The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMisc• • \Villiam Popp Associates ae\\\o\\ ~" ·00 Tramp,Jrtation Engineers/Planners ·t~ O' ',JiSI (425) 401-1030 FAX (425) 401-2125 e-mail: info@wmpoppassoc.com TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS for Eagle Ridge Office and Apartments frcparedfhr: Chris Korugtl 5454 30th Ave SW Seattle, WA 98126 f'repared by: William Popp As.wciutes 14-400 Building. Suite 206 14400 !lei-Red Rd Bellevue, WA 98007 .lune 8, 20()9 14-400 Building• Suite 206 • 14400 Bel-Red Road• Bellevue, WA 98007 • 7l'l,lfic lm/JOCI Analysis Eagle Ridge Office and Apartment.,· TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................ l A. EXISTING CONDITIONS .................................................................................................................... I I. 2. 3. SITE SrRVICES INVENTORY .. . TRAHIC' VOJ.UMLS ......................... . LEVEJ.-UF-SERVICi; .............. . . .................................................................. I . .................... 1 .. ................................ 3 B. FUTURE CONDITIONS ........................................................................................................................ 4 I. BACKGROUNl.l TRAFFIC VOl .. lJMl;S. 2. PROJtCTTRll1 GENERATlON. }. TRIP DISTRIBIJTION AND TI\AFFIC ASSIGNMFNT. 4. BACKGROUND TR,\1-MC Pl .US !'RO.IF.CT TRAFFIC VOLIJMI S ... 5. LEVEL-OF-SERVICE. 6. INTLRSECTTON S1c;HT DISTANCE ANALYSIS ............. .. ............ 4 .. ........... 4 ............ 6 .7 .......... 7 . ....... 8 C. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS ..................................................................................................... 10 I. 2. l'IWIF:CT VEI-IICIJLAR IMPMT ....... Li:VELOF SERVICE. 3. lNTFR~LCTION SIOllT DfST:-\NCL'. .. 10 . .................. JO . ... 10 D. MITIGATION AND RECOMMENI>ATIONS .................................................................................. 11 Page i • . Tru(fic lmpau Anal)lsis (6/8/09) F.agle Ridve Office and Apartments INTRODUCTION The Collowi ng report was prepared in order to address the traffic related impacts of the proposed mixed use office and residcntial development located in the city of Renton. The study addresses the typical City of Renton traffic impact analysis guidelines of project impacts at year of foll occupancy. [n general, this study evaluates the project's average weekday stred AM and PM peak hour impacts to the sun-ounding street system. Project identification The proposed project known as the Eag,le R idgc Office and Apartments development located on the t:ast side of Benson Hill Rd notih of Pugel Dr, and just notth ol'Eagle Ridge Dr. as shown in Figme l. The proposed project design includes 2 buildings totaling 147.241 gsfofoflice and residential space. The development will be constructed in lwo phases. The south portion of the properly will be constructed as Phase l. The south building (Phase I) will have approximately 74,504 gsf of building area on four floors. The parking garage has about 18,626 gsf The north huilding will have approximately 72,736 gsfofbuilding area on four floors. The garage for this building is approximately I 8.184 gsf. Access to the site is proposed with one driveway to Benson Rd S. "Jllis access is approximately 600 feet north of'lhc Benson Rd S/Eagle Ridge Dr S intersection. There is also a smal.l .internal paved roadway that connects an existing small ollice building with the Eagle Ridge Lodge assisted living complex. The small ofiice building ha~ access to Benson Rd S. This access is approximately 430 feel north of the proposed access. The Eagle Ridge Lodge takes access lo Eagl<c Ridge Drive. The site plan is presented in Figure 2. A. EXISTING CONDITIONS l. Site Services Inventory Roadways The roadways infrastructure in the vicinity of the site .include Benson Rd S which fronts the west side ol'thc site, Puget Dr SE, Talbot Rd (aka SR 515 and Benson Dr S), Grady Way. and Main Ave. Additional detail ol'Bcnson Rd Sis discussed below. B<cnson Rd Sis a two-way not1h/south collector roadway that connects from Main Ave near City Tlall south to Benson Dr (aka SR 515). In the vicinity of the site, the roadway grade has a downhill grade south to north of approximately 6%. The roadway is generally two lanes wide with curb, gutter, and sidewalk on the cast side and a 5' paved shoulder William Popp Assuchlles Page I ... , . : '.-,.. ' .·· .' ....... . sJ6ij';""'"' . -.1:..: w IT,l,IAM rorr .,\SSOC:J,\"ITS l44GO flcl-K,.,d Rd n'206 Bdlei.11c. W:\ <J::;11(17 .i.2:-,l.tJl.1030 i1rfo(ri!wmr0ppr1sS(>\.'.(;l!11J 17 :"·~: )JJ, ;:·-~, ~-·•:r• .ii'. . .-... ~ ...... ,;:_. VICINITY MAP :;~-, ·-•:,rs p t?l'fit' . ...,..;. Figure I ,;,.,,ii C;"~- ·--~~-,.,,.,, N Eagle Ridge Apartmellt/Office Development \\~\\/// / ,/ /"""~ ·•,">' .; \_ i_',i,. I 1 / .,/1 1 ',: ~/;.; ___ ·:.. .• '..<'"./~.-;:_: ... ___ ~---·-'_--·.·::_::--.·.--:·.·_-·._:·-,_·_·-~~-,-_:, .•• •"_:~_-_·._._---/_._._:~ __ ._· .. >:~;:-~::_;:;'/·:(.1~:-,,,/~ f /111 ! , , / , ,.,\~{',i"f:..-»:;:-:-.::;,, -~ "..;;!," ,, <". ...::.'.-f:,,,1(7 ,/ __ .? __ f_·;_-.>,:',>,~; __ '_;- 1 -1 \i ! ./-, L hrt.:.-(;;7..4 '1'.\ "'-\ / / ;-i-\. "- \J l,,!\;·'/,,,1•,,•,,~ ·,·i\,·';·\"f (1''· ;;l , ;-11.-,..-'i11:!(Jl/ , "1•lt,l!, ':-~;1\f_lt\,~ \ !-.i! ;tY\ , .. ti;;· .t,1 \\ '.r ;1,,!~,;1! /''.!)~\','J \ 1, ', ,1_w\, \., i-·• 1·/,' //1.·/'l/, ... .J····· 'I''-I ---1 -, /1''•• ···-; 1,•l,,,.,,,_''1r1//;, ,,, ,, , .J_'/• .. ,1.//.-/Ji/·//·,·•""•~ 1 ' 'i 1 1 1 ,,,, -1,-~_-· __ / __ -,;-i·t_--f __ ,;. ··\, ,""' l Ii!'; i ! : !.f 1 • ,1·:·,t1 n,{: t ir--1 ,1 ,,·1!.;,.,,.;,/1 1 /i!!f-'/•-re / ,',,,, i_:ff.•-/ -,,~-j L >' 'I //, ' ·'1 ,f -'i I.)~"''" r.:~-H ~µ;.\._ l ~ \ . +-/~'/~/.(~"{I·,/·'/·/ \ l~ ';i I il6 ) ,,r.,.,;,-'t ,. ·-t, .. -t.U•, \ ht-,; \ :-I ' \ , ( t ' 1 'f ,>' ' r/_.w_1_vH,rf:?--....-". ", __ \ \:; ,,. \ -1-!ili(f,1:.,:,.1 // '·· ; ... ~ . .,,,~,/1.!~~.,Jrt. --·-.. ~..~~~ t)1.?.·._; ·\(~;· r11 :~ L/J.J H h~t/l 1/:/)l 1t t [ " ~-.d/ ;'! rt l ; : 1 /, /. 1 r:;t::t . ! .·.,_._:~: •. Tuhl_-=-· •• li:_~-'--'._1,_-_·1 __ 1 __ ,:._:_. _ _.7_ ' ___ --_"-.- 1 ... :,l:?-l(.; {_" .·.:: ·· .. -.h' ! ,:117.•-I/! I / ( ! I J l / . Ni / I t:ii"X5S(i i !/.i,1 1((Jf l,. '- itr·' -.li?, '1'.; /+\,y;;~~ ". ;::::'71:··~.:l~,i; l; ·~r.t: -~.,,, r. A" ..... '/ \ii:;}·' :~-:._?( ··\1",~_-__ .. +)- ,1 --·t --r· __ .. .,, --•r;;;..J...:l:,., .. --, ~·cr'Tn 'X'~l~;: i. t 1 i' I ' " . ',. ~ .:'. ., :~ . i ~' N / «/ ! '" Yi' ~ --1 --_-"'\t\\J ' : ·, \· T ' .. ~,,A:,,W• \ -,,;·--,,-,·-"' •: E . . WlLLIAM POPP ASSOCIATlS 14-,100 Ad-RL~ f{rl ,/:20{'J [klJt'Hlt' \Ii,\ ')X007 425-101.IIJ3\I rnfo!'?),~mpopp,1.~SPC com ''.';-- ' \ -, SITE PLAN Figure 2 !~ f '\ \,, -\__ '" Eagle Ridge ApartmenUOffice Development Traflic lm1wc1 .foalvsi.,· (i,/8/09/ Eagle Ridge Oflice and Apartments on the west side. On-street parking is prohibited. TraHic control includes signals at Benson Rd S/Grady Way/Main Ave and Benson Rd S/Puget Dr S. The only significant roadway intersecting the segment of Benson Rd S between Main Ave and Puget Dr Sis Eagle Ridge Rd, which is controlled with a stop sign. The roadway is approximately 30 feet wide with a 12' lane southbound and an 18' lane northbound. The roadway has street lighting with a mix of PSE and City luminaires. The posted speed limit is 35 mph. Pedestrian Facilities Pedestrian facilities in the vicinity of the site includes a sidewalk on the east side of Benson Rd S that extends south to Puget Dr S and partially north. Bicycle Fnl"il iries There are no ofiicially designated bicycle routes or paths in the site vicinity. The City of Renton proposed trails and bikeways improvements plan designates Benson Rd S as a roadway with a bicycle lane. This of course is a future consideration. Transit Service Transit service in the region is provided by the King County Department of Tramportation (Metro Transit). There is, however, no transit service fronting the site on Benson Rel S. The nearest transit service is Route IO 1 and Route 148 which travel cast/west 011 Puget Dr at Benson Rd S. Both routes traverse between the Fairwood area and the Renton Transit Center. D1e Renton Transit Center is located on the north side of the Main Ave S/S 3'd St intersection. There is also a Park. & Ride lot on the north side of the S Grady Way/ Talbot Rd intersection. 2. Traffic V ulumes Existing PM. peak hour turning movement counts were collected at several of the major intersections in the surrounding area of the project. Traffic counts were collected for average ,veekday AM and PM peak hour conditions and were obtained from the City. The majority of the cow1ts are approximately no more than I year old. According to the City of Renton Policy Guidelines for Traffic Impact Analysis for New Development, intersections and roadways that would experience a 5% increase in peak hour traffic volu.mcs as a result of the proposed development would be subject to further review in the traffic study. A sumnwry of the existing PM peak hour volumes at surrounding project vicinity intersections are shown in Table I along with the estimated project impact at each. The project volumes are discussed more in detail in the future section of this study. William Popp Associates Page 2 Traffic Jm1,c1c/ Anal)'sis (6/8/09) Eagle 1/idge Office and Apartments Table l Intersection Volumes ~md Pro,jcct Jmpacts :\M PK PMPK ·101al Pn1.iect Proj<..:cl rotal Project Project Coun1 Enkring Lnlering ~{) Cnunt Ent~ring Entering 'Y., l11t~rsectio11 Dale Volume Vulmne Impact L>nlc Volume Volume lmp.ict Cirac.Jy Wayfl <1!bo1 Rd .Jul 8, 200R J,417 10 0.3'!{, Jan 22. 20{)8 '.i.569 13 0.2'Yc, (;rndy/Bc11sn11 l{d/f\l,1in An: i\ug 19. 20U8 2.10:1 19 I .{)0/o Scµ 4, 2008 2,95[} 24 0.8% Puget Dr/Bc11su11 Rd Jul 3. 2008 1.905 16 (UB·<, Jul 2. 2008 2,493 19 0.8% Puget Dr/Bc1L~\\l'I Dr/ 15th St Jul 7. 2008 2.S2J 0 0.0% Aug 26. 2008 J,.194 0 () O'X1 lkmon Dr/Bcno.;rn1 Rd/SR 515 Apr I 0, 2008 1.7(,1 14 O.ll% Apr 8, 2008 2345 17 0.7'Yo lknson Rd:l:agk RiUge Dr n/a n/a 16 11/a Apr IS, 1997 1.330 19 1.4% As shown in Table 1, tht:rc are no intersections that are estimated to be impacted by the project to the tlm:shold degree or 5% noted in the City guidelines. The maximum project impact occurs at the Benson Rd/Eagle Ridge Dr intersection during the PM peak hour and it is estimated lo only increase that intersection volume by 1.4%. It is interesting to 110LC the PM peak hour leg volume on Benson Rd S south ofEagk Ridge Dr of 1.211 vph which was counted in 1997 and the north leg volume on Benson Rd S north of Puget Dr S or 1,258 vph which was counted in 2008 are almost identical. What can be deciphered from this is the growth rate on Benson Rd S is probably very small. This can be substantiated by the historical growth on SR 515 north of Pugel Dr (MP 6.76) which shows a slightly declining growth rate from 1996 to 2007. The average annual growth rate over this period is -0.44% per year. The source data is from WSDOT annual lmllic report records and can be found in the attached appendix. 3. Level-of-Service Leve]-of:servicc (LOS) is a tenn ddincd by transportation and traffic engineers as a qualitative a11d quantitative measure of' operational conditions within a traffic stream and the perception of these conditions by motorists and/or passengers. There are several quantitati vc i mliccs utilized depending on the type of intersection control present. There arc six levels-of:servicc that are given letter designations from "A" lo "F", with "A" being the best. or minimum delay conditions, and "F" being the worst, with maximum delay or jammed conditions. LOS "C" or "D" is generally considered acceptable for planning and design purposes, while LOS "E" represents operating conditions at or near capacity with li·eedom to maneuver being extremely difltcult. Lcvei-ot:scrvice for the existing condition was calculated using the techniques presented in the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual (!-!CM). Level-ol:servicc for signalized and non- Hli/liam r'opJJ /lssociafes Page 3 J'ruf/ic lm1wcl ,-/nuln'is (6/8/09) Eagle Rid~e Office and Apartments signalized illtersections is quantified in terms of vehicular delay. Delay, measured in terms of time (seconds), also represents driver discomfo11, frustration, excess ti.tel consumption and lost travel time. The supporting Highway Capacity Software utilized for all calculations is version 4. lc. Table 2 rutersection Level-of-Scn·ice Criteria Lev~! of Service A ll C D E F Definition Little or no delay Short traffic delays A veragc lrallic de lays Long traffic delays Very long traffic delays Extreme de lay Delay; :--cu111J,; per vehicle Stopped Delay Per Vehicle signalized non-signalized Less than 10.0 sec I 0.1 to 20 sec 20.1 to 35 sec 35.1 to 55 sec 55. l to 80 sec Greater than 80 sec Less than I 0.0 sec 10.ltol5sec 15.1 to 25 sec 25.1 to 35 sec 35.1 to 50 sec Greater than 5 0 sec Since there are no intersections subject to analysis based on the 5% threshold, and the sit,; access intersection does not currently exist, no level of service analysis was done for existing rnnJitions. Refer to the foturc level of service section for site access results. B. FUTURE CONDITIONS I. Background Traffic Volumes Background tral'lic volumes arc estimated by factoring the existing trallic volumes by historical trafJic grow1h rate(s) to the project's horizon year and adding in known pipeline development proposals. However, there are no pipeline projects identified by the city to be included in this traffic analysis. Thus, the future volumes arc solely based on background grow1h rates. As noted earlier. historical traffic records suggest stagnant or negative grm,th in the last 10 years in this area. For conservative estimating purposes though, the :mnual growth rate used frn this analysis wus assumed to be I% per year up to the project horizon year of 20 l l. 2. Project Trip Generation Trip generation for the proposed project was calculated using rates obtained from the Eighth Edition of the lTE Trip Generation Report, 2008. For the proposed apartments, trip generation rates associated with Land Use Code 223 (Mid-Rise Apartment) were used. According to !TE definitions for the various land use categories. mid-rise William P(1pp Associates Page 4 ihrffic fm;wc! .·1nolysis (6/8/09) l:agle Ridge Office and Apartments apartments arc apartments in rental buildings that have between three and ten levels (floors). Thus. this LUC would be appropriate for the proposed land use. For the proposed oHicc project trip generation rates associated with Land Use Code 710 (Office) were used. The results of the trip generation analysis arc presented in Table 3. Table 3 Project Vehicular Trip Generation ITE Lind Use AM Peak PM Peak Code Size AWDT Tntal 1 n Out Total In Out PHASE I 213 60 unih Rat~ :1.09 0.300 0.31 0 (J.690 0.390 0.580 0.420 Vol 24:i 18 (, 12 23 LJ JO 710 J bl" fbk I I .Ill I .550 0.880 0.120 l .490 0.170 0 830 Vol 33 ' 4 I 4 J ·--····--·-·· Suhll}lal Phase 1 278 ,. ~, J(J u 27 14 13 l'IUSl':2 223 41J Llllih Ralc 4_U9 0 300 (I 310 0 690 U.390 0.580 0.42(1 Vol ICJ4 L' 4 & 16 9 7 Tnlal l'hasc I <llld 2 442 1;; 14 ,L 43 23 20 J .Ii(' 71 (I. Olfm-' The first phase of the projcd will include the south bui I ding which will consist of 60 apartment units and 3.000 gs!' or office space. As shown in Table 3, this phase (Phase I) is estimated to generate 278 average weekday daily trips, 23 AM. and 27 PM peak hour trips. The scco1KI phase of the project ,vill include the north building which will consist of 40 apmtment units. As shown in Table 4, this phase (Phase 2) is estimated lo generate 164 average weekday daily trips. 12 AM, and 16 PM peak hour trips. The total development is estimated to generate 442 average weekday daily trips. 35 AM. and 43 PfV! peak hour trips. The site is currently vacant thus there would not be any credit for existing Lraffic removed from the site. Wi/lium Po/J/J ,,-fssuciatcs Page j Traffic lmpacl Analvsis (6/8/09) liagle Ridge Office and Apartments 3. Ti·ip Distribution and Traffic Assignment Trip distrihution percentages were applied to the project-generated peak hour trips. In general, the distribution percentages to/from the site were based on existing traffic volumes on the smTounding roadway infrastructure, existing vehicle patterns at the Benson Rel S/Eaglc Ridge Dr S intersection, as well as from general knowledge of residential and populated development in the surrounding area. The distribution patterns are shown in Table 4. Table 4 PM Peak Ho11r Distribution Percentages Origi 11/Destination 1-405 to/from the north 1~405 to/from the west Main Ave to/from the north GraJy Way to/from the west Rainier Ave S to/from the north SR 167 Lo/from the south SW 43'' St to/from the west SR .\ I 5 to/from the south Pclrovitskv Rd to/from the east Puget Dr t()/from the cast Total Distribution Percentage 15% ]5% 10% 5% 10% 15% 10% 5% 10% 5%) I OO'Y., The distribution percentages shown in Table 4 are also displayed in Figure 4. Based on these percentages, 55% of the project trips would be to and from the 11orth on Benson Rd S and 45% would be to and from the south. Locally, there arc several options for travel to and from Grady Way. A travel time evaluation was conducted to determine which way project trips are likely to enter and exit the site from the north near Grady Way and I-405 no1ih. From the Grady Way/Talbot Rd intersection. it is estimated that it will he approximately 1 minute faster (3.0 minutes vs 3.9 minutes) to use Benson Rd S rather than Benson Dr S to enter the site. In addition, it is estimated to be approximately 1 minute faster (3.3 minutes vs. 4.1 minutes) to exit the site to the Orady Way/Talbot Rd intersection via Benson Rd S ratlwr than Benson Dr. Travel time estimates are attached. Also, a travel time evaluation of trips to and from I-405 north was conducted to detennine whether the project trips would use the l-405/SR 167 interchange (freeway route) or the I- 405/SR 169/SR 900 extended interchange (arterial route). Based on travel time estimates it was calculakd that it is nearly identical time wise for trips approaching the site from 1- 405 north; 5.7 minutes via the freeway route, or 5.8 minutes via the arterial route. However, it is twice as far distance \Vise lo traverse the freeway route. In addition, it was iVi/liam I'o/JJ) .,/s.wciates Page 6 fruffic lmpuct ·'!'"~li~w_i.1·~(_61_'8~/!_!9~i -------------=E=ag=l~e~R~ic~/gLe~C~)flLi~ce~' "~'~'d~A~rc.c,a=.r.c.tmc.ce=.n=ts asswncd the average running speed on the freeway southbound would be 50 mph which is probably overly optimistic, thus l'urtber demonstrating the arterial route is probably the preferred choicl' for weekday peak hour times. For project trips exiting the site, it is estimated to be about 2 minutes faster to T-405 north via the arterial route than the freeway route; 4.5 minutes verses 6.3 minutes. Travel time estimates are attached. The site will have primary access to Benson Rd S, however, there is an existing asphalt drive connecting the adjacent north oDice building with the Eagle Lodge Assisted Living development, thus there are realistically three alternative accesses points to ru1d from the site. However. due lo the circuitous route between the project parking area and Eagle Lodge it is assumed that there would not be any significant traffic activity for the project to use the Eagle Lodge access from Eagle Ridge Dr nor would any Eagle Ridge traffic use the proposed project access lo Benson Rd. lt is possible that some of the trips to and from Phase 2 may use the adjacent north Lot I office building's access. The assignment of project trips lor AWDT, AM and PM peak hours is also shown in Figure 4. The trips shown in this figure reflect both Phase 1 and Phase 2 of the project. As shown in Figure 4, at tl1c site access for the PM peak hour, it is estimated there would he 13 trips turning left into the site and IO trips turning right into the site. There would be 11 trips exiting right from the site, and 9 trips exiting left from the site. While there may be some spreading of project traffic between the existing oflicc building access and the proposed access, for conservativ<: purposes, this analysis it was assumed that all of the project trips use the proposed project access to Benson Rd. 4. Bad,~rouml Traffic Plus Project Traffic Volumes The existing 2009 PM peak hour 2-way volume on Benson Rd S fronting the site is approximately 1,430 vph. The estimated volume on this roadway in 2011 which is presumed lo be the horizon year of the project is 1,460 vph. With the project trips, this volume is estimated to increase to L480 vph. As shown in Table I, there arc no ofi~sitc intersections where !he project impact results in a 5% increase in the total vehicles rnlning Lhe intersection. nor a 5% increase in traffic on l3enson Rd S. Therefore, a11 analysis of offsite intersections would not be required. The site access intersection with Benson Rd S however is included in this analysis. 5, Lcvcl-ol~Scrvicc Lcvel-ot~scrvicc for the 2011 PM peak hour with-project condition was calculated for the site access intersection with Benson Rd S. For the site access driveway, it is conservatively assumed for analysis purposes that all of the project trips (for both Phase I and 2) utilize this driveway. The results of the analysis arc presented in Table 5. The intersection would be a slop control for the site access. William Popp Associates Page 7 ---------·-·--·---- ~;~· (!", ,, ,;·: (J; .8l vi " .-.:: SW 7th St  2 (\) (11 ct-------+---! WU.LIAM POPP AS..~OCli\ n:s 14400 Bel-Red Rd lf20C. Bellevue, WA 98007 42~ 4-01 !030 --.-j-----'-""-"~~~-,v~~~passo~: __ ,,_m-+--- to 1-405 north~ 15%, € ,o "' -"' )] " u, 9(9) 5 (5) 5 (3) © :;. PROJECT VOLUMES -----------------+,-- N / 1 ('1) 1 (1) 1 (1) 2 P} 2(2) 2 (2) !§% LEGEND {xxx] Daily Pr~ T~p.s IOI Projuct PM pW hour hips (lo:) • Project AM pe111<. hoorlrips -~---·------· Eagle Ridge ApartmenVOffice Developmenl Fip;ure 3a ·---... -._ .. _ ... _ / 11 9 ----,---------~- i - ,o () !l) ,- ff) (/J xx -2011 PM Peak Hour Volume Estimates WILLIAM POPP ASSOC'IATJl;S 14400 Bd--Rcd R<l /1206 Rellevue, WA 9R007 1)25.401. 1030 info({!lwmpoppassoc .. com PROJECT VOLUMES Eagle Ridge ApartmenVOffice Development Figure Jb -:=-----:--,-::c:---::--"---=:-r:---c:::---:=:------·- Traffic 1111/)(fc/ Analvsis ({,/8/09) Eagle Ricfr.;e Office und Apartmei?ts Table 5 Future Intersection Level-of-Service (l'M Peak Hour)• InrersccriuJJ Benson l{d S / l'rojl.!cl Sit1..· Access L, 2009 Existing 2{) 11 Background 2011 w/Project E (40.0) H (I 04) A 10.4) Conunenls wc.'>thound lefi tum westbound right tum s11uLhbou11d approach " J OS and Lkla": Jd:iy represented in seconds per vehicle. I .OS at sidc"~tn::d .~(op Ctlllfro!led int..:rsection applies nnly to the sick~ ~trcc.t apprna;."lt l11lcrscctiu11 ,md control ar~ b,1sed (ill c.,L,ling configurations on Benson Rd S. h For cu11scrvaLlve purposes, rmalysis a-.smnes all prnjei.::t traffic utili1e thi~ driveway. New inlcrsection, drh·cway is stop control. As shown in Table 5. the left tum exiting the site is the critical movement at this intersection. The mmlysis assumes tl1c driveway is wide enough to accommodate two lanes exiting. The left turn exiting is estimated to operate at LOSE, with an average delay of 40.0 seconds per vehicle (sec/vch) during the PM peak hour. The right turn movement exiting is estimated to operate at 10.4 scc/veh during the PM peak hour. Note that even though there alternative accesses to Benson Rd S. the analysis assumes a worst case scenario where all the project tratlic utilizes the new driveway. Furthermore, the analysis assumes that none of the existing smrnunding uses use this new driveway. 6. Intersection Sight Distance Analysis A sight distai1cc analysis for Intersection Sight Distance (lSD) was evaluated at the proposed project access point. The minimum acceptable values for intersection sight distance arc shown in Table 6. These values arc based on "'A Policy on Geometric Design ofllighways and Streets" 2004, published by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation OCJiciuls (AAS! ITO). ISD deals with sight distance for vehicles approaching and exiting intersections. !SD is based on an entering vehicle eye height of 3 .5 feet and an approaching vehicle height of 3.5 feet. The eye height setback distance is assumed to be 14.5 feet back from edge of traveled way, based on AASHTO, !SD generally deals with the ability of side street entering, crossing, and mainline left-turning, motorists to see oncoming vehidcs m1d to successfully make entering, crossing, or exiting maneuvers without significantly impeding the speed of the mainline tratlic. Intersection sight distance thrcsbolds m'c generally highest for the condition that allows a vehicle to enter the major street and attain 85 percent of the design speed before being overtaken by an approaching vehicle. As a result, the intersection sight distance for this condition relates more to driver comfort and roadway level of service than safety. Since lhe project driveway is a future driveway, certain elevation a,sumptions were made for the driveway to establish the entering motorist's eye height. Given the existing topography, the ckvation of the driveway at the eye height location for the driveway William f>oJJJJ Assncimes Page8 Troffic lm,rwct /:noli:.~is (6/X/09) Cugle Ridge Of!jce a11d Apartments motorist will likely be higher than then centerline elevation of Benson Rd S. However, the roadway profile ofl3enson Rd Sis a relatively constant grade or 6% southbound, thus the sight line limitations are due primarily to the horizontal curvature of the major roadway. Table 6 Intersection Sight Distance Minimum Required a Design Speed Intersection Sight (mph) Distance (Ill ·----~~~------- 30 35 40 45 50 335 390 445 500 555 Per 201J4 /\.'\\HTC) tilr tdl ·1·um ExiLin~ i'vlovemcnt:>. b Av<ti!.thk !SD l111)l-.i11g nmlh. Avc1ilahle ISi) lnol.;"mg. soulh. Available Intersect ion Sight Distance (fl) 730 1'/ 1.140" 730 I, / 1.140 C 730 1 I 1.140 " 730 I,/ l,140 C 730 " ; I, 140 " !SD Met Yes/No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Without existing data to identify the 85'11 percentile speed of Benson Rd S, the design speed of this roudway is assumed to be l O mph over posted. Since posted is 35 mph, the design speed is assumed to be 45 mph. Based on a 45 mph design speed, the minimum lSD is 500 feet for left-tum-out movemenls. "J11is distance would be true for both looking right and !ell rrom the driveway. although it can be argued that the minimum !SD required looking left to turn left would be less than that looking right. The minimum !SD for a right turn oLtt movement (looking left) is 430 feet for a 45 mph design speed. Nevertheless, we have used 500 feel as the critical sight distance threshold for all movements and all viewing directions. The grade on the mainline is not a factor for TSD since both \'ehicles would be traversing the same grade. The !SD for a vehicle exiting the site looking south (turning left or right) is estimated to be approxi1rn1tdy L 140 feel. The available sight distance extends approximately to the sta1t of the center two-way left turn Jane. The required minimum [SD based on a 45 mph <lcsign speed is 500 [i:d for a left turn and 430 for a right turn. thus the available !SD is adequate looking south. The !SD Cora vehicle exiting the site looking north (turning left) is approximately 730 feel. The available sight distance extends approximately to the end of the center two-way left turn lane. The required minimum lSD based on a 45 mph design speed is 500 foet thus the available !SD is adequate. The !SD evaluation for both viewing directions is attached. J,fi/liam Po/1/J ,/s.rnr..:iutes Page 9 Traffic lmeuct llnolv8is {6/8109) t:ag/e Ridge Otfice and Apartmenls It is important lo note the analysis assumes that the sight lines will not be obstructed by vegetation allmg the sight line. Brush clearing along the site frontage will likely be required to provide adequate sight distance as well as to maintain adequate sight distance. C. FINDINGS ANO CONCLUSIONS The proposed development will be located on a parcel fronting Benson Rel S and is approximately 600 feet mn1h of the Benson Rd S/Eagle Ridge Dr S intersection. The development will consist o/' two buildings; one mixed-use apartment/office building with 60 apartments and 3,000 gsf office, and one apartment building with 40 units. The properly takes primary access to Benson Rd S, however, there are also two other scconclmy access routes through adjuccnt parcels l. Project Vehicular Impact The project is estimated to generate 442 average weekday daily trips, 35 AM, and 43 PM peak hour vehidc trips to the surrounding street system. 2. Level of Service The results of the level of service analysis for the PM peak hour indicate the left turn movement exiting the site will operate at LOSE with an average delay of 40 seconds per vehicle. The right turn movement exiting the site is estimated to operate at LOS Band the southbound approach with the shared left tum movement is estimated to operate at LOS J\ with minimal ckluy. As noted earlier, there are two other potential access points. However the analysis assumes a ,vorst case scenario where all the project trufiic enters and exits from the primary driveway. 3. Intersection Sight Distance An analysis of intersection sight distance was conducted at the proposed site access to Benson Rd S. The minimum threshold LSD required based on 2004 AASHTO is 500 feet assuming a design speed of 45 mph (IO mph over posted speed). The available TSO based on lield review and planimetrics is 730 feet looking north and 1,140 feet looking south. Thcrefore, it is estimated that the ISO will be adequate in both directions. Due to the fact this will be a new intersection, it is presumed that adequate sight distance setback and lnndscape requirements will be in plucc to maintain the proper sight lines. William F'o;;;; /lssnciul(•s Page JO ·Truffle linuucl tlnafrsis (6/8/09) Eagle Rnl~e Of!ice und Apartmems D. MITIGATION and RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the foregoing, it is concludcd that the project's impact to the surrounding roadway and intersection is not significant enough lo warrant further review based on the City's 5% threshold criteria. The City of Renton l1as adopted a transportation mitigation fee of $75 per net new average daily trip (ADT). Using the lTE based trip generation estimate of442 ADT. the required mitigation fee would be $33.150. It should be noted that the project ADT estimate docs not consider any potential project Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program which could possibly reduce the base ADI estimate, which in turn would result in an reduced mitigation fee requirement. Jt'illium foJ)J) Associates Page I I William Popp Associates Transportation Engineers/Planners (425) 401-1030 FAX (425)401-2125 e-mail: wepa(iyseanet.com TECHNICAL APPENDIX Eagle Ridge Apartments/Office • PEAK HOUR TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS FROM CITY • PROPOS~:u TRAILS AND BIKEWAYS [MPROVEMENTS • METRO BUS ROUTE MAPS • TRAVEL TIME EVALUATION • TURN VOLUME ESTIMATES AT SELECTED LOCATIONS INCLUDING SITE ACCESS • PM PEAKHOllR LEVEL OF SERVICE AT BENSON RDS/SITE ACCESS • INTERSECTION SIGHT DISTANCE MEASUREMENT (PLAN VIEW) June 8, 2009 14-400 Building• Suite 206 • 14400 13el-Red Road• Bellevue, WA 98007 Weather : SUNNY (uiJnteU by: CMS/RWM Board t TI2-15~ S1_n-f.:ice : DRY I TALBOT RD S ! Southbc,und St.art I Ti1e I Left Thru P~ak Hour Analyi:.is B~ Ti ee I 07:00 Vol. JS 1,.1 Pct. I lb.3 t-7. 3 Total f'J.3 Higr, Qi7:45 ~1c, i. I 18 53 TotaJ i Bf. PHF 0. 728 Right Ent.irt! jj !4.1 9 -cAl~S/PEDESTRIANS · HE~1lrf l)f:HICLE:.S City of Renton lran~portat.ion S1~te1s Dinsion Traffic DpE<rat.lon~ 2~ Studies CARS/PHicSTR!ilNS, HEAVY V!:H!CltS IS GRADY WY I TALBOT R[I S !WE-stbe<und if~c,rth~c,und I Other! Left Thru Rig~t other I left Thru Right Jnhrs.ertion for the Period: 07:00 on 07 /0&/~B to M:45 I 07:00 I 07: ll0 :ii l77 :5i8 82 41 8~3 2. 1 l 22.6 6&.3 10. 4 0. 51 47.0 781 rnq, ! 07:45 1n~00 01 bB 132 45 11 257 24:b I 527 I 0.794 0. 900 # TALBOT RDS I 5#~ 321~ 154!~ 381 jj"'' 11· 31··· ,z,1 ···· -.-11---·-··--· ! _ .. , .... _ .... 1-.. -.. ·-· .. I -It ~:: -3 I 1 '::.;1 I .. ~:a :tt 788 21b 41. 5 11.3 211 8 .,, .. 7Be i.:'.:8 :j'1 : S GRAl>Y WY :t.as.tbound I Other I Left Thru on 0) /08/08 I 07:0~ 01 2B 326 0.01 ' -p, ,..I, J . ., 52} I 07:30 ~I ' 9~ I ! ::,9 I 0.81~ .fl. # Stud~· Natt>: Tr•irnili5A Si« Cod, : ~~~l\0000 Start [late: 07 Nb/(16 Paqe Right 155 30.5 55 ' ·j ' . iintv l. other l lotai bi I. 11 1 I I *I ii # #~w##############H##### S (31;:ADY l-,lY l nbol.1nd I [11.1.t bound rota .l 8.'j8 1 1 :3 1 ll ###1111#1111!1##!1########## lb 1444 5113 B'32: 27 2f3 1 lnbci1.1nd 5;::'.i ---------------------[lu t bound 14'+ 4 1 i=c ,.J _1 f, 302; lotE1l 196~; r., 1 1-t '·) Ji;>\ '• ~ ~· l II II # -~ # Inbound Uutbound Tc,t:.::d ,-~· ~5 QI 121 l E~ 781------·-----·--- ~.:iE~2 -v 17 4 1/7 :··~·-:------·---,~--~-----·-~-~-· Inbound 1E,':17 ;::: 16 328 j[-\ Ei GRHD'r' ~JY Outbound 493 ###################### Total 23S0 # 15'3 1~ 8811·· 7B31"'" 2li::lr 0 1~1/' 1··, 1E'.I··· ~:ii···· 4#···· Qi /J\ 1 77 I===== I-'~=== I ·-===·cjj,c,~==00 i I \ =•,=== I 8'33 I 788 I ;?lb lt Q1 # 11 4'j3 H~L.BUT RD £, # # North Weather : LI k•Uo f'>ll*ilU UN, Counted Oy :lJWL, HV>' ~oar,o t :Hm~ :c ~, ·' :IJti·t 111-iLtlU. rw '.j I tio1Jttiboumi Start ~b' f LH:1 c,r kenton 1ran~por-tat1on ~ystelil.:, Lii.v sior, 1ratrl2 Uperat1011~ .:'\Mt! ~tUOlP:< LHtr;:i1~:1.:.1itti t k1Ki~::i., Ht HJ ( ~tli; L.t. t:.~., l:..i bto·di"r W't i lHli.',J.!f Xll ,:, 1w~~-t-uuuno i Nor-irifJUl\llO 1,, tjl~t-itl J \~ / ll-.a<:-tbiHJliO ~,tUOf N,d1£: i~1u,_,t,._!r :,11.e Looe : ~i\'..<lilbt,,'.1, ... 1 t>U:1r""t L•atr,: ~Hl.::cH~.:-.. l!il\YL Ille ! ___ Lett. uir-u i·mVH-_ Utht>rl L~rt __ foru 1-(LQ .. lit~utnHl_ Lei\_~ __ Ji·,ru ki_gr1t. uttwrf _____ L~1t __ )t1f'IJ__k1_g,1,t utrie~::_!_J __ u~~ J.'eak Hour Hnai ysi 5 by l:.1n; 1r~ lnt+:fsec.:t :t,,1t rot"· the l-'1:r1,Jtl: 1b :~•Ill 1.rn tH tc"..o,::~ to l ,' :>t:i irn ~lii::):.: "'~ "llu 1 !niltitl l.n-:"<l.i I lr'~~1~1 i1a'll{, Vol. J.c;:.:, ~'ct. li.t, l r ota.1 1~_:{ . .-. H19il J ,'; ld Oo;. :n lot al .:,~,} ,•)fr l,'.l, /'jj "LHHU! ~--•;_·.UI:~-~::;; I l·•: .l Hi·-l: ·,1--·lL.t-iV·y Vt:.l···i i l.,Lt:b lill Ji,) '716 ,',i) ti! . .JC,'.l -ll:. 1,'ij ti.I, fl! ,:,). Iii bC, ~ 1r,.~j '1i,J j,'.~) l~•.i, l.•tt<:j (.j l,.'., ,-•• --1 }i° i 1··-1!.. u1...1 i H ,.) ,J f! : .. !'""JI U.1 ') I 1 .i.f .~ .. i .",d' ·H" VJ i ,·.:: i ---.;-:c :::..:~..c:,i·i··.·· ··"" I • -···· . I ,(,f I, ··_:J 11·:::,·.'1 ,_),:. -H= ~----' / ~:: i, ,,..1, -H ,+ 'Ii {-f Ji:,.) dl:l'"J ·j-'+'f p,,:;: -'j,::., • .=i .. fj. J 1::0,:· J !i ! j :__1 ###~#:lttl~#~~·Hf~;F:Atf:~w=Fi:~[;Frr:R l Uu"l, f...1\1Un[i ;·-:; { 1+ .i. '.::_1 fl· '~t ti· -:t f~ :tf :; f. Cf~*!: ff-:~f ..-\ ~:j '~l: ;~;:'#·I; :H ~:i :1.,. +,: :;:, :3 l:.:i HH.U ·t VJ f 1 :::.ii/J,:i .-J i i·_, -' -----·-·_, ----·-.:·······-·----·---··--.... ·-··· -.·-----_ .. ·-· l ;:-.: ,,.'., i,:_t 1'.'; /:-_I .f. ··+ J 11t°)OU1fti ··-·tJ1..1·t uou1·1u \ L<t r-,i, .l ··.-)b,:-' ; utd, .t 1.1,t:.1{,1Jnd 1..Ju·i:; i:".ioitll(j I c, -r.: ~~ J '}-4·'+ ~dl '.".) l . .;J """' •... ·.--.--·- -n ;:·.;::: t' tl l~ 11-....iLBUI H.u '::J. .1, ntlc1unr:l : .. i• .. l i..-1;UUfrf.l I i.• C r:'\ J l<-tb:.)"' /_ t".: j_ ,·:: ,.; t, I ,· .c: . ..::c:.::::._.· ,. '~ ;_-, lt..1 ·.i !/I l .\ .•.I .. l ' . :·-.1 I.·', ,J. .i' ~-' (·.11·,H.U "I" ~,J \' > •• ,:._ i ,.·\ +f ·Jl· ·i'1· ii' "tf ·i+ ·Jr ·rf 'If ·If ·Ii= ·ii· 'ff Hi+ ·;-t :]Cf ~-i: 11: ; i· -l-t Ft ,:.,,-.', ') ·,'I " '·It · '·I· J. :;-.-i I ll.i ! . I. I I -ii=.,. l 'fl' · -· ;:.;:~.: I :: .. , rt:::~:'· '·t i :-.-.. ! J. / t:I 'ff I I ~lfcitrrPr :3TRATOCUMULUS 1 f.1 1 F Cc,11n1.t"d by;DLS B.n,•d I :D4-1028 :e :DRY !MAIN AV S IS0uthbc1\.md Ci h of Rent c,r, ir""ar,sprrta.tiern Sy~te11~. lil'nsivn Traffic Operation~. 2008 Studif<:. CHRS/P!:D!:SlRlANS,HEAVY V!:HlCLES I BtNSON RD S I S GRADY WY Start I Northbound I IEas\bocnd I I lntrvl. 11 te Jr,ru Right Other I Left lhru Other I Lei t R1 qc,\ Other I iota! Pea, Hour Analysis By Entire Jnters,ciion for the Perioc: 07:00 on 0Bi11/08 to 08:45 on 08/l'l/% li,e I 07:00 I 07:00 I 07:01" I v,<1. · 131 578 01 121 668 01 35& 21 01 Pct. i 18.4 81.'., 0.01 12.b 87.2, 0.01 14,4 5,5 0.©I lJta] I 70'l I 1017 377 ~1gr, I 07:30 I ~7:00 i 07:4:i VoL I 28 lb'1 0:1 27 255 0; 104 4 0i Total 117 I 282 HlB PHF -cARS/PEDESIRIANS 'HUWY 11n1 I C:Ucti 0.%2 # Mn l N P'i S I #'"~· ~-;'.:.iE, I~~ J 2£.\ I 0. B/3 #' 201' 31 3jG D ·· ''"''-•H=•~=--I~===•=•~• I .......... · -~ # 57S I 1;31 i 1;~4~ # 'II I I *I # i Inbound /0'-J ft. ####################### !Outbound 1244 # ·,:::::-·--·-==~-,:,:,:::::.-=--~~~-·.::...·--· ·-·- , . ., 33b Inbound -------------OL1·tbound 707 l O t i1 l 1 Q'l84 . ·--·----------·-·------··---- C' 1 i'.~ 1 IZt ####################### ~ # ll # # # tt Tot:,:,. .l 1 ')'..5J Inbound 11.:117 Out bound l ~'SC: Tot:c1l 11[,9 ;,, 1 I'-l ;:;:11 I ... , ,'!76 I 131 1···. LI' l.;c:I 152 1=·-===l=====I 1 i::~i l 888 I II •ia # if # •ll' ij H···. 1/) #. e, 11,-.,c~~~ tt e, jj # ~tudy Nae~: Hirn12i:i Sit, Code : ,1000111,~~ Start Date, 0Biil/\'.8 Paqe /I\ I \ ' Weather :S!NIY Counted by :KVP Board I :Hl'll'I Surfac• :DRY City of R•nlon Transportation Syste1s Di,ision Traffic Dp•rations 2008 studies CAAS/PEDESTRUlllS, IEAVY VEHilllS !BENSON DR S I~ RD S ISR-515 !Southbound IW•stbound I Northbound Start I I I llntrvl, Tin I Left Thru other! L•ft Right other! Thru Right Otherl Total Study Na1e: TMC132P Sit• Cod• : 0llllll00ll0 Start Dah: 04/M/l!B : 2 Peak Hour Analysis By Entire lnt•rs•ction for the Period: 16:1!11 on 04/M/M to 17:45 on 84/08/M Ti1t I 16:115 I 16:45 I 16:45 I Vol. 56 1127 JI 418 ~ 51 384 331 31 Pct, 4.7 '15,0 0.21 '12.4 6.4 I.JI 53.4 46,I 0.41 Total 118!, I 452 I 718 High 17:llll I 16•4~ I 16,45 Vol, 14 ~8 01 !12 5 II 'l'I '15 01 Total 312 !18 !'14 PHF 0. '151! 0. '158 0. '125 "'CARS/PEDESTRIANS "HEAVY VEHICLES # BENSON DRS I\, 3# 1~11201~ 5f,I 29 384 413 !I !I !I !I ... ~ # =====# 3 # !I # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # !I # # # # # \. f ·'·· 71 A 01 1-----1-----1 11127 I 5f, I I I I !I !I 5 5 I Inbocmd 118!', !Outbound 413 !I ###################### Total 1599 28 Inbound Outboctnd Total 1127 I 418 I ===== I 1545 SR-515 Inbound Outbound Total 1 29 452------------- 387"' 414 839 ····. 4 418 ========~============ 331 56 387 718 B~NSON RDS 1545 ###################### 22f,3 # I"' 3831"' 329#"' 3 I" 11" 211-0 l=====I=====#===== 3B4 331 # 3 # # / I\ / I \ North I Weother :STRATUS, DRIZZU, W F Count e<l by :HIIP Baar<! I :T-Ml9 S~""'~• :WET IBENSOO DRS I Southbound Start I City of Renton Transportation Syste1s Division Traffic Operations 2808 Studies CAAS/P!:D!:STRIANS, 1£1WY VH!J[US IBENSOO RD S ISR-515 I Westbound I Northbound I I llntrvl. Study Na1e: THC!Jcll Sit, Code : 1101100000 Start Date: 84/18/08 Page : 2 Ti,, Left Thru other I Left Right other I Thru Right other I Total Peak Hour Analysis By Entire Intersection for the Period: 87:e!! on 04/10/08 to 08:45 on 04/10/08 Tise I 07:80 Vol. 10 131 Pd. 7.8 92.2 Total I 142 High I 07:31! Vol. I 43 Total 45 PHF 0.789 ""CARS/PEDESTRIANS AHEAVY VEHICLES I 07:80 I 07:00 11 1411 49 e1 1101 e.11 74.e 25.9 0.81 76.8 I 189 I 1433 I 07:l!i I 07:l!i 11 43 19 01 316 I 62 411 0.762 0.872 # BENSON DRS I 101 01 l # I "" 12'3 I"" # I .~ .. I 331! 21 23.8 e.11 95 01 # # # =====# 1-----1-----1 4'3 1101 1150 # 1 # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # 131 I 10 # # I nbocmd 142 !I ###################### !Outbound 1150 Total 1292 "" 4':l Inbound Outbound Total 131 I 140 ===== 271 Inbocmd Outbound Total .,. 0 4'3 18'3------------- 340"" 137 529 ,.•,, 140 ====~=======~=~====== 330 10 340 1433 BENSON RDS 271 I !!##################### 1704 I # ,~109a1~ 322#~ 2 IA 31A B#A 0 /1\ !=====!=====#===== I I \ 11101 I 2 # SR-515 I 330 # # # North I Start : 1-0g1, :DP.Y I TALB01 HD S IS1Jutt"1bound Ci tr· of ~·e-nt on Tri!ns;iortat.i{in Sys.t.e,a~. Divi5ic,ci Traffic· DPEY·a:tior-1~. 2008 StudiE~- CARS/Vi:Df:STRIANS, HEAVY VEHHUS IS PUGET DR IBEtH~ DR S I westbounci I Nnrt.hbouno I IS. 15TH ST ltastbc,und I Study Nan; TMCl?IC7P Site C.od~ ; ~00('.i..'0Q:il1 Start Datf: 08/26/08 Page : c.' Ti 1e i Le ft Th re R i g h t Gt her I Le ft l hr u -'-R:,_. i ,.,gr,._, t---"D"'t h,..e'-r'---' IL,_.e"-f t"---_,T.,.,hr,.,·«'-.!.Re..l O,ch,,_t -"Ot-"t"', e'--r l'---'L,,e.:._f t"-----'l-"h -,_,, u kight I Int v l. lither.[ Total I Peak Hour Analysis By Entire Int.enettrnn for tne Period: 1/,:00 on 08/2f,/il8 to 17:45 on 08/2&1~ Ti•• I !f,:30 I 16:30 I 1&:311 16:30 Voi. 743 1435 71 Pct. 13.(1 63.B 3.1 Toti:1l 224~ High l&:30 Vc<l, 178 3·12 21 Total :1~1 PHF 0. ;51 '·--c:hHS./PEDEbTR 1 (-1;-,Jf_; ··HHWY VEHICLEE, 01 0.01 I I 01 I I 15 3 ~,B 3. 9 0. 7 ~4. 7 378 16:30 2 ' 100 104 0.90'l a! THI..HU r F<D S :J:1,•·.. 71 I ·~1/tl~i ! ,,,.. 2) 2 0. :, I 0.2 711 :7; 1~ 0· \1 ;:,'~5 I 0.8(,7 72:;/I :Jt.··· 121 ! c,cc,,cec=•Hc•cc•oc••oc j ·.• •.•. j ..••..•..• • j ~ / j I 1 i+,:.;:.::; I / -:i-j i ti: -I! ####################### .,., 1 ::. TH rn 71. /f, 3 --·-.· -·-----··------··---·-~·-··;-... ',- -'+ ~--' InbouncJ --------------Outl)ound Tot i::i 1 '">·· 10 QI ####################### t_\ lt 6b !b .1,:1-;~· f n bi.:.1 IJ'i"rd ;?2ir'J I Uutbound 1(·.'i56 T c, t a J j ,.~: ~;J :·.:1 lnt,o,_111cl ?11 Uutl::,ounrJ l"tb(:1 Tcd.:~d 2171 b53 ]4 21 4:, 10 1 :,, l 61 1.01 91.8 7,5 0.21 OB.1 ' . I,.! J~.4 20 ti& lt.:30 11 1~ ' 2 ii I 20 I 0.82j I #• # }j # ll ii # ###########ff########## Ir1bc)uncl ~78--------··------- ci~.ttboi~nd 802 ~ 14 "i'ot2t:I 1.11.::il/1 1 :t':.:, "'·-·~------··· ·-· ......•.... :.. ... ,_ .. , .. : ... ·-... ······-· /1+3 :3 PUGEi Dk ###################### # 10 14 :,;::, ,~ 21~ 6481~ j4#~ 2 I .··· IZi J · 5 t ,···-0#·'· 0 1-====1-----1---==#====~ .·.-~ ........ . I i.:~ I 65,3 I ::_;,:t # .:::: tl l'tC"..,(~ # BU·bON Dk :', !I # /1\ / I \ Weather : SUNNY AND CUi<R Counted t,y:DOH/D~Z Boar-d I : D4-hl27 Sur'ace :DRY ,,:~ I TALBO, RD S J S0uthb:C1und Start City of Rent(,n 1ran~~r{lrtatir,n S•;ste-1: D1vi~lon ":raffic [1peratior1: 200B Stud ie! CiiRS/PEDtSTRlANS,flEAVY VEHJC1ES IS PUGET DR l~ENSDN DR S IWestbocmd I INortht,ound I iS 15TH ST I ta<tbound I Study NaH: Hr1(:q127A Sit E Cede : f1~f~Jm108 Start Date: 07/07/0& . :, . ' I Int vi. Ti,, I Left Thru Right Other! Left Thru Right Oth,rl J._eft fhru Right Other! Left Tr,ru R10~,t otheE.!..J.,,tai Peak Hour Analysi, By Entire Intersection for the Period: 07:(10 on 07/07/08 to 08:45 on 07/07/08 Tue I 07:00 I 07:00 I 07:00 07:!Jq, Vol. I 111 230 12 Pct. I 31. 4 65. l 3. 3 Totai 353 High I 07:15 Vol. ,1 58 2 l otal I 91 PHF I 0. 970 ~CARS/PEDESTRIANS ····HE:HtJy l)EHI CLEE1 01 30 0 81~ •. 01 -. j, ._, 0.0 9~,. 9 846 I ~7:00 01 12 0 216 223 I 0.924 'Ji· f(4LBUT HD ·3 tt '~ 1121 I ·-~-C: E: .i1. t ,-~ # ·· le' I·'· ,:, I 41 2 0. 41 0. j I i259 07: 1j 11 Jib I 0. 937 I l Q1''' I L:'. I ·····,···J,---,-·--·-1----·-·-·· I··----· .. ,,, I 1242 98.b j34 l 1?tt2 /t ---_·_.-·-- 32 0.1 31 71 0.21 ~2. 2 I 77 i 07:45 01 20 23 j 0.837 #• •tt I! ,;; jj 0 ji 1 -:, ,C •. 0 !:1.41 0 3i _.,I # 12 I 230 i 1ll I ,n # i~ ,Jt ####################### S 15TH t.iT 12 l 4 c· 71 71 ,) I nbouncl ---------------Outbound Tota] 0 0 ####1################## 5 5 # # # # # # 77 91 Inbourid J::,3 l Outbound ~=~12:'; T c,-1:: a] # ###################### In bo unci 1 ~7:'~'i9 Inbound tJ1 .. 1t bound Teotal .,, f1l[! l 846-------------- 1 i.=-::1.f ,..,. Jit:i '·)'/('.! (1 J. ;~: l l J l S i::-iue,1::: f' Dk Outbound 2&0 ###################### Tcital 1519 ~~ 1~ 21~12221-11#-3 I · Q:I I·'· 10 I .. i tt·· 0 1~=--=l=====l=--=-#===~- C:60 l :=· I L~~'t2 1 C' # 3 ll /f\ / I I ~·Jo·r .. ·i;h I ~' •" ee : AL10SlRATUS TRANSL Lt IDU5, 75F Cit'{ v~ Rentc.irr Tran~-portation Syster.s f!Hi~.ion Traffic Operation: Cs d bv:CMSJHl/P B,aro • :T-0919 20\?iB Studies B »~face :DRY CARS/PrncSTRHlNS, HEAVY Vf_HH:LES I BENSON RD S IS PUGET DR I BENSON RD ,; IS Pl.KT DR Studv Nare: T~[J~;:·;p Site CodE> : 00\:1000~0 Start Date: lfi/02/~8 ! Southbound I Westbound I Northbc,,_md I co> tbound Start I I i llnt,l. Tue I Left Thru Right other! Left Thru Rioht other! left Thru _Ri~~t_ otherl Left ___ Thru .fil.llhLJ)\herl __ J_Qj.~J. Peak Hour Analysis By Entire Intersection for the Period: H,:t\0 on 07/02/VJB to 17:45 an ~7/02/0.8 I Tioe I 16:45 I 16:45 i6:45 v,1. 321 &07 Vi 61 41 230 111 51 ua Pct. Tdal 33.6 63.6 l.5 0.61 10,5 59.4 28.f. 1.21 36.7 953 fiigh 17:30 Vol, j 7~ 17'. Total l 2'~+4 PHF I 0. 938 ··cAF~S/PEOES.fRIANS ····HEH'/\/ \.'EH I CLE.le, ' I 387 376 I H:30 01 14 68 I l 18 I 0. 820 ,if BEi'-./St)l·.J f~l) S 17:3~ ~i 45 I i0l l 0.931 6#0 1g1~ 6061~ 3201 #··· ,Z1 I .· 1 I··· :l i ~~=~=#====-1==-==l==:·=I f, # 1. 9 b lZI"/ I 3;~ 1 ·j:j: # ##################1#### '.::j PUGET Df~ 1 ':} 367 ;~:31,-?l 17 1 ~:a 17 0 Inbc1<.1nd ----------·-----Outbot1nd ..... i:t09 Totcc:'t..l r,:, 364 ###1################### 5 '*~ l:.\tZ11 3l~7 I l f\B Inbo1..<.nd I [lut.be<1.1nd Inbound 37E, Outbournj 101.i.~ lot,d 1388 183 4&.b 45 :Ill 1 E~, ..3 .l. 31 l 47 12. 5 11 81 2.11 •H· # # # ll # 01 ! 1&:45 17 2. i 801 17:3~ • c ·J•)::, ---0.'102 415 364 :il 51.9 45.4 ~.bl j14 102 !l ··-' -~ ###################### 1 1 l "I Jnbo1_1nd ~8'7------·-------- tJutbouncJ 783 ~ 39 Toted 117Q'.i ---·· --.. · .. --· --·----·-·-· -----·------'·--·-· .. ~: ·;cc , .. :l ::i ,3;::: l s e•UGE,r DH ###################### # ,:::· tt .~;&4 '·-' 1~ 1351~ 1831~ 47#~ R ,_ lt 607 1l 41 # ,;::::;:;=:=::-· 11 1 Q) l 2 tl BH,JE<ON RD I.., 3 I . Q.\ I ,Z1#. 0 l==-=•l==-=~1=====#=•=== l 38 I 182: 4 7 # f:.I # # /I\ / I I North I ~'~her :~HIN Cc.unted by:HVP/DLS/CMS Board # :D4-i028 Surface :WET Start !BENSON RD S l SouthbounD City o.f Renton lrar,~portation Syste1s DivlSJ[in Traffic Operations 2008 Studie~. CARS/Pf.DtSTR!ANS, HEAVY VtH!CLES IS PUGET DR I Westbound !BENSON RD S I Northbour,d I I JS ~·UGET DR llastbc.und I Stlld·t Na~e: fMCt\2&H Site Cc.de : 000000.111 Start D?.t.e: 07 /03/i/JB Page . ' . - I lntv !. Ti1e ; Left 1~1"f'U Right Dther! left Thnt Right Other! Lett Thru Rinht Other'i ~.fft ___ nJ_ru _Jhght_ Otheri, fotai Peal, Hour Analysls By t:ntire Intersedion for the ~1frtc,C1: @7ifi0 on 07N1J/~1B t-0 0B:'i5 on 07il'.!3/Ql6 Tue I 07:00 I 07:00 I 07:00 I 07:00 Vol. 1 40 N1 2~ 2i 20 ljj~ 29& 31 }% Pct. 30. 3 53. \'.I J~,.1 L5i 2.5 :,S.3 30.6 0.31 43.B fotal 1 -;--:. "" 771 I 90; High 07:30 I 07: 1:, 07:30 Vol. 10 ·"•\ c. 7 01 6 1:i:r cc 78 2! 107 lot.ai i ,B 2['8 252 PHF I 0.868 0.927 ~.897 It !)ENS1Jr, RD b '~L~~i~\i/r1E[1ES1.R1ANS ••1 n1~1 Y 1/EHlCLES 2#~ 201~ 681~ 371 w·· 01· ;::::1·· :,, =~=#==~==l=====l=====I •It •• ####################### ~:; PUUE T D f~ 8Gb 20 4~31~! 2;<:)b =====···=====~===~====~·-- lnbound ·---------·-----·-·Ol1tbound To tad 45 #################### ,,, # 1 10:::; BGS 971 71Z1 I Inbound ! Out. bc)und Tot,c,1 lnhound Ot.it bound Total l 3i:'. 79':l ~1.;::: .l 90•\ 1 JC.j H'IL> 2: 491 54. 3 13'i ~:·c::-18 Lj. ~! 1 1 Q'.i 16 1. 7 s 1 i 10 45 4'1 11 0.11 '!. 5 ~i·. B 46. & 0., I 10~ I ilf7:30 ,, I 3 ~B 15 01 I 39 I 0.67:!, jf lj # #, ii # ###################### i'.:.''.':l7 .1 c::se '\, 4.4.11. E:, Inbounc:I t.)1_1t t::,o 1_1r1d Total -.''?]-----··--··---·------·- B7C· 16 101 41/1 :::; r:,uc;ET f.Jh ###################### # l. # # ll •II (~_,._, 7Ql 20 I ··· 0 I · l 4 I ··· 0# ·· (o /1\ l=====l===~-1=====#==-== / I \ 2/~f, '~91 I 11::' # 1 # i:;9 I # 1I P[Nf>OM RD S # loit.'at her : Cl RRUS 1 72' F Counted oy:C1'1S/HVP e· , # ,04-rn21 .c, :DRY IMAIN AV S Cit-.,. of t1f~rt (,r, Tr-ari~-~1urti!.tirrn S·,~.teR~-Divisior1 Trr.;ffic L'cct-r"<St.lor:: CARS/PtDESTR!RNS, HHiVY VfHJ[lES I BtNSCl!t RD S !S GRADY WY 1Southboi..mcl !Norihbound ic:.asibo-und Start I I I ntr-v l. -.. ·--·· 110, I _ Thru R~,[ll _ Other1_ Left~ Thru Other I ___ LtfL __ g_,_lli!L__Otherl Total. ~'ecik H{•Ur Analysis fl.~· Entire Tue I 16:00 Intersection for thE-Pe-r-ir,d: I 16:00 lb:00 (,n 01/~4/~8 t.o 17:4~, (,n ~~/04/(18 16:0i' \'ol. I 1021 &40 0i 64 351 01 bBfl. i86 Ji Pct. 61. 4 Tot.al 1661 JB, 5 0.0! 15.4 B4.5 0.01 415 7B.4 877 High 16:00 fol. 2B2 112 Total 454 PHF 0. 915 ·~cARS;~·EuES"fRIANS "•Ht:fWY VE.HI CLE.b lb: 1:1 01 IS 103 I 121 0.857 # Mi:.iJM (il.J '=.:'. I W" b 11 I ~-1 k\l 1 I tt ... ~·91···· lCJI 10: .li! 01 1S'l 247 0.&88 ~-·~-·-#-----=--~!-•--··--·I 4'J 6 .irtl~ i J. IL1i":'.: 1 #· !t ####################### c! 01~,::1D\ ~JY 6412'1 llt'l4 b 4 '" b70 1 fj lnbound ----·---·-------Outbound Tot a} l (jt., 1 Eli:> 0 3 ll 7\:1~ l ~d:.11 inbound Jbbl IUutbouncl 1039 Totr.11 i:~1i:i1Z1 Inbouncl Lti=.; Outbound 1207 Total 16C:C'. 21. ~' :i8 ::;~_:; l f-, ,\°::\ 13 3 # 18f. I ... _ E.13 ! ~--.:Vt 1 I # # # # # j QiC~ i 1.;::'.'.0l I . .1 I 10 I I cc==== I===== I I 6 L~ I 35 .1 BENSON RDS 0. ,if 01 Is II I+ # ii ti· H· # # fl. H tf # !f :l:J: # # # jj H 11 H l* # ll # ll''' (11 # e, #cc "" -'"""'" # QI # # ~•tud 1i Nan·; ·1frlt;:IJ2J..' '3j r.E? [Gd~ ~ ~~0ti(;ei@0 Start Date: 0';/04/08 Paqe 2 /I\ I \ ~,j O '("·th MERCER ISLAND KENT :-~'··· ~,-~-~?;"·"'-'"'.'' < ' y ' • ' > ' Legend 1n,;·<>IS1r~":·l fXl5T1.% f!(~NS .-._ Nhh, c:·~·t•·1kfi"q1011,l! !!ic,·,:J,, l.,;p,:- Si9m:d ~h.~wd' >•l-dw,1r .,.,_..., t,'hi!<1 ,1,,,: (H•f f{ti;,t.crhli ' M,J!Ji H><' ;,;,1J. !..n~~! ~",,,,,,. B1q,c!t> l,u,i.' ~1qri<"tl q""""d :,i,1rh~~., F'1•,h,s111,)1)-1111\v 11 ;:ii H.,rm,.;1~,;c-HJ11,<r,,r(c(J,:,• -· ·_·; (ii,' lir,,ii; L_ J f!i,A':, p;,.-~ '.'i.:hv;J/ Renton Trails and Bicycle Master Plan II Proposed Trails and Bikeways Improvements r,11.\1·' "-\.::1)(11,. Onibo Too!s 0! T:·;:n::a:::i>n -~'~.,;~) ft t<r;;:;ii. [ ,~ ,,,.!,., .. Route 148 I· ·.\\l'eekda~, Saturday Sunday iit,jljiiff§ -.-!A•"-1·-: .:·- 1/#,/,~t,,n · RENTON TRANSIT CENTER MAP LEGEND -hlakesall re~1ular.c;tops. 111111111 P.oute 101 lo!tom Seattle • TIME POINT" StraetintE11section IJ';,f;u [r,,1 L1111t: ~d1f:'1Julr; rt:ft:rt:rlt~ point listed ,:II the top oft im e columns 10 estimate bu" c1rrn,:~I and trip l~nes ...,_J,?·-rf·· TRJ'IJJSFFI'; ~'DIMT·f:;(ll~~ 4 . ., ,_j i1·1terf-ect1on tor lt;1nt,fC'mllg to the• cormocting 1oul0 01 ro1Je~ iridr:=ited --·if 4,:,-t, TIME POIIHrTl=.'.I\NSfEP. POINl combined. f~ll:E ::o l~E Addrtionc1! t11e requ11ed. ~ PJ~RK~\ RIDE:_DeSgn.11eci he ~ ~rkingcirea wilh rJirect busser~ic:e lo mo11orcommerc1o1I cen1er·~. D LA!'JDMA~1 i'l· 1-1.signif1c-,1·rt geograph1c.-,1 referem.e point RENTON Hso 1(•1 11r; 14':i 1~:;; ?at:: :,o_:,:, 1,:,;: H(i 1.~ ~ 1".{I .:,,J., '!'/?. -1,: .. ; 14:'", 1.1,:, :'.-G~ ~'!:09 I See detail map) "' "' (•) 1994-2009, Metro Transit. Ml~tro Tr.:111sit is i:I divisinn of the 'U .\-L, ,, '" ;,,;(,_·;;!_ . ) ,·;!Pf·>):·,,·· ;/_1f.':,1 I Bzr 1 B•t 2 ;D to • '°D -BJro :a.,1e,1, , C) 1, Bir, D O tUI .. "' ~ ji S2ndSt em METROPOLITANS} PLACE SE 17711, ~ I ,,,., Link:c; to external sites do not constitute <,ndorsements by Ki11g County. By visiting this and other King County web p;;i-ges, yr:iu e;,cpre~5ly c1gree to be bound by terms and condlt10ns of the site. "' N ,. ~ S H,11~1<ltl:' '5t , .. 0 0 0 "' FAR:E ZOHE mo ,.-.,,,,.,·,'fl, .. .ir.··~·· rll ]~ ~: 1: ~-ii } $ .tad- MAP LEGEND -1.1.,1.,;s .;II r;gular stc,ps. 1.t:ika;.s lir11it>sd or nr: i't;:,ps -CJ E1~s stops ... • TUI II !EL POUTll 1(, s;i-,·es all stations Tunn~I :Station e-ntr.=ince TlklE POii fT Stl Ht inters;,;- t/.::in u~:o;.(I fc,r tim~ 5.-::h.;.ciul~ i-?f- eren,;s pe,int list;,j at the top or tlrn; colt1111ns to estimate brJs .,rn,cal an·i trip times. "'f--]1] (T 4.) -,j) TP ;,11SFEP POii iT: Poute inter-section for tr·ansf~rring t,; the ,:on:1Hctln·J rout; 01· r,:,ut;s 1nd1,:at,d. ~-'° r., TIJ.JE PC•II ITTP 'I ISFEP 43 -V F'GIIH cornt·IMd. D "cklitic,nal far, r,quire·i. F'/Ph. ~ PIC·E: C•esiqnat;d free parl iM area ,,1tl1 direct bus se1vi,:fto majc,r ,:c,rnm;rcial cent;rs L.0 11c;..1"Pr: A si~nificant g,;ographlcal r;fersn,:, p·,int. WJ,· H'a~h '-"1111 F11,;,,r, r.11 I ;c Hi, •• • • I.IETP:•)l"OUf;;·; PLAU .5 Rt '101 fo:fl'l)l'll e-r,ron T, ans it (e-me1 f To-l=1om F,,il'W(l-tHI (See delail map) ROUTE 101 TO/FROM FAIRWOOD • " . f ,,.,,,,., -j j"\J' ~ ~ ] ;; Week<i(I·)•;:: S ~tn-7 f" (;l(lt°"1J S>:!l•JI da:1y i,nci Sun(li'ly EAGLE RIDGE TRAVEL TIME CHECK FOR ASSIGNMENT Distance Running Speed Intersection lntersectkm De~y Segmen1 Time Total nme Tot:tl Time Segment Begln '"" (fl) \mph) Movement (vehlsec) (S8C) (sec) (rrrin) St TE ACCESS OPTIONS 1 AND 2 ENTER SITE ROVTE OPTION 1 (lllfll BenMln Rd) starling at Grady Way!Talbot Rd Grad)'W&JWB Taltmt Rd " Main Ave 1550 35 Tlru'l.,fl 40 70 70 BetlS011 Rd Main Ave to Site Au:ess 3710 35 Rigt,t 30 "" 172 Enlering S~e-lefl Tum Leff 10 -----10 182 30 100 ENTER SITE ROUTE OPTION 2 (vJa Benl5on Dr) starttr,g at Grad'J Way/Talbot Dr Talbot Rd-Benson Dr Grady Way lo ""''"" 2390 35 TIYU/Right 35 81 61 ""6t"' Talbot Rd,Benson Dr to Benson Rd 2180 35 Left 40 82 164 8Elnscin Rd Pug0i Dr to Site Acoess 1650 35 Left 40 72 236 Enteririg Site Right Tum 118 Righi 0 236 39 EXIT SITE ROUTE OPTION 1 {V11 Bens.ora Rd) starting at SIie EXiting Sile Right Tum Right 15 15 15 Benson Ra Srte Access to Grad)"/Main 3710 35 '" 40 112 127 Grady Way Main-1:!8flSOf1 Rd to Talbo1 .. aenSon rn ~-35 Tim, 40 70 197 33 100 EXIT SITE ROUTE OPTION 2 (VNII Benson Dfl starting .:it !~e Exiting Site tffll Tum ,_.. 45 45 45 Bmison Rd SIie Access 10 Puget or 1650 35 Ri[lht ,o 52 97 PIJge1 Dr Benson Rd 10 'talbot--Benson Dr 2i80 " Righi 20 62 159 TallloH!enson Dr Pug!!tDr to Grady Wey 2390 35 Lelt/Thru 40 86 248 4.1 1'" CONCLUSION: ROUTE 1 IS FASTER BOTH ENTERING AND EXITING l-4DS NORTH OPTIONS 1 AND 2 ENTER SITE ROUTE OPTION 1 (rre-ewav rolrte) starting at SuflSfft off-ramp 1-405 southbounci Sunset oft-ramp " SR Hi7 off r;;imp 12000 50 ""' 0 163 163 405-167 off-ramp SR 167 offramp to Grady Way 1190 40 Right 20 40 204 Grady Way SR 167 to Talbot Rd 2400 35 The, 40 ., 290 Grady Way TillbotRd "' Main 1550 35 Right 20 50 340 5.7 3.25 ENTER SITE ROUTE OPTION 2 (City route) startrng a! Sunset off-ramp SR 159 off-ramp 1-40!':iStl "' Sunset Blvd 1280 40 ~. 0 22 " Sunset Blvd SR 169 off-ramp to NE 3rd SI 1500 35 Thru 40 69 91 Sunset Btvd NE:.:JrdSt to Bronson 990 35 Righ1 20 " 130 B,oo= Sunset Blvd lo Park Ave 1400 30 Thru 20 52 162 Elronsari Parl<. Ave to Main Ave 700 30 "" 30 46 228 MairiAve Bronson to S 3rd Sl 600 30 Thru 20 34 261 Main Av111 S 3rd SI to S 4th St 5BO 30 Thru 20 33 295 Main Ave S4th St "' GraciyWay ___ 930 30 "" 30 51 r 346 =i " 1 51 E>CIT SITE ROUTE OPTION 1 (freeway routel sl:arting at Grady/Maio Lefl tum al Grady/Main Leff. 40 40 40 Grady Way EB Main Ava lo Talbot Rd 1!i50 35 Thru 40 70 110 Grady Wa"f £B Talbot Rd to SR 167 2400 35 Lefl 40 87 197 405-167 M-rarnp Gri.dy Wa", "' 1-405 4070 40 ,,, 0 69 266 1405 NB SR 167 to Sunse1 on-·ramp B210 50 ~. 0 112 378 6.3 3.07 EXIT SITE ROUTE OPTION 2 (City route) starting at Grarjy/Ma1r1 Rjght tum al Grady/M.iln Right 20 20 20 Main Ave NB Grady Wa~ •• S 4th SI 940 30 1],ru 20 41 61 MainA\leNB S 4th St 10 HouserWa~ 580 30 R'Qht 20 33 94 Mooser Way MBinAva to ""'""" 2330 30 Rigt,t 20 73 167 Brom.on HouserW;;iy to Sunsel Blvd no 30 Thru 40 46 213 SR 169 Sunsetl3ll1d " 1-405 on ramp 440 35 Lull JO 39 252 1-405 oo ramp SR 169 to 1,-405 1140 40 o/a 0 19 271 4.5 108 SR 515 AADT (source: WSDOT) trend forecast annual MP Location 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 growth actual count actual count actual count 6. 76 north of Puget Dr 33000 34000 32000 33000 33000 34000 31000 32000 32000 32000 32000 32000 31591 31451 -0.44% --···. """ --- SR 515 MP 6.76 north of Puget Dr Annual Average Daily Traffic 35000 34500 -34000 I <> <> b 33500 : 33000 I <> <> <> "; 32500 ~ 32000 I • <> . ~--. ~ <> <> o 31500 > 31000 I • 30500 30000 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 Year EBLT Rl.lT EBRT WBLT WRT WIJRT Nl!LT NBT NBRT SBLT SBT SBRT EBLT EBT EBRT WHIT Wll'J' WBRT NIILT NBT NIIRT SBLT Sffl SURI' EAGLE RIDGE TURN VOLUME ESTIMATES WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR Eagle Ridge Rd/Eagle Lodae/Regency Woods 201 I 2011 Eagle Ridge 2009 Background Background Pha....c 1 I Phase 2 PMPK Growth PMPK 8 0 9 -----" 168 J 172 25 I 26 -----. 0 I) 0 ---- 34 I 34 -" 0 0 0 - 34 I 34 0 II 0 0 0 () 0 0 0 ---- II 0 0 8 0 9 278 6 283 (I 0 Benson Hill Rd/Eagle Ridge Rd 2011 2011 Eagle Ridge 2009 Background Background Phase l 1 Phase 2 PMPK Growth PMPK 0 -0 0 0 0 -0 ..... IO I) IO --- 0 0 0 ·-· '""' 65 I 66 " 0 0 266 -266 6 8 45 I 46 160 3 163 "" 937 I'! 956 5 7 - 0 -0 1373 28 1507 II 15 2011 with Project PM PK 9 172 26 0 -" 34 -- 0 ·--... ...... 34 -- 0 0 0 0 9 283 0.0% 2011 - witll Projoct PMPK 0 0 0 IO I) --- 66 ···- 0 280 46 163 ---- 968 " """ II 1533 1.7% 2009PMPK 8 8 76 202 25 34 2011 Background PM PK 99 77 206 26 34 201 l with Project PM PK 99 77 206 26 34 2009 PM PK 1097 331 0 0 947 JI I 20 I I Hackground PM PK I I 19 3)2 0 0 966 312 20 I I with Project PM PK I 131 346 0 0 978 326 34 168 34 172 34 172 75 205 77 209 77 209 C·\Z.proj8Cls\eagle ridge\eagle nd!;JE! turn counts 11.ls William Popp Associates EBLT EAT EBRT WllLT WBT WflRT NAU NBT NBRT SBLT SBT SBRT EAGLE RIDGE TURN VOLUME ESTIMATES WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR Benson Hill Rd/New Site Access 2009 PM PK 2011 2011 2009 Background Ba.ck.ground PMPK GroMh PMPK 0 . 0 0 . 0 .. I) . 0 ..... 0 0 0 0 0 0 ............... 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 ... . " -- J31 7 338 0 0 0 ,. 0 0 0 ... ' 1097 22 1119 0 0 1428 29 1457 Eagle Ridge Phase I I rhase 2 5 7 I I 6 8 2 I 14 17 2011 with Project PMPK ····· . . ---- 0 0 ····- 0 9 0 II 0 338 10 13 1119 0 1500 2.1% ············· 1097 331 0 0 l097 331 20 l I Background PM PK 1119 338 0 0 1119 338 2011 with Project PM PK 1132 349 () 0 1128 348 0 0 0 0 20 23 C:\2proiects\eagle ridge\eagle ridge lorn COUf1iS.Xls William Popp Associates HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Site Access & Benson Hill Rd -t" ~ t ~ \. Mi'i~_emeiit:,,::•: •·•.·· .• ··•M./at J/VBR JNB:Ji/. NBR . .:,YS!:!L Lane Configurations "I ,.,. I 1> Sign Control Stop Free Grade 0% 0% Volume {veh/h) 9 11 338 10 13 Peak Hour Factor 0 92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flowrate (Vph) 10 12 367 11 14 Pedestrians LanEiWidth (ftl ·· · Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1617 373 378 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2;!stag.e 2 tonfvol vcu, unblocked vol 1617 373 378 IC, single (sJ 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) IF (s) -, r, c.a 3.3 2.2 pO queue free % 91 98 99 cM capacity (vehlh) 112 673 1180 Q\JJ:i'&tior\; tilr\ etf . ..,...JJ"i;l:):Lj/ •WB2. /NB.:-! SBJ · Volume Total 10 12 378 1230 Volume Left 10 0 0 14 Volume Right 0 12 11 0 cSH 112 673 1700 1180 Volume to Capacity 0.09 0.02 0.22 0.0·1 Queue Length 95th (ft) 7 1 0 1 Control Delay (s) 40.0 10-4 0.0 0.4 Lane LOS E B A Approach Delay (s) 23.8 0.0 04 Approach LOS C iiJl~ts~ctioh•iS.ufoniary-• Average Delay 0.6 .i ·; ••• ,SSJt.)•:/•••<···,···' 4 Free 0% 1119 0.92 1216 Intersection Capacity Utilization 79.3% ICU Level of Servic€ Analysis Period (min) 15 Weekday PM Peak Hour 5128/2009 Baseline City of Mt Vernon, PUblic Works Dep D 5/28/2009 Synchro 6 Report Page 1 INTERSECTION SIGHT DISTANCE Intersections At Grade Chapter 910 ··-······--------------··--------- ,----------,--t----,>----;--,.-,-+--+--+--+-~+--t----,,,..,...~l'LO() KEY: Below curve, storage not needed far capacity. 1-----+------t---+t,--+ llC,C::, Above curve, further analysis recommended. l------+-----+---l--+-l---+1000 25 20 15 10 5 0 % Total DHV Turning Left (single turning movement) Notes: [1] DHV is total volume from both directions. [21 Speeds are posted speeds. Left-Turn Storage Guidelines: Two-Lane, Unsignalized Figure 910-12a 900 800 -> :c 0 700 600 500 400 300 '" 0 f- . ..., -- -----······-·-·-·--------·-----·--------·-·--·······------~ Page 910-26 Design Manual M 22-01.02 November 2007 II J 9 > ::c 0 - 6 5 4 Left-Turn Storage Guidelines (Two-Lane, Unsignalized) WSDOT Design Manual, Figure 910-12a Extrapolated Data to past 1200 DHV i \_.._-.)":'.) DC"T" ij,".:"\ (,,,, C,< . c,~-'. Z.D,.~--.. ~·-~ y = 50402718.19x243 R2 = 0.99 Y = 2228970.99x·202 R2 = 0.99 .. -···· Y = 5793216.28x·221 ~ 3 R2 = 0.98 = j "$. 2 1 7 --\. \4. ~---.. "4·--.. - 0 800 900 1000 I • • "o!""--·~·=·,...,---····--·-' 1100 1200 1300 1400 Total DHV (peak hour) O 40 mph curve data pt <> 50 mph curve data pt O 60 mph curve data pt • ~500 1600 A 35 mph extrapolated -50 mph Best Fit Curve (800 DHV to 1200 DHV) -60 mph Best Fit Curve (800 DHV to 1200 DHV) -40 mph Best Fit Curve (800 DHVto 1200 DHV) ---·····- C:\Zr>ro,ects\8agl~ ridgeleagla ri()ge turn coum.:ids Wdliam Popp Associates LEFT TURN LANE WARRANT CALCULATION Intersection: Project: Volumes: INPUTS: V= • Vo= V1= v= P tlm.-shold = Benson Rd S / Site Access Eagle Ridge Apartments 2011 PM Peak Hour estimate w/Project volume advancing (per hour)= volume opposing (per hour)= volume left turns per hour operating speed = utilization factor threshold based on operating speed (design speed is assumed to be + IO mph of operating speed) For 2-lane highway; from TRB 211 field ~'tudies (also represented a'i t 1) T = average time to make left turn = F~u 2-lane highway; from TRU 211 field studies t = g critical gap = For 2-lane highway, from TRB 21 I field studies t., = left turn time to clear or exit= CALCULATIONS: percent left turns in advancing stream L= Vi/Va average headway; advancing stream t. = average headway (3600/V.) opposing vehicle flow rate le = 0 vehicles opposing/sec (V J3600) for a two-lane highway, um:;ignalized 1132 vph 348 vph 13 vph 35 mph 40 mph, p =.020; 0.0225 50 mph, p = .015; 60 mph, p = .010 3.0 sec 5.0 sec 1.9 sec 1.1% % 3.18 sec 0.097 veh/sec average time that a left turning vehicle must wail for a suitable gap in the opposing traffic -~tr~am tw = [3 600/ { V 0e -(V,t,fl600)} ]-(3600N0 )-tg # of arrivals/hour of through vehicles behind A1 = left tuming vehicles = [L( 1-L)V ,.l(tw +t.)/[(2/J)t,,] (! = e-1.,,,'(\,tg + I) A= (1-13)3600 B = (I -B)3600/2 = A/2 average service rate (number of left n1ms that can be made in one hour) µ = (3600-A-B)n' = (3600-1.5A)/T p = "1 'µ IS LEFT TURN POCKET WARRANTED? Source HRR, TRB #211 eiigfe ridge tum counts.xis, HRR TRB 211 LT Wi!ir'nm1 5129/2009 1.43 sec 20.17 0.91 306 153 1047 0.0193 NO Wi/Uam Popp Associates Chapter 910 Intersections At Grade 100 Consider right-turn lane 151 I 80 cl <IJ Consider right-turn E pocket or taper 141 ::, 0 > 60 C ~ ::, :;: .<: .!2> [l'. ~ 40 :;J 0 I .:,: Radius only Pl "' <IJ a. 20 0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 Peak Hour Approach Volume (DDHV) 111 Notes: [1] For two-lane highways. use the peak hour ODHV (through + righUurn). For multi lane, high-speed t1igt1ways (posted speed 45 mph or above). use the right-lane peak hour approach volume (through + righHurn). f2J When all three of the following conditions are met, reduce the right-tum DDHV by 20. The posted speed is 45 mph or less • The nght-tLYn volume is greater than 40 VPH • The peak hour approach volume (DDHV) is less than :mo VPH [3] For right-turn corner desfgn, see Figure 910-11 [4] For right-turn pocket or taper design, see Figure 910-16 [5] For right-turn lane design, see Figure 9·10-"1? [6] For add1t1onai guidance, see 910.07(3} Right-Turn Lane Guidelinesl6J Figure 910-15 ··-······-··--·-·-·--·-·---------------------- Design Manual M 22-01.02 November 2007 Page 910-37 RIGHT TURN WARRANT CHECK EAGLE RIDGE APARTMENTS WEEKDAY STREET PM PEAK HOUR Benson Rd S I Site Access Scenario 1 MajorSt Approach DDHV 2 Right Turn Volume Right Turn Adj Warranted?' Adjustment Adj Right Tum Volume Taper Warrant Threshold4 !Weekday PM peak hour street peak 1 348 10 No 0 1 Traffic Options, all based an 2011 forecasts 2 DOHV is approach volume from south on Benson Rd S; thru plus right turn 3 when posted speed 45 mph or less, RT vol greater than 40, DDHV less than 300 4 variable where DDHV < 500; threshol = 20 where DDHV > 500 10 s variable where 225 < DOHV < 600 ; threshold=90 where DDHV < 225 and 40 where DDHV > 600 Conditions for Right Turn Reduction (less 20 vph) Major St Right Tum condiUons met? Driveway Posted Speed Volume DDHV Condtion 1 Condtion 2 Condtion 3 1 35 10 348 yes no no No C:\lproieclS\eagle ridge\eagle ridge turr, counts.xis 35 Taper Warrant Met? No Turn Lane Warrant Threshold" 74 Turn Lane Warrant Met? No William Popp Associates ) G'EOTECH CONSULT ANTS, INC. Hancheroff Construction 1771 O 234th Avenue SE Maple Valley, WA 98038 Attention: Robert W Hancheroff City of Renton Planning Division Subject: Geotechnical Engineering Reconnaissance Proposed Townhomes Development Near Eagle Ridge Drive South at Benson Road South Renton, Washington Dear Mr. Hancheroff: 13256 Northeast 20th Street. Suite 16 Bellevue. \Vashington 98005 (425) 747-5618 FAX (425) 747-8561 May 19, 2006 JN06166 On May 8, 2006, the undersigned Principal of Geotech Consultants, Inc. met with you at the proposed townhomes development property in Renton. The purpose of this visit was to observe the existing site conditions and the soil conditions in a series of test pits. The recommendations and conclusions presented in this report are professional opinions based on the observations made during our site visit and on previous experience with other projects in the vicinity. We were provided with a conceptual site plan for the project that included topographic information. This plan was prepared by JM Architects and dated January 27, 2006. Based on the plan, we understand that an existing, somewhat rectangular property is lo be short-platted into two lots, the larger lot being somewhat L-shaped. Most of the L-shaped lot is undeveloped, although a paved driveway extends through it. The other lot, located at the northwestern corner of the rectangular property, includes an existing building and transmission tower. This property will be left unchanged. The driveway that extends through the L-shaped lot provides access to Eagle Ridge Drive South. The L-shaped lot is to be developed with several townhome buildings and some driveways. The site plan indicates that the buildings will be located on the northern-central and southern portion of the property. No grading for the buildings and driveways were available at the time this report was prepared. If the scope of the project changes from what we have described above, we should be provided with revised plans in order to determine if modifications to the recommendations and conclusions of this report are warranted. SITE CONDITIONS SURFACE CONDITIONS The L-shaped Im is located on the southern portion of Renton, adjacent to the eastern side of Benson Road South. The existing Eagle Ridge Lodge development is located adjacent to the eastern side of the project site. As noted above, although most of the lot is currently undeveloped, a paved driveway extends from near the southeastern corner of lot to the northwestern side to provide access for the office building that is to the northwest. Also, some utilities are located on the property. Overall, the property slopes downward to the west or northwest. A large majority of the ,j Hancheroff Construction May 18, 2006 JN 06166 Page 2 property has an inclination greater than 15 percent. Most of the property has an inclination of less than 40 percent. However, there are five distinct areas where inclinations exceed 40 percent. These areas are: 1) at the northeastern side of the site below the Eagle Ridge Lodge, 2) near the east-central portion of the site adjacent to the eastern side of the existing driveway, 3) at the northwestern side of the site adjacent to the driveway/parking lot of the office building development, 4) at the northwestern side of the site below and west of the existing driveway, and 5) at the southeastern side of the site below the entrance of the existing driveway. The location of these areas is shown on the attached site plan. It is apparent that Areas 1, 4, and 5 are steep areas created by the filling of soil over the native ground, while Areas 3 and 4 were created by excavating into the native ground. The vegetation cover north and east of the existing driveway and the office building is mostly grass and blackberries with scattered trees, while the vegetation cover south and west of the driveway and the office building is mostly blackberry vines and brushy trees. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Our understanding of the subsurface conditions at the site is based on our observations of 12 test pits excavated by the client throughout the. L-shaped property. The test pits were excavated using a mini-excavator. In general, the test pits revealed loose to medium-dense, fill soil, topsoil, and or native silty sand with gravel. This native soil then became medium-dense to dense, or denser, at depths ranging from approximately 2.5 to 4. 5 feet. However, a large amount of loose fill soil was revealed near the western-central portion of the site above Area 4. It appears likely that a ravine previously existed in this area that was filled. We have attached a site plan with this report that indicates, along with the test pit locations, the depth to the medium-dense to dense or denser native soil. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS GENERAL The L-shaped property is suitable for development, but some significant geotechnical considerations regarding foundations are needed. With the exception of the filled ravine at the west-central portion of the site, it appears that competent bearing soil is located within a reasonable excavation depth of the ground surface. Therefore, with the exception of the filled ravine area, it is our opinion that conventional footing foundations should be adequate for the residential buildings. If buildings are placed in the filled ravine areas, deep foundations consisting of drilled concrete piers or driven steel piles will likely be needed. Additional explorations such as test borings would be needed in the filled ravine area if buildings were to be placed there. Based on the site soils, the City of Renton code indicates that slopes greater than 40 percent in inclination are Protected Slopes and a High Landslide Hazard. Also, slopes 15 to 40 percent in inclination are a Medium Landslide Hazard and a High Erosion Hazard. The code indicates that Protected Slopes are not to be constructed on, but exceptions are available. One is an Exception through Modification. This exception can be granted for grading to allow reconfiguration of protected slopes created through private road installation or widening. As noted earlier, there are five areas on the site that are sloped greater than 40 percent and thus are Protected Areas. It is our professional opinion that development can be done in Areas 2, 3, and 5 because these steep areas were created to constuct the driveway that extends through the site. We believe that the steep slope of Area 4 should not be constructed on due to the amount of fill placed there. Area 1 does not qualify because the grading was not created for road installation. GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. Hancheroff Construction May 18, 2006 JN 06166 Page 3 The code also indicates that Medium and High Landslide Hazard areas, as well as High Erosion Hazard areas, which encompasses all slopes greater than 15 percent on the site, can be built on if the development: 1) will not increase the threat of the geological hazard to adjacent properties beyond pre-development conditions; 2) will not adversely impact other critical areas; and 3) can be safely accommodated on the site. It is our professional opinion that these three criteria are met at this site for all areas inclined between 15 and 40 percent. At this time the development is in the planning stage. We should be advised once a final development plan and grading plan is prepared in order to observe more soil explorations and/or prepare a final geotechnical engineering study for this project. EXCAVATIONS AND SLOPES Excavation slopes should never destabilize existing upslope structures or exceed the limits specified in local, state, and national government safety regulations. Based upon Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 296, Part N, .the loose to medium-dense fill and native soils at the subject site would be classified as Type B, while the dense to very dense native soils at the subject site would be classified as Type A. Therefore, slopes cannot be excavated at an inclination steeper than 1:1 or 0.75:1 (Horizontal:Vertical), respectively. All permanent cuts into native soil and compacted fill soils should be inclined no steeper than 2: 1 (H:V). Water should not be allowed to fiow uncontrolled over the top of any slope. Also, all permanently exposed slopes should be seeded with an appropriate species of vegetation to reduce erosion and improve the stability of the surficial layer of soil. Any disturbance to the existing slopes outside of the building limits may reduce the stability of the slopes. DRAINAGE CONSIDERATIONS We recommend the use of footing drains at the base of all footings and backfilled, earth-retaining walls. These drains should consist of 4-inch-diameter, perforated PVC pipe surrounded by at least 6 inches of 1-inch-minus, washed rock that is encircled with non-woven, geotextile filter fabric (Mirafi 140N, Supac 4NP, or similar material). At its highest point, the perforated pipe invert should be at least as low as the bottom of the footing, and it should be sloped for drainage. All roof and surface water drains must be kept separate from the foundation drain system. The excavation and site should be graded so that surface water is directed off the site and away from the tops of slopes. Water should not be allowed to stand in any area where foundations, slabs, or pavements are to be constructed. Final site grading in areas adjacent to the buildings should be sloped at least 2 percent away from the building, except where the area is paved. Water from roof, storm water, and foundation drains should not be discharged onto steep slopes; it should be tightlined to a suitable outfall located away from the slopes. LIMITATIONS The conclusions and recommendations contained in this report are based on site conditions as they existed at the time of our site visit. If the subsurface conditions encountered during construction are significantly different from those anticipated, we should be advised at once so that we can GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. Hancheroff Construction ,May 18, 2006 JN 06166 Page 4 review these conditions and reconsider our recommendations where necessary. Unanticipated soil conditions are commonly encountered on construction sites. Such unexpected conditions frequently require making additional expenditures to attain a properly constructed project. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Hancheroff Construction and its representatives for specific application to this project and site. Our recommendations and conclusions are based on the site materials observed and on previous experience with sites that have similar observed conditions. The conclusions and recommendations are professional opinions derived in accordance with current standards of practice within the limited scope of our services. No warranty is expressed or implied. We trust that this report meets your immediate needs for the proposed development. Please contact us if we can be of further service. Attachments - • Site Plan • cc: Chris Koruga DRW: jyb Respectfully submitted, GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. 1 EXP1Res , i;) [ 1..1 h-9'vl D. Robert Ward, P.E. Principal GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. ~-;,., TEST PIT 3 ~" ~ ~ " .¢;, ~ ~ c' '!',..~ ,:;:," ~ c.,O<i uses Descriorion Elevation +/-43' 0 Gray and brown, silty SAND with occasional gravel, very moist to wet, loose -FILL - -!.' Old tonsoil with roots m: Reddish-brown, silty SAND with occasional gravel and heavy iron-staining, '-SM 5 .m. fine-to medium-grained, wet to saturated, loose to very loose '--;!;!;J;: '-SM Brown, gravelly, silty SAND, fine-to medium-grained, moist, dense '-ffl· ( Glacial Till) '- ~ Test pit terminated at 7 feet below grade on 1-3-97. 10 '--Heavy groundwater seepage encountered at 3' during excavation. '- No caving. '- --15_ TEST PIT 4 -.::," " ~ §~ ~ -~ ~t:;, ,:;:," ·~tt uses Descrimion Elevation + I-45' 0 son L-:l:f:: Grayish-brown, gravelly, silty SAND with iron-stains, fine-to medium-.... L... .... .... grained, moist, medium-dense .... L... .... SM -becomes dense (Glacial Till) L... 5 '--· becomes very dense '- '- '-Test pit terminated at 6 feet below grade on 1-3-97. '-No groundwater seepage encountered during excavation. 10 '-- No caving. '- L... '- '- 15.__ ) ___ ,, TEST PIT LOGS GEOTECH 1600 EAGLE RIDGE DRIVE SOUTH CONSULTANTS, INC. RENTON, WA \ ..... ~ c:: • Job No: Date: Logged by: Plate: -"' 96448 FEB 1997 JHS 4 TEST PIT 5 .o:;-' ,_., ,.,.'-' s '-·~ cS Iii: .f ~ ,::)" vo uses Description Elevation + /-42 ' 0 :Soo -?' FI LL Brown, silty SAND with organics, moist to very moist, loose -.... .... Reddish-brown, silty SAND with iron-stains and occasional gravel, very -.... .... .... moist to medium-dense, loose ?' .... ..... . ... 5 ··;..: -SM -becomes wet .... ..... .... . ... -becomes grayish-brown, moist, dense (Glacial Till) .... .... ..... .... 1:1:·· -becomes gray, very dense .... ..... ..... Test pit terminated at 8 feet below grade on 1-3-97. 10 -Slight groundwater seepage encountered at 1 ', moderate groundwater ..... encountered at 4' during excavation .. -No caving. --15_ , --(S:' TEST PIT 6 ----~ ..... ~~~ t' ·~ ~ -9" ,$ ~ vo uses Descrivtion Elevation +/-43' 0 Sod ..... FILL Gray and brown, silty SAND with some gravel, moist to very moist, loose ..... ..... Dark brown, very silty, organic SAND with tree roots, very moist, loose ..... 5 -FILL - --becomes wet -?' '[;fil;l'" Gray to greenish-gray, silty SAND with gravelly, fine-to medium-grained, -...... 10 SM moist, medium-dense -'I!" -becomes dense (Glacial Till) --Test pit terminated at 11 feet below grade on 1-3-97. -Slight groundwater seepage encountered at 8' during excavation. -No caving. 15_ ' TEST PIT LOGS --ii GEOTECH 1600 EAGLE RIDGE DRIVE SOUTH CONSULTANTS, INC. RENTON, WA \ ' iiiiilill: --Job No: Date: Logged by: Plate: ..... ,. 96448 FEB 1997 JHS 5 j TEST PIT 7 'I:;' ,.~ ii' ,Si '" ~ -~ 6 .f ~ ,:;f c? uses Descrivtion Elevation +/-38' 0 So<1 '- L... F ILL Gray and brown, silty SAND with some gravel, moist to very moist, loose '- L... FIL L Dark brown, very silty, organic SAND with tree roots, very moist, loose 5 .._ ?: L... !;· Gray to greenish-gray, silty SAND with gravelly, fine-to medium-grained, ..... moist, medium-dense, wet, loose L... SM L... L... -becomes moist, medium-dense to dense 10 .._ L... Test pit terminated at 8 feet below gi:ade on 1-3-97. -Slight groundwater seepage encountl;lred at 5' during excavation. '-No caving. '- 15.__ TEST PIT 8 ""' ,.,., ii' ,Si,-. ~ -~ ~ ~<J .f ~ Go uses Descrintion Elevation + !-48' 0 KarK '-FILL Brown to gray, silty SAND, fine-to medium-grained, very moist, loose .... .... ·1r Grayish-brown, gravelly, silty SAND with iron-stains, fine-to medium- .... ]~ grained, moist, medium-dense 5 .._ -becomes dense L... L... .... Test pit terminated at 6 feet below grade on 1-3-97 . -No groundwater seepage encountered during excavation. 10 -No caving. L... L... - '- 15.__ -·-" TEST PIT LOGS GEOTECH 1600 EAGLE RIDGE DRIVE SOUTH CONSULTANTS, INC. RENTON, WA \. ,:: -iiiiiilt: -- Job No: Date: Logged by: Plate: " 96448 JAN 1997 JHS 6 • . .• 5m! '. ! 1~,., .. 1 ••.••. ,)@·. ".: .•. .. .., . ' . ' ·r , · :.··.·_: ' ... T'1'"'. '}'_''.'_i .. '."';_·:·_;, . .'.'. .. i·\.;.- Taylor Engineering Consultants City of Renton Planning Division NOV l 3 2009 PRELIMINARY TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (DRAINAGE REPORT) for EAGLE RIDGE Eagle Ridge Office and Condomi, Apartments and Offices Tax Parcel No. 2023059162 Pre-application No. 05-125 Site Address: 15xx Benson Road South Renton, Washington 98055 Prepared by: Lorna M. Taylor, P.E. TEC Project Number: 307-TFC Date: March 12, 2009 205 Front St S. , P.O. Box 1787 , Issaquah, WA 98027-0073 , tel. (425) 391-1415 • fax (425) 391-1551 • www.teccivil.com Preliminary Technical Information Report Eagle Ridge Office and Condominiums Section 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Appendices Appendix A: Appendix B: Appendix C: Appendix D: Appendix E: Appendix F: TABLE OF CONTENTS Description Project Overview ...................................... .. Conditions and Requirements Summary .......... . Off-Site Analysis ....................... .. Flow Control and Water Quality Facility Analysis and Design ................................... .. Conveyance System Analysis and Design ...... .. Special Reports and Studies ......................... . Other Permits ..................................... .. ESC Analysis and Design ............................. . Bond Quantities, Facility Summaries, and Declaration of Covenant ............................... . Operations and Maintenance Manual. ............. . Figures: Page Number 1 1 2 3 3 5 5 5 5 5 Figure 1. Technical Information Report (TIR) Worksheets Figure 2. Site Location Figure 3. Drainage Basins, Subbasins, & Site Characteristics Figure 4. NRCS Soils Map Off-site Analysis Drainage System Table and Map Analysis and Design: C.1 Flow Control C.2 Runoff Treatment C.3 Conveyance System (pending) C.4 Erosion Control (pending) Maintenance Requirements for Privately Maintained Drainage Facilities Bond Quantities Worksheets (pending) Retention/Detention Facility Summary Sheet and Sketch (pending) TEC Preliminary Technical Information Report Eagle Ridge Office and Condominiums SECTION 1 PROJECT OVERVIEW This drainage Technical Information Report (TIR) is submitted to the City of Renton in accordance with the City-adopted King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM). Appendix A contains a TIR worksheet for the project (Figure 1 ), as well as a Site Location Map (Figure 2), a Drainage Basins, Subbasins, and Site Characteristics figure (Figure 3), and a copy of the NRCS Soils map for the vicinity (Figure 4). The project will construct a mixed use facility, including office space and condominiums, just east of Benson Road South at South 15th Street. The property totals 1.88 acres. SECTION 2 CONDITIONS AND REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY The following summary describes how this new project will meet the eight "Core Requirements" and the "Special Requirements" that apply: Core Requirements 1. Discharge at the Natural Location: The site currently drains in a dispersed manner to the west/northwest to the Benson Road drainage system. The project proposes to discharge all runoff to the existing Benson Road system. 2. Off-Site Analysis: A Level 1 offsite analysis was conducted for this site as described in Section 3 and Appendix B. 3. Flow Control: The project will increase the 100-year runoff more than 0.5 els, and therefore is providing Conservation Flow Control in two buried detention vaults sized per the 2005 KCSWDM. Detention sizing calculations are summarized in Section 4, and KCRTS input and files and other supporting documents are included in Appendix C.1. 4. Conveyance System: Pending. The conveyance pipes will be analyzed for capacity under the anticipated backwater conditions using King County's Backwater routing program (KCBW). 5. Erosion and Sedimentation Control: Pending. Runoff from the construction areas will be contained by a temporary construction entrance, silt fencing, a sediment trap, and temporary catch basin protection in accordance with the KCSWDM during construction. The ESC facilities will only be removed once all exposed site surfaces have been stabilized. Other temporary erosion and sedimentation control measures will be installed as needed. 6. Maintenance and Operations: The drainage system should be regularly inspected and maintained as described in Section 10 and Appendix D. 7. Financial Guarantees and Liability: Pending. The County's Bond Quantities Worksheet will be provided for the frontage improvements and drainage elements of the project. 8. Water Quality: The area of new and replaced Pollution Generating Impervious Surfaces (PGIS) totals 25,073 square feet, which is more than the 5,000 square foot threshold for requiring treatment. Treatment of runoff will be provided in proprietary cartridge filter facilities located upstream of the detention vaults. Sizing calculations for the treatment facilities is included in Section 4 and Appendix C.2. Special Requirements 1. Other Adopted Area-Specific Requirements: Not Applicable. TEC Preliminary Technical Information Report Eagle Ridge Office and Condominiums 2. F/oodplain!Floodway Delineation: Not Applicable. 3. Flood Protection Facilities: Not Applicable. 4. Source Controls: Not Applicable. 5. Oil Control: Not Applicable. SECTION 3 OFF-SITE ANALYSIS The following subsections describe the inspection and evaluation of the site and its surrounding areas particularly the downstream drainage path. Task 1. Study Area Definition and Maps The figure in Appendix B shows the extent of the study area and the local topography. The Site Plan drawing shows more detailed topographic information on the project site. No runoff flows onto the site from the north, south, or west as shown on the Figure in Appendix B. Task 2. Resource Review The City's utility mapping was consulted, as well as King County's iMAP data. Following is a summary of the KCSWDM's recommended resources for review. Adopted Basin Plans -The project site is not within any adopted basin plan area, nor is there a finalized drainage study for the area. Finalized Drainage Studies -No finalized drainage studies were available for projects in the immediate vicinity. Basin Reconnaissance Summary Reports -The project site is not covered by any basin reconnaissance summary reports. Critical Drainage Area Maps -The project site is not within or adjacent to any mapped critical area. Floodplain/floodway (FEMA) Maps -The project site is not located within any FEMA mapped flood plain/floodway. Other Off-Site Analysis Reports in the same sub-basin. if available -The offsite analysis report for the Lodge at Eagle Ridge project immediately to the east was consulted. Sensitive Areas Folio -The project site is mapped with the following critical areas: SAO Erosion Hazard, Areas Susceptible to Groundwater Contamination. Drainage Complaints and Studies -There are no reports of problems in the immediate vicinity of the project. US Department of Agriculture. King County Soils Survey -A copy of the NRCS (SCS) soils map is included in Appendix A. Figure 4. The soils are predominantly Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes. These soils have moderate to high runoff potential. Wetlands Inventory Maps -There are no wetlands systems on the site identified in the King County Wetlands Inventory. 2 TEC Preliminary Technical Information Report Eagle Ridge Office and Condominiums Migrating River Studies -There are no rivers on the site. Task 3. Field Inspection A Level 1 off-site inspection was conducted on January 291 h, 2007. The site and its surrounds were also inspected and documented as part of field investigations for several nearby properties before that time and since. At the time of the most recent site inspection, the weather was clear and cold. Task 4. Drainage System Descriptions and Problem Descriptions The drainage tributary area extends up to, and for the northern portion of the site, onto the adjacent Lodge at Eagle Ridge property. This runoff must be taken into account in the detention sizing. Elsewhere, the land uphill of the site is served by catch basins and pipes that collect and transport runoff across the project site to Benson Road S. The site itself slopes down, steeply in places, toward the west and the Benson Road South frontage. Benson road was cut into the hillside and slopes down to the north. There is a piped storm drain conveyance system along Benson Road, with an overflow to Talbot Road South, just north of the project property. There are several existing storm drains crossing the site, as well as other utilities including sanitary sewer, water, electrical service, cable and possibly gas. There is an existing detention pond on the property along Benson Road, near the northern boundary. This detention pond serves the office building directly north of the proposed development and was probably designed and built to older, obsolete detention design standards. The downstream drainage system is shown on the map in Appendix B and The Offsite Analysis Drainage System Table in the same appendix describes each segment of the downstream drainage path. No drainage problems were observed or reported except for historic flooding in the vicinity of Renton Village more than Y. mile downstream. Task 5. Mitigation of Existing or Potential Problems Water quantity impacts from the project must be mitigated in accordance with the King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM) because the project will increase the 1 DO-year peak runoff by more than 0.5 cfs. Water quality impacts will be mitigated using proprietary cartridge filter catch basins upstream of the detention vaults, because the development will have more than 5,000 square feet of new and replaced Pollution Generating Impervious Surfaces (PGIS). SECTION 4 FLOW CONTROL AND WATER QUALITY FACILITY ANALYSIS AND DESIGN The project proposes 63,802 square feet of new impervious surface on the project site, 25,073 square feet of which is traffic pavement (PGIS), as shown on the Figures in Appendix C-1. The frontage improvements will be limited to curb cuts for access and utility connections. Existing Site Hydrology (Part A) The drainage on the existing site was analyzed for this project with King County's KCRTS routine assuming historic fully forested conditions. Data provided in the KCSWDM were used to determine modeling parameters. The two figures in Appendix C-1 show the delineation of the areas generating runoff on the existing site. Appendix C-1 also contains the data and output from the hydrologic analyses. The site soils are predominantly classified Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam, 15 -30 percent slopes, with two small areas near the two northwest corners 3 TEC Preliminary Technical Information Report Eagle Ridge Office and Condominiums classified as Beausite gravelly sandy loam, 15 -30 percent slopes (see Figure 4 in Appendix A). Developed Site Hydrology (Part B) The developed site drainage system will discharge site runoff to the Benson Road South drainage system. The developed site conditions identified for this project and used in the KCRTS modeling are as follows: Developed Site North Detention South Detention Conditions used for Vault Vault Total Hydrologic Modeling (areas in acres) (areas in acres) Building 0.43 0.46 0.89 Pavement 0.14 0.44 0.58 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Impervious Subtotal 0.57 0.90 1.47 Landscaping 0.35 0.34 0.69 Forest 0.21 0 00 0.21 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Pervious Subtotal 0.56 0.34 0.90 Total 1.13 1.24 2.37 Performance Standards (Part C) Detention is required because the 1 DO-year flow is predicted by KCRTS to increase from 0.48 els to 2.62 els using 15-minute time steps. Detention must meet the Conservation Flow Control Standards established in the KCSWDM, which in this case means Level 2 flow control assuming historic forested site conditions for peak flow and duration matching. Treatment is required because the PGIS area is increasing more than 5,000 square feet. Runoff treatment facilities must meet Basic Water Quality Treatment parameters established in the KCSWDM. Conveyance features must be able to convey the predicted 25-year flows without flooding. The 100-year flows will also be modeled to be sure that significant flooding will not result under extreme runoff conditions. Flow Control System (Part D) Flow control is being provided in two separate detention vaults which will function completely independently. The following table summarizes the sizing requirements for the two vaults. Detention Vault North Detention South Detention Total Requirements Vault Vault Required storage volume 13,600 cf 21,860 cf 35,460 cf Effective storage depth 10 ft 10 ft Facility length 68 ft 109.30 ft 177.3 ft F aci lily width 20 ft 20 ft 20 ft Facility area 1,360 sf 2,186 sf 3546 sf Orifice #1 diameter* 0.42" (7/16") 0.45" (7/16") Orifice #2 diameter 0.85" (7/8") 0. 75" (3/4") Orifice #2 height 6.00 ft 6.00 ft 4 TEC Preliminary Technical Information Report Eagle Ridge Office and Condominiums Water Quality (Part E) The area of new asphalt pavement totals 25,073 square feet, so water quality treatment is required. King County has issued a blanket adjustment allowing use of cartridge filter treatment facilities for Basic Water Quality treatment, so treatment is being provided in several cartridge filter treatment facilities located upstream of the detention vaults. Treatment of roof runoff is not required. Sizing calculations for the cartridge filters are included in Appendix C-2. SECTION 5 CONVEYANCE SYSTEM ANALYSIS AND DESIGN Conveyance sizing is pending. Conveyance pipes must convey the predicted 25-year flow without flooding and the 100-year flow will be modeled to be sure the significant flooding will not occur as a result. SECTION 6 SPECIAL REPORTS AND STUDIES Not Applicable. SECTION 7 OTHER PERMITS No other permits beyond those required by the City of Renton are anticipated to be required for this project. SECTION 8 ESC ANALYSIS AND DESIGN Erosion control design is pending. Erosion control for this project will likely include a stabilized construction entrance, silt fencing, sediment retention, and temporary catch basin protection in accordance with the KCSWDM. SECTION 9 BOND QUANTITIES, FACILITY SUMMARIES, AND DECLARATION OF COVENANT Pending. SECTION 10 OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE MANUAL The drainage facilities should be maintained as described in Appendix D (part of which was excerpted from the KCSWM Maintenance Requirements for Privately Maintained Drainage Facilities). 5 TEC APPENDIX A FIGURES 1. Technical Information Report (TIR) Worksheets 2. Site Location Map 3. Drainage Basins, Subbasins, & Site Characteristics 4. NRCS Soils Map FIGURE 1 King County Department of Development and Environmental Services TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET Part 1 PROJECT OWNER AND PROJECT ENGINEER Project Owner Chris Koruga & Robert Hancheroff Address Phone Project Engineer Lorna M. Taylor Company TEC Inc. Address/Phone 205 Front Street S/PO Box 1787. lssanuah WA 98027 425-391-1415 Part 3 TYPE OF PERMli" APPLICATION ··• D Subdivison D Short Subdivision D Grading 0 Commercial LJ Other Site Plan Review Part 2 PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION Project Name Eagle Ridge Office and Condominiums Location Township 23 Range§. Section SW 20 Part4 OTHER REVIEWS AND PERMITS D DFWHPA 0 COE404 D DOE Dam Safety 0 FEMA Floodplain D COE Wetlands . D Shoreline Management 0 Rockery 0 Structural Vaults :__: other Part 5 SITE COMMUNITY ANDDRAINAGEBASiN . "_. ,,'-., . -. -, -- Community City of Renton Drainage Basin Black River Part 6 SITE CHARACTERISTICS D River . . D Stream __________ _ D Critical Stream Reach D Depressions/Swales C Lake ------------ 0 Steep Slopes--------- ._ .. D Floodplain D Wetlands D Seeps/Springs LJ High Groundwater Table iJ Groundwater Recharge D Other Part 7 SOILS Soil Type AgD BeD Slopes 15-30% 15 -30% Erosion Potential Erosive Velocities D Additional Sheets Attached ____ _ . ' -· ,, ' Part 8 DEVELOPMENT LIMITATIONS · ... · .•.... · REFERENCE LIMITATION/SITE CONSTRAINT 0 Ch. 4 -Downstream Analysis D D D D D 0 Additional Sheets Attached ·. . Part 9 ESC REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS DURING CONSTRUCTION 0 Sedimentation Facilities 0 Stabilized Construction Entrance 0 Perimeter Runoff Control 0 Clearing and Grading Restrictions 0 Cover Practices 0 Construction Sequence D Other . ... . MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS AFTER CONSTRUCTION 0 Stabilize Exposed Surface 0 Remove and Restore Temporary ESC Facilities 0 Clean and Remove All Silt and Debris 0 Ensure Operation of Permanent Facilities LJ Flag Limits of SAO and open space preservation areas D Other .. Part 10 SURFACE WATER SYSTEM [J Grass Lined 0 Tank ' Infiltration Method of Analysis Channel 0 Vault L KCRTS 0 Pipe System Depression D Energy Dissipater D Flow Dispersal Compensation/Mitiga- D Open Channel tion of Eliminated Site D Wetland D Waiver Storage D Dry Pond D Stream D Regional D Wet Pond Detention Brief Description of System Operation: Roof runoff piped to detention vault Pavement runoff treated in stormfilter CB's, and then piped to detention vault or tank. Facility Related Site Limitations Reference Facility . ··.' ',• ' . Part 11 STRUCTURALANALYSIS D Cast in Place Vault 0 Retaining Wall 0 Rockery > 4' High 0 Structural on Steep Slope D Other Limitation .. Part 12 EASEMENTS/TRACTS D Drainage Easement D Access Easement D Native Growth Protection Easement D Tract D Other Part 13 SIGNATURE OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER I or a civil engineer under my supervision my supervision have visited the site. Actual site conditions as observed were incorporated into this worksheet and the attachments. To the best of my knowledge the information provided here is accurate . .. 3-12-0} 3/s "' " " I I ~ f i I ii! " i S 15THst S18TltST + \ ,\ ;: :) ,, ll !' '-':'\ SSTI'f:ST $ 1cmt ST PROJECT SITE ;,,._, \ ': '..,;_;"' ..... /\ ...... ...-----------------~5/e ''E?t~hi~g~ ~a~J•?:~},~~,1:>~ijsi11s & Site ¢har. -.J:iij.Mre·.3 The 1nfr,rrr,alion .,1clude:J on this map has l!>:t!f' co11;:,iled oy_ Kmg County st11f'. ,~om a v;:maly oi sources arid is su:->it:1d to clla11;,e without ~rihce K1·1g Co_.,rly rnaKcs no ropresenl1ot,m1,:; ur w,.m<1t-t1l:!S. express or 1mpl1ect, 11s to nccumcy. complrc\eness, rmel1nts,:;,:;, -1r r1µ•1b to tr.a iJse ol such 1nfr,rmw.on ·1 h1;; ~ncu11e!lt 1s not intended _:ur u:.e as a ,,J,vey pcoduc:l. Kirg Co,mly shall not be liable for any gemir~I. _~p<:dal. •nd11,:1ct incidental. o• C:~·rlSNJLcrt..11 d~m~sc1s mclud1!lg, _bu\ no'. !1_rrileJ to. 10,,t rdvenues or log( profits resu::,ng /rem the usec or m1susci oft1e nlurm<1Li~·n contaned en this map. Any s;cilc DI H1is ma~ or 1nform~lion or, this mc1p 1s proh1~it~d except by wnttan perrniss1on of K1r.g Cours'.y. ScL.rce: K1ny Cour,ty iMAP-P1::ipe1iy Information ,:11:tp"i/wvM'.metmf;c.gov/GIS.'1M/\P) / 126tt ~ King County 47" 28' 7" 47" 27' 55" lJSDA -- 559760 N A Soil Map-King County Area. Washington (Figure 4) 559800 559840 5598BO 5593~,J 559880 ii.lap Sc.,ile 1.1.800 ~ :1n:ed o~ A size ,:s s· x 11") s'1eet Meters 00 ---==~-----=====Feet 0 15 30 0 50 100 200 300 559920 55iiWO Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey 2.1 National Cooperative Soil Survey 560000 N N N 0 . ~ 0 N '" N '" 0 , . . ,, 3/6/2009 Page 1 of 3 47" 28' 7" USDA - Soil Map-King County Area, Washington (Figure 4) MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION Area of Interest (AOI) Area of Interest (AOI) Soils Soil Map Units Special Point Features \!) Blowout IZI Borrow Pit * Clay Spot • Closed Depression :x; Gravel Pit Gravelly Spot @ Landfill A Lava Flow .i. Marsh or swamp 1< Mine or Quarry ® Miscellaneous Water @ Perennial Water V Rock Outcrop + Saline Spot Sandy Spot -Severely Eroded Spot ¢ Sinkhole l> Slide or Slip ,. Sadie Spot = Spoil Area <) Stony Spot Natural Resources Conservation Service ('.l) Very Stony Spot f Wet Spot .. Other Special Line Features Gully Short Steep Slope Other Political Features 0 Cities D PLSS Township and Range D PLSS Section Water Features Oceans Streams and Canals Transportation 'H± Rails -Interstate Highways ~.-US Routes Major Roads « Local Roads Map Scale: 1 :1,800 if printed on A size (8.5" x 11") sheet. The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1 :24,000. Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for accurate map measurements. Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey URL: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov Coordinate System: UTM Zone 10N NAD83 This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below. Soil Survey Area: Survey Area Data: King County Area, Washinglon Version 4, Nov 21, 2006 Date(s) aerial images were photographed: 7/24/2006 The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. Web Soil Survey 2.1 National Cooperative Soil Survey 3/6/2009 Page 2 of 3 ~ Soil Map-King County Area, Washington USDA - Map Unit Legend . . . Map_Unit symbol AgC :AgD i ' - 'BeD I T~tals lo! Area of Interest Natural Resources Conseivation Servlco .·· King County Area, Washington. (WA633) .. .. Map Unit Nam& Acres in AOI Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes ' ' ------i - Beausite gravelly sandy loam, 15 to 30 ' percent slopes ! L Web Soil Survey 2.1 Nalional Cooperative Soil Survey . 4.5 5.9 ·-· 5.1 ------ 15.6 -· Figure 4 Percel1t of AOI 29.0% I ----· -'""j 32 9% - 100.0o/~ 3/6/2009 Page 3 of 3 8/8 APPENDIX B OFF-SITE ANALYSIS DRAINAGE SYSTEM TABLE AND MAP Symbol. Drainage Component Tvne, Name, and Size see map Type: she.et flow, swale, stream, channel, pipe, pond; Size: diameter, surface area A-B Pipe 12" CMP B-C Pipe 12" CMP C-D Pipe 12" CMP D-E Pipe 12" CMP E-F Pipe 12" RCP F-G Pipe 18" RCP G-H Pipe 18" RCP (presumed) H-1 Pipe 36" CMP, 1.046 -1.029 1-J Pipe 42" CMP, 1.029 -1.023 J-K Pipe 42", 1.023 -? L-M Pipe 42",? -1.020 98-4\inH04 OFF-SITE ANALYSIS DRAINAGE SYSTEM TABLE SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL, CORE REQUIREMENT #2 ling Hill Drainage Component Slope Distar:ice from Existing Potential Problems ' Description site discharae Problems drainage basin, -vegetation, cover, o;o }'4 ml ;; 1,320 ft. constrictions, under capacity, ponding, depth, type of sensitive area, overtopping, flooding, habitat or organism volume destruction, scouring, bank sloughing, sedimentation, incision, other erosion E side of Benson Rd S 5.8 O' (pipe None None drainage conveyance. along frontage) E side of Benson Rd S 6.0 O' (pipe None None drainage conveyance. along fronlaQe) E side of Benson Rd S 3.3 O' -155' None None drainage conveyance, w/ add'n of pond outlet from E E side of Benson Rd S 5.4 155' -213' None None drainaQe convevance. E side of Benson Rd S 6.9 213'-303' None None drainage conveyance w/ addition of runoff from E (Lodge raJ Eagle Ridge). Crosses Benson Rd to W ? 303' -553' None None onto private property w/ add' n of runoff from E. Crosses private property ? 553' -653' None None and connects to the city system described under "observations ... '1 for A-B. Parallels Talbot Rd 0.3 653' -793' None None Crosses Talbot Rd 793' -933' None None Flows N on W side of 933' -1,193' None None Talbot Rd S. Flows N along Talbot Rd S 1,193' -None Flooding under 1-405 1.423' Observations of field inspector, resoi.Jrce reviewer, or resident tributary area, likelihood of problem, overflow pathways,. potential impacts This pipe is undocumented on the City's GIS & drainage maps. The City GIS shows a system just S of"A" which drains W to PuQet Dr. S. This pipe is undocumented on the City's GIS and drainage mans. Ditto above. Ditto above. Ditto above. Survey shows this system carries on to the N as 12" RCP, but it is not documented. This pipe is undocumented on the City's GIS and drainage maos. This pipe is undocumented on the City's GIS and drainage maps. No invert elev. info., length from Citv GIS maos. Ditto above. Ditto above. Historic flooding problems reoorted downstream --R ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ""' ~ ·--;.Oll1 ,, ....._D',_J 1. UIII ""' "" / z i.---r---c-=~ ~- ~ ~ ~ f~lr'T-'h--~ G i I F4 -17 T23N RSE W 1/2 ' -1--1 -----,j "' 1, , , l L " 1__J L_Lj _ J --~ ,'[~-Ii I -I -I/ ' f-- \ Scale: 1"=400' -/i_ -' -~/ DH ', :::,$--1• th SL " ,·_ ~~ U18 i ' ·/ \ ,, a2i'-------"'-~·-f·---I~ _ Cl' // ,,,, ,~, ,:_1 \; ! " I 3.020 .. ! ;i.,t, lD22 I lD21 --a i'~ /I ' -I -, / I I \ I 3.~---+-·"-~~--~ ,, \ r \_ 1, I \ Ii I l.U71 \ \ ' /I '\ ""' ' -\ ' 'i:. ' ' (f) APPENDIX C ANALYSIS AND DESIGN APPENDIX C-1 DETENTION FACILITIES DESIGN [E~ (Gl iL [E 1Rl ~ [D) (Gl [E (OJ fr fr~ re; [E I re; (OJ fMJ [D) (OJ fMJ ~ fMJ ~ [UJ fMJ ~ ~ iMJ @ rEu rE /MJ1f ~ !DJ iMJ J I," ' • ·1r · ·'' I • . . .· .· 7 ... . /~-·-~ .. · AFFSITE / .. r ~< . 1 \>x :ri;;1~UTAR-~AREA' · .. <.'! ·· .. i1··i1>, .. ~//~i'!~··\ .. ii • i'!, cc ~Jt;}ilit~ ,.,,. ~ EXISTING (SF): SITE: FOREST: 49,300 (1.13 AC) TOTAL: 49,300 (1.13 AC) I '1 PROPOSED (SF): SITE: BLDG: 18,669 (0.43 AC) PAVEMENT: 6,096 (0.14 AC) SUBTOTAL: 24,795 (0.57 AC) FOREST: 8,967 (0.21 AC) LANDSCAPE: 15,568 (0.35 AC) TOTAL: 49,300 (1.13 AC) ;/ \ \ / ,/ ··~·;;'.c·i . · .. · . . · .. ',;' . . . \ \ '\ \ \ I zffi 0 I )" 100 I SCALE: 1'' = l 00 ft. 0'' --&c- Eagle Ridge office & condominiums (N oet) summary of 15-minute Predicted Runoff 3/11/09 Flow Frequency Analysis Time series File:existlS.tsf Project Location:sea-Tac ---Annual Peak Flow Rates--- Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak computed Peaks computed Peaks computed Peaks computed Peaks computed Peaks computed Peaks computed Peaks computed Peaks Flow Frequency Analysis Time series File:devlS.tsf Project Location:sea-Tac ---Annual Peak Flow Rates--- Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak (CFS) computed Peaks computed Peaks computed Peaks computed Peaks computed Peaks computed Peaks computed Peaks computed Peaks LogPearson III coefficients Mean= -1.485 StdDev= 0.262 skew= 1. 598 -----Flow Frequency Analysis------- --Peaks Rank Return Prob _ -"?' 0.252 100.00 0.990--r-) 0.175 50.00 0.980 g: 5g i6: gg 8: §gg ef.J Sl 1/\l ~ 0.066 8.00 0.875 0.049 5.00 0.800 0.028 2.00 0.500 0.021 1.30 0.231 LogPearson III coefficients Mean= -0.490 StdDev= 0.162 skew= 1.419 -----Flow Frequency Analysis------- --Peaks Rank Return Prob (CFS) Period ~ 1.10 100.00 0. 889 50. 00 0.716 25.00 0.532 10.00 0.502 8.00 0.420 5.00 0.297 2.00 0.243 1. 30 r 0.990 .oi-) 0.980 0.960 0.900 0.875 0.800 0.500 0. 231 -('.'j( Vii..,.;,., r -~~ ·7 J, \ KCRTS Program ... File Directory: C:\KC_SWDM\KC_DATA\ [C] CREATE a new Time series ST 1.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 existlS.tsf F 1. 00000 F 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 [T] Enter the Analysis TOOLS Module [P] compute PEAKS and Flow Frequencies existlS.tsf existlS.pks [R] RETURN to Previous Menu [C] CREATE a new Time series ST 0. 21 0.00 0.35 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 o. 57 devl5. tsf F 1. 00000 F 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 [TJ Enter the Analysis TOOLS Module [P compute PEAKS and Flow Frequencies devlS.tsf devl5.pks [R] RETURN to Previous Menu [X] exit KCRTS Program Ti 11 Forest Ti 11 Pasture J Till Grass outwash Forest Outwash Pasture outwash Grass Wetland Impervious Till Forest Till Pasture Till Grass '--) outwash Forest Outwash Pasture Outwash Grass wetland Impervious 1\1, eF\S N !N i)UT Dl\tl\ 1s-M i1J ,1 Mr; :: TL.:.PS. 31 12i sumpks.txt N, 61\SIN -SJMM!o,f:·f DP dnJRLY PU\f ~- Eagle Ridge Office & Condominiums (N Det) Summary of Predicted Runoff 3/9/09 Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:exist.tsf Project Location:Sea-Tac ---Annual Peak Flow Rates--- Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak Computed Peaks Computed Peaks Computed Peaks computed Peaks Computed Peaks Computed Peaks Computed Peaks Computed Peaks Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:dev.tsf Project Location:Sea-Tac ---Annual Peak Flow Rates--- Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak (CFS) computed Peaks Computed Peaks Computed Peaks Computed Pe a ks Computed Peaks Computed Peaks Computed Peaks Computed Peaks Level 2 Detention Vault (10') Int Size=[0.079-(0.028*0.5) )/(36-1) =0.002 1st Int.=0.028*0.5 =0.014 Qmax=(4/3*0.014) =0.019 Orif(2)=3/4*10 =7.5' LogPearson III coefficients Mean= -1.563 StdDev= 0.233 Skew= -0.132 -----Flow Frequency Analysis------- --Peaks Rank Return Prob 0.090 100.00 0.990 0.079 50.00 0.980 0.068 25.00 0.960 0.054 10.00 0.900 0.051 8.00 0.875 0.043 5.00 0.800 0.026 2.00 0.500 0.018 1.30 0.231 LogPearson III coefficients Mean= -0.774 StdDev= 0.112 Skew= 0.413 -----Flow Frequency Analysis------- --Peaks Rank Return Prob (CFS) Period 0.331 100.00 0.302 50.00 0.274 25.00 0.237 10.00 0.229 8.00 0.208 5.00 0.165 2.00 0.138 1.30 Page 1 0.990 0.980 0.960 0.900 0.875 0.800 0.500 0.231 • KCRTS Program ... File Directory: C:\KC_SWDM\KC_DATA\ [CJ CREATE a new Time series ST ,J. t3A-::; I kl I N ? J'T O I\ --;14. r\"DJ(<'l.-'j I, /\4 L r:.-~S. 1.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0. 000000 Ti 11 Forest ) 0.000000 Till Pasture 0.000000 Till Grass O. 000000 outwash Forest CV ( ~i, N ~ 0.000000 outwash Pasture t,.,f'- exist.tsf F 1. 00000 T 0.000000 Outwash Grass 0.000000 wetland 0.000000 Impervious [T] Enter the Analysis TOOLS Module [P] compute PEAKS and Flow Frequencies exist.tsf exist.pks [R] RETURN to Previous Menu [C] CREATE a new Time series ST dev.tsf F 0.21 0.00 0.35 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.57 1. 00000 T 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000000 Till Forest • 0.000000 Till Pasture ) O. 000000 Ti 11 Grass 7v;,,, ;, r-.[)r;·,, 0.000000 Outwash Forest ~~f ~ 0.000000 outwash Pasture 0.000000 outwash Grass 0.000000 wetland 0.000000 Impervious [T] Enter the Analysis TOOLS Module [P] compute PEAKS and Flow Frequencies dev.tsf dev.pks [R] RETURN to Previous Menu [X] exit KCRTS Program Eagle Ridge N Detention 3/9/09 TE=f&,-tTI o>..J -r=-Ac IL I TY i)t'.;S It, f,j Retention/Detention Facility Type of Facility: Facility Le::1gth: Facility Width: Facility Area: Effective Storage Depth: Stage O Elevation: Storage Volume: Riser Head: Riser Diameter: Number of orifices: Detention Vault 68.00 ft 20.00 ft 1360. sq. ft 10.00 ft 0. 00 ft 13600. cu. ft 10.00 ft 12.00 inches 2 Full Head Pipe Orifice# Height (ft) 0.00 6.00 Diameter (in) 0. 42 0.85 Discharge (CFS) 0.015 0. 039 Diameter (in) 1 2 4. 0 Top Notch Weir: None Outflow Rating Curve: None Stage (ft) 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.20 0.37 0. 54 0. 71 0.88 1. 05 1.22 1.39 1.56 1.73 1.90 2.07 2.24 2. 41 2.58 2.75 2. 92 3.09 3. 26 3. 42 3.59 3. 76 3.93 4 .10 4. 27 4 • 4 4 4.61 4. 78 4.95 5.12 5.29 5. 4 6 Elevation (ft) 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.20 0.37 0.54 0. 71 0.88 1. 05 1.22 1. 39 1. 56 1. 73 1.90 2.07 2.24 2. 41 2.58 2. 7 5 2. 92 3.09 3. 2 6 3.42 3.59 3. 7 6 3.93 4.10 4.27 4. 4 4 4.61 4. 78 4.95 5.12 5. 29 5.46 (cu. Storage ft) (ac-ft) Discharge (cfs) 0.000 0.001 0. 0.000 14. 0.000 27. 41. 54. 272. 503. 734. 966. 1197. 1428. 1659. 1890. 2122. 2353. 2584. 2815. 304 6. 3278. 3509. 3740. 3971. 4202. 4434. 4651. 4882. 5114. 5345. 5576. 5807. 6038. 6270. 6501. 6732. 6963. 7194. 7426. 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.006 0.002 0.012 0.003 0.017 0.004 0.022 0.004 0.027 0.004 0.033 0.005 0.038 0.005 0.043 0.006 0.049 0.006 0.054 0.006 0.059 0.007 0.065 0.007 0.070 0.007 0.075 0.007 0.081 0.008 0.086 0.008 0.091 0.008 0.096 0.008 0.102 0.009 0.107 0.009 0.112 0.009 0.117 0.009 0.123 0.009 0.128 0.010 0.133 0.010 0.139 0.010 0.144 0.010 0.149 0.010 0.155 0.011 0.160 0.011 0.165 0.011 0.170 0.011 Percolation (cfs) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.63 5.63 7 657. 0.176 0. 011 0. 00 5.80 5.80 7888. O.lBl 0.012 0.00 5.97 5.97 8119. 0.186 0.012 0.00 6.00 6.CO 8160. 0.187 0.012 0.00 6.Cl 6.Cl 8174. 0. 188 0.012 0.00 6.02 6.C2 8187. 0.188 0.012 0.00 6.03 6.03 8201. 0.188 0.013 0.00 6.04 6.04 8214. 0.189 0.015 0.00 6.05 6.05 8228. 0 .189 0.016 0.00 6.06 6.06 8242. 0. 189 0.017 0.00 6.07 6.07 8255. 0.190 0.017 0.00 6.24 6.24 8486. 0.195 0. 022 0.00 6.41 6.41 8718. 0.200 0.025 0.00 6.58 6.58 894 9. 0.205 0.027 0.00 6. 7 5 6. 7 5 9180. 0. 211 0.029 0.00 6. 92 6.92 9411. 0.216 0.031 0.00 7.09 7.09 9642. 0. 221 0.033 0.00 7.26 7.26 9874. 0.227 0.035 0.00 7.43 7. 4 3 10105. 0.232 0.036 0.00 7. 60 7.60 10336. 0. 237 0.038 0.00 7.77 7.77 10567. 0.243 0.039 0.00 7. 94 7. 94 10798. 0.248 0.041 0.00 8.10 8.10 11016. 0.253 0.042 0.00 8.27 8.27 1124 7. 0. 258 0.043 0.00 8.44 8.44 11478. 0.264 0.045 0.00 8.61 8.61 11710. 0.269 0.046 0.00 8.78 8.78 11941. 0.274 0.047 0.00 8.95 8.95 12172. 0. 279 0.048 0.00 9.12 9.12 12403. 0.285 0.049 0.00 9. 29 9.29 12634. 0.290 0.050 0.00 9.46 9.46 12866. 0.295 0.051 0.00 9.63 9.63 13097. 0.301 0.052 0.00 9.80 9.80 13328. 0.306 0.053 0.00 9.97 9.97 13559. 0. 311 0.054 0.00 10.00 10.00 13600. 0.312 0.054 0.00 10 .10 10.10 13736. 0.315 0.363 0.00 10.20 10.20 13872. 0.318 0. 927 0.00 10.30 10.30 14 008. 0.322 1.660 0.00 10.40 10.40 14144. 0.325 2.450 0.00 10.50 10.50 14280. 0.328 2.730 0.00 10.60 10.60 14416. 0. 331 2.990 0.00 10. 70 10.70 14552. 0.334 3. 220 0.00 10. 80 10.80 14688. 0. 337 3. 440 0.00 10.90 10.90 14824. 0.340 3.650 0.00 11. 00 11. 00 14960. 0.343 3.840 0.00 11.10 11.10 15096. 0.347 4.030 0.00 11.20 11. 20 15232. 0.350 4.200 0.00 11. 30 11. 30 15368. 0.353 4.370 0.00 11. 40 11. 40 15504. 0.356 4.540 0.00 11. 50 11.50 15640. 0.359 4.690 0.00 11. 60 11. 60 1577 6. 0. 362 4.850 0.00 11. 70 11. 70 15912. 0.365 4.990 0.00 11. 80 11. 80 16048. 0. 368 5 .14 0 0.00 Hyd Inflow Outflow Peak Storage Target Cale Stage Elev (Cu-Ft) (Ac-Ft) 1 0.31 0.09 0.05 8.71 8.71 118 52. 0.272 2 0.18 ******* 0.05 9.43 9. 43 12819. 0. 294 3 0.21 ******* 0.05 9.14 9.14 12433. 0.285 4 0.18 ******* 0.04 7.70 7.70 10471. 0.240 5 0.22 ***"'*** 0.05 8.46 8. 4 6 11505. 0.264 6 0.19 ******* 0.04 8.04 8.04 10938. 0.251 7 0 .13 ******* 0.02 6. 23 6.23 8472. 0.194 ---,----------- 8 0.18 *"'*"*** 0.01 5.38 Route Time Series through Facility Inflow Time Series File:dev.tsf Outflow Time Series File:~dout 5.38 7312. 0.168 Inflow/Outflow Analysis Peak Inflow Discharge: Peak Outflow Discharge: Peak Reservoir Stage: 0.314 CFS at 6:00 on Jan 9 in 1990 0.077 CFS at 20:00 on Feb 9 in 1951 10.01 Ft Peak Reservoir Elev: 10.01 Ft Peak Reservoir Storage: 13610. Cu-Ft 0.312 Ac-Ft Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:rdout.tsf Project Location:Sea-Tac ---Annual Peak Flow Rates--- Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak (CFS) 0. 011 0.031 0.077 0.010 0.027 0.012 0. 011 0.036 0.012 0.024 0.012 0.042 0.031 0.009 0.022 0.028 0.030 0.019 0.027 0.012 0.020 0.026 0.012 0.045 0. 034 0.023 0. 011 0.012 0.008 0.029 0.009 0.042 0.019 0.035 0.021 0.010 0.009 0.026 0.039 0.010 0.009 37 15 1 42 19 31 39 10 34 24 36 6 14 45 26 18 16 29 20 32 28 22 33 4 13 25 38 35 4 9 17 48 8 30 11 27 43 44 21 9 41 46 2/22/49 3/05/50 2/09/51 2/04/52 1/18/53 1/07/54 2/09/55 12/22/55 3/10/57 1/17/58 1/27 /59 11/21/59 11/24/60 12/24/61 11/30/62 11/19/63 12/01/64 1/07/66 1/28/67 1/20/68 12/11/68 1/27 /70 12/07 /70 3/06/72 12/26/72 1/18/74 1/14/75 12/04/75 8 / 2 6/7 7 12/15/77 2/13/79 12/18/79 12/30/80 10/06/81 1/08/83 12/13/83 11/04/84 1/19/86 11/24/86 12/10/87 11/05/88 22:00 6:00 20:00 9:00 21:00 21:00 4:00 15:00 4:00 8:00 1:00 6:00 11: 00 6:00 18:00 16:00 8:00 3:00 5:00 23:00 7:00 3:00 14:00 22: 00 6: 00 17:00 4:00 11: 00 8:00 18:00 1:00 1:00 22:00 19:00 1:00 8:00 8:00 5:00 9:00 8:00 23:00 LogPearson III Coefficients Mean= -1.698 StdDev= 0.269 Skew= 0.055 -----Flow Frequency Analysis------- --Peaks --Rank Return ?rob (CFS) (ft) Period 0.077 10.01 1 89.50 0.989 0.051 9.50 2 32.13 0.969 0.047 8.71 3 19.58 0.949 0.045 8.46 4 14.08 0.929 0.045 8.44 5 10.99 0.909 0.042 8.16 6 9.o: o.889 0.042 8.07 7 7.64 0.869 0.042 8.07 8 6.63 0.849 0.039 0.036 0.035 0.034 0.034 0.031 0.031 0. 030 0.029 0.028 0.027 0. 027 0. 026 0. 026 0.026 0.024 0.023 0.022 0.021 0.020 0.019 0.019 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0. 011 0. 011 0. 011 0.010 0.010 7.71 7.44 7.28 7.20 7.18 6. 96 6. 89 6.88 6. 76 6.66 6.61 6.55 6.52 6.52 6. 4 6 6.34 6. 29 6.24 6.22 6.17 6.13 6.12 6.01 5.95 5.95 5.82 5.79 5. 72 5.38 5.28 5.22 4.69 4.53 9 lD 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 5.86 5.24 4.75 4.34 3.99 3.70 3. 44 3.22 3.03 2.85 2.70 2.56 2. 44 2.32 2.22 2 .13 2.04 1. 96 1. 89 1. 82 1. 7 5 1. 70 1. 64 1. 59 1. 54 1. 4 9 1. 45 1. 41 1. 37 1. 33 1. 30 1. 27 1. 24 0.829 0.809 0.789 0.769 0.749 0. 729 0. 709 0.690 0.670 0.650 0.630 0.610 0.590 0.570 0.550 0.530 C.510 0.49D 0.00 0.450 0.430 0.410 0.390 0.370 0.350 0.330 0.310 0.291 0. 271 0.251 0.231 0. 211 0.191 -------- 1124 0.047 3 1/09/90 16:0J 0.010 4.32 42 1. 21 0.171 0.045 5 ll / 2 4 / 90 17:00 0. 010 4 .11 43 1.18 0.151 0.026 23 1/31/92 6:00 0.009 3.93 44 1.15 0.131 0.009 47 1/26/93 6:00 0.009 3.87 45 1.12 0 .111 0.008 50 2/17/94 23:00 0.009 3.81 46 1.10 0.091 0.034 12 12/27 /94 7:00 0.009 3.63 47 1. 08 0. 071 0.051 2 2/09/96 4:00 0.009 3. 2 9 48 1. 05 0.051 0.042 7 1/02/97 12:00 0.008 3.00 49 1. 03 0.031 0.010 40 1/25/98 1:00 0.008 2.93 50 1. 01 0. 011 Computed Peaks 0.087 10.01 100.00 0.990 Computed Peaks 0.073 10.01 50.00 0.980 Computed Peaks 0.060 10.00 25.00 0. 960 Computed Peaks 0.045 8.40 10.00 0.900 Computed Peaks 0.042 8.03 8.00 0.875 Computed Peaks 0.034 7.15 5.00 0.800 Computed Peaks 0.020 6.17 2.00 0.500 Computed Peaks 0. 013 6.03 1. JO 0.231 Flow Duration from Time Series File:rdout.tsf Cutoff Count Frequency CDF Exceedence_Probability CFS % % % 0.001 204268 46.637 46.637 53.363 0.534E+OO 0.003 72909 16. 64 6 63.282 36. 718 0.367E+OO 0.005 67484 15.407 78.690 21.310 0.213E+OO 0.008 45319 10.347 89.037 10.963 0. llOE+OO 0.010 28909 6.600 95.637 4.363 0.436E-01 0. 012 14620 3.338 98.975 1. 025 0.103E-01 0. 014 1925 0.439 99.414 0.586 0.586E-02 0. 016 111 0.025 99.439 0.561 0.561E-02 0. 018 353 0.081 99.520 0.480 0.480E-02 0.020 254 0.058 99.578 0.422 0.422E-02 0.023 261 0.060 99.638 0.362 0.362E-02 0.025 289 0.066 99.704 0. 296 0. 296E-02 0. 027 321 0.073 99. 777 0. 223 0.223E-02 0.029 210 0.048 99.825 0.175 0.175E-02 0.031 166 0.038 99.863 0 .137 0.137E-02 0.033 128 0.029 99.892 0.108 0.108E-02 0.036 129 0.029 99.921 0.079 0.785E-03 0.038 66 0.015 99.937 0.063 0.635E-03 0.040 82 0.019 99.955 0.045 0.447E-03 0.042 59 0. 013 99. 969 0.031 0.313E-03 0.044 36 0.008 99.977 0.023 0.231E-03 0.046 32 0.007 99.984 0.016 0.158E-03 0.048 21 0.005 99.989 0. 011 0. llOE-03 0.051 23 0.005 99.994 0. 006 0.571E-04 0.053 16 0.004 99.998 0.002 0.205E-04 0.055 7 0.002 100.000 0.000 0.457E-05 0.057 1 0.000 100.000 0.000 0.228E-05 0.059 0 0.000 100.000 0.000 0.22BE-05 0.061 0 0.000 100.000 0.000 0.228E-05 0. 064 0 0.000 100.000 0.000 0.228E-05 0.066 0 0.000 100.000 0.000 0.228E-05 0.068 0 0.000 100.000 0.000 0.228E-05 0.070 0 0.000 100.000 0.000 0.228E-05 0. 072 0 0.000 100.000 0.000 0.228E-05 0.074 0 0.000 100.000 0.000 0.228E-05 0.076 0 0.000 100.000 0.000 0.228E-05 Duration Corr.par.ison Anaylsis Base File: exist.tsf New File: rdout.tsf Cutoff Units: Discharge in CFS -----Fraction of Time--------------Check of Tolerance------- Cutoff Base New %Change Probability Base New %Change 0. 014 0.97E-02 0.59E-02 -39.8 I 0.97E-02 0.014 0.012 -14.8 0.019 D.SOE-02 0.47E-02 -5.9 I 0.50E-02 0.019 0.018 -4.4 0.023 D.28E-02 0.33E-02 17.3 I 0.28E-02 0.023 0.025 7.2 0.028 0.17E-02 0.19E-02 12.6 I 0.17E-02 0.028 0.030 4. 8 0.033 O.lOE-02 O.llE-02 7.4 I O.lOE-02 0.033 0.034 1. 8 0.038 0.67E-03 0.63E-03 -6.4 I 0.67E-03 0.038 0.037 -2.0 0.043 0.45E-03 0.28E-03 -37.9 I 0.45E-03 0.043 0.040 -6.1 0.047 0.30E-03 0.12E-03 -S9.4 I 0.30E-03 0.047 0.042 -10.8 0.052 0.21E-03 0.27E-04 -87.2 I 0.21E-03 0.052 0.045 -14.0 0.057 0.12E-03 0.23E-05 -98.0 I 0.12E-03 0.057 0.048 -15.6 0.062 0.59E-04 0.23E-05 -96. 2 I 0.59E-04 0.062 0.051 -17.9 0.066 0.32E-04 0.23E-05 -92. 9 I 0.32E-04 0.066 0.052 -22. 0 0.071 0.68E-05 0.23E-05 -66.7 I 0.68E-05 0. 071 0.054 -24.1 0. 07 6 0.23E-05 0.23E-05 0.0 I 0.23E-05 0.076 0.077 2.2 Maximum positive excursion = 0.002 cfs I 8. 0% I ' \0Di4 ok-, occurring at 0.023 cfs on the Base Data:exist.tsf and at 0.025 cfs on the New Data:rdout.tsf Maximum negative excursion = 0.005 cfs (-30.2%) occurring at 0.017 cfs on the Base Data:exist.tsf and at 0.012 cfs on the New Data:rdout.tsf en u.. ~ -a+ "' rdout.pks in Sea-Tac exist.pks gi, 10-2-,- ~ .... -c.~~---• "' .c 0 .!!1 0 ,/·· 0 0 .-•• ~ • 10·1 -"---1 -2 5 • • • _ .. --- ... -•·• 2 R Return Period 5 10 .. _.[: . -·.,,. J_ (' •. -·• . _,,,,/ I •.. 0 y- ) ... -_,.-.. -. / A _., .•.• -~.. I/ j ( .. ,•.. ) (, 0 20 .. / -~·,, ') 1'1 .JL' 'I lli, -;- rU\, t r(.l):..u (11\ An: H tJ :1 50 .. -·· 100 _J • .. --.-•·+1;•++'.,v > _,,..·· ·-···· ,<:· r'e)\(L Q S,R'f C 1 L 'f •• ;--.···· <' > . . (/ --· (,. <' ,,,,,,,,,,, 00 ~w a.1<:,71 r..Jcj FoR 2.:-'i.t'c <( iU-yR.. ./ (., ') ·,:/ /> -r---~r 10 20 30 40 50 60 Cumulative Probability 70 80 90 95 98 99 '< ¥ (/) u.. ~ Q) Cl ~ rn .c u a ro 0 0 " • . . *' t--0-f----~-----+~---------- 0 .. ··-····-·-~ ... , (0 0 ci I L ___ -- 0 ------ .. , ... ',~ •, '•. >.. •, "v ') \.\ ~. M De:: VA•v,-LT. WRl\v ON (V\A'T(H ,tJi rdout.dur target.dur • ·<,, ~ 'SI- 0 ci (") 0 ci C'J 0 ~ ci 0 0 10 ·6 00 : I 10 ·5 10.., ~ ., ,~-- ~ \ ... ~ '. *\ <> \~ T L.~y_-;o 1 . .1...._ ____ _ ,v .... ~", ~' \;-_\ I) • ) ___ ""• ·-' . 10 .3 10 ·2 1 0 ·1 Probability Exceedence I 100 -:-.t::: N ...L [E~(@[L[E [ffi~[j)(@[E (O)[F[F~t[E @ t(O)~[j)(O)~~~~(UJ~© 1 ~ [OJ [E1J'[E ~1!'! (0) ~ ~ ii __ I I ----EXISTING 00: SllE: FOREST: 53,858 (1.24 AC) TOTAL: 53,858 (1.24 AC) \ \ . '1\ ' --;-,, __...' ... ~---- - PROPOSED 00: SITE: BLDG: 20,030 (0.46 AC) PAVEMENT: 18.977 (0.44 AC) SUBTOTAL: 39,007 (0.90 AC) LANDSCAPE: 14,851 (0.34 AC) TOTAL: 53,858 (1.24 AC} / ---- \ \ / / ( \ 0 I \ \ \ ----- zffi 50 100 I I SCALE: 1" = 100 ft. w \:::----- ~ i;. i"t~1N Pf:A\l a·, Eagle Ridge office & condominiums (south Det vault) summary of 15-Minute Time Steps Predicted Runoff 3/11/09 ( 1 '5-MIN) Flow Frequency Analysis Time series File:existlS.tsf Project Location:sea-Tac ---Annual Peak Flow Rates--- Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak computed Peaks computed Peaks computed Peaks computed Peaks computed Peaks computed Peaks computed Peaks computed Peaks Flow Frequency Analysis Time series File:devl5.tsf Project Location:sea-Tac ---Annual Peak Flow Rates--- Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak (CFS) computed Peaks computed Peaks computed Peaks computed Peaks computed Peaks computed Peaks computed Peaks computed Peaks LogPearson III coefficients Mean= -1.445 stdDev= 0.262 skew= 1. 597 -----Flow Frequency Analysis------- --Peaks Rank Return Prob -0.277 100.00 0.990 ..,.,__ ) 0.192 50.00 0.980 0.132 25.00 0.960 0.080 10.00 0.900 £)1S.11r,.!.~ 0.072 8.00 0.875 0.054 5.00 0.800 0.031 2.00 0.500 0.023 1.30 0.231 LogPearson III coefficients Mean= -0.310 StdDev= 0.154 skew= 1. 274 -----Flow Frequency Analysis------- --Peaks --Rank Return Prob (CFS) Period _.,.. 1. 52 100.00 1.25 50.00 1.03 25.00 0. 787 10.00 0.745 8.00 0.633 5.00 0.455 2.00 0.372 1.30 \.1 '1 ( ('ii gJ~g .at--) .. 0.960 0.900 0.875 0.800 0. 500 0.231 "7 KCRTS Program ... File Directory: C:\KC_SWDM\KC_DATA\ [c] CREATE a new Time series ST 1. 24 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 existl5.tsf F 1. 00000 F 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000000 Till Forest 0.000000 Till Pasture 0. 000000 Ti 11 Grass \ 0.000000 outwash Forest ) 0.000000 Outwash Pasture 0.000000 outwash Grass 0.000000 Wetland 0.000000 Impervious [Tl Enter the Analysis TOOLS Module [P compute PEAKS and Flow Frequencies existl5.tsf existl5.pks [R] RETURN to Previous Menu [CJ CREATE a new Time series ST S, l5AS11~ INP,fi uA"TA \s· ('/\IN rftM(;... STEP$ 0.00 0.00 0.34 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000000 Till Forest 0.000000 Till Pasture ) 0.000000 Till Grass O. 000000 outwash Forest 1, r::u cc. ,-.n,-T, S 1.,.,......-0. 000000 Outwash Pasture \,./'t;..V,c...r_JJll-r;:;....,jL.J t~ devl5.tsf F 1. 00000 F 0.000000 Outwash Grass 0.000000 wetland 0.000000 Impervious [T] Enter the Analysis TOOLS Module [P] compute PEAKS and Flow Frequencies devlS. tsf dev15.pks [Rl RETURN to Previous Menu [X exit KCRTS Program surr.pks. txt Eagle Ridge Office & Condominiums (South Det Vault) Summary of Predicted Runoff S , ·'K:f\Sl/'4 -SU M:{ v\A.,(Z Y or· t+OJRL-Y r~AV ~ 3/10/09 Flow F'req·.1ency .~::-ialysis Time Series File:exist.tsf ?roject Location:Sea-Tac ---Annual Peak Flow Rates--- Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak computed Peaks Computed Peaks Computed Peaks Computed Peaks Computed Peaks Computed Peaks Computed Peaks Computed Peaks Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File;dev.tsf Project Location;Sea-Tac ---Annual Peak Flow Rates--- Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak (CFS) Computed Peaks computed Peaks computed Peaks Computed Peaks computed Peaks Computed Peaks computed Peaks computed Peaks Level 2 Detention Vault (10') Int Size=[0.086-(0.030*0.5)]/(36-l) ~0.002 lst Int.=0.030*0.5 ~0.015 Qmax=(4/3*0.015) ~0.020 Orif(2)=3/4*10.0 =7.5' LogPearson III Coefficients Mean= -1.522 StdDev= 0.232 Skew= -0.138 -----Flow Frequency Analysis------- --Peaks Rank Return Prob 0.099 100.00 0.990 0.086 50.00 0.980 0.075 25.00 0.960 0.059 10.00 0.900 0.056 8.00 0.875 0.047 5.00 0.800 0.030 2.00 0.500 0.020 1.30 0.231 LogPearson III Coefficients Mean= -0.600 StdDev= 0.104 Skew= 0.471 -----Flow Frequency Analysis------- --Peaks Rank Return Prob (CFS) Period 0.476 100.00 0.436 50.00 0.396 25.00 0.345 10.00 0.334 8.00 0.305 5.00 0.247 2.00 0,209 1.30 Page 1 0.990 0.980 0.960 0.900 0.875 0.800 0.500 0.231 ) KCRTS Program ... File Directory: C:\KC_SWDM\KC_DATA\ [CJ CREATE a new Time series ST 1. 24 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 exist.tsf F 1. 00000 T 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 [T] Enter the Analysis TOOLS Module [P] compute PEAKS and Flow Frequencies exist.tsf exist.pks [R] RETURN to Previous Menu [CJ CREATE a new Time Series ST dev.tsf F 0.00 0.00 0.34 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.90 1. 00000 T 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 [T] Enter the Analysis TOOLS Module [P] compute PEAKS and Flow Frequencies dev.tsf dev.pks [R] RETURN to Previous Menu [X] exit KCRTS Program Till Forest Ti 11 Pasture Till Grass Outwash Forest outwash Pasture Outwash Grass wetland Impervious Ti 11 Forest Till Pasture r\il U /( l..'i Ti M f-S. TG1:;i$ , ) ~,is-[ IN\ Till Grass )' outwash Forest Outwash Pasture outwash Grass wetland Impervious Eagle Ridge S DetP.ntion 3/10/09 Retention/De:ention Facility Type of Facility: Facility Length: Facility Width: Facility Area: Effective Storage Depth: Stage O Elevation: Storage Volume: Riser Head: Riser Diameter: Number of orifices: Detention Vault 109.30 ft 20.00 ft 218 6. sq. 10.00 ft 0.00 ft 218 60. cu. 10.00 ft ft ft 12.00 inches 2 Full Head Pipe 1)2::.11;...N-n o t,J l=A c. 11 .. -i'0-/ De:s I c,rJ Orifice# Height 1ft) 0.00 6.00 Diameter Discharge Diameter l 2 Top Notch Weir: Outflow Rating Curve: Stage Elevation (in) 0.45 0.75 None None Storage (CFS) (in) 0.018 0.031 4.0 Discharge (ft) I ft I (cu. ft) (ac-ft) (cfs) 0.00 0.00 0. 0.000 0.000 0.01 0.01 22. 0.001 0.001 0.02 0.02 44. 0.001 0.001 0.03 0.03 66. 0.002 0.001 0.04 0.04 87. 0.002 0.001 0.21 0.21 459. 0. 011 0.003 0.38 0.38 831. 0.019 0.003 0.55 0.55 1202. 0.028 0.004 0.72 0. 72 1574. 0.036 0.005 0.89 0.89 1946. 0.045 0.005 1. 05 l. 05 2295. 0.053 0.006 1. 22 1. 22 2667. 0.061 0.006 1. 39 1. 39 3039. 0.070 0.007 1. 56 1. 56 3410. 0.078 0.007 1. 73 1. 7 3 3782. 0.087 0.007 1. 90 1. 90 4153. 0.095 0.008 2.07 2.07 4525. 0.104 0.008 2.24 2.24 4897. 0 .112 0.008 2.41 2. 41 5268. 0 .121 0.009 2.58 2.58 5640. 0.129 0.009 2.75 2.75 6012. 0 .138 0.009 2.92 2.92 6383. 0.147 0. 010 3.09 3.09 6755. 0.155 0.010 3.26 3.26 7126. 0 .164 0.010 3. 4 3 3. 43 7498. 0 .172 0.010 3.60 3.60 7870. 0.181 0. 011 3. 77 3.77 8241. 0.189 0. 011 3.94 3.94 8613. 0.198 0. 011 4 .11 4 .11 8985. 0.206 o. 011 4.28 4.28 9356. 0.215 0.012 4. 4 4 4.44 9706. 0.223 0.012 4. 61 4.61 10077. 0.231 0.012 4. 78 4. 78 10449. 0.240 0.012 4.95 4.95 10821. 0.248 0.012 5.12 5.12 11192. 0.257 0. 013 5.29 5. 29 11564. 0.265 0. 013 5. 4 6 5.46 11936. 0.274 0.013 Percolation (cfs) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.63 5.63 12307. 0.283 0.013 0.00 5.50 S.80 12679. 0. 291 0.013 0.00 5.97 5.97 13050. 0.300 0.014 0.00 6.0C 6.00 13116. 0.301 0.014 0.00 6.01 6.01 13138. 0.302 0.014 0.00 6.02 6.02 13160. 0.302 0.015 0.00 6.03 6.03 13182. 0.303 0.015 0.00 6.04 6.04 13203. 0.303 0.017 0.00 6.05 6.05 13225. 0.304 0. 017 0.00 6. 06 6.06 13247. 0.304 0.018 0.00 6.07 6.07 13269. 0.305 0.018 0.00 6.24 6.24 13641. 0.313 0.021 0.00 6.41 6.41 14012. 0.322 0.024 0.00 6.58 6.58 14384. 0.330 0.026 0.00 6. 75 6.75 14756. 0.339 0.028 0.00 6. 92 6.92 15127. 0.347 0.029 0.00 7.09 7.09 154 99. 0.356 0.031 0.00 7.26 7.26 15870. 0. 364 0.032 0.00 7.43 7.43 16242. 0.373 0.034 0.00 7.60 7.60 16614. 0.381 0.035 0.00 7.77 7. 77 16985. 0.390 0.036 0.00 7.94 7. 9 4 17357. 0.398 0.037 0.00 8.10 8.10 17707. 0.406 0.038 0.00 8. 27 8.27 18078. 0.415 0.039 0.00 8.44 8. 4 4 18450. 0.424 0.040 0.00 8. 61 8.61 18821. 0.432 0.041 0.00 8.78 8.78 19193. 0.441 0.042 0.00 8.95 8.95 19565. 0.449 0.043 0.00 9.12 9.12 19936. 0.458 0.044 0.00 9. 29 9.29 20308. 0. 4 66 0.045 0.00 9.46 9. 4 6 20680. 0.475 0.046 0.00 9.63 9.63 21051. 0.483 0.047 0.00 9.80 9.80 21423. 0. 4 92 0.048 0.00 9.97 9.97 217 94. 0.500 0.048 0.00 10.00 10.00 21860. 0.502 0.049 0.00 10.10 10.10 22079. 0.507 0.357 0.00 10.20 10.20 22297. 0.512 0. 921 0.00 10.30 10.30 22516. 0.517 1. 650 0.00 10.40 10.40 22734. 0.522 2. 4 4 0 0.00 10.50 10.50 22953. 0.527 2.730 0.00 10. 60 10.60 23172. 0.532 2.980 0.00 10. 70 10.70 23390. 0.537 3. 220 0.00 10.80 10.80 23609. 0.542 3.430 0.00 10.90 10.90 23827. 0.547 3.640 0.00 11. 00 11. 00 24046. 0.552 3.840 0.00 11.10 11.10 24265. 0.557 4.020 0.00 11. 20 11. 20 24483. 0.562 4.200 0.00 11. 30 11.30 24702. 0. 567 4.370 0.00 11. 40 11. 4 0 24920. 0. 572 4.530 0.00 11. 50 11. 50 25139. 0.577 4.690 0.00 11. 60 11. 60 25358. 0.582 4.840 0.00 11. 70 11. 70 25576. 0.587 4.990 0.00 Hyd Inflow Outflow Peak Storage Target Cale Stage Elev (Cu-Ft) (Ac-Ft) 1 0.26 0 .10 0.09 10.01 10. 01 21886. 0.502 2 0.28 ******* 0.05 9.49 9. 4 9 20745. 0.476 3 0. 4 0 ******* 0.04 8.90 8.90 19449. 0.446 4 0.27 ******* 0.04 8.38 8.38 18309. 0. 420 5 0. 4 4 ******* 0.04 8.14 8 .14 17792. 0.408 6 0.36 ******* 0.04 7.70 7.70 16841. 0.387 7 0.25 ******* 0.02 6.21 6.21 13586. 0.312 8 0.17 ******* 0.01 4.97 4.97 10854. 0.249 Route Tine Series through Facility Inflow Time Series File:dev.tsf Outflow Time Series File:rdout Inflow/Outflow Analysis Peak Inflow Discharge: Peak Outflow Discharge: Peak Reservoir Stage: 0.437 CFS at 6:00 on Jan 9 in 1990 0.085 CFS at 20:00 on Feb 9 in 1951 10.01 Ft Peak Reservoir Elev: 10.01 Ft Peak Reservoir Storage: 21886. Cu-Ft 0.502 Ac-Ft Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:rdout.tsf Project Location:Sea-Tac ---Annual Peak Flow Rates--- Flow Rate (CFS) 0.012 0.029 0.085 0. 011 0.029 0.013 0. 013 0.036 0.013 0. 021 0.013 0.037 0.031 0. 011 0.025 0.030 0.031 0. 021 0. 030 0.013 0.018 0. 027 0.014 0. 041 0.033 0. 021 0.013 0.013 0.010 0.027 0.010 0.041 0.014 0.034 0. 021 0.012 0.012 0.020 0.036 0.012 0.012 0.038 Rank 40 19 1 46 18 33 38 9 36 26 32 8 15 45 22 16 14 25 17 34 29 21 31 5 13 24 37 35 48 20 50 4 30 11 27 43 44 28 10 39 42 7 Time of Peak 2/22/49 3/05/50 2/09/51 2/04/52 1/18/53 1/23/54 11/25/54 1/06/56 3/10/57 1/17/58 1/27 /59 11/21/59 il/24/60 12/24/61 11/30/62 11/19/63 12/01/64 1/07/66 12/13/66 1/20/68 12/11/68 1/27 /70 12/07 /70 3/06/72 12/26/72 12/17/73 1/14/75 12/04/75 8/26/77 12/15/77 2/13/79 12/18/79 12/30/80 10/06/81 1/08/83 11/24/83 11/11/84 1/19/86 11/24/86 12/10/87 11/25/88 1/09/90 22:00 7:00 20:00 8:00 21:00 2:00 12:00 12:00 4:00 8:00 1:00 6:00 16:00 6:00 18:00 17:00 8:00 3:00 11: 00 21:00 7:00 4:00 13:00 22: 00 6:00 8:00 0:00 5:00 8:00 19:00 0:00 4:00 23:00 19:00 3:00 9:00 9:00 3:00 9:00 8:00 1:00 17:00 LogPearson III Coefficients Mean~ -1.683 StdDev~ 0.232 Skew= 0.316 -----Flow Frequency Analysis------- --Peaks --Rank Return Prob (CFS) (ft) Period 0.085 10.01 1 89.50 0.046 9.49 2 32.13 0.043 8.90 3 19.58 0.041 8.65 4 14.08 0.041 8.64 5 10.99 0.040 8.38 6 9.01 0.038 8.14 7 7.64 0.037 7.89 8 6.63 0.036 7.84 9 5.86 0.036 0.034 0.033 0.033 0.031 0.031 0.030 0.030 0.029 0.029 0. 027 0.027 0.025 0.022 0.021 0.021 0.021 0.021 0.020 0.018 0. 014 0.014 0.013 0.013 0. 013 0.013 0.013 0. 013 0.013 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 7.70 7.50 7.34 7.31 7.17 7 .11 6.99 6.97 6.90 6.85 6.70 6.64 6.47 6.29 6.25 6.22 6.21 6.21 6.18 6.07 5.94 5.92 5.84 5.84 5.75 5.68 5.59 5.36 5.10 4.97 4. 96 4.86 4.51 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 5.24 4. 75 4.34 3.99 3.70 3. 44 3.22 3.03 2.85 2.70 2.56 2.44 2.32 2.22 2.13 2.04 1. 96 1. 89 1. 82 1. 75 1. 70 1.64 1.59 1.54 1. 4 9 1. 45 1.41 1.37 1.33 1.30 1.27 1.24 1.21 0.989 0. 969 0.949 0.929 0.909 0.889 0.869 0.849 0.829 0.809 0.789 0.769 0.749 0.729 0.709 0.690 0. 670 0.650 0.630 0.610 0.590 0.570 0.550 0.530 0.510 0.490 0.470 0.450 0.430 0.410 0.390 0.370 0.350 0.330 0.310 0.291 0.271 0.251 0.231 0. 211 0.191 0 .171 "l' L', '.2/-j· 0.043 3 11/24 /90 17:00 0.012 4. 4 9 43 1.18 0.151 0.022 23 1/31/92 23:00 0.012 4.36 44 1.15 0.131 0.011 47 1/26/93 5:00 0. 011 4.09 45 1.12 0 .111 0.010 49 12/11/93 11: 00 0. 011 4.06 46 1.10 0.091 0.033 12 12/27 /94 7:00 o. 011 3.56 47 1. 08 0. 071 0.046 2 2/09/96 5:00 0.010 3.23 48 1. 05 0.051 0.040 6 1/02/97 13:00 0.010 3.21 49 1. 03 0.031 0.012 41 1/25/98 0:00 0.010 3.17 50 1. 01 0. 011 Computed Peaks 0.081 10.01 100.00 0.990 Computed Peaks 0.068 10.01 50.00 0.980 Computed Peaks 0.056 10.00 25.00 0. 960 Computed Peaks 0.042 8.73 10.00 0.900 Computed Peaks 0.039 8.28 8.00 0.875 Computed Peaks 0.032 7.27 5.00 0.800 Computed Peaks 0.020 6.19 2.00 0.500 Computed Peaks 0.014 5.93 1. 30 0.231 Flow Duration from Time Series File:rdout.tsf Cutoff Count Frequency CDF Exceedence Probability CFS % % % 0.001 177048 40.422 40.422 59.578 0. 596E+OO 0.004 78311 17.879 58.301 41. 699 0.417E+OO 0.006 51412 11. 738 70.039 2 9. 961 0.300E+OO 0.008 64012 14.615 84.654 15.346 0.153E+OO 0, 011 34325 7.837 92.490 7.510 0.751E-01 0. 013 22236 5.077 97.567 2.433 0.243E-01 0.015 7354 1.679 99.246 0.754 0.754E-02 0.018 150 0.034 99.280 0.720 0.720E-02 0.020 595 0.136 99.416 0.584 0.584E-02 0.022 478 0.109 99.525 0.475 0.475E-02 0.025 42 6 0.097 99.623 0.377 0.377E-02 0. 027 427 0.097 99.720 0.280 0.280E-02 0.029 412 0.094 99.814 0.186 0.186E-02 0.032 272 0.062 99.876 0.124 0.124£-02 0.034 116 0.026 99.903 0.097 0.973E-03 0.037 151 0.034 99.937 0.063 0.628E-03 0.039 109 0.025 99. 962 0.038 0.379E-03 0.041 75 0, 017 99.979 0.021 0.208£-03 0.044 36 0.008 99.987 0.013 0.126E-03 0.046 26 0.006 99.993 0.007 0.662£-04 0.048 26 0.006 99.999 0.001 0.685£-05 0.051 1 0.000 100.000 0.000 0.457E-05 0.053 0 0.000 100.000 0.000 0, 457E-05 0.055 1 0.000 100.000 0.000 0.228E-05 0.058 0 0.000 100.000 0.000 0.228E-05 0.060 0 0.000 100.000 0.000 0.228E-05 0.063 0 0.000 100.000 0.000 0.228£-05 0.065 0 0.000 100.000 0.000 0.228E-05 0.067 0 0.000 100.000 0.000 0.228E-05 0.070 0 0.000 100.000 0.000 0.228E-05 0.072 0 0.000 100.000 0.000 0.228E-05 0.074 0 0.000 100.000 0.000 0.228E-05 0.077 0 0.000 100.000 0.000 0.228E-05 0.079 0 0.000 100.000 0.000 0.228E-D5 0.081 0 0.000 100.000 0.000 0.228E-05 0.084 0 0.000 100.000 0.000 0.228E-05 Duration Comparison Anaylsis Base File: exist.tsf New File: rdout.tsf Cutoff Units: Discharge in CFS Cutoff -----Fraction of Time--------------Check of Tolerance------- Base New %Change Probability Base New %Change 0.015 O.lOE-01 0.78E-02 -24.5 O.lOE-01 0.015 0.013 -10.D 0.020 O.SlE-02 O.SBS-02 13.9 O.SlE-02 0.020 0.022 ' ' ' . " 0.025 0.30E-02 0.35E-02 18.7 0.30E-02 0.025 0. C27 5.3 0.031 0. 18~.-02 0.16E-02 -8.6 O.lSE-02 0.031 0.030 -2.8 0.036 0. llE-02 0. 72E-03 -34.0 O. llE-02 0.036 0.033 -8.3 0.041 0.68E-03 0. 22E-03 -68.2 0.68E-03 0.041 0.036 -12.1 0.046 0.46E-03 O.SOE-04 -89.0 0.46E-03 0.046 0.038 -17.8 0.052 0.31E-03 0.46E-05 -98.5 0.31E-D3 0.052 0.040 -22. 8 0. 057 0.22E-03 0.23E-05 -98.9 0.22E-03 0.057 0.041 -27. 7 0.062 0.12E-03 0.23E-05 -98.0 0.12E-03 0.062 0.044 -28.9 0. 067 0.62E-04 0.23E-05 -96.3 0.62E-04 0.067 0.046 -31. 6 0. 07 3 0.34E-04 0.23E-05 -93.3 0.34E-04 0.073 0.047 -35.1 0.078 0.68E-05 0.23E-05 -66.7 0.68E-05 0.078 0.049 -37.5 0.083 0.23E-05 0.23E-05 0.0 0.23E-05 0.083 0.085 1. 8 Maximum positive excursion -0.002 cfs I 8.7%) < 10}. ()~ occurring at 0.022 cfs on the Base Data:exist.tsf and at 0.024 cfs on the New Data:rdout.tsf Maximum negative excursion -0.030 cfs (-38.2%) occurring at 0.078 cfs on the Base Data:exist.tsf and at 0.048 cfs on the New Data:rdout.tsf 2 Return Period 5 S D£-r. VM.cr ft:;A('-'FLOI/J MArcl-/ 1/\.IC1 10 20 50 --__ .! _____________ ~-----~---~----~ .,. If) u.. ~ > rdout.pks in Sea-Tac • exist.pks ,.,, .. R --. -·· . ... -·--····. .. --.--········· I -+ •• r 0 .. .... ·r ... ,..('0 )/-/ 0 ••• --• ,0 •• •.• •. · A• .. -· --.-----~-. ,; '/ < 00 (/ V '','-//<''/ .,'-···</ /'/ _..__ /) <· .. • a, . i 10·2+ ~~=-__.._~-::::-._c:::_:_ ________________________ _ __ .--. <· .v·· . ~ 0 • "' • 1 o·.L.L___~-----,----,-----,---~---:i::--::i:--~--~---;,sh- 1 60 70 2 5 10 20 30 40 50 Cumulative Probability • • J ~ .....• • .. · I • .. ·,_I< > ., .v 8::,At q s.·nei<rLY t.ELON G:.X! ,; Ti"' ~ foR 2-y(( t o-yi<:. I 90 95 98 100 __ _J • 99 " '~ ~- "-..,;."' 2 I I-!,.) \-J "'. :s ~ <t" > 2 CJ ~-~ \:U p C\l 0 J a ' . ~ ~ ::, ::, DD ~~ 0 0) u~ ~2J • I • • 0::: ; <: 0 0 0 a '7 a ~ "! a '\' r-------+-------+---------+-------+-------+-o 0(0 8 ·o g ·o v ·o 00 ~ (s.:1::i) e61e~:is10 Ql u C: Ql u Ql Ql u X w -~ Ei "' .a e CL APPENDIX C-2 TREATMENT FACILITIES DESIGN Flow Frequency Analysis Time series File:npavel5.tsf Project Location:sea-Tac ---Annual Peak Flow Rates--------Flow Frequency Analysis------- Fl OW Rate Rank Time of Peak -Peaks Rank Return Prob (CFS) (CFS) 0.067 6 8/27 /01 18:00 0.165 0.046 8 9/17/02 17:45 0.126 0.126 2 12/08/02 17: 15 0.091 0.054 7 8/23/04 14: 30 0.075 0.071 5 10/28/04 16:00 0.071 0.075 4 10/27/05 10:45 0.067 0.091 3 10/25/06 22:45 0.054 0.165 1 1/09/08 6: 30 0.046 Computed Peaks 0.152 Eagle Ridge North Pavement Area Runoff Cales. 3/10/09 North ca Stormfilter N(flow)=Q(trt)*[(449gpm/cfs)/Q(trt) gpm/cart] Q(trt)=0.6*Q(2) Q(trt)=0.6(0.067) Q(trt)=0.04 cfs N(flow)=0.04*(449/7.5) N(flow)=2.39 cartridges (use 3 cartridges) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Period 100.00 0.990 25. 00 0.960 10.00 0.900 5.00 0.800 3.00 0.667 2.00 o. 500 1. 30 0. 231 1.10 0.091 50.00 0.980 e AR1l21lJ4 E:.. fl L--rc::R.. 1'(2!2"TMENT S1"b"14. KCRTS Program ... File Directory: C:\KC_SWDM\KC_DATA\ [C] CREATE a new Time series ST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.14 NbldglS.tsf T 1. 00000 F 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 [TJ Enter the Analysis TOOLS Module [P compute PEAKS and Flow Frequencies NbldglS.tsf Nbldgl5.pks [R] RETURN to Previous Menu [x] exit KCRTS Program Ti 11 Forest Till Pasture Till Grass outwash Forest outwash Pasture outwash Grass wetland Impervious f.lD/2'.fH Vl\v8"1'te>JT µJ27f5 1rJPJT v/\TA f"Dtz 11Zf:J'\TM.ENT $/G,1 l\.l tj. Flow Frequency Analysis Time series File:devlS.tsf Project Location:sea-Tac ---Annual Peak Flow Rates--------Flow Frequency Analysis------- --Peaks --Rank Return Prob Flow Rate Rank Ti me of Peak (CFS) (CFS) Period 0.067 6 8/27 /0l 18:00 0.165 1 100.00 0.046 8 9/17/02 17:45 0.126 2 25.00 0.126 2 12/08/02 17:15 0.091 3 10.00 0.054 7 8/23/04 14: 30 0.075 4 5.00 0.071 5 10/28/04 16:00 0.071 5 3.00 0.075 4 10/27/05 10:45 0.067 6 2.00 0.091 3 10/25/06 22 :45 0.054 7 1. 30 0.165 1 1/09/08 6: 30 0.046 8 1.10 computed Peaks 0.152 50.00 Eagle Ridge south Pavement Area Driveway Entrance Runoff Cales. 3/10/09 \ south CB stormfilter N(flow)=Q(trt)*[(449gpm/cfs)/Q(trt) gpm/cart] Q(trt)=0.6*Q(2) Q(trt)=0.6(0.067) Q(trt)=0.040 cfs N(flow)=0.040*(449/7.5) N(flow)=2.41 cartridges (use 3 cartridges) ' 0.990 0.960 0.900 0.800 0.667 0. 500 0.231 0.091 0.980 ~ Ai"<n'?i Oti £ f1 L.TCR ~ffTM~T '.S!'ii\J~ KCRTS Program ... File Directory: C:\KC_SWDM\KC_DATA\ [c] CREATE a new Time series ST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.14 devl5.tsf T 1. 00000 F 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 [T] Enter the Analysis TOOLS Module [P] compute PEAKS and Flow Frequencies devl5.tsf devl5.pks [R] RETURN to Previous Menu [X] exit KCRTS Program Till Forest Till Pasture Till Grass outwash Forest outwash Pasture outwash Grass wetland Impervious Soun-\ jJ l\\/2M GJT DR I vfJ/JAy t;:.I\CfY~/\l(E:, l(ct?T} IN/?UT , D/'(TA, fb~ ,r2l,A:7MLJ-.JT $12 1N4. Flow Frequency Analysis Time series File:dev15.tsf Project Location:Sea-Tac ---Annual Peak Flow Rates--------Flow Frequency Analysis------- --Peaks Rank Return Prob Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak (CFS) (CFS) 0.138 6 8/27 /01 18:00 0.342 0.096 8 9/17/02 17 :45 0. 261 0. 261 2 12/08/02 17:15 0.188 0.111 7 8/23/04 14: 30 0.154 0.146 5 10/28/04 16:00 0.146 0.154 4 10/27/05 10:45 0.138 0.188 3 10/25/06 22:45 0.111 0.342 1 1/09/08 6:30 0.096 computed Peaks 0.315 Eagle Ridge south Parking Pavement Area Runoff Cales. 3/10/09 south CB Stormfilter N(flow)=Q(trt)*[(449gpm/cfs)/Q(trt) gpm/cart] Q(trt)=0.6*Q(2) Q(trt)=0.6(0.138) Q(trt)=0.083 cfs N(flow)=0.083*(449/7.5) N(flow)=4.95 cartridges (use 5 cartridges) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Period 100.00 0.990 25.00 0.960 10.00 0.900 5 .00 0.800 3.00 0.667 2.00 0. 500 1. 30 0.231 1.10 0.091 50.00 0.980 C A-({11' I .0 4. £ 1:'.'i L,.. 'i'£("'- 1)U::J\ TM EAI1 ".:"12-' "-' ~ · KCRTS Program ... File Di rectory: C:\KC_SWDM\K(_DATA\ [c] CREATE a new Time Series ST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0. 29 devlS.tsf T 1. 00000 F 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 [T] Enter the Analysis TOOLS Module [P] compute PEAKS and Flow Frequencies devl5.tsf devl5.pks [R] RETURN to Previous Menu [X] exit KCRTS Program Till Forest Till Pasture Ti 11 Grass outwash Forest Outwash Pasture Outwash Grass wetland Impervious -:;o..r,H (A(<k ,J"j f'f\vt.i"'U-.fi jlc.(2:T'S 1iJPv-r ~TA r"!Q(< ,¥2£1\T Mf:.t-17 ! 12. ,,J", . APPENDIX D MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR PRIVATELY MAINTAINED DRAINAGE FACILITIES • MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS MANUAL FOR PRIVATELY MAINTAINED DRAINAGE FACILITIES ADDRESS: 15xx Benson Road South Renton, Washington RETENTION/DETENTION FACILITY The purpose of the detention vaults is to reduce the rate of runoff from the developed portions of the property to historic levels. Water can flow freely into the vaults, but orifices in the outflow risers restrict the outflow. When the inflow exceeds the capacity of the orifices, the excess water is "stored" in the vaults and released slowly after the storm abates. In order to function properly, the vaults must also be kept free of accumulated sediment. The outlet pipes also must be kept clean, as even a partial blockage could significantly impact the ability of a facility to store runoff. The facilities should be visually inspected for sediment accumulation and blockages at least once each year and also after every major storm greater than or equal to a 10-year return frequency. CARTRIDGE FILTER TREATMENT FACILITIES The cartridge filter treatment facilities should be maintained in accordance with the manufacturer's recommendations. CONVEYANCE SYSTEMS Pipes transport runoff from one place to another, in this case from catch basins and cartridge filters to the vaults, then to the downstream drainage system. To work properly, pipes must be kept free of silt and other debris. If pipes become blocked, surface flooding will usually occur. CATCH BASINS AND AREA DRAINS Catch basins collect surface drainage and direct it into storm conveyance pipes. They help prevent downstream drainage problems by trapping sediment and other debris that would otherwise flow downstream with the runoff. It is important to keep catch basins clean so accumulated silt is not flushed out during a significant storm. Also, if the outflow pipe becomes blocked with debris, surface flooding will usually occur. All catch basins should be inspected at least once each year and after major storms. Area drains convey runoff directly into conveyance pipes. To prevent surface flooding, their surface grates must be kept free of litter and debris. If dirt or other sediment gets into the pipes and they become blocked, the pipes will need to be cleaned, either manually or using a Vactor truck. The following tables identify maintenance issues, which should be addressed regularly, describing possible problems with the drainage system and their respective solutions. • APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FLOW CONTROL, CONVEYANCE, AND WQ FACILITIES NO. 3 -DETENTION TANKS AND VAULTS Maintenance Defect or Problem Conditions When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Component Maintenance is Performed Storage Area Plugged Air Vents One-half of the cross section of a vent is blocked Vents free of debris and sediment at any point with debris and sediment. Debris and Sediment Accumulated sediment depth exceeds 10% of All sediment and debris removed the diameter of the storage area for 1h length of from storage area. storage vault or any point depth exceeds 15% of diameter. Example: 72-inch storage tank would require cleaning when sediment reaches depth of 7 inches for more than 1h length of tank. Joints Between Any crack allowing material to be transported into Alt joint between tank/pipe sections Tank/Pipe Section facility. are sealed Tank Pipe Bent Out of Any part of tank/pipe is bent out of shape more Tank/pipe repaired or replaced to Shape than 10% of its design shape. design. Vault Structure Damage to Wall, Cracks wider than X-inch and any evidence of Vault replaced or repaired to design Frame, Bottom, soil particles entering the structure through the specifications. and/or Top Slab cracks, or maintenance inspection personnel determines that the vault is not structurally sound. Damaged Pipe Joints Cracks wider than X-inch at the joint of any No cracks more than 1/.i·inch wide at inleUoutlet pipe or any evidence of soil particles the joint of the inleUoutlet pipe. entering the vault through the walls. Manhole Cover Not in Place Cover is missing or only partially in place. Any Manhole ls closed. open manhole requires maintenance. Locking Mechanism Mechanism cannot be opened by one Mechanism opens with proper tools. Not Working maintenance person with proper tools. Bolts into frame have less than 1h inch of thread (may not apply to self.locking lids.) Cover Difficult to One maintenance person cannot remove lid after Cover can be removed and Remove applying BOlbs of lift. Intent is to keep cover from reinstalled by one maintenance sealing off access to maintenance. person. Ladder Rungs Unsafe King County Safety Office and/or maintenance Ladder meets design standards. person judges that ladder is unsafe due to Allows maintenance person safe missing rungs, misalignment, rust, or cracks. access. Large access Gaps, Doesn't Cover Large access doors not flat and/or access hole Doors doses flat and covers access doors/plate Completely not completely covered. NOTE however that hole completely. grated doors are acceptable. Lifting Rings Missing, Lifting rings not capable of lifting weight of door Lifting rings sufficient to remove lid. Rusted or lid. 1/24/2005 2005 Surface Water Design Manual -Appendix A A-4 • APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR FLOW CONTROL, CONVEYANCE, AND WQ FACILITIES NO. 4 -CONTROL STRUCTURE/FLOW RESTRICTOR Maintenance Defect or Problem Condition When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Component Maintenance is Perfonned General Trash and Debris Distance between debris build-up and bottom of All trash and debris removed. (Includes Sediment) orifice plate is less than 1.5 feet. Structural Damage Structure is not securely attached to manhole Structure securely attached to wall wall and outlet pipe structure should support at and outlet pipe. least 1,000 lbs of up or down pressure. Structure is not in upright position (allow up to Structure in correct position. 10% from plumb). Connections to outlet pipe are not watertight and Connections to outlet pipe are water show signs of rust. tight; structure repaired or replaced and works as designed. Any holes-other than designed holes-in the Structure has no holes other than structure. designed holes. Cleanout Gate Damaged or Missing Cleanout gate is not watertight or is missing. Gate is watertight and works as designed. Gate cannot be moved up and down by one Gate moves up and down easily and maintenance person. is watertight. Chain/rod leading to gate is missing or damaged. Chain is in place and works as designed. Gate is rusted over 50% of its surface area. Gate is repaired or replaced to meet design standards. Orifice Plate Damaged or Missing Control device is not working properly due to Plate is In place and works as missing, out of place, or bent orifice plate. designed. Obstructions Any trash, debris, sediment, or vegetation Plate is free of all obstructions and blocking the plate. works as designed. Overflow Pipe Obstructions Any trash or debris blocking (or having the Pipe is free of all obstructions and potential of blocking) the overflow pipe. works as designed. Manhole See "Detention Tanks See "Detention Tanks and Vaults" Table No. 3 See "Detention Tanks arid Vaults" and Vaults" Table No. 3 ~005 Surface Water Design Manual -Appendix A J/24/2005 A-5 • APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FLOW CONTROL, CONVEY ANC:E, AND WQ F AC:ILITIES NO. 5 -CATCH BASINS Maintenance Defect or Problem Conditions When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Component Maintenance is performed General Trash & Debris Trash or debris of more than ;I;, cubic foot which No Trash or debris located (Includes Sediment) is located immediately in front of the catch basin immediately in front of catch basin opening or is blocking capacity of the basin by opening. more than 10%. Trash or debris (in the basin} that exceeds 1/3 the No trash or debris in the catch depth from the bottom of basin to invert the basin. lowest pipe into or out of the basin. Trash or debris in any inlet or outlet pipe blocking Inlet and outlet pipes free of trash or more than 1 fa of its height. debris. Dead animals or vegetation that could generate No dead animals or vegetation odors that could cause complaints or dangerous present within the catch basin. gases (e.g., methane). Deposits of garbage exceeding 1 cubic foot in No condition present which would volume. attract or support the breeding of insects or rodents. Structure Damage to Comer of frame extends more than % inch past Frame is even with curb. Frame and/or Top curb face into the street (If applicable}. Slab Top slab has holes larger than 2 square inches Top slab is free of holes and cracks. or cracks wider than ~ inch (intent is to make sure all material is running into basin). Frame not sitting flush on top slab, i.e., Frame is sitting flush on top slab. separation of more than % inch of the frame from the top slab. Cracks in Basin Cracks wider than Yi inch and longer than 3 feet, Basin replaced or repaired to design Wal ls/Bottom any evidence of soil particles entering catch standards. basin through cracks, or maintenance person judges that structure is unsound. Cracks wider than Yi inch and longer than 1 foot No cracks more than 1/4 inch wide at at the joint of any inlet/outlet pipe or any the joint of inlet/outlet pipe. evidence of soil particles entering catch basin through cracks. Settlement/ Basin has settled more than 1 inch or has rotated Basin replaced or repaired to design Misalignment more than 2 inches out of alignment. standards. Fire Hazard Presence of chemicals such as natural gas, oil No flammable chemicals present. and gasoline. Vegetation Vegetation growing across and blocking more No vegetation blocking opening to than 10% of the basin opening. basin. Vegetation growing in inlet/outlet pipe joints that No vegetation or root growth is more than 6 inches tall and less than 6 inches present. apart. Pollution Nonflammable chemicals of more than % cubic No pollution present other than foot per three feet of basin length. surface film. Catch Basin Cover Cover Not in Place Cover is missing or only partially in place. Any Catch basin cover is closed open catch basin requires maintenance. Locking Mechanism Mechanism cannot be opened by on Mechanism opens with proper toots. Not Working maintenance person with proper tools. Bolts into frame have less than Y.i inch of thread. Cover Difficult to One maintenance person cannot remove !id after Cover can be removed by one Remove applying 80 lbs. of lift; intent is keep cover from maintenance person. sealing off access to maintenance. Ladder Ladder Rungs Unsafe Ladder is unsafe due to missing rungs, Ladder meets design standards and misalignment, rust, cracks, or sharp edges. allows maintenance person safe access. l/24/2005 2005 Surface Water Design Manual -Appendix A A-6 • APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR FLOW CONTROL, CONVEYANCE, AND WQ FACILITIES " NO. 5 -CATCH BASINS Maintenance Defect or Problem Conditions When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Component Maintenance is performed Metal Grates Unsafe Grate Grate with opening wider than 7 /s inch. Grate opening meets design (If Applicable) Opening standards. Trash and Debris Trash and debris that is blocking more than 20% Grate free of trash and debris. of grate surface. Damaged or Missing. Grate missing or broken member(s) of the grate. Grate is in place and meets design standards. NO. 6 -DEBRIS BARRIERS (E.G., TRASH RACKS) Maintenance Defect or Problem Condition When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Component Maintenance is Performed. General Trash and Debris Trash or debris that is plugging more than 20% Barrier clear to receive capacity of the openings in the barrier. flow. Metal Damaged/Missing Bars are bent out of shape more than 3 inches. Bars in place with no bends more Bars. than}':. inch. Bars are missing or entire barrier missing. Bars in place according to design. Bars are loose and rust is causing 50% Repair or replace barrier to design deterioration to any part of barrier. standards. NO. 7 -ENERGY DISSIPATERS Maintenance Defect or Problem Conditions When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Component Maintenance is Performed. External: Rock Pad Missing or Moved Only one layer of rock exists above native soil in Replace rocks to design standards. Rock area five square feet or larger, or any exposure of native soil. Dispersion Trench Pipe Plugged with Accumulated sediment that exceeds 20% of the Pipe cleaned/flushed so that it Sediment design depth. matches design. Not Discharging Visual evidence of water discharging at Trench must be redesigned or Water Properly concentrated points along trench (normal rebuilt to standards. condition is a "sheet flow" of water along trench). Intent is to prevent erosion damage. Perforations Plugged. Over 1h. of perforations in pipe are plugged with Clean or replace perforated pipe. debris and sediment. Water Flows Out Top Maintenance person observes water flowing out Facility must be rebuilt or of "Distributor~ Catch during any storm less than the design storm or redesigned to standards. Basin. its causing or appears likely to cause damage. Receiving Area Over~ Water in receiving area is causing or has No danger of landslides. Saturated potential of causing landslide problems. Internal: Manhole/Chamber Worn or Damaged Structure dissipating flow deteriorates to 1h. or Replace structure to design Post. Baffles, Side of original size or any concentrated worn spot standards. Chamber exceeding one square foot which would make structure unsound. --- 2005 Surface Water Design Manual -Appendix A l/2412005 A-7 .. ~l APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR FLOW CONTROL, CONVEYANCE, AND WQ FACILITIES NO. 10 -CONVEYANCE PIPES AND DITCHES Maintenance Defect or Problem Conditions When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Component Maintenance is Performed Pipes Sediment & Debris Accumulated sediment that exceeds 20% of the Pipe cleaned of all sediment and diameter of the pipe. debris. Vegetation Vegetation that reduces free movement of water All vegetation removed so water through pipes. flows freely through pipes. Damaged Protective coating is damaged; rust is causing Pipe repaired or replaced. more than 50% deterioration to any part of pipe. Any dent that decreases the cross section area Pipe repaired or replaced. of pipe by more than 20%. Open Ditches Trash & Debris Trash and debris exceeds 1 cubic foot per 1,000 Trash and debris cleared from square feet of ditch and slopes. ditches. Sediment Accumulated sediment that exceeds 20% of the Ditch cleaned/flushed of all design depth. sediment and debris so that it matches design. Vegetation Vegetation that reduces free movement of water Water flows freely through ditches. through ditches. Erosion Damage to See "Detention Ponds" Table No. 1 See "Detention Ponds" Table No. 1 Slopes Rock Lining Out of Maintenance person can see native soil beneath Replace rocks to design standards. Place or Missing (If the rock lining. Applicable). NO. 11 -GROUNDS (LANDSCAPING) Maintenance Defect or Problem Conditions When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Component Maintenance is Performed General Weeds Weeds growing in more than 20% of the Weeds present in less than 5% of (Nonpoisonous, not landscaped area (trees and shrubs only). the landscaped area. noxious) Safety Hazard Any presence of poison ivy or other poisonous No poisonous vegetation present in vegetation. landscaped area. Trash or Litter Paper, cans, bottles, totaling more than 1 cubic Area clear of litter. foot within a landscaped area (trees and shrubs only) of 1,000 square feet. Trees and Shrubs Damaged Umbs or parts of trees or shrubs that are split or Trees and shrubs with less than 5% broken which affect more than 25% of the total of total foliage with split or broken foliage of the tree or shrub. limbs. Trees or shrubs that have been blown down or Tree or shrub in place free of injury. knocked over. Trees or shrubs which are not adequately Tree or shrub in place and supported or are leaning over, causing exposure adequately supported; remove any of the roots. dead or diseased trees. 2005 Surface Water Design Manual -Appendix A l/24/2005 A-9 • • APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR FLOW CONTROL, CONVEYANCE, AND WQ FACILITIES NO. 20 -STORM FILTER® Maintenance Defect or Problem Condition When Maintenance is Needed Recommended Maintenance to Component Correct Problem Media Section Sediment Sediment depth exceeds 0.25 inches. No sediment deposits that would Accumulation on impede permeability of the compost Media. media. Trash/Debris Trash and debris accumulated on compost filter Trash and debris removed from the Accumulation bed. compost filter bed. First Chamber Sediment Sediment depth exceeds 6 inches in first No sediment deposits in vault Accumulation chamber. bottom of first chamber. Drain Pipes Clean-Sediment When drain pipes, clean-outs, become full with Remove the accumulated material Outs Accumulation sediment and/or debris. from the facilities. NO. 21 -STORMFIL TER® (CARTRIDGE TYPE) Maintenance Defect or Problem Condition When Maintenance is Needed Recommended Maintenance to Component Correct Problem Compost Media Plugged Drawdown of water through the media takes Replace media cartridges. longer than 1 hour, and/or overilow occurs frequently. Short Circuiting Flows do not property enter filter cartridges. Replace filter cartridges. Pipes Damaged Any part of the pipes that are crushed, damaged Pipe repaired and/or replaced. due to corrosion and/or settlement. Access Cover Damaged/Not Cover cannot be opened, one person cannot Cover repaired to proper working Working open the cover, corrosion/deformation of cover. specifications or replaced. Vault Structure Damage to Wall, Cracks wider than %-inch and any evidence of Vault replaced or repaired to design Frame, Bottom, soil particles entering the structure through the specifications. and/or Top Slab cracks, or maintenance/inspection personnel determines that the vault is not structurally sound. Damaged Pipe Joints Cracks wider than 1.-"2-inch at the joint of any No cracks more than Y..-inch wide at inlet/outlet pipe or any evidence of soil particles the joint of the inlet/outlet pipe. entering the vault through the walls. Baffles Damaged Baffles corroding, cracking warping, and/or Repair or replace baffles to showing signs of failure as determined by specification. maintenance/inspection person. Access Ladder Damaged Ladder is corroded or deteriorated, not Ladder replaced or repaired and functioning properly, missing rungs, cracks, and meets specifications, and is safe to misaligned. use as determined by inspection personnel. -'~ 2005 Surface Water Design Manual -Appendix A 1/24/2005 A-17 -,, -.. - f :•: ' ·-: ~ . . ' I ,,,,,,,,,fl f.r... J' .: ,1 ·.· . :· .. I :·_: . I 60 (J) "" I \ I I \ . ·,{ mA,-v~ I , ·( ----~ I ·' . I I , - • ·0 j "= I I I I 4 I I I .... I I I -t-.,.. ,i.. I .s I I J ~,I 2.20AC-I \,. T.L .,1 _--'. ..,. :....-- ;,;--- ..... A LJ N.CDLN EXHIBIT 2 \"l'ROPERT' ll 11 / I I I 11 \I \I •• \_l 1 I ON 1 1 I SE, ,---------- \ I I ' \ I :.. I § ~ \ :a,: §a F © fa> • ,! i @a \ ml i © N @a © ,a; 9 l I I I I I ' :a,: §a i , I i , I j F § § ~ • ' ' . ~ !r: i ~ =g ••• +~ ! .... :,.. +* ffi ... . . . ' © "'" ... ' .. If * = ~ ' ' ' ' --! i"''\, ------- \ -------------- -------- EAGLE! RJDGE APARTMENTS & OFFICES SITE PLAN EXHIBIT 3 N d,Q) M ,,. © --0 "" ffi """ ,_., = ~ '-' '@ lfifil g ---------------- \ I \ --0 (") -· ~ ~ :J 0 :'i' -(Q 0 :0 <: Ci) w· :; -· .... 0 0 :J :I \ \ \ 'I / / \ \ \ \ I I \ \ \ / \ \ \ \ 1600 BENSON ROAD SOUTH EAGLE RIDGE APARTMENTS & OFFICE RENTON, WASHINGTON EXHIB1T4 WEISMANDESIGNGROUP F F--' F=- I I Ln t:; CQ 1-1 ::c ~ Bi!..:: 205 fnol M. l Iii. ollJ-,•t--Hn M, "" 1111' 11111 Ql-lJHIII .......... aaf --- I ~----- ' I I I I ------1 ---- GRADING PLAN IIW.t, ,·-iii' QIW'HIC l!CALJ: " U r • , . ...,, ·-~· .. 0 ~ ~ •z l' -"- B't(llom:1- Qill "'9;;ltE -1-800-424-5555 fQI PlnJI lOCllmll 0, -l1IJJllUI ,._ ® 1..;:;,_ I y; l # 4ofRenton 1 Planning Division NOV I 32009 [gl[e©~ll~~IQ) INARYPUD PRELIM , .... -EAOLI RIDE CFFICE AND OONDOlftNUl8 BENEAAUZED unmE8 Pl.Nil-lltHIWATER 1: •I --, u ----+-II --, n u I I I I I I u u II II II II II II II II I II II II II I II II II II II II II u II II II II II u H I I D I II H D I II n u II II II -Ii II II u ----clC----jf Cl CJ Cl II II II II II II II II II EXHIBIT 6 I ~ ' '" C, iO i' § ~ ~ w ~ w :n ! ~~ EXHIBIT 7 C c 0 o .... ·-c: .\Q Cl) .2: 0::0 Ol .'+-C 0 ·c: >, C .... Ol ·-0... () B = = = ~ > 0 :z II -11 II II II II II II II II II II II II II II _..Jj g ~ " i' § ~ ~ w ~ w ~~ ~~ EXHIBIT 8 ] C: ©l 0 C: ....... Q /jAfJ C: -~ g, a, .?: = ~ .cca .... ..., = .._ Ol ,_, /jAfJ 0 .£ ,,. <Ll) >, § c:, .... (U 2: w c3 0:: ~ 8 g ~ ;;j O'.l I ~ ~ ,, z !l il ~ ~ w ~ ~ w !o ~ ~! ~H o, z• , ---, II II !I !I ii II II ii II II ii II II ii II II II II II ii II II II II II II II II ii II _ _JJ ii II II _ _JJ II II ii II II II II II II II g fil ~ ~ ti ~ > w ~ w ti;~ .... w, EXHIBIT9 C: C: 0 o .... ·-c: .!!l Cl> .:': cr;o .... Ol 0 .!: C >, C .., (1J c3 0:: = = = ~ ~ = = = ,- 1 I I • I I I L------- ! : I i 1-I I ~l + /~ J § EXHIBIT 10 r------- I .,,.-..,,--,e;,"'F-----1 --, I I I I I I I I ,!, I I I I I ~rr,/~;'-'---I I I I • I (_J / . i e I i--~-.y;t---t=====t:t--:-~-tt ·1 i--,1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I ~?~ : . : : . I I I I C') "'(] -· -... ~ '< 2. O ::, -~ :::c .;;· CD -· :::; ~-r+ 0 0 ::, :::; I I • I I L II f---~--t" ,1 I I i Li + . " • I I • I ~ I ==4 I I I I IJ : ,J : I I I lL ___ I I I / I I L, L--, I I r__J i I f-----<H, f---"-·-...,:--t ~ I ! ~ ,' b-¥===;:a.t" =~aa~ ---=~ -al --si --a : I I __ _:_· ---\:~; ~-+-1:E~~~ I ~ • " _J I I:' i I ~ --, i• !, L--1 • I " L_ lf-------,---t~ I I I ' ' l-i-'!'===='lt--, I I I . I ~__J ' I i ! ' ''i! ... l ~ ~ J " " .. .: ""' . ::: '-...._ I ·"' ', I --,,-.---ti , ____ _J I I I I I I I I I 'l"f 'l"f I:; m 1-f ::c >< w COMMON ROOM COMt1MoN RMS 1'336 5F DECK 48,Z, UNIT l<Z> 1141 5F DEC!<.12S OFFICE I 1548 5F OFFICE SPACE COURTYARD OFFICE 2 IS.52 SF OFFICE 5FACE TOT AL COM'10N se~&F FIRST R.OOR PLAN • SOJTi-1 0LDC:i L'll",r-r OFFICE 3 ':13':I SF OFFICE SPACE COURTYARD ~ UNITS OFFICES COMMON TOTAL 1@132 5F 4@3'3 SF 586':I 5F 21Zl061Zl 5F City of Renton Planning Division NOV 1 3 2009 ~~CC~IlVJ~[D) WI DECKS • ;;! it D ,u "' (!) " 0 " -z "'-,u" _,o c.,O "'i5 ,u L) z "' a:' (!) 0 "'-' 0 d) 0 JI "-f-=> f-0 "' "' "' ii:: . ''I 111 !1il'I : I :I ·1··1'·1 :,:1: 1,1• 11 ·' ' 11 I ,1 11!\J I •~•Iii . r'·· ,,1·1· ll :111 ,,jl I ,,·11 · 11n1:1· 1;! .. i!l , .. :1 I 1Mw1i }111•1: I ! h!l,dn ~ ""' .. ~ .... __ _ ~-...w.- JG,b f,....llli..,__ --·-- A 3.1 S N ..... I::; co 1-1 ::c >< w LNJT I r 11/l>63 SF ' DECK 12 SECOOD FLOOR FLAN • 50 • .ITl·I 6LDG. v.•,r..-~ COMMON TOTAL 163'32 SF= W/ DECKS 24!,Z, 6F 1aw2 SF City of Renton Planning Division NOV 1 3 1009 lR1~©~~V/~[2) J .. :;1 IL D ,u <fl "'"' o2 -z ~- ,u::, __,o (!)o "'B ,u <..) :;i --' ._ "' ~o o--' o"' -'I LL f- 0 => zO 0 <fl (J UJ <fl l l"i•·'1·1'1 l·I!.': I I h!l!d:J 0<>10, 1-23-Qii- lo<>I•~-- Dro.,o,....J.!,.l... Jal, j,..JllL__ ~ ............. __ A 3.2 S M ..., I:; = 1-f .:x:: ~ UNIT 2 14a SF DECK UNIT 16 1141 SF Pl::CK 12S UNIT 11 ~U c::::;J 61!::> $F ii IDECK 1 UNIT 3 141 SF DECK ~I n-llRD FLOOR PLAN -SOUTI-l BLOO. l/a",r-11>' (; J .. :;1 IL l..rc..o D Ml ill Cctt10N TOTAL 241,z> SF. 186©2 5F City of Renton Planning Division NOV l 3 2009 ~~~[~]~~[Q) tU"' (!>::, 0~ ii:~ <LI::,; -' 0 <Do «z .,g z '.'i "-(!> 0 "' --' 0"' 0 --' I lL >- ~ oo ec: '" I >- . ''! '11 M,·1 : 1 :, ··1·1'·1 :111! Iii' 11 :: ·1···11 ···11• "II' 1·1 I ' 11 •·1 1:!!111 .!;11, •·11 • 111.i:1· iiln!!I ul!I I J M11l11 1 ll!l!da Oolo,....i:ll:9!._. ''"'·~--~...___,.._ .!obi,~ ·---- ...... A 3.3 S ~ .... t:; ca 1-1 :c >< LU UN!T I I~ a lrZlb;J 5F r 1 DECK 12 UNIT .2 148 5F DECK, UNIT Ii& 1141 5F DECK 12S- FOJFi!TI-I FLOOR PLAN • 50.JTI-I BLDG. lla',r.a• ~ J "< :;1 H! i .. L= u i11D CClMMON TOTAL lb3'32 &F 2234 SF 166'26 .5F WI DECK5 City of Renton Planning Division NOV l 3 2009 [R{~«;~OVJ~[Q) ~ "' --' ~~ o..(!) 0~ a.::O o23 gii5 lU5_1I ~o IL.1-- <(z :r:~ lU O 1--O u "'<J) => 0 IL ' 11! '11 f1l1•I : ! {R ·1··1 1 ·1 ·1·11• I ! 1· ll :: 'l''1il "'II' "II ' l'I I • •• •·1 l:l:111 .!;1!1 t·11 • 111i1l1· ',·I •11 '11 I I Jh ii llh t !ii!1ili1 1 ,1!1,1!:1 Oalo. 4-p-~ ...~ -...w...._ Jobl,....1.Ui....._ ...,. __ _ ...... A 3.4 S EXHIBIT 15 rn ~ g' ~ "' r i;: ;;/pJ cl C) ffi 2:: ~~-0 C ""' :::, ffi -· 0 .... c6 .... = ""' D ::0 ~ i ;:;· (I) iii' :J -· -+ lg 0 0 :::, :J l ' l I I f= _J ' I I L J 1---- i i I I r ~ ~ ~ ' L ' L ' L ' L r I I ,J EXHIBIT 16 ---------......., ' I ,r Ll I I I rj \ I I I • I ~ ! ~ I ~ I ~ ; I I I I I I r' ~ I I ~ '" ! ; I I I '" ~ \ I r' I I I l,_ •• '" __ _r . " "' \~ m ;e r ---1 § • I I .. ~ I ; r l1 ~ I z I ~ I ~ I • L -, "' ,r I r I ~ I r~ ~ I I I I I I I I ~ !~ I I I . I I I I ~ I I L, I I I I I ~ I I I I I " I ~ I I \ I C') \ ' I I I I .} 2,Q) -0 -· ---~ ffi ~ .z I :z: I C) 2. 0 .. )> ~ '"" ~ -; I 0 ~ I ~ :1] 'l ~ ~ ., ..... I \ITT ,:,:, a .. 0 -· (1) ~ ri ~ )> I ~ ,._,. s. ::i 0 )> ll I = ~ .. 5a: ~. r+ )> I 0 0 r \ITT ::, ::i 'l I lg ~ .. iii • I ~ ____ __; " ,-f I- I-I cc 1-1 ::c ~ UN!f 1 1103 5F DECK 40 UNIT 2 Cct1MON 2213 SF ~ FIRST FLOOR PLAN • NORTI-I BLOC.. 111•,r-r (; UNITS COMMON 15~11 SF UJ/ DECK5 211' SF TOT AL 161&4 5F City of Renton Planning Division NOV 1 3 2009 lR1 lE CC rE ~VI lE [)) • •• :;1 1 •• D ..J .. L ,u"' "'" o=> a2Z ,u Se _,o e,O .,z ,us z < a: (!) 0 "' -' 0"' 0 -' I IL I- "' I-0 "'z !'c IL i,iii! 1111:, ·1··11·1 :1:I!' !ii· 11:: ., ... 11 ···11· "II' 1·1 • ·1 •· j:i• 11 :11' .,;r,1 ili!!:i1l!!Mli l!i~lilil I !111,il:I ,,...,.,-1:U:QL.. ~ Jab 1,...J.lli......_ -·--- A 3.1 N 00 ..-4 I- I-I ca 1-1 :c >< w 5EC0ND FLOOR FLAN · NORTi-1 BLDG:. ~ 119,•., ... UNITS COMMON 1S'311 SF lU/ DECK& 1821 5F TOT AL 11133 5F City of Renton Planning Division NOV 1 3 2009 ~~t~~~~[Q) .I .. :;i H! D .JI II L 1,1 ,u"' "' " 0 => c2 ~ ,u" -' 0 "'a .,z .,o '-' z <( -' n.. (!)i "'o, 0 -' 0"' -' IL i= 0 "' zO oz L) ,u "' ' ''I '11 11 1 •1 : I '· • •1 "l'I ·1··1 ·1 ·1· ! l!I• 11:: ·1•·•11 '''II' "II' 1·1 I I IJ I ! 1:!:111 .!;1!1 •·11 • 111"·1· iii:?.!! ul!i 1 J !li,!lil,11 1111,rn ~ .,.,,.,.....1:ll:QL_ Beal..______ ~............__ Job f,...lliL_. blllolONI, __ A 3.2 N CJ\ 'l'"I I-.... co .... :r. >< w UNIT I 1leJ3 5F DECK 4e> UNIT 12 %4 5F DECK E,4 Tl-l!RD FLOOR FLAN • NORTH BLDG . w.•,r ... ~ coMHoN TOTAL ten 5F 111:?i:?> SF City of Renton Planning Division NOV 1 3 2009 !R1fE(C~~~~[g) J ,;! it D .Ji • IL z tU U'l ::5 {!) :::l!: a.. (!) D => D ....... n:: ...J ~ ~ 0 n) IU5 3:r __J Cl u... 1--"'z "' ..:Co oo tU l) n:: z 'i: ,_ . ''! '11 !11,·1 ; ! fa ·,··1'·1 ·1·1!' l?I' n1:: ·1···11 ···11· "JI' l'I ' • 1 •• 1 ·1· fl :n1 I 1 •• ; 1 1,1 .. ,n· 11· ·1· i;l .. :!111:11 I l l1,i1:1 11 I il·11·1:1!1 I ,I ,I ,I 00\o,.....!:ll.:QL_ Boal..______:_ """"---"'-Joli f,....li2.L.._ ~ ..... ...., .. ~~ Iii A 3.3 N C N I-.... al .... ::c ~ UNIT\ 11@3 5F DECK 40 Fl'.XIRTI-I FLOOR PLAN • NORTI-I BLOC, . IIB",r-r ~ COMMON TOTAL 164b 5F 11~51 5F City of Renton Planning Division NOV 1 3 2009 [R1~~~~~~[Q) J :~1 IL D z <( __J tU CJ") CL(!) 0::i!: a::::O o2 o _J ii::3 ac:o :,S --'I lLio U..1---- ffi~ It j:3 ~z ~ :I' ·1•1 '11 !!1,·,1 : p. 0 1'1 'I '!'I'' I i 1·1 il :l , 'I'" I ·•·11' : 1·11.: !jl·1! 1: :111 .,;l,1 r;i!kii!!!!!ili l llji!f l I il·11·1:!h 1,I ,rn -~ ,..,, • .J:ll:.2L..._ -·---~""'--"L.... .191, ,,....lllL- _, __ _ A .3.4 N EXHIBIT 21 rn ;:u ~ z 0 "i z I" ~ ~ :mi C1 -u ;:;: m :z: ~ '< ~ = 2. 0 <; [ijj] ,_. c5 .... ""' 0 ::0 = ~ ~ <' (I) = = cii' :I = Inn! ci' ..... 0 lg :J :I r, I _ _J I ' I L r I I I L r I I I 'i 0 I I ,. " ' " / / ' / / / ; co SRnon~F'I i co co .. ' --;._ R-8 ,-·-·'-·~- ~ -, ---R-8 . ' i _.l.__ ·-, ... ..J --' -~--·' {"-----n-s R-8 ' • • I ZONING MAP BOOK / CA PW TECHNICAL SERVICES PRINTED ON 11/13/09 -----·~·-----·--,q;-Sb_ .... ""'----oftho--__ .. _ .... Oli' ..... __ co F4 -17 T23N RSE W 1/2 EXHIBIT 22 W-R;B a, !- · -.; __ ··~-·~· --; --- _:·-i--: _..--······· -··r--- ··-~ _L_ __ ..... ----· '--R':1,-------- -~-------,------------- \ i -~~-------1.....-·--------.. _...······ { RM-F '<,, \. R-8 H4 -29 T23N RSE W 1/2 0 200 a N 400 I Feet 20 T23N RSE W 1/2 1:4,800 5320 00 F lg iaj) • 9'l :;r:: )es ,;,;, m i~ i ' § ~ i:iit-T --NiiJ2}4' ---, I : l I~-------· IFl'--ll.l..-4:J-~~ ~~ --•----~ EXHIBIT 23 I i . - f §P~ HHI HilHj! Ii~':,~~~~~;;;,~ i ~ ~ ~·11; ~i'!li ; ii ~iiii ~aiiii HHI ~1•ru 1JH111J! 11~111 11 pnl! un ,1 .... t1··,,·1i ;;n ·1 .... ti ·---~ 11·· •• ·1 •••• ,. HH I { :1 !I II j !I fl /I I I «: © ~ :ls "" F lg @l) ""1 :ls "" """ m '"' i ,- ' § t i- i \ ,- \ ' I ----- _, \ I I EAGLE RIDGE APARTMENTS & OFFICES SITE PLAN r[r' ~--~_,,({!lC· r~r~~ 5~; ..__.., .. ___ __ ______ .... EXHIBIT 24 :z 0 < ..... = § = §1~,u sl 11nl! I, U 'I".. t1·., "I~ i1ii 11 .... ti .... ~ ,u~ ;r··· ·1 .... Ii ; .~\ ~ :1 ~I II j !I ~I II _.--o· ---.......... ---------- ------ ' / -S'S_.-- ......... N t- 1-4 cc 1-t J: >< w [E~(@[UE ~~[D)(@[E LJ(O)\WJ~[H](O)~[E~ C-=:J ( ll! nzT) l tnob-GoOt\. • 205 Front Sl 5. P.O. Box 1787 ls,oqucii, WA 98027 tel. 425-J91-1415 fox 425-391-1551 .l!lZ::lK !1!11 Bf. 1.\11 Authorized Use: Thi$ dro .,i.ng i$ i$$tJ~ for ose ,r, t/'Jt titltd projt,ct Of'lly. It st.all oot be vsed for ony othM purpost -.ithoot tt.e express ooth«r"zation rind/or odopfofion by rec Permit Agency: OTY CF SNOHOMISH 8/J l/05 Dote C1 Sh .. t of DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING June 15, 2010 AGENDA COMMENCING AT 9:00 AM, COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 7TH FLOOR, RENTON CITY HALL The application(s) listed are in order of application number only and not necessarily the order in which they will be heard. Items will be called for hearing at the discretion of the Hearing Examiner. PROJECT NAME: Eagle Ridge Apartments & Offices PUD PROJECT NUMBER: LUA09-150, ECF, PPUD PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting approval of a Preliminary Planned Urban Development (PPUD) for a mixed used development including office and residential uses. The subject site is located at 1600 Benson Road S. The site is composed of two vacant parcels totaling 125,708 square feet (2.89 acres) located within the Commercial Arterial (CA) zone. The applicant has proposed two 4-story buildings with a total of 117 apartment units which would result in a net density of 56.52 units per acre. The applicant has proposed that the project be developed in two phases. Phase One would include the South building comprised of 61 residential units and 4,039 square feet of commercial space. Phase Two would include the North building comprised of 56 residential units. The South building would have 61 residential units, 4,039 square feet of office use on the ground floor, and 75 structured and surface parking spaces. The North building would have 56 residential units with 56 structured and surface parking spaces. HEX Agenda 06-15-10.doc '" g " .; .; § § i', i', " ~ Ii > w w ~ ~ w w B i'. tr;~ i'i; !li i z• 8 ~ B --_Jj Hi 'rn .. ~ 7 U> ; i! ,~ rn rn r r rn rn < < ": ": 'l It z z 0 0 "I "I L L l" ~ r ~ ~ &] ::g Q ro ill .... = ::, '< fi = 2. 0 < m ..... (6 -«> 0 :0 = ~ ~ <. (t) = = 1n· ::i = m -· .... 0 0 lg ::, ::i ij • Eagle Ridge PUD (LUA09-150) Appeal Time line Location: 1600 Benson Road South Proposal: HEX Preliminary Planned Urban Development and SEPA for a mixed use development including office and residential uses on a 2.89 acre parcel located in the CA zone. November 13, 2009 December 2, 2009 April 26, 2010 May 17, 2010 June 4, 2010 June 15, 2010 June 15, 2010 July 12, 2010 July 24, 2010 Application submitted for Environmental Review and Preliminary PUD Incomplete letter sent Application deemed complete Environmental Review Committee (ERC) issues threshold Determination of Non- with 7 mitigation measures related to erosion control, geotechnical considerations, noise, and mitigation fees 14-day appeal period of environmental determination ends; no appeals filed Staff recommendation for approval with conditions Public hearing before HEX to consider the Preliminary PUD application Hearing Examiner recommends approval of Preliminary PUD subject to conditions Request for reconsideration including the provision of more public amenities and flat versus pitched roofs August 30, 2010 Reconsideration approved with added recommended conditions September 10, 2010 Appeal filed October 28, 2010 Appeal hearing before Planning & Development Committee to consider appeal --i L __ J.ilHIS·ddd ' ' C\ ' h ~~ \ ""~- C: Q C ...... 9 C: .!!! (l) .,: o: a ' \ EB N ~ a, w § 5 C w !,I ~~ z• I!! I i' I ! I • e 1 II !!t 1·1 .,. hJ 1; ---- DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING June 15, 2010 AGENDA COMMENCING AT 9:00 AM, COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 7TH FLOOR, RENTON CITY HALL The application(s) listed are in order of application number only and not necessarily the order in which they will be heard. Items will be called for hearing at the discretion of the Hearing Examiner. PROJECT NAME: Eagle Ridge Apartments & Offices PUD PROJECT NUMBER: LUA09-150, ECF, PPUD PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting approval of a Preliminary Planned Urban Development {PPUD) for a mixed used development including office and residential uses. The subject site is located at 1600 Benson Road S. The site is composed of two vacant parcels totaling 125,708 square feet (2.89 acres) located within the Commercial Arterial (CA) zone. The applicant has proposed two 4-story buildings with a total of 117 apartment units which would result in a net density of 56.52 units per acre. The applicant has proposed that the project be developed in two phases. Phase One would include the South building comprised of 61 residential units and 4,039 square feet of commercial space. Phase Two would include the North building comprised of 56 residential units: The South building would have 61 residential units, 4,039 square feet of office use on the ground floor, and 75 structured and surface parking spaces. The North building would have 56 residential units with 56 structured and surface parking spaces. HEX Agenda 06-15-10.doc DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING June 15, 2010 AGENDA COMMENCING AT 9:00 AM, COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 7TH FLOOR, RENTON CITY HALL The application(s) listed are in order of application number only and not necessarily the order in which they will be heard. Items will be called for hearing at the discretion of the Hearing Examiner. PROJECT NAME: Eagle Ridge Apartments & Offices PUD PROJECT NUMBER: LUA09-150, ECF, PPUD PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting approval of a Preliminary Planned Urban Development (PPUD) for a mixed used development including office and residential uses. The subject site is located at 1600 Benson Road S. The site is composed of two vacant parcels totaling 125,708 square feet (2.89 acres) located within the Commercial Arterial (CA) zone. The applicant has proposed two 4-story buildings with a total of 117 apartment units which would result in a net density of 56.52 units per acre. The applicant has proposed that the project be developed in two phases. Phase One would include the South building comprised of 61 residential units and 4,039 square feet of commercial space. Phase Two would include the North building comprised of 56 residential units: The South building would have 61 residential units, 4,039 square feet of office use on the ground floor, and 75 structured and surface parking spaces. The North building would have 56 residential units with 56 structured and surface parking spaces. HEX Agenda 06-15-10.doc PUBLIC City of Renton HEARING Department of Community and Economic Development PRELIMINARY REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER A. SUMMARY AND PURPOSE OF REQUEST: REPORT DATE: June 15, 2010 Project Name: Eagle Ridge PUD Owner: Robert Hancheroff, 17712341 " Avenue SE, Maple Valley, WA 98038 Applicant: Chris Koruga, Eagle Ridge,LLC, 5454 30'" Avenue SW, Seattle, WA 98126 Contact: Same as above File Number: LUA09-150, ECF, PPUD Project Manager: Gerald Wasser, Associate Planner Project Description: The applicant is requesting approval of a Preliminary Planned Urban Development (PPUD) for a mixed used development including office and residential uses. The subject site is located at 1600 Benson Road S. The site is composed of two vacant parcels totaling 125,708 square feet (2.89 acres) located within the Commercial Arterial (CA) zone. The applicant has proposed two 4- story buildings with a total of 117 apartment units which would result in a net density of 56.52 units per acre. The applicant has proposed that the project be developed in two phases. Phase One would include the South building comprised of 61 residential units and 4,039 square feet of commercial space. Phase Two would include the North building comprised of 56 residential units. The South Building would have 61 residential units, 4,039 square feet of office use on the ground floor, and 75 structured and surface parking spaces. The North Building would have 56 residential units with 59 structured and surface parking spaces. Phase One would begin shortly after final approval of the PUD and Phase Two would begin approximately one year thereafter. Both buildings would have flat roofs with fa~ade modulation including bay window projections. Access to the site would be gained from Benson Road S and from a private easement that connects to Eagle Ridge Drive S. The Olympic gas pipeline lies to the north of the site and High Voltage Electrical Transmission lines cross the south portion of the property. Project Location: 1600 Benson Road S City of Renton Community and Economic Development Department EAGLE RIDGE PUD PUBLIC HEARING DATE: June 15, 2010 S 1:SJl,t ST 1222r:100255 122200!!2M 1~vro2'6 , N22-0or.iL1G 0 "' fl:l 'en l2220!10U0 f ~ fl Stf!THST ~ ;, rm2aa02:tEing eountv 'i 2023060011 2{}2'3~~093 2D23!:J5QrJ3:3 20:?Et.9DJ5 2{.l23D59!i32 2D2j[159!12~ 2C23059119.;-. 21.~122:J:1:)tJ Project Location Mao Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner LUA09-150, ECF, PPUD Page 2 of 21 SITE o-rltt City of Renton Commun;ty and Economic Development Deportment EAGLE RIDGE PUD PUBLIC HEARING DATE: June 15, 2010 B. HEARING EXHIBITS: Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner LUA09-150, ECF, PPUO Page3 of 21 Exhibit 1: Project file ("yellow file") containing the application, reports, staff comments, and other material pertinent to the review of the project. C. 1. 2. 3. 4. Exhibit 2: Exhibit 3: Exhibit 4: Exhibit 5: Exhibit 6: Exhibit 7: Exhibit 8: Exhibit 9: Exhibit 10: Exhibit 11: Exhibit 12: Exhibit 13: Exhibit 14: Exhibit 15: Exhibit 16: Exhibit 17: Exhibit 18: Exhibit 19: Exhibit 20: Exhibit 21 Exhibit 22: Neighborhood Detail Map Site Plan Conceptual Landscape Plan Conceptual Grading Plan South Building -East and South Elevation South Building -West and North Elevations North Building -East and South Elevations North Building -West and North Elevations South Building -Garage Floor Plan South Building -First Floor Plan South Building -Second Floor Plan South Building -Third Floor plan South Building -Fourth Floor Plan South Building -Roof Plan North Building -Garage Plan North Building -First Floor Plan North Building -Second Floor Plan North Building -Third Floor Plan North building -Fourth Floor Plan North Building -Roof Plan Zoning Map GENERAL INFORMATION: Owner of Record: Robert Hancheroff 1771 234th Avenue SE Maple Valley, WA 98038 Zoning Designation: Commercial Arterial (CA) Comprehensive Plan Designation: Commercial Corridor (CC) Existing Site Use: Vacant City of Renton Community and Economic Development Department Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner EAGLE RIDGE PUD LUA09-150, ECF, PPUD Page4of21 PUBLIC HEARING DA TE: June 15, 2010 5. Neighborhood Characteristics: North: Vacant, Olympic Pipeline, and a dental/medical office building (CA zone) East: Senior housing (Eagle Ridge Lodge) and multifamily neighborhood (CA and RM-F zones) South:Vacant, high voltage electric transmission line (CA zone) West: Benson Road S, vacant land (CA zone) 6. Proposed Orientation: East/west 7. 8. Site Area: Project Data: Existing Building Area: 125,708 square feet (2.89 acres) N/A D. HISTORICAL/BACKGROUND: Action Annexation Comprehensive Plan Zoning Hancheroff Short Plat Hancheroff Lot Line Adjustment Land Use File No. N/A N/A N/A N/A LUA07-089 Ordinance No. 5327 5099 5191 SHP-83-023 N/A Date 03/01/2008 11/1/2004 11/12/2005 05/31/1983 08/14/2008 E. PUBLIC SERVICES: 1. Utilities: Water: This site is served by the City of Renton. There is an existing 8-inch water line along the Benson Road S frontage. There is an additional 8-inch water line in the easement crossing the site; this is part of a looped system serving the Eagle Ridge Lodge development to the east which includes a combination of 8 and 10- inch water lines. Sewer: This site is served by the City of Renton Wastewater Utility. There is an 8-inch sanitary sewer main that crosses the property in the above mentioned easement. Additionally, there is an 8-inch sanitary sewer main in Benson Road S along the entire property frontage. Surface Water/Storm Water: A preliminary technical information report (TIR), which uses the 1995 King County Surface Water Design Manual standards, has been submitted. This has been accepted as a preliminary design. Storm water on the subject site flows into an existing City system which has a history of flooding issues downstream that the current 1-405 project may have resolved. 2. Streets: The site is located on Benson Road S. The proposed project would also tie into an existing private access road terminating at Eagle Ride Road S. Existing improvements include pavement, sidewalk, curb, gutter, and lighting. City of Renton Community and Economic Development Department Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner EAGLE RIDGE PUD PUBLIC HEARING DATE: June 15, 2010 3. Fire Protection: City of Renton Fire Department F. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE RENTON MUNICIPAL CODE: 1. Chapter Z Land Use Districts Section 4-2-020: Purpose and Intent of Zoning Districts Section 4-2-070: Zoning Use Table LUA09-150, ECF, PPUD Page 5 of 21 Section 4-2-120: Development Standards for Commercial Zoning Designations Z. Chapter 4 Property Development Standards Section 4-4-030: Development Guidelines and Regulations Section 4-4-060: Grading, Excavation and Mining Reg,ulations Section 4-4-080: Parking, Loading and Driveway Regulations Section 4-4-130: Tree Cutting and Land Clearing Regulations 4. Chapter 6 Streets and Utility Standards Section 4-6-060: Street Standards 5. Chapter 9 Procedures and Review Criteria Section 4-9-150: Planned Urban Development Regulations Section 4-9-250: Variances, Waivers, Modifications, and Alternates 6. Chapter 11 Definitions G. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: 1. Land Use Element -Commercial Corridor 2. Community Design Element 3. Environmental Element H. DEPARTMENT ANALYSIS: 1. Project Description/Background The applicant is requesting review of a Preliminary Planned Urban Development (PPUD). The PPUD proposes the construction of two new 4-story buildings. The South Building would consist of 61 apartment units and 4,039 square feet of commercial space and 75 parking spaces, 33 of which would be structured and 42 surface spaces. The North Building would consist of 56 apartment units and 59 parking spaces, 39 of which would be structured and 20 would be surface spaces. The 4-story buildings would have a flat roof and fa~ade modulation with surface texture and color changing approximately every 40-feet. The proposed project would be completed in two phases. Phase One would include the construction of the South Building and the common open space/ landscaped areas; and, Phase Two would include the northerly building and additional landscaping on the northeastern portion of the property. The project site is located on the east side of Benson Road S and northerly of the intersection of Eagle Ridge Road S and Benson Road 5. The site is L-shaped and slopes downward from east to west towards Benson Road S. The subject site is designated as Commercial Corridor on City of Renton Community and Economic Development Department EAGLE RIDGE PUD PUBLIC HEARING DATE: June 15, 2010 Preliminary Repon to the Hearing Examiner LUA09-150, ECF, PPUD Page 6 of 21 the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and is zoned Commercial Arterial (CA), in addition to being located within the Urban Design District "D" Overlay. The concept for the PPUD, Eagle Ridge, is to create a development that would facilitate in the transformation of an "island" of CA zoned property on the east side of Benson Road South amid RM-F zoning surrounding it. This "island" of CA zoned property is further isolated by the existence of high. voltage transmission lines in the southern portion of the property and the Olympic pipeline to the north. RM-F zoning allows up to 20 dwelling units per net acre and would accommodate apartment structures. The only commercial use on this stretch of Benson Road Sis a dental/medical office building abutting the proposed project site to the north. A multi-family senior housing development exists to the east and an apartment building is farther up the hill to the northeast. The applicant has proposed a 78,584 gross square foot, 48-feet high mixed use building that would be built on the southerly portion ofthe property; 4,039 square feet ofthis would be office commercial use and 74,545 square feet would accommodate 61 apartments and approximately 3 offices in 4-stories. The northerly building would have 71,716 gross square feet, would be 48-feet in height, and would include 56 apartment units in 4-stories. The net density of the proposed project is 56.52 dwelling units per net acre. The southerly building would have 33 structured parking spaces and 42 surface parking spaces. Of these total 75 spaces (73 are required) there would be 6 accessible, 51 standard, and 18 compact parking spaces. The northerly building would have 39 structured and 20 surface parking spaces. Of these total 59 spaces there would be 30 standard, 25 compact, and 4 accessible parking spaces. Structured parking would be provided for apartment residents; surface parking would be for residents, their guests, and the public utilizing the commercial and open spaces. Both ofthe proposed buildings would be developed with a contemporary architectural style; craftsman-style detailing is provided through the use of cedar beams. The use of bay window projections at intervals of 12 to 24-feet would provide architectural modulation on the east and west elevations. However, the north elevation of the South Building and the south elevation of the North Building do not have architectural modulation similar to that of the east and west facades of the buildings. Several different facade materials are proposed including wood, cement, stucco, and cedar siding. Stucco would be used at the first and second levels; hardiplank or cementious board would be used at the third and fourth levels; and cedar would be used art belly bands, corner boards, trim and support beams. The submitted elevations also indicate that the exterior walls of the ground level structured parking would have stamped or stained concrete walls with openings having vertical iron bar grating. There are several man-made protected slopes on the proposed project site. These were created by the construction of Benson Road S and the access easement which bisects the property and provides emergency access to the Eagle Ridge Lodge development to the east of the project site. Grading of these man-made protected slopes would accommodate the main entrance driveway to the project and provide level areas for the proposed structures, parking areas, and internal pedestrian and vehicular circulation. Vehicular access to the site would be provided via a driveway located near the southerly property line. The overall development is intended to be pedestrian-oriented even though the site presents some challenges due to the slope issues; interconnecting 5-foot wide walkways, crosswalks, stairways, and passive recreation areas would create this pedestrian orientation. This pedestrian connectivity would be linked to the dental/medical office building on the property to the north and to the Eagle Ridge Lodge development, via the existing paved access road, to the east. In City of Renton Community and Economic Development Department EAGLE RIDGE PUD PUBLIC HEARING DA TE: June 15, 2010 Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner LUA09-150, ECF, PPUD Page 7 of 21 addition to these pedestrian interconnections, there is an existing sidewalk along Benson Road 5 for the total length of the project frontage. To the north ofthe site there is vacant land (zoned RM-F) and an existing dental/medical office building (zoned CA). To the northeast is an existing apartment building (zoned RM-F). To the east is an existing senior housing development (zoned CA). To the west of the proposed project site is vacant land across Benson Road 5. There is vacant land (zoned RM-F) south ofthe site. 2. Environmental Review Pursuant to the City of Renton's Environmental Ordinance and SEPA (RCW 43.21C, 1971 as amended), on May 17, 2010, the Environmental Review Committee issued a Determination of Non-Significance - Mitigated (DNS-M) for the Eagle Ridge PPUD. The DNS-M included 7 mitigation measures. A 14-day appeal period commenced on May 21, 2010 and ended on June 4, 2010. No appeals of the threshold determination have been filed. 3. Compliance with ERC Conditions Based on an analysis of probable impacts from the proposal, the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) issued the following mitigation measures with the Determination of Non-Significance - Mitigated: 1. Erosion control shall be maintained for the duration of the project. Weekly status reports shall be submitted to the Development Services Division Plan Review project manager. 2. The applicant shall be required to comply with the recommendations contained in the Geotechnical Engineering Reconnaissance, dated May 19, 2006, prepared by Geotech Consultants, Inc. during clearing, grading, and site and building construction. 3. In the event that pile driven foundations are utilized, the applicant shall submit noise and vibration studies and may be restricted to certain days and hours of pile driving activities. 4. The applicant shall pay a Parks Mitigation Fee based on $354.51 per each new multi-family unit which is estimated to be $41,477.67 and is payable prior to the issuance of building permits. 5. In the event that archaeological artifacts are encountered during construction, work shall immediately be stopped and the applicant shall submit an archaeological resource survey of the site. The survey shall conform to the requirements and standards of the Washington State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation and must be conducted under the supervision of a state- approved archaeologist. Work shall recommence only when approval is received by the State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation. 6. The applicant shall pay a Traffic Mitigation Fee in the amount of $75.00 for each new average daily trip prior to the issuance of building permits. The fee is estimated to be $39,192.75. 7. The applicant shall pay a Fire Mitigation Fee based on $388.00 per each new multi-family unit and $0.52 per square foot of office space payable prior to the issuance of building permits. This fee is estimated to be $45,606.00. City of Renton Community and Economic Development Department Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner EAGLE RIDGE PUD LUA09-150, ECF, PPUD Page Bof 21 PUBLIC HEARING DA TE: June 15, 2010 4. Staff Review Comments Representatives from various City departments have reviewed the application materials to identify and address issues raised by the proposed development. These comments are contained in the official file, and the essence of the comments has been incorporated into the appropriate sections of this report and the Departmental Recommendation at the end of the report. s. a) Consistency with the Planned Urban Development Regulations Compliance with the Underlying Zoning Designation (Code provisions restricted from modification through the PUD process): The subject site is designated CA on the City of Renton Zoning Map. i. Use: A planned urban development may not authorize uses that are inconsistent with those uses allowed by the underlying zone. The applicant is proposing the eventual construction of multi-family dwelling units and a commercial space. The CA zone permits attached-residential, retail, and general office uses. ii. Density: The number of dwellings units shall not exceed the density allowances of the applicable base zone. The allowed density range in the CA zone is a minimum of 10 to a maximum of 60 dwelling units per acre. After deducting 9,000 square feet for private access easements and 26,454 square feet for critical areas (protected slopes) from the 125,708 gross square footage the net square footage of the proposed development would be 90,254 square feet (2.07 net acres). With 117 dwelling units, the proposal would have a net density of 56.52 dwelling units per acre (117 units/ 2.07 acres= 56.52 du/ac), which falls within the permitted density range for the CA zone. b) Code Provisions That May Be Modified: In approving a planned urban development, the City may modify any of the standards of Renton Municipal Code (RMC) Chapters 4-2 Zoning Districts-Uses & Standards, 4-4 City-Wide Property Development Standards, and 4-7 Subdivision Regulations, and RMC 4-6-060 Street Standards. City of Renton Community and Economic Development Department Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner EAGLE RIDGE PUD PUBLIC HEARING DATE: June 15, 2010 Table A LUA09-150, £CF, PPUD Page 9 of 21 REQUESTED MODIFICATIONS FROM RENTON MUNICIPAL CODE (RMC} RMC# Reguired e.er RMC Reguested Modifjcation RMC 4-2-120A: Required Location Parking for residential units shall be To provide 72 total for Parking enclosed within the same building as structured parking spaces the unit it serves. for residents within the buildings in underground/ground floor parking garages and 62 surface parking spaces. RMC 4-2-080: Conditions Associated Note 18. To allow stand alone With Zoning Use Tables a. General Requirements: Subject to residential for the North the density limits ofthe development Building and ground floor standards for this zone and only residential for the North and permitted within a structure South Buildings. containing commercial uses on the ground floor. Commercial space must be reserved on the ground floor at a minimum of thirty feet (30') in depth along any street frontage. Residential uses shall not be located on the ground floor, except for a residential entry feature linking the residential portion of the development to the street. RMC 4-4-080F.8.c.iii: Maximum Compact parking spaces shall not To allow up to 40 percent Number of Compact Spaces Outside account for more than: compact parking spaces. ofthe UC-Nl and UC-N2 Zones • All other uses -not to exceed thirty percent (30%). RMC 4-3-0SOJ.Sb Protected Slopes-RMC 4-3-0SOJ.5.a prohibits The grading of 5 protected Exceptions through Modification. development on protected slopes (40 slope areas which were % or greater). RMC 4-3-0SOJ.b. allows created either for the exceptions through modifications to construction of Benson Road the prohibition for filling against the S or the private access toe of natural rock wall or rock wall, easement located onsite. or protected slope created by natural resource recovery activities or public or private road installation or widening and related transportation improvements. City of Renton Community and Economic Development Department Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner EAGLE RIDGE PUD PUBLIC HEARING DA TE: June 15, 2010 Design District 'D' Reguested Modifications RMC 4-3-lOOE.2.a.ii The front entry of a building shall not be oriented to a drive aisle, but instead a public or private street or landscaped pedestrian-only court- yard RMC 4-3-lOOE.3.a.i A primary entrance of each building shall be located on the fa<;ade facing a prominent street, shall be prominent, visible from the street, connected by a walkway to the public sidewalk, and include human-scale elements. LUA09-150, ECF, PPUD PagelOo/21 Front entry of buildings would be permitted to front parking areas. The primary entrance of each building would face the internal drive aisle. The applicant has not indicated how the primary residential entrances for each building would be demarcated as a prominent feature of the building. Therefore, staff recommends as a condition of approval that the applicant shall submit revised elevations and floor plans that indicate that such primary entries would have awnings or canopies and be identified with decorative paving and/or landscaping features. If lobby areas are to be provided these must be shown on the revised floor plans. Refuse and recycling areas are indicated on the submitted site plan. However, these areas are not dimensioned. A minimum of 1.5 square feet per residential unit is required for recyclable deposit areas and 3 square feet per unit for refuse areas is required. Office uses require 2 square feet per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area for recyclables and 4 square feet per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area for refuse deposit areas. The North Building would require 84 square feet of recyclable area and 168 square feet of refuse area. The South Building would require 99.58 square feet for recyclable areas and 107.66 square feet of refuse area. Staff recommends as a condition of approval that the refuse and recyclables areas be dimensioned on a revised site plan. In addition, a detail of the refuse and recyclables areas shall be shown which indicates compliance with RMC 4-4-090. b) PUD Decision Criteria: i. Demonstration of Compliance and Superiority: Applicants must demonstrate that a proposed development is in compliance with the purposes of the PUD regulations and with the Comprehensive Plan, that the proposed development shall be superior to that which would result without a planned urban development, and that the development will not be unduly detrimental to surrounding properties. Comment: If the conditions of approval are met, the applicant will have demonstrated compliance with the PUD regulations and the Comprehensive Plan. The applicant will have demonstrated that the development is superior to that which would result without a PUD and will not be detrimental to surrounding properties. Provided the conditions of approval are complied with the development of this site as a PUD would result in a superior design than would result by the strict application of the Development Standards; because the result of the requested modification, to approve stand alone residential on City of Renton Community and Economic Development Department Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner EAGLE RIDGE PUD PUBLIC HEARING DA TE: June 15, 2010 LUA09-150, ECF, PPUD Page 11 af 21 the northern portion of the subject site, provides for a successful transition from CA property to the existing multi-family residential development located to the east and northeast. If the northern portion of the site was required to develop with commercial/retail on the first floor such commercial use would be isolated from Benson Road S and would be virtually inaccessible from Benson Road S. site. ii. Public Benefit: The applicants shall demonstrate that a proposed development will provide specifically identified benefits that clearly outweigh any adverse impacts or undesirable effects of the proposed planned urban development, particularly those adverse and undesirable impacts to surrounding properties, and that the proposed development will provide one or more of the following benefits than would result from the development of the subject site without the proposed planned urban development: >-Critical Areas: Protects critical areas that would not be protected otherwise to the same degree as without a planned urban development; or >-Natural Features: Preserves, enhances, or rehabilitates natural features of the subject property, such as significant woodlands, native vegetation, topography, or noncritical area wildlife habitats, not otherwise required by other City regulations; or >-Public Facilities: Provides public facilities that could not be required by the City for development of the subject property without a planned urban development; or >-Overall Design: Provides a planned urban development design that is superior in one or more of the following ways to the design that would result from development of the subject property without a planned urban development: • Open Space/Recreation: (a) Provides increased open space or recreational facilities beyond standard code requirements and considered equivalent to features that would offset park mitigation fees in Resolution 3082; and (b} Provides a quality environment through either passive or active recreation facilities and attractive common areas, including accessibility to buildings from parking areas and public walkways; or • Circulation/Screening: Provides superior circulation patterns or location or screening of parking facilities; or • Landscaping/Screening: Provides superior landscaping, buffering, or screening in or around the proposed planned urban development; or • Site and Building Design: Provides superior architectural design, placement, relationship or orientation of structures, or use of solar energy; or • Alleys: Provides alleys to at least fifty percent (50%} of any proposed single family detached, semi-attached, or townhouse units. Comment: The following table contains comments on public benefits. City of Renton Community and Economic Development Department EAGLE RIDGE PUD PUBLIC HEARING DA TE: June 15, 2010 Table B Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner LUA09-150, ECF, PPUD Page 12 of21 PUBLIC BENEFIT PROVIDED: NATURAL FEATURES & OVERALL DESIGN NATURAL FEATURES: The site contains a total of 81 significant trees; 2 are dead, dangerous or diseased, 27 are in proposed access easements and 20 are critical areas resulting in 32 protected trees on site. The CA zone requires 5 percent tree retention of the 32 protected trees on site. At a 5 percent retention rate, 1.6 trees would be required to be retained. The applicant has identified 40 trees that would be retained. The preservation of these trees would result in an overall development design that would not only provide for growth in an area of the City that has been identified as a Commercial Corridor by the Comprehensive Plan, at the same time preserve the natural features on the site to the extent possible. OVERALL DESIGN: 1. Open Space/Recreation: In addition to private open space, the applicant is proposing to provide public amenities such as picnic tables, benches, a gazebo, and a walkway system that would provide pedestrian connectivity throughout the project site as well as to the surrounding existing development and Benson Road S. The proposed pedestrian system provides for additional active and passive recreation on the site that is not required by code. This 5-foot wide walkway would give the residents of the new development and the patrons of the commercial facility access to places for relaxation and/or exercise. Furthermore, the existing sidewalk along Benson Road S is immediately next to the travel lanes, there is no buffering for the pedestrians from this fast moving street. This does not provide a safe environment for pedestrian mobility in this area. As such, the addition of this internal pedestrian circulation system would provide a safer path for pedestrians to utilize, if they choose to leave the existing concrete sidewalk along Benson Drive South. In order for this path to provide a complete loop, for recreational purposes and for an alternative to walking along Benson Road S, staff recommends as a condition of approval that the applicant extend the pedestrian system so that it provides connectivity to Benson Road S and between the northerly and southerly buildings and their associated surface parking lots. 2. Circulation: Provided that the conditions of approval are complied with the proposed site plan provides for a superior pedestrian circulation system. In addition to the proposed pedestrian circulation system between the buildings on and off site, the applicant has proposed walkways provide access to the passive, publically accessible recreation areas. In order for these pedestrian walkways to be clearly delineated from the drive aisles and parking spaces, staff recommends a condition of approval that all pedestrian walkways within parking lots be differentiated by material or texture, such as stamped concrete or raised asphalt, from adjacent paving materials. 3. Landscaping/Screening: The proposed landscape plan for the entire site is superior to what is required by the Renton Municipal Code. In addition to the enhanced tree preservation, as discussed above under "Natural Features", the applicant has provided a landscape plan that includes screening landscaping and enhanced landscaping along Benson Road South. City of Renton Community and Economic Development Department EAGLE RIDGE PUD PUBLIC HEARING DATE: June 15, 2010 Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner LUA09-150, ECF, PPUD Page 13 of 21 The landscaping adjacent to the buildings would occur in generously sized beds that would seek to highlight the architecture and soften the fa~ade where needed. Surface parking lot areas would be screened from adjacent residential areas through large perimeter landscape strips with trees, shrubs, and groundcover, which would enhance the pedestrian experience along adjacent sidewalks. The interior of the parking lots would be softened with landscape islands that would include trees, shrubs, and groundcover; this would enhance aesthetics while providing solar relief and aiding long-term stormwater management. The provided landscape plan indicated that the following plants would be included in the proposed landscaping: October Red Glory Maple, Vine Maple, Korean Stewartia, and assorted conifer trees; shrubs including Redtwig Dogwood, Yellowtwig Dogwood, Oregon Grape, Pacific Wax Myrtle, Zabel Laurel, and Red Flowering Currant, Kelsey Dogwood, Spirea, and Sword Fern; groundcovers would include Sala!, Creeping Oregon Grape, and Wild Strawberry as well as seeded lawn areas with a mix of Perennial Rye, Fine Fescue, and Kentucky Blue Grass. Staff recommends as a condition of approval that the applicant submit a detailed final landscape plan for review and approval by the Planning Division project manager prior to building permit approval that indicates an expanded and enhanced landscaping using more trees in the area of the gazebo, and benches and picnic areas. 4. Site and Building Design: The proposed development is separated into two phases; the multi- family development to the north and the mixed use development to the south. The placement of the North Building on the northerly part of the parcel would allow for utilization of existing grades. In addition the orientation of the building takes advantage of views toward downtown Renton and the Valley to the west. Furthermore, both buildings allow for a transition into the commercial development to the north and residential development to the east. The building design includes horizontal modulation to break down the visual bulk of the building. Such horizontal modulation is accomplished by the use of bay window projects and balconies at each residential unit. These increments are then modulated further with the addition of various surface materials and changes of color. The roofline is flat except for raised parapets at the bay window sections which provide vertical modulation on the east and west facades. However, the north elevation of the South Building and the south elevation of the North Building do not have architectural modulation similar to that of the east and west facades of the buildings. Because these facades face garden areas and would be viewed by those people using these areas for passive recreation, they should have greater architectural modulation. Therefore, staff recommends as a condition of approval that revised elevations showing architectural modulation in a manner similar to the east and west elevations be submitted to the Planning Division project manager prior to the issuance of building permits. The building materials proposed would include hardiplank siding. The exterior walls of the ground floor area parking garages would be comprised of stamped or colored concrete with iron grates for air circulation. Such vertical bars convey an institutional appearance. Therefore, staff recommends as a condition of approval that that revised elevations be submitted to the Planning Division project manager indicating that decorative ironwork would used for ground level parking structure openings. Several paint colors would be used to accentuate the building modulation. City of Renton Community and Economic Development Department Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner EAGLE RIDGE PUD PUBLIC HEARING DATE: lune 15, 2010 LUA09-150, ECF, PPUD Page 14 of 21 The buildings use a contemporary architectural style with some craftsman detailing by the use of cedar beams and corner elements. The commercial space on the first floor of the southerly building is proposed to provide glass storefront windows. The commercial entrance at the main level is designed to have a canopy over the entrance. iii. Building and Site Design: Perimeter: Size, scale, mass, character and architectural design alang the planned urban development perimeter provide a suitable transition to adjacent or abutting lower density/intensity zones. Materials shall reduce the potential for light and glare. Comment: The size, scale, mass, character and architectural design of the proposed planned urban development would provide a suitable transition to the commercial building to the north and to the multi-family residential developments to the east and northeast. The materials proposed for the project's two buildings in combination with the building location on the project site at an elevation lower than the existing surrounding multi-family development would reduce the potential for light and glare. The fact that the commercial offices in the South building face eastward may cause a small amount of glare in the morning hours, but because these commercial spaces are at as lower elevation than the residential units in the North building may further reduce the amount of glare experienced. Interior Design: Pramotes a coordinated site and building design. Buildings in groups should be related by coordinated materials and raof styles, but contrast should be pravided throughout a site by the use of varied materials, architectural detailing, building orientation or housing type. Comment: The two buildings on the project site are similar in architectural character. The existing neighboring development has played a role in locating the buildings. Most of the floor of the South building and all of the floor area of the North building is devoted to residential uses. As such the site has been designed to reflect an integrated living environment while providing the potential for commercial office services. The buildings are linked through the use of similar building materials (stamped or stained concrete at the garage level, stucco at the first and second levels, hardiplank or cementious board at the third and fourth levels, and cedar at belly bands, corner boards and trim, and cedar beams for supports. iv. Circulation: Provides sufficient streets and pedestrian facilities: The planned urban development shall have sufficient pedestrian and vehicle access commensurate with the location, size and density of the proposed development. All public and private streets shall accommodate emergency vehicle access and the traffic demand created by the develapment as documented in a traffic and circulation report approved by the City. Vehicle access shall not be unduly detrimental to adjacent areas. City of Renton Community and Economic Development Department Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner EAGLE RIDGE PUD PUBLIC HEARING DA TE: June 15, 2010 LUA09-150, ECF, PPUD Page 15 af 21 Comment: The proposed project includes one main access point on Benson Road S. Emergency access would be provided by the 20-foot wide paved private access which originates in the Eagle Ridge Lodge development to the east and crosses the subject property from southeast to northwest. All drive aisles throughout the site would be 24- feet wide and would provide for two-way traffic circulation. While the submitted landscape plan indicates that there would be a series of 5-foot wide connecting pedestrian walkways throughout the site, staff recommends that additional pedestrian walkways and crosswalks be provided which promote pedestrian safety throughout the site. Such walkways shall be shown to provide a connection to the dental/medical office building to the north, between passive recreation areas as well as providing crosswalks across surface parking lots. Promotes safety: Promotes safety through sufficient sight distance, separation of vehicles from pedestrians, limited driveways on busy streets, avoidance of difficult turning patterns, and minimization of steep gradients. Comment: While parking area bollard lighting is indicated on the submitted site plan, a detailed outdoor lighting plan was not included. Therefore, it is not clear how the proposed and recommended pedestrian walkways and parking lot crosswalks would be illuminated at night. Staff recommends as a condition of approval that the applicant submit a lighting plan for review and approval by the Planning Division project manager prior to utility construction. The lighting shall contain pedestrian walkway lighting in addition to landscape and building lighting if proposed. Along Benson Road S there would be one 26-foot driveway cut which would provide direct access to the proposed project. When the conditions of approval are implemented, the promotion of safety will have been accomplished. Provision of a system of walkways: Walkways that tie residential areas to recreational areas, transit, public walkways, schools, and commercial activities. Comment: The existing street frontage improvements along Benson Road S provide connections to schools, public transit, and other public walkways within the neighborhood. As mentioned earlier in this report proposed and recommended pedestrian walkways would provide additional pedestrian links to such services. Provides safe. efficient access for emergency vehicles: Comment: All private drives would be designed to accommodate emergency vehicle access. A properly recorded fire access easement is required over the abutting parcel to the northwest of the project site in order to p [provide Fire Code approved apparatus access. v. Infrastructure and Services: Provides utility services, emergency services, and other improvements, existing and proposed, which are sufficient to serve the development. Comment: Water and sanitary sewer services would be provided by the City of Renton Water and Waste Water Utilities. Existing water and sewer mains are located within Benson Road S and in the existing paved access easement which crosses the project site. A new water main looped throughout the site would provide domestic water supply and City of Renton Community and Economk Development Department EAGLE RIDGE PUD PUBLIC HEARING DA TE: June 15, 2010 Preliminary Report to the Headng Examiner LUA09-150, ECF, PPUD Page 16 of 21 fire flows for the proposed development. Fire protection would be provided by the City of Renton Fire Department. Additional clearing and new impervious surfaces would result in increased surface water and runoff. The developed site drainage system would discharge site runoff to the Benson Road S drainage system. Stormwater detention would be required and is proposed in two separate detention vaults which would function independently. A Final Technical Information Report and design, in compliance with the 1995 King County Surface Water Design Manual would be required prior to final surface water design for the construction permit. The proposed infrastructure and services would be sufficient to · serve the proposed development. vi. Clusters or Building Groups and Open Space: An appearance of openness created by clustering, separation of building groups, and through the use of well-designed open space and landscaping, or a reduction in amount of impervious surfaces not otherwise required. Comment: The topography of the site includes some steep slope areas presenting some design constraints. Because the site generally slopes downward from east to west, the two proposed buildings would be located at different elevations. The South building containing the commercial space would be located closer to Benson Road S. Open space between the two buildings would be landscaped and would provide public access to pedestrian walkways and passive recreation areas. Surface parking area landscaping would be provided and would provide additional visual relief. The orientation of the buildings provides views primarily to the east and west and would allow for light and air circulation. Views to the east would be of hillside vegetation and landscaped areas and views to the west would be of the valley below. A feeling of openness would be created by the proposed landscaping and recommended pedestrian connections. vii. Privacy and Building Separation: Provides internal privacy between dwelling units, and external privacy for adjacent dwelling units. Each residential or mixed use development shall provide visual and acoustical privacy for dwelling units and surrounding properties. Fences, insulation, walks, barriers, and landscaping are used, as appropriate, for the protection and aesthetic enhancement of the property, the privacy of site occupants and surrounding properties, and for screening of storage, mechanical or other appropriate areas, and for the reduction of noise. Windows are placed at such a height or location or screened to provide sufficient privacy. Sufficient light and air are provided to each dwelling unit. Comment: Maximum privacy is provided by taking advantage of the topography of the site. Not only is the South building located at an elevation above Benson Road S, it is also separated by heavily vegetated buffer. Each of the proposed residential units has access to a private deck which would provide light and air to each unit. These private decks/balconies would include glass enclosures would afford future residents the ability to have outside views while providing a more open feeling. The two buildings do not directly face each and are offset o·n the site so that there are no direct sight lines between units in the separate buildings. City of Renton Community and Economic Devefopment Department Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner EAGLE RIDGE PUD PUBLIC HEARING DA TE: June 15, 2010 LUA09-150, ECF, PPUD Pagellof21 Rooftop equipment would be screened. Refuse and recyclables areas are proposed both inside the structured parking areas and in outside areas. As indicated on the landscape plan the outdoor refuse areas would be screened by landscaping. Because refuse and recyclable area screening details were not provided, staff recommends as a condition of approval that prior to building permit issuance the applicant shall provide a screening detail to the Planning Division project manager for review and approval. When the conditions of approval are met compliance with the privacy and building separation criteria will be satisfied. viii. Building Orientation: Provides buildings oriented to enhance views from within the site by toking advantage of topography, building location and style. Comment: Both of the proposed buildings are oriented east/west with the majority of window and door openings on these two facades. The two buildings are offset on the site to take advantage of views, to provide a feeling of openness, and to allow for optimum light and air. ix. Parking Area Design: Design: Provides parking areas that are complemented by landscaping and not designed in long rows. The size of parking areas is minimized in comparison to typical designs, and each area related to the group of buildings served. The design provides for efficient use of parking, and shared parking facilities where appropriate. Comment: The very limited amount of surface parking near Benson Road S would be screened from pedestrian view by a landscape strip. Surface parking area landscape islands would be provided at every six parking spaces or fewer would provide additional parking area screening and visual relief. The residential component of the South building would utilize the structure parking and would share surface parking spaces with the commercial uses. The residential units in the North building would have a combination of structured and surface parking areas. The structured parking reduces the amount of surface parking which provides for a more efficient use of the proposed project site and a reduction in impervious area. Surface parking spaces would be designated and in proximity to the commercial space to reduce intrusion into the primarily residential character of the project. Adequacy: Provides sufficient on-site vehicular parking areas consistent with the parking demand created by the development as documented in a parking analysis approved by the City. Comment: The proposed 134 parking spaces for the entire project would provide sufficient onsite parking demand. For the South building which contains 61 residential units and 4,039 square feet of commercial space, the applicant proposes 63 spaces for the residential component and 12 parking spaces for the commercial component which includes a6 accessible parking spaces. The North building contains 56 residential units and would have a total of 59 parking spaces including 4 accessible spaces. The applicant has provided parking in compliance with Renton Municipal Code. The overall project would have 2 more parking spaces than is required. City of Renton Community and Economic Development Department Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner EAGLE RIDGE PUD PUBLIC HEARING DATE: June 15, 2010 LUA09-150, ECF, PPUD Page 18af 21 x. Phasing: Each phase of the proposed development contains the required parking spaces, apen space, recreation spaces, landscaping and utilities necessary for creating and sustaining a desirable and stable environment, so that each phase, together with previous phases, can stand alone. Comment: The applicant has requested the option of phasing the proposed project. Phase One would be the South building, its associated structured and surface parking, as well as all of the landscaped open areas and their associated passive recreation facilities. Phase Two would include the North building, its structured and surface parking, and its associated landscaped areas. Construction of Phase One is anticipated to occur shortly after approval of the Final PUD and Phase Two would begin approximately one year thereafter. Because the public amenities and outdoor open space would be constructed and installed with Phase One, this phase can stand alone. xi. Development Standards Common Open Space Standard: Open space shall be concentrated in large usable areas and may be designed to provide either active or passive recreation. Requirements for mixed-use developments are described below. Residential Portions: Mixed use residential and attached housing developments of ten (10} or more dwelling units shall provide a minimum area of common space or recreation area equal to fifty (50} square feet per unit. The common space area shall be aggregated to provide usable area(s) far residents. The location, layout, and proposed type of common space or recreation area shall be subject to approval by the Reviewing Official. The required common open space shall be satisfied with one or more of the elements listed below. The Reviewing Official may require more than one of the following elements for developments having more than one hundred (100} units. (a) Courtyards, plazas, or multipurpose open spaces; (b) Upper level common decks, patios, terraces, or roof gardens. Such spaces above the street level must feature views or amenities that are unique to the site and provided as an asset to the development; (c) Pedestrian corridors dedicated to passive recreation and separate from the public street system; (d) Recreation facilities including, but not limited to: tennis/sports courts, swimming pools, exercise areas, game rooms, or other similar facilities; or (e) Children's play spaces. Comment: The proposed 117 unit multi-family development would require 5,850 square feet of common open space. Including landscaped areas which encompass passive recreation, the overall development would have 52,805 square feet of open area. Amenities would include benches, picnic tables, a gazebo structure, barbecue, and pedestrian walkways. Because these common open areas would be accessible to the public, staff recommends as a condition of approval that a revised landscape plan be submitted prior to the issuance of building permits which include enhanced landscaping with more trees planted in the areas containing the gazebo, picnic tables, and benches. City of Renton Community and Economic Deve/apment Department Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner EAGLE RIDGE PUD PUBLIC HEARING DATE: June 15, 2010 LUA09-150, ECF, PPUD Page 19of21 Mixed Use Nonresidential Portion: All buildings and developments with over thirty thousand {30,000) square feet of nonresidential uses (excludes parking garage floorplate areas) shall provide pedestrian-oriented space according to the following formula: 1% of the lot area + 1% of the building area= Minimum amount of pedestrian-oriented space Comment: The non-residential (commercial) component of the South building would have 4,039 square and, therefore, is not subject to compliance with this requirement. Private Open Space: Each residential unit in a PUD shall have usable private open space (in addition to parking, storage space, and corridors) for the exclusive use of the occupants of that unit. Each ground floor unit, whether attached or detached, shall have private open space which is contiguous to the unit and shall be an area of at least 20% of the gross square footage of the dwelling units. The private open space shall be well demarcated and at least 10' in every dimension. Decks on upper floors can substitute for some of the required private open space for upper floor units. For dwelling units which are exclusively upper story units, there shall be deck areas totaling at least sixty (60) square feet in size with no dimension less than five feet {5'). Comment: As evidenced by the floor plans, each residential unit would have a private deck. Each of these decks is accessible through its contiguous residential unit. Ground floor decks do not have the minimum dimension of 10-feet and most decks do not comply with the 20 percent gross floor area minimum. Therefore, staff recommends as a condition of approval that the applicant submit revised floor plans which indicate compliance with the dimensional and square footage requirements for private open space. Such floor plans shall be submitted to the Planning Division project manager prior to the issuance of building permits. Installation and Maintenance of Common Open Space: All common area and open space shall be landscaped in accordance with the landscaping plan submitted by the applicant and approved by the City. Comment: Prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit, the developer shall furnish a security device to the City in an amount equal to the provisions of RMC 4-9-060. Landscaping shall be planted within one year of final approval of the planned urban development (phasing may be taken into consideration), and maintained for a period of 2 years, thereafter, and prior to the release of the security device. A security device for landscape maintenance may be waived if a landscape maintenance contract with a reputable landscaping firm licensed to do business in the City of Renton is executed and kept active for a 2 year period. A copy of such contract shall be kept on file in the Planning Division. Installation and Maintenance of Common Facilities: All common facilities not dedicated to the City shall be permanently maintained by the planned urban development owner by the property owners' association or the agent(s) thereof. Comment: Staff recommends as a condition of approval that the owner of the PUD be responsible for any common improvements, including but not limited to pedestrian City of Renton Community and Economic Development Department EAGLE RIDGE PUD PUBLIC HEARING DATE: June 15, 2010 Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner LUA09-150, ECF, PPUD Page 20of 21 walkways and shared parking areas within the project. All common facilities, not dedicated to the City, shall be permanently maintained by the PUD owner. I. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approval of the Eagle Ridge PPUD, Project File No. LUA09-150, ECF, PPUD subject to the following conditions: 1. Refuse and recyclables areas shall be dimensioned on the revised site plan submitted to the Planning Division project manager for review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. A detail of the refuse and recyclables areas must be submitted with the site plan indicating compliance with RMC 4-4-090. 2. The pedestrian walkway system shall be extended to provide connectivity to Benson Road S, between the North and South Buildings, and between the project site and the dental/medical office building to the north. This extended walkway system shall be indicated on the revised site plan submitted to the Planning Division project manager for review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. 3. All walkways/crosswalks within parking lots shall be differentiated by material or texture, such as raised and stamped concrete or raised and painted asphalt. Such walkways/crosswalks shall be indicated on the revised site submitted to the Planning Division project manager for review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. 4. A Final landscape plan shall be submitted to the Planning Division project manager for review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits that indicates expanded and enhanced landscaping using more trees in the area of the gazebo, benches and picnic tables. 5. Revised elevations for the south elevation of the North Building and the north elevation of the South Building showing architectural modulation similar to the east and west elevations shall be submitted to the Planning Division project manager for review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. 6. Revised elevations shall be submitted to the Planning Division project manager for review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits which indicate that decorative ironwork would be used for ground level parking structure openings. 7. A revised site plan showing additional walkways and crosswalks to promote pedestrian safety throughout the site. Such walkways shall be shown to provide a connection to the dental/medical office building to the north, between passive recreation areas as well as providing crosswalks across surface parking lots. The revised site plan shall be submitted to the Planning Division project manager for review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. 8. A lighting plan shall be submitted to the Planning Division project manager for review and approval prior to utility construction that indicates pedestrian walkway, landscape, and building lighting. City of Renton Community and Economic Development Department EAGLE RIDGE PUD PUBLIC HEARING DA TE: lune 15, 2010 Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner LUA09· 150, ECF, PPUD Page 21 of 21 9. A revised site plan and revised elevations shall be submitted to the Planning Division project manager for review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits indicating that primary entries would have awnings or canopies and be identified with decorative paving and/or landscaping. 10. A rooftop mechanical equipment detail shall be submitted to the Planning Division project manager for review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. 11. Revised floor plans shall be submitted to the Planning Division project manager for review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits indicating compliance with the dimension and square footage requirements of the PUD decision criteria. 12. All common facilities, not dedicated to the City, shall be permanently maintained by the PUD owner. EXPIRATION PERIODS: The developer shall, within two {2) years of the effective date of action by the City Council to approve the preliminary plan, submit to the Planning Division a final development plan showing the ultimate design and specific details of the proposed planned urban development or the final phase or phases thereof. Upon application by the developer, the Hearing Examiner may grant an extension of the approved preliminary plan for a maximum of twelve (12) months. Application for such extension shall be made at least thirty {30) days prior to the expiration date of preliminary plan approval. Only one such extension may be granted for a planned urban development. If a final development plan is not filed within such two {2) years or within the extended time period, if any, the planned urban development preliminary plan shall be deemed to have expired or been abandoned. y7 f -:·. ~ I,,''''''" '.· r... , , . ' .:·. I I 60 (/) I ' ti a:: l .L 0 --CO ...J ~~ .. { :_:· -'il/.12 __ r..l.Z7 . 1Ji!Dr.L.2<',1!\ 0.'l18Ac. ~rL2f- T.L,5S t %. ---,, - \ I . I \ . ·, { l.'5 Ac;. ~~ I , ·t ~ ~ I , ·1 I r 0 . I I J~ \) C. . G) tty of Rento 1 ~ Pla°i'l(ling Division\ -\ .,_ \ I I W , 11 g NO~I32009 1\ "'-! ,, .. \ \ ~~~~~~[Q) \\ I . . \ \ I ' ' ~ I I~ I I .,.-11..,.. : J ,.. ,i,-I I -s I ,:'II 2.20At. I '\,. T.L-'7 -J / _ _..-- ~---- .,. A LINCOLN \ 'f>ROPERT' EXHIBIT 2 1.70 ·r.L.112 TRANSMIS ' II II / I I I 11 \I ,, .. 1) I I ON 1 \ I SE, OIABl.0 -,:_,~ - T.~td:_-...,__ 3 b5 A£": . L.88 : ;,,/),,, &: BC ,--------------- \ 1-- \ I ' \ \ ~ § ~ ~ ""' F gJ @j "g ~ "" @@ \ Inn] '"' i ' ' § I ' .. 1 ·• ~ \ -----------------EXHIBIT 3 i U! r, .... "'''Ii. i ~B(i),1 °··-i I 11· t 2 l I ·1····· ·1 .... I l·:Uf • u t I ! ' I • • :1 l -----:I EAGL.e RIDGe D APARTMeNTS & OFFICES SITE PLAN ~ ______ r i:.=:.r.~, ~ ~ ' ~I ~ d,Q) J;i ffl l)l )> ::J ---0 ::J © co s· ffi ""' (0 .... 0 = -;:;c· ~ ~ w \iml 6 ::J © ! 20 i u • !E a! l; ei ~ • i ~ ~ ii~ • • I I ~ r ' ~ 0 • ' ' \ I 0 ~ 0 -::0 CD :l ..... 0 ::l ! i ' ' ~ • ' • 0 \ ' ' \ i , ,..·,~ ,:,/·,!: L..,:... ...... r, //-/ : ~ /l,' I/, I ' .}[Jl ' 1600 BENSON ROAD SOUTH EAGLE RIDGE APARTMENTS & OFFICE RENTON, WASHINGTON EXHIB1T4 WEISMANDESIGNGROUP I= F··' f:=... I I Lt> t::; cc .... ::c >< w •= immol!l.5. bi.~1411 r.a.a..1111 1o<••~1--11iM ............. .v --- I I I ~ .. IE1-(WIJ ----- I ~-----I :~: ----------1 I I I J..-- 1 ---..:..!--------------b-:::.:------------------ (D 1~ ---- GRADING PLAN IIQALEJ 1•-; j,,; GRAPHIC SCAW .u--r T. c..--i ....... - zffi l' " ... I !I.Ill I ,.,PR !' [ "4lL ,_,.. muoo J 1-800-424.-5555 P'Dllrnl.DLOCmDHDl'l.tllJOIGIIDJfCUTU!ll!!5 ,._ ® ltJJ:.1 l 9 0 I " ; ,t I Gt of Renton .Ji I Planning Division NOV I 3 2009 [Rl~(g~~~~/Q) PRELIMINARY PUD &ADLE Rl>CE OFFICE AND OCNJOtaffl.UB BENEIWJZ!D UTnJTIES PLAN -ITDRMWATER -,i II II -,i II II II I I II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II --n n 8 II --~1------n D D D II n II n II II II II II j-1 I • EXHIBIT 6 I • I I I • f ' , f I ~ ' .,; 0 ;;j " § t ~ > w ~ w ~; ;~ EXHIBIT 7 C: C 0 o .... ·- c: ·"' Cl) .2'. a: 0 '+--g o ·c >, C .... C\l ·-0:.: 0 = = = ~ "'"' -:> 0 :z: .,; 0 ifi " § t ~ > w ~ w ~' o:-z• ; - -EXHIBIT 8 ] C: C: ©) 0 ...... Q I!l1IJ C: .!'? 0, (!) .2: el ~ cc 0 "' .., = .... 0, _, I!l1IJ 0 .s > t» >, 2 c:, .... m "" I!l1IJ c3 a:: [Q's g g ~ <I m I § Ii 0 z z is i5 ~ ~ 1 w w ~ ~ w w ~~ :;;! ~H !if ··~··"D l!0\16 r.11 'TE!UOO ,s1n311- '• ,-'.-"i',~,,,;;;-:;,;f;;:.::..K ' 11 t il • 801g HHON g SNOll'/A;Jl;J s~nJNl~OONOJ e80!~ el8V;J ., " L _ _JJ d 0 ~ m " 0 z e " 1 w ~ w -· ~. " .. w, EXHIBIT 9 C: C: 0 0 +' ·-c: _[!) Cl) -~ a:;o -Cl) 0-'= C >, C ,.., (1l 0 0:: > = = d 0 ~ m § z Q ~ "l w ". ~i 0 T"'I I- I-I ca 1-1 ::c >< w F""""" II I I I I I I I I I r • 1 L ______ _J L I I I I I r---------------------, • I ' : I : I • I : I 1··-···----------1 ul" II : I II 11~ II ;.-; ;.-; Ii " 'if I r ----1 !! J 1k • ., .. ;t"",i ill L__jl----__ _J,_ __ _,,_ __ ,_._ __ --I·--- II ii II ,--~-, _J ___ l'l_ -$---C--,__ -) I Ill ~ __, <LI '" "-"' :, (!) 5 HANDA~D STAI.LS :I COMPACT HIILLS Ii 2 ~ANillCAP ~ AI.J~ _,. ~ HANDARD HALLS / II II I c.,..PAGT STALL I II II ~ !I II ,/' l! II t JCl)lll'AcHlo~ n:::C -z O __1 ct::~ 0 d) tu6i[I -'a 1-- 0 Z lU => ' rf_CI ST LL I j! II ! HANDA~ STALL A A 7 S!ANo/RO STALLS 2 !;OIPACT HALLS 2 1-lAND]C>IP ,fTALLS II~ ST NDARD STALLS ,f 3 COMPACT STAL!..S II . L1 1 j7' I I I I~ --··-"'" ---,.._ --+---+-_<-,, !I----.... --·----i--· --~~ ~ 'j---t--fli' I I I ,, I <o (.!)O lUu < U1 "' .,: (!) " !LJ ~ ,, ~ II / N N 1 1 o I N N I I I II I N 1 / C C C "C: ..i,: / I ; II / 11 ~ ,, / ··-· ---·Cl---·-- I r LL~ __ _r Ii j II n r""""' STANDARD µ, -....... . ,--1 : ,--'-_J L -' I L ____ ; l__ __ J ~ I r--11-1 I r' r· _j II I_ -, _J .. J • L--~ u L-- L\__ __ f 6ARAC,E FLOOR FLAN -50..JTI-l BLDG. V&',1'·0' (; COMPACT e-!ANDICAF PARKING TOT AL City of Renton Planning Division NOV 1 3 2009 [R{fg~fgfi~fg[Q) ,~ • 4 " : II , II • ···1 '11 !•kt ~ ! ~· 'jfl '!t 1 I • 1· 11 ,, • 11 ' •• ·11·· ···11' ''II' !'I I j:!:1ii .!;i!i ,·11 • 111·''1' iii .. :!l .. m I -- 1 lni1:1 1 , ! •1 'i' I I !1!i,i!:1 I 0a, .. .....±ll:2i__ ,ooh, __ 0r-n._____LA5_______ J~b f,....llJ.L.._ ft--·- A 3.0 S .... .... .... ""' r:a ""' :c >< w COMMON ROOM Cct1MMOH Rt15 1'380 5F DECK 4.32' ·~=-=;,,;.,y-v, OFFICE I I 1548 SF OFFICE 5FACE COURTYARD OFFICE :. 1!:>!:>2 SF OFFICE 5FACE --~ _I!!.-· TOT AL COMMON 5>88'3 5F FIRST FLOOR PLAN -SOJTl-l BLDCi. 11&',r."° OFFICE 3 '33'3 5F OFFICE SPACE COURTYARD (i UNITS OFFICES COMMON TOTAL 10132 5F 4'2'l3':l SF ~00':'.I 5F 21Zl0I00 5F City of Renton Planning Division NOV l 3 2009 [g{~(CgijVJgfQ) WI DECK& i •• "( n D ,u "' (')::, o3 -z "'-" "'o ..., 0 "'z -<o "'u z <( a:' (') 0 "' ..., O<ll 0 ...,r LL f--=, f--0 "'<fl ~ LL ' ''I '111 !11,•1, ;~ !, ·1··1'·1 :,,1!' l •i' I"' • 11 I ,, ·1··· ···11· '·1~· !'I' 1'•!1111' 1,iil : .. 1 • 1·1·:,: ' ',·11 •" 1••111 ! n,H llh 111o1'1,1t1 1,,,,:111 I 11- 1 ,1•1, 1 ,11,1 ,I Doi<, 4-)}-0Q S«>lo, __ _ Or<>wn.~ Jo~ f,....llli-~•Yia"""''-- ----A 3.1 S N .-1 I:; Cll .... ::c >< w UNfT IE> IIS.<ZJ SF DECK ~4 SECOND FLOOR PLAN • SOUTH BLDC.. ~~·,r . .,,. (i 1 £ ~ I •, ,i g) ~ D a ,II UNITS Cor1MON TOTAL l,&3':'.1'2 SF ?410 SF 158(Z)2 SF City of Renton Planning Division NOV 1 3 2009 [R{~(C~~~~[D) \ii/ DECKS ., '" "'"' o2 -z "'-:,; "'o --'o <!>z «o "'u z <( --' (L <!) "'0 0--' o"' --' IL I 1-- 0 => zO 0'" (.) u.., <I) '1•1 '11 !rhtl· ~ ! !· ·1··1'·1 ·1·1!1 I ' I' ' ' ,, · 11 .... •1•1,r '"~!' ' 'II ' l'I' ' • 1 •• I 'i• 1: in, i.:1;, ili!!:id!!!iili l i1,1i111li1 1 ,11,I ll -0a, .. ~ Scal•~--~---w__ Jok> f.JllL____ ·---- ....... A 3.2 S - M .... ,_ 1-f £Q 1-f ~ UNIT 2 148 5F DECK, Tf.llRD FLOOR PLAN • 50UTJ4 BLDU. w·,r-11>' (~ ~ • ,• ;~! I.or. DH. "' ',, ,II j~~ UNITS COMMON TOTAL 163':12 5F 2410 SF. 181*'2 SF ill/ DECKS City of Renton Planning Division NOV 13 2009 [Ri~~~~~~[Q) -' L ,u "' {') " o2 -z "'s, ,u 0 ---' 0 {')z <( 0 ,u u z j (L "' 0 I>'---' 0 d) 0 iC ~· C, oo "'"' 'r f-- ' ''I 111 !11 •! ; I la ,. 1,j, :,:1·· 11m1• 1n: 'I''' I '''II' : 1 ·11,: !1'!,,I I' ··~ ., .. ' 'I 1··•1•' .. , . u,. i;I,,: !1, .. :11! I !1il!:ljj ! !l!l!il:1 Oa•• Hl·QII -·-------'l>L- Job ,.____lilL._.. Rovl•"""'-- ,iiiai.ii A 3.3 S o::I" .... I- I-I ca 1-1 ::c X w UNIT .2 148 5F DECK UNIT l/o, 1141 5F DECK 12~ FOURTH FLOOR FLAN -50.JTH BLD6. w,r,11>' (; UNITS COMMON TOTAL l~:3'32 SF 1234 5F 18626 SF UJ/ DECKS City of Renton Planning Division NOV 1 3 2009 [R{~~~~\W~[Q) 1,1 r;;:1 " ,, <U "' (!) ::, o2 -z "'- <U " _,o "'o ""5 <U l) z <( ---' CL 0 .,o o---' 0 " -'I lL f- I c, f-0 "' <fl C> ~ . "I '11 ~•11 11 : I ~· ·1··1'·1 :111!1 I' I' I ' ,, • 11 ' ,, ·1··· ···11· "II' !'I ' j1l:11'i .!;i!i ,•·d · 111,1:1· ,;1,,:1! 11:11 I i !11!1ili1 I !i!l,il:i o,,,.. t-j!)·(,~ ~-·---~-"""""-- Job f,JilL_ ~ ........... __ ....... A 34 S EXHIBIT 15 :i!} lJ (") m 2: ru ~ f2) D ::, 'c:: <: ::, lmJ ..... 5· 0 co .... = c.., 0 :0 ~ ...., = ;;c· a> lfiiiJ ~ iii" :l -· ..... lg g 0 :l ~ I L ·1 I I L _J ' ' I I L J l I I ,-- L_~ ' L ' Ci 1 11 .•, 11 '--' -L ~---~,eu EAGLE RIDGE CONDOMINIUMS ROOF PLAN SOUTH BLOG ,- L ' L r ' I ,J \0 9'i .... .... co .... ::c: >< w __ _;-------:. ______ s-' -·-t.1. ______ .r' -'1 __ .r' --'-1 ,.r-,l __ __:---: ___ f-'1_ ___ f-'-i , --__ r--'-i i L I I II I -~ I I II II I ~ ~ b-dA I I 11 tt r @---l--tl--__. __ r,--_, __ ~,--_, ___ --'..-_,, -~- ' I I I I I I I I I I I I I I .; --·l---tt---1·-3----¢----f --·-+---6---f---$---+----~ '~ 12 COMPACT STALLS 2 HIU!DlCAP STALLS 5 STANDARD S~AlLS 4 CDHPACT HALLS 2 HANDICAP STALLS 5 STANDARD !HALLS 6 JTANPIIRD STALLS ,..,- 1', ,, ,,, -,I I I 111 11 ~------,-, 1 L._ _r .. -, __;· -·--1 ,---·-1_ : I _r---,. ;----, _...// ,-, __ ,._ --Q------,-. -r-1 - STANDARO COMPACT lo ,. L_J l__ "l__J L_J L_ _ _J L_........ """"L __ S GARAG-E FLOOR PLAN -NORTI-I BLDG. 11&",r.v (; HANDICAP 4 F ARKING: TOT AL 3~ City of Renton Planning Division NO~ 1 3 IU09 ~~~~u~~© 1··1 ~ ~ '•1· 1\i J "< =i1 !2_ D z '.'i "'<I) 0. "' "' "' 0::::) e::::0 irzo-1 -0 <O .,::e ..., ....JO IL I "'0 f--<( z UJ ll:'. tuO (!) 0 0 <( Z ~ "' :,i,!il !111:, ·1··1'·1 :1:1!' 111· 11:l ·1···il ·•·11• ' ·11 • I'! I ' ! ,, 1 ·1· II !QI I , •• ;,1,1 ··111· 11· ·1· i;i .. :11 .. :11 I l l1,11ili1 1 Ml,d:1 0.:.1 .. ~ Scul•--- ~-_w___ Joi,f,JilL_ ~ ............. __ A 3.0 N "' ~ 1- 1-4 al 1-1 ::c >< w COMMCN 2213 SF i )- ! FIRST FLOOR PLAN -NORTf-1 BLD6. vii·,r-ir (; LINIT5 COMMON TOTAL i:>'oll SF 221:3 SF 181M SF WI DECKS City of Renton Planning Division NOV 1 3 2009 ~[E~[E~VJ[E[Q) ' ., !;; IL D _j . L ,u "' (!> " o2 -z "'-,u" ~o C!>D «15 <Uo z "" i~ O' ~ o.o 0 ~I u.. f- "' f-0 <f)Z "' u.. . ''l '111 !rl •! ·~ !i ·1··1~·1 :1·1! l ' I' I"' • Ill I ,1 'I'"~ "·II' ! 1'1l,, lil·1i 1: !'P. .,;l,1 i!i!!:nl!!!!ili I M!:l!11 I •i!•1: I ! !i!l,d3 0010,~ S<aia. __ _ Drawn,~ Jo~ J,....l&2i- ~o.Wono, __ A 3.1 N go ..-1 I-.... ca .... :c >< w UNIT l 1103 5F DECK 41Z' 5EC0ND FLOOR PLAN -NORTl-l BLDG. 1111·.r-e· (; COMMON TOTAL 182:2 SF 11133 SF City of Renton Planning Division NOV I 3 1009 [R1~(C~~~~[Q) ,~# J :I':! "'""' ir iii D _j .. L ,u <I> "'"' o2 -z "'-:,; "'o --'o "'z <to "'u z <t --' "-"' "'C, o--' 0 '° --' lL I t- c, "' zO oz u ,u <J) !,i,!il !11111 ., .• ,,., :II!! Id· n1:: ·1•·•11 '"II' 1 'II ' l'f I . .. .., 1:11111 -!i1!1 1·11 • jll"·1· i;!,.1!! nl!i I J!l!ill:1111 1 ,11,1,l -()al<l.......i:ll.QL_ -.. __ _ ----"'---Job J,---1,Ui._ ----- A 3.2 N CJ\ .-1 I-.... co 1-1 :r. >< w UNIT I 1103 SF DECK 40 TI-IIRD FLOOR FLAN • NORTH BLDG . w,r.r (; UNIT 'J l36'J SF DECK 14 UNIT$ COHHON TOTAL IS.'Jll SF 1822 SF 11133 5F WI DECKS City of Renton Planning Division NOV 1 3 2009 [Rl~(C~~V/~!Q) ii J .. ;ij;~ iii D _i .. L ,u"' c,,::> o2 -z "'-:,; "'o ~o "'z <( 0 "'u z <( ii' (') 0 "'~ 0 '° 0 ~I LL f- °' oO es z I f- • '1 ''l !111, ;! ,,1 ; ·1:1 11m:1 iii 1: ·1···11 ·•·11· "II' 1'1 1 · 1 ,, 1 ·1· 1:,1~ .,;1,, ,,·a 1u1, • ,;! .. : 11 ... :,ii 1 !1.111i~1l!1 1 ,I ,I ,I -~ uo,o,___i:ll:.2L_ s ... .,, __ _ Pco,.o.....l.1&.- Job 1,_ll11_ ~•vlol<lno, __ A 3.3 N 0 N t- '""' a:i 1-1 ::c X w UNIT I 11ei3 SF DECK 40 FOJRTH FLOOR FLAN -NORTl-l BLDG,. V&',1'·"' (; COMMON TOTAL 164'0 SF 11:?!;1 5F City of Renton Planning Division NOV 1 3 2009 [Rl~~~~~~[Q) rJ;f [ ' •• .. ;ii l •.. D .Ji " L ,u "' (!) ::> D2 -z "'-"' "'o JD "'z "'o ,u C) z .,: ,_, IL (!) "'C, o-' D <D -'r IL >- I°' >-0 ocZ => 0 IL •-''I !111, 1!1111 i r ~j '1'"'' ·1·1· 1111· 1 1 n: 'I''' I '"II' 1 ,·11.: ljl•1i 1: :•11 .,;1,, i!i!M!l!!i:ili' l l"il•l11!1 f •ll•'i I 1 !dl!ii:1 -,.,..,, •• ...J.:ll;.2.L_ Soolo. __ _ ~,.,........J.!i..._ Job f,...--llll..-..-··--- A 3.4 N EXHIBIT 21 i; I b, ' I I I I 0 i' i I 0 b-, f l. ,--, rn I ;ii _ _J .. 0 i' ~---' z is ~ ~ "' r 0 ~ I 0 l. I j 0 ~ (') --cJ -· Im -... :z: ~ '< (0) = ;;,_ 0 <'. ~ .... ffi -(Q 'i = JJ = 0 I ~ ~ <" (I) = = ui" ::, = ffi o· ... 0 g ~ ::, .:'"- ~ .i .... fa:i R-8 ~· z 5151hSI ~ t'l ~ ~ R-8 __ F4 -17 T23N RSE W 1/2 RM-F-_ \CA ,-------':.."""'~ " RM£ ... _ i EXHIBIT 22 • 1 f --R-8 -- RM-F RM-F -~ / ,, . R-8--·- ·, N ~-~":_s·-~~-~~------'------'--"----'-----R--8-----.,,_,~--l t ZONING MAP BOOK PW TECHNICAL SERVICES PRINTED ON 11/13/09 -.......... h,~ ....... -no\ _...,....,., • ...,..oru,1aq,....,~-don lhol>ort.........,_..,.,_.,oltl>t-•'-'>. --~-bOty ................. '"" H4 -29 T23N RSE W 1/2 0 200 400 N I Foet 1:4,800 G4 20 T23N RSE W 1/2 5320