-proposed in-fill slope along the site's south boundary, in view of RMC 4-4-060Nl 's first sentence neither a modification nor a variance will be needed from the City in order to obtain the fill and grade permit and construction/building pe1mit(s) for the now-proposed slope because the Soil Engineering Report for the proposed slope-a report rhat (I) competentlv demonstrates rhe appropriateness of and recommends the slope 's proposed design and (2) in al/fairness thus should be approved. (See the accompanying copy ofESNW's August 13, 2014 report.) Pages 40 through 51 of the Soil Engineering Report demonstrates that the now-proposed fill slope is designed to fully address and confom1 to all of the applicable provisions of Subsection N (FILL) ofRMC Section 4-4-060-see pages 40 through 51 of the Soil Engineering Report, except for RMC 4-4-060N6's second sentence (the sentence regarding exceptions through modifications). However, due to the soil engineering report's recommendation of the proposed slopc·s design, that sentence ·will not be applicable (and will thus not bar construction of' prohibited slopes without an exception through modification) if the City approves the soil 6. 'lfaximum Slope: The slope of fill surfaces shall be no steeper than is safe for the intended use. Except in conjunction with a modification grant(,!_d per RMC 4-9-250Dl hr one of' the circumsrances listed in R.J.\fC 4-3-050N2a(ii) (Geologic Hazards - Modiflcations), Jill operarions associated with a plat, short plat, subdivision or dedication, or other permitted land Jevelupment w.:tivitv which would result in the creation of' permanent slopes (ortv percent 140%) or greater which are f}fieenj(!e,J. (15') in height i.e. protected slopes, shall not be approved. (Amd. Ord. 4835, 3-27- 2000) (Boldfacing in the code text; underlining and italics added for emphasis.) City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Planning Division Attn: Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner August 18, 2014 Page 10 engineering report like it did in approving the slopes 10 the west and the east as it did in 2004 and 2005. The City continues to have the power to do that. Having approved 1.5H: IV slopes along the south edge in 2004 and 2005, it is appropriate for the City to allow Pointe Heron LLC to fill in the gap with essentially the same slope and thereby enable Pointe Heron to create a relatively flat area of the site suitable for development of one or more IL-permitted uses. Please let me know if you or your colleagues have any questions concerning this and if this would be an acceptable way to move this matter forward. Sincerely, FFICES, P.S. r;~ Attachments cc: Pointe Heron LLC Attn: Gary Merlino, Don Merlino, and Jim Blais (via email, with copies of attachments) Y:\cf\2623\023\City\Dolbee LTl (DLH 8-18-2014).doc , . -------------------------------------- i'·,.· ,., .... .... 690 . , .. , .... .... ....... 1..,, ........ .. ,,, .......... .... .... .... .... .... 0 .... ... _ WGS_ 1984_ Web_Mercator_Auxiliary_Sphere w -ith City of Renton Regulated Slopes -· -· -· ._. -· -· ... -· -· .._ .. . ·--·-·-·-· ..... ~ ........... .. BR s .c .~A 345 690 Feet ..... \, .•. ,. Information Technology -GIS RentonMapSupport@Rentonwa .gov 05/28/2014 ·, ·, . . ""'" ' ' ·, ·, ·, ·, ·, ·, . .., . ' " . I i i "· . '• ~ .. ' ) I '.fl~ I,, POINTE HERON LLC PARCEL BOUNDARY ..... ;,., ... ! ; ! , ... ~ ·~ . ! ....... ~ ....... ---... .. ...... 1"1, • ., This map 1s a user generated static outpu t from a n Internet mapping s ite and is for reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate, current, or otherwise re l iable. Map title , labeling, and parcel boundary added by Halinen Law, 8/12/2014 THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION Legend City and County Boundary Other :--·• Cit)I of Renton lo,; Parcels Slope City of Renton >1 5% & <=25% LI >25% & <=40% (Sensitive) • >40% & <=90% (Protected) • >90% (Protected) En vi ro nment Designations D Natural D Shoreline High Intensity D Shoreline Isolated High I ntensity D Shoreline Resident ial D Urban Conservancy D Jurisdictions EXHIBIT A-1 Notes None 0 City of lle1ff Q n Finan ce & IT Division POINTE HERON LLC PARCEL AND GRADE & FILL PROJECT SITE with City of Renton Regulated Slopes .•. . ,., ... I ., • ...., ·-...., '•, 690 ~ ..... P ROPOSED GRADE & FILL PROJECT SITE ........ ..................... ·,.,., -·-· ·,·,·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·---·-·-· .... , a""• .. ~ Renton l JT BR_S C -A 0 345 690 F eet I I •• • • • • • • • •• • •• .. (/ •• •• 1' • ~ Informat ion Technology. GIS RentonMapSupport@Re nto nw a .gov •• • ··1 . • , 4! •• (f ·, ·,·,"'"", .. ·, I •, ·, ·, ·, ·, -.., j;. ',, i i " "· ~ J, ... ,.. POINTE HERON LLC PARCE L BOUN D ARY , ........ .. ' ! ; ! , ___ ...... ., ...... •-i ... •.. .. This map is a user generated slal1c oulpul from a n Internet mapp in g si te a nd is for reference only. Data layers that appe a r on this map -n a y or may n ot b e accurate . current. or otherwise rel ia b le. WGS_ 1984 _Web_Mercator_A uxilia ry_Sphere 05/28/2014 Map ti tl e, labeling , parcel boundary and p rop osed proj ect site added by Halinen Law, 8/J 2/20 14 THI S MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAV IGATION Legend City and County Bou nda ry Other ;-·, l.,; C ity of Renton Pa rce ls Slo pe City of Renton >15%& <=25% • >2 5% & <=40% (Scns ibve ) • >40% & <=90% (Protected) • >90% (Protected) Env ironment Designa tio ns D Natural D Shoreline High I ntensity D Shoreline Isolated Htgh Intensity D Shoreline Residential D Urban Conservancy D Jurisdict ions EXHIBIT A-2 Notes None 0 Cityof R-e11ton Finance & IT Divi sion Notes : • Geogrid Lengths (alternate layers) Main= 40' Intermediate= 20' • Minimum Long-Term Design Strength LTDS = 7,520 lbs./ft. • Geogrid to be approved by Geotechnical Engineer prior to placement. • Buttress Fill shall taper from a minimum horizontal depth of 35 feet at base to 1.5H : 1V Field-Adjust Transition from Buttress Fill and Core Structural Fill per Geotechnical Engineer Buttress Fill .A~" (See Notes) 5 feet at top of slope. Face Inclination ~/, t Approximate Existing Grade Geogrid Reinforcing (typ.) See Appendix D and Above Notes for Geogrid Length I wl~ cir :.:::i Cl Q) C Q. B-2 ..Q Q) ,-:x: Cl) e1.~o n.. (ii I> I I and Strength Parameters Existing Native Soil Horizontal Scale 0 Vertical Scale O ·1"4 Existing MSE Ecology Block Wall to be Abandoned -in -Place Bench as Needed to Ensure Stable Interface Existing Native Soil Approximate Existing Grade 40 20 40 ~ Scale in Feet EXHIBIT B ---C'Cl (.) -Q) Q) ---. oe Q) 0.. a. Q) C 0 "O O (/) ~ Cl = (9 .!= u::: "O -5:i (.) C C'Cl -:;::; C'Cl> ro_> E = - Q) LL C ..C C ..8 (.) 0 C (/) .... Q) >~0:: ~ Q) ··-I .!= Lt) 0 -0.. ~ ~ == z fl) "" C: ·;: 8 "i: 0 E = r.; .c = ... 'C: ... ta=~ '-'"S z Cl) Drwn. By GLS Checked By SSR Date 07/02/2014 Proj. No. 2334.01 Plate 3 CITY OF RENTON EXHIBIT C-1 Construction Permit Permit Number: U040257 Permission is hereby given to do the following described work, according to the conditions hereon and accordiny to the appro'1eci pla:1s and specifications pe~taining thereto. subject to compliance with the Ordinances of the City of Re:iton. V./ ork Do..:~c.:rip:ion: l.',STALT, GEOGR!D REINFORCED Fil,L SLOP[ Job Address: Owner: Contra,;;:tor: Contact: 510 MONSTER RD SW BLACK RIVER QUARRY QUARRY L"Dl/STRIAL PARK LL C '!125 lOTH AV S SEATTLK WA 981 OR GARY MERLINO CONST CO INC 912510TH AV!£ S SEATTLE, WA 98108 GARY MERLI-"'10 CONST CO 1:-iC _Jther Information: Date of issue Date of Expiration Date Finaled Conrraclor Lit..:~nsi:::: GARYMCC!SO.MW 206-762-9125 Contnu.:tor Phone: City Lici.;nse: Contact's Phone: Work Order Parcel Number lnspcctor's Name lm:p~ctor's Phone 4016 206-762-9125 87031 3779200005 it 1s understood that the City of Renton shall be hdd haunle:,s of .any and all hab1lity, damage or injury arising from tile performance of the work descnbed above. Yo~ will be billed time and ma ten al for i:iny work done by City staff to repair damages. Any \.Vork perform~d within th~ right-of-way must be done by u licensed, bonded contractor_ Call 425-430-7203 one working day in advance for inspections. Locate utilities befort! excavating. Call before you dig -48 Hour Locators 1-800~424-5555 r hereby certt.:fy that no work. is to be done except as des;:ribed ahovr: and in approved plans, and that work ism canfonn to R<.'!nton codes iind ordinances. Subject to compllanct:: with the Ordinances of the City of Renton uud information fi:ed hcrew~!h pencil is granteA I I : r .. Y1i/ /fl X e. J--o,;'.u)( If\,~ ____ __,,X~-h'---'--"l>'-'-.._/;-ll.L Applicant Public W ork.'i Rep THIS PERMIT MUST BE POSTED AT THE JOB SITE AT ALL TIMES. .( ( 1/-zJ) 6 L( RNCiO\ 12/00bh .. May 26, 2004 Gary Merlino Construction Company, Inc. 91 2 5 Tenth Avenue South Seattle, Washington 98108 Attention: Subject: Reference: Dear Mr. Bidon: Mr. Jim Bidon 1.5H: 1 V Fill Slope Construction Black River Quarry Southwest Monster Road Renton, Washington Earth Consultants, Inc. Geotechnical Engineering Study Slope Mitigation and Slope Construction E-9543, dated February 1 3, 2001 EXHIBIT C-2 (7 pages) Established 1975 E-9543-1 As requested, Earth Consultants, Inc. (ECI) is pleased to present this letter providing recommendations for constructing a 1.5H: 1 V (Horizontal:Vertical) fill slope at the subject site. We previously prepared the referenced geotechnical engineering study for this project. In preparing this letter, we reviewed our previous work, visited the subject site to review the current site conditions, and conducted additional engineering analyses. The letter presents a summary of our review, observations, and analyses. Project Description The existing Stoneway Black River Quarry has been in operation for several decades. As part of quarry operation, in the summer and fall of 2000 a fifty (50) to seventy (70) foot high, 1 H: 1 V fill slope was constructed in the southeast portion of the quarry. The face of the fill was constructed ot two layers of five to eight foot diameter boulders. ----------·· ----- 1805 136th Place N E., Suite 20 I, Bellevue, WA 98005 8cllo•1ue (425) 643-3780 FAX (425) 746-0860 Toll Free (888) 739-6670 Other Locations Fife Gary Merlino Construction Company, Inc. May 26, 2004 E-9543-1 Page 2 In February 2001 , we prepared the above-referenced geotechnical engineering study evaluating the condition of the rock and the fill. As part of our study, two borings were drilled behind the rock facing. Our borings indicated that the fill primarily consists of dense to very dense silty sand with gravel. As described in our referenced study, in our opinion, the fill was competent but the rock facing was susceptible to rapid weathering. As a means of remedying the situation, in our referenced study we provided recommendations for constructing a retaining wall at the toe of the slope and then facing the rock slope with a geogrid reinforced structural fill. The reinforced fill would have a finished slope inclination of 1.5H:1V. At this time, we understand that you now plan to reconstruct the entire slope, with the process to consist of removing the rock facing and rebuilding the slope as a 1.5H: 1 V geotextile reinforced structural fill. Except for an approximately 140-foot long by 10-foot high ecology block wall to be installed along a portion of the toe of slope, no other retaining wall will be constructed at the toe of the slope. The completed 1.5H: 1 V reinforced fill slope will be about 1,500 feet long and will range up to about 25 feet in height. Site Conditions In March and April 2004, representatives from our firm visited the subject site to review the condition of the slope. During this period, we also observed the removal of the existing rock face. The soils exposed below the rock facing consist of existing fill comprised of dense to very dense silty sand with gravel, cobbles, and boulders. Concrete rubble was present in the fill. No seepage was observed emerging from the slope. Discussion and Recommendations Based on the results of our review and observations, in our opinion, the existing slope can be reconstructed generally as planned. Fill slopes are typically not constructed steeper than 2H:1 V. In order to construct a 1.5H:1 V fill slope, the slope will need to be reinforced with a geotextile fabric. The geotextile reinforcement should consist of woven fabric, such as Mirafi 600X or an approved equivalent. The fabric should be rolled out parallel to the slope and should extend six feet into the fill. The reinforcement should be placed with a vertical spacing of at least three feet. A schematic representation of the reinforcement embedment and spacing is shown on the attached Plate 1. Earth Consultants, Inc. Gary Merlino Construction Company, Inc. May 26, 2004 E-9543-1 Page 3 The fabric must be placed without wrinkles and should be held tight with stakes. In no case should equipment operate directly on the fabric. The fill to construct the slope is to be generated from on-site cuts. We anticipate that this soil will consist of silty sand with gravel. The fill will need to be keyed and benched into the ex1st1ng slope. This process should consist of excavating a keyway at the toe of the planned fill and cutting a series of benches up the slope as the fill is brought up. The keyway should have a width of about six to eight feet and should extend at least two feet into dense, competent soils. The slope above the keyway should then be cut into a series of horizontal to slightly inward sloping benches. Typically, the benches are excavated with a small bulldozer as the fill is brought up. The width of the benches will vary with the gradient of the slope, usually the gentler the slope, the wider the benches. The structural fill should be compacted in one-foot loose lifts to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by the Modified Proctor Method (ASTM 0-1557). Due to the moisture sensitive nature of the site soils, placement and compaction of the structural fill should be performed during dry weather. An ECI representative should observe the fill placement and should test compaction of the structural fill and verify placement of the geotextile reinforcement. Based on our experience with similar projects, a key element in successfully constructing a 1.5H:1V fill slope is obtaining adequate compaction out to the face of the slope. In order to obtain compaction out to the slope face, in our opinion a large "hoe-pac" should be used on the outer edge of the fill and on the slope face. The completed slope should then be track- walked with a small dozer. As the fill is brought up, the contractor should minimize the spilling of loose soil over the face of the slope. The completed slopes should be covered with an erosion mat, such as jute netting, and seeded with an appropriate species of vegetation to reduce erosion and improve stability of the slope surface. Earth Cur1sultants, Inc. Gary Merlino Construction Company, Inc. May 26, 2004 Ecology Block Wall Recommendations E-9543-1 Page 4 In our opinion, the proposed ecology block wall can be constructed at the toe of the slope. We understand the wall will be about 140 feet long and range up to ten feet high. The ecology blocks have a typical dimension of two feet high, two feet deep, and six feet long. The backfill behind the wall will need to be reinforced with a geogrid. A detail illustrating our design recommendations is provided as Plate 2. Before constructing the walls, the wall alignment and reinforced backfill zone should be cleared and grubbed. This process should include removing topsoil, vegetation. duff, or other organic or deleterious material. A representative from ECI should then observe the prepared subgrade. The base course of blocks should be placed on a six-inch thick, two-foot wide leveling course of crushed rock or recycled concrete. The design does not provide for resistance against hydrostatic loading. In order to drain the walls and prevent hydrostatic pressures from building up, the wall backfill should include an eighteen I 181 inch wide layer of free-draining gravel that extends along the entire height of the wall. A four-inch diameter perforated collector pipe should be placed at the bottom of the free-draining gravel layer. Geogrid Placement The wall backfill will need to be reinforced with a geogrid. Our design is based on the use of geogrids manufactured by Synteen. The geogrids should be placed in direct accordance with the manufacturer's recommendations with specific consideration given to the proper orientation of the geogrids. Splicing of the geogrid along the embedment length shall not be allowed. Prior to placing fill, the geog rid reinforcement should be pulled tight to remove any slack in the reinforcement and around the connecting pins. This can be accomplished by pulling the grids taught and holding them in place using stakes or sandbags. The fill materials should then be placed from the back of the blocks towards the tails of the geogrids to allow further tensioning of the soil reinforcement. The geogrid lengths should be placed side by side such that 100 percent coverage is achieved. In no case should tracked equipment be allowed to pass over the exposed grids. The wall backfill should be compacted to at least 95 percent of maximum dry density per ASTM D-1557. Modified Proctor. Earth Consultants, !nc. Gary Merlino Construction Company, Inc. May 26, 2004 E-9543-1 Page 5 The base course of blocks should be placed on a six-inch thick, two-foot wide leveling course of crushed rock. Construction Monitoring The ecology block wall and slope construction should be observed and monitored by a representative from ECI. The purpose of our monitoring will be to verify our recommendations are followed and to observe and test the structural fill. Upon completion of the wall and slope, we will provide a written letter summarizing our observations. We trust this information meets your current needs. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact us. Respectfully submitted, SDD/KRC/csm Attachments: Plate 1 Plate 2 Geotextilo Reinforced Slope Detail Geogrid Reinforced Ecology Block Wall Detail Earth Consulta,its, !nc. Height Varies --· ;;' 4' Overbuild Face of Slope (Min. 3') or Compact Slope Face 1.5H: 1V 6' .. ----1 ,:;,------~ ., . ., ., -1-/ --~ :;.:,s:: Reinforced FIii Zone .,.,":\/ I _., I --.,- ---u-J ____ ., I - -1---Existing Grade r ----->.,...., J Benches -- _____ I Geotextile Reinforcement (Mlrafl 600X or Equivalent) t. 6'-8' ~ Keyway SLOPE FILL PLACEMENT NOTES: • Slope should be stripped of vegetation and unsuitable materials prior to excavating key way or benches. • Benches are typically equal to a dozer blade width, approximately 8 feet, but a minimum of 4 feet. • Final Slope gradient should be 1.5 : 1 (Horizontal : Vertical). • Final Slope face should be denslfied by over-building with compacted fill and trimming back to shape or by compaction with dozer or roller. • The slope should be hydroseeded with a seed mis intended for use on slopes. • The slope should be covered Jute malting or geotechnlcal fabric to maintain the seed and mulch In place until the root system has an opportunity to germinate. • Structural FIii should be placed In thin loose lifts not exceeding 12 Inches In thickness. Each lift should be compacted to at least 95 percent maximum dry density per ASTM D-1557 Modified Proctor. SLOPE REINFORCEMENT NOTES; • Embed Geotextlle reinforcement minimum 6 feet Into slope. • Vertical spacing of reinforcement maximum 3 feet. • Overbuild slope face minimum 3 feet to achieve adequate compaction at design face of slope. Optional: or use a large "hoe-pac• to compact the slope face. • Install landscaping fabric along face of slope to reduce erosion and to allow vegetation to become established. LEGEND D CTI . . . ., ., --· Structural Fill, organic free, granular material with a maximum size of 6 Inches, or other materlal approved by ECI Slope Overbuild Existing Grade Geotextile Reinforcement (Mirafi 600X or Equivalent) Schematic Only· Not To Scale Not a Construction Drawing • Geo,~~!!!:.,S~!;,~~Lt~~'°~~~~~~~ce, COnstrucilon ·resl\ng& ICBO / WABO lnspecflon SetV\ces Slope Reinforcement Black River Quarry Renton, Washington Drwn. GLS Date May 2004 Proj. No. 9543-1 Checked SOD Date 5/24104 Plate 1 .. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 12 13 15 16 17 18 COMPUTED BY -st, CHECKED BY ---,---c-- PROJECT NO, ',;)'543" " \ SUBJEC'r J6J..1Z1,&f.:,.J ,.s ~\ DATED DATED SHEET __ OF eyL,\,c. ~ t::E:TAI 19tz.l~.,....,t--~----......... ..__,~-~~__.,_ _ __,._~ ...... -~.....+..___-'--i ,o 21 22 23 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 . 4 11 • tP D1ZA1N ~\'\"~ -=-SITE PLAN FOR THE BLACK RIVER QUARRY'S ~--::-...:_ _ _-.c_--- ~~~ 1'•50' SOUTH EDGE ECOLOGY BLOCK WALL AND GEOGRID-REINFORCED FILL SLOPE (l 25 !;JO ,oo l"'wl • iii <-/ / ;/ . / ./// . /,,· -/// ·// '/ '/ . ,:(// ·/ f""'; /Jr . / .;, .,/;;/:: /,'/, / / / / ~-~·', •·,. I. ;;i!??f :/;< &t~Jit:/ //.. //./ / // // j/" ;Yi// '/' /y / ··. , "'//·,: .,;. ·' · rA•:f,k{;·/ . · · -. :. / / / / /;/;./if ' ;/ •. // ·;. ;> / / // / ,;, ..... ,:/ ;/ •• .y' . // // . /}: '/;;;//• . of' , f. . , I /' ', ',,}"c ' ;?' • .c/ // /J>;•) / /#' . £/ / / ,f;;.f.f· •••• // .::# / /;;/ // 1ff '? /i • .//' ~ / / / / "'~ !% . ,1' . / / . ;;/ / , /. :;.,// / -/ / / // /:£,::// ;{/ / --·/ ?',/,// // ? / // ~·,//''/'/ /' ,/' ./ $: / /;f, ~ / / :~:4//,. n //;: • , . f(.C/x/v/' / // .1,:l\/J;//· '.; :;1 'f),f ;;:; / '/j /,,,; /' // .~ ... · .. -/; :// ~v; :-:/ / :r,:·;;:-);,;// /// ';,:;;/" 4 //-'/:,;: -;; ,: /'.// '/;_:_~, / _.,;,, .-,---/ ,ff' //' ,.,-_,,,,. ,.-,c'_ •"_,,// _, ,/ / / / / I '/ / // // / ... ,;;. /--;,// :~/ //'_ / _// / _/ / •/ / / / / -/ / ·/ ·,-:,,,,- . / ·./ / ~~ GROUNC W:VATJON A/W ~ ~ ~ ffP11x~tF1 S!RUCTUIIAL FU1 lllflll SOL """"""'~ ,·('ffl>.) il!Flll S{Jj~ GEOGRD SCHEDULE LOC,l.'i)IJl,j "" ""'" 1 llfiOUG+t 5 """" ""' ,.. & THRQUGH P SYIITITM Sf56 ·c· ECOLOGY BLOCK WALL SECTION rJITT TO $OJ flll[R( T\1[ G£00RIO ELEV~TIOH WITCHES TH[ JOINT !1E1WEEN EILOCICS, THE GEOORIO SHOUL.O BE ~lAC£0 OUT OF THE r.o.ct or TH£ WALL GROIJNO SURr/.c[ /,,/_)-,- . ~i=r~RE}tl~c:~ 10' i-.GH ECOlOGY 9LOCI( WIOJ.L PER fAlffit tONSIJLTAAl'S, INC RfPORT DAlED MIIY 26, 2004 . .JOB#E-~4J-I MIIY 2tl, ~' JOSf(-~3-1. 1\,\\. 0\:.1 \\ :,\. I '\\ \ i \ \\ ti \ ' ' ' ~: ;..:;,: FC:,~ """':/ ,·,.-_J··.:Y " -=- VICIN:MAP ~ 1·~300· EXHIBIT C· i t ~ • ~ <w (/J ~ 25 ~ ~ al ~ "' _J 8 8 ii! z I _J o j mw .. ~ ff !!:I~ 3 ~ m ~ 8 a:i I!! W IC F~o !I, 0 ~ il'. w 0 ~~ • 5~ g ~~ ti;§ ~~~~ ~< -"' >Z~ ::>w~~ 0 _J .. z n.. w -i ! IC < !ii 8 & -- 1 s • ' 'f 1 l " ' ' I .__ ~ ~i ' ' ? ,, ; ; ! l 81 • f j It ! i l p .e I ~~ ~ jt:i ~ ~ ~~ I ~ u. §~ " W N N ·r C :;,?~~~ ~ ~ c,o,wa;, ffi'"' ~ Z I I ~ . .~ ~ ~;:;:;;;; l:!>~ • "1 -5::!..5:::!. ~~ J NZ~~ ~::, l ~ ~.:'!-.:!. '-'"' [_ ' " '',;,""' ' :~ i ~ ' \ "(' _, "' f ~ . -. :; 0 .::": i ,, ~ ... &'-~co"" :{: I 2 \1 ..... 1 ~ U) '" I "' '[ " I' ~ !2 ~ ' CITY OF RENTON EXHIBIT C-4 Building Permit Permit Number: 8040386 Permlsslon is hereby given to do the following described wofk, accorOing to the conditions hereon and according to the approved plans and specifications pertaining thereto, subject to compliance with the Ordinances of the City of Renton. Nature of Work Job Address: Owner: Tenant: '";ontractor: CONSTRUCT ECOLOGY BLOCK WALL 510 MONSTER RD SW QUARRY I'.'IDUSTRIAL PARK LL C 9125 10TH AV S SEATTLE WA 98108 GARY MERLINO CONST CO INC 9125 10TH A VE S SEATTLE, WA 98108 --------------- Const Lemler: Other Inf01mation: Date of Issue Date of Expiration Constrnction Value Parcel Number 07/2012004 01/16/2005 $6,300.00 3779200005 I hereby certify· that no work i:,,; tu be done except a~ described above and in approved plan!-., and that work is to conform to Renton cod(."!s and ordinance:;;. BD32i4a 12100 bh Contractor License GARYMCC150MW Contractor Phone 206-762-9125 City License UBC Type of Construction Building Height Story Count Building Sq. Ft. Dwelling Count Occupancy Group 4016 0 0 0 0 Subject to compliance wii:h the Ordinanc~s of the City of Renton and informutiou filed herewith permit is gmnted. Building Official June 22, 2004 Gary Merlino Construction Company, Inc. 9125 Tenth Avenue South Seattle, Washington 98108 Attention: Subject: Reference: Dear Mr. Bidon: Mr. Jim Bidon Geogrid Reinforced Ecology Block Wall Calculations Black River Quarry Southwest Monster Road Renton, Washington Earth Consultants, Inc. Geotechnical Engineering Study Slope Mitigation and Slope Construction E-9543, dated February 13, 2001 Earth Consultants, Inc. 1.5H:1V Fill Slope Construction E-9543-1, dated May 26, 2004 EXHIBIT C-5 (16 pages) E-9543-1 As requested, Earth Consultants, Inc. (ECI) is pleased to present the attached geogrid- reinforced ecology block wall calculations. We previously prepared the referenced letter providing recommendations for the wall and slope design. 1805 136th Place N.E .. Suite 201, Bellevue, WA 98005 Bellevue (425) 643-3780 FAX (425) 746-0860 Toll Free (888) 739-6670 ---------------- Other Locations Fife Gary Merlino Construction Company, Inc. June 22, 2004 The following soil parameters were used in our analysis: Parameter -----------Tv~tue E-9543-1 Page 2 _ Wall Height -------'f--. -'-10"--'-f=-ee=-t=---------------l Slope Inclination Above Wall1 '-'--''5cc.H.:c:--=-1--=-V--------------1 Infill Soil __ _ _ Unit Weight_ 135 pcf _ _ __ _ ____________________ _ Angle of lntemal Friction 32 de rees Retained Soil -------. Unit Weight _ 135 pcf __ 11 ____ An}lle of Internal Friction 32 de rees , Foundation Soil _____ Unit\Neight __ 135 pcf __ Angle of lntEffnal Frictio11 -~4 _degrees Cohesion O psf ----------------'--'--'---'-I--'---"-''------------------- Su rcl~arg_e __ L~o_a_d_s ______ --+-"O'--"-ps"'f'-----------------l , Primary Geogrid Synteen SFSO Long Term Design Strength 3,324 lb/ft ll:[eco n~~ Geog rid J,_y:n teen S F_§:.:5~.a:Laa:o::.n:..,g"-T,:,.e~r.;,;m.:..;;;D:.::e~s;,;i "'"n~S~t~r~e n~g;;;_ t;;.;h;_1,:.;,~6:.::0~0;_l:,;;bc;,;/f"'-'t Our calculations indicate factors of safety in excess of 1.5 for sliding, 3.0 for overturning and 8.0 for ultimate bearing capacity. We trust this letter meets your needs. If you have any questions, please call. Respectfully submitted, Attachments: Geogrid Reinforced Ecology Block Wall Calculations Plate 1 Ecology Block Watt Detail Earth Consultants, Inc. D;\ TE: May 26, 2004 GEOGRID REINFORCED ECOLOGY BLOCK WALL INPUT INFORMATION Will N.J'1llER 1 PROJECT NAME: Black River Quarry PROJECl NUMBER: E-9543-1 DATE: May ZG, 2004 PREPARED BY: SDD REVIEWED BY: KRC ECOLOGY BLOCK PARAMETERS WALL PARAMETERS BACKSLOPE PARAMETERS ,;rid spacing height: block height: h := 1.0·fl r:u1t1b'3r of block cour·ses: n := 5 Sack.slope argle: i ::=:: 30·deg block depl.rJ: t ;cc:: ?_. Ft. b;ock lerigt'.: : := 5-It unit percent conc:rnte: c := 100-% unit pe-cer,t voids: blor:k setbacr<: V := Q."/~ SURCHARGE PARAMETERS 'b g:=0·- total wall height: /1 := n· hb H = 'Oft e:11badttent depth in cour·c,cs: e :.c.... 1 total etnbedttientdcpth: J := e·hb 0" 2ft ft 2 Surcharge Types: 1~retained soil dead load ?=r0tAi·1Ar:I :soil iive load ?.:•=infil I soil dedd lo:1d 4-infill soil iive load Cunt.act. ,:irna bounddries from Lo,~ of wal I: x9 := 4 stan.ir,q f)Oint: x2:= Cf-t GEOGRID PARAMETERS number cf geogrid laye:-s: g := 9 geogrid length: L := 10-ft tiyers SOIL PARAMETERS INFILc SOIL RET/\INEJ SO!L geogrid type A: geogrrd type B: A:= "Synteen SF55" B := "Sy,oteen SFBO" lon9 term allowable design strength geogrid type A: geogrid type :3: lb LTDS_A := 1600·- ft lb LTIJS B :~ 3324---ft reduction factor for long tenn ere ~p: geogrid type A: RF er _A ;;c:; '1.67 ,;ieogr\J type B: RF::;i·_B := 1.67 factor of safety ge.ogricl over.strns~,: FSos := ~.5 ,;1eogrkl ir1teractio1·. coelfic1ent: Cl:= 0.75 lb unit weight: yi := 135·- -3 tt unit weight: ::oUNDATION SOIL {Standard Method) 11iction dng:d: cohesion uriit wei9ht: ~c := 34 deg lb 1.,f:;c:;Q.- f:2 ,b yf:=135-- 3 f': FOOTING D!NENSION'.:i foocinsi width: Lwidth := 4,0·tt footin9 depth Ld'3pth := 2· l'c toe ex:te1.5iOI'.: Ltoe := 1· It Black River Qua1-1c1, 10-foot ecology block wall with 1.5-1 slope, E-9543-1.rncd Earth Consult.ants, Ire. lb -yr:=135·- ft3 P#: 1 g0ogrid I ength: L9rid := O· ft GEOGRID LAYou-PARAMETERS ra11ge of geogrid layer::,: i := s .. 1 geoqricl coursinc:;: geO(f'd type: gridj := type J 9 A B A 7 A 6 A 5 B 4 B 3 t3 2 B B Black River Qua1Ty, 10-foot ecology block wall with 1.5-1 slope, E-9543-1.rncd Ea,--tJ, Consultants, Inc. DATE: May 26, 2004 P#: 2 JATE: May 26, 2004 BROKEN BACK SLOPE DETERNINA TION t:.WOKLN 131\CK ::i, ()i'i_:;-(.;\[ u;L.ATIO\l'.:,, i', ONLY IF '.""H[ HOR:ZO"JTAL. t_E,\/G rH OF THL Sl.CPE IS LESS Hi.1\N rwlCE THE 'v-/.t.LL H~!c;i-:r l hi 1 Dt.7ERMIN':: rHE fRUE B1\Cr,.., '.3LOF'E A/\IGt..E i':= atari -1 2·ll; i' = 36.E)? deg i := if(:'~ i, i' i') THEREFORE: CALCULATION OF STATIC: AND DYNAMIC EARTH PRESSURE COEFFICIENTS ~veighted 'Tiction a:gle: ~w/ = 21.333 deg wall batter: I~ '.-"' 90-de0 -(0 0 = 90 deg setback per bled: s := U.1035·/.:. + ( ta11((0)·_:) \ 2 s = 0.104ft effective Wdll he:<1ht: H.s :"" H + [L -(t-s) j-tan(i) STATIC: i = 30(kg r Ji Retai111;d Soil / := I csc(~ )·si»(~ -~,) J- K .i, -----';:;:=r==:;=:::;::=:;:;:: II s·r1 ~,-1-~wr,-siri.~1-i ~ sin(r3 + $wr) + I L sir(ll -;} Black River Quarry, 10-foot ecology block wall witc 1.5-1 slope, E-9543·1.rncd Earth Consultants, Inc. .'\ai = l)..fS49 Kar·= 0549 P#: 3 DA ff: May 26, 2004 EXTERNAL ST ABILITY Free Body Diagram \1/he~e Hec:cEffec::.ivi=.: Wall H3ight fl=Total wait Heiqht 'l'Vi=w'e'gl,t of the Backslopc Wgc..c·Jr)fil: Sur-chargP. Lh·riri [_u;,d Wf~Y./e'qht of the A:lan Block Facing Ws""V-ieight of the G0oqr·id RGirifor::.;ed Soil Mu3s P=Point Load St..;rcharq..: Qot 0 -T~anslated Point Load DFdyn.--Jyn.::irnic E&t,h Force Fg=Swrcharge Force FOµt -Po!nt Load Force YQ0·:=Trar1slarnd Poin-: Load Vertical l.ocati0n Fa=Aclive Ear::h F::irce r ' He DRIVING FORCE CALCULATIONS AG-IVE t:;\RTH FORCE: 1 2 Fc1 :=~-Kar-yr· Ye ~! .=cJh := Fa·cos(¢>wr) H Fr--~---c- b corir..rete u1it wei,3ht: ye:== t:".:5--U"!n:: -~i:l u·1ir. wc:ic"Jht: lb r:'ah = 7432.474- ft , r,·· HOME\Jr AR,'v1S: I FaArrt.h :""" -;· l"e I 1b -yut ·= V.':i·-, t,'' Fa/\rr11h = 4.8:331't lb F av= 2~102.783- ft FaArnw := L + s+-·He·~-nn({J)) FaA.rrrw = 10.104ft 3 5URCH,\RGE FORCE: Fg := q· Kar, He fqh :~ fq·cos(~wr) lb fq = 0- fc lb Fqh ~ O- ft Fqv := iJ{xq = I, F,pin($wr), i~xg = 3, Fqsir.