Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Misc
·• ® King Countyr Development and Environmental Services 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest LANDSCAPE BOND QUANTITY WORKSHEET FORM Renton. 'Nashington 98055-1219 206-296-<l600 TTY 206-296-7217 For alternate formats, call 206-296-6600. PROJECT NAME: DDES PROJECT NO: . ADDRESS: Rathinam Short Plat -Significant Trees and Street Trees, Form I of 2 L04SR077 11634 192nd Street, Renton, Washington PREPARED BY: H. BRUCE MCCRORY, RLA NO. 5 PHONE: (425) 251-6222 Bonds are based upon required landscaping only and will be posted for performance and/or maintenance. Required landscaping includes perimeter landscaping, surfacing parking area landscaping, (KCC 21A.16) and any landscaping required by SEPA environmental review. The maintenance period Is for the life of the project, however, after posting for maintenance, the performance bond wilt be reduced to 30% ($1,000.00 minimum) and be held tor a two year period. Upon re-inspection of the site the bond will be released it the site has been properly m~intained (21 A.16.180). A landscape maintenance Inspection deposit Is required prior to permit Issuance to cover the costs of the 2· year maintenance Inspection. Landscape Inspections are billed at the current hourly rate once the lnltlal deposit Is exhausted. It the project has not been maintained and there are dead trees, shrubs, ground cover, or other deficiencies noted in the required landscaping, the bond will be held until the deticiences are corrected. I I ,, I J I I UNIT'PRICE' UNITTYPE · QUANTITY ;PRICE:· ,. SOD LAWN AREAS $500.00 MSF(I.OOOSQ. Ff.) $0.0( HYDROSEEDING (FRONTAGE R.0.W.) $50.00 MSF (1,000 SQ. Ff.) 7 $350.0( !SOIL PREPARATION A. TOPSOIL (6 INCHES DEEP) $25.00 CY (CUBIC YARD) $0.0( B. 'MULCH (2 INCHES DEEP) $4.00 CY (CUBIC YARD) $0.0< C. ·PEAT MOSS (2 INCHES DEEP) $2.30 SY (SQUARE YARD) $0.00 ,. D. · COMPOST (3 INCHES DEEP & TILLING) $26.00 SY (SQUARE YARD) $0.0( ' E .. FERTILIZER $6.67 CY (CUBIC YARD) $0.01 PLANT MATERIALS A. DECIDUOUS TREES J.75·2" CALIPER (minimum height 10') $250.00 EACH COST& LABOR 17 $4,250.0( PERIMETER AND PARKING AREAS 1.50·1.75" CALIPER $225.00 EACH COST& LABOR $0.0( INTERIOR LANDSCAPING OR OTHER REQUIRED LANDSCAPING B. EVERGREEN TREES (SIGNIFICANT TREE REPLACEMENT) FIVE (5) FEET OR ABOVE $150.00 EACH COST& LABOR 36 $5,400.01 C. SHRUBS (POND) $35.00 EACH COST& LABOR 25 $875.0< D. GROUNDCOVER $4.00 EACH COST&LABOR $0.0C MISCELLANEOUS TREE STAKES $2.65 EACH PER STAKE & LABOR 70 $186.0( 1.,neck out me ODES neb site at www.metrokc.govmnes Page 1 of 2 12-17,2003 11614.008.xls [_/_] • , ' . UNIT PRICE UNIT TYPE QUANTITY · PRICE ,. ,, . , .. . WENCING (FENCE AT POND IS PART OF CIVIL SITE BOND) . SOLID WOOD CEDAR $28.50 LINEAR FOOT $0.0l (INCLUDES LABOR) . BERMING $17.50 LINEAR FOOT $0.0l (INCLUDES LABOR) ; -~ : IRRIGATION $0.80 SQUARE FOOT $0.0( ; RELOCATING TREES ON SITE ' 36-INCH BALL $260.00 EACH $0.0( 60-INCH BALL $920.00 EACH $0.01 RELOCATING SHRUBS ON SITE 12-INCH BALL $26.00 EACH $0.0{ 24-INCH BALL $33.00 EACH $0.0 ADDITIONAL ITEMS: ONSITE RECREATION FACILITIES ~e~ P.ark quantity caJculations, Form 2 of 2 $0.0C .. $0.0( $0.0( $0.0 $0.0 $0.01 $0.0l $0.0 SUBTOTAL BOND AMOUNT $11,061.01 Add 30% of the Bond Sub-Total for Contingency in Accordance $3,318.3( with Financial Guarantee Ordinance 120220, Section 13. TOTAL BOND PRICE $14,379.3( ,. Check out the ODES Web site at www.metrokc.gov/ddes 12-17-2003 Page 2 of 2 11614.008.xls [_/_) ,· ; / . .. ® Kii:,g Countyr Development and Environmental Services 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Renton. Washington 98055-1219 206-296-{;600 TTY 206-296-7217 LANDSCAPE BOND QUANTITY WORKSHEET FORM For alternate formats, call 206-296-6600. PROJECT NAME: Rathinam Short Plat -Park Only, Form 2 of 2 ODES PROJECT NO: L04SR077 ADDRESS: 11634 192nd Street, Renton, Washington BARGHAUSEN CONSULTING ENGINEERS. INC. PREPARED BY: H. BRUCE MCCRORY, RLA NO. 59:fC....i:t) / PHONE: ..,_(4:.::2;:..5)c.::2:::.5=-l-6"'2:::c22=------.. .:..:.:.:::..:.::.:::..:::.:.:................:~~~~~~~~.:..:.:.:.:.~~~::::::~ ,1 . Bonds are based upon required landscaping only and will be posted for performance and/or maintenance. Required landscaping includes perimeter landscaping, surfacing parking area landscaping, (KCC 21A.16) and any landscaping required by SEPA environmental review. The maintenance period Is for the life of the project, however, after posting for maintenance, the performance bond will be reduced to 30% ($1,000.00 minimum) and be held for a two year period. Upon re-inspection of the site the bond will be released if the site has been properly maintained (21 A.16.180). A landscape maintenance Inspection deposit Is required prior to permit Issuance to cover the costs of the 2- year maintenance inspection. Landscape Inspections are billed at the current hourly rate once the Initial deposit ls exhausted. If the Project has not been maintained and there are dead trees, shrubs, ground cover, or other deficiencies noted in the required landscaping, the bond will be held until the deticiences are corrected. I I UNIT PRICE I 'UNITTYPE .. SOD LAWN AREAS $500.00 MSF (1,000 SQ. Ff.) HYDROSEEDING $50.00 MSF (1,000 SQ. Ff.) SOIL PREPARATION A. TOPSOIL (6 INCHES DEEP) $25.00 CY (CUBIC YARD) B. MULCH (2 INCHES DEEP) $4.00 CY (CUBIC YARD) :. PEAT MOSS (2 INCHES DEEP) $2.30 SY (SQUARE YARD) D. COMPOST (3 INCHES DEEP & TILLING) $26.00 SY (SQUARE YARD) E. FERTILIZER $6.67 CY (CUBIC YARD) PLANT MATERIALS A. DECIDUOUS TREES 1.75-2'' CALIPER (minimum height 10') $250.00 EACH COST&LABOR PERIMETER AND PARKING AREAS 1.50-1.75" CALIPER $225.00 EACH COST&LABOR INTERIOR LANDSCAPING OR OTHER REQUIRED LANDSCAPING B. EVERGREEN TREES FIVE (5) FEET OR ABOVE $150.00 EACH COST& LABOR C. SHRUBS $35.00 EACH COST& LABOR D. GROUNDCOVER $4.00 EACH COST&LABOR MISCELLANEOUS TREE STAKES $2.65 EACH PER STAKE & LABOR FENCING Check out the ODES Web site at www.metrokc.gov/ddes LandscapeBondQuantity b-wks-landscapebq.pdf 12-17-2003 I I I QUANTITY I PRICE ' 4.2 $2,100.0( $0.0( 3 $75.()( $0.()( $0.()( $0.0( $0.()( $0.()( / $0.()( $0.()( 21 $735.0< 250 $ i ,000.0( $0.()( Pago 1 of2 11614.009.xls L_/_J I ;,· I .,, • • UNIT PRICE .UNIT TYPE QUANTITY ' PRICE SOLID WOOD CEDAR $28.50 LINEAR FOOT 3!0 $8,835.()( (INCLUDES LABOR) BERMING $17.50 LINEAR FOOT $0.()( (INCLUDES LABOR) RRIGATION $0.80 SQUARE FOOT $0.()( RELOCATING TREES ON SITE 36-INCH BALL $260.00 EACH $0.()( 60-INCH BALL $920.00 EACH $0.()( RELOCATING SHRUBS ON SITE 12-INCII BALL $26.00 EACH $0.0( 24,INCII BALL $33.00 EACH $0.0( ADDITIONAL ITEMS: K:)NSITE RECREATION FAC!LlTIES Concrete paving $2.50 SF 212 $530.()( Concrete curb (play) $2.50 LF 100 $250.()( Play surface $1.50 SF 540 $810.()( Big toy table (BT-IO) $1,000.00 EA I $1,000.()( , Kompan MQ 100271 $6,000.00 EA I $6,000.()( Kompan GXY8014 $1.000.00 EA I $1,000.()( 4-foot-high black vinyl chain-link fence $15.00 LF 80 $1,200.0( $0.0( SUBTOTAL BOND AMOUNl $23,535.0( Add 30% of the Bond Sub-Total for Contingency in Accordanc, $7,060.5( with l<'inancial Guarantee Ordinance 120220, Section 13. TOTAL BOND PRICE $30,595.5( Check out the DDES Web site at www.metrokc.gov/ddes Page 2 of 2 11614.009.xls [_/_] landscapeBondQuantity b-wks-landscapebq.pdf 12-17-2003 ' , • King County Department of Development and Environmental Services Land Use Services Division 900 Oakesdale Ave. Southwest Renton, WA 98055-1219 April 6, 2005 Hal P. Grubb P.E. Barghausen Consulting Engineers Inc. 18215 72nd Avenue S Kent, Washington 98032 L04S0003 Rathunam Short Plat This department has reviewed the final submittals for the above referenced short subdivision. The following items must be addressed before final approval is granted. This is a list of outstanding issues at this time however; additional revisions to the mapping may arise as a result of these additions/corrections. If you have questions or need clarifications, please call Patrick Simmons, Platting Review Engineer, at 206-296-6636. Technical Information Report Not returned Section 4.0 Comment no action required The KCRTS Calculation List the type of facility as a Detention Vault vice the pond as shown on the plans. The vault dimensions seem to match the dimensions of the pond at the dead storage elevation, therefore this would agree with the required/provided storage capacity volumes shown on the plans. Bond Quantities Worksheet The following items are missing The Fence for the detention pond. The manhole for the control structure. .· • Site Improvements Plan Postmaster approval area Page 2 Rathinam-2 The clearing limits and border silt fence should be revised to protect the retention trees on the east side of the property. Page 3 Road "A" must be designed to urban standard per approval iten 3D. A thicken edge is not meet this requirement for an urban street for the 1993 KCRS. Revise the roadway section. The Improvement to SE 192nd Street require a pavement design for the Principal Arterial Per KCRS 4.03, Submit a design for review. Page 4 New County Road Engineer requirements are that no shading is allowed on plans, Remove the shading in the roadway and pipe sections. A location for the mailbox cluster is needed and detail of the mailboxes need to be shown. A private drainage easement is needed for the private roof/foundation drains within lot 1, 7 and 8. KCRS 5.05 requires that a principle Arterials have continuous illumination for the entire length of the roadway widen to the required roadway width. Additional luminaries may be required Submit a lighting plan to determine if this road standard is met. Page 5 Remove shading per note for page 4 The inlet and outlet pipe should have the elevation shown on the plan. An additional section is needed of the pond to include the control structure. Page 6 The new ADA ramps with the truncated cone need to be shown. Page 7 The tree retention plan is being reviewed by the Grading section # Rathinam-3 Landscaping plans The preliminary Recreation plan is being reviewed by the planner. The plan set should include landscaping the area between the detention pond and the sidewalk/ SE 192nd Street on both sheets. Patrick J. Simmons Engineering Review Section ~ Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 2:51 PM To: 'cvisintainer@barghausen.com' Subject: RE: Rathinam Short Pit BCE#11614 Revision Thanks We get to this as soon as possible. Pat -----Original Message----- From: Cara Visintainer [mailto:cvisintainer@barghausen.com] Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 1 :56 PM To: Simmons, Pat Subject: RE: Rathinam Short Pit BCE#11614 Revision Pat, Page 2 of2 A copy of the "minor preliminary short plat revision" submittal package was submitted to Fereshteh Dehkordi on 7/15/05. \: 02/23/2006 Thanks, Cara Visintainer Design Engineer II Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 18215 72nd Avenue South Kent, WA 98032 (425) 251-6222 -Phone (425) 251-8782-Fax e-mail: cvisintainer@barghausen.com website: http_:L,! www.barghausen.com -----Original Message----- From: Simmons, Pat[mailto:Pat.Simmons@METROKC.GOV] Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2005 12:40 PM To: 'cvisintainer@barghausen.com' Cc: Henoch, Lanny Subject: Rathinam Short Pit BCE#11614 Revision Did the revision get resubmitted. I think everything else is complete. Thanks Pat Simmons, Pat From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Simmons, Pat Friday, November 04, 2005 12:16 PM 'Cara Visintaine~ Rathinum Short plat L04S0003 L04S0003M.doc I have review the resubmittal and the Alteration on 10/28/2005. I am still waiting for the answer on the Width of SW 192nd and a stripping plat. I will try to get an answer on Tuesday from our traffic engineer. I also have not got a illumination plan for SE 192nd Street. livi]'i ~ _Q450003M.doc (49 KB) You can submit the mylars when ready Pat Simmons Engineer 206-296-6636 1 Simmons, Pat From: Cara Visintainer [cvisintainer@barghausen.com] Sent: Friday, May 05, 2006 9:54 AM To: Simmons, Pat Cc: File Subject: RE: Rathinum Short Plat BCE#11614 Pat, If you want, go ahead and make the plan change. Let me know if you would like a revised mylar. Thanks, Cara Visintainer Design Engineer Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 18215 72nd Avenue South Kent, WA 98032 (425) 251-6222 -Phone (425) 251-8782 -Fax From: Simmons, Pat[mailto:Pat.Simmons@METROKC.GOV] Sent: Tuesday, May 02, 2006 10:56 AM To: Cara Visintainer Cc: Dye, Pete Subject: Rathinum Short Plat The diversion berm for the Water quality should be extended to the 2 year flow. Per the TIR report of the pond discharge that would be 500.20 at 0.102 CFS Page I of I, With your permission I shall change the elevation of the berm from 498.20 to 500.20 on sheet 5 pond section A-A or give me a elevation of the two year flow. Sorry for this last minute change. Thanks Pat Simmons 206-296-6636 05/05/2006 ( I ~ , . ~ ! ffe/111/drn l~ !)I ?t}tt/ {;&55 ~r/;&!IJ : . &d fl c-7 . i.· . ... . ldJ;d --tf,41//;?7~~/t';~. . j .. . . / v/J. / / ~v v 7°J 1. . . . . 2)\ ?; l i1/ .~. j1.f ,; ~? ! 'JO· I ' . i ' 1 3 j f;h{f/14dt~1 . ffif 1 . 1 . . . . l . L--1 ... t I I l I I j j I . I . r-Revised Design for the l. .minary Short Plat for the Ratlunam Pro. .y October 28, 2005 Page 2 of2 Enclosed is a copy of the approved, revised, preliminary short plat design for your records. If you have any questions, please contact me at (206) 296-6632. Lanny Henoch, Planner II Current Planning Section, LUSD Enclosure cc: Sharmila Rathinam, owner Erik Wicklund, Charter Homes, Inc. Curt Foster, Senior Engineer, Engineering Review Section, w / encl. Pat Simmons, Engineer, Engineering Review Section, w / encl. Steve Townsend, Supervising Engineer, Land Use Inspection Section, w/encl. Joanne Carlson, Administrative Specialist II, Engineering Review Section, w/encl. Kim Claussen, Planner Ill, Current Planning Section, LUSD File No. L04S0003 . . .. ® l<ing County Department of Development and Environmental Services 900 Oakesdale Avenue SW Renlon, WA 98055-1219 October 28, 2005 Ivana Halvorson Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 18215 -72"d Avenue South Kent, WA 98032 RE: Revised Design for the Prelimina,;y Short Plat for the Rathinam Proper,;y DDES Project No. L04S0003, Activity No. L05RE025 Dear Ms. Halvorson: The Subdivision Technical Committee of the Land Use Services Division (LUSD) has reviewed your client's proposed modification to the design for the preliminary short plat of the Rathinam Property. The Committee has concluded this re-design does not contain "any substantial changes," as referenced in KCC 19A.12.060A. Therefore, based on this finding, approval is granted to the revised preliminary short plat received October 6, 2005, subject to the original conditions of approval issued September 17, 2004 ( except as modified below), and the following condition. A right-of-way width of 32 feet shall be provided for the on-site road (Road A). Due to the changes to the preliminary short plat design which are reflected on the October 6, 2005 submittal, the following conditions from the September 17, 2004 LUSD approval of the preliminary short plat are no longer applicable: lD, 3F, 3G, 3Ml, 3M2, 6B, and 7B. The lead-in paragraph of Condition 7E is also revised to read as follows: The 4 500 S<jttftfe reat •eere•tiea tfftet configuration of Tract A is consistent with the requirements ofKCC 21A.14.180 and KCC 21A.14.190. Recreation improvements shall be provided in Tract A consistent with KCC 21A.14.180 and .190 (ice, e.g., sport court[s], children's play equipment, picnic table[s], benches, etc.). I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 6t-\Av I ~ : 't -. 0 . 0 u I ... (, '~4 ... ~I>, / <,-, , 'f,f,,q. ,\,c;: ttNGI~ 'REC~i'1/~© 1-Jif,.'i '1, 0 7.()()'.l l~~t~sio;.~CES IRafthlnraam ShloD'ft IPlaft 634 S.E. 192nd Street ing County, Washington County Project No. L04S0003 Prepared for: Sharmila Rathinam 24006 S.E. 10th Street Sammamish, WA 98075 November 2004 Revised February 21, 2005 Our Job No. 11614 CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 18215 72NDAVENUESOUTH KENT,WA 98032 (425)251-6222 (425)251-8782FAX BRANCH OFFICES o OLYMPIA, WA o TEMECULA, CA o WALNUT CREEK, CA www.barghausen.com I I .. -) I . I I I I I • I ) I I I I I I I I I LO TABLE OF CONTENTS PROJECT OVERVIEW Figure 1 -Technical Information Report (TIR) Worksheet Figure 2 -Site Location Figure 3 -Soils 2.0 CONDITIONS AND REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY 3.0 . OFF-SITE ANALYSIS 4.0 FLOW CONTROL AND WATER QUALITY FACILITY ANALYSIS AND DESIGN 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 lO.O A. Existing Site Hydrology B. Developed Site Hydrology C. Performance Standards D. Flow Control System E. Water Quality System 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 11614.004.doc I I I .... ) I I I I I I I I \_) I I I I I I I I I ' 1.0 PROJECT OVERVIEW I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1.0 PROJECT OVERVIEW The proposed Rathinam Short Plat is approximately 2.25 acres in size and located within a. portion of Section 33, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, Willamette Meridian, City of Renton, King County, Washington. More specifically, the site is located at 11634 192nd Street in Renton, Washington. The proposed project will subdivide approximately 2.25 acres into nine single-family residential lots, a storm drainage tract, recreation tract, and a sub-access street. The proposed lots will be accessed directly from the sub-access street that is designed in accordance with the King County road standards. There is one existing single-family residence on the site with adjacent outbuildings. The remainder of the property contains grass, brush, and trees. No wetlands or sensitive areas exist on site. The site is bound on the west, north, and east by single-family residences and by S.E. 192nd Street to the south. The subject property is relatively flat and gently slopes from the west to southeast, with elevations ranging from approximately 510 feet along the western boundary of the site to 502 feet along the eastern site boundary. The overall topographic relief between the west and east site boundaries is 8 feet. The site contains Alderwood type soils. The project proposes to construct a combined detention/wet pond in the southeast portion of the site. The stormwater pond is designed pursuant to the 1998 King County, Washington Surface Water Design Manual (KCWSWDM) and provides Level 2 Flow Control and Basic Water Quality Treatment. Stormwater from all future homes and proposed roadways will be collected in a series of catch basins and conveyed to the pond for treatment and detention, then discharge near the southeastern property line. · Enclosed within this report are calculations that show how the proposed facilities will accommodate the requirements as outlined in the 1998 KCWSWDM. 11614.004.doc I I 1-) I I I I I I 11 FIGURE 1 TECHNICAL lINFORMATION I \ _) REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET I I II • I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I King County Department of Development and Environmental Services TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET Part 1', ' 'l' I''• 1 T•' •' '' 11 ~ / I• ~i :PROaECT.OWNER AND PROJEC"i;'EtiGINEER' "",:' •, . n'. ·' !,,._ :·• t , " ,, I'\ .'; / '" Project Owner Charter Homes Address 2825 Eastlake Avenue East, Suite 100 Seattle, WA 98102 Phone Project Engineer Hal P. Grubb, P.E. Company Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. Address/Phone 18215 -72nd Avenue South Kent, WA 98032/(425)251-6222 . . ..: ' ::. ,·. . . ' .. , . ·, . ' ,. '1' :. •:". _' .: 1·:' ,. ' ' ,'J Part3• ·TYP,EOFPERMff~!'L!CATlqN_{·\ .. , '': ·.,.' :' D Subdivision HPA 181 · Short Subdivision D Grading D Commercial '"-D Other (__, L....============:::J 'Part 5 .. S!TE COMMUNITY AND DRAINAGif eASIN Community Soos Creek , ... Drainage Basin Green/Duwamish River Basin . ,,. .. Part 6, . SITE CHARACTERISTICS ... .. : .. ,,,,, D River D Stream D Critical Stream Reach D Depressions/Swales D Lake D Steep Slopes ,,, •' ",.' ' ·~~. ,, \ j .. . . , .. ,,. : ,., ' -1- ,• i>'".'"'';: ... 1.,,,1,:"'"·'"'''•· .,.,,,, :,:. ;·; . '""' · .. ·1. ,Part;2;·: :tPROJECT LOCATION'AND.DESCRIPTION .. ' · ,,"_i,·11 .. , ". '',i·'Clitl1•!', ,,, .. :, .,.,.... ' 'tn,,, ,•·: "' ... ,,f-I : . Project Name Rathinam Short Plat Location 11634 S.E. 192nd Street Township ..:2:::3:..:..N:.:o:.:.rt::.h=-------------1 Range _5'--E_a_st __________ ___, Section 33 -"''--------------1 D DFWHPA D Shoreline Management D COE404 D Rockery D DOE Dam Safety D Structural Vaults D FEMA Floodplain D Other D COE Wetlands .~.-. ' : y ' /,' ' . ; '(,• . . ' . ,! :·, . .,, ... . . . •.' •, . (· :,, . ,. ' 1,~, ', ~• ' ,, . ·• '} ·· .. ' '. •\: . . . . . ' D Floodplain D Wetlands D Seeps/Springs D High Groundwater Table D Groundwater Recharge D Other t t6t4.003.doc I I ·I :J I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Part7 SOILS Soil Type Slopes Alderwood (AgB) 1 to 5 ~rcent D Additional Sheets Attached . Part,8 DEVELO~MENT,LIMiTATIONS REFERENCE D D D D D Additional Sheets Attached Part 9 . ESC REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS DURING CONSTRUCTION Sedimentation Facilities Stabilized Construction Entrance Perimeter Runoff Control Clearing and Grading Restrictions Cover Practices Construction Sequence Other Part 10 SURFACE WATER SYSTEM D Grass Lined Channel D 181 Pipe System D D Open Channel D D Dry Pond D 181 Wet Pond D Tank Vault Energy Dissipater Wetland Stream Erosion Potential Erosive Velocities Minimal . . ,) LIMITATION/SITE CONSTRAINT D D D D D MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS AFTER CONSTRUCTION Stabilize Exposed Surface Remove and Restore Temporary ESC Facilities Clean and Remove All Silt and Debris Ensure Operation of Permanent Facilities Flag Limits of SAO and Open Space Preservation Areas Other ----------------~ Infiltration Method of Analysis Depression KCRTS Flow Dispersal Compensation/Mitigation Waiver of Eliminated Site Storage Regional Detention Brief Description of System Operation Runoff will be ti~htlined to a combined detention/wet pond. Facility Related Site Limitations Reference Facility Limitation , -2-11614.C)(}J.doc I I I I I I I I I ,-, P~rt .11 STRUCTURAL ANAlYSIS1'. i /,:.· ... _. --'-"-~--~--"-'-'-'--"-~"-"-'-'---''-'---'-'-, ' D Cast in Place Vault D Retaining Wall D Rockery> 4' High D Structural on Steep Slope D Other . Part 13 SIGNATURE OF, PRdies~1d11111i..; ENGINEER .. )_-( ; .,' ,:,'.' ~ D Drainage Easement D Access Easement D Native Growth Protection Easement D Tract D Other I, or a civil engineer under my supervision, have visited the site. Actual site.conditions as observed were incorporated into this worksheet and the attachments. To the best of my knowledge the information provided here is accurate. Si ned/Dated I ) I I I I I I I I I -3-11614.003.doc I I I . l} I . I I I I I I I ( ) I I I I I I I I I . I FIGURE2 SITE LOCATION I I I -I( JllfH f\ 180TH T !c n -1ft1: u 4 _.,, 111 SE 182ND •' ~ ~ ST ~ 33 "' • i( I ,~ 81111 U " ,. tJ ' ' 0 ,, ::,. S( !lllllt si ~ < ~ j• ~ • ,< • ,, " 100m ~s "' ~ 168TH _,_ ~ ·;: is -< :-' ~ I I SE JWJii I n, ··:1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I VICINITY MAP I 6 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I - / ;;7 2-~ ; -;1 ' - / / 7 -/ / """" =--~ --·------..... ., .... ™" _,_., 51 _, ...... ~ _,,_ __ ,.,%":I -1---KING, WA 23-05-33SW __ L-:..,, .. M1plO; // // / /1/ / / I/ / /)0/. ,~/ / I/ I/ """"'.( .,,,,J;'.,.., ~"" I{ '"';1· "'rn / I:, i // / / // / /'' ~ I ~m 01 , ~ om/ IJ6t; / / 1--r'---..,.I -· i! r -/ / -., a~ I/ .,/ // / ., """ ' / / l/ / 619780 ~ 619780 0242 -"' 61976.0 r II 0241 ( I ~ 619960 0100 -·· ; . - 819900-0040 ··-· ' ' 619!.!60 0140 61~-~ J 0060 "'°""" 0050 i 619900 0100 .. 619900 0080 ' 619900 0101 i / ,i-_--oo----j---_.,.. __ _j ! &19~100 I .,, • .,. I,.,_ I 0126 ' / ' ; ! ·- / . - / 619840 619840 6191140 0180 0360 0341 "'"":!!''"' -·· -· -· -"'"""" 7 . . .. _ .. _ 0142 0106 : 11K100-111•·1 .,_ 01BS ... 619840 I 1 1 f-::J. p 9900 0340 ; 160 -I' 01so ' ' ' : : 619000 0127 .. -0210 .. ,._ ~~! ' ,,_ 9. .... 11HOO rOlll 0182 ASSESSOR'S MAP 619900 0220 519900 0240 ~ .,_ ~" 619900 0260 I ·I •n I I I I I I I· FIGURE 3 I· o SOILS MAP I I I I • I I I __ J I I I I I I I I I· I I I I I I I I I SOILS MAP I I I t, I I I I I I I I !.J I I , I I ' I I • I ' : ,, I \ I ' . 2.0 CONDITIONS AND REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I • 2.0 j ) ) CONDITIONS AND REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY 2.1 Core and Special Requirements Summary CORE REQUIREMENT NO. I: DISCHARGE AT THE NATURAL LOCATION Requirement: All surface and stormwater runoff from a project must be discharged at the natural location so as not to be diverted onto or away from downstream properties. The manner in which runoff is discharged from the project site must not create a significant adverse impact to downhill properties or drainage systems. How this Project Complies: This project is proposing a combined detention/wet pond that will discharge flows near the southeast comer of the site; the natural discharge location of the existing site. CORE REQUIREMENT NO. 2: OFF-SITE ANALYSIS Requirement: All proposed projects must submit an off-site analysis report that assesses potential off-site drainage impacts associated with the development of the project site and proposes appropriate mitigation of those impacts. The initial permit submittal shall include, at a minimum, a Level 1 Downstream Analysis as described in Section 1.2.2.1. How this Project Complies: This project is submitting an off-site analysis, which can be found in Section 3.0 of this Technical Information Report. Please refer to that section for the off-site analysis. CORE REQUIREMENT NO. 3: FWW CONTROL Requirement: All proposed projects, including redevelopment, projects must provide on- site flow control facilities to mitigate the impacts of increased storm and surface water runoff generated by the addition of new impervious surface and any related land cover conversion. These facilities shall, at a minimum, meet the performance criteria for one of the area-specific flow control standards described in Section 1.2.3.1 and be implemented according to the applicable flow control implementation requirements in Section 1.2.3.2. How this Project Complies: This project is proposing drainage facilities that will detain all stormwater runoff using Level 2 Flow Control in accordance with the 1998 KCWSWDM methodology. CORE REQUIREMENT NO. 4: CONVEYANCE SYSTEM Requirement: All engineered conveyance system elements for proposed projects must be analyzed, designed, and constructed to provide a minimum level of protection again overtopping, flooding, erosion, and structural failure as specified in the following groups of requirements: • "Conveyance Requirements for New Systems" Section 1.2.4.1 • "Conveyance Requirements for Existing Systems" Section 1.2.4.2 • "Conveyance System Implementation Requirements" Section 1.2.4.3 11614.004.doc I I . ) I I I I I I I I ( ) I :1 I I I I I a I How this Project Complies: This project has proposed conveyance system facilities in accordance with the sections noted above. All conveyance systems have been designed as required by the 1998 KCWSWDM. Pipe sizing calculations have been included in Section 5 of this Technical Information Report. CORE REQUIREMENT NO. 5: EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL Requirement: All proposed projects that will clear, grade, or otherwise disturb the site must provide erosion and sediment controls to prevent, to the maximum extent possible, the transport of sediment from the project site to downstream drainage facilities, water resources, energies, and properties. To prevent sediment transport, erosion and sediment control measures are required and shall perform as described in Section 1.2.5.2. Both temporary and permanent erosion and sediment control shall be implement as described in Section 1.2.5.3. · How· this Project Complies: This project has proposed erosion and sediment control . facilities in accordance with the typical Best Management Practices utilized by King County and the Washington State Department of Ecology. Sediment pond calculations have been provided as part of this Technical Information Report and are contained in Section 8.0. In addition, an erosion and sedimentation control plan has been designed for this project with supporting details necessary for the . contractor to construct such improvements. CORE REQUIREMENT NO. 6: MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS Requirement: Maintenance and operation of all drainage facilities is the responsibility of the application or property owner, except those facilities for which King County (Maple Valley) is granted an easement, tract, or right-of-way and officially assumes maintenance and operation as described below. Drainage facilities must be maintained and operated in compliance with King County maintenance standards. How this Project Complies: This project proposes to construct a stormwater pond that will be dedicated to King County. This facility will be maintained by King County. CORE REQUIREMENT NO. 7: FINANCIAL GUARANTEES AND LIABIUTY Requirement: All drainage facilities constructed or modified for projects ( except downspout infiltration and dispersion systems) must comply with the financial guarantee requirements in King County Ordinance 12020 and the liability requirements of King County Code 9.04. JOO. There are two types of financial guarantees for projects constructing or modifying drainage facilities: the drainage facilities restoration and site stabilization guarantee and the drainage defect and maintenance guarantee. How this Project Complies: This project will provide all financial guarantees and liability, in accordance with the 1998 KCWSWDM. CORE REQUIREMENT NO. 8: WATER QUALITY Requirement: All proposed projects, including redevelopment projects, must provide water quality facilities to treat the runoff from new and/or replaced pollution generating impervious surfaces and pollution generating pervious surfaces. These facilities shall be 11614.004.doc I I i) I I I I I I I IC) I I I I I I I I :~) I selected from one of the area-specific water quality menus described in Section 1.2.8.J and implemented according to the applicable water quality implementation requirements of Section J,2.8.2 .. How this Project Complies: A wet pond is proposed for this project as a means of · providing water quality treatment. SPECIAL REQUIREMENT NO. 1: OTHER ADOPTED AREA-SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS Requirement: This requirement mandates that all projects within critical drainage areas, master drainage plans, specific basin plans, lake management plans, or shared · facility drainage plans comply with special provi_sions that were created for each of the above special overlay areas. If a·proposed project is-in a designated critical drainage area, an area included in an adopted master drainage plan, a basin plan, a lake management plan, or a shared drainage facility plan then the project shall comply with the drainage requirements of each of the governing documents. How this Project Complies: There are no critical drainage areas, master drainage plans, basin plans, lake management plans, or shared facility drainage plans for the area of the proposed project. Therefore, this Special Requirement does not apply. SPECIAL REQUIREMENT NO. 2: FWODPLAIN/FLOODWAY DELINEATION Requirement: If a proposed project contains or is adjacent to a stream, lake, wetland, or closed depression, or if other King County regulations require the study of flood hazards, then the JOO-year floodplain boundaries (andfloodway, if available or if improvements are proposed within a JOO-year floodplain) based on our approved flood hazard study ( described below) shall be delineated on the site improvement plans and profiles, and on any final subdivision maps prepared for the proposed project. How this Project Complies: There are no streams, lakes, wetlands, or closed depressions immediately adjacent to the project site, nor are there other King County regulations requiring the study of flood hazards in the area of the project site. · Therefore, this Special Requirement does not pertain to this project. SPECIAL REQUIREMENT NO. 3: FWOD PROTECTION FACILITIES Requirement: If a proposed project either I) contains or is adjacent to a Class I or fl stream that has an existing flood protection facility ( such as a levee, revetment, or berm), OR 2) proposes to construct a new or to modify an existing flood protection facility, then the flood protection facility shall be analyzed and/or designed to conform with the Federal Emergency Management Administration (FEMA) regulations (44CFR). How this Project Complies: This project is not adjacent to a Class I or II stream that has an existing flood protection facility nor will it propose to construct a new or to modify an existing flood protection facility. Therefore, this Special Requirement does not apply to this project. SPECIAL REQUIREMENT NO. 4: SOURCE CONTROLS l 1614.004.doc I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I (y () .) Requirement: If a proposed project is either I) a commercial, industrial, or multifamily site development, OR 2) a redevelopment project proposing improvements to an existing commercial, industrial, multifamily site, then the project must provide water quality source controls applicable to the proposed project in accordance with the King County Stormwater Pollution Control Manual and King County Code 9.12. How this Project Complies: This project is a single-family residential development, therefore this Special Requirement does not apply. SPECIAL REQUIREMENT NO. 5: OIL CONTROL Requirement: If a proposed project either I) develops a site which will have high use site characteristics, OR 2) is a redevelopment project proposing $100,000 or more of improvements to an existing high use site, then the project must treat runoff from the high use portion of the site using oil control treatment options from the high use menu. How this Project Complies: This project does not qualify as a high use site. Therefore, is not subject to this Special Requirement. 11614.004.doc I I (') I I I I I I I I () I I I I I I I I \ I\ BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON Short Subdivision File No. L04S0003 Rathinam Short Plat DECISION The following outline provides each of your comments in italics exactly as written, along with a narrative response describing how each comment was addressed: Proposed Short Plat revised and received August 26, 2004 (Attachment 1) is GRANTED PRELIMINARY APPROVAL; subject to the following conditions of final approval: 1. Title 19A A. Compliance with all platting provisions of Title 19A of the King County Code. Response: The platting provisions in Title 19A of the King County Code will be complied with. B. All persons having an ownership interest in the subject property shall sign on the face of the final short subdivision. Response: All owners of the subject property will sign on the face of the final short subdivision." C. All utilities within proposed rights-of-way must be included within a franchise approved by the King County Council prior to final short plat recording Response: The utilities within the proposed rights-of-way will be included within a franchise prior to final short plat recording. D. Modifications to the approved preliminary site plan ( Attachment I) are needed to allow for the extension of JUDT to lots 3 and 5. A revised site plan shall be submitted to DDES for review and approval. If additional modifications are required to accommodate engineering conditions, then those must be included in the revised plan. The revised site plans shall be submitted with the engineering plans or the final short plat submittal. Response: The JUDT has been eliminated from the proposal. 2. Surface Water Management (KCC 9) 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual (SWDM) The proposed short plat qualifies for full drainage review as outlined in Chapter One of the Surface Water Design Manual. Final short plat approval shall require full compliance with the drainage provisions set forth in King County Code 9.04. A professional civil engineer licensed in the State of Washington shall prepare drainage plans and a technical information report as outlined in Chapter 2 of the drainage manual. The . drainage plan submittal shall demonstrate compliance with all applicable Core and Special Requirements. Compliance may result in reducing the number and/or location of lots as shown on the preliminary approved short plat. Preliminary review has identified the following conditions of approval, which represent portions of the drainage requirements. All other applicable requirements in KCC 9.04 and -!