Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLUA15-000039 3 of 3_Misc 1HALINEN LAW 1.:,.1"' · !~1i:r·tc'1·, f) .A:·or•·t;\· .~· ! ·-1.' davidhalinen@halinenlaw.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 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 (1) Reiteration of Request for a Variance Concerning the Proposed l.SH:lV South- Edge Fill Slope and (2) Updated Justification for the Variance Request Dear Mr. Vincent and Ms. Dolbee: My client Pointe Heron LLC hereby (I) reiterates its April 24, 2015 request for a variance concerning the proposed I.SH: IV south-edge fill slope that is part of Pointe Heron LLC's Grade and Fill Permit Application submitted on January 20, 2015 and assigned LUAIS- 000039 and (2) updates and expands the section of the April 24, 2015 variance request letter concerning justification for the requested variance. Five additional appendices that were not submitted with our April 24, 2015 letter have been attached to this letter, and appendix numbers have been updated to correspond to the text of this updated variance letter. Pointe Heron LLC requests that this updated variance application be considered in the alternative along with the previous modification request that was submitted as part of the Grade and Fill Permit Application on January 20, 2015, a modification request that was explained in more detail in a June 1, 2015 letter ( with its 14 supporting attached appendices) that updates and supersedes the original (January 20, 2015) modification request letter and its attachments.1 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- 3-05011 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 1 Note that the appendices attached to this updated variance request letter have identical numbering and contents to the appendices attached to the June 1, 2015 updated modification request letter. City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June 24, 2015 Page 2 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 grade and fill 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 4-9-2500 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 I .SH: 1 V 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 my January 20, 2015 modification request letter (and in my updated June I, 2015 version of the letter that supersedes it), in view of RMC 4-4-060N6 and other applicable code criteria discussed in my modification request letter, the fill slope portion of the proposal qualifies for a modification per RMC 4-9-25001 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. 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 submitted to the City the April 24, 2015 request for a variance under Subsection B.5 of RMC Section 4-9-250 by means of a letter from me to CED (with supporting attachments), which is updated by this letter and its attached appendices. On Pointe Heron LI.C's behalf, I hereby request that: (1) 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 I (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 4-8-080G (LAND USE PERMIT PROCEDURES) the decisions for (a) the requested modification, (b) the requested variance, and ( c) the requested special grade and fill permit. The remainder of this letter constitutes Pointe Heron LLC' s justification for the requested variance. (Note that this letter restates the variance request made in my April 24, 2015 variance request letter and updates the justification for the requested variance.) City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June 24, 2015 Page 3 Renton Code Background Regarding Fill Slopes and Regarding Variances for Creation of Permanent Fill Slopes 40 Percent or Greater That Are a Minimum of 15 Feet in Height RMC 4-4-060N's Maximum Fill Slope Paragraph Subsection N (FILLS) of RMC Section 4-4-060 (GRADING, EXCAVATION AND MINING REGULATIONS) 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 a minimum of 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: 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.) Note that as part of Pointe Heron LLC's complete Grade and Fill Permit Application submitted to the City on January 20, 2015, Pointe Heron submitted a detailed request for a modification per RMC 4-9-250Dl based on more than one of the circumstances listed in RMC 4- 3-050N2a(ii) (Geologic Hazards -Modifications). Nevertheless, the City asserted without explanation in a February 16, 2015 "Notice of Incomplete Application" letter that the Grade and Fill Permit Application submitted on January 20, 2015 was "incomplete." Following that letter, CED orally advised Pointe Heron LLC of its contention that the grade and fill proposal does not qualify for any of the circumstances listed in RMC 4-3-050N2a(ii) and that a request for a variance for the proposed south edge fill slopes should be submitted to make the Grade and Fill Permit Application complete. By virtue of the submittal of our April 24, 2015 variance request letter and its attachments, Pointe Heron LLC did so, under protest, without in any way waiving its contention that the grade and fill proposal qualifies for a modification per RMC 4-9-250Dl under more than one of the circumstances listed in RMC 4-3-050N2a(ii). Thereafter, on May 5, 2015, the City issued a letter of complete application concerning Pointe Heron LLC's Grade and Fill Permit Application. This update to our April 24, 2015 variance request letter hereby reiterates and reaffirms Pointe Heron LLC's submittal of the variance request, under protest, without in any way waiving Pointe Heron LLC's contention that the grade and fill proposal qualifies for a modification per RMC 4-9-250D I. City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June 24, 2015 Page 4 Relevant Provisions of RMC 4-9-250 Relating to the Subject Variance Request The subject of variances 1s addressed in RMC Section 4-9-250 (VARIANCES, WAIVERS, MODIFICATIONS, AND ALTERNATIVES). Under subsection A (PURPOSES), a variance is described as follows: 1. Variances: A grant of relief from the requirements of this Title which permits construction in a manner that otherwise is prohibited by this Title. Because the proposed variance is not a request for a variance from the City's critical areas regulations [regulations that are set forth in RMC 4-3-050 (CRITICAL AREAS REGULATIONS)] but, rather, a request for a variance from the second sentence of above- quoted paragraph 6 (Maximum Slope) of RMC 4-4-060N, the variance decision criteria of subsection 8.5 ofRMC Section 4-9-250 apply. 2 Subsection 8.5 states: S. Decision Criteria: Except for variances from critical areas regulations, a determination shall be made in writing that the conditions specified below have been found to exist: (Amd. Ord. 4835, 3-27-2000) a. That the applicant suffers practical difficulties and unnecessary hardship and the variance is necessary because of special circumstances applicable to subject property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings of the subject property, and the strict application of the Zoning Code is found to deprive subject property owner of rights and privileges enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity and under identical zone classification; b. That the granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and zone in which subject property is situated; c. That approval shall not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitation upon uses of other properties in the vicinity and zone in which the subject property is situated; d. That the approval is a minimum variance that will accomplish the desired purpose. (Amd. Ord. 4835, 3-27-2000; Ord. 5675, 12-3-2012) 2 On March 24, 2015, CED advised Pointe Heron LLC that the variance decision criteria of subsection B.5 of RMC Section 4-9-250 are the applicable criteria for the subject proposal. City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June 24, 2015 Page 5 Reasons Why the Requested Variance Should Be Granted Background Information Concerning the Subject Parcel 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 I 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 11-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 grades of pre-Sunset Bluff predevelopment slopes within what is now the subject Project Site.) Summary of Site Work Performed as Part of the Previously Commenced but Not Completed Sunset Bluff Residential Subdivision Development The Sunset Bluff site development work created some areas with much steeper slopes than previously existed, including areas within and adjacent to the southern half of the currently proposed Grade and Fill Project Site, and some areas with flatter slor,es than previously existed. [See attached Appendix 3 (an 11-inch-by-17-inch color map exhibit), Appendix 4 (a set of ll- 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 of Barghausen cross-section exhibit sheets that accompany this letter as Appendix 5.4 ]. Note that Appendix 3 and Appendix ' Appendix 3 was created for the modification request letter 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.) 4 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 and Appendix 4 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 of the 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 Permit application) under the subheading "Previously Placed Fill," a subheading that appears in the middle of page 5 thereof. Note that (A) APPENDIX B attached to that report is the same as Appendix 5 City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June 24, 2015 Page 6 1 generally depict in "bunches" more narrowly spaced elevation contours than does Appendix 2 (such bunches on Appendix 3 and Appendix 4 reflecting the more steeply sloped areas that were created by the Sunset Bluff site work). Those more narrowly spaced contour bunches are separated by 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. Summary of the Proposed Filling and Grading of the Project Site Including Regrading/Reconfiguring of Existing Slopes to Achieve an Overall I.SH: 1 V Fill Slope Generally Higher Than 15 Feet along the Project Site's South Edge Pointe Heron LLC' s overall filling, excavation, and grading proposal is (I) 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 JO-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 11-inch-by-17-inch reduced-size set of which is attached to this letter as Appendix 8). Regrading/reconfiguring of existing slopes (slopes that had been created on Lot I as part of Sunset Bluff project construction) is proposed in order to create a 1.5H: IV engineered fill slope along the Project Site's south edge [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 Earth Solutions NW, LLC's August 13, 2014 Pointe Heron Geotechnical and 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: (1) 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"), 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 24, 2015 Page 7 (2) It notes in the last of the bullet points in the plate's upper left-hand comer 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 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 Exhibit 5 (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 X5 and X6 6 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 (I) 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, X5, and X6], fill placement that will result in a regraded/reconfigured 1.5H: 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 5 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 E5 and E6 of the Appendix 8 Barghausen Grading Plans. 6 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 24, 2015 Page 8 (i) the existing l.SH:IV engineered fill slope to the west of the Sunset BluffStormwater Detention Pond and (ii) the existing 1 .SH: IV engineered fill slope to the east of the Sunset Bluff Stormwater Detention Pond and (2) Upward l.SH:lVengineered fill slope extensions of both (a) the existing south-edge I.SH:! V engineered fill slope lying to the west of the existing storm water 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 I.SH: 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 both (I) fill in the gap along the parcel's south slope between the existing l.SH:IV previously constructed fill slopes to the east and west of the existing stormwater pond and (2) 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-ot:fi!l-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. Existence of All Four of the Conditions for a Variance Set Forth in Subsection B.5 ofRMC Section 4-9-250 As demonstrated below, each of the four conditions ( conditions a, b, c, and d) listed in subsection B.5 of RMC 4-9-250 (quoted on page 4, above) exist in the case of Pointe Heron City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June 24, 2015 Page 9 LLC's proposed creation of the subject permanent fill slope forty percent (40%) or greater and fifteen feet ( 15') or more in height. I. The First of the Four Variance Conditions {a Two-Prong Condition) Exists Because {A) in Regard to the First Prong the Applicant Suffers Practical Difficulties and Unnecessary Hardship and the Variance Is Necessary Because of Special Circumstances Applicable to the Subject Property {Including Shape, Topography, and Surroundings of the Subject Property) and {B) the Second Prong Is Inapplicable. A. Only the First of the Two Prongs of the First Variance Condition Is Applicable to the Subject Provision of RMC Chapter 4-4, and That First Prong Is Satisfied under the Circumstances of This Application. The first of the four variance conditions listed in subsection 8.5 of RMC Section 4-9-250 has two prongs. The first prong deals with whether an "applicant suffers practical difficulties and unnecessary hardship and the variance is necessary because of special circumstances applicable to subject property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings of the subject property." That prong is satisfied under the circumstances of this application, as is demonstrated in subsection I.B from pages IO to 41, below. The second prong of the first of the four variance conditions deals with whether "the strict application of the Zoning Code is found to deprive subject property owner of rights and privileges enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity and under identical zone classification." (Italics added.) That second prong is inapplicable to the requested variance because the subject request is not a request for a variance from any provision of the Zoning Code [i.e., the code that is set forth in RMC Chapter 4-2 (Zoning Districts -Uses and Standards)] but, rather, a request for a variance from a provision of the City-Wide Property Development Standards (standards that are codified in RMC Chapter 4-4). That being the case, the first of the four variance conditions listed in subsection 8.5 of RMC Section 4-9-250 is fully satisfied by meeting just its first prong. 7 7 Note that even if the second sentence of RMC 4-4-060N.6 (Maximum Slope) was in the Zoning Code (which it is not), 1.5H:IV fill slopes higher than 15 feet were constructed under City construction permits along the south edge of the three most easterly Black River Quarry parcels to the west of the subject parcel pursuant to City permits issued during 2004 and 2005. [See the lower half of page 5 through the bottom of page 7 (and the associated footnotes) of my August 18, 2014 letter to the City of Renton CED (Attn: Vanessa Dolbee) attached as Appendix 1 to this letter.] Those easterly Black River Quarry parcels are zoned IL (Light Industrial), the identical zone of the subject parcel. Thus, the second prong of the first variance condition would be met if the second sentence ofRMC 4-4-060N.6 (Maximum Slope) was in the Zoning Code. City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June 24, 2015 Page 10 B. Explanation of the Practical Difficulties and Unnecessary Hardship That the Applicant Suffers and of the Necessity of the Requested Variance Because of Special Circumstances Applicable to the Subject Parcel As explained in subsections l.B.7 and l.B.8 from pages 27 to 41, below, Pointe Heron LLC suffers practical difficulties and unnecessary hardship, and the variance is necessary because 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: (I) 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 (i) the south edge of Sunset Boulevard's pavement surface to the north of the parcel and (ii) 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]. In a nutshell, these special circumstances of the 26.26-acre subject parcel cause the applicant to suffer the following practical difficulties in relation to the applicant's desire to achieve 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 1.8.4 (which begins on page 18, below), (B) footnote 13 on page , below, and (C) subsection 1.8.7 (from pages 27 to 38, below)]; City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June 24, 2015 Page 11 (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 above-listed special circumstances in combination-for more details, see subsections I.B.2 and I.B.3 (from pages 13 to 18, below) and subsection I.B.5 (on pages 20 and 21, 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 I.B.6 (from pages 21 to 27, below). These special circumstances, along with these associated practical difficulties that the special circumstances pose, are discussed in more detail in subsections I.B.2 through I.B.6 from pages 13 to 27, below. Also discussed in detail below (especially in subsection I.B.7-see pages 27 to 38, below) are specific reasons stemming from these special circumstances that (a) make the strict letter of RMC 4-4-060N6 impractical and cause the applicant hardship and (b) demonstrate the necessity of the requested variance. In addition, subsection I.B.8 (see pages 38 to 41, below) demonstrates that the hardship that a flatter south edge fill slope than the proposed 1.5H: IV slope would cause the applicant to suffer is unnecessary. I. 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, 8 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 8 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 24, 2015 Page 12 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 10.) For an additional depiction of the subject parcel's overall layout, see Appendix 11 to this letter, an 11-inch-by-17-inch color map exhibit that was created using as a base sheet an 11-inch- by-17-inch reduction of the black-and-white Sheet El (the Cover Sheet) of the Appendix 8 JO- 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 2 and Appendix 3. (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. In contrast to the west part of the subject parcel, the easternmost portion of the subject parcel is generally triangular. [See map Appendices 2, 10 (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. Note that how the applicant suffers from the special circumstances of the long, narrow, irregularly-shaped subject parcel is explained briefly in the portion of subsection 1.8.2 on pages 15 to 16, below, and more fully in subsection 1.8.7 from pages 27 to 38, below. City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June 24, 2015 Page 13 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 the south edge of Sunset Boulevard's pavement surface and across the west part of the subject parcel to 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: (]) 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 XS 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 City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June 24, 2015 Page 14 (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 IS extensive and the overall 21-percent average slope is substantial. 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 9 to the subject parcel's southwest comer, (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 IS tremendous and the overall 25 percent average slope is quite substantial. Note that a comparison of (I) the above-calculated east-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 from the Project Site's east edge to the subject parcels' west boundary 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 I of 2 of the Appendix 4 Topographic Map sheets, from (I) the parcel's northwest comer 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 9 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 24, 2015 Page 15 comer). 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 of67 percent (i.e., 62 vertical feet+ 92 horizontal feet"' 67%), which is a l.5H:1V 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. The applicant suffers hardship 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 hardships of 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 storm water detention pond), including the proposed 1.5H: 1 V south-edge fill slope needed in conjunction with the proposed relatively flat area. (See subsection I.B.5, which begins on page 20, 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 (see subsections I.B.5 and I.B.6 from pages 20 to 27, below), the applicant suffers from the hardship of having 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 opposite 80th Avenue South 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 be able to 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, City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June 24, 2015 Page 16 (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. (See subsection 1.8.7 from pages 27 to 38, below.) 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 variance is approved and/or the separately requested modification is approved, the applicant will suffer unnecessary hardship. 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 1.5H: 1 V slope. See subsection 1.8.8 on pages 38 to 41, 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 a portion of 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 depictions of the locations of the stream and wetland (and their respective buffers) and the locations of 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 locations of development-constraining existing 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 for 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. Note that 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 contours of the existing steep topography to the southeast City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June 24, 2015 Page 17 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 Area 10 (an area that lies about 500 feet to the east of the east end of the Grade and Fill Project Site) and the 50-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. In sum, in view of the special circumstances of the intermittent stream, its buffers, the areas of steep slopes, and the Very High Landslide Hazard Area and its 50-foot buffers, all of which together constrain most of the east part of the subject parcel, except for (I) 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 (a) as access to a possibly viable, narrow-depth building development along the north edge thereof ( development that, ' 0 Note that the last two full paragraphs on page 18 of the August 13, 2014 GEOTECHNICAL AND SOIL ENGINEERING REPORT IN SUPPORT OF PROPOSED FILL, EXCAVATION, AND GRADE POINTE HERON LLC PARCEL prepared by Earth Solutions NW state: 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 ( 1) 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 4-3-050Jib(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 E 1) 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 proiect 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 24, 2015 Page 18 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 as 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- turn movements onto Sunset Boulevard likely would be prohibited in view of the future 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 Desired Primary Purpose of the Proposed Filling, Excavation, and Grading Project Note that the desired primary purpose 11 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: 12 11 Note that the phrase "desired purpose" appears in variance decision criterion d of RMC 4-9-2508.5, a criterion that states: 5. Decision Criteria: Except for variances from critical areas regulations, a determination shall be made in writing that the conditions specified below have been found to exist: • • • d. That the approval is a minimum variance that will accomplish the desired purpose. (Italics added.) 12 In addition to the applicant's desired primary purpose (i.e., of the subject proposed filling, excavation, and grading project creation of the proposed relatively flat area), a supporting desired purpose is replacement of the existing stormwater 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 stormwater 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. City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June 24, 2015 Page 19 (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 IS-foot-wide front yard setback from that future street right-of-way, and (c) the primary future developable area 13 that would lie within the subject parcel to the north of that setback.] 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. ll In this letter, the term "primary future developable area" refers to the area within which future buildings may be constructed-i.e., the area lying outside of (a) the 15-foot-wide front yard setback from the planned future street, (b) the proposed new stormwater detention pond and a JO-foot-wide area around the pond's top edge, and (c) a IO-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 14's Map Exhibit I). 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 Avenue 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 24, 2015 Page 20 5. Explanation of How the Combination of the Special Circumstances of (A) the Subject Parcel's Topography, (8) 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 Variance 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 I.SH: 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 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 Avenue 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 I.B.6, which begins below on page 21, 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 (I) 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 I .SH: IV engineered fill slope with a buttress fill face in order to extend surface grades up from both City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June 24, 2015 Page 21 (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 l.5H: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 storm water detention pond). This is more fully explained from the middle of page 7 to the middle of page 8, 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, (I) the only entrance- street location that appears to be viable to serve as a primary entrance street to the subject parcel from Sunset Boulevard 14 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. 14 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 E 1 of IO of the reduced-size 10-sheet set of the Barghausen Grading Plans. On that sheet, (i) the subject parcel is outlined in red and (ii) the location of a portion of Monster Road SW is depicted at the left edge. 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.) City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June 24, 2015 Page 22 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 (1) 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.1; 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 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. 16 With the relatively light volumes of residential traffic contemplated for the Sunset Bluff residential development, the potential for turn-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.) 15 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). 16 See as part of Exhibit D-5 to Appendix I to this letter the reduced-size (l l-inch-by-17-inch) copies of sheets Cl and CJ 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 of 80th Avenue South (which is located about 350 feet to the northwest of Oakesdale Avenue) is also depicted on those two sheets. City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June 24, 2015 Page 23 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 (1) the SO-foot-wide buffer for the existing Very High Landslide Hazard Area to the south and southeast of the street's nearly immediate 90- degree turn 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."17 That very- 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 primary entrance street from Sunset Boulevard opposite 80th Avenue South is the 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 would work well with the proposed 125-to-128-foot 17 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 1 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, (b) the location of 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 24, 2015 Page 24 elevation 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 A venue 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 tum 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 (1) 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 existing 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 I.SH: 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 Sunset Bluff residential subdivision development), drivers of the expected future significantly- higher-than-Sunset-Bluft: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 attached Appendix 14. 