(~wr), o)) lb Fgv = 0- ~ MOMENT ARMS: FgAnnh := 0.5-~e FqArm.; := L + s+ 0.5-He-tan(w) Black River Quarry, 10-foot ecology block wall with 1.5-1 slope, E-9543-1.rncd [arth Consultants, inc. Fc;Ar.-rif-: == 7.339 ft FgArrnv =:c ~0.104ft P#: 4 lJA.TE: May 26. 2004 PCINT Lci.~D '.)Uf<CI 11\?,.Jl.: t' ev.::r:·.ior, of Sl1:·c·1c,rge ilbovc. r.op o~ w,.111: H Er1J9 ;:o:: L + s+ H·tari(n>) +- 4 Lndq.:..: 12.604ft (-·-~( __ H_·--~~r)~+--:.-1 L 1 :~ ·t.--H-tan(w)J·-:.ar,(i)·sir1(JO-deg+f) l tan 45-deg-z >1inx1 := L + s +-; + ---- 1 - 1 ---+ -'---'------'----~-------,-'----------co{ 45· deg -~) tan(45,dog-$r~ si,145-dag-.!':-,) , 2; \ 2 Minx1.:::: -667.096 ft ~octiticn ofth ,.or1J Ji' th~ gi 'd al t~c YOpL e:evatim plus the ir1fience zone buffor of I-J/4: H [nd9YGrL :'----L --1 '.'", + Y:J.11t·ti'l11(ro) + -. 4 l,ndgYQpt ~ 12.604 rt T\e f.!cint loaJ will be di:--,trt>uted ever its co11tac:: area, Qp a11d t,-an:·,la· ed tr'totJgh th(;) c.:;oll if it cc::., bu:-ii:id tho cinforccd rnc:1s:~. Opt. f' Opi :== ----- (x?-x1)-1-ft lb C)pi = 0- . 2 rt Poinr. l.oad Surcharge influence p Qpti := -------------- [(,1-EndqYOpt)·2+ (x?-,1)],1 fl lb Opti = U-:::- ft,:: If the point load conLact only with the reinforced mass if will add stability to -i:.he wall structure, therefore thf> 'ouds a:·e cnly considered in ~he interr1al stabllity calculations. Note: Qp := iKx2 ~ l. + .c. + H·tan(m) -2--ft, Qpi, o) If the point ·ond cont.acts i!1 b6yond the reinforced mass and its inflc;ence zor1e buffe1 it will only ,:iffoct the external stdbil;ty. If it overlaps both both the influence zone and retained soi! It wi:t effect both ir-:ernal and cxr.:crnal stability. Qpt :-if(x1 ~ Endg,Qrti,Op) If tho po111t load coritac:t. beyor1d the -einfcrceJ mass plus its !11fluence zone buffor it will have ilO effect or. the wall. Qpt-0. lb (1pt :""' it( ,t > Minx1, 0, Gpt) Opt= 0- 2 [-t Opt is the translated distributed point load surcharge used to determine the point load force that will be :nfluencing the external sta:J1l(ty of the 1·etaini11q wall structure. Opt is a fJnctiori of the location of the contact areo with rnsp8ct to the sieogrid reinfor·cetr:ent. Qp will t:e usP,ci to calculate the poi;1t load surcharge 'fit acts directlyo11 top of the rehforced soil, No tTanslatior1 cakulat1011s a, t: riece:~c-,ary for Qp bAcaL:se its appiicatioric::. area is on top of the reinforced rt1ass 2nd its infl uerice zor,e buffer. Black River Quarcy, 10-'oot ecology block wall with 1.5-1 slope, E-9:;,43-1.rncd Earth Consultants, Inc. P#: 5 f-'OiNT LO;\Cl SlJRCH .. AJ~-'.:.iE FORCE: POlNT LOAD SURCHARGE WEIHT lb ror,t = o-. ft FQFt-_h :== FOpt·vY,(~wr) lb FQo,~h -,= 0- 1 ft WQptl :~ Qp·(,2-,1) W0[)t2 := Op1·(l_ + '..; + H·tan(w) -xi) WOpt :~ ,f\,2 s l + e , +tan(m) -?-~:. WOpt1, WGpt2) WOpt :-= it(:"1 > L t-s + H· Vin(<,l), 0, W.Jpt) 'b WQpt = O- ft RESISTING FORCE CALCULATIONS: Wt.lGH r OF r~H~ BACKSL Oi'E: WEl(..:il·!l OF -,lE DEAD LOAD SURCHP..RGE: WEl(jHT OF THE FA.Cl NG: WEIGHT OF THE REINFORCED SOIL MASS: TOT1\L WEIGHT: SLIClflG RESlSTANCE: 'f/i:::c (J.~·r··(He-H;,. L-(t-s)] lb Wi = 255f3. l07 - ft Wr.:r := itT,,;,-1 = j,[L-(t-:,)lr-1 V lb Vig~ 0- fl Ws:~ H,C--(t-s)J,yi Wt := Wf + V,/s lb V•it = 136.59.72()- ~ 1b Wf = 2700-fL lb Ws = 1093::1.725- ft Frsta1:ic. := (Fav + F,iv + Wi + Wg + V.Jf + Ws)·Vm( $1) lb Frstatic -c:; ~1936.0'i't- ft YOf"il:. fOpti\rmh ·--=, --; FQpt.Ar:t1f'. = 7.359 ft MOMENT ARM: (x2-xi) 'v'/OotArrn 1 := xl + -·---, :? i lEnd9 ---,1 I r' H 'l l 4 ) WOptArrn2 := x1 + L 2 _ DATE: May 26, 2004 WQptA,rn := iKx2::::; L + s + f--J.tan(U)) -2·1t, WQptfanr.1, WQptArn,2) 1..v'QptArrn = 0 ft 2 Wi,\i-;-r. := -·ll -(t-01] + 1-f-t,d11((J)) + I: ?, ,. HOMENT AkH: Wif.nn = 7.402 J-t MOMEN~ A.RM· Wti\r:,i := 0.5· (L + s) + 0.5-H-;_:ar1( co) Wt Ar:-:-, = 5. 052 ft Black Ri'cec Quarcy, 10-foot ecology block wall with 1.5-1 slope, E-9543-1.rncd Fan:h Consultants, Inc. P#: 6 Jr.TE: May 26, 2004 EXTERNAL STABILITY FACTORS OF SAFETY F1~J:l{)R OF-'.)/1J-FTY FnR. Sl_l[JiN(-i ::=:tatic Cor1ditio1v.:,: FSstaticsliding,, -1.~ Frst.at;c F::,sta-:icsl;d1rig FSs::aticsl:diris; = 1.61 Sv:itic Conditions: FSstaticove·--::Jrrifng> "'2.0 ;:sstaticoveeturr.inSj :c::: Wt W'tArm + lt.'i·WiArii1 + Y.ig·WqAnn + ::av Fa.Anny+ Fciv· r1Ar-nv BEARING CAPACITY CALCULATIONS: Verticdl .::::orce Rc1sulta--,t: R := W.:;+ Ws + \r/i+ Wy-:-fav-r Fqv+ WQpt lb K = 1:J101.ci15- /, po:c.itiv~ := V•/t·Wt.A.rr'.1 + \•./i· \'l/i1Vrn + \'hf 1A!,j/\rrn _j_ WQr,t WO:..,u\nr1 1-f :NF c.1/\1·11w r F qv· FqArr1w rv~gative := F dh-FaAr'.flh + F~h· FgAnnh + FQpth· f'.QpU\r11h X := posit.ive -neg,:r:.iv.:-) R X = Lf.231 ft E:= 0.5-(L+s)-x E = O.B21 ft Determine ·c.:he .:wer,:1ge beari119 pressure act'rtg at the certcdirH:J of the wall. R navg :=--- (L + s) ib cr avg = 1890 .594- 2 f,: C, po•;;itiV'.! c= 1.J"J) X ]l)"' lb Detentiine the rnornerit about tt.s cer.terline of the wall ::;ue to tr\e rnsul lant bearir,g load. section rnodu1us fl Mel~ 15666.471 lb- ft 5: (tC·f'.:)·(L + s/ 6 S = 17.0J.::, ft.-71 Differ tweed ir1 be&ing pressure due to the eccentric loading. Mel-I-ft cr1110~-, := --- 5 ,b arnorn = 922.004- t/ therefo1 e: Black Ricer Quar:-y, 10-foot ecology block wall with 1.5-1 slope, E-9543-1.rncd Earth Consultants, Inc lb O'rf1<1X = 2612.5,98- ft? lb cr1ni11 = .%8.5D- 2 f· P#: 7 ULTIM1~TE [':,fARlt~c_-:. C.AF'A.:.:ITY CALr::tJU\TION: Whor:::: ( ( ( ·ill' ( ~f));, Ng:.= exp1t·tarr¢f), tar\_45·deg+ 2 . Ne := ( Nq -lj.co1:( ~f) Ny:= (N" -lita11(1.4 $') I ~1 c-c 29.44 Ne= 42.1b4 Ny= 31.146 There;:ore: rrult := -·yf Lwidth· f"'y + cf-Ne+ r~· (ldej)th + D)· N9 2 Factor uf s.:..ifety: FSbsaring .- crult fSboaring = 8.6~2 Black River Quarry, 10-foot ecology block wall with 1.5-1 slope, E-9543-1.rncd Earth Consultants, Inc. lb crwl·_ = 2"306.7E6- ft2 D.~ TE: May 26, 2004 P#: 8 INTERNAL STABILITY Vv'here: Djc.cDepth to each geogrid layer C.?J~ ,Orie,,t~:ion of line of rnc.Jxir,urn tension 45+pr)i/2 -Orient2:Jtion of the li1;e uf rnaxirnurn Un1:c.io11 1\cj"':rifl ue.1ce area oF each goognd layer Hei-effective .val: neiqht /-or i~terr,al stability He1 ..., 10.637f_ Noto: DATE: May 26, 2004 L 'IE OF NA><INUM TENS:oN For inL0r'lii: sU:1biiity r;alcu/ations sarnpl e :::alcu:ations will be sr)own fo-grid :ayer #1. A.II o::her grid uyers wili be c;hown ,:-.h~ough t:abt;l.cir calculations at t.he end oft~is .'oection DETERMINATION OF iHE FORCE ACTING ON EACH GRID LAYER ST;\TIC LOADS, uGe t.he sub,-,u;pt \-/' fnflu011ce ::irea: lb Fai'1 = 1023.192-:- Jt ·_;,urcharge pressure: point load ;;t;rd,orge presslJre; Black River Quarry, 10-foot ecology block wall with 1.5-1 slope, E-9543-1.rncd Earth Consultants, Inc. lb Fgi = 0- 1 ft P#: 9 TENSILE FORCF ON E.ACH GR:D: STATIC: lb fisJ· :~ Fai,· + F:ti, + FO"ti,· 'ic V'3192 • r , ''1 = i /._, • , -ft GEOG RID TENSILE OVERSTRESS geogrid tensile strength FA,CTOR OF :::,AfETY, Static: lb L TDS 1 = Z,324- ft LTDSj P'.:iov.<;rstress,~J := -.-. -::so.;erslrflsc;s1 = 3.21.9 :"lb i GEOGRID PULLOUT FROM THE SOIL: t:quctions for 1;achi segrnent of the line of rnaxirnum tension: segMH:ll1t #2: x=(HY(0.2-J+Un(co)) lb FQn-ri = 0- • 1 ft Sett'ng these two eciuac1ohs eciual 1-.o ecJr.:hot.her ::,nekb the eicivation o~ -;JH:lir intersectior, point· yint :~ ta{45·decJ + ~){H·(O . .:l+ tan(u>J) t] yint = 1.804ft Therefo,e the l0i1gth of gco,Jrid P-m'.::edded b~yor1d :he line of rnn:drnurn teri5io11 is the follc1vinq: For gcogrld elevation< yir,1· Le1j := (L + "",) ·- For gsogrid elavatto,1s > yJnt Le2j := tL + s) -H-(0.3+ tan(co)) + tari(m)·(gridr!:) Le 1 = 7.549ft puilout cap3city: Fp J :~ 2 Ci·tac{ ~i) {( Hai -grid r h) ·yi LeJ + g ( t.gi) J FACTOR OF S,"'-FETY GEOGR.ID PULLOUT, static: lb h I ~ 9205.795ft Bluck River Qu.:irry, 10-foot ecology block wall with 1.5-1 slope, E-9543-1.r11cd Earth Consultar,ts, Inc. DATE: May 26. 2004 P#: 10 GEOG•@ EFFICIENCY Stati:..: Condition~: 1 l.TDS-- J 1.5 Black River Quarry. 10-foot ecology block wall with 1.5-1 slope, E-9543-1.rncd Earth Consultants, Inc D.ATE, May 26. 2004 P#: 11 SUN NARY OF RESULTS \\lull ~eight: H 7' 10ft Block Set!::ack: cu = O deq 63ckslop6 A~gte: i = 30 de9 Surc~argc: Loccl: hi = '15fc lb ~c O- ft2 Foint [ ocw Locat·o11: :,d = O '.L x2.=0ft EXTERNAL STABILITY: Static Conditions; SOIL Pr\RANETERS: Infill Soil: lb y; C 135- 0 it" ~r = 32deg lb yr= 1.:55-- 3 ft Foundation Soil: ~f = 64 deg ib yf= 13'.)- 3 ft lb cf ::..c 0- ? tt Fact.::ir of Safety for Slidirrg: F'.istatic~;lidinq c:c-. 1.61 F actur of S..::fety for Overturn1n,.r FS.s taticovertLTl',ing -?l.22 Bearing Capacity: Base Footing D/1-riensions: Jltirn.;1te Bearinq Capacity: Be;:iring pressure;: factor of Safo Ly~ lb crulc: = 24307- 2 ft lb crrriax = 2813- r/ FSbearing = 8.64?. Widtk of Foctir1g: Lw;dH = 4.0tt foe Extension: :~toe= 1 ft ,Jepth of Foot:r19: ! depth= 2ft: Note: DATE: Hay 26, 2004 GEOGf<ID f'ARAMETfRS: Geo9rid Type A: A= "Syrr:e13n SF55" Ge<J~~r!d Type B: [1 = "Sy1,tee11 SF8C' Nurnber of L3yers· g = 9 L,1yt:rs Geogrid Length: I. C 10ft Width of Reinforce1nent: Lgrid = 0 ft WhRn reinforcement is present it shall always be placed 6in frorn the hottorn of the foot:ng. The minimum footing Gim,,-nsicns are 6i11 deep by 24i11 wide. If the values ::ipec.:ifyin9 the footi11q dimensiuns are not Jreater than 6in X 24in the rrinimurn size should be used. Wher1 geogrid reinforce1-nent is rrnsent the rni,1irnu1ti footir1g citt[.Jth shall be 12in to ?rovide 6ir1 of covt::r above and below the geogrid. Black River Quarry, 10-foot ecology block 'Na!I with 1.5-1 slope, E-9543-1.rncd Earth Consultants, inc P#: 12 SUMMARY OF RESULTS, continued Static Conditlor:s: Geogrid Length: Geog1·id Nurnber INTERNAL STABILITY: j = 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Geogr:d Nurtiber J - 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 L -10ft Ge<ogr!d Elev, elevJ == g ft 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 F-actor Safety Overstress 10.155 8.794 6.376 5.001 8.547 7.259 6.309 5.578 3.249 Allowable Load LTDSj 1066.667 1066.667 1066.667 1066.667 2216 2216 2216 2216 2216 Factor Safo':.y Pullout, Soil: 9.34 13.028 13.028 13.028 13.028 13.028 13.028 13.028 8.997 -1 lbfL Black River Quarry, 10-foot ecology block wall with 1.5-1 slope. E-9543-1.rncd Earth Consultants, Inc. Tensrle Force 157.55 181.938 250.93 319.922 388.913 457.905 526.897 595.888 1023.192 Geogrid Efficiency, ·1~ 14.77 17.057 23.525 29.993 17.55 20.664 23.777 26.89 46,173 DATE: May ?6, 2004 lbft. P#: 1.3 19 8 7 :::::: ,6 0 C/) ~ 5 (I) .£; .l!! ·~ (I) cc 3 ® 1 {.\. L Structural Fill :! ...... .... ~. :.\·-::-.· Infill Soil 18" Wide Drainage Layer----~~>-c I Structural Fill 1 (Typical)' Infill Soil Foundation Soil fr.\~- .·.-.: .. /? L __ 4"Diameter Drain Pipe -----· --i Ecology Block (2'H X 2'W X 6'L) Where the geogrld elevation matches 1 the joint between blocks, the geog rid should be placed out to the face of the wall L GEOGRID SCHEDULE e-~~Q_'.;.~~,;:~!;~~~!~ . -~.- -Leng!~ I Location Type 1 through 5 Synteen SFSO 10' I Constnictton Tes1lng & JCBO I WABO lnspectlon 5erv1ces 6 through 9 Synteen SF55 1 O' Ecology Block Wall Detail Black River Quarry Renton, Washington Drwn. GLS Date June 2004 Proj. No. 9543-1 Checked SDD Date 6/21/04 Plate 1 i I ~ CITY OF RENTON EXHIBIT D-1 Building Pern1it Permit Number: B050337 Permission is hereby given to do the following described work, according to the conditions hereon and according to the approved plans and specificalions pertaining thereto, subject to compliance with the Ordinances of the City of Renton. -----------------------------~-------------Nature of Work: GEOGRID REINFORCED SLOPE AND ECOLOGY BLOCK WALL AND REINFORCED SLOPE BENEATH ENTRANCE ROAD AND OTHER AREAS fOR SUNSET BLUFF PROJECT Job Address: Owner: ·enant: Contractor: 1101 SW SUNSET BLVD 1101 SW SUNSET BLVD SR900 LLC 9125 10TH A VE S SEATTLE WA 98108 SUNSET BLUFFS GARY MERLINO CONST CO INC 9!25 10TH AVES SEATTLE, WA 98108 Lender: Information: natc of Issue Date of Expiration Construction Value Parcel Number 07/29/2005 12/25/2011 $180,000.00 13230~9010 I hereby certify that no work is to be done except as described above and in approved plans, and that ,vork is to confcmn to Renton codes and ordinances. COPY fillplican'-'t Xe,___ __________ _ BD321-la 12/00 bit Contractor License GARYMCCISOMW Contractor Phone 206-762-9125 City License 26062 _____________________ Const ________________ Other UBC Type of Construction Building Height Story Count Building Sq. Ft. Dwelling Count Occnµancy Group 0 0 0 0 Subject to compliance with the Ordinances of the City of Renton and i11formation filed herewith permit is granted. Ouilding Official REVISED 1H:1V AND 1.5H:1V REINFORCED FILL SLOPE AND GEOGRID REINFORCED ECOLOGY BLOCK WALL CONSTRUCTION PROPOSED SUNSET BLUFF RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SOUTHWEST SUNSET BOULEVARD NEAR OAKESDALE AVENUE SOUTHWEST RENTON, WASHINGTON E-10927 May 26, 2005 Revised June 6, 2005 PREPARED FOR SR 900 L.L.C. AND GARY MERLINO CONSTRUCTION CO., INC. Earth Consultants, Inc. 1805 · 136th Place Northeast, Suite 201 Bellevue, Washington 98005 (425) 643-3780 Toll Free 1-888-739-6670 EXHIBIT D-2 (7 pages) F .. arth Cnnsultants, Inc. ---------- (_ie()fOJ111icaJ !-J1g1nl:'t:'.r". (kY.Jl<)),.,!iSI<; & Fnvitn1unc1t!al .':io;..if'n!is1s C.nn~mldic.>rJ TL""rlnX & !CHO W:\[l() lnspn .. !ion 5t~rvk..t~ May 26, 2005 Revised June 6, 2005 SR 900 L.L.C. and Gary Merlino Construction Co., Inc. 1915 Maple Valley Highway Renton, Washington 98055 Attention: Subject: Reference: Dear Mr. Merlino: Mr. Michael Merlino Revised 1 H: 1 V and 1 .5H: 1 V Reinforced Fill Slope and Geogrid Reinforced Ecology Block Wall Construction Proposed Sunset Bluff Residential Development Southwest Sunset Boulevard near Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Renton, Washington Earth Consultants, Inc. Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Study E-10927, dated January 9, 2004 Earth Consultants, Inc. Geotechnical Engineering Study Addendum E-10927, dated April 19, 2004 EstatJlishccl JD75 E-10927 As requested, Earth Consultants, Inc. (ECI) is pleased to present this letter providing recommendations for constructing 1 H: 1 V (Horizontal:Vertical) to 1 .5H: 1 V reinforced fill slopes and a geogrid reinforced ecology block wall with 2H: 1 V fill slopes at the subject site. We previously prepared the referenced geotechnical engineering studies for this project. In preparing this letter, we reviewed our previous work and preliminary grading plans and conducted additional engineering analyses. This .letter presents a summary of our review, analyses, and design. 1805 136th Place N.E., Suite 201, Bellevue, WA 98005 Bellevue (425) 643-3780 FAX (425) 746-0860 Toll Free (888) 739-6670 Other Locations File SR 900 L.L.C. and Gary Merlino Construction Co., Inc. May 26, 2005 Revised June 6, 2005 Project Description E-10927 Page 2 We understand that you propose to develop a portion of the 26.26-acre, irregularly- shaped Sunset Bluff site with a new residential subdivision. Based on preliminary design information provided to us by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc., we understand that the proposed Sunset Bluff development will include up to 65 single-family residential lots, a stormwater control pond, an asphalt-paved public street as well as a paved private road across the abutting property to the west-southwest for secondary emergency vehicle access to the Sunset Bluff site. Review of preliminary design information indicates that cuts of up to 30 feet below existing grade are planned to reach proposed construction subgrade elevations for the lots on the north side of the proposed access street. Up to 20 feet of fill is planned to reach construction subgrade elevations to the south of the proposed access street. An open pond-type stormwater detention facility is planned near the toe of slope in the southern portion of the site. Cuts of up to 15 feet deep will be required to reach the proposed bottom of pond elevation and fills up to 12 feet will be needed to construct the berm. The pond will be accessed by an approximately 15-foot wide gravel maintenance road. The proposed development will include construction of a series of reinforced slopes up to about 40 feet in height and ecology block wall ranging up to 15 feet high. The proposed stormwater control pond will include a 1 .5H: 1 V reinforced slope to the south of the pond. An ecology block wall up to 14 feet in height with geogrid reinforcement is planned to the north of the pond and pond maintenance road. A 1 H:1 V reinforced slope will be constructed near the entrance of the proposed public access road to raise the existing grade for construction of the access road. A 1 .5H:1 V reinforced slope is also planned in the area generally to the south of the cul-de-sac that is proposed just to the west of the west edge of the site. Site Conditions Subsurface soil and groundwater conditions at the site were assessed for the referenced studies by excavating 15 test pits to a maximum depth of 20.5 feet below existing grade and drilling five borings to a maximum depth of 73 feet below existing grade. Earth Consultants, lnc, SR 900 L.L.C. and Gary Merlino Construction Co., Inc. May 26, 2005 Revised June 6, 2005 E-1 0927 Page 3 At our test pit locations, we encountered primarily silty sand with gravel (SM) and localized interbeds of silt (ML) and silty gravel (GM) underlying moderately weathered to highly weathered bedrock. At our boring locations, we encountered 4.5 to 28 feet of surficial soil, glacial deposits, and bedrock derived soil over weathered bedrock. Light to moderate perched groundwater seepage was encountered in two of our borings and four of our test pits at 1 to 20 feet below existing grade. For a detailed description of subsurface and groundwater conditions encountered in our test pits and borings, please refer to the referenced studies. Discussion and Recommendations Based on the results of our field explorations and review of the plans, in our opinion, the fill slopes and ecology block walls can be constructed generally as planned. Permanent, non-reinforced fill slopes should not be constructed steeper than 2 H: 1 V. The planned 1H:1V and 1.5H:1V fill slopes will need to be reinforced with geogrid and geotextile fabric to achieve the desired stability. In our opinion, the 1H:1V fill slope near the entrance of the access road, the 1.5H:1V fill slope to form the pond berm, and the ecology block wall should be reinforced with layers of geogrids. Typical sections of the reinforced slopes and ecology block wall are presented on Sheets 1 and 2. For the 1.5H:1V fill slope located near the cul-de-sac, either geogrid or woven fabric may be used for slope reinforcement due to better soil conditions and fill material anticipated. A typical section of the reinforced fill at this location is presented on Sheet 3. The geogrid and fabric should be rolled out parallel to the slope and should extend into the fill as required. The geogrid and fabric must be placed without wrinkles and should be held tight with stakes. In no case should equipment operate directly on the fabric. The fill to construct the slope is to be generated from on-site cuts. We anticipate that this soil will consist of silty sand with gravel. The fill will need to be keyed and benched into the existing slope. This process should consist of excavating a keyway at the toe of the planned fill and cutting a series of benches up the slope as the fill is brought up. The keyway should have a width of about eight feet or H/3 (H is the slope height in feet), whichever is greater, and should extend at least two feet into dense, competent soils. The slope above the keyway should then be cut into a series of horizontal to slightly inward sloping benches. Earth Consultants. tnc. SR 900 L.L.C. and Gary Merlino Construction Co., Inc. May 26, 2005 Revised June 6, 2005 E-10927 Page 4 Typically, the benches are excavated with a small bulldozer as the fill is brought up. The width of the benches will vary with the gradient of the slope, usually the gentler the slope, the wider the benches. The structural fill should be compacted in one-foot loose lifts to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by the Modified Proctor Method {ASTM D-1557). Due to the moisture sensitive nature of the site soils, placement and compaction of the structural fill should be performed during dry weather. An ECI representative should observe the fill placement and should test compaction of the structural fill and verify placement of the geogrid and geotextile reinforcement. Based on our experience with similar projects, a key element in successfully constructing a 1 H: 1 V and 1 .5 H: 1 V fill slopes is obtaining adequate compaction out to the face of the slope. In order to obtain compaction out to the slope face, in our opinion a large "hoe- pac" should be used on the outer edge of the fill and on the slope face. The completed slope should then be track-walked with a small dozer. As the fill is brought up, the contractor should minimize the spilling of loose soil over the face of the slope. The completed slopes should be covered with an erosion mat, such as jute netting, and seeded with an appropriate species of vegetation to reduce erosion and improve stability of the slope surface. Ecology Block Wall Recommendations In our opinion, the proposed ecology block wall can be constructed at the toe of the fill slope, located north of the pond and maintenance road. The ecology blocks have typical dimensions of two feet high, two feet deep, and six feet long. The backfill behind the wall will need to be reinforced with a geogrid. A detail illustrating our design recommendations is provided on Sheet 2. Before constructing the wall, the wall alignment and reinforced backfill zone should be cleared and grubbed. This process should include removing topsoil, vegetation, duff, or other organic or deleterious material. A representative from ECI should then observe the prepared subgrade. The base course of blocks should be placed on a six-inch thick, two-foot wide leveling course of crushed rock or recycled concrete. Earth Consultants, Inc. SR 900 L.L.C. and Gary Merlino Construction Co., Inc. May 26, 2005 Revised June 6, 2005 E-10927 Page 5 The design does not provide for resistance against hydrostatic loading. In order to drain the walls and prevent hydrostatic pressures from building up, the wall backfill should include an 18-inch wide layer of free-draining gravel that extends along the entire height of the wall. A four-inch diameter perforated collector pipe should be placed at the bottom of the free-draining gravel layer. The wall backfill will need to be reinforced with a geogrid. Our design is based on the use of geogrids manufactured by Mirafi. The geogrids should be placed in direct accordance with the manufacturer's recommendations with specific consideration given to the proper orientation of the geog rids. Splicing of the geogrid along the embedment length shall not be allowed. Prior to placing fill, the geogrid reinforcement should be pulled tight to remove any slack in the reinforcement and around the connecting pins. This can be accomplished by pulling the grids taught and holding them in place using stakes or sandbags. The fill materials should then be placed from the back of the blocks towards the tails of the geogrids to allow further tensioning of the soil reinforcement. The geogrid lengths should be placed side by side such that 100 percent coverage is achieved. In no case should tracked equipment be allowed to pass over the exposed grids. The wall backfill should be compacted to at least 95 percent of maximum dry density per ASTM D-15 5 7, Modified Proctor. The base course of blocks should be placed on a six-inch thick, two-foot wide leveling course of crushed rock. Construction Monitoring The ecology block wall and slope construction should be observed and monitored by a representative from ECI. The purpose of our monitoring will be to verify our recommendations are followed and to observe and test the structural fill. Upon completion of the wall and slope, we will provide a written letter summarizing our observations. Earth Consultants, Inc. SR 900 L.L.C. and Gary Merlino Construction Co., Inc. May 26, 2005 Revised June 6, 2005 E-10927 Page 6 We trust this information meets your current needs. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact us. Respectfully submitted, Scott D. Dinkelman, LEG Principal HMX/SDD/lap Attachments: Sheet 1, Typical Reinforced Slope Section, Detail, and Notes Sheet 2, Typical Reinforced Slope and Ecology Block Wall Detail Sheet 3, Typical Reinforced Slope Detail Distribution: Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. Attention: Mr. Don Dawes Halinen Law Offices Attention: Mr. Dave Halinen Earth Consultant3, Inc ...., ___ ..... ___ __ ·--------~ .. -=---=-. .-oc--------------•-:;;;_:;_}~ r----PR0D0SE0 'H. 'V :7~ ~: ~~~~ // "'"'°"'"'"~ / =--=-.=-.=-,"""-=-="--j,.• ~----'~ L~3C--·-·------------ ~;, S~Cot,[;,\RY GEOGR;c "w RA GRID 5XT OR EQUIVAl..'C\ ~ /TYi'» -------;---e~--;-~ '"'-30'-----------~~~--~~-~~ ~ Dfilt,'./\RY G;OG'l.lD ~ M1RAGFl1D 7XT" OR ~Q.IIVALEf. T (TYP_ -, .. / _r--EROS,O!>. :ONTROL f.AAT :MER.AF' TM8 '.)'i. / EQI.JIV~LE"-TI. STAKE ON 1H W ' R!'lr.FORCED SLCPE "ER 1!>.ST >L~A110,,, NO~es 0\ THIS SHEE" -------:~·-·1f~ TYPICAiG!<ID "'"----------------~ ~--',. -' ! :: e ,,, •• , . ~:,5·-------- L-~ 2 5·Mm -i-~ SECTION A -A' SCALE: 1" = 20' EX,STl'iG G'l.OUr..D . . -: --f _:_:;~~i FACE WRAP DETAIL (TYP) SCALE: 1" = 5' 3 sheets GENERAL SLOPE REINFORCEMENT NOTES 1. REFER TO CIVIL GRADING DRAWINGS FOR SLOPE ALIGNMENT ANO ELEVATIONS 2. ALL GRADING AND EARTHWORK SHALL BE COMPLETED PER EARTH CONSULTANTS GEOTECHNICAL REPORTE-10927. DATED 11912004 3 PRIMARY GEOGRID LAYERS SHALL SE M!RAFI 7XT OR EQUIVALENT SECONDARY GEOGRID LAYERS SHALL BE MIRAFI SXT QR EQUIVALENT. ALL GEOGRID SHALL BE CLEARLY IDENTIFIED AND LABELED IN THE FIELD. ANY UNMARKED ROLLS OR PORTIONS THEREOF THAT CANNOT BE IDENTIFIEC SHALL NOT BE USED IN SLOPE CONSTRUCTION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSPECT THE MATERIALS UPON DELIVERY TO ASSURE THAT THE PROPER TYPE AND GRADE HAVE BEEN RECEIVED. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROTECT ALL MATERIALS FROM DAMAGE. ALL GEOGRID MATERIALS SHALL BE STORED AT TEMPERATURES ABOVE 20" F AND BELOW 140" F ROLLS OF GEOGRID MATERIALS SHOULD BE COVERED TO PREVENT DAMAGE FROM LONG TERM EXPOSURE TO SUNLIGHT ANY MATERIALS DAMAGED DURING STORAGE SHALL BE REPLACED BY THE CONTRACTOR AT NO ADDITJONAL COST TO THE OWNER 4. A QUALIFIED AND EXPERIENCED CIVIL ENGINEER EMPLOYED BY THE GEOGRJD MANUFACTURER OR 1rs SUPPLIER SHALL BE AVAILABLE FOR A MINIMUM OF ONE DAY OF SITE ASSISTANCE AT THE START OF INSTALLATION. TO ASSlSTTHE CONTRACTOR AND THE ENGINEER IN THE PROPER CONSTRUCTION/INSTA-LATION TECHNIQUES. THEREAFTER, THE REPRESENTATIVE SHALL BE AVAILABLE ON AN AS NEEDED BASIS, AS REQUESTED BY THE ENGINEER. D'JRING THE REMAINDER OF THE PROJECT. 5 GEOGR!O SHALL BE INSTALLED ON HORIZONTAL SURFACE OF COMPACTED STRUCTURAL FILL AT PROPER ELEVATION AND ORIENTATION AS SHOWN ON SECTIONS A·A· AND 8-8' OR AS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER. CORRECT ORIENTATION OF THE GEOGRIO SHALL 9E VERIFIED BY CONTRACTOR GEOGRID SHALL BE PULi...ED TIGHT AMO SECURED IN PLACE WITH STAPLES, PINS. SAND BAGS OR BACKFILL AS REQUIR~D. STRUCTURAL FILL SHALL BE PLACED, SPREAD, ANO COMPACTED IN SUCH/'. MANNER AS TO PREVENT THE DEVELOPMENT OF WRINKLES IN AN DIOR MOVEMENT OF THE GEOGRID , GEOGRID MAY ~OT BE OVERLAPPED OR CONNECTED MECHANICALLY TO FORM SPLICES IN THE PRIMARY STRENGTH DIRECTION. SINGLE PANEL LENGTHS ARE REQUIRED IN THE PRIMARY STRENGTH DIRECTION. NO OVERLAPPING IS REQUIRED BETWEEN ADJACENT ROLLS UNLESS SPEClFIED BY THE ENGINEER A MINIMUM FILL THICKNESS OF 6 INCHES !S REQUIRED PRIOR TO THE OPERATION OF TRACTED VEHICLES OVER THE GEOGRID. TURNING OF TRACKED VEHICLES SHOULD BE KEPT TO A Mll\l!MUM TO PREVENT TRACKS FROM DISPLACING THE FILL AND DAMAGING THE GEOGRID SUDDEN BRAKING AND SHARP TURNS SHALL BE AVOIDED. ANY GEOGRID DAMAGED :lURING INSTALLATION SHALL BE REPLACED BY THE CONTRACTOR AT NO ADDITIONAL COST TO THE OWNER. 6 SLOPE FACE SHALL BE HOE-PACKED TO A FIRM CONDITION AS SLOPE CONSTRUCTION PROGRESES ~-- ~_!:'.!RES c:,(:25-,,Z z 0 -f-f-z (.) LlJ LJ.J ::; Cl) a.. w U) g a_WLUZ 0 >-> 0 -' 0 LlJ >- Cl) z O C'l u. z oCiu.I wz:3(/) (.) <( "' <( er " >-:s: OCl)~z LL='zO z <( ::, >-_ f-cn Z WW o UJ er o w "' -' en <( 0 u g; -a:: CL a.. >->- " 0B C, C -~~ in l"u :: ~ ~ i;;; ~H ,-;:;" ._ ;: ~ /""..:. ~ ,._, t ~ " ~ ;: :;:: '"-' ·~..., c- € i"~ /~ ~.~ u..i ; • i " " z " ciu:,0>- ~~ rr; ~ b3~ z ~ -,w ~ l) 01-<CI.U ct:: <( ct:: J: Cl.. 0 0 Cl SHEET (J) I "'m m .... PROJECT NO. 10927 DATE 5/4/05 DRAWN BY DNM CHECKED BY MX • ·-) ,, I, I .... , ) ->) :., ! ' i 'f·~('!-'f_ F 1 'l /C,.~) iNi '\, ) f~i / ! /\. . I -'--·')C :':(' ·.c? H .I 1_,1 .'-., I _(~1; I (,:l ., ():_ .(, (J) ti) o m ,. 0 r .... !Tl 5 ~ z ' II "' "' 01 q u1; 1>\I. · 1/ I \i1 1 I iii---~ r-, t11'( I I! ·., I ,_,-! ,, r·, I': ·: l \ " \ ( "\ ./. ----i '1 i ! ·;1 ~ -t! l I !11111; • l1l1l1l1IP1I \_ l l1l1l1l111111 \\ 71l1h!il '\ H I \ ~; [!l;ll tt p 'il §W. oO g ffi i~ ... B m 0 5 Gl -< , "' or ,o 0 () ~ " ' :a ,. r r ~ r Earth Consultants. Inc. {iCUl('('IHli('"] 1cng111r·,·m1;.!. (i<:<)i<)~V. l lrlVir<ITllll("llt<1) S!'\l'!ll'("_'-, r:,H1.o-;tr1wti!•n ·11·..;tlni~ Ro If'.H( !!W.'\1\l J lnspr'r r1rn1 Srf""\iiT<; ' r·,·: _ _.; 'T ~., I f ~ ,-. 1i;~, 1"•1 'I: :r; m --~ I ' e ~ ·.,. I "' 1· ~~ .. "'"' On-"; ~ .... '!l~s., fli';!fH ,.,o :c<nm ""2l 0-<-< "'GJ z -<~ -,, §~ ~~o g l.;~ i5 £ I ~ :t! ~~ ~ ,.,_, :,,;Ji::.: ~g ir1 13 g;i:: 7J r" ~~ "" 5lJ: c• er om 1 ja ~~I CJ' ,·.T /•. .1,11 MAX. H = 15' C o_,_,_ ' ~ ~ I i Rn>,iNEOSOII ,7 (' ,, l n 'I !_,' I"_) r-·; ~m :rg xr ~~ I ;_"' -j :ci[;j i)· 11 ! \ ~ \ t_ \ ~; \ ~:ii \ !i \ -· ~' \ 1-! \ ' \ \ TYPICAL REINFORCED STONE AND ECOLOGY BLOCK WALL DETAILS PROPOSED SUNSET BLUFF DEVELOPMENT HENTON, WASHINGTON • • • • • • • / OVERBUILD FACE OF SLOPE {MIN 3') OR COMPACl SLOPE FACE 2: "/ 2: .~ . -~.··"~ REINFCRCEDFILLZONE . / / -::.