-11614.002.doc (!H/tep) I I I fl I I I I I I I () I I I I I I I I \_) I the Su,face Water Design Manual (SWDM) must also be satisfied during engineering and final review. A. Drainage plans and analysis shall comply with the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual. Prior to short plat recording, the applicant shall submit drainage and engineering plans to address the required short plat improvements. King County approval of drainage and roadway plans is required prior to any construction. Permit fees for review and inspection shall be paid as required by County codes and policies. Bonding for the drainage plans will also be established as determined by DDES prior to plan approval. After receiving drainage plan approval, the applicant shall contact the DDES Land Use Inspection Section to schedule a pre-construction meeting prior to pe,forming work on the site. Response: The drainage plans and analysis comply with.the 1998 King.County, Washington Surface Water Design Manual. Engineering plans will be submitted to DOES for review and· approval upon payment of fees. A pre-<:onstruction meeting will be scheduled when appropriate.· B. Current standard plan notes and ESC notes, as established by DDES Engineering Review shall be shown on the engineering plans. Response: Standard plan and ESC notes are included on the engineering plans. C. The following note shall be shown on the final recorded plat: "All building downspouts, footing drains, and drains from all impervious su,faces such as patios and driveways shall be connected to the permanent storm drain outlet as shown on the approved construction drawings # on file with DDES and/or the Department of Transportation. This plan shall be submitted with the application of any building permit. All connections of the drains must be constructed and approved prior to the final building inspection approval. For those lots designated for pe,forated stubouts, dispersion, or infiltration systems, the designs shall be constructed at the time of the building permit and shall comply with the plans on file." Response: The note described above will be included on the final recorded plat. 3. 1993 King County Road Standards (KCRS): Final short plat approval shall require full compliance with the provisions set forth in the KCRS, including engineering plans for all road improvements. The engineering plans shall be prepared by a professional civil engineer licensed in the state of Washington. DDES strongly recommends the engineering plans be submitted at least two years prior to the expiration date of the proiect. All construction and upgrading of public and private roads within this short plat shall be done in accordance with KCRS established and adopted by Ordinance No. 11187, as amended ( 1993 KCRS) and shall comply with the following requirements: A. A road variance application regarding intersection spacing was approved by King County on May 11'. 2004. The final engineering plans for the short plat shall comply with all conditions of approval for the road variance decision. Response: The final engineering plans are in compliance with the road variance for this project. -2-11614.002.doc [lH/tcpJ I I {; I I I I I I I I {) I I I I I I I I I B. That portion of the north half of SE 192"d Street adjoining the subject property shall be improved to an urban principal arterial standard per KCRS Section 1.03. Response: The north half of S.E. 192nd Street is proposed to be improved to an urban principal arterial as shown on the engineering plans. C. Twenty feet (20) of additional right-of-way for SE 192"d Street shall be dedicated along the south property line, allowing for 50 feet of right-of-way from centerline. Response: The southern 20 feet of the property has been dedicated, allowing 50 feet of right-of-way from centerline. D. The on-site road shall be constructed lo a public urban subaccess standard per KCRS Section 2.03. Response: The on-site road has been designed in accordance with KCRS Section 2.03 as a public urban subaccess. E. A 25Joot property line radii shall be dedicated at the intersection of the on-site road and SE 192nd Street per KCRS Section 2.10. Response: The 25-foot property line radius is dedicated at the intersection of the on-site road and S.E: 192nd Street. F. The joint-use-driveway tract (}VDT) shall be extended to reach lots 5 and 3. Lots 3 and 5 shall have undivided ownership of the access Tract and be responsible for its maintenance. A note to this effect shall be placed on the engineering plans and final plat. Response: The joint-use driveway tract has been eliminated from the proposal. G. The minimum roadway improvements within the JUDT shall be 18feet wide and 20 feet long with controlled drainage. This tract shall also meet the Fire Marshal requirements (See Fire marshal requirements for additional access standards). Response: The JUDT has been eliminated from the proposal. H. A temporary cul-de-sac shall be provided at the north terminus of the on-site road per KCRS Section 2.08). Response: A temporary cul-de-sac has been provided as seen on the engineering plans. /. The proposed road improvements shall address the requirements for road surfacing outlined in KCRS Chapter 4. As noted in section 4.0lf. full width pavement overlay is required when widening existing asphalt. Response: The proposed road improvements address road surfacing requirements outlined in the KCRS. J. Street trees shall be included in the design of all road improvements, and shall comply with Section 5.03 of the KCRS. Response: Street trees have been included in the design and are included on the landscape plans. -3-11614.002.doc (IH/tep] I I I _() I I • I I I I () I I I I I I I I I K. Street illumination shall be provided at intersections with arterials in accordance with KCRS 5.03. Response: Street illumination has been provided. L Modifications to the above road conditions may be considered by King County pursuant to the variance procedures in KCRS 1.08. Response: No modifications to the road standards are proposed. M. The following notes shall be shown on the final recorded short subdivision: (I) All private easements and/or tracts to be maintained, repaired, and/or rebuilt by the owners of the parcels having legal access there from and their heirs, assigns or successors, unless and until such roads are improved to King County standards and are dedicated and accepted by King County for maintenance. Response: The above note will be included on the final short plat. (2) There shall be no direct vehicular access to and from SE J92,u1 Street from the abutting lots (KCRS Section 2.02). Access shall be from the on-site road. Response: The above note will be included on the final short plat. ( 3) Removal of the temporary cul-de-sac and extension of the sidewalk shall be the responsibility of the developer who extends the road. Response: The above note will be included on the final short plat. ( 4) All utilities within proposed rights-of-way shall be included within a franchise approved by the King County Council prior to final short subdivision recording. Response: The above note will be included on the final short plat. ( 5) All restrictions, easements, tracts, and their purpose shall be shown on the final recorded short subdivision. Response: The above note will be included on the final short plat. 4. Health (KCC 13) A. This project is exempt from further King County Heath Department review. However, if improvements are required from the Sewer and/or the Water District, then verification shall be required from said District(s) that the improvements have been bonded and/or installed, prior to final recording of the short plat. Response: Verification from the water and/or sewer district(s) will be provided prior to final recording. -4-11614.002.doc [l!Ytep] I I :-) I I I I I I I I c· ._) I I I I I I I I I 5. Building and Construction Standards (Title 16) A. The applicant shall comply with all applicable provisions of KCC 16.82: Response: The provisions of KCC 16.82 will be complied with. B. The applicant shall demonstrate compliance with KCC 16.82.150 requirements at engineering and final short plat. Response: The requirements of KCC 16.82.150 have been complied with, as seen on the engineering plans. 6. Fire Code (KCC 17)-Section 902 of the 1997 Edition of Uniform Fire Code: A. All portions of the exterior walls (at grade) of future residences constructed within this short plat must be within 150 feet (as a person would walk via an approved route around the building)from approved fire apparatus access. Approved access is a minimum 201oot wide driving surface that supports 25 tons in all weather, is not over 150 feet in length if dead-end and with no gradient in excess of 15%. Response: The fire·apparatus will be designed in accordance with the applicable regulations. All proposed roadways have been designed in accordance with KCRS. B. If a suitable access as described above· is not provided, any future residences constructed on lots 3, 5 and 9 MAY have to be sprinklered per NFPA 13D The proposed driveways serving the main body of these lots does not meet the minimum 201001 width requirement and portions of the exterior walls may be over 150 feet from approved access as outlined above. Response: Lots 3, 5, and 9 will be accessed directly from the subaccess street. C. The applicant must obtain the approval of the King County Fire Protection Engineer for the adequacy of the fire hydrant, water main and fire flow standards of Chapter 17.08 of the King County Code. Response: Approval from the King County Fire Protection Engineer will be obtained. 7. Zoning Code (KCC 21A): A. Density and Dimensions (KCC 2/A./2) All lots shall meet the density and dimensions requirements of the R-6 zone classification or shall be as shown on the face of the approved preliminary short subdivision, whichever is larger. Minor revisions to the short subdivision, which do not result in substantial changes and/or do not create additional lots may be approved at the discretion of the Department of Development and Environmental Services. Response: The proposal is for nine lots on 2.2 acres, which is less than the base density afforded by the R-6 zone. .5. 11614.002.doc [Ui/tep] I I I (; I I I I I I I (J I I I I E I I I I B. Three additional lots may be created through the subdivision of Lot 7 as long as the Zoning of the site remains R-6. This shall be noted on the recorded short plat. Lot 7 shall be developed in such a way that does not prevent any future short subdivision. Response: The subdivision of Lot 7 is not proposed since the lots have been reconfigured. C. Street Trees (KCC 2/A./6) Street trees sholl be provided along the street frontage and the new on site road as follows (per KCRS 5.03 and KCC 2/A./6.050): I. Trees shall be planted at a rate of one tree for every 40 feet of frontage along all roads. Spacing may be modified to accommodate sight distance requirements for driveways and intersections. Response: Street trees are proposed at the proper rate, as seen on the landscape plans. 2. Trees sholl be located within the street right-of-way and planted in accordance with Drawing No. 5-009 of the 1993 King County Road Standards, unless King County Department of Transportation determines that trees should not be located in the street right-of-way. Response: Street trees are proposed with the right-of-way dedication, as seen on the landscape plans. 3. If King County determines that the required street trees should not be located within the right-of-way, they shall be located no more than 20 feet from the street right-of-way line. Response: To our knowledge, King County has not objected to street trees in this location. 4. The trees shall be owned and maintained by the abutting lot owners or the homeowners association or other workable organization unless the County has adopted a maintenance . program. Ownership and maintenance shall be noted on the face of the final recorded plat. Response: Ownership and maintenance of the street trees will be described on the final plat documents. 5. The species of trees shall be approved by DDES if located within the right-of-way, and shall not include poplar, cottonwood, soft maples, gum, any fruit-bearing trees, or any other tree or shrub whose roots are likely to obstruct sanitary or storm sewers, or that is not compatible with overhead utility lines. Response: The street trees proposed do not include the trees listed above and will be submitted to DOES for review and approval. 6. The applicant shall submit a street tree plan and bond quantity sheet for review and approval by DDES prior to engineering plan approval. Response: A street tree plan and bond quantity sheet will be submitted. -6-11614.002.doc [lli/tep) I I j) I I I I I I I I C) I I I I I I I I I 7. The applicant shall contact Metro Service Planning at 684-1622 to detennine if SE 192nd is on a bus route. lf it is a bus route, the street tree plan shall also be reviewed by Metro, Response: If S.E. 192nd Street is part of a Metro bus route, the street tree plan will be reviewed by Metro Service Planning. 8. The street trees must be installed and inspected, or a perfonnance bond posted prior to recording of the short plat. lf a perfonnance bond is posted, the street trees must be installed and inspected within one year of recording of the plat. At the time of inspection, if the trees are found to be installed per the approved plan, a maintenance bond must be submitted or the performance bond replaced with a maintenance bond, and held for one year. After one year, the maintenance bond may be released after DOES has completed a second inspection and detennined that the trees have been kept healthy and thriving. Response: The above conditions will be followed as required. D. P-Suffix/ SDO Conditions (KCC 2JA.38) -To implement KCC 21A.38.230 which applies to the site, a detailed tree retention plan shall be submitted with the engineering plans for the subject plat. The tree retention plan and the engineering plans shall be consistent with the requirements of KCC 21A.38.230, as well as the conceptual tree retention plan which is part of the hearing record for this project. No clearing of the subject property is pennitted until the final tree retention plan is approved by LUSD. Flagging and temporary fencing of trees to be retained shall be provided, consistent with KCC 21A.38.230B4. The placement of impervious surfaces, fill material, excavation work, or the storage of construction materials is prohibited within the fenced areas around preserved trees, except for grading work pennitted pursuant to KCC 2JA.38.230B4d(2). Response: A detailed tree retention plan has been submitted with the engineering plans. E. The 4500-square{oot recreation tract is consistent with the requirements of KCC 21A.14.180 and KCC 21A.14.190 (i.e., sport court[sj, children's play equipment, picnic table[sj, benches, etc.). ( 1 ). An overall conceptual recreation space plan shall be submitted for review and approval by DOES, with the submittal of the engineering plans. This plan shall include location, area calculations, dimensions, and general improvements. The approved engineering plans shall be consistent with the overall conceptual plan. Response: A recreation space plan has been provided with the landscape plans. (2 ). A detailed recreation space plan (i.e., landscape specs, equipment specs, etc.) consistent with the overall conceptual plan, as detailed in item a., shall be submitted for review and approval by DOES and King County Parks prior to or concurrent with the submittal of the final plat documents. The landscape plan shall be prepared in accordance with KCC 2/A.16. Response: A detailed recreation space plan will be submitted prior to or concurrent with the final plat documents. -7-11614.002.doc (IWtep) I I n I I I I I I I I (J I I I I I I I I I ( 3 ). A performance bond for recreation space improvements shall be posted prior to recording of the plat. Response: A performance bond for the recreation space will be posted prior to final recording. 8. Road Mitigation Payment System: The applicant or subsequent owner shall comply with Road Mitigation Payment System (MPS), King County Code 14.75, by paying the required MPS fee and administration fee as determined by King County Department of Transportation. The applicant has an option to either: A. Pay the MPS fee at final short plat recording, or (B.) pay the MPS fee at the time of building permit issuance. If the first option is chosen, the fee paid shall be the fee in effect at the time of short plat application and a note shall be placed on the face of the short plat that reads, "All fees required by King County code 14.75, Mitigation Payment System (MPS) have been paid." If the second option is chosen, the fee paid shall be the amount in effect as of the date of the building permit application. Response: The option will be decided by the project owner and appropriate notes will be added to the final plat documents. 9. A homeowner's association or other workable organization-shall be established to the satisfaction of DDES which provides for the ownership and continued maintenance of the Recreation Tract. · Response: A Homeowners Association will be established for the ownership and maintenance of the recreation tract. Other Considerations A. Preliminary approval of this application does not limit the applicant's responsibility to obtain any required permit or license from the State or other regulatory body. This may include, but not be limited to, obtaining a forest practice permit ,an HPA permit, building permits, and other types of entitlements as necessitated by circumstances Response: All required permits required for the project will be obtained prior to construction. B. The short subdivision shall conform to KCC /6.82 relating to grading on private property. Response: The subdivision complies with KCC 16.82 in regard to grading. C. Development of the subject property may require registration with the Washington State Department of Licensing, Real Estate Division Response: All registrations and licenses will be obtained, as appropriate. -8-11614.002.doc [lH/tepJ I I t'1 I I I I I I I I (J I I I I I I I ' ' I : I .. I : I I 3.0 OFF-SITE ANALYSIS i I I I I I I I I ) I \ J I I I I I I • I I 3.0 OFF-SITE ANALYSIS A Level-I Drainage Analysis was prepared by Cramer Northwest Inc., dated February 2, 2004. This drainage analysis has been verified and is contained within this section of the Technical Information Report. 3.1 Study Area Definition The enclosed Exhibit A, Vicinity Map, shows the approximate location of the proposed site. The existing site has slopes that are approximately 2 percent across the majority of the site. The total relief across the site is 8 feet from west to southeast, sloping in the southeasterly direction. There is one existing single-family residence located on the site, with adjacent outbuildings. Overall, the undeveloped portions of the site contain a pasture-type area with grasses, brush, and some trees. The on-site soils range from silt loam to gravely sandy loam also known as the Alderwood-type soils. The soils map can be seen in Exhibit B. · The existing on-site residence will be demolished for this development and the proposed single-family lots will be constructed with the appropriate pipe conveyance, water quality and detention facilities, all on site to mitigate stormwater requirements in accordance with the 1998 KCWSWDM. Upstream Drainage Analysis: Based on our site visit, there minimal upstream flow onto the subject property from the west. Resource Review: , Adopted Basin Plans: The site is part of the Soos Creek drainage basin. , Finalized Drainage Studies: This is not applicable. , Basin Reconnaissance Summary Report: The site is located in the Black River drainage basin. The Reconnaissance Summary Report is included in Exhibit C. , Critical Drainage Area Maps: Per the King County Flow Control Applications Map, the site is subject to Level 2 Flow Control and Basic water Quality Protection. , Floodplain and Floodway FEMA Maps: The FEMA map for this area shows that the site is located in Zone X and is not subject to flooding. , Other Off-Site Analysis Reports: A review of Exhibit C (Basin Reconnaissance Summary Report) and a site investigation were conducted in preparation of this Level 1 Drainage Analysis. , Sensitive Areas Folios: Based on a review of the King County Sensitive Areas Map Folios, it was found that the subject site does not contain SAO Wetlands, as seen in Exhibit D . , Road Drainage Problems: This is not applicable. 11614.004.doc I I .n \ , I I I I I I :1 I C~) I • I I I I I I I • United States Department of Agriculture King County Soils Survey: Based on the soils map for this area, the entire site is located within Alderwood-type soils. • Wetland Inventory Map: There are no wetlands located on or adjacent to the site. • Migrating River Studies: This is not applicable. 3.2 Field Inspection There were no problems reported or observed during the resource review. Based on the review of the drainage complaint list provided by King County, there are no existing complaints on the downstream drainage course that are a result of runoff from the subject property nor are there any constrictions or lack of capacity · in the existing drainage system as determined by the field visit, nor did the field reconnaissance find any potential constrictions or lack of capacity in the existing drainage system downstream of the site. Conveyance System Nuisance Problems, Type 1: Conveyance system nuisance problems, in general, are defined as any existing or predicted flooding or erosion that · does not constitute a severe flooding or erosion problem. Conveyance system nuisance problems a:re defined as flooding or erosion that results in the overflow of the constructed conveyance system for runoff events less than or equal to a IO-year event. Examples include inundation of a shoulder or lane of roadway, overflows collecting in yards or pastures. shallow flows across ·driveways, minor flooding in crawlspaces or unheated garages/outbuildings, and minor erosion. A recent review of the drainage complaint list provided by King County showed no evidence of past conveyance system nuisance problems occurring, nor was there any evidence of any occurring during our site visit. Severe Erosion Problems, Type II: Severe erosion problems are defined as downstream channels, ravines or slopes with evidence of or potential for erosion/incision sufficient to pose a sedimentation hazard to downstream conveyance systems or pose a landslide hazard by undercutting adjacent slopes. Severe erosion problems do not include roadway or minor ditch erosion. Based on our site visit and review of the drainage complaint list, there is no evidence of or potential for erosion/incision sufficient to pose a sedimentation hazard to downstream conveyance systems evident anywhere along the downstream drainage course. Severe Flooding Problems, Type III: Severe flooding problems can be caused by conveyance system overflows in elevated water surfaces and ponds, lacks, wetlands, or closed depressions. Severe flooding problems are defined as follows: I. Flooding of the finished area of an inhabited building for runoff events less than or equal to the I 00-year event. Examples include flooding of finished floors of homes or commercial and industrial buildings and flooding in electrical/heating systems and components in the crawlspace or garage of a home. Such problems are referred to as "severe building flooding problems." 2. Flooding over all lanes of a roadway or severely impacting a sole driveway for runoff events less than or equal to the 100-year event. access Such 11614.004.doc I I I () I I I I I I IO I I I I I I I \ I j I problems are referred to as "severe roadway flooding problems." As mentioned previously, there is no evidence of flooding from the drainage complaints or from our site visit downstream of the subject property. As mentioned previously, there is no evidence of flooding from the drainage complaints or from our site visit downstream of the subject property. 3.3 Drainage System Description and Problem Descriptions Runoff leaves the site by sheetflowing to the southeastern portion of the site, where it enters an open roadside ditch. From the roadside ditch on S.E. 192nd Street, the runoff is conveyed easterly down S.E. 192nd through a series of open ditches, culverts, and underground storm drainage pipes, and eventually. discharges into Soos Creek. Due to proposed frontage improvements, the existing ditches and driveway culverts that are located in the project's frontage will be replaced with an enclosed conveyance system. The downstream conveyance system is in good condition and minimal erosion was observed. A review of the drainage complaint list showed few complaints on the downstream drainage course; therefore, the project site is considered developable as proposed. 3.4 Mitigation of Existing and Potential Problems The area downstream of the proposed project does not exhibit any potential problems. Since the 1998 KCWSWDM has indicated that Level 2 Flow Control and Basic Water Quality Treatment are required, which this project uses these standards for this development, and they are assumed to be adequate for this site. This project will neither aggravate nor create a problem as specified in the problem-specific mitigation requirements set forth in the 1998 KCWSWDM as delineated in Task 4 of this report. 11614.004.doc I I r~, I I I I I •• I I \_) I I I 'I I I I ~- I . ) EXHIBIT A I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1.,JNO, RK VICINITY MAP PARK & I SE L!J RfDE~I~ < I ~ ;!1~ SE'i!lsTii~ ~! c: ~I~ I In I I I I I I I IO I I I I I I I I -) -~ I I EXHIBITB I I I I I I I I I I I u I I I !,~ ., .. ·. -j . ' ~ . .:.. I I SOILS MAP I I I In I I I I I I I It) I I I I 11 , I I I I EXHIBITC I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Map Output @) King County ~I ~11C\wI!B=·=·~I ~I ,....m=="'=·...,~11 ~ 11 @, .. , ..... ,oa 11 ~ . ~ Sa@cl.ad Parcals I • County Boundary Slr.aels. ~ t·li9'r11.r)' 1\M-.:ri~:!: /'/ .• '-=' D P3r~ls SAO Slr.aam ~ Ci~z1 Cr;:iz 2 Per,.!.'1ci;J tv C:=~ 2 .S;.:i m,:u1J lc~rlf Rathinam Short Plat -Sensitive Areas 00)6 002CJ (JCJ1:5 01 ' Legend ;v· .Cl~~) .. Urc=:i,.l:I 0 Lakas .:rnd Laug,:1 Riv,ars ~/ I Slr,aarns ~ Floodw.ay llEi:I 100 Y.aar F\o(ldplain Em SAO 1J1.'.ell3nd ~ SAO land.slid,a ffl SAO Coal Min.J ~ SAO S.aismic SAO Erosion I I ,' n 0026 -vow 1 he information included on this map has been compiled by King County staff trom a variety ol sources and is subject to change without notice. King County makes no representations or warranties. express or implied, as to accuracy. completeness. timeliness, or rights to the use of such information. King County shall not be liable for any general, special, indirect. incidental. or consequential damages including, but not limited to, lost revenues or lost profits resulting from the use or misuse of the information contained on this map. Any sale of this map or information on his mao is orohibited exceot bv written oermission of Kina Countv. King County I G1S Center I ~I~ I Comments I ~ By visiting this and other King County web pages. you expressly agree to be bound by terms and conditions of the site. The details ra~c; l u1 1 I ei I htto ://www 5 .metro kc. gov /serv let/com .esri .esrimap. Esrimap ·,serv iceN ame=overv iew &Client Versi... I l / 4/2004 I I ~ r-r ) .. \ . 1 ·· , I I I I I I I (~) I I I ~ I \ I I I I •\ I\ \ \ RECONNAISSANCE REPORT NO. 2 SOOS CREEK BASIN JANUARY 1986 Natural Resources and Parks Division and Surface \Vater Management Division King County, \Vashington I I () I -.....: . I I I I I I I (~) I I I I I I I I ' l ' ' ,- I Department of Public Works Don LaBelle, Director King County Executive Tim Hill King County Council Audrey Gruger, District 1 Cynthia Sullivan, District 2 Bill Reams, District 3 Lois North, District 4 Ron Sims, District 5 Bruce Laing, District 6 Paul Barden, District 7 Bob Grieve, District 8 Gary Grant, District 9 Parks, Planning and Resources Joe Nagel, Director Surface Water Management Division Joseph J. Simmler, Division Manager Jim Kramer, Assistant Division Manager Natural Resources and Parks Division Russ Cahill, Division Manager Bill Jolly, Acting Division Manager · .Dave Clark, Manager, River & Water Resource Section Lury Gibbons., Manager, Pro_ject t\1anagement and Design Section Contributing Staff Doug Chin, Sr. Engineer Randall Parsons, Sr. Engineer Andy Levesque, Sr. Engineer Bn1ce Barker, Engineer Arny Stankus, Engineer Ray Steiger. Engineer Pett! Ringen, Engineer Consulting Staff Don Spencer, Associate Geologist, Earth Consultants. Inc. John Bethel, Soil Scientist. Earth Consultants. [n<:. P:CR Derek Poon, Chief, Resources Planning Section Bill Eckel, Manager, Basin Planning Program Contributing Staff Ray Heller, Project Manager & Team Leader Matthew Clark, Project Manager Robert R. Fuerstenberg, Biologist & Team Leader Matthew J. Bruengo: Geologist Lee Benda, Geologist Derek Booth, Geologist Dyanne Sheldon. Wetlands Biologist Cindy Baker. Earth Scit!ntisr Di Johnson, Planning Support Technician Robert Radek, Planning Support Technician Randal Bays, Planning Support Technician Fred Bentler, Planning Support Technician Mark Hudson, Planning Support _Technician Sharon Clausen, Planning Support Technician David Trnax, Planning Support Technician Brian VanderL,urg, Planning Support Technician Carolyn M. Bverly, Technical Writer Susanna Hornig. Technical \Vriter Virginia Newman. Graphic Artist Marcia McNulty, Typesetter Mildred Miller. Tvpesetter Jaki Reed, Tvpesetter Lela Lira. Office Technician l\..[artv Cox. Office Technician Cl ' ' I I -,--) ( t . I _, , I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I {-) ,- . TABLE OF CONTENTS I. SUMMARY II. INTRODUCTION m. FIND[NGS [N SOOS CREEK BASIN · A. Overview B. Effects of Urbanization · C. Specific Problems 1. Bank failures 2. Channel erosio·n 3. · Flooding and pOtential flooding 4. Stream habitat IV. RECOMMENDATIONS A. [nform appropriate governmental agencies of the reconnaissance findings B. Reevaluate specific surface water management policies C. Prepare a comprehensive basin plan D. Construct the capital improvement projects E. Maintain or enhance instrcam and riparian habitats V. MAP APPEND[CES: APPEND[X r\: Estimated Costs APPEND[X 8: Capital Improvement Project Ranking APPEND[X C: Detailed Findings and Recommendations 1 1 2 2 3 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 6 6 6 7 A-1 B-1 C-1 I I ,~) ICL' I I I I I I I (') I I I I I I I I \ ) I L SUMMARY The Soos Creek Basin is located north and east of the Green River in King County.· While the southern and eastern portions of the basin are rural, the remainder is a rapidly expanding suburban community. This development. pattern has not caused serious environmental damage or flooding, however, due to highly pervious soils, an extensive network of streams and wetlands that provide natural storage for stormwater runoff, and the fact that development has only recently accelerated in this basin. Although the overall severity of problems in the Soos Creek Basin was not great at the time of reconnaissance, several significant problems were identified and should be addressed. These include bank failures, channel erosion, flooding in some locations, and poor stream habitat Recommendations· io address these problems include efforts to 1) inform appropriate agencies of the reconnaissance findings, 2) reevaluate specific policy is,;ues regarding the management of surface water, 3) prepare a comprehensive basin plan, 4) construct the capital improvement projects evaluated with cmzen advisory committee criteria, and 5) maintain or enhance habitat throughout the basin. II. lNTRODUCTION: History and Goals of the Program P:SC8 In 1985 the King County Council approved· funding for the Planning Division (now called the Natural Resources and Parks Division), in coordination with the Surface Water ~fanagement Division, to conduct a reconnaissance of· 29 major drainage basins located in· King County. The effort began with an initial investigation of three basins --Evans, Soos, and Hylebos Creeks --in order to determine existing and potential surface water problems and to recommend action to mitigate and prevent these problems. These initial investigations used available data and new field observations to examine geology, hydrology, and habitat conditions in each basin. Findings from these three basins led the King County Council to adopt Resolution 6018 in April 1986, calling for reconnaissance to be completed on the remaining 26 basins. The Basin Reconnaissance Program, which was subsequently established, is now an important element of surface water management. The goals of the program are to provide useful data with regard to I) critical problems needing immediate solutions, 2) basin characteristics for use in the preparation of detailed basin management plans, and 3) capital costs associated with the early resolution of drainage problems. The reconnaissance reports are intended to provide an evaluation of present drainage conditions in the County in order to transmit information to policymakers to aid them m developing more detailed regulatory measures and specific capital improvement plans. Thev are not intended to ascribe in any conclusive manner the causes of drainage or erosion problems; instead, they are to be used as initial surveys from which choices for subsequent detailed engineering and other professional environmental analyses may be made. Due to the limited amount of time available for the field \VOrk in each basin, the reports must be viewed as descriptive environmental narratives rather than as final engineering conclusions. Recommendations contained in each report provide a description of potential mitigative measures for each particular basin; these measures might provide maximum environmental protection through capital project construction or development approval conditions. The appropriate extent of such meJsures will be decided on a case-by.case basis by Count:' officials responsible for revie\ving applications for permit approvals and for choosing among co111pe1in~ projec1s for public construction. Nothing in the reports is intended to substitute I I I il I I I I I I I I ~, C J I I I I I I I I ) I m. P:SCB Soos Creek Basin ( continued) for a more thorough environmental and engineering analysis possible on_ a site-specific basis for any proposal. FINDINGS IN SOOS CREEK BASIN Reconnaissance in the Soos Creek Basin was conducted in November 1985 by Ray Heller, resource planner; Randall Parsons, engineer; and Don Spencer and John Bethel, consulting soil scientists. Their findings and recommendations are presented as follows. A Overview of Soos Creek Basin Geographic and land use features. The Soos Creek Basin is located north and east of the Green River in the eastern portion of the Soos Creek Plateau Community Planning Area. The basin is situated east of the city of Kent, northeast of Auburn, and southeast of Renton. The city of Seattle's Lake Youngs watershed is included in the Soos Creek Basin. The south and east portions of the basin are rural in character, with the north and west portions committed to a suburban development pattern that includes subdivisions and scattered single-family homes. The 1985 King Countv Comprehensive Plan shows areas east of Big Soos Creek (in the northern part of the basin) and south of Lake Youngs with "rural development" designations that specify 1-5 dwelling units (DU) per acre. The southern area to the east of Soos Creek and north of the Green River is designated "transitional." This interim designation will limit development to rural- residential densities until such time as rural/urban designations are made through updated community plans. The King County Parks Department owns more than a five-mile stretch from Southeast 192nd Street to Lake Meridian, along Big Soos Creek. These presently undeveloped park lands are mostly wetlands and lie within the 100-year floodplain. Major geologic, hydraulic, and hydrologic features. The Soos Creek drainage area is a tributary basin to the Green River basin. The area is part of the Puget Sound lowlands and is characterized by a glacial drift plain, covered by small ridges and rounded hills that were formed by continentar glaciation. While the Soos Creek Basin is moderately developed, the degree and amount of channel erosion. slope failures, and other forms of geologic and hydraulic damage are far less than might be expected. Artificial conveyances are also still functioning in this basin as they were originally designed and intended. These conditions may be explained by three main factors. First, there is a very effective natural retention and detention (RID) system provided by an extensive nei:-,.,:ork of 52 wetlands and numerous major and minor streams. ivlost of the wetlands are located in the northern portion of the basin in the upland areas as well as adjacent to streams. Big Soos Creek originates in the norrheast corner of the plateau zind flows southeast to the junction of Little Soos and Jenkins Creeksi then curves \vest at its confluence with Covington Creek. Big Soos Creek joins the Green River east of Auburn near State Road (SR) 13 at 160th Avenue SE. These wetlands and streams appear to be functioning \1..