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 City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June 24, 2015 Page 25 (b) Appropriately trans1t10n 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 I.SH: 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 I.SH:! V south-edge fill slope, see the next subsection, subsection I.B.7, from page 27 to page 38, 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, Earth Solutions NW (the grade and fill project's geotechnical and soil engineering consulting firm) recommends a vehicular traffic setback of20 feet from the top of the proposed new fill slope.18 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 1.5H: IV 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.19 18 In regard to a roadway vehicular traffic setback, the third sentence of the section entitled "Future Slope Setback Recommendations" on page 14 of that geotechnical and soil engineering report specifically 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. 19 See Map Exhibit 1 (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 24, 2015 Page 26 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, Pointe Heron LLC, with a myriad of practical difficulties and corresponding unnecessary hardship 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 to achieve the applicant's desired purposes. As a practical matter, those listed special circumstances (which are described in more detail from page 11, 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 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 I 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 City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June 24, 2015 Page 27 (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-lo- 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. 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 Would Be Impractical and Cause the Applicant Hardship Because It Would Narrow the Primary Future Development Area and Effectively Preclude Construction of the Future Street and Future Capital-Intensive Building Development The primary future developable area (see its definition in the first paragraph of footnote 13 on page 19, above) that would be created by the proposed filling, excavation, and grading of the Project Site 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 (see Map Exhibit I of Appendix 14). That City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June 24, 2015 Page 28 area (I) 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 I.SH: IV maximum south- edge fill slope and (2) any flattening of the south-edge fill slope would be impractical and would make the applicant suffer hardship 20 because it would make the barely-wide-enough primary future developable area too narrow to function for its desired purpose. To (a) illustrate key points concerning the proposed primary future developable area in view of the proposed I.SH: IV 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 of a 1.5H: IV south-edge fill slope, I have prepared the table (Table 1) set forth on pages 32 to 33, below, a table that is based on dimensional and acreage information taken from two accompanying color map exhibits (Map Exhibits 1 and 2, l l-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 E5 and E6 of the I 0-sheet set of Barghausen Grading Plans. 21 A comparison and contrast of those two Appendix 14 map exhibits illustrates both (I) the extreme development-constraining effect of flattening the proposed south-edge fill slope to a 2.5H: IV slope and (2) the practical difficulties and hardship that applicant Pointe Heron LLC would suffer if a south-edge fill slope any flatter than the proposed 1.5H: IV fill slope is required. Please examine and compare those two maps carefully. The first of those two map exhibits (Appendix 14's Map Exhibit I) depicts the approximate estimated location of a future 69-foot-wide public street right-of-way 22 in relation to the location of the proposed I.SH: IV 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, future sidewalk depiction is intentionally omitted.) The location of the right-of-way's centerline is based on (a) the assumed 36-foot face-ot~curb-to-face-of-curb paved street width and (b) the face 20 As demonstrated in subsection l.8.8 on pages 38 to 41, below, that hardship is unnecessary. 21 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 10-sheet set of the Barghausen Grading Plans. (See Sheets E2, E3, ES, 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 review and analysis. 22 For purposes of Map Exhibit I and this analysis, a future "Commercial-Mixed Use & Industrial Access" public street is assumed based on (a) the City of Renton's Minimum Design Standards Table for Public Streets and Alleys set forth in RMC 4-6-060F and (b) an assumption of two JO-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. City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June 24, 2015 Page 29 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.23 ) Also depicted on Map Exhibit I is the apparently applicable, code-specified minimum 15-foot-wide front yard setback24 from the north edge of such a future street right-of-way. In addition, Map Exhibit I 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. Map Exhibit I also includes the following: (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) 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 23 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 too of the new [ill slopes should be incorporated into future site layout plans. (Emphasis added.) 24 Because the anticipated future street will not be a principal arterial, for the IL zoning designation, RMC 4-2- IJOA (Development Standards for Industrial Zoning Designation) states as follows for Minimum Front Yard for "other streets": Other streets: l1.ll,_ 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 4-11-010.) City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June 24, 2015 Page 30 (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 stormwater detention pond (including an assumed JO-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 2.97-acre approximate area of the I.SH:! V south-edge fill slope that is proposed to be created under the requested Grade and Fill Permit. The other one of those two exhibits (Appendix 14's Map Exhibit 2) depicts (for comparison and contrast purposes) the location of a top-of-south-edge-fill-slope line based on a 2.5H: 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, future 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:IV top-of-south-edge-fill- slope line, (b) the approximate location of a 69-foot-wide street right-of-way north of and generally 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.2; 25 Note that on Map Exhibit 2, the size of the proposed new stormwater 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 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 1.5H: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 2.5H: IV south-edge-fill-slope design than under the proposed 1.5H:1 V south-edge- fill-slope design. With a lower permitted flow discharge rate from the stormwater detention pond corresponding to a 2.5H: 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 City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June 24, 2015 Page 31 The version of Map Exhibit 2 included in Appendix 14 to this letter also includes the following: (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 10-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 I.SH:] V south-edge fill slope (if such a fill slope was to be created). The table on the next two pages (Table 1) summarizes and analyzes key information illustrated by and/or derived from Appendix 14's Map Exhibits I and 2. a 2.5H: 1 V south-edge-fill-slope design than under a 1.5H: 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 24, 2015 Page 32 TABLE 1 (I) Analysis of the Effect of Constructing a Maximum 2.SH:lV South-Edge Fill Slope Rather Than the Proposed 1.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 2.5H:l V Rather Than the Proposed l.5H:l V Parcel Feature With l.5H:1V With 2.5H: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: 1 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 (I) the upper end of the typical range of the depth of the PFDA based on a 2.5H: IV fill slope to (2) the Y!lllJ!L 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 1.5H: 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 a- approximate length of PFDA Ratio of ( 1) 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 1.5H: IV fill slope Area of the new stormwater detention pond Ratio of the area of the new storm water detention pond to the PFDA Ratio of (I) the ratio of the area of the new stormwater detention pond to the PFDA with a 2.5H: IV south-edge fill slope to (2) the ratio of the area of the new storm water detention pond to the PFDA with a 1.5H: 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 l included in Appendix !:!. to this letter) 7.35 acres 1,353 feet 7.35 X 43,560 S-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) 245/289 ~ 85% 103/178 ~ 58% 1,356 feet 5.47 X 43,560 ~ 1,356 ~ 176feet 176 a-237 ~ 74% l.90 acres minimum* 1.90 7 5.47 = 34. 7% minimum* 34.7% <-26.9% = 129% 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 24, 2015 Page 33 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) a 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 I.SH: 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 (l) the future street right-of-way depicted on Map Exhibit 1 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 ( 1) 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 storm water 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 (1) Totally inadequate along the approximately 100-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 25, a footnote that begins on page 30, above. As can be seen from Map Exhibit I, Map Exhibit 2, and Table I, using a 2.5H: IV south- edge-fill-slope design rather than the proposed I .SH: 1 V 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 24, 2015 Page 34 (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 [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 (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. 26 26 For the type of substantial capital-intensive future buildings (consistent with the subject parcel's IL 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 stormwater detention pond depicted on Appendix 14's Map Exhibit I cannot be made any narrower (narrowing would be the result of flattening the proposed 1.5H: 1 V south-edge fill slope) and physically accommodate the scale of such future buildittgs 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 (especially so in view of the fact that the street will serve no buildings along its south side). City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June 24, 2015 Page 35 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 of the entire subject parcel within which rent-paying buildings can ever be constructed 27), 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 and hardships that the applicant would suffer if the grading design was modified to carry out the 2.5H: IV 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 I.SH: IV south-edge fill slope, are some of the important specific reasons that would make following the strict letter of that second sentence of RMC 4-4-060N.6 impractical and an extreme hardship to the applicant 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 and unnecessary hardship of using a 2.5H: IV slope design (rather than the proposed 1.5H: IV 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 I .SH: 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 !!Q 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 (I) 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:IV 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 I.SH: IV south-edge fill slope, and 27 See footnote 13 on page 19, above, especially the second paragraph. City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June 24, 2015 Page 36 (3) a new stormwater detention pond of at least the same size as (and perhaps much larger than 28 ) the new stormwater detention pond planned with the proposed l.SH:1 V south-edge fill slope (and thus the same or greater corresponding construction and maintenance costs). As Table I 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 oflength of future street to primary future developable area with a I.SH: IV south-edge fill slope is 135 percent, which means that the cost of the future street is expected to be correspondingly higher per acre of the future developable 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 storm water detention pond area ( and, thus, construction and maintenance costs) to primary future develo~able area with a I.SH:! V south-edge fill is at least 129 percent (and perhaps much larger 2 ). 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: 1 V south-edge fill slope in contrast to a I.SH: IV south-edge fill slope, compare in Table 1 (1) 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) a new south- edge fill slope ("Total New Constructed Support Area") (based on a 2.5H:1V south-edge fill slope) to (b) the primary future developable area (based on a 2.5H: IV south-edge fill slope }-which is a ratio of at least 182.4%30-with (2) the ratio of (a) 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}-which is a much smaller (although very high) ratio of 108.3%31 • 28 See the second paragraph of footnote 25, a footnote that begins on page 30, above. 29 See the second paragraph of footnote 25, a footnote that begins on page 30, above. 30 The actual ratio could be much larger in view of the second paragraph of footnote 25, a footnote that begins on page 30, above. 31 The 108.3% 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 entire acreage. City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June 24, 2015 Page 37 Comparison of those 182.4% and 108.3% ratios makes clear that(]) 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: 1 V 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 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 LB through subsection I.B.6 (from page 10 through 27, above) and in the portion of this subsection l.B.7 (from page 27, 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 I, 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 26 on page 34, 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 32 (even though the primary future 32 See the second paragraph of footnote 25, a footnote that begins on page 30, above. City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June 24, 2015 Page 38 developable area would be reduced m 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 I. 5H: 1 V 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 I.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 impractical and cause the applicant to suffer great hardship. That hardship is unnecessary for the reasons explained in subsection l.B.8, below. 8. The Reason That the Hardship Posed to the Applicant by the Code Provision's Maximum Fill Slope Provision (Requiring a 2.SH:lV Maximum Fill Slope) Is Unnecessary Is That Extensive Geotechnical and Soils Engineering Work Has Been Completed to Make Sure the Proposed 1.SH:lV Fill Slope Will Be Safe (Work That Will Be Independently Reviewed by Qualified Specialists Selected by the City at the Applicant's Expense). 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: 1 V fill slope in particular are designed to be safe City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June 24, 2015 Page 39 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 especially that the report's Slope Stability Evaluation section (on pages 10 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 safe for the intended use of supporting fill to the north for future development .... " (Emphasis added.) 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 h P . s· 33 t e roJect 1te. 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 storm water pond and other adjacent areas of the site to raise grades, (2) the construction of the proposed 1.5H:JV permanent structural fill slope along the southerly and 33 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) ECI'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 Barghausen 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 24, 2015 Page 40 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.) Fourth, one of the important and noteworthy features of the design of the proposed new 1.5H: IV 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 Geotechnical and Soil Engineering Report immediately following the report's main text and preceding the report's attached appendices. Please examine Plate 3 (see attached 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 l O 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 1.5H: 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 !,'TOundwater 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. City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June 24, 2015 Page 41 (Emphasis added.) In addition, an independent review of the ESNW's Geotechnical and Soils Engineering Report will be performed by qualified specialists selected by the City at the applicant's expense. II. The Second of the Four Variance Conditions Is Met in View of ESNW's Extensive August 2014 Pointe Heron Geotechnical and Soil Engineering Report Concerning the Proposed Filling, Excavation, and Grading Project, a Report That Is to Be Independently Reviewed by Qualified Specialists Selected by the City at the Applicant's Expense. The second of the four variance conditions in Subsection B.5 of RMC Section 4-9-250 ("that the granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious lo the property or improvements in the vicinity and zone in which subject property is situated") is satisfied by ESNW's extensive August 2014 Pointe Heron Geotechnical and Soil Engineering Report Concerning the Proposed Filling, Excavation, and Grading Project. Several of the sections of that report that make clear that "the granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and zone in which subject property is situated" are referred to and/or quoted from in subsection I.B.8 of this letter starting on page 38, above. Note that further confidence that the granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and zone in which subject property is situated will presumably result from the independent review of the ESNW report, a review that, as pointed out above, is to be performed by qualified specialists selected by the City at the applicant's expense. III. The Third of the Four Variance Conditions Is Met in View of (1) the Highly Unusual and Unique Confluence of the Many Special Circumstances Concerning the Subject Parcel and (2) Approval and Construction of 1.SH:l V South-Edge Fill Slopes on Abutting Parcels Immediately to the West of the Subject Parcel. The third of the four variance conditions ("[t]hat approval shall not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitation upon uses of other properties in the vicinity and zone in which the subject properly is situated') is met here both because of (I) the highly unusual and unique confluence of the many special circumstances concerning the subject parcel addressed above and (2) the fact that, on abutting Stoneway Rock and Recycling parcels immediately to the west of the subject parcel, 1.5H: IV south-edge fill slopes were previously approved by the City and constructed 34 . 34 For details, see my August 18, 2014 letter ( a copy of which, along with all of the exhibits attached thereto, is attached hereto Appendix I) from the middle of page 5 through the end of page 7. City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Attn: Chip Vincent, Administrator, and Vanessa Dolbee, Planning Division Manager June 24, 2015 Page 42 IV. The Last of the Four Variance Conditions Is Met in View of Subsection 1.8.7 of This Letter, a Subsection That Makes Clear That the Requested Variance Is the Minimum Necessary to Enable the Applicant to Accomplish the Desired Purpose Described in Section 1.8.4 of This Letter. The last of the four variance conditions in Subsection 8.5 of RMC Section 4-9-250 ("that the approval is a minimum variance that will accomplish the desired purpose") is satisfied by the demonstration in subsection 1.8.7 from pages 27 to 38, above, that any narrowing of the primary future developable area (narrowing that would result from a City-required maximum south-edge fill slope any flatter than the l.5H:IV south-edge slope proposed by the applicant) would make impractical the accomplishment of the applicant's desired purpose described in Section 1.8.4 on pages and 19, above. Conclusion As demonstrated above, all four of the conditions required for a variance under subsection 8.5 of RMC 4-9-250 exist in regard to the applicant's requested variance. As is also demonstrated above, the requested variance is the minimum variance that will accomplish the applicant's desired purpose. Accordingly, the applicant's requested variance for the proposed 1.5H: IV fill slope should be approved. Please let me know if you or your colleagues have any questions concerning this variance request. Respectfully Submitted, HALINEN LAW OFFICES, P.S. ~~0 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 a set of copies of the appendices) Y:\cf\2623\023\City\Variancc\Vinccnt and Dolbee L T2 (update) (DLH 6-24-2015).doc Table of Annendices Appendix Description of Appendix Number A copy of David Halinen's 8/18/2014 letter to Renton CED (Attn: Vanessa 1 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 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 3 sheet comprised of spliced-together l l-inch-by-17-inch reduced-sized copies of a portion of Sheet 1 and a portion of Sheet 2 of the Barghausen Topography Man for the current filling, excavation, and PTading nroiect nronosal) A set of l l-inch-by-17-inch reduced-sized copies of Sheet 1 (updated 4 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 Annlication 5 A six-sheet set of 8/13/2014 Barghausen cross-section exhibit sheets A copy of the cover sheet and a set of copies of pages 5 through 7 of Earth 6 Solutions NW, LLC's 8/13/2014 Pointe Heron Geo technical 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 Ann!ication An l l-inch-by-17-inch reduced-size set of the 8/2014 IO-sheet set of the 8 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 Ann!ication (the "Barllhausen Grading Plans") A copy of an l l-inch-by-17-inch color Plate 3 cross-sectional view of the 9 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 EnQineerinQ Renort 10 An 11-inch-by-17-inch reduced-size copy of the SR 900 L.L.C. Lot Line Adiustment recorded under King Countv Recording No. 20040311900015 An 11-inch-by-17-inch color map exhibit that was created using as a base sheet 11 an l 1-inch-by-17-inch reduction of the black-and-white Sheet El (the Cover Sheet) of the JO-sheet set of the 8/2014 Bar2:hausen Grading Plans 12 An ll-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 subiect narcel and the limits of the Proiect Site added to it 14 Two 11-inch-by-17-inch reduced-size color map exhibits (Map Exhibit 1 and Man Exhibit 2) updated by Barghausen Consulting Engineers on 4/24/15 Table of Aooendices Appendix Description of Appendix Number A copy of David Halinen's 8/18/2014 letterto Renton CED (Attn: Vanessa I 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 Preliminary Plat 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 3 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) A set of l l-inch-by-17-inch reduced-sized copies of Sheet 1 (updated 1/13/2015) 4 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 of8/l3/2014 Barghausen cross-section exhibit sheets A copy of the cover sheet and a set of copies of pages 5 through 7 of Eartb 6 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 Application 7 Project Narrative submitted to the City on 8/18/2014 as part of the Grade and Fill Permit Application An l l-inch-by-17-inch reduced-size set of the 8/2014 IO-sheet set of the Grading, 8 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 1-inch-by-17-inch color Plate 3 cross-sectional view of the proposed slope's 9 design prepared by Earth Solutions NW, LLC that is attached to Earth Solutions NW, LLC's 8/13/2014 Pointe Heron Geotechnical and Soil Engineering Report 10 An l l-inch-by-17-inch reduced-size copy of the SR 900 L.L.C. Lot Line Adjustment recorded under King County Recording No. 20040311900015 An l l-inch-by-17-inch color map exhibit that was created using as a base sheet an 11 l l-inch-by-17-inch reduction of the black-and-white Sheet El (the Cover Sheet) of the I 0-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 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 dav1dhahnen@halinenlaw.com • • Seattle• 206.443.4684 Tacoma • 253.627.6680 • Fax • 253.272.9676 • Cell · 206.713.0992 Ha linen L~w Offices. P.S., !019 Regents Blvd Ste 202 Fircrest, WA 98466-6037 · haiinenlaw.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 ofRMC 4-3-0501 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 Di vision Attn: Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner August 18, 2014 Page 2 The Lack of Existing "Protected Slopes" within the Project Site in View ofRMC 4-3-0SOJla(i) On May 28, 2014, I had my legal assistant use the City of Renton's publicly available GlS 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. (See attached Exhibit A-1.) Subsequently, on August 12, 2014, I had my legal assistant create a similar map exhibit (see attached Exhibit A-2), one that (1) utilizes everything that is shown on Exhibit A-1 as base information and (2) has superimposed on it a dashed line outlining the limits of the Pointe Heron LLC Grade and Fill Project Site. Those limits arc consistent with the project site limits depicted on Sheets El, E2, E3, E5, and E6 of Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc.'s ten-sheet August 2014 Grade and Fill Permit application set of Grading, Interim Drainage, E.S.C., and Rehabilitation Plans. (In this letter, I refer to that ten-sheet set of plans as the '·Barghausen Grading Plans.") In view of the City's GIS map legend of the various-listed slope ranges on the Exhibit A- ~ GIS base map that my legal assistant downloaded from the Renton UIS 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-2 indicates that no areas of '·protected slopes·· lie within the Project Site. ~ote that Section 1 (Applicability) of RMC 4-3-0SOJ (Geologic Hazards) states in its entirety: I. Applicability: The geologic hazard regulations apply to all nonexempt activities on sites containing steep 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 locatioll identified on the City o( 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 City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Planning Division Attn: Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner August 18, 2014 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. ii. Steep Slope Types: (a) Sensitive slopes. (b) Protected slopes. (Boldfacing in the code text; underlining and italics added.) Above-quoted RMC 4-3-050Jla(i) provides a permit applicant with a very clear 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 steep slopes. Pointe Heron LLC hereby opts for the fonner. Because(]) Point Heron LLC opts to have the ·'the boundaiies of ... regulated prote\:ted slopes ... determined to be in the location identified on the City of Ren/On '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 not apply to the Project Site.1 That being the case, RMC 4-3-050.ISa's prohibition on development of protected slopes is inapplicable to any of the Project Site portion of the Pointe Heron LLC parcel. 1 The Exhibit A-2 map makes dear that no protected slopes lie within the Project Site, although the map depicts in red four areas of protected slopes \vi thin the portion of the subject parcel to the cast of the project site. Sheet E 1 of the above-rd'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 Arca l (which Barghausen determined encompasses approximately 5,299 square feet). Protected Slope Area 2 (which Barghausen detennined encompasses approximately 68,936 square feet), Protected Slope Area 3 (which Barghausen detcnnined encompasses approximately 2,241 square feet), and Protected Slope Area 4 (which Barghausen determined encompasses approximately 1,532 square feet). Sheet E 1 also depicts the minimum distance ( I l O feet) between the westerlymost protected slope area (Protected Slope Area 1) and the nearest eastern edge of the Project Site. City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Planning Division Attn: Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner August 18, 2014 Page 4 Pointe Heron LLC's Proposal to Create Certain Areas of Permanent 1.5H: IV 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 l.SH: 1 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 foet ( 15') in height. A cross-sectional view of the proposed slope' s design prepared by the Pointe Heron project's geotcchnical and soil engineering firm, Earth Solutions NW, LLC ("ES>IW"), as Plate 3 to ES\!W"s August 13, 2014 Gcotechnical and Soil Engineering Report in Support of Proposed Fil/. Excavation, and Grade, Pointe Heron LLC Parcel (referred to herein as the ''Geotechnical 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 BJ 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 L5H: IV rate of slope and the geogrid reinforcing, the design of the proposed slope is comparable to the design that the City approved in 2004 and 2005. For important context, I explain below the following four things: City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Planning Division Attn: Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner August 18, 2014 Page 5 (1) The existing, similar adjacent L5H:1 V engineered fill slopes to the west and east that the proposed fill slope is intended to connect to and extend t, ' up rom·; (2) The permits that the City issued for those existing slopes; (3) The design drawings and soil engineering reports that the City approved for those existing slopes; and ( 4) That, due to RMC 4-4-060N 1 '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 l.5H:1V slopes to the west and east of the proposed slope or (b) are needed from the City nmv. As I elaborate below, in view of the effect of R'v!C 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. Summary 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: l V 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 L5H: 1 V engineered fill slope [a l.5H: IV slope that is greater than fifteen feet (l5') in height] 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 infill slope that, at its base, will be approximately 700 feet long along the pro:cct 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 \Vest. 3 In regard to the portion of the similar, existing 1.51-!:IV engineered fill slope that was first created (created during 2004 along some of the southerly edge of the easterly part of the Stoneway Black River Quany City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Planning Division Attn: Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner August 18, 2014 Page 6 the second portion of that slope (as part of the Sunset Bluff project construction) was authorized along (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 8050337 issued July 29, 2005 and Renton Construction Permit Number 0050099 issued July 26, 2005 4 and propetiy) and that was authorized under Renton Construction Permit Number U040257, please see the following five attached exhibits: (aJ Exhibit C-1, which is a copy of Renton Conshuction Permit Number C040257; (b) Exhibit C-2, which is a copy of the May 26, 2004 soil enginee1ing report in support of the slope design prepared by Eatth Consultants, Inc.; (c) Exhibit C~J, which is an 11" by 17" reduced-size copy of the Site Planji,r the Black River Quarry ·s South Edge Ecology Block Wall and Geog rid-Reinforced Fill Slope dated June 29, 2004 prepared by Barghauscn Consulting Engineers, Inc.; (d) Exhibit C-4, which is a copy of the building pennit (Renton Buil<lmg Permit Number B040386) issued July 20, 2004 by the City for the gcogrid-rcinforced ecology block wall located along and beneath a portion of he lower edge of the 1.511: IV geogrid- reinforced fill slope; and le) Exhjbit C-5, which is a copy of the June 22, 2004 supplemental soil report (a report of calculations) prepared by Earth Consultants, Inc. in support of the design of the geogrid-rcinforced ecology block wall. 4 In regard to the portions of the similar existing l.5H:IV engineered fill slope constructed as part of the Sunset Bluff project [including ( 1) the pottion lying along the southerly edge of the easternmost pate of the Stoneway Black River Quarry propetty, (2) the pottions lying along the south edge and west edge of the subject Pointe Heron LLC parcel Lo the west of the now-existing stom,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)'., pottions that were authorized as part of the Sunset Bluff project construction under Renton Building Permit Number B050337 issued July 29, 2005 and Renton Construction Pennit Number U050099 issued July 26, 2005 (for clearing, initial grading and TESC for Sunset Bluff), please see the following seven attached exhibits: (a) (b) Exhibit D-1, which is a copy of Renton Building Pennit Number B050337 issued July 29, 2005; !i\!lil;ljt_D-2, which is a copy of the May 26, 2005 (Revised June 6, 2005) soil engineering report prepared by Eatth Consultants, Inc. for the proposed Sunset Bluff 1 H: 1 V 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: l V that is greater than fifteen feet (15') in heigh( created along a portion of the south edge of the Sunset Bluff site just to the eas1 of the Sunset Bluff stonnwater detention pond, a slope that also was authorized under Renton Building Permit Number 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 engineering reports, and design drawings for the existing adjacent fill slopes to the east and west of the planned location of the proposed slope. ( C) (d) (eJ ( 1) (g) Exhibit D-3, which is an 11" by 1 T' July 11, 2005 reduced-size three-sheet set of design cross-sections, details, and notes prepared by Earth Consultants, Inc for the proposed Sunset Bluff l 1-l: 1 V and 1.51-l: l V geogrid-reinforced fill s!opes and geogrid-reinforced ecology block: Exhibit D-4, which is a copy of the construction pennit (Renton Construction Perrnit \lumber U050099) issued July 26, 2005 by the City for clearing, initial grading, and TESC for Sunset Bluff; Exhibit D-5, which is an 11" by l T October 7, 2005 reduced-size seven-sheet set of the clearing, initial grading, and TESC drawings for Sunset Bluff prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. (this set, which bears a City approval signature dated October 9, 2005, was, to my knowledge, the latest scl of those drawings to be approved by the City, and it superseded an earlier set of clearing, initial 1,>rading. and TESC drawings <lated July 2:, 2005 and signed on the City's behalf on July 22, 2005); Exhibit D-6, which is a copy of the July 8, 2005 supplemental soil enginee,ing report (of design calculations) prepared by Earth Consultants, Inc. in support of the design of the l H: l V geogrid-reinforced fill slopes, slopes that were designed for portions of the Sunset Bluff entrance road and lie outside of the currcnLy 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 1 H: 1 V geogrid- reinforced fill slopes; and Exhibit D-7, which is a copy of the July 8, 2005 report of design calculations prepared by Earth Consultants, [nc. in support of the design of the geogrid-reinforced ecology block retaining wall along the north edge of the storrnwater 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 RMC 4-4-0602'11 '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. It is important to note that because of the first sentence of paragraph I (Applicability and Exemptions) of subsection N (FILLS) of RMC Section 4-4-060 (GRADING, EXCAVATION AND MINING REGULATIONS), neither modifications [under RMC 4-9-250Dl for one of the circumstances listed in RMC 4-3-050N2a(ii) (Geologic Hazards -\1odifications)J nor variances were needed in order to secure the building/construction pennits issued during 2004 and :zoos 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 RMC 4-4-060'-: states: 1. Applicability and Exemptions: Unless otherwise recommended in the approved soil engineerinf! report, Ji/ls shall conform to the provisions of 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 4-4-060N refers to R"v!C 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 1.5H: IV fill slope south of the existing Sunset Bluff detention pond-existing slopes that were authorized by the City and constructed under Construction Permit l\:umbcr C040257, Building Permit Number B050337, and Construction Permit Number U050099-were all recommended in the soil engineering reports prepared by Earth Consultants, Inc. Those 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 permits for the slopes) approved by 1he City. In view of the fact that the approved soils engineering reports recommended the 1.51-l: IV 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 5 RMC 4-4-061JN6 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 or the circumstances listed in RMC 4-3-050N2a(ii) (Geologic Hazards -\foditications) in order to qualify/or approval a/the creation of permanent slopes forty percent (40° o) or greater which are jifieen 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. Neither a Modification nor a Variance \Viii Be N ecded 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 sitc·s south boundary, in view of RMC 4-4-060N l's first sentence neither a modification nor a variance will be needed from the City in order to obtain the fill and grade pcnnit and construction/building permit(s) for the now-proposed slope because the Soil Engineering Report for the proposed slope-a report that(!) competently demonstrates the appropriateness of and recommends the slope ·s proposed design and (2) in al/fairness thus should be approved. (Sec the accompanying copy of ES'.',/W"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 conform to all of the applicable provisions of Subsection N (FILL) of RMC Section 4-4-060-see pages 40 through 5 l 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 slope·s design, that sentrnce will not be applicable (and will thus not bar construction of prohibited slopes without an exception through modificarioni if the City approves the soil ------------------------------------------- 6. '\1.aximum Slope: The slope of fill surtaces shall be no steeper than is safe for the intended use. Ei.cept in conjunction with a modification granted pf.r Rlv!C 4-9-250Dl hr one o( the circumstances hsted i11 Rlv!C 4-3-0SON:la(ii) (Geologic Hazards - lv!odification5.)_, Jill operations associated with a plat, short plat, subdivision or dedication, or other permiued land development activitv ',vhll.'/1 would result in the creation o( pennanent slopes fOrti,1 percent (40%) or greater which are fifteen feet I 15'! in heivht. i.e., protected slopes. shall nor 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 to the west and the east as it did in 2004 and 2005. The City continues to have the power to do that. Having approved I .SH: l V 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. ~~ 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 LTI (DLH 8-18-2014).doc POINTE HERON LLC PARCEL AND GRADE & FILL PROJECT SITE with City of Renton Regulated Slopes i' .. , .... -t-' .... .... 690 .... .... ........ ""1... ..... • ... , , ...... -,,~ ., .... .... .... . ... 0 ... ,~ ' ~ "1 · ..... . ... ....... -· -· _,., -· .... -· -· -· -· _,.. -·~ ·-·-·-·-· .... / B R .S C _-A 345 690 Feet ---- ·-c___- Information Technology -GIS RentonMapSupport@Rentonwa .gov WGS _ 1984 _ Web _Mercator_ Auxiliary_ Sphere 05/28/2014 ·, ·, ..... _ ·, '"., ·, ·, ·, ·, ·, ' ... ·, ..... ;,. . ,. i - ; ,, I '- ~ ·~ ' ' . , all ,., ... POINTE HERON LLC PARCEL BOUNDARY I ' I . J . ! "'""~. ... -.._. '• ....,._ ·~ .. This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and is for reference on ly . Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate, current , or otherwise re liable . Map title, labeling, and parcel boundary added by Halinen Law, 8/12 /2014 THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION Legend C ity and County Boundary Other ~·, City of Renton l .• Parcel s S lope Ci ty of Renton >15% & <:25% • >25% & <:40% (Sensitive) • >40% & <:90% (Pro tected) • >90% (Protected) E nvironme nt Designations D Natura l D Shoreline High Intensity D Shoreline Isolated High Intensity D S horeline Reside ntial D Urban Conservan cy D Jurisdictions EXHIBIT A-1 Notes None 0 City of ;&etrf on -:·. Finance & IT Division POINTE HERON LLC PARCEL AND GRADE & FILL PROJECT SITE with City of Renton Regulated Slopes .. ,., _,., I ·,.,. 690 ., ..... ....... PROPOSED GRADE & FILL PROJECT SITE ~ ...... ·, ......... '"· ·,.,.,. ' -·-· ... ,.... '·,., . --·-· ' ........ ·-·-·-·-·-·-· -· ""~~. ......... (' R•"tort ' 0 345 BR_SC _-A 690 Feet •••• • ••• • • • • -····v . ... .• ....____ . - Information Technology . GIS RentonMapSupport@ Rentonwa.gov WGS_ 1984_Web_Mercator_Auxiliary_Sphere 05/28/2014 ·, ,•, ... ., ..... \, ·, ·, ·, ·, ·, , ·, "a.""··· ;,. . ; ; ; ; . .... _ ... '• ; I t1"t.\y ·~ ' ; • l POINTE HERON LLC PARCEL BOUNDARY . .; . / "''•4 • .. , ...... ·~ ..... ,. .. . .... , .. This map is a user generated static outpu t from an Internet mapping site and is for reference only . Data layers that appear o n th is map may or may not be accurate , curren t, or oth erwise reliable. Map title , label in g , parcel boundary and proposed proj ect s ite added by Haline n L aw, 8/12 /20 14 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% C >25% & <=40% (Sensilive) • >40% & <=90% (Pro tected ) • >90% (Protected ) Environment Designations D Natural D Shoreline High Intensity D Shoreline Isolated Hig h Intensity D Sh oreline Resid ential D U rban Conservan cy D Jurisdictions EXHIBIT A-2 Notes None 0 Cityo~elffon · Finance & IT Div ision Notes: • Geogrid Lengths (alternate layers) Main= 40' Intermediate = 20' • Minimum Long-Term Design Strength L TDS = 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 1.5 H:1 V Field-Adj ust Trans it ion from Buttress Fill and Core St ru ctural Fill per Geotechnical En g ineer Buttress Fill ,.., (See Notes) 5 feet at top of slope. Face Incli na tion .., /. n.n. n.1y111-u1-v vc:1y t Approximate Existing Grade Gee Reinforc ~ . ,gr id ino (typ.) and Above Notes See Append ix D ,,... I D ~ . ' :n Q) : Cl. :, 0 o/ §Ii C B1 ( Cl) ~ -Q) 0 0J1< g-1 t 1·.::: re > ,._ ( a.. 1:· id Length for Geog1 and Strengtr • • 1 Paramete rs Existing Native Soil Horizontal Scale 0 Vertical Scale O .,... Exi sti ng MSE Ecology Bl ock W all to be Abandoned -in -Place Bench as Needed to Ensure Stab le Interface Existing Native Soil Approximate Existing Grade 40 EXHIBIT B ·--ctl u -Q) Q) ·--. oe Q) 0... 0. Q) C 0 -o 0 U) ctl 0) ,_ C = (9 :.c LL "O C/l U C Ctl :;:. ctl > ctl -> E = - Q) LL C .C C _g U O C U) .... Q) >~rr. ..-Q) . ...... I-~ I.() 0 . 0... ...... Drwn. By GLS Check ed By SSR Date 0 7/0 2 /2 0 14 Proj . No. 2334 .0 1 Plate 3 CITY OF RENTON EXHIBIT C-1 Construction Permit Permit Number: U040257 Per~ission is hereby given to do the following described work, according to the conditions hereon and according to the approved p!ans and speclfications pertaining thereto. subjec:t to compliance with the Ordlnances of the City of Renton. \Vork Dcs-.:riptio:1: INSTALL GEOGRID REINFORCED FILL SLOPE Job Address: 510 MONSTER RD SW BLACK RIVER QUARRY -------------· Owner: Contractor: Contact: QUARRY L"<DCSTRIAL PARK LL C 912510TH AV S SEATTLE WA 98108 GARY MERLINO CONST CO INC 9125 10TH AV!<: S SEATTLE, WA 98108 GARY VIERLINO CONST CO !NC er Information: G.::ite of Issue Date of Expiration I )ate Finalcd -------~ ----- Contractor License: GARY:VICC151JMW Ccntraclor Phone: 206-762-9125 City LiC(;IlSC: 4016 Comact's Phone: 206-762-9125 Work Order Parcr:l Number ln~pcctor's Name II1:::p~ctor's Phone 87031 3779200005 lt 1s understood that the City of Renton .:.hall bL hdJ hurmless of any and all liabi:ity, damage or injury arismg from the performance of Lbe work described ahovc. You will be Oi.Led time and material for a.ny work done by City staff to repair dsn:..uges . .A • .ny work performed withm Lh~ right-of-way must be doniJ by a licensed, bonded contractor. Call 425-430-7203 one working day in advance for inspections. Locate utilities befort! excaYating. Call before you dig -48 Hour Locators 1-800-424-5555 r hereby certify that no work is to be done except ns cies(;ribed ahove ;;ind Ln approved plans. and that wurk is to ,onfonn to Renrnr. codes and ordinances. X r~1 ~_I'( VVLJ._g__="'c=='--- Applicant Subject to complianct:-with Lh1;; Ordinances of the City of Renton and information filed herewith pcrrnil is gran~eA. Ii' , ,l ..' / t ' I I -[_ ( , 111u v t I A.r2J) 6 L( _____ ___.X...__-1,l~·/--'-"l('-"~··_'t,_·· _· ,.[,__;___ -'-( Public Works Rep THIS PERMIT MUST BE POSTED AT THE JOB SITE AT ALL TIMES. t.:NCiUl 12/00 bh 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 13, 2001 EXHIBIT C-2 (7 pages) 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 of two layers of five to eight foot diameter boulders. 1805 : 36th Place N.E, Suite 20', Bellevun. WA 98005 Bcllc'JLle :.4251 64:l-3780 FAX 1425) 746-0860 Toll Free (888) 739-6670 Other Locat,ons 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:1V. In order to construct a 1.5H:1V 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. :nc. 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 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 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 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 verity 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 Consultants, 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 ( 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. Geogrid Placement The wall backfill will need to be reinforced with a geog rid. 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 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-1557. Modified Proctor. Earth Consultants, Inc 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 Monitorir:i_g 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, Kyle R. Campbe Principal SOO/KRC/csm Attachments: Plate 1 Plate 2 I Geotextile Reinforced Slope Detail Geogrid Reinforced Ecology Block Wall Detail Earth Consultar1ts. inc. Height Varies ,..-' 41 Overbuild Face of Slope (Min, 3') or Compact Slope Face 1.5H: 1V 6' --"1 . ,,---e:::: , -,. :_ / I __ ..., ~K Reinforced Fill Zone _,,,:\-, / -,. ,. I -- _ .. -[J--J -----I - ----• 1,--- r ---_.._-1 J ..... .,.,,,. c---•/ 2 L Benches _____ I Geotextile Reinforcement (Mirafl 600X or Equivalent) ~ 6'-8' ~ Keyway Existing Grade SLOPE FILL PLACEMENT NOTES; • Slope should be stripped of vegetation and unsuitable materials prior to excavating key way or benches. • Benches a re 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 matting or geotechnical fabric to maintain the seed and mulch in place unHI 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 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 - . . . . . . . . . . .... ... ~ ---· , Structural Fill, organic free, granular material with a maximum size of 6 Inches, or other material approved by ECI Slope Overbuild Existing Grade Geotextile Reinforcement (Mirafi 600X or Equivalent) Schematic Only -Not To Scale Not a Construction Drawing e ,~~'l:!.S~n~,~~n,£;_ Conslrudlon Testing & ICBO I W/\BO Jnspeclion Services Slope Reinforcement Black River Quarry Renton, Washington Drwn. GLS Date May 2004 Proj. No. 9543-1 Checked SDD Date 5/24/04 Plate 1 l I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 11 12 17 COMPUTED BY ~ CHECKED BY---- PROJECT NO. ':),s./t;-I SUBJECT t(.p)&{.:(1 \,5 :-1 I 18 191-,,li,--o---,---<l---,---<1---'---"~-:.:--.e.-~-----~-'-1~-----I 22 23 24 ®.-----------------... --e.-----__,H-~---•- 25 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 43 44 45 '5'Yt-J'"l:'S::' .. A 'SF' Bo -S'it-.JTESN-SF S5 DATED ,S J.~ o4 DATED ----- SHEET __ OF eYl¥-UJA.U.-tE'.rAI 3d01S 111:1 0301JO:INl3tl-GIIJ0030 GNV 1111M )10018 J..001003 3003 HlflOS s..wuvno ll3t\l!! )!01118 3Hl 1J<>-1 w CL 0 _J Cf) _J _J LL 0 w 0 a: 0 LL z oow -a: >-I a:o a:- :3~ a@ zffiO <C>O _j-z CL a:<( ~ WQ_J I--<( _J Cf) _J <( ms: w~ IO I--0 a:_J om LL>- 0 0 _J 0 0 w w 0 0 w ~ ::::> 0 Cf) g 0 Nlfld 3liS -~ '~I "'I'' I ''°' I" " " ' '\ '\ \ \ 000l-9i::i:: (!ii::1') 99086 VM 'N01N3tl J..VMHOIH A:fllVA 3ldl1V'4 S161 ·0·1·1 ')11,jlf d lVll:ilSnGNI )..IJIJVno '\ '\ . '\ .'\ •. 6 Si 00 •1oa / / / / / S::3J11llJ3S 1Vlrfll'IN™I/\NJ '!JNLIJN!ns '~NINNVld ONV1 '[lNl!J3JNl'*3 -wJ X't.:l 1'.8L8-l<;Z(o;;zy} 1'.ll9-(t;;Z(sn,) 2£086 Wf, 'lN])! Hlnos 3nN31\V GNll <; lZIH I J ,,,•""'%, " . ; {, t : '.;'. \ .b,o, 4\'>VH~'I) ~ i • " ,--,- ~ ~ ~ I i 0 ; i .. I I -. •• CITY OF RENTON EXHIBIT C-4 Building Permit Permit Number: 8040386 Permission is hereby given to do tt,e following descr',bed work, according to the conditions hereon a:id according to t:ie approved plans and specifications pertaining thereto, subject to complia:ice with the Ordinances of the Clty of Renton. Nature of Wrn·k: --~-------~ Job Address: Owm.T Tenant: tractor: CONSTRUCT ECOLOGY IJLOCK WALL 510 MONSTER RD SW QUARRY INDUSTRIAL PARK LL C 9125 10TH AV S SEATTLE WA 98108 GARY MERLINO CONST CO INC 9125 10TH A VE S SEATTLE, WA 98108 Const Lender: Other Information: Date of Issue Date of Expiration Construction Valu~ Parcel Number 07/20/2004 01/16/2005 $6,300.00 3779200005 I hereby certit)' that no work is Lo be done except as described above and in approved plans, and that work is to conform to Renton codes and ordinances. BD32 l 4::i. 12/00 bh Contracror I .icensc GARY MCC150MW Contractor Phone 206-762-9125 City License 4016 U8C Type ofCom;truction Iluilding Height Story Count Building Sq. Ft. Dwelling Count Occupancy Group 0 0 0 0 Subject to compliance with :he Ordinanci.::s ofthi.: City of Renton and informution Ci led herewith permit is granted. 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: 1 V Fill Slope Construction E-9543-1, dated May 26, 2004 EXHIBIT C-5 (16 pages) Estdblishc<l ID7S E-9543-1 As requested, Earth Consultants, Inc. (EC!) 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. ----------------------- 1805136th Place N.E., Suite 201, Bellevue, WA 98005 Bellevue (425j 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: E-9543-1 Page 2 Parameter -I Value --== --.------·~~~~------------~"'"' Wall Height -------~f--1 O_f_ee_t'--------- ' Slope Inclination Above Wall 1.5H: 1 V Infill Soil _ Unit Weight 1}5_pcf _________________________ _ ,.____ . Angle of Internal Frictioc_n+-'3=-=2=-=dcce,,_g'--'re=-=e=-=s'--------------- i Retained Soil 1 ·-. Unit Weight 135 pcf _______ A_· _ng~l_e_o_f Internal Fric1:io;:; : 32 d--;;g(e_e_c_~------------------------------' Foundation Soil 1 i - · --Angle of lnter_11al Friction 34_d_t3greEls __ - Cohesion O psf __c _ _c_c_'---------------- 11-_ Unit_Weight_ J35 pcf ' Surcharge Loads _ 0 psf . PrJmary Geogrid Synteen SFSO Long Term Design Strength 3,324 lb/ft j Sec:on_~_ary GEJogrid Synteen SF55 Long Term Design Strength 1,600 lb/ft i 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, Scott Dinkch~nan SDD1KR10J,;.~~~-----" Attachments: Geogrid Reinforced Ecology Block Wall Calculations Plate 1 Ecology Block Wall Detail Earth Consultants, Inc. DA fE: Hay 26, 2004 GEOGRID REINFORCED ECOLOGY BLOCK WALL INPUT INFORMATION WALL N\JHBER: 1 ECOLOGY BLOCK PARAMETERS WALL PARAMETERS PROJECT NAME: Black River Quarry PROJECT NUMBER, F-9543·1 DATE: Hay 26, 2004 PREPARED BY: SDD REVIEWED BY: KRC BACKSLOPE PARAHETERS grid spacing height: block n,oignt: nwtiber of b'.ock courses: n := 5 backslope angle: i := 30-deg bloc.< depth: to"':ai wall !wight: H := rd1b H = "O ~ (~t-nbc:drnent depth 1:1 courses: e := 1 Lotal ernGedme:y:: depth: D := e·hb bac~slopc height: hi:= 15·ft I:= 5· fc unit per,:er,tcor,crcte: c:= ·100.·16 ur--,it percent voidc,: block setback: ro := C·deg SURCHARGE PARAHETERS surcharge: lb g:~02 -i't Surcharge Types: 1°,i-etained soil dead load 2-c-retained sc:: livr.: lodd .'3=infili soil dead load 4"-iniill soil live load GEOGRID PARAMETERS number of geogrid layers: g := 9 geogrid l(wgth: __ := 10·ft geogrid type A: geogrid type B: A := "SyntBe,i 5F55" B := "Synte en SF80" long term 3lloweble design streng-i.:h geog,id type A geogrid twe B: lb "Tl.lS A :~ 160(J.--tt lb L TDS_B :-3324- f: reduction factor for long tent1 creep: geoyrid type B: Rfc:r-_B := 1.67 ogricl interact'on coefficient: Ci:= 0.75 ooirit load: r~ := (). lb Cor tact ar0a boundaries frolil toe Di' wa: I: start\n9 point: ,d := !).~ '2 :~ Oft SOIL PARAMETERS INFILL SOIL RE~1\INED SOIL t1ict1on angle:¢;:= .32·de<J friction an~Jle: ~r:= 32·deg lb unit weight: /i := 135-- t? u:1it weight: 0 0UNDATION SOie (Standarc ~atnod) frictio11 arrg! e: cohesion unit weight: $f :~ 54·deg lb Ci.:= :J,- . 2 tt. FOOTING DIMENSION~ foo;::i11g width: Lwid:h := 4.0·ft toe extension: L::oe := lft lb yr := 13~:'i·-- tt 3 Black River Quarry, 10-foot ecology block wall with 1.5-1 slope, E-9543-1.rncd Eart'.1 Co,1su ltants, Inc. P#: 1 geogrid length: Lgrid ::c:: O·ft GEOGRID LAYOUT PARANETERS geoqrid .::oursing: gec':c-)rid type: gridj :c::o: ;_Y[lf; j .- 9 .A 8 A 7 fa. 6 A 5 B B 3 1, 2 B B Black River Quarry. 10-foot ecology b:ock wall with 1.5-1 slope, E-95L3-1.rncd Earth Consultants, inc. DATE: Nay 26, 2004 P#: 2 DA ff f-1ay 26, 2004 (OKEN BACK SLOPE DE rERHINA TION r,ROKL\ JACK SI (JI'[ (,/\,CIJL/\ TIOHS, i', om Y IF HIE HORIZlN" AL LEclG Hi OF THE SLDl'E IS i_[S5 THN, l't/llT THE WALL I lclCHT l, I' \ ;':=at.an 2 _ 1~j '.)[ fFRMl~lE: THE -;-RUE BA.CK SLOPE ,A,NGI.E i' = 36.87 .:Je-g I ;o::: if{i'?: i,i,i') 'HERErORc: CALCULATION OF STATIC AND DYNAMIC EARTH PRESSURE COEFFICIENTS weighted ;'ricr.lon arigle: 2 rtJwi := -·ti)i 3 ~wi = 2L333 de,_-:1 wal I batte,-: (~ := 90-deg -w ~ = 90 deg setback per block: , :~ C_10.'6ft 1 r tan( m )-_1:_ I ' 2) r~ffr:(~tive wall he'ght: He:= H + fl -(t-s)]"tar(i) STATIC: Acti•,e ean:h prnssu·e coetficient: Infill Soil K'.e-:::ai11ed ':ioi i :; ~ 0:104 ft He == 14.679ft Black River Quarry, 10-foot ecology block wall with 1.5-1 slope, E-9543-1.f!'cd Eare.f) Consultants, Irie. i=30ceg K:-:Ji = 0549 KcJr = C54'.J P#: 3 D.A TE: May 26, 2004 , TERNAL STABIUTY free Body Diagram Vvl1er-e: He:c,Effoct:ve 'Hall Hei~Jht f-1:,.::rotal W'all Hei::Jht V'/i=\r1/eight of the B,jck::,lope Vv'(~..c!nf1;1 Stm.:h;m_;ie )snr:l l_oaJ W'f·ccWeiS--)ht of the Al Ian Block Faci''9 Ws::::\t,ie'g\;_ of :ne Geo,~r-ic! ~e H I I I I w, -----tl!c; j -eol ,/f"t t'-r _ P -1 ~ \I/ , 11• --,-.-r---' -/ ---------". 1 1-ac I I ' Qi:'l ' f 0 5H --;I 1 _~ -----~.- J / Ws / < ___ ----',) I/ u [ / 0 ~/ ::OFci~n ··-------· 1, ·l: __ .-Fq -,\ ----; I --p;-c-rr t~-~~ ::pt --ii, ---l 1·apt ,1 I , 1 ---r 1 . 00'-'s , Hir i I '. 05T Q· f She I ll I R::fr~or·c;ed Soil /v1-1ss F'=Po;rit Load S1Jrchr.i,·q~; Qp:0 ~Translated F'cfr·,t Loau DFdyn-~Dynarnic E-u.r:h Fo-ce F g=Surcharge ~o·-ce f-Qptoc:f'oint lo~1C Force YiJpt=:c; Tr-r::1nsl atBd Point Load Vertical !..oca";.ion r=accActive Ea1--:h F-orr:e I t j i I i i I 1/3!-+e . p ! I I -L ___ I ! -_j_J___ J J ___ J_ ' L DRIVING FORCE CALCULATIONS A,Crll/F. EAR~-H FORCE: ? r=s.i := -· K,:1r·yc-· Hr~ - ? fah :~ Ca-ccs($wr) --·-;a,- lb (;on1;rnte ur1it wei,,,iht· ye:= 165·--:;-1nit fill unit we',Jht: fl' lb f-a = 7Y79.?.11- ft 'b Fah = 7432,474- fl: 1 F3Annh ·=-·He . 3 1 Fa/srn+r = 4.693h lb fav = 2902.783- tt FoArmv:= L+s+-·He·tan(m) FaAntw= 10.104fi 3 SURCH/1RGE FORCE: Fq := g· Kar· He F,1h := Fq·cos($wr-) lb F,1 ~ O- ft lb Fqh ~ O- ft Fe, ~ ii( "1 = 1,f q· si,,( ~wr), it( xq = 3, Fq· sin( ~wr), CJ)) lb Fn, = 0-, ft MOMENT ARMS, F~Arlt'.v := L + s + G.S·· He·tan( rn) B!ack Rive, Q~arry.10-foot cco:ogy block wall With 1.5-1 slope, E-9543-lrncd Earth Consultants, Inc. P#: 4 01\ TE: May 26, 2004 ,1,!T LOAD ;RC:11/\R(~I~: H fr·dJ := L + s+ H· tan(<:i) +- 4 ,'vlinirnu~ application distar,ce for zero inf u1r1ce: End:J ~ 12.6U4ft. l H 1-i \ -1" -+ :_ + s-t -H·tari( ro )j·tan(i)· sin(90· de(J + 1) H H ta{ 45· deg -; ) 4 . Ninx1 := L 1--s + 4 + -------+ -"---'------'-------------'---------co{ 45 ,fog -: ) ta{ 4:i deg -~) si{ 45 deg -~ -) Minxl ~ -657.096 ft. ~ocation of the tra11:,1::ite . .:! ?Oint. lo,Jd s11n:ha1-ge: YQpt := if(/> Endg, YODt. He) YOpt. = 14·.679ft H Endr;YOpt. := L + ::, + YG.;.xt· t,--m( rn) + - 4 0 Opi ::::c ------ (x2-xl)·l ft. lb Or,·i = 0----::;- f: L Point Loac Surchcrge Influence h:dqYOpt = 1?.604ft :lpti := ------------- [(xl -Endg:'"Op· )·? + (x) ~ x1) _ · k":- lb Opti = o- r,/· .r the pc;r,t load contact only with the 1·eirifor·ced rt,a::;s if will adc' stability to the wall stn.:cture. therefor·e t~e loads c.r-e 01,ly cors1dered 111 the inter1al stabili:~y calculations. Note: Qp := i~x2 :s: I.+ s + H·tan(co) · 2 ft,Qpi, o) If tl-ie poi'lt load :::cm tacts in beyond the reif'lforced rr-,ass ar,d its influerice zone buffor ;t wfll only affect the external stabili:.y. If it overlaps bm:::'.-t botl the infltJence zone and retained .soil it will effect both ntcn,al and 1:;xtr;r1:al stability. Qpt:= i:(x1~ Endg,Qpti,Qp) lf 1J,u pc;int iuad r:on1act. beyond the reinfcrced :-tia'.:;;:; F1lu,; its infiuence zone buff0:-it will have 1,0 effoct 011 the wall. Cbt=O. lb \)pt:=if(x1> Minx',O,Opt) Op-~= 0--:; '°tL Opt is the translat~d distributfid ~,oht load sur:::harge ·Jsed to dete:rr:irv~ the point load for.;,~ that will ~p, info1(mcir1tJ thP-r-;xtwndi siabilfly of the retainin(J wall sti-ucture. Opt i~, a knction of r:f-ie location of the coritact area with respect to the geogr-id reinforcertie.111:. Op will be used to calcular.D the pornt loacl surchan:;e if it acts Jirectly 011 top of the 1-ei1,forced ~~011. No t:-,::n:slation c:alrnl,)t1oni-', are necessary for Qp becai.:se its appliczt:::io1·1.3 area iJ on loµ of ':he reinforcsd rnass and its influcr1ce zor1e bJffer. Black P.iverQuar;y, 10-foo, ecoloqy block wall with 1.5·1 slope. E-9543 .. 1.rncd Eari:i1 Consult.arits, Inc. P#: 5 )INT LUAU SURC! ::'\r<GE- FOR'.:t: POINT LOAD SURCHARGE \'/EIGHT: lb FOp t: = 0 ---,- 1 t FOp-r.:-, := FOpt· ,..:o~,( !pwr) lb FQp::::, = O- ft :,JQptl := Qpi· ( x2 -x1) w'Opt2 := Opi-(L + s + H·tar,(w) -x:1) Vv'Qpt := it{x2 SL+ s ·t-i+tari(m) -2·f-t, WQpt:, V,/Qpt2) WQp t := i :<1 > L -t-.s -t-1-'· tan( <ii), 0, WOpt) lb RESISTING FORCE CAILULATIONS: V,1EIGHT OF ·r;-1r-: l".>ACK:Jl OF'E: ,EIGHT OF TflE DEAD LOAD SUkCHA.RGE· \'/EIGHT OF THE F.ACING· WEIGW OF ffE REINFORCED SOIL M/1SS: TOTAL WEIGrlT: SLIDING RESISTANCc: I·· V'/i = 25!59.1:Jl- ft Wf:= H·t·(cyc+v-yui) lb w·-.. = 136.5.).720- ft b Wt= 2700- '.t !I', 'w'b = '1CJ938.725- '.t. FrsL:n:ic := (f,:w+ Fqv+ Wi+ ','/q + Wf + '0/s)·tcm($1) lb Frst.Jtk.: = 11::":36.l:'i-1- f-t YG:::·l F0p1.Ar if' h := ?. FOptArrnh = 7.::;.39 f: M0.'-1ENT ARN: (x2 -,1) WQptArm" := x1 t---- 2 W0ptrnr2 := ,1 + l ( Erdg- 2 ;-'~ J DATE: May26.2004 WOptA,111 := 1i{x2 S L + .s + H· t:ciri( ro; -2·-ft, WQpt.t\r·:-n 1, 'WiJptArir,?.) WQptAr11 = 0 ft 2 V•/i1\rtn := -·t· ~ -(t-,,)J + f··t.:,rlw). + t .3 . . . f-':OMENT ARM 1 \lh/"-,r'. := -· [L --( t: -sJ J + f I-tari( w) -.-L ' 2 MOMENT ARM: Wu\-m ;= 05-(L+ s'.· + 0.5-H·tari(O)) Wt.Ar;r = 5.052 ft Black River Quarr.;, 10-foot ecology block wa.11 witk 1.5-1 slope, E-9::..4.3-1.rncd Earth Consultants, Inc. '(-'#: 6 DATE: Hay 26, 2004 <TERNAL ST A.BILITY FACTORS OF SAFETY '.")t.c1 1·.1:. C()(1ditiOI'~;: f"S:,taticslidirig>~ 1/"i Frstatic FSstati.:::_;l'ding .-------- Fch + Fqh + F(2p:>, F/\ClOR OF SAfc'Y cOR OVERTURNIN:3: S::citic Conditions: FSstaticovertwming>=c:2.0 F'.:i,,tat'csiiding = 1.61 Wt·\VtArn1 + W1·WiAntt + 1..v'q·WciJi.,nn + f\w-FaAnrw+ Fr~v-rgi\rrnv F ah· F a/-l.rn1h + Fqh· F(j?.rrtih + FQp•:h· f0ptt\nnh FSstaticoverturnirrq = 3.22 BEARING CAPACITY CALCULATIONS: V-i::rticcJI Force Resultant: R :==; VJt+ Ws+ Wi+ Y./q + F~N+ fr~v+ W'Qpt lb R .::-: 18101.615- lt positive -nega::ive :< = 4.231 ft 5 osilivf3-= 1.72 x 1() lb E := O.S<L + s) --x E ~ 0.'321 ft [)eLerrnine he ave:-2gA bearin; pressure aci::i·,g e-r:: the ~e<:t:arlirw of the wal. R (L + s) ib cravg = 1B90.594- 2 fr Jeterrnirie t.he rnornent about the cerrtcrlinfJ of the wall dui:, to the resuftarit bearing loaJ, Hcl := R E sect.ior1 rt'odulus s ft Hcl = 15666.~T !b- ft 5: 2 (lO·f:,) (L + s) li IS CT"flOrn = 022.004- .. ? rt ,, S = 17JY3 ft' Black River Quarry, IC-foot ecology block wall with 1.5-1 slope, E-954<3-1.rncd Earth Cor1sultunts, Inc. lb crrnax = 28'12.59B- ft? lb crrnw = 968.5f:l- Jc 2 P#: 7 ( ' ))2 N'j :~ (e,<p(rr-tar,\$f))).I tarf 45 de,J+ <l>f \ \ 2 k :~ (N1-1)·co·J¢,) Ne .cc;; 42.:64 Ny:~ ( Ne -1) t.011( l+H) Ny~ 31.146 I Thereforn: cru!t := 2·rf. Lwk:h· Ny+ cf· Ne+ yf· (Ldepth + D)· Nc1 FS6er-Jrir1g ~ 8.6..:!.2 (Hf18X Black River Quany, 10·/oot ecology block wall with ~.5-1 slope, E-9543·1.rncd Earth Consultants, Inc. ib crul t = 24306. 786- 2 ft DA TE: Hay 26, 2004 P#: 8 'NTERNAL. ST ~.BILlrY \IJhe-s: ~1j=De,pt~ ::o coar h geogr·d layer 0/fr-l ():-ie·1t .. ;:::.1on oi linf; of rn :.ixirr:urri '~ersior1 4::>-,-;J~i/2.~Cr-ienta•jon of the ll'D of max fi'lJrn U:r1::..ion Acj=influence arnu uf euch c,wogrid I c:iyer Hei~ affective wal: ne1ght for internal stability fl e i :ccc 1-i + [ () .?:•· H -( t -s) j' tdn( i) He1:::: 1U.'0.37fi: Note: J DA 'E: Hay 26, 2004 LIHE OF MAXIMUM TENSION For internal sta,.;1 1ic.y ::::al::::·Jla"'::ion~ s::1rnrle cdlculations will be shown for· cJrid lc1ytT #1. Ail otli,:,-,;irid lay8rs will be t,howr1 through tabular calculations at. tJ,t; nr.d of this section. DcTERMINACION OF THE FORCE ACTING ON EACH GRID LAYER [:) Fai 1 = 102.3.192-. 't Black River QuarfY, 10-fcot ecology block wal I with 1.5-1 slope. E-9543-1.rncd Eart.h Consultants, Inc. lo Fgi. = 0- 1 't (~~riJj'h+gridj_1 ? Pit: 9 NSILF FORC'.' ON EACH GRID: ST.ATIC: GEOG"'.ID TENSILE OVERSTRESS weogrid tensile strar1gth FACTOR OF SAFETY, Static: L-Ds lb 10?3192- tt FS0ve1·stre::is'.->j :c-;: --. -· f<)overstrest:is1 = 5.?.4'..1 F1~, J GEOG RID PULLOUT FROM THE SOIL: Equations for 1;ad1 seg111 er,t of the iire of !""'.l.3x.1rnurn tP.rision: "tting these twc eciua tior1s egu,11 to eac~oth ~r y1s Id:, 1:h .,; t>: e·..-.:1ticn of 1:heir i!Yt .. grsecion point: yint :~ ta{45·dcg + ~}[H·(,;5+ l,1n(rnJ) 1] yin t_ ---=-1.c.304 ft For ;eo1Jr!d elevation< yint r . <jlij tan 45-de;; +-j ' 2 J + j + ts,n(m) (,rid 1 t,) For yeogrid elevatio1;s > yint pullout c,1pac:'ty: Fp. :~ 2·Ci·tcm(<1i,){(Hr,i-,iria;>)·ri LCJ + q·(t.'IJ] FACTOR OF SJ\f=ETY C7E:OGRIP f'.'UU.OUT, std tic: Black River Quarry, 10-foot ecology block wail with t5-1 slope. E-9543-lincd Ea,-th Consultants. Inc. DME: May 26, 2004 P#: 10 GEOGR'D EFFICIENCY Static C.or,dition~;: fi.sJ effecsj .------1,JO e!T'ecs. = 46.173 I l.TDS--- 1 1.5 Black River Quarry, 10-foot ec:ology block wall with 1.5-1 s ope. E-9543-1.mcd Earth Cor,,,ultants, Inc DA.TE: M,ay 26, 2004 P#: 11 SUMMARY OF RESULTS W'all Hei,Jht: 1-1 = 10ft B.oc:k Setback: co = 0 '.Jag Bac.blope ,4..ng!c: i = 30 de(,) Backs lope Height: hi= 15 fr lb Surd-1drge Load: g = O 2 -ft Point l oaj locat'on: x1 = 0 ~t x2 = Oft EXTERNAL STABl!.i'Y: Static Conditions: SOIL f-' AR/\ME-:H:R~::.i: Infill Soil· lb yi = 135-- r-i:3 Retained Soil: q>r = 32deg ib y,= 135- f:3 Four:dation Soil: ~f = 54 ceq lb yf = 135-- f,,3 lb cf= 0- ? rt DA TE: May 26, 2004 Seogrid Type A: A= "Syrr::een sr::.'"!~J" Nuttiber of Liyers: g = .0 Layers Factor-of S0l'ety for Ove1--r.urni119: FSs:·.a,·imvertun·iflCJ = 6.22 Bearing Capacity: Base Footing Dimensions: U ltirt1ate eearir1g Capa,;ity: Bearing pressure: Factor of Safety: lb o-ul': "" 24-307- 2 f: lb amax = 2813- .:? f=Sbearing = 8.642 Width of Footi•1(:J: Lw1dth = 4.l) ft Toe Exten.-3ior.: :_toe= 1ft Depth of Footing: ldepth = 2ft: Note: Width of Reinforcement: Lqrid = 0 tt ~\l'hen reinforcement is present it shall always be p1acecJ 6i11 from the bottom of the foot'Pg. The rninimum foO':·.ing dirrll:lns:ons xe 6i11 deeD by 24in wide. !fthe v,1lues specifying thi; footing dirr:er1r,io11s are not c1re,3ter than 6i1-, X 24in the rrir1irnu1~ size :_;f-ioui,J be used. Whe·1 geogrid reinforcement is present trw rni11irnurr, footirvJ depth shall be 1?.in to provide 6in of cover above and below the geogrid. Biack River Quarry, 10·foot ecology block wall with 15-1 slope, E-9543-lrncd Earth Cori~ultar-ts, Inc. P#: 12 SUMMARY OF RESULTS, continued Static Conditior-s: Geogrid Length: Geogric.l NL:1t1ber INTERNAL STABILITY j ~ 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Gecg·~id Nurnbe:- J - 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 L ~ soft Gecgrid E!ev, ~.ev, = 9 ft 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Factor Safety Overstress 10.155 8.794 6.376 5.001 8.547 7.259 6.309 5.578 3.249 Allowable Load LIDSj 1.5 1066.667 1066.667 1066.667 1066.667 2216 2216 2216 2216 2216 Factor Safety Pullout, Soil: 9.34 13.028 13.028 13.028 13.028 13.028 13.028 13.028 8.997 Black River OuarTy, 10-foot ecolcgy block wall with 1.5-1 slope, E-9543-1.r-ncd Earth Consultants, Irie. Terisile Force Fisj = 157.55 181.938 250.93 319.922 388.913 457.905 526.897 595.888 1023.192 Geogrid Efficiency, ID 14.77 17.057 23.525 29.993 17.55 20.664 23.777 26.89 46.173 ·I lbft D/\TE: Hay 26, 2004 P#: 16 i ,g 8 7 :-:::: 6 0 (/) -0 5 <l:l .s: .l!:! 4 <l:l ct 3 ® CD ?!\ ~--· )------------+ ... ~ ... Structu ra I Fi II Infill Soil 18" Wide Drainage Layer ~~ Structural Fill 1 (Typical)' Infill Soil Foundation Soil ... •: '~ :--.~::. -.... • \\: i /i/1 ..... I : :-:,:, I ; :::.:: I . · .. : .. -.:?{·;· .... . . .. . 4"Qiameter Drain Pipe Ecology Block (2'H x 2'W x 6'L) / Where the geogrid elevation matches the joint between blocks, the geogrid should be placed out to the face of the wall GEOGRID SCHEDULE e-!.:~!l~-SZJ!~J!rD!J.:"2~S.. Location Type Length Cons1nJC1ion Tt'!S1ing & ICBO / WABO lnspecrton &:!r',1ces 1 through 5 Synteen SF80 1 O' i 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 CITY 01', RENTON EXHIBIT D-1 Building Per1nit ---------------"---------- Permit Number: 8050337 Permission 1s hereby given to do the following described work, according to the condilions 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: GEOGRID REINFORCED SLOPE /\ND ECOLOGY BLOCK WALL ANO REINFORCED SLOPE BENEATH ENTRANCE ROAD AND OTHER AREAS FOR SUNSET BLUFF PROJECT Job Address: Owner: nant: Contractor· 1101 SW SIJNSET BLVD 1101 SW SUNSET BLVD SR 900 LLC 912510TH A VE S SEATILE WA 98108 SUNSET BLUFFS GARY MRRLINO CONST CO INC 9125 10TH A VE S SEATILE, WA 98108 Contractor License GARYMCC150MW Contractor Phone 206-762-9125 City License 261162 ___________ Const Lender: l n form a!ion: Dfttc of hsne Date of Expiration Construction Value Parcel NumbtT 07/29/2005 12/25/2011 $180,000.00 1323049010 I hereby certify that no work is to be done except as described above and in approved plans~ and that ,vork is to conform to Renton codes and ordinances. Applic,~a=nt~X~'---- l3DJ2l 1fo i 2/00 hh UBC Type of Construction Building Height Story Count Building Sq. Ft. Dwelling Count Occupancy Ciroup 0 0 0 0 Subject to compliance with the Ordinances of the City of Renton and information filed herewith permit is granted. Building Oflicial Other 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) 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: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 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 F.s1;;·1t;lisl1eci 1r~75 E-10927 As requested, Earth Consultants, Inc. (ECI) is pleased to present this letter providing recommendations for constructing 1H:1V (Horizontal:Vertical) to 1.5H:1V reinforced fill slopes and a geogrid reinforced ecology block wall with 2H:1V 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. ------- 1805136th Place N.E., Suite 201, Bellevue, WA 98005 Bellevue (425) 643-3780 FAX (425! 746-0860 Toll Free (888) 739-6670 Other Locations Fife 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 1 2 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:1V 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 Consu\;anls. !r,c. 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 (SMi 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 2H: 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 1 H: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:1 V 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 feeti, 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 Consultnn1s, Inc. 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 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 geogrid and geotextile reinforcement. Based on our experience with similar projects, a key element in successfully construcf,ng a 1 H: 1 V and 1.5H: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 C:onsu/t<inl.S, 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 geog rid 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-1557, 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 ConsL1tants. 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, Mb~~~R-~7w~ .J Senior Project Manager Scott D. Dinkelman, LEG Principal HMX/SDO/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 Consultants, Inc ~·..:c·: _-_-~;,. --~-,. .. ________________ . ----. * -~:.-~----_-_ _. ---::::::/ -------------------_, _____ _ ·-------------------------- -y ---------- _:".:'~~~'\I = ':_ --~_;~::·': SE'.;:Ct-.::-s"'" ·'?:'C::G''. "-" -1,1 R~(-RI: G>C ~'" ~a,.hr~-~f<-iTY" ___ ;y;__~: -----c--..i.: 'L_ -----------~--:.,.. --==_~..;:" "Rl\l".1-i" ;;· :18>-s.m = ·,:,~"'~,;·r ·x· :JR ~o~'·"· H,, c,,:, ___ - -c-" >- --~---:c.--·\ ~-=-:::~:~·;, ::-\' ,, ~- <fs(,SION C·::" •'<Ot ;-· : •:b :J-: ~-"'~10\ SECTION A -A' SCALE: 1 '° = 20- __ ,, .. ______ _ ~-_ S~~~~1-:----=~ :---,=~t~, "'; ------------r--------~=~~~:~\-.=:,J----- '=")------ c~!,----------- --'- -----~ -------=-~--=. ,_· -;, .:.~_]_:~-~:.~\ ·-:, ---·;, _____ j ~---.:~----·,\ ' 0 (;; :.~ ~ ~~:?\-;':"; __ T ____ _ ·; _ Ex;s-. Nt. ,:; s'.: .. •r,l FACE WRAP DETAIL (TYP) SCALE: 1 '° = 5- EXHIBIT D-3 3 sheets GENERAL SLOPE REINFORCEMENT NOTES REFER TO CIVIL GRADING DRAWINGS FOR SLOPE AUGl\'ME\IT AND ELEVATIONS .2 A'._L GRADING AND EARTHWORK SHALi._ BE COMPLETEC ;:,ER EARTH CONSULTANTS GEOTECH,\JICAL REPORT E-10927 DATED I 19,2)04 3 PRIMARY GEOGRlO L-AVERS SHAU_ BE MIRAFI ?XT OR EQUIVALENT SECONDARY GEOGRID LAYERS SHALL BE MIRAFI 5XT OR EQUI\IALEN': ALL GEOG RID SHALL BE C,_EARL.Y IOfNTlFIED ANO LABE:...EO IN "7H:'. FIELD ANY UNMARKED ROL-.S OR PORTIONS THEREOF THAT CAN\IOT BE iOENTl;:IED SHALL NOT BE USED IN SLOPE CONSTRUCTION ""'."HE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSPECT THE MATERIAL..S UPON DELIVERY TO ASSURE THAT THE PROPER TYPE AND GRADE HAVE BEEN RECEIVED. THE COJ\JTRAC~OR SHALL PRO--:-ECT ALL MATEi:.:IALS FROM DAMAGE ALL GEOGRID rv1A7ERIALS SHALL BE STORED AT TEMPERATURES ABOVE 20' F A!\10 BELOW 140' F ROLLS OF GEOGRiD MATERIALS SHOULD BE COVERED TO PREVEI\/T DAMAGE FROM LONG TERM EXPOS:JRE TO SUI\IL..iGHT ANY MATERIALS DAMAGED DURING STORAGE SHALL BE REPLACED BY THE CONTRACTOR AT \JC ADDITIONAL COST TO THE OWNER 4 /a.. QUALIFIED AND EXPERIENCED CIVIL ENG!NEER EMPLOYED BY THE GEOGR!D MANUFACTURER OR IT'S SUPPLIER SHA-l. BE A\'AJLA3LE FOR A MINIMUM o.c Or..JE DAY OF SITE ASSISTANCE AT THE START OF l~S-P.UATION. TO ASSIST THE CONTRACTOR AND THE ENGlr>.JEER IN THE PROPER CONSTRUCTiOr-.J/INSTALLATION TECHNIQUES. THEREAFTt:.R. THE REPRESENTATIVE ShALL BE AVAILABLE ON AN AS NEE:)EO BASIS AS REQUESTE:D BY THE ENGINEER. JURING THE REMAINDER OF THE PROJECT 5 GEOGRID Sf-lALL BE INSTALLED ON HORIZONTAL SURFACE OF COMPACTED STRUCTURAL FILL AT PROPER ELEVA-ION AND ORIENTATION AS SHOWN ON SECTIONS A-A· AND 8-B' OR AS DI REC-ED av T:-!E ENGINEER. CORRECT ORIENTATION OF-THE GEOGRID SHALL BE VERIFIED BY CONTRACTOR 6 GEOGRl'J SHALL BE PULLED TIGHT MID SECURED IN PL.ACE WITH STAPLES, PINS SAND 3AGS OR BACKFILL.AS REQUIR::.o STRUCTURA~ FILc. SHALL BE PLACED SPREAD, ANO COMPACTED IN SUCH f. MANNER AS TO PREVENT THE OEVl:::.LOPMEN,- OF WRINKLES IN AND•OR MOVEMENT OF THE GEOGRID GEOGRID MAY NOT BE OVER'._APPEO OR CONNECTED MECHANICA\..LY TO FORM SPLICES IN THE PRIMARY STRENGTH DiRECT!Ql\l SINGLE PANEL. LENGTHS ARE REQUIRED IN THE PRIMARY STRENG-;'~ DIRECTION. NO OVERLAPPING IS REQUIRED BETWEEN ADJACENT ROLLS UN'...ESS SPECIFIED 3Y THE E\IGINEER P. MINIM"JM FILL THICKI\JESS OF 6 iNCHES IS REOUIRE:.D PRIOR TO THE OPERATION OF fRACTED VEHICLES OVER TrlE GEOGRID. TURNING OF TRACKED VE:HtCLES SHOULD BE KEPT--:-0 A Mlr-.JIMUM TO PREVENT TRACKS FROM DISPI.ACII\JG THE FILL N•JD ~AMAGING THE GEOGRID. SUDDEN BRAKING At\JO SHARP TURNS SHAl..L. BE A\/OtDED JI.NY GEOGRID DAMAGED DURING iNSTA'...LATION SHALL BE REP-ACED BY THE CONTRACTOR AT NO ADDITIONAi.. COST TO THE OWNER S~OPE FACE SHA_i.. BE rlOE-PACKEU TO A F!RM C0ND1Tl0r;J AS SI.OPE CONSTRUCTION PROGRESES c--¢r~ /~~~~ -"-~ .. _ .-\<<""7~t~ ~.>t~JC4 G~-.. ~ @{_ ""ii;1,c '~"":PP(::;& .. ~ . z 0 -,--1-z u w w :, (/) "- w (/) s a.. w w z 0 I-> 0 _, 0 ~ r (f)Zu_~ oo"":i: w z 3 ~ u <( co ;;; Cr'. U) ti:; . Q_,u,Z lL -Z 0 z<!'.=>r _l-u,Z w w Ow 0::: 0 w a:: _, "' <( 0 u is -a:: o._ CL /'.= U:=::.- C ! j ' ,. if', C ,:'..::: ' ..... -:: -i::.< ..--::-:,. ? ~~ C '~ '"'-- '-' '-' = 7 ~:: f .~! ,.,.., .:: -= ~ ~~ A w ~ g :, X z :, o ... "o>- 2 e >-m +--'<l" ma ~?; z ~ , ..,. s: (.) 0 i--<t w Ci::< a::::::::. Cl...00(.) SHEET 1 .,-;-, .,-, ... .,.._ rr~ ,, '\ .,,,-, -- :! __ "_. ;,--,,..,,'\_· c\. ~ ':'.' /t;-,' \ :YJ ;'.11 J.,·1_·· .. '> \}fl •j, ,, ,''' • / ' ,. ,j \ ·, .. , .. ,:.:.--,--'-'~ '\)\:~.' ::; '-~-_;f I I ~ ,. '·N•-" . 1'\ I ,} (fl I Nm m -j PROJECT NO. 10927 DATE 514105 ORAWN AY IJNM CHECKED BY MX ---~. (fl 0 )> r m ~ ' " "' Q V, m (') -I 0 z CD Cl! l:1,_,~f-il:11\· .' 1, _/ I ·i 1 (\~ '1 '1) r. 1111 I I I .(' rcr-.-mci 11 l1Tf:11jl1I -'· l_l1i11i'1l1l1I l1l1l1l1i1l1I l1l1l1iiirl,I / !m I~ 1Sl 'OJ 'r IR IJ r 0 ~ r Earth consultants, Inc. ',r·, 11,·("11111( ,ii 1=rn)rH'!'l1T1t• .. I Oi'<>l(o)\\' l·.n\"'F<Ul>lh'ilt,11 <-;r i•·11!'t"--. ( :rn \',h 11( lH 'I I ·11·•,lini: I:.. :r 'I~( l '\\• '\'\{) 111',f I("( II('! f ,'-;( r\ ;I ·1 ·• :;:g} ?~~ Un i,1"]_:i' '.!1l il~[~3 5~~ rOO ' 0 ";;Ji~ ~~~ ~~~ "o, if.£r •;.---,,, fi~ ' i i I' :1 ".',. I ' ~/ ---------~--- I'-. M,,x H 1~· 0 -,~ ' I j ,- ' ! ~ HI· 1/\1"1! IJ SCJII 8 0 ? G I I ! ),']: ,,, ~i~ ~1:i c.z ' ~ " · --. ·-TYPICAL REINFORCED STONE AND ECOLOGY BLOCK WALL DETAILS PROPOSED SUNSET BLUFF DEVELOPMENT RENTON, WASHINGTON ' \ 1'· ____ __{f__. ____ _ OVERBUILD FACE OF SLOPE (MIN 3') _.,,;:z. OR COMPACT Sc.OPE Fl'iCE ~----- /,;;::/ .....--,-_;::>· /;::, /• -~~ ,,,:::.'"'------;y.::.L-' ------ /_,::// ,/ _.-----<'.~> REINF-CRCEO FILL ZONE _ .. /.-:,-;:; ---,;; // ----.,. £~<--;::· --~..2:----_r,,, /~;::: <,_/ ---- EXIS":ING GRADE SLOPE FILL PLACEMENT NOTES -, L__ __ .. e: __ KEYWAY GEOTEXTILE REINFORCEMENT (MIARFI 600X OR EQUIVALEr\lT} • SLOPE SHOULD BE STRIPPED OF \/EGETt,,TION AND UNSUITA3LE MP..""."EFIALS PRIOR TO EXCA\/ATl:'JG t(EYVI/AY OR BE\JCHES • 3ENCHES ARE TYP!CALL Y EQUAL --:-0 A DOZER BLADE WIDTH. APPROXIMATELY 8 J:CEET. BUT A MINIMUM OF 4 FEET • FINAL SLOPE GRADiENT SHOULD BE •. 5:1 (l-iORIZONTAc..:VERTICAL) --BENCHES • FINAL S .... OPE FACE SHOULD BE OENSIFIED BY OVER-BUILDING WITH COMPACTED FU. AND TRlrVIMING BACK TO SHAPE OR BY COMPACTION WITH DOZER OR ROLLER THE SLOPE SHOULD BE HYDROSEEDED WiTH A SEED MIX INTENDED FOR USE" 0\1 SLOPES SECTION C -C' SCALE: 1" = 20' • THE SLOPE SHOULD SE COVERED VVITH JUTE MATTING OR GEOTECHNICAL FABRIC TO MAINTAIN THE SEED AND M.JLCH IN P~ACE UNTI~ THC R:00:" SYSTEM HAS AN OPPORTUNITY TO GERMINATE STRUCTURAL FILL SHOULD BE PLACED IN THIN, LOOSE LIFTS NOT EXCEEDING 12 INCHES ;N Ti---JICKNESS EACH LIFT SHOULD BE COMPACTED TO AT LEAST 95 PERCEI\JT MAXIMUM ORV DENSITY PER ASTM D-1557 MODIFIED PROCTOR • SLOPE REINFORCEMENT NOTES OVERBUILD SLOPE FACE A M!NIMUM OF 3 FEET TO ACHIEVE ADEQUATE COMPACTION AT ~ESIGN FACE OF SLOPE OPT10NAL.: OR USE A "-ARGE. ''HOf-PAC" TO CQM::iACT THE SLOPE FACE INSTA!...L LANDSCAPING FA3RIC A_QNG r"ACE OF' S~OPE TO REDUCE EROSION ANO TO ALLOVV VEGETATiO'\l TO BECOME ESTABLISHED I' , \, ~[~;\~-- -- ... ·'-~' r ,,,., C " <l~ieig*- :·\· ~,1.,>- li. :':Pj!ff.F•.'i,~~2 ..J <( f--r z w w 0 :. a. 0 w CLuw:lz O<i:>o .....J (I) LU J- (/') I O ('.) 0 LI.J tt: ~ w C? ~ ~ U.....Jcic;'.( D:'. ::J f--s ouw- LL D:'. ~ 5 z <!: ~ f--wwU)[j D:'. Z O o:: w ..J <!: u iI >-r Cf) 0 Q_ 0 0:: a. ~ ]j :f; C ~I ~-:.:: _:,,.,,. ::; -r:. 2 ~-~ :: ~ ~- :._; -~ "J ~ ~! s ~~ Gt "" - ~ N § :a, X z" 0 D >-z )3 >-m l-~a:iO u -LL] ~ i.n 2 ~ -, w ~ u C !-< w 0:: <( D:'. I 0... OQU SHEET 3 CITY OF RENTON EXHIBIT D-4 Construction Permit Permit Number: U 050099 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: ntact: 1101 SW SUNSET BL VD -SUNSET BL VD QUARRY INDUSTRIAL PARK LLC 9125 IOTII 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 Fmaled 0712612005 01/22/2006 Contractor License: GARYMCCISOMW 206-762-9125 Contractor Phone: City License: 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 shall be held hannless 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 damages. Any work performed witl1in the right-of-way must be done 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 1-800-424-5555 I hereby certify tl1at 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. ©-c{,(,,,y ;4f e_,,. Ir',,., '9 Ce,. -, Subject to compliance with the Ordinances of the City of Renton and information filed herewith pennit is granted. -Ry~A pplicant /1.1,'c he; r' "7 0 1 f0-e.v Public Works Rep THIS PERMIT MUST BE POSTED AT THE JOB SITE AT ALL TIMES. ENGO 1 12/rlO bh ' I z .. § 1 11111~ I r: !;! ,, I i N I ~-I 1 ' ... 1 - '\1 i .! 1:. ,I i' \ ' ~ i; ! ' . ' ' \', ·, ' \ i. ·.. ' .,\ \" ' t !ral&-~9L (~) 80l86 'If M :J"UJ. 'lf3S H1ll08 3nN3A'lf HWi ms 'ON ·oo .LN:1'4dO"B\3CI OoN"1 ON11Bn m l8LB-,sz(m,) lll9-<Ol(«•) lS:086 VM 'lNJ>t HJ/lOS 3nNJAV ONU ; L ZB L ! P~ "·-~Ii-~ §jig~ ~.Q! ~ M I , I h,!1 I ,~~;, -U h1 1~ ~ ~niUI ~ lnun .......................... ••••••• O~HJ11U3t; Ii I f JI !1 ! 1 n jJ 1 1 !t ! ! • ij;ii1a 1IH1n;1h i•;lli!II 1l1n~litlls1hUail1i In! ,-"~ I !c.i >''_l:1:1;: ,'.de'. ,t, ,; 0 ·' 't,J._;j){ ~ff1ijJ :j@ 11( ~ fl"l-t +· LI <;J ' ',, -.,: ' D~It~l ~~ 11 i ~El H•1i I d1:hu1:a s I i DI ' I ' , , 1 • I I • > • I : ii Id ,j lrlii;I I II " i ! I 'I ~ I : :' i : ' ' I • i ! i ,,~ 0 0 ·ii • I t f ~ i ! ! ; i ! ; 1;11 ! ; I ; 11 i ~rsl i i • i I : i i ; 1111 ,~iii I' i, ; ~ i i I d I Ii U1; ..: N ..s,,: orl d to= Iii oi Ii ! l! I ~s 8 ~ ~ ~ I 8 8 8 8 • ~ is ii I Ii I ! I •• I; § fi I!' I!' . " ~ -a ~ I I I J .. ' .... ! I i~'i Ii I :1, 11-aai l,~I I i I ii 1~1-~Ii. Ii, 1~-, !I, ··1 'f ··1 6~ ~; I 6~ I ti • i ~ -___c!!"": ::l:::Kl18 .1.3BNflS -. ... --,\y;);' . !,:,1,1111 '1 i 111 i' (/:','' ! 11l ', .. , , It• \ ',: 1: ' \ ' II I ' \ ffllll ::l:ll18 !3SNOS ~l:9.l (90l:) 80l86 VM '3'U.LV3S HlJl08 3rl8\ V Hl.Cll 9l:l6 "ON "00 .1N3rid0"8,\3CI OWi ON-.sf'I !, ,. '"t-i.. .·,'".if\ \ i \ \ gl~liji 1aaa~ ! §~H ii ~ s :::rn ~~t~ f' aa~ r--~ ~I~ -; ~~~~it 'Cs~s~a~· >"' QI .n N <C .... to~ N ~ ~.,.,..._.,,..., __ , ~::;':)~~~~~~ JCl~JIIJP't' "]"d IJGW..IIIW~ 60-..) · lllµQM :>!f'¥1d/&tJ.!Pl!fl0/ JUUl)l,:l ~ NOJ.N3:H ~ .iO MIO ...,~"rJ:~ Hr.):!;.~ ... J,,..,..., ... .N•;;.,.• •- ,09-J t ', XV.:l Z9L8-L'il(£Zt) ZZZ9-ISZ(sz,) lf086 VM 'lN3>1 HJ.flOS 3nN3i\V ONZL £lZ81 "' """' "'"" J.8 "' -;J~ ~Ith "' ---t.LT,. --7wo "' ~!OCI ---~/Ol oa I ,o + I ·~-\ i J ~ \..} ~i ~t-l ........,' Ii! iii ! I I I I !~ ~ ... f' § st 8 I r r I 8 8 8 8 l i I e R I ti S i I • • I~ § s ~ i; . " N • i ~ ! ! I i Ii /j /j Ii \ ' I ,\ t\ '-: \ ,,., \ ',,;, \ ' ' \ ' ' \ ' \__ I \ -------o,,ji-l«lllQI _., ~-iBci -~ -NOOOII J:1.UIO-n:i . . ' SlDfMIO Wld l1lS $'.Kl IMltJ lllius_cim/~tiMiif_~- z <( _J CL I / I I y ::l::::f118 l.38Nl1S i r;;~~~ ~ • Sl:16-l:9£ (90l:) 80l86 VM '3ill '13S HUlOS 3f'IBA 'I Hl.Ol Sl:16 'OIII •oo ltand013A3Cl OIY1 ON"IBn NOJ.N:f!H 11:0 A.J.l:) ,OS•.l XV.:! Z:8l8-l9Z(9Zt) ZZZ9->,Z(sz•) l'.1:086 YM '00)1 Hlf\OS 3nN31\V ONZL 9lZ81 00 00 "' 00 ,., '.:il~..---1"'. -·- ~1'1!1 • """"" D\lill MCWIJl:i JO '.uo -IDd- -ooiiii):5-~-i) ",W,') :e,:w·· --~--Wld"ils !3i_'l"JIWl1 ~ rD'YH/~f~ I ·ON r _-: ' -T-- -~'" ::!::rllB !38Nns S,Vl3(] o,iv Nnd CH:)d .llalCBS ~ ;3"1J.U. s~ie.::: C90l:> 80l86 'f/M '31ll \138 HlJl08 :llN3II 'f/ H!a Sl:18 -~ "00 .ua1d0"13A3Cl (J>.IV1 ON""IBN Pj di~ 11 ~ ;! ~1! I! ;;~ /I 'lol ;~ \ 11 'I 'I c~ I-,. ' '· I• I ,\t I I \51 I\\ ' I .•• I\' ~~:' ;1ll}::=i~U!= ~ .... --. ,~,; ,.., .. NO.I.N3:ll ~ ,rn ill:) '"'4":'u:" ~-.OC-J I I ~ I ! I ,,,, l8L8-1Sl(SZ>) lU9-lSl(Slt) l£086 "IN. '00)1 1-llilOS Jnr&i'f' ONU S'IZ:81 • ,s .! i I I i i ~ I "'I i * I ' i ~ * / I ·oN aor :,::rs 8 8 8 8 5 0 l 1;~1 i,1; •·I· ,,~ I h~ i '" • 8 ·. ! < i I .I: • i ; " ! ~ ~ * 00 Odd't 31"1 .~:_:: _ _:: ----- 00 '¥JjUt ... " .... 00 "i).ii" ____ ______ ~ NCWml jl) JJ.I:) 10:1 I ---OOl'll'IOO HOi.OI JO ,iJJ:I lO,j ' i - ------'illiiiH:i'Wlllitf·---· """"'" ·oo -_g(l OIi _00.NMIO l'IIIQ1S o»t/f/lHtJN'J,,Ol#dX),. •.. ...J <( E z ------~~ --?-------· XV.:I i!"YLQ-L si(szt) llZ9-<Sl(Szt) Z£096 'fM. '00}1 H1/10S 3nN3fl.~ ONc!L gizBl 8 8 8 B • iii iii iii iii ' • ! ; i i l ', Ii bll ~ ~ I I lo H r..z 11 Oo l!f >-~ •..; E-< f:1 ~. tii:,; }I I ~~ ";r,l u J;Q ~~ ~ i~ ii11· ,:~!w :-:! i ij 8 ~ ~ I} II iii ii I i I I i_._~+~ i ; I i!:! I I ! I ~ r-1-· I I ~,---.- i 1IO 1IO 140 PROPO!iEl !RUE • F'FE ' 120 ' I ~ : I ! !lllO I "" ' ~ i ;t---- i~ m! ~ ..... WI sw, ""°"' u, sb. 21:t+47JJ8 ..... 130..18 -IE-12!.18 {18" SD) ~: ~• ii' ,, ... DmM=:~_·\ 111..![1~- '''" ! 1llO ~ -, "'" ii ~. ~ """" SWPENC1re PIPE StW.L. II[ IMT FUSm JrS El',.ll!ED '" -..""""' """"' ....., . """. \ ' 1IO 1IO 140 C8f" 1"tp[ He" SEE SICllill.R 'G' OH 1lG SIE'f 1llO Ii --._... ~~"r'"' :(Sf;!~LE ::11! 120 I ! I r -·-l-1JU8{12"Stl) _,...,.ao lf.io,1""2.IIO c,r S1J STOAMLINE 'G' ~ l ..... 1·-50· 1·-10· ., ! ~ ..i " -1 ' ,.... 120 STOAMUNE )·=50' j~ .. 10· ~ I 31 .! . ,1 ., I I I ..... ,...,, STORMLINE PROFILE A PORTION OF 11-E S 1/2 OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHP 23 N, RANGE 4 E, W.M, RENTON, WASHINGTON ~'''" •I sw, "'°""' u, itA. %.1+47.41 ltll-179 .l1 IE•175.06 (1T SD} ----......_ __ --r""""' .....,., • "-\ / lW CE ~I Stt1PE .!.7_!f. t --~s~!\~U> Rll-f51M IE-14Ul!.i (12" Sll) STOAMLINE 'G' ~ ji , .... ~ """ , ·.50' 1" .. 10· "" ..... ;(,._~urJCN.UO __ ., -fx:~<g' (~ sm: PIIDPDSED GtlU e APE 4 ----- """" -. "" . \ . 200 ~ .' ''"" SfI SfOIIU£ ';' '"'" """ 1IO ~ -, ~ ,..., ~ £lt 12'" SO 200 180 STORMLINE '8' ,n_..so· 1·-10' ~ ., ~: 1IO " ~' "'"' ~ ~ '""" "" ' w/ """ ""°" "' stA. &+51l.118 _, .... """'"' or "' 1. EX '.£-15lld: (ti'" cac) : EXISTN. GIIO.Kl • PIP( l ~' ""°"°5Ul 1l't,IO[ • l'l'E t--.. . / -t ,' MO ;r .. ~.001.J) 111,1o,n4.,o i:-,oe~ cir so) 120 I ..., STORMLINE 'C' 1· .. :,o· 1~ .. 10· ' i .. ; ~ _, .... -5 f[ ""' .-::ew "' ~i -r 1IO MO 120 -I .i, -, ,..,., "" ' W/ SOI.II lllCICIC LD st,._ 2)+47,41 lllt-iSZ.~ IE.•1..a,4& (12" SO) i .. ti -: ""' !; ' "''" :("~n~u;, _, .... IE.•141.ae (1r SO) i ' '.'i ~ "'"' ii . -, """""..... ~· -,-.... --... la F'RCf'OSED OAAll£ • Pl'£ C .Rf 1IO 1IO """"'""""·"''\/ EX. 12" SD ~ 1IO 180 "" ' SE[ sniiiui: 'G' " -""" STORMUNE 1·-50· 1 ·-w· 1 I I ~ ~ ,, :1, ., • i i ! ! I 110i I ·1 i j i ~ I --------1 m .. ===Ii~ lg MO;i i---1 ;I -, I '"" iao, ! I r -! ": ~ ~ ' 8~ 11,~ ~~;di ~is~ ~ii~ ;1 ! I i ~ 1 ~ t------1" -. ? ~ i., ~ <!!,?"IN a,;""' i 0, ~ ~ ~~.!..!. ~~~ ~~4~!!'t "~~ "' " " -:lil:~~ ·; t ~1 I g; .• ~ ...... , .. :, s,,--~ ,c' ~ 'J: : ~ ! ii, .... , , co'i>.,.::.~ ! ~ ~ ' J f ~ ~ ' .... ~ jl ~A~ENTQFOP A;~~ WORK$ ~ ~ •I ;I .... j !!! i ~ ~ : 474 11 11 I I_~~~ I g ~ " .. "' ... ~ -R I - --~~ -l1i ce ~i...l ~ 1-- ' I • ' 1i I 'I " ~ ~ J i ! ; ! lo : I •z ff ; 0~ ~~ ~z i~ _ r.:i C u~ i " I i : ,E i IC fi ·~ ~ ~ ::E , I i. ~ • !! o I ~ I i,i 1 ' i11<! ti2~ • . ' _'·! L ' 8 8 g, i! I .I ! II . - J ~ ; ~--,-:~Ii i I I : ! i I ! I :-"-t . j ii EXISllilC: CRCUI) • PfPE l \ --· W/ '°"' """"' \I) ~ ; $ti.. 3tt0.9'I .' ~ill?'(1t' SO / €X. IE•l!laM: {l~ CiF / 1111) ,' 1111) Cflf41 lffl: ! ~ ;,;j=t. ,,. .. SEE fflRIIUi: ~ .'.! "' """ " 140 140 STORMUNE 'E' 1H .. 50• 1· .. ,o· I $ """ I -1 1 STORMLINE PROFILE A PORTION OF TrE S 1/2 OF SECTION 13, TOWNSlf 23 N. RANGE 4 E, WJ.A, RENTON. WASHNGTON -I ' :(4 ~2&%1W()(lr,I(; I.XI / .... ,82..61 : ~·r.:~9r {'f'; S,] I EX. 12" SD T'l'Pf:~ ~ ' ~ ... .._... .. 1· ON~CI / EXISTNC. GIIOUII) • l'fl£ t \ / ... PIIOPOSfII GRMlE • Pl'E I\ \ /. 180 MO /i/ t!A 140 I cafolltli 'ttPE I ~~Lil 1111-117 .00 ~/ • I ._~ ltoo11UIO (12" SO) 11!!1 I If 1l!l) STORMLINE 'P ;H.50• :"•LO' 1 i I i ~ Si ! -..., """" """' • PF[ • 1 l"'HUl'l'!'f;__!_ __ •I 'SOl1l LOCICINC Ul: S'bl 7~.0I .... 1112.11 1f .. 1~7.l1 (12" :SIi) EX. IE•1fl03t; CS" QP) 1,__... 190 ,;;effl'T'!'PEl ~ ~ (IA 12"~ SEE~'cr I :!, '" """' ~ • 140 MO STORMLINE 'J ;• .. 50' 1" .. 1 D' I' j ~; ii ' . ..... -· Li:J g ~ i ! I ! i ' 8~ 111 ~;;I ~ii; ;1 ~ is .., IN~ <l<'lC'.IN ci~~ zOIU>ta ~,,.!.. .!. II"> ~~ -:s·--N ~~ <0 N N -::it:..:!;..:!. 11 !I !1 ~ .,. ~ '• .:, \ ~ ~ :r. ; 0 ~ ..... ".c(l•• ..._ CITY OF RENTON OEPARTMENr OF PUBl..JC WORKS ;: ' l ~ ! , ,, ' ~ i ~· I ' [ r l i e ~ II /2, • nr="'" ,/--,. I I I .,.~/PA --<*~T I ·-: _________ _ STOFM..JE PROFI..E IUIETBUff : JD,1;'111 100/05 ..... !kl.WO.- g ~ .. -~~~-.. -~ -p ,_ .. ff -""""" -~~m ~~ I ~ c:, ~_']__ ai .. .,. .. ...,.iiijjiij _____.__ I~ 1·-- Scott Oinkelman 1H:1V REINFORCED SLOPE DESIGN SUNSET BLUFF E-10927 July 8, 2005 fEXPIRES 06-25-07 Earth Consultants, Inc. ' I 1805 -136th Place Northeast, Suite 201 Bellevue, Washington 98005 (425) 643-3780 Toll Free 1-888-739-6670 EXHIBIT D-6 (9 pages) 2 3 4 ' 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 " 14 15 18 17 18 19 21) 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 26 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 •• 43 .. Earth Consultants Inc. PROJECT COMPUTED BY /Mi< CHECKED BY~---- PROJECT NO. ~l<>iz7 SUBJECT J4> ,;,,:'.,,01,t i. ' ' : I • . •. ' f ·I i . k:: \t.onle.·· J ~s, .... \I) 1..,;;i, 1fi 1 . , f-J I i . -i ! ' : i la ! tr t H' . __ : I ye.,~~.w...-&-~%*"e ~+..,,: ' i • : ' ' : ':, l~J. '~ .:=. <;. ~ j. '[ Jv~.-ci.tl '1.~~;\,11!. ~~:> [1,':) : 4.,r..,L ~"'{'VS \'.=c,ilv---e it= S. ~ ''12,i'f'~"''<-\.,.,~;~ h":, }-1,?:, : \,,~~w.v, 7'\or.e. ~\i,\i4ta 1-S 7 i,~ ;µ...•' «;,, l ~ Yvp(Jet"-\rt> ~ Oeic< ·," cJ' "?o ;1, ae .:4-<.2& ~~ .. J ,ct. .. . <,,, ~ L, ·~---"""==' ; L \1"":. ____ ,_1_0~ ~1. ........... ~- 0 0 0 DATED DATED _____ _ SHEET -1._ OF s (9{'e., +r i I ; I ' L. I_ I -I ' I I·· 1 ... i. I, __ + 1· '' i 1- 1 .. L ! ' fi : ~ : 'r.>, 'b., .... '' 2 3 4 5 • 7 • 9 10 tt 12 13 14 15 18 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 ,,, 29 30 31 .. 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 • PROJECT ' ' I -i t I ... .l i -I I -I_ I .. i., I i i i -J. l I ' I ,_ -! I I-! i ! i _J I i ' - Earth Consultants Inc. ,~i .. ,: ' . -{} -' ' ' '4,iJ2· ' l. ' -1-lc, 1'}Pi +-4 __ i COMPUTED BY -"'r\ic,c\)(,_ __ CHECKED BY ---- PROJECT NO, ---- SUBJECT I 4o'+ I I ; : ' : /)y.l"'-le-~ I : "~ ., ,.., Ao' I ' ' ' i'2C..j0 I il'R ... i ! "=I 4h:.' . I -1 -, ' ( \j'.) -. i i ' . I /c..: .,' I I> 1'-!2-~~D i ! . - t-' i-.4 -;!;__t;-)(f,\I) ,4._::\ ._' ' ; I Jl~\~;4~~~ ! ' ' i -I I I 1' \ --' ; l'--1\l"r\,Y,, DATED 41,.., DATED SHEET~ OF -! 10,1 n • L..:ieb I I -' -i i L '--t . 1 .. ... , .... , 2 3 4 5 6 7 a 9 10 11 " 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. • --' . I' J--1 = 10 -(IC() .. '..;. ~o ,/ ~t/-r'r"'\~I: '-~ C -)VY\\Jk.~ - COMPUTED BY---- CHECKED BY ____ _ PROJECT NO.----- SUBJECT OATED DATED ~-----~ SHEET~-OF n~~J.. ti, vef;:{,r ~\,M ~b: L\ "'' ~ ~I', • Earth Consultants Inc. 2 3 4 5 6 7 PROJECT .. I I j ' I .. ( 11- 8 ----L ____ )_ 9 12 13 14 15 ' I ••• I. I ; ........ 1 I 1. J i' --l !1~\[so; -! -j : I I 16 i' " -I : ___ + i I I -;, ''-elf 18 !9 20 21 22 23 .. 25 26 27 ,. 29 30 31 32 33 34 as 36 37 ,. 39 40 41 42 43 I I ··r.. .. I i ---·r 1-' _, < ' . I --~i~-·.r -. .l., .. • --• I -• ., I I I ... ( j i ' I I h-: i~P tJ ,:4. '<, I/ -r:~ "'!". '. -t'.' ! ---. =i - COMPUTED BY---- CHECKED BY----~ PROJECT NO.----- SUBJECT i j ' I .. <i,z i -..v .u ! . u : --! -.! -1 - : • i ' I v<k i {t' ·' ' i ; 1. ' . : DATED DATED SHEET __ OF i ·-• .i_ .! ..• } i - -· • I : I ···-:-.,,.r ~ ·-- I ·, _ _j i ! I ~:. ) i -1 I 1·- ·-1-- ' ,I__, • ' 3 4 PROJECT .:» j ! ' ! ! ' s .. J. ... lj, .. L e J .. 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 43 44 ... / ,-i ·{ i,. j • !·---' ' . I Earth Consultants Inc. I ' -I· :·· '"i i {;fe.,~<f COMPUTED BY -'-M."-'-X __ CHECKED BY ___ _ DATED DATED PROJECT NO. --,---SHEET __ OF SUBJECT ~,4tae ~\~ I i. i. ! ~t rw.-"* ---· .• -, r .• -i i j I·-' I ' ~I .,i,~ ' ' ~<1~+<4 1 a. ... ~y~ 't"f' !c,h : .. : .. :. .J. ,,-; . -.. -./ ,.. . -) r I ' ' ( ! , ; :. i ~ ~:n~'~P~~i~h><'f)(~+_"?"?-f c•--.!•"• ' . ' ' I, \ :, -. ' -~,,-~~~~ I i 1 Lo.1~rsi G<eoty;c\ ' N..' -~ sx, i.3 -i l<'.i \o ! 'bX• •& 12.e '!;"' .. ~ ~,...J,.,j> """'""' la."5+t. ' L--/ µ,' y(;TI ,:, bd'7 i o/ <seq I -, ',?] t>, 5'$'/( <:' '\ ' -. 3 2"' I : i 1 t<-=p, ('2. ·' -j ·-, .! \-----·--. '~fet ! ; ' I i 7-"1 iS-z; I i I , .. J I : ' I I. . .. ···i-= ' i - ! ! ; ""t""" i -i ·T-· -J .I I i 2 3 4 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 i ' ,. I i ! ' I -i -l ' ! - f j. I ·, i I . /-· r i ' ' t I ··j" ' I· Earth Consultants Inc. i _, ! ' -:+-i I: h ·=-.;::'i". .1 I -'. __ ; . ' i COMPUTEO BY---- CHECKED BY ___ _ PROJECT NO. ----- SUBJECT ' [ .; . I ),~,._ ~ )"2,.: "' -. DATED DATEO SHEET __ OF . ' ! I I i '. ' ; - I I r --+ I i .1 ... j_~, 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 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. '4) ~ ?<-l 0 iJ:-~<>11'( ;:' . . ' ._nec:i ~,,r1cl. :\J,,~,.,,. 3 ,, 't, <;" '<T '2. -, \(T '2-. l \, cc ,.,, q" ''-= ' 2-o l.,-, .. (J ,c; rt. ·i --11( . A:\s. 0 _c.kia. . < -L-n;>Z, ..:>IJ 'l'v....1-'C, - . I ( IC-'!: COMPUTED BY---- CHECKED BY ----- PROJECT NO. ---- SUBJECT DATED DATED SHEET __ OF :~,J Sv,v.-4;~',( --, '7 I 4 . ..;. - I \ I i;_ ,-, \,, I ,HJ t1, I · Sv"'-.tl<-;e .,_ '- ~V .. T ~~I <;; '<T G-s' 'IC, &,f! K ••• ... ... ~ .. • CTheTensar Corporation 01Na •I ~ts::c:::1: I I J I I I I -~ I "I • I •• • , ... , 1:1 0.11:1 1.1111 9LOPI. AfM:~Lt)! hll••••t •I "IINl"OflCUICNT PatlCIE COVHClt!NT CHART PROCEDURE: q> I = ... ,., " • •• J.. H' ... ••• • ~ .. .L.---LalH·' ~---...._T IH' \ •••• ••• L:!!.. CTheTensar Corporation ..... 2,· , . ..,.,......--·-·-... -· •. .,.,,. _ .. -- .......... ~· ~ ., ... 1..t •\.ra: 1 .. ..• , ,, UON Allt4LK.# '-.... •I .,, ACNPOftct:IIIIUfr UNQ:TH IIAhO tan </> r ) tan·/ ( FSR I) Determine force coefficient K from figure nbove , where: where: <I>,= friction angle of reinforced fill Tm., = 0.5 KY, ( H' )2 N 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 33.2.278 SEISMIC DESIGN Project: Sunset Bluff Project No: E/0927 Case: Case 1 Design Method: Rankine-w!Batter (modified soil interface) Design Parameters Soil Parameters: t 32 32 32 0 0 0 LQff 130 125 125 6 s 4 Reinforced Fill Retained Zone Foundation Soil Reinforced Fill Type: Unit Fill: Silts & sands Crushed Stone, I inch minus H--,'--,----, 3 ..,._-+-,.._---~ 2 1 Peak Acceleration= 0.15 g Vertical Acceleration= 0.00 g Factors of Safety (seismic are 75% ofstaticj sliding: 1.50/1. I 3 pullour.· 1.501/13 overturning: 2.0011.50 shear: l.50 1.50 bearing: 2.0011.50 bending: Reinforcing Parameters: A1irafi ...ITc Geogrids Tult RFcr RFd 7XTc 5700 1.67 1.10 Analysis: New Case Unit Type: leveling Pad: Wall Ht: Compac Crushed Stone 17.00 ft RFid 1.05 lTDS 2955 BackSlope: 26. 60 deg. slope, Surcharge: Resul~·: Factors of Safe~y: LL: 250 p.ifu.nijOrm surcharge load Width. 99. 00 fl Sliding Overturning 1.83/1.24 3.30//.80 Calculated Bearing Pressure: 31i59!61!36 psf Eccentricity at base: l.06 ft/3.13 ft Reinforcing: ( ft & lbs/ft) Cale. Layer Height Length Tension Reinf. T;rne 8 15.33 14.0 192 I 407 7XTc 7 13.33 14.0 395 I 664 7XTc 6 11.33 14.0 6ll I 932 7XTc 5 9.33 14.0 827 I [20/ 7X'I'c 4 7.33 14.0 1042/1470 7XTc J 5.33 14.0 1258 I 1738 7X1,, 2 3.33 /4.0 l 473 /2007 7XTc I 1.33 /4.() l 393 I /979 JXTc Rejnforcing Quantities (no waste included): lXI'c 12.44 .,yiji uncertainties: I.5011.13 connection: /.50//.[3 (Base Friction used in Tension of base grid) FS 1.50 J__qJ [970 Ci 0.90 Case: Case 1 Cds 0.9(/ Wail Batter: 0.00 deg (Hinge Ht NIA) embedment: I, 00 ft 90 00 ft long DL: 0 psf uniform surcha,ge load Width: 99. 00 ft Bean·ng Shear Bending_ 6.92/2. 90 2.JJ 12.10 2.56/0.94 Allow Ten Pk Conn Serv Conn Tai Tel Tse 1970/3509 ok 602/803 ok NIA 1970/3509 ok 7/9/959 ok N/.4 1970/3509 ok 836/l ll5 ok NIA 1970/3509 ok 954/1271 ok NIA /970/3509 ok 1071/1428" N/A !97013509 ok l ! Sfi/1584'? NIA I 97013509 ok 1305/1740?? N/A 1970/3509 ok 1422/1896.?? Ni1 NOTE: THESE CALCULATIOl'/;~ ARE FOR PRELIMINARY DESIGN ONLY ,LND SHOUW NOT BE USED FOR CONSTRUCTION WITHOUT REVIEW BY A QUALIFIED ENGINEER Date 5/512005 / / Pullout FS >/0/9.12 ok >/0/8.67 ok >1018.84 ok >10/9.31 ok >10/9.91 ok >lO/>IOok >lO/>lOok >IOI> IO ok Page I ' DETAILED CALCULATIONS roject: Sunset Bluff roject No: E/0927 Case: Case I Design Method: Rankine-w!Batler (modified soil interface) Soil Parameters: ,p_ Reinforced Fill 3 2 Retained Zone 32 Foundation Soil Leveling Pad: Crushed Stone lUoduiar Concrete Unit: Compac 32 Depth: /. 00 fl In-Place Wt: 1 20 pcf Geometry Internal Stability (Sloping geometry) Height: 17. 00 ft Backs/ope: Angle: 26. 6 deg Height: 44. 5 7 ft Batter: O.OOdeg Surcharge: Dead Load: 0.00 psf Live Load: 0 psf Base width: 14. 0 Factors of Safety (seismic are 75% ofstatic) £ 0 0 0 l'....Qff 130 125 125 External Stability (Sloping geometry) Height: 23.51 fl Angle: 26. 60Deg Height: 38. 06 ft Batter: O.OOdeg Dead Load: 0. 00 psf Live Load:O psf Date: 5/4/2005 Designer: HMX sliding. 150//./3 pullout: 1.50//.13 1.50 uncertainties: 1.50! 1. I 3 overturning: 2.00/J.5() shear: bearing: 2.0011.50 bf.mding: Earth Pressure::i: k~=~~~~~;:---';:=::::::::=========~ sin' a sin(" -o)[ 1 + 1--+~-,---'!'---'-'-c connection: l.5011.13 1.50 (Base Friction used in Tension of base grid) Internal: ~; 32deg a; 90.00deg P; 26.60deg o ; 26.60deg H~J7.00 ft ka ~ 0.464 /Ixterna",-'--,-1"""-,--'-~~.L-~~~-'-~~ ~; 32deg a ; 90.00deg p; 26.60deg o; 26.60deg ka • 0.464 Hinge Height: Hinge Hee Not applicable due to draw-down on face Date 51512005 Page 2 Reinforcing Parameters: Mirafi flc Geogrids Tuft fl,f'cr RFd 7XTc 5700 1.67 1./0 RFid 1.05 LTDS 2955 FS 1.50 Tai 1970 Ci 0.90 Cds 0.90 .(mnection Parameters: fttlirafi XTc Geogrids Frictional I 7XTc Tel= Ntan(36.20) + 757 Break Pt 1989 Frictional 2 Tel= Ntan(O. 00) + 22 I 3 Unit Shear Data Shear= N tan(40.00) Inrer-Unit ShearShear = N ran(26. 90) + 768.81 Calculated Reactions For the "modified'1 design method, the back of the mass assumed to be vertical fur calculation of resisting forces. effective sliding length = 14. 00 ft Pa= 0.5H (~ Hka-2c,Fa) P'h := h cos(o) Pa.,:= Pa sin(o) Pq := q H·ka Pg,,:= Pqcos(o) P'lv := Pqsm(o) I H' . 'L~ -1 Pq ---··o I Reactions are: 1 1 J: d·o .·~·· I . H/2 ~eff. length 1 Area Force Arm-x WI 2040.00 [0.500! W2 28730.00 [7.500] W3 5500.88 [9.667} Pa_h 14318.31 NIA Pa_v 7170.08 (/4.000} Sum V= 43440.95 Sum EI= 14318.31 Calculate Sliding at Base For Sliding, Vertical Force= WJ+W2+W3-i-W4-t-qd The resisting force within the rein. mass, Rf~ 1 The resisting force at thejCnmdmion, Rf~ 2 = N tan(J2. 00) Arm-y 8.500 8.500 19170 [7.837] N/.4 Sum Afr= S1,mMo ~ flte driving forces, Df are the sum of the e.xtenwl earth pressures: Pa+ Pql + Pqd the Factor of Safety for Sliding is Rf_ 2/Df Calculate Overturning: Date 51512005 Q1,,erturning moment: Alo = Sum Jvfo Resisting moment: Afr = Sum Mr Factor of Safety of Overturning: MrlNJo Moment 1020.00 215475.00 53175.15 -112207.42 100381.06 370051.21 -112207.42 = 43441 = Ntan(32) = 27145 = 27145 ~ 14318 ~ 1.90 ~ //2207 = 370051 -3.30 Page3 Calculate eccentricity at base: with surcharge/ without surcharge Sum Moments ~ 257844/257844 Sum Vertical~ 43441/43441 lase Length~ 14.00 e ~ 1.0611.06 Calculate Ultimate Bearing based on shear: where: Nq~23.l8 Ne~ 35.49 Ng~ 30.21 (ref. Vesic(1973, 1975) eqns) Quit~ 25314 psf Equivalent footing width, B' ~ L -2e ~ 11.87 111.87 Bearing pressure~ sumV/D' ~ 3659 psfl 6036 psf [bearing is greatest without liveload] Factor of Safety for bearing~ Qu!t'bearing= 6.92 Calculate Tensions in Reinforcing: The tensions U1 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] [2J [3] [4] [5J [6] [7] [8] [9] [1 OJ [11 I Layer DeQth zi bl ka/rho Pa (l'as+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 0.464/45 214 o o 192 6 3.67 395 719 NIA 4.67 0.464145 656 0 0 587 5 5.67 611 836 NIA 6.67 0.464145 l340 0 0 1198 4 7.67 827 954 NIA 8.67 0.464/45 2264 0 0 2024 3 9.67 1042 1071 NIA 10.67 0.464145 3430 0 0 3067 2 11.67 1258 1188 NIA 12.67 0.464145 4836 0 0 4324 13.67 1473 1305 NIA 14.67 0.464/45 6484 0 0 5798 o 15.67 1393 1422 NIA 16.33 0.464/45 8042 o 0 7190 Calculate sliding on the reinforcing: The shear value is the le~sor of base-shear or inter-unit shear. [I] [2J (3] [ 4] [5] [6] [7J [8J [9] [!OJ [ 11 J [12] I.ayer Dc~th zi ]'! Li Cds I RF ka Pa Pas+Pasd DF FS 8 1.67 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 !3. 00 0.90 1114 10675 0.464 4296 0 3841 2.78 5 7.67 21065 /300 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 11794 0 10546 1.96 l 15.67 38357 13 00 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 (Rl) divided by tl1e tension (Df) in in that layer_ The angle of the failure plane is: 29.00 d~grees from vertical [ I J [2] [3] (4] [SJ [6] [7] [8] Layer De2th zi Le SumV Ci POi Ti f:L!'J2 8 /,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 S27 / 6_ 91 4 9.67 8.94 16191 0 90 18212 1042 1747 3 I 1.67 1004 20449 0.90 23001 1258 18.29 2 /3.67 11.15 25204 0.90 28348 1473 19.24 1 15.67 12.26 30455 0.90 34254 1393 24.60 Check Shear & Bending at each layer Bending on the top layer the FoS of Overturning qf the units. (lidost surcharge loads need to he moved hack from the face.) [lj [2] {]] [,./} [5] [6} [7/ [8] [9} .YJY-f.r Depth =i §i_ D.'vf Pv RM F_S.J,_ Shear FS Sh 8 l.67 1.67 39 200 100 2.56 870 13.95 Seismic 1.67 1.67 107 200 /00 0.94 870 !3.95 7 3.67 2.00 85 320 273 .UO 992 5.81 Seismic J.67 2.00 82 320 273 3.33 992 5.72 6 5.67 2.00 139 560 413 3.11 1114 4.00 Seismic 5.67 2.00 136 560 433 3.18 I/ 14 3.96 5 7.67 2.00 193 800 593 3.07 1236 320 /'"J~eismic 767 2.00 190 800 593 3.12 1236 J.18 4 9.67 2.00 247 /040 753 3.05 1357 2.75 Seismic 9.67 2.00 244 1040 753 3.09 1357 2.73 3 ! 1.67 2-00 301 1280 913 J.03 1479 J . ./6 Seismic ll.67 2.00 298 1280 913 307 1479 2.45 2 13.67 2.00 355 1520 I 073 3.02 1601 2.26 Seismic 13.67 2.00 352 1520 1073 J,05 !601 2.25 15.67 2.00 409 1760 1233 3.02 1723 2.11 Seismic 15.67 ]_/)() 40/i 1760 1233 3.04 /723 2_ / () Date 5/512{)1)5 P.ige 5 EXTERNAL STABILIIT fo.rizontal Acceleration / ertical Acceleration Am= (1.45 -AJA kh( ext) = Am/2 Inertia Force of the Face: Wis Inertia Forces oft.he soil mass: W2s W3s Pif Pir Pis Seismic Thrust , Pae D Kae Pae Pac h Pae v Calculated Reactions = 0. l5g = 0.00g = 0.195 = 0.098 = H x Wu x ganuna = 2040.00 ppf = H x (H2/2 -face depth) • gamma = 17.QQ X !0.0[ X 130.00 = 22111.24 ppf = 112 x sqr(H2/2 -l ft) x tan(beta) x gamma = 3258.27 ppf = w l • kh(int) = 2040.00 X 0.098 = 198.900 = W2s • kh(int) = 2211 J.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(H2) x D_Kae/2 -0.5 x 125.00 x sqr(22.0I) x 0.244 -14782.63 ~ Pae x cus(delta-batter)= 6608.97 = Pae x sin( delta -batter) = 3309 .53 For the 1'modified" design method, the back of the mass assumed to be vertical for calculation of resisting forces. effective sliding length = 14.00 ft 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 2/5475.00 WJ 5500.88 [9.667] 19.170 53/75.15 Pa_h 14318.3/ NIA [7837] -I l 2207.42 Pa_v 7170.08 {14.000] NIA 100381.06 Pir 2155.85 5.503 [8.500] -18324.69 P_(I 198.90 0.500 [8.SOOJ -/690.65 P is 317.68 7.670 [/8.670] -5931.13 Pae_h/2 MOB 97 11005 [13.206] -87278.80 Pae_v/2 3309.53 [11005] 13.206 36421.64 Sum V= 46750.48 Sum Mr~ 406472.85 SumH~ 23599.71 Sum Mo= -225432.69 Date 5/5/2005 Page6 Sliding Calculations Pa h Pae h/2 PIR = 14318.31 ppf ~ 6608.97 ppf · 2672.43 ppf Resisting Forces, RF Foundation fill ~ (Wl + W2 , W3 + Pav +Pae_ v)tan(phi) ~ 46750.43 x tan(32.IJO) =29212.94 FS Overturning Calculations Ovcrtuming moment: Mo.,,. Sum Mo Resisting Moments Mr·-Sum tvlr Factor of Safety of Overturning= Mr!Mo Calculate eccentricity at base: Sum Moments Sum Vertical Base Length e Calculate Lltimate Bearing based on shear: where: Nq-23.18 Ne= 35.49 Ng~J0.21 (ref. Vesic(l973, 1975)eqns) Qult = 17523 psf Equivalent footing width, 8 1 -=-I -le Bearing pressure _ _c surnV:·13 1 Factor of Safety for bearing= Qult/bearing P.ffER,AL STABILITY kh(int) = (!.45-A) i\ -(!.45-015) 0.15 Inertia Forces = RF!(Pa_h -Pae_h/2 + P _ir) = 1.24 = 225433 = 406473 = 1.80 = 181040 -46750 = 14.00 = 3.13 = 7.74 = 6036 psf = 2.90 ~. 0.195 W! -1.00 X 17.00 X 120.01) X kh_int) ~ 397.80 ppf Wedge= Wedge x kh __ int [for failure plane angle of61.0lldeg.J ~ 14413.58 X 1),21) ~ 2810.65 ppf Total A<l<litional Internal Dyrnimic Loading 2810.65 f· 397.80 ~ 3208.45 ppf Tension in Reinforcing Layer Le ( ft) Tension Dvn Tension Total Tension( !;;!QQ 8 4.50 191.66 2 [5.)7 407 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 S.94 1042.17 427.58 1469.76 3 10.04 1257.80 480.63 l 738 43 2 l ll5 [473.42 533.69 2UC7. 10 12.26 1392.56 586.74 1979.30 FoS Pullout 9.12 8.67 8.84 9.31 9.91 JO 58 11.30 13.84 Page 7 RETAINING \VALL DESIGN Version 3.3.2.278 SEISMIC DESIGN Project: Sunset Bh{ff Project No: E/0927 Case: Case J Design :\'Iethod: Rankine-w/Batter (lnodt+ied wil interf(lce) Date: 51412005 Designer: H, ./ / Design Parameters Soil Parameters: ,_._ __ ___,_~' 7 / Reinforced Fill Retained Zone F uundution Soil Reinforced Fill Type: Unit Fill: <I> 31 32 32 Silts & sands 0 0 n Cnished Stone, I inch minus y_£S1 JJU 125 125 Peak Acceleration= 0.15 g Vertical Acceleration= 0.00 g Factors ofS(/fet_v (seismic are 75% ofstath.) sliding: 1.50/1. / 3 pullout: overturning: 2.00/l.5() shear: bearing: 2.IJ0/1.50 bending: Reinforcing Parameters: .1vfiraJi XTc Geogrids 1.50/113 1.50 1.50 uncertainties: 1.5011.13 connection: l.50/1.13 (RasP. Friction used ir. T€nsion a/base grid) fo/t RFcr RFd RFid L TDS Di. [gj 1970 (,'/ 0.90 C',l, 0.90 77.Tc 5700 1.67 I /U 1.05 2955 1.50 Analysis: Case: Case 1 5 4 3 2 1 New Cu8e Unit Type: Cornpac Crushed Stone 15.00 Ji Wall /latter: 0. 00 deg. (llinge flt NIA) Results: Leveling Pad: Wall Ht: BackS/ope. Surcharge: Factors of Saf€t,v: ]6.60 deg slope LL: 250 p~funifvrm surcharge load fViJ1/,: 99. QI} Ji Sliding Overturning /.8411.22 3.20/1. 74 Calculated Bearing Pressure: 32461553/ psf Eccentricity at base: 0.97 fl/2.82 ft Reinforcing: (f\ & lbs/ft) Cale. Laver Height Length Tension Reinf. Ty[!e 7 13 33 12.0 192 / 380 7XTc 6 11.33 12.0 395 i 642 7XTc 5 9.33 12.0 6/i 1916 7.,,YTc 4 7.33 12.0 827 _I l/89 lXTc 3 5.33 12.0 1042 1 1463 7XTc J 3.33 12 II 125811737 7XTc I 133 12.0 1213 'l750 7,\Tr: .Reinfordng Qwmtities (no waste induded): 7ATc 9.33 ,y/fi emhedment: I. 00/i 90. 00 )t long DL: 0 psfuni}Orrn surcharge Load Width: 99. 00 JI Bearing Shew· Bending 6. 74/2. 70 2.26 /2.25 2.56 !0.94 Allow Ten Pk Conn Serv Conn Tal Tel Tse 1970/3509 ok 602/803 ok NIA /97013509 ok 719/959 ok NIA /97013509 ok 83611115 ok N/,4 /97013509 ok 954/127/ ok NIA 197013509 ok 1071/1428'.)_? NIA 1970!3509 ok /188/1584''' .~Z4 1970/3509 ok 1305/1740?? /V';'.4 NOTE: THF:S!i CALCULATIONS ARE FOR PRELIMINARY DESIGN ONLY AND SHOULD NOT BE USED FOR CONSTRUCTION WITHOUT REVIEW BYA QUALIFIED ENGINEER / / Pullout FS >/0/6.96 ok > 10/6.87 ok > I 017.23 ok > 10/7.80 ok >/018.46 ok >/0/9./8ok > JOI> 10 ok Page I DETAILED CALCULATIONS Project: Sunset Bluff Project No: E/0927 Case: Case 1 Design ::\.Iethod: Rankine-w!Battcr (modified soil inter,face) Soil Parameters: <I! Reinforced Fill 32 Retained Zone 32 Foundation Soil 32 Leveling Pad: Crushed Stone _Modular Concrete Unit: Compac Depth: 1.00 fl In-Place Wt: 120 pcf Geometry Internal Stubilifv (5/oping geometry) Height: 15. 00 fl Backs/ope: Angle: 26. 6 deg Height: 44.57 ft Batter: 0.00deg Surcharge: Dead Load: 0. 00 p.,f Live load: a p~f Base 'tvidth: l 2. 0 Factors of Safety (.seismic are 75'!1) u/static) f U£f 0 130 0 125 0 125 External Stability (Sloping geometry) Height: 20.51 Ji Angle: 26.60Deg Height: 39.0li ft Batter: 0. OOdeg Dead Load. 0. 00 psf Lf1/c Load:0 psf Date: 51-1/2005 Designer: HAL\" sliding: 1.50/1. J J pullout: over!llming: 2. OU! I. 5() shear: 1.50/1./3 1.50 uncertainties: connection: 1.50/1./3 150/1./J bearing: 2. ()0/l. 50 henJing. 1.50 (Base Friction used in Tension of base grid) Earth Pressures: r7=~ P R Internal; \ Externanr-~e"::':r-~-~~--~--- ~ = 32deg e< = 90.00<leg P = 26.60<leg o ~ 26.60deg H = 15.00 ft ka = 0.464 $ = 32<leg a = 90. OOdeg fl = 26.60deg o = 26. liO<lcg ka ~ 0.464 Hinge Height: Hing~ Ht= Not applicable due to draw-do\vn on face Date 5/S/2005 Page 2 Reinforcing Parameters: Afirafi XTc Geogrids Tuft RFcr RFd RFid LTDS FS 7XTc 5700 1.67 1.10 1.05 2955 1.50 Ci 0. 90 Cds 0. 90 :onnection Parameters: ,'\tliraji XTc Geogrids Frictional 1 7J.Tc Tel-Ntan(36.20) + 757 Break Pt 1989 Frictional 2 Tc!-Ntan(D.00) +2213 Unit Shear Data Shear -N /an(40. 00) Inter-Unit ShearShear = N tan(26.90) + 768.8 l Calculated Reaction . .,.· Fur the ''mvdflied 1 ' design. method, the back of the mass assumed ta be vertical for calculation ofresistingjhrcl?s. effective sliding /cnglh = 12.00 p rqd I qi rr:-: Pa:= 05H (y H ka-2c ,foa) P'h := Pa cos(o) Pq=q·Hka PCJh = P q cos(&) Pq. = P s sin(&) wa ·.· .. · 1'· -.----r- . --------· .. ) -1 I j 1 ("'J H' /J. :.1 ~-:' 1J: ; I P,., = Pa sin(o) -'- j H/2 I Reactions ar~: f------Gff. length Area Force Arm-x WI 1800.00 [U.500] W2 21450.00 [6.500] WJ 3938.50 [8.333] Pa ___ h 10895.64 N/,-1 Pa_v 5456.!3 ( UOOO] Sum V= 3264-1.63 SumH= 10895.64 Calculate Slidlng at Base For Sliding, Vertical Force= Wl+W2+W3+W-I i-qd The resistingfurce within the rein. mass, R/_l The resistingforce at the foundation, Rf 2 = N tan(32JJO) Ann-y 7.500 7.500 16.836 [6.836} N/A Sum Mr= Sum Afv The driving forces, DJ; are the sum r~(!he external C:'arth pressures: Pa+ ?qi-,-Pqd the Factor rdSa.fi:tyfhr Sliding is Rf 2/Df Cah:u/ute Overturning: Date SiS/2005 Overturning moment: 1\10 = Sum ,.\Jo Re.sisring moment: ,\1r = Sum .1Ir Factor o/Safely (f0vl!rtuming: J,fr,'_;_\,Jo i\-loment 900. 00 139425.UU 32R20.81 -744R4.//2 65473.56 238619.38 -74484.02 ~ 321i45 ~ N tan/32) ·= 20199 ~ 20399 ~ 10896 ~ 1.87 ~ 74484 -238619 = 3.20 Page 3 Calculate eccentricity at base: with surcharge I without surcharge Sum Moments = 1641351164135 um Vertical= 32645132645 ase Length= 12.00 e = 0.9710.97 Cakulate Ultimate Bearing based on shear: where: Nq=23.18 Ne= 35.49 Ng= 30.2 l (ref. Vesic(l 973, 1975) eqns) Quit= 21887 psf Equivalent footing width, B' = L -2e = 10.061 10.06 Bearing pressure= sumV/B' = 3246 psf I 553 l 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 J [4] [5] [6] [7] [8) layer Depthzj hi ka/rho P"a (Pas+Pasd) ' (5+6)cos(d)=1 0.00 0.464145 0 0 0 0 6 1.67 2.67 0.464145 214 0 0 192 5 3.67 4.67 0.464145 656 0 0 587 4 5.67 6.67 0.464/45 1340 0 0 1198 3 7.67 8.67 0.464145 2264 0 0 2024 2 9.67 10.67 0.464145 3430 0 0 3067 I 1.67 11.67 0.464/45 4836 0 0 4324 0 13.67 14.33 0.464/45 6193 0 0 5537 Calculate sliding on the reinforcing: The shear value is the le11sor of base-shear or inter-unit shear. [11 [2] [3) [4] [5] [6] [7] [81 [9] [1 OJ .Layer Dci:!th zi !'! Li Cds ! RF ka Pa Pas+Pa~ 7 f.67 36 0.00 0.90 870 891 0.464 80 0 6 3.67 10274 /1.00 0.90 992 6770 0.464 2439 0 5 5.67 13662 I 1.00 0.90 1114 8797 0.464 3618 I! 4 7.67 17154 11.00 0. 90 1236 /0882 0.464 5029 0 3 9.67 20749 11.00 0.90 I 357 13016 0.464 6672 0 2 I/Ii? 24448 I 1.00 0.90 1479 15228 0.464 8546 /) I 13.67 28252 /1.00 0 90 1601 17489 0.464 10652 a Date :)/5/2005 [9] [ !OJ [ 11] Ii Tel Tse 192 602 NIA 395 719 NIA 611 836 NIA 827 954 NIA 1042 1071 NIA 1258 I 188 NIA 1213 1305 NIA [11] [12) DF !§ 72 12.38 2181 3.10 3235 2.12 4497 2.42 5966 2.18 7642 1.99 9525 /.84 Page4 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 J [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] Layer D!llltb zi Le SumV Ci POi Ti FS PO 7 1.67 3.6/ 2943 0.90 3310 /92 17.27 6 J.67 4.72 4903 0.90 5514 395 13.95 5 5.67 5.83 7359 0.90 8278 611 13.55 4 7.67 6.94 10313 0.90 11599 827 14.03 3 9.67 8.04 13762 0.90 15479 1042 14.85 2 I 1.67 9.15 17708 0.90 19918 1258. 15.84 l 13.67 1026 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 Ehe face.) [/] [2/ [3] [4] [5] [6] [71 [8] [9} layer Deeth zi Si DM Pv RM FS b Shear FS Sh 7 1.67 1.67 39 200 JOO 2.56 870 13.95 Seismic /.67 1.67 /07 200 100 0.94 870 13.95 6 3.67 2.VO 85 320 273 3.20 992 5.8/ Seismic 3.67 2.00 82 320 273 3.33 992 5.72 5 5.67 2.00 139 560 433 3.11 II 14 400 Seismic 5.67 J.00 136 560 433 3.18 1114 3.96 4 7.67 2.00 193 800 593 3.07 1236 3.20 Seismic 7.67 2.00 /90 800 593 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 753 309 1357 2.73 2 1/67 2.00 301 1280 913 3.03 /479 2.46 Seismic 11.67 2.00 298 /280 913 3.07 1479 2.45 I IJ.67 2.00 355 1520 1073 3.02 1601 2.26 Seismic 13.ti7 2.00 352 /520 1073 3.05 1601 2.15 Date 5/512005 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: W2s W3s Pif Pir Pis Seismic Thrust , Pae D Kae Pae Pae_h Pae v Calculated Reactions =0.15g = O.OOg = 0.195 = 0.098 = H x Wu x gamma= 1800.00 ppf = H x (H2/2 -face depth) • gamma = [5.00 x8.67 X 130.00 = 16908.60 ppf ~ 1/2 x sqr(H2/2 -1 ft) x tan(beta) x gamma = 2447.32 ppf -Wl • kh(int) = 1800.00 X 0.098 = 175.500 = W2s • kh(int) = 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 gammax sqr(H2) x D_Kae/2 = 0.5 x 125.00 x sqr(l9.34) x 0.244 = 11416.01 = Pae x cos(delta -batter)= 5103.83 = Pae x sin(delta -batter)= 2555.81 For the '1modified 11 design method. the back of the mass assumed to he vertical for calculation of resisting forces. effective sliding length = 12. 00 ft Reactions }Or Seismic (U/culations Area Force Arm-x Arm-y ,Uoment WI 1800.00 [0.500} 7500 900.00 W2 21450.00 [6.500} 7.500 /39425.00 W3 3938.50 [8.333} 16.836 3282081 Pa_h /0895.64 NIA [6.836] -74484.02 Pa_v 5456.13 [/2.000] N/,4 65473.56 Pir 1648.59 4.836 [7.500] -12364.41 P_if 175.50 0.500 [7.500] -1316.25 p ,s 238.61 6. 781 [16.447} -3924.58 Pae __ h/2 5103.83 9.671 [11.605] -59231.49 Pae_v/2 2555.81 [9.671] 11.605 24717.43 Sum V= 35200.44 Sum Afr= 263336.81 Sum !I= 18062.18 SumJ.\.fo = -151320.74 Date 5/5/2005 Page6 Sliding Calculations Pa_h Pae_h/2 PIR = 10895.64 ppf = 5103.83 ppf = 2062. 70 ppf Resisting Forces, RF Foundation fill =(WI+ W2 + W3 + Pav+Pae_v)tan(phi) = 35200.44 X tan(32.00) =21995.67 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 Nc=35.49 Ng= 30.21 (ref. Vesic(1973, 1975) eqns) Quit= 14916 psf Equivalent footing width, 8 1 =--:: L -2e Bearing pressure= sumV/B' Factor of Safety for bearing= Quit/bearing INTERNAL STABlLITY kh(int) = (I .45-A) A = (1.45 -0.15) 0.15 [nertia Fore es = RF/(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 Wt= 1.00 X 15.00 X 120.00 X kh_illt) = 351.00 ppf Wedge= Wedge x kh_int (for failure plane angle of 61.00deg.] = 11221.64 X 0.20 = 2188.22 ppf Total Additional Internal Dynamic Loading 2188.22 + 351.00 = 2539.22 ppf Tension in Reinforcing Layer Le { ft) Tension Dl:n Tension Total Tension{ l!l!f.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. l 7 420.73 1462.91 2 9.15 1257.80 478.72 l 736.52 10.26 1212.88 536.71 1749.58 Date 515/2005 FoS Pullout 6.96 6.87 7.23 7.80 8.46 9.18 l l.39 Page7 RETAINING \VALL DESIGN Version 3.3.2.278 SEISMIC DESIGN Project: Sunset Bluff Project 'fo: El0927 Case: Case l Date: 5/4/2005 Designer:~ / /// / / __ f-1 / Design :Vfothod: Rankine-H,lBu.tter (mod1/ied .wi! inte,fC1ceJ Design Parameters Soil Parameters: ~ 32 32 32 Silts & sands f (I 0 0 Reirforced Fili Retained Lone Foundation Soil Reinforced Fill Type: l:nit Fill: Crushed Stone, 1 inch minus l'....2£f 130 125 125 6 s 4 3 2 1 Peak Acceleration= 0.15 g Vertical Acceleration= 0.00 g Factors olSuf'ety (seismic are 75% ofstu!ic) sliding: l.5U/1.13 pullout. l.50il13 overturning: ].00//.50 shear: 1. 50 150 beuring: 2.00//.50 bending: Reinforcing Parameters: A1irafi XTc Geogrids Tull RF er RF d 7Xfr 5700 1.67 I.JO Analy.<,b;: !Vew Case Unit Type: leveling Pad: Wall Ht: Compac Crushed Stnne 13. 0/Jji RFid LTDS 1.05 2955 BackSlope: 26.60 deg. slope. Surcharge. Results: Factors ofSc.tfi!t_v: LL: 250 rnfunUi.mn surcharge Load Width· 99.0IJ /i Sliding Ove,-turning 1.89//.JJ 3.26/1.78 Cakulated Bearing Pressure: 2780/4644 psf Eccentricity at base: 0.82 ft/2.39 ft Reinforcing: (ft & lbs/ft/ Cale. Layer Height Length Tension Reinf. T:yue 6 11.33 10.5 192 i 36r'i 7XT'c 5 9.33 /0.5 395 / 630 7XTc 4 7.33 10.5 61/ i 906 7XTc 3 5.33 UJ.5 827/1181 7XTc 2 3 33 10.5 1042 ! 1457 7XIc i 1.33 10.5 1033 / 1508 7XTc ReinjOrcing Quantities (no waste included): 7.ITc 1.00 sy//1 uncertainties: 1.50!113 connection: l.j()/J.13 (Base Friction U.<;ed in Tension a/base grid) FS 1.50 Tai 197() Ct U.90 Ca.~·e: Case I Cds 0.90 FVali Batter: 0.00 deg. (Hinge Ht .1.V1A) embedment· 1.00 ft 90. 00 Ji long DL O p.~funi}Orm surcharge Load Wu/th. 99.00Ji Bearing Shear Bending 7.07/2. 95 2.46 1:.45 2561094 AJlow Ten Pk Conn Serv Conn Tal Tel Tse }()70/3509 ok 601/803 ok />l/A 197013509 ok 719./959 ok Nhl 1970/3509 ok 836/1115 ok i\'h1 1970/3509 ok 954/1271 ok NIA 1970/3509 ok 1071/1428',' N/A. /970/3509 ok 11881/584 ok 1WA NOTE: THESE CALCuLATIUNS ARE FOR PRELIMINARY DESIGN ONLY AND SHOULD .VOT BE USED FOR CONSTRUCTION WITHOUT REVIEW BY A QUALIFIED ENG!NEER Date 5/512(.HJS Pullout FS >/0/5.78ok > / 0/5. 90 ok >/0/6.36 ok > 11//6. 99 ok > 1017.68 ok > /f)/9.67 ok Page 1 DETAILED CALCULATIONS 'roject: Sun.set Bluff 'roject No: £10927 Case: Case 1 Design l\-Iethod: Rankine-w/Batter (modified soil imerf.'1.ce) Soil Parameters: !P. Reinforced Fl/I 32 Retained Zone 32 Foundation Soil 32 Leveling Pad: Crushed Stone ilJodular Concrete Unit: Compuc Depth: 1.00 ft In-Place Wt: 120 pcf Geometry Internal Stability (Sloping geometry) Height: 13. 00 Ji Backs/ope: Angle: 26.6 deg Height: 4.:f.57 ft Bauer: O.OOdeg Surcharge: Dead Load: 0. 00 psf Live Loud: 0 psf Base wiJth: J().5 F aero rs of Safety (seismic a.re 7 5?-6 of static) f 0 0 0 LQ£! 130 125 125 External Srab1lity (Sloping geometry! Height. I 7.76 Ji Angle: J6.6UDeg Height· 39.8 I ft Batter: I!. OOdeg Dead load. 0. 00 ps/ lil·e Load. I! psf Date: 5/4/2005 Designer: HAL>: sliding: I .50/ 1.13 pullout: overturning: bearing' ].00/1.50 shear: 1.50/1. /3 1.50 uncertt1inties: connection: J.50/1./3 1.50/1/3 2.00/J.50 bending: 1.50 (Bast! Friction usi:!d in Tension q(base grid) Earth Pressures: FR sm'(a+¢) - k,-2 [ Jsm(¢+J)str{il-/J)l 2 -· stn asm(a-J) 1+ n( ) n( ) , st a-J St a+;J H WJ· Internal: ~ -32deg a~ 90.00deg p ~ 26.61Jdeg 6 = 26.60deg H ~ 13.00 ft ka-0.464 Extemnar'-.-="':,---'----'------'--- q> = 32deg a= 90.00deg P = 26.60deg 5 = 26.60deg ka = 0.464 Hinge Height: Hinge Ht-'-'-"t-,iot appli<.:able due to dmw~do'wn on face Dat<.': 5i5f2()0S Page 2 Reinforcing Parameters: Mirafi X'J'c Geogrids Tult RFcr RFd 7XTc 5700 /.67 I.JO RFid 1.05 Connection Parameters: A,firafi XTc Geogrid.\· Frictional 1 7J..Tc Tel= Ntan(36.20) + 757 Unit Shear Data Shear= N tan(40 00) LTDS 2955 Inter-Unit ShearShear = N tan(26.90) + 768.8[ Calculated Reactions FS 1.50 Tai /970 Ci 0.90 Cds 0.90 Break Pt 1989 Frictional 2 Tcl= Ntan(0.00) +2213 For the 11modified" 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 (yH ka-k~ P'1, :• Pa· cos(o) P'v :a Pa sin{&) Pq := q·H-ka Pqi, • P.-cos(o) Pq,, := Pq·sin(o) H' qd qi Pq ... --1; l H/2 Reactions are: i----~-eff. length Area Force Arm-x WI 1560.00 [0.500] W2 16055.00 [5.750] W3 2937.60 [7.333! Pa h 8/68.47 NIA Pav 4090.47 [10.500] Sum V= 24643.06 Sum H = 8168.47 Calculate Sliding at Base For Sliding, Vertical Force= W/+W2+W3+W4+qd The resi'ltingforce within the rein. mass, Rf_l T7,e resisting force at/he foundation, R/_2 = N tan(32.00) Arm-y 6.500 6.500 14.586 [5.919} NIA Sum i'vfr = Sum Alo= The driving forces. Df are the sum of the external earth pressures: Pa+ ?qi+ Pqd the Facwr of Safety for Sliding is R/__2/Df Ca/ciliate Overturning: Date S/512005 Overturning moment: Mo = Sum Mo Resisting moment: }vfr = Sum Nfr Factor of Safety of Overturning: Air//t.4o l\'loment 780.00 92316.15 21542.39 -48349.87 42949.90 157588.54 -48349.87 = 24643 = Ntan(32) = /5399 -/5399 ~ 8168 = 1.89 = 48350 = 157589 = 3.26 Page 3 Calculate eccentricity at base: with surcharge I without surcharge Sum Moments~ !09239/109239 Sum Vertical~ 24643/24643 Base Length ~ l O .50 e -0.82/0.82 Calculate Ultimate Bearing based on shear: where: Nq~23.18 Ne~ 35.49 Ng~ 30.21 (ref. Vesic(l973, 1975) eqns) Quit ~ 19639 psf Equivalent footing width, B' -L -2e ~ 8.87 I 8.87 Bearing pressure-sumV/B' -2780 psf/ 4644 psf [bearing is greatest without liveload] FactorofSafety for bearing -QulvbearinF 7.07 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 [lJ [2J Layer Depth_~ 5 1.67 4 3.67 3 5.67 2 7.67 0 9.67 11.67 [3] hl 0.00 2.67 4.67 6.67 8.67 10.67 12.33 Calculate sliding on the reinforcing: [ 4] [5] [6] ka/rho Pa (Pas+Pasd) 0.464145 0 0 0.464/45 214 0 0.464/45 656 0 0.464/45 1340 0 0.464145 2264 0 0.464/45 3430 0 0.464/45 4585 0 The shear value is the lessor of base-shear or inter-unit shear. [ 1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] Laver D~thzi ~ Li Cds 1 RF ka 6 1.67 36 0.00 0.90 870 891 0.464 5 3.67 8386 9.50 0.90 992 5708 0.4M 4 5.67 11345 9.50 0.90 I 114 7494 0.464 3 7.67 14408 9.50 0.90 1236 9339 0.464 2 9.67 17575 9.50 0.90 IJ57 11241 0.464 I /1.67 20845 9.50 0.90 1479 13202 0.464 Date 515/2005 [7] [8] £ (5+6)cos(dl-7 0 0 0 192 0 587 0 1198 0 2024 0 3067 a 4100 [9] [ l OJ Pa Pas+Pasd 80 (} 2056 0 3148 0 4472 0 6028 0 7815 u [9] [ l OJ [ll] Ti Tel Tse 192 602 NIA 395 719 NIA 611 836 NIA 827 954 NIA 1042 1071 N/A 1033 1188 N/A [ 11 J [12] DF FS 72 12.38 1838 3.11 2815 2.66 3999 2.34 5390 2.09 6988 1.89 Page4 Calculate pullout of each layer he FoS (R */S ') of pullout is calculated as tl1e individual ayer pullout (Rf) divided by the tension (DJ) in in that layer. The angle of the failure plane is: 29.00 degrees from vertical [I] [2J l3 J [ 4] [5] [6] [7] [8] Laver De11th zi Le SurnV 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. 91) 7203 611 11.79 3 7.67 6.54 9175 ()_ 90 10320 827 12.49 2 9.67 765 12443 0.90 13995 1042 13.43 1 11.67 ?76 16207 0 90 18229 1033 17.64 Check Shear & Bending at each layer Bending on the top layer the FaS of Overturning of the units. (Most surcharge loads need to he moved back.from the.face.) [I} [2} [3] [4] [5] [6} [?] [8] [9] Laver Depth zi Si DM p,, RM FS b Shear FS Sh 6 1.67 1.67 31) 200 100 2.56 870 13.95 Seismic 1.67 J.67 107 200 100 ()_ 9./ 870 13. 95 5 3.67 2.00 85 320 273 3 Ji) 992 5.81 Seismic 3.67 2.00 82 320 273 3.33 992 5. 72 4 5 67 2.00 139 560 433 311 II 14 4.00 Seismic 5.67 Jon 136 560 43] 3.1~ 1114 396 3 7.67 2. ()() 193 800 593 3.07 1236 3.20 Seismic 7.67 2.00 190 800 593 3.12 1236 3.18 2 Y.67 2.00 247 1040 753 3.05 1357 2.75 Sr!ismic 9.67 2 UV 244 1040 7 53 3 09 1357 ]. 73 11.67 2, ()() 301 1180 9/3 3.03 1479 2.46 Seismic 11.67 2.00 298 1280 913 3.fJ7 1n9 2.45 Date 5/Sr2005 Page~ EXTERNAL STABILITY orizontal Acceleration 1 e1tical 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 ~ 1-1 x (l-12/2 -face depth) * gamma ~ 13.00 X 7.J4 X ]30.00 ~ 12399.64 ppf W3s ~ l/2 x sqr(H212 -l ft) x tan(beta) x gamma ~ 1752.23 ppf Pif ~ Wl * kh(int) Pir Pis Seismic Thrust, Pae D_Kae Pae Pae_h Pae_v Calculated Reactions ~ 1560.00 X 0.098 -152.100 ~ W2s * kh(int) ~ ]2399.64 X 0.098 ~ 1208.96 --W3s * kh(int) ~ ]752.23 X 0.098 ~ 170.84 -~Kae -Ka~ 0.952 -0.464 ~ 0.488 = 0.5 x gamma x sqr(H2) x D _Kac/2 -0.5 x 125.00 x sqr(l6.67) x 0.244 ~ 8483.81 ~ Pae x cos(dclta -batter) ~ 3 792.92 ~ Pae x sin(delta -batter)~ 1899.35 For the "mndified" design method, the hack of the mass assumf:!d to he verticalfnr ,:alculution of re~isting.forces. ejfe1.;tive .Y!iding length = 10.50 ft Reactions for Seismic Calculations Area Force Arm-x Arm-y 1\-'loment w·1 1560.00 [0.500] 6.500 780. 00 W2 16055.00 [5.7507 6.500 92316.25 W3 2937.60 [7.333] I 4. 586 21542.39 Pa_h 8168.47 NIA [5.919] -48349.87 Pa_v 4090.47 / 10.500} N/A 42N9.90 Fir 1208.96 4./69 [6.5001 -7858.27 P_if }j2.l0 0.500 (6.500} -988.65 P is 170.84 5.891 [ 14.2251 -2430.18 Pae __ h/2 3792.92 8337 (/0.004} -37946./5 Pae_v/2 1899.35 [8.337} 10.004 I 5835 01 Sum V--:-: 26542.41 Sum it.fr= 173423.55 SumH= 13493.30 Sum klo = -97573./2 Date 515/2.005 Page 6 Sliding Calculations Pa h Pae h/2 PIR ~ 816847 ppf = 3792.92 ppf = 1531.91 ppf Resisting Forces, RF Foundation fill FS = (W 1 + W2 + W3 + Pav +Pae_ v)mn(phi) = 26542.41 x tan(32.00) =16585.54 -RF/(Pa_h + Pae_b/2 + P_ir) Overturning Calculations Overturning moment !vlo = Sum Mo Resisting 1v1omc:nts Mr= Sum Mr Factor of Safety of Ovcrtunting = ?1,,fr.lMo Calculate eccentricity at base: Sum Moments Sum V crtical Bas~ Length e Calculate Ultimate Bearing based on shear: where: Nq=23.l~ Ne= 35.49 :-lg= 30.21 (ref. Vcsic(l973, 1975) eqns) Quit = 13690 psf Equivalent footing \vidth. B' = L -2e Bearing pressure= sumV/B' Factor of Safety for bearing= Qult/bearing INTERNAL STABILITY kh(int) = ( l.45-A) A = (1.45 -0 15) 0.15 Inertia Forces = 1.23 = 97573 = 173424 = 1.78 = 75850 -26542 = 10.50 = 2.39 = 5.72 = 4644 psf = 2.95 ~0.195 Wl = 1.00 X 13.00 X 120.00 X kh_int) = )04.20 ppf Wedge= Wedge, kh_int [for failure plane angle of 61.00deg.J =8428.70x0.20 ~ 164J.60ppf Total Additional Internal Dynamic Loading [643.60 , 304.20 Tension in Reinfordng = I 947.80 pp!' Layer Le ( ft) Tension D1·n Tension Total Tension( 1:rnO 6 3.22 191.66 174.4[ 31\6.08 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 ' 7.65 I 042.17 414.77 1456.94 ~ 8.76 1033.[9 474.85 1508.04 Date 51S/2005 FoS Pullout 5.78 5.90 6.36 6 99 7.68 9.67 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) Date: 514/2005 / / 5/ Design Parameters Soil Parameters: Reinforced Fill Retained Zone Foundation Soil Reinforced FiU Type: ~ 32 32 32 £ 0 0 0 Lll.£f 130 125 125 H----f---,-'-IY. 4 / 3 / Silts & sands Unit Fill: Crushed Stone, I inch minus Peak Acceleration = 0. 15 g Vertical Acceleration = 0. 00 g Factors ofSaf"ety (.o;eismic are 75% ofstatic) sl,Jing: 1.50/ 1.13 pullout: l.50/1./3 1.50 overturning: 2.0011.50 shear: bearing: 2.0011.50 bending.· 1.50 Reinforcing Parameters: Mir4fi XTc Geogrids Tult RFrr RFd RFid LTDS 7XTc 5700 1.67 1.10 1.05 2955 Analysis: uncertainties: l.50/1.13 connection: 1.50/l. I 3 (Base Friction used in Tension of base grid) ES. 1.50 Tai 1970 Ci 0.90 Case: Catie I Cds 0.90 2 l New Case Unit Type: Leveling Pad: Compac Crushed Stone 11.00fl Wall Batter: 0. 00 deg. (Hinge flt NIA) Wall Ht: BackS/ope: Surcharge: Results: Factors ofSaff.!ty: 26.60 deg. slope. LL: 250 psf uniform surcharge Load Width: 99. 00 fl Slidimr Overtur11ing: 190/1.24 3.341/.83 Calculated Bearing Pressure: 2315/3772 psf Eccentricity at base: 0.66 ft/1.97 it Reinforcing: (ft & lbs!f\) Cale. Layer Height Length Tension Reiof. TlJ!e 5 9.33 9.0 192 I 352 7XTc 4 7.33 9.0 395 I 619 7XTc 3 5.33 9.0 61! / 898 7XTc 2 3.JJ 9.0 82711176 7XTc I 1.33 90 85411266 7X'Tc Reinforcing Quantities (no waste included): 7XTc 5.00 ,y!fi embedment: 1. 00 fl 90. 00 fl long DL: 0 psf uniform surcharge Load Width: 99. 00 ft Beuring Shear Bending 7.5113.30 2.7512.73 2.5610.94 Allow Ten Pk Conn Serv Conn Tai Tel Tse 1970/3509 ok 602/803 ok NIA 1970/3509 ok 719/959 ok NIA 1970/3509 ok 83611! 15 ok NIA 1970/3509 ok 9541127! ok NIA 1970/3509 ok 107//1428 ok NIA NOTE. THESE CALCULATIONS ARE FOR PRELIMINARY DESIGN ONLY AND SHOULD NOT BE USED FOR CONSTRUCTION WITHOUT REVIEW BY A QUALIFIED ENGINEER Date 515/2005 Pullout FS >I0/4.66ok 9. 7314.97 ok >10/5.53 ok >/0!6.20ok >/01795 ok Page I DETAILED CALCULATIONS roject: Sunset Blujf roject No: EJ0927 Case: Case I Design ~Iethod: Rankine-w/Batter (modf(ied soil imerface) Soil Parameters: 2 Reinforced Fill 32 Retained Zone Foundation Soil Leveling Pad: Crushed Stone 1Hodular Concrete Unit: Compac 32 32 Depth: 1.00 Ji In-Place Wt: 120 pcf Geometry Internal Stability (Sloping gf!ometry) Height: 11. 00 Ji Back.slope: Angle: 26.6 deg Heixht: 44.57 ft Batter: O.OOdeg Surcharge: Dead Loud: 0. 00 psf live Load: 0 psf Base width: 9. 0 Factors of Safety (seismic are 75% o/8tatic) C 0 () /) ):...Jlli(. 130 125 125 External Stability (Sloping geometry) Height: 15. 0 I fi Angle: 26. 60Deg Height: 40. 5 6 _ft Batter: O.OOdeg Dead Load: 0. 00 psl Live Load: 0 psf Date: 514/2005 Designer: HMX sliding: 1.50//.13 pullout: 1.50//.13 1.50 uncertainties: i.5V!l./3 overturning: bearing: Earth Pressures: sin1 2.001/.50 shear: 2. 00/ 1.50 bendin{;: conner.cion: I.50/ 1.13 1.50 (Base Friction used in Tension of base grid) Internal: llxterna,,,_~,._._~,---'--~~~~~--'~~~ ~ = 32deg Ct= 90.00deg ~ = 26.60deg 8 ~ 26.60deg H = 11.00 ft ka = 0.464 t = 32deg a= 90.00deg fl = 26.60deg /J = 26.60deg ka = 0.464 Hinge Height: Hinge Ht= Not applicable due to draw-dovm on face Dmc 5/5/2005 Page 2 Reinforcing Parameters; lvfirafi XTc Geogrids Tutt RFcr RFd 7,'(Tc 5700 1.67 UO RFid LTDS J,05 2955 FS 1.50 Tai 1970 Ci 0.90 Cds 0.90 '.onnection Parameters: Nlirafi XTc Geogrids Frictional l 7XTc Tel= Ntan(36.20! + 757 Unit Shear Data Shear= N tan(40 00} Inter-Unit ShearShear = N tan(26. 90) + 768.81 Calcu!uted Reactio11s Break Pt /989 Frictional 2 Tel= Ntan(0.00) +2213 For the "modified" desir;n method, the back o.fthe mass assumed to be vertica!j(,r calcw'ation ofresisting,fbrces. effective sliding lcngrh = 9. 00 ft Pa= 05H (y H ka-2c ji<a) Pa,.:= Pa· cos(o) P>v = Pa, Sl!l(o) Reactions are: Calculate Sliding at Buse Pq := qHko P'lh = Pq cos(o) Pq., = Pq ,in(o) Area Force Wl 13]1),()() YV2 11440.00 WJ 208], 17 Pa h 5833,45 Pa v 2921,/7 Sum V'----' /7764.35 Sum H =-5833.45 H' -'-, Arm-x [0,500} [5,000/ [6.333! NIA [9,000} For Sliding, Vertical Fane= Wl+W2+W3+W4+qd The resisting force within che rein. mass, Rf_l l'he resistingjrJrce at rhe/oundation, Rf_ 2 = N tan(32.00) ---~-eff. length Arm-y 5,500 5.500 12.335 [5,002] N(·1 Sum Afr= Sum ;'vJo----' Moment 660.00 57 200,1)0 13193.43 -29 I 79. 12 :!6290.57 97 343 99 -29/79.12 = 17764 = ,V tan(32) = II /00 = 11100 The drivingfOrces, Df, are the sum of the external earth pressures: Pa+ Pq/ + Pqd the Factor of Safety f,-,r Sliding is Rf _]iDf Calculate Overturning: Overturning moment: lo.Io = Swn iHo Resisting momenr: Afr = Swn J,fr Factor oj"Safety qf Overturning: Afr/Afo ~ 5833 C 1.90 ~ 29179 -97344 ~ 3.34 Page 3 Calculate eccentricity at base: with surcharge/ without surcharge Swn Moments -68165/68165 %m Vertical = 17764117764 ase Length~ 9.00 e = 0.6610.66 Calculate Ultimate Bearing based on shear: where: Nq=23.18 Ne= 35.49 Ng= 30.21 (ref. Vesic(1973, 1975) eqns) Quit= 17389 psf Equivalent footing width, B' = L -2e-7.67 I 7.67 Bearing pressure= sumVIB' ~ 2315 psf/ 3772 psf [bearing is greatest without liveload) Factor of Safety for bearing= Qulubearing= 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 [I) [2) [3] [4] [5) [6] [7) [8] Layer DeQth zi !Ll. ka/rho Pa (Pa.+Pasd) C (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 0.464145 1340 0 0 1198 7.67 8.67 0.464145 2264 0 0 2024 0 9.67 10.33 0.464/45 3219 0 0 2878 CalcuJate 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] [ l OJ -1!=: D<;!lth zi ):>! Li Cds 1 RF ka Pa Pas+Pasd 5 1.67 36 0.00 0.90 870 891 0464 80 0 4 3.67 6660 8.00 0.90 992 4738 0.464 1706 0 3 5.67 9190 8.00 0.90 1114 6282 0.464 2711 0 2 7.67 11824 8.00 0.90 1236 7885 0.464 3948 0 1 .9.67 14562 8.00 0.90 1357 9547 0.464 5416 0 Date 5/512005 [9] [ \OJ [ 11] Ti Tel Tse \92 602 NIA 395 7\9 N/A 611 836 NIA 827 954 NIA 854 1071 NIA [ 11] [12] DF FS 72 12.38 1525 JI/ 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 layer pullout (Rt) divided by the tension (Df) in in that layer. The angle of the failure plane is: 29.00 degrees from vertical [ l J l2J [31 [4] [5} [ 6} [7 J [81 1,ayer Deptilzi Le SnmV Ci POi Ti FS PO .i 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 6/1 10.15 2 7. 67 6.15 8104 0.90 9115 827 11.03 1 9.67 7.26 l /l90 0.90 12586 854 14. 75 Check Shear & Bending at each layer Bending on the top layer the FoS (!/Overturning o_f the units. (Most surcharge loads need to be moved back from thefi:tce.) [I} [Jj (3] [4} (5} [67 [7/ [8} [9] Laver De2_th zi Si DM Pv RJ.lJ FS b Shear FS Sh 5 1.67 J.67 39 200 100 2.56 870 l_l.95 Seismic 1.67 167 107 200 100 0.94 870 JJ95 4 3.67 2.00 85 320 273 3.20 Yn 5.81 Seismic 3.67 2.00 82 320 273 3.33 992 5.72 3 5.67 2. (Jr) 139 560 433 3.11 1114 4.00 ,C..,'eismic 5.67 2.00 136 560 433 J 18 II !4 3. 96 2 7.67 2. (}/) 193 800 593 J. 07 1236 3.20 S'eismic 7.67 2. ()(} 190 800 593 3.12 1236 3.18 1 9.67 2.00 247 1040 753 3.05 1357 2.75 Seismic 9.61 2. ()() 244 1040 753 3.09 1357 2.73 Date 5/5/2005 Page 5 EXTERNAL STABILITY :orizontal Acceleration ·ertical Acceleration Am -(1.45 -A)A kh( ext) ~ Am/2 Inertia Force of the Face: Wls Inertia Fore es of th~ soil ma:;;s: ~ 0.1 Sg ~ O.OOg ~ 0. \ 95 ~ 0.098 ~ H x Wu x gamma~ 1320.00 ppf W2s ~ H x (l-!2/2 -face depth) * gamma ~ \ \.00 X 6.00 X 130.00 ~ 8584.36 ppf W3s ~ li2 x sqr(fl2!2 -l ft) x tan(beta) x gamma ~ l l 72.98 ppf Pif ~ Wl * kh(int) Pir Pis Seismic Thrust, Pae D Kac Pac Pae h Pae v Calculated Reactions -1320.00 X 0.098 ~ 128.700 ~ W2s * kh(int) ~ 8584.36 X 0.098 ~ 836.98 c WJs • kh(lllt) -1172.98 X 0.098 ~ \ \4.37 ~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(14.01i x 0.244 ~ 5986.04 ~ Pae x cos(delta -batter)~ 2676.22 ~ Pae x sin(delta -batter)-~ 1340.15 Fur !he '1modified11 design method. the back of the mass assumed to be 1'ertic.aijOr caluilation of resisting forces. (ffective slidtng lengrh --== 9.00 ft Readions_/Or Seismic Calculations Area Force Arm-x Arm-y Aloment WI 1320.00 [0.50Vj 5.500 660.00 W2 11440 00 [5.000] 5.500 57200.00 WJ 2083.17 [6.333] I 2 335 1]]93.43 Pa h 5833.45 NIA [5.002/ -29179.12 Pav 292117 [9.000] NIA 26290.57 Pir 836.98 3.502 [5.500} -4603.37 p ,j' 128. 70 0.500 (5.500} -707. 85 P is 11./.37 5.002 [12.002} -l.l72.li2 Pae h/2 2676.2] 7.003 (8.404} -22490.05 Pae, v/2 1340./5 (7.003/ 8. 404 9385.15 Sum V= 19104.50 Sum Afr----= //)6729./4 Sum fl~ 9589.71 Sum Alo= -583HOO Date 5/5,20C5 Page 6 Sliding Calculations Pa_h Pae_h/2 PIR -5333.45 ppr ~ 2676.22 ppf ~ 1080.04 ppf Resisting Forces, RF Foundation fill -(WI+ W2 c W3 + Pav +Paev)tan(phi) -19104.50 x tan(32.00) -t 1937.81 FS Overturning Calculations Overturning moment: Mo = Sum iv1o Resisting :rvioments \1r = Sum Mr Factor of Safety of Overturning= Mr/\1o Calculate eccentricity at base: Sum Moments Sum Vertical Bm:>e Length e Calculate Ultimate Bearing based on shear: where: Nq -23.18 Ne -35.49 Ng-30.21 (ref Vesic(l973, 1975) cqns) Quit -12461 psf Equivalent footing width, B'-= L ~2e Bearing pressure= sumV/B' Factor of Safety for bearing= Qult/bearing INTERc'IAL STABILITY kh(in() -(l.45,A) A -(l.45,0.l5J0.15 Inertia forces -RFl(Pa h + Pae_h/2 -P _ir) -l.24 -58353 '' 106729 ~ 1.83 -48376 -19104 -9.00 = 1.97 -5.06 -3772 psf -3.30 -0.195 Wt -1.00 X 1100 x 120.01) X kh mt) -257.40 ppf \Vcdge ~-Wedge x kh __ int Lfor failure plane angle offil .OOdeg.] -6034.75 X 0.20 ~ I [76.78 ppf rotal Additional Internal Dynamic T .oading 1176.78+257.40 ~ 1434.18 ppf Tension in Reinforcing Laye1· Le ( ft) Tension Dyn Tension Total Tension( 22!} 5 2.83 19 l.66 160.74 352.40 4 3.94 395.31 223.79 619.10 3 5.04 610.93 2%.84 897.76 2 6.15 826.55 349.88 l l 76.43 7.26 853.50 412.93 1266.43 Date 515/2005 FoS Pullout 4.66 4.97 5.53 6.20 7.95 Page 7 APPEND1X2 -i..8 • e o-, ~z ~:~ Oo bE E--< • ~ ~z ~~ E-< µ;;i Li' il.. -" "'°'c: u ,n '5 E I "'' SN ' c, c, 5:~ /~ -~ "•., ' / ~ ;.. ~ ~ ~ " " ~ w ~ ~ ~ f • 100' e ~ 2_()C PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR SUNSET BLUFF A PORTION OF THE S 1/2 OF SECTION 13. TOWNSHIP 23 N. RANGE 4 E. W.M., RENTON. WASHINGTON ~ __ '-___ ----c__, ___ _ ------------------------._ s.w ".. su~ ~s "' 'Sf:r Bi.Vo~ P,OPOSED 1C IL'' ~ ;, . . ' -- "' ' """ " ~ --------" ., "''"" _J { mACT A --Sf/ 9Q ~ I I ' ' OSEN SP,CC :'°""" OJ I ,; f o })R41NAGE •• ---....;. ,, / EASoMEST c• _.-3 ,-'2 ·-,.c,·_ lJTIL!TIE~SERVICES "' "f· 1,,p,-,· " ·,1.·· "'"' Et'jGINEER/PLANNE:Rj~l,IF,VE'l'_QR -NuiC,[C~'.' •;A•,c ,.;_.,')~:CC\ '.C\~;" ?.;,,_•-': -=~~,',' •• ,t'\''' '.i : ~-~." \\',--,.-;-,-;P"~,-.-.•ij;"-,.-c--.,-,-' -' -,~,.,-.. ,,;J,.,=···-·"'"'-"'"'~·•' --~--';,,·-c,-:'-J J " -·---' ' ' ,1 ' ' ' ' ,, ' '""' •• --~ ---' ~ -----------__ ' -' -' • -.,.,_ '.·--. '"-..: ~ / <::,· /;' -" . ----.. ' -' ·-' • " • ·-' -~ -,.v ---· -. . . -"' -' __ .. -., -.. ,,. ·-· -~ """"' i • ,• ,, • •• '• /< •• •• I • ,«>, ,,'i><• -., ' •,-' ;(",=~'---<IY '. // -. ' ---' ' --'-· . ' ---'/ _ ;(t··-~+ ~,..-r--, ;!~:.'.; ,, '0~ ~ ' ::.·' '.•;: ;;, ' . - . -~~ ' ) ~ ~~ ---""' _, __ , --. ~--· --------_,,-·-·--/-j//. ft4 / '°'' aDUNO<R< , ~RO'OSCO _/ '"'' 60 . f',/-A--'=' '" '• --.......~ 62,., '• 63' I-'~~~";;:;: , ~. B.N.SF RAILROAD ------------~- '<:.:.::., §1:_ ----------------~ ..... ·· ···· ...... ~ ·...... .... . ---------- · .. /~0 /(~/'. o.t"~<§) , .. 3i 2 ~· i;; I LOT AREA TABLE I TRACT TABLE l,._EQE;NQ PROTECT[[: S"OP[S (S~ NOTE ·,8) z Q co cS 0 l'.;'_t__ O.iill· s'T 4:~" ~:>D, -101),: ~:o,· 1'.0·C 4·,•. 4 'CS i:cc~ 4:CGC .\/f~ ,,c~ ,,;:~ -~' /f 3'.r " ,, .-,:):, 4J,J; 4T( < •C q,:,( sj(•( <10·~ .;3c,c -.},_',( 430( <5')( , .. 1,,c _ _:_ __ _:0·.~=· " 4,1J'. ., ,~_.~ .:~~2 ,;1. ~.i·r ce C9 5ZC ·,p~;_:_ ;5~. 'V, ~f<cl C:"L·, 3-"gL ;;76 -~"-.' TOTAL TRACT ARE.A llJ.4.1:i4 5.f. 11U5 N;. DENSm' CALCULATIONS PROPOSED N/\TIV( GRDW"'.I· PROTlC'IO'I U.StMENl (NG PE.) EDGt OF '111::"LANcl LIM'l OF VERY HIGH LANDSJDE tiAZAAD /\REA l.cEGAL DESCRIPTION /, -PRO'rf+TD S~·. OPES '""") I s~~O""ES 1e··•~ .... ',~·. . ~\.,;;:,:, ~ ~·~=~ "'2AAD AA:~, ~ . ·""""""'- . ' . ' ,-i "' '""ftOT,,•f"j VICINm' MAP NOTES -~, ~ ''"},-,,_ gJ·r: i,-1.0:,Jr.,4 -~,_-,r;f c•:,;FF~ 7E-?6~C •.-~ 0.i~-A'i[~ 7/J 'ii' ~f (1 fS~ R::~C .. ,.• :,,. ;i,;·1,:ft1 ~Rf A~ '1"'1N:-vt.:~m ~~c~'.'S[L l SE S.C· _c-S·~~~ f '~M.l ,. PFC,'1' NTl,',.L ,.,;g[)e,lS'~f. •s -~~REO R -, :~cs,xh,IAL ') ~J:p;i.·;-_ A\[ -)f ;.., ~--,.RFc,r-,1,~rr '.'YJ~"Rv<s-lCl'{ i'.A,'°Rf~F·;~,,.,. ''.o.N 1,cs.,;1;,:.; "-'·""---:,'" .. :!\'." MC kJ''"--~,-x,,~;1,,1 rp~·. ~"'0"2SEC ,•i\. -~-111c-~,,c,0 ,~ 3~ ,-10.-r ~~: ,.,, -WT~::c 0·-:c·' ,:(, e0,,,,1, Leis:, · :;: r- ),'I-\ -!..~.'~ <C.>r, ' I -'·'V'.)Sc~ VI\ -,,c,_, <Oc,: ,,,,,, 8,, .-~:.~ :•:~[~,',(',; ',',C~A:., ~t~~''' r: ~F:'IP', . .'C '-"" ~;J;~~C l'M fi~S! ~,,,-,----8LJ -,,•;G' .;:-, ,~, ,; QJI~·-· ''l\ MC,\; :lck'll' ~::r. A:~C oJ ;i--~::cue~ HI'' 4 O•I _l~G: :J~ P~J~;j3C[ f.f· J:t.":O!l•. 'f )) ~CR ~~~C -,,[ T'-"~C ~ ,\'A"CS ~JCC ,'I.-,'. ,,,re·· 7Mf •n IF ·--R[Af/ s~rTr RIVE• Of• WA]~r, ~·L·>,:" ._1,.:,~1-i,V. C-f4 UC· r.·f RFt,00~ ~-, ~T ;< i 4'.-F --~~,, 0 -~ Q. n J' m·:,1J,1 ::RT,:::.11 .• ;~p~ :A· 11[',N.l' •J~•,r~ ·'0~' rl, ~~:~ · · A'. :,,· :'. WE'LAII: J!\~;TE" ~OPT.}', <SC Sc ~S-A. G~. C•\ .. ~~BIT.>.· 'SA,Jf_ 1-..- S~"srr,'[ 3. u~,, c·---•· 1~:,_N,u: u··c ± 4: .. :n• /"·•, '-'-~·,. ;)N' ~A'!Tr -A~~s ,-,: : w ~ i= ~ lL !;;: ...J H:: c.. :::, >-...J a: a: [IJ < 0 I-~ u. ~ ;;: z ...J :::, IE Cl) i ~ :g 0:i::og . >-00 ...J C) 0 _j~ <t I 8 ...J3:'° <{ N a,>ZN a: w I? (o (/) ii: z ~ <( ~ ~ ::; ~ 2' § W X ~ ~ z ~ w~ ~ 8 fl~ c,aJ~6:j Zen I I ~ ~ ITT ~ NN lO • ,-.__.-. ~1-(0..r-, NZNN 00 W -.t-..;-~ ::,:::.__,,.__, " iti I t4 ii' :.t 0~ ~! ~~ :::w ~ ci a'j~ "~ >o 00 ... ~~ .. · ., .. , .:,~ #,~/T't>. -I'~-;>,;> ~-~~--~ ~ e . -; ij,,.. . ' /' e cc.,._"'-:i" DF:-PARTMENT OF PUBLIC WC>RKS -,~~ :,5oc s.c:1:1 C,35( '''"f. Jj5( 5•C8 ~Jc(: C,C.C "'' ', \ ,_'c_'.--... fcl-J)lc--.. _ I "' . i~:s~-C,.A f ! I 1--l----~~ i~o :,so: qoc -'',CC E ~ TCTAL LOT ARD. J09,7J2 S.f. •,;'I) s;:0 <i>C~' 7.11 K;. ~ ' ,...__,_ NC .UA QJ !FE.c euor ?AfJL ~~~ ~ "" :>MW!\ JI.II, CHFC,,:~ ~SC'°'E 1/S/04 1·~100· Af"'r' j DA< 'a-<R'" 1 "" 11 ~ 0 z [D 0 -, lU 0 ai APPEND1X3 w ~ 'z ~ z 0 a.. 0 w Cf) 0 a.. 0 er: a.. LL 0 i=' Cf) <( w '-' a.. <( ~ >-I a.. <( er: CJ 0 a.. 0 I- 1:i a.. Iz !2 0 ~d Oz I--(') ffi -<{ 5~ Fz 00 lli 'z IL W 0 a: ,1:1'' I'',' 111 1', ,,; 1•,1 ,,.1 ,,j., ,' I ,,, 'y I' ,:,,,,, i 0 ·;i !: I , \'i> t;1 ·li!I \~ I I I- ~ a: w a.. I ...J ...J LL 0 z <( w 0 <( a: CJ z 0 ::. a: ,< w ui I " w~ 'z ~ oz a.. 1:i a.. 0 I z W !f,l 0 Cf) ~ d 0 f2 ,if a.. ri I -CJ) 0 z <{ 0~ a..a: F z 00 LL HJ 'z O lLow' a: 1'~ I I, i I I I I ! I U) C 0 ·-.. ra --ra .. U) C a, C ·-.. U) ·->< w .... C: 0 Cl. ' ..... QJ ..c: .... 0 w u C: 0 .... C: QJ 0:::: "' QJ t).() 111 Cl. QJ QJ V) * -..: .. .c io .. . APPEND1X4 I- ~ a: w a.. ...J ...J LL 0 z <( w 0 <( a: C, z ~ 0 a: w w· I ..,. w w ~ I-rl. z 0 z· "' a.. N o._ 0 :i: Ct) w z CJ) 3: 0 ~ a.. ('.i" 0 z a: 8 a.. () w LL Ct) 0 LL 0 I-N ;:, a: Ct) 0 w a.. ~ a.. LL ::::) 0 CJ) z 0 z ~ 0 CL ,,.... <( I- CJ) w 3: ........ a.. <( ~ >-I a.. <( a: C, 0 Q_g o· I- ~ ~ ,S/NOf:J3H 31NIOd d\fV'l ,l,.Hd\fl:!OOdOl I I J ,S/NOf:J3H 31NIOd ,31111 d\fV'l ,l,.Hd\fl:!OOdOl ~l16-l9L (90l) 0017l-VCl86 VM '3lilV3S im 3.llns Hu1os 3nN3A v 1m 0909 011 NOf:J3H 31NIOd ® S~JOM D,1qnd JO 1u.iw),Ddaa NOJ,N3H ¥, ..io },_J,JJ ""'""·'"· , ..... , SJ:JINHS 1\/lN]~NM/\N] 'ONl,'Jfl<jflS 'ONINNVld ON\f I '~NIH HNl~N l 11/\IJ HlnOS cc cc cc cc XV.:! l8L8-lc:ii:(c:ilt) Z2'.l9-l<;iZ(£Zti) lT096 VM '1N3>t 3nN3AV ONZL c:ill8l ~dd'a' ]l'V'O ••• 11 11 \ " ooivi ON sor ·3 8 s ' ' \JOISl/\3~ ! • I ' ON I- ::? a: w a.. _J _J LL 0 z <( w 0 <( a: a z 0 a: w I w ~ 0 a.. 0 w Cl) ~ 0 a: a.. LL 0 a.. <( :::? >-I a.. <( a: 8 a.. ~ 8 ,S/NOl:l3H 31NIOd d\fV'l J..Hd\f!:IOOdOl 031111 ,S/NOl:l3H 31NIOd d\fV'l J..Hd\f!:100d01 SlIB-l9L ( 90l) OOl>l-17£1-86 't/M '3lil 't/38 im 3llns 'H.Lnos 3nN3A v lffi osos 011 NOl:l3H 31NIOd NOLN3:lI ..JO ).J,IJ SJ'.llNJJS 1¥1NJt'iNOH,ANJ ''.lNID~ns ''.JNINN\fld ON\f" ''.lN,H.3.3Nl'.lN.3 11/\,J I / / '/:li_i: i I i ,1 ! ' I I, @ ''"", Hdd\f .31\fO A8 oo ao ·~r/~1/G·aa· ca ca 00~1 ·oN sor 3::rn I 8 ' \_ ---~ •••••••••••••••• NOISl/\]1:1 "ON ONOd :JO lS'i3 NOll'ol:lOl HJlJO "X3 Ol SNOISl/tlH ~ONI~ , APPEND1X5 :::l:::lffl8 l3SNflS NV1d 083.1 Q,N l)Nl(J\fl:IO l\fWNI 'oNl:l\/310 ' { ·,'" ' : i."" i '.' i r~ § , I J ~ ~ !~1--~ 0 0:: 0 LL f- a) _J I _J X LL Wo zz 0 <( ~w uo w <( (/) D:'. rh (!) (/) z 00 D:'. D:'. uw '"" I ~w ~ f- M z ~o co o._ ::l::ll'll8 .13SNns SZL6-Z9L (90?} 80l86 \fM '3lll \f3S HlJlOS 3nN3A \f Hl.0£ SZL6 "ONI "00 lN3"d013"3Cl Q,Nl ~ 0 w > 0 D:'. o._ 0 o._ w <f D:'. >-z t::: -u 0 L() WO oo 0 £:' ~~ z~ g l±: !;i:3z u aJ <( 0 f-_J _J w o._ z (/) (!) ozz -::J 0 f-(/) <( ~ZD:'. (/) 0 (!) NO.LN3:H .-IO A.LI:) ~--------~% i;r:;'8~2~8:;l~ '.:~;'!!~~~[;;~~~ z"-' -- a ~--l-+-l---1-+++-l-l "~ '"-·-I ~ 1"~WG ·~LG\ll(}S ':'.>NtNNYld QH'(l 'f.>NIH~ ~ -,;:yj Z8L8-L9Z(t;Zt) ZZZ9-<SZ(Slt) Z£086 'r/M '!N3)1 HlflOS 3nN31\V ONZL 9LZ8L 00 00 00 00 00 00 ' ' \ ·oN sor ·3·::i·s ! Ii~~ ? "'~$ 8 ~ i ~ ! 8 8 8 8 • ~ ~ I I i1!!i ! : fi fi " ~ ~ ... "' .... -i ', \· ~ ~ ~ j j ' \ ' " ii ii it ' \ \ ' \ NOISl,\3ij "ON M3~ NCllH3!I ~ /J.l:J H3cl I SlN3'll'l(X) -NO.J.N3!l .JO /,,ID _!Bi_ -·z ------ S3otM-O tNld :111S r --siilfffmiij" ~ OJOQV/!)NKMI!) ~ -.--- S88Z/l8/lt :H"l18 13SNnB NV.d ::>631 CNV 'oNICJVl:lO .VWNI 'oN~V31::> Cl:'. 0 LL t:: C'.l ....J I :! >< LL WO zz 0 <( i= w uo w <( [/) Cl:'. Ji r:J [/) z 00 Cl:'. Cl:'. ow 'Sl"I ~ w 0 N f--z "' ~ 0 a3 D.. 0 zW o> 0 0 Cl:'. w D.. Cl:'. D.. z"f ->-0 f-w-oU 0 "' <( 8 [/) N z ;,c 0 a ~ LL Z U LL<( 0 ::::J....J ....J ....J D.. C'.l z f-(cJ Ow~ i= [/) 0 u z c2 w ::::J [/) [/) r:J ::1::1n.a l3SNns Nv.d ::>631 CNV 'oNICVl:IO ,VUJNI 'ONll:IV31::> 9C:16-C:9L (90C:) 80l86 VM '3l.ll V3S HlflOS 3'1N3A V H!O! 9C:16 "ONI '·oo lN3nd0,3A3Cl CNV. ONl"'U::13rl NOJ,N3:tI dO X.1IJ •tlO=i ,OS•.l S]:)l,AIDS WlN31'iN~WO '~NU3,\HnS ':'l~NN'fld ONYl '~l-!IJ3Nl~3 llt'J:) XV.:! l8LB-Lc;z(c;zv) ,u,-"'''"·) t£'086 1:/M 'lN3>1 Hlnos 3nN311Y ONlL g I l8 I I "' " 00 !idd'I, '.31'1'0 JJ:I SO/L/L; 3dl-l : ~ -/61/ t !ldH I 00 (Zif [)di! ' 00 /r.10·1 oo--oo ON sor ·3::rn ~1',IUM3 /;;If/ {o; . ' I ~· . . • I ~ ~ .• ; " ! < i~~ l i ~I 0 ~ i , I 53 ' 6'1)i, H ,o'I) I . !;e ~ 8' 1;i: w• ~~m i a:. ~I i LL 0 I 0~ 1~1 ' i ~· a (j ~ I( < ~~~ t w 0 r i I ' .ii ii ~ 8 ~ ~ t:: ~ ' ' . ' 8 ~ ~ ~ ! ! ,, 8 8 8 8 • i ' ' / /'; / J' '' . ;; ,·'i ./ ./_,f ./; ,,/t.f'; !J' ,i' Ii I !' ,. ,/ ' , I ' NOISI/Gl:l NJllffil NQ.0011 JO .IJJO ~3d SJ.N3irti0J H<lJJGl:I JO All:'.> ~3d SJetNH:J N'fld""ius ~n t,MIQ Nl:!015 mom'/DNI~-ci3<littdX3 "ON NO. R[VISION \ \ \ BY DATE APPR I •0 '" \ 00 m 00 00 \·1111''1' \',1', :':'.,.\". ~ Ii/I,',' ~ CITY OF RENTON Deportrnen\ of Pc,t,lic Works I I ' " I I '' 1,111 111 >· I 1, PHASE 2 -CROSS SECTION PLAN VIEW EXHIBIT POINTE HERON/S' '>,\,1''1i'1'1 '.'.I·'··. ~ ·---~----~/ ~--,·,---~ I • I I ! : 1, I 1, Ii I I, '11'\1 'I 11 ,11 '1 ,' .. 11 ~ } '\ ( .( \'.: I I 1, \' ' \~~\ \\\~: ,~\\ "\.• '· \ \\~1. ·. : ~t? """ t~i i~f, ~~,; t~ \-\\ -11', /~-~\ / We.~ .. tf,;\ <a9l~ " " '" .. ,\ I" /, / 0 (_~~ \'""1 ":it~ \7 .,.., ...... 0::--~ ,,_/,) c-{<> ,..../'.J ; . ,_ 0 .. ,, -{... \ \\l <\'\ ·-~0--· ,~\' .·\ ~ --""-)Y--;::;;;------ () ~_, \ \ I ·.. ~ rn \ • \ \\ . \ n \\ .. . . . . I \ \~\\ \ \ S:tJ '-,7 c:(\ / ~- ''.>..\\ \_;.. 1;:\ 1~' ~ \\ . --, ·. \, \\ . . " .. ·.·.·. ·. ·-· .-------r··. -\1."' , .\ --r {~\ \.. · ........ ----l.·· ... ··. 0 \ I I I ' \, :. \if' .. · \ j .. \~\ .~.f.. . . .. ' ... ·;. . ·. \ \','--~. '\' . . . . \~'.\\\ ~ ... · . . ·: .· .. \ I l ', i~ \,:-' .. ·. ·· .''- \ \~o_·I \~ '\ (~\~.' ,. \ \'&\. \: .. ~?,."' ,: . ~-a S \ \ •. . o · . ,11! -o . \ (\ ,': \ • j~ t\ \. \ ' ~ ~i o \ I \' '\ n, ji '~111f, ~,,,d. I II \ ':, \ ~\ • -~ I ·1 1 • \\ ··~. tJJ I \ : >z \ \ I '(I) \ I \ \ '11, \\11 .\ 2;,\\ \·1~ c II\"• C I s; II~-. \ I ' i - g 'I I 1i ,~i Ii, -...£;;:I ~~i:i ;jf ~"'il: "'"~ a•Z :1~ ~-0 ,o.:---<c:: t~i ~~Q if,"' ~ni~ ~;g II " ~ lg i a g -~ ! l ~~i ~s ':' ,7• 1 0 ' o. ,,'. I ! I Ix~ ; I"' ' . ! 1: 1 I m gi~ ~~~ °' !!lo ~ I ' \ '" \\ <C ~ -:s. I '· ~\ ..:11\'\; ~· \."ll 0 , -1 .. \ "'i, • \ '-•• I I' I I I \ I \1 11 I Y'11 I II , 1\ \I I \\ 1\ z"'ri»L'!O:O:-A\i• =,Ozc..-.,"l;'.;' ' O:S"'!:' .... :C· I I I i'~:r}a~i:;ir;;? I t:,: l,l, ll- "' "' ·;;l I -1 IT\ ~s.;rg:'cl~8 ~ \\ \\ ~~g;i;;J~ i I I I\ __.. ~~}:!~~~~ : \\ \1{ ;:::'~"':r:' ~ c: 1+ I "' ::,;,)> t"' "'-r,: .., I I -~1/1 oz ,'"• a \" ~Ou';-i'~c::, "' 11\ rn ~c»OH-rn:jf \ Z ~~ '1,., 111 : , , a 11 , oL., ti(,._ ''S 11 ~I ,' 15 +t .-,1 ci \z I I .., 11 :~. ~"- I I II\~ I 8 I \ 1\11"'11 I ················-·- -u m l -I * '" ~~ ;::i~ ~~ ~;:i =~ • £5lg7·i §~'\:;ii~ "''cl!jco~ gi£:<iQ~ *§;i~; :a~F ;b ~ ~ ~ !~; R: ~~ §~ ~ ~; ~ ::.,~ 0 ~ ~o ~ :;! ~o 0 11 • :IJ ,m c~ ~o oz ~ ~ ' 00 o,<r~~oH~A<,,s,((' .. ' . ii. i' ,i ~ < ~ 0 "v .! ~,. ,,,. '/.Ir:; 1:KGl,i.'o.'<, 4 =· 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 (425)251-6222 (425)251-6782 FAX CIVIL Ei'/GINFFRl~G. IANI} PIANNING, SURVEYING, ENVIRONt,<ENTAL SERVICES FOR ' I I ' IC I '1:: ' . ! ( r ~ I )(, •• I I ;,, : 1, ;'. \--~~- ~ ~ a ~ < ~ f. " ~~~ :~ -~! g> ;~ p l I ( 1 I • /,Pl. I c:s :~ I-~ 02 I ,o!;z I ~~fl .j ~~: . .~ ,o \~ ' I \ / ' I j i , . I ' ' ' ., ,. r \ ' ' I ' I . : -· 0\ ' ' I I ' ' •./ ,,,"' / ; / ' ' I ,-•• : I I I ' '" =· .~ ~'~ ~§ ~i '3~ '" 0~ ~ POINTE HERON LLC '\ I I ( I / } :' ,· . / ;·,yz,,, ·--~<_::;;/j~>-~- C/;:_/"' \ \ ' \}\ (_ .. .. , V ... i)\ SH .. .\ , . L,....-::.->>.' " ' ' .. "' )7 . -tJ ,, "-/) .. .\ . ' /'· .\·{A.,."--}. :;:n ,. (). \..c:,'::>" . .. .\ '\ ,· 1) ~':,--,,.' (1 "k '• i P,Siijli~ \ ·. ,•le~'~. ~I,.',, ,.,i}MB?;e'":ig ;~~~i~~~t;i-g z~r--~~g!'~~ iM ~ .... ~'ii""!~ ci; B~~~i!>-,: l ~ii'',. ~ ' • TITLE, 5050 1ST AVENUE SOUTH, SUITE 102 SEATILE, WA 98134-2400 (206) 762-9125 B.C.E. JOB NO. 14200 FdeF\141JOJs\14200\prel;m,nmy\M:!fJC-egd dwg )a,e/T,me:5/13/2014 9·57 Al.' Scele:1' FSING. FTO'I ,,el \,'.\ .1 i _,',,-' \ \ ' 1, :JE!"' "• -~f:l ., ·•· .... ,)~ . ,,, l. 0 g ii / ,,1 \' ,' I. I I ,, '/ ,: I .I. J I l ·'; '(· ' r 1 J'" ~ ; ' I l~ I. :Ii: i "' ·1i '~ 1§ -~ ] '· -u I 6) > m i~ ~o 11 :0 ~o ~ Cf) "' Cf) . :IJ 0 \' m 11 Cf) . ~ "' 1 o ?J m "Jr. ::J 0 =E ~ ti, --I Jo .'. ----'=.f.,==~ I :i: ·"' -~o o 0~ Z () • I ""'!"'"""¥ J ..... 1i. z "' a!i -u ti r .z )> ?; z z f1\ < .. m ~ :'?: ~m >< I CD -I PHASE 2 -CROSS SECTION PLAN VIEW EXHIBIT POINTE HERON/S' ,S/N0!:13H 3.lNIOd .1181HX3 M31/\ NVld NOl.1038 SSOl::IO -l 3SVHd 7 ,, I . I : I / I 1- (Il j_J I ~;) w~/' > a:_ z z gJ <( !b _Ji~ /1 (L 3: t; ~~ z ci ffi -<( 0 ~ 3: -Fz I-~~ 0 u. I!! Wo Cl)~ UJ Cl) UJ Cl) iE 0~ a: z 0~ I "- <( C\I w Cl) <( I (L 8 e N ' I, I I fil i I ,, /1 1\1, ' " ' I 1,\ ', ,S/N01::13H 3.lNIOd .1181HX3 M31/\ NVld ' , ' ' ', , ,' I NOl103S SSOl::IO -l 3SVHd Sl16-l9L (902:) OOl>l-vE:~ VM '3lilV3S .::m 311ns 'H.u1os 3nN3A v .1s1 osos 011 NOl::l3H 3.lNIOd \ s~JoM ~!l'lnd 10 iuawirnd;,a NO.LN,m ~ ..i:o J,..LL) / ~ ,,, ,,.,. /,, I ~ I •tlO:I / SJ:)1Nj3S Tl'lNJJjNQl,WH ':)NIJ.3Mns ''.lNINNil Id UN'Q' I '::INl!:I.HN18NJ 11/\IJ XVJ i'.8L8-tc;z(c;z:v) llZ:9-(0::.l(C,lt) lr096 'vM '1N3>1 H~nos ]nN]A~ ONGL C,lG9l cc .,, ' l,dd'II , 31'10 ,s cc m cc ~,i.10N3 DJ.it ~-' < • a 0 . <l ; '· /,; ~ 4 ,s,'>\J'H 0~ ~~ t!::5 ~~ "" ~~ '" ' ' \ I I ' ' I '--~-- \ \ I \ 00 ' [ 0 ~ ~~ !a: • UJ [ a:" u. 0 0~ ~w -l C.h [ ~ w 0 NOIS1/\lH ON aor 388 I ! "' ~ i ., ~ l ~ )( i f I l ~!k ~~ i ;;-~ :, ·- 0~ ! 'z ! ~ ;~ ii: 8 ti g; I 111 ! ·o, ,o ' I ' j ! ~~~!lti ~,~,.m 1. eio 1~11 i~p~ m~~5 ~ ~]~ ~om .. ~; tll>~ i;1 ~ I Ii 11 Ii 81a1g l ! 11 i ~ i I~! ~ ffi ! ! ~ ~ ,,, ,!; I~ 9 ~ en 1' ' i"' Ii f<E:.VISIQ/., ~ ~ 0 ~ ~Q m~ ~o 0 "Tl ~ ~ " " ~ ~ "1l m ~ -I * 00 m ~R CITY OF RENTON 00 ~ Deportment of Publ;c Work5 PHASE 2 -CROSS SECTIONS POINTE HERON/S' BY DATE Af'PR ~ 8 i ~ ! ~ ~ 'd 5'-41 59 52 66.61 7),76 806J 87.89 95.C-2 102.21 109 4~ 114.26 114.90 115.25 115.60 115.26 114.B7 115. 19 115.67 115.95 116.02 '" 116.4J 116.BJ 117.23 11162 118.17 127.38 1}7.54 147.70 0 00 g s !!l PROPfRTY Uf/E !, •, \\ ~·,:"' , rJJ , ~ l1l \' t~!"I, '5 ',~~ : ~ \;I' Tu i ;Js : a, ' -~ ' !~ ' !~ ! '~ i -§ i i I ir !ill ,0 ., 11 r 11 ~! :,, ' ~ ' / 8 ~ ~~~~i;R ~l~E f ~--,C-----~-~-~-~ g O g s ij 8 ~ § s i ~ ~ § ! 3859 44.05 40.06 39.2J J9.79 41.BB 4~.44 61.2~ 71.20 0 ,C)\ " ·, o;,,~R §~~L'} st;~~s ~-:,,Q~ z5,,--,l 83"'~ B1T6 I si;i~2"tl _, I ~·~ 91 ... ff -i?~: ,:;,,,,J8 ,!;~ lOCiil 101.35 ,,;,, I ~i ' .,,,, I ~~ , ii0.B6 ii i 111.H I ]i ~ ~ l '" SJ I I - 112.44 llJ.34 'f,- 11.l.74 1H.OO e' 114.00 120.04 127.BJ i~S.29 H2.74 150.20 I a rJJ ~ l1l ;, ;I ls. ~ -' • 1 ;:: ;:;: ~ s s @ § ~ PROPEfID LINE STA. 0+25 ' ':1,< \'·~. ~% ~!! p· ij ' I / :111:;g' ~!ii' ~s:. ;~: ·" -~ ;; j e I! 8 ) --------' I :l ' ' PROPERTY LINE STA. 6+17.19 ~ 0 g 8 i § ! ~ ! 69.92 77.64 85 35 9J.07 1()0.77 108.45 112.01 ,12.02 112.19 112 44 112.69 ;,2.s2 112 51 112.86 113.JJ \ 14.02 1 \4,1.3 1 \4 5J 114.90 115.49 ' I 15.96 122 DO i29.5~ ,Js 1e· 145.84 a rJJ ' l1l ;; ::I < 0 z • 1 '-? l < 11 ' lo I 11 i ]i ~ i 1 i s ~ § ~ PROPERTY UNE STA. 0125 \ !!I I'° i: " ~~ ~ / . _j' i i ] ' I 11 I I ' ' \ \ • J PROP RTY LINE STA. +S7.~0 i O s s ij 8 ~ § ,-------~ g s g ~ ~ 8 ~ ~ ~ ~ i ffi 32.58 40.57 46.35 56 05 63.72 7U9 79.06 86.?J 94.4.l 102 13 109.6.l -Tf&i'!O 'J' t -Ti600 c~' -115.03 I 15.9J I 15.40 114.87 ' 114.JS 114.02 1H.01 !1S.16 116.29 116.90 117.51 \19 57 127.\IJ 1J6 28 144,79 0 ' .. I"' " l1l ::J " 0 ; z : ~ 1,· r s 11 ,, !I l' '! I PROPERN' LINE STA. c-+26 ' i \ ·1! '·s ii" ·~ I[ \ • ; I !I r ! &~ ., \ ~, PROPERTY l NE STA. $+95.65 s S 8 § ~ ""U I )> CJ) m "' () :0 0 CJ) CJ) CJ) m () -I 0 z (/) 0 g ~ ' :JJ ,m~·==========~==============:::;:;;;::;==================================r-;.,=;;===========================; ~ ~ oHA<, FOR TITLE s !!l 8 oz ~~ ··. '9~. 18215 7,No AVENUE sours POINTE HERON LLC PHASE 2 -CROSS SECTIONS c. M'f _. KENT, WA 980.32 o :'/' . ':I,.~ (425J2s1-,222 5050 1ST AVENUE SOUTH, SUITE 102 ~ i. ,c,__;;1' g (425)251-8782 fAX SEATTLE, WA 98134-2400 0 • I.).~ ' .J'>t-l 0:-,-,,· CIVIL ENGMERING. IANO PIANNING, (206) 762-9125 l',i'fG mo.ill~~ SURVEYING, EN\IIRON~£NT/\L SERVICES POINTE HERON/S' B.CE JOB NO. 14200 r ,Id'·\ unoos\ 14?~1\r.re·<·· ;, mv\ · ~7(·0 egd d~Q Dale/J;me.8/' j/2014 11.3.'. Ml S:o e ·" C51NG_ll[)~ X•e' NO ~ sl ~I ii ii ~I Ii I ~ a I ' j ! I :i II !g no a o ! ! -. ~ " 0 ~ ', -. j ! I I>< I 1 0, ! ' , I :0) ,Jil REVISION 0 l!l e PRDPfRTY LINE ----STA. 1f+_,S __ 45.14 52.51 60.}~ 67.76 69.52 79 25 B4.8J 8606 93.45 9524 9502 ... 96.0J 956'- 97 80 98.41 !! 99.50 ,, 100.42 "i I, 101.14 ]j :H • 101.94 I 102..}~ lOJ.05 !0~.81 105.61 112.J\l 120.52 1,9.15 137.69 146.0S 0 ~ n; !jo ,, !i ' I ' 1 ~ j CfJ m ~ 0 z ,, I ,, !! I;'~ 2; '.,;,~ .f;.?-'-,t t~o . '* '.% I e "1l m :0 li:: -I * §' s s: s: .. .. !'! !'! 0 ~ ~ m -a o ~ ': ~~ ~ ; ~~ iii • :a ~ ,m ~ oo~ -ro "a i oz ~ , ~ q.otlA(l ~f.S\\'~. 0 r., . -"" " 41(:. u,v ~ '~ ~., 'Na ENGl~~t; ' ' ' I Ii 1: ,, ~9 ·-,;:: BY DATE APPR[•'''''" l'i § 11 / PROPERTY LINE ST~. 6+J8.B1 !! 8 ~~~illl~ ~ii! ~f~~ 111! ~iii ~~~ "Oi!i ~>i ~11 "" "' "" "" f!l ~ 8 ~ ! i ~ 1l 8 ~ 18215 72ND AVENUE SOJTH KENT, WA 9803? (425)251-6222 (425)25',-8782 FAX CIVIi fNGINfHll\JG, IANlJ P\ANNING, SUR\lfYING. EN\IIRON~ENTAl SERVICES 44 10 40.0B 3550 35.04 3794 " 40.84 44.12 57 67 67.72 77 56 B7.40 94.20 94.B4 95.49 97.93 104.f§ 104.45 104.64 104.90 106.15 107 14 107.48 107.76 ' 10799 117.32 127.49 1)7.66 "r C 147 B? ,,,., ~ 157.99 -~c; ., 166.16 I 176.08 FOR, ,,;-,-.,. ;R CITY OF ® RENTON Oeporlrnenl of Public Works 0 !! e l'i ~ ij PRO"'[RlY LIME STA. 0+25 " ! '0 ,;!. '.'~"% r•~ i /\ \;i1>\ " ' ' lo no~ I~~'"' ij ~§ ~ !:l~ s "' os a ..,,,, o• • "• ~ ~~ ~ ' !!! I II I' ' I ! i: --1 • Ej ' I " i, ~ 1 II I 1" ·i ] I ! ' CfJ ~ m s ,, •.;; z •• "' 0 i, I 0 88 68 C,o -.2::;i ' ' g PROPERTY LINF STA. 6+47.55 0 !! e I§ 8 8 POINTE HERON LLC 5050 1ST AVENUE SOUTH, SUITE 102 SEATTI_E, WA 98134-2400 (206) 762-9125 B.CE JOB NO. 14200 c;,c P \ 140(:()s\ I 420J\orelirrincrv\ 14200-cqd dw~ Jct~/1,me:B/1J/20M 11 ·3J ~!,( 'Scale· I" L~l'J~_UON Xrel· I PHASE 2 -CROSS SECTIONS POINTE HERON/S' ~ 0 !! ii !! § ~ PROfl'ERTY LINE c'I' ST~. 0+25 44.55 ~~ ~J 3802 ',;,1, 34.00 '!;\~ 8 J4.00 \~ % ' 34.00 ' .Y 40.62 ;;!f \_ 44.54 52.95 ~~~i ~ .... i;::;;~ 72.92 oia\ti . "• 82.85 "'vi-'~ ~~:<'.> 92.ii5 o~~ 111 i JJ ~" JI' . I ii 97.B2 :,l I 98.05 _J ~ '" "! 99.22 103 64 I i ~I 0 ""U icB o2 I • ~ I !o 1 107.99 !I j )> 106.02 J! i ~ 1 CJ) 109 o~ I m \ 1004 110.48 ' I\) ~ g 110.99 I ~: 111 49 ::l 0 0 113.42 z :D z •• 122 59 I 0~ 0 z M "" \31 7? CJ) 1~ 140 94 -3 CJ) ,! 150 19 CJ) ~ " 8 159.45 m 166.71 0 PROPERTY LINE 177.54 $TA. !i+43 87 -, 0 ~ IZ 8 0 !! e I§ 8 8 CJ) TITLE, PHASE 2 -CROSS SECTIONS POINTE HERON/S' 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 -1361h 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 EC l'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, E.S.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:1Vengineered 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, Intermediate 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 110 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 extension 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 on line 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, Excavation, 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 Town homes 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 l,SOO 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 ofthe 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 ofthe provides both (1) an assessment ofthe 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 ofthe 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 4-3-0500, 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 4-3-0SOLSa(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 4-3-0SOLSb(ii), the code-specified stream buffer along that segment of the stream extends to the protected slop e's boundary)]. Steep Slopes Renton Municipal Code Section 4-3-0SOJla(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 Slope 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 ar 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 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 tvpe 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 droinoge conditions Surface water runoff from the project site current drains into the existing stormwater 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 Soil Engineering Report in Support of Proposed Fill, Excavation, ond 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.SH:lV 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.SH:lV 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 1 V 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 ofthe 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 ofthe 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 storm water 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 (Fl LL 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 8 inches 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 35-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 en z <( _J a_ 1-w w I en a: w e5 0 ,S/NO!:l3H 3.LNIOd SN\fld NOil \f 11118\IH3!:l GN\f ··o·s·3 '30\INl\f!:la V'il!:l3.LNI 'ONIG\f!:JO -133HS !:l3AOO g --_ _____j I -__ _J i/ :nm ,S/NO!:l3H 3.LNIOd SN\fld NOil \f 11118\IH3!:l GN\f ··::ys·3 '30\INIV!:la V'it!:l3.LNI 'ONIG\f!:JO -133HS !:l3AOO 9C:IB-C:9L (90C:) oot>C:-l>Cl86 \f M '3lil \f3S c:m 311ns 'H1nos 3nN3A\f 1Sl 0909 011 NO!:l3H 3.LNIOd NO.LN3H dO A.LIJ "' ~ " i ~ i ffi w I en 12 X w C ,l; .ooc:-.1 H0:1 S3J1Afj3S l\llN3~NOiJIAN] '::JNIDA<Jns '::JNINN'l'ld (]N'(\ '::JNl!U.:INl::JN.:l 11/\IJ XVJ l8L8-LSl(Sr'.V) azg-L,;;z(,;;zv) zrogs <JM '1N3>1 H1nos 3nN3AV ONZL ~[ZB( I' i I ' , Is! ' ' I GO ., .. ,. ,. CklcJV ]1'110 A[) oe ;;a '" * I- ::::i: a: w a.. I I OOlvl ·oN sor ~::r::>s ~ I ! ~ 0 I~ ~ " 8 I w, [ l 0 ~ ,ii IL ' 1 I zu f~J ' OJ ~~ 0 we !j~ :,, ~ ~~ :;. C 0~ l ~w :i! ! -~ u~ < ~g @: H 21 " w ~w 0 I I 8 I I j j ] i ' " " " " ' • o, ,S/N003H 31NIOd (lS3M) SN\fld NOil If lll18\/H31:! ON\/ '·::,·s-3 '30\fNl\fl:!O ~ll:!3!NI 'ONIO\fl:!O -l 3S\/Hd ......... 1- U) w 3: '-' U) z <( _J a.. 0 Cf.! w CJ z 0 <( a: CJ ..-- w U) <( I a.. g ~ " w z ~ ! w 15 ::, 0 ,. w a CJ) r z • 0 ~ F B 0 ' ::, 7 g: 0 C CJ) ~ z ~ 0 8 0 ' -~ w ~ CJ) <( ti J: a. - ' L_ I I ' r ' ' / l I I /i ,, ' ' l·· -· ' \ .\) -' f I \ ' \. 31111 " ( ·.1"7 I ',), .1'.-b ,~ ,, ., ,· ],) \',\J'·.·1 1 1. \ ,S/NOl:!3H 3lNIOd (lS3M) SNV"ld NOU If lll18\fH31:! ON\f ··o·s·3 '30\fNl\fl:!O ~ll:!31NI 'DNIO\fl:!O -l 3S\fHd !.ll6-l9L (90l) 0017l-17£:l86 \fM '3lil\f3S lm 3llns 'HlnOS 3nN3A If !Sl Q!,Q!, ::>11 N003H 3lNIOd •80=J NOil lfnNllNOO 80cJ C3 133HS 33S 1',, f \\ I •'! I J NO.LN3H .tlO A.LIJ \\\ ,1,111 \ OOl:VI ON sor ·30s SDl/\ll]S l'i.LN]riNO<JIJ\N] ';JNl).JMJrlS 1,l'i1':JK3 !"Jff, ~~ I p:il ';JNll>INVl.i ONVI ';)~m"JNDNl ·11AIJ ,t'~l"' • b X'Jj l8L8-l£l(glv) 0, 0 , ;.:::'i i I t.11 ·~ ' l) [ l lZZ:9-l<;l(sz-t,) ~ ~· ~a, 0 I~~ (.1,'0\lti VM 'lNDI ~ ' i I Hln0S 3nN3/I'?' ONU £1Z:8 l IS'f>\fttO.,) zo ; i2Tu ' OJ !z ~ ~~~ we ;, ~ a:. LL 0 !111!! ~ C 0\, -I!!~ l ~· ~c ~ ' <3 ~ ' ' :;; ~ • '~<..f 8 ~! 8 C w a,a, 0 1w a. I I I I I ~"'~ ~e'<'.l ~ ~ i i §ai': ~~~ >-t-f:5 ei i~~ ~5 * i!I r:,::::.i;; t: ~§l ~§s:'.l ~ ~~~ '"' a: """ i'i"" w Co" a.. ;;,;4(~ ~ ~ t .. \ \ , • <Jdd\l ]lVO AB N0IS1A3!:J ON ,S/NOl:l3H 3.lNIOd (lSV3) SNVld NOL1Vllll8VH31:1 aNV "O'S'3 '30VNIVl:IO ~11:13.lNI 'ONIOVl:IO -I 3SVHd ,,nm ,.-... I- C/) <( w ......... I I I I' 1 I I ' I I i -, Irr_\ ~~ C, z 0 <( a: C, w Cl) <( I a.. I I I 1111 1111 ,S/NOl:l3H 3.lNIOd I I I I '' '' '' I I ' , ' ,, ' ,I (lSV3) SNVld NOil V llll8VH31:1 ONV '':)'8'3 '30VNIVl:IO ~11:13.LNI 'ONIOVl:IO -I 3SVHd Sll6-l9L (90l) OOVl-vE:186 VM '3""U.J.V3S .:m 3.llns 'HJ.nos 3nN3AV isr osos 011 NOl:l3H 3lNIOd I!Ocl / I I ' / / / / / //~r'- / / / / / / SJ:JINJJS l'tlNJl'lNO~l/l~J 'cJNIAJAfjnS ''.lNINN'i Id UNV, ''.::Nl~:HNl'.lN.J 11/\IJ XVj l'<lL8-l £l(Slt) ZlZ9-l£Z(£Z:t) 1:roi:ia VM '1NJ>i H1110S JrNJA\/ ONll SlZ8l u.; <P z Cl NOU VnNUNOO 1,0::I Z3 133HS 33S NO.LN3:tl dO ,X,.LIJ , <lddV 311/0 AB ·oN aor :::r:::ia ~ ~~ ' 12 ' ' . ro ' ~ 0 • .::5 a . . 0 " til ~ ' ~;, 0 ~o. l I ~ i I * IB1n 1 .S-/)VH,o~ is~ ~~ g~ w• ?cc ~ a:" lL 0 !1':i: $ ·- Os gl!!~ i /: ~ ~ -~ @~ () c " ,< < i~ g " § • w 0 I ' I I ' ! ! ' I ' ~ ~t ~ ;;~ I l ___ ~ , e I ~8 I~ ~g~ g;;; ,;~ C ' ~ o;;j ~~ ' ~ ~ ' I gi.JOCJ:il ""gl~*S ~ :~;:~~ I c,J!ti M 33 ::::J,!:J~:;; C ! E5~W~§? wC. !;,:::i;,-c:,c:, zw ~~~~~ t!:::l~ ~~§££ ~§1§ ~e~ii s§;~ :~~ <~" ~~~ NOISll\3ii ON w C/l CJ) ~ <( IL I~ (L ~ <( - ,S/NOl:l3H 31NIOd SNOl.l:J3S SSOl:l:J -I 3S\fHd I n I h I ,S/NOl:l3H 3lNIOd < I < z 0 t w (J) SNOl.l:J3S SSOl:l:J -I 3S\fHd I , .. ,. j 66"601 66"WI 66 6(H 00·011 66'66 66'66 66"66 66"66 66"66 66'66 66"66 66'66 66'66 66 66 66'66 66 66 66"66 6666 66 66 66'66 ; ' ----.o,x NC_11JN,;"l 91 '0l I ~1'011 ll 011 L6"DLL 1:0"16 ~ ~-=e--~~~-~0,_-~ i S~JOM O!lqnd JO jLI8L1JjJOd~o NO.LN,rn: ~ ..io ,1..LIJ Ill I Ill z 0 t l ~y ~ ",,','\'; . ""' 66'66 66 66 ~· 601 B('OI I 9£'~: I i ~ ., 01 ! sz·o~ . '" .. ' ""·• 00 ~cklil 31i1G 00 m '"" 00 ····· -.• ,.·~ - '8 * I:: ooi111 ·oN sor ·3·os ! ' ffi I a.. '"'"" NOISl/\31:l ,S/NO!:l3H 3lNIOd (183M) SN\1ld NOil \1 lJll8\1H3!:l ON\1 ··o·s·3 '3D\1Nl\1!:l0 V'll!:l3lNI 'DNI0\1!:JD -l 38\1Hd (/) z <I: _J a... z 0 I- ~ _J CD~ <{ w I ... w~ a: ~ O z ~ z 0.. .-'i: z ....... ~ 0 ~ 3: t, Q ~~ (/) ~ ~ • ~ 3: W Fz ~ ld ~ w ~ w \ 0 ~ a: <I: -;o, z~ <I: ~ a: 0 0~ ~~ --,: a: w 1-z 0 z 0 <I: a: 0 I C\I w (/) <I: I a... g ~ ~ I ' I 1' I r ' ' f \ I I /' \ ! \ ,\ \ ' f I ,S/NO!:l3H 3lNIOd ,31.111 ' '~~ \ 1 1 1, (183M) SN\>'ld NOil \>' 1Jll8\>'H3!:l ON\>' ··o·s·3 '30\>'Nl\1!:JO V'll!:l3lNI 'DNIO\>'IID -l 38\>'Hd 91:!6-1:9L (901:) Oot>1:-17Cl86 \1 M '31.ll \138 1:m 311ns Hi.nos 3nN3A \1 1st agog OTl NO!:l3H 3lNIOd I I I I '•-0'" ':c -::., \ t ' . ' I I / IJ I ', i: 1°11 ~1:1 1 NO.LN3H ..IO A..LIJ ' ' :, '' ' '' , 1.1:11 \ S1JIM3S 1V1N3~NO<Jl/\1><3 ''.lNl/..]AfjnS ''.JNINN'flcl ON'f' '~Nl<J33Nl'.lN3 11/\IJ XV.:J Z9L8-fSl(SlV) ZG'G9-fSl'(Sl't) CT086 VM '1N3~ HlllOS :'Jr:N]AV ONZL S l Z:9 l \ · " 1'ddV 31\10 ).(l ON sor 3:JS ~j' 00 t -0 , \ ~,' ~; " 0 ~ tP ,\\/)~ ... 9~ 0 ~B * tj::li!\ I-~~~ "~" :::i1 ~ffB a: ;;.!'.,?"' w ~~~ a... \,d w• a:. LL 0 0~ I= w -1 CJ f- " < • w 0 i i ] " " " I 'i Ca. 1, o; 0 \ ' " a; ' \ ~ ~ \ ~ ~~ ~:s g .. ::.s. i"'~ -~; !liI ~~~ ' :;: 12 OJ ' WQ OJ <11 ,i;w .. 2 a " u:. ' ~ \ (!l ' \ NOISIAJtJ ' ' \ ' ' s;, ' ' a l I "' w ' i i -' $ Ji :, ' i ' g "Q u Q I I I I ! ! ' I ON ,8/N0!:13H 31NIOd (18\13) 8N\fld NOil \I 11118\IH3!:I ON\/ ''::)'8'3 '30\INl\l!:IO Vil!:131NI 'ONIO\l!::10 -Z 38\/Hd 31111 U) z <( _J [L z 0 I- <( 1- _J ::i CD s:' uI <( ~ IS? w;,i; a: z 0~ ~Ii ~ s:i ~ rn ~:;:: VJ F Z w ~~ -~ a: w "' 0 ;o, <( ~ z i!: -IL <( 0 a: ~ 0~ a. :::2: <( a: w 1-z 0 z 0 <( a: 0 I C\I w U) <( I [L g 0 \' '' ' • I \ ' ' '1' 111 I I If ' I/ Ii "'' I 11 1/ ' I \ 7- 1, -, ' ' I ' I ' . ' ' I ' 1\ \ \i..l.. I i:; ,;::,, 1 ' " ,, ' Ii' I' I I I ' v' ' I, i,.,, ,,, ,, ,8/N0!:13H 31N10d (18\13) SN\fld NOil \I lJ118\IH31:1 ON\/ "::,·9·3 '30\INl\11:10 Vill:l31NI 'ONIG\11:10 -Z 38\/Hd !;Zl6-Z9L (90Z) OOVZ-Wl.86 \IM '3111\138 ZOI 31/n8 'Hln08 3nN3A\I 181 (lg()!; :::,11 N0!:13H 31NIOd ' I ' ' ' HO=l S]:JINHS l\/lN3~NmJINH "ONIA3AfJOS ':!NINNVH [IN\f I ':!NIH-l lNl:!N l 11/\IJ XY.:l l8L8-lSl(Slt) llZ:9-lSZ(t;;Zt) GTGl:i!i VM 'lN.:J)I Hlnos 3nN3A~ ONZL Sll8l NOil'tnNll.NO:::> l:IO=l S3 133HS 338 NO.LN1IH dO J...LIJ ~dd\l ]l\/G /,.fl oozvi 0 " [ 0 l zo OJ !a: ~ Wl ::: ~ 0~ j':: w u~ [ < l w D \ ' NOISl/\31, ON sor 3:::rs ~~ I pi ' ~~ ! l I ii!: ' i I z ' ~g-t;t ~ ~ fl :,: :;i C gM!~ ! i j~ "' ' ~~ g· ~ g -<LU :,: I d 0.. ! ! ! ! ' I ' 1a,~ NC.3 l')N Sc oo~vt ·oN eor 3'::re ,S/NOl:l3H 3lNIOd SC:16-C:9L (902:) S]'.llNHS 1\/lN]~NOIJIAN] ''.JNIAJ~ilS <~:,sll-\ONil ~N,~ I ~ ~: 'ONINNYld ON\/1 'ONll:lD'IION] llNJ '~t 0 ~ OOVC:-t,E:186 VM '31ilV3S ~ --0 " 8 XVJ l8L8-l(ir'.(~lt) ~ ,, :; , l 1 lil' zm 3lJns 'HJ.JlOS 3nN3A V .lSI osos UZ9-t£Z(o;;Zt,) ~ ! lT096 VM 'lN]>I ' i I SNOU.038 8801:lO -C: 3SVHd 011 NOl:l3H 3.lNIOd 5~ ' 1-unos 3nN3AV ONr'.L SlZB( .s,/)..,~~~ Cl) 31111 HO:! ~~ -; ' -w, ! 5, ~ ~ C: C ;;;, ·. Ji: " LL 0 I ' 0 0~ ~ M ,_ . u ! i ~ I~ ~: Q i; w ' w u~ "' ~· .. 2~ §l ) a ~ 0 gg·go ! w ' ca [ -· \ ' < (J) ~~ " "' o e o 61' l~I ' ~ 0 u 0 ,. ~~ w •o 0 :f~ ~ a·on I 8~ i ~<! ;.', I I I ~3 ~ -·~ 01'6ll 11!1n!~ "'"" I "" "( i~ ) ~ 69'l2L ~ ~( l!~i ! J~''l_lf 90'1'ZI ~~~~ ·~ E 1 j j ! 9g·,ir ~i~i 8 LL 911'UI i;~m ' ~ ' . ' I LL QZ'Fll ~ a I z ~~~! • !· 0 9S'SII ,! ' F ~ §l a ~ .~ I:: I 0 u l9'90l 11§1, ::i1 [ w § ,m ! (J) lfl L6 a: i w " ' W611 IL L9 )II i ' o~,~~ .. .. .. . ~~ ~ 6SW i~ tli~ ~f ~ C ~ ' ' • 61"911 ~ 11!~~[[[1; I i e »1"611 ' .W~~ I '"' ~ i S"l ze OS'tl I ~ . . .. ci 00'119 ~ OS-'1'1 l I " N 09'H OS1'll I . Cf) I ii I n·cv OS' ti I ~ z ' m "'"~ W"!''i: 0!;"1'll 0 i ' I i W"I'> :1 I OS'?H r-! % . " ("9 9(' ~ Qli'tU 0 i ~\;,t-1 I 'ti,;., sn:v q,;-)'1\ ' w %-%_, ~ 1 ·,i, I OS'tl I ~ I ~ Cf) S6"Si' I '" I r, c;, OS'Jl l _.,n,+o~-- I~ e ~~ Ii 0 Cf) SlJ,,11 V3<:V ~clOM ' 'i' ]Nil /,HGdOcld 11 ~• " z OS 1'1 l 0 L.1, Cf) ~ 1:1..., " 0 os·,1 l !!;~~ lHO: \l ., I &l 0 ~;;j,i.;j I~ ~ ~- 0~ 1'1 l ...J ~ r/} a: ~ §l a ----il. . 0 ! ! I oc; >l: ~ 0 ~ os·,11 ~I . I ~ ~~ I i oc; 1>1 l ., ~ a il 0 iil I OS"l'i I C\I e~ ,~ ' ' ,a ~i I I OS'tl l w §~ ~ i! I 0S"1'1l Cf) M :n: ~-7j,'HI I I Vi-~! I <( c,z. ~ .. ;;i ,-,, oo o ~e Ll'9L I ~ f§ ti ~gj_ O'i"I'; I I ~~ ~~~~ ~ ~ '• ~ "'' L...1~ L 1 I O<;"j,i 1 I os·1>, t (L ·---· . ,,, >li! 1 _ OS 1>1, O'i:"l'\I J~ l£'Ml I 0S'1'1 I ~ ' -wsn ~ oni• .. i lr-sl1 i I b 0',"1'11 i w rs sCl O','l'll ' ' w ~ S'l'~ll I ()<;'jrll ,/ l6 Sll 0<;"1'11 ~ ' F 11 ! &l a 6l'9U Oc OS'l'll '" I ) (J) i~ lt Bll i rn·6ll ---rg·gn 66'Fll ! S'\l 9ll 00-S'll •' WLll L____ _______ ~ oo ~ §l a . &i 0 5i': ~~ sz·a1 i~ 1s·a1 ~ "' N "" r1·a1 ,a " d8 S6'lZl !I J 96'9·. I '% •H.Q! ~ i ~ % .r 06 c>-01,i L6'9L 't'(l "(a ,n:g \ o.:·os 19"l>+o ·v~s $111'111 11'.l~V ~~C:,.. 'i' 3Nll IJ.l:j]dO~ i.1 l:i..,. ' ~ Ui! ; ~ --~-a il 0 ,S/NOl:l3H 3.lNIOd ~ co <lddV ]lVO " "JOISIA31:J ' ON S~JOM ~!IWld JO ]UtlWlJOdaa co ' ... NOlN,rn ~ rn ' SNOU.038 8801:lO -Z 38'</Hd co .'IO }.l!J " '" ,., .. I - -.• I .. "' .,,,, ~ CITY OF DATUM ..• m ~~ ~ RENTON PHASE 2 -CROSS SECTIONS DD --Department of Public Works 3 NU. RlVISION BY DATE APPR OD -POINTE HERON/S ~ o g B 0 ~ I 8 P~OPERTY LINE STA. 1+11.14 11 ""'(J .... ,, I ~AR1<,~~~2r1TS ~ g a ~ 8 )> N , . ~" 0 CJ) a 9u!I --qr,,.~"... m 10.i.49 ·1.,~~'% ·~::I,;· 11780 <' \q,: ~ ~~ f\) iv.97 ~ ~~ 1 ~ 12788 ', 5 \_/. <-;:l FROPERTY LINE 0 Z STA 0+50.J4 127.79 Cf) 112.93 :c '";;, :0 ,27.70 ~ 12048 ± ,, I! Q ms• ::lo !! ± . J CJ) z ~ 8 1 26.23 i----.....--- 127 .~2 _ I ) ',/ ? CJ) ..1. V ,2e.oo ~ ~ 127.43 i .,.. , 128.00 ° (I) s. "'" ..---m I ,., ,----!ii 127.27 !:I 5 0 ' ' 127.22 ~ ~ ~ , " . ~ I -I ,21 16 I "'·" i I o ~ "'" i O g s § ~ ffi :::·:: i! ~ 126.06 V WORK AREA u~nJ ~5+7T47- , ~ ~ ~ ~ ;iii~ I~ . I ~ ~~~~al § . ~ ~111 ! ----,,-----if--g I§ -~ ; : ~ ~ f f _li!i I I 5~om 1 1 I m ~; I ii I . ;a;~ l ~ ~ ~~~~ g ,a lg JI fll i O ,6'~ "'',a@ =I , ~ Cl-S.l I\) t =i ~ ~l :. ["1 , ' ;z; ~' ~-< ,~ fP m =IQ {,"'o ,i.'~ 1 ;-sffi i~~',,,,,'4i< ~~; 11m,. ---" ~ ~ ~~t===G==~=A=u:::::='::==============:::;:~F~O~R==================================::::;:~T~IT~LE~•==========================~ "'"!-+!..-+.!---, " rl Oz V"'I', .. ~~~ :~~;5 :J'q0 ,0~V,ENUE souTH POINTE HERON LLC PHASE 2 -CROSS SECTIONS m ~ ! ~ ~ ~/ , ": (42S)251-6222 5050 1ST AVENUE SOLTTH, SUITE 102 .. ! ~ i. '""' 0 (425)251-8782 FAX SEATTLE WA 98134-2400 q I " • ..,.,..t . "" "'"( 4,</:-.,. CIVIL ENGINEERING, _ANO Pl.ANNING, (206) 762-9125 ~ ~ "'Ne E:NG 1~t-SURVEYING. ENV1RON1JENTAL SERVICES POINTE HERON/83 I B.C.E. JQB NO. J__42QO ·-'deP.\1'0G0s\l420D\orel;m,nc,)'\1~200-eg3dwg [lalc/lmc5/l:2U14 · 15 Pl,! Scale:!' l5NGLUON Xrel (I) ..J <( 1-w 0 0 z <( (I) w 0 z ' ,S/NO!J3H 31NIOd SllV .130 ONV S3.lON •31111 I I I I Y----, ,S/NO!J3H 31NIOd SllV .130 ONV S3.lON ' Ml cy, SC:16-C:9L (90l) OOVC:-PE:186 VM '3lilV3S c:m 3.llnS 'H.U10S 3nN3A V .lSI agog 011 NO!J3H 31NIOd .D ·,l ( HO=l S]::lll'l<l]S l\llNJ~NmJIANJ '::m1AJ/ilif1S ''.JNINN'Q'ld Ui'l'II ''.JNll:1.:1.:l'll::JN.:1 111\IJ X\f..:l l8L8-lgr:(glt) UZ9-t£Z(<;Zt) lTC96 VM '1N3>1 H1nos 3nN3A\f ONZL g([8l ~l ,x ,. F-----;,c;<--~-- 11 ,o ' .,-' NO.LN3H ..ro ;,,.11J ' XI ~. 00 00 ;a, 00 a:i u ci "" , l:lddV Jl\lD AO • 1- ::i,; a: w a.. ' ~. NOISI/\J~ j ON sor ·c1:::is ! ! 1-+-+-+-H---l ' I ' ON ~ ~ 0 0 • en z --<( z en fi1 5 UJ I z ! ...J ~ z I ~ ~ -- ~z { Oo • f--. !i. ~z ~ E---<~ -up:: ~ 1 II - "@ :···-~ ' :;'.; n ' g t} g g ~ " < " ~ Is z Q " ~ e 0 z This sheet sets forth text exc~s and a Plate 3 Illustration from "GEOTECHNICAL AND SOIL ENGINEERING REPORT IN SUPPORT OF PROPOSED FILL, EXCAVATION, AND GRADE-PotNTE HERON LLC PARCEL-RENTON, WASHINGTON !ES-2334.01)" dated August 2014 prepared by Earth Solutions NW, LLC for Pointe Heron LLC. On ttlls sheet E10, that report Is referred to as the "Geotechnlcal Report." The contractor should refer to !he Geolec::hnlcal Report for additional Information relating lo the subjtlct pi!lrcel and the subject fill, excavation, and grade project. Earth SolUttons NW, LLC can be contacted at: 1805 • 138th Place Northeast, Suite 201 Bellevue, Washington 98005 Phone: 425"""49-471)4 Fax: 425-449-4711 Toll Free: Ml6-336-871 Spec;;lfk:atlons for Preparation of Ground for Fltf The grour.d surface that is to receive fill stiall be prepared lo receive fill by removing any vegeta1ion. any noncomplying flH. any topsoil, and any other unsuitable materials (as detennined by ESNW) from the areas in which the fill is lo be placed. Areas of loose native so~ or loose fill soil must be recompacled or replaced with new, compacted fill. In areas 10 be filled where the existing ground lo be filled consists of slopes that are SH:1V or steeper, such areas prior to 1116ng shall be benched into sound bedrock (or. as determif'ed by ESNW, benched into other competent material). so lhal the fill is placed on a level surface wtth width(s) determined by ESNW during the course of the fill work. FHI shall not be placed on a sloping surface. The benchif1g shall create as homogenous a fill inlerface as is reaS0!1ably pracUcat:4e. The ground surface shall be scarified prior to fill placement. ESNW should observe the subgrade prior to fill placement. A schematic slope fill det;il is induded oo Plate 3 attached 10 this report FNI Ma1erlal Specffications for the Proposed FHI Two categories or struclural fill are proposed for 1he subject fill and grade project (1) a cruslJed aggregate fill lo be used lo construct a buttress ml zone along the face of tt1e proposed fill slopes and (2) a m 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 All zone and the core structural fill zone behind i1.) Both of !hese categories of slructural fill must confonn to RMC 4-4-060N4 [FILL MATERIAL). whici1 states in relevant part: Fil materials shall have no more than minor amounts of organic subs1ances and shall have no rock or similar irreducible material wilh a maximum dimension greater than eight inches (B"). FIi malerial shall meet the following requirements: a. Construction, Demolition. and Land Clearing Watte Prohibited: Fill malerial shall be free of construction, demolition, and land clearing waste eKCept that this requirement does not preclude the use o1 recycled concrete rubble per Washington St.ite Department oi Transportation Standard Specifications for Road, Bridge, and Mun1c1pal Construction. b. Claanliness of Fill Mab!rial: Fill material shall not contain ooncefltrations of contaminants that exceed deanup standards for soil specified in WAC 173-340-740, M0081 Toxics Co!ltrol Act. In addition to conformi'lg lo 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 lhe face of the proposed fill slopes shall be crushed aggregate conforming to RMC 4-4-060N4 (FILL MATERIAL) and conforming to the follov.ing strength parameters: Internal angle of friction Moist unit weight Maximum aggregate size 46" minimum 14S pc! minimum 8 inches Maximum fines content (passing U.S. Sieve No. 200) shall not exceed 5 percent This specified material, which is equivalent lo coarse gravel and/or cobble, must be well-grade<l and angular (crushed). Samples of this proposed fill material musl be provi:led to ESNW for latroratory analysis al1C approval prior to placement. Core Struc:Wral Fill Material Specif,catiCJn Material to be used to construct the proposed fill core to be placed behind lhe crushed aggregate buttress zone fill shall conform to the following strength parameters: Internal ar,gle of friction Moist unit weight Maximum aggregate size 36" minimum 125 pcf minimum 8 inches Maximum fines content (passing the U.S. No. 200 sieve) shall not exceed 20 percent. GEOTECHNICAL NOTES AND DETAILS en ...J Samples or this proposed fill material must be provided to ESNW for laboratory analysis and approval prior to placement. Placement end Compaction Specifications for the Proposed FIN Buttross Fill Plar:ement and Com~ction Specfflcat/Oll The buttress fill material must be placed in maximum 12-inch loose lifts and compacted lo a firm and unyielding condition. Adequacy of compaction must be confirmed by an ESNW representative at the bme of material placement At a minimum. three passes in two orthogonal directions using a vibratory drum roller shoulc be made to compact each lift of buttress fill material. Because of the aggregate nature of the ounress fill, the specified bunress fill material Is outside the range of typlcal grain size for testing ur,der ASTM D-1557 or equivalent American Public Works Association (APWA) specificaUons and field density standards. Core StnictwaJ Fill Placement and CompacUon Specification The core structural fill material must be placed in maximum 12-inch loose Jil1s and compacted to a relatNe compaction of 95 percent, based on 1he maximum dry density as determined by the Modified Procror Method (ASTM 0-1557). which is a compaction standard compatible with the American Public Works Associatmn (APWAJ specifications and field densily standards. AdeQl.!8C'f of compaction must be confirmed by an ESNW representative at the time of material placement. Al a minimum, three passes in lwo orthogonal directions using a vibratory drum roller should be made to compact each lil1 of core structural Iii material. Recomme-nded Construction Sequence for FIii PlilCllment We recommend the fonowing cons I ruction sequence for fill placement (1)Prior to placement ot llll on any particular area to be filled, the ground of such area must be prepared for fill consisten1 With the section under the subheadlllg "Specifications for Preparation of Ground for fill" as set forlh on page 7 [ol the Geotechnical Report and on this Sheet E10]. (2}Place six-inch or larger quarry spalls or recyded concrete aggregate In the existing stormwate, detenUon pond area to a depth of a trout live 1ee1 prior to filling that area. (J)Generally simultaneous with the placemen! and compaction ol the adjacent por1ion of the core structural fill pe· paragraph 4, below, construct a buttress fill in the buttress ml zone (a) using fill material meeling the buttress fill material specificat100 set forth on pages 7 and B [of the Geotechn!cal Report and on this Sheet E10] (b} complyir,;i with the buttress fill placement and compaclion specification set forth on page g [of the Geo1echnical Repol1 and on !his Sheel E10J, (c) in conlonnance witt1 the design set forth on Plate J [set iorth in the Geolechnical Report and on 1his Sheet E1 OJ, and (d) placing the materlal ln maximum 12-inch-thic:k lifts compacted to a firm and unyielding condition. The base or !he new slope should inciude a keyway that is at least fNe teet in depth. The existing material from the southern berrr of the existing stonnwater pond should be removed and placed within the core structural fill zone behind the buttress zone. (See Plate 3 for a schematic depiction of the buttress fill zone, the keyway, 1he core structural HI zone, and geogrid ma1erial and placement specifications.) (4)Place and compact 1he core structural nn (in the core siruciural fill zone consis!enl with Plate 3) (a) using fill material that (i) meets the core structural fill material specification sel forth on pages 7 lo 9 [ol 1he Geotechnical Reporl and on this Sheet E10] an(i is (ii) near lo slightly over opUmum moisture content at the time of placement and (b) placing and compacting that fiU material so as to confonn to the core struciural ml placement ano compaction specification set forth on page 9 [of the Geotechnical Report and on this Sheet E10]. Pond Lining Specifications for lhe Permanent Stormwater_Pond The proposed Permanent Stormwate, Pond is to be construc1ed along the south edge of a portion ol the toe of the existing slope in the north portion of the Pointe Heron LLC parcel south of SN Sunset Boulevard. The pond should include. at a minimum, a compacted iill or clay liner conforming to the 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM) Section 6.2.4 specifications, with the following amendments Compacted till liner gradation should include a fines content of al least 40 percent. and the material should be placed in maximum 6-inch loose lifts for a total minimum deplh of 1S inches. II these conditions cannot be met. a synltletic membrane pond Hner should be used. Noh,s: • G!OQnd Leflr;.tu, (<!lten;ate l&ye~i ~'.Sl!"l"'4-0-" lnte!mediate = 2D" Min.mum :..orig.Te~ D(!!;ign SlJength LT0$ ... 7.52C lb:;./ft. • Ge09riel to be ilP~ ~ G@otedin,c..lll Engineer p"l!lrto ~!lleemert • &.I~ Fill :.hal' tape~ from ii rn.rnmurr: hol'Y.wntal dep.tti ol 35 feet 111 basl' to S fa.et a11op ~ slope -l'l~fw-i Fo6id.Jl,,dl-Jt.:Tn,-.f..,m eu-F.J el>d Core Stn,d,;,at ~llpi,r~ec;t,,:'-'!·&,gi-- Ii::; ~! i~. i~! .g ;:: t ··~ Ee;;; . -~. £~£ .... ~ :!; .a:::! c:= .~ J: .s ~t S-.o.;,pe"°"' 0 ..-.:,Ao:),,.,e :,.c:,tes ro1~,;,,~ .oMS,,,,,,gir,~"n!ttm ;/8 ~J 11·~ ·J ' I ' r\ brmil'IQ Nat,\,<o! S6fl .\ii'.'"l>l<,rr,;,t.e ~~ Exittinr; ~/JrNt? Soil ' -E>osl;ng ,:-.....,. ' .-lc>r.JD"(al Sc,oic, .....J... 20 'll '---Sc:al,oinJ;,o,l ..,._Sc,\l,t -, .. 2~--- -~in"""'4 " __ ,, ,., ~ 01/IU'2014 i~No 23-34.0' ::,_JI Pl.A TE 3 FROM GEOlECHNICAL AND SOIL ENGINEERING REPORT Specl!U &oslorJ Control Requirements Due to lhe existing grades across the project sile, it is critical thet lemporary erosion conlrol measures be planned for and in place prior 10 and dvnng grading activities. Temporary erosion conlrci measures must include, at a minimum. (1) sih fencing placea in lhe locations depicted on the Barghausen Grading Plans and (2) installation of a construction en1rance consisting of quarry spalls, as appropriate, to minimize off-site tracking ol soil and to provide a firm surface. (ti construction ingress and egress lo and from the project site is through the Black R1Ver Qtl8rry to the west o1 the projecl site. the existing wheel wash facilities near the quarry entrance driveway with M011Ster Road may be used in lieu of constructing a construction entrance consis~ng of quarry spalls.) Surface water should not be allowed to flow over \tie top edge of temporary or permanent fill slopes. Except fO( surface waler in the proposed Interim Stormwater Pond contemplated as part or Phase 1 grading and desigr.ed OP Sheets E2 and E3 of the BarghBusen Grading Plans (the top edge of that pond must be located no cioser than BO horizontal leet from the top of the Phase 1 fill slope to \he south of the pond without ESN\N's approval-see Sheet E3 of the Barghausen Grading Plans), Scnface water should not be a~owed to pond near the top of temporary or permiment fill slopes without ESNWs approval. Interceptor drains or swales should be considered for controlling surface waler flow patterns. During construction. ESNW should observe 1he erosion control measures and provide supplemental recommendations tor minimizing erosion as needed. Additional erosion and sediment control measures are specified on the Barghausen Grading Plans. Subsurface Drainage SpeclfitetloAS Regarding tlte P!9.P.!;'!sed fill and Cut Slopes The proposed fill and cut slopes shall be provided wi1h subsurface drainage features as necessary for sleblllty. Because the subject ml and cut slope proposal irdudes placing fills in areas where past grading has occurred, in our opinion very linle subsurface drainage ,.,;11 likely be required. In order lo maintain slope stability during past grading activiUes on this site, subsurface drainage prollisions were installed 10 accommodate flows that were encounlefed. These provisions appear 10 be perfonning as in1ended. Means al'ld methods consislenl with previous subsurface drainage measures (including subsurface corridors of gravel) to control subsurface drainage shaR be implemented as pert o' lhe grading activities currently proposed. If subsurface drainage measures are u!Umately reeded, particular measures and methods 'MIi be determined during site grading depending on the concitions encountered. SubstJrface drainage measures must be approved by ESNW representatives lo accommodate subsurface flows encountered during the Ill, cut. and grading project Temporaiy meastJres to control groondwater seepage and surface water runoff during construction may Involve additional subsurface drains. interceptor trencties, sedimenla~on ponds, and/or sump areas. Where groundwater seepage is observed in areas to be filled, permanent stJbsur!ace drainage meastJres must be installed. The type of drainage measures to be used must tie determined during construction, once lhe soil and groundwater conditions are exposed. Subsurface drainage measures sometimes consist of perforated pipes surrounded by drain rock and wrapped in filter fabric. II cut slopes expose seepage, such exposed water shall be routed 10 a discharge point approved by ESNW and. if needed, an appropriate portion of the cul slope face shall be stebilized using quarry spalls or alternative ma!erial(s) approved by ESNW. No Terracing of FIi or Cut Slopes Is Required No terracing of proposed fil or cul slopes is required due 10 tne reasons set forlh in the Geotechnical and Soil Engineering Report PERMIT i APPFIO\'B:) FOR CCNmJLCJPN 1 s~. Dote. I <( f- UJ 0 0 • z en --<( z en 0 UJ a: b UJ I z ~ ...J <( z 1.2 a z II.. I u ~ .. 0 w UJ E o ,_ 15 Ll. "' 52 ~o u iii ~ _J_IU') ...J ~ ~ ~ z ::, ao "' 0 0 a, c\i a: en <( "' UJ UJ 3l: " I::, ~ !l:I z u.i "' z !!;! ...J ~ -<(1=~ 2 f-<( IQ~ i" ~ 0 ~ ~ w ~ X z ~ w~ ~ ?r 8 ~ ~ o OC NI'-- ..::: a: '° a:, ~~~i u, -~.'.Y.. ;:::. 'z er. lO ~~~~ " ti zW ,. ~~ z" :3~ i~ "~ cw ;~- "~ G Sl q,~tl.;.:__,, ::, .#,,."~ 6'"»'..,:, ~-wJ,r, ~ \ l!I . • "· !, Y"b,,,, '. ,._--e' i ~o ... ""~ .... B)' D~te, _____ 1----~--------~---------, ~ I 8)-: Dote I '" Dote CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS GEO TECHNICAL NOTES AND DETAILS POINTE HERON/S' -cc ~~ 8/lJ/14 FLE !00 LUA 03-=~ ces = 00 = AS SHDW'I --,- ~ "~ ,~ -·· !HcET EK) OF 10 ] p '.t ~ 0 , 3: " " ~ / i r ' i :; ~ ;. I ~ a, 0 -, uj ~ APPEND1X9 Notes: • Geogrid Lengths (alternate layers) Main= 40' Intermediate = 20' • Minimum Long-Term Design Strength LTDS = 7,520 lbs.If!. • Geogrid to be approved by Geotechnical Engineer prior to placement. Field-Adjust Transition from Buttress Fill and Core Structural Fill per Geotechnical Engineer Buttress Fill :;xf,{, (See Notes) • Buttress Fill shall taper from a minimum depth of 35 feet at base to 5 feet at top of slope. 1.5H • 1V ~~~~,. Face Inclination 02 ~\·._-·.:· Geogrid Reinforcing (typ.) See Appendix D and Above Notes for Geog rid Length 1., Q)I~ .!:I"' ., _J C a. ~.Q .Q <1.>1<C CJ) a..,_ e1.!!1 o 0.. ~ I~ I and Strength Parameters ·.J.. Existing MSE Ecology Block Wall To Be Abandoned -In -Place Bench As Needed To Ensure Stable Interface I Existing Native Soil f Approximate Existing Grade Existing Native Soil Horizontal Scale 0 Vertical Scale O 20 40 ·~-Scale in Feet 20 40 -JI Scale in Feet ~ 0 0 u.. -0 C "' C 0 Ql C Cl C C 0 0.- N ~~ Q) (/) = I <ti u::: Q) 3: rn C -rn ·-c: Ql O O t: CL 'E :, Q) CIJ 0:: 0 :;:; "' E Q) ~ 0 Cl) Drwn. By GLS Checked By SSR Date 08/12/2014 Proj. No. 2334.01 Plate 3 APPENDIXlO -. .2.ro/.f O:i l l '2l o 00 l 5 lb9/.l33 ClTY OF RENTON l DEPARTMENT Ot-ASSESSMENTS CITY OF RENTON APPROVAL: I RECORD!NG NO. VOL/PAGE LUA-03-124-LLA ' WY OF RENTON PLANNING/BUILDING/ PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT E\(A'-ll~IL(l ANLJ .o.f'PIIO\/fD T'</S J.l_ DAY nr-matd __ _ ?oa':i_ f--1 __ _ ------ LND-30-0273 DECLARf,TION OF L01 UNE ,\l;,iU~;-· 1,,,1[NT S::.o+t -~'fohl~----., .. :.s~ssori a .-. -1f.u./G_Y£Xy )/J_ _ _..fb_'11{]1\i,& __ _ DEPUTY ASS[SSJR ~ccoun NUIJBER ..l3~9ao6 __ E/.. _(tCID f(Wl1*(l' .vi(• JPPIICU!.I.> !HIS_!_ DA> OI ___M__4_~~-'1 _____ '.lt-_f)r+ Jw[.pl{)a.11,,i "'"" ,:; ... ,:...,_,_.:;,lt'IM!lt--'"~ I j',ICU = 200 f1 . 3.IllJ._ _ ___ L_·~-~ 0 {>0(1 SC!1LE "" 20() :l-0() "'' F·ORTICl'-J 1JI SR 90D l.l.C, n Wos\1iri,Jbr, iirnik,:1 li(]/Jilitl; company_ n,>r1:'b~ io) certifies lhot it is thl' Ol'lne, of the lorido. subjed to \!l{' ,ot line f-----------------S 1/2. S.13. T. 73 N., R. 4 E, WJk -----------.. --- odJvstment~ Sf!t tortri he··ew,, (L,) makes the v::o·,-~,;_,S ic\ h:,t, odiLlslments to those lonUs u~ set fodh hl!rei:1 mid ;< 1mpnsPs a ·rmlive growth protection e<:semenT. upon i't:c:I /, a~ r!es~ribed in J.he poragraph conc:efn1ng lruc'. A s~l !~>r!r in li,,s ins!r'lirr,ent SR 'c=JOO L LC. , o Woshingtor limiled 1,obi/ity compa'1y l:ly Gury M ::md Donna M. Me·lirc-:::ily)f I r;:;;_?_ ::o __ "_::mw ~~riinr~;~ r'\:_ -. a,·~~--- Dionn€ Merlino, Trustee Bv Donold J and Joan P Mnlinc fom,ly rrus\ No 1 J/a/c 8/9/9C, 1:s member By_&{w,,... ,A~--- Steven A. Me 0 l·no. Tru~l1!~ ~ By --------·- Trl.ls:ee ACKNOWl [OGD.4i::NTS STAT[ OF WASHINGTON , ) " COUN-Y or KING ) I U"li'y lha~ know or have sotisFGct:)ry t'v1den::e thc1 GRE.GG MERLINO ,s the oer:son who oppeorec befor~ me and ac:snowie:lqd th::it r.e s.iqned the hsfrumen'., ::in :,c\h stated tlool ~-e wos outl=o1 :zed -tu execu:e the insi·u-iern nrid r.{ -:r::;wlt'Q:11:d Ct os a lrus!ee of GARY M. A.NJ DONNA ~'-.\'l[R_INC 'AMI> ;;;:~ST ~lO I U/A/D 8/9/90 1~ its ::.Dpo-::it) as c memb>er ::if SR 90:.i LL.C., :.i Wtishington limited 1;0Uily cur-1pcn~. to be \he free u:-id volunto·y act .)f such l1rrrilerl "i::ibili::,· comporiy 1 :Jr thE uses and purposes menlinned i11 t'le ,n~1n,rr""ent. Doced ~-'1~'XD!:L ___________ ~_ ai 'lM -.;, .,,,7. .--"""""" r,.,,1.1~ ___ (.!_J:.._s:..JlbrL~~--7 ---~-~<;~e~~!t.r,-~, ~ .: o<). ·/.,,s,. (' i,,_:-.01, \ :M,far-~ _____ Notar)' Pub!ir;___....£__?-'<:f..,..G:.~.~-~-~ 1;_.._L-0 ~---·-----------lw~~.t;;:~ _ )~j_._ i.Ay Appo1ntme'"!l Expires \ ~--..... (' 1 _0-.... ,// '•,,:,~ o~-V,A;'=",~----- ACKNowLrnGE~ENTs (cor1t'c .,ext colum,i) '''"'"" ___ ,. RECOR8ER'S CERTJFICA1F 2ftl40~\\~0D:ll5 FILED FOR RECORD THIS AT ~;Q~. PM IN BOOK IL DAY or ""(· .2004 .. OF !"S AT PAGE.l.33.AT TH[ REQUEST OF BARGl-i.AUSEN CONSU .. TiNG [NG1>.J(~RS. l~C ~"'(\. Jo,Pc\ 1.AA.N.6..Glli! .JJk-;J.,,.J,..;. b sun :)F. R~C.JPcs SlA:[:. ~rf Wf,SHIN{.:JDN ) " CO\.loJ!Y o: KING 1 ,:!irtih th,1\ k'"lc,v,-or f-,a~e salisfoc\ory e:v1dP.nrl:' tnat D{)r,N~ l,ER:...1NO 1s the per;;on y,rho appeared bf!fo,e me and ocknc,1<,leda,;c thci'. she s oned 1'1€ instrument.. on ootr s\at€d lho: he ,;u~ 1iuH1or,iec to 1.;xe<::ule the t'"lstrurr·~'n\ ar:(! ::::·know,t',iged ,l as a t,·J'..\ee o' GARY M. AND DONNA M. M[RUN:.:: (AMILY TRUS- NO 1 U/A/[: f:/9/90 m its cowcity as o rnerriber oi SR ~l.i( L : .. ( a W:Jshirgton limited l1obiiity ::Orl"porw, le oe the f•.-.:-e ond volunta~v ocl of sud1 lmi:\ed lwbiiity compan~ for the .. ses ona purposes rnent,oned in th€ instrume~t Col 0 d ~'{,-2.C!:ti ___ ------------- ~ /JM 01 ·,,,: .--,-----"~"'•, .LLJ....~l~~--~~+"::-.~Q.~4,;--,.: .c-=s. ~.'.·;S"<'li (f;~qt\ ~~~Q:"/' ______ ""'"" fW;t -r:'-cc:;·";~J ~v-ApPc,,ntment Ex;,ires "/~ · .. ,•, ·'.,..0/ • \,:.: ·~t ~,:;,~;,\{~:.:T S1AT[ or WASHINGTON) '"""""~~-- '.":S C::OUNf'/ '.JF 1(11\G , certify l11a\ I k<::tl" or /wve solt::;i:::i..:lory ev1dcnrl' that SFVrl\ A MERLINO is tf1e person who appeared beto··e .'ne or,(. oc1mowled9ed tho! he signed the instnimcnl, o.-, ,:iotr st0tcc lf'.at he was oulhomed to exec11te \he ,rs\rurner1t on:.J ::ckr,owle:cged ,t cs a t·uslef) d DONALD J. AND ~IOAN P MER_,NC FAMil.':"" Tf~L.1'-,;;: NG i :J/A/D 8/9/'::10 in ,ts c.:uµociiy a5 a 'Tl{"t-roer ol SF 900 L.:.. C., C! Washington lirnited l1obil.ty company, lo bt: th~ fref' on-: v:)luniary ad of such limited lio~J1l1\~ comp•rnv 1 c.n thf' us~s end r:,ucposes n1€"tioreC m the iw;t.rufYlcnt Denet ~-'i~-------------- _JfL'iJb1-----,c-"--sos;-"-,;,--te. """'""• --=---~ ~\;.J(>".v:•'>'o \ ___ ta_~ __ --·-_ Noto•y >-ublic ¢.-;_P . .:;+---,--:.!:'\:.._'1.,-\ ~~k-1~03:__________ _ ___ _{_:_~~ ~~~~~~~-~ My App.::,in;"rtert L .. pi··es ... .. r, ·-: § j ',,<I'::,~·· .. e.,.,, .... ··c; / S'Xl '.)F WASH/f.•G70N ) ,,,,,;'; o·~·v;~:;.,>:'o~~-~-- ; ss. '•,,.,." ..• ~·· COUNTY C' KIN'.; J :·er'.ify trct ! k~ow or h(l\le s0trsfcclory eviuence lho! MICHAE"L } M:::RL!l~O ,5 the :>ersor who .;:ippeored before rie und ac:Km,wle,1ce-C thal he s·ar,ed the instrur:1ent, on c:oH· s!nh,d lb-:.it !-.e 1<,a:s u.;lhorizf'c ·,::, Exe~tJle the n,s1r1Jrne-,t m1G <Jckcicwl<,cged 11 :is u :,ustee of OC,',A_D J. A.NO .JOAN P. MU~ll~I'.::·, rAMi~Y ll"<US1 NC• 1 U/1\/D 5/9,i':?O ;., ils capoc,t:,-:1~ a rnt'mber ;)f SFi 9:JO L.L l'. c W;:isnin~iltm lw1i•.to lrability com:,ony, 1o be 1'1e fro:-1• and v0l:_mlmv a,:1 cl sue~ :;rr,iied ,iob,;it,· c.orr,pt!nv to~ :Ile uses <J,1c p~·r"poses mentioned 1n tne i-,~;tr1Jn,·1·t , , .. , '11.,_ • L ,l fiMU __ ,.--"·.c-"•,,. LJ(;J'd Ll.lLY.Uk_-.Z,_....,(J,A.J_,_ _________ ::-..... V:.~ :•,,, -~ 'lJL I}J::i,r"!~ .f <>'·-,>'O>·i··.'O ". '/j;;±a~----'~--=-------·f-?~;;,o~~?\'1· \ 0~~/Ql,=====-~:a~-Pab~: ........ \i~!~,.l) I M)' 4.pp0mtme11t [xp,res '•,;' (;,-y,;p..S"'\ ---- , '''""·-------- SR 900 L.L.C. LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT S 1/2, S.13, T. 23 N., R. 4 E., W.M. DET::R\llNA.TiON ON THE 8,.'\S,S OF THF RFPRFSE"\J-/,T;0NS llCR[GY SUBMlrT[C.. THE Clll OF RH,T)N Al)M'N SI f(AI J;;: Of THE DEPA~TMENT o~· PL,\NNING/au:· .. JINC/ p"":B:...IC W•)RKS HE~~8" :-ill.S ,t..PPRO'v'[[\ ... ,·HS LOT LINE t,DJliSWUn NC• LU/o.-03-· ';:-4 L·_A LJf~QfR THF PROVISIONS OF C-iAPTER 7 0t -1T _E 4 OF -HE 9ENT8N MUNICIPAi (f':f)[ ___ ._iJe;.I uJo.tt, f.t..; G.o1~,-~--e,,,..Mo(~IL"l'Nlt_!!___~,--- AJM!NISTRi\101" '.)f' PLAr,'t~ING/BUILJ NG/PUBLIC WORKS DtPl DAT[ ":RACT A SR 90C L.L C., c Wo~t11r1gton Lmitec l,obili!y company, hereb\l der.;ores Tract A os dep,cted on ln,s Lot Line Adjustment io be c trnd for open spoce arid preservation 0f r,otive vegetat1or' SLJbject tc (,o) ,;r; eosemenl. to the C:ty of Renton al1owing o tieoiin9 ol a 2l1-iooi wide strip of lond in o 9niernlly no-1 '1-south rijrection c-.ver, m>je,, and ocross O"""I)' Jor11on o: T•act A 'or instollC!lion, L·Se, MOintenJ'H:e. rep:iir oi1d reco~strucliori c! c wat!'r rn:1in m:·:J C!ppwteno.,ces the'eto, ono (b; A resNved drc·.noge e<:1SN''-ent fo, \he ~ene'it cl \.:it l or h,.,_, ; ot :.ine Adjus\rne,i! ,Jlcowiri(J the O\'mer\1 ;: t,I I nl 1 ond lhe,r '1e,.·s, successors. personal 'eprese:1\c!.,.es ori<j ossi(Jri~ lo clear stdps of l,:ind of ,.1p tD 20 fee1 ...-ide in c 9E>nnc.lly nortr-k,-soutn dire::ticr at 1he !xat::rn of all CJiifeC:s ci:schargi~,; south from o::iuttmt; SW SLmset Bodev::ird (S::.: SJ[)l') and nst<ii!. use. 1""1C1:1tun•, re;.imr c:mi reurnst:uct ditc~es ono dtoin pipes and o~r:,unenan::e~ tnercto over. under, ond across those strips of ;ond Subjeci fc. tnct ""'ote ~rnr f!Gsemf>·~: Md lhot rc:.;ervec dro;n::igi;, e-osen-ient, a ric!ive grcmlh p~oteec,on eosl?mcnt ("NC='ER) is hereby ir;cposed ·..;pon Trnct A Im ::ireswv,ng rctve vegt>co:ion ond for !he conlrnl of ~urioce water ::,rd eros•on. mo1ntenonce ::J' 510;::1; stoD:i.ly. ond visual one aura buffe~ing, prorti.l'l1ng oil ;;,,esed one f.;tu,·e owner(s) o• T:a::t r... frDf""', dis\ur'.,111g on~· t,ecs or o:•,er -.egetdion wi:hir: the ~JGPE unless done pu-s,;ara'. lo e:,.:press w1 (tp;, rermiss1on of :fie City oi Rer!on This protiib1t,on r.hol' be erifo~ceoble oy tl"'.e City of Rer,tor Excep1 o~ proYidt'(i for obo.-,,-. tht' owne-·(s) o1 l·m.:: /.. rnoy not cul. pou1e. ccver wiln ';11. remove o; tJ[]rr.rn:v· lhe V~<Jelo·.1on with>, it: p•cvidec, '"lowe,er. th:,\ th~ nw1e··(s) r•irJ1-' mslol• londsccping wi'.~in ii F;1.-· ;o \070G0..\76J?\~'-'""'~\r,lril~\~~J91:JLA1 d.-a O~te;'l,me 01/.'0/200<1 DG·"-7 Scol~ '. -?00 P"'si,oce ~·e~! LA~D S'JRVEYOR'S CERT!~:CATE ThlS LV'T :..lNE ADJ:JSTMENT CORREC'."L Y ~EPRESEWS A W,P MAOE SY Mf OR iJl•<DER M" JIRECT SJPERVISION IN CONFORMANCE WITH '"HE REQUIRD,!C:NTS ,::r TH[. A"Pf<O;:,RIAlE STATE t.ND C.OUNTY STAT .. 1T[ AN[' ORtm~ANCE IN DECE. BE 1 :, --i U?!RES 01-:5-06 ~i '" n"O '"'U' V' ~ KENT Wt.. 98Ct ltJ '%, (42S 125l-G222 " ~ \"25)25J-87K rAx ~ " ';:. ~ CMl l~GiNEl Ri;.JG LmO PtJIJ'lN1'<G (JI "" Sl!R'l(YlW.: •NVTRONM~NT.... SfRV\C(S I r ~ 1~G !:NG.I~~ I [ SR 900 L.L.C. I LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT [ _ 1 _ ~UA-03-124 I U"N "' u,;,.1t I .J()8 NC) PCW '2-22 · C,.3 7639 CHkC·. B" SCALE" I $-iEfT [),IS 1· = 200· 1 or 3 CITY OF RENTON LUA-03-124-LLA 1---------~- .t6tAO::i l \ C?J O 00\ 5 I SR 900 L.L.C. LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT S 1/2, S.13, T. 23 N., R. 4 E., W.M. I RECORDING NO. VOI./P~GF t(,f I z34 i.ND-.30-0273 EASEMENTS .-..:J;,: l~[:}r{ cr10t.:s Easemen; for an e1eclr1c l1:.i11~n:1s~11)11 syste·n rer::orde<:l Mor:.;>, 1918 under K.nq Coun:y r~ecordmg Ne i !98403 C <. 2 Restr,ct,::,ns set io'lh in t.:nrecorde(J "Develor::'ler;l Agreernen:" be1,,.e€n the. City o' Rrc-nton mid ')P 9C[) L.l C., a Woshi-igton ·.irniteCJ lic,ility company. dol.ed December iO, 20-0::'., 3 Mohers (,f any) '.:1'.J' mfJ"; :1~ d.~d,JseC b; !he s•.i'l'ey oedo:meC b) Bmqr-,ousen Consulting ~ngineers. Inc recorded Decer,\l.,er 1 ?.. 1990 unlie· Kir,g Coun!y Reccrdinq V, 90!?1:9007 SURV['fOR'S N·JT(S AP title ininrm:111011 r:how11 z,n th,~ -nap has been ol:ttaineu from he "SeumcJ Subdi ... is,on Guarantee'' 1~.su,;:d by Tronsration Titie 1r:sur11nce ::orTc;:,:rn~· U'lder Order N0 20017041 dt1tf'(1 nec:P.mher '~ 2003 in vepor,r,g th:s map. Hargr,au~en Cons.1Jtin9 t.n9inecrs, inc has ccnduclPd nc: 1r·deperidcnt title search and is un·Jl'jare of ony HI,;, issues oftec!nry the pror,erly otnec ihan fi10<;,e dt5clused hereon. In veporinq this map. Bargh(wser Consul1,ng lng,r,eers, inc. hos rpiled solely on the obov(·-referenc:ed Seco·,d Subd1111s1on Guwar,tee us le he proparty"s tilw ,:cr,::i1\1on 2. 111~ basis for this rriap·s georr.etry ,s t,'1e ReconJ tlf Sur11ey drowin,:; performed b:i Barghousen Consult1~q Engrnee's. Inc. recorded Di;ce::11.Je1 12 99(i under King County Rf'r.ordiri;i No 9017129007 _[G,\L DE".~,CRIP-ION PAh'CLL t.. {TAX LOT NC. L'{:-5J4 300E) That rwnion ot Government Let 7 ;, Sedior · 3, k-w.-.shic 23 North, ~:anqt: 4 c.ost. Wi!icrr1etle Merid,on, lyinc; SouH1 r)f $;.11'~el H1qhwo~· ,:Primo·v Slai.e H r;nwoy No. 2 and also kw.:,,,.,, 'J~ SR 9'JC. Lmp;re {J,;Jy Soutri. Morl>r) l u\l,er :<ing J: Woy Sn1,~h 1Jr1d SW Sunset 80ulevmc; and North oi tiie '1Qh1-of-woy of Chicago, M,iwoukee ond S1 Pa<,' Ro!iwny Ccrl'pony C'>C Prx:ik C:oas'. Ra:!r".'cd :::,..:rr1ponv '.8u!lir1,:;1.:m No:'.h':'r~. OLG Svntc re Poilwcy C0mpunv i: INCLUDING ·.ccoted Sou;/-140li-' 5;'eP.\ ic k o lie•ornr. Coe.I .1/ine CO'l1'.)Cny Rood) ly,ng wi1111n sc,::J fYH\1t1r, oi Gcve1n'TH'.'ll l.ot 7 pursuor1: 1-J vo::ot,or, under Kins Cc,wty C,,mmi~sior1ers" Jourr,al \'olurne 29. pag~ 3 5;\uate ,r, :he Cily of Rent-:-):1, County of Ki11g. '::ta\e of Woshi"glor Pi\RCE.L 5 (TAX L.Or NO. 1323:)~ 90:c) That p:,rt,on o• the N::,rtr. h•)lf 01 11,1: 5ouhe;:,sl quortP-r o~ ~,ez:t;on iJ. Townsh,o 22 North. Ronqe 1• lest. W,llometle ~ier,d;ori. 1~·i11g Soutr, of Stm~et H1qhwoy (Pn,nary Stott' '"'1,,;hw<J\· No 2 GIG U!SO kriuwr ,JS SR 90C, [,npire Way '3ou:h. Morl,n Lutr,er l\,r~ ,Jr. Wdy So.1th rinri SW Suns.;>t 8ou:e11ord) nnd north or the ··ig!1t-o•--,...ay of Chk:ac;o. Mi,woukee on:::1 S'. Po...1, Rmlwov Company w1c P•Jc1 1ic Crnst Roilrc-cd C001pany fEurlington Northern 011d Santo F<: Roilwcy C.:i'Y'ir(rny), l"lCl UDIN~ both ( 1) vocdcd South · 4-'.):t Street (a."'.c. Beacori Cool M f'I: Cornp'.lriy Fo1Jd) lying within e>GJd pod1011 uf :he Norlh Lalf of \he Southcoc-1 quarter µursuont to ·mcc111on under Kine; Cou"ly Comrniss:oners' Jo·J"noi Volume J.8, page J cr1d (2; the vcc.a1r-:·0 :1:)dlon r;I 52nd Aven:1e South lyirg within smd partier rif the North h'Jlf o' the So,.,[tieasl ().,crter. [XC[PT Ihm pcvlior1 oi the Nert'! h1;1! v: \i1e 'Southeast quorler. t·,mg South ::,' a lirar. vowr, frorr-1hf< Nrxt'·.wes".W') comer of ~o\ 15 .r, 5!::,::k 13 of :,01d pla'. ol Eorling:on and "U'l~1nr; thence ""es\erly c d1stonce of 12:;o feel lo c point on \he Northerly line of srn(; ,iyl.1-of-wo1• :Jf tne Ch·.:.,,ugo. Milwoukl!e arid SI. :oau: Ru::wo~ Comp;i~1y llr1d Pcciiic ~~ocs1 Rai1rood Compory, so[;: pom1 Demg at rig!1f ongle_s lo_ '.he cenle,·iine o' t<;e_ ,n::i;ri. \rocks of tl1e .:iocik: Coos1 Rodr-::,od ::::ompariy 1,Bud11glon Norllierr, and S:ink f{' Railw::,y Com.pony). cit q point th('rf.'m d,::;tcn: otiosd 20:>0 feet Westcr!y. mca.sure,j o!nm; '.i1e cen:e,rline :;:rf \nl;' moi•1 1rock of the Pacit,c C:oasi Rciiry:;a Cornr,an~ {GL1r!ing1on N0rthern ,:ind ~,(m'.o ~f' ~z11lw[]y Cc-iparw). cs nov. ,-::,coled along sa,d riqht-oi-·wo7'. from !he ,nte•sect,on of sa,d <":enteriine l'<ih :'"le Eos! :ine n' suic St'dirm L): s;tu.Jle ,n the City of Kcrnrm, Cour,ty o' .(in~. Sto'.e o! If.ash na\c,· GHA<, -~q.:. .,S-A\. 13215 '?ND AV[.NUE S0vTH SR 900 L. L. C. '° ,,: K[I-JT WA 980.32 111 ~ (4~'5 ;'";1-672; EJ<Pll'lf~ 01 ; ~ '°' '47"'1751-8'62 U,X ~ " J CM\ fliC.l1<rrn1~ AN(\ "1.A/.lt.11'-IC <IIG,-':,' SJfiYfYJt,iG U,";1H0NMlN!A_ '.:ffJt::(.<; ' < ;,--.:,<t-I 'Ale ~NGl~i, -:JW1" BY LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT LUA-03-124 I DAH ! -.iOS NO PCw j 12 -22-t·J i I -cA' -11 CHKD. BY i S"EET2 j:, Lt I [}.JS ' • " '=' 2CJO' --- 7639 ·- QF 3 CITY OF RENTON LUA-03-124-LLA i...N0-30-0273 ~"IV>' CO!' ~ 1,l-23-4[ '181,~-~ --------2H:: .. o,:c V----- SR 900 L.l.C. LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT S 1/2, S.13, T. 23 N., R. 4 E., W.M. ·N l/4 CDR / IJ--23-4[ (Cll'I 01 RFNINI MD!.UUH,11 I HI:>()) ~-----LIHE T!.I!L( t,l;:,v;>lr,,,c -1 ""~/..c!?'"',f-__ -'8","'·, -;-7,~ t-------l·/S/".}1'5~-'li -------------Zt.~; -~q \.--.\5.00 NOS'48'!9°'4 ~ ! 72.781 ~-[ I __ :~ 3ci.oo t{20·.31·.i~~:::rnD r L5_ 45.001 SJTQ\'19"W /Rl r l6 I 1 ::::~l 5475.nn ,· "'"'·"" f,4Tn~·ne·r _(fil. La ,oo ~}"[)~fo~-~ IR, I -~D 20.00 N)i,51'~~-[ (RI 1~00 N10'4.C:'52T _ _lQ",_; -r-~--;;, (Pf.!1.0\p-:!_-=._9 C ., ..,s,_..7 "--.. L 11 ""' so1:_41_,4_s~i...IB.J ,'2 67.71:1 ~rn~ "' 26.00 N()5'4B'19"W i LH ·es 95 Ns,·11·•1.:r......___ ~ \2 10 NOri7'17"( NOTE; All BU>Rl>IG5 NOTfD ~ fR) AR( Rlt.i)W. a \1.0 • r (S~~i'i'> t.W.~~'L!O)j'.1"\\)\/._()t, ~;~ ~%. vGS • :=;1:c ~ DST Lloli Ct-.... C !lllOW:,wrll C.L C NO •' ',--. .• EASJ LINE Ji.Jw;Tl(ltl ....._ """'"' 'f 1.14 ''---, :5 ',,} _ti ~ ,Lll c9 .'---LU .,,-.1,ctl ~ 1tt1.t.r~ ;10ao':l{ "· 1 1_1;,.-i·t-;. p..C.1<-tS) GOY"l LOT I - I ~~ {,~ ~o c2 t,,~1- \ ~ '-o·-;~--.. ' . -' -\ -·~ Lm UNS LOT 1 !, \4:3.7\J:1 5 f {2& l&± ACRE.Si \ \-TRACT A .!6.~~8~ '.' I ro 6.\± ,o,cpf s: S 14(ll\l $1 -~/'. t: 9(,1!:Qt,I ~~-_ i,,1\Nt. RO~ R,.,z914.93 l "'2G8 87 (V-1!'.A.rf_tJ; .,~·.J.~,tll-',() jj'.I, \0• ')("\°J -_ Yl":°'~-~ s.~ .. ')O'i,·~ ~c.Af:..-1 :_11>~' --·· .. '," .- P:',RTIN/-1 Of 'RA.Cl A ,. ';, ; >( '· RECORD1NG NC. VOL./PAGE 1.0oJ+ D:i 110000 I 5 -------~__1__ib_E / .23~ ---------.J·v------ S· ------l N ~ •z~~c.""'\_ W;, . ;E (CIT" or REN~(ll,j -f·-7\_';;',c ·,-.. ~./ -U0NUl.jfNT f\3.1~) i < ,) ,1~ :,;,; ~J_'_/"' E '/4 COR f ;J-2Hl I I ~I'' ~ ; • < i ~ "'I~ I s 0 100 200 M...1"""'£ 1· = 200· _,..::_Q_(;.2_1[ ~o' \~ ~t~I"'{'~" _..J ·-~ _i_--------, --·-----,, . ;'5' •_.._ '· J\)~· •. 'r' ---~ ----' ' ........__ -,J(l/,.. .,. -------'. 'l.__________ -·-,-----~--------~-I', sf ....... ______ -_...-----___,_.._. --~ ,-· ...___ IP ', --_...--'·. \ ----,ai ,,;, ---.....:. '°C '--.. __. _,... __. -~ ,{ ;"::-_ :~ ---<.!.._·'·,-c >,, __.-..---_ I • ~ \._ 1.SBLJll r CE1f'H11fif _ 11 ', ~. :.:.i ~o 1 ,_ ...______ , __......------------, ._; OF RA.ILROAD W.ILl!'lt ~ ',"' ::_ --.....:: 1' ,.. ._ •'i /'"'" -----'.':.; TRAC~ " '.~ -~ "" ,:, , . ---, ··-; -~·1· -1\\J)~\~D--~·-" ~/i --~ '~ -- w,,--"~ -I" -~, ~"' "' _ fu~ ' l.FNGTH R~ OL~!A i!: ~ /f·" , ~\., ''-.. C1 17473 182S.0~ -~~· ~r-,<,,'_.· \ C2 665(0 18.29.C·J 20-50'~· ~-, ,.) CJ 535.28 :BS9.DJ J6"'Q"51· ;:;'.I~ C4 ~94.~ :e1r. ::iJ s·o7·415· ~{;> ;;lo CS '2H4 1814.03 3"56'<4€"";] ~ ~ C6 198.47 1609.Dj, i··:-:~~ S :i: C7 516.64 -1829.03 ;~·· 1·oij 2, GB :'09.0.:l 181~.~t-Uk\"41"' 31 J',/·._ '\,,;S".j'" '-{t.;..,.f' ' ' ~,..~u~,1()1; f"'l(ftl \IOI.·, •. 8<·Y~CA10J _B2~l• '-.... ,Wfhj~f s ""' xt"~~-..;:;'i-"__, ,:s,, §~ \' ...... c:'"'~c., .J::/ ..J;,/1..J • ·~--.!!/ V /;,' :,..__D S,,' -.........::::: ,; ,,.- c.0..-,t>C'"',;,_,r:i~~._s :_a. ~(). ,;,G':! ,~,. J ;.,i..:, gl; :. "' ~l"' I L_....:_%__. _128,Q.!!_l?D!lOJ 4~w ";'i /··S 1/4 (;(JR ~ ''"" J" BAASSY IN ---_ ---~2_2'01]_______ ~ IN COHC POS"' ~ )59667" ----------------_ ----_____ C{!rl~J34·, !>fl to>!/ "~,~ ?6•96-,-. ------- ? l~~ IN ,r;t-'r-. N Q"iE: ---I --<> --\-.V' ~» "" ' ----,-\1-l.J·4f --J 8RASSY IN c~c POS! -"";$<0?---------~ R6.$1S or MAP -RECORD OF SUR\IEY ~ , t-48{EDS----"--.(;!1r '->f RFNT-:Jt-< RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER ,,, ----2•~8.ll1 MONUt.lDfl 175-4 9012129007 ROTAITD TO CrTY OF ~-"v--RENTON HORIZONTAi. CONTROL CITY or RE?-llOt-1 (ROTATION ANGLE 00'00'1-4· RIGHT' 1.iOOW[NT liAf>~ ' 'i '""' ''"' '"' =, ' V' ((\: K[."t,T w;,. 98032 QJ ,i, (425)25-1-€:;:2: ..,. _.. .,,, 1425)251-8'782 'I\X "' 0 ~ ;! CMl Hl(;t"1EfRINC l»II: Pl.1-Jlf.llNG di,;!'.-• '>I.WV!:lltlG Hl'l1FWNM"E"1'Al SERI/ICE$ ',. ' '\-'"'a ENGlt''(;:. DWt,_ f?Y O·il<D 3Y "= SR 900 L.L. C. LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT LUA-03-124 CH'·.T:: I .JO& i-.,c, PC'n" · 22 --C3 SCA:..E SH[i:1 DJS ,, = 2co· 3 7639 OF 3 APPENDIXll .a.x ~Ol318N SC , ~ 005 ~V g I l HOl/Z 1/~:aw 1J,•10Q o~p o5a-r,r.~~ I VJcJ w 1•.J\coce I \scoc,, \ J a,,.J r---------------=------------------------------,-------------_:::.:..:.:.::::.::.._:_.::__:_:::..:_:_:.:::_l~S=D~,,.,:,s-· ~"~m~;:,:,o,:,,,:,;~'°':::::,,.,:,.,:,s:----,~,~.~,o:,:,~,~.~,,-,--r-1~:---rr~~ ,S/NOl::l3H 3.lNIOd Sl:16-l:9L (901:) '"'"'"' °'" ''""]]"""' "'" i~-b ~1' ?<Paj..o ON sor '3'.YB i! j ! ~ SNVld NOU'11fll8'1H31::1 ON'1 OOt>l:-1>£186 '1M '3lil'138 m rnLS-,sz(,<>) ·" " · 0 ''0'8'3 '30'1Nl'11::10 rlli::13.lNI l:Ol 31Jns 'Hlf108 3nN3A'11Sl osos '~~;t ~!'~J;~ \ <c-i11 'ONI0'1l::IO -l33HS 1::13,\00 011 NOl::l3H 3.lNIOd Hrnos inNJAv o,u ma, ;s,'>vw 9 ~ H0::1 •311.IJ. Cf) z <{ _J a.. z 0 ~ _J m <{ I w a: 0~ z~ ~~ 0 0 w ~ (j 2 z <( 0 <{ a: (j I 1-w w I Cf) a: w e5 0 b 0 "' • ,__ ' , e_--- _J_~ -------\ ___ __J I I L 1--__, <.) w w <.) .., ct "' <( ::, Q. <ll J fP:' (i i I J ,,I ! \: I 11 ~l' \ \\ I 1 11 I-' il I ' 11 \ '11 )\ Jr,j \; --~L __ ~- 2 e • • • I ~ i • i • • • ~ I I ! I 0 I i [ \ ~------- i bi ~ ~ ;g "" 158 .. "~ ~ ;; ~·~ fi1 .. ~~ I a..-; !~ oC ~! ~; w ..J ·~ w -~ ~ ~~ •• ~i ~ ~. ~· i '" ;;i ~~ &l "e ~~ ~ ! ~f ~ ' ' -,~ ---o.._ji §i§ 0 ooooooooo- 15000~60600 ::;:;E:n::i~:::..e::.ern~ ~ CQ ::, i" ~! !I, ~ii::_; 8~0li;: ~; ~~~~ ~~~~ ~;., 'i'' ~~:i j '"§i I!! ,o • 5 M. o~re ... ~·" ~ ~8~@ oci ~al~ CI: w .. 0 ..J ~ 0 UJ °' _, ' ' ' -~~ ~~ ~vi:' .. J] 2'!;!:J!~"' @<;!~ ~§~~ti ~~~Ei t ~ • I:: :::1; CI: w a.. " s -8 ~~ i~ ~~ rt w> - w '<; !~ \!j,:J~~ ~ ~§§~ .nv,c::!.u ~ " ffl ~ ~ -Cl) w s 5 • ' [ 0 ~ ~~ !z. wr CI: • u. 0 0~ j>: w u~ ~ • ~ j ;. ~ !l,1 ~ Qc.i..ca az~~ 5!:;!~ .. ~ti~~ t,;::~~ "-'ow::l ~~if~ ~ ~ <" ~i; ~.,i """'''' 0 O 1:=:RS: u:2Ei! ~ $ i ,S/NOl::l3H 3.lNIOd SNVld NOil '1.11118'1H31::1 ON'1 '·o·S'3 '30'1Nl'11::10 rlli::13.lNI 'ONI0'11::10 -.L33HS 1::13AOO ·· _, l:JddV 31VO AB NOISl/\lH NO.LN3l:! ~ .'IO J..L IJ l!imv 00 ' SW l • ! ,~k ~ ,1 tii i~ i, 'f 'i! i 1~ "9 " I I 11 ; H-++-+-+--i " iii .g " 1-+-+-+--+--H : E I ~ G ;. ~ !1 • • I !~i ~~~g Uc,a,::, s~~~ ~ ~ I ~c" ~i:R ··~-~'$! .. ~ ~:-i 2"'• I ~~~ !~~: ~~I §'Bc.L <>..-w-u-• ~ • ! ~ APPEND1X12 d'1W W'13H.LS ON'1 SON'1,.13M I- ~ a: w a.. ...J ...J LL 0 z <( w 0 <( a: c.:, z 0 a: w I w I-z 0 a.. 0 w Cl) 0 a.. 0 a: a.. LL 0 ,S/N01::13H 3lNIOd d\fV'4 J..Hd\fl:IOOdOl :i. 3:: ui ... ~ .,: a: z "' "' !l. Iz Cl) 0 z f-,: Cl 8 .!:: .I "' Cl) -.,: z ,: Sz ~~ LL W 0 a: ' ' I ' I , ' I ' ' , ' , I ' ' I ' I ' I I I ' I ' ' I ' ............... ,S/NO!:l3H 3lNIOd d\fV'l J..Hd\fl:IOOdOl SZl6-Z9L (90Z) OOVZ-17£186 VM '3lilV3S zm 3.lJnS 'H.l.llOS 3nN3AV 1Sl osos 011 N01::13H 3lNIOd / •' ,, §> "§ ---------/ r ~ ~ ~ S~JOM ~!1qnd )Cl )LI9l.!JjJOdaa NO,LN3N ~ ..io ,1.J,IJ ., ,·;,~· ,:: S.:!:Jllll:t:lS l'l'lN.:!l'INOe!IAN.:! ':JNl,l3/\llnS 'f.1NINN'f1d GNVl "c)M~JJN :JNJ 111\IJ xv..1 l9L9-lt;l(sn,) lll9-l£l(<;ltr) Z£086 'r/M '1N3)1 H1nos lnN]A'r/ ONlL Sll8l \ ' ' ' 15 g f-m ZJ W' a: ' LL 0 0~ ~w 0~ [ < ' w 0 a.. <I: ~ >-S!! iE; <I: :,: ~~ ~~ ~ I I Ni ! ~ ! l ~ "' i ' ~ I , ,, JI ! i ~ g g I I I I ,·,. '----'----'-'--'-.L..-, ~.,,/ 00 00 00 00 I 'I :~ ' ' ' ' ; I I ; 0 !I a: \ u.; \ ~ , Z. I I r I I j I I I I .I :-.0.:,·,f I /, / I ; I \ \ / ; / ' ' ' •. ··. i1. roj :I, ' 11 I .i'.1.1, ·1,I 11 ! l------~ ., •.••..................... - l,dd'v i ]1'1'0 '° NOISIA]~ ,--,,,•' ! :~ ON APPEND1X13 POINTE HERON LLC PARCEL AND GRADE & FILL PROJECT SITE with City of Renton Regulated Slopes (' R•nlo• 690 0 PROPOSED GRADE & FILL PROJECT SITE - ' B R .SC-A ... ... --• • I •• •• •• 345 690 Feet Information Technology • GIS Re ntonMapSu pport @ Rento nw a.g ov WGS_ 1984_ Web_Merca tor_Auxiliary _Sphere 05 /28/2014 ' ·~~. ·, ·,., ..... ·, ·, ·, ·, ·, ·, -~ ;» . i i i r "'""';; ;! -~: /; I r ,. ' -. . "~ ~ '-.. ' POINTE HERON LLC PARCEL BOUNDARY ! .... ........ , ... ~ . .. This 11ap 1s a user genera1ec static output f•om an Internet mapping s i1c and is for reference only Da1a layers that appear on t>i1 s map may or may not be ac-cu';:ite c .. .went or otherwise reliable . M ap ti tl e , labe li ng , parce l bo undary and pro po sed proj ec t site added by Hali nen Law, 8/1 2/201 4 TH IS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGAT ION Legend C ity and Cou nty Boundary Othe r i. .• c ,ty of Re nton P arcels Slope C ity of Renton >15% & <=2 5% L >25% & <=40% (Sensitive) • >40% & <=9 0°/o (Protected) • >90 % (Protected ) Envi ronme nt Des igna tions D Natural D Shoreline High I ntensity D Shoreline Isolated High lntens ily D Shoreline Resktenha l D Urban Conservancy D J u risdict ions Notes Non e 0 Cityo f~etrf on Finance & IT Div ision APPEND1X14 urc?.,ii;.·1m0,1100,o"' °'"~"" '"'"""]~ ""'" 00',' S3d01S 3003 KJ.J10S lllH!H 03S0d00d NO 03S\f8 \f31J\f 318\fd013A3a 3~n.J./1~ JJ,V~IW N003H 3lNIOd - I , 1< 7/ I j ,: I ---I_J___j~ / ___ j / I -I I I , I J; I / I ii ' 'I . I : I ·-_._:/ I ., \ I I I ,I j Jj ,1 )?' ,, /, I ,: i I I' \ \ J j 80186 VM '3lil \f3S H.lflOS 3nN3A\f H.1Dl -9~16 ::lll N003H 3lNIOd I ·. I 1 1. i ;,_:/, 1· J/' SL/O./L O><,O I ~ z "' ' \ . \ I \ .. ,\ ~ ' '.' o\.: \ \ '•, \ ' .. ,\. ,\' '-\,,'\ i,:,~}i,.t-.tl'.\, '~ \ SDNll5 l'L"i~l~NOaW<l -~"•llv1n~ ~NINN>"ld 0.S,1 ·~ie:ilNl~,l 11/IJ~ \ i Xl".:i ~8L6-I £l(~~~) ;:ug-,g;:(;z~) ,:rn86 'I'll, 'JNJ~ H111os ~mow a~7.1 <a?.Q1 I I \ \. CJ) w a: 0 <( l!) C".) r..: +1 ~ <( 0 LL o_ ~ <( w a: <( w _J m <( o_ 0 _J w > w 0 w a: ::::, f--::::, LL >-a: <( :;;;; ir o_ ,---, CJ) w a: 0 <( l!) l!) N +I >-<( s: I LL 0 I f-- I ('.) ir f--w w a: f-- CJ) w a: ::::, f--::::, LL w 0 3: I f-- 0 0 LL I (ll <D LL 0 <( w a: <( a: w f--0 w z w ::::, a: f--0 CJ) w w f--CJ) a: <Cw ::::, wa: f--a:o CJ) ::::, 0 <( w LL w l's a: 0 LL rn m <( 0 ON 0 I f--+I (ll f--0 II a: +I 0 wt:: z CJ) :;;;; 0 a: 0 ,,c o_ w z 0 0 o_ 0 <( a:_J o_ m o__J f--z w w 0:: 0 CJ) o_ 0 F oz z 0 u5 <( w a: f--<( _J w w >-cc! 0 0 f--LL<( a: z CJ) wa: Ow w ('.) ('.) f--a:a: <( LLO oz s: w<t wO :;;;; Ost I a: a: 3: l!) f--w i;2 ::,I ~ ?i ow CJ) 0 II CJ) f-- s: 0 >->~ =O w LL<( Io_ z I s: ~o a: ~ I 0 LL LL LL W LL o9 0 CJ) 0 <( <( f--<( o_ w wI wo a: a: Q a: a: <( <( a: <( o_ ,1,c"1>,·,tuuao,,c..., CH""JVJS 1Nl.'1JN1'.l '""1J< '<" z !i / 7/ f I /, ! 4 : ' : / ' I I I } S3d<YlS 30Cl3 H1/lOS AIHH G3SOdO~d NO G3SV8 v~v 318Vd013A3Cl ~~ A~V~IW N0~3H 3lNIOd I ! -....._ __ I / / I ._J__ i I ---_j " f ,1._: I .I I '! 'I - 80l96 VM '3-W. V3S HlJlOS 3nN3,W H!OI -gru, 011 N003H 3JJ',10d 'I !1 ' I \ '"' ''" s./och """ ,a,..=.,,, " ,..,,.41 m ,-a ,,, """ .. '"" ' \ S]~l"")S Wll<l~NOSW« -,..,,.;,.>mo ~· -r ?N NH'f,d O~'fl '91li~ll~l9Nl lWJ i -.. 0 W:I lgLB-,g~(£Z1') \ ~-~; i'.U9·· l~i'.(£C7) lr•JEl6 'IN. "tNl~ ooiv1 Hln0$ JrN.JJ\'V UNU Sf(ij, &q\fHO~ CJ) w (/) a: 0 w a: <( 0 set <( LI) 00 CJ) ci er, w +< st a: II +; 0 >--<( <( ~ " s: 0 set IW LI) LL 1--- +I 0 <( ,w 1---a: <( Io 0 Qw LL a: rn (l_ ti:i 0 ~ <( CJ) w 1--- w w a: CJ) a: a: 1---<( <( 0 (/) s: w <( w w a: __J ,.0 ::::, (l_ rn LI) 1---0 <( N CJ) ::::, __J (l_ +I w LL CJ) 0 a: __J 0 LL __J w >--<( 0 __J > <( 0 I 0::: w s: er, 1---<( 0 I a: LL +i QI w 0 a: I zO ::::, 1---0 "' ::::, 1---I z 0 CJ) ::::, CJ 0 LL LL <( 0: (l_ rn C >--1---z 1---w a: w (l_ <( w 0 CJ) 0 ::;; w fC= a: 0 __J a: z CJ) 1---w a: (l_ CJ) 1---<( __J w w >--d r---, a: 0 1---LL ::::, a: z w 1---::::, w 0 CJ LL 1---a: 0 <( LL W w s: w 0 ::;; 0 I ,j:: a: ,j:: 1--- 0 ::::, I 0 1---1---I 0 1---CJ) CJ) 0 0 s: 0 "" LL w LL ±: I er, z I l[) ,.0 l[) N a: LL 0 LL LL 0 LL 00 <( <( <( <( w w w w a: a: a: a: <( <( <( <( \ \