--L ----~ -~ . _,,_. ____ . _______ - SLOPE FILL PLACEMENT NOTES L -----1c:c=-· ,,_ ' ' L__ ' ----"-KE"'WAY -~ '-GEOTEXTILE REINFORCEMENT (MIARFl 600X OR EQUIVALENTJ SLOPE SHOULD BE STRIPPED OF VEGETATION AND UNSUITABLE MATERIALS PRIOR TO EXCAVATING KEYWAY OR BENCHES BENCHES ARE TYPICALLY EQUAL TO A DOZER BLADE WIDTH, APPROXIMATELY 8 FEET. BUT A MINIMUM OF 4 FEET. FINAL SLOPE GRADIENT SHOULD BE 1.5"1 (HORIZONTAL:VERTICAL). '-BENCHES FINAL SLOPE FACE SHOU~D BE OENSIFIED BY OVER-9U1LDING WITH COMPACTED FILL AND TRIMMING BACK TO SHAPE OR BY COMPACTION WITH DOZER OR ROLLER THE SLOPE SHOULD BE HYDROSEEDED WITH A SEED M!X INTENDED FOR USE ON SLOPES w --- ---- EXISTING GRADE SECTION C · C' SCALE: 1" ; 20' THE SLOPE SHOULD BE COVERED WITH JUTE MATTING OR GEOTECHNICAL FABRIC TO MAINTAIN THE SEED AND MULCH IN PLACE UNTIL THE ROOT SYSTEM HAS AN OPPORTUNITY TO GERMINATE. STRUCTURAL FILL SHOULD BE PLACED IN THIN, LOOSE LIFTS NOT EXCEEDING 12 INCHES IN THICKNESS EACH LIFT SHOULD BE COMPACTEJ TO AT LEAST 95 PERCENT MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY PER ASTM D-1557 MODIFIED PROCTOR . ~ ~--.if!JJ~ (7~~~6 ~ [S·:·,;~[;,~~-,;;;"'=1 ·'¥~~1::,~\~-_>;,,~ SLOPE REINFORCEMENT NOTES OVERBUILD SLOPE FACE A MINIMUM OF 3 FEET TO ACHIEVE ADEQUATE COMPACTION AT DESIGN FACE OF SLOPE. OPTIONAL: OR USE A LARGE "HOE-PAC" TO COMPACT THE SLOPE FACE . INSTALL LANDSCAPING FABRIC ALONG FACE OF SLOPE TO REDUCE EROSION AND TO ALLOW VEGETATION TO BECOME ESTABLISHED jEJIPfRES i __ 5-2S-r2 _J <( >- f-z w LU 0 :. a. 0 w Q. (.) [d z 0 <( > o _I U) LU I- (J'J I C) C) 0 W tl: ~ w O:::, J: {_) I _I Cl) _J "' <( 0:: => >-;:: Q(.)LU. u.. 0:: (I) 5 Z<(z,_ -:::, z w w CJ) w 0:: z ta a:: ...J (I) <( 0 (.) a. 0 i5: >-f- a:: a. " ~ ,r, cj t~ C; .E ~Ii ->-< -~~ :J "§ ::-, Cl'; ·" 2 C , ;;,, C < -.. -~ '=' _. 9,-::: U n. ~-c" €ii co < C r, 1 C C l-L-1 ~ '-' (t §: 0 :, X z :, ci O )-z ~ >-IIl I-~ CO 0 irl L!'l z ~ ,w~O ~~'2~ D.. 0 0 U SHEET 3 CITY OF RENTON EXHIBIT D-4 Construction Permit Permit Number: U050099 Permission is hereby given to do the following described work, according to the conditions hereon and according to the approved plans and specifications pertaining thereto, subject to compliance with the Ordinances of the City of Renton. Work Description: CLEARING, GRADING & TESC ONLY FOR SUNSET BLUFF Job Address: Owner: Contractor: Contact: 1101 SW SUNSET BLVD-SUNSET BLVD QUARRY INDUSTRIAL PARK LLC 9125 lOTII AV S SEATTLE WA 98108 GARY MERLINO CONST CO INC 912510TH AVES SEATTLE, WA 98108 SR 900 LLC/ GARY MERLINO Other Information: Date of Issue Date of Expiration Date Firuled 07/26/2005 01/22/2006 Contractor License: GARYMCC!SOMW Contractor Phone: City Liccn::.e: 206-762-9125 4016 Contact's Phone: 206-762-9125 Work Order Parcel Number Inspector's Name Inspector's Phone 87031 1323049010 STEVE PINKHAM 206-999-1832 It is understood that the City of Renton shaU be held harmless of any and all liability, damage or injury arising from the perfonnance of the work described above. You will be billed time and material for any work done by City staff to repair danuges. Any work performed within the right-of-way must be doi,e by a licensed, bonded contractor. Call 425-430--7203 one working day in advance for inspections. Locate utilities before excavating. Call before you dig -48 Hour Locators l-800-424-5555 I hereby certify that no work is to be done except as described above and in approved plans, and that work is to conform to Renton codes and ordinances. Oa.,,( t,t/ <L,--/ r' .., i) G h~ -v t-f t 'o 0 Ce. ' Subject to compliance with the Ordinances of the City of Renton and information filed herewith permit is granted. X ~ ~~ Applicant ;'VI ,'ct-,., r'-, 0 1 4-y .z Public Works Rep THIS PERMIT MUST BE POSTED AT THE JOB SITE AT ALL TIMES. ENGO I 12/00 bh 11 --fl_ 70:., -------COVER SHEET L:1 : (l i; ,, ~-_::=~Ii 1'•200' A PORTION OF THE S 1/2 OF SECTION 13. TOWNSHIP 23 N, RANGE 4 E, WM, I I '--"-'"°-"' i~~! 1r1 ~ ""'z Oo ~~ _r.i u~ I fl d ~l ii ,. H Jl " 1"' 1f ~u !i /~ j,-1~~~ ,;•~r.r .. ~ ~ ,.__ " f ~ ,• :1 8 8 8 B _,,~!!_ f Jl't$ ~ ------=---lll..--~ dH~ 8888 Ii -~·~~~~~~~[V'TH 'IME MCRlONfN. MIO VDl'flCAI.. l.DCA1ION PRIJR TO CCWS111UCOOk. ~UTJ'T11.0CI,~ ~l=-~='T= ~ EXl!iT. LOCAOONS Of ~ U1lJTl:S AS SHOW! ON Tl£SE TM£ IJtMRIFEl PU8IX IIFCIIIIMTION ~ m WIRl,l,TDI. ,, -~ro11en.~~~ ro PROCEmNt "MTH ,:-\"--- CONSmUCTION SEOtENC8 1. ~Tl()() Pll£-CONSTRUe1lON li1IEITN:. WITI, CITY OF IIDffllN 2-Fl.Mi ~ I..IIIITS AS 5HDIIN ON Sl-ll:T C2 liWJ CJ J. ,m.-u. SI.T FDIC[ "5 SH011N Ol<il Pl.#IS. 4. o:iNS'IRUC'T ACCESS ACWI mow otWRI' SITt ~!IEGlt,L.OOI.INI.~ NOTES &. RCUiH CM:£ 5llI AS SMJlillH OIi Sl-££1" C2 MO C, Ne«! ESC l'ACl..n6 AS 1£EDED. 7. NSTAU. STOllil fflTBil AS s.()lfN ON PvH$. i I 1. w I= 132J04-eo10 2. CROSS SIT[ IR£A 28.211 K;. I l.s ! CCHIU.. TANT ll<FON.U.TIOM xa1U :I~ e.e i~fifj l~:U .... ,..,, .. - --r..«!',j CONSL.l.TNITS. Ne. 180&-!Jenl PI.ACf NL.. !llJIT[ 201 ~,. .... ~FPk~LMJ--~...esJD FAX: (425) ~~ c:o.n;icr; SICOTI' ON(LD,WI ........... MICtWJSOI CONSI.UIIIC ElCNEJIS. INC. 11121S 77ND MM.IE SOOTH l(E(l, 111. illllDJ,2 FHOIIE: (0) 2.Sl--ettl i I FAX: {0) 2:l,l--&712 COKLICI'; DONS kM _,,, ""'""' ,,_ r,,...., c.- 11130 -1181ti ...... NL., Sim l!IOO IMbMl * te034--7120 n:,4~)2S~JtlM CONTlCT: ICEWI JONES WET1JHl CONSULTANT, ~ COMSU,.TIC EMCMIRS, INC. 111215 72Nl NiEU: SOUJli KDfT. Wit, A0.1:1: ~J)~J,~ COHVCr; ll£R£SA DUSEi( &. lfflllm5tED Atl) 11..1.0i EXPOSED SOL AF'18I ,-,, (lllJ,Df: IS """" I. aitl1'Rl(:1l)R SIWJ.. .......,.,... TESC f1iCIJTIOi UNII. H.J.. RISI( C1f" EIIOSQI ~ ""'5 l'...ssED NtD '5MNI n51tll IS 1N!rnUEC .1iN> FUNCTlOtMI... DO NC1l" COINtY SlllalENT lAIJOI 'MTCR lO DCJIINSTR£MI DIWIWE SYSTEM unJTES/SERYICES -~ atY or RD1TOM 118 S.. GfW]'( 'MY ROITOtl, -.. 08065 POlfllEJI .t: CliS: POC(1" SOUICI OilJI(;'¥" 105 1!,Stt, ltJI£.. IU. -... """ 1(800) 321~1 F11E: Cff'I' OF IIEMTON FR: OCNll'IWElt! 1~ s.. Gl¥OI' W,Y _..__ """"""' ~ RENTON, WASHNGTON L __ ...... lllACT A """ SPAC< iJt~' / ..... ' .. ' . L.EG90 -""""- CONfOOR$ ·---l® ---- ~ __ , ..-.... , ""'""' -""' STOfllil 1 "CC =--~(,$NOl'll)} fl.TD r~ tENCE """"""""" CA»l lllllill (Cl) UWIT'S OF Cl..EAltN, ~ I '- _ ...... _ -v- """"' -~---~ ..... """'-~ 11ott,J,I,'{. hi,.[. """",... .. --.. .... ............... ------= __ ..., ... _ -- "1:DI$ IIUl£Au. ~ FUlOft """""' ... - ,: ~ .3 Wllll'ft' DBI: -a£" {SSalf) ..wrr see Q.£MOJf (SWI) .. """ .... ~ *1'l1i: 'tllV( {II¥) .. ..,_..., ......... ........ ... """"om OIIECTQI rs '6ICl.[ TIMI. T.P.O.L 1111.E l'CIIIT OF IGNalC -5, SH'Y IDII0'1 (IS IIOIDI) . """"" -{-: sa;:YQI CtRIJI (.-s l«Jllll) • RUGID'll!,/tM'~ICffttl) .... ,,,._ ...., """" .... Cl or 7 " .. ' " .. ' ~ .. ' "' .. ' " .. ' C7 r:,; 7 -7 """"' ... ~4<. .t ,l,Q20 Al.JllUl9,I WlliT NQlm1 PO 8())j 1oql MJ8lAI ... liNIQ02 .,, " ;'.....J: CALI.. BEFORE YOU DIO 1-800-424-5555 r---.. VICINITY MAP ,I EXHIBIT D-5 1(7 sheets) IM I II I!:! g i i~I ! ~ ~ ! ! ~ ~ ',~ <:". --,~ ~:.::/:, ,,,sc;,{/::f';r 8 ~!; j;;! N)E)( TO SI EL I$ CCMll Slo£ET Rlft Cl..ENIING, HTW. GAADN.: NC) rest ~ IWIW.. OIWIING. NCl lESC PUN Cl.ENIINC. N1w_ CA.I.DK;, NIil T[SC PU,N TDll"Ol'Wn ~ PQflll PU,N N<ICl l)[TNI.S NO!ES NCI O£DILS F'Of! o...ENIN;., NJW. GIRAOflG Nil ttsc -"""" -"""" K P'Qft H'P'P'N -~ -· ' EXP.fMlED (IW)IIC/l()C)El'J $0 UN[$ l '"'""" .,_., "" ' m cm Of RDffllN ctMEf1S ' PD: ctrr or llfHTON REV£II ... ~ - I..EQAL DESCAPT1C)N, LOT 1 OF SR IIIIO U..C. LOT UN£ AWJSnEf'f (CrTY OF ~ LOT LINE ~ ND. l.lliH)3..,2,t-W), AS P£A PIAT lt£COROfl) UClER ~ NO. 2004Ql11900()1~ VERTICAL DAiu.t CITY Of RDfTUlrj IIDDlillrRI( fM2 El.EV. • 29.33' ~ 8'SIS Df" liW' -RECORC Of SU1MY RECORO[D \MIER RECOIUrlC Jol.loa'.R III01212'007 RCW'AlEtl TO CrTY OF IIOITCW HC!fll20tif"I.. COlmlOl. ~ aJNSU!.TWG 01CNER$. IMC, 1821:lo 72nd NIE.. soon! KOO. w. lil80l2 ~~I4~t~--97B2 CONf.lCT: l'W.. P. Qft.81 / MliNi HM.~ / DONS J. SAI..T't'!i OwtER/DEYELOPER '>fl 900 I..C.C. 9!25 IOTt; A1t'tN.(" SOL/Tl! SCAlTI.£.. Wlil 981CII (205) 7152-912' ~ ~ui 15 i !! "i ~ "' z I.I.. 3':lii ~~~~ !i~ Zc i ~ ~ ,~ ' ' ~i~~ ;· "1 ----...--.. -ffi"'"' N N N ~ "' ~ ~ -::.: ........ _ ,,:~""' '•,,. ~~-:.i.., .:,, ~ ,r ~ :z: • e. l ~ .... -,co°"•.:,"' CITY OF RENTON 0G 00 10/3/M, " ... ,tz,to, " ... 11,aM oc ... 'f'I"' ~ -~~ DEPAATlvlENT OF PUBLIC WOFIK9 - COVER 811:ET FOIi CI.EAfW«l, NTW.. a=IAOIICl AN) 1e9C l!lNET 8l.lff' ~ _ _____.DI,_ __ ~w t.."_1 ~-7 ~ _m;i __ -IIIC/oi.E ,·.g· ~~-~---1 - ' • f ~ ' ' ' { ' ...,, I! ,-...: g ~ w ~ ~ ~MlOFJl !ITTlRW DIIAII lNS 00 00 "~·"-~ Pl.NI CfWIC6 DC lflC .fl/ 00 PER CfTY Of R£NTl'.lN C<MElffl; DC lf'C 7/1t ,~-00 P£R art or RlHTON ~ 00 H"G :111~ ,, .. ~,: 00 "'· I ""'1SION BY D,t,T[ · APPR ·---" 00 I -·-· ;1! ; -·T-;~·-·r al•l•l· .. 1°1°1·-1* ~~1~1gJ~J;I!~; .~slil i~c.o J hs ~i~i·· i2 " -· _,"" ' ~ ""i"~ ;.:":"·I" ~ (a ,0 ~ ~ C. "gt,d s.·•e••~ ~ .. ~ ~ ... 8888:&. ~ . . I I ij / I I / . ,' ... · I / .·. I I ' ;· ' / ' I; ·"-. I / ~· • 1J~ t;: I-I /, / ;/ ~ ~ r r r J I I I ~ . N " > ll ll i I ~ ~ Iii i i I I I ij ffi ~,iltlilil I lill,1[1[ ~ tttl.J jg • I~ l~WI ~Sil 'I~ ~,i ~, i I .r' Ii q.GHA(J,s. J'.~\ .. . i ' .f . ' <Pc, ~- ( ,, t,~ ~Q E11G'«'t, 18215 72ND AVENUE SOlJTH KENT, WA 98032 (<25)251-6222 (425}251-B782 FAX CM. DIGINE£RIHG, LAND Pl.ANNING, SIJRVE'11NG, DMROHWENTM.. SOMC£S r-so· ~-"r::~-;;.-•1.:':'!.,. ,~ ... ··~· ~---- ... / l '"' ·',-~, ' y/ I . . n~ , //\_ ji V / ;z: / , e / / / / FOR, ~ CITY OF RENTON G=i1,~=tplt~ ~~~~~¥!·r i i -.J l ¥ r"'~'i ""f . . al. a§, ,{ I "·ii "' , ' ,Jf•i-Hi ('~ ·<, 1~ii1i Hi i1 H; 1 ;. ~ !., 1 s; .. l ... ; I i , 1 ' // ! ','{ 1 l ojU ·c~ , < j f'"! H• 'lq 'l'i HJ.'" sr~ '!I JI' ilii9 !~· i:i, , 1 t' 1 I ,: I 1;, ,f .~ l¥h It1 hr :I !•]t !-~ i'1. ' ,-j !§'· ' f.li ~t ~ ~3 ,., l~ J !} ~ .f I 1[~ l s ' ! 1~ ,-,-~ !~ • • I I CLEARING, NllAL. QRAOt,jQ, AN) TESC PL.AN 8lNlET BLUFF T I :~t5~S / I ~~s I: /'• "' !~·; I ~ 6, ~ f (_ ---I ' f • ! 1 f ~ i" ~ f f rl l''r tf 1'1 ~,~; ,j' i~ E ti !JE ' l· '" I' '' I I I ,, Hf ! .. '' ·t' '.. -' i H •.· I 1 1. j !! ,1-f Ii } " 'l .. g I ~i , §l i i" f '{ e§ - ~i ' H i ; (: g ' ;1 .; t 0 § I IJ h ! fj ii jl !fl !PrUi r i ~ ii J If rJ1 • ' ~ tf r fil ~ ! I ! "· t 8 J f'f 'J ·rui !ffH iffHH ifif.H' f ·I-I I ~' 1 1· ,·-1 1 1,1d p ! f ~ t ! j1Jilf i i ii • il ~ ~~ ..... ; If TITLE 1··· ,·~· ·=··' mil )r -t i!VI Ii\ cl, • . i' ·' o : 'i';,l'.I -: /1,' I ii.i) ·:· 1:,,,1 it:1!.1· ·y 0 r m )> )> ,, ::IJ ~-B Sil -~z en..; ~)> iii Sil r ~~o ~~~ ! c;S 0 ~ ,-i-Ci z f! _o tl )> _zz !o ... ..; Jll m :,,. en ~o ""U r )> z MERL.NO LAJIO DEVB.OPMENT CO, NC. 9125101H AVENUE SOI.mi Cl.EARN), N1T1AL OAADINO, AM:> TESC PL.AN SEA TTl.E, WA 98108 (206) 762-9125 SUNSET BLUFF B.CEJOBNO. 7639.1 ,., r ,11·,,.,,,.1t,<•\-~cy:•••1,o~'>".!~ ,;•.'<•1 rw-·r,..,,. ,c:o /)(~J'.• 'l<n ·,,.,1; , .'c .<,10 ~,,~ '"•", ,,i;y,, ,,i;.10 •,,,1,·,e,c,1' •• ,·,n1, s,v l3CJ ON N\f1d o«)d .1.N3NCl3S .A!:MlC>c:t13.J '3"lill SC:l&-C:9L (90c:) 80l86 YM '3lllV3S HUlOS 3fW3A \f HU)I. SC:16 'ON "00 JN3nd013l\30 OIVl ON11:13n t ,, ' ' -· ,\ .\\ ,-.~. ,r ,1, ii', ,! ,,1, ., l ',~ 2 ' • \ ',,~ ! \ ',~ 1: a .. "°J;;~UjWIJW' "]'d U(MJ,U-.,UJ[ ~ . 0 qJ(l/11 :ljl'!fld/flU!Pl!f18/ jULIOld NOJ.NIIH ~ 110 AJ.IJ ~ ~§ ; "l cl g• . ~ • ~ 51 0 . ; ' " " i .I § i l ~ I ~ ' . b •• ~ .~ ... ,,,,, ·"'Woo::;;: ~::';."""' .OC-.1 I I II i ;R L d I ,; ".: i ., ., 00 ., XV..:l Z:EllQ-l~Z(~zv) zm-,sz(sztJ lfOB6 VM 'lN:3)1 HlflOS 30N3t.V ONU t;lZ81 I 't ! ffi ·~ .·4 il .. d ~ ~ ~ ! i 1; If".' g I ! ! _dg I 1-t.· ! ! : 1~ I tli 8 ,: ' I ' d I VQ! ~·· ~ liidi i """' '"" "' 00 00 00 00 ·oN eor 3'::rs ·(j' ' i.'>~Ho-b; 5 f ~; -..... --i~ ~! i a ~i~~ !! 0,, ;::: s. ~ 8 r l l E 8 8 8 8 • ~ s I ! fi!!I I , 6 s l: U! .... .., ... -!iii 6 ~ " ' '- m ~ I m '! ~ " ! .. ~ ~ 1 ! """"" !0\311 NQlJQI JO ,W) 10d J.lllllMll) HQIJOll .., ,W) 113d -"""'"' SHl ~ ,RjQJS IBOOW/~ l]J(Jftldl(] ! j ON ClO ., ..... _,. ttdd't' ll'f'CJ AB ' NOISll\3.l:I "ON ,,-,,_,,,, .. ' 00 ·~· .... _ 1./£ Ct.ll I "' . ~ _,_ -~~j~ ~ : : oo I ' '°'3li ~--Ji? JJJ0 ¥3,i '. I llB'IIIOO N:llJOlj .:I) )JD H3d ' i ilfl IMO NIIQLS Q300#/?Jl(IWO CDCIIWdX3 : S" ....... ' ,, Ii . II! ;~ Ii!. ' ., I ffi ~ i j'· I 140 PROPOSm ~ e PIPE C. i!:e 'M'EI 11 ~ :z: J W/ BEEM LIi Q J E STA. U+Q0.04 0 ~ E .,_too.so f-< I: :J: £""'5.50 (1e" SO) i'.: Z i.., 120 P<l '• -. utl:: ~" H 1 ·· ~ ·r, •a ' I•;,~ ' ' " ~{~/ ~ i~ lj 8 8 8 : ~ I l ~ ~ s ~' ; • -; --' W/S<U>~ Lil stA. 20+47.BIS ..... \30.111 E-l~III {I!'" SD) ~ ''"° ~~-~'\ ,v Lf. 1( ~ tl~ "" ' i ;(A.~IN~LII rm:-~ :(,._~n~u, I .... ,.<14 £-13111111 (12'" SD) -H-1,IIO £•142..(IO [12"" SOJ STORMLINE 'G' 1 "w5{J' , ·,, ~o· - ~ ,, ... i ~ ~ ,,... BWPENOTE, Pf'E Stw.L Bf llJTT f'VS£D AS RECII..RD " ..... """"' EXlS1IN; QIIOI.Ml • Pl'£ I. \ ' ., ., "1 ,r '°"' STORMLINE PROFILE A PORTION OF n£ S 1/2 OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHP 23 N, RANGE 4 E, W.M., RENTON WASHINGTON i:,.11 TYPE I wt sa.D L,OC10N1; l.tl !itA, 22+4?.41 ..,,19.31 l:•115.06 (12• SI)) STORMLINE 'G' ¢; _, @ ~ I "•50' ,·~10' ,_, '"""' Ml'l'PElf--48" 'II/ SOlXl l.OQ(N. I.ti stA. 3+80.50 _,,..., ~~~(~lso: AIClPOSED QIAI)[ • PIP[ t ---- """" ""-"' • -l \ 200 "1 ii § ..... ~ OC 12" SD 200 ; 'IIIO I "'"""""""" . TOI' Of 2:1 SU)PE " • ,,..., CBt:Ji' Tl"PE M-IO° ;/.i._~,~~ ..... ,:i1.& IE•l~.15 {12" 'SD) i ~ 2'+00 CllfJB l'l'P[ I W/ SOll) l..OCOla Lil STk 6Ull.911 --156.Clll E•1!1Hm t12· SI)) EX. JE .. 1~.M (18"' COie) --.. -.-- _!J. IJ. Ir. !;I) TT ' ~: 1IIO 005TN; fiAOIJlll • PP[ { \ ~ GRAD£ • PPE t [)(. ,, CONc: 140 cef57 T'l'PE ~ 48" SEI ,,_.. V ''"'" """ 140 120 140 a!f:J3 'l'T'P£ Ha" l~l'l'fEI 120 ,a: s,-..c V ''""" Sim 1IIO ...... $[[~'Ii' "'""'..., ., :{.._ ~-l.DIXIIC UCI ,.._1n.111 ~;1~~9:" (fP COIC} STORMUNE 'A' 1· ... :,:r 1· =1 ~ STORMLINE 'B' 1 "=50' 1 "=10' Bl 1§· "'° STORMLINE 'C' ··=so· 1"s!O" ~ 0 ;; ; .... 1 ......... "M'll ~· _,, g_~~Ll) Rlrtl-152.4~ IE•14U6 {lTSD) ; ! ! ,.,.,, '~ ix li:;.;i~ {12' SD) PIHlPOS(D CllWlE • PP[ C. ~ Bl ' ""' ' ;{1,. ~nu::* u, _,...., IC•t•1.ee (1:t" SD) • ;; ~ ,,.., Bl EX. ,r so 1IIO .£!tl0 'l'T'P£ I SEE S1UAlil..lNE ·er .. "" ""' wj 'IIIO ;r .... ~-~~ -..,s11'i E•15.U5 {12" SO) S"(OAMLINE 'D' :· .. 50· '."•10" ~ ~ ~ ,.., i' : I i i I .I II i ~ -,I i ! ---1m Ilg 140 1 i ~ 1201 i i • -;; ii, i~l\! ,, ... ~u; ~ u. ii i !~ ~ 8 ~; ~ ~ ~ ~ If a°' <D tr;l I z ' ' ~i;:;;;;:; I .n -~~ -~"'"' N:ZNN I! ~~~~ ~~ .:,i ~r ""~ !Ii~ ;_ ...... ,., ••• ,,r ~ ::c ; 0 • I, .... \· eo~"~.:," CITY OF RENTON • " • ~. ~ ;; ! •: ' -; """ ...., ...., :: .... C>el'"AATll,,ENT OF PUBLIC WORKS Q a ~ il E -l~~ .. ~:~AI I 111 I=-~~ I ~· 10/7/D!I ll'LEtrmlJM .... ~ .. -Ii "' --~ ,_ ~· """----"--- ~ -,..,..,.,,.~._, ----·--~-IMET ~-Of' 7 ' • ' ? ' {, ~; ,' [ $ , I g ~ ui ~ • I i ' I , I i j j l ~ '1~ ~ ~ i• \, j '."> J w '"'' :. z 2 :J -mi ( 9 s ' ~ • ! i., ~ ~~ . a: I -~ -. ' " ~ ~ ;f~;_ on Htt O• I i ~t~.:, ;, ·' .-~,~1:1 i i 18 j j ~! <{ j 8 µ_ o·e1 w ! 3 z·i.g, °"'c· ::i: • a: .~, 0 Oi, "" ,~:;:; 8 ' ' fffi • i j -9 " ~r·" 8 ~:;~ i ..gji i • j • I ~ W1 . ' ~ -.~ W' cu, z l"fOL " ~ _, :J ~ s ~ • ! ~ a: I i t~t: .-12 flit ! ?,~. ~ ~~-" ,1,u I :?~:i (/) I i ~i~~i i iij j -i !~~ :::l::ll'll8 .l3SNl1S ~UIWP',' '"3"d UDWJaWW~ 66alo ~~ .,~,._ l:ldd't' 3.1.W ,,, t;.iµoN, ~!lqnd/~u1pune/ u1 ... uo1d ,x, ' 00 ,._,,,, ....... " NO.LN3H ~ -·· 00 .;IO A.LIJ NMOH8 f1'f ..... J., '"'·.;."·,;::; ;;(".;~ ... ... I '"' ,·~-·· I ON I I "' ·,~.,, ""''' , ~ ', mu'"' .... '""'"" Scott Oinkelman 1H:1V REINFORCED SLOPE DESIGN SUNSET BLUFF E-10927 July 8, 2005 !EXPIRES 06-25-07 l Earth Consultants, Inc. 1805 -136th Place Northeast, Suite 201 Bellevue, Washington 98005 (425) 643-3780 Toll Free 1-888-739-6670 EXHIBIT D-6 (9 pages) ' 3 4 5 B 7 8 9 10 11 " 13 14 15 18 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 28 27 ,. 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 38 40 41 42 43 44 • PROJECT Earth Consultants Inc. H' ; • I l ·. · · 1/r i !9 COMPUTED BY fM>< CHECKED BY ___ _ PROJECT NO. ()-lo7z. 7 SUBJECT 'Ai ,;,:\p,,pr~ --'· YI?,~ <><""l<i. o,.. ~ %"' "e """+.,, . Sl~J,~ \-,;. ~ 1,S- c>v.ev-"'t\ <1.~bJt f-'~> 1,~ L~(~ ~""''''b i;:~,,\,.._--e i:: s ~ 'l),i "'""" '~ l..,"'°\ 1 "") \--'::, ~I,?:, \...,+ev""-1). -:,\•r.e: ~t,I;-\, 1,--S 7 I,'> ~(A .. J ,cl-,"" ""'.iL __ _ 11. 5" ''3 o I '2.c, -··-·'"··---·--------•¥• 3'2. 0 0 0 DATED DATED SHEET __l__ OF si»re.. ·- ··L... ........ ~~~~~...:...~~~...:...~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 " 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 ,a 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 38 37 38 39 40 41 43 44 • PROJECT Earth Consultants Inc. ·, ' (\A ri,. ~ "~ "'1 >< T COMPUTED BY ----"'rv:_y\X.,_ __ CHECKED BY ---- PROJECT NO. ---- SUBJECT f ;"2¢0 ; I 4o + : 1 'i! '> -= · 4rL ' . . . ' . DATED 41,., DATED SHEET~ OF • ,-Ji ;+-,,,-.32. . -I . ,, ·,-t., ,-.,. = I (\SA . l \, ,;: .)';:. "" \\J,,,,~-= Z40J.!l hA b I ~ SJ~ ~ q \0ti e;" I. ' 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 PROJECT Earth Consultants Inc. . ' ' COMPUTED BY---- CHECKED BY ___ _ PROJECT NO. ---- SUBJECT ·~v,,~~, C,7,\,.,J",~'":1-· . Llv15A i : : : . ~ "''""'' jl'.1'.2-' - . ' . 40.Rj .~ I . . . ! ,---; I' /;-1 ~ =_o.7f.:,C('l,,'-; .,o \'-l,,,r M"""' ~\(owq,blQC . Ve<tttg ;ft!('.',~ DATED DATED ------ SHEET __ OF . . n«~A ~\oW. ' 6ie<>'G':C,. ""',(P-C•"'Ci ~t-\::.,ii-o"" ~~' "i,f,~:. ~('.,, <s-Y'."f 'Gi~o:j0 ~, i.:-r GeJ~,<-t\ Z . ' I -b . °'SV'(\/1«( -~G,1ii>,J..I ;<-!~y:4121)-,:; ,;;, 1..' ~'(' 101(1'. I"' '+{.v, \a,,;\."" E:,OW2 Y'-"'~· :i•T cc :;:nv,o7'l,= ''l.<-","( •io;(J.:t 2 3 4 5 • 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 .. 40 41 43 44 • PROJECT i Earth Consultants Inc. t\J,01,\~ to"'2 COMPUTED BY---- CHECKED BY----- PROJECT NO. ---- SUBJECT \'Y';,( ~ \ 1-'I: coo t ":"1.ro?t7 f>pl..(. i ·j ; ¥1J r,. i ~' i ,, -4'.::r DATED DATED SHEET~-OF • PROJECT 1-1,.:.., 2 3 4 5 I • 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 I ' 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 ... 43 44 45 Earth Consultants Inc. DATED COMPUTED BY ~"~"~X __ CHECKED BY -----DATED PROJECT NO. -----SHEET --OF SUBJECT ~,w:k:c,,.cl. ~\¢ • • i I , ; . . , . ~,.,,_~-{ :.,-\Jw.,,,es4 l~ cc,2 ~ ,i) :SI "F /\-~\ ,e 8 ~ +,J, -,! C ,t'>'. ) = ~ ~ :1 • .1v1,,.e;..(:,:.J "."<> \ore Pei#,\ H ' \::1 ' f \~ +' "ff (-=-' -s:-, + ~~ '= s;:$.'\ ' ~ : ~/ ' (!e.,,~f~ \c"'"'" . O,eGl-,(<'e-,>.;-¥-.. . i. V<.i~ CW..f+ . -...::,/ ~~~ ..... , .. ·, i:i;~~ z-z,'-0 ""R': 'f..=P,!2. • 6',eotv:c\ ~.:.., c;-X,: 13 "l ',(, \o ,e,x, 'b \2.e 't""' .. ~~ c::..,_ 1:-,,J-~ L:i .. 5-1{.. L-[ 1-\1 @"I,:, D,q" """\' ~ q c),',',<' .,..'\ '~ 3 2!' '. I 2 3 4 5 • ' 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 ,. 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 • PROJECT Earth Consultants Inc. . . '.·--r-.: ;-b]e:,",!r,ql . . I tufv,~; ~ ~~e~ COMPUTED BY---- CHECKED BY ----- PROJECT NO. ---- SUBJECT .i )J ..... ~~ -,!,:i 2.~•s'f>;i<1611 ~ ;(""I~~ DATED DATED SHEET __ OF !~ <Z .4'-{~r, . . ! Sr 14 ~1; -:c ~. c; ' • =;;, ,ts.e b,, ,. • PROJECT 2 3 4 5 6 7 ·' B i 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 Earth Consultants Inc. COMPUTED BY ___ _ CHECKED BY ___ _ ' Nev-1 ' L." L,-, i b-j ' .. ·1 i 1-\, ~ ' ' i ..... _+ ·-~" ,7 "f- )'i, s' ~T -, "l(T _l ; ; ~~(.) _ A,1 ~ ;.,_,._1 • ,; ~•,., i" r-r '. \' ""! I "''i, ., '-, 2-0· ' = -/JI'; t,-, = ur 'ck'l-1... ! ' PROJECT NO. ----- SUBJECT L~x~~ :sV~\C lA se. 7 XT DATED DATED SHEET __ OF .-i_ i '· K ... ... ... ... [;] 0 • CTheTensar Corporation . , ... 111 --ezc::? I 1 I f I • 4 q I ., I •• I n ,o 1,.:, 1;1 o.1s:1 0.1:1 81,.0N ANGLI.J1 ~ ....... 1 •I RIINf"OflC(MlHT PC*CI C01l,-,ICll!r,jf CHART PROCEDURE: 'P1 = ..L. H' u , .. u ,., u, ~ / •• 1-/· • •• u • \. ' [ffiJ • , CThe Tensar Corporation •·, •:to· --.----·---.. · ,. •f·u· ... --.-·- ~ ., ... i.;t 1 \.1a1 .. ..• , .. ILON &NCl\.'1.# "-...... 1 •1 ~"l'OPI.C:t•UT LINQ.Tit flATIO tan ¢, ) tan·J ( FSR I) Determine force coefficient K from figure above. where: where: ¢>, = friction angle of reinforced till Tmax = 0.5 K Y, ( H' f .. Scott Oinke\rnan RETAINING WALL DESIGN SUNSET BLUFF E-10927 July 8, 2005 (EXPIRES 06-25-<>7 Earth Consultants, Inc. 1805 -136th Place Northeast, Suite 201 Bellevue, Washington 98005 (425) 643-3780 Toll Free 1-888-739-6670 EXHIBIT D-7 (29 pages) RETAINING WALL DESIGN Version 3.3.2.278 SEISMIC DESIGN Project: Sunset Bluff Project No: E/0927 Case: Case 1 Design Method: Rankine-w/Batter (modified soil interface) Design Parameters Soil Parameters: Reinforced Fill Retained Zone Foundation Soil Reinforced FiU Type: Unit FiU: i 32 32 32 Silts & sands f 0 0 0 Crushed Stone, 1 inch minus l'....illi 130 125 125 Peak Acceleration= 0.15 g Vertical Acceleration= 0.00 g Factors of Safety (seismic are 75% of static) sliding: 1.5011. 13 pullout: 1.5011. 13 /.50 overturning.-2.0011.50 shear: bearing: 2.0011.50 bending: /.50 Reinforcing Parameters: Mirafi XTc Geogrids Tull RFcr RFd 7XTc 5700 f.67 1.10 Analysis: New Case Unit Type: Leveling Pad: Wal/Ht: Compac Crushed Stone 17.00 fl RFid 1.05 LTDS 2955 BackS/ope: 26. 60 deg. slope, Surcharge: Results: Factors of Safety: LL: 2 5 0 psf uniform surcharge Load Width: 99.00 fl Sliding Overturninr 1.83/1.24 3.30//.80 Calculated Bearing Pressure: 3659/6036 psf Eccentricity at base: l.06 ft/3.13 ft Reinforcing: (ft & lbs/ft) Cale. Layer Height Length Tension Relnf. TyIJe 8 I 5.33 14.0 /92 I 407 7XTc 7 13.33 14.0 395 I 664 lXTc 6 11.33 14.0 611 I 932 7X'I'c 5 9.33 /4.0 827 /120/ lXTc 4 7.33 /4.0 1042 /1470 7X'I'c 3 5.33 14.0 1258 I /738 7XTc 2 3.33 14.0 /473 I 2007 7XTc I 1.33 14.0 I 39311979 7X'I'c Reinforcing Quantities (no waste included): 7XTc 12.44 ,ylft uncertainties: 1.5011.13 connection: /.50//./3 (Base Friction used in Tension of base grid) FS 1.50 Tai 1970 Ci 0.90 Case: Case I Cds 0.90 Wall Batter: 0. 00 deg (Hinge Ht NIA) embedment: I. 00 fl 90. 00 fl long DL: 0 psf uniform surcharge Load Width: 99.00_/i Bearing Shear Bendin,:,, 6.92/2.90 2.1112./0 2.56 /0.94 AUowTen Pk Conn Serv Conn Tai Tel Tse 1970/3509 ok 602/803 ok NIA 1970/3509 ok 7/9/959ok NIA 1970/3509 ok 836/1115 ok NIA 1970/3509 ok 95411271 ok NIA /970/3509 ok 1071/1428?? N/.4 1970/3509 ok ff 88/1584?? NIA 1970/3509 ok /305/1740'? NIA 1970/3509 ok /422//896?? NIA NOTE: THESE CALCULATIONS ARE FOR PREUM!NARY DESIGN ONLY AND SHOUW NOT BE USED FOR CONSTRUCTION WITHOUT REVIEW BY A QUALIFIED ENGINEER Date 5/S/2005 Pullout FS >10/9./2 ok >/018.67 ok >1018.84 ok >/019.31 ok >/0/9.91 ok >101>/0ok >10/>10 ok >/0/>/0ok Page 1 ' DETAILED CALCULATIONS 'roject: Sunset Bluff 'roject No: E/0927 Case: Case l Design Method: Rankine-w!Batter (modified soil interface) Soil Parameters: <p_ Reinforced Fill 31 Retained Zone 32 Foundation Soil Leveling Pad: Crushed Stone Modular Concrete Unit: Compac 32 Depth: 1. 00 ft In-Place Wt: 120 pcf Geometry Internal Stability (Sloping geometry) Height: 17.00 ft Backs/ope: Angle: 26.6 deg Height: 44.57 ft Batter: O.OOdeg Surcharge: Dead Load: 0. 00 psf live load: 0 psf Base width: 14.0 Factors o_(Safety (seismic ure 75% of static) £ I) 0 0 LJ1f.!' 130 125 125 External Stability (Sloping geometry) Height. 23.51 ft Angle: 26.60Deg Height: 38. 06 ft Batter: 0. OOdeg Dead load: 0. 00 psf live load: 0 psf Date: 5/4/2005 Designer: f!MX sliding: /.50/I.13 pullout: /.50/1./3 1.50 uncertainties: l .50/ 1.13 overturning: 2. 0011. 5 0 shear: bearing: 2.0011.50 bending: 1.50 Earth Pressures: Internal: $ = 32deg a = 90.00deg ~ = 26.60deg S = 26.60deg H=17.00ft ka = 0.464 Extern ~ = 32deg a = 90.00deg ~ = 26.60deg ii = 26.60deg ka -0.464 Hinge Height: Hinge Ht= Not applicable due to draw-down on face connection: 1.50/1./3 (Base Friction used in Tension of base grid) p Date 5/5/2005 Page 2 Reinforcing Parameters: Mirafi XTc Geogrids Tu/t RFcr RFd XTc 5700 i.67 I.JO RFid 1.05 ~ 2955 FS 1.50 Tai 1970 Ci 0.90 Cds 0.90 onnecti.on Parameters: Mirafi XTc Geogrids Frictional I 7XTc Tel= Ntan(36.20) + 757 Break Pt 1989 Frictional 2 Tel= Ntan(0.00) +22/3 Unit Shear Data Shear= N tan(40.00) Inter-Unit ShearShear = N tan(26.90) + 768.81 Calculated Reactions For the 11modified'1 design method, the back of the mass assumed to be vertical/or calculation ofresistingfOrces. effective sliding length = 14. 00 ft Pa= 05H (1-H-ka-,c~ Pq := q·H·k• P'h := Pa-co,(6) P'll, := Pq·Cos(6) I Pa,,:= Pa ,in(o) Pq., := Pq·•in(o) H' Reactions are: Area Force Arm-x WI 2040.00 [0.500] W2 28730.00 {7.500] W3 5500.88 [9.667] Pa_h /4318.31 NIA Pa_v 7170.08 [14.000] Sum V= 43440.95 SumH= 14318.31 Calculate Sliding at Base For Sliding, Vertical Force= WI+W2+W3+ W4+qd The resisting force within the rein. mass. Rf_J The resisting force atthefoundation, R/_2 = N tan(32.00) Arm-y 8.500 8.500 19.170 [7837] NIA Sum Mr= Sum Mo= The driving forces, DJ, are the sum of t.lte external earth pressures: Pa+ Pq/ + Pqd the Factor of Safety for Sliding is R/_2/Df Calculate Overturning: Date 51512005 Overturning moment: Mo = Sum /1,{o Resisting moment: Mr = Sum Mr Factor of Safety of Overturning: Mr/Mo \ ' \ I'~ -----:, \ l'• ' ~o H/2 eff, length Moment /020.00 215475.00 53175.15 -112207.42 100381.06 370051.21 -112207.42 = 4344/ =Ntan(32) = 27145 = 27145 = 14318 = I.90 = i12207 = 37005/ = 3.30 Page3 Calculate eccentricity at ba,e: with ,urcharge / without surcharge Sum Moments= 257844/257844 Sum Vertical= 43441/43441 !ase Length= 14.00 e = I.06/1.06 Calculate Ultimate Bearing based ou shear: where: Nq = 23.18 Ne= 35.49 Ng= 30.21 (ref Vesic(l973, 1975) eqns) Quit= 25314 psf Equivalent footing width, B' = L -2e = 11.87 / 11.87 Bearing pressure= sumV/B' = 3659 psf 16036 psf [bearing is greatest without liveload] Factor of Safety for bearing= Quit/bearing= 6.92 Calculate Tensions in Reinforcing: The tensions in the reinforcing layer, and the assumed load at the connection, is the vertical area supported by each respective layer, Sv.Column [7] is '2c sqrt(ka)'. Table of Results ppf [I] [2] [3] [4] [SJ [6] [7] [8] [9] [ 10] [I I] Layer De~thzi hi ka/rho Pa (Pas+Pasd) £ {5+6)cos(d)-7 Ti Tel Tse 0.00 0.464/45 0 0 0 0 7 1.67 192 602 NIA 2.67 0.464145 214 0 0 192 6 3.67 395 719 NIA 4.67 0.464/45 656 0 0 587 5 5.67 611 836 NIA 6.67 0.464/45 1340 0 0 1198 4 7.67 827 954 NIA 8.67 0.464145 2264 0 0 2024 3 9.67 1042 107 l NIA 10.67 0.464/45 3430 0 0 3067 2 11.67 1258 1188 NIA 12.67 0.464/45 4836 0 0 4324 13.67 1473 1305 NIA 14.67 0.464145 6484 0 0 5798 0 15.67 1393 1422 NIA 16.33 0.464145 8042 0 0 7190 Calculate sliding on the reinforcing: The shear value is the lessor of base-shear or inter-unit shear. [I] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [IO] [ 11] [ 12] Layer D!mth zi !'! Li QI§ 1 RF ka Pa Pas+Pasd DF FS 8 I.67 36 0.00 0.90 870 891 0.464 80 0 72 12.38 7 3.67 13041 13.00 0.90 992 8326 0.464 3000 0 2683 3.10 6 5.67 17001 13.00 0.90 l Jl4 10675 0.464 4296 0 3841 2.78 5 7.67 21065 13.00 0.90 1236 13082 0.464 5823 0 5206 2.51 4 9.67 25232 13.00 0.90 1357 15547 0.464 7581 0 6779 2.29 3 11.67 29503 13.00 0.90 1479 18071 0.464 9572 0 8559 2.11 2 13.67 33879 13.00 0.90 1601 20654 0.464 ll794 0 10546 1.96 I 15.67 38357 1300 0.90 1723 23294 0.464 14248 0 12740 1.83 Date 515/2005 Page4 Calculate pullout of each layer he FoS (R*/S*) of pullout is calculated as the individual ayer pullout (Rf) divided by the tension (Df) in in that layer. The angle of the failure plane is: 29.00 degrees from vertical [ 1 J [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] Layer Dt;gth zi Le SumV Ci POi Ti EU'Q 8 1.67 4.50 4125 0.90 4639 192 24.21 7 3.67 5.61 6397 0.90 7195 395 18.20 6 5.67 6.72 9165 0.90 10309 611 16.87 5 7.67 7.83 12430 0.90 13981 827 16.91 4 9.67 8.94 16191 0.90 18211 1042 17.47 3 1/.67 10.04 20449 0.90 23001 1258 18.29 2 13.67 11.15 25204 0.90 28348 1473 19.24 I /5.67 12.26 30455 0.90 34254 1393 24.60 Check Shear & Bending at each layer Bending on the top layer the FoS of Overturning of the imits. (Most surcharge loads need to be moved back from the/ace.) [/} [2] [3] [4} [5] [6] [7} [8] [9] Layer Deeth zi !ii_ DM Pv RM FS b Shea_r fS Sh 8 1.67 1.67 39 200 JOO 2.56 870 13.95 Seismic /,67 1.67 107 200 100 0.94 870 !3.95 7 3.67 2.00 85 320 273 3.20 992 5.81 Seismic 3.67 2.00 82 320 273 3.33 992 5.72 6 5.67 2.00 139 560 433 3.ll II 14 4.00 Seismic 5.67 2.00 I 36 560 433 3./ 8 II 14 3.96 5 7.67 2.00 193 800 593 3.07 1236 3.20 Seismic 7.67 2.00 190 800 593 3.12 !236 J.18 4 9.67 2.00 247 1040 753 3.05 1357 2.75 Seismic 9.67 2.00 244 1040 753 3.09 1357 2.73 3 11.67 2.00 301 1280 913 3.03 1479 2.46 Seismic Il.67 2.00 298 1280 913 3.07 1479 2.45 2 13.67 2.00 355 1520 1073 3.02 1601 2.26 Seismic 13.67 2.00 352 1520 1073 3.05 1601 2.25 I 15.67 2.00 409 1760 1233 3.02 1723 2.11 Seismic 15.67 2.00 406 1760 1233 3.04 1723 2.10 Date 5/512005 Page5 EXTERNAL STABILITY Iorizontal Acceleration f ertical Acceleration Am= (1.45 -A)A kh(ext) = Am/2 Inertia Force of the Face: Wis Inertia Forces of the soil mass: = 0.15g = 0.00g = 0.195 = 0.098 = H x Wu x gamma = 2040.00 ppf W2s = H x (H2/2 -face depth) * gamma = 17.QQ X 10.01 X 130.00 = 22111.24 ppf W3s = 112 x sqr(tU/2 -l ft) x tan(beta) x gamma = 3258.27 ppf Pif = WI * kh(int) Pir Pis Seismic Thrust , Pae D_Kae Pae Pae __ h Pae v Calculated Reactions = 2040.00 X 0.098 = 198.900 = W2s * kh(int) = 22111.24 X 0.098 = 2155.85 = W3s • kh(int) = 3258.27 X 0.098 = 317.68 =Kae -Ka= 0.952 -0.464 = 0.488 = 0.5 x gamma x sqr(fU) x D _Kae/2 = 0.5 x 125.00 x sqr(22.0l) x 0.244 = 14782.63 = Pae x cos(delta -batter)= 6608.97 = Pae x sin(delta -batter)= 3309.53 For the "modified" design method, the back of the mass assumed to be vertical for calculation of resisting forces. effective sliding length = 14. 00 fl Reactions for Seismic Calculations Area Force Arm~ Arm-y Moment WI 2040.00 [0.500/ 8.500 1020.00 W2 28730.00 [7.500/ 8.500 215475.00 W3 5500.88 [9.667] 19.170 53/75./5 Pa_h 14318.3/ NIA [7.837} -/12207.42 Pa_v 7170.08 [14.000] NIA 100381.06 Pir 2155.85 5.503 [8.500} -18324.69 P_if 198.90 0.500 [8.500] -1690.65 p i!l 317.68 7.670 [18.670] -5931.13 Pae_h/2 6608.97 11.005 [13.206] -87278.80 Pae_vl2 3309.53 [11.005} 13.206 36421.64 Sum V= 46750.48 Sum Mr= 406472.85 Sum H= 23599.71 Sum Mo= -225432.69 Date 5/512005 Page6 Sliding Calculations Pa_h Pae_h/2 PIR -14318.31 ppf -6608.97 ppf -2672.43 ppf Resisting Forces, RF Foundation fill ~(WI+ W2 + W3 + Pav +Pae_v)tan(phi) ~ 46750.48 x tan(32.00) ~29212.94 FS Overturning Calculations Overturning moment; Mo= Sum Mo Resisting Moments Mr -Sum Mr Factor of Safety of Overturning~ Mr/Mo Calculate eccentricity at base: Sum Moments Sum Vertical Base Length e Calculate Ultimate Bearing based on shear: where: Nq ~ 23.18 Ne -35.49 Ng-30.21 (ref. Vesic(1973, 1975) eqns) Quit -17523 psf Equivalent footing width, B 1 = L -2c Bearing pressure = sum V/B' Facror of Safety for bearing~ Quit/bearing DITERNAL STABILITY kh(int) -(1.45-A) A .~ (1.45 • 0.15) 0.15 In~rtia Forces ~ RF/(Pa_h + Pae_ h/2 + P _ir) -1.24 -225433 -406473 -1.80 ~ 181040 -46750 -[4.00 -3.13 ~7.74 -6036 psf -2.90 ~ 0.195 WI~ 1.00 x 17.00 x 120.00 x kh_int) -397.80 ppf Wedge~ Wedge x kh_int [for failure plane ongle of61.00deg.J -14413.58 X 0.20 -2810.65 ppf Total Additional Internal Dynamic Loading 2810.65 + 397.80 ~ 3208.45 ppf Tension in Reinforcing Layer Le ( ft) Tension Dyn Tension Total Tension( i;rnO 8 4.50 191.66 215.37 407.04 7 5.61 395.31 268.43 663.73 6 6.72 610.93 321.48 932.41 5 7.83 826.55 374.53 1201.08 4 8.94 1042.17 427.58 1469.76 3 10.04 1257.80 480.63 1738.43 2 11.15 1473.42 533.69 2007.10 12.26 1392.56 586.74 1979.30 Date 5/512005 FoS Pullout 9.12 8.67 8.84 9.31 9.91 10.58 11.30 13.84 Page 7 RETAINING WALL DESIGN Version 3.3.2.278 SEISMIC DESIGN Project: Sunset Bluff Project No: El0927 Case: Case 1 Design Method: Rankine-w!Batter (modified sorl interface) Design Parameters Soil Parameters: Reinforced Fill Retained Zone Foundation Soil Reinforced Fill Type: Ji 32 32 32 Silts & sands £ 0 0 0 Unit Fill: Cn,shed Stone, 1 inch minus Peak Acceleration = 0.15 g Vertical Acceleration = 0. 00 g Factors of Safety (seismic are 75% of statiL) r...m:f 130 125 125 Date: 5141?005 sliding: 1.50/1./3 pullout: /.50/1./3 1.50 uncertainties: 1.50/ 1. 13 overturning: 2.0011.50 shear: bearing: 2. 00/ I. 5 0 bending: Rejnforcing Parameters: Mirafi XTc Geogrids T ult RF er RFd 7XTc 5700 1.67 1.10 RFid 1.05 1.50 LTDS 2955 --------- Analysis: connection: J.50/1.13 (Base Friction used in Tension of base grid) FS 1.50 Tai 1970 Ci 0.90 Case: Case 1 Cds 0.90 5 ,i 3 2 1 New Case Unit Type: CompaG Crushed Stone 15.00Ji Wall Batter: 0.00 deg. (Hinge Ht NIA) Leveling Pad: Wall Ht: BackS/ope: Surcharge: Results: Factors of Safety: 26.60 deg slope, LL: 250 psfuniform surcharge Load Width: 99.00ft Slidinr, Overturning 1.84/1.22 3.20/1. 74 Calculated Bearing Pressure: 3246/5531 psf Eccentricity at base: 0.97 ft/2.82 ft Reinforcing: ( ft & lbs/ft) Cale. Layer Height Lengtll Tension Reinf. Ty:ue 7 13.33 12.0 192/380 7XTc 6 1/.33 12.0 395 I 642 7XTc 5 9.33 12.0 6111916 7XTc 4 7.33 12.0 82711/89 7XTc 3 5.33 12.0 1042 I 1463 7XTc 2 3.33 12.1) 1258/ 1737 7XIc 1 1.33 12.0 121311750 7XTc Reinforcing Quantities (no waste included): 7XTc 9.33 iy/ft embedment: 1. 00 Ji 90. 00 ft long DL: 0 psf uniform surcharge Load Width: 99. 00 ft Bearing Shear Bending 6.74/2.70 2.2612.25 2.56 /0. 94 Allow Ten Pk Conn Serv Conn Tai Tel Tse 197013509 uk 602/803 vk NIA /970/3509 ok 7/9/959ok NIA 1970/3509 ok 836/11/5 ok NIA 1970/3509 ok 954/1271 ok NIA 1970/3509 ok /07/11428'? NIA 1970/3509 ok /188/1584?? NIA 1970/3509 ok 1305/1740'' Ni.A NOTE-THESE CALCULATIONS ARE FOR PRELIMINARY DESIGN ONLY AND SHOULD NOT BE USED FOR CONSTRUCTION WlTHOUT REVIEW BY A QUALIFIED ENGINEER Date S/5/2005 / Pullout FS >10/6.96 ok > 10/6.87 ok > 1017.23 ok > 1017.80 ok >/0/8.46 ok > 10/9./8 ok >10/>lOok Page 1 -DETAILED CALCULATIONS Project: Sunset Bluff Project No: E/0927 Case: Case 1 Design '.Wethod: Rankine-w!Batter (modified soil interface) Soil Parameters: <I! Reinforced Fill 32 Retained Zone 32 Foundation Soil Leveling Pad: Crushed Stone Modular Concrete Unlt: Compac 32 Depth: 1.00 ft in-Place Wt: 120 pcf Geometry internal Stability (Sloping geometry) Height: 15. 00 ft Backs/ope: Angle: 26. 6 deg Height: 44.57 ft Batter: 0. OOdeg Surcharge: Dead Load: 0. 00 p.if Live load: 0 psf Ba::.ewidth: 12.0 Factors of Safety (seismic are 75% of static) £ 0 0 0 Y..J2£f 130 125 125 External Stability (Sloping geometry) Height: 20.5 I ft Angle: 26.60Deg Height: 39.06 ft Batter: 0. OOdeg Dead Load: 0. 00 psf Live Load:O psf Date: 5/4/2005 Designer: HMX sliding: 1.5011.13 pullout: 1.5011.13 1.50 uncertainties: 1.5011.13 overturning: 2.0011.50 shear: connect/on: 1.50/1.!3 bearing: 2. 00/1.50 hending: 1.50 (Base Friction used in Tension of base grid) Earth Pressures: k,= S1n'(a+f) ,-~-~ , [ sm(~ + 8) stn(f -JI\ ] ,,.,. -,.. .. --stn asm(a-8) 1+ P/ ... 1 sm(a-8)sin(a+,8) H '/. w1·,.-... Internal: $ = 32deg a= 90.00deg ~ = 26.60Jeg Ii = 26.60deg H = 15.00 ft ka = 0.464 . '.'.'.'. p Externaar-'--r"""''-r..L..--''-----'---- $ = 32deg a =90.00deg ~ = 26.60deg Ii= 26.60deg ka = 0.464 Hinge Height: Hinge Ht= Not applicable due to draw-down on face Date 5/5/2005 Page 2 Reinforcing Parameters: 1.\firafl XTc Geogrids Tull RFcr RFd 7Xfc 5700 1.67 I.IO RFid 1.05 LTDS 2955 FS 1.50 Tai 1970 Ci 0.90 Cds 0.90 Onnection Parameters: Mirafi XTc Geogrids Frictional 1 7)1.Tc Tc/= Ntan(36.20) + 757 Unit Shear Data Shear= Ntan(40.00) Inter-Unit ShearShear = N tan(26.90) + 768.81 Calculated Reactions Break Pt 1989 Frictional 2 Tcl= Ntan(0.00) +2213 For the "modijied 1 ' design method, the back of the mass assumed to be vertical.for calculation of resisting forces. effective sliding length = 12.00 ft Pa:= D.5H(~ H ka-2c ~~) Pa,,:= Pa· cos(6) Piiv = Pa-sin(6) Reactions are: Calculate Sliding at Base Pq = q·H-ka P<Jh := Pq·co,(o) P'lv = P, ,in(o) Area Force WI 1800.00 W2 21450.00 W3 3938.50 Pa __ h 10895.64 Pav 5456.13 Sum V= 32644.63 SumH= 10895.64 l H' -'- Arm-x [0.500} [6.500} [8.333] NIA [12.000] For Sliding, Vertical Force= WJ+W2+WJ+W4+qd The resisting force within the rein. mass, Rf_ 1 The resistingforce at the foundation, Rf_ 2 = N tan(32. 00) Pq .... ·o l H/2 I ---~-eff. length Arm-y 7.500 7.500 16.836 [6.836] NIA Sum Mr= Sum Mo= Moment 900.00 139425.00 32820.81 -74484.02 65473.56 238619.38 -7448402 = 32645 -Ntan(32) = 20399 -20399 The driving forces, DJ, are the sum of the external eanh pressures: Pa+ Pql + Pqd the Factor of Safety for Sliding is Rf_ 2/Df Calculate Overturning: Date 5/5/2005 Overturning moment: .Mo = Sum Afo Resisting moment: Afr = Sum 1'.Jr Factor of Safety of Overturning: Mr/Mo -10896 ~ 1.87 c--o 74484 =238619 ~ 3.20 Page3 Calculate eccentricity at base: with surcharge I without surcharge Sum Moments= 1641351164135 'um Vertical= 32645132645 ,ase Length= 12.00 e = 0.9710.97 Calculate Ultimate Bearing based on shear: where: Nq = 23.18 Ne= 35.49 Ng= 30.21 (ref. Vesic(I973, 1975) eqns) Quit= 21887 psf Equivalent footing width, B' = L-2e = 10.06 / J0.06 Bearing pressure= swnVIB' = 3246 psf I 5531 psf [bearing is greatest without liveload] Factor of Safety for bearing= Quit/bearing= 6.74 Calculate Tensions in Reinforcing: The tensions in the reinforcing layer, and the assumed load at the connection, is the vertical area supported by each respective layer, Sv.Column (7] is '2c sqrt(ka)'. Table of Results ppf [ I] [2] (3] [4] [5] [6] [7] (8] [9] [10] [ 11] Layer D!;!1th zi hi ka/rho Pa (Pas+Pasd) f ( 5+6 )cos( d)-7 Ii Tel Tse 0.00 0.464145 0 0 0 0 6 1.67 192 602 NIA 2.67 0.464145 214 0 0 192 5 3.67 395 719 NIA 4.67 0.464145 656 0 0 587 4 5.67 611 836 NIA 6.67 0.464145 1340 0 0 1198 3 7.67 827 954 NIA 8.67 0.464/45 2264 0 0 2024 2 9.67 1042 1071 NIA 10.67 0.464145 3430 0 0 3067 11.67 1258 1188 NIA 12.67 0.464/45 4836 0 0 4324 0 13.67 1213 1305 NIA 14.33 0.464145 6193 0 0 5537 Calculate sliding on the reinforcing: The shear value is the lessor of base-shear or inter-unit shear. [l] [2] [3] (4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [ 11] [12 J Layer D!,11th zi )::! Li Cds 1 RF ka Pa Pas+Pasd DF FS 7 1.67 36 U.00 0.90 870 891 0.464 80 0 72 12.38 6 3.67 10274 11.00 0.90 992 6770 0.464 2439 0 2181 3.10 5 5.67 JJ662 11.00 0.90 /114 8797 0.464 3618 0 3235 2.12 4 7.67 17154 /1.00 0.90 1236 10882 0.464 5029 0 4497 2.42 3 9.67 20749 /1.00 0.90 1357 13026 0.464 6672 a 5966 2.18 2 /1.67 24448 f/.00 0.90 1479 15228 0.464 8546 a 7642 1.99 I 13.67 28252 I/00 0.90 1601 17489 0.464 10652 0 9525 1.84 Date 5/5/2005 Pag(l 4 Calculate pullout of each layer The FoS (R*/S*) of pullout is calculated as the individual ayer pullout (Rf) divided by the tension (Df) in in that layer. The angle of the failure plane is: 29.00 degrees from vertical [ 1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] Layer Dsithzi Le SumV Ci POi Ti FS PO 7 1.67 3.6/ 2943 0.90 3310 192 17.27 6 3.67 4.72 4903 0.90 5514 395 13.95 5 5.67 5.83 7359 0.90 8278 6l/ 13.55 4 7.67 6.94 103/3 0.90 11599 827 14.03 3 9.67 8.04 13762 0.90 15479 1042 14.85 2 11.67 9.15 17708 0.90 19918 1258 15.84 1 13.67 10.16 22151 0.90 24915 1213 20.54 Check Shear & Bending at each layer Bending on the top layer the FoS of Overturning of the units. (Most surcharge loads need to be moved back from the face.) [/] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] {71 [8] [9} Layer Der1.th zi Si DM Pv RM FS b Shear FS Sh 7 1.67 1.67 39 200 100 2.56 870 13.95 Seismic l.67 1.67 !07 200 100 0.94 870 13.95 6 3.67 2.00 85 320 273 3.20 992 581 Seismic 3.67 2.00 82 320 273 3.33 992 5.72 5 5.67 2.00 139 560 433 3.l/ 1114 4.00 Seismic 5.67 2.00 /36 560 433 3.18 II 14 3.96 4 7.67 2.00 193 800 593 3.07 1236 3.10 Seismic 7.67 200 190 800 593 3.12 1236 3.18 3 9.67 2.00 247 1040 753 3.05 1357 2.75 Seismic 9.67 2.00 244 1040 753 3.09 1357 2.73 2 11.67 2.00 301 1280 913 3.03 /479 2.46 Seismic 11.67 2.00 298 1280 913 3.07 1479 2.45 1 13.67 2.00 355 1520 1073 3.02 1601 2.26 Seismic /3.67 2.00 352 1520 1073 3.05 1601 2.25 Date: 5/5/2005 Page5 EXTERNAL STABILITY Horizontal Acceleration 'ertical Acceleration Am= (1.45 -A)A kh( ext) = Am/2 Inertia Force of the Face: Wis Inertia Forces of the soil mass: = 0.15g = 0.00g =0.195 =0098 = H x Wu x gamma = 1800.00 ppf W2s = H x (H2/2 -face depth) • gamma = 15.00 X 8.67 X 130.00 = 16908.60 ppf W3s = l/2 x sqr(H2/2 -l ft) x tan(beta) x gamma = 2447.32 ppf Pif = Wl • kh(int) = 1800.00 X 0.098 = 175.500 Pir = W2s • kh(int) Pis Seismic Thrust , Pae D_Kae Pae Pae h Pae v Calculated Reactions = 16908.60 X 0.098 = 1648.59 = W3s • kh(int) = 2447.32 X 0.098 = 238.61 =Kae-Ka=0.952 -0.464 = 0.488 = 0.5 x gamma x sqr(H2) x D _ Kae/2 = 0.5 x 125.00 x sqr(19.34) x 0.244 = 11416.0l = Pae x cos(delta -batter)= 5103.83 = Pae x sin(delta -batter)= 2555.81 For the "modifled 11 design method. the back of the mass assumed to be vertical for calculation of resisting forces. effective sliding length = 12. DO fl Reactions for Seismic: Calculations Area Force Arm-x Arm--y llfoment WI 1800.00 [0.500] 7.500 900.00 W2 21450.00 [6.500] 7.500 139425.00 W3 3938.50 [8.333] 16.836 32820.81 Pa_h 10895.64 NIA [6.836] -74484.02 Pa_v 5456.13 [12.000] NIA 65473.56 Pir 1648.59 4.836 [7.500] -12364.41 P_if 175.50 0.500 [7.500} -1316.25 P_is 238.61 6.781 [16.447} -3924.58 Pae h/2 5103.83 9.671 [/1.605] -59231.49 Pae_v/2 2555.81 [9.671] 11.605 24717.43 Sum V= 35200.44 Sum Mr= 263336.81 SumH= 18062.18 Sum Mo= -!51320.74 Date 51512005 Page6 Sliding Calculations Pa_b Pae_h/2 PIR = 10895 .64 ppf = 5103.83 ppf = 2062. 70 ppf Resisting Fore es. RF Foundation fill =(WI+ W2 + W3 + Pav+Pae_v)tan(phi) = 35200.44 X tan(32.00) =2]995.67 FS Overturning Calculations Overturning moment: Mo = Sum Mo Resisting Moments Mr= Sum Mr Factor of Safety of Overturning= Mr/Mo Calculate eccentricity at base: Sum Moments Sum Vertical Base Length e Calculate Ultimate Bearing based on shear: where: Nq=23.18 Ne= 35.49 Ng=J0.21 (ref. Vesic(I973, 1975)eqns) Qult=14916 psf Equivalent footing width, 8' -L -2e Bearing pressure== sumV/B' Factor of Safety for bearing = Quit/bearing INTERNAL STABILITY kh(int) = (1.45-A) A = (1.45 -0.15) 0.15 Inertia Fore es = RFl(Pa_ h + Pae_h/2 + P _ir) = 1.22 = 151321 = 263337 = 1.74 = 112016 = 35200 = 12.00 = 2.82 =6.36 = 5531 psf =2.70 = 0.195 WI= 1.00 X 15.00 X 120.00 x kh_int) = 351.00 ppf Wedge= Wedge x kh_int [forfailure plane angle of 61.00deg.] = 11221.64 X 0.20 = 2188.22 ppf Total Additional Internal Dynamic Loading 2188.22 + 35 l.OO = 2539.22 ppf Tension in Reinforcing Layer Le I ftl Tension Qyn Tension Total Tension( l!l!!l 7 3.61 191.66 188.78 380.45 6 4.72 395.31 246.77 642.08 5 5.83 610.93 304.76 915.69 4 6.94 826.55 362.75 1189.30 3 8.04 1042. 17 420.73 1462.91 2 9.15 1257.80 478.72 1736.52 I 10.26 1212.88 536.71 1749.58 Date 5/5/2005 FoS Pullout 6.96 6.87 7.23 7.80 8.46 9.18 11.39 Page7 RETAINING \VALL DESIGN Version 3.3.2.278 SEISMIC DESIGN Project: Sunset Bluff Project No: El0927 Case: Case l Date: 5/4/2005 Designer:~ / 4// Design Method: Rankine-w/Batter (modified soil inte1face) Design Parameters Soil Parameters: Reinforced Fill Retained Zone Foundation Soil Reinforced Fill Type: Unit Fill: JR 32 32 32 Si Its & sands 0 0 0 Crushed Stone, J inch minus l'....l1!J 130 125 125 5 4 3 2 1 Peak Acceleration~ 0.15 g Vertical Acceleration~ 0.00 g Factors a/Safety (seismic are 75% of static) sliding: I.50/1.!3 pullout: 1.5011.13 1.50 overturning: 2. 00/1.50 shear: bearing. 2.0011.50 bending: 1.50 Reinforcing Parameters: Mirafi XTc Geogrids Tult RFcr RFd 7XTc 5700 1.67 I.JO Analysis: New Case Unit Type: Leveling Pad: Wall Ht: Compac Crushed Stone IJ.UOfl EFid 1.05 LIDS 2955 BackS/ope: 26.60 deg. slope, Surcharge: Results: Factors of'Safety: LL: 250 psfunifonn surcharge Load Width: 99.00ft Slidine Overturnin,:. 1.8911.23 3.26//.78 Calculated Bearing Pressure: 2780/4644 psf Eccentricity at base: 0.82 ft/2.39 ft Reinforcing: (ft & lbs/ft) Cak Layer Height Length Tension Reinf. T:yue 6 11.33 10.5 192 /366 7XTc 5 9.33 10.5 395 I 630 7XTc 4 7.33 10.5 611 /906 7XTc 3 5.33 10.5 827 I 1181 7XTc 2 3.33 10.5 1042 I 1457 7XTc 1 1.33 10.5 1033/1508 7XTc Reinforcing Quantities (no waste included): 7XTc 7.00 sy/ft uncertainties: 1.5011.13 connection: l.50/1.13 (Base Friction used in Tension ofbase grid) FS 1.50 Tai 1970 Ci 0.90 Cds 0.90 -----~--·------------~------ Case: Case 1 Wall Batter: 0. 00 deg. (Hinge Ht NIA) embedment: I. 00 ft 90. 00 fl long DL: 0 psfumji:;nn surcharge Load Width: 99. 00 Ji Bearing Shear Bending 7.0712.95 2.4612.45 2.56 /0.94 Allow Ten Pk Conn Serv Conn Tai Tel Tse 1970/3509 ok 602/803 ok NIA 1970/3509 ok 719/959 ok Nh1 1970/3509 ok 836// Il5 ok NIA /970/3509 ok 95411271 ok NIA 1970/3509 ok 1071/1428?? NIA 1970/3509 ok 1188//584 ok NIA NOTE.-THESE CALCULATIONS ARE FOR PRELIMINARY DESIGN ONLY AND SHOULD NOT BE USED FOR CONSTRUCTION WITHOUT REVIEW BY A QUALIFIED ENGINEER Date 5/5i2005 Pullout FS > /0/5.78 ok >10/5.90 ok > 1016.36 ok > 10/6.99 ok >1017.68 ok > 10/9.67 ok Page 1 DETAILED CALCULATIONS roject: Sunset Bluff roject No: £10927 Case: Case l Design Method: Rankine-w/Batter (modified soil interface) Soil Parameters: i Reinforced Fill 32 Retained Zone Foundation Soil Leveling Pad: Crushed Stone il-fodular Concrete Unit: Compac 32 32 Depth: 1.00 .ft In-Place Wt: 120 pcf Geometry Internal Stability (Sloping geometry) Height: 13. 00 fl Backs/ope: Angle: 26.6 deg Height: 44.57 ft Batter: 0.00deg Surcharge: Dead Load: 0. 00 psf Live Load: 0 psf Base width: 10.5 Factors of Safety (seismic are 7 5% of static) Q 0 0 0 'Lllii 130 125 125 External Stability (Sloping geometry) Height: 17. 76 ft Angle: 26.60Deg Height: 39.81 ft Batter: 0. OOdeg Dead Load: 0. 00 psf Live Load: 0 psf Date: 5/4/2005 Designer: HMX sliding: 1.5011.13 pullout: 1.5011.13 1.50 uncertainties: 1.5011. I J overturning: 2.0011.50 shear: bearing: 2.0011.50 bending: Earth Pressures: k.=~~~~~;:---';:==========~ sin' a sin(a-8{1+ _l--+-....L.--'e-~ 1.50 r ffifi :.: . .,. connection: I .50/1.13 (Base Friction used in Tension of base grid) Internal: ,j) = 32deg a= 90.00<leg p = 26.60deg Ii= 26.60deg H •= 13.00 ft ka = 0.464 Extern"a,-L-.=,-..L--''-----'--- q> = 32deg a= 90.00deg p = 26.60deg Ii= 26.60deg ka = 0.464 Hinge Height: Hinge Ht~ Not applicable due to draw-down on face Date 5i5f2005 Page 2 Reinforcing Parameters: Mirafi XTc Geogrids Tu/t RFcr RFd 7XTc 5700 1.67 I.JO RFid 1.05 Connection Parameters: };Jirafi XTc Geogrids Frictional 1 7XTc Tel= Ntan(36.20) + 757 Unit Shear Data Shear= N tan(40.00) LTDS 2955 Inter-Unit ShearShear = N tan(26.90) + 768.81 Calculated Reactions FS 1.50 Tai 1970 Ci 0.90 Cds 0.90 Break Pt 1989 Frictwnal Z Tel= Ntan(0.00) +2213 For the 11modifled1 ' design method, the back of the mass assumed to be vertical for calculation of resisting forces. effective sliding length= 10.50 ft Pa:= 0.5H ( y H ka -k ,Fa) Pai.:• hcas(o) Pa.,:• Pa sin(o) Pq •= q·H·ka Pq,.. = Pq·cos{o) Pq,,:= Pq·sin(o) 1 H/2 : I . I ~eff.l~ngth Reactions are: Area Force Arm~x Wl 1560.00 [0.500] W2 16055.00 [5.750] W3 2937.60 [7.333/ Pa_h 8168.47 NIA Pa_v 4090.47 [10.500] Sum V= 24643.06 Sum H = 8168.47 Calculate Sliding at Base For Sliding, Vertical Force= Wl+W2+W3+W4+qd The resi'lting force within the rein. mass, Rf_ I T1ze resi'1tingforce at the foundation, Rf_2 = N tan(32.00) Arm-y 6.500 6.500 14.586 [5.919] NIA Sum Mr= Sum Mo= The driving forces, Df, are the sum of the external earth pressures: Pa+ Pql + Pqd the Factor of Safety for Sliding is Rf_ 2/Df Calcrilate Overturning: Da1e 515/2005 Overturning moment: Mo = Sum klo Resisting moment: Mr = Sum Mr Factor of Safety of Overturning: Mr/Mo Moment 780.00 92316.25 21542.39 -48349.87 42949.90 157588.54 -48349.87 = 24643 = N tan(32) = 15399 = 15399 = 8168 = 1.89 = 48350 = 157589 = 3.26 Page3 Calculate eccentricity at base: with surcharge/ without surcharge Sum Moments= 109239/109239 um Vertical= 24643/24643 ase Length = 10.50 e = 0.82/0.82 Calculate Ultimate Bearing based on shear: where: Nq = 23.18 Ne= 35.49 Ng= 30.21 (ref. Vesie(1973, 1975) eqns) Quit= 19639 psf Equivalent footing width, B' = L -2e = 8.87 / 8.87 Bearing pressure= sumV/B' = 2780 psf / 4644 psf [bearing is greatest without liveload] Factor of Safety for bearing= Quit/bearing= 7.07 Calculate Tensions in Reinforcing: The tensions in the reinforcing layer, and the assumed load at the connection, is !he vertical area supported by each respective layer, Sv.Column [7] is '2c sqrt(ka)'. Table of Results ppf (l] [2] [3) (4) [5) [6) [7] [8] Layer Degth zi hl ka/rho Pa (Pas+Pasd) s: (5+6)cos(d)-7 0.00 0.464/45 0 0 0 0 5 1.67 2.67 0.464/45 214 0 0 192 4 3.67 4.67 0.464/45 656 0 0 587 3 5.67 6.67 0.464/45 1340 0 0 1198 2 7.67 8.67 0.464/45 2264 0 0 2024 I 9.67 10.67 0.464/45 3430 0 0 3067 0 11.67 12.33 0.464/45 4585 0 0 4100 Calculate sliding on the reinforcing: The shear value is the lessor of base-shear or inter~unit shear. [l J [2] [3] (4] [5] [6] (7] [8] [9] [l OJ Layer Deg!h zi )',! Li Cds I RF ka Pa Pas+Pasd 6 1.67 36 0.00 0.90 870 891 0.464 80 0 5 3.67 8386 9.50 0.90 991 5708 0.464 2056 0 4 5.67 ll345 9.50 0.90 1 /14 7494 0.464 3148 0 3 7.67 14408 9.50 0.90 1236 9339 0.464 4472 0 2 9.67 17575 9.50 0.90 1357 11241 0.464 6028 0 1 11.67 20845 9.50 0.90 1479 13202 0.464 7815 0 Date 5/5/2005 [9) [l OJ [ 11 J Ti Tel Tse 192 602 NIA 395 719 NIA 611 836 NIA 827 954 NIA 1042 1071 NIA 1033 1188 NIA [ l l J [ 12] DF FS 72 12.38 1838 3.ll 2815 2.66 3999 2.34 5390 2.09 6988 1.89 Pagc4 Calculate pullout of each layer be FoS (R */S*) of pullout is calculated as the individual ayer pullout (Rf) divided by the tension (Df) in in that layer. The angle of the failure plane is: 29.00 degrees from vertical [l] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] Laver D~th zi Le SumV Ci POi Ti FS PO 6 1.67 3.22 2350 0.90 2643 192 13.79 5 3.67 4.33 4129 0.90 4644 395 11.75 4 5.67 5.44 6404 0.90 7203 611 11.79 3 7.67 6.54 9175 0.90 10320 827 12.49 2 9.67 7.65 12443 0.90 13995 1042 13.43 1 11.67 8.76 16207 0.90 18229 1033 17.64 Check Shear & Bending at each layer Bending on the top layer the FoS of Overturning oft/re units. (1\.{ost surcharge loads need to be moved hack from the/ace.) [I} [2} [3} [4} [5} [6} [7] [8] [9] Layer Defl_th zi §j DM Pv RM FS b Shear FS Sh 6 1.67 1.67 39 200 100 2.56 870 13.95 Seismic 1.67 1.67 107 200 JOO 0.94 870 13.95 5 3.67 2.00 85 320 273 3.20 992 5.81 Seismic 3.67 2.00 82 320 273 3.33 992 5.72 4 5.67 2.00 139 560 433 3.11 1114 4.00 Seismic 5.67 2.00 136 560 433 3.18 1 I 14 3.96 J 7.67 2.00 193 800 593 3.07 1236 3.20 Seismic 7.67 2.00 190 800 593 3.12 1236 3.18 2 9.67 2.00 247 1040 753 3.05 1357 2.75 Seismic 9.67 2.00 24./ 1040 753 3.09 1357 2.73 I 11.67 2.00 301 1280 913 3.03 1479 2.46 Seismic 11.67 2.00 298 1280 913 3.07 1479 2.45 Date 5/5/2005 Page S EXTERNAL STABILITY !orizontal Acceleration ·ertical Acceleration Am~ (1.45 -A)A kh( ext) ~ Am/2 Inertia Force of the Face: Wis Inertia Forces of the soil mass: ~ 0.15g ~ 0.00g ~0.195 ~ 0.098 ~ H x Wu x gamma~ 1560.00 ppf W2s -H x (H2/2 -face depth) • gamma -13.00 X 7.34 X )3Q.QQ ~ 12399.64 ppf W3s -1/2 x sqr(H2/2 -l ft) x tan(beta) x gamma -1752.23 ppf Pif -WI * kh(int) -1560.00 X 0.098 -152.100 Pir -W2s • kh(int) Pis Seismic Thrust , Pae D Kae Pae Pae_h Pae_v Calculated Reactions ~ 12399.64 X 0.098 -1208.96 -W3s • kh(int) ~ 1752.23 X 0.098 -170.84 ~Kae -Ka~ 0.952 -0.464 ~ 0.488 ~ 0.5 x ganuna x sqr(H2) x D _Kae/2 -0.5 x 125.00 x sqr(l 6.67) x 0.244 ~ 8483.81 ~ Pae x cos(delta -batter)~ 3792.92 ~ Pae x sin(delta -batter)~ 1899.35 For the '1modifi,ed" design method, the hack of the ma<;s assumed to be vertical.for calculution of resisting.forces. effective sliding length ~ 10.50 ft Reactions for Seismic Calculations Area Force Arm-x Arm-y ,Uoment WI 1560.00 /0.500] 6.500 780.00 W2 16055.00 [5. 7501 6.500 92316.25 W3 2937.60 [7.333} 14.586 21542.39 Pa_h 8168.47 NIA [5.919] -48349.87 Pa_v 4090.47 [10.500] NIA 42949.90 Fir 1208.96 4.169 [6.500} -7858.27 P_if 152.10 0.500 [6.500] -988.65 P is 170.84 5.891 [14.225] -2430.18 Pae_h/2 3792.92 8.337 [10.004] -37946.15 I'ae_vl2 1899.35 [8.337] /0004 15835 OJ Sum V~ 26542.41 Sum Mr= 173423.55 SumH~ 13493.30 Sum Mo= -97573.12 Date 5/5/2005 Pagc6 Sliding Calculations Pa_h Pae h/2 PIR = 8168.47 ppf = 3792.92 ppf = 1531.91 ppf Resisting Forces, RF Foundation fill -(WI+ W2 + W3 + Pav +Pae_v)tan(phi) = 26542.41 x tan(32.00) =16585.54 FS Overturning Calculations Overturning moment: Mo= Sum Mo Resisting Moments Mr~ Sum Mr Factor of Safety of Overturning= Mr/Mo Calculate eccentricity at base: Sum Moments Sum Vertical Base Length e Calculate ffitimatc Bearing based on shear: where: Nq = 23.18 Ne~ 35.49 Ng= 30.21 (ref. Vesic(l973, 1975) eqns) Qult = 13690 psf Equivalent footing width, B' = L -2e Bearing pressure= sumV/B 1 Factor of Safety for bearing= Qult/bearing INTERNAL STABILITY kb(int) -(1.45-A) A ~ (1.45 -0.15) 0.15 Inertia Forces ~ RF/(Pa_ h + Pae_h/2 + P _ ir) ~ 1.23 = 97573 = 173424 = l.78 = 75850 ~ 26542 ~ 10.50 ~ 2.39 = 5.72 ~ 4644 psf = 2.95 = 0.195 WI --1.00 x 13.00 x 120.00 x kh_int) ~ 304.20 ppf Wedge~ Wedge x kh _int [for failure plane angle of 61.00deg.] ~ 8428.70 X 0.20 = 1643.60 ppf Total Additional [nternal Dynamic Loading 1643.60 + 304.20 ~ 1947.80 ppf Tension in Reinforcing Layer Le { ft) Tension Dyn Tension Total Tension{ I!llfl 6 3.22 191.66 174.41 366.08 5 4.33 395.31 234.50 629.81 4 5.44 610.93 294.59 905.52 3 6.54 826.55 354.68 1181.23 2 7.65 1042.17 414.77 1456.94 l 8.76 1033.19 474.85 1508.04 Date 5/5/2005 FoS Pullout 5.78 5.90 6.36 6.99 7.68 9 67 Page? ,-STONE !.!ii..._ ,~NINIIWAllSYSTfMS Project: Sunset Bluff Project No: E 10927 Case: Case I RETAINING WALL DESIGN Version 3.3.2.278 SEISMIC DESIGN Design Method: Rankine-w!Batter (modified soil interface) Date: 51412005 / / Design Parameters Soil Parameters: Reinforced Fill Retained Zone Foundation Soil Reinforced Fill Type: ~ 32 32 32 g 0 0 0 l'...Jl£f 130 125 125 5/ 1-1-----1-'--~).\ / 3 Silts & sands Unit Fill: Crushed Stone, l inch minus Peak Acceleration = 0. 15 g Vertical Acceleration = 0.00 g Factors of Safety (seismic are 75% of static) sliding: 1.5011.13 pullout: 1.5011./3 overturning: 2.0011.50 shear: 1.50 bearing: 2.0011.50 bending: 1.50 Reinforcing Parameters: Mirafi XI'c Geogrids Tult RFcr RFd 7XTc 5700 1.67 1.10 Analysis: RFid LTDS 1.05 2955 uncertainties: 1.5011.13 connection: 1.5011.13 (Base Friction used in Tension of base grid) FS 1.50 Tai 1970 Ci 0.90 Case: Case 1 Cds 0.90 2 1 New Case Unit Type: Compac Crushed Stone ll.OOfl Wall Batter: 0.00 deg (Hinge Ht NIA) Leveling Pad: Wall Ht: BackS/ope: Surcharge: Results: Factors oJSufety: 26. 60 deg. slope, LL: 250 psfunijorm surcharge Load Width: 99.00 fl Sliding Overturning 1.90/1.24 3.34/1.83 Calculated Bearing Pressure: ZJ 1513 772 psf Eccentricity at base: 0.66 ft/1.97 ft Reinforcing: (It & lbs/ft) Cak. Layer Height Length Tension Reinf, Tme 5 9.33 9.0 1921352 7XTc 4 7.33 9.0 3951619 7XTc J 5.33 9.0 611 I 898 7XTc 2 3.33 9.0 82711176 7XTc l 1.33 90 854 I 1266 7XTc Reinforcing Quantities (no waste included): 7 XTc 5. 00 sylfl embedment: 1.1)0 fl 90. 00 fl long DL: 0 psf uniform surcharge load Width: 99.00 fl Bearing Shear Bendini 7.5113.30 2. 75 12.73 2.5610.94 Allow Ten Pk Conn Serv Coon Tai Tel Tse 1970/3509 ok 602/803 ok NIA 1970/3509 ok 719/959 ok NIA 1970/3509 ok 836/1115 ok NIA /97013509 ok 954/1271 ok NIA 1970/3509 ok 1071/1428 ok NIA NOTE: THESE CALCULATIONS ARE FOR PRELIMINARY DESIGN ONLY AND SHOUW NOT BE USED FOR CONSTRUCTION WITHOUT REVIEW BY A QUALIFIED ENGINEER Date 5/5/2005 Pullout FS >1014.66 ok 9. 7314. 97 ok >1015.53 ok >10!6.20ok >1017.95 ok Page 1 DETAILED CALCULATIONS ?roject: Sunset Bluff Project No: El0927 Case: Case 1 Design Method: Rankine-w/Batter (modified soil interface} Soll Parameters: !I! Reinforced Fill 32 Retained Zone 32 Foundation Soil Leveling Pad: Crushed Stone !,Jodular Concrete Unit: Compac 32 Depth: 1.00 ft In-Place Wt: 120 pc[ Geometry Internal Stability (Sloping geometry} Height: /1. 00 ft Backs/ope: Angle: 26.6 deg Height: 44.57 ft Batter: O.OOdeg Surcharge: Dead Load: 0.00 psf live Load: 0 psf Base width: 9.0 Factors of Safety (seismic are 7 5% of static) f 0 0 0 ')'___jl£( 130 125 125 External Stabi/i ty (Sloping geometry) Height. 15. a I ft Angle: 26. 60Deg Height: 40.56 ft Baller: 0.00deg Dead Load: 0. 00 psf' Live Load: 0 psf Date: 5/4/2005 Designer: HA-IX sliding: 1.50/1./3 pullout: overturning: 2.0011.50 shear: 1.50//./3 1.50 uncertainties: I.50/1.13 connection: 1.5011.13 bearing: 1. 00/ I. 5 0 bending: 1.50 (Base Friction used in Tension of base grid) Earth Pressures: Internal: Externa.ar-1-.::':=:::r_,__ _ __, ___ _,_ __ ~ = 32deg a= 90.00deg p = 26.60deg 8 = 26.60deg H -11.00 ft ka-0.464 ~ ~ 32deg a= 90.00deg ~ = 26.60deg 8 = 26.60deg ka ~ 0.464 Hinge Height: Hinge Ht= Not applicable due to draw-down on face Date 5/5/2005 Page2 Reinforcing Parameters: Mirafi XI'c Geogrids Tuft RFcr RFd 7XI'c 5700 1.67 I.JO LTDS 2955 FS 1.50 Tai 1970 Ci 0.90 Cds 0.90 Connection Parameters: Miraji XTc Geogrids Frictional 1 7X[c Tel= Ntan(36.20) + 757 Unit Shear Data Shear= N tan(40. 00) Inter-Unit ShearShear = N tan(26.90) + 768.81 Calculated Reactions Break Pt 1989 Frictional 2 Tcl=Ntan(0.00) +2213 For the "modified" design method, the back of the mass asswned to be vertical for calculation of resistingfOrces. effective sliding length = 9. 00 fl P, = 03H·(1 H ka-2c·yka) P"h:= P..cos(c) P,. := P..sin(c) Reactions are: Calculate Sliding at Base Pq := q·H·ka PIJh = Pq cos(&) Pciv = Pq sin(o) Arca Force WI 1320.00 W2 11440.00 W3 2083.17 Pa_}, 5833.45 Pa_v 2921.17 Sum V~ 17764.35 SumH= 5833.45 1 H' -'-· Arm-x [0.500] [5.000} [6.333} NIA [9.000} For Sliding, Vertical Force= Wl+W2+W3+W4+qd The resisting force within the rein. muss, Rf_ 1 'f'he resisting force at the foundation, R/_2 -N /an(32.00) ~--~-eff. length Arm-y 5.500 5.500 12.335 [5.002/ NIA Sum Afr= Sum Afo = Moment 660.00 57200.00 13193.43 -29179.12 26290.57 9734399 -29179.12 -17764 = N tan(32j =11100 -II /00 The driving forces, pf, are the sum of the external earth pressures: Pa+ Pql + Pqd the Factor a/Safety for Sliding is R/_2/Df Calculate Overh,rning: Date 5/512005 Overturning moment: lvfo = Sum Mo Resisting moment: lvfr = Sum Mr Factor of Safety of Overturning: Mr/Mo = j8J3 = 1.90 =29179 = 97344 -3.34 Page3 Calculate eccentricity at base: with surcharge I without surcharge Sum Moments = 68165/68165 um Vertical= 17764/17764 ase Length= 9.00 e = 0.66/0.66 Calculate Ultimate Bearing based on shear: where: Nq=23.18 Ne= 35.49 Ng= 30.21 (ref. Vesic(l973, 1975) eqns) Quit= 17389 psf Equivalent footing width, B' = L -2e = 7.67 17.67 Bearing pressure= sumV/B' = 2315 psf I 3772 psf [bearing is greatest without liveload] Factor of Safety for bearing= Quit/bearing= 7.51 Calculate Tensions in Reinforcing: The tensions in the reinforcing layer. and the assumed load at the connection, is the vertical area supported by each respective layer, Sv.Column [7] is '2c sqrt(ka)'. Table of Results ppf [l] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] Layer !Jmlth zi hl kalrho Pa {Pas+Pasd) <; (5+6)cos(d)-7 0.00 0.464145 0 0 0 0 4 1.67 2.67 0.464/45 214 0 0 192 3 3.67 4.67 0.464/45 656 0 0 587 2 5.67 6.67 0.464/45 1340 0 0 1198 7.67 8.67 0.464/45 2264 0 0 2024 0 9.67 10.33 0.464145 3219 0 0 2878 Calculate sliding on the reinforcing: The shear value is the lessor ofbase~shear or inter-wtit shear. [ l] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] Layer De,ith zi l'l Li Cds I RF ka Pa Pas+Pasd 5 1.67 36 0.00 0.90 870 891 0.464 80 0 4 3.67 6660 8.00 0.90 992 4738 0.464 1706 0 3 5.67 9190 8.00 0.90 l !14 6282 0.464 27/l 0 2 7.67 11824 8.00 0.90 1236 7885 0.4M 3948 0 I 9.67 14562 8.00 0.90 1357 9547 0.464 5416 0 Date 5/5/2005 [9] [1 OJ [ l l] Ti Tel Tse 192 602 NIA 395 719 NIA 611 836 NIA 827 954 NIA 854 1071 NIA [11] [ 12] DF FS 72 12.38 1525 3.11 2424 2.59 3530 2.23 4843 1.97 Page4 Calculate pullout of each layer The FoS (R •;s•) of pullout is calculated as the individual sayer pullout (Rf) divided by the tension (Df) in in that layer. The angle of the failure plane is: 29 .00 degrees from vertical [I] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] Layer DeQth zi Le SumV Ci POi Ti FS PO 5 1.67 2.83 1824 0.90 2052 192 10.71 4 3.67 3.94 3421 0.90 3848 395 9.73 3 5.67 5.04 5514 0.90 6202 611 10.15 2 7.67 6.15 8104 0.90 9115 827 11.03 1 9.67 7.26 11190 0.90 12586 854 14.75 Check Shear & Bending at each layer Bending on the top layer the FoS a/Overturning of the units. {Most surcharge loads need to be moved back from the face.) [lj [2] [.JJ [4} [5} [6} [7] [8} [9} Laver Dee.th zi Si. DM Pv RA! FS b Shear FS Sh 5 1.67 1.67 39 200 100 2.56 870 13.95 Seismic 1.67 1.67 107 200 100 0.94 870 13.95 4 3.67 2.00 85 320 273 3.20 992 5.81 Seismic 3.67 2.00 82 320 273 3.33 992 5.72 3 5.67 2.00 139 560 433 3.11 1114 4.00 Seismic 5.67 2.00 136 560 433 3.18 1114 3.96 2 7.67 2.00 193 800 593 3.07 1236 3.20 Seismic 7.67 2.00 190 800 593 3.12 1236 3.18 1 9.67 2.00 247 1040 753 3.05 1357 2.75 Seismic 9.67 2.00 244 1040 753 3.09 1357 2.73 Date 5/5/2005 Page S EXTERNAL STABILITY Horizontal Acceleration Terticat Acceleration Am~ (1.45 -A)A kh( ext) -Arn/2 Inertia Force of the Face: Wis Inertia forces of the soil mass: -O.I5g -O.OOg -0. 195 = 0.098 -H x Wu x gamma= 1320.00 ppf W2s ~ H x (H2/2 -face dcptl1) * gamma -J 1.00 X 6.00 X 130,00 = 8584.36 ppf W3s = li2 x sqr(H2/2 -1 ft) x tan(beta) x gamma -1172.98 ppf Pif = Wl * kh(int) Pir Pis Seismic Thrust , Pae D_Kae Pae Pae_h Pae __ v Calculated Reactions -1320.00 X 0.098 = 128.700 -W2s * kh(int) -8584.36 X 0.098 -836.98 = W3s * kh(int) -1172.98 X 0.098 ~ 114.37 -Kae -Ka-0.952 -0.464 = 0.488 = 0.5 x gamma x sqr(H2) x D._Kae/2 = 0.5 x 125.00 x sqr(14.01) x 0.244 -5986.04 = Pae x cos(delta -batter)= 2676.22 = Pae x sin(delta -batter) -1340.15 For the '1modified 11 design method, the hack of the mass assumed to be vertical ji:Jr calculation of resisting forces. effective sliding length= 9.00 fl Reactions for Seismic Calculations Area Force Arm-x Arm-y Afoment WI /320.00 [0.500] 5.500 660.00 W2 1/440.00 [5.000] 5.500 57200.00 W3 2083.17 [6.333] 12.335 13193.43 Pa_h 5833.45 NIA [5.002} -29179./2 Pa_v 2921.17 [9.000] NIA 26290.57 Pir 836.98 3.502 [5.500] -4603.37 P_if 128.70 0.500 [5.500} -707.85 P is 1/4.37 5.002 [12002] -1372.62 Pae h/2 2676.21 7.003 [8.404] -22490.05 Pae_v/2 1340./5 [7.003] 8.404 9385.15 Sum V= 19104.50 Sum Mr~ 106729. 14 Sum JI~ 9589. 71 Sum Mo= -58353.00 Date 5/5/2005 Page6 Sliding Calculations Pa_h Pae_h/2 PIR = 5833.45 ppf = 2676.22 ppf = 1080.04 ppf Resisting Forces, RF Foundation fiU = (Wl + W2 + W3 + Pav+Pae_v)tan(phi) = 19104.50 x tan(32.00) =l 1937.81 FS Overturning Calculations Overturning moment: Mo = Sum Mo Resisting Moments Mr= Sum Mr Factor of Safety of Overturning= Mr/Mo Calculate eccentricity at base: Sum Moments Sum Vertical Base Length e Calculate li1timate Bearing based on shear: where: Nq = 23.18 Ne= 35.49 Ng= 30.21 (ref. Vesic(1973, 1975) cqns) Qult = 1246\ psf Equivalent footing width, B' = L -2e Bearing pressure= sumV/B' Factor of Safety for bearing= QuJubearing INTERNAL STABILITY kh(int) = (1.45-A) A = (1.45 -0.15) 0.15 Inertia Forces = RF/(Pa_h + Pae_h/2 + P_ir) = 1.24 = 58353 = 106729 = l.83 = 48376 = 19104 = 9.00 = l.97 = 5.06 = 3772 psf =330 = 0. 195 Wl = 1.00 X 11.00 X 120.00 X kh _ int) = 257.40 ppf Wedge= Wedge x kh_int [for failure plane angle of61.00deg.J = 6034.75 X 0.20 = J [76.78 ppf Total Additional Internal Dynamic Loading 1176.78+257.40 = 1434.18 ppf Tension in Reinforcing Layer Le { ft} Tension Dyn Tension Total Tension( ~~f} 5 2.83 191.66 160.74 352.40 4 3.94 395.31 223.79 619.10 3 5.04 610.93 286.84 897.76 2 6.15 826.55 349.88 1176.43 7.26 853.50 412.93 1266.43 Date 5/5/2005 FoS Pullout 4.66 4.97 5.53 6.20 7.95 Page7 APPEND1X2 0 r. t t::S f-~ j o._ >-(C (C e,.. < 0 ;;; u.. ::; ~ ::J w (C o._ ~ fll ·. ~ b 0 -... ;:;! :ii ui st ~ 'r1. 2' ~ c.. ~z z r::i s: 0 0 z f-I ~ en z < 0 s: I= z U 0 w f-(/) z u.. w 0 (C "' ;o i! § g c:1=1n1s ESNns l:IO=I l Vld Afl\fNlr-4113!:ld ,, •, ' cc, O' ~ >-I WI ~ I i{! CCI ~ ~: z . j c.. ~ (C w w ~ z w ) ffil fLI o, _JI WI >' w! O' ~ (Cl W' z' s:' 0 ~ I 31.ll.l ' ~ ' , \ I I I I oom-9c:c: csc:v l SS086 VM 'NO!N3!:I A \f MHOIH A311\f A 3ld\fri Sl.61 ·~y1·1 006 !:IS " ,1, t,'.,' 'i -. " :~ ., .J ~' ~ ~1 ·itt~~:~.~ C , c .:3 --;: 3c :~ ""' ~ is' # ' - I,_. ___ , ' '' ','·::; NO.LN:ilt! dO A.LI:) I l .Om•,( X''l:J i:"BL8-r£i:(£i:ir) lo:'.i':9-,(;l(SZt) i:£086 VM '1N3>1 H1nos 3nN3AV ONlL 9!l9\ 0 < 0 , , ' ' ! I I I \ I I \ bl z wl ~I u " ~ g ~ e i ~dd'i 31'9'0 m r~ [,,:J K·j I ,::__.,__J ;;; • • ~1 ~ 5~ ,a I ~ ~, ., . ~ • •• ti 5 "a " ii e i: " ((,c) 'I rst9L ON 80(' 3 ::rn z: o: li:I ii: u (/) w 0 _JI <31 ~! w < [ ~ zo OJ f-ill ZJ w• (C. u.. 0 Or >-z t: ~ Ur [ < • w 0 ~-~-i cc,:; II ' :I ' -;1 g 1 J ! ! • I , • ' I ' ' . I ' 9 tfr :~ ~~8~~~~~'.1: .. ,•.•.~'._.·,• .. l .. ',','c.',1.,~L.·.· •. ·.!,,.·,·',·.• ;';' ~-';'; ",' z-:'; '!' '.',' _: s ' ' .'.' ., .. " "' , ••• <• J,CO - ~ ~ .., -, ~ ,., .. NOISl/1111 ON APPEND1X3 w !:ii ~ "r1: 0 z IL ~ !b 0 ill z W z 0 0) ~ t, 0 I--;,:; IL \2 ffi 0 z < a: 0 ~ IL 0 2 WO LL w I;;; 0 LL W 0 a: I-~ a: - 0 ~ IL I IL :;: ::) 0 ~ i <I'. .... ·= 0 f C. ' " APPEND1X4 ,S/NOl:l3H 3.1.NIOd dv'V'l AHd\fl:IOOdO.l Si:16-i:9L (90i:) OOVi:-VCUle 't/M '3lil't/3S i:OI-3.Llns 'Hll1os 3nN3A v 1Sl osos OTl NOl:l3H 3.1.NIOd S3::J1Nj3$ li'lN3~NOillJ\N] '::JNl)JNJnS ':lNINN'i" Id UN\I I '::!Nl!:1.:1.:INl::iN.:I 11/\IJ XV.:J l£L8-tSi'.(Sl1') U'9-<Sl(Slt) GrG'il6 'IM '1N3>1 H1nos JnN]AV ONZL SlZ8l :?:l,~1-0N:J ~/./!°') ,··(jj ,c'•. g le~ 0 \<4-}, ,s,1)111-1~~ ~ ~ "-=========================='3=1J.=l=l:::::::=================================H=0=~:::::==============:;:::;:========1~~ ,-w l I- ~ a: w 0.... ...J ...J LL 0 z <( w 0 <( a: CJ z 0~ a: :;: w uI I.,. ~1 z oz 0.... ~ <L o :E z ' \ ' ,, •I ' ' / '.l ' \·,': ~ ! ~ 0 . I.\ ~ 12 ~ F~ z·. a: ~ 0.... &l ~ LL 00u_ w 0 0 a::--- ' ' \ ' '\ ' 1· ', '\1 ' ' ' () \ '{':. / \'.£. \_ ,S/NOl:l3H 3.1.NIOd dv'V'l AHd\fl:IOOdO.l ,, / ' \ .. _.:::'.- -7 ', { '\:. NO.LN3:H dO ,\,.LIJ i oo ildd\l ]l\lG Ml ! 00 - 00 ' ' \ 0:: " u_ 0 Ot ~~ () ~ NOISl/\31, ~ w 0 ' \ a.. <( ~ >-~ ~; 8! a.. ~ I ! l I ' ~ ! ~; § I ~ .. ~ s~ I I ~ ·-I' ' I g: ! ! ' I • o, , S/NOl:13H 3lNIOd 91:~1:9L (901:) 00171:-t>Cl86 'IM '3lil '13S d\f~ .J..Hd\fl::IOOdO! 1:m 3llnS 'HlflOS 3nN3A 'I 1SI agog :Jll NOl:13H 3lNIOd I- ~ a: w a.. _J _J LL 0 z <( w 0 <( a: (j z 0 ~-a: W w· I..,. w a:~ !z 2; n. 0 ~ z w z ~ Cl) ~ £ 9 oi ffi LL -<{ 0 z 3: a: 8 :z a.. ~ ~ LL LL !l! 0 0 < 8 ,311u. I , ,, I I / ;\ // / --l __ J__ i ', ,' / ~1 X' I ' ' , I ,S/NOl::l3H 3lNIOd d\f~ .J..Hd\fl::IOOdO! ', NO.LN3H dO Al!J S3JIN/3S 1VlN3f1NO/:JIAff3 ':JNIJ..W,OS ':JNINN'tld ON\/"' ':JN1~I3Nl:lN3 11/1:J XV.:J l9L8-l£l(£ZV) ZU9-f£Z(£Z?) 2£096 VM '.1N3~ HlllOS 3rN3/\I/ ONll S l Z'iH ~ddV 3J.VO ' ,1.8 ooc:i,( "ON sor TJ s ~ Ii il• j; '· "" ""~ ~i t:!~ ~~ ,. all i;l NU "~ E".:i 'il ' ~i " ' ., !i ~~ s o,8!!! i 050 ~ ~ !it!i 8 L~---•••••••••••••••• NOISIJ\31:J ! N ' ,· 'i ,,; ~~ ~o ·~ !lli=! •" ;~ we ::.~! Q w'i: ""-ti;~p ~ i~~ ~o~l:i ~ ~i~ ~ lg i= ~ ~ a-!;ll)gi:w ~::;:; i~~a. "'ti!~ w2~-;~t; " ,w " : '' ~ " ffi e t; ~ , • • ~I i\ ' 8 ! s • ON APPEND1X5 - 0 er: 0 LL f- (l) _J I _J X LL Wo zz 0 <I: i= w oo w <I: (f) Ct'. ch C!) (f) z 00 Ct'. Ct'. ow st I ~w 0 f- "" z ('") -~o a3 a. :::l:::M"flEI .ESNns N'vld 083.1 ClN'f/ 'ONICM:IO l\lWNI 'ONll:l'f/3"lO 5~-i:9L (901:) 80l86 'f/M ':nll 'f/38 Hl/lOS 3nN3A 'fl HLOI 91:16 "ONI '·oo .lN3ndOT:lA3CI Ol'fl ~ .. ·-·" .:!:· -........ g. b ! " ~ JO~Jl.l!l.llP'f" '"3"d UDU.UQWW!fi flDll.if) . S>fKIM ;:1!1(lndf6u!Pl!na/ l.l!UUDtd ,><Y. '" n NOJ.N31:I ~ ,1.0 A.LI::> ,05-J ""''ii.":-'ol:."~~ S"3:Jll,;!f3S 1V!N3NMOl:IWO ~ns '::>NINtHld (]tlt'l 'DN1ijl3Nr;JN3 lw:> XVJ Z8t8-l'..l(Slt) ll'9-ISZ(Szt) lf086 Viii 'lNJ>t HlOOS 3nNJAV ONll StZ8! "' "' I ' ' l ' ' I ' ' \ I \ NO~ "ON Q<JI.I ~-!J J..il~l-~ ~ - 00 "' ,~~~f------------"""""""'=-·-·---'::,:::~•:=+--co-i ,_. ·--·----~·---··· 9111 IMID nllQiS <I10m'/~ CIDfl'.dX3 . ···---------------·------··---,------· ,,.,,,.,;-. .. -t-:::L~c~~ STORM~ U_N[S --+.,-, ~-00 _ _, "'1"1'~ ,.,_ ' 00 NO PER CITY Of"_~ COW~_ PER CITY Of RENTOH REVIEW REVISION 1" al•lalcl•lslc,, 11 '·l"l+i~l .. ,.:,m,,,, I olclolcJ ~ I ,. -, I , -! ;, I , ; , . . ' HPG /22/ HPG /11 '""' DG HPG _ 7/_7/oS ,,,,:,,·; 00 DATE I APPR ...... ,.•~ DO I i, I ·;· I _,,,,,,,- ' ,. . ' . ·,."-,:. ' I I J-1 et/·; '/' _./· ' /.' I /• :;{ ' :.-:: /' , ,j' !!' ~ !!' ~ !'. J I !,- iHi ~ i ~ ~ i e 11i i I I s ! I ! •18181818 !1~1~1~1 8 'l'::t~Tu ~ "1"1"1-~~~ss I ii i I ~~f § i1 1 ! l ~ 5J I, ~ fl!~! & 1~ ~ ~~ I ~ ~ ~ I~ F i !i ' I, I' a, i ~/ ~ ~ ~ () ~ :;! ~o 0,, ':n ,m ~~ [0 oz i " 'I ~Gti.11,<,,s, f~~--~ 0 :; •. ' .:;.,,., r «-~<1>· NG tNG-11",'<- 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 9B032 ( 425)251-6222 (425)251-8782 FAX CML DIGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 1'•50' ""-"~'~ ,,., '"'""'" ~" CITY OF RENTON 1-c'cc'·'..~ ~ Planning/Building/Public Work8 Dept. Gregg Zimmerman P.E., Administrator FOR / . r}i:;(; ~ .,,,/ ,& ... ':/. -~--'!><'"'\1;("., '¥11 -· i I "·' ,' ?X: /,: ... ,,.._,.. _:_-I : ; : ' ' . ', / 1' ")} .' I ( f f) I /,, ,"" I ,f, I 'I r, 'l . ;' i ."' '· ~l ! I '.'-.. . . •, /; " "' ,/ . '.\ .,., ,.;,, u / MERLINO LAND DEVELOPMENT CO., INC. 9125 10TH AVENUE SOVTH SEATTLE, WA 98108 (206) 762-9125 B.CE JOB NO. 7639.1 fl,, f'' CX,C-0, \ 7~ '9\•n~inaerr,.J\I~ 1~-qe:• ,j~~ Dnie/T1n,e 11/07/ )C·OC, I fi ,11 ',, nlo· 1-.'Ji cgc.h,;•t <rar, , 76(4 ' · 'fi_,~-o.J,,Jl,,,,e.,111 o• ",nl0""• CLEARING, INITIAL GRADING, AND TESC PLAN ,f,>i'-h", TITLE SUNSET BLUFF Gl (f) (f) ;o Cm :r> Z 0 0 (fJ -I zmo Cl -I z c:ri '1J r r ,co :,, 'Tl 0 z 'Tl :,, ~ -I eO "'-Z ,;; rn 0 :,, ~o 00 -m -I 0 -< -:i, z '1J ;o -u m ;o 0 Oo rii z 0 , ·r~-~~,·~~r .... ·-·1 :/' '/· ,o I " i'if; ',: I ~-: J_; ;i.i\ 'lff11 i··r :g ~ / ,i·1.l!.1? 8 . i1::1.1, ill,' ' ' AL:iJ .. '1/ 0 r m )> )> .,, ::D o-~z 0 C) z_ 0 "z ~- ,- I I I , '1J rn I 0 ::. -"' z- -I "' m '= I"'-mo ;o ;o oo z (f) Gl 'f' ;o [f) :,, m 0 0 m -I :,, 6 zz Om 'Tl >< ;= I r DJ -I 'Tl 0 ;o (J) -I i)> ill~ r ~ fR C) 0 () -n ;z :::j ,.J,J ~ ~ )> !£ _oS 0 z -I -~iZ 0 iii r"\ z ;1)"''' .,, tl )> _zz !o ... -I mm :. en tO "1J r )> z CLEARING, INmAL GRADING, AND TESC PLAN SUNSET BLUFF 11/87/2885 Ii Ii ' /., \ 0 0 ,S/N01:13H 3lNIOd JJ81HX3 M31A N'</ld NOL103S SSOl::10 -Z: 38'</Hd /,: I I I .L_ ' I .1 ' ' l ' ' I ' I ' •g -·~· " ,, r · .\. \ I I· t> ' I / ' ., /' 11 I ' ., \/, - \ \ , \ ~ I '. '3Llll SZ:!6-Z:9L (90Z:) OOVZ:-WUIB VM '3"1.ll'</38 z:m 3.lJnS 'Hll10S 3nN3A V lSI osos 011 N01:13H 3lNIOd ~ \ c ; 00 ~2 f< ~~ 00 ~ •• ~~ ~ em e I .. I / / ', ;" I IJO=i \ -\ ~ ;T::;;~cc"'' : /,,_; //:,,.-- 2 I ,__ I l ;~ 'l.· ·, '1 1·,'1.,1,ii, ,S/NOl:l3H 3lNIOd JJ81HX3 M31A N'</ld NOL103S SSOl:IO -Z: 38'</Hd I ' 'I S~JOM 011qnd /0 )Ui:IUJJJOdaa NO.LN,UI ~ ,IO ,1..L!J .-:.--;\: .. --- . 1.,1 I\ ~ '"' ,-~- S.c!Ji/\;<HS lV1N3VjNQ<JII\N3 ·~NI/.JNJns ''.lNINN\fld ON'f" ''.lNli:1.J.JNl'.JN.J IIJ\IJ X\fj ZSLS-l £l(£lt) lU9-\£l(£lV) zrnes VM '1NJ>1 HlnOS lrlNlM ONlL £!Z:8l 00 ,, . .,_,, i:ldd" 31110 Af] 00 go 00 ~~1!)N.:I !;)lit -.,"> <) ~· t 0 . ';j, <.l V '. / <• \ . ,4((/ iSl/)""t40'I) m • " 0 ~ ZQ OJ ~~ we a:. LL 0 0~ i'= w 0~ \ " < C w 0 ' ' NOISIA3i:I ON sor ·::i-os I ~ <Dj ~ i l g~ z 8 2 I ffi ~ Iii ie ' I~~~ ~ l al !I! ;, ~ '>~ ! ~ ~~~ i :s1 ~ 81 a. I 111 i f--+--+-t-++-l! • I 'ON I i I g_ ~ ~ ! iL ,S/NOl:l3H 3lNIOd ll81HX3 M31A NVld NOll038 8801::10 -C: 3SVHd "' ' I I 11 ,S/NOl:l3H 3lNIOd ll81HX3 M31A NVld NOll038 8801::10 -C: 3SVHd ~ Si::16-C:9L (90C:) OOVC:-1'£186 VM '3lil V3S C:OI 3llns 'HlJlOS 3nN3A V lSl osos 011 NOl:l3H 3lNIOd 1i.1i § / I NOJ,N3l:I 110 ALIJ I? !, C i 8 ' _,"-~ g ~ ~.a-o, / / > ffi ~i ,_><1::-i1~~8 ~lf:! oo>-:i~o ~~ete~-\ DZ / / / / / / IJO:I / / S3::JIN:j]S li'lN~~NOMI/IIH ''.)NIA]illJnS '~NINNVlci aN'fl ''.)NI/JJJNl'.)N] 11/\IJ XV.:l l2L8-p;;z(c;zt) UZ9-lSl(Slt) ff086 1/M '1N3>1 HlnOS 3nN3A~ O'IZL c;izet <:ldd'r , ]l'q"O ~ ' -j ---l- ~~ "w c~ i§ !2,l I I \ ' ' I L __ _ ' I I I I, I I NOISI/\J~ ·oN sor 3::rn j " " j l ' ' ! • I • • 8 8 " ~ ON OATIJM ::, '®"' " ~R ~k"Jrg~ PHASE 2 -CROSS SECTIONS OD -Deportment al Public Works NO. I REVISION 8Y DATE I APPR DD _ POINTE HERON/S 3 § o g a @ ~ s I o g g ~ ~ s I PROPERTY lit.IE ! I PROPE~'(Y UN( .. ,, \. ,,, ,.,, I ·ee "' "'' ~~ I ~-' , n I• 59.52 ' t:~ •, s I ::,: • s .,,, "' \ "' ofil m . ao.aJ ~ () 17.64-0 ·-. -, ::I ::I ., 87.89 ~ 0 B5.J5 0 I~ CJ:. 0 z z \' !,i ~ 95.C-2 9J.07 (_ J ~ I':' 7;' ··a· I / ~ 102 21 ;, ]':; 100.77 (.. ~ I , ~ ~ 1C9.44 <-8 108 45 ~14.26 I ,,i.oi 114,9'() 11202 ~ . ' -,,5.25 ; 1,2.,9 ; 115.60 ~ 11244 ] i I ,\'5-.2-6 -~ 1-1-2'.:~ 114.9B 1f2.s2u i '~~ D; !I O I cc ' '!" ! "l "'" i! I lj ::;'.: I 1, "! ,,s.,9 u i 8 11_2.~ i ~; 11567 1~ ~ llJ.33 ~ ti I :, t , --8 1\5.95 ,:I ~ . !!:"'" J::f 8 114.Q2 ! .! " • ,u ;, ~ 116,02 ii8, :...p! 114.lS 116.43 !iB . 114_53 116.83 i~ . 1; '"" ll ~, ""' ,--) ,,;.:, \ ,; i) l\7.62 I ,,5".' 118.17 12200 -u •= ,.~ ' ~ ms. ""' \··. en onro WM m ~ ~Rj!f~~8-~_E ~ · ~~PL~7-~E _ 6: ~ ,,:; ( t\) ;~ij~I~ ii O s e e 8 ~ ~ 0 g e ~ ~ s 0 i~a § 0 g e I! 8 8 i O g g l!i 8 ~ ::]J ~ ~ ~ ' . f PROPEF/Tv UNE PROPERT'f UtlE 0 !~~~ ::: ir s,, "'' ~: i! ~ s,, ,.,, ~ ~~pi!' '"" I {'<1,~ "" en j~~~ 8 "" I *? 8 "·" 0 "' )~<J, m ~gf ~ "" ~ I ''." ~ ~ \;~ , ~ ~~Ir :::: 0000 L ' : :::: ~ ~ i O ; Q I~ "." ~~,:; . I M)j -. -~ r1-' . z :,. ')' ao0j / N q ', ~ 8 71.20 gi§! . / 8 944J ~ 00 "f' .... ~..,,., ~ 81.15 ~F'i; 102.13 i'il "'"'"""~ ~~ ~ "·" n;o J!f . '"'"' lio ·. \ I ii :!I •oom ~"l !I II m.oo !~\. • o ,1 I I I I i I :,::: i: · ... \ _ _____J ~ ,'::: ~ i •... ii ---. -. ' . I 101.\"19----1 ~ 115.93-I II 1111 1 "'1 "1 "1· "1·· 1 1 rll ::::: ii j i : :::~: ii i I I 1 ~ ~ 111.44 ji ~ i\435 ]~ ; . I I &~ -I t:11193 ~1 1 f· t:11402 i;!], ,"'i:i s. ~ 1 s. I 112.44 I 114.01 . ' 115.34 i15.HO- rrt-m I I I I 111 ,,;;, § f{l :;;,. ~~~~ ~g 'C_ I I j. j I\UJ(} ~ Q 116.90 i 11400 ct: Z -( i 11751 ! I I I I 11 I 11 """' ;-i !! ""' 0 •• 127itf-. i;; T27.9:5- lli 11111 ""' -~ ' '"" l o o lo 1 ~ Oil 142.74 : , \· f 1':t.~'9 I \ PROPJm LINE o [:l c lii ):, 8 150.20 I ·. 8 S-fA $+%.65 - I m ~ () PROPERP. LINE i, . f I\) ~ -STA. 6+·17.1'1 ' m ::;! ~ ~ 0 I I I f ---! 11;, ~ iii ~' ~ ! ~ 0 g e ~ 8 ~ g ~-~o-~g~-e I! 8 ~ ~oi!l ~m· I -• I ~ ~ :::j l===t-l=A=::::::========:::;::;F:;:0:;:R I TITLE, • i O ~ q..G (/~ 1B215 72ND AVLNUE SOUTH ID ! ~ ~ t:IV-j~\ KENT, WA 98032 POINTE HERON LLC PHASE 2 -CROSS SECTIONS 1;; I ! o ,. ( ,, _ (425)251-s222 5050 1ST AVENUE SOUTH, SUITE 102 ' ~ i' ~ " (425)251-8782 FAX SEATILE WA 98134-2400 , I , . ~~~ ~ . ! "'''(i-(:,":-<,-CIVll l:NGINFFRING, "ANO PLANNING. (206) 762-9125 jO> 'Ir,;; rnaitlot. SURVEYING. ENVIRONMENTAL SER\/ICE"S POINTE HERON/S3 8.C.E. JQB NO. 14200 f,l•:~·\140~0;\i420:\p 0 e1;,,-;sccy\lt2C·O eqdd~c, flale/T,mO"B/"l/2fJ'4 11·33 A~ Sco'c'" -·· fSING nCN x,e'· ---- 00 i ~ ~ CITY OF = RENTON I PHASE 2 -CROSS SECTIONS 1-•• 00 Deportment of Public Works POINTE HERON/S' NO. REVISION "' DAT[ ,\,PPR I ,n,o;;::::-00 ~ 0 ----, !! g I§ ~ s ~ 0 l!l g !!i ~ s ~ 0 l!l g !!i ~ ~ I r·- PROP~RTY U"1E PROP[~ UN[ PR0PE<m LINE SlA. 0+75 STA. +25 ,/}' STA. 0+25 ii) I 4!'{14 44.10 44.55 " " '" ~~ 40.08 ., ' J8.02 ,, i 52.51 ", .,.~1, i~~~~ ,;;, 8 ~ 60'5 .lS.50 "'•~ 34.00 ~I ~ )•1'J 'f(J::. ~ , '1 67.76 JS.04 JHJ!J f"f a D ~ I ,% ' 69.52 37.94 ~ I 34.00 ' 79.25 4o.M ' 40152 go l z B4.s.'l -44. 12 "" 44.54 ~g~ ~£ , oi; ., :::1iJ"l -66 06 -57 67 B?; 62.95 :cc:i ~I ~ ·,, d~ ~ ~: r, !;;l~i 93.45 67.72 .. 72.92 sa~ 11 "o i~· zZ 95.24 nss '° 620!:i ~~~ § ' •"" 96.02 Hj 67.40 111 i ~-85 ~~ 11! ~ Jj •z I' 11 ! ~:::i !j %113 94.20 97.B2 ii" I ' %.84 ' 1! 98.0S :i "-J ::!!c" ~ 94.84 ii •• 11 i § i !1 •§ • 97.80 95.49 99.22 ,-I ,___'.3 i 95 41 97.9.l !OI54 !j ' ' !j ' I '! 0 ' ""U 99.50 I 104.19 I 108.02 I I la i I, :i I, I 106A2 u ; 104.45 II 107.99 !I :i ~ ~ i )> 101. 14 r • :i 104.64 r 9 !08.02 :i~ !I :· 6 -j 1 f L' -i 1 ! ' •• 1 00 ! • 101.94 104.90 109.04 m --_,, i I ! I I 102.JB 106 15 I 10.04 ~~ I ' 110.4!! ' I\) 103.05 ~ co "" 107. 14 [ll "' ~ co " co ~ 10J.81 10148 m 0 I 1099 g g ::I g 105.61 0 107.76 .. 111.49 I 0 ~I I'~,: z ~ "· 0 ~~ ~ 0 " ,, " z •• z !1'1 . 112.59 107.99 co 11.3.42 •• :0 ,, ' • 0 z •• 120 ~2 ,, 117.52 I 122.59 ' 0 0 z I 129.15 127.49 Ul.77 en 1J7.69 157.66 -Tto 94 en ' 146.05 147.82 ~· 150.19 I 00 i I ··,·c !l ~ ~ I 8 ,· 157.99 159 45 m ·5:,' 16B.16 168 71 0 ~~p~':1Ie.~l~E 178.08 ~ROPERTY LINE i 177."4 ''°'"N ""' I STA. 6+47.55 fu. 6+nB7 -I 0 ~ 0 !! g !!i ~ s ~ 0 !! g !!i ~ ~ ~ 0 !! g I§ ~ ~~ , I I I I I :a 2l ~~115 !r· ~ ~ " " I ~ pjcJ ""O 0 ~~ 11 I I I I 11 I I I ~I~ !;II -l * , I I I I I 11 I I I 111 iili • s s s lo" lo" • • ~gm ! I I I I I 11 I I I 11 !~I I Ii 1111 I ~ 0 ~!; ~ m 1 > '~ ill m ~O .I "' [ - ~I ~ ~ ~ ' m:;! ~ ~o . ~ ~ ffi ~ ~ g' ~ ~ ,m ~ CZ '" f ~o ~oHA.c,,s, FOH I ! ~ " , 0 Z 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH POINTE HERON LLC ' ~ ~~e;,: KENT, WA 98032 l&°i I~ ' ! 0 (425)251-6222 5050 1ST AVENUE SOUTH, SUITE 102 ~ (425)251-8782 FAX SEATILE, WA 98134-2400 ' ,· ! 00 ~ -., i O> Ii I "~ ~ .;-: CIVIi FNG NEERl"IG. LAND !'LANNING. (206) 762-9125 ,,.,~G: ENGl'll~~<I< SURVEYING, ENVIRONl,ffNTAI SFRVICES TITLE, PHASE 2 -CROSS SECTIONS POINTE HERON/S' B,CE JOB NO. 14200 r;1e.F:\1400.Js\14?DJ\prel,rr,r,ory\'42L'U-egdd~<; Oole/Tmo.g/13/2314 11 ].\ A~ <:cole·l LSING.STON X,cf APPEND1X6 PREPARED FOR Pointe Heron LLC Kyle R. Campbell, P.E. Principal GEOTECHNICAL AND SOIL ENGINEERING REPORT IN SUPPORT OF PROPOSED FILL, EXCAVATION, AND GRADE POINTE HERON LLC PARCEL RENTON, WASHINGTON ES-2334.01 Earth Solutions NW, LLC 1805 -136th Place Northeast, Suite 201 Bellevue, Washington 98005 Phone: 425-449-4704 Fax: 425-449-4711 Toll Free: 866-336-8710 ' Pointe Heron LLC August 13, 2014 ES-2334 01 Page 5 An existing stormwater detention pond constructed for the previously planned Sunset Bluff residential subdivision development is located along and just to the north of the site's south- central property boundary. That pond, which was completed around 2006, is currently about 50 vertical feet lower than the portion of the site located immediately to the north of that pond. Some pockets of very small trees and brush vegetation are located within portions of the proposed work area. We understand that no trees within the work area have a caliper of two inches or greater at breast height Subsurface ESNW reviewed the subsurface information provided in the above-referenced reports prepared by ECI dated January 9, 2004 and April 19, 2004, That subsurface information was used in preparation of ECl's geotechnical engineering study report E-10927, a report that was prepared in 2005 in support of the then-proposed Sunset Bluff residential subdivision. Copies of the boring and test pit logs prepared as part of that study that relate to the currently planned grade and fill project site are provided in Appendix A to this report. The subsurface information contained in geotechnical engineering study E-10927 and subsequent geotechnical design recommendations reflect conditions at the time of exploration (i.e., November 2003 and March 2004). The approximate limits of the proposed filling, excavation, and grading project site area are illustrated on the Boring and Test Pit Location Plan (Plate 2). Please refer to the boring and test pit logs provided in Appendix A of this report for a more detailed description of subsurface conditions. While the surface elevations noted on the boring and test pits may not correspond to the project site's current topography, the subsurface information set forth therein is still relevant in relation to the current evaluation. Previously Placed Fill Structural fill placed as part of the Sunset Bluff project's filling and grading is present within the currently proposed filling, excavation, and grading project site. For a graphic comparison of (1) the Sunset Bluff project's design grades contemplated by the Clearing, Initial Grading, and TESC Plans for Sunset Bluff that the City approved on October 4, 2005, (2) approximate existing ground elevations, and (3) the currently proposed design grades within the filling, excavation, and grading project site, see attached APPENDIX B, which is a six-sheet reduced- size (11" by 17") set of exhibit drawings (Sheets X1 through X6) prepared by Barghausen. Sheets X1 and X2 depict in plan view the locations of cross-sections J-J, K-K, LL, M-M, N-N, 0- 0, and P-P that Barghausen added to certain of the Clearing, Initial Grading, and TESC Plan sheets for Sunset Bluff that the City approved on October 4, 2005. Sheets X3 and X4 depict in plan view the same locations of those cross-sections as set forth on Sheets E5 and E6 of the set of Grading, Interim Drainage, ES.C., and Rehabilitation Plans dated August 2014 prepared by Barghausen for the subject Pointe Heron fill, excavation, and grade project Sheets X5 and X6 depict cross-sectional plots of (a) the Sunset Bluff project's design grades, (b) approximate existing ground elevations, and (c) the currently proposed design grades at each of cross- sections J-J, K-K, LL, M-M, N-N, 0-0, and P-P. Earth Solutions NW, LLC Pointe Heron LLC August 13, 2014 ES-2334 01 Page 6 Along (1) the existing stormwater pond's north side, (2) roughly the north half of the pond's east side, and (3) the pond's west side, a mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) ecology block wall up to about 16 feet in height with a top elevation ranging from approximately 50 feet to 65 feet is present. This wall is planned to be left in place and, as Cross Sections E-E and F-F on Sheet E7 of the Barghausen Grading Plans illustrate, will lie well beneath (roughly 60 feet beneath) the top of the planned fill. An existing structural fill slope inclined at about 2H:1V (a) is located upgradient from (immediately north of) the north segment of the ecology block wall and (b) extends upward to elevations ranging from about 80 to 105 feet, where the slope reaches an existing interim, intermediate plateau area ("Existing Interim, Intermediate Plateau Area 1"), a plateau area with a width ranging from about 30 feet to 100 feet. [See APPENDIX C, a reduced-size (11" by 17") two-sheet Topography Map exhibit of the project site prepared by Barghausen dated August 2014.] That intermediate plateau area extends to the north from the top of that existing structural fill slope to an interim structural fill slope ("Existing Interim Fill Slope 1 "), a fill slope bisected at an angle by an access road that is labeled "Access Road 1 to Temporary Sediment Pond Lying East of Sunset Bluff Stormwater Detention Pond" on Topography Map sheets 1 and 2. That access road extends farther up to the north to a more gently-sloping existing upper plateau area ("Existing Upper Plateau Area 1," which is labeled on Topography Map sheets 1 and 2). That plateau area ranges in elevation from (i) about 115 to 124 feet on the plateau's south edge to (ii) roughly 128 to 130 feet along the north edge of the project's work area limits. Existing Interim, Intermediate Plateau Area 1, Existing Interim Fill Slope 1, and Existing Upper Plateau Area 1 were all filled and graded as part of Sunset Bluff project site filling and grading. An approximately 2H:1V engineered fill slope is also present along the east side of the existing Sunset Bluff stormwater pond. South of the east leg of the MSE ecology block wall, the height of that fill slope is about 24 feet. At the top of that fill slope is an existing, interim intermediate plateau area ("Existing Interim, Intermediate Plateau Area 2") that has a width of about 70 feet and that extends generally to the east to an existing interim fill slope ("Existing Interim Fill Slope 2"), a fill slope that extends both to the east-southeast and to the north. A temporary sediment pond lies within the southerly portion of Existing Interim, Intermediate Plateau Area 2. (See Topography Map sheet 2.) The north end of Existing Interim, lntenmediate Plateau Area 2 (a) wraps to the northwest around the northeast corner of the intersection of the stormwater pond's north and east slopes that extend above the north and east legs of the MSE ecology block wall and (b) connects to Existing Interim, Intermediate Plateau Area 1. Existing Interim Fill Slope 2's east-southeast leg extends up to a relatively gently-sloping upper plateau area ("Existing Upper Plateau Area 2"), a plateau area that ranges in elevation from (i) about 11 O to 116 feet on the plateau's south and southwest edges to (ii) roughly 126 to 137 feet along the north edge of the project site. The northwesterly end of Existing Upper Plateau Area 2 connects to the northeasterly end of Existing Upper Plateau Area 1. (Again, see Topography Map sheet 2.) Existing Interim, Intermediate Plateau Area 2, Existing Interim Fill Slope 2, and Existing Upper Plateau Area 2 were all filled and graded as part of the Sunset Bluff project site filling and grading. Earth Solutions NW, LLC Pointe Heron LLC August 13, 2014 ES-2334.01 Page 7 In addition, an existing engineered fill slope is also present on the west side of the existing stormwater pond, to the west of the west leg of the existing MSE ecology block wall. That fill slope, which has an inclination of approximately 2H:1V, extends from the top of the existing MSE ecology block wall up to top-of-slope elevations ranging from about 104 feet to 112 feet The top of that slope connects with the westerly ex1ension of Existing Interim, Intermediate Plateau Area 1, which is coincident with an access road that is labeled "Access Road 2 to Temporary Sediment Pond Lying East of Sunset Bluff Stormwater Detention Pond" on Topography Map sheet 1. Further, existing engineered fill slopes with an inclination of approximately 1.5H: 1V are located along the south edge of the Pointe Heron LLC parcel, both (a) to the west of the existing stormwater pond (south of the existing stormwater detention pond maintenance road) and (b) to the east of the east end of the pond. (Again, see Topography Map sheets 1 and 2.) Native Soil Native soil within the project site (work area limits) generally ranges from outwash sand and gravel to glacial drift including silt, sand, and gravel. However, because there have been significant modifications to the original site grades, very little, if any, native soil is expected to be exposed during grading activities associated with the proposal. Groundwater Conditions Groundwater seepage zones are present in or near and under the project site, and subsurface drain systems have already been installed to control the flow of these sources. In view of the varied nature of the existing fill on the site and previous engineered modifications to portions of the site topography, minor perched groundwater may be encountered during the wetter winter months, but no groundwater table will not be exposed or interrupted. Because the proposal involves raising site grades using engineered structural fill, any seepage would likely be very limited in flow volume and would also likely attenuate relatively quickly. Existing Wells in the Vicinity Based on a review of readily available information maintained on the Washington Department of Ecology's online well database, no wells are present on the project site or within 1,000 feet of the project site. Earth Solutions NW. LLC APPEND1X7 PROJECT NARRATIVE Justification for the Proposed "Point Heron Filling, EKcavation, and Grading Project" Project Name: Pointe Heron Filling, Excavation, and Grading Project Size and Location of site: The approximately 14.12-acre filling, excavation, and grading project site is part of the approximately 26.26-acre parcel of land on which the previously proposed Sunset Bluff residential subdivision development was approved. That parcel of land is located at 1101 SW Sunset Boulevard Renton WA, 98057, between SW Sunset Boulevard to the north and the BNSF Railroad right-of-way to the south, and between the forested westerly end of the existing Sunpointe Townhomes Condominium development property to the east and the Sunset View Apartments and the Black River Quarry parcels to the west. Assessor's Parcel Number: The Pointe Heron LLC parcel on which the subject project site is located has been assigned King County Assessor's Parcel Number 132304-9010. Legal Description of the Parcel: The legal description of the Pointe Heron LLC parcel on which the subject project site is located is as follows: Lot 1 of the SR 900 L.L.C. Lot Line Adjustment (City of Renton File No. LUA-03- 124-LLA) as recorded in Volume 168 of Surveys, pages 233 through 235, under Recording No. 20040311900015, records of King County, Washington. Land use permits required for proposed project: A Special Grade and Fill permit pursuant to Renton Municipal Code Section 4-9-080 is required for the proposed project. Zoning designation of the site and adjacent properties: The entire parcel on which the subject project site is located is zoned Light Industrial Light (IL). Project Narrative Pointe Heron LLC Properties adjacent to the east, west, north, and south of the parcel are currently zoned as follows: To the east: To the west: To the north To the south: August 18, 2014 Residential Multi-Family (RM-F) zoning exists on the Sunpointe Townhomes property. light Industrial {IL) zoning exists on an approximately 0.9-acre vacant east portion of the Sunset View Apartments property. To the west of that portion of the Sunset View Apartments property, the Sunset View Apartments property is zoned Residential Multi-Family (RM-F). light Industrial (IL) zoning exists on the east portion of the Black River Quarry property. A narrow tract of land lying between (1) the north edge of the portion of the parcel on which the subject project site is located and (2) the south edge of SW Sunset Boulevard is zoned light Industrial (IL). Single- family residential neighborhoods lie to the north of SW Sunset Boulevard north of the subject parcel (some on lands within unincorporated King County zoned R-8 by King County and some on lands within the City of Renton zoned R-8 by Renton). Along and to the south of approximately the west 600 feet of the subject parcel, both (1) the abutting 100- foot-wide Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railroad right-of-way and (2) the portion of the open space area owned by the City of Renton to the south of that right- of-way are zoned Resource Conservation (RC). Along and to the south of approximately the east 900 feet of the west 1,500 feet of the subject parcel, both (1) the abutting 100-foot-wide Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railroad right-of-way and (2) the portion of the open space area owned by the City of Renton to the south of that right-of-way are zoned Commercial Office (CO). 2 Project Narrative Pointe Heron LLC Current use of the site and any existing improvements: The overall parcel encompassing the project site is currently vacant. The project site portion and some of the rest of the overall Pointe Heron LLC parcel were graded as part of site development work for the previously planned Sunset Bluff Residential existing topography across the site is variable, largely the result of commercial aggregate mining and import grading operations. A storm water detention/water quality pond constructed as part of the Sunset Bluff project is located along a central portion of the south edge of the parcel within the currently proposed project site. Special site features {i.e., wetlands, water bodies. steep slopes): Wetlands and an Unnamed Intermittent Stream No wetlands or streams exist within the project site. However, a portion of each of two wetlands and an intermittent stream-water bodies referred to in the subject Special Grade and Fill Permit application materials as "Wetland A," "Wetland," and an "unnamed (Class 4) stream"-lie within the parcel on which the project site is located. See the accompanying (color) Wetlands and Stream Map for a depiction of their locations and respective buffers and a brief summary statement concerning each of them. Raedeke Associates, lnc.'s August 13, 2014 QIP/Virtu/Sunset Bluff (MLDC) Properties Wetland & Stream Delineation Update 2014 1 technical memorandum in support of the provides both (1) an assessment of the wetlands and a study of the unnamed stream in relation to the proposed filling, excavation, and grading project and (2) copies of prior studies of both of the two wetlands and the stream. 1 Because, during 2009, (a) Raedeke had previously jointly studied (i) what is now the Pointe Heron LLC parcel while it was owned by Merlino Land Development Co. (aka "MLDC"), (b) the easterly three lots of the Black River Quarry Property to the west of the subject Pointe Heron LLC parcel while those three lots were then owned by Quarry Industrial Park L.L.C. (aka "QIP"), and (c) an approximately 0.9-acre vacant southeasterly triangular portion of the abutting Sunset View Apartments property while that property was then still owned by AG/Virtu Sunset View, L.L.C. (aka "Virtu"), Raedeke's prior (2009) wetlands report referred to what is now the Pointe Heron LLC parcel as the "MLDC property," what is now the east part of the quarry property as the "QIP property," and the 0.9-acre vacant southeasterly triangular portion of the abutting Sunset View Apartments property as the "Virtu property" for continuity with Raedeke's 2009 report. 3 August 18, 2014 Project Narrative Pointe Heron LLC Wetland A is an approximately 408-square-foot Category 3 wetland with a 25-foot-wide buffer. Approximately 258 square feet of Wetland A lie within the subject parcel and the balance of the wetland (approximately 150 square feet) lie within the abutting BNSF Railroad right-of-way. Wetland Bis as an approximately 2-acre existing wetland that: (a) Is located in a depression that has neither a piped outlet nor a surface water outlet; (b) Straddles the south boundary of the eastern portion of the Pointe Heron LLC parcel with (i) only about 6,078 square feet of Wetland B lying within the parcel and (ii) the balance (most of it) located offsite on the parcel of land to the southeast of the Pointe Heron LLC parcel and east of the BNSF Railroad right-of-way; and (c) Is either (i) a Category 3 wetland {with a 25-foot-wide buffer) under Renton's critical area regulations if the wetland is not hydraulically connected to the existing wetlands in the Black River Riparian Forest to the southwest of Wetland B across the BNSF Railroad right-of-way or (ii) a Category II wetland (with a 150-foot-wide buffer) under Renton's shoreline master program critical area regulations if the wetland is hydraulically connected to the existing wetlands in the Black River Riparian Forest to the southwest of Wetland B across the BNSF Railroad right-of-way and under Renton's shoreline jurisdiction. Because all of the proposed work associated with the subject project lies at least 193 feet from Wetland B (well outside even a 150-foot-wide buffer), there is no need to definitively ascertain whether or not Wetland Bis hydraulically connected to the existing wetlands in the Black River Riparian Forest. The unnamed stream flows from north to south across the eastern part of the site into Wetland B. The stream channel is incised to a depth of 3 to 5 feet. The channel drops 64 feet in elevation from a culvert up the slope within the Pointe Herron LLC parcel south of SW Sunset Boulevard down to the north edge of Wetland B, resulting in an average slope of greater than 20% for 315 lineal feet of stream channel. On page 13 of Raedeke's Wetland & Stream Delineation Update 2014 technical memorandum, Raedeke explains that (1) This stream is a non-salmonid-bearing stream that is (a) intermittent during normal years of rainfall, (b) not mapped on RMC 4-3-0SOQ, Figure 4 August 18, 2014 Project Narrative Pointe Heron LLC Q4, Renton Water Class Map as Class 2 or Class 3, and (c) is not classified by the City of Renton or the State of Washington as a "Shoreline of the State"; (2) This stream is a Class 4 water under RMC 4-3-0SOLla(iv); and (3) Under RMC 4-3-050L5a(i)(c) a 35-foot-wide code-specified buffer exists on both sides of the stream [except where a segment of the stream passes through a protected slope area as depicted on Sheets El, E3, and E6 of the Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. Grading, Interim Drainage, E.S. C, and Rehabilitation Plans for the subject project (because of RMC 4-3-050L5b(ii), the code-specified stream buffer along that segment of the stream extends to the protected slope's boundary)]. Steep Slopes Renton Municipal Code Section 4-3-050Jla(ii) classifies steep slopes as either sensitive or protected. More particularly, RMC 4-11-190 defines steep slopes (and the protected slope and sensitive slope subclassifications) as follows: SLOPE, STEEP: A hillside, or portion thereof, which falls into one of two (2) classes of slope, sensitive or protected. A. Slope, Protected: A hillside, or portion thereof, with an average slope, as identified in the City of Renton Steep Slape Atlas or in a method approved by the City, of forty percent (40%) or greater grade and having a minimum vertical rise of fifteen feet (15'). B. Slope, Sensitive: A hillside, or portion thereof, characterized by: (1) an average slope, as identified in the City of Renton Steep Slope Atlas or in a method approved by the City, of twenty five percent (25%) to less than forty percent (40%); or (2) an average slope, as identified in the City of Renton Steep Slope Atlas or in a method approved by the City, of forty percent (40%) or greater with a vertical rise of less than fifteen feet (15'), abutting an average slope, as identified in the City of Renton Steep Slope Atlas or in a method approved by the City, of twenty five percent (25%) to forty percent (40%). This definition excludes engineered retaining walls. 5 August 18, 2014 Project Narrative Pointe Heron LLC (Italics added.) In regard to the location of steep slopes on a site, subsection i (Steep Slope Delineation Procedure) of RMC 4-3-050Jla (Steep Slopes) states: i. Steep Slope Delineation Procedure: The boundaries af a regulated steep sensitive or protected slape are determined ta be in the location identified on the City of Renton's Steep Slope Atlas. An applicant's qualified professional may substitute boundaries independently derived from survey data for the City's consideration in determining the boundaries of sensitive or protected steep slopes. All topographic maps shall utilize two foot (2') contour intervals or the standard utilized in the City of Renton Steep Slope Atlas. (Underlining and italics added.) The City of Renton has delineated areas of steep slopes {both sensitive and protected slopes) on the City's Steep Slope Hazard Atlas. Those delineated steep slope areas (along with areas of slopes that are greater than 15 percent and less than or equal to 25 percent) are depicted on the City's regulated slopes overlay that is part of the City's GIS system that is publicly accessible through the City of Renton website. Accompanying this application is an 11" by 17" color map exhibit generated from the City's GIS system for the Pointe Heron LLC parcel with the regulated slopes overlay turned on (the "Regulated Slopes Map"). On that map both (1) the Pointe Heron LLC parcel boundaries have been outlined with a thick black line and (2) the limits of the project site for the proposed fill, excavation, and grading project have been outlined with a thick dashed line. That map makes clear that no protected slopes lie within the project site, although the map depicts four areas of protected slopes within the portion of the subject parcel to the east of the project site. Sheet El (the Cover Sheet) of the Grading, Interim Drainage, E.S.C, and Rehabilitation Plans for the subject project depicts those four areas of protected slopes and their approximate respective square footages: namely, from west to east, Protected Slope Area 1 (which encompasses approximately 5,299 square feet), Protected Slope Area 2 (which encompasses approximately 68,936 square feet), Protected Slope Area 3 (which encompasses approximately 2,241 square feet). and Protected Slope Area 4 (which encompasses approximately 1,532 square feet). Sheet El depicts the minimum distance (110 feet) between the westerlymost protected slope area (Protected Slope Area 1) and the nearest (eastern) edge of the project site. The Regulated Slopes Map indicates 15% to 25% slopes across nearly all of the proposed project site area and also indicates some small areas of sensitive steep slopes in the proposed project site, primarily in the western half of the project site. The map depicts in white the remaining, scattered small portions of the project site, with the white portions intended to indicate areas of 15 percent or lesser slopes. 6 August 18, 2014 Project Narrative Pointe Heron LLC Black River Riparian Forest to the South of the Project Site Although not part of the project site or the parcel that the project site lies within, the Black River Riparian Forest (BRRF), which lies to the south of the 100-foot wide BNSR Railroad right- of-way that abuts a portion of the project site's south edge, is a known critical habitat area. In the 2014 Great Blue Heron & Wildlife Habitat Update prepared by Raedeke Associates, Inc. in relation to the QIP/Sunset Bluff (MLDC) Properties (including the subject Pointe Heron LLC parcel 2 ) in relation to the proposed Point Heron Filling Excavation, and Grading Project and dated August 13, 2014, Raedeke provides the following summary of impacts on Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat at the bottom of page 10: Summary of Impacts on Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat As noted above, the proposed fill, excavation, and grading project would be located entirely within a portion of the Pointe Heron LLC parcel (MLDC Property) that is highly disturbed and consists largely of bare ground, and is outside the forested habitat of the BRRF. Consequently, we anticipate no adverse impacts to the forested habitat of the BRRF. In addition, the project would have no adverse impacts on the former heron colony within the BRRF or either of the known eagle nest sites in the vicinity (one of which was in the BRRF), as these sites have not been occupied for several years and no longer appear to be active. Even if the heron colony and nearest eagle nest sites were active, the proposed grade and fill project site lies well outside of standard setbacks recommended by WDFW to protect heron colonies and the USFWS to protect eagle nest sites. The proposed grading would eliminate a small area of shrubs and sapling trees and would remove an existing stormwater pond, which would result in only minimal impacts to existing wildlife habitat on site. In summary, the proposed fill, excavation, and grading project would not result in probable significant adverse impacts to wildlife or wildlife habitat. 2 Because (a) Raedeke had previously studied what is now the Pointe Heron LLC parcel while it was owned by Merlino Land Development Co. and (b) Raedeke's prior (2009) reports referred to what is now the Pointe Heron LLC parcel as the "MLDC Property," for continuity with Raedeke's 2009 reports, in the 2014 Great Blue Heron & Wildlife Habitat Update Raedeke sometimes refers to the Pointe Heron LLC parcel as the MLDC Property. 7 August 18, 2014 Project Narrative Pointe Heron LLC Statement addressing soil type and drainage conditions: Soil Types Native soil within the project site generally ranged from outwash sand and gravel to glacial drift including silt, sand and gravel. However, because there have been significant modifications to the original site grades as part of site filling and grading for the previously planned Sunset Bluff residential subdivision development project, very little, if any, native soil is expected to be exposed during grading activities associated with the proposal. Structural fill placed as part of the Sunset Bluff project's filling and grading is present within the currently proposed filling, excavation, and grading project site. For a graphical comparison of (1) the Sunset Bluff project's design grades contemplated by the Clearing, Initial Grading, and TESC Plans for Sunset Bluff that the City approved on October 4, 2005, (2) approximate existing ground elevations, and (3) the currently proposed design grades within the filling, excavation, and grading project site, see the accompanying 8/13/2014 six-sheet reduced-size (11" by 17") set of Cross-Section Exhibit drawings (Sheets Xl through X6) prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. Surface drainage conditions Surface water runoff from the project site current drains into the existing storm water detention and water quality pond constructed in conjunction with site grading work performed for the previously planned Sunset Bluff residential development project. The existing pond's flow control manhole drains into a storm drain pipe that connects into an existing storm manhole at the Pointe Heron LLC parcel's south boundary (the common boundary between the Pointe Heron parcel and the railroad right-of-way). At the outlet side of that existing manhole, an existing 18-inch-diameter storm drain pipe conveys the pond's discharge water to the south under the railroad grade into the Black River Riparian Forest property owned by the City of Renton. Groundwater conditions Page 7 of Earth Solutions NW's August 13, 2014 Geotechnical and Sail Engineering Report in Support of Proposed Fill, Excavation, and Grade Pointe Heron LLC Parcel (the "Geotechnical Report") explains: Groundwater seepage zones are present in or near and under the project site, and subsurface drain systems have already been installed to control the flow of these sources. In view of the varied nature of the existing fill on the site and 8 August 18, 2014 Project Narrative Pointe Heron LLC previous engineered modifications to portions of the site topography, minor perched groundwater may be encountered during the wetter winter months, but no groundwater table will ... be exposed or interrupted. Proposed use of the property and scope of the proposed development: The proposed filling, excavation, and grading project is primarily intended to create within a portion of the 14.14-acre project site at elevations ranging between about 125 and 128 feet a relatively flat area for future development. That relatively flat area is proposed to extend south from roughly the toe of the existing slope that extends downward from the south edge of SW Sunset Boulevard. The 125-to-128-foot grade range is a roughly mid-level grade range between (1) the average of the existing elevations (an average of about 193 feet) of the segment of SW Sunset Boulevard lying to the north of the project site, elevations that range from (a) about 164 feet to the north of the project site's east end to (b) about 222 feet to the north of the project site's west end, and (2) the average (an average of about 45 feet) of the existing elevations of the south boundary of the Pointe Heron LLC parcel along or to the south of the project site (elevations that generally range from about 40 to 50 feet). As more fully explained below, in order to vertically intersect with the south edge of the proposed relatively flat area, a proposed l.5H:1V engineered fill slope with a buttress fill face will extend up from either (i) the parcel's south boundary (along the central part of that boundary) or (ii) the top edge of the existing l.5H:1V engineered fill slopes along the parcel's south boundary that lie to both the west and east of the central part of the boundary. As part of the proposed work, the existing stormwater detention and water quality pond, which is located at the lower (south) edge of the project site, is proposed to be filled and replaced with a new stormwater detention and water quality pond to be constructed along much of the proposed plateau area's northern edge. That proposed new pond will afford easier access for pond maintenance than does the existing stormwater and water quality pond at the base of existing slopes. The proposed changes to the project site's existing grades will eliminate the undulating terrain that resulted from the previous grading of the project site performed as part of the Sunset Bluff project, grading that was not completed due to the collapse of the residential development market that started around 2008. The project will involve approximately 495,500 cubic yards of fill and approximately 18,200 cubic yards of cut, for a net fill volume of approximately 477,300 cubic yards of structural fill materials to be imported. The imported fill materials will be hauled into the project site either (1) from stockpiles of structural fill materials stored on the Stoneway Black River Quarry property, property that abuts the southerly part of the west boundary of the subject Pointe Heron LLC parcel, or (2) through the Stoneway Black River Quarry property from the quarry property's entrance roadway at Monster Road SW. The overall grading actives will involve 9 August 18, 2014 Project Narrative Pointe Heron LLC compaction of structural fill and, along the project site's south and west edges, construction of engineered fill slopes. The work is proposed to be done in two phases. The Phase 1 portion of the proposal is to involve both (1) filling of the existing stormwater detention and water quality pond located near the site's south boundary and (2) filling of the adjacent areas of the project site in order raise site grades to an interim elevation of approximately 110 feet. Phase 1 is also to involve construction of a new interim detention and water quality pond with a bottom elevation of 100 feet and an overflow elevation of 109 feet. The Phase 1 work will involve roughly 267,000 cubic yards of fill. The lower portion of an engineered l.SH to lV fill slope (up to an elevation of approximately 111 feet) will be constructed along the south side of the site over the existing pond and will close the gap between the existing engineered fill slopes along the south edge of the Pointe Heron LLC parcel to the east and west. The interim detention pond will provide the required detention for level 2 flow control for the proposed site conditions and will also serve as a temporary sediment pond. As noted on Sheet E3 of the 10-sheet set of Grading, Interim Drainage, E.S.C., and Rehabilitation Plans (the "Grading Plans"), the southerly top edge of this pond will be setback to the north from the interim Phase 1 top of the proposed engineered fill slope by a minimum of 80 feet unless the project's geotechnical engineer approves otherwise. This interim pond is to be in place and operational by October 1 following the first season of the filling and grading operation. After both (a) the permanent stormwater pond (described in the next paragraph as part of the Phase 2 construction) has been constructed and is operational and (b) most of the relatively flat area described in the first paragraph, above, has been filled to its final Phase 2 design height so that runoff from that area of the plateau will drain into the permanent stormwater pond, the interim pond is to be filled with compacted structural fill. The Phase 1 work will involve approximately 267,000 cubic yards of fill but no excavation (unless work on the permanent pond starts early, in which case the approximately 18,200 cubic yards of excavation for the permanent pond could be done as part of the Phase 1 portion of the project). During the Phase 2 portion of the project, (1) a proposed stormwater pond (designed to be permanent) will be excavated from a segment of the northern portion of the existing plateau portion of the project site (if this pond by then has not already been excavated during Phase 1), (2) the area of the Phase 1 interim detention pond will be filled to final grade, (3) the upper portion of the engineered fill slopes will be completed, and (4) the remainder of the project site will be filled to final grade, which will result in the proposed, relatively flat area of the project site having elevations ranging from 125 to 128 feet as depicted on the Grading Plans. The Phase 2 work will involve approximately 18,200 cubic yards of excavation (excavation for the permanent pond) and approximately 228,500 cubic yards of fill for a net fill of roughly 210,000 10 August 18, 2014 Project Narrative Pointe Heron LLC cubic yards. The Phase 2 work is expected to be completed during the overall project's second or third construction season. As is also shown on the grading plans, a new 2.6H:1V engineered fill slope is proposed along a portion of the project site's west edge. To avoid increasing the potential for instability or impacts to adjacent or abutting properties beyond pre-development conditions, the design of the proposed fill as set forth in the Geotechnical Report specifies (among other things) the use of (1) compacted structural fill materials throughout the proposed fill; (2) a crushed aggregate buttress fill zone ranging in horizontal dimension from 35 feet (at the fill slope toe) to 5 feet (at the fill slope top) along the face of the proposed l.SH:lV fill slopes (with the crushed aggregate buttress fill zone to be comprised of material meeting the buttress fill material specification set forth on pages 7 and 8 of the Geotechnical Report, material intended to both enhance slope strength and stability and prevent accumulation of surface water runoff from the fill slope's face); and (3) geogrid reinforcement of the proposed l.SH:lV fill slopes to further increase slope strength and stability. As specified on the Grading Plans, once the proposed filling and grading is completed, (1) the surface slope of the flat area will direct all of its stormwater runoff to the new stormwater detention/water quality pond at the project site's north edge and (2) the finished grade areas that lie outside of the stormwater detention and water quality pond and outside of the engineered fill slopes shall be surfaced with a six-inch minimum compacted depth of crushed aggregate for interim site rehabilitation and to prevent erosion. The six-inch minimum compacted depth of crushed aggregate is the same type and depth of surfacing that was placed on the previously-graded portion of the project site, a surfacing that fully stabilized the previously-graded portion from erosion. As once again proposed, it will provide full stabilization against erosion and will thereby eliminate the need for interim landscaping or hydroseeding of the project site. As discussed on page 34 of the Geotechnical Report, the proposed crushed aggregate buttress fill along the slope face will not only be excellent for providing slope stability and preventing 11 August 18, 2014 Project Narrative Pointe Heron LLC slope erosion, it will also provide a porous, nonerosive aggregate facing of the proposed slope face, a facing that will be excellent for vertically transmitting and dispersing through the crushed aggregate buttress zone both (1) rainwater that strikes the slope's face and {2} any hillside perched groundwater that may seep into the buttress fill zone from the fill core. This will eliminate any need for terracing the fill slope. Because of the porous, nonerosive characteristics of the proposed fill slope face, vegetation of the slope face will not be needed to prevent erosion and, because the facing will not be conducive to landscaping, other plantings, or hydroseeding, vegetation of the slope face will not be appropriate and is not being proposed. The subject proposed fill, excavation, and grade project is the initial phase of a multiphase overall site development project. In this initial phase, the portion of the Pointe Heron LLC parcel within the project site will be reconfigured to the grade proposed as part of the subject grade and fill permit application. As part of one or more later expected site development phases, further grading modifications are expected, the extent of which will depend on the particular details of the ultimate future development proposed. That being the case, ultimate landscape design and installation cannot be determined and installed until a final site use is determined and a particular development for such site use is designed on behalf of the property owner and approved by the City. The linear configuration of the proposed new stormwater detention and water quality pond is similar to the linear configuration of the existing stormwater detention and water quality pond. Unlike the existing pond, which was designed to meet the requirements of the 1998 King County Surface Water Manual, the proposed new pond is designed to meet the requirements set forth in the 2009 King County Surface Water Manual and 2009 City of Renton amendments to that manual. Access: Construction access to the project site is proposed through the Stoneway Black River Quarry property from the quarry property's entrance roadway at Monster Road SW. Proposed off-site improvements (i.e. installation of sidewalks. fire hydrants. sewer main. etc.}: No offsite improvements are proposed as part of the subject filling, excavation, and grading project. Total estimated construction cost and estimated fair market value of the proposal: 12 August 18, 2014 Project Narrative Pointe Heron LLC The total estimated construction cost and estimated fair market value of the proposed filling, excavation, and grading project is $1.0 Million. Estimated quantities and type of materials involved if any fill or excavation is proposed: As noted above, the project will involve approximately 495,500 cubic yards of structural fill material and approximately 18,200 cubic yards of cut for a net anticipated fill of approximately 477,300 cubic yards. The specifications for the two categories of structural fill that are proposed for the project as set forth on pages 7 to 9 of the Geotechnical Report are as follows: Two categories of structural fill are proposed for the subject fill and grade project: (1) a crushed aggregate fill to be used to construct a buttress fill zone along the face of the proposed fill slopes and (2) a fill to be used to construct the proposed fill core behind the crushed aggregate buttress fill zone. (See Plate 3 for a schematic depiction of the buttress fill zone and the core structural fill zone behind it.) Both of these categories of structural fill must conform to RMC 4-4- 060N4 (FILL MATERIAL), which states in relevant part: August 18, 2014 Fill materials shall have no more than minor amounts of organic substances and shall have no rock or similar irreducible material with a maximum dimension greater than eight inches (8"). Fill material shall meet the following requirements: a. Construction, Demolition, and Land Clearing Waste Prohibited: Fill material shall be free of construction, demolition, and land clearing waste except that this requirement does not preclude the use of recycled concrete rubble per Washington State Department of Transportation Standard Specifications for Road, Bridge, and Municipal Construction. b. Cleanliness of Fill Material: Fill material shall not contain concentrations of contaminants that exceed cleanup standards for soil specified in WAC 173-340-740, Model Toxics Control Act. 13 Project Narrative Pointe Heron LLC In addition to conforming to RMC 4-4-060N4 (FILL MATERIAL), each of the two categories of fill material must conform to the respective applicable technical specifications set forth below. Buttress Fill Material Specification Material to be used to construct the buttress fill zone along the face of the proposed fill slopes shall be crushed aggregate conforming to RMC 4-4-060N4 (FILL MATERIAL) and conforming to the following strength parameters: Internal angle of friction 46° minimum Moist unit weight 145 pcf minimum Maximum aggregate size 8inches Maximum fines content (passing U.S. Sieve No. 200) shall not exceed 5 percent. This specified material, which is equivalent to coarse gravel and/or cobble, must be well-graded and angular (crushed). Samples of this proposed fill material must be provided to ESNW for laboratory analysis and approval prior to placement. Core Structural Fill Material Specification Material to be used to construct the proposed fill core to be placed behind the crushed aggregate buttress zone fill shall conform to the following strength parameters: Internal angle of friction 36° minimum Moist unit weight 125 pcf minimum Maximum aggregate size 8inches Maximum fines content (passing the U.S. No. 200 sieve) shall not exceed 20 percent. 14 August 18, 2014 Project Narrative Pointe Heron LLC Samples of this proposed fill material must be provided to ESNW for laboratory analysis and approval prior to placement. In regard to the relatively small quantity of material to be excavated, page 39 of the Geotechnical Report states as follows: [E]xcept for the relatively small volume of material to be excavated for construction of the proposed Permanent Stormwater Pond, none of the site is proposed to be excavated. Successful use of the limited volume of those excavated on-site soils will largely be dictated by the moisture content of the soils at the time of placement and compaction. Use of onsite soils from site excavations for structural fill material may require moisture conditioning prior to placement and compaction if the material has greater than optimum moisture content. Moisture conditioning would likely include passive measures such as aeration for overly moist soils and addition of water for overly dry soils prior to placement. These moisture conditioning methods would not affect water quality on the project site or the quality of water that may be discharged from the project site. Trees to be removed: As a result of the prior grading, only sapling trees remain on the project site, and those trees are in only a small area of the project site. Those trees all have a caliper of less than two inches at breast height. Those sapling trees are proposed to be removed as part of the project. Explanation of any land to be dedicated to the City: No land is proposed to be dedicated to the City as part of the proposed project. Any proposed job shacks, sales trailers. and/or model homes: No job shacks, sales trailers, and/or model homes are planned as part of the proposed project. Any proposed modifications being requested {include written justification): No modifications are being requested as part of the project. 15 August 18, 2014 Project Narrative Pointe Heron LLC For projects located within 100 feet of a stream or wetland. please include: Distance in feet from the wetland or stream to the nearest area of work Wetland A, which is a Category 3 Wetland and has a 25-foot-wide buffer, is located 37 feet to the nearest area of work. Wetland B, which is either (1) a Category 3 wetland (with a 25-foot-wide buffer) under Renton's critical area regulations if the wetland is not hydraulically connected to the existing wetlands in the Black River Riparian Forest to the southwest of Wetland B across the BNSF Railroad right-of- way or (2) a Category II wetland (with a 150-foot-wide buffer) under Renton's shoreline master program critical area regulations if the wetland is hydraulically connected to the existing wetlands in the Black River Riparian Forest to the southwest of Wetland B across the BNSF Railroad right-of-way and under Renton's shoreline jurisdiction, is located 193 feet to the nearest area of work. The unnamed Existing Class 4 Stream, which has a 3S-foot-wide buffer, is located 100 feet to the nearest area of work. Note: The project is not located within 200-feet of the Black River, Cedar River, Springbrook Creek, May Creek, or Lake Washington. 16 August 18, 2014 APPEND1X8 ,S/NOl:l3H 31NIOd SNVld NOLI. V llll8\IH31::1 ONV '·o·s·3 '30VNIVl::IO V'ill::l31NI 'ONIOVl::IO -l33HS 1::13AOO ~- CJ) z <( _J a.. z 0 ~ _J en <( ,l I w-::i. a: ~ L1i 0 " z llJ <( ~ oz . ~ ~~ ~ !i 0 12 ili <( 15 ~ Z Fz <( ~ ~ a: w 0 ~ a: "' ;:, ~ CJ) -w a: j!: w lL I-0 Z 15 -~ 0~ Z< 0 <( a: 0 1-w w I CJ) a: w e5 0 b lil ' .... I ' ,,/"° J I ' ' 131111 .. < :::; ~ ~ ~ - L __ ~ 1l ' g 0 L__ ___ _ ,S/NOl::l3H 31NIOd SNVld NOLI. V llll8VH31::1 ONV '·o·s·3 '30VNIVl::IO V'ill::l31NI 'ONIOVl::IO -l33HS 1::13AOO sit6-i9L (90i) OQl7i-wra6 VM '3lilV3S im 3llns 'HlnOS 3nN3AV lS( osos 011 NOl:l3H 3lNIOd ' ' • ~ ' a ~ ~ ' ! • ~ " " ~~~ , i , • • ~i~ " ~ ffi ""o ~ " ~g, 8 5:: ~~ t ~;; 8 i i I ' CJ) t; w a a: .. w j!: 0 z ~ a.. ~ ~ w ..J w a! < .. lL 0 z 0 Ii: ir 0 a, w 0 ..J g ; !g •o 00 ~o "o lr'~ .,, ':s'~ T~ ~~ ;'.),,.,· ~I 18 sa c::g 2o zZ li'~ i:;@ ~§ "" ,. ~~ ., OS ac <' .. ~B §! u~ "" _J<r. §~ ~ :c :~s -0,: §!i NO.LN,rn ~= ,IO J;..LIJ V .ooi=.r SJJl/\,J3S lVINlf'jNO/:Jl/\h] 'clNIJJN,nS ':JNINNVlcJ ON'l'l \lhi1:d:JN1:JNJ 111\IJ WJ Z:8L8-tSi'.(SGt; Z:ZZ:9-l£C:(£C:v) Z:rn86 VM 'lN]>I H1nos ]nNJAV ONZ:L £(Z:8( ~ CJ) :, o• ~! ii";~ 0 00 oz, F• i:;~l3~ <'I ~!i: 0~ ..J. ~!~ ·t~;~ ~511_ ~ $~~~ ~§~ ~ \Gg§N:2 ~~~~ LJ j 0 1 ., ' ' I i ' ~ 0 i ~ ~ /:Jdd\l ]lVO AB 1 , ~ e I C a * t- :::i: a: w CL I ~ I ! $l • I~ < l'l! I w [ l 0 ~ ;;;"-2 I I zo ~,~ ' OJ I-. z, ,fii ~ w< ;, a:. ;;;. ~ lL 0 ot i! i'= w ' 51 ~ i -~ 0~ tu .... ~ ' < ~ 8 e g • w !w 0 I I I I ' ! ! j il--+--t--+-t--1--1 • I ' :l • NOISl/\~/:J ,S/NOl::l3H 31NIOd (lS3M) SNVld NOllVllll8VH31::1 ONV ··::yg·3 '30VNIVl::IO ~11::131NI 'ONIOVl::IO -I 3SVHd Cl) z <( _J a.. d z 0 <( a: (.') w Cl) <( I a.. e i w ~ 0 il5 • :::, t 0 e w u (J) ' z • 0 0 z F ~ 0 :::, z ; 0 ~ ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ ~ w ~ (J) ~ s a.. . I ' i I ' I, { \ \ ) I I \ \ ' \ ' \ I iii I 1 • . .1 . .1,1. ,S/NOl::l3H 31NIOd (lS3M) SNVld NOL1Vllll8VH31::1 ONV ··o·s·3 '30VNIVl::IO ~11::131NI 'ONIOVl::IO -I 3SVHd Sll6-1:9L (901:) Q017Z-VCl86 VM '3lilV3S zm 3llnS 'HlnOS 3nN3AV lSI osos ::>11 N01::13H 31NIOd 1::10,l NOil vnNUNO:J 1::10,l C3 l33HS 33S ' I 1· 11 ':I. ·I 1 '-: i I i ,~I, I • 11 NO.LN3H ..io A.LIJ ·-~ ___ , I \\ ,,,11, \ ScJJl/\l:US l'Q'lNji'jNQ<Jl/l~j ''.}NIA.Wms :lNINN\flcJ ON\fl ''.}Nl<JJJNl:lNJ 11/\IJ WJ Z9L8-1Sl(Slt>) z:2:Z:9-r Sl(SZt) ffQg6 'r/M 'lNJ>i HH'CS 31N3A'r/ ONZ:L S(Z8l <JddV :uva AB ~~\1JN3 !l.v, ~· < ~ ... · .• ~ --~~-~ \ ':i.'1' ~/)lrH~~ * 1- :::i, a: w 0.... m • " 0 ~ zu OJ f-0 z, w• a:' LL 0 0~ ~· -~ 0>-< < " w 0 'JOISl!\.:l!:J ~gi s R ' ~ ' ~:5 l g~ ~~ 2 i I ~B· 1 ;g~ ,, ~I $ .[D (:1,i; I :, '. -w~ Orr: ! j ffiril ~ ' <( ~c; g ~ 8 ~CQ i!:w I i I I ! ' ' I ' I ' ,S/NOl:l3H 3.lNIOd (1SV3) SNVld NOl1Vlll18VH31:1 ONV ··o·s·3 '30VNIVl:IO ~11:13.lNI 'ONIOVl:IO -I 3SVHd •31.lll CfJ z <( _J a... z 0 I- ~ _J:::; ms' <( ~ I~ w~ a: a: z 0 gi z CJ)~ A' ~ ........ z I-~ ~ ~ 0 !iili z .. CfJ O:,:: • F z W O 0 !JJ !z LL W 0 a: w CJ~ <( ~ Zi:1: <( \5 a: z oi ~~ a: w 1-z d z 0 <( a: CJ ..-- w CfJ <( I a... "T ~ I 'I (~ I ' I I I ,S/N01:13H 3.lNIOd \ ' I 'if'\ ' ', \ \ I 11 ' I ii ' I 'I '' I, I " '' '' (1SV3) SNVld NOil V llll8VH31:1 ONV ··o·s·3 '30VNIVl:IO ~11:131NI 'ONIOVl:IO -l 3SVHd Sll6-l9L (90l) OOl>'l-vmB6 VM '31.llV3S c:m 3llnS 'H.Lf10S 3nN3A V 1SI osos 011 NOl:l3H 3.lNIOd ' ' ' ' \ \ i :, NO.LN3:H ,IQ J,..L[J S3'.llAlJ3S WlNJ~NOiJIMJ ''.JNl/...:IM,ns ''.li'IINN'fl<l ON\11 ''.lNliJ]JfWJNJ "IIJ\I) xv:1 2·1ug-r£Z(£Z:t) uzg-l c:;i(i:_;zv) i:'.£'086 VM 'lNJ>i HH10S 1nNlAV O\IU c; l zg l 80:1 ON sor 3::rn ~~1~N3 !;Ni ~· ' . t 0 ~ A; ,s,/)"' 1-1 ~~ e I l--~_ I! 00 ~ ;;1e ~3 !z ~ II! ~ r1 LL 0 0~ :! ~· 0¢ < ' .. < j~ ' w 0 ~ <.i<..i I *~ ~~ ~ c 111• • ~g 0 ~~ ~ 0" ::,-jo"'"- II "-'8°;;i':,1 ~ d~-33 o; II'$'$ ~"'doo I e-~l~~ O,::~zz e~~~§ ~,.,w ~~~~\;: ~ uu 00 I 0 "'. a. -,\;'i,i • " ~ ~;~~~ < !,: ci~ "!! 0 f::i~,:j~~ I !;;'::it-00 :§=~~ ~g;~t;ti "" "-"'"' NOISl/131:! • I< ' ' 8 l s@ I ' i i . " * ;i-C ! i o: !:::l 0 U 8 I 111 ! ' ' ·oN ,S/NOl:l3H 3lNIOd SNOU.03S SSOl:IO -( 3S'<1Hd '. - ,31111 I 'e lo I ~~ I cl I I 8 -.., Ii ! •• I ~ 5 il lij ' L. I 1 I I i------1 [ u 11 i ,I I I 1 11 I:, I 1 11 11, ,0 I: ~! I I I I ~ ,- b, Oo e' :!ii2 ,8/NOl:l3H 3.lNIOd .. <( I <( z 0 t w CJ) SNOU.038 8801::10 -( 38'<1Hd I 66'601 66-6(H 66"601 00·011 00·01, 00'01 I l't .01 66'6€ 66 6€ 66 66 66'66 66 66 66'66 66"66 66'66 66'66 M"66 6€'66 6!i66 61..i66 6666 l 66 66 66'66 66'66 ~~-§~ 66"66 ~6 66 66 66 66'66 ' 66 66 I ,. 9?:(6-C:9L (90C:) OOl7C:-17£:(86 v'M '3lil'<13S c:m 311ns 'H1no8 3nN3A'<1 .18( 0909 011 N01:13H 3.lNIOd - 0 I 0 z 0 I- 0 w CJ) g 1-"B ' .~ ;:~~ ~ ' ~~{ ! ' ! ,---' ,_ !~ij > ~ ,. -• I ·o ~ " ·-0 " I C , ), ' ' -·' ' L..-----·--· s Ii! s i I 0 CD I CD z 0 I-C 0 0 w ~ CJ) - ~ . i I /, I --'1 ~ S~JOM "!lqnd JO )LJ9LJJjJOdaQ NO.LN3:l:I ~ dO }..1IJ . " ' 66'66 56 66 66 65 6666 ~9'QOI s1·011 .. <;f'OII rs·o, 1 u·o11 ' 16011 sn•o• rn'LG u·u 5n9 ,;n<; 61'8£ 0 66 66 66'66 ~('60L BL 011 9r·o11 s~ 01, rl'CI I ZSCl I Lt·rn1 81'06 ~\:r9l ~Vi~ om~ ' S]:Jl/\<J3S lVlN]l'INOlHIINJ ''.lNIA..JAflnS ':)NINNVlcJ GN'ofl .:)Nl~]JN,:)NJ ·11111:J X"t..:I l9L9--f£1'.(gz:v) Ul9-lSl(Sl-V) lrG86 VM 'lN..:1>1 Hlr1CS ::inN]N1 ONU £lZ9l 00 00 rn 00 0 I 0 > ~ z ,11 0 • I-. 0 T w -~ Cl) ,,1 R •.•· l:kJcJV .... Si'OL L -~l:i;JL j,Q'06 ~ . i 31¥0 " -bozv1 ·oN sor ·3::rs ~v,1~H3 !Jq1 ,··'~It°' • t --0 , ~{} A; [ ~ 0 ~ ,s,l)~H~-b zu ! OJ 'z ~ C/J ' .. w• ~ .=-<YJ-., i a:" fo~~/ ~ LL 0 u :,:: *""'~ .,,...., ~ 0~ ~ ci.., ':, _. ... ' ; l ~ ~~ i; w -"'o~:, f 0~ ~ 2 ~~\ [ ~ "' < • .. I p:i ' ; I il'i l ' I i ' s s • ·- ' l ' ~ g ~ § , w 0 I ! I I ! i j f-H-+-+-+ ! * I:: ~ w a.. NOISl!\3/J ' I ' o" ,S/NOl::l3H 3llNIOd (183M) SNVld NOL1\>'1Jll8\>'H3l::l ON\>' ··o·s·3 '30\>'Nl\>'l::lO V'lll::l3llNI 'ONIO\>'l::10 -l 38\>'Hd U) z <( _J (L z 0 I- <( 1- _J CD ~ <( uI I" w~ er: a: 0 :z ~ z IL <( i () ~ ts t, z I 52 CJ) s ~-~ ~ - U) w w lL w ' l"'i O a: v~ <( en Zw -iE <( lL er: 0 0 ts '.' ~ ~ §' -<( ~ er: U). w ~ I-~ z tu\ 0 z 0 <( er: 0 I C\I w U) <( ~ "' ~ I )___ '-·., \ I ! / I' I I ' \ '- ,· ' •31111 \ \_ _, ,, / ' " \ \ ..J "1,-~ .... -7 I e ' I \ -•_:.._[, -;i "· (L ~ ~ I l r I ,S/NOl::l3H 3.lNIOd 11 (1S3M) SN\>'ld NOll \>' 11118\>'H3l::l ON\>' '·::rs·3 '30\>'Nl\>'tlCJ rillfi1NI 'ONIO\fl:10 -l 38\l'Hd Si::16-i::9L (90l) OOVC::-t>Cl86 VM '3lil\>'3S .::m 311ns 'Hlf10S 3nN3A \>' .LSI osos 011 NOl::l3H 3.lNIOd ,_ \ '1 ·-•• CZ:· I I I ' ' HO=i ' ~-----------:~ ' I I .. \1\\ I 1,/1 \ " 'I S~JOM Cl!l'lnd J<l 1us,ujJ~d8Q ® NO.LNe!H ~ ,IQ J...LIJ SDIN:l3S l'q'lN3~NOOIM3 ':JNl.'J/\cjnS ':lNINNVlJ ON\fl '!JNIIIDNl:lNl l1AIJ X\/J l1Wl-t<:;2(c;zp) Ul9-tc;2(c;z:t,) lT086 1/1',\ 'lN.:l>I Hln0S l()Nl/1\i ONl/ Cjll9l \ l:lddV 31VO AEl ··a· !/~-:.l 00 " [ 0 ~ zo ,s,'>\J'H~~ ~ e "" * tjs~ I-~~~ a~~ ::;; ~"-~ a: """ w ~l"' Cl.. :.;.,'it' ~ OJ ~~ w• a:" lL 0 0~ ~· <3 ~ ' ' [ • " w 0 i NOISl/\]rJ ' ' ON aor ·3:::ra I ~f/1 I ~ $2 ' 11~ ! s~ j 2 m I I ::.s. l ~.,,e ll;; ;:. ~: ~: " -I~ i ~:a ~ ' .... N ' 8 tl! 8 ~);I ~w ,a_ I i I, I I i ~ ! L_ __ _ \ "ON ,8/N0!::13H 3lNIOd (18\13) 8N\fld NOil \111118\1H3!::I aN\1 ''0'8'3 '30\>'Nl\1!::la Vil!::13lNI 'ONla\1!::10 -l 38\>'Hd •31111 ....... l-oo <I: w ......... U) z <I: ...J Cl.. z 0 ~ ...J -:i. s" ffi w <I: ... I~ w~ a: :z' 0 z <I: I ii; t;g ii" . ' ! I ~E I ge; "i'Vll ,/;; 0 z 0 <I: a: 0 I C\I w U) <I: I Cl.. I I I ,8/N0!::13H 3lNIOd om 0~ 2:: ~J~;; ~~ j]~ I ' (18\13) 8N\1ld NOl.l II 11118\1H3!::I ONII '·o·8'3 '301/Nl\1!::IO Vil!::131NI UNIOIIW -l 38\>'Hd g;:16-l9L (901:) 0()1,l-178186 \>'M '31.ll\138 lOI 31108 'Hl/108 30N3A \1 181 OSOS OT! N0!::13H 3lNIOd ' ' ' ', ' •' ~: : ' I J' .~ 'I ' / / HO=i / / / S.DINH; li'lN.:l~NOill/\N.:I 'ONI.G~rlS ':lNINNVld arw1 '::JN11:JJJN1::JNJ 1,A1) X''1..:I Z8Ls-io;z(,;zv) urn-t£l.(szr) lrG'd5 VM 'lN.:l>I HlnOS 3nN3A~ ONZL £lZ9l 0 <( NOll'tnNllNOO !lO=i 93 l33HS 33S N01N3l:I '10 )..L!J S3J ?,dd'II 31'110 J..0 ON aor 3::rn ~ ~~ I p~ . . 00 ~ ' < t 0 , z:3 i i ill 0 [ . . 0 I~::, l \ 4111 ~ ' l I &1)"'"'9~ zo ::.~. l OJ ;-.-~ !z ~ UJ" -;; "" ·~ ~~ ~~:i: ~ ·- 0~ r= w io~ ! l ()~ zO [ '..,o. < "' ' 8 ti :S! " w<-l w o,Ol 0 ~w 0. I 111 ! ' I i ~ ] ] ;l ~ I ~ J ct t I I I I ' ! ~~~~~ So ! ~ P;~~~ "" I ~~ 3 ~~ g ~~~m1~ " "' ~c " ~~ P;';f:::<;1;;:.:"' -55 ~ ~ 0. ~f ; ~d 0 ~~~~~ ~ •• ~:~~~~ o~-~g ~u, II co ; ~~~!;:'~:;; I <1-<>:-,ZZ • ~~"-'1i'li' ,,._"'~M !~ ::?!i':uS~ ~g~~~ ------ ~ ~ .. I • I L ! > s 00 g o•• I " ~~ i " ~~ ;!g ... • 00 ~ ~~.J! t,i?l ~ -~;ctt<>-f;~gi 1,5-ww ,~ dui 1133 •" ~~:4 ' I ::53;;:l~'5! oC i~§~~ ~~ "'"'"'"' !o<"'c,"-"- Sz ~~~~~ 50 '6~ g'~ oo ~~ NOISl/\3~ 00 ~ ~R CITY OF cc; RENTON PHASE 2 -CROSS SECTIONS ' - 00 Depa,tment of Publ;c Works POINTE HERON/S' '"· REVISIO~ BY DATE APPR I . --,, I .:, 0 !! g @ 8 iF i!n ... p 2 I PROPfRi'r llNE & WORK AREA LIMITS slh o+J2.61- 50.30 , 6J.64 ~>.,_"% 7691 (\ ~ I 'Tu 90.Jl 0 ( " HH.64 I f" I' C S 116.98 11795 Q 12) 75 ~ ~ '27.51 I ~-~Jl I§ 8 127 29 ~ § 0 !! 127 07 12500 126.85 124.99 126 65 11962 I~ ~ 126 41 r' i( ' U) ' I 14.50 '" 126.19 ' m ! "' -0 ~ I ;, ::I ' I 14.50 125.97 g 0 '1450 1 ~5 75 z I ' m i ' I '14.50 125 53 ;, m !• ~ g j '14.50 ! ~25 JI '14.50 "---I 125.09 --N il: 114.50 119.31 1H.50 I 11450 1-l~,l -0 114.50 I 14.50 1 n.!." I I ~ 'ht'' ~ , 14 ~o 8 116 77 . J:'!'l~~ ... I ::£> ,, :, I 114.50 12J.44 •: " (1) !I I 14 50 I I m " • 114.50 ~~ ~ ' i I i I\) 114.50 0 !! g I§ ,; 8 114 50 i'.3 I '· . 114.50 , I: 0 ~I 114.50 . i i 0 !! g I§ 8 :0 00 1~ ~-, 0 , ;;, so m g § ~!~~ I ,. JJ.1:12 . b1!i!~" (1) j 14.50 0 ,, "'Q ~ 114.50 z ii r 34.11 ____J PROPERTY LINE & (1) 9 ~R __ .,...... WORK AREA LIMITS ' STA. 0+35.74 114.50 t__ ,. 3~_95 (1) i I C) " 114.50 J, 44.12 ;,:i.,, m 4~_35 '; 0 114.50 "% 114.50 I '' s J6.6J % -I ,~ 114.SO ' ~4.B9 1 0 I ~ ,4 89 I '\"is ' 1'4.50 I z ii ~ 114.50 40.74 1 (1) 114.50 I 44 ~Q 114.50 ~ 68.00 >~ 82.75 a 114.50 I ,, 119.83 Bli.69 ~;~ijrRI~ ~ ~ 8 B6.19 ,1 I I I I !.lffi! ~~ 8559 ,, i I i; iii '!1 ., 84.67 ,, ,, ~ ~ "'U iii! 89.41 i II I I 11 11 I I I m ' ~ 97.82 , U) i I § ~ m / 1 105.61 ' 0 -I i~I; 0 !! g I§ ~ a I! , ... 115.55 I ~ i z a 124.28 l1 IB+H~ I I I I ~;1, 122.88 "Tl ~ ~ } j ~~~1 121.55 ·-- 124.0B 1L, I I I I I I 11 I I 11 126 . .17 mi>! § ~ !1 127 69 It'' ~ I Ii 11111 , P!Jii ~§ 129. 10 "' I ; V f~ 0 13047 .:,;. !" I I m , 1 "31 49 , i a ~ () H888 0 !! B !! ~ 8 "' m :i ~~ ,, ~ l ~ ,, ~ ~ ~o "' s ;, ~ ! ~~ g_ :;: ,m al i ~~ q.GHA<,,s, FOR I TITLE, [0 18215 72ND AVENJE SOUTH Ri oz ~~~~ POINTE HERON LLC PHASE 2 -CROSS SECTIONS ~ KENT, WA 98032 ' 0 (425)251--6222 5050 1ST AVENUE SOUTH, SUITE 102 ] '.425)251-8782 FAX SEATILE, WA 98134-2400 ' S ~ '_ . (.; ,I m > . I,), .. ~~ ,S' • o,· (206) 762-9125 ,:,( ~ ,.,~ CIVIL fNGNFFRl~G. IANn f'IAN"JING, I ,.-,.11 rn,:;.111."'-SURV[YING. [NVIRONI.IENTAL SERVICES POINTE HERON/$' B.CE JOB NO. 14200 r; e P \, 4Jl'Us\ I 4/CJ\prel m r,rry\ I 4?10-ey? ·o~q )ct~;-;rr,e 8/ 1/2C·I 4 05 PI..I Sc:lec I" cSINGL[IO"l ~re\ Cl) z 0 l-o w Cl) Cl) Cl) 0 er: 0 I C\I w Cl) <( I CL . ... ,S/N0!:13H 3lNIOd SNOll:::>38 8801:1:::> -C: 3S'vHd !;C:16-C:9L (90C:) OOVC:-VC(86 'vM '3lil'v3S c:m 31.1ns 'Hines 3nN3A'v lS( 0000 011 N0!:13H 3lNIOd ~ ----!il_ l! s ~-,__~!il,_ _ _.,,l! __ ~s,._ _ ___,o,_ __ ~ I w~i1 OO"e1:1 H'9~l I g,,·ol1 ' I 1'6'lLI z 0 bl ,;,,) (J) l! 5l 0 ,S/N0!:13H 3lNIOd SNOll:::>3S SS0!:10 -C: 38':/Hd I ~ ~ s ? S~JOl,I ~!l'Pd JO lUQllJjlOdaQ NO.LN3~ ~ ..JO A.LIJ v1·11+1 -~is 3Nl1 .U~3d,)<jd ~j ' .. I z 0 b w (J) 0 I s " S]JIAfJ]S l'li.N311NO<Jl/\N] '::JNIDNJnS '::JNINl'Nld ONVl ':)Nlii 1 lNl8N 1 11/\IJ ;;@~ i~~i ~r-~ wi~~ ~~~m 2 ~i If ~@i~ ,~~1~ . ~ g~!i~ ~ a:!1i ~Ql §I~~~~~ ~ ~ 9g·gz1 i:,_~·9,1 116'9ll Vfflll Ol'lO 91RI u·a1 ll"lll I'\' aL 1:1,·a1 1:,;·a1 19 Lll OUll 6l LZl w·ai L6lc! Oil LIL WrOI 61'16 co <J<JdV ]!VO '" co rn co OOlvi ON aor ·3 88 ! * I I- ~ a: w i a... " " i ii, ' ~OISIJ\J~ ON ,,,,, NO. ii1 ;:: cl il;' :IJ -< :IJ 0 )> Cl )( I -z ~ Cl 2 (!) :E )> r m ~ I ' - j ! I ii I o nlo 0 [,! 0' ~ ! ~~ ~Cl) > . " !e, ~ ~ ~ ; "'~ I ! ; I -~ ill [ ' ! ' i I IS RE\i1SION l:lY DATE Al'l'R I O :" m 0 > ~ .~ " "° "' "" "' ~~ a, ~q~! --<;;l-z ~ i f ~ ~ ~~ ~~8 ~§ "' ~ ° F t 8 ... ~ ... ~£ ,::::E 3l ~ S ::E,., ~ ~~ ':-'I Dr::J ~~ ~ ; i ~ ~ ; ~f ~e ~~ F ..., rn ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 ~ : ~ ~ B ..-~ ~ [ii "a ," zg ~~ Q~ :s. i: ~b~C' r-i,.,:;,;t:; '· ,, ~ ~;,1 ~:,,. { ", i "' ~ > "'ln£~;g~~~~i!i ~c,>°c,°i:Fs~~g ,.,;.;rilffl[;,:~~c:8Sl g~~~~;:~d~ ~~-•~=>co:,Sz.,,il, :,'Sil!!f'\.,c:,,,.,o Q;!:;~o;Eig~~ ~~i~~~~rn~i ""~r:i:;!:~}l::!,.,~ 8~ui"'i!i~ih8g ~-ijlf';;!l'"'d:;:!,3~,.. ~~:ii::'~o ::!:!;cs;t28 o 3::l~'-",:::c~;S ~'El::!~,.,'iig~uqg ~;~oc:;~~io~ ,., Q~8~~'J"'~ ~~d~,..;!2~86t2 __.c,-.,~~".lzo>"' ~g~'-"~"'>"'~o · -•;§>::::<~6)(;n:Q o,.,~i'=< iiiu~ "ll:,.. • '!'.)(lo;;,,., s " i:'h~~::;~~~8° B5Bi~~s~! ~~g..-jjgg{"J~ ~:;5~f2z5~2 ~F5i:t~8ffi¥iJi "-1__..-,, z a_ ij~!~~j20~ 5~~~ ·"'iii~ El;;g ~ ~o ~ '! '! f ~ ' ~ ' ~ ' • > Z il, o f2 n 5 li5;::; ~'-" gSl "ll "1 -< 52 ~ <; ~ "'-C:3! z'I: ~ s o 5.1 3° t:i ~Bil~~ iri:e:1 I : ~ ~ ~ ; ~ ~l ?; ;~ ~ ~ ! . , ,- ,ii:i ~' ~8 •• •" ~~~~ =t~~~ rn,-r,;, Z:;!cl~ i ;.. 5 0 ' ~" .o cc ~~~: r O ~ <l> "ll ._,, M rn _..:;:i "' -""cil"'"' :l'Z_§IF u, i ! I ; J i ~~ ~! ! : ~ ~ :; -8~ e! cl"' ~~ P~oSl o; ~~~i § g~~B .., ,:: Q r::i ... ' u,:> 0 ~ ; p C ~ ~ ~ ~ f~ a ! '.: ~ ~ "' ~ i!i~ ~J ~ ~ ~ f:l ~ ~ 8 V I:S d • ~ ::E \.n o z enc:;'~~ -< z ",. ~ In g ~~ [ll~ ~ 0 i s j 6 "' §~ i~ B ,., ~ "'i!i ;;;:;o j " j ~ I i : j < 'l • ~~88);;bZ~ ;~~§2~]; ..,,,.,,1"'5· c:~o ~§b~~:~~ ~il,~r=~~t;~ :;:f~6~;:i,:~ :!~~ii;~ ""3if5"'"' "g ~ ... 6tB~~";:;, ~~:~~:~& /;:~5';~:~2@ i~~~:~8 ~B~~~~i ,!rii ..';:'u,zg' ~~o~'=\Z~ ~"'~,-,.,~;= @lEo"'~o:, ni:i~"''il~[:l ~~~i~:; 0!;5~00 ig;BJ~~ ,.,~gZi!@~ ~~;§;~~~ I~r:'.1::::<0SJS ~.R:§Jl1~ "' o§'""!'>'.§ a -u m ~ -I ·* Qn f;1 2 ~~ xP 'at :re: "o ul 02 ~"' ;; f8 ~~ ; fl ~ "' ' C ~ ~ ~ 8 _iii; ::;_.-.,a:: v;,:,;;\;,!io (5r:1~~ ~~]~ 8"' e,, ~~R~ ••"" ~:,, u,I'= :: ~::E ;~~~ c,.~;~ ... 'I! ;,,0 ~i~~ ia!~f' (i~! ~~~~ yi~ ~; ~!! •"" --o0" ~~! ,..~o VJ~ .P ";; ~85 g~~ ,, > o~~ <, a;-<n ~~~ i!i~ 5'] ~g "o ,. "o ~~ ~~ •• ~<"; oC =~ ~§ ~pl "> '" ~7 "8 o, §~ 'i;'] ~~ ~ < ~ ~ • 0 " i I j i ; : ~!~~~ii! ~ s ~~~~~I~ r ""'"'i' ,··$0"' s I[! : §s;H):, ~ =:! ? i b~ i~; .· ~ II a 2 :;,'i'ri .';<n" ,., ~ g ~'"~i ~q 0 naiso ,a m td:!? ~ I a~"'"'~"' Si, ,.,Q~!~ .i~ 'i!l <= 2i"'o ~ c;: > i ~. ~~ F §u1 §ifl : ; ;~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ Q IR ~: ~~ 'fl~ o::i I! ~~ " ~§ J • ii ,~ ,. , ~ 7 "'~ .., ~ ~ ~ ~~ vi~::: o "o ~ g~ f3 ·-" ~ ~ : =~~~ "1 i!i"';o =t : ~~!~ a •1H ~ ~E~ s ".!'-"> § ~E s ~ "ii I~ Ii.~ I <:, .l \':! "';;o I ti -:-; CO O ~ -~ ~g ~ ;~a-~ i§ ,. ;~~z: ~l "'+ g ..,[!> .,, .r,. ct, ~ @i; ~ i6 ~ ;~ ~ g ,o ea :i ao ,o "" -. ~~ ~ ~fg~~ """ ~ B" ~ ~A ,: .1.;;l i ~; ,: j~ ~~ :2 ~ ~; '~ ,.g .. ~·() 0' e~ z ~..8 ~ i~ 5 :5u: 0 Q z z-s I'-': C I I I L ~ ~ CITY OF RENTON Oeportmen\ of Public Works NOTES AND DETAILS POINTE HERON/S' .; ,,. i D3!CH~ 8 ~;lls:: ;,., ~ 9!,;n8i7i z ~;i~~ ~ "'"'!2C'E . l~~=;;; ~i~i!i,1"' ;;i!; "'~z .,.,g S?ril:=t ~;:;j ~p'.::~ ~~t~~ i~;;;~ ;!I .. il? .. f-8 Pl ~ ~ ...,:,,. -<1 "~ g,., 'cl..,·~ :!1 "'u ;::;~ ~~"§ ;~ ~!,, iri tn r, (!) m m Cl ;:: x ~ r ij~: ~ ~i ~ ~~ o• "o 2: :<~ z ,o i"j "'" I iJ " I " ~iii~!~ t::~~~=-'8i -:...~:&;~~~ ~;i3 ... ~B3 ~"'~~..,~: n~5g~,':;3i ~~!~h.::il= ~Iii~~~~~ ~~:~;~~ F;~?'h~~ ~~~~~~~ ~~?;;~~ §l-.;,:;!"' "' ~~~~~~ "1I.:;!:>J$ F;:z~~ "'>°~ g"" R'"'cii8ra> g~f;;~:8 zn<C'['Jnr <llO;o--<:,~ S;~g~~r, ~.' :1c~I; i!i.,,~~08 3l~:h2i 9~iiB·o; ~~ .... ~:i:~ i~~f:~ 03~/l';?~ t,gn,.,"':i:o 8~~~~;::i ;:~1: no a 2~'.i ~ ~§~ ! ~~= ~ ~2i!i ~ o;,,ig"' l~i ~ i:=tfi"' ~§~: ""o ~ ~:~ E? ~~~g ~~;; ~~~~ ~s~ ~ ;Rt~ ~',l::;!n ;§--<n :'2 8~~~ ~~~~ ~~~~ ~~1g ; d~Gl "'il z 1s '=l ">. ~~~ ~§3M "'~ :;! R• i . DO Ou ,. ...... • , • • Iii ' . ' , 11 C: "' 0 C, i~ 0~ o> •o I g: <~ i~~ "'"'"' ' " 6~2., i~; ., ~~ !~ "' os ;. ~p "" c.'. )> F I 0 C (!) 11] ~ :IJ -,, ~ Cl ~ r @ Pl 0 ~ " .., ... ..,"' ~i~~ "'"'""'"' ,.,:,so,,, ~a;~ ;;;;l~g "l]"'t:JI "U ,.,,.,o"' P!?!...,:§i ~~r:;g c;J~§~ ;~~: ~ .... ~~ ~~;~ ITTr:ia~ zb±~ n ... "'-"' ;:1 ,.,;§;:::l ~!6~ ~§~ a"o ~!! ::;!':'.,, a • o>o ·~; ~r:l~ ~ _.o ~Oo ., ~~; ~~el 0 ,,R ~g oo, ii1 ;:: ,, 0 :IJ )> ~ <; Cl d I "' ~~ --p~ "" ~~ 88 I J " ~~ ~ §l~ 5~ £ ~~ ~i: a~ 'o~ \i1 ~f "n S:::f" i~ i ~8 z Ul ""'c:u ~f;l ~ "6"' ~~ F ~~ ~ffi ffi ~~ "'"' ~ n"' ~~ ;'l ;;:~ ~~ ~ /§~ ~~ : ~o ~~ 0 "'6 ~7 ;:;i 0 '"ll q ..., ~~ ~ ~: ~ ~f, j ~: ~ i; ~ '\ ' ~ • "' ' :J ~ ji ~ ~ a •• ~~ § ~. -o ~~ tH '.h ii •> ~~ 00 !~ a ' " ~ ~ ! ! C>,i!C: i:b8~~ ~ ~:~iii;§~ : ~~~B~~~!i 0 3!~?\~~P't:,.. ~ ~!~"' ~~~21 ~ ~~~i:~~~ ~ acz"""• c :!:.c::,'iJ--<,ii'f:::Mn rn "1'"'m In1 n"" o ~ij;~;gii: ~5~:!i~~5. ~ i::8u,;r;i~~~ ~ r'd!~~aM:;;: 8 g~w~~~~: ~ !~;=~~~! 1il ~iC,.; In!;:!::,:: "1 ..,~~;~~~~ ;;: ~~~;g;!~ ~ i~-~::~!i 6 .,.,, -<,o" ,:: ;;~~§j~~: ~~~~~;~g ~ ~§~8~~E~ : ~;;:§g~i~g ~ l!l"'~:>i'ililo:".: !£ "''='loi:~ ,;,oz 6 zE?"~~~;,o/; -~~~~~d~~ ~~~~cc:;!;~ ~"""'"' 0~ "'F ~ 'ti"' i r ... "'~ ~ ·< ~~~~i~i~; i~f~~~~~g "'zr·•conu,-:;:!~ e ~;:cs;,::o!"a ;g~;!I ''""'~ !i;~.:~ii~ --.,~f=~s';i'i;..,:'"" ~ ~;;:~=:~~ ~~i,if'.irof;;~~ ~;;~:un ;o ""'-< .... .:5i;,J !!!!~1~1 '-"2 n-u7o ~ ~~ l~Bi "'2 -s -~ ~ ~vi~~ 3 ~~ o c' ~ 8ui "" ~~ ~~ --.. ~~ ~~ ~:z ,. i1ri 1 0 " " // ·' ~H ! Cc a ~v:'.;;! ~ o~7 "3 ,, " M'~ 6 ':1~~ i5 :iJ i ;v: ! ~ ~ ~ ct le: "'.i ~ * ~ ~ 1· Ml-. (2" Ml~ 0 PIP[) 'l I - i ~ ~§ OJ ~!; ~I· ,o < §l~ili ~~E ~5i ~~~ is~ noo ~~~ oc::z ~§~ ~~; i~;i :~i co aza . ~~ ;~ ,, I~ ;~ ~~ !i ~§ ~~ <" ~~ a g uUl):1 l~I ,....,~ ~?.:i ,o, g:l.§ .:.,'=<5 ;;l1§z "'':'lg el.,,-; '"• ~I;;!:;' ·~-~~~ ~jG f:li~ ~~ 8~ or :$,:; co ~~ @~ So ~~ ;:;;,:; gg <o z, §~ og ., os ij a • <; Cl d I )> z Cl eJ I~ I m 18 )> ;:: Cl ~ :; ~ gf Q ~,... :i ~g;i [:l :::c: ,., !~ j ~~ 8 ~gj ~ ~'=: Bi @~ 1§ ,!/ 0 ;:g~ : §~ ~ ~I; Zo M ~~ g ~~ ~ '-"!i': ~ ~ j , " 0 M ~ i < C § g Q ; z ~ ~ • 0 ~ ~ I "'":l. ~~: E:::i~~ ~~?'='l ;;~~ '.£;:;l_:;:<~ so,.,> c~~~ :;!;a::;!"' ~~'Q ~~~ ~~i ~~: ,.,Fi'"' !RI ~S8 /\io.; :$i2 o::::<el ;g~ ~i'.ld ~~~ gi!ii, -~'o;: ~§~ O<O £B.,, ~~~ ~~:!If g~l oc "'§~ ;; " l:;ba;; g;~ 1-~! ;;: ,irn:iJ ~3,;R ~u~ ~~!'1 "'~B ~~~ ~§g ~~! ~~~ oz:.• .... ..,~ ~~z iEil,.. g8§ ~~~ '•' ~8~ 3~~ !o:61 aaM ~:i "•· ~~~ ""• ~~~ •o fi"',l ~8 ~§ ~ --- ~ ;;~ I"' 5"''" ' 0 ~'..' ;,! ~ m ', " ~ t:;~~ ~ ~:;i; :'.;,;:;i!f~ ~ ~ ' s ~ ~ ' io "> Q~ ,, o;.:g •• ~§l :~ 1; s• ~5 •' ~~ "'g oz ~·"' ·" o< [;l~ ~~ ~~ i';'J ., ., ' " ' ~ • "' 0 l i ~ z ~ "' z ~ m CJ) )> z 0 0 m -I )> r CJ) u~~~ ~~~t:Jf. ~--ii ;~ ".::; -~ ~ >-c, ,= "8 I " 2'-6" "''~ .... ..-" 5 ,,_ __ tt-'c, -i~ 18" RISE~ i:,:I; I ~g I I ! I I I J'-0" ..i11 __ :>'-0" Ml~ ~i: . ' "·~ ~I '~IL-~,u,'I~ Ji:¥ ~,; ~g ... ,, -:~ , 'r';i;~ ;,,~= '£r~ t3 ~ ~ l f==l===j ~ * I~ • 0 i a " ?n-< ~~{?~ r,~i;I~ L __j 1! ® C ' "', "' 0: ' '! ,, '. 1 111111i1r ,o v,;;..n ov;.,.,;;1.., .,.,"'t:J vi~ "';:i~ c 53;:)l ~;:,u,r, '.;;-< .-:u,;';i ~n~o .... :;:; ,;o c~ "'·~@ ~.::3~ i!~I,; ~b 5~ o~,: \:.]"':n,:5i I •j I § •! I ,:; ~~ ~~ i~~ ~~,- ~o ~-m :;! ~o 0 -,, I ; Ir _£e~ .. ~ •.. ,_ l--£·-o~----. --~1 ~ ~:iU n~;; z~ !;l ~: I -~ i ~ , ~c; 2~ ~ iE,,. ~; =! 0 ~g ~ ' :IJ ,m CZ rn-; [0 oz ; '9"q.(GtiA~(/IS' llJ -. . \ 0 ,.,> ~ ~ .·-:.,, '-' <f'&(' ~..,'f ../ ,-,Na ENGl'll~~.q.. 18215 72ND AVENJ[ SOUIH KFNT, WA 980J7 (425)251-6222 ( 425)251-8782 FAX C<'/11 fNG1NEEs!ING. LANO PLANNING. SURVFYING. FWIRDNl,ffNTAL SERI/IClS FOR POINTE HERON LLC 5050 1ST AVENUE SOLJTH, SUITE 102 SEATTLE, WA 98134-2400 (206) 762-9125 TITLE< NOTES AND DETAILS POINTE HERON/S' B.C.E. JOB NO. 14200 .;1e P·\ I 40U0s\ 1420:)\;,ral,m•n•ry\ · 420C-~gc d~g 8ule/T me B/S/;014 9:58 A~ Scolo. I" E'~Gll·o~ ~ref -- • • . • ~ ~ Cl • z ~ <( z ~ ~ 0 I ::; ~ c3 -z ~ a 5 w 0 "'oz , 0 !! :,.. E-< ' E-< z ~ -(.:l " U0::: C 11 '~ ::: ~ . . c3 ' 8 e 8 8 ---~ C < w g !;; z " ;;, ~ 0 z This sheet setll forth te11:I e11:cerpts and a Plate 3 lllustraHon from "GEOTECHNICAL AND SOIL ENGINEERING REPORT IN SUPPORT OF PROPOSED FILL, EXCAVATION, AND GRADE-POINTE HERON LLC PARCEL-RENTON, WASHINGTON tES-2334.01)" dated August 2014 prepared by Earth Sc:ilutlons NW, LLC for Pointe Heron LLC. On this sheet E10, that report Is referred to as lhe "Geotechnlcal Report." The contractor should refer to the G&olechnlcal Report fOt eddlUonal Information relating to the subject parcel and the subject fltl, excaYalion, and grade project. Earth Solutions NW, LLC can be contactMI at: 1805 -136th Place Northeast, Suite 201 Bellevue, Washington 98005 Phone: 425-449-4704 Fax: 425-449-4711 Toll Fr!!e: 866-3~71 SpeclflcatJons tor Preparation of Ground for Fill The ground surface that is to receive fill shall be prepared to receive fi~ by remo.1ng any ~egetation. any noncomplying fill, any topsoil, and any o!her unsuitable ma1erials (as determined by ESNW) from the areas In which the fill is to be plaood. Areas of loose natNe soi\ or loose fill soil must be recompacled or replaood with new, compacted fill. In areas lo be filled where the etlsting groul'ld to be filled consists of slopes that are SH:1V or steeper, such areas prior to filling shall be benched Into sound bedrock (or. as determined by ESNW. benched into other competent material). so that 1he fill is placed on a level surface with width(s) determined by ESNW during the course of the fill work. FIii shall not be placed on a sloping surface. The benching shatl create as homogenous a fiU interiace as is reasonably practicable. The ground surface shan be scarified prior to fill placement ESNW should observe the subgrade prior 1o fiN placement. A schematic slope fill detail is included on Plate 3 attached to this report. FIii Material Specifications for the Proposed FOi Two categories of structural fill are proposed for !he subject fill and grade project: (1) a crushed aggregate fill to be used to construct a buttress fill zone along the lace of the proposed fill slopes and (2) a fill to be used to cons!ruct the proposed fill core be11lnd tt1e crushed aggrega1e buttress fill zone. (See Plate 3 for a schematic depiction of the buttress fill zone and the core structural fill zone behind it.) Balh of these categorres of structural fill must conform to RMC 4-4-Cl60N4 (FILL MATERIAL), which states in relevant part: Fill materials shall have no more than mmor amounts of organic substances and shall have no rock or simUar irreducible material with a maximum dimension greater than etght inches (6"). FIii material shall meet the folbwing requirements: a. Construction, Demolltlon, and Land Clearing Wasta Prohibited: Fill material shall be free of construction, demolilion, and land clearing waste except that this requirement does not preclude the use of recycled concrete rubble per Washington State Department o1 Transportation Standard Specifications for Road, Bridge, and Municipal Construction. b. Cleanliness of FIii Materlal: Fill material shall not contain concentrations of ccmtaminants that exceed cleanup standards for soil specified in WAC 173-340-740. Model Toxics Control Act In addiLion lo conforming to RMC 44-060N4 (FILL MATERIAL), each of the two categories of fill materia! must conform to !he resoective applicable technical specificalions set forth below. Buttress Flll llateria/ Specirlcation Material to be used to construct lhe buttress fill zone aloog the face of the proposed Iii slopes shal be crushed aggregate conforming to RMC 4-4--0fiON4 !FILL MATERIAL) and conforming !o the following strength parameters: Internal angle of friction Moist unit weight Maximum aggregate size 46' minimum 145 pcf minim~m 8 inches Maximum fines content (passing U.S. Sie~e No. 200) shal! not eKceed 5 percent. This specified material, which is equivalent to coarse gravel and/or cobble, must be well-graded and angular (crushed). Samples of this proposed fill material must be provided lo ESr.lW for !abora1ory af'\alysis and approval prior to placement. Cttre Structural Fifi Material Specifn:ation Material to be used to construct the proposed fill core to be fllaced behind the crushed aggregate buttress zone fill shal! conform lo the following strength parameters· ln!ernal angle of friction Moist unH weight Ma~mum aggregate size 36' minimum 125 pcf minimum 8inches Maximum fines content (passing the U.S. No. 200 sieve) shall not exceed 20 percent. GEOTECHNICAL NOTES AND DETAILS Cl) ...J Samples of this proposed fill material must be provided to ESNW for laboratory analysis and approval pnor to placement. Placement and Compaction Specifications for the Proposed FIii Buttross Fill Placement and Compaction Specification The buttress fill ma1erial must be placed in maxim1.1m 12-inch loose lifts and compacted to a firm anrj unyielding cood!tion. Adequacy o' compaction must be confirmed by an ESNW representatille at the time oi material placement. At a minimum, three passes in two orthogonal directions using a vibratory drun" roQer should be made to compact each lift of buttress fill material. Because of the aggrega!e nalure of the buttress fill, the specified buttress fill material Is outside the range of typical grain size ror testing under ASTM 0-1557 or equivalent American Public Works Association (APWA) specifica~ons and field density standards. Core Structural Fill Placement and Compaction Specification The core structural fill material must be plaood in maximum 12-inch loose lifts and compacted to a retati\le compaction ol 95 percent, based on the maximum dry density as determined by the Modified Proctor Method (ASTM D-1557), which is a compaction standard compatible with the American Public Works Association (APWA) specifications and field density standards. Adequacy of compaction must be confirmed by an ESNW representative at the time of material placement. Al a minimum. three passes in two orthogonal directions using a vibratory drum roller should be made to compact each 11ft of core structural fltl material. Recommended Construction Seguence for FUI Placement We recommend 1he foUowing construction sequence for fill placemen I (1 )Prior to placement ol 1111 on any particular area to be filled. the ground of such area must be prepared for fill consistent wilh the section under the subheading "SpeclficaUons for Preparation of Ground far Fill" as set fortti on page 7 [of the Geotechnical Report and on lhis Sheet E1 OJ. (2)Place six-inch or larger quarry spalls or recyded concrete aggregate In the existing stormwater detention pond area lo a depth of about five ieet prior to filing that area. {J)Generally simultaneous wilh the placement and compaction of the adjacent Portion of the core structural fill per paragraph 4, below, construct a buttress ffll In the buttress HII zor.e (a) using fill matenal mee1ing the buttress fill material specification set forth on pages 7 and 8 [of the Geotechnical Report and on this Sheet E10J. (b} complying wtth \he buttress fitl placement and compaciion specification se; forth on page g [of the Geotechnic:al Reporl and on this Sheet E10], {c) in oonfonnance with the design se! forth on Plate 3 [set forth in the Geotechnical Reporl and on this Shee'. E10], and (d) placing the material in maximum 12-incl1-thick lilts compacted to a firm and unyielding condllion. The base or the new slope should include a ke~ay that ls at least frve feel in depth. The existing material from lhe southern berm ot the e:o:1sting stormwater pond should be remo>"ed and placed within the core struclural flll zone behind the buttress zone. (See Plate 3 for a schema1ic depiction oi the buttress HI zone, the keyway, !he core structural fill zone, and geogrid matenal and placement specifications.) (4)Place and compact the core structural fill (in lhe core s1ructural fill zone coosis1ent with Plate 3) (a) using fill ma!erial that (i} meets the core structural fill material specification set for\tl on pages 7 to 9 (of the Geotechnical Reporl and on this Sheet E10] and is (ii) near lo slightly over optimum moisture content at the time of placement and [b) placing and compacting thal fdl material so as to conform lo the core structural fill placement and compaction specificalion set forth on page 9 [o1 the Geotechnical Report and on this Sheet E10] Pond Un Ing Specfftcations for the Permanent Stormwater Pond The proposed Permanent Stormwater Pond is to be constructed along the soulh edge of a portion of the toe o1 the existing slope in the north portion o1 the Pointe Heron LLC parcel soulh of SW Sunset Boulevard. The pond should include, at a minimum, a compacted till or day liner conforming to lhe 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual {KCSWDM) Section 6.2.4 specifications. wHh the folbwing amendments: Compacted till finer gradation should include a ~nes content of a! least 40 percent. and the material shouk:l be placed in ma:dmum 6-mch loose tilts for a toml minimum depth of 18 inches. If these conditions i::anoot be met, a synthetic membrane pond liner should be """' Not,s; • Geognr:l Lengths (allen-<ft tay,a,fs) I\Aai!'l "40' lnliemlec:1111:te = 20' • Mmimum l.t'.lng-Term Desigf1 Strenott, LTIJS ~ 7.52C lbsJfl • Geog rid to be a~ ~ Geotechn,cal Elll:lineer Pc~r to plaeemem. • ~~ Flll $~.all iape: from a m:n1ntum ~rilontal liepth of .35 flBel 111 base to S fMt g1 tq:, of slope -Rel~(lyp.) ti co ti< ~ 0 ~a!' .!,?,:,,o m ;;3 ~ii;: c· ii e .2 u:, S? i ~r~ :. .t: ~~ s.....~canc1Ar.o-~ kl,l~l'ld i.-gth t Si ~ ' I - •na Stte<-.gi,, """"'"""""' ' I\ Exit.ting N~b>"P Se,H --&wing Nl'JtNe So,l ' -&isfin9 G,a,:;, ' ~~ie -,. :>o ,o L_ -So:d. in f'M1 ~Seel,: • 1iia 2Q 40 ' -sea.. In Feel 1~.ey GUS 'C-:<adllj/1: .. , "" !071(12,':.?('1i "" "' 2l34.~- ~J PLATE 3 FROM ClEOTECHNICAL AND SOIL ENQINEERINO REPORT Special Erasion Contn:JI Requirements Due to the existing grades across the project she, it is crttical that temporary erosion control measures be planned for and in pla:::e prior 10 and during g,adlng activities. Temporary erosion control measures must include, a1 a minimum, (1) sitt fencing ptacec in the loca1ions depicted on the Barghausen Grading Plans and (2) installation of a conslruction entrance consisting of Quarry spalls, as appropriate, to minimize off-sNe tracking of soil and to provide a firm surface. (ti construction ingress and egress to and from 1he project site is through the Black Ri'ler Quarry to lhe west of the project site, the existing whee! wash facilities near the quarry en1rance driveway with Monster Rood may be used in lieu of constructing a construction entrance consisting of quarry soalls.) Surface water stiould not be allowed to flow over the top edge of temporary or permanent HII slopes. Except for surface water in the proposed Interim Stormwater Pond contemplated as par! of Phase 1 grading arM:I designed on Sheets E2 and E3 of lhe Barghausen Grading Plans (the top edge of that pond must be located no closer than BO horizontal feel from lhe top of the Phase 1 fill slope to the soulh of the pond without ESNW's appro~al-see Sheet E3 of the Barghausen Grading Plans), surface water should not be allowed to pond near the top of temporary or permarien1 fill slopes without ESNW"s appro~al. ln1erceptor drains or swales should be considered for controlling surfar::e water flow pallerns. During construction, ESNW should observe the erosion control measures and provide sup~emental recommendabons for minimizing erosion as ne&Oed Additional erosion and sediment control measures are specified on the Barghausen Grading Plans. Subsurface Drainage Specifications Regarding the Proposed FIii and Cut Slopes The proposed fill and cut slopes shall be provided with subsurface drainage features as necessary for slabitily. Because the subject fill and cut slope proposal includes placing fills in areas where past grading has occurred, in our opinion very little subsurface drainage will likely be required. In order to maintain slope stability during past gradillQ activities on this site, subsurface drainage provisions were installed lo accommcx!ate fiows lhal were encountered. These pro'o'isions appear to be performing as Intended. Means and methods consistent with pre~ious subsurface drainage measures (including subsurface corridors of gravel) to control subsurface drainage shall be implemented as part of lhe grading activities currently proposed. If subsurface drainage measures are ultimately needed, particular rieasures and methods will be determined during site grading depending on the conditions encountered. Subsurface drainage measures must be approved by ESNW representatives to accommodate subsurface flows encountered during the fill, cul, and gradir,g project Temporary measures to control groundwater seepage and surface water runoff during construcUon may involve additional subsurface drains. interceptor trenches, sed1mentabon ponds, andlor sump areas. Where groundwater seepage is observed in areas to be Hied, permanent subsurface drainage measures must be installed. The type of drainage measures to be used musl be de1ermined during construction, once the soil and groundwater conditions are exposed. Subsurface drainage measuras sometimes consist o1 perforated pipes surrounded by drain rock anc wrapped m Hiter fabric If cut slopes e.xpose seepage, such exposed water shall be routed to a discharge point approved by ESNW and. if rweded, an appropria1e portion of the cut slope lace shall be stabilized usir,g quarry spalls or alternative material(s) approved by ESNW. No Terracing of FIii or Cut Slope$ ts Required No terracing of prop:,sed fil or cut slopes is required due to lhe reasons set forth in the Geolechnical and Soil Engineering Report. PERMIT# AFffiOYEP FOR CONB'1RJCTON t'Y Dote: ____ _ ~ Cl Cl " z Cl) -<( z Cl) 0 5 a: w I z ~ ...J <( ~ 0 z ll.. I ~ '0 WW E o f- "' s;! ~o (.) ::, !@ Cl) "' j§~il) z (') "' ~osi~ w Cl) <( ~ IW3'"- ~::, ~ z . <D !l! w 0 Q<Cg~ ll.. I-<( Cl) w ~ Cl) g g ct 0 u. " 2c 0 t5 ~ ~~ 0 z• ~ ,~ w "a ~ X o• z '° zz ~~NN :'.S ~ 0 N ro '3 ~ c:,<ONT'--~~ zo,<.DOO ~~~~ e• ~i ~ NN ~§°~~ ·~ -::.::~~ ES si ~tl c 0 1i1, I ~:~·-. <Ct _t.}\ % X. ' .... ::'; <!I ', ;s. ,' "' ' <' 8, co"'°"" fly·. Dote: _____ f----~-------~CL---------1 tiy Dote ____ _ " "·· ~ ~ BY I APl'f\ ~rr CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS GEO TECHNICAL NOTES AND DETAILS POINTE HERONLS' ~ °' o,rr A/13/1~ R..ENO~U/100 -~ CES =ro DP_ = f'5 SHOW'--= .. ~ ,-SHEET EK) Cf' K) / ; ~ 0 :" ] , "' e ;;, ;;; 1 : ;i [ ~ / f. ' ~ ? ~ > ~ / ' c ; ci z (I] ~ uJ c..i (I] APPEND1X9 Notes: • Geogrid Lengths (alternate layers) Main= 40' Intermediate = 20' • Minimum Long-Term Design Strength L TDS = 7,520 lbs.If!. • Geogrid to be approved by Geotechnical Engineer prior to placement. • Buttress Fill shall taper from a minimum depth of 35 feet at base to 5 feet at top of slope. Geogrid Reinforcing (typ.) 1.5H: 1V Face Inclination See Appendix D and Above Notes for Geogrid Length RR Right-of-Way f Approximate Existing Grade 1., .,10 cir' :.J O> Q) C Q. ~.Q .Q "'I~ en Q. <I) -e1.!!1 a Q. ~ I~ I I and Strength Parameters Existing Native Soil l::::lotizcatal Scale Vertical Scale 0 Field-Adjust Transition from Buttress Fill and Core Structural Fill per Geotechnical Engineer Buttress Fill xt~< (See Notes) c/,. Existing MSE Ecology Block Wall To Be Abandoned -In -Place Bench As Needed To Ensure Stable Interface Existing Native Soil 10 20 40 L LJ~ Scale in Feet 0 21) 40 -LJ Scale in Feet ~ 0 t) u: "O C: C: ro o Q) r-C) C: ~ C: 0 Q __ N ~.s:::: QJ rn = I ro u: Q) ~ w C -(/J._ C QJ O 0 .::; a.. C :5 Q) CD Ct'. u :,:; ro E Q) .s:::: u en Drwn. By GLS Checked By SSR Date 08/12/2014 Proj. No. 2334.01 Plate 3 APPENDIXlO I Cl1Y OF RENTON LUA-03-124-LLA D[CL.r..RATION or LOT LIN[ A:::...,us-M[NT LND-30-0273 SF. 900 I .l.C .. o Woshir1gtM lirniled iiability company, hereby (a_', ced1f1es lhol il is tf1c o\fjner of H1e loods su:!Jed to \ht> lo: line o,,jusl,r,ents sei fo·th her~in. (~,) makes the v:Jricus let line orlj~slments to thc,se ;ands vs set forlh herein rnd (r-) imposes a native grawth prolf·c\Fon ':!{]sernent ul-Jon 1rc-::1 A os described ir the porogrop., conce'r'l1ng lrCJd A set 'or\h in t•,,s ,nslrJrn,ml SR 9nc ~LC c Washington l,rnited hobil ty company ~Y Gor~ M cnci [lon-10 M. Merline, ::~ii) )i,_" N: o/c/~-5/9/90 its >>embec ~~rlin , Trustee r.:_ -. By~~--- D1onne Merlino, Trustee Bv )onaid J one J:mn P M1>riino · f;:im11y T•us!. No li/a/d 8/9/9~!. its member By_O~ ,A.~------- Steven A. Me·lir.o, Tr;;stee , ,1j,{_l,.i} ;L(d ,.'., [:Jyv~~~~~ Tru~;-e __ _ Ar.KNOW! [JGEM[N-:-S STATF OF WAS'-l>NGTON COUN! OF KIN:; ss. z·Nlify tho\ I know or hove sotisfm:\orv evidence that GREGG M::::RUNO 1s the c11:!rson who oµpemec before me:> one adnowleooed thot tie s·g,11cd· the i,1st, .;me.-.'.. -'.)n ooth siot!:<d thal he w'a5 o.;tr1rn11el! tu execute ihe instrunern 01r1 nc:knowlerJgcd it as G trustee o' GARY M ANJ 001\NP. fJ M[RUNO ~A.MILY TRUST NO 1 U/A/0 8/9/90 1n its copo:::ilv as a member d SR SOO L.L.C, u Washington limited liability r:ornpony. '.o be \he free und ~oluntory o:::l of sue" limilerJ iiabilit)' company fo, the uses ond purposes mentioned in he .nstrumenl Coted ~ "1+'2!:D!:J. _______________ _ i 1rL Z ~ --"""'"•,, ,.._,, -----V'· fl08, •,,, ·~ f,,,li~ ___ :.. .bJ.,_ ---.---_:-t}_ :.-~;;o.;/~fo_:.o..r.;--~ s·O."''-l,,,,· .. 't-~ ~fv:j-_____ Not.c·y Public'.__ : ?,t":'..,.cil.~'4-~·'."""-% %-L~~----------------4-w~--±:::~:~--/tJ.__· My Apporrtment Ex;:,1res ',,:'.,/ ... ti , .r,: .. ,· (?·; ,.1·{~/~1;._;~t----- ACKNOWLEDG~JAENlS (con.:'c eiex1 co:urnn) 'iECORDER'S CcRTIFICAlF m'.)4D~\\~0D:)J5 FILED roR RLCORC· r,,1s IL AT ~;Q~ Pt./: IN BOOK DAY or ~O.l'. .... 2004 .. OF l.(,S ,AT PAGE.l.33.AT TH[ R[OUEST OF 8ARG!1AUS£N CONSU; l ,NG [NGINEERS. INC ~"'" Jor,:JY:\ "'1ANAGl~ ,J,Jj-.;~b sun N ··1{f:.CO~os .'.Zro/..fO':l I I '2l oOOI 5 ibB/~33 l CITY OF RENTON APPROVAL: RECORDING NO. VOL./PAGE CllY OF RENTON PLANNING/BUILDING/ PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT riJ.Mlh'w .o.H(I ~rr: n,1s 1 DAY of ___ M.::v·d1. _____ . 7C~ ~:51MO{W.,_i;:J~ -f-':I G, .. ,,, G.11tt1NtV-MG" S1ME Of WASHINGTON i ) ss COUNTY or KING I certil) lho\ know or hove sotisfcclory e1o1dence that OIONN=::- MrnUNO Fs he pe'son who appeared hefore rne and ockrowledq0cc thal she s19ned the 1rr:;l!urnenl. on oath stated t;;(1; lw wos nutl1or12:;d lo execute the i"lstrurneni owl ocknc>wiedced it as a trustee of GARY M. AND '.XJNNA M. M[R_lr\:J FA.MIL':' T~JST ND. 1 L/A/D 6/9/9ll 1n its copaci'.y os c rnemtier o' SR ~100 L ,. :'.: .. o Wash·:-.gtor Fm,tea liability cornpony, to be the-he:,: one vol,rnlo,y ac'. of such limi\ed liability company fu tllf-w,~-; ond pu~poses menl1oned in the instrumen'. Do\•d ~ !/,.'lCl;ti ________________ _ ~ ,..,,, 0/ ·,y ---"'""'",, _ _LLJ.-.~Lffi -~~--'" .... ~~::.~~~'4.;;-: -r.·~5,01,f···.o,, ~,~;~~~:~~-:~'::_:~"~~ -(·"';:~~,~~) Mf 1\ppoinlment c.xpires \·;. .. ":.-:, .. ;_i· .. .:-, '•<: c-;·· W/>.s~~~----·· Si.AT[ or WASHINGTON i ''''""~,,,•' ':iS :::(JUN-:-'( O> KING certify that know or hove su\1sfudorr cvide'l·~E that ;F·~n~ A. MERLINO it the person who appe:Jreo befw<! me end oc:howledged tho( he s,gnec the instrument. on oofr slated \hot he was outl1orizect Lo exeq1te he ,ns\rument ond ack,,,Jwleaqed ,t as o lruste(' of 00Nl\LD ,I AND JOAN P MfRLINO t AMI\_'-' iRU'ST NO ~ L'/A/0 8/9/90 in its n1poc:ily as o me~ber o! SR 900 L..L.C., o Woshmgtor !·ri1ted ![ability C0'":1pony, to Le Lht free and volLmlory ac: oi such l,mited linb1i1\y c:ornr,unv for lht> uses and c>ur~oses mentioned m )tic instruf'"'C"tl Doted ~'J~-----------.------·-·-~ ,),,1 ~,,, """""·' _../{.U_~OJ._ --------="""':--P.01114,-;-;-,-- ---..i. "'·" ..... "'.so,,. ___ fiUf-·-----t./::ita')· Pu!"Jl,r ?-/;:f}-/::-.j·~·''.''' .... t.~·.,.'-1--~, ;~~;E.i~,-,;;,~,;---------{.;~~<j;:~1:;~ 'S~ATt OF MSHINGTON '",/; o,·:,:;r.'.~--1<\>- s::; ,,,,, ..••• .- COUNTY OF KINC I ce-lify that I kn0w r1• ho~e ~(ltisf0::-tory evidence h(E I.IICHII.::... J t.4[Rur~c, is I!;(' perso~ wtw oppeore:J before rne ,inc w:b0wledaf~ that he s,gried the i'istrument, on ooih sto\ed ti-.ct he ~cs outhuri:Zf'd to execute the m:strurneni ond ack<1owledoeo 1: cs o trustee of DONALD J AND ~IOAr-, P. MERLINO FAMICY rR:.JS' NQ ' IJ/A/D 8/9/90 ,~ ils copoci\y ns o rnemher of SF: 90D L.L.C., o Woshing\or: limited :ability cornpony, to t,e 1:·1e free . and voluntary ac o! such limited liability corT:IJ(HW for the I uses and purposes men\ior1ed in the i,istrur1cnt I llia..4 I,}, tl d' --•"'"''.,, I ,1e . __ f.2tl:,'f________ . ,-::;.. . .e.o,,,,;•,,,, I ~ 11,w "'i/1_ -~ j' <!~. ·,(·:Oi, i;--.~O \ '' . --_llL..._l(J!Dl --------....f~9*'"--.,....~,:::~-.-i-\ I I nc1ue :: :L, ~\O·" r ~ ~ ' rJ/_ ' -' " ..... '"' ' ! Titie J ...... ------Nola y Publ,c.. ----""t~~-?'(f,.}v .-'g j 1--~j.:':Qr_____ -. -. -· -~-"-~0~~LU-"',.ef My Appoi•1iment i::xp1res '•,,;-,:.,F·w~s~'·''..--: ''""""'',.~· DEPARTMENT OF ASSESSMEMTS EXAJ.'IN[D AND APF'RC\\'CT• TH:':, -1.L [W( o,-zt]{)/).1:~--· 20n~L S:.c::l::l_~"io.hkc __ ~yso~ a ' . ?J:1,tf.,a)(i,w_Jlt_l{,;)1~---- SC/,LE nux: __ ,_:i.· .,oo l 00 ,.. I lc'<CU 200 F'T DFPUTV .\S'.'iES50R ACCOC:lf' Nl)l.AB[R .l32.3-0!I:.90DQ_g:.__0_(;!0 :a:::ir::-10,-..i or S 1/2, S.i3, T. 2~5 N., R. 4 [, W.M SR 900 LL.C. S 1/2, S, 13, ---~- LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT T, 23 N., R, 4 E,, W,M, Df'tR"iliNATION ON T:-tE Sl\S1:=; OF THE R[PRES[\JiATI0~5. ·-!rnE3Y SU3Mlii[C. if-':[ C:'TY OF RENTJI\ ADIJll,J'Sff:'t.1,JR QF THE DEPARTMEN-o; PtAr~NINl;/tJUl~JIN(.;/ P(lf.:lLIC WORKS HEREBY :---Ji\':'; APPROV((: H!S ~o~· UN[ A.OJJST.·~:::w NC ~U1\-·C3-124-l.A UNDER TH[ Ph'-JV!Si'.J\t.; '.)!" c~!l\~"Y'.TR 7 o:: -r:L.: 4 OF THE ~ENT:::ON MUNICIPAL CCi}[ ,\),;.( u)~, 6 "'il-,,, ...... ~ ...... {,l;·MIN!STRA1().fl or PLAN.\/iNG/BU1_QING/PLJBt..1C• "o'R~,~<S~. ~O"f.?; TRAC A L!A':E. SP 9:;o l..L.C., c Woshi'"loior. limited ··oc>ilitY com;:iony, 'le~et,v oec1ores T,act A as dep.cled on t;,~ Lo~ Lint< AdjJst~e-'1; lo lie c trod for ope'1 space arid preserJCt1on :_if r10tiv{' vege:.ut1or; SL.bjec 1 to (ci: Ar eascmen: lo the -'."; I~ ti Remor cliowing o clea 0 in,; of o 20-fc::it w,de st·ir.' of lo-10 1n n qere•allv '1orth-so11th direcli::in Gver. unde· on0 ac-oss w:y ;:iorl,on of T;o:::l A \·,y 1nsto:lc'.1on. ,1se. mo:ntcn::mce. '<cpc,r v~c rc::o'1strudion of c wn'.tr mom ond a:,p~rfr.10·-.ccs !here:,:;, enc (h} A rf'served dro:'1oge e:is'c'rne:it 'o, lhe be··,<!fi\ ol Lot cv'. this 1.ct L·ne AC_ius1men'. allowing !he owner,::' at Lot end thoir heirs, Success,:;•s, D€:"'so·cu· 'e;:in°sc1:a\,1es O:"',d ass<gr,s iv c.:l,:,01 sir"ps of l;::in:,c' of up !o LC feet w1dF ir, o ge-,i:rclly north-1c,· soutr d1(ect,ori at th"' !ric(ll_,vn 01 nl: culn1r:~ dis:110,ging soutr hm: otiuttmq ~l'i :-iuriset ~o.Jle"ar~ (SR 90:.;;1 a:nd ,'"!stol, u:;;e, nionlam. r~:::,rn' end ,·<·co:1struc: dilc!"Je~, e;,,r; a10,,· ;.>1f.1~:S :md appurtenances thereto ove,. unde·, crid ;:;c,oss !fiosf' s:r1ps cl or,d S;.1~iec1 to t"l::it wo1w mcur ec:c-ern-0•1' ornj he'. reser..-ea dro1iiaqe eas-ernent. n .;n(,v~ .;:irvw\h pr~:ediori ecsement (NG:->[") 's r·erehv 111'1p0sed u;;,on T,o("[ A ;Or prese~v1nq nct1ve l'f:::JE!'.a\,011 ur,d f<.Jr t'1e cor1:rol of Sl.'rfoce water and eros,on, rnG1;1\c!Hor:ce of slopt slab ::t.\f. and ,•isuol enc ouro, buffeimq. prchib1'..ir,q ail r:,rese11t and futu.-e owr1e•(s) of ";",·oec A from ddu1b1n; any tri:,es c• ot~f'' Vf-1:Jeloti-.:in wth,r, the \GP[ unless d0'1e pursuon~ tc E') press w,:tten permissjo,, o~ the City d Renton ":his pru,.11bihor sho!I be enforceabl€'. by the City of Re'ltor, Except as proviced 'o:· abo·,e, the owCJer(s:· !Ji iroct J. mov -iot ed. pr,.ne . .-:o,er ,..·,t 1 fi:I. ,em011F or do~oge the "f'ge~otiori ""i1hi=-i i! oroyn:Jec '1ow<?~er. thai !he e,wrier(s) r'"!ay iris1oll londsccp·ng w,th1~ i: f",11' P·\OlC10~\7t.J9\svn.-e~\r-!oh\ 763~8\.A 1 d,-·9 D<ll~/T,~ C' / 3C/2C04 09 42 Xole LANO SURVEYO<;;'S CERllF•CAff c;.HAc, --I SR 900 L.L.C, -r --=-r==i soc "" r,oo 1 c,'{10 p ... ;IIQC<! )(·~!s --~ e,S\ 18215 72ND AVENJ[ SOUTH · >HIS LOT LINE ADJUS,M£N' CORRECT,Y SEPRESEN'S~ .,_ KfNl "98''2 . LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT A l.1AP MADE BY ME OR ·JNOER WY DIRECT ' '\~' • '' i SUPERV!SION IN C'.)N>CRMANCE WITH T!-E REOJIREMENTS 1/J ~ ' 1-425)251-62,2 I LUA-03-124 OF THE APPROPR:A'!T STATE .l'iND cour-..TY ST . .e.T._ITE AND ..-'i'( = '42S);·:.1-87f.2 rAx ORD:l~ANCE !N UEC.:E Bt. 2 J n ,:., 1 -m, f! CML tNGl~EFR~(; LJ,M) rtl<NN1NG <.PO , r::, Sl.l'MYl~G fNVfRONIJE~TAL S~!MCTS (;,I~ • ,:1,.-:C,~q,. D1~N 8> OATf JOB NO 7639 PCW '2-·22-03 2:'.)25 C. i:N£.\ H"IRE~ Qi- Ci-!KD s, SCALE SriECT C.JS ,· C 200" 1 or 3 t CITY OF RENTON LUA-03-124-LLA Mb.lfO~\\ '3 000\5 SR 900 L.L.C. LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT S 1/2, S.13, T. 23 N., R. 4 E., W.M. 1 RECORDING NO. VOL./PAGE 1(,f I .2,34 LN0-30-0273 EASEM[MTS AN:.) RE:ST;;::cT.:)t~S 1. Fasemen: br on electr,c trc,·,sr-iiss1:,r, svstem recorde~ Marer 1 L 1916 tmd{'' K,r,c Coun'.y RecorC:1119 No · 1::i84C:·J L Res:nci1ons sPI fo,th in unrecoroed UUeveiopment Agceement be:wecn lhe c;t1· o' ;;?er(on and SP 9DO ( .l C .. o Washington lirrikd l,c!:Jility compary, d::iled De~err:~•':'r 10. 2003 3 Metters (i: anyJ '.'1:J\ may be d,sck:se(! by tH• survey per'ocrneC by l:lor9houscn (onsL;l\in,:; ~rgineers me recorded Decernbe~ 12. 1990 unae· Kini;; Coun'.y Recordinq Nu 901 2129007 SURV[YOR'S !~CHES A: title ,nlorrn:-\io'l shown on :nis r-10 nos t>eP.n obtaineo frorn tr:e "Seconc Subd;vis,on ::;L..orcnt'!e" rs~ued by 1,nsr1dia'l Title msur,:ince C.:orrpony un:'Jp.· OrdP., No 2no1 (141 do:ec i),:,c,:,mber 15, 200.:S. In P'P.ponnc lh,s map. Barg>iousen Co"\sultin(J t.ng1neNs. t11c hos conducted r,c ir,oe:ienden\ title search ond 1s unaNO'e of a~y ;ille ,ssues offec!r"lg the prorerty oti,e, them tl'.r,~t' d,sdosed hereon Ir p-epc-inG 1his ,nap, 8argl1ousen Consul\mq Lnq,~ee~s. Inc hes rc11ed so!ely or the otmve-refe~enced Scconc; Subd"·;s,on Guoro'1~e€ as :o th& propwty'~ td,i;-co:-icii\,on 2 T11e basis for this mop's geomeuy s the Re<::ira of Survey ::lrcw1nq perforrned by 8orghocJsen '.:onsi..ltint; :ngineers. Inc. 1e,~ordec Dl'cc111ber 12 '99C u1der Kmg ;~unty RP.cnrrJing Nc.1 9Q12129007 , c;.HAv LEGAL DLSCRIPT()N f'AR:=EL A (TAX LO: NO 1 32-"5'.)4 9006) Tllo\ portion of ::;overnmen1 :...ct 7 fr'. Sedior \ 3, fowe1sr,ii:: 23 t~orlh. Ranqt: ~ Lost. Wiilcr-iet\e IAerician. !yint; SouH; :;[ Su1,5d H,(,jhwuy (;->•1mo .. , Sl::itc H:,;hwoy No 2 ond als0 know,, o~ s~: 9DO. Empir,· Woy South. l.'orlir. Luther '\ing Jr Woy Snuth U'l(l SW Sunset 8tJul,:>vard:, and North of ti,e rrqt,:-:>f-woy of Ch,cogo, Mrlwoukee and Sl ;.,OJ! Ro::way Comp:my 01c F'o:::ik Coos: Roi.lroo:: Cor-ipony '.Burlingbn North~r~, one Santa I e Roill'l·ay Co"'riponv): INCLJOING vc:::ated Sou\n 140tr. Sl'ee\ le k o Beo~on Coal 1./rne Cornpa'1y Road) lying ,vi:n1~, so,;J pm:1ur, uf Gc11erwnrc.·d Lo! 7 pursuan'. '.D vo,::ol,on under K111q Cou~1ty c~rnrr1i~siori(.'rs' Journo1 Volume 29. page .) :iituo\e 1n the City of Renlor\ County of K1119. Slo\e of Woshriglon rARC[L 8 (lAX LOI NCI 1.:::.304 Jc· C) Oho' port·on of t,e Nortt-1,01f 01 t".e Southeast quarter of Section 1.3 1ownsh,p 23 l\lo,th, Ra::mqe 4 East. Wiliometle Mer,dion. lying Sc.1 utr. ot Sunset H1gh""oy (P11mory Slat!;' I--J1qhwo1 No. 2 a:10 o;c,o hnowr cs SF 900 F':'tl1re Wov Soti•.h. Marlin l.J(hef >(,re; Jr Woy S6Jth nnD SW Sunspl Bouievor:c.: one north o' the r1qht-o'-woy o'. Chicm;;o, Miiwoukee ano Sc Poul Rai111,oy Company DnC Pocii1s Coast Roilrood Cor-1pan:-(Burlir·~ton Norther11 or1d S::wio Fe Railway -::::o . ...,..,prmy): INC~UD!N::; both (1 ) 11oca\cd South '4-'.)tl' Str-eel. (o.k.c. Beacor. Cool Mirie Cornpuny Road) lving wiih,~1 srnci portior, o! :ilf Nor!t1 half ol lhe So·~theost qua·ter rursuanl to vocutian uPcier KinG Cou'1(~ Comrrissioners' JOU"nal Volu~e )9. rage-3 end i'2) the vocat1'~'l p0rtion CJ' 82nd Aven,,ie South 1yir; ... ithir sc,d pori.;on ol the Nmtb hnli c' the So,Jltie:Jsl q~cr!!!r. fY.CEPT that porlior of the North holf of ct1".;' Sc>utheost q~orler. ly,nG Scu~h of ,a line drow'! frorr 1h~ NO'!hwcste'iy corner or ~o: 15 ,~ 3bc>< 13 of smG plot d F'.iriinqton and rvnnirg thence Westerly c Ois(ance d '25C fo1d :ca p::;int o.~ the Norlhcny lirie oi :c;air: righ1-of-wov :]( the Chicoao. "i!iJ,.,.,:wk~e O"d S!. Paul Rnilway :::0rr1pony onc1 Paci!i, C.ocsl Roil,·oc::! Company, sois:i pa1m :iei-19 o! r•r,;llt cw9les 'O the rerile,,line of the ma,n tracks of tre Pncif1c Cons; Roilrocid Cornpan; (Burlinglon Northerr. and Sa"lc Fe RailwcJy Compon:,·), o\ o point tr1erem dis\onl ooou! 2050 fee\ Westerly. ;:-;e::isured atone., lr1e cenierline of lhe T,oin track. of the PQcif,c: Coct.: Roi·r00~ Company {GF.Jrlmg:o'r Northern o,id c,an;o ~e Hoilwoy Co'T1;xmy), a~ new, loc0ted olorc said riqnt -o1·-'t"OJ', frcm the jntersecbon ot so,d certer·ine witn the East lino? of ~aid. Sect,c,1, ~3: s·tuote i.·, the Cj;)' o,. Ren:o~. County of -<,ric;, State of Woshin9lori SR 900 L.L.C. i -~q.:_ ~.A\. 182•5 72ND All[NU[ SO,lTH ' -,-. V: KEN'" WA 98032 4:1 --i. (42~n51-fin2 .,. .,. (4/'>1 2~1-8782 PAX LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT LUA-03-124 --·-·------- 0 0 U 'I, .1; !'.ML (NG'Nf(P;l"lC .J,Nf) \'.>'..ANllll'-1(: IS'"< '<-'? SuFN(Y'r,;., ENY!fNl'<MfNJA.. srn\llC..[$ '"'1tr.; E"ttG.\"'""~ Cl , 5-0G JWN e, ~.Tf JOB NO PCW ] 12-22-03 r-:::HK[J a, SCA...E SHCG J,S 1" =-200· 2 7639 or 3 CITY OF RENTON LUA-03-124-LLA :..N0-.30-0273 t./'I,' COR ~ t,l--2.l-4f -------"~Q.£~\ r----- 26bJ.C(, V SR 900 L.L.C. LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT S 1/2, S.13, T. 23 N., R. 4 E., W.M. ,,.---"i 1/t COR ,/' (iT}3Cr4 ~HflON /' M()~lJ~lN' I 1850) RECORDING NO. 11.6oJ/-D:, I I goco 15 VOL./PAGE I iGE / 2.3!;, _ _]_ __ ------- ]\ ~I {'-&t-l~t.,,s, w(~E NSTJ..4"5YW -------26~2 . .19___ ---- ,-NF. COP / :J-2.o-~C ---------1\ _ ~-(('ITY if RE:i1D!..: v------t ~clN.il,lf"N1 ,UD) '"·~· NOTE: ,'.U l;[,\Rl~C$ N01ED AS (Ri AR!: "l~c"A: t"S'"'''·'' ,;_1,1?'."-'-if.l"'1•1"1\.Jl> p 1--'.)Jl-l~b p:::;S ,(fo-' '"' . a L\S'. LIN~ C(.-----0 8ROWNW(U C.L.C N0 , 1 ~ 7 EA.st LJNE J~i'lel!ON ........_ Af,'1)11~ I -------+ i ' < ' Ll4 LI~ .• ·.ti C\I cl3 -.,1.r~::-~1'\\1:·. £ ,iv-,,,,~_qr$ f -~~71.1.eas;~li.5:, \.b ;:<.Jc V cov·1 LOT 7 I "I' '".j = w5 ;/;;; ~ 8 ;_; P. -!l C L' ----------- (PR 11,! A 1-? y ST Arr /--111----;-,.,,0------------_ ......... C;, ;, ) --c:8 \~!-EW 10-IJNf LOT 1 I.IC.713,c Sf (26.26± A(;R[SJ ::-..._ '\.'·TRACT A 36,?,I\± s r (0 ~J:t ACRL"S: . "1-~,~ '"": ~"'.' ""'' ·401.1 $l. ~i--..•.. ---!U fvACA.r1.[l, rW'~~c ."' to,D ,~ .. -~-"'"'() ·~'{f\<Jt J!t.sl ',?.l'.~1t. -~- i '6_ --------------~- \~~\{)}', ~cie::::'°" \IC'L \~ 'r' ., s , '""di". , .. ,.7,·o, ·,,. .';fee n <' ,.,,,, ,, -:,,· \~· f, 9:-, ,_. -' ------------------- t:,""5 -A:.-291 _ e 1, s. .........____---......... ." --·--.....:__,",; '..._ ' •• , ''§ -....::::,'..::..,,-:-; t1-c:::HRtlN[ {l , ~ 01 W-.ILRQAI) IAAJILl)I[ z"j : er '-,\ !RACKS i: I I~~ CIJ!'t,I[ TAfl:.l '._,~ 2 jc CURVE I LENGT~ ' RA:l-1.JS 1··-~ ~ i,; ,-~~1 ,74_7ji'J?,j"g"().3 -~-~1~ I C2 665 4Q 1$191).3 .29·~..:_~· ~' ' CJ 5J5.28; 185~.(H 1c:?9's1· ~Ir C-,_·4 !..~!.,_O_fll_ l!lM.DJ -G"O~-~ri; :: I~-- ' C5 I)• 941 18!4 C3 Y';,~'46· ~ [ J-----C6 19a4:, ,em.c:i. c-~~-fJ ,,.. , C7 5\6UI 182~.0.l ,f:;,-,Q3: e, ~e, mCl.,_ 1fl,4_:)3 nn::21 ;:s: ~ 1:,8()3' ;/g5:)j ~-04::i:J 'f, /:; 1/4 COR ['Is J" af/.ASSY IN ~-_ -~;;2."oll__ _II .:1: / IN CONC P0$1 ------------ ----------------f------- ~ " '.i 1..0'· ._ \.\l~·-"''_(ll(l, ·._,,. '-...~~ ~-......_ 'i --.....:? Ii' . ' "·_-: .:~ ' t•'~ ",;' c,;-:\" 4" ' P;,:er,QN-/ nr TnACl A "c (J:l~::i" ~c\~~.<> "1 ,{)'+!'!l~rs s0"''<"11¢' 9-1:; \Isl'-91,, pl,S §: ,4.,,' . .::: .~: .> ~~ ::~ ~,"' ,r£ 1/~ COil r/ ,)-2'-<C "/" ti i:'i . " ~-i !1.1 I ~I -·1· ~.';; . 0 ~It I s 0 100 200 400 E~ .. E1'5 .. "';;;;;;;J 1· = 200' -----~----1-': ,J-23-4[ ;' "' )&%a, -----V -------_______________ se___?·,~~ SW ~:)R_! ~'fu,_ _ JMg 6.:r -----------------~~---;~-·9k3,.;~ I~ c1.,,;:.:,~, NO IE: ~/" "" -¥' 1J-23-4f ---:; 9s!AS5Y IN (:.f6£ IN CONC P051 ~?~~t".:. . -----~'\ Q,'S,S Of IMP -RECORD or SURVfY '( N.67~0---'-'.:If" 0" RFW()I,, RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NU~8£R "· -----·--2u.s.o, i.lOfll.li,j(NT f!'J", 9012129007 RiJTATfD TO CITY Of ~ RENTON HOR!20NTAI... CONTROL f:<1Y 0' R(M(lw j" (ROTATION A.NGL£ 000(}'14• RIGHT) .!OIIIJI-JU-11 f11!!>4 ~GH~u~ 'B215 72ND AVENu[ SO\JT•I 'Q'"~ KENT '(jA 9BOJ2 G:J *f,. [425)25'-€222 .,,. ,. .-~ ( 425)2"5' -8782 F Al. C ' O <;_ . ~ ('.Ml (NC N(£RINC lANC P'J•IU<INC <$> 0 '<!t"": SURVE:YJNC llMl<UNt,l[l,lAl SERVICES (}' .-;-,,<t- 'lvc ENG'~~ DWt-. BY CtiKD. 8Y SR 900 L. L. C. LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT LUA-03-124 DAT( I .JC:-fi NO PCW ]'.,;-22-0.3 I SCALE SH[El DJS \" : 200' 3 7639 o::-3 APPENDIXll CJ) z <( ...J a... z 0 I- <( 1- ...J CD <( I w a: ,S/NOl:l3H 3lNIOd SN\11d NOl.l \I .Ull8\IH31:1 ON\/ '·:::rs·3 '30\INl\11::10 V'll1:13lNI 'ONI0\11::10 -.L33HS 1:13AO::l 0 ~- ~ i CJ z 0 <( a: CJ 1-w w I CJ) a: w > 0 () 8 "' I ... ~ ~ 0 . . I I I :i----~-- L _~ ,S/NOl:l3H 3lNIOd SN\11d NOl.l \I .Ull8\IH31:1 ON\/ '·::,·5·3 '30\INl\11::10 V'lll:l3lNI 'ONI0\11::10 -!33HS 1:13AO::l gi;~-i:9L (901:) 001>1:-l>Cl86 \IM '3Lil \138 t:m 3.1108 'Hl.lnOS 30N3A \I !SI agog ::,-,-, NOl:l3H 3lNIOd NO.LN:,U-1 i!O .U.IJ ' ~ " , • ~ e I ffi w I m ~ X w D ;;:; .001:-.1 S]::lli\!J]S l~lN]~NO~I/\N] '::JNIDll<Jns ''.JNINN'l'ld ON'fl ':JNl~3]Nl:JN] 11/'J::J XVJ l9L8-lSl(Slt>) c:ug-ic;l(c;zv) lrD96 VM '1N3>1 1nN3AV GNZL Sll8l 1:kJ<.JV 31'1'0 ' Ml t ' ti ~ ~ I " a • 8 I * t- ~ a: w a.. ;; ·oN aor ·3::rn j ' R, ,r, ' I ~ ' iii, ;;. l I :,; ' 1' l ~ " j ' C . -~! " ;; ' -= ;i-' -;; :,; l --! -" "' " " "' 0" g " 0 u " .5 I " I I "' I " " C " ! ::i. C '5 ' , ii ii 8 ! ~ --" ' -ii = .c " C " " C. I ~ -C, "' ;; I I ;f ; " ' " s ; """ • ' (Ir~ • ~ a• 8 , I i! • i I • !is • a• rn E "-- ,; 0 ~ ~ -'•·+· lJ ~ ~01SIA3tJ ON APPEND1X12 OOZ1'1 ON sor 3 '.) 8 ,S/NOl:l3H 31.NIOd d\f~ J..Hd\f!:IOOdOl SZl6-Z9L (901:) OOVZ-M:186 VM '31ilV3S zm 3llnS 'Hl/108 3nN3,W .LSI osos :)11 NOl:l3H 31.NIOd S3:JIM3S l'li'lN]f'1NOcJIM] ':)Nl/..]AfJnS '~NINN\fld ON\f" '~Nl~JJNlclN] 11/\1) XV..l l'9L2-l£l'(£2'.t) UZ9-l£l(£Zt) lT086 VM 'lN..:l)l HlfCS 3rN]A~ ONZL £lZ9l ..;:.~~,,,,1~N3 t)lf1~) t~~r~_\, \C~'JA; 0 " [ 0 ~ ~'>;,.1-19'1) t ~ ;::==============3=~=11===================·8=0=~===============1r• ZJ w• I- ~ a: w D... ...J ...J LL 0 z <( w 0 <( a: 0 z : 0 a: w w· I <t w w C, z I-< z a: 0 z "' D... "' 0.. 0 :f z w g/ 0 Cl) ~o 0 r;;:; .I D... "' CJ) --o: 0 s: a: D... (.) 0 LL ~ !z u. w 0 0 a: "' I-~ a: CJ) 0 w D... ~ D... u. 0 ::::> Cl) z i .-... < I- C/) <( w '-' D... <( ~ '.i: D... <( a: 0 0 D... ~ g ,S/NOl:l3H 31.NIOd d\f~ J..Hd\f!:IOOdOl NO.LN:3)1 .'10 A.LI:) NOU '<tnNLlNO'.) 80:I I 133HS 33S 'I ' I I I / ; ! I I I r ~1:H.:1110.Ps~ cJdcJ'li' 31'1i'O J..0 I I I I I ,/ I I a: • u. 0 0~ i'= w u~ • • ~ I I I ' I I ,: / ~OISl,\J<J j " N ' ' a.. <( l IN ~ ' I i ' >-1!! I i5 g el a.. Hi ao II• <( I ~ :.- ~~ i i1 0~ a.. .. 0 I- ~ gg I I I I / ON APPEND1X13 POINTE HERON LLC PARCEL AND GRADE & FILL PROJECT SITE with City of Renton Regulated Slopes / ........... ... 690 ·, .......... + ........... PROPOSED GRADE & FILL PROJECT SITE ., ' .......... ............. .......... ______ -·-·-·-· -·-· ... _ ,, .. -··-'"' --·-. \J . • ~/f ,;-'"' \ ~;;, l .. 0 ,_:;.,, _;,,"':;"' "'~"' ..t;i:;1, -1~' iii/.-ifi "' #ft ... ft~~:;,'!: _.,,. BRS C_:A ,d;i'' 345 690 Feet "" ",,..'.,:. ~. _,,l" :;• '} I ,;!' __,, ... / Information Technology -GIS RentonMapSupport@Rentonwa.gov WGS_ 1984_Web_Mercator_Auxiliary_Sphere 05/28/2014 : ' ' ·, ·, ·, -c,~ ~":1"··- ·, ·, ·, ·, ·, ~---~ ~~4-,_ ·,' ;,,· ,,. . ""i, .. ,. ,· "I ' ,,, I i i { I i i ; ; ; i -+ .~#;-is r i .;,'-I.' ;' . . .• > . '-i '·~·Ii;. ...... ,· .:• .... ·~ "· ' ,-,,._ """~:,e;.~ A,:..,, -· POINTE HERON LLC PARCEL BOUNDARY ,,,,., . r ·"r·· , .. :;:·. . } } i: cf ·:t ·. •.'... I #"t CH-~ 'l ,,~ 1 .... .i ' ,, -,r• ,j . _,,.., ... ,-. ,''\J; i·• This map is a user generated s:01.1c 0~1tp-..;: f·om a·· lnlernel r'lapping sile and 1s to: reference only. Cata iayers that a:ipear on this map rr1ay ur may no: be ac:::wate. c..;rrent J~ o:herwise reliable Map title, labeling, parcel boundary and proposed project site added by Halinen Law, 8/12/2014 THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION Legend City and County Boundary Other -' City of Renton l ., Parcels Slope City of Renton >15% & <:=25% .,~~ >25% & <=40% (Sensitive) • >40% & <=90% (Protected) • >90% (Protected) Environment Designations D Natural D Shorelme H~h Intensity D Shoreline Isolated High lntens1ty D Shoreline Residential D Urban Conservancy D Jurisdictions Notes None 0 ~on Finance & IT Division APPEND1X14 mil V3'l'I Mj()IJ~ID' C~~ ~"'"C<"..S JN,l.J!'lJ) 0,00 0C,, S3d0.S 3003 filllOS AvHS'I 03SOdOOd NO 038118 \131,\1 318\ld0,3A30 31,flil1,j MN-NOtl3H ~ - f I I I I i ' I I I I i ! r 1 • j '" BOl86 'VM '3'Ul 1138 o.-., 1-ilflOS 3f'l'J3A II HlOI -gru3 :,,, NOtl3H a!NIOd ""' I I I I ' , I ·• 1, I 1 \ )' "'"'' """' Sl'.MIH'i lVI•lloNOl!W<J ''.ll,l.lJN,n~ ·-· • ~-, ~ ·- ""'"'""'°"" \ ., \ I I I I \ ' \ \\ \, ' \ ·.·. . \ . .. \. \ • .. \!o , ··-. ~,.~~ 'ij~,i:i ~~~lt. ·~111NV1,J Q"l"l "ONlbll"v.l"l 1~:J xv, zg19-1w{~zt) lU9-ISl{Slf) Zrn\16 VI/I "LN3~ ,unos 311N3AV GNU ~ilBL (/) w a: 0 <t l{) C') " +I ::? 0 LL (L ~ <t w a: <t w __J m <t (L 0 __J w > w 0 w a: :::, f--:::, LL >-a: <t :, a: [L ---, \ ' \ \ \ \ ~. -I ~ " ... ' ' . \ ~ 00.M ~,," ... g"I\ a: w f--0 w z w :::, (/) a: w f--0 a: (/) w 0 w f--(/) <t a: <tw l{) :::, wa: l{) f--a: 0 "' (/) :::, 0 <t +1 w LL a: w II 0 LL (0" 0 a, >-<t OC\i <t 0 I f--+1 3:: 0) f--Q II I a: LL +1 0 wt:: 0 (/) :, z 0 a: f--0 :,,'. (L w I z 0 0 (L (J 0 <t a: __J a: (L m (L __J f--f--z w w [[ w 0 (/) (L 0 w F oz a: z 0 Vl <t f--w a: (/) f--<t __J w w w >-__J 0 a: 0 f--[[ <t :::, a: z (/) wa: f--Ow :::, w (J (J LL f--a: a: <t LLo oz w 3:: w<t wO 0 :, Q st Ia: 3: a: 3:: l{) f--w I 0 :::,I f--I 0 ow f--f-+i 0 (/) 0 II (/) f-- 0 3:: 0>->~ LL w LL <t .,,-Q I ICL a, z J, s: ~o ~ a: ~ I LL 0 LL LL LL~ 0 LL oo Oo I <t <t <t f--<t (L w w wI WO a: a: a: 0 a: a: <t <t <ta: <t [L <( ' I 7r I /\ ' I / I I i I '/ S3d0.S 3003 Kl/lOS /\l•HS'I G3SOdOOd NO 038118 V31JV 3"18Vd013A3Cl 31Jf\lfbal Al!Vrtlald N003H =IOd I /j I i _1_ I I ' 1, I I / l ... 80l86 VM '3"1J..l V3S H.LI10S 3nN3,W HlOI -ms 011 NOIJ3H =lad I', ''I , I!, f. I . I .,. .,; .. ,, O]'<J ca""'"''' " ,.,~,, '"""''"" "' "~•U . ... ""' '"' ,...,...., Bl1N1'1S 1'1Nl~~Q>,"""l '1l<Llll""1S ·~s,NN.--,d o,.-i ·~Hial3"~Nl lW~ XV.:I l~Le-.£l(£l1) lU9-.<;Z(£Z1'} lrOBG 'vM '.N.:I~ H110S cnN~~~ o~u <;L~91 (J) w a: u <( f's <o;j" Lfi +, <( 0 ll. 0... ~ <( w a: <( w _J m <( 0... 0 _J w > w 0 w a: ::, r-::, ll. >--a: <( :;-a; a: 0... ---, I I I I I I I I I I I I I ,_ I \ I '"T , -0 §i·· ~.. ,l 00?1'1 l'l\rt-1'0 (J) w a: u <( (0 lO N +< >--<( 3:: I ll. 0 ' r- I 0 a: r-w w a: r- (J) w a: ::, r-::, ll. w 0 ~ ' r- 0 0 ll. ' 0) (0 ll. 0 <( w a: <( (/) w a: u <( 0 0) " (/) w (/) a: w 0 a: <( 0 <o;j" <( lO 0 g; +I ~ >--<( 3:: ' ll. 0 I r- I 0 a: r-w w a: r-C0 w a: ::, r-::, ll. ll. 0 I r-a: 0 z +• 0 w r- <( w a: 0 w m 0 r- (/) <( 3:: w 0... 0 _J (/) _J _J [[ <( I 0 0 "' i.il 6 u ll. 0... a3 z r-w 0 w 0... i= (/) 0 z O 65 w a: r-<( _J w >--_J 0 r-[[ a: z w woo r-a: 0 <( ll. w ~~I a: ~ !; ~~@ 0 3:: 0 ~ w ll. ±: z 1t.0 a: '!2 (\J 0 ll. ll. u.. 0 0 <( <( <( WWW a: a: a: <( <( <(