-e!I as stormwater control facilities for the current levels of Je\·dopmenr, as ,veil as ser,ing to prevent damage from surfncc water runoff. 2 () I :a1 I I I I I I I t) I I I I I I I I t.) I P:SCB Soos Creek Basin ( continued) Second, the soils in the upland areas generally have a high infiltrative capacity, particularly in the southern portion of the basin. Stormwater is absorbed into the ground at these locations before it can cause erosion or other damage. Third, development in the basin has only just begun. Properly functioning wetlands and streams have not yet been altered, nor have well-draining soils been covered by impervious surfaces to any great extent. Maintaining these properly functioning drainage systems should be a goal in this basin and will be the focus of recommendations made later in the report. Habitat characteristics. The habitat of Soos Creek Basin is generally good and supports large populations of both native and hatchery anadromous fish. The source of the hatchery fish is a State facility near the mouth of Soos Creek. Cutthroat trout reside in stream waters, and anadromous fish spawn and travel in many of the tributaries and the main stem of Big Soos, according to field observations and reports from local residents at the time of reconnais.sance. Habitat is being damaged or threatened in some places by bank erosion and degraded water quality associated with land clearing, livestock feces, and wetland filling for development. One -of the more serious instances of habitat-threatening erosion originates at the parking lot of the Seattle International Raceway (SIR), which is located on the plateau in the lower portion of the basin. Drainage from the paved parking lot is increasing erosion -in nearby tributaries and filling spawning gravels with sediment. Appendix C of this report identifies sites of habitat damage or potential damage. Further water quality information related to habitat in the basin can be found in the Critical Stream Inventorv of Soos Creek, published by Metro. B. Effects of Urbanization Low levels of development in most parts of the Soos Creek Basin, together with a well-functioning natural drainage systemi have kept serious erosion, sedimentation: and habitat damage to a minimum until now. However, the present and projectt!d rates of development irl.di-cate that there could be increasing amounts of damage: as suggested by the types of problems observed during reconnaissance. The expansion of impezvious surfaces in the basin is already beginning to accelerate the rates and volumes of stormwater flowing into (and reducing the capacities of) both natural and artificial channels. [mper.rious surfaces are also reducing the amount of highly pervious soils available to absorb runoff. The predictable impacts are already in evidence: erosion. mass-wasting, sedimentation. and degraded water quality and other habitat destruction. The following section provides a more detailed account of problems found during field investigation. C. Specific Problems Identified The studv team examined numerous sites along the main stem of Big. Soos: Little Soos: and \Vest Soos Creeks. as well JS 21 small drainages tributary to these main stems. Severa! of tlle most significant problems found during reconnaissance arc described below. 3 I I I () I I I I I I I () I I I I I I IV. I I l.) I P:SCB 1. Soos Creek Basin (continued) Bank ·failures. On Tributary 0072A, ri~er mile .30, for e,a;mple, there exists a major bank failure triggered by bank undercutting. The source of the problem appears to be increased runoff from street construction. Unless flows are intercepted and redirected to storm sewers or other facilities, there will be increased bank erosion and consequential deterioration of property and stream habitat. 2 Channel Erosion. This includes both instream and bank erosion caused by large volumes of runoff emerging from storm drains and washing away highly erodible soils. This creates a new, deeply incised channel that enlarges over time. One example of ihis problem occurs on Tributary 0072 near the SIR in· the lower part of the basin. Large expanses of pavement at this location have contributed. to high volume flows and channel erosion. 3. Flooding and potential flooding. In numerous locations, development has .increased the amount of runoff entering existing drainage facilities or otherwise impeded the ability of natural systems to carry the amount of runoff. When drainage systems fail to function as they were intended, flooding can occur. Increased development without concurrent increases in drainage facilities adds to the possibility that serious flooding will occur. On Tributary 0092, river mile 1.20, for example (collection point 11), the· Little Soos has been contained and manicured as it passes through a developed plat. Such alteration to a natural drainage channel reduces the stream's capacity in places. The result has been the regular semi-annual flooding of some homes. Further development could aggravate these kinds of flooding problems. 4. Poor stream habitat due to: a. Lack of overhead canopy and streamside vegetation. Overhead canopy stabilizes water temperature, while streamside vegetation protects banks from erosion. b. Contamination by livestock feces. In areas of the basin where livestock have extensive access to streams, water quality has become degraded by animal feces. These cause harmful nutrients to be added to the water \vhich can threaten fish survival c. Erosion. Streambank and channel erosioni already described above, is caused in part by livestock access. On Tributary 0073, river miles 3.60--l.70. for example, there exists poor stream habitat because livestock have trampled and denuded banks of vegetation: this has led to the sedimentation of spawning areas and caused turbiditv. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ACTION The follo\ving recommendations are based on findings of the field team and reflect the original goals of the Basin Reconnaissance Program, as outlined in 1he introduction of this report. A Inform appropriate governmental agencies of the detailed findings from the reconnaissance of this basin. Project representatives should meet with staff from King 0 I I (lJ , ,J __ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I () C) B. P:SCB Soos Creek Basin (continued) County Roads Division, Surface Water Management Division, Building and Land Development, and other interested agencies to transmit relevant information. Reevaluate specific policy issues regarding surface water managemenL These may include the need to: 1. 2 3. Improve enfon:ement of wetlands regulations to maintain these areas in their natural states. This will insure their continued function as surface water quality and quantity controllers, as well as preserve their habitat value. If regulation proves ineffective; the County should secure -easements or consider other means to preserve wetland areas. Require the establishment of undisturbed buffers and setbacks adjacent to natural drainage swales. Variations in stream morphology and geology indicate the need for stream corridor guidelines that take these into consideration. Improve enforcement of "no clearing" covenants in these sensitive areas or seek County easements or actual ownership. Fencing along streams in livestock areas would help water quality and reduce erosion and sedimentation. Investigate and promote the infiltration of surface water. where feasible and economical to reduce increased fllnoff from developed areas. Also, encourage the use of grass sv.-·ales and open ditch conveyance systems to improve infiltration and water quality enhancement capacity. Areas of high filtration are identified on final display maps (for the Basin Reconnaissance Program) in the offices of Surface Water Management, Building and Land Development, and Basin Planning. 4. Require the tightlining of storm-<lrainage outfalls down steep or sensitive slopes using state-of-the-art facilities, including high density polyethylene pipe with energy dissipation at the outfall. 5. Reevaluate stonnwater rate and volume release regulations for new developments. Current regulations may be inadequate and res1:1lt in unacceptable downstream , erosion that causes property damage and loss of habitat. 6. Increase current maintenance levels for King County surface water RID and conveyance focilitics. Due to the lack of funding, maintenance of existing facilities is sometimes insufficient and results in facility dysfunction and failure. These will only be aggravated bv additional upstream development. 5 I I I {) -·· I I I I I I I C~) I I I I I I I I L) I P SCB Soos Creek Basin ( continued) C. Prepare a comprehensive basin plan to consider, at a minimum, the need to: 1. Enhance and utilize the extensive existing wetlands as regional storm-detention facilities without jeopardizing habitat values. Prepare a schedule for the anticipated need for these hydrologic enhancements as they relate to projected development in the basin and impact the wetland ecology. 2. Examine existing storm-detention and oonveyance facilities to determine whether their control orifices are properly sized to optimize the detention site and achieve the maximum benefit to the downstream systems. 3. Establish floodplains in low-lying areas of slight gradient for existing arid developed runoff conditions, i.e., adjacent to wetlands, particularly for wetlands proposed as regional detention sites where inundation of adjacent properties may be significant. · 4. Identify stream reaches critical to the maintenance of anadromous and trout populations. 5. Review geologic findings from this study in order to identify areas of particular soils' sensitivity and develop special analysis criteria fol' new developments. D. Construct the capital improvement projects according to the CIP priority selection criteria These projects, identified in Appendix B of this report, include projects to: E. 1 Calibrate and retrofit existing detention.control structures. and to improve existing conveyance systems. 2. Stabilize channels and slopes. 3. Provide regional detention facilities, including the utilization of wetiands, where biological assessment has determined that the natural habitat values will not be significantly altered. Maintain or enhance the instream and riparian habitats. 1. Maintain wetlands and buffer areas around them. These provide both valuable wildlife habitat and natural stormwater storage that helps to maintain year-round baseflows in the stream. 2. Adopt a stream-eorridor policy in the Soos Creek Community Plan to protect the stream corridor from damaging types of land uses in adjacent areas. 3. Encourage the Washington State Department of fisheries lo aUow use of the natural stream system for salmon spawning. Maintain a natural run of all 1he indigenous anadromous species. 4. Prohibit filling in the 100-ycar floodplain. The County should establish regulations to prevent the !oss of floodplains in order to maintain their natural storage for floodwaters and guard against degradation of important fish and wildlife habitat. 6 () --:-:t:.)-,..._..,_ (" / '···' I I ' SOOS CREEK BASIN 00000 . Boundary Basin . t Boundary Collection Pom Collection Po mt •••••• ® = Stream 0072 *5401 ' . • . . Tributary Numller Proposed P::r=oj\e_c __ t----~ . . . • '. ,. ..... t~, ... -+ -:-__ _, • . • 1 mi. . .,1 ·~· . .,:. ,, \'.'.'I ::c ;~ •mn . "'" i:'~"'JR"7![i' I " ~, 'F." I ·F' I I I m " -i. (.' ·_: ;~ ~. ·-'""<) ,, !...I SOOS CREEK BASIN ,SR II 00000 ...... ® . Boundary Basm . Boundary Collection Pomt _r" : • ..., -0072 *5401 Collection Point Stream Tributary Number Proposed Project • • Covington roSR f. -------·· :..---: ' '--.... -----... .. , -·-·-' ~ APPENDIX A ESTIMATE[) COSTS: PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECrs SOOS CREEK UASIN NOTE: l'rojcct Number 540 I' 5--102* 5,103" lndicales proje~t was idenlilied by lhe Surlace Water Management Division prior to reconnaissance. All projecls are localed on map included in this report. Collect. Point 20 9 Project Ocscript ion Construct low berm (approx. 2') and proportional t..lischargc-control weir al outlet to wetland. (This project is independently justifiable.) Welland rating is #2. Uiological assessment is nccJcJ to assure this project Jocs not Jccrcasc hahil<ll values. Excavate and berm to construct regional facility at lower end of wetland. Provide proportional weir <lischargc. Well.ind r.lling is # I. Uiological assessment is needed to assure this project docs not Uccrcasc hahilat values. CoulU not locate or vcriry. )•10.P 17 Construct a proportional c.:onlrol weir Wct lanJs .:1-t I() l':SCB.1\l'i\ at SC 224th St. bridge. (Project should he justirieU hy a future hasin plan.) Wetland rating is #2. 13iological assessment is ncc<lcJ to assure this project <locs not decrease habitat values. i\-1 Problem Addressed Mitigates increased upstream peak flows and runoff volumes. Mitigates increased upstream peak flows and nonoff. This location scives Trih. 0073 and 0076. (Good· location.) Address in basin plan. Mitigates increased upstream peak flows and rnnoff. (First site that could address flows south of Pelrovitsky.) ----3- Estimated Costs and Comments $153,000 (likely to be much less due to land acquisition cost) $194,000 ( dependent on land costs) (Eliminate for now.) $250,000 - -l!!!!!!I --· .:ct Number 5405" -Collect. Point 19 5401>" 12 Wctlanu S444 5-HJ7 IS Welland S·120 5408" Ll l':Sl :tl/\ I' A -·----',-· ... --- Project Description Construct hcnn anJ proportional conlrol weir in UoulcvarJ I . .anc Park. (Project should he justified hy a hasin plan.) Wetlands rating is # I Uiological assessment is nccJcJ to assure this projccl Joc.s not Lkcrcasc habitat valuc.:s. (~onslruct outlet-control structure at existing culvert passing flow unJcr SL: 256th Sl. (Pro_jcCt would he inuepenuenlly justifiable.) Welland rating is #2. lliological assessment is ncct..h . .:J to assure this pro_jcct Jocs not Lh:crcasc habitat values. Constnict a berm anJ proportional Jischargc weir at outlcl of existing wt.:tlanU. (Projccl should he justi· fieu hy a hasin plan.) Weiland rating is #2. is needed to not decrease Uiological assessment a;-.surc this project Jocs h<.1hitat values. Raise the SL: 240th St. rrn,dway approximately 2' anJ construct a new hridgt..: with proportional control weir. (Proj,xt should he justifjcJ hy a basin plan.) Wetland rating is #2. Uiological assessment is ncctlcJ lO assure this project Jocs not Uccrcasc habitat values. ..--. ,__.., A-2 ' ..... ~. Prohlcm Addressed Mitigates increased upstream peak flows and .rnnoff. Mitigates increased upstream peak flows and rnnoff. May provide extra dctcn1ion to assist in ,1llcviating capac.:ity problems far downstream. Mi1iga1cs increased upstream peak flows and runoff. Mitigates increased upstream peak flows and rnnoff. (Good location.) -\ 111!!1 --. '-,) Es11maled C""'~ and Commcnls $98,000 $17,800 $228,000. $70,000 0 - ----·-r '._ ProjcL} Number { :olkct. Point 5~0'J· n Wetland 5~13 5410" 8 Wetland 548.~ 5411" 18 Wetland 547(, 5412" 16 Wet lanu 5480 :'i4 JY· .l \Vdl,rnd 5-177 1':SCll.1\I' 1\ -,. ----'-_ .. -/- J>rojcct Dcscripl ion Construct berm anJ proportional control weir al outlet 10 Clark Like. (Project could be independenlly justified.) W<.:tlanJ rating is # 1. Uiological assessment is nccJcd to assure this pro- ject Jocs not Jccrcasc hahilat values. Construct central m<rnholc at outlet of existing porn.I. Dead storage should be maintained for aesthetics. (Project sc...:ms of vc1y limited valut.:.) Wetland rating is #2. Small wetland located near top of suhhasin; maintain condition as is. WctlanJ rating is #2. Biological assessment is needed to assure this projct docs not decrease habitat values. Construct berm and proportional control weir al oullcl to wetland. (Project shoulU he justified hy future basin plan.) Wetland rating is #2. IJiological assL:ssn1ent is needed to assure this projcct docs not decrease habitat values. Conslruct berm and proportional control weir at outlet to wetland .adjacent to SR 18. (Project should lie justified by fulurc basin plan.) Wetland rilling is # 2. Uiologii.:al assessment is necdet..l to assure lhis projcr..:l docs not dcr..:rcasc hahit,11 values. -' '_./ J\-3 Problem Addressed Mitigates increased upstream peak flows and runoff volumes. May provi~c extra detention to alleviate capacity problem downstream: Provides cqntinucd de1cn1ion for mobile home park plus small amount of a<lditiom1l area. No project proposed. Maintain wctlan<l in its cxiSting state. Mitigates increased upstream peak flows and runoff. Mitigates increased upstream peak flows and runoff. (May not be as desirable as Projects 5419 and 5420.) -; -.. . ~3- Estimated Costs and Comments $221,000 ( depending on land costs) $28,000 (Eliminate for -now.) $246,500 ( dependent on land costs) $193,600 ( dependent on land costs) - -··--}1·.c..:,:ct ~ 'i.11-1 5415 54 16 5-117 5-11-~ ).t j tJ .1.1211 l':S<:ll.J\l':\ -Colh..:cl. Point 2 11 11 I,~ 10 11 -----l'rojcl'.I Ot.:scription Construct hcr111 anJ cxcav,uc to provide additional Jctcntion volume. Construct a control manhole. (Project is inJcpcnJcnlly justiriahlc.) Con:,;truct tightlinc system in existing stream channel. (Project is inJcpcnJcntly justil'ahk:.) Construct new lanJscapcd hcrm:-. adjacent to existing privately owned and main- t.iincJ stream channel to i111.:rc,1sc capacity amJ prevent ncighhorhuod flooding. (Project is in<lcpcndcntly justifahk.) Raise !~8th Ave. SE roadway approx. 1.5' and t:onstrw.:t proporlional control weir at S~ 256th bridge. (Project is i11Jcpcnckntly justifahlc.) Construct control weir at hriJgc on SE I .ah: Youngs Way. (Projci.:l should he justified hy future basin plan. Constrncl proportional weir al existing hriJge. ( Pro_jccl should he jusl ificd hy fu1ure h.isin plan.) l)iverl cxn;ss flows from l.illlc Soos into ,1hanJoneJ ho1T{Jw pit for infiltra- tion. (Projecl should he justificJ by future basin plan.) .. -\--·--· .-., ,__...., Prohlc.::m Addressed Mitig,ilc increased upstream peak flows and runoff. Reconstruct discharge from SE 320th St. to stable outlet. (.Justifiable imm1.a.Jiatcly due to impacts on. state fish hatchery.) Prevents further road embankment and steep cut-hank failures. (Justified immediately due to impacts on state fish hatchery.) Prevent ncighhorhood flooding, which jeopardizes 3-4 homes hy containing stream as it passes through plat. (Justifiable immetliately as sitmuion will only worsen with upstream development.) Eliminate seasonal flooding of roadway and mitigate· increased upstream peak flows and rnnoff. (Justifiable immediately Jue to flooding of roadway,) Mitigate increased upstream peak flows anJ runoff. Mitigate incrcusctl upstream peak flows ,ind runoff volumes. (Site appears more desirahlc than 5413 due to case of m:ccss.) Mitigat...: increased upstream peak flows and runoff volumes. (This is a highly Jcsirahlc alternative tluc to groundwater recharge and qualily control.) A-4 -~ --\ -Estimated Cf''""' and Commc1~..., _ / Sl69,000 $156,000 $223,000 $88,700 $138,000 ( dependent on land use costs) $88,500 ::) - I In ,c ... I I I I I I I () I 'I I I I I I I i ) --~ I APPENDIX B CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT RANKING SOOS CREEK BASIN Prior to the Soos Creek watershed field reconnaissance, 13 projects had been identified and rated using the CIP selection criteria developed by the Surface Water Management (SWM) Division and the Natural Resources and Parks Division. Following the reconnaissance, 20 projects remain proposed for this area. They include the 7 new, previously unidentified and unrated projects plus .the initial 13 projects. The previous SWM capital ·improvements project list for the Soos Creek Basin had an estimated cost of S3,450,0d0, while the revised list decreases to an estimated cost of 52,622,000. This 24% reduction in estimated capital costs is due mainly to downward revised cost figures for acquiring or securing easements over wetlands. The following table summarizes the scores and costs for the C!Ps proposed for the Hylebos Creek Basin. The projects were rated according to previously established SWM Program Citizen Advisory Committee criteria. The projects ranked below are those for which the first rating question, ELEMENT 1: "GO/NO-GO," could be answered affirmatively. The projects can now be considered for merging into the ."live" CIP list. Any project scoring over 100 points should be considered for incorporation into the six'year CIP plans: RANK PROJECT NO. SCORE COST 1 5415 135 s 156,000 2 5417 127 223,000 3 5407' 113 228,000 4 5414 105 169,000 5 5409' 100 221,000 6 5416 98 68,400 7 5402' 95 194,000 8 5401' 59 153,000 9 5406' 33 17.800 TOTAL Sl,-!30,000 Indicates project \vas identified by S\VI\[ prior to the reconnaisance. ,, -------L ---(-. ',_/ - APPENl)JX C -- DETAIi.ED FINOINCiS ANO RECOMMENDATIONS SOOS CREEK I3ASIN AH ilems listed here are localed on final display maps in lhe olfices ol Surlace Waler Management, building and Land .Dcvclopmenl, anc1 Uasin Planning. Trill. & ( _'olh.:t.:t. ExiS1ing. An1icipatcd - lh.:m IZivcr Mih.: Point Category Prop. Proj. ComJitions and Problems Condilions and Prohlems 1 111172 RM 2.X-1 11072 IZM .W l':S< 'IJ./\l'C I lyJrolO!,'Y I), 10, llahitat 13, 17, 18,19, 20 Sec Item 6. I Iahitat of upper stream good from buffer of exten- sive wetlands and mainlcn- ancc by County P,1rks Dept. P rohlcms on 562 acres of wetlands include illegal filling, livestock-related hank erosion, debris in stn.:am. There is a greater degree of Ucvclop1ncnt alljacc~t to st ream. Main sh.:m proviJcs important rearing habitat for salmonid species. C-1 Main s1c111 will he slrained Io accommodalc increased volume of runoff from developing areas upstream. Dank erosion (ci1using increased siltation and habilal deslruclion) and slope failures (leading to property damage) will resull. More filling of wetlands. Scdjmcnt from adjacent devel- opment will fill portions of . wetlands and stream channel · due to low gradients. More debris, pollution, and flood- ing will resull from additiona developn1enl. --I!!!!! l!!!!I <:) Recommendations New developments in upland area should invesligale infiltration of runoff as much as possible. Direct discharge to stream, after tightlining down sensitive slopes, is undesirable nlast choice" alternative. 1111111 Prohibit filling within 100-yr. floodplain or in wetlands. Work with landowners to fcnceg alongside stream to keep farm animals out. ··:) ---,.-, ' \_, Trih. & Colh.:cl. lkrn llivcr Mili.: Point 1 •I _) 6 0072 RM .(,0 0072 RM .W 11072 ltM 1.70 0072 IZM 2.50 l':SCll1\ l'C: -- Catcgoiy Cicolo~ry I fohital (icolot,ry (icoloe,ry ------/-' '-.J Existing Prop. Proj. Conditions and Problems Soos Creek meanders on a wit.le alluviul plain. Hum- mocks on valley walls and "pistol hull" tree trunks suggest colluvial creep. Numerous springs with silt/ clay lilhology. Dam on main stem impounds fish for state fish ha1chcry. No problems ohsc1vcJ. Eros·iomll chute 6' deep cml!rgcs from runoff of Seattle I ntcrnational Road- way (SIR) parking area. Lithograph is loose, strati- fied recessional sands. L1rgc slide induccJ north of railraoU right-of-way. Main stem of Soos Creek is 25' wide with well-developed gravel bars. Terraces suggest occasional flows 2" above current level. C-2 ---- Anticipated Conditions and Problems Unstable soils and wet con- di1ions on valley slopes. Increased flows will result in more rlooding and potential hank erosion. I lighlighls severe erosional potential of this recessional sand unit and impact of lin- conlrollcd runoff. None. ----,3 Recommendations Future construction should receive close study for stability and erosion potential. Develop basin plan with computer simulation of stream flows to give complete analysis in lower portion - of Soos Creek. Also include Jenkins and Covington Creeks. Recessional &'ind deposits in sections 2, 3, 10, 11, 14, 15, 16, 21, and 22 of T21 N, R 5 E are highly sensitive to erosion. Require hydroloic and geolechnical reveiw for design, adequacy, and suitability of collection and conveyance facili- ties for all runoff from SIR, as well as existing and planned develop- ment within boundary of co_llection area. Require implementation and compliance if no facilities exist. None. - 11 i..:n1 (, 7 s ') I 0 -,--. ,,.___, Trih. & Rivcr Milt: 11072 JtM 2.)0 0072 llM 2.riO 11072 RM 2.W 0072 RM 2.6S 0072 l(M 2.X.J- _\XS 1':S( 'll./\l'C --- Colkcl. Point Cate~ I (icology (icology I lahitat Geology 3 I lydrology -----1..-.....i '-..,) Existing Prop. Proj. Com.Jitions am.I Problems 5413 Main stem of Soos Creek is 25' wide with wcll-dcvclopcd gravel bars. Terraces suggest occasioan I flows 2' above current level. In vicinity of private foot bridge, medium to large hank failures occur in silt/ clay-rich colluvium. Causative mechanisms include undercutting and rc<luced shear strength owing to ahunJant springs and seepage Private landowner has placed riprap for 150' on left hank. 30" <liarnclcr CMP with erosion in rcccssionul sands. Sec Item 6. C-3 ---- Anticipated Condilions and Problems None. Continued medium to large failures into creek. Fill and riprap will shift stream onto opposite bank, rc_sulling in increased bank erosion. Continued maintenance. Main stream will he increas- ingly strained to handle higi1cr volume of n1noff from developing areas. Dan-k erosion anticipated, causing habitat dcgradalion, slope · failures, and property damage. .. l!!!!!!!!!!I --:) Recommendations None. None. Restrict filling and riprap in natural meander of rtoodplain. If propeny in danger, consider pro- tective measures along streambank such as ri pra p. None. 1!!!11 New developments in upland area should investigate infiltation of runoff as much as possible. Direct- i.ng discharge to stream after tightlining down sensitive st.opes is undesirable "last choice" alter· native. () -------,, -Trih. & Col Ice 1. I le 111 River Mik Poinl Catt:grny 11 11072 3 (icology l(M .1211 10 11072 3 l lahital RM .i.20 13 11072 3 Geology RM 5.80 1.1 01172 JO J lydroloi,,y l(M 5.85 1':Sl :ll.J\l'l: -----' 0 Existing Prop. Proj. Conditions am.I Problems 5419 West of confluence of .Jenkins and Soos Creeks, 200' of sloughing in recessional sanJs and gravels in 40'-high hank. Cause appears 10 he ovcrbank discharge. Stream habitat appears to he in good condition on this steeper portion of the stream. Riffles common, with some pools. SI rca1n- sidc vegetation and over- head canopy both abundant. Near bridge, stream flows through wooded wetland. Slight degree of develop- ment has not caused sig- nificant problems. South portion or Wethrnd 6430 and unJcsignatcJ wetland at this collection point provide R/D [or local and upstrc,1111 trihutn1y flows. Some localizcJ hank ovcr- topping, in portions of main reach, hut innundation prohahly limi1cd to adjac- ent agricultural land. C-4 ---- An1icipated Conditions and Problems Creek hlockagc and threat to property near edge of bank. None. Increased [uture flows could ovcrtop existing berm ·struc- tures and flood adjacent agricultural lands. Arca planned to develop only moc.Jcrntcly; significant prob- lems will probably result from upstream areas tribu- lary to this poinl ra1her lhan from flows generated hy runoff. ----s - Recommendations Recessional sand deposits in sections 2, 3, 10, 11, 14, 15, 16, 21, and 22 of T 21 N, R 5 E are highly sensitive lo erosion. Identify discharge sources and evaluate adequacy and suitability of collection and convey- ance facilities. Require compliance if none exists. None. Development detention for tributaries upstream. A basin plan should examine feasibility of directing flows from Trib. 0092 at collection point 11 into proposed R/D site at gravel pit east of 156th Pl. SE. This could provide infiltration, deten- tion, and overflow discharge directly to collection point 10. · ---\ Trill. ,.\ ... -· Collect. 11cm ltivcr Milt.: Point 15 0072 u l(M 7.20 [ () 111172 11 IZM 7.•!S 17 01172 13 Main slcm RM 7.20-7.4 l(M 7.9:\ 18 01172 17 l(M 9.45 19 0072 17 l(M 9.55 l':SCll.Al'C -- Calcgory (irniOb'Y (icology I lyJrolob'Y Gcolob'Y IIyJrology - Prop. Proj. 5417 5408 5404 ----,,...._, , . Existing '.._/ Comlitions anJ Problems Al 256th crossing, wetlands anJ slow flow cluuactcrizc soils. At 244th (240th) overland out-or-hank now is common; flooding. Wetlands provide R/l) for areas upstream anti tribu- tary to reach. 148th Ave. SE roadway crossing wetlands in area is ovcrtoppcd during high flows Jue to a slight elevation of roadway. Some localizcJ bank overtopping in nonwctlnnd portions of m,1in reach, hut innundation limited to adjacent agri- cultural land. Minor flooding in wetland areas with degradation or portions of SE 224th. No significant problems in upland due to low level Jcvelopmcnl. SE 224th St. road embankment is only approx. 2' above wetland; 1nay he ovcrloppcd. Periodic ovcrlopping and innundalion of hasc, deteriorating road- way where Trih. 0095 pnsscs unJcr SL: 224lh. C-5 ---- Anticipated Conditions and Prohlcms Overflow between SE 148th and SE 256th. None. Flooding of roadways will become more common and greater in extent as upland areas develop. Increased flooding activity is likely wi1h upstream development. No upland problems antici- pated as area is planned lo develop very little more. Any developments in areas tributary to this suhbasin will exacerbate flooding of SE 224th St. ---l!!!!I ·.:) Recommendations Perform cost-benefit analysis for gmde raise and improved drainage. None. l!!!!!I Increase height of roadway embank- ments to prevent continued flooding. Monitor wetlands for illegal filling and grading. Develop detention for upstream areas. Monitor areas adjacent to wetland for illegal filling and take enforce- ment action as needed for restor- ation. .:) ------ Trih. & Collccl. I !cm l{iv1.:r Mik Point Catcgo1y 20 11072 18 (jcology l(M 10.511 21 11072 18 1 ryJrology H.M 1()78 22 0072 19 1 lydrolo6'Y RM 12.20 l':SCB./\l'C ----111!11 r:i.., \_) Existing Prop. Proj. Conditions and Prohlcms 5418 5405 Soos headwaters flow slowly through smooth pasturcland. Wetland 5409 provides R/D [or areas tributary to reach. Some localized hank ovcrtopping in main reach south of 204th Way, but flooding currently limited to adjacent agricultural lan<l. Wetland 5402 provides natural R/D lo downslrcam system, although i1.s func- tions have bt:cn severely dcgra<lcd by illegal filling south of and adjacent to Pctrovitsky Rd. and cast of SE 182nd St. Some capacity problems exist at unJcrcrossing of Pctro- vilsky Rd. C-6 ---- Anticipated Condilions and Problems None. Conlinued devclpment may cause some localized capacity prohlcms in upland trihutary areas. Flooding sou1h of SE 204111 Way likely 10 become more severe until upstream regional detention sites development. Wetlands will conlinue to be lhrealened hy illegal filling until effective enforcement methods arc developed. Capacity problems should be. addressed by downslream anal- ysis for new developments. Counly should coordinate conveyance improvements. -- Recommendations None. l!!!!!!!I I!!!!!!!! ,~ ·\~ ,, , '--' I!!!! Monitor areas adjacent ·to wetland for illegal filling and take enforce- ment action as needed fo~ restora- tion. Legal actions pending against illegal filling; seek to restore wetland to original state. Possible opportunity to create multi-use facility in existing King County Boulevard Lake Park if need identified in future basin plan. - I ( C Ill ?" -' 2-1 25 -L- Trih. 8.: Rivt.:r Milt.: ----- 111172 l(M 14.25 0072/\ RM 2.-10 0072/\ RM .25 l':SCB.i\l'C - ( ~ol h.:ct. l'oi n t 20 -- c,11cg01y 11 yd rology I labitat Gcolobry -----0 Existi.ng Prop. Proj. C.onJitions and Problems 540 I Factors explaining lack of problems in this area: l) this uppermost suharca has no other tributary arc.as; 2) development is moderate and 1nany ho1ncs arc situated on large several- acre parcels; 3) an exten- sive wetland (#5401) acts as effective natural R/D site, as evidenced at collection point. There -arc several severe hank cuts, as well as debris in stream. Habitat ror fish is poor. Drain pipe undercuts to [orm erosional chute. Natural springs have down- cut 8" inlo soils C-7 ---- /\ntidpatcJ Conditions and Prohlems Recent installed sanitary sewers make ii likely that area will approach its anticipated density soon. Welland will continue to provide adequate buffer for downstream syslem, provided ii is not degraded by illegal filling or clearing. Channel upstream of wetland is likely lo experience some capacity problems; these should he addressed by new developments as they occur, possibly wi1h County coordinating a coopera- tive funding of conveyance i1l1provemcn1s. More development at collec- tion point 2 and at Green River Community College will increase flows. Increased flows will result in more hank erosion, sediment, and loss of habitat. Highlights potential for conlinucd or increased erosion in loose colluvium -----,:) Recommendations Protect and enhance welland. A high-density muJticfamily development may be proposed adjacent 10 wetland due to increasing development pres- sures in area. Repair erosion of R/0 pond at upper end of tributary. Remove debris from stream. Evaluate source and establish altcrnale means of conVeyance. a ---'~ Trih. & Collect. 11cm Rivcr Milt: Point 2(1 27 n 21) 01172/1 JUvl .:m 11072/1 RM 2.111 0072[1 RM .IO 11072Ll IUvl .75 1':S< ll.J\l'C 2 -- Calt:gQ!_}'. Cicology I Iydrology I labilal (icology --- Existing --.--., \_/ Prop. Proj. ConJi1ions and Problems 5414 Bank failures of dcltaic deposits (ancient lake) triggered hy. undercutting; rcsporisc to increased flows fro1n streets above. Detention facili1y for Rainier Ridge single-family plat appeared to be functioning, although one sect ion of he rm had eroded severely and needs repair and armor. Pipe directing roaJsidc runoff from nor1h side of SE 320th has failed, and runoff has cut ditch through vege- tation 10 cast, causing significant slope failure on right hank of tributary. Culvert under railroad is a fish blockage. Small ephemeral stream undergoing some bank erosion due to increased peak flows. Silt/day lithology exposed in h,.ink. C-8 ---- Anticipated Conditions and Problems Increased erosion of banks anJ deterioration of habitat. If not corrected, problem will deeply incise swale bank and 1ransport an unacccptublc volume of mutcrial to s1ream below. Increased runoff from area soon to he developed will aggravate slope failures obsc,vcd. Reach is of par- ticular concern due to adverse impacts on stale fish hatchery immediately downstream. Increased stream downcuUing and resulting hank erosion, sidccu11ing1 and scdimenta· lion .downstream will occur. None. ---~ .J - Recommendations Intercept source flows in street areas and direct to storm sewers or suitable facililies. Construct detention facility here and direct runoff from SE 312th St. to this location. Analysis and design of facility should calibrate existing detention facilities and construct retrofitting control features to allow all facilities in the subbasin to work as a complete system. Place strict onsite controls on any future development tributary to this drainage, since no area exists for regional R/D. None. - --- Trih. & Colh.:cl. Item l{ivcr Mik Point 10 JI .:;2 J3 3~ 0072C l(M .10 0072[) RM .10 007 .1 RM .30-.'/0 0071 l(M .35 0071 RM RM .90 l':S( :U.A I'(: -- C.11cgorv I lahitat I lahitat I lahitat (icoloe,ry (icolob'Y --- Existing -----,..__.. Prop. Proj. ComJitions and Problems Smull, d,1ss 5 stream; poor fish habitat Jue to small size. Strcamsidc vegetation anU overhead canopy in good condition. Severe erosion, hank fail· un.:s, slides, and sediment exist. There arc ironfixing bacteria from Llchris. Out- fall from SIR parking lot flows into this tributary. I lahitat in good condition. Nice pools and riffles. some debris dams but no fish blockages. Stream is fairly high, muddy and silty. Overhead trees ahundanl, as is strcamsidc vegetation. 100-to 200-yr.-old debris flow with recognizable fan morphology emerges from narrow draw. May have been triggered hy togging before tum of century. Sill exposed in slope failure induced hy undercut I ing. C-9 --- Anticipated ConJitions and Problems Erosion and downstream sclHmcntation incvi1ablc if <lcvclopmcnt occurs. - There will be more movement of large amounts of earth. Muddy waters on rainy day show erosional problems ~pstrcam from collection point 5. Unstable for constn1ction. Risky. Con1inucd hank recession, ----:J Recommcrn.lations Establish nonerosive stormwa1er release rntcs and volumes for future development. Establish onsite control for SIR stormwatcr. Retain natural stream Corridor. Enforce erosion control require- ments for new development. - Monitor during permit review process. dCgrading of spawning encironmcnt. Evaluate total system flows and, if prudent, develop alternatives to instream discharge of runoff from developments. 0 ---~ i \._ Trih. & Colk:ct. Item l{ivcr Mile l'oint ?.) 3() '?I 7 :is 3') .HJ 01171 1Uv1 .11) 0071 l(M 1.00 ()()7., 111171 l(M l.W ()()7:1 l(M U,O ()()7J RM 2 I'; !':Sr :IJ.i\ I'(: 5 5 5 7 -- ( :ah:gorv (,icology (icology I lydroloh'Y (icology I lahitat (icolo~y --- Existing --.----\ .. .) l'rop. Proj. ConJitions <1nJ Problems Silt cxposcJ in slope failure im.luccd hy unUc rcut ting. Litter and debris blocks stream L"hanncl. /\ccclcratctl hank erosion of main channel due lo increased runoff upstream. Trih. 007JU experiencing serious instability near confluence with main stem due to development. (Sec geologic appendix.) Confluence with tributary; crosiorlal cuts suggcsl rcccn1 flood raiscJ strewn 3' ..ibovc existing flows. I Iahitat in good condition. Silt in suspension; live- stock have access to stream. Gcnlk (20%) side slopes in pasturdand. No evidence of erosion, hut flooding rcportcU. C-10 --- /\nticipalcd Conditions and Prohlcms Continued hank recession, degradation of spawning environment. PerioUic breakout could trigger flooding. - As. area above Trib. 0073 develops, erosion of. swale that conveys it will experi- ence increasing capacity problems. Increase erosion will occur as stream altempts to seek new equilibrium capacity. · None. Dank erosion will occur from presence of livestock. Slight increase in high flows proportional 10 devclopcmnt upstream .. ----C) ':) Recommendations Evaluate total system flows and, if prudent, develop allcrnativcs - to instrcam discharge of runoff from developments. Clean out and restore to natural condition. Future developments above Trib. 0073D should use infiltrative capacity of soils in the area as feasible to reduce runoff. Developments adjacent to main st ream channel should provide adequate setbacks from slopes to prevent slope failure. None. Plant some trees· in floodplain. corridor section. Put in· some drop structures to create pools. None. --(- '. -- Trih. & Colkcl. Item l{ivcr Mile l'oinl '11 ,12 41 4-1 4'.i -lei ---~--- 0117:l l<M 2.15- 1511 0117_1 l(M 255 0117:l l(M 2 .• ~0 007:l RM 2.95 007:l RM 3.15- 1.r,S 11071 l{J'vt :-;_2-t 7 7 7 7 9 7 I' : s Cl !.;\ I'(_' -- ( :at..:gorv 1 lydrolo~y ( icolo~y Geology (icology I IyJrology ( k:ology --- l..:xis1ing --!--..l \ -~ Prop. Proj. ConJitions and Prohlcms S402 Urn..lclcnninul source produc- ing suhstarlliill suspcnJcJ loaJ of silt in trihutary. Stream aJcquatcly accommo- Jating incrcascJ runoff from upstream Jcvclopmcnt. Stream crossing with runoff of S-10 ds. Evidence of short-duration flooding. Evidence for sidccutting 6" above c>dsting flows. On till soils, 60'-wide flood plains IS above existing flows with evidence for aJJitional LS' depth_ Extensive existing Wetland S4SO is currently providing R/0 buffering the flow before· it p~1sscs into channel through King County I lousing Authority Jcvclop- 111cn1. In housing development, erosion around culvert entrance 2' above existing flows. C-11 .-..._ ---- Anticipated Conditions and Prol',lcms Localized capacity problems will become more evident as ,1rea develops. Slight flooding. Widening and undercutting of banks in response to added flows. None. Provides good index: for evaluation of system. Filling may ocCur in area· along north border of wetland lo increase amount o( potential commercial real c~tatc .. Subarca development may cause localized capacity problems in lower reaches. Continued erosion around structure. -----:) Recommendations No regional facility proposed· for this tributary due to lack of obvious location, but basin plan may justify one. Maintain distance from 25-yr. flood- plain using 3' above existing flows as minimum guideline. None. None. Monitor wetland for filling; take action to obtain restoration ir this occurs. Enforce wetland protection regulations. Provide some armoring as bank p~otec- tion (riprap). ,::) - 11cm 47 -IS . jl) 511 :i I -.- ' .... _ Trih. & l{ivcr Mik 007.1 l(M :155 0071 l(M H,0- ,!71) 111/71 l(M -U 1107:1 l(M 4.7, 007:ill l(M .10-:10 --- Collect. Point (~a11..:go1y 7 ( icology 'I lt1hital 9 (il.'.Ology 12 1 lyJrology 'i l lahital -----;-,, I ' \__,, Existing Prop. Proj. ComJitions anJ Problems :i40(, Peat overlies till in wetland area. lnstrcarn habitat is poor due 10 lack of overhead canopy amt strcambank vegetation in some areas. I .ivcstock have access to stream; ·hanks have been crodcU in some areas . Stream occupies swale in rolling 1crracc. No erosional stress. No signific..int problems. Poor fish hahital. Small stream with bank erosion ---- Anticipated Conditions and Prohlcms None. More flooding with increased strcambcJ anJ bank erosion will occur. None Arca planned for only slight additional development. Nci problems anticipated. Increased bank erosion will occµr. -- Rccommcndalions None. -o-::) Establish more resl rictive controls - on volumes and rates of release for developments. Work with landowner to provide fencing and natural .vegetative buffer along stream. None. Future basin plan should consider Wetland 5444 for detention facility to assist in alleviating downslream capacity problems. Establish nonerosive stormwater release rates and volumes for anJ associated pasture future developments. with livestock. l':SUS.1\l'C C-12 ---·-------r ._,, Trih. & Collect. I !cm 1<.ivi.:r Mik Point 52 007:! 1,4 RM .30-.50 )J 5-1 007-1 l<M .50 0074 RM .r,o l':SCll.1\J'C -1 ,-. u Existing C,1tcgorv Prop. Proj. Condilions and Problems l lydrology 5415 Mostly undeveloped; high percentage of open ficlc.Js amt pastures. Uank erosion along west sit.le of SE 312th \Vay threatens intcgrity 11.ibitat I labitat of roadway. 1 lahitat. downstream of SE 312th Way. Culvert is improved from RM .50 but only marginally. Lots of Uchris in SI ream. I lillside and road sliding inlo stream at USGS stream gauge at RM .10. 11..ibitat poor for fish Jue to debris, roatl, anJ erosion problems. C-13 .... -.. ---- Anticipated Conditions and Prohlcms Future development offers opportunity to constn,ct regional c.Jctcntion facility, as undeveloped area consists of several large, contiguous parcels. Dank undcrculling will accelerate,. causing failure of roadway along 1000' of SE 312th Way if only normal detention requirements met. I ncrcascd ninorr from suhhasin now developing will aggravate· slope failures and adversely impact state fish hatchery downstream. I ncrcascc.J nows may cause scour and bank erosion. Bank erosion, sedimentation and road failure exist. This will be a big problem with· increased nows in future. -!---·::J Recommendations Construct proposed tighlline project to prevent failure of road embankment and transportation of material to sensitive main creek reaches. Clean out debris. Provide R/D as needed at top of ravine. Armor stream bank and reinforce road. C) - -----I \ - Trih. & Colh..:ct. 11cm Rivi.:r Mile Point -------Category S5 · 007S (, 1 lydrology l(M .31- 1.-10 )() 0081 9 Ilahit,11 l(M .JO S7 0081 ') (icology nM .62 S8 008 I 9 I lahitat RM .(,2 1':S( 'B.1\1'<: ----1111 -. ' '--' Existing Prop. Proj. Contlitions and Problems Due to relatively slight degree of Jcvclopmcnt, there Jo not appear to he any significant problems al this time. No major problems other than lack of ovcrhca<l canopy from loss of t recs, vcgcta- lion. Culver! 2.5' X 2.5' passes under road. I rridcsccnt hydrocarbon sheen noted on surface. Some minor side- hank scour noted. Stream has been ditched through pasture. Dirt banks exposed with few or no trees to shade stream. C-14 ---· Anlicipatcd Conditions and Prohlcms No problems anlicipatcd as area is planned to develop only slighlly. Norte. Increased flows will have minor increase ·in soil erosion. 13ank erosion will occur. ---~o- ·~~ Recommendations None. Maintain stream corridor and buffer. Encourage owner to fence slrea01 from animals. Identify hydrocarbon· source and test to evaluate pollutants. Would be beneficial 10 isolate livestock from sidebank areas and establish vegetation on banks for erosion control and filtration. Revegetate strcamsides. - Encourage owner to fence off stream from livestock. - I I cm 51) 1,11 <ii -: - Trih. & l(iver Mile (J()<)J l(M 11 ll ()()<) I /\ 1,M . 17- 2.4S 00'1 I/\ l,M .20 !':SC 'IJ.1\l'C --- ( 'olkLI. Point (~alC_gQ!"Y 8 1 lyurolo~J' 11 1 lydrolohJ' 11 I fabitat --- Existing ---' . V Prop. Proj. Conti it ions and Prohlcms 5410 f ,1ke Meriuian area nearly entirely developed with single-family resiliences. 5409 Lake acts as subregional receiving hotly is effec- tively huffering runoff lo down st ream reaches. Some potential for flooding of mohilc home park down- stream of lake due to pos.<;iblc limilcll capacity in pipe discharging from onsi1c pond. Development is causing in- cn:ascd capacity problems and resulting increased volume of runoff, acccler- ting erosion or stream channel in subdivisions near golf course. /\ltcrcd por1ion of stream due to rm1d construction. /\II riffles with few or no pools. t\lJcr shades stream well. C-15 ---- Anticipated Conditions and Prohlems Arca tributary 10 lake is nearly completely developed, so little change is antici- pated for system. Arca south- east of lake has yet to fully develop and potential exists for localized conveyance capacity prohlems that should be addressed by downstream analysis for new dcvclopmcnls. Capacity problems will increase as upstream areas arc developed. Puture prohlcms only likely to be scouring of smaller rock during peak flows1 due 10 import of rock ----!!!!!!!I ·:> Recommendations Dasin plan should consider modification of L1ke Meridian outlet to provide considerably more deten- tion with very minimal alteration of lake levels. This could substan- tially reduce future capacity problems immediately downstream. Construct berm and control structure at outlet to Clark Lake to possibly "detain" runoff and help reduce flow downstream. If a high-density multi-family project is propsed near lake, as is likely, there would be opportunity to develop berm and control measures. Address capacity problems at Clark Lake by channel armoring or upsizing pipe. Placement of some larger rocks to create pools and eddies. 0 - I l Clll <>2 (1.1 l>-1 <)) (i(i -' '-- Trih. & Hivcr Mik ----- 1111') I A RM _:;o 011'1 I A 1Uv1 I. 20- 2.2() II()') I B IUvl .<,2 110'12 RM .10 1111'12 . RM _:,o 1':S< :U.1\ I'<: --- Collect. l'oint Category 11 11.ihitat 11 I lahitat 15 llydrolog;y 3 (icology 3 (icology --- Existing ---' ' \_) Prop. Proj. ConJitions and Problems 5~07 Stream has hccn <litchcd anJ most strcamsidc vegetation rcmovct.1 through golf course. Some hank erosion occurring. Very little.: ovL:rhcad vcgc~ tation ;.ilongsiJc stream. GooJ strc,1111sidc vegetative cover except through shopping center. Overhead canopy varies by property. MoJcratc amount of current development. Wetland 5240 provides R/D, protecting downstream channel from increaseJ volume of runoff <.1s area develops. No sig- nificant prohlc1ns in area. Lillie Soos Creek near norlh margin of Covington Channel. No reported or observed flow or erosion problems. Debris anJ bank erosion fount.I. C-16 --- J\ntkipatc<l Conditions and Prohlcms More hank erosion and sct.limcntation of channel expected. - There will he additional loss of native vegetation along· side stream. More flooding and erosion will occur. Localized capacity problems may occur in upland tributary as areas develop. Wetland, if preserved, will continue to provide R/D for increased flow generated by new dcvelop- mcnls. None. Increased bank erosion is . expected. -- Recommendations --() ':) Stabilize ba_nk and shade stream by planting native vegetation. l!!!!!!I -Enhance use of Clark Lake as R/D facility to reduce peak flows. Further restrict stormwatcr rate and volume rcalcase rates. Protect and possibly enhance wetland as upper area develops. None. Reduce storm flows by use of stricter stormwater controls, new R/D facili- ties, and fencing of stream. increased flows. - 11cm /, 7 (),') ()l) 70 71 --Trih. S ( _·(like 1. l~ivcr !'v1'r1c l'oint 1111')2 l(M .:\S-1.<i') non RM .<,5 ()()<)2 l<M U,O ()()')2 l<M 1.70 ()()')2 RM 1.70- :1.riS II 11 II I~ 14 1':S( :ll.1\l'C --- ( 'atcgory Prop. Proj. 1 lyJrolo:;y S4 I 6 I lahitat l lahital Geology I lyurology -----Existing \ j ConJi1ions anJ Problems--" I .itllc Soos Creek tributary has hccn contained and mani- curcJ as it passes through plats. This has reduced capacity of stream in key areas where resultant channel ovcrtopping causes flooJing of some homes semi- yearly. lnstrcam hahitat is good. Stream corridor mostly in good condition. Manicured lawns nan down to stream in places. Some dchris found in stream. I lahitat generally good. Meandering segment of Little Soos; possihlc colluvial creep in adjacent sidcbank areas. I .ittlc current dcvclopmcnl. No significant prohlcms other lhan some localized hank ovcrtopping in portions of main reach. lnnundation will likely he limited to aJjaccnt agricultural land. C-17 ----J\nlicip<ttcJ Conditions and Problems J\s Jcvclop1l1ent continues, existing capacity problems will he further aggravated by increased. volume of runoff, which previously was able to enter groundwater system directly. I ncrcased flows will cause flooding and erosion. Bank erosion, flooding, and sedimentation likely to occur. Potentially unstable banks would affect construction. J\.s .area develops, channel capacity prohlems will become more evident and increased erosion will occur as stream attcmps to seek new equi- librium capacity. -- Recommendations -. 1!!!!11 .) -I No apparent suitable sites for !!!!!I regional detention facilities to help reduce flow entering problem reaches. Address increased runof( volumes from new developments with infiltration systems where feasible. Channel capacity enhancement projects (such as Project 5416) should b.c constructed to .prevent further property damage. Basin plan should· address potential of detaining runoff from· upstream tributaiy area to allow for increased flows. Establish undisturbed stream buffers. Stricter control on R/D release rates and volumes should be established. -Maintain natural buffer along most of channel. If construction were considered, recommend evaluation of soils and stability of sites. Future developments should utilize infiltrative capacity of soils to rcduc-c increased runoff volumes. Provide adequate flooding protection for future runoff con- ditions. ::) - I I cm 72 7.1 7-1 75 7(, 77 78 7'J --'I 'rih ..... ~'--( :01 h..:cl. River Mile Point ()()<)2 l(M 2kll ()1)<)2 l(M 2k1J OO<J2 RM 1.1:i 0(1<)2 t,M 1-10 0092 RM 3.-10 00'!2 RM 3.65- 4.75 (l()<J2 RM -1.00- 4.-HJ 0(1<)2 RM ~Ji5 1-1 1-1 I(, Ir, I 6 Ir, 16 I Ii l':S( :IJ.1\1'(: --- Calcgo,y Prop. Proj. (icolo!:,ry I lab1tilt Cicology I lahitaL Geology 1Iydrolo1,'Y 5412 I lahitat (.icolot,ry --Existing --('1 '--" Contli1ions and Problems Potential for flooJing in low a·rcas; vc1y low siJc- slopcs. Some debris found. ()verbank nows. I .ots of s"nd in bedload. Strcam.siJc buffer generally good. Resident reports trees down in stream and sidcbank erosion evident. Lillie current development. some localized bank over- topping in portions of main reach hut innunJation is probably lirnitcJ to adjacent agricultural land. Stream ditched. Little strcamsidc vegetation and no ovcrhcaJ canopy. Some livestock-related erosion and runoff. Orange iron prcc1p1tatc noted in st rc,1mhcJ near outlet to I ,akc Youngs. C-18 ---- Anticipated Conditions an·d Prohlcms· Possible flooding (minor). Bank erosion and sedimenta- tion likely. Possible flooding (minor). More scdinicnlation likely, as well as bank erosion and flooding. Some continued erosion. No problems anticipated as very litlle additional development is planned for this area. l3ank erosion and flooding of now "improved" pasture will occur. Some localized O).-ygen depiction of fish habitat. --1!!!!11 -n-·':i Recommendations Consider upstream detention. Estahlish stricter control on R/D release rates and volumes. Maintain natural buffer along most of channel. Consider upstream detention. Establish stricter control on R/D release rates and volumes. Maintain natural buffer along most of channel. Some clean-out of trees and limited armoring of banks would be beneficial. Consider Wetland 5480 for a detention site, in a future basin plan, in order to alleviate down- stream capacity problems. Work with land owner to fence off stream. Plant native vegetation buffer. Natural deposition as iron is exchanged for oxygen. - Item .~() 81 82 x:i x,1 ,,r ,").) K<I --,_ Trih. S: Collccl. l{ivcr Mile Point -------- (_)11')2 Ir, l(M 4.<i5 r111•n 14 l(M 00-87 ()( )IJ:, 14 l(M CU5 00')4 I :i l(M CUI) (I( )')4 13 1(1\1 .0.30 OO<l4 13 I( M 1.00 Oll')-1 I?, 1(1\1 1.50 1':SUl.1\l'C --- Category Prop. Proj. I lahitat I lahitat (icology Geology 1 lahitat I lahitat 1 lahitat -- IJxisting ---'0 Cont.litions "nJ Problems ---- Anticipated Cont.litions and Problems Iron-fixing haclcria and None. assodalcJ otlor present. Source unknown. Lake Youngs release rate is minimum 2 cf. Very small t rihutmy with unJcfincJ channel in places. llahitat value for fish is low. Poorly defined stream channel wilh no evidence of erosion. Minor sidchank erosion below convergence of two culvert/creeks. SI rcamsidc vegetation has been removed hy logging. Important: This is a salmon spawning stream. Some hank erosion probably due lo live- stock. There is riverine wetland just cast of 156th Ave SL C-19 .,·,~,, Erosion and flooding from future development likely. None. Slight enlargement of erosional· features. There is a possibility of bank erosion due to increased flows from development. More bank erosion will occur. None. ---l!!!!!!B 11111111 <:J Recommendations None. Reduce storm flows by use of stricter stormwater controls, new R/D facilities, and fencing of stream. None. Local armoring/riprap applied by owners would reduce impacts. Provide stormwater control Establish ·stream corridor buffer. Improve stormwater control. Encourage property owners to fence stream. Provide stream corridor buffer. Improve stormwater control. Maintain wetlands and stream corridor in natural state. () - I 11..: m S7 .~K :,.;t> l)(J •1 I - Trih. & ~Ve~!!!£_ (JI 1'15 IZM .35-.. ~) 00•15 A RM 00-2S (1()•15/\ IZM .<>) ()()')7 RM .Yi ()()')7 RM .,5 1':S( "B.Al'C --- (\>llt.:cL. Point ( :ah.:g.orv 17 I lahital IS I lahilal rn I lahilal JS Geology JS llahitat -------..J Existing Prop. Proj. Conditions anti Problems Small1 ephemeral stream flowing through pasture. I .ivcstock c,1using bank erosion. Ditched area; lots of Lkhris. Debris exists in salmon spawning area. S1ream flowing 1hrough dcvdopmcnt shows minor bed and hank erosion as stream equilibrates to new channel. Debris and fill in wclland. C-10 --- Anticipated Conditions and Problems None. Continued filling may ocnor in flood plain. - This will have minimal effccl ~ on habital. Conlinuing adjustment will occur until system establishes a mature, developed water- course. More filling may occur. -- Recommendations 1111 l!!!!I 0 J Encourage property owner lo fence stream. Maintain stream corridor. Enforce grading and filling ordinance. Maintain s1ream corridor in nalural condilion. 1!!11 The key word is "equilibrates." Disturbance of the natuml system has initiated or induced readjustment in the bed as a function of new gradients, materials; and other hydraulic factors. In time, the stream will establish itself in another "natural" equilibriumt assuming no new variables such as added flows or alteration of channel geometry are introduced. Enforce grading and filling ordinance. I I f1 I I I I I I I I rJ ·I i :I ' !I :1 11 ·I I \ l -.,, I ·, EXHIBIT D ,- () •; I ·• •'. l ·c,· .·. ··.:· -:.·· ..... I 1,.--. . . -· ..... · I .• _ . .. It); I I I I I '· · FJ11>f\Jao/t iQ<!4/ ·i :,:~:~ .:r· ·.:\. ,,•\ • L C -L -L C -L () C • L C [ .... L C C: ... I. TASK1 II. TASK 2 Ill. TASK 3 IV. TASK4 V. TASK 5 APPENDIX TABLE OF CONTENTS STUDY AREA DEFINITION AND MAPS RESOURCE REVIEW FIELD INSPECTION DRAINAGE SYSTEM DESCRIPTION AND PROBLEM DESCRIPTIONS MITIGATION OF EXISTING OR POTENTIAL PROBLEMS THRESHOLD ASSESSMENT; PRELIMINARY CALCULATIONS ... ---1 I I n I I I I I TASK1 STUDY AREA DEFINITION AND MAPS I I In __ , I I I I I I I I l. ) I I I ,o I I I I I I IC) I I I I I I I I I TASK1 STUDY AREA DEFINITION This project is located at 11634 SE 192nd Street in Renton, Washington. It lies along the north side of SE 192nd Street and is approximately 2.25 acres. The property will be divided into nine residential lots. All lots will gain access from SE 192"d Street via a new sub-access street. . There is an existing house, three driveways, a concrete pad and two sheds located in the southwest portion of the property, while the rest of the property portion consists mainly of grass, some brush and some trees. The existing site drainage sheet flows from the west to the east. No significant amounts of . · upstream flow enter the site. MAPS A vicinity map, sensitive areas map, aerial/topo map, and offsite drainage map can be found in the proceeding pages. · • I ,n I I I I I I lo I I I I I I I •. (.) 11 -.........- .... SE 188th St E 96th St ~CJCJth St RA THI NAM SENSl!IV_E AREAS .. SI! tffl,; T · ""'4<m68·--···-t--& 61 7 6198400245 : I\ J. 1~· I I 98dttte,~=~ I 1 .-·-·---; ! e·~ &t9&400066 6 151 f .,. __ _, I 6t9'il000040 ··;' · •• . _,...-SE..11S9TJU~ i·· ....... ~ . . , ......... --._ ... 1 IIITH.AVE.SS_: !\1~0024~ / . ... .. .. .. -S""""-"';;o (J"~~ I · / .,...,oooso I o,9&400:,,;o : I 61""""'-104> ~1:~~ ~I ; '.····--···--. -----.;. -·. ·---.. t ,:··--·--·-,-__ L __ f'. ~--, z , . . I ~109000120 ~~--~ ~ , : 619'&,.100100 i 51~002&0 1--------.. ·,050:, t !, . ,t • .... ,1~ $ i!· r-· ··-.. -·-·---~. ···-· .................. 1"(-------~-···-··-·· ···-··j~ [··-···!\~-!~~---r·· 1----~~~•lO ~!)903'3 ;~ ! M9M00125 &198ff~tt> 619.'M00:300 !~ i :S,t9900014lj '··!,~~~~' lSL.1 .. JJH.LNj 1·.;~00;-..;:· ·-········--·---"-:--···· ...... ······1~ r··· i i ,/~~ j-i ;··--------.I • 519,B.400140 ! 61:';)tWOQ32() 1-: &.190000143 ~ ' 61!3400141 j _; &'11)00(014() ~,o ' . . ......................... ~-........ , .............. 1 (· / ', ·-.: . i OU)a.1001162 \ j 1 ! i 1~---~-.. ·--;. ·····-----··-----------1 t·-. __________ _._ ! ; i I 6<g~1&1 lr-······)··=~i l t 6 1984100161 6196400180 5t~00300 &1~©~1 ! : Q199t00teo .· ~~l$)...._ . .J j 3223059100 t··-·-····--T---· I 6!9S:400340 ! i : j ; ~100 ! , · . ,i, ... oo,sd ; i /6•~••• "'""'*'""" ./"··---'"' ···-.. •------.--: _J L__ __.aiD.!Woo ··-····--·-·st:.:tffliliO i ·---··L __ : L_.! _.L. ____ J ________ _ 1+···-r·1~~.:i.1 J: --~)~7~L.L;----i---r-r ·--r··-----·, [ ,-····:,;~ I ... -oszio.g"'3~-, 'T"""~,. 79poooo1~·-1 ! ' ; /··, .·-; j i t I : ! 1'0 1932000020 ' r--•-. "-•' I 1 , ! 1$? r· -~-""--).moooo,r ' I 1 \ :iamlciooJ(j· 1 ·--~L ..... L. ____ .1' ! 4-47~112<t.t\'t i l ·····-----I ' \ .-> ) ~ ·.' . Ii I ,93aOXXl& i----. :..u:'1 1-------· L___ ----1 ' 2817~ 1l 052205'9104 L .. 1·-,-Pi; . \ : : \ ,· ' ~,= ~,,., i i / , ~2a -----~---i0521°T33° r~ ................................. 1. ! ,-..... 7~-r1 r §r-------.... -~1 i f ·-· 2ah&/Ol. 70 ! l 1 ~ 1-1 ~'PI ! "1 750000 ~! i 1P) ' I • j i t· . I I ' ', ....... J., ... -.L ~.......... ' ',. _ , .................. _.-; ~lr .. l~DJ> 793.lt':'0015 , 2'l18'lOOIIO ·*-··----.. L ..... -..... l ~rrot?OO ; 1~,oo ; ,•r1~ I ... I .i 057205!»58 .l..r~;;·--1~~.1 \J;l~.·. l!!l!l!!l ... '.,. l .. r --..• l ~ i l 1~3:2r.00004 -~;~ ........ ····; 1 : -··-~-----r---...!.-T ,tcl"""ICJaeCooriJ i i ' w,s O • --·· .. ·,·-: 0,09-3ml79:i,,,,:)0060 1 lillii jJ:/ Selected Features ,N SW•!S [] P•,001 SA0Stn,am # Ca51 ;v' """, ........ ~ ~2s.noid /'·/ a.,,.3 u.- Lak&& and large-f:tivefa I' I "'"t ....... ---- Legend ~ FIO<ldway [31 100 Y"a, FlOOdplao, ffl SAO W..Hond [B) SAO Land'S&de §Ill SAO Coal Mina ~ SAO Selsnuo SAO .;__,,.. Land&ik:la Hazatd CminagQ Ate.a fslll .. _,,, iii ...... 0 --'------,-----, ------ -C ------~-------------r-, ....... _/ ·--I ' ' I~--r· I -16 I I I I I 8 s i -····~-·-·· ll (I) I I I ) I I I i I I I I I I iRf. I 11 I I ~~------ (2) 2 ~ .. 12 ~ ( I) $ _.!li.--, t i r, ,1 ,' ii 11 I I :u. • 81 "I t; ~ I! I I !d ~ Ps: -. .A. offs:+~ Dr~:t\..,Jt /Vl"'-f ·~. ,. ,- ""' V f- I I . () •• I I I I I I IC) I ' I I I : I i I I\ ) I TASK 2 RESOURCE REVIEW I •:n i .·. I I I I I I '() I I .. I I I I I I I TASK 2 RESOURCE REVIEW Adopted Basin Plans and Finalized Drainage Studies: The site is located inside the Soos Creek Basin Plan. Basin Reconnaissance Summary Reports: No known reports are known to exist. Critical Drainage Area Maps: The site is not known to be located in any critical drainage areas. (FEMA) Maps: The site is located outside the 100 year flood plain. Other Offsite Analysis Reports: None were available Sensitive Areas Folio: None of the site is located in or near any sensitive area (see sensitive areas inap under Task 1 ). DNR Drainage Problems Maps: Not applicable. Road Drainage Problems: Not applicable. King County Soils Survey: Soils on this site consist of Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam, 0 to 6 percent slope (AgB). Wetlands Inventory Maps: There are no wetlands located on or near the site. Migrating River Studies: Not applicable. Drainage Complaints: According to the list of drainage complaints provided by King County, there were no complaints near the downstream analysis limits of this project that are a direct result of runoff from this property. Most of the drainage complaints have been resolved. However there were several drainage complaints from property owners on the south side of SE 196th Street, east of 120th Ave SE. It appears that most of their runoff problems are a result of development runoff I I I I I I I I I I I I I I FEB. 3.2004 12:03PM KC WLRD King County Water afud Land Resources (WLR) Division " . 20 I S Jackson S~ Suite 600 Seattle, WA 9g 104-3855 Date: -N0.306 P.1/7 FAX Number of pages including cover sheet: _7,___ To:~/1~ ~!JIJIJ Fax: <%0)9~-7VI Phone: ( ~~ -71C2/ ' From: Cindy Torkelson WLR. Stonnwater Sel'Vices Section Phone:~ 296-1900 Fax Number: £2.Qfil 296-0192 RE: Level 1 Analysis I' : . . To follow is a list of compl<IPlts received by the Water and Land Resources Division Drainage Services Section. Complaint numbett. beginning prior to 1990-XXXX have been archived and are no longer in · our possession. They can st I be retrieved, if necessary, but.will talce additional time-and may-not be · · beneficial to your re~elU'ch 1 e to· their age, development which has occurred,·ew ... ·If you are intere~ted - in reviewing the actual com~laints, they can be pulled (time permitting) for your review. Copies can-be: obtained for$ .15 per page, iµtd $2,00 per page for plans. . · .. · Keys: Type of lnvcstfgatjgn Type of Problgm C Acltiofl ltequcst : · DCA ~clopmont/Co1utNctlon BCW Business' for Cloan ~ator DOM Dralna:e-Miscollaneou, CCP Response ro Inquiry! DES Drainer• -Etc,;on/S.diment41ion . 'CL Clalrn : OLii Dl81naGO-L,ndslld<illorth Movement EH Enfbrcement on Hcl~ OTA Dralntte ~hnicaJ As1i1tanc; 6R llnfbrcomont Revi..1/ !NQ Pnlfn•go-Oc,,o:ral Inquiry FCC,PCR,FCS Facility Complaint, I' MMA Malnionanco • ~lh<lics Pl SWM Foo Inquiry ' MMF Moint<nonce • Flooc!in~ FIR SWM Pee Review MMO Malntaumco. <Jenera! ffil SWM Fee on H<>ld ;' MMM Malntena,,co. Mowing 'LS lAw,uit t MNM _Moi!11fnanco -Need1 _ll;{ainlmMot RR F11<lllty Entinewins O\'lew · MNW Maln1enanci,N0Klow Weed, NDA Neighborhood Dt'lln c A."istanee SWF SWM Fee Question•.,:., WQC Waler Quality C<Jmpla1n1 WQD Weier Qu'llicy-Be,l Management 1'11<1fe., WQE w ... , Quality BnlbrF,••t WQD w,u, Quoli!l'-Dumpmg WQR Water QuaJity Enginijering: ~icw WQr W.oler Quality-nnclc ConneO'tlon WQA Water Quality Audit I\ IUiM SWM Pee -Remoasurernent ' WQO WataQ,,.ilty-O~r ORT SWMFC<-OrRllt Sl,S2,SNJ EnJlnMrlng Stud;e,; NWD SWM Fee-N<w Discount •subject to Public Disclosuro roquJrem,ni,t Ro«lpl of written roquost for document, 2. Review llnd approval by Pro,ocutlng >.ttomey, offioe 1\ I FEB. 3.2004 12:04PM KC WLRD N0.306 · P.2/? I_ . . .· 1· ) klno County Water am! land Resources Dllrlslon • Dralrulue lorvtcas Section I CnmjJlolllt Searoh Printed : 2/3/2004 9:42:42 AM I CoJnpJalnt . TYIB Typu or Problem Number Coll!I Addr888 Of Proollllll comments TbroBPa111 1976-0076 C FLOG RD WYIFLD'Dl112TH AVE SE/SE 186TH ST 686E2 I 1975-0149 C EROSION 12227 SE 208TH ST GALEN CARIN #1 686F4 1977-0003 C ORNG 12207 SE 192NDST @ GOLDEN HILLS 686F3 1978-0028 C ORNG 20205 106THAVESE 6861:3 I 1978-0085 C FLOG 20921 . 120TH AVE SE BACKYARD 686F4 1979-0047 C 11403 SE 204THST SOIL BULLDOZED/PANTHER LK AREA 6861:2 1981-0081 C DRNG 19917 122ND PL SE BLOCKED/EAST HILL AREA 686F3 I 1981-0215 C DRNG 19918 122NO PL SE C/B CAVING IN 686F3 1981-0320 C FLOG 20921 120TH AVE SE PANTHER LK AREA 686F4 I 1983-0194 C DRNG 108TH AVE SE 6861:3 1983-0199 C 10860 SE 196TH FILLING & GRADING 686E3 1983-0424 X DRNG 12528 SE 202NDPL SYSTEM MAINTENANCE 686F3 I 1984-0091 C DRNG 20656 120THAVE SE DITCH FILI.ING 688F4 1984-0095 C FLOG 20204 106TH AVE SE 686E3 1984-0324 C DRNG SE 204TH ST/124TH AVE 686F3 11 ---)986-0377 E DRNO 12002 SE 208THST VL TR CRID PROB. BLOCKl:;0 DRIVEWAY 666F4 ,,986-0702 C ORNG 12240 SE 200TH ST MAINTENANCE OF LOT 686F3 1986-1166 C FLDG 11202 SE 186TH ST STORM OVERFLOW ', 6861:;2 I 1986-1185 C FLOG 11202 SE 186TH ST SEE: 86-1166 BRYANT, BILL 6861:2 1986-1190 C FLOG 11001 SE 186TH ST BASEMENT OETTING WATER 666E2 I 1987-0246 C FLOG 20238 127TH PL SE WATl;R FROM NEIGHBORS 87.0918 6661"3 1987-0334 C DRNG 11202 SE 186TH ST CULVERTS BLOCKED 86-1166,1185 686E2 1987-0471 C FLOG 11202 SE 186TH ST SPRING OLEN 86-1166.1185 666E2 I 1987-0545 C DRNG 18827 109THAVE SE INADEQUATE SYSTEM 6B6E2 1987-0675 C DITCH 19407 124TH AVE SE DRAINAGE DITCH ON PROPERTY 686F3 1987-0918 C DRNG 20236 127TH PL SE WATER UNDER HOUSE 87,0246 686F4 I 1988-0551 C DRNG 20002 124TH AVE SE FILL IN WETLANDS 686F3 1989-0019 C DRNG 19400 124TH AVE SE DITCH MAINTENANCE 686F3 I 1989-0328 C DRNG 12202 SE 204TH ST BUILDER OF NEW HOME IMPORTED FILL 686F4 1989-0410 C DRNG 12213 SE 199TH ST PONDING IN DRAINAGE EASEMENT 686F3 1989-0564 C DRNG 12225 SE 204TH ST EROSION OF YARDS IN NEW PlAT B86f4 I 1989-0560 C DRNG 20508 123RD PL SE DOWNSPOUTS ERODING YARD 89-0584 886F4 1969-0564 C EROSION 20508 123RD PL SE NEW HOME DOWNSPOUTS OPEN 686F4 1989-0650 C DRNG 18631 111TH PL SE S/W DRNG AND DAMAGE 888E2 I 1989-0700 X DRNG 18631 111TH PL SE WATER ON SIDEWALK/69·0650 FRITON 686E2 1990-0075 C DRNG 11254 SE 186TH ST PLUGGED CULVERT/STORM 686E2 -1 0-0141 C FLDG 18400 112TH AVE SE PONO OVERFlOW/90-0149,235,372/STOR 686E2 I ) I Page 1 of6 I FEB. 3.2004 12:05PM KC WLRD N0.306 P,3/7 •n=t TYPB Type of Pr11bl8m Addreaa of Pl'alll8m Cummunts lbro8Paol COlla I ·c-1990-0149 C FLDG 11202 SE 186TH ST RID POND OVERFLOW/ROBERT/ STORM E 68SE2 -1990-0231 C DRNG 18425 112TH AVE SE RID POND OVERFLOW/STORM 90-274,37 686E2 I 1990-0235 C FLOG 11202 SE 186T.H ST WATER IN BASEMENTISTORM/90-141,149, 68SE2 .... 1990-0274 C FLOG 11022 SE 184TH PL RID POND FLOODED/STORM 68SE2 _., 1990.0342 C FLOG 11202 SE 186TH ST R/0 POND/ROBERT/ STORM EVENT 686E2 I t.,-1990-0372 X DRNG 11202 SE 186TH ST RID PONDS OVERFLOW9/90-141,149.235,2 686E2 -1990-0664 ER MANHOLE 12400 SE 201STPL FAILURE-LINDA CREST PLAT DIV 1 & 2 686F3 I ~ 1990-0709 CL FLOG 18504 112TH AVE SE Cl#12959 SEE CL#13224 DUE DECEMBE 686E2 -1990-0884 C DRNG 18427 112TH AVE SE RID POND DRAINAGE/STORM 6S6E2 1990-0910 C FLOG 12403 SE 202ND PL WATER FROM NEW DEVELOPEMENT 6S6F4 . I ;.-, 1990.1061 CL FLOG 11202 SE 186TH ST Cl.#13224 SEE CL#12959 GARAGE FLOO 686E2 )t1990-1063 C DRNG 12025 SE 196TH ST SPRING HILL ONE/DITCH NOT DRAINING 686F3 -1990-1186 Cl FLOG 11044 SE 186TH ST MEMO/RUDDELLS STUDY TO PA 686E2 I -1990-1212 C DITCH 11044 SE 186TH ST RD/SIDE OITCH-FILL/90-1186 .686E2 -1990-1212 E FILL/DIT 11044 SE 186TH ST· WILL START WORK 09/20 CHK ON 09/30/9 686E2 I -1990-1212 ER FILL/OIT 11044 se 186TH ST RUDELLS STUDY 686E2 ~ 1990-1226 C DRNG 18615 107THAVE SE FLOODED BASEMENT/BAD ROADWAY 6S6E2 -1990-1445 C ORNG 18427 112THAVE SE RID POND OVERFLOWING TO STUDY/91-1 686E2 I ..,,.j90.14es C EROSION 12601 SE 201ST PL LINOACREST 686F4 ( 90-1530 SR FLOG 18427 112THAVE SE STORM EVENT 686E2 -1990-1531 SR FLOG 18427 112TH AVE SE STORM EVENT NOT NDAP 686E2 1-1990.1577 SE STUDY 12601 SE 201ST PLACE STUDY OF AREA 686F4 -1990.1596 C FLOG 12403 SE 202ND PL WATER ON ROAD/YARD/LINDA CREST ST 686F4 ~1990-1612 X DRNG 12601 SE 201ST ST @ LINDA CREST DIV II 686F4 F 1991-0150 C ORNG 18624 112TH AVE SE 686E2 -1991-0150 SR DRNG 18624 112TH AVE SE NOTNDAP 68BE2 I ~ 1991-0196 C FLOG 18425 112TH AVE SE 686E2 -1991-0196 SR FLDO 18425 112TH AVE SE NOTNOAP 686E2 c-1991-0253 C DRNG 11254 SE 186TH ST 686E2 --1991-0299 C FLOG 19835 121ST AVF:. SE OVERFLOW OFF PIPES 686F3 ~1991°0299 SR FLOG 19835 121ST AVE SE REFER TO BALD 686F3 -1991-0338 C FLDG 11214 SE 196TH ST LEVEL OF PANTHER LAKE/STORM EVENT 686E3 L, 1991..()338 SR FLOG 11214 SE 196TH ST STORM EVENT NOT NOAP 686E3 .,,. 1991-0426 C FLOG. 12100 SE 197TH ST WASHOUT OF ROAO/DEVELOPEMENT 688F3 ..-1991-0438 S1 SPK TO FINISH 51 3/4 -S2 TO '92 CON 686E2 t :1991-0512 C FLOG 20024 124TH AVE SE CATCH BASIN LEAKS/OVERFLOWS 686F4 ..; 1991-0579 C WTRS/W 20313 122NO AVE se WATER OVER SIDEWALK 686F4 J 1991-0579 E WTR SN-J 20313 122NDAVE SE OH/SWM DIV PLY 686F4 1991-0579 EH WTRS/W 20313 122NDAVE SE OH/SWM DIV PLY 686F4 .-l -y·0580 C FLOG 20803 124TH AVE SE SMALL DRAIN SYSTEM CLOGGED 666F4 I Page 2 of6 I FEB. 3.2004 12:05PM KC WLRD N0.306 P.4/? I COllllllaint Type l'YP8 of Problem Alfdr88s or Prt!blam n NWllbsr Comments 1llraa P11t1 COl!B I :.._ 1991-0667 CL DRNG 18427 112THAVE SE SEE 91-0438 SEE RUDDELLS 686E2 ·"-·1991-0798 91 FLOG 12403 SE 202NDPL 688f4 I --1991-083 7 C OAMAGECB 19001 1161H AVE SE C/8 BELOW GRADE 686E2 -199H005 C DRAINAGE 12213 SE 199TH ST PONDING IN YARD/FENCING 68BF3 -1991-1095 C FLOG, 11200 SE 186TH ST RUDDELL POND OVERFLOW B86E2 I -1991-1120 LS FLOODING 19300 108TH AVE SE 686E3 -1991-1132 C DRAINAGE 19006 118TH AVE SE INFOTOPM&D 686E2 I -1991-1149 X FLDG RIO 11200 SE 164TH ST CCF# SWM-1031 RID POND CAPICITY B86E2 -~ 1991-1165 C DRAINAGE 11007 SE 196TH S'f INFO TO BALD DIU./PARKING LOT EXPAN 686E3 -1992-0689 S3 STUDY CULVERT UPGRADE 6861'4 I __ 1993-0383 C FLOG 20247 117TH AVE SE UPSTREAM DEVELOPMENT 686E4 -1993-0383 RN FLOG 20247 117THAVE SE UPSTREAM DEVELOPMENT 686F4 -1993-0592 .C ORNG 12209 SE 208TH ST SURCHARGE FROM C/8 686F4 I -1993-0794 WOA DUMPING 12561 SE 203RD PLACE TOWQA 686F4 1993-0794 woe DUMPING 12561 SE 203RD PLACE TOWQA 686F4 -1994-0038 C PONDING 11430 SE 192ND ST POSS GRADING/FILLING VIOLATION 886E2 I :.-1894-0321 C INQUIRY 12525 SE 203RD PLACE ANY PIPES IN YARD WHERE SHE Wlll DI 68BF4 -1994-0431 C PONDING 12602 SE 202ND PL PONDING IN GUTIER 8B6F4 I ~994·0498 C DITCH 19701 121ST AVE SE GRAVEL DUMPED IN ROADSIDE DITCH 686E3 • 994.0555 woe GREEN/CB 11320 SE 208TH ST POSSIBLE ALGAE GROWTH NO POLLUTA 686E4 -1995-0048 C DRNG 20255 124TH AVE SE WORK IN WE'fLANDS CONTACT AINSLE 666F4 1; 1996,.0076 C DRNG 20803 124TH AVE SE GROUND WATER & PVT DRAIN 686F4 1895-0226 WQC MUD FLOW SE 196TH & 118TH A SE RFDDES GRADING 666E3 ~ 1995-0587 X DRNG 20255 124TH AVE SE WETLAND ON HIS PROPERTY 666F4 1~ 1995,0594 C DITCH 19803 121ST AVE SE REQUEST TO ENCLOSE R/S DITCH 686E3 -1995--0596 C FENCING 20424 121STWAY SE REQUEST TO INSTALL FENCE ALONG EA 686E4 -1895-0800 C CONSTRUC 20418 121STWAY SE PROPOSED RETAINING W/\LL IN DRNG E 686E4 I -1995-0600 NDA CONSTRUC 20418 121STWAY SE PROPOSED RETAINING WALL IN DRNG E 686E4 -1995-0600 R CONSTRUC 20418 121STWAY SE PROPOSED RETAINING WALL IN ORNG E 686E4 1•· 1995.0974 C FLOODING 19701 121ST AVE SE APPARENT OBSTRUCTION IN R/S DITCH 686E3 'f 1995-1067 C RUNOFF 19631 121ST AVE SE EROSION FROM NEW SCHOOL CONST 686E3 -1996-0081 C R/0 POND 20255 124TH AVE SE DOWNSTREAM IMPACT FROM R/0 OUTLE 686F4 IA' ! 996-0243 C DRNG 19631 121ST AVE SE DOWNSTREAM IMPACT SCHOOL DEVELO 8861':3 -1996-0244 C DRNG 11403 SE 204TH ST ADJACENT PROPERTY DISCHARGE ON P B86E4 fr 1996-0245 C RUNOFF 19528 122ND PL SE SPRING HILL ELEMENTARY INFO RD$ DIT 68SF3 1-1996-0432 FCC PIPE? 11645 SE 208TH ST MAINT NEEDS OF COUNTY RD SIDE OITC 6861:4 ..-1996-0632 FCR RID PONO 11705 s 203RD ST GROUNDWATER IMPACT TO PVT PROP 686E4 ~ 1996-0729 C ORNG 11705 SE 203RQ ST GOUNDWATER SURFACING BY DRIVEWA 686E4 I ~ 1996-0788 C FLOG 12232 SE 200TH ST FLOODING DUE TO STORM AND SUBSTN 666F3 --' ·,6,0768 I (s.J NOA FLOG 12232 SE 200TH ST FLOODING DUE TO STORM AND SUBSTN 68SF3 I Page 3 of6 I FEB. 3.2004 12: 06PM_ KC WLRD N0.306 P.S/7 '\_ Inc••~ TYJJt TYIII of ProlJlmn llddr8aa or Pl'dllmn Comm&11ta . lllroa P811B I . llmnber Cllda -1996..0766 R FLOG 12232 SE 200TH ST FLOODING DUE TO STORM AND SUBSTN 686F3 · fr 1996-0605 C DRNG 19400 120THAVE SE DRAINGE FLOW QUESTION DEVELOP INF 68BE2 I --~-\1996-1233 C FLOG 19910 118TH AVE SE GROUNDWATER IMPACT TO PVT PROP 686E3 -1996-1564 C DRNG 18908 113THWAY SE PRIVATE PROPERTY IMPACT TO PVT ORN 686E2 I .. -;;._ 1996-1613 C FLOG 19910 118THAVE SE ROOF DRNS PLUGGED PVT PROB 686E3 -'-1996-1635 C DRNG 20024 124TH AVE SE ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROJECT IMPACT 68SF3 -1996-1738 C DRNG 12047 SE 209TH ST INFO REQUEST DOWNSPOUT DISCHARG 686E4 I -1996-1763 FCR SIGN 20537 . 122ND PL SE DAMAGE TO TEMPORARY POND SIGN 666E4 -1996,,1906 E RID POND 12613 SE 232ND Pl FENCE ENCROACHMENP INTO TRACT 68SF3 ~ 1.997-1102 FCR RIP POND 20316 122ND CT SE TREE FALL AND MAINTENANCE NEEDS N 666E4 I -1997-1123 C GRADING 18908 113THWAY SE PVT PROP IMPACT NO DRNG INSTALLED 6861:2 -1997-1123 R GRADING 18906 113THWAY SE PVT PROP IMPACT NO DRNG INSTALLED 686E2 -· · 1997-1505 C TREES · 12232 SE 200TH ST DANGEROUS TRE5S ON COUNTY PROP 686F3 I 1997-1550 C FLOODING 19631 121ST AVE SE PVT PROP IMPACTS UPBASIN DEVELOPM 686E3 'IJ; 1997-1550 R FLOODING 19631 121ST AVE SE PVT PROP IMPACTS UPBASIN DEVELOPM 686E3 1897-1550 $1 FLOODING 19631 121ST AVE SE PVT PROP IMPACTS UPBASIN DEVELOPM 666E3 1-. 1997-1572 C TREE 12232 SE 200TH ST REMOVAL OF WINDFALLS REQUIRED 686F3 -1998-0019 C DRAINAGE 19016 116TH AVE SE NEW GRAVEL RD POSSIBLE PVT PROP IM 686E2 I ~~]95.oosa c DRAINAGE 18820 116THAVE SE SFR CONST IMPACTING ADJACENT PROP 686E2 l., 98-0089 WQC DUMPING 11805 SE 204TH ST DUMPING OF ROOFING MATERIAL IN RID 686E4 .., 1998-0089 WQR DUMPING 11805 SE: 204TH ST DUMPING OF ROOFING MATERIAL IN RID 68654 1-1998-0090 FCR ACCESS 11806 SE 204TH ST LACK OF MAINTENANCE ROAD TO MAINT 686E4 -. 1998-0108 woe OIL SPLL SE 199 ST/124 AVE SE SPILL OF POLLUTANTS ALONG RD R/W 68GF3 I 1998-0223 FCR FENCE 20814 127TH Pl se DAMAGED FENCE ADJACENT TO FENCE 686F4 -1998-0235 C DRAINAGE 11715 SE 203RD ST BERM AROUND CB NEl:DS REPAIRED 66BE4 -1998-0244 C DRAINAGE 20620 119THAVE SE NEW SFR CONST LOT DRNG NOT FUNCTI 686E4 ,-1998-0361 C DRAINAGE 12463 SE 198TH PL INFO REQURST RE WETLAND/OPEN SPA 68SF3 -1098-0386 C DRAINAGE 11804 SE 204THST REQUl:ST TO ENCLOSE DRAINAGE SWAL 686E4 -1998-0386 R DRAINAGE 11804 SE 204TH ST REQUEST TO ENCLOSE DRAINAGE SWAL 666E4 1-, 998-0504 FCC WETLAND 20809 114THPL SE POSSIBLE FILL IN WETLAND BUFFER 686E4 -1098-0922 FOR RDPLUGD SE 208TH ST/127TH AVE PLUGGED ORIFICE & FENCE REPAIR 686F4 -1999-0306 C DRAINAGE 11618 SE 188TH ST ADJACENT PROP PAVED 2500 SO FT 686E2 I _ 1999-0325 C DRAINAGE 20531 122ND PL SE LOT GRADING/DRAINAGE NEW HOME CO 686E4 -19119-0385 FCR FENCE 20502 122ND PL SE CONSTRUCTION OF FENCE ACROSS ORN 686E4 -1999-0385 R F5NCE 20502 122ND PL SE: CONSTRUCTION OF FENCE ACROSS DRN 666E4 1-1999-0386 C DITCH 20414 121STWAY SE REQU TO FILL IN DRNG ESMT 68BE4 -1999-0503 C FENCE 12455 SE 198TH PL REQUEST FOR FENCE BOLLARDS AT AOC 686F3 .-1999-0521 C DRAINAGE 20629 119TH AVE SE REQUEST TO PIPE BIO-SWALE 686E4 -1999-0877 C DRAINAGE 12227 SE 208TH ST PONDING WATER ROAD IMPROVEMET 686E4 -( ,-oe77 R DRAINAGE 12227 SE 208TH ST PONDING WATER ROAD IMPROVEMET 686E4 I I Page4of6 I 12:05PM KC Wt.RD N0.305 P.E,/7 FEB. 3.2004 I Clm!lll&lnt Tme TYPD of Problam Adllr88a Of ProlJleQI. Collllllllllb lJJnJs Paue ()Nmnbar . 1:8118 I -r-200()..0226 R BSR 20620 119THAVE SE SURVEY SIOSWLAE ANO UPSTREAM SYS 68BE4 _J 2000-0415 C MNM 12208 SE 207TH PL VEGETATION GROWTH'IN TRACT. TRACT 686F4 I ,... 2000-o's1~ C DDM ACROS 19029120TH AVE SE APPARENT FILLING OF ROADSIDE DITCH. 686E2 .,-.200()..0572 R DOM ACROS 19029 120TH AVE SE APPARENT FILLING OF ROADSIDE DITCH. 68BE2 ~ 2000-0634 FCR WQO 20506 122ND Pl SE ABANDONED VEHICLE ADJ TOR/DIN RO 68BE4 I .--. 2000-0640 R DOM 20629 119THAVE SE ALREADY REVIEWED UNDER 99-0521. AL 686E4 -2000-0640 WOR DDM 20629 119TH AVE SE. 686E4. I -·2000-0713 C DDM 12232 SE 200TH ST INCREASE FLOWWS IMPACTING DRAINA 686F3 -200()..0713 NOA-DOM 12232 SE 200TH ST INCREASE FLOWS IMPACTING DRAINAGE 686F3 -2000-0713 R ODM 12232 SE 200TH ST INCREASE FLOWS IMPACTING DRAINAGE; 686F3 I 2001-0076 R BSR 11808 SE: 204TH ST BIO-SWALE RETRO FIT. CATEGORY C. CL 6861';4 ~ 2001-0181 C DOM 119TH AVE SE & SE 196 GROUNDWATER DISCHARGE OVER SIDE 686E3 -2001-0214 C DDM 20813 126THAVE SE UTILITY WORK DAMAGED STUB OUR ORA 686F4 I ·:-2001-0311 R BSR 11705 SE 203RD BIO-SWALE RETRO FIT. CATEGORY C 686E4 2001-0360 FCC MMG 12025 SE 196TH ST OFFSITE FLOW ONTO PRIVATE PROPERT 6B6E3 * 2001-0360 NDA-MMG 12025 SE 196TH ST OFFSITE FLOW ONTO PRIVATE PROPERT 686E3 I 2001-0360 R MMG 12025 SE 196TH ST OFFSITE FLOW ONTO PRIVATE PROPERT 6B6E3 -2001-0377 C DDM 20418 123RD CT SE SINK HOLE DEVELOPING ON PROPERTY. 686E4 I rj01·0416 woe WQB 12232 SE 200TH ST CONCERN OF SOAP SUDS BEING DISCHA 686F3 01-0444 E MMA 20714 122ND PL SE 2 ISSUES MAINTENACE OF RD R/W: RE;FE 686E4 '--2001-0444 EH MMA 20714 122ND PL SE 2 ISSUES MAINTENACE OF RD RI\N: REFE 6B6E4 • -2001-0444 FCR MMA 20714 122ND PL SE 2 ISSUES MAINTENACE OF RO R/W: REFE 686E4 _., 2001-0444 R MMA 20714 122ND PL SE 2 ISSUES MAINTENACE OF RO R/\N; REFE 6B6E4 "'. 2001-0455 woe WOB 12313 SE 198TH ST APPARENT LACK OF POLLUTANT CONTR 686F3 1-2001-0455 WOR WQB 12313 SE 198TH ST APPARENT LACK OF POLLUTANT CONTR 686F3 .,. 2001-0632 FCC woo 12430 SE 208THST APPARENT DUMPING OF PAINT OR?? INT 686F4 -2001-0632 WQR woo 12430 SE 208TH ST APPARENT DUMPING OF PAINT OR?? INT 686F4 1-2001-0825 C DOM 20632 120THAVE SE SEVERAL ATTEMPTS AT CONTACTING CO 686E4 -2002-0179 woe WOI SE 208T & E OF 121STWAY SE REPORTED SEPTIC SMELL IN CATCH BAS 68654 • -2002-0267 FCR BSR 20530 122ND PL SE BIO-SWALE RETRO-FIT 686E4 -2002-0267 RET 8SR 20530 122ND PL SE BIO-SWALE RETRO-FIT 686E4 -2002-0403 C MMA 12235 SE 199TH ST REQUEST TO REMOVE TREES ON COUNT G86F3 1-2002-0411 FCR MNM 20522 122ND PL SE MAINTENANCE REPORTED DAMAGED PO 686E4 ~ 2002..0553 C OTA. 19013 114TH CT SE CONCERN REGARDING POSSIBLE SLOUG 686E2 .._ 2002-0560 FCR MNW 19250 117TH PL SE REQUEST TO REMOVE TANSY RAGWORT 686E3 I -2002-0604 woe woo #43114 & SE 211TH LN ALLEGED DUMPN(l OF PAINT INTO STOR 686E4 -2002,0604 WQR woo #43 114 & Se 211TH LN ALLEGED OUMPNG OF PAINT INTO STOR 686E4 I -2002-0810 C MMF 11818 SE 208TH ST REQUEST FOR INFORMATION REGAROIN B86E4 -, 2003-0181 WOA WQAI 11436 SE208TH ST 68GE4 I -c C J-02.30 C OCA 11455 SE 196TH ST APPARENT DIRT BERM CONSTRUCTION. 68BE3 I Page5of6 I FEB. 3.2004 12:07PM KC WLRD I ·. .. · n COIIQllllfnt Typo TYim of Prollfem U llmnll8I' COll9 . . "" 2003-0230 R DCA .,, 2003-084 7 C ODM I ,-2003-084 7 R DOM -2003-0947 WQA WQAI I I I I I lu I I I I I I I I 1, ) I AdtlrellB or Prllldem 11455 SE 196TH ST 19230 118TH AVE SE 19230 116TH AVE SE . 11517 · SE 208TH ST N0.306 Cummanta Tbros PIIQ8 APPARENT DIRT BERM CONSTRUCTION. 6561:3 APPARENT OBSTRUCTION OF OFFSITE C 6861:2 APPARENT OBSTRUCTION OF OFFSITE C 686E2 686E4 Page e of 6 I 'n I . I I I I I I IC~> I I I I I I I I r ) I FEB.12.2004 10:24AM KC WLRD N0.508 P.l/26 King County Water and Land Resources (WLR) Division 201 S Jackson St, Suite 600 SentUe, WA 98104-3855 FAX To: Fax: c.3tri1:!l.85-78 7t Phone: __ &~f/. ...... WJ--"-'-f_ RE: Level 1 Analysis Date: Number of pages including cover sheet: _f/ft_ From: · Candi McKay, Eng Tech JI \ WLR Stonnwnter Service.~ Section Phone: 206-296-1900 Fax Number: 206-296-0192 · To follow is a list of complaints received by the Water and Land Resources Division Drainage Services · Section. Complaint numbers beginning prior to 1990-XXXX have been archived and are no longer in· our possession; They can still be retrieved, if necessary, but will take additional time and may not be beneficial to your research due to their age, development which has occutred, etc. If you are interested · in reviewing the actual complaints, they can be pulled (time pernrltting) for your review. Copies can be obtained for$ .15 per page, and $2.00 per page for plans. Keys: Type grinvestlm,tign C Action Roque,t BCW Buslnes1'(orCloA11 Watc.r CCP ~n1e ro !nqui')' •cL Claim Bl! llnfotcemont on Hold SR Bofcrcemcnt Rovicw FCC.FCR.FCS Fooilil)> Complainb l'1 SWM P .. Inquiry Fil\ SWM Pee Roview Pill SWM Peo on Hold •LS Law1uit RR Pp;iU,y llni;ineerins Revlow NDA Neighbl>rhood I>,afoago Anisw,oe WQC w,rerQualil)> Complain! WQB W11<T Quality Bnfon:emen, WQJt W01tt Quality Bnsinoerlnti Review WQA Worer Quality Aladi< WQO Wa"" Qu.Uty -Other Sl.Sl,SN3 llngineerins Siudlo, nee or problmt DC" DDM Dl!S DLB OTA INQ WM MM!' /,0,IO ~ MNM MNW SWP WQB WQP WQI ltBM ORT NWD Dovdopment/Constroedon D~l\llgo • Miscellonoou, Drai!'lago -Brosiow'Sedimc:t1ta.tion Dnilno1• -undllldtllllnl, Mo•enlenl ProJnas:c Te,hnic:al AHilfM" Draina;• -0.Mnl Inquiry t-bfotenanoe .. Ac:1rhetlc1 MlllntenllllCO. Floodinc Mainten111cc • GoncraJ · Malntm1Mce . Mowini: MWltenMce -Needs MIUntenanc:c Maint,:nonoc,.Noxi0111 Wood1 SWM Foe QtiestiQPS Watff Qoallty -Bt$1 MM•1•m<nt Pl'ICtioes w ... , Quality -Dumping W 11..-Qualhy -Illicit Conn<etlon . · SWM: Feo -Romeaauromcnr SWM Poe-Grant SWM Fec,..t,lew Dil4::ount I ~B.12.2004 I . . 1~i~~~f"Q C~HWJ-~N DEPARTMENT OF~tJBLIC WOt:19:~28 SURFACE WAT~R fvlANAG~MENT DIVISION I I I I I I I {J . . COMPLAINT INVESTIGATION REPORT NATURE OF COMPLAINT: / LOCATION;, 1 c:1wPLAINT RECEIVED BY: i DETAILS 01' INVESTIGATION: · ·-·o;, site ·1~20·~96. ·· Sketch on reverse side: Yes i.l" No O Photos: Yes f3" ~No 0 OurmVty I I I I I The Webster property is relatively level. SE 196th St is a shoulder type roadway wi.th dit no storm drains. The culverts were open and free of any major drainage obstacles. To the east of 121st Ave SE, just prior to the slope of 196th increasing, the ditch appears to have sloughed in, and could be a restriction to run off. Spoke with Mrs Webster but she knew nothing of the problem. Photo l) Looks west on SE 196th. Webster house is in photo at left. 2) Loo~s east on 196th. Webster culverts are in right foreground. I I I , _ rr=:~/.'.°ev'!:,.,~~~ 10 :. ~~: ;·:~~,~!'~~':t'..-ro I . ~ .. v~c; ,,..,.,19(,-,,:/. W4..J'-•) '1b,-, '8..t: tow~~-/,)r.u,-..JA-c;. Ph,.,.,,,.,, y-c..J--v- ;9...,() ()L,J..,-,11,1'!,.,r j)~,,,v "T~t>.Jf'AI //, J P1;:"e,,I/, .: p.;r:Peab~ ........ -. . . .. . I ~~l_a'.~ant_~~vlse~ ~~-a~t~°.~. poss Ible or Letter a Personal contact D Complaint Action Handled By .,c.~;....,.,,,,.:;z.-L~~~----1c,~sed: 0 fl Iii Ro ,---~;,r. I· OK'd: llQ!l 1n1u.r.. I FEB.12.2004 10:25AM KC WLRD 'c·-)~iw:::;?"I~· ··...&1>· .............. _....._ ... -~__;;_.._. ...... ·----·--'---....... : .. . I ....... .. I I I ., . . . N0.508 P.3/26 ' Scar,No I t:..:6~:..:...:.........:__ __ .--.-~-~,--------=----=-=-=-=--::-:i .__.., ---~ -~ =--_ ~ "':.:. -~-=-:---""' I ~d 1 ~.c....,,, ~ ....... c. 12."r~c. I 1 I C-J r .... II I I I I I I I I j l I I 1· I I I I I I le:) I I I I I I I I I ' .. '\'•"" ~ ' ·~ .. -;..,,; MEMO TO: File FRC Ml: ~e, Jr. DATE; June 28, 1990 .SUBJECT: Spring Hill . Downstream Drainage Job No. 138-13-896 ---··------· . ·--·· Ye:;terday morning ~illiam Flni,belner and myself,. in respc;nse t? Change Order No. 5, walked the road side ditch c,long S.E. 196th Street and met with Mrs. Webster · who lives Fl\ the corner of SE 196th Street and 121stAvenue S.E. The Websters have lived at the cu:-'1er since 1943. We iniroducecl ourselves El$ the · developer and the engineo;. She ~~as concerned and so was her husband of what was going t,.; be done with the storm drainage from the development. She indicated that in the P .;,J 1960s King County plaG!::c.: ci culvert under 196th and reconstr\.lcted thi! druinag to drain towards the south cmto the Webster property. She said the County tole n,;rn that was tho natural way the drainage flows. Mrs. Wt:Jlls1-.; ··,teited tt1at in 1968 they (the WebstfiJr's) dug a ditch from 196th along their bac:-._·t-.;.,..Jrty line to~-1:.ird::i 121::;t. I asked her if there weria any storm drainage f,Jrobi6111s ·,, .: , t!·1e curre,v :J•,:r,. He1 ro$ponse was no, they were concerned with tlH:l µu,,.-,;,.. · ,1~ of bain 8 .. ,;-.... ,. ,.: : _;-., .. tt, . .;t the "big culvert'' was placed \~pre:,,,)~ ·, -., 200 feet wr,,;· ·: •rv-:t pr,·•pP.rty corner (the culvert she was referring.to ··,e ·· ·· r1,~w or-the··" --· ., ... !f"tu,·':' tor Spring Hill). :. "• , .. ~ ' . ' I, -';,· . '." • /,I 1 I,! • :.l :0\1 , ·1w .. ,.... J ?.·,·., ~: ;· neaVy rain ij she or h-::· neighbors were -;!-.. x! hor where her drainfielct ,ns :ocated with -,•;;c! tt1at ;, .,-,.;,,,...,the back •)ithe house in the -·-is '.i. dr,· of i,· ii1e drainfield with high ,:c,r·... , /1'3, ara111fisid. 8he responded no . . •·;-:·"·'·. .., •• ·, 'Jo talking with her 11usb.ind but he was at -...... rr '.! ,,_,_ 11i-r ii,,; c:1-trcl witt1 his home numlJer and ask that he ! :-,~f..:·d Mrs. i/':-;,1:;,,ter if :,l~e could then take us and show us on her property where · ihe ilooding problem was occurring. She said that they were eoneefned of a potential flooding frorn che new development and that there was no flooding of their propP.rty sinr.o they blJilt the ditch in 1968. · ;;11:do14 I I I I I I I I I Ii • ) I •• I I I I I I I ,, I FEB.12.2004. 10:26AM KC WLRD N0.508 P.5/26 A CIVIL ~NCINEERINC, lAND SURVEY, AND PROJECT MANAGEMENT CONSU~TINC Pl~M July 25, 1990 Ms. Lydia Reynolds · South King County Review Engineer· King County B.A.LD. 3600 136th Pl. SE, Suite A Bellevue. WA 98006 RE: Plat of Spring HIii King County B.A.L.O. #789-21 Revised Downstream Analysis Change Order #5 . Dear Lydia: • Job No. 138-13-896 Enclosed for your review is the additi9naJ downstream suNey information and Clllculation:. for the ditch along the north side of S.E. 196th Street and the Webster's property. As reques'Ced by King County, the Manning's number has been incraased from 0.035 to G .::JO for the check of the dil'ci', ;;Jong the Webster's property. The.flow during;~ I.~ year /24 hour $,orm ss•;em wnich crosses the culvert 1n S.E. 196th is 2.0 els. ; i· ,s combined with the basin ·x, the south side of 196th develops 4.7 cfs . cornrib0r,· •:.J to the Webster';, ditd1 In r.:Niew of the Webster's ditch sectiom:, the '·.:i:·i•~: .. " · ~;.J,ir,:ty of~ri.~''.iir,;n i•: ?.\l d,, beised on the revised Manning's number. ~·:· ,.;,.,,,.-. · · .:~ ditr:n ,Jl:~. ·,n :::•,, ·,:; ;:;c,_,,,,·· ,: cw:iperty can adequately :ur.dle me · ···-:~1, .... ·,·,1'J!"" I 2tl l"lr1, !•' ,·,, :,·r,., .... .:ir,t '.-.~--.. ' ., ,..... I If ,' r-.Y .;1 .......... (.,, i. •. · _ DARRELL L. OFFE Project Engineer Enclosure· ' .. ,,' 1( I// t; ',,./ ,'-··:·· .. )/ ., :·1··i·.in,<I ,,iformatinn. nlfl8S1" :,cal tree to cc: Mr. Ned Langford, Suboivision Manager Wllliarn FinkbP.iner · A..,a. .. ,,_ I:!,,, c .. i. .. •"""' I I I I I I I I I I() I I I I· I I I I \ ) I FEB.12.2004 10:26AM KC ~ILRD •· .,.~ ... ~ ........... . N0.508 ' . f\s. l.ydl.>J !t~yno).cl,, .. ~ . " .. (lOS) 464·Tl77 · 12011 ~·Red Road #200 Bellevue; \Na!Jhtngton 98Q05 July 25, 1990 South King County R~vie,,,. Engineer K{ng County ,.A.L.D. 3600 ~ 136th Place$. ~ •• Suite A Bellevue, Wash~ngton 98006 Re: Pl~t of S~cing ~ill ~hl\nso Qr ~r. 115 At approximaialy 6 P.B, on July 10,1990 D!rrell Ofte of E.S.M., David Liadle of Finkbeiner Development and myself had a meeting 1,1ith ·l-!r. and Mrii. Hebster ~t their home at. 120Z5 S. IL l9~th, Renton, Washington, 9805B, We discussed with them their c:o:nplair.•: to Kin; County Insp~ctor John O'Brien that Chey had floodint ;,r0b.lar.i'1. l'.r. 11nd Mi:s. Webster indtcaced th&t i:.he last floodino nrobl~~ they had was i11 1968 when King County consci-1,·· ·.,.:-;\ !l c•.:1•«:n: across S. E. l'loth which flo1.1ed onto their prop..:~·:··. ,,· .. :y .lta:1icated ;.!i..'lt they hod madP, variou!l at.cempte to get t,i1 :;.;,~t~.::y t~ r~dr,ciltt: theit' c~lvert, inc!u·~ling bloeking ,::,,, ,;,.. ,. ·: · .. , -s·,:~t. '!'li·>',t ,Htempts wece un11u~c,.;:d'ul and r,ow ~h~,. ·,,,: .:.;:, .. ;·.);,;:n::.,,: .• ;f :SJ:>1'1ng tlill was un\!,;•). -:c.nstruCCi(ln ~.~,.... :,:. '.'.'.w,, .... : '~!.~!·: (! )')•:ing t!)itl:r occur in c.r·,.t: future~ .At ·, · · .'. ... :·:: ;.··:: ,.: •:·.1.1 ., r ,ha cl.i.ini.og -:,ut ·:,!'. t\ii,i draiuage · • , ..... -~ .. · ·,,·c,~~rty c.o pr~,,~11; die po~e!ltial · ... , : •. :::: ., ... ~;l: conct:::nc:d ~b1,.,•ut:.. Ihe Websters ·" ""' .,, ,. 1:,·; (>.ffcr <1nrl wo~l<l l,,~ nie know if ,.1· .. i. :,,.,,::(· C(1 llnt'y :ivuld ltkc me u, , ,,.,. ,;:.;,·~ ~:, ;,en· ,,f rriy ;:1atl.s!y;.ng .. • . : , "l .,J : :·.:..: y,:,u Wttnt,-d a fact.or of :,."ff. <·"':'l~~J ·.c:i!quir:em('.nt :ind if the : :-. d,• :r.e dr·aio"g" :..ot·k th.:n you :-:::\) i:-:i rir'.',?\'~1nt later complaints if t' · :.,:,.,; :p.:eric ty, r called ~he Webs~ers at .,v-.. ·,:.·, .. ; · :,,"· ;·, M. m· .'i;l/ z:,, 1990 mid I ""kcd H:., Webster if :·,,. h:1·:: ·,r.tp.( :lb,,\JL m:; l)Lfti: to clean his ditch.· lie said he, ""·" .:.,.;:j·jc,.i ;-,z~inst allowing any vork on his property·. He s,«(l hE< would lika! co sell his property to me for S225,000.00, He wo<Jld be rt•r.in.ng in approidmetely two years and he ,;,ianted 1.be u;,l~ c,, clooe at that ti~e. I told Mr. Webster that. l ~as I Ir I I I I I I I I ' ' ,. \). ' Reynolqs 'July Z'i, 1990 •. probably noc intereB~ed at th~t p~ice buL that I vould b~ happy to t<1lk w1th him som,, more ·;t;n the future, /H this point I a eked Mr. i,ebater if he would provide me vith a ·1etter stating thtH he would not ,ill.ow me to enter his property to clean the d:ttch, Mr. Ytb~t.r indicated that he would not provide me With.such a· le t~e r. 'ie · explained that he felt . King County was wrong in dumpi,18 the c:u1vert on hiJi property f.r:olil the noin:ll side of S, E, 196th. He ixplair1ed he wanted King County to r~move the culvert to keep the .later or1 the north B.ide o! s. E, 196th or a11 an alterna.t~ve. co reerade the ditch on the south side of S, IL 196,h ant;\ l:n1(!r t:he C\llvert tn 121st Avenua s. E:, at S, E. 196th. Mr. Nebstor fn~ls ih1a will Allow the water co stay in the roadui<l• ctttch and, con1equently, not ·r1ow onto his ptOpt0t'ty. Jn summ.:y, Mr. Webster vill noc e\lov me to enter hi• property r.o :1<:'/Jll th2. dr11inege ditch and he vill not f(ive II le~tec ;,r,,,,.ir,e ,b.is rucl', He went.!' X:!.ng County 1.0 solve e p1·oblem he ,,:,:t·,~ain,; ~h«'' ,:..-e<"':.i;d 1n 1968. lo/hut 11011? I' ('~) \._.,.., I I I I I I I I\ I ) I I ~FEB.12.2004 10:27AM KC WLRD · 'N0.508 KING COUNTY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT DIVISION DRAINAGE INVESTIGATION REPORT P.8/26,___ (---) I . Page 1: INVgSTIGATION REQUEST 'fype _f!.. Received by: l::JfO Date: . z/ g/ CJ~ OK'd by:· File No:. q {p ~ ZLf: I I I I. I I --.. ------·------·-·· .. ·--------.-............................. _. ____ ....................... ---·--···-·-... .. -. -. - Received from: (Pleaoe pri"I plainly tor =nnino). (D>y) (Eve) NAMic:. __ .!,;M~· Mc1~ 1 ..!::e~~6~~~+...!.Wl.!..:.l:.O,.ki::.:....:..._...,..-___ PHONE g52 ~ 244 r -- ; q {p 3 / . ( 2/ S7 /:h/£ S'£c1ty. (2~A.} State,,___ ADDRESS: Zip__:_ .Location of problem. ff different: / q (,p -1h 4-, ---······---.-..---------·-··-·······-·-----·········-··----········-·····-···------·····--··---··········· .. ·---- Reported Problem: · Oti"l-ar a;;encles i:wot·.19d: /~ ~~qe.,, /YJea~,UJ-··es 6-,u_;'II ~ Pu -lo ·3/ock No: Sasin S'QO Council Disil Charge No: -------------·-··--·=.:.:.====== -·-------·-----r-- ·• · RESPONSE: Ct.ii:.en notified on 2.. \G:,. '7t, by v"' phone _ Isner _. in person . · . . G>.lso..&. ~~ ~;t--""'6..-. ~ ,\ .llA h_, \ I ~-X \h.., Q,li_ '(l\ '1'"-'""'-~ ~ 0 ES I ~ct T (h~ ~ V '{'(\. Gi-~IL <. 2.1...i.<,6') ' . . . I DISPOSITION: Turned to ori by O?.: No fucther action recommended be Sr"...V...-fo.J,Ll.f'.o,-w.D -,;<" Lead egency has been no:l!1ed:. P,?e;;s U,v? v,S'e=, ~<?'<'=::S _ ,:(4A-'O .c/?.fr _/,,_,.!>r: 1 1, ,L Problem has been corrected, _ No problern hes b,en icientified. l"nor mve511g211on acoresses pre . -, ~e Fil~·i . Privare problem -NOA? will not oonsider oecer.,$e: ----- -_ Water o;lgina,es onsile and/or on neighboring parcel . I · Location Is outside SWM Ser,,ice Area. . . Oiher (Specify): DATE CLOSED: -i> / /~)?tt" bv: ~ Pa-.~' ",,-,_',_,_ / , ,c ,, , r-iO I I I I I I I I I f . " ; I c::) I· I ' I I I I I I I l ' . 1: ,,. ) -FEB.12.2004 10:28AM KC WLRD N0.508 .\ !, !/' , . ' . ,.' --,.-.. ··, \ _-· /nt1. · !MIIE~O _ ,,., :··' ,., ) . · /ii· . : Plant and Facilities't . __ . . / : --_,}·, :-. __ : -~ ,.-- acJ..==!:s~"~ 11i'c;-;;:::;tpa ... c:1e ~ s:l'D'GI ... •=·;"'~" ••1=t ;,o 11111' cai::;att~/. ~;;;; i=;-;==== ~a• aa tro=r:::rac:n:,~~ .'.:) ~.~:~ ·~ ; J, Oate: February 21. 1996 To: · Clint Marsh i Frorn: Di.ine Pistoll " ' Re: Voic:1i Mail from Larry Get1le • 2/21196 !, .• "Good morning -Clint, this Is Larry GetUe, King Oovn1y Surface Water Marlegement, " sorry ii took rne so long to get back lo your call yestorday. t Just got off the phone .l.vl1'1 Steve Townsend, Delight Morris's supervisor, discussed with Him the concerns reoar(ling the downstream property owners and then your message to me related to the. off. sire flow and the downslroam t&Sttiction11 and the enllru problem cul there. · · It's slill my', opinion; and Stevo's opinion also, that· tlu;1 problems out there were pre-_ existing. They wern addre$S8d as· a pan or lhe TIR, hopefully they were, anyway, aS'"part of the devillopmen1 or the site. The Issues should be resolved in the pormil process, II them is a problem with the TIA required plan change or whalevor, then either you, your enolneer, or whoever, should be involved with DDE$, h's not thal I'm not lnlerested it's a memo of understanding tnat we operate 1.mder where problems lie and the · . _ ...._ __ responsibility, this Is obviously a development related issue and belongs In DDES's , court. My only recornmendallon would be lo gel a hold of Delight and or Steve Towns.end, \ hav& your meeting with them regarding tho draina11e out there, and ii Steve feels.,.that · ' Surface Water Management should be involved in this thing tll8n I'm sure Steve .will give ,i,: i:all. Anyway, you can c:ill mr> al 2%-83?5 tn rli~cuss ltie situation further if you'd lik,;,. Thank you·. <" Glen .l\n<:1Nr.nn I tlf ry Br t,1111t:1 [1-.,L> o, y,l/1 I 11rry r.n111~ nP.light !vi,,,,;,, T(~fll 01~AJ1\(,(f A r.-1 ion Ill.Im· Bob, Please schedule, or h;ive Tom Se;,1non schedule, a meeting with Delighl Mo,rls ~"d T&try Rnmn<>r :ii the site. · .. . ·~~ ... , .. I . ,' I • I I I IC) I II I I I I I I I I ) FEB.12.2004 10:28AM February 15, 1996 Dear Neighbors: KC WLRD N0.508 I am in receipt of the Febrµary 9, 1996, letter, to Gary Reinke of King County Surface Water Management. · · P.10/26 The Keni Scho-~I Distri~t.~nderstands 'and.shares the concern reg;rding the large'vo)ume. of surface water in the area of your homes near the Elementary #28. construction ~lte. We appreciate the positive method In ·which you brought your concerns to our attenllon. The Kent .School District arid Elementary #281s architect, along with King County Department of Development and Environ mental Services, King County Roads, King County Public Works, and King County Surface Waler Management 1Nill be meeting within the next two weeks to cooperatively determine a solution to menage the large volume of water In the area correctly. You will be notified as soon as a solution has been achieved. If you have any further questions please· call me at e·13. 7277. Thank y,ou very much. Sincerely, }IJ/ ~ Glen Anderson, Director · Plant & Facilities c: Terry Brunner Bob Bryan George Cattey Marie Eastman Dr. Hager Clint Marsh Robert May Richard Osborn John Overby Kent Pullen Gary Reinke Al Swanson GHNdp ....... I I I 1. I I I· I I: 1·0 I I I ,, I' I I 1' ) I FEB.12.2004 10:29AM KC WI.RD . :.;410, tJ .. . ' February 9, 1996 . ; N0.508 P.11/26 . ·.~ To: Gary Reinke -King County surface Waste Management cc: Dr. Hager -Superintendent-Kent School District ( B"'5 z.-qs-s0) Kent Pullen -King County Council We the undersigned are alanned at the amount of water that is now coming on to our property. We all know the term" you can't change the natural flow of water" but there was never this problem before the Spring Hill home development and especially since the new elementary school was started. Our suggestion is that a stonn water system run off pipe must be installed all the way down to I 24th S.E. to take care of this situation. What are you going to do about this? G. Cattey . -:;, 6 nda.J ~~~(..{...- ,, ~~~µ.... I q {.,;"2,.., -;;;_ I -r Jl! 'B,.,d.,.->y, c...:Jc:i, q &(,~ M. Eastman · !?fa~; tr.' Z:aZn'7,..J / 96 ..3/ /.x/ «1"' .s .e ~ -t6~ .v...., PJ'Af a Overby ~#~~r ~01~ l9'v:J?. ;~, s/e- -t'Z tr r / ,-_, , IV ,,r!> J. '? r;,ir' to/5H.r 1-· tflA/J /1) 1€ . ' - .. I I r"' I\ ) I I, I I I I I(~) --~/ I I I I I I I I ·11 -rEB.12.2004 10:30AM KC WLRD· MO. 508 P. 12/26 --KING COUNTY SURFACE \"/ATER MANAGEMENT DIVISION DRAINAGE INVESTIGATION REPORT . Page 1: INVESTIGATION REQUEST T~·pe _i 'Aeceivedby:AEO . . Date: .. 2.../gjq&, OK'dby:',.A,J. FileNo'.q1-.:.z1 --------------------------··--·-··--· · .................. ,---········-····--·-······-----·········Yt~---------·····--·'k'. ..•... Received from: (Please print plainly !or oc.,nninc). (Day) (Ee NAME:~..:..~-"C..!../.~0d:J:..:...C,,:,.cl_...J..f;.;;.;.;;c1;..;..::...c:J.:...:(-f:==-.----,-~~~-PHONE~S,:...:::;5.:=:;2.....:..·/...:..;7&,(~;,~· ~ ADDRESS:_~1_q~5,__2_1J:J~. ~._12_2._n_ol__.p_L=--'-S_E....;.._ City. R.w-lv~ State ' Zip 9 · Location of problem, ff different: Reported Problem: rJ e,uJ 6/-e..w. ~vL1 ~c/r..c.rD L 1/.q' /lv1 ; I< IS G-re~ 0 V\d' .. ~°116 WhAch.. l~ c~/n.J _Neow-t.{.i.g. h.O""U5e-rn CJv--e1,-(::-{uW., l-hs r,J.e..tJhbcr be-h;i hi it0 4,-o -t'h-e. ~%.+ ·, . h1A.--c;. W ~ w~ h 1' v1 J Ov--€.-v- VV\ 5 'D/'!0, ~ w~ l,-~:1V'l.5 'c.JiA1{----t-iAe (NV2..0. • . me. <;c./A, ~~~ ~l)~J~~~ ~~j'- t/u 5 Afs N.? Lo No 1 :,1m\·:JrJL Othe~ ag~ncles i;i\~olved: · No ?i~ld lr,\·esiigst;on Na~C~d __ aasin 5DO Council Dist '1 c:,;;.rge No: ·--·-···-·--_ -_-_______ .:.::_::..:_..:...======-------~··--··-- RESPONSE: C~izen noti11ed on :;:s-'r,-jw by y_ phone _ Isner _. in person 5Poo<.ii'· v-J17'rl R..oo..AoJO ANC> 11'0POt!.K~Q J.l1/VI -r-HA-r' DC~.$ I':> WORl<..l"-Ju, 11\J '-C>N~Uf.)C.,T \t\ll'i"'H !.~HOc>t.. Di~T"l<IC I TO Ru:!.oL.VE r.l..Uf\J oFrr PR..()at-l!'M l=/i'.QM -<l'·'~1NC>Hl(...L. Et...e . GAV~ H 1"'1 PHO Ne' I\)() l"'1 r.r&/t/5, i:'OR.. Os,._, '7'€ Mc,(I. R..1 ~ (CIPIEJ!i) Ar.JD 7"'0NY '-cD rrer:re I~ oe:-ROA~ MA1r,;..,-5',V~l\)l!.., ~cJ~ 3/e,/<10 0/SPOS/TION: Turned lo on b)' ------------O?.: No flmher ",Ction recommended ) Leed eg&ncy has been n'otified: --,.,.--.....,-.--,.-----=-...,....-----=-,-....,....-.,.-.,.---,-,-'---= ?roblem hes beel'\ correcled, · No problem hes b!en identiiied. Prior investiQation addresses -See File*----- Private problem • NDAP w//1 not consir;Jer because: -_ water originates onsrte and/or on neighboring parcel Location is outside SWM Service Area. Other (Specify): DATE CLOSED: _3 // .. ? t ?'.t' by:~ c-~=.-Q/' ,... ..., .4,.,,. I I ,.,() I I I, ,. I I I I c ·~) ~ I I •• I I I I I , FEB.12.2004 10:30AM KC WLRD N0.508 p, 13/26 '-----·---"'------------------- l)llfe; M11rch 7, 1996 :bate of Iuvestigation: March 6, 1996 ll'M: Doughts Wlllters RE: l!!valuation for Complnint # 96-0245 Roland Riddle 19526 122nd PL SE Renton, WA 98058 (206) 8S2-1766 Mr. Riddle is coll=ed that runoff from a new elementary school approximately 1/4 niile away is creating runoff which is <:auslng II ditcll in front of his home to overflow. The elemel\lary school is cummly under coDBtJUction and is located wen of Mr. Riddle at approllimately 119th Ave Sli ilw1 SE 196th ST. Water leaving the trite at the present time is minimal and will be better controlled in the tiltute once the l!etentlon system is in and operational (see photos land 2), The real problem appears to be the ouiverts in front of Mr. Riildle's home IIDI! the aqjacent properties ate partially bwie<I by debris IIDd vegetation which has greatly~ their capacity to handle design flows and volumes (see photos 3,4, and 5). Maintenance of the dJtch culvens will probably resolve the problem of the ditch ovedlowing. SJ>R.I N(:, HILL. £:. Le M EE/\IT'A ~ y S'-HOOl. !, 1-rta -··-- I I I I FEB 12 2004 10:31An. KC WLRD N0.508 P.14/26 -==·""· . NNG (.;UUN I Y SORF)i(CE; WATER MANAGEMENT DIVl::;IUN ...., DRAINAGE INVESTIGATION REPORT Page 1: INVESTIGATION'REOUEST . Type C,. Received by: L Grr?€ Date: .s;A-t,/9'.(0K'd by: 14+/ FReNo. 96-~80 Recelved from: (Please print plalnly tor =nnlng), (Day) (l!v•) NAME: &/It. ;e Y ,Bdn11trt2u rH~NEdf6-:IZI( __ ADDRESS; bpc S ~d{/b-;e C 1&t. />&(ll( City State Zip_ Location of problem. If different:. Reported Problem: <;:'/,-<!'/.JC-f/1~c.. ~/;/-<,,:;{., .. Wl-.47. C,~ l"""(k--})~ /,r./,1 c.,-· ~ ") . If.,,./ r~ x/, IC) I //[40 Lot No: 8 BlockNo: .z. I I I I I I I 1• Other agencies Involved: No Field Investigation Needed __ _ . o~~ -~-~~~] · $1<.) 33 n S" Paroef No. t 19 8L/O C>'31.f I Kroll 60SW Th.Bros: New ts~ E~ 1/4 S T A 01(1 <1211s;' 8~,<. Basln?t)O. Council Dist 'f Charge No: -===--....:........:..:...___:_-=======---- RESPONSE: Cttizen notified o-;;-r.:?,-:yc;·by _ phone _J5. _letter _. _ in person ->e-c 11-, c,,tc.~ ~rc3f2-. DISPOSfflON: Turned to on by -----------OR: No further action recommended bee _ Lead agency has been notified:· Problem has been corrected. -_-""'No-pr-o,...,bl-em--=-ha-s--=b-e-e11_1,...,de-n--=tH1,,...e""'d-. -----=-pr.,..lo-r .,.-ln-ve-st"'"lg-at,rlo_n_a....,dd..,..re_s_se.,...s_p_ro·t ,---~~# -·_Private problem -NDAP will not consider because: ----- -Water originates onslte and/or on neighboring parcel _ Location Is outslds SWM j;?·ervlce Ar . · DATE CLOSED: _±_;-2.1 K by; . . _ Other (Specify): I I I • lcJ I I I I I I I I II FEB.12.2004 10:31AM KC WLRD N0.508 NOISl/\10 .LN311'l3~VNVll'l l::13.L'v'M 30V::ll::ln8 AI.NIIU:J 1:JNPI rl I ., .......... complaint 96~0805 Wilsey Hamilton Investigated. by Jacquie Little 03/29/96 f' C f,,<1,1 f ·'c.·-1,; :1 •' ,,.·, 1«r~. f ,.,/ we ' .R. .. .. , '1- , :a. .. ,,, . o;'+c.l, fl 1118251 .' f:' . / ,.. W'··.,. 120TH AVE I !SPRING ...... ,. ® '('-..-~ I); +d, I ·!) HILL ELEMENTARt! I .:•,;l -~ ~J C ~ 1, :.-... L , .. r, '( ' I'! :·r ,/, I,· : ' f'\l "·' IA.,'•' }• •/. 12 ,; c:: l''r'/ p ·-.~ ,f t.R t:: " Nf' ·fr, r -:,,-,. r ,-./,.<,) <.',-:·,:,· . /' <' ,/ ,. I ' .SE 192ND ST -1/. :.: . ' i ,., ,, I ,I S-rnc,.-'/ d ra: ro v.ndc( /11?.rv::I "'J' -!he, 18' f>;f"r:. ,ct11'•.fl'f fA."·J.Vi ,+J,,.,-. t '2 II F~ ·t·,,. ,:..,,, ~ 1:.>r ; ~ ........ ,.,y \,. 1/ t;., "' / .,. C: .8 C.13 lcc.;,l,0 ,;I _,,, ~/ ,:; , ,t ,. ,, ./r, .',' ·/~ ·/· iv_. a f..C.f' <;,,; Rd ;.ii .;,. i:c( J t'· i' ve: µ) 1 ;I o,,dle+ 10,..-,.+i(')n ,f·r,:,,,,, f,/c,,-Jh'!',·.-it f ,_ .. ; ,,-./ r.:,.. lf'e ,"T' .... ,_ ·,: .. I I I 'if. 11:J.:) l ;.J ~ ''{:1 ,,, ,.-,.,-- p··,'. .,;,u\·· .r7,,,, t.;.'0 L' '] Flows ,,. 11 i , . r ~ ~·"-.·:/-1-r ~,.1.rY> +-l-,c,.+-:...~,:.;,"l' ~··1 .. , .;~, :, down o·,i+o -U,e ,,;e,ho.::,IS pt,;,f:) •. rr-/.v. p,4 c..-h I i f\C · ., I ''-· ...-,::,,.,t+h 1~rr1-•e.1··I·/ ,:;,,. (.,1. .:J .~. (;) "!J .,.~ :;;,. i.,v~ -e-r .f'1,,;,,.; s '1'Q -U· r.P. we s + . I I ri 1- I I I I I I I c) I I I I I I I I ) I FEB.12.2004 10:32AM KC WLRD TO: · FROM: DATE: KING COUNTY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT INTERNAL MEMORANDUM Wilsey Haud;Lton __AJ~ Larry Gettle -p---v April 6, 1996 N0.508 P.16/26 SUBJECT: Hamilton -96-0805 South 192nd Street Drainage -Spring Hill Elementary Per·your request I have investigated the constructed drainage system along southeast 192nd Street west of 120th Avenue Southeast, reviewed the drainage plans and field notes for southeast 192nd street and reviewed the drainage improvement completed in 1.992 and have the following information. The. plan/profile for southeast 192nd street (90-43) shows a 18- ino_h dia, cross-culvert at Sta. 36+15. A flow direction arrow, on the plan indicates the flow is from south to north, The plan also shows the construction of a "special ditch and a dike to ~e constructed along the south side of the road, It appears this ditoh and dike were con~tructed to insure flow was directed into the cross-culvert. A review of the field survey notes (copy enc:losed) do not show a cross culvert. A ch.eek of the elevations of the driveway culverts and side pipe(?) shows the elevations to be higher on the north side of the road, I also reviewed the 1992 drainage improvement completed by Roads Maintenance as part of a school path project, The plans do not show the cross culvert. Improvement Plans Sta. 3+30 = SE 192nd sta. 36+15, All flow to the north side of SB 192nd is conveyed easterly to 120th Ave SE. It is interesting that the basin map shows the flow from this project going south, just west of 120th Ave SE, The problem was discussed in the Road coordination meeting on April 2nd. Racheal Gutierrez, Roads Drainage Design will investigate further but I don•t think much will come of it. The only concern voiced during the discussion, regarding abandoning the cross-culvert was the history of road shoulder and ditch erosion east of 120th Aves~. No information was provided why the asbuilt does not match existing conditions. I bad Jacquie Little complete a more '·thr.£WJh site investigation at the cross culvert. She walked the area between SE 192nd and the school site. A well defined channel was identified that appears to have historically conveyed flows to the south onto the school site. The channel ends where the school graded along the north property line. I I \ I I I I I I D It~~) I I I I I I I I I FEB.12.2004 10:32AM KC WLRD .April 6, 1996 Wilsey Hamilton Page 2 N0.508 P.17/26 we did not check invert elevations in the type II catch basin where the oross culvert is located but it appears from visual observation the cross culvert is lower than the pipe outlet to the east. Also because of the entrance pipe from the north it would seem the flow would go south before any would flow east. · JUst because its more of· a straight shot to the south. I'~ not sure how much this helps you with your project, It appears from existing conditions some quantity of flow does historically flow south to the sobool site. If a split in the flows is appropriate that would probably IIUltc:h e~isting conditions. tf the school wants to eliminate all flow to the south they will need to address.Roads concern of potential erosion problem east of 120th SE, · If you need further information or X can be of some other assistance please give me a call on 6-8326, 1- I . n I I I I I FEB.12.2004 10!33AM -VKC WLR()A..ul!; JI.!'( V ~;"!I llbA r1u~ .KE.t'UKT N0.508 P.19/26 . 1;,:,-1-, PROBLEM: +:l,pt0t:r R.BCBJVEO BY: Mei •• -page I: INYESTI0ATIONR£~UEST . Type ~ Received from: l)c11tk, /.k.S5c-((}.tlu~) . NAME: M(L.V j-t, EC\S~IU\ Cl'vlo+tie.-r) ADDRESS: I C\\.£'~1 · I Z-1 sr \l\yt 8f, Location of problem, if different: r. ' Date:-%..J ,-., -· . OK'd by: f: 1'-: /,.i-· FILE No. Mo~ (BYe) (2-'? ; 5 5'2--7 .. A4 8' r,· . ' } I .'l.Y.·.~.'),'i.' ~ I I . " . .r .. 4' .. I Cf:;--.. /,Q(), t 1 9.1,,-21::3 I cJ,-~ · · Plat name: £pr,~ Lot No: / 8 Block No: I I I I I I Other agencies involved: D<· i)c;o I\ ....-1 - No field investigation required. __ (lni1Jals) :: To BE.COMPLETED JIY°COMPLAINT PROGRAM STAJlli'·('·.:•·H,;;.;-· ·~·,.,,:·~I.\;;~,_.;,;;,:.:,_.' ·· • ' , , , • • • ,. , a ,, , i ' r', •: -~,~~ _.' •r .,M'I ..... ', .... ,;,,.,, ',,:,.,, ' 4 ?-.5 ~:.;...---.-oi10 \l.i S T R Parce!No.~32(ef)Ol8'0 0\ ':f O Kroll <Pf D \IV Th.Bros: New (p ~l., 6,f ~ Old +i~i£3tp Basin ~D Council District ...:L_ Charge No . ... -. .. ._._., .. ,,,, .. ,~-•,--.. ------·MMm .............. , .. ,_01110 ' , ..... -............ ,_., _ _., .......... , .................... _, __ ,_, ___ -__ -.,.-... -.,_-_-__ -_-__ -_-___ -_-_-_-__ REsPONSE: Ci.tizen notified on· 12--11,-';, by: ...!5...._ phone _. _ letter _. _ in person l,-;?..-C1rl"Z1;',H A'n ....... {';~f''4-r ,8,9,v(.. $~#7" ,!),,o/ ~ ~W~7'/>''f;y' ~,r. .1..wr-Ftl!-'-Vh Rtv1FtV. A.,,,...,r ().,::-C1~r1lt' r (!,L ,.r,<,;/1/ ci,,11 ,,,,,5 P z~ 6 -e,et, · s1 1 ~ 1Y. J1-,1 cwJrc..,.,,,. (o-P 7-<':L 7 6''1J DISPOSITION: Turned tog_ on I J I/ 51 I fJ by $oR: No further action recommended because: ~ Lead agency has been notified: __________________ ......,. ___ _ I _ Problem has been corrected. _ No problem has been identified. __ Prior investigation addiesses problem: SE£ FIL£ # -,---- ( )-Private·problem • NDAP will riot consider because: · I · -. . Water originates onsite and/or on neighboring parcel. __ .Location is outside WI.RD Service Area. __ O.ther (Specify): . DATE CLOSED: > I J / 1 9 't By: ,.g;::::.. . I I I I I I I I I I 10 I I I I I I I I rJ I FEB.12.2004 10:33AM KC WLRD N0.508 P.18/25 ..,.;,...,...--'--,,,---,---------· ._,?!se.E=-.J{i:z.47.1<.< "-<b=T...;4~WJII., -10u'l2LP1'-o!tA,Vl!!ir,a;: ""''--'€>:i!Jll:e:.,:......JJ(N!Y,/v:.~u) ___ J Project ,4.• 111 Comp A:L · z::=) Chk _____ _nov ______ 1 Oats .;-/~}..q__t/ Date ______ Data-----Page _ _,_1 __ ,ol 1 Publlc Worko BASINS CALCULATION AREA AREA= (eERIMETER READING)*(SCALE)**2/43560 ( INCH**2)*(FEET/INCH)**2/(FEET'2/ARCES) Area I : c:t'~<?.Wseotion) Area 1 = ( 0.604 )*(1000)**2 / (43560) = 13.87 arces Since total area is less than 25 arces therefore rational method is used. 1. Flow Path Segments For Tc Ll = 700 feet (short grass pasture and lawn) Ks= 7.0 L2 = 900 feet (short grass pastur~ and. lawn) Ks= 7.0 2. slope Sl = (520 -500 )/( 700 ) = 2.86E~2 S2 • (500 -491 )/( 900) = 0.01 3. Velocity Equation = 2.86% = 1. 0% v = Kr (S )*.5 = Feet per second Where Ks= 7.0 (short grass pasture and lawn) Vl = 7.0*( 2.86E-2 )**.5 = l.18 fps V2 = 7.0*( 0.010 )**.5 • 0.70 fps 4. Time Travel Tl= L2/(60*Vl) = ( 700 )/(60 * 1.18 ) = 9.8~ minutes T2 = L2/(60*V2) = ( 900 )/(60 * 0.70 ) = 21.43 minutes To= Tl+ T2 = 9.86 + 21.43 = 31.29 minutes S. curve Number There are approximate 18 houses. Therefore land cover density is 18 DU/13.87 arces = 1.30 DU/GA Therefore C = 0.342 6. Rainfall factor For 25 years 24 hours precipitation P ~ 3.3 a = 2.66 b = 0.65 Ir= Pr* ar *(Tc)"(-br) I = 3.3 * 2.66 * (31.29)'(-0.65) I = 0.963 flow (cts) = CIA 7. Peak Q Q = (0.342)*(0.963)*(13.87) = 1R'( 1/Z.11 AO<!-. -5Jtf1;: =-[ .4-,//-)Y?,~.~]1 = /. 3i% 111:t I/_ -, -, , 111,1_ I ....,J 1/: ... /' ... 4.44 cfs ( -I "" P&ge1 I I I I I I I m I I(--) _.., I I I I I I I I f ) I FEB.12.2004 10:34AM KC WLRD Department o_f Natural Reao1.1rces · 1 Water and Land Reao1.1rco Division N0.508 · · -FII:ll'NU. -:, , 0 T oav . NAME MARIE EASTMAN ADDRESS ,ees,· • 121ST .AVE SE P.20/26 RAINAGE INVESTIGATION REPORT FIELD INVESTIGATION PHONE 1253) 939,9448 TB PAGB AftG•fS KROLL PAGE 6jOW DATE 12-08•97 MAINT. DIVISION _3_ . lNITIALS _ MAM DETAILS OF INVESTIGATION: ~ ,m~ VISIT ON U.04-97, PROPERTY FLOOD& eveRYTIMe IT RAINS. WATeR GOES UNDER HOUI! CAU81NQ HEAT li.n bUCT8 TO BECOME Fl.OObED AND H!ATER SHUT OFF TILL WATER IS PUMPED OUT. U'\'I INVESTIGATION FOUNP WATBR II. PROM TWO SOURCES. ONE APPURG TO Pe FROM GROUND W .. TER ENTeRING UNDER THB HOUGB, THE OTHeR $0URC! APPeARB TO Pf PROM A COMPINATION OF THE RID SYSTEM AT SPRING HILL D01715 AND TH! NEW COMMBRCIAL R/D SYSTEM AT &PRING HILL !LBM!NTARV S.CHOOL. POTH SYSTEMS EMPTY INTO THS PROPERTY NOFl'rk OP 19601 , 121ST AVE 9&. MOST OF THI WATeR SHEET FLOWS ACR088 THE PROPBRTY TO A DITCH WHICH EMP'IY'II INTO A DITCH ON THE W&sr IIDe OF 1211T AVe SE,·THEAE APPeARG TO HAVE QEEN AN IXl8TING DITCH CN l!ASYMAN'I PAOP!RTY WHICH HAS BUN FILLeD. THIG DITCH CONVeY FLOW& rROM SPRING HILL TO T~i WHT AND MAY 8& A DIV!RSION. TH! DITCH TO TH! NORTH HAS NOT BEEN MAINTAINED AND MAY NEeO TO BE CL&AN1!D TO HANDIS.L FLOWS PROM &PRINO Hill .ANO SPRINC. HILL BLl!MENTAJ:IY. PHOTOS TAKUN D I LOOKING EAST ON U UGTH .8T AT NORTH SIDE OF DITCH AT 1 •oTH AVE se. # 2 LOOKINQ AT 18' OUTLET ON GOUTH 81De OF BE 1'8TH ST. DRAININQ SOUTH. ii o DRAINAGE CHANNBL ON. NORTH SIDE OF EASTMAN'& PROPERTY. # 4 CATCH bASIN AND INLBT OF FILUD CHANNEL ON NORTH SID! OF EASTMAN'S PROPERTY. ti $ SIGNS OP GROUl'ID WATER/SHEET FLOW FROM eA&TMAN'& PROPERTY. PUMPING CRAWLSPACE, OPAIN~ HIU. El-t;MENT.t.RY R/0 P,\CJl,ITY SKETCH: AOADSIDi DliCH SE 196TH ST 01+---------1~ --STANDING WATER IN DITCH ORtNQ HU.I. AID Dtn1• I I I I I I I it I I \ ..... ~ D I \1 ,: : ' ... ---. y~~::1::,: / ~ tOL.0 ,~N CHANNI!'~'---~ I FILLED IN / BY US "f:, ORQVN!i> WAT!R SPRINGS MOlJSt; 110:n fa 9 T ,... C\I ... SE 197TH PL OSHORN l'ROPERIT ?1------1<1 ----I> I •• I( I 1. . " I I I I I/-l ) -~, I I I I I I I I I ) ll'ROM• Glenn lilvans Larry Gettle DATE, December 19, 1997 SUBJECT: Eastman, Marie 97-l550 19631 121st Avenue Southeast This drainage p~oblem has prior review and investigation by Ga:i;y R, . .-.ll'he properties downstream from the new Spring Hill Elementary ~chool are experiencing continued flooding problems. The previous complaints, -during const~ction of the school, were referred to DDES, It appears DDSS has si~ed off on the ~evelopment so the problem is know ours. The downstream conveyance system, through private properties appears to be inadequate. Some filling of t:he e:icisting channel has occurred which results in flow bypassing the channel lllld impacting the Eastman's. The investigation also revealed some groundwater impacts to the property. I I I I I I I I I IC) I I I I I I I I ) ii FEB.12.2004 10:34AM KC WLRD " . Date 0 rx11.,esdcation; January 6, 1998 m: Gary-Paul Reinke RE: ND.AP Evaluation for Complaint# 97-1550 Marie Eastman 19631 121 11 Avenue SE Renton, WA. 98058 Day P 253,939.•9448 Eve P 253-852-2448 Background N0.508 P.22/26 Ms. Eastman has had flooding problems over the last several years. She hns lived in her home since I 964. Woter has gathered under her house and has required Ms. Eastman to turn her furnoce off and rely on space beaten; to keep the hot1.1e warm. It has added an additional financial bunlen on her fixed income, Most of her flooding problems has come as a result of a new developmcnt (Spring Hill) and the new buildings at the Kent Middle School north of 196.,., Findings Brian Sleight and myself met with Ms. Eastman at the site in the morning. It was raining at the time of the visit. Water was actually flowing across the front and back yards of the lot. I! wos about 3·5 inches deep in most places. One cannot walk anywhere in the yard without boots on. We also looked at the property to the south (Osborn, 95..0974) and found water was freely flowing at the property line. In several locations on the Osbornpropeny, water was bubbling out of the lawn. Mr. Osborn had installed a pipe on the· property line to intercept the water but it W/lS not sufficient to handle the surface flow and not deep enough to intercept the groundwater flow. The source of most of the water is actually from three sources. Spring Hill Development, the Kent Hill Middle school and the Spring Hill RID D-91715. All three of these sources end up in tlte area north and in Ms. Eastman's 101. · The Spring fµII pond is in a registered wetland, It flows to 1961)\ and then east. See drawing. The Kent Middle School runoff flows south from the school grounds to a driveway entrance on 1961ll. It flows to a control structure just 30 feet cast of the driveway. There the flows are split east and south. We pulled the manhole and found the main flow is going south and the overflow to the east. We found a · · cement bag in the outlet of the pipe flowing south This restricted flows by about 75%. This obstruction was cousins the east pipe to flow at half full at the time of our inspection. The south flow meets up with the RID pend flow at the south pipe outlet and this combination flows south through the back of the property nonh of Eastman. There is a drainage ditch behind the Eastman property. It flows south to north. This water meets with the southbound flows from the first two sources. This combined flow turns east and flows between the Bo,tman property and the property to the north. It outlets onto 121". At this point it flows south in open ditch and pipe to the middle of the Osborn lot. At this point. it flows east again to o ditch. This area has also experienced frequent flooding d11ring nominal storm events ( l O year and less). There was an additional drainage ditch closer to the Eastman home, but Ms. Eastman stated the neighbor to the north filled It in two years ago. I I I I I I I I I 10 I I I I I I I I ) I FEB.12.2004 10=35Al1 KC Wt.RD N0.508 P.23/26 ~ water in the ditches was about rnid leg high. Brian and I got a shovel from Roads Maintainence and Brian 1"8S able to plug several areas.where tho ditches W!lre spilling onto !he Eastman property. Brian was very willing to get in there and help her out in this matter He <lid the best he could with limited materials. I have nwked the map with the comment "fi.lled hv us" to indicate the two areas we tried to block water from going onto her property. hnpact Score ~ 520. Option, and lllscussion • Flooding or erosion • Flooding • Affects mainly private property • Yes • Caused by more than one adjoining single family parcel or not a code violation • Yes and No • Causedbylaterupstreamdevelopment -Yes, Yes, Yes There are several short term and long-tcnn solutions to this problem. I will address the long term first. 1. Get a erew out to the site to dig and clear out the ditch to the north. It would take about a day to clean the debris and shore up several of the banks to keep the waler in the <litch. 2. Ms. Eastman should install gutter pipes to carry the watC1' away from the house. Right now, they roof drains empty directly below t~ house. Long Term 1; First and foremost, this should be a study. 2. The study should address the following solutions • Establish a better flowing drainage ditch on the south side of 1961h. • Cle1111 out the <litcit on the north side of 1961h. • lllstall a drainage system arolllld the Eastman horn~ • Install another drainage ditcl1 between the Eastman and Osborn homes. 0 Look into a pennanent solution to the drainage problems in front of the Osborn home. This should be looked at J19 a Roads problem. Proposed Solution We should get a Special Operations crew to the site to clean the drainage ditch north or the Eastman home ASAP. Currently, she cannot use her furnace because it is under water. She is relying on electric heaters (the gas furnace has to be turned off) which really cut into a very limited ineome. It should also be noted that if the power went out, she would be without heat and she is in her 70' s. For the long nin, I feel this should be turned into a study. Priority Score'." NIA I I I I I I I I I It:) I I I \ I I I ,I I I FEB.12.2004 10:35AM KC WLRD . Hey Lpren, · . . . -· , . S6/6T /.6. JO ·s~ SNISVg J.:!IOUV.L·NONO'NV J.3:!>UV.L dYON· Reinke, Gary.Paul Tuesday, January 20, I998 1 :51 PM Nett. Loren Shular, Ryan; Evans, Glenn; GetUe, Lany Spring HIii Elementary 7 · '' s I ·r ;:err t r:,r 17.~i j This is just a follow up on our dlscuss1on·1ast week. I need to place a note in the file N0.508 I was wondering if you haw any lime table on getting the flow restrlclor Installed at th~ Type II we discussed last week. I haw finished a report on the Marie Eastman complaint and hew requested we refer her complaint to LDSU's Steve Foley who Is ln charge of NDAP studies. He will assign a pool engineer to the complalnt and that engineer wffl ettemptto come up wfth a permanent solution. In the meantime, we are trying to come up with some relief for Ms. Eastman, She has approldmately 3.5 Inches of water running through her yard 24 hours a day and has not been able to use her gas furnace for about 2 months now. Let me know If there Is something I can do from my end, Please keep me Informed of any other progress. thanks for your time gpr Page 1 I I I I I- I I I I IC) I I I I I I I I I FE_B.12.2004 10:36AM KC WLRD EWns, Glenn Wednesday, January 21, 1998 11 ;31 AM Reinke, Gary.Paul -RE: Marie Eastman Use Project# 2C1789 From! SO/It: . To: Cc: S11b)oct1 Hey Glenn, Rolnko, Gory.POlll · Wed1101day, Ja""orv 21, 1998 11 :22 AM E1111n,, Glonn Nau, Loren, Shular, Ryan Morie Eaotm11n · · N0.508 P.25/26 x.1..1:;;Jnt I Just flnlsh13d speaking with Loren Nett. He said the contractor Is starting fabrication of 1h11 now control device but Is not sure of the compleUon date. Loren, to his credit, tiled to Install some sandbags In the south culvert to stop the.flow but the water In the CB was too high and the culwrtwas running almost full. He.wnr keep us posted, On. the other frorit, I spoke _with Jamey from Clean .l3ervice Company, Inc. and he stated he can open a new ditch on Marie Eastman's prop&rty in one day and stay wHhln the confines of the monetary limits of the Quick Fix program. I haw already contacted Marte and ~a said I was okay to proceed. A plus about this Is the current stream is also on her property so we won, have to worry about the neighbor. Jamey wUI use tile spon to form a berm between the eldsting channel and the new one. Can YoU send a PO# to me for this ?? Any questions ?? gpr Page 1 I I I ~ •• I I I I I IO I I I I I I I I I I FEB.12.2004 10:36AM KC WLRD' N0.508 , .. JONG COUNTY WATER and LAND RESOURCE$ DIVISION LOCAL DRAINAGE SERVICES UNIT INTERNAL MEMORANDUM DATE: January 22, 1998 TO: Steve Foley FROM: ~term Evans SUBJECT: 97-1550, EASTMAN 19631121• Ave SE Please look at this as a study. · There are a multitude of mess-ups here; not the least of which is a "control" structure that has no restrictor in it. Basically, it looks as though some diversion of flow from the system installed by Spring Hill Elementary a few years ago may be in order; ifit won't exacerbate any ·presumed downstream problems. As it is, the water is impacting Mrs Eastman's house to the point that she can't use her heat through much of the year. We are (even as I write) expecting Loren Nett at ODES to somehow block the unrestricted outlet, sending most of the offending water out through an overllow; we are also constructing a ditch to dewater a portion of the Eastman back yard toward the open ditch road system as a Quick Fix ... Gmy is.honchoing this with Clean Services. I I C'l I I I I I I I U·J I I I I , I I I I I TASK 3 FIELD INSPECTION I •c, I I I I I I I If) I I I I I I I I I TASK 3 FIELD INSPECTION A field inspection was conducted on January 30, 2004 to inspect the onsite drainage system of the site. Offsite drainage systems were also inspected downstream approximately 1/4 mile(s) from the discharge point of the site. The inspection involved investigation of the ten specific items of a Level 1 Inspection per the King County Surface Water Design Manual, 1998. The inspection yielded the following findings: 1. Some debris and litter was observed in ditches, culverts, and around trash racks. This could potentially cause flooding problems in the future. The drainage complaints referred to in Task 2 appear to be resolved, but Complaint 2001-0360 wasn't available. 2. Most of the existing drainage system capacity was adequate. Debris and litter could potentially limit the capacity of some of the drainage system if not removed. 3. Drainage complaints showed a history of flooding problems along the south side of SE 196th Street, east of 1201 h Ave. SE. A drainage study and recent · repairs appear to have solved most of the problems. Complaint 2001-0360 was not available to conclude if a problem still exists. Debris in some of the facilities could cause flooding if not removed 4. There were no existing or potential sedimentation, scouring or bank sloughing problems. 5. No significant destruction of aquatic habitat or organisms was noticeable. 6. Qualitative data such as land use, impervious surfaces, topography, and soil types was noted and can be found in Task 4 information. 7. Information was collected on pipes, ditches, and structures. This information is also included in the Task 4 information. 8. Tributary basins delineated in Task 1 were verified. 9. The neighbor located east of the project site at 11806 SE 192"d Street was contacted. He had concerns of sheet runoff entering his property from our site. He has had problems with sheet flow from the project site in the past. It appears that he also has a groundwater problem. 10. The weather conditions at the time of the inspection were cool and cloudy with showers. ,I I l'j ' I , I I I I I I l(J I I I I I I I I l. _) I from Spring Hill Subdivision, the Spring Hill RID D-91715, and Glen Ridge Elementary School (formerly Spring Hill). They also had groundwater problems · and blocked drainage channels. · · ' I In I I I I I I I IC~) g I D I I I I ( ) I - I TASK 4 DRAINAGE SYSTEM DESCRIPTION AND PROBLEM DESCRIPTIONS I •n I I I I I I I 10 I I I I I I I I \ ) ,,_ I TASK 4 DRAINAGE SYSTEM DESCRIPTION AND PROBLEM DESCRIPTIONS Site Drainage . This project is located at 11634 SE 192"d Street in Renton, Washington, It lies along the north side of SE 192"d Street and is approximately 2.25 acres. The property will be divided into nine residential lots. All lots will gain access from SE 192nd Street via a new sub-access street There is an existing house, three driveways, a concrete pad and two sheds located in the southwest portion of the property, while the rest of the property portion consists mainly of grass, some brush and some trees. The existing site drainage sheet flows from the west to the east No significant amounts of upstream flow enter the site. Soils on this site consist of Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam, O to 6 percent slope (AgB), Offsite Drainage An Off-Site Analysis Drainage System Table is provided on the next page that describes in detail the offsite drainage components at least Y. mile downstream from the project discharge location. Please refer to the offsite drainage map in Task l because the map symbols listed in the table correspond to drainage component symbols on the offsite drainage maps. ,/ Basin: 5002 Gree-!; C ~ ~. OFF-SITE ANALYSIS DRAINAGE SYSTEM TABLE Surface Water Design Manual, Core Requirement #2 Subbasln Name: o' .... z4fei I a' -320' 1 vH," ~ y'\ C,.., e. 2:12%l 3io' -[6$ I n °~ I t68'o' -17ZIJ' ~2"f 117zo' -/$;' -2~1§ I 1%o'-19'9o' q}/o 1,.,,0· ""-'> 0 , I Subbasln Number: c~ L1Table.doc 11/2/02 \ ·-------------------- ' ./ Basin: A, Az. .B'-1 IJ5 Bb ~7 ti f;1 e,o e1 I C OFF-SITE ANALYSIS DRAINAGE SYSTEM TABLE Surface Water Design Manual, Core Requirement #2 ' I 05 C.ree Subbasln Name: Subbasln Number: z. I,<); D>f!. t. . ., ""~p 01 5"me. de,,t~ pe5S'if.;I t det,r,5 Covlt c,,.u.<;t. g, 1 Si iS J·f' wa}t,.. "-2% -i 1,4, ·cor. sh:dto,,.. ~ J;,.. •J of~••r I c,.."' ·How5 e.a.sf -i.2. % o'·3?..o' no.ri e. ;10'1 e. ·~bl~~~'J "':$ e .e ""=='-.-.J..1 --1ro Ju/ -?Ito' --· 5w01. le. "-'2!/o '!l{o · · 57t/ "'H O.."'l "'--2,01, {Jo'--%a1 ~·,..,e ;5 'f0~5 ;i, e _ _ , I o0( "" bu.h:Vl (OV\ f,\c,l-~o~ I F{4.J;,fk~J'!J ott,Q,.-/idJ.'16 w~-· 6ou.t\.... 1o 9od · '8'00 1 r,or-.{. r, ,,.., <..,. o<JJ SO"' I... ro"' i.... sd--.eio 1'10 8'cv 1 ·13/o' 50<A f k_ I 0 / 1110' -/ l-/zo' .~ 'lo I liz.o' · f"{y} .S°lo tY3o' -trld /Jo..-.6 'K<~ f;o;7 Po"'J.'-:iceJ I ti'/o 1'€''1 cfG() ~" ov--e. o,;5 . 1 I , ,;,,, .. J\.. +• SF 1q4+1.. -..z O lbOO -;> I 1/lC,·1 e.. I not\ .e L1Tabl•.doc 1112192 0 .--.., ------------------- I •n I I I I I I I 10 I I I I I I I I( __ ) I TASK 5 MITIGATION OF EXISTING OR POTENTIAL PROBLEMS I If> D 1· I I I I I I ( .) I I I I I I I I I I ' TASK 5 MITIGATION OF EXISTING OR POTENTIAL PROBLEMS After a thorough field inspection and a detailed resource review there were no some existing problems identified. The debris observed in some of the downstream facilities should be removed. The past drainage problems southeast of Glen Ridge Elementary should monitored and repaired as needed. The proposed improvements will not produce a significant impact to the existing drainage patterns once the site has been stabilized and the runoff has been controlled via a combined detention/wet vault. A temporary erosion and sedimentation control plan will be created at the final design stage to minimize the transport of sediment laden runoff to the downstream conveyance system. I •o I I I I I I I I(~) I I I I I I I f ·1 I ·-- 1 APPENDIX THRESHOLD ASSESSMENT AND . PRELIMINARY CALCULATIONS •• •n I I I I I I I IC_) I I I I I I I I I ) THRESHOLD ASSESSMENT The below figures represent the impervious surface calculations for this project. · Developed impervious: 8 new homes & driveways @ 2500 each New road, sidewalks & frontage improvements Existing home & new driveway Total 20,000 sf 15,800 sf 1,850 sf 37,650 sf Per Section 1.1.2, this project qualifies for Full Drainage Review. Both water quality and flow control facilities are required .. A combined detention/wet vault will be provided for this project for both flow control and water quality. I / 1, n I I I I I I I I I ·,, \. ) I I I I I I, I I I I PRELIMINARY CALCULATIONS PREOEVELOPED FLOWS +-Land Use Summary---------7---------------------~-----------+ :Till Forest 0. 00 acres : Till Pasture 2. 21 acres \ Till Grass O. 00 acres : Outwash Forest O. 00 acres :outwash Pasture 0.00 acres :outwash Grass 0.00 acres :~etland 0.00 acres : Impervious O .15 acres :----------~------------------------------------------------ ' ' ' ' Total Area : Scale Factor: 2.36 acres 1.00 Hourly Reduced :------------------------------------------------------------ Time Series: PREDEV :------------------------------------------------------------: : Compute Time Serie·s : · Modify User Input +------------------------------------------------------------+ Flow Frequency Analysis -------------------------------------------------------- Time Series File:predev.tsf Project Location:Sea-Tac ---Annual Peak Flow Rates--------Flow Frequency Analysis------- Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak -Peaks Rank Return Prob (CFS) (CFS) Period 0.180 2 2/09/01 15:00 0.338 1 100.00 0.990 0.090 7 1/05/02 16:00 0.180 2 25.00 0.960 0.180 3 2/28/03 3:00 0.180 3 10.00 0.900 0.047 B 8/26/04 2:00 0.171 4 5.00 0.800 0.103 6 1/05/05 B:00 0.163 5 3.00 0.667 o._111 4 1/18/06 16:00 0.103 6 2.00 0.500 0.163 5 11/24/06 4:00 0.090 7 1. 30 0.231 0.338 1 1/09/08 6:00 0.047 8 1.10 0. 091 Computed Peaks 0.285 50.00 0.980 I I n I I I I I I I I ( ) I I I I I I I I I DEVELOPED li'LOWS +-Land Use surmnary-----------------------~-------------------+ :Till Forest O. 00 acres· :Till Pasture 0.00 acres : Till Grass 1. 50 acres :outwash Forest 0.00 acres :outwash Pasture 0.00 acres :outwash Grass 0.00 acres :wetland 0.00 acres : Impervious O. 86 acres :------------------------------------------------------------: Total Area : 2.36 acres sCale .Factor: 1.00 Hourly Reduced ' ' :----------·-------------. -----------------------------------: Time Series: DEV ' ' :--------------------------------------·---------------------: Compute Time Series Modify.User Input +------------------------------------------------------------+ Flow Frequency Analysis -------------------------------------------------------- Time Series File:dev.tsf Project Location:Sea-Tac ---Annual Peak Flow Rates---. -----Flow Frequency Analysis------- Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak -Peaks Rank Return Prob (CFS) (CFS) Period o. 342 5 2/09/01 2:00 0. 724 1 100.00 0.990 0.252 7 1/05/02 16:00 0.418 2 25.00 0.960 0.418 2 2/27/03 7:00 0.360 3 10.00 0.900 0.242 8 8/26/04 2:00 0.351 4 5.00 0.800 0.299 6 10/28/04 16:00 0.342 5 3.00 0.667 0.360 3 1/18/06 16:00 0.299 6 2.00 0.500 0.351 4 10/26/06 0:00 0.252 7 1. 30 0.231 0. 724 1 1/09/08 6:00 0.242 8 1.10 0.091 Computed Peaks 0.622 50.00 0.980 I I I (J I I I I I • ICJ I I I I I I I f 1· , I Retention/Detention Facility Type of Fa.cility: Detention Facility Length: Vault 59.82 59.82 3578 sf 5.00 100.00 17892 cf 5.00 12.00 2 Facility Width: Facility Area: Effective Storage Depth: Stage O 8levation: Storage Volume: Riser Head: Riser Diameter: Number of orifices: Orifice # 1 2 Height (ft) 0.00 3.75 Diameter ( ip) 0.99 3.03 Top Notch Weir: None Outflow Rating Curve: None Stage (ft) 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.18 0.28 0.38 0.48 0.58 0.68 0. 78 0.88 0.98 1. 08 1.18 1. 28 1. 38 1. 48 1. 58 1. 68 1. 78 1. 88 1. 98 2.08 2.18 2.28 2.38 2.48 2.58 2. 68 2 .'78 Elevation (ft) 100.00 ·100.01 100.02 100.03 100.04 100.05 100.06 100.07 100.08 100.18 100.28 100.38 100.48 100.58 100.68 100.78 100.88 100.98 101.08 101.18 101. 28 101.38 101. 48 101.58 101.68 101. 78 101. 88 101.98 102.08 102.18 102.28 102.38 102.48 102.58 102.68 102.78 Storage (cu. ft) 0. 36. 72. 107. 143. 179. 215. 251. 286. 644. 1002. 1360. 1718. · 2075. 2433. 2791. 3149. 3507. 3865. 4222. 4580. 4938. 5296. 5654. 6012. 6369. 6727. 7085. 7443. 7801. 8159. 8516. 8874. 9232. 9590. 9948. ft ft 116'x31'=3596 sf provided ft ft 116'x31'x5'=17980 cf provided ft inches Full Head Discharge (CFS) 0.060 ·0.278 Pipe Diameter (in) Discharge (ac-ft) (cfs) 0.000 0.000 0;001 0.003· 0.002 0.004 0.002 0.005 0.003 0.005 0.004 0.006 0.005 0.007 0.006 0.007 0.007 0.008 0.015 0.011 0.023 0.014 0.031 0.017 0.039 0.019 0.048 0.056 0.064 0.072 0.081 0.089 0.097 0.105 0.113 0.122 0.130 0.138 0 .146 0 .154 0.163 0.171 0 .179 0 .187 0.196 0.204 0.212 0.220 0.228 0.020 0.022 0.024 0.025 0.027 0.028 0.029 0.030 0.032 0.033 0.034 0.035 0.036 0.037 0.038 0.039 0.040 0.041 0.041 0.042 0.043 0.044 0.045 6.0 PercolatioI). (cfs) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 o.oo 0.00 0.00 o.oo 0.00 o.oo 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 I 1,:-) l -· I 2.88 102.88 10306. 0.237 0.046 0.00 2.98 102.98 10663. 0.245 0.046 0.00 3.08 103.08 11021. 0.253 0.047 0.00 3.18 103.18 11379. 0.261 0.048 0.00 3.28 103.28 11737. 0.269 o. 049 0.00 3.38 103.38 12095. 0.27.8 0. 049 o.oo I 3.48 103.48 12453. 0.286 0.050 0.00 3.58 103.58 12810. 0.294 0.051 0,00 3.68 103.68 13168. 0.302 0.051 0.00 3.75 103.75 13419. 0.308 0.052 0.00 •• 3.78 103.78 13526. 0. 311 0.054 0.00 3.81 103.81 13633. 0.313 0.062 0.00 3.84 103.84 13741. 0.315 0.074 0.00 I 3.88 103.88 13884. 0.319 0.090 0.00 3. 91 103.91 13991. 0.321 0.109 0.00 3.94 103.94 14099. 0.324 .0.134 0.00 3.97 103.97 14206. 0.326 0.160 .o. 00 I 4.00 104.00 14313. 0.329 0.179 0.00 4.10 104.10 14671. 0.337 0.202 0.00 4.20 104.20 15029. 0.345 0.222 0.00 4.30 104.30 15387. 0.353 0.241 0.00 I 4.40 104.40 15745. 0.361 0.257 ·0.00 4.50 104.50 16102. 0.370 0.273 0.00 4.60 104.60 16460. 0.378 0.287 0.00 4. 70 104.70 16818. 0.386 0.301 o.oo I 4.80 104.80 17176. 0.394 0.314 0.00 4.90 104.90 17534. 0.403 0.326 o.oo 5.00 105.00 17892. 0.411 0.338 0.00 10 Hyd Inflow Outflow Peak Storage I Target Cale Stage Elev (Cu-Ft) (Ac-Ft) 1 0. 72 0.34 0.34 4.99 104.99 17871. 0. 410 2 0.34 ******* 0.22 4. 21 104.21 1507 3. 0.346 3 0.35 ******* 0.17 3.99 103.99 14283. 0.328 I 4 0.42 ******* 0.13 3.94 103.94 14 085. 0.323 5 0.36 ******* 0.07 3.84 103.84 13740. 0.315 6 0.30 ******* o. 05 2.87 102.87 10273. 0.236 7 0.25 ******* 0.04 2 .14 102 .14 7662. 0.176 I 8 0.24 ******* 0.03 1.15 101.15 4127. 0.095 I I I I I l_~) ~ I I I I I I I 10 I I I I I I I I r_J I \ WETPOND CALCULATIONS The following calculation ie pei: SectiOn 6. 4 .1 of the· KCsv:ioM·. Runoff Volume = Vr = (0.9Ai + 0.25Atg + O .. lOAtf + 0.0lAo) X (R/12) Ai=37650 sf Atg=65151 sf Atf=O Ao=O R=. 47 Vr = [ (0.9) (37650) + (0.25) (65151) + 0 + OJ x (.47/12) = 1965 cf Wetpool Volume Vb= f(Vr) f=3 Vr=1965 ·cf Vb =.3xl965 -5895 cf Wetpool volume= 116'x3l'x3.0' required. 10788 cf, thus satisfying the volume I I I <-1 I - I I I I I I I() I I I I I I I I r . , ) I I .. J 11 I 4.0 JFJLOW CONTROL AND WATER QUALITY lF ACJIJLJITY ANALYSIS AND DESIGN D I I (') I I I I I I I C) I I I I I I I \1 ) I \ 4.0 FLOW CONTROL AND WATER QUALITY FACILITY ANALYSIS AND DESIGN A. Existing Site Hydrology The existing site consists mostly of undeveloped pasture type land. The site contains one drainage basin. The existing site contains approximately 0.20 acre of impervious area and 2.05 acres of till pasture. Runoff sheetflows to the southeast portion of the site, where it enters an open ditch and is conveyed to the east through a series of driveway culverts and enclosed drainage pipes, eventually discharging into Soos Creek. B. Developed Site Hydrology Based on the existing site hydrology, runoff will be collected in an enclosed drainage system and conveyed into a combined detention/wet pond near the southeast property line. All runoff will be treated, detained, and discharged at the natural location. The proposed drainage basin will consist of 1.16 acres of till grass and 1.09 acres of impervious surfaces. This area will be treated and detained in the stormwater system. C. Performance Standards Pursuant to the 1998 KCWSWDM, Level 2 Flow Control and Basic Water Quality Treatment will be applied. D. Flow Control System Detention storage will be· placed above· the wet pond ~ead storage elevation. The _King County Runoff Time Series (KCRTS) methodology was used to meet the volume outflow design requirements for Level 2 Flow Control. The pond will discharge via a multiple · orifice flow restrictor. The pond will detain approximately 16,100 cubic feet of stormwater with a live storage depth of 2.8 feet. E. Water Quality System For this site, a wet pond has been designed to capture and transform pollutants.· The wet pond is a two-cell system separated by a berm. The design provides for· a 4-focit dead storage depth with a I-foot minimum sediment storage. The required volume and surface area of the wet pond are 6,478 cubic feet and 2,688 square feet, respectively. 11614.004.doc -------------------,_ ________ ,-.., ''-,,,;-------------------"'''",-----.. '"' ... it '"i::. ;;· ·~ ~~ l~~~~ ·-";,; >;: •::i ·;,. '.'':?."" ,~::: r•,·,., .. ,. qi :f'f1 '.:;~ ' ~': ~ !;:j Job Number 11614 Sheet 2 2 __ ,, __ ·.~\' .~/-~:~.:;~---~t ,r-·z~; ·~,--:-...."-: 1: ~~ ·> ~ ~'.; r ·-... <~lrry: __ i l[~i lill t. i · ... ' \ ···~;~l·:::~:~4j ~ A.. "' \ \ 7' "''cl~.- "'"··-·--<: ..... ·'"-'0-,1.__ ~-···"· --~ ·,:..-. -r '(\,\ -. -. _:~-~:; //' '\ I ~" ,., ' ' I I r r~, ... 1:,t,_;.r:-1;r 1 I (' \ \:.:.-( ;I. I I l 1 I 11 \;,,.,,; ~ 1il I I I ,--1 ';11 I I 11 --I I I I I I I I I I I 1i1 I <0 : 11 _-:_-_-_-:_:-_ I ~fl< I I l' I -----I• 1' 1 I -I ·1' 11\. 11, 'II\ :\11 . . . 'I I· l. .. ·...... . I I I I '•,,, ~ I 11 ''<· ,,(.) ' r_ . ..,-; 't 't• ;i,. 10 :'.i;J ,, , .. i .!.:~. "'o·:(·· 00 ", : /f'' ' ij. ~ ,,, :l: ~·: :rr1 ··········• 'I ', _____ Y>;;; ; ·;· ,,,,0~-,--:.:---~~~1,~ .. "i"-·11 .t;~· , •' ,-si ,;; / sa1·20'26iV 296.JO'(CALC'D) S01'U3'06"W 296.J5'(PLAT) -I -I -0 0 oomz --t --t ;gen )>)>_=! rrom )>-C ::IJ s: en m-o)> l> m ::IJ II ;gm co-)> _ex, 0 II oco, oeno ex, )>.01 en ::IJ I\) "Tlm«:> II )> en !'J II "Tl N> ~ II 0, -...J,.... -..... )>~O, () -...J )> ' co enf> "Tl II ..... g )> 0 r•· (~ -., ,,-; 1 ~GHA(JoS' 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH Designed CMV I I . V' ,JJ, \ KENT, WA 98032 Ocowo OMH I llJ . (425)251-6222 Checked HPG I ;_ "'.(425)251-8782 FAX 0 Ji Approved HPG I 1-' "'c:. '>' CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, I ~ 1"1/v ~<,,'<-~ SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES D,t,~I G ENGi -, I . O> __ ,,, ·$('(<. ~ -..i ( ,, Scale: Horizontol 1"=50' Vertical N/A ,;1 9F' .,/ .,/ \ . .,, 4'f~ 0, ;,i. )• i.'J J ..t,:,;.- 1 I I 'J I .".1 ! ··-·-5 r:; ,,,·tJ'' ht 1 ~:·.~· J%Z l~~ "'l~/f ' N.~ ! / 4;,6' ;; $! \ ', § ~ ,,:;: i,".l,..,~ ! t:,..,, !Et! :+,.~ ~~ ·'D~ I "" 0~ ,,~s: ',J .:j. . -;~~!0. 0:.}~ ~::[~ ?:~1~ .,,.,. .,)•( ~' ' ' 0) ,~ ... ~ ,< t~ ·, ,11 ,.~ 'f; >;'' x.,1,;-i ~~r~ '.~ik ~:i~ 9-~t] {_,_ff-~,;:,>;,_fJ ~---~--··· ,::;,,. 0.-=··· ;;ir;t: '··SC4 , .. '.; ., ·z~·-t .. ,, \/, Ne. Dote By I Ckd. I Appr. Title: 0 N u, u, 0 0 0 ...... ~ II 01 q Revision 0 m < m r 0 -=u m 0 0 0 z 0 = ~ = 0 z (I) m >< I = OJ = =i DEVELOPED CONDITIONS EXHIBIT For: SHARMILA RA THINAM (425) 369-2198 File: P:\ 11 OOOs\ 11614\exhibit\ 11614-EX3.dwg Date/Time: 02/23/2005 08:44 Scale: 1 ;50 dholstad Xrefs: z 11614-s,zl 1614-\, I I I D I I I I n I IO I I I I I I I I I ! ) KCRTS Command CREATE a new Time Series Production of Runoff Time Series Project Location: Sea-Tac Computing Series 11614PRE.tsf Regional Scale Factor : 1.00 Data Type : Reduced Creating Hourly Time Series File l1\Rl4 Leve,{ z_ ft ow Cv~ I u-?>-Olf- Loading Time Series File:C:\KC_SWDM\KC_DATA\STTP60R.rnf Till Pasture 2. 05 acres Impervious Loading Time Series File:C:\KC_SWDM\KC_DATA\STEI60R.rnf 0.20 acres Total Area 2.25 acres Peak Discharge: 0.344 CFS at 6:00 on Jan 9 in Year 8 Storing Time Series File:11614PRE.tsf Time Series Computed KCRTS Command Enter the Analysis TOOLS Module Analysis Tools Command Compute PEAKS and Flow Frequencies Loading Stage/Discharge curve:11614pre.tsf Flow· Frequency Analysis -------------------------------------------------------- Time Series File:11614pre.tsf Project Location:Sea-Tac Frequencies & Peaks saved to File:11614PRE.pks Analysis Tools Corrunand RETURN to Previous Menu KCRTS Command CREATE a new Time Series Production of Runoff Time Series Project Location : Sea-Tac Computing Series 11614DEV.tsf Regional Scale Factor : 1.00 Data Type : Reduced Creating Hourly Time Series File Loading Time Series File:C:\KC_SWDM\KC_DATA\STTG60R.rnf Till Grass 1.16 acres Impervious Loading Time· Series File:C: \KC_SWDM\KC_DATA·\STEI60R.rnf 1.09 acres D I I I I I I I I n I CJ I I I I I I I ;1 I I \ Total Area : 2.25 Peak Discharge: 0.760 CFS at acres 6:00 on Jan 9 in Year 8 Storing Time Series File:11614DEV.tsf Time Series Computed KCRTS Command Enter the Analysis TOOLS Module Analysis Tools Command Compute PEAKS and Flow Frequencies Loading Stage/Discharge curve:11614dev.tsf Flow Frequency Analysis -------------------------------------------------------- Time Series File:11614dev.tsf Project Location:Sea-Tac Frequencies & Peaks saved to File:11614DEV.pks Analysis Tools Command RETURN to Previous Menu KCRTS Command Size a Retention/Detention FACILITY KCRTS Command Enter the Analysis TOOLS Module Analysis Tools Command Compute Flow DURATION and Exceedence Loading Time.Series File:11614pre.tsf Computing Flow Durations Durations & Exceedence Probabilities to File:11614TARGET.dur Analysis Tools Command RETURN to Previous Menu KCRTS Command Size a Retention/Detention FACILITY Edit Facility Loading Time Series File: 11614dev. tsf Time Series Found in Memory:11614dev.tsf I I I I I I I .n ' I 0 I I I I I I I ( ) '-" I \I \ Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:11614pre.tsf Project Location:sea-Tac ---Annual Flow Rate (CFS) 0.179 0.098 0.184 0.060 0.105 0.176 0.166 0.344 Peak Flow Rates--- Rank Time of Peak 3 7 2 8 6 4 5 1 2/09/01 15:00 1/05/02 16:00 2/27/03 7:00 8/26/04 2:00 1/05/05 8:00 1/18/06 16:00 11/24/06 3:00 1/09/08 6:00 computed Peaks 11614PRE.pks -----Flow Frequency Analysis------- --Peaks Rank Return Prob (CFS) Period 0.344 1 100.00 0.184 2 25.00 0.179 3 10.00 0.176 4 5.00 0.166 5 3 .00 0.105 6 2.00 0.098 7 1.30 0.060 8 1.10 0.291 50.00 Page 1 0.990 0.960 0.900 0.800 0.667 0.500 0.231 0.091 0.980 I I I I I I I I I I CJ I I I I I I I I _) Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:11614dev.tsf Project Location:sea-Tac ---Annual Flow Rate (CFS) 0.367 0.285 0.445 0.293 0.356 0.389 0.426 0.760 Peak Flow Rates--- Rank Time of Peak 5 8 2 7 6 4 3 1 2/09/01 2:00 1/05/02 16:00 2/27/03 7:00 8/26/04 2:00 10/28/04 16:00 1/18/06 16:00 10/26/06 0:00 1/09/08 6:00 computed Peaks 11614DEV.pks -----Flow Frequency Analysis------- --Peaks --Rank Return Prob (CFS) Period 0.760 1 100.00 0.445 2 25.00 0.426 3 10.00 0.389 4 5.00 0.367 5 3.00 0.356 6 2.00 o. 293 7 1. 30 0.285 .8 1.10 0.655 50.00 Page 1 0.990 0.960 0.900 0.800 0.667 0. 500 · 0.231 0.091 0.980 g 1,-. l I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1· I J Retention/Detention Facility Type of Facility: Side Slope: Pond Bottom Length: Pond Bottom Width: Pond Bottom Area: Top Area at 1 ft. FB: Effective Storage Depth: Stage O Elevation: Storage Volume: Riser Head: Riser Diameter: Number of orifices: Detention Pond 2.00 H:lV 118. 00 ft 40.00 ft 4720. sq. ft 7353. sq. ft 0.169 acres 2.80 ft 498.20· ft 15811. 0.363 2.80 12.00 2 cu. ft ac-ft ft inches Full Head Pipe Orifice # Height Diameter Discharge Diameter (ft) ( in) (CFS) (in) 1 0.00 1.25 0. 071 2 1. 90 2.10 0 .113 6.0 • Top Notch Weir: None Outflow Rating Curve: None Stage Elevation Storage Discharge Percolation I ft) (ft) (cu. ft) (ac-ft) (cfs) (cfs) 0.00 498.20 0. 0.000 0.000 0.00 0.01 498.21 47. 0.001 0.005 0.00 0.03 498.23 142. 0.003 0.007 0.00 0.04 498.24 189. 0.004 0.008 0.00 0.05 498.25 237. 0.005 0.010 0.00 0.07 498.27 332. 0.008 0. 011 0.00 0.08 498.28 380. 0.009 0.012 0.00 0.09 498.29 427. 0.010 0.013 0.00 0.10 498.30 475. 0. 011 0.014 0.00 0.20 498.40 957. 0.022 0.019 0.00 0.30 498.50 1445_. 0.033 0.023 0.00 0.40 498.60 1939. 0.045 0.027 0.00 0.50 498.70 2440. 0.056 0.030 0.00 0.60 498.80 2947. 0.068 0.033 0.00 0.70 498.90 3461. 0.079 0.036 0.00 0.80 499.00 3981. 0. 091 0.038 0.00 0.90 499.10 4508. 0.103 0.040 0.00 1. 00 499.20 5041. 0.116 0.042 0.00 1.10 499.30 5582. 0.128 0.045 0.00 1.20 499.40 6128. 0.141 0.047 0.00 1.30 499.50 6682. 0.153 0.048 0.00 1.40 499.60 7242. 0.166 0.050 0.00 1. 50 499.70 7809. 0.179 0.052 0.00 1.60 499.80. 8383. 0 .192 0.054 0.00 1.70 499.90 8963. 0.206 0.055 0 ,.oo 1.80 500.00 9551. 0.219 0.057 0.00 1.90 500.10· 10145. 0.233 0.058 0.00 1.92 500.12 10265. 0.236 0.060 0.00 I Surf Area (sq. ft) 4720. 4726. 4739. 4745. 4752. 4764. 4771. 4777. 4783. 4847. 4911. 4975. 5040. 5105. 5170. 5236. 5302. 5368. 5435. 5501. 5569. 5636. 5704. 5772. 5841. 5909. 5979. 5992. n •n 1. 94 500.14 10385. 0.238 0.064 0.00 6006. 1. 97 500.17 10566. 0.243 0.070 0.00 6027. I 1.99 500.19 10686. 0.245 0.078 0.00 6041. 2.01 500.21 10807. 0.248 0.088 0.00 6055. 2.03 500.23 10928. 0.251.. 0.100 0.00 6069. 2.05 500 .·2s--·· "'-11050·. 0.254 0.108 \ 0.00 6083. I 2.07 500.27 11172. 0.256 0 .111 . 0.00 6097. 2.10 500.30 11355. 0.261 0 .114 d 0.00 6118. 2.20 500.40 11970. 0.275 0.128 0.00 6188. I 2. 30 500.50 12593. 0.289 0 .14o" 0.00 6258. 2.40 500.60 13222. 0.304 0.150 0.00 6329. 2.50 500.70 13858. 0.318 0.159 0.00 6400. 2.60 500.80 14502. 0.333 0.168 0.00 6471. I 2.70 500.90 15153. 0.348 0 .176 0.00 6543. 2.80 501.00 15811. 0. 363 0.184 0.00 6615. 2.90 501.10 16476. ,,9<ll.!!__...O . 5 0 0 0.00 6687. I 3.00 501.20 17148. 0.394 1. 070 0.00 6760. 3.10 501.30 17828. 0.409 1. 810 0.00 6833. 3.20 501.40 18515. 0.425 2.600 0.00 6906. 3.30 501.50 19209. 0.441 2.890 0.00 6980. I 3.40 501.60 19911. 0.457 3.150 0.00 7054. 3.50 501.70 20620. 0.473 3.390 0.00 7128. 3.60 501.80 21336. 0.490 3.620 0.00 7203. 3.70 501.90 22060. 0.506 3.830 0.00 7277. I 3.80 502.00 22792. 0.523 4. 030 0.00 7353. 3.90 502.10 23531. 0.540 4.220 0.00 7428. 4.00 502.20 24277. 0.557 4.400 0.00 7504. lo 4 .10 502.30 25032. 0.575 4.580 0.00 7580. 4. 20 502.40 25793. 0.592 4.740 0.00 7657. 4.30 502.50 26563. 0.610 4.910 0.00 7733. 4.40 502.60 27340. 0.628 5.060 0.00 7811. I 4.50 502.70 .28125. 0.646 5.210 0.00 7888. 4.60 502.80 2891.8. 0.664 5.360 0.00 7966. 4.70 502.90 29718. 0.682 5.510 0.00 8044. I 4.80 503.00 30526. 0.70~ 5.650 0.00 8122. Hyd Inflow Outflow Peak Storage Ta·rget Cale Stage Elev (Cu-Ft) (Ac-Ft) I 1 0.76 ******* 0.50 2.90 501.10 16476. 0.378 2 0.37 0.18 0.18 2.70 500.~ 15122. 0.347 3 0.37 ******* 0.15 2.45 500. 5 13555. 0 .311 4 0.39 ******* 0.14 2.29 500.49 12532. 0.288 I 5 0.44 *****·** 0.14 2.28 500.48 12498. 0.287 6 . 0. 23 ******* 0.06 1. 79 499.99 9521. 0.219 7 0.29 ******* 0.05 1.29 499.49 6601. 0.152 I 8 0.29 ******* 0.04 0.85 499.05 4237. 0.097 ---------------------------------- Route Time Series through Facility I Inflow Time Series File:11614dev.tsf Outflow Time Series File:11614RDOUT I Inflow/Outflow Analysis Peak Inflow Discharger ..... 0.760 CFS at 6:00 on Jan 9 in Year 8 Peak Outflow Discharge: 0.500 CFS at 10:00 on Jan 9 in Year 8 ll) Peak Reservoir Stage: 2. 90 .. Ft Peak Reservoir Elev: 501.10 Ft, I g ICJ Peak Reservoir Storage: 16476. Cu-Ft 0 .378 Ac-Ft I Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:11614rdout.tsf Project Location:Sea-Tac I ---Annual Peak Flow Rates--------Flow Frequency Analysis------- Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak --Peaks --Rank Return Prob I (CFS) (CFS) (ft) Period 0.176 2 2/09/01 20:00 0.500 2.90 1 100.00 0.990 0.048 7 12/28/01 17:00 0.176 2.69 2 25.00 0.960 0.138 5 2/28/03 7:00 0.155 2.45 3 10.00 0.900 I 0.039 8 8/26/04 6:00 0 .139 2.29 4 5.00 0.800 0.057 6 1/05/05 15:00 0 .138 2.28 5 3.00 0.667 0 .139 4 1/18/06 22:00 0.057 1. 79 6 2.00 0.500 0.155 3 11/24/06 7:00 0.048 1.28 7 1.30 0.231 I 0.500 1 1/09/08 10:00 0.039 0.85 8 1.10 0. 091 Computed Peaks 0 .392 2.87 50.00 0.980 I Flow Duration from Time Series File:11614rdout.tsf Cutoff Count Frequency CDF Exceedence_Probability CFS % % % 0.002 41923 68.368 68.368 31. 632 0.316E+OO I 0.007 4459 7 .272 75.639 24.361 0.244E+OO 0.012 3357 5.475 81.114 18.886 0.189E+OO 0.017 3308 5.395 86.508 13.492 0.135E+OO lo 0.022 2653 4.326 90.835 9.165 0. 917E-01 0.027 1670 2. 723 93.558 6.442 0.644E-01 0.032 1303 2.125 95.683 4.317 0.432E-01 0.037 873 1.424 97.107 2.893 0.289E-01 I 0.042 682 1.112 98.219 1. 781 0.178E-01 0.047 "303. 0.494 98. 713 1. 287 .0 .129E-01 0.052 315 0.514 99.227 0.773 0.773E-02 I 0.057 261 0.426 99.653 0.347 0.347E-02 0.062 78 0.127 99.780 0.220 0.220E-02 0.066 14 0.023 99.803 0.197 0.197E-02 0. 071 8 0. 013 99.816 0.184 0.184E-02 I 0.076 7 0.011 99.827 0.173 0.173E-02 0.081 1 0.002 99.829 0 .171 0 .171E-02 0.086 6 0.010 99.839 0.161 0.161E-02 0.091 4 0.007 99.845 0.155 0.155E-02 I 0.096 3 0.005 99.850 0.150 0.150E-02 0.101 2 0.003 99.853 0.147 0.147E-02 0.106 3 0.005 99.858 0.142 0.142E-02 I 0 .111 10 0.016 99.874 0.126 0.126E-02 0 .116 15 0.024 99.899 0.101 O.lOlE-02 0.121 8 0.013 99.912 0.088 0.881E-03 0.125 5 0.008 99. 920 0.080 0.799E-03 I 0 .130 5 0.008 99. 928 0.072 0. 718E-03 0 .135 11 0.018 99.946 0.054 0.538E-03 0.140 7 0 .011 99.958 0.042 0.424E-03 I 0.145 3 0.005 99.962 0.038 0.375E-03 0.150 4 0.007 99.969 0. 031 0.310E-03 0.155 8 0.013 99.982 0.018 0.179E-03 r· ) 0.160 1 0.002 99.984 0.016 0.163E-03 ,,_, 0.165 2 0.003 99.987 0.013 0 .130E-03 I I I I I I I Do I I I , I I I I 0.170 3 0.005 99. 992 0.008 0.815E-04 0.175 3 0.005 99.997 0.003 0.326E-04 Duration Comparison Anaylsis Base File: 11614pre.tsf New File: 11614rdout.tsf Cutoff Units: Discharge in CFS -----Fraction of Time--------------Check of Tolerance------- Cutoff Base New %Change Probability 0.053 0.70E-02 0.69E-02 -1.9 0.70E-02 0.063 0.52E-02 0.21E-02 -58.5 0.52E-02 0.073 0.38E-02 0.18E-02 -52.8 0.38E-02 0.083 0.27E-02 0.17E-02 -38.7 0.27E-02 0.093 0.18E-02 0.15E-02 -12.8 0.18E-02 0.103 0.14E-02 0.14E-02 4.8 0.14E-02 0 .113 O.lOE-02 O.llE-02 6.5 O.lOE-02 0.123 0. 77E-03 0.80E-03 4.3 0.77E-03 0.134 0.60E-03 0.60E-03 0.0 0.60E-03 0.144 0.39E-03 0.38E-03 -4.2 0.39E-03 0.154 0.23E-03 0.23E-03 0.0 0.23E-03 0.164 0 .13E-03 0.13E-03 0.0 0 .13E-03 0.174 0.98E-04 0.33E-04 -66.7 0.98E-04 Maximum positive excursion= 0.006 cfs 6.0%) occurring at 0.105 cfs on the Base Data:11614pre.tsf and at 0.111 cfs on the New Data:11614rdout.tsf Maximum negative excursion= 0.028 cfs (-32.3%) occurring at 0.086 cfa on the Base Data:11614pre.tsf and at 0.058 cfs on the New Data:11614rdout.tsf Base New %Change 0.053 0.053 -0.6 0.063 0.054 -13.7 0.073 0.056 -23.6 0.083 0.058 -30.8 0.093 0.076 -18.6 0.103 0.108 4.6 0 .113 0 .115 1.9 0.123 0.126 2.2 0.134 0 .134 0.5 0.144 0.143 -0.2 0.154 0.154 0.0 0.164 0.167 1.9 0.174 0.169 -2.7 I I I I I I 10 I I I I I Wetpond Sizing Worksheet Summary of the 1998 Surface Water Design Manual Requirements Project Name: Rathinam Short Plat Project Number: 11614 Step 1) Determine volume factor f. Basic size ............................................ . I= 3 Large size ............................................ . Step 2) Determine rainfall R for mean annual Storm Detemine rainfall R for mean annual storm Rainfall. ............................................... . Step 3) Calculate runoff from mean annual storm V, = (0.9A, + 0.25A;9 + 0.10Att + 0.01A,,g) X R A; = tributary area of impervious surface A,9 = tributary area of till grass Att = tributary area of till forest A 09 = tributary area of outwash grass R = rainfall from mean annual storm V, = Volume of runoff from mean annual storm Step 4) Calculate wetpool Volume V0 =IV, f = Volume Factor V0 = Volume runoff, mean annual atorm V, = Volume of the wetpool Step 5) Determine wetpool dimensions a) Determine geometry of first cell· Volume in first cell Depth h 1st cell (minus sed. Storage) Determine horizontal xs area at mid-depth using A mid = Vol. 1st cell / h Mid-width Mid-length Determine xs area at surface Z = Side slope length ( _H:1 V) 2(h/2 x Z) = Dimensions of top of pond adjusted for geometrics Top width -----1= 4.5 ----- --'o-'.0-"39 __ (teet) 47,480 (sf) 50,530 (sf) 0 (sf) 0 (sf) 0.039 (feet) 2,159 (cf) 3 2,159 (cf) 6,478 !(cf) 1,943 (cf) 4 (feet) 486 (sf) 22 (feet) 22 (feet) 2 3:1 recommended 8 (feet) 30 (feet) m In I I I I I I I 10 I I I I I I I Ii ) I I Top length Area of Top b) Determine geometry of second cell Volume in second cell Depth h 2nd cell Determine xs area at mid-depth using A mid = Vol. 2nd cell / h Mid-width Mid-length Determine horizontal xs area at surface Z = Side slope length ( _H:1 V) 2(h/2 x Z) = Dimensions of top of pond adjusted for geometrics Top width Top length Area of Top Adjustment to cells (II necessary) Geometry check: Overall pond L:W at mid-depth = 3:1 Pond width (mid-depth) Cell 1 length (mid-depth) Cell 2 length (mid-depth) Pond Length (mid-depth) = Cell 1 + Cell 2 Lmid:Wmid= Total Wetpond Surface area required= Total Wetpond Bottom area required= 30 (feet) ----902 (feet) ---- 4,534 (cf) 4 (feet) 1,134 (sf) 22 (feet) 51 (feet) 2 3: 1 recommended 8 (feet) 30 (feet) 59 (feet) 1785 (feet) 22 22 73 3.33 2,688 807 -----· --.. ----------... ---------------------------------''"""""---------------------------,6'.•.\,~---~ ·, __ ) -\ ·508-'.'.,---- 'b \ ., "\ "' ..__ ,. / t I '· '.~ I Job Number Designed CMV Scale: 11614 Drown ~ Horizontal Checked _Jj£'£ 1H=50' Sheet Approved HPG Vertical Date 1 I l8l04 N/A 1 2 ---of--- - --- ~ ti.) ., j /· I I t, .,. ' I""' ,,,,,.o, I I I '' I I No. Dote By Ckd. Appr. Title: (Jl 0 0 0 ...... • II 01 q Revision -· m >< = (I) 4 = z C) 0 0 z 0 = =I = 0 z (I) EXISTING CONDITIONS EXHIBIT For: SHARMILA RATHINAM (425) 369-2198 File: P:\ 11 OOOs\ 11 61 4\exhibit\ 11614-EX2.dwg Date/Time: 11/09/2094 14:53 Scale: 1 =50 dholstod Xrefs: z 11614-s,z 11 614-t, I I ~1 I I I I I I I I [.' ") I I I I • I I I I 'I 5.0 CONVEYANCE SYSTEM ANALYSIS AND DESIGN I I I I • •• I I I I I D I I I I I • I ,-.) 5.0 ,,-- I ) \_. .) CONVEYANCE SYSTEM ANALYSIS AND DESIGN Runoff from the project will be collected in a series of catch basins and tightlined to the proposed stormwater facility. The conveyance system is designed in accordance with the 1998 KCWSWDM. Specifically, the system is sized to adequately convey the 25-year post-development event conveyance calculations can be found within this section of the Technical Information Report 11614.004.doc I I, ___ ' \ J I I I I I I I ·(-) \...., I I I I I I I .(~) I BACKWATER COMPUTER PROGRAM FOR PIPES Pipe data from file:11614bwl00.bwp Surcharge condition at intermediate junctions Tailwater Elevation:501. feet Discharge Range:2.37 to 3.37 Step of 0.1 [cfs] Overflow Elevation:505.79 feet Weir:NONE Channel Width:2. feet PIPE NO. 1: 34 LF -12"CP @ 13.26% OUTLET: 496.00 INLET: 500.51 INTYP: 5 JUNC NO. 1: OVERFLOW-EL: 503.72 BEND: 90 DEG DIA/WIDTH: 2.0 Q-RATIO: 0.37 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N-FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI ******************************************************************************* 2.37 2.47 2.57 2.67 2.77 2.87 2.97 3.07 3.17 3.27 3.37 3.37 1. 02 1. 05 1. 09 1.12 1.16 1. 20 1. 24 1. 28 1.33 1. 38 1.43 1.43 501.53 501.56 501. 60 501.63 501.67 501. 71 501.75 501. 79 501.84 501.89 501. 94 501.94 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 0.66 0.68 0.69 0.71 0.72 0.73 0.74 0. 76 0.77 0.78 0. 79 0.79 0.28 0.29 0.29 0.30 0. 31 0.31 0.32 0.32 0.33 0.33 0. 34 0.34 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 0.66 0.68 0.69 0.71 0. 72 0.73 0.74 0. 76 0. 77 0.78 0.79 0. 79 ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** 1. 02 1. 05 1.09 1.12 1.16 1.20 1.24 1. 28 1. 33 1. 38 1.43 1. 43 Us "3:, Th c...B 2- PI PE NO. 2: 168 LF -12"CP @ 1. 23% BEND: OUTLET: 500.51 INLET: 502.57 INTYP: 5 JUNC NO. 2: OVERFLOW-EL: 505.79 0 DEG DIA/WIDTH: 2.0 Q-RATIO: 0.60 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N-FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI ***************************************·**************************************** 1. 73 1. 80 1. 88 1. 95 2.02 2.09 2.17 2.24 2.31 2.39 2.46 2.46 0.81 0.83 0.85 0.88 0.90 · 0. 92 0.94 0. 96 0.98 1. 00 1. 03 1. 03 ~ 2. -+c ~I 503.38 503.40 503.42 503.45 503.47 503.49 503.51 503.5:i 503.55 503.57 503.60 503.60 PIPE NO. 3: 21 LF -12"CP * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 0.56 0.58 0.59 0.60 0.61 0.62 0.63 · 0. 65 0.66 0.67 0.68 0.68 0.45 0.46 0.47 0.48 0.49 0.50 0.51 0.52 0.53 0.54 0.55 0.55 1. 02 1.05 1. 09 1.12 1.16 1.20 1.24 1. 28 1. 33 1. 38 1.43 1.43 @ 1. 05% OUTLET: 502.57 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N-FAC DC DN TW 1. 02 1. 05 1. 09 1.12 1.16 1.20 1.24 1.28 1.33 1. 38 1. 43 1.43 0.56 0.58 0.59 0.60 0.61 0.62 0.63 0.65 0.66 0.67 0.68 0.68 ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** 0.81 0.83 0.85 0.88 0.90 0.92 .0. 94 0.96 0.98 1. 00 1. 03 1.03 INLET: 502.79 INTYP: 5 DO DE HWO HWI ******************************************************************************* 1. 08 1.13 1.17 0.69 0. 72 0.74 503.48 503.51 503.53 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 0.44 0.45 0.46 0.36 0.37 0.38 0.81 0.83 0.85 0.81 0.83 0.85 0.58 0.61 0.63 0.69 0.72 0.74 0.61 0.62 0.64 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1. 22 1.26 1.31 1. 35 1.40 1.45 1.49 1.54 1.54 0.76 503.55 0.78 503.57 0.80 503.59 0.83 503.62 0.85 503.64 0.87 503.66 0.90 503.69 0.93 503. 72 0.93 503.72 * 0.012 0.47 * 0.012 0.48 * 0.012 0.49 * 0.012 0.50 * 0.012 0.51 * 0.012 0.51 * 0.012 0.52 * 0.012 0.53 * 0.012 0.53 0. 39 0.88 0.88 0.65 0.76 0.65 0. 39 0.90 0.90 0.68 0.78 0.67 0.40 0. 92 0.92 0.70 0.80 0.68 0.41 0.94 0.94 0. 72 0.83 0.70 0.42 0.96 0.96 0.75 0.85 0.71 0.42 0.98 0.98 0.77 0.87 0.73 0.43 1. 00 1. 00 0.80 0.90 0.74 0.44 1.03 1. 03 0.83 0.93 0.76 0.44 1. 03 1. 03 0.83 0.93 0.76 I 1,. ; ) I I I I I I I le) I I I I I I ) I BACKWATER COMPUTER PROGRAM FOR PIPES Pipe data from file:11614bwlateral.bwp Surcharge condition at intermediate junctions Tailwater Elevation:501.94 feet Discharge Range:0.18 to 1.18 Step of 0.1 [cfs] Overflow Elevation:503.72 feet Weir:NONE Channel Width:2. feet ()3, 7:, -1-t, c..Xslf- PIPE NO. 1: 21 LF -12'CP @ 1. 00% OUTLET: 500.51 INLET: 500. 72 INTYP: 5 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N-FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI ******************************************************************************* 0.18 1. 23 501.95 * 0.012 0.18 0.15 1.43 1. 43 1. 23 1. 23 0.23 0.28 1. 22 501.94 * 0.012 0.22 0.19 1.43 1. 43 1. 22 1. 22 0.29 0.38 1.23 501. 95 * 0.012 0.26 0.22 1. 43 1.43 1.22 1. 23 0.34 0.48 1.23 501.95 * 0.012 0. 29 0. 24 1. 43 1.43 1.22 1. 23 0.39 0.58 1. 24 501. 96 * 0.012 0.32 0.27 1.43 1. 43 1.22 1.24 0.43 0.68 1. 24 501.96 * 0.012 0.35 0.29 1.43 1.43 1.23 1.24 0.47 0.78 1. 25 501. 97 * 0.012 0.37 0.31 1.43 1.43 1. 23 1.25 0.51 0.88 1. 26 501. 98 * 0.012 0.40 0.33 1.43 1.43 1.23 1. 26 0.55 0.98 1.27 501.99 * 0.012 0.42 0.35 1. 43 1.43 1.23 1.27 0.58 1. 08 1.28 502.00 * 0.012 0.44 0.37 1.43 1.43 1.24 1. 28 0.61 1.18 1. 29 502.01 * 0.012 0.46 0.38 1.43 1. 43 1.24 1.29 0.65 ----ilill .. ---l!!!!!I --- ·-· JOB NAME: nom Short Plat JOB#: 11614 REVISED: A-Contributing Aleo (Ac) C-Runoff Coeffielent Tc• Time of Concentration (min) 1. lntensltY at Tc (hi1Y) d• Diameter of Pipe(),) L-Length of Pipe (ft) 0-Water Depth at Qd (In) FROM TO A (' J klnQC0· 100.xts BARGHAUSEN CONSULTING ENGINEERS -PIPE FLOW CALCULATOR uSing the Rational Method & Mannino Formula KING COUN1Y DESIGN FOR 100 YEAR STORM NOTE: ENTER DEFAULTS ANO STORM DATA BEFORE BEGINNING DEFAULI~ C• ~~ ~-.. 09 0.013 n. Qd,. Design Flow (Cts) Qf,. FuD CQPOCitv Flow (Cfs) Vd• Veloctty at Design FIOW (fps) Vf• Velocity at Full F!Ow (fps) s,. 9ope of pipe(%) n. MoMlng Roughness Coefficient n. Travel Time at Vd (m!n) d Tc n d-12 Tc• 6.3 COEFF\CJENTS FOR THE RATIONAL METHOD ir•-EQUATION -STOOM ,., " . 2VR 1.58 0.58 lOYR 2.44 0.64 PRECIP .. 3.41 25YR 2.66 0.65 IV-2.6"il 50YR 2.75 0.65 B<-0.631 lOOYR · 2.61 0.63 C I SUMA l ·A"C ISUMA"C Qd Qt Qd/Qf -~-_;;--·;:.;;· ·-;~-r~;-· --~;-· -~~~;-·;;;· •==··· -~'.;;·1··;;··· ·;:;;· ....... •= ........ ==••• 0.83 5.04 0.166 209 4.09 0.510 CBl CS2 CB2 CB3 0.401 0.75 1.32 167 12 6.4 0.013 0.t.08 1.151 O.A6 0.76 2.76 CB.3 POND 0.85 16.87 79 12 6.9 0.013 0.618 2.001 0.53 1.28 2.63 3.37 14.63 0.230 CB4 CB.3 0.77 2.00 21 12 6.3 0.013 0.55 0.77 0.42 0.42 2.78 1.18 5.04 0.234 Page 1 --------:) Did D VI Vd Tl ... ,.... ==··· =....... •==,.·· ===·"'· 0.272 3.27 6.42 4.73 O.Q7 0.506 6.07 5.21 5.26 0.53 0.324 3.89 18.64 15.10 0.09 0.327 3.93 6.42 5.22 0.07 ~ -l!-30' 1 •'; '.! li£ E!ta* ,-ti () 525 520 515 iii,l LOIi' P()IN1 [l(V ;a·5ro_g1· .L.0Wl'PIHT.~,\:~.10t65 l'VI 'ST/\ ,.--10+60 ™:nw:.,; 503.61 A.o .. .! -5-.00- K ·,,. no_oo. ~-. P"ll STA ,.: iH20 ·: PVUU\I :;;. :SOU1 .o..o: ": .:_o.,5. K :• ~2.(4 ~oo··yi:; 510 III!lt ~J~if ·. ·.1·.· •.... ; -f ll 505 ry ~- 495 .. '4.-Tl'F'Eh, 2;:u:ti;-:so:o·i.ooi r·--;_ . 'It/ f!OUill_ V,IJQ:CPATt. _ JD_· G_ROl;JND EL ·;1~-'-I~ifflt~ ;r""'~ ,..c.i, .• "'"''"' 51g 81ai 2~ .l ····---··-· ................. .J ___ .[ ____ _ """' .... ROAD 'A' PRORLE l 0 •J0·11 1"•5'V CALL BEFORE YOU DIG 1-800-424-5555 l/Tl.J1Y CONR.JCT NQJE: CAllllOI+ THE CONTfW:TOR SfW.l BE RESPONSIBLE FOR VEFtlfYING THE LOCAllO~ Dl~[~N. NlD DEPTH or All EX!STING UTIUTIES WHETHER SHOWN ON Tl-1ESE PV,NS OR Nm 8'T' P01HOUNG THE UTlLITIES AND S1JR',1£YlNG THE HORIZONTAL AND VEFllCAL LOCATION PRIOR TO CONSfROCOON THIS SHALL INCLUDE CAWM, UTIUlY LOCATE O l-B00-424-5555 .t.ND lHDI l'OlHOLING ALL Of THE EJ(ISTIN~ VTIUTIES AT LOCA.TIONS Of NEW unt.m' CROSSIOOS 10 Pt-fYSICOUl V£RlFY \IJHETHER 00 t,l,JT CONFLICTS EXIST. LOCATIONS OF SMl UTILmES AS SH:lWN ON THESE ~IA1"_S ~ __ Bl,$EQ_Uf'O!l_!Ht ~d~~T~~~~L~fu.u~ECT TO V.tJl~TION. . TO RESOLVE All PROBLEMS PRIOR TO Pf!OCE[l)ING wrTH COITT!w::TOR SHAU. BE rut.u R!;SPONSIBLE FOR OBTAINING PERl,IIJS FROM TH[ WASHINGTON ST-'TE DEPNmlENT OF W.TURAL RESOURCES fDR REMOVING NIO REPIACING AU SLIIMY MON\JM[NTATION THAT MA.Y BE AITECTID RY CONSTRUCTION ACTMIY, PU~UANT TO WAC JJ2-120. WPUCATlONS MUST B£ COMPI.EIED RY A REG=EO ~O SURVrnlR. APPLJC,1,1101-15 FOR Prntm'S TO R~ MONu.lENTS f.lAY B£ 08TAJNEO FRO!,! lliE WloSHINGTON STATE DEPilRTMENT Df NAT\/IW. ( ---~URCES, OR B"1 CONTACTING lliEIR OFFII:( Ell' T8..£PIJONE AT (206) 902-11!!0 '. ,) WASHIM;TON STATE D[P.O.RIMENT or W.lURAL RESOURCES .._ PUBIJC LANO SLPlfl/EY Off1C£ 1111 WASHINGION smm S.E. P.O. BOX noro Oll'WPIA, W"5HSNGTDN 9B504-7060 UPON Cl'.lMP!.rnON or CONST!IUCTION. ALL MONUMENIS OISPl..l,C[[), RO.ICM:O. OR OfSTROYEll SH-"1.L BE REJ>lACEO RY ,._ RfGISTERID I.NW SUMY0R. -"l THE COST AND AT mE DIRECTION OF THE COf'flAAC"IOR, PURSUANT TO lli(SE REGULATIONS. mE APPROPRIATE FURIIS FOR REPI.JcrMENT or s.w MONUWENTATION SHAU. Al.SO 8[ THE RESPONSl8UIY OF Tl!E COITTRACTOff ·.i ··" 3~ 0 =·.·.· ~ ~ii f''~ r .:·-:.--: .... : ·2.1.U':.:12·.so·. CBf 1, TYPE 1 0 MO~ . W/IROlliO. VANID 'GRAlE STA; 12+J2.53. ·10(50'LT . RIMi-505.79. : . . . . . . RATHINAM SHORT PLAT GRADING AND STORM DRAINAGE PLAN LOCATED IN THE S.W. 1/4 OF THE SW. 1/4 OF SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST ,!"-;, .,~J5t:~:.1;;J;{::?F-}~\1~: ~ ~~>~~;··~~\ ('---~ ; ,#.-!' ' '\ !!'"f; -• TYPE III BARRICADE _,.,p!f .-,.;<J!iD "'Q_;i.[; ... ~f;~~;; ;~~} ;~~-i / 01· u,;__,;'[; (C'i<f1Li? -;.1:,}¥ .;.•'f-,:;,::::- ,,~·, .¢),.. !5 ,,;~;f'f:, " . 1:.« 525'{·''· "' ~. I\ '. A ~, ,.,..,,=='ij .k ..... :s20 IG; S .;:;?' 515 P~;<[I/T ?,v,,::n C.i-?fA· :id.{11'.,fa C:Q. _; .. ;-_ 510 :.-)._,.., ,-..j ~Sj r-:r:n£: .,_~'' 505 \'·,t'1/'!}g.)llv.'i:ff'{/;<" 500 495 ,2 5• PV(: TJGHTLlliE 0 1.0:l-' MIN. SLOPE FOR CONNECTION TO ROOf/ »ID FOOTING ft '-'~-~-·«-.,-+~~·~'~·~~~ ... ~-'Dfl>l_!~K,~ """1 DETAIL THts SHEET ,; "' N89'51"0J"F .JJO.J4"(PlAT) ""·--so'Sl"E .JJO • .J.1-jQP,(.,t'D) ,c-; 7 :TY i~: :; ?:~~\t; ____ ~ _ ~ SOS.6,}~(,$-, ~ ._ ---~PORAAY EASI / (42" RADI\JS) / ,,,.,// ,,~,~ / -NT mi,</'!¥' 6 -.."fl,-'*' 7· \ _.,Ai 1 0· 1( ~c. 6" f'VC TlGHTtmE 0 1.(1,: MIN. SLOPE: FOR CONNECTION OF" ROOF AND FOCffi'IIG DRAINS (TYP.) !M~''' r; ,,-;, at a;, " ,_ 'i" ~ ~~,;:.'* .,.4';,; b '~ Wii 8, L(·"t ii o--~ T--1, :, .. ·">.;- "?-;,;-·' --F""""··•l''.,'. ''"-' ! I a.. o RtlODWAY fl. j -~~ ,-,i tJ CATCH BASIN TABLE• Ci\, T!'PE I W RDLl.£D V"NEO G 1£ SA: T2+J2.SJ, 10.50Rj\T RM=505.79 IE~:;()2.79 (E) CBf2, l'YPE I STA: 12+J2.SJ, 10.50" RT RIM=505.79 £-502.57 (w.s) CBf3, TY!'E I ST!c 10+65.00. 10.50" RT RIM~SOJ.72 E-500.51 (N,W) Ci4, T!'PE f W R0I.L£D VANED GAATE 5 /1\: 1D+65.00, 10.50" LT RlM-50J.72 rt~S00.72"([) C8f5. TYPE I STA. 11+17.08. 21.00" lT R!l,$-505.87 E•502.B7 (E.W) cef6, TYPE: I STk 13+11.~, 21.00' LT Rlt,t..501.89 IE~49H.1H (N.E..W} CBl7, TYPE l STA. 13+21.0!l, 21.00' LT RIM~SOl.71 IE--497.99 (N,E,W) CBl8, TYPE I CONNECT TO EX. SD PIPE S"IA. 13+~2.95, 22.67' LT RIM~S00.89 IE=-197.77 MHll. TYP£ II -S4" W(JA/lHOUSE STk 13+2!.02, 62.B1" LT RIM=502.00 IE-498.20 CB#9. TYPE II -46. W/ BIRDCAGE: STA: 13+21.02, 62.81" LT Rlt.1=501.lO 1["'499.30 515 510 505 500 495 /::l ~i~ ,,.,,, SE 192:NO ST. CONSTRUCTION "l.lGNMENT STAAT POIN"l N 5001.8477 E 5330.4281 l~f\i1l~:c:ii: 21.IJO·_n · SE 192ND ST PRORLE · i~~JO'lf 1"~5\'" . ·· .. . :. :-fEX-:6Rru~_O .. 1 ----,------;{:~ .,, -1· ; r-:i~ ;"' "'1~ ' ;r;~ J;g ... L ................... .1..... ,. 11+00 -=:·····. ~--~~ .. ·--· . - II' · · sr~ 1J+11,;:,t~;~~~ .. -. ---. RIM"50t.1!9 · 1~~f9!!.18(N,E,W} J~ :Lf: 12· :sP: ~-uox ·sr· ~ f R POSE[) GROUND .· . .· .' .A :13f21,09 •. 7.'1,ot.,! 11.0WI.JN[ . · I[-'-RIM~501 71 j • /''-"-'r so O ,;::',~l'.c•J 0 ' ;g :J:g "I" .,,. t if~ 12+00 lJ+OO 10 v: .1r so· D·I.~· ~] ' ::-i~ JF .. .l H1.59 515 ,510 '505 500 '495 KING COUNTY D.D.LS. Review Engineer Revie"' Engineer JAMES H. SANDERS, P.E DEVELOPMENT ENGINEER Cornments: Completion Dote Completion Dote Approval Dote ~ 1 1 ~ ~ i ;_ .i i'= ~ <t z a: I-~ fr j 0 w n. ~ .J 1-ir [[ a: aoo ti IE vi 0 0 :::!i z z <t <t <t z c,z'E 6'.) !::;: 0 IL OC ~ :::; "' <t i--: 5 ~ (/) ~ co ~~~r;J [C -I <t w ::c $ _Jo,22(") ~ <O:::; ~ a:O<(IJ') <ta:::;~ I~ :::E .._.. (/) N <t (/) TIPiRES&-f0-::-05 i J f H ~ ~ I l J-1 5 0 ~ W X ~ ~ z ~ WN >f')NN <CON a:, 00 N ~ 0 01 ,,:,co Z I ! N <( --;-.. 3-,n ..., NN ..., -~~ -1-,,-,u, NZNN a::,w-s1--.,. -Y~~ ~ ,= 1 -~ ~~ !~ . " ~§ "'~ ~:if aw ~~ :fl b u• "' 31 t " E I ~ t ] i ~ { " ; ! ~ ij l I l I i i i I i ! I ' I I I I I 1 I ! I ! I ~ I 11· I 1 !(~ I BARGHAUSEN DATE, z-~-os-PAGE_,_oF_,_ CONSULTING ENGINEER: C V I ENGINEERS, INC. PROJECT #===,=1 (R=!=<I-============== (J\...'.:_'.PR~O~J~EC~T~/S~U~BJ~E~CT~:.::::::::::~~=\A.)=:::::;~=J=o~=S=·~·kn_~/4d1y:=::::::::~,h~4~M:::::,~~=h~o=d==:~=/=q=f======/ I I I I I I I I I I I ! I lt-t-t-t---t--t'.J):::-+-_" ----ifl---c(rf·L-+-,1 -tci-. 21+1,-i.-<--i\1+ ,::i:· "Z... I (\ •,::; . "2. 1 lD. 4--'- H-·+-+---1----;-,_~!-±~~-C .( i I -1---1--1----+--+-l --+---·+-+-+--+-+I ·-rt-. 1-1--+--tl-+-+----t-+-1---H I l<J'l-1-t--+----t-+---+-+--+--+---+-+-+--,--t-t--+--+--+--t-+--+-! -+-! -,-! --t-t-+---+-+--+----t-+---+-1 -+--t---+--t---tt +I 1+: ii I -,--+--_• i 1-·---~ i+-1 1 I I-~ ------------1-----1=---1-+---------------1--4 l------------1 ~-----I t---·----------+------i·--+1------------------------H_---------~ -----·--------- ;--+.--·---·--1----------!----------! · · ----·-· -1--+--H I -t--t--f--t---r+--l-l--+--+--i,-' -+1 -+---+--+-+--1--+--t--+-+-f ----ij-t--+--+-+I 1 I I I I ! I I I I I l I H-+--·1----+--+--.I----•·-~-!-+--~ -·•-· , +f--t---1---l I I I I I , I i I ,-,,,_,~-+--+--h I I i 1,.-,,. H---+--+--t--t--+-+--t--+--+--t-t--t--+--l---l--!-+-+--+-+--t-+--+--1---l--!-+-+--+--t-t--t--t-+-+-+I 1+--1--+--+---+---+-+--+--+----+--+I -t1-~-i ; I I I f i I i I I I I I I I I I Ir, I I I I I I I 6.0 SPECIAL REPORTS AND STUDIES I (J I I I I I I I \ ) I . - I ,-05/20/2005 11:25 4257460860 EARTH CONSULTANTS PAGE 02/135 'n -~~.,h~~~~~~~~r~.~:.,.~~~: I ""''""""'"' ·1\-sHnp: • 1mr,; WAllO lnSfX<'IKY> ill.VIC= . . EStahlis\11.".<1 197S I I I I I I I I I I May 20, 2005 Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 18215 -72"d Avenue South Kent, Washington 98032 Attention: Subject: Dear Mr. Grubb: Mr. Hal Grubb, PE Pavement Design Rathinam Short Plat Southeast 192•• Street near 1 16"' Avenue Southeast King County, Washington E-11853 As requested, Earth Consultants, Inc. (ECI) is providing a pavement design for the widening of Southeast 192"d Street near 116"' Avenue Southeast. In preparing this design, we visited the site to collect a representative sample of the pavement subgrade materials and conducted a California Bearing Ratio test on the soils. Project Description ECI understands that as part of the site development the north shoulder of Southeast 192"d Street will be widened. The widening operation will consist of sawcutting the existing pavement edge and extending the paved area another one to two feet. 1805136th Place N.E., Suite 201, Bellevue, WA98005 Bellevue (425) 643·3780 FAX (425) 746·0860 Toll Free (888) 739-6670 Other Locations Fife I I mn I I I· 'I le_) I I I I •• I I I' I ) 4257460860 Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. May 20, 2005 Design Values EARTH CONSULTANTS PAGE 03/05 E-11853 Page 2 Our pavement design is based on a California Bearing Ratio (CBR) of 4.2 for the soils based our laboratory testing. Traffic design values were obtained from Table 11.3 of the AASHTO Guide for Design of Pavement Structures (1986). For our design, the .street was classified as an urban minor arterial with a corresponding ESAL of 700,000 for a 20-year design life. Pavement Design Widening The AASHTOWARE DARWin Pavement Design and Analysis System program was used to calculate the pavement section for the widened section. Input and output parameters are attached. ECl's design indicates the following pavement section can be used for the pavement widening: 0 4.5 inches of asphalt concrete (AC) over 6 inches of crushed rock base (CRB) material over 8.5 inches of gravel base. The gravel base and the CRB should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density per ASTM D-1557, Modified Proctor. The crushed rock base should consist of 1.5 inches of crushed surfacing top course (CSTC) underlain by crushed surfacing base course (CSBC) to achieve the depth specified above. CSTC and CSBC should conform to the gradation standards in Section 9-03.9(3) of the WSDOT standards. The native materials or structural fill placed for pavement subgrade should be moisture conditioned, graded and compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density per ASTM 0-698 (Standard Proctor) to subgrade elevations below the gravel base material. Additional Services A representative of ECI should be on site to observe the subgrade in the widened section and test the compaction of the existing subgrade, gravel base, and CAB. I I ,r) I ,a 1, I I I, I I I I I I 05/20/2005 11:25 4257460860 ' . Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. May 20, 2005 EARTH CONSULTANTS EC\ trusts this letter meets your needs. If you have any questions, please call. Respectfully submitted, EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. f!....XP~S 02~ 7 Kristina M. Weller, PE Associate Principal Scott D. Dinkelrnan, LEG Principal KMW/SDD/lap Attachments: DARWin Pavement Design Printouts cc: Plate 1, California Bearing Ratio Test Results Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. Attention: Mr. Hal Grubb, PE PAGE 04/05 E-11853 Page .2 I I ,1-) I. I, I I I I I:> I I I I I I ,, 1· I 4257460860 EARTH CON5ULTANTS 1993 AASHTO Pavement Design DARWin Pavement Design and Analysis System A Proprietary AASHTOWare Computer Software Product l!arth C'.onsulumts, Inc. 1805 -136th Place Northeast, Suite 201 Bellevue, Washington USA Flexible Structural Design Module 18-l<ip ESA Ls Over Initial Perfonnance Period Initial Serviceability Terminal Serviceability Reliability Level Overall Standard Deviation Roadbed Soil Resilient Modulus Stage Constniction Calculated Design S1rUct1iral Number Thickness precision Layer I 2 3 Total Material Description asphalt concrete crushed roclc base gravel base Struet Coef. {Ai} 0.44 0.13 . O.tl Southeast 192nd Street !Flexible StructuraD Design 700,000. 4.2 2.7 . 85% 05 6,104psl · 1 3.56 in Layered Thickness Design Nearest 0.5 in Drain Spec Min Elastic Coef. Thickness Thickness Modulus (Mi) ffiil@l (Ql)(in} (1ml 1 2 1-00,000 0.95 6 28,000 0.95 8 20,000 Page I Calculated Width Thickness (f!l lli!) 4.50 6.00 8.50 19.00 PAGE 05/05 Galculated SN fin) t,qg 0.74 0.89 3.61 I I I, •. ,) I I I I I I I 7.0 OTHER PERMITS I {,·) I I I n D I D i I ~ I I I • () I I I I I I I I (J I I I I I I I I I ,I I \ 7.0 OTHER PERMITS o Postmaster/ Mailbox Location Approval • Fire Hydrant Locations Approval • Street Name Approval o King County Metro Approval 11614.004.doc I I I I I I I I I 1• I -I I I I I I I I ~, .. ) I~) '--· ) ~ ' " Bil: 525 520 515 T-30' "' " "nWP,J :i.ow POIII( ri£v ;._S0191 LOI Pl'.*J:STA.-.lo+61! ···l',OI ffl ·•·1o+IO · · P\II-E1£V 1.: 50.Ui . . : '.IJ).:.:. S.:00 : . - "k.; ·10.DO·. 5Q..OO".,,,;:.· p-, srA ;.· n+:m· · · PYI: El!Y,;,;--50,[!C" . AD: •;--0.IIS: . "K-' ~44· . 50.00·:..;; . 5IO Jlt :· .:.i:; J~> 505 ::' 500 495. 1~ >§ ..... .. utr.tf.so.~:0.11.x:: :rm; 1. . ~:~ m 1o+e.oo. -~ u "'b ~72ro _ ,. ij I . .... ROAD 'A' PROFU..E 1·.30,< 1"-5'\I ~I [CJ I.L BEFORE YOU DIO I ~D0-424-5555 ELORCWlWl'IYl - COM'IAIICTOR StW.!. !IE f\A.I.Y RtSl'CHill.£ mt 08TMIIC F'OMTS FIIOU THE ""51eN.ltlN ST"''lE DEPAlflVEJCT OF W.nJW. RESOJRCES FOR RD10W1G .lfCI IIEPl.lOC Ill Sl#4Y lilONIMOITA110N '!W.T IMT IIE .lfl'ttilII BT' OONSTIOClDI M:JMIY, PUISlWfT 10 1lllC 332-1211. oflF'Pl.£*,11QNS lll5r BC IXM>I.ETID 1h' /l. flElllSlERED LW) SllMYOR. WPUC'lilDIS RlR P£IIIIITS fl) RDICYE lilDIU«MlS lMT IIE oerloNED flO,I tllE ~ srm OlJ'IIRTMENf OF IWUIW. RESOUAa:S. OR 8T' CONTICTIC ll-£R om;:£ 1h' TElD'IOt£ 1(1 (206) 902-1100. IMSHICTOM STA1E: EEWmlENT Of k'JIM. n;snan PUaJ,'.: I.NCI SUIM'I' oma: 1111~SlllfDS,£. P.O. 11C11 47080 OL'l'IIAI,, ~'JlltlCM-JOIIO I.FON CCIIF\.D1CIN OF CXlM51WUCTlON, M.I. IICIU,ID(lS t&UaD, ADIIMD. DR OESTJIOTEI) Slw.L BE RtPIJCm IT A IIBISmtED LAN> SUM'tOR, "1 l1iE C0SJ NII AT l1iE Oli8:llON Of 'II£ IXllflRIIC:roR, PURSIWff to Tl€SC RECUlAllOIIS. l1iE Af'l'IIICIPIIII ftlRIIS FOR FIEPt./llCDIDfl OF SIii IIDUEff.lJlDN StW..L .1iL50 BE THC R£3PCNSIBIJlY OF 1HE ~ -~ "' -~~ : . ~.:. ,,iL· ._.if . ~:·· RATHINAM SHOAT PLAT GRADING AND STORM DRAINAGE PLAN LOCATED IN 11-IE S.W. V4 OF TI-E S.W. V4 OF SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH. RANGE 5 EAST ,. S! ™ f0, y.~'}t ... "1 .. o.so t /<. ~JP. dlii\ .OUND ,1 1/2" IRQN PIP( Q.27' W 6-0."5 S. OF ~~ ';' 9:_i'<;!f? '· •OVND 112" R£B<R ANDO_~ ill i.~~!l 0, CALC'!:i COP.li[R ,.,• \ ,-¥ I ,.;,• '\ ,-,,• \ 15 ?"~ ,.<, 'c-~·~\f;,~ ~ ..-,; o-a:g-iGi i.Li A,M D --;:~ "t ............. -- ~~v'{;::<:..~· • _ _.,t,,,:·?:,-~ ~,;;.·· 520 515 5IO LOT 8 ,•-' PARENT PJ:RCH AR!:A; 98.008± SO. FT. (2.25~ ACRES) :1;QTE: _,.,. 505 AU £XIS1!NG smucrum:s 10 8£ R[\IQ\fll. 515 ,"!;,,46 \ I I I ' \ 3 I i ,2 ROl.ilD Cll!B ~ CUTTER PER OCI'f 'MS SI-ID' r ,.I, """"' ~-:.~ "" " ,~~co· , fDi.,'tifl -.·x ,· .-pw· ~N ~/. roe flRQ"fN . f:R6 W. & 0 52 ~-0 CAL O C.oRNf.P ,.,. \. _.,r~ C-RO!./,';O •' o ' ,... 'I . < hi' !<!' CZ ,-, ~·• .t: 1.7 :1: II'. OF P/WP / ,> ,' ,;(· 6 \ \ \ ',-1-~ 7\ \ " \ -,: 81 ~ \ ,,,. ,~~- \ "\ ... ./ / 9 I ,} I I T-41 CATCH BASIN TABLE, =~~~~ ~~~CR>\Tt sfA: 12+3"3, 10.50' LT _,, 1£0,50%.'79 (E) g!f,,~12.!,0'111 _,, l[-::C.Z..57 (W.S) C8fJ. Tl'PE I SfA: 10+0!!,.00, 12:.50' R'I -=n 1£-500.$1 (M,w) ~ 4.Tl'PEI ROI.Lt!) \'MED llllt.Tt to+e5,Dl, 1D.50' tT -=n 1£-500.72 (t} ~1lm.le.nwu _.,,., lf:"5Clll7 ([.'I) --· Sl'k 13+11.35, 21.oo' lT ........ E--4N.11 (H.E.W) g'f;~~ 21.oo' LT llll'*'Dl.71 E:•497.lt (M.E.W) ~ 1YPfo ID.. SO PIPE st,.. 13+52.t~ 22-IT LT ........ E--4117.n :Z I, TYPE I -~· -IJ.+21.02, 52.111' LT RIY--502.00 · ........ :?D. TYPE ~ -411' ""'"' 1J.+:tl.o2. SU11' LT _,.,.,, £-481.JO 500[ 495 ~ ,,,., . ' se :s2N6 .sr.' PROFU: • . i:-~-1·_-~'V::. ! ~; ~i ,,_ I -,i ~§ i ,,_ l'1IOPOSa) .OACIUC) • o: FUJlllJI[: · . J1'.1F:1r.so o'il.M:ii:· ij '"" LOT 7 .,,. ' ,,,t1(!f.'tt '- Cr) \c ,.,,.. tor 9 ,,,. '<>, ...,. ' 1tW ~ ~-'t~ o e · "" {)-t).r ();v. -"'""" """""""""""""' -"' """""""' . ~~w !~.~ IIDOl'E tx. CB IE•t497.lll D. """"" . ·cs•'. ---··-c-····· -· :HO lf 0. 12" SD :·: 515 : .. :-:510 '-,:~ :500 : 4116 "';I •! KN. COUNTY. O.D.LS. Re..;..~ --JMIES H. SANOERS, P.E. DE\'El.OPMEN1" DQNEER Comment.: Compi.tton Dcrt, CompleUon o.ife -- l!J ~ IC I- JI ~ ~ ~ ~~~ 0 0 :::I: zz~ <( <( is~ ~ i Q. ~ •' ~~ • 1~1 ~~~! u11 j I ~ I! ~ ' ~ ~ ~ Ii l l ; I ~ ~ ~~NN ~~~~ z °' I I ~,~~ ,n ·--Nffi~~ ~::w::.:!..- d ~~ 0 d :I ,; ...... ,., ••.. ::, ~-i <r ~ :c ' : \..,_ tt:.o"""'-.?J~ I i I "I • ... 31 h,, .; 0 ~ . J \r ~· i-:r- ~ o j .7 I.~ jJ ·~ ~~ ·-? q. ; 4: {2 .l 0 Ii ! V ' 0 iJ i~ ! 111 /J j -:;;-< ~ j'. I Ir> I I I I I I I 8.0 ESC ANALYSIS AND DESIGN I () I I I I I I • r 11 ... / I I I {') ' , I I I I I I I I ,. ' i ) \,j I I I I I I I I I 8.0 ESC ANALYSIS AND DESIGN The Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control (TESC) analysis and design complies with the KCSWDM. The TESC elements are addressed as follows: Clearing Limits: The clearing limits are on the engineering plans and will be flagged in the field. Cover Measures: Cover measures are added in the TESC notes on the engineering plans. Perimeter Protection: (silt fencing). Perimeter protection is shown on the engineering plans Traffic Area Stabilization: A stabilized gravel construction entrance is shown on the engineering plans. Sediment Retention: A temporary sediment pond is proposed on site at the low point in the topography. Surface Water Control: Interceptor ·ditches with checked dams are shown on the engineering plans and will be implemented during construction if needed. Dust Control: Dust control by sprinklering will be utilized if needed. Wet Season Construction: Construction will be conducted according to the King County's standards during the wet season. Construction Within Sensitive Areas and Buffers: No construction is proposed within sensitive areas or buffers. Maintenance: Maintenance requirements are detailed in the TESC notes on the engineering plans. Final Stabilization: Upon completion of the project, all disturbed areas will be stabilized and Best Management Practices removed if appropriate. 11614.004.doc I I {) I I I I I I I I ) I I I I I I I I I KCRTS Command CREATE a new Time Series Production of Runoff Time Series Project Location: Sea-Tac Computing Series 11614TESC.tsf Regional Scale Factor: 1.00 Data Type : Reduced Creating 15-minute Time Series File Loading Time Series File:C:\KC_SWDM\KC_DATA\STTG15R.rnf Till Grass 1.16 acres Irnp~rvious Loading Time Series File:C:\KC_SWDM\KC_DATA\STEI15R.rn.f 1. 09 acres Total Area 2.25 acres Peak Discharge: 1.87 CFS at 6:30 on Jan 9 in Year 8 Storing Time Series File:11614TESC.tsf Time Series Computed KCRTS Command Enter the Analysis TOOLS Module Analysis Tools Command Compute PEAKS and Flow Frequencies Loading Stage/Discharge curve:11614tesc.tsf Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:11614tesc.tsf Project Location:Sea-Tac Frequencies & Peaks saved to File:11614TESC.pks Analysis Tools Command RETURN to Previous Menu KCRTS Command exit KCRTS Program I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I • I I \ () Flow Frequency Analysis Time series File:11614tesc.tsf Project Location:sea-Tac ---Annual Peak Flow Rates--- Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak (CFS) o. 519 6 8/27/0118:00 0.395 8 1/05/02 15:00 1.24 2 12/08/02 17:15 0.418 7 8/23/04 14: 30 0.808 3 11/17/04 5:00 0.657 5 10/27/05 10:45 0.742 4 10/25/06 22:45 1.87 1 1/09/08 6: 30 11614TESC.pks -----Flow Frequency Analysis------- --Peaks Rank Return Prob (CFS) Period 1.87 1 100.00 0.990 1.24 2 25 .00 0.960 0.808 3 10.00 0.900 o. 742 4 5 .00 0.800 c&:nb 5 3 .00 0.667 6 2.00 0. 500 0.418 7 1.30 0.231 0.395 8 1.10 0.091 computed Peaks 1. 66 50.00 0.980 . ) \ .- .SA:: z.otoos+ ~ Q.(s 11'\.ft!M) SA" (_z.o?>o )(. Sl CJ) : 1019. 5Lc.-8. Page 1 --== == == 11111111 11111a Ilia iiiii iiiii liiii iiiii liliiiii -------, Site Improvement Born:i Quantity Worksheet J ·- @ Kung County Department of Development & Environmental Services 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Renton, Washington 98055-1219 206-296-6600 TTY 206-296-7217 Project Name: Rathinam Short Plat Location: 11634 SE 192nd StrE!et Renton, WA 98075 Clearing greater than or equal to 5,000 board feet of timber? ~~~~~~~ yes If yes, Forest Practice Permit Number: (RCW 76.09) Page 1 of 9 X no For alternate formats, call 206-296-6600. Date: 11/11/2004 Project No.: L04S0003 Activity No,: Note: _All prices include labor, equipment, materials, overhead and profit. Prices are from RS Means data adjusted for the Seattle area or from local sources if not included in the RS Means database. 11614Bond Quantity Worksheet.xis Check out the DOES Web site at www.metrokc.gov/ddes Unit prices updated: 02/12/02 . Version: 04/22/02 Report Date: 4/12/2005 --111!!!1 !!!!!!I !!!!! !!!I m=I 1111111 ;;;;a liiiiiii liiiil liiiil -------,,.--, ,_ Site Improvement Bond Quantity Worksheet IEROSiONISEDIMENffi}comaoitt I Backfill & comoaction-embankment lCheck dams, 4" minus rock 1 1/4" minus rExcavation-bulk !Fence, silt 'NGPE) ged ' berm section Water truck, dust control 1WRttSilwttEMSltii':( Page 2 of 9 11614Bond Quantity Worksheet.xis ESC-1 ESC-2 SWDM 5.4.6.3 ESC-3 WSDOT 9-03.9(3) ESC-4 ESC-5 ESC-6 SWDM 5.4.3.1 ESC-7 ESC-8 SWDM 5.4.2.4 ESC-9 SWDM 5.4.2.2 ESC-10 SWDM 5.4.2.1 ESC-11 SWDM 5.4.2.1 ESC-12 ESC-13 ESC-14 ESC-15 SWDM 5.4.2.3 ESC-16 WSOOT 9-13.112) ESC-17 SWDM 5.4.4.1 ESC-18 SWDM 5.4.4.1 ESC-19 SWDM 5.4.5.2 ESC-20 SWOM 5.4.5.1 ESC-21 SWDM 5.4.5.1 ESC-22 SWDM 5.4.2.4 ESC-23 SWDM 5.4.2.5 ESC-24 SWDM 5.4.2.5 ESC-25 IESC-26 SWDM 5.4.7 $ 5.62 CY $ 67.51 Each I 1 I $ 85.45 CY $ 8.08 CY I 201 s 1.50 CY s 1.38 LF I 4501 $ 1.38 LF $ 0.59 SY I 48001 $ 1.45 SY s 2.01 SY $ 0.53 SY $ 10.70 LF $ 16.10 LF $ 20.70 LF $ 2.30 SY s 39.08 CY $ 1,464.34 Each I 11 $ 2,928.68 Each $ 1,949.38 Each $ 17.91 LF I 30J $ 68.54 LF s 0.51 SY $ 6.03 SY s 7.45 SY $ 74.75 HR I - 6 $ 97.75 HR I 8 Each ESC SUBTOTAL: 30% CONTINGENCY & MOBILIZATION: ESCTOTAL: COLUMN: Check out the DOES Web site at www.metrokc.gov/ddes :) 11 68 , 1 162 , 1 621 1 I 2832 -11 1464 -11 537 $ 6,914.25 $_ 2,074.28 $ 8,988.53 A Un~ prices updated: 02/12/02 Version: 04/22/02 Report Date: 4/12/2005 I!!!!! I!!!! l!!!!I l!!!!I !!!!!I l!!!!I l!!!!I l!!!!I l!!!I == == == == == Site Improvement BoR Quantity Worksheet v Gl-2 $ 8.53 GI· 3 s 0.36 ree Removal GI· 4 $ 8,876.16 Excavation • bulk GI -5 $ 1.50 Excavation -Trench GI· 6 $ 4.06 GI -7 $ 18.55 6' hi 0 ~ GI. 8 $ 13.44 GI· 9 $ 1,271.81 GI· 10 $ 12.12 GI -11 s 22.57 GI· 1' $ 25.48 GI· 13 $ 37.85 $ 54.31 $ 74.85 GI -1' $ 132.48 GI -1· $ 2.02 GI -18 s 0.95 GI· 19 $ 135.13 GI -20 $ 2.88 GI -21 $ 7.46 GI -2 $ 788.26 GI· 2 $ 1,556.64 ·aers) GI· 24 $ 85.18 GI· 25 $ 7.59 IT rail, 4" crushed cinder GI -26 $ 8.33 lTrail, 4" ton course GI -2i $ 8.19 a, concrete GI· 28 $ 44.16 GI -29 $ 9.49 Page 3 of 9 SUBTOTAL *KCC 27A authorizes only one bond reduction. 116148ond Quantity Worksheet.xis SY Acre -1 T 1 1 2.251 CY I I I 400! 500.ooj CY LF LF I T T 35oT 4,7o4.ooT Each 1 1 l 2 2,543.621 LF CY CY CY SY SY SY SY SY 1 1 3oool 2 850.ool Each I I I 1 I 135.13j Each SY -- Dav 2 1 576.52 Acre 2.251 HR 8 681.44 16 1,362.88 SY SY SY SF SF ----·---- 1,243.44 16,582._15 Check out the ODES Web site at www.metrokc.gov/ddes --;;;a .. --·. J ll111111~1iill::1~ 19,971.361 3,502.44 23,473.80 Unit prices updated: 02/12/02 Version: 4/22/02 Report Date: 4/12/2005 .. == 1111 liiiil iii iiiiiiiiil _______ _ Site Improvement Bor"'l Quantity Worksheet - $ 1.38 $ 41.14 RI· 5 $ 30.03 Barricade, hme Ill (Permanent\ RI· 6 s 45.05 Curb & Gutter, rolled RI· 7 s 13.27 Curb & Gutter, vertical RI· B $ 9.69 Curb and Gutter, demolition and di""OS IRI • 9 $ 13.58 Curb, extruded asnhalt RI· 10 $ 2.44 RI· 11 $ 2.56 RI· 12 s 1.85 Sawcut concrete, ner 1" denth RI· 13 $ 1.69 Sealant, aqnhatt RI· 14 $ 0.99 Shoulder, AC, f see AC road unit nrice RI· 15 $ . Shoulder aravel, 4" thick RI· 16 s 7.53 Sidewalk, 4" thick RI· 17 $ 30.52 Sidewalk, 4" thick, demolition and ct1~~ RI· 18 $ 27.73 Sidewalk, 5' thick RI· 19 $ 34.94 s 34.65 IRl-21 $ 85.28 IRI. 22 $ 5.82 RI· 23 $ 2.38 RI· 24 $ 0.25 Page 4 of 9 SUBTOTAL ·KCC 27A authorizes only one bond reduction. 11614Bond Quantity Worksheet.xis '-" I 11001 6,325.00 SY SY LF LF 11 45.05 LF 20QJ._ 2,654.00 LF 280 2,713.20 LF LF LF LF I 3601 666.00 LF LF I 3601 356.40 SY SY SY I 2501 7,630.00 SY SY I I I 1001. 3.494.00 SY Each Each SF LF 36oi 90.ool 17,780.60 6,193.05 Check out the DDES Web site at www.metrokc.gov/ddes ----:) Unit prices updated: 02/12/02 Version: 4/22/02 Report Date: 4/12/2005 - ----------l!!!!!!!!I I!!!!! l!!!I 1111111 Site Improvement 809 Quantity Worksheet V For KCRS '93, (additional 2 s· base) ad AC Overlav, 1.5' AC RS-2 s 7.39 AC Overlav, 2" AC RS -3 $ 8.75 AC Road, 2•, 4" rock, First2500 SY RS-4 s 17.24 AC Road 2", 4" rock, Qtv. over 2500SY RS-5 $ 13.36 AC Road, 3", 4" rock, First 2500 SY RS-6 s 19.69 AC Road, 3", 4" rock, Qtv. over 2500 s· RS-7 $ 15.81 AC Road 5" First 2500 SY RS-8 $ 14.57 AC Road, 5', Otv. Over 2500 SY RS-9 $ 13.94 AC Road, 6', First 2500 SY cs· 1 $ 16.76 AC Road, 6', Otv. Over 2500 SY RS· 1 $ 16.12 Asphalt Treated Ba_se, 4' thick laS -1 $ 9.21 s 11.41 s 7.53 s 21.51 rpcc Road, 6', no base, over 2500 SY IRs -1cl $ 21.87 Thickened Edne IRs-1~ S 6.89 Page 5 of 9 SUBTOTAL *KCC 27 A authorizes only one bond reduction. 116148ond Quantity Worksheet.xis SY T 10001 7,390.00 SY SY SY SY SY SY SY SY SY SY SY SY SY SY LF T T I 3001 2,os1.ool 7,390.00 2,067.00 Check out the DDES Web site at www.metrolcc.gov/ddes == -liiiiiil iiii :> Unit prices updated: 02112102 Version: 4/22102 Report Date: 4/12/2005 - -----------l!!!!!!!!I l!!!!!!!!!I !!!!! Site Improvement Bq"'"1 Quantity Worksheet Access Road, RID D • 1 $ 16.74 Bollards -fixed D -2 $ 240.74 Bollards -removable D-3 $ 452.34 • (CBs include frame and lid) D -4 $ 1,257.64 D • 5 $ 1,433.59 D· 6 $ 2,033.57 D • 7 $ 436.52 D • 8 $ 2.192.54 D-9 $ 486.53 D-10 $ 2,351.52 D · 11 $ 536.54 D -12 $ 3,212.64 D -13 $ 692.21 D -14 $ 366.09 Cleanout, PVC, 4" D -15 $ 130.55 Cleanout, PVC, s· D -16 $ 174.90 Cleanout, PVC, s· D • 17 $ 224.19 Culvert, PVC, 4 • D -18 $ 8.64 Culvert PVC, s· D-19 $ 12.60 Culvert, PVC, a· D· 20 ·S 13.33 Culvert PVC, 12" D -21 $ 21.77 Culvert, CMP, 8" D -22 $ 17.25 Culvert, CMP, 12" D-23 $ 26.45 Culvert, CMP, 15" D-24 $ 32.73 Culvert, CMP, 18' D • 25 $ 37.74 Culvert, CMP, 24" D-26 $ 53.33 Culvert, CMP, 30" D-27 $ 71.45 Culvert, CMP, 36' D -28 $ 112.11 Culvert, CMP. 48" D -29 s 140.83 Culvert, CMP, 60" D -30 $ 235.45 Culvert, CMP, 72" D • 31 $ 302.58 Page 6 of 9 SUBTOTAL "KCC 27A authorizes only one bond reduction. 116148ond Quantity Worksheet.xis '-...,-' t1dNA~:;rt~t*'M-¥iP'~:ii SY I I I 1201 2,008.801 Each Each 1 I I 31 1,357.02 Each I 41 5,030.Saj ·4{ 5,030.S6j Each Each 1 I I 1 J 2,033.57 FT Each I I I 1 J 2,192.54 FT Each FT Each FT Each Each Each 6 Each LF LF LF LF LF LF LF LF LF LF LF LF LF LF 5,030.56 12,622.49 Check out the DDES Web site at www.metrokc.gov/ddes == == liiiii iiii :) 1,049.40 1,049.40 Unit prices updated: 02/12/02 Version: 4/22/02 Report Date: 4/12/2005 · - -------------------------------------·---·--.. Im .. -----------Site Improvement Bq:::-1 Quantity Worksheet '-' !culvert, Concrete, a· O· 32 $ 21.02 Culvert, Concrete, 12" 0-33 $ 30.05 Culvert, Concrete, 15" 0 • 34 s 37.34 Culvert, Concrete, 18' 0-35 $ 44.51 Culvert, Concrete, 24 · 0-36 $ 61.07 Culvert, Concrete, 30' 0-37 s 104.18 Culvert, Concrete, 36' 0-38 $ 137.63 Culvert, Concrete, 42' 0-39 $ 158.42 Culvert, Concrete, 48' 0-40 $ 175.94 Culvert, CPP, 6' 0 ·41 s 10.70 Culvert, CPP, a· 0 • 42 s 16.10 Culvert, CPP, 12' 0-43 $ 20.70 Culvert, CPP, 15' 0-44 $ 23.00 Culvert CPP, 18' 0-45 s 27.60 Culvert CPP 24' 0 • 46 $ 36.80 Culvert, CPP, 30' 0-47 $ 48.30 0-48 $ 55.20 0-49 s 8.08 0 • 50 $ 25.99 0 • 51 $ 22.60 0 · 52 $ 2.40 O· 53 s 74.75 0 • 54 $ 1,605.40 0 • 55 $ 14.01 0-56 $ 1,045.19 0-57 S 1,095.56 0 • 58 $ 1,146.16 0 • 59 $ 39.08 Tank End Reducer (36' diameter) 0-60 $ 1 000.50 Trash Rack, 12' 0 • 61 $ 211.97 ,Trash Rack, 15' 0 • 62 s 237.27 Trash Rack, 18' 0 · 63 $ 268.89 Trash Rack, 21' 0 • 64 $ 306.84 Page 7 ol 9 SUBTOTAL "KCC 27 A authorizes only one bond reduction. 116148ond Quantity Worksheet.xis \.....,' LF LF LF LF LF LF LF LF LF LF LF LF I 3651 7555.51 3131 . 6479.1 LF LF LF LF LF CY LF LF SY HR Each·I SY Each I I I 1 I 1045.19 Each Each CY Each Each Each Each Each 7555.5 7524.29 Check out the DDES Web site at www.metrokc.gov/ddes l!!!!I -==·-·\ . .._,, Unit prices upcated: 02/12/02 Version: 4/22/02 Report Date: 4/12/2005 liiiii ----------l!!!!!!!!I l!!!!!!!!I !!!!I I!!!! !!!9 Site Improvement Bo=-i Quantity Worksheet \_,I 1!111 -== -... <.J ·- !'!!!. 2" AC, 2" too course rock & 4" borrow PL· 1 $ 15.84 SY 2' AC, 1.5' ton oourse & 2.5" base cou PL·2 $ 17.24 SY 4" select borrow PL· 3 $ 4.55 SY 1.5" top course rock & 2.5" base course PLJ ..! 11.41 SY Each WI ·2 SY WI ·3 CY W1·4 LF WI· 5 FT WI ·6 WI ·7 WI ·8 W1·9 Wl-10 SUBTOTAL SUBTOTAL (SUM ALL PAGES): 30% CONTINGENCY & MOBILIZATION: GRANDTOTAL: COLUMN: Page 8 of 9 39,000.10 44,988.98 11,700.03 13,496.69 50,700.13 58,485.67 B C *KCC 27A authorizes only one bond reduction. 116148ond Quantity Worksheet.xis Check out the DDES Web site at www.metrokc.gov/ddes 24,523.20 7,356.96 31,880.16 D E Unit prices updated: 02/12/02 Version: 4/22/02 Report Date: 4112/2005 1111 ------------------~· ..... -, -Site Improvement Bcind Quantity Worksheet ·-' Original bond computations prepared by: Name: Hal P. Grubb Date: 2/10/2005 PE Registration Number: 23975 Tel.#: (425) 251-6222 Firm Name: Address: Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 18215 72nd Avenue South Project No: L04S0003 ROAD IMPROVEMENTS & DRAINAGE FACILITIES FINANCIAL GUARANTEE REQUIREMENTS. Stabilization/Erosion Sediment Control (ESC) Existing Right-of-Way Improvements PERFORMANCE BOND· AMOUNT (A) $ 8,988.5 (B) $ 50,700.1 Future Public Road Improvements & Drainage Facilities (C) $ 58,485.7 Private Improvements (D) $ 31,880.2 Calculated Quantity Completed Total Right-of Way and/or Site Restoration Bond"/'" (First $7,500 of bond" shall be cash.) Performance Bond" Amount (A+B+C+D) = TOTAL Reduced Performance Bond" Total ••• Maintenance/Defect Bond" Total NAME OF PERSON PREPARING BOND" REDUCTION: (A+B) $ 59,688.7 (T) $ 150,054.5 Minimum bond* amount 1s $1000. BONO· AMOUNT REQUIRED AT RECORDING OR TEMPORARY OCCUPANCY••• (E) _$~~~~~~ Tx 0.30 $ 45,016.3 OR (T-E) $ 150,054.5 Use larger of i x30% or (T-E) Date: * NOTE: The word •bond• as used in this document means any financial guarantee acceptable to King County. ** NOTE: KCC 27A authorizes right of way and site restoration bonds to be combined when both are required. PUBLIC ROAD & DRAINAGE MAINTENANCE/DEFECT BOND" (B+C) x 0.25 = $ 27,296.5 The restoration requirement shall include the total cost for all TESC as a minimum, not a maximum. In addition, corrective work, both on-and off-site needs to be included. Quantities shall reflect worse case scenarios not just minimum requirements. For example, if a salmonid stream may be damaged, some estimated costs for restoration needs to be reflected in this amount. The 30% contingency and mobilization costs are computed in this quantity. *** NOTE: Per KCC 27 A, total bond amounts remaining after reduction shall not be less than 30% of the original amount (T) or as revised by major design changes. SURETY BOND RIDER NOTE: If a bond rider is used, minimum add~ional performance bond shall be ! $ 90,365.8 ! (C+D)-E REQUIRED BOND· AMOUNTS ARE SUBJECT TO REVIEW AND MODIFICATION BY ODES Page 9 of 9 Check out the DDES Web site at www.metrokc.gov/ddes 11614Bond Quantity Worksheet.xis Unit prices updated:. 02/12/02 Version: 4/22/02 Report Date: 4/12/2005 - I E () m E I E E E • E (J • E E • m I • • m 9.0 BOND QUANTITIES, FACILITY SUMMARIES, AND DECJLARA 1I'IONS OF COVENANT I I ,.-) . I I I I I I I I ;_·J I I I I I I I I I 10.0 OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE MANUAL I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ··; . l .·~) / 10.0 OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE MANUAL The drainage facilities on this project will be public facilities owned and maintained by King County. Therefore, no Operations and Maintenance manual is required. 11614.004.doc 0 King County Department of Development and Environmental Services 900 Oakesdale Avenue SW Renton, WA 98055-1219 October 28, 2005 Ivana Halvorson Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 18215-72nd Avenue South Kent, WA 98032 RE: Revised Design for the Preliminar_y Short Plat for the Rathinam Property DDES Project No. L04S0003, Activity No. L05RE025 Dear Ms. Halvorson: The Subdivision Technical Committee of the Land Use Services _Division (LUSD) has reviewed your client's proposed moc\ification to the design for the preliminary short plat of· the Rathinam Property. The Committee has concluded this re-design does not contain "any substantial changes," as referen·ced in KCC 19A.12.060A. Therefore, based on this finding, approval is granted to the revised preliminary short plat received October 6, 2005, subject to the original conditions of approval issued September 17, 2004 (except as modified below), and the following condition. A right-of-way width of 32 feet shall be provided for the on-site road (Road A). Due to the changes to th\5 preliminary short plat design which are reflected on the October 6, 2005 submittal, the following conditions from the September 17, 2004 LUSD approval of the preliminary short plat are no longer applicable: 1D, 3F, 3G, 3M1, 3M2, 6B, and 7B. The lead-in paragraph of Condition 7E is also revised to read as follows: The 4500 S'!tlftfe feet reereatiea tfaet configuration of Tract A is consistent with the requirements of KCC 21A.14.180 and KCC 21A.14.190. Recreation improvements shall be provided in Tract A consistent with KCC 21A.14.180 and .190 (bee e.g., sport court[s], children's play equipment, picnic tablc[s], benches, etc.). FILE COPY ...... 1·· ) ® King County Road Services Division Department ofTraneportation MS KSC-TR-0222 201 South Jackson Street Seattle, WA 98104 April 25, 2006 TO: FR: RE: Patrick Simmons, ODES ~ _L, ' Linda Mott and Henry Perrin, ~ Rathinam Short Plat Per the email request below, I am sending the Rathinam Illumination and Channelization mylars to you for your use. I have kept a set of mylars for DOT /Roads use, as well. Please let me know if you have any questions. I can be reached at (206) 263-6140. -----Original Message----- From: Jim Hutson [mailto:jhutson@charterhomesinc.com] Sent: Monday, April 24, 2006 4:36 PM To: Mott, Linda; Perrin, Henry Subject: Lighting and Channelization/ Rathinam short Plat Linda, I just wondered if you could CC me when you get the Mylar's headed towards Patrick Simmons. That way we can go ahead and close on the property with Sharmila Rathinam. Thanks so much. Jim Hutson Land Development Manager Charter Homes, Inc www.chartcrhomesinc.com 601 Union St. Suite 3920 Seattle, WA 9810 I 206.550.6117 Cell 206.322.4393 Office 206.322.0482 Fax jhutson @chartcrhomesinc.com Patrick J. Simmons King County Department of Development and Environmental Services Engineering Review Section 900 Oakesdale Avenue S.W. Renton, WA 98055-1219 CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES July 8, 2005 COURIER DELNERY RECIE~VIED JUL O WZ005 KING COUNTY LAND USE SERVICES RE: Resubmittal of Engineering Plans for Rathinam Short Plat King County Project No. L04SR077 Our Job No. 11614 Dear Patrick: We have revised the engineering plans for the project referenced above in accordance with the comments in your email dated June 15, 2005. Enclosed are the following documents for your review and approval: L Three (3) sets of revised engineering plans The following outline provides each of your comments in italics exactly as written, along with a narrative response describing how each comment was addressed: · 1. I am also forwarding ihe pavement design comment letter. Which may require a change in the cross section for the road widening. Response: The pavement section for S.E. 192nd Street has been revised pursuant to the pavement design comment letter. My comments are related to sheet C4 2. The end of the sidewalk shall have ADA ramps and a taper section to the pavement. Response: The end of the sidewalk now has a concrete transition to the asphalt in accordance with King County Road Standards. 3. A 5 foot private drainage easement should be shown for the drainspout drain in lot I, 4, 7 and 8 where other lot water flows across the lot. This should be shown of the drainage plan. Response: A 5-foot drainage easement has been added to Lots 1, 4, 7, and 8. 4. It appears that the control structure should be Man Hole JO not 1. The Manholes and CB are labeled in succession. Response: The catch basin and manhole labels have been revised. 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT. WA 98032 (425) 251-6222 (425) 251-8782 FAX BRANCH OFFICES + OLYMPIA, WA + TEMECULA, CA + WALNUT CREEK. CA www.barghausen.com Patrick J. Simmons King County Department of Development and Environmental Services Engineering Review Section -2-July 8, 2005 5. The diameter and elevation was not changed to reflect the new values in the Revised TIR with the pond. Response: The diameter and elevations have been revised. Tree Retention Plan Comments: I. Revise site acrage to be 2.25 acres in item 4. Response: The site area has been corrected. 2. Add the attached tree retention notes to the plan. Response: The tree retention notes have been added to the plan. We believe that the above responses, together with the enclosed revised engineering plans, address all of the comments in your email dated June 15, 2005. Please review and approve the enclosed at your earliest convenience. If you have questions or need additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me at this office. Thank you. CMV/dnVtep l 1614c.006.doc enc: As Noted cc: Sharmila Rathinam (w/enc) Sincerely, & «Ilk? '-711, ,y,;;~~: "'="' Cara M. Visintainer Design Engineer II Hal P. Grubb, Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. (w/enc) Ivana Halvorsen, Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. Bruce McCrory, Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. Patrick Simmons King County Department of Development and Environmental Services Land Use Services Division Sheet 4 -2- 6. Change the detail for the sidewalk transition to cones or note see sheet 6 detail Response: The sidewalk transition detail has been revised. December I, 2005 7. The West end of the sidewalk shall have the Asphalt tapered to the back of sidewalk. Response: An asphalt taper has been added to the west sidewalk end. 8. The East end of the sidewalk shall be tapered to avoid the adjacent Fire Hydrant unless it is to be moved. Response: The east end of the sidewalk has been tapered. 9. A Striping plan may need to be submitted. Note: SEPARATE ILLUMINATION PLAN TO BE APPROVED Response: An illumination plan is currently being designed and will be submitted for review and approval when received. We believe that the above responses, together with the enclosed revised site improvement plans, address all of the comments in your letter dated November 4, 2005. Please review and approve the enclosed at your earliest convenience. If you have questions or need additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me at this office. Thank you. CMV /tep/ath J 1614c.013.doc enc: As Noted cc: Sharmila Rathinam (w/enc) Erik Wicklund, Charter Homes (w/enc) Sincerely, Cara M. Visintainer Design Engineer II Hal P. Grubb, Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. (w/enc) ® King County Department of Development and Environmental Services 900 Oakesdale Avenue SW Renton, WA 98055-1219 October 28, 2005 Ivana Halvorson Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 18215 -72"d Avenue South· Kent, WA 98032 RE: Revised Design for the Preliminacy Short Plat for the Rathinam Property DDES Project No. L04S0003, Activity No. L05RE025 Dear Ms. Halvorson: The Subdivision Technical Committee of the Land Use Services .Division (LUSD) has reviewed your client's proposed modification to the design for the preliminary short plat of the Rathinam Property. The Committee has concluded this re-design does not contain "any substantial changes," as referenced in KCC 19A.12.060A. Therefore, based on this finding, approval is granted to the revised preliminary short plat received October 6, 2005, subject to the original conditions of approval issued September 17, 2004 ( except as modified below), and the following condition. A right-of-way width of 32 feet shall be provided for the on-site road (Road A). Due to the changes to the prclimimrry short plat design which are reHected on the October 6, 2005 submittal, the following conditions from the Sept~mber 17, :i004 LUSD approval of the preliminary short plat are no longer applicable: 1D, 3F, 3G, 3M1, 3M2, 6B, and 7B. The lead-in paragraph of Condition 7E is also revised to read as follows: The 4 500 sqttare feet reereatien traet configuration of Tract A is consistent with the requirements of KCC 21A.14.180 and KCC 21A.14.190. Recreation improvements · shall be provided in Tract A consistent with KCC 21A.14.180 and .190 (hec e.g., sport court[s], children's play equipment, picnic table[s], benches, etc.). FILE COPY .. ' Revised Design for the Preliminary Short Plat for the Rathinam Property October 28, 2005 · Page 2 of2 Enclosed is a copy of the approved, revised, preliminary short plat design for your records. If you have any question,:, please contact me at (206) 296-6632. Lanny Henoch, Planner JI Current Planning Section, LUSD ·Enclosure cc: Sharmila Rathinatn, owner Erik Wicklund, Charter Homes, Inc. Curt Foster, Senior Engineer, Engineering Review Section, w / encl. Pat Simmons, Engineer, Engineering Review Section, w / encl. Steve Townsend, Supervising Engineer, Land Use Inspection Section, w/encl. Joanne Carlson, Administrative Specialist II, Engineering Review Section, w/cncl. Kim Claussen, Planner III, Current Planning Section, LUSD File No. L04S0003 Patrick Simmons King County Department of Development and Environmental Services Land Use Services Division 900 Oakesdale Avenue S.W. Renton, WA 98055-1219 CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICEp December 1, 2005 COURIER DELIVERY RE: Submittal of Revised Site Improvement Plans Rathinam Prelimin~r Shott Plat King County No. L · 0, Our Job No. 11614 Dear Patrick: We have revised the site improvement plans for the project referenced above in accordance with your comment letter dated November 4, 2005. Enclosed are the following documents for your review and approval. I. One set of the revised civil plans on mylar The following outline provides each of your comments in italics exactly as written, along with a narrative response describing how each comment was addressed: Site Improvements Plan I. Sheet I 2. 3. Add the Alteration per October 28, 2005 by Lanny Henock Response: The alteration to the plat conditions has been added to Sheet I. Index change all to "of 8" Response: The index has been revised. Change the activity number to L04/i;77 Change the Project number to L04S0003 Response: The activity and project numbers have been added to the plans. 4. Sheet 3 Change the North line of lots 5 and 6 to 149.28. Response: The lot dimensions have been revised as appropriate. 5. ThepavementwidthofSE !92"d to????? Response: The pavement width of S.E. 192nd Street is measured at 22 feet from the right-of-way centerline to curb face in accordance with KCRS. 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 (425) 251-6222 (425) 251-8782 FAX BRANCH OFFICES + OLYMPIA, WA + TEMECULA, CA + WALNUT CREEK, CA www.barghausen.com (® King County Department of Development and Environmental Services 900 Oakesdale Avenue SW Renton, WA 98055-1219 October 28, 2005 Ivana Halvorson Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 18215 -72nd Avenue South Kent, WA 98032 RE: Revised Design for the Preliminai:y Short Plat for the Rathinam Property ODES Project No. L04S0003, Activity No. L05RE025 Dear Ms. Halvorson: The Subdivision Technical Committee of the Land Use Services Division (LUSD) has reviewed your client's proposed modification to the design for the preliminary short plat of · the Rathinam Property. The Committee has concluded this re-design does not contain "any substantial changes," as refereticed in KCC 19A.12.060A. Therefore, based on this finding, approval is granted to the revised preliminary short plat received October 6, 2005, subject to the original conditions of approval issued September 17, 2004 ( except as modified below), and the following condition. A right-of-way width of 32 feet shall be provided for the on-site road (Road A). Due to t>'ie ch,mges to the prelinri:nary short plat design which are rdfoctcd on the October 6, 2005 submittal, the following conditions from the September 17, 2004 LUSD approval of the preliminary short plat are no longer applicable: ID, 3F, 3G, 3Ml, 3M2, 6B, and 7B. The lead-in paragraph of Condition 7E is also revised to read as follows: The 4500 squHe fuot reereatioa traet configuration of Tract A is consistent with the requirements of KCC 21A.14.180 and KCC 21A.14.190. Recreation improvements shall be provided in Tract A consistent with KCC 21A.14.180 and .190 (he, e.g., sport court[s], children's play equipment, picnic table[s], benches, etc.). FILE COPY . •, Revised Design for the Pteliminary Short Plat for the Rathinam Property October 28, 2005 · Page 2 of 2 Enclosed is a copy of the approved, revised, preliminary short plat design for your records. If you have any question,:, please contact me at (206) 296-6632. Lanny Henoch, Planner II Current Planning Section, LUSO Enclosure cc: Sharnula Rathinatn, owner Erik Wicklund, Charter Homes, Inc. Curt Poster, Senior Engineer, Engineering Review Section, w/encl. Pat Simmons, Engineer, Engineering Review Section, w / encl. Steve Townsend, Supervising Engineer, Land Use Inspection Section, w/cncl. Joanne Carlson, Administrative Specialist II, Engineering Review Section, w / encl. Kim Claussen, Planner III, Current Planning Section, LUSD File No. L04S0003 Patrick J. Simmons King County Department of Development and Environmental Services Engineering Review Section 900 Oakesdale Avenue S.W. Renton, WA 98055-1219 CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES May 20, 2005 COURIER DELIVERY RE: Resubmittal of Engineering Plans and Technical Information Report Rathinam Short Plat King County Project No. L04S0003 Our Job No. 11614 Dear Patrick: We have revised the engineering plans and Technical Information Report for the project referenced above in accordance with your comment letter dated April 6, 2005. Enclosed are the following documents for your review and approval: 1. Three sets of revised plans 2. Three copies of the revised Technical Information Report 3. One set of original redlines 4. One copy of the Postmaster Approval 5. One copy of the Pavement Design Letter prepared by Earth Consultants, Inc. dated May 20, 2005 The following outline provides each of your comments in italics exactly as written, along with a narrative response describing how each comment was addressed: Technical Information Report 1. Comment no action required The KCRTS Calculation List the type of facility as a Detention Vault vice the pond as shown on the plans. The vault dimensions seem to match the dimensions of the pond at the dead storage elevation, therefore this would agree with the required/provided storage capacity volumes shown on the plans. Response: The KCRTS calculations and corresponding printouts have been revised for a detention pond. Please see Section 4.0 of the revised Technical Information Report for more information. RIEC!EU~~!Ql MAY 2 0 2005 KING COUN1Y LAND USE SERVICES 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT. WA 98032 (425) 251-6222 (425) 251-8782 FAX BRANCH OFFICES t OLYMPIA. WA t TEMECULA, CA t WALNUT CREEK, CA www.barghausen.com Patrick J. Simmons King County Department of Development and Environmental Services Engineering Review Section Bond Quantities Worksheet I. The following items are missing The Fence for the detention pond. The manhole for the control structure. -2-May 20, 2005 Response: The bond quantity worksheet has been revised to reflect changes on the plans. Site Improvements Plan I. Postmaster approval area Response: The postmaster approved plan is included for your review. (Page 2) 2. The clearing limits and border silt fence should be revised to protect the retention trees on the east side of the property. Response: The clearing limits and silt fencing have been revised on the eastern property limits. (Page 3) 3. Road "A" must be designed to urban standard per approval iten 3D. A thicken edge is not meet this requirement for an urban street for the 1993 KCRS. Revise the roadway section. Response: Road A has been redesigned in accordance with urban road standards in the 1993 King County Road Standards. 4. The Improvement to SE 192nd Street require a pavement design for the Principal Arterial Per KCRS 4.03, Submit a design for review. Response: A pavement design and analysis for S.E. 192nd Street is included and is incorporated into the design. (Page 4) 5. New County Road Engineer requirements are that no shading is allowed on plans, Remove the shading in the roadway and pipe sections. Response: The shading in the roadway and pipe sections has been removed pursuant to your request. 6. A location for the mailbox cluster is needed and detail of the mailboxes need to be shown. Response: The location of the proposed mailbox cluster is shown on the plans with details. 7. A private drainage easement is needed for the private roof/foundation drains within lot I. 7 and 8. Response: A private drainage easement is proposed for the roof/foundation drains within the lots referenced above. ,; Patrick J. Simmons King County Department of Development and Environmental Services Engineering Review Section -3-May 20, 2005 8. KCRS 5.05 requires that a principle Arterials have continuous illumination for the entire length of the roadway widen to the required roadway width. Additional luminaries may be required Submit a lighting plan to determine if this road standard is met. Response: A lighting plan is being prepared and will be submitted under separate cover. (Page 5) 9. Remove shading per note for page 4 Response: The shading has been removed. I 0. The inlet and outlet pipe should have the elevation shown on the plan. Response: Elevations have been added to the plan. 11. An additional section is needed of the pond to include the control structure. Response: An additional pond cross-section has been provided. (Page 6) 12. The new ADA ramps with the truncated cone need to be shown. Response: The new ADA ramp detail has been added to the plan. We believe that the above responses, together with the enclosed revised engineering plans and Technical Information Report, address all of the comments in your letter dated April 6, 2005. Please review and approve the enclosed at your earliest convenience. If you have questions or need additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me at this office. Thank you. CMV/ath/ca 11614c.004.doc enc: As Noted cc: Sharmila Rathinam (w/enc) Sincerely, Cara M. Visintainer Design Engineer II Hal P. Grubb, Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. (w/plans) Ivana Halvorsen, Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. ~~,L~IL~~o 11:Lo .. -· F..artt1 Consultants, Inc~ r-'(11t'(hntr.-1I El~n<'CrS. (.n,k¢sl~ I'. t'.m.'ir(n'Tx"l\lfll 5dcn1i.$1,; rnn~n_l(':llnn '1\'$1inp:,. IQ3(l; W/\RC) 1nst)OC1i«I ~TVlrn. May 20, 2005 Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 18215 -72nd Avenue South Kent, Washington 98032 Attention:. Subject: Dear Mr. Grubb: Mr. Hal Grubb, PE Pavement Design Rathinam Short Plat Southeast 192°d Street near 116'" Avenue Southeast King County, Washington EARTH CONSULTANTS PAGE 02/05 ·--·-·~ Estahlisl1cx:l 197S E-11853 As requested, Earth Consultants, Inc. (ECI) is providing a pavement design for the widening of Southeast 192"d Street near 116"' Avenue Southeast. In preparing this design, we visited the site to collect a representative sample of the pavement subgrade materials and conducted a California Bearing Ratio test on the soils. Project Description ECI understands that as part of the site development the north shoulder of Southeast l 92"d Street will be widened. The widening operation will consist of sawcutting the existing pavement edge and extending the paved area another one to two feet. IRl IE CC~ ~"IE D MAY 2 0 .'.005 1805 136th Place N.E., Suite 201, Bellevue, WA 98005 LANiNG COUNTY Bellevue (425) 643·3780 FAX (425) 746-0860 Toll Free (888) 739-6670 USE SERVICES Other Locations Fife .. 4'.Lti /4bl:ftlbl:f Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. May 20, 2005 Design Values EARTH CONSULTANTS r-· ff AN '._j PAGE 03i05 E-11853 Page 2 Our pavement design is based on a California Bearing Ratio (CBR) of 4.2 for the soils based our laboratory testing. Traffic design values were obtained from Table 11.3 of the AASHTO Guide for Design of Pavement Structures (1986). For our design, the .street was classified as an urban minor arterial with a corresponding ESAL of 700,000 for a 20-year design life. Pavement Design Widening The AASHTOWARE DARWin Pavement Design and Analysis System program was used to calculate the pav_ement section for the widened section. Input and output parameters are attached. ECl's design indicates the following pavement section can be used for the pavement widening: 0 4.5 inches of asphalt concrete (AC) over 6 inches of crushed rock base (CRB) material over 8.5 inches of gravel base. The gravel base and the CRB should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density per ASTM 0-1557, Modified Proctor. The crushed rock base should consist of 1 .5 inches of crushed surfacing top course (CSTC) underlain by crushed surfacing base course (CSBC) to achieve the depth specified above. CSTC and CSBC should conform to the gradation standards in Section 9-03.9(3) of the WSDOT standards. The native materials or structural fill placed for pavement subgrade should be moisture conditioned, graded and compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density per ASTM D-698 (Standard Proctor) to subgrade elevations below the gravel base material. Additional Services A representative of ECI should be on site to observe the subgrade in the widened section and test the compaction of the existing subgrade, gravel base, and CRB. • , Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. May 20, 2005 EARTH CONSULTANTS EC\ trusts this letter meets your needs. If you have any questions, please call. Respectfully submitted, EARTH CONSULT ANTS, INC . . Gf zn/t>s- . ~c§Jl"'P'"'N:=s~02:--'»-=-""7,__ ..... l Kristina M. Weller, PE Associate Principal Scott Dinkelman Scott D. Dinkelman, LEG Principal KMW/SDD/lap Attachments: DARWin Pavement Design Printouts Plate 1, California Bearing Ratio Test Results cc: Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. Attention: Mr. Hal Grubb, PE PAGE 04/05 E-11853 . Page 2 . --, EARTH CONSULTANTS • 1993 AASIITO Pavement Design DARWin Pavement Design and Analysis System A Proprietary AASHTOWare Computer Software Product Earth Consultants, Inc. 1805 -136th Plare Northeast. Suite 201 Bellevue, Washington USA Flexible Structural Design Module 18-kip ESA Ls Over Initial Performance Period Initial Serviceability Tennina1 Serviceability Reliability Level Overall Standard Deviation Roadbed Soil Resilient Modulus Stage Construction Calculated Design Structu"ral Number · Thickness precision Layer Malet:i~ription I asphalt concrete 2 crushed rock base 3 gnivelbase Total Struet Cocf. (Ai} 0.44 0.13 0.11 Southeast 192nd Street !Flexible Struct1111raH Design 700,000 4.2 2.7 . 85% 0.5 6,104 psi 1 3.56 in Layered Thickness Design Nearest 0.5 in Drain Spec Min Elastic Coef. Thickness Thickness Modulll!I {Mi} illil(fu.l illiXin} q!fil} l 2 400,000 0.95 6 28,000 · 0.95 8 20,000 Page I Calculated Width Thickness (fil lli!l 4.50 6.00 8.50 19.00 PAGE 85/05 Calculated SN CinJ. 1.98 0.74 0.89 3.61 ® King County Department of Transportation Engineering Services Section Materials Laboratory 155 Monroe Avenue NE, Bldg. D Renton, WA 98056-4199 June 14, 2005 TO: Pat Simmons, Engineer II, Department of Development and Environmental Services, Site Engineering and Planning Section VIA: Alan D. Corwin, P.E., Materials Engineer, Materials Laboratory, Project Support Services Group FM: Douglas Walters, P.E., Engineer II, Materials Laboratory, Project Support Services Group RE: Ratbinam Short Plat: SE 192"• Street near 116 1h Avenue SE As requested, we have reviewed the arterial pavement design section required for widening of SE 192nd Street associated with the Rathian Short Plat. Our review was based on the May 20, 2005 pavement design report by Earth Consultants, Inc. (ECI). Based on our review, we have the following comments and recan- mendations for the design and construction of the proposed pavement section: We understand the following pavement section is recommended: o 4.5 inches compacted depth Class "B" Asphalt Concrete Pavement o 6.0 inches Crushed Rock Base (CRB) o 8.5 inches compacted depth Class "B" Gravel Base In general, we concur with the design methodology and most of the design parameters used by EC!. Hc:w- ever, we disagree with the assumed ESALs of 700,000. Based on 2004 King County Traffic Counts for SE 192"• Street at the intersection with I 16th Avenue SE, we calculated approximately 1,200,000 ESALs for a 20-year design life. Based on the higher traffic count, we obtained a slightly thicker required asphalt con- crete depth. In addition, we are unable to find CRB and Class "B" Gravel Base in the Washington State De- partment of Transportation (WSDOT) Standard Specifications. All materials should be specified in accor- dance with the WSDOT Standard Specifications. Therefore, our recommended modifications to the above design is as follows: o 5.0 inches compacted depth Class "B" Asphalt Concrete Pavement o 1.5 inches compacted depth Crushed Surfacing Top Course o 4.5 inches compacted depth Crushed Surfacing Base Course o 8.5 inches compacted depth Gravel Borrow The plan for the improvements to SE 192"• Street shows the existing asphalt being cut at the edge of the ex- isting pavement. We recommend the sawcut take place at the fogline so that the existing road shoulder will not be used as part of the new driving lane section. We trust this information meets your current request. Please call me at 296-7708 if you have any questions or require further clarification. ® King County Department of Development and Environmental Services 900 Oakesdale Avenue SW Renton, WA 98055-1219 October 28, 2005 Ivana Halvorson Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 18215 -72"d Avenue South Kent, WA 98032 RE: Revised Design for the Preliminar_y Short Plat for the Rathinam Propert;y DDES Project No. L04S0003, Activity No. LOSRE025 Dear Ms. Halvorson: The Subdivision Technical Committee of the Land Use Services Division (LUSD) has reviewed your client's proposed modification to the design for the preliminary short plat of the Rathinam Property. The Committee has concluded this re-design does not contain "any substantial changes," as referenced in KCC 19A.12.060A. Therefore, based on this finding, approval is granted to the revised preliminary short plat received October 6, 2005, subject to the original conditions of approval issued September 17, 2004 ( except as modified below), and the following condition. A right-of-way width of 32 feet shall be provided for the on-site road (Road A). Due to the changes to the preliminary short plat design which arc reflected on the October 6, 2005 submittal, the following condition.s from the September 17, 2004 LUSD approval of the preliminary short plat are no longer applicable: 1D, 3F, 3G, 3M1, 3M2, 6B, and 7B. The lead-in paragraph of Condition 7E is also revised to read as follows: The 4 §00 SfjHare foot reereatioa traet configuration of Tract A is consistent with the requirements ofKCC 21A.14.180 and KCC 21A.14.190. Recreation improvements shall be provided in Tract A consistent with KCC 21A.14.180 and .190 (lee, e.g., sport court[s), children's play equipment, picnic table[s], benches, etc.). .... ~·. . ·-• Revised Design for ~reliminary Short Plat for the Rathina.operty October.28, 2005 Page 2 of2 Enclosed is a copy of the approved;revised, preliminary short plat design for your records. If you have any questions, please contact me at (206) 296-6632. Lanny Henoch, Planner II Current Planning Section, LUSD Enclosure cc: Sharmila Rathinam, owner Erik Wicklund, Charter Homes, Inc. Curt Foster, Senior Engineer, Engineering Review Section, w/encl. Pat Simmons, Engineer, Engineering Review Section, w / encl. Steve Townsend, Supervising Engineer, Land Use Inspection Section, w / encl. Joanne Carlson, Administrative Specialist II, Engineering Review Section, w/encl. Kim Claussen, Planner III, Current Planning Section, LUSD File No. L04S0003 ® King County Department of Development and Environmental Services 900 Oakesdale A venue Southwest Renton, WA 98055-1219 September 17, 2004 Sharrnila Rathinarn 24006 SE 10th Street Sammamish, WA 98015 ,. ,_ RE: Preliminary Approval for Short Subdivision No. L04S0003 Dear Ms. Rathinarn: The Land Use Services Division (LUSD) has completed review of the short subdivision application captioned above. The LUSD. finds that the proposed short subdivision complies with · the King County Land Segregation Code (Title 19A), Zoning Code (Title 21A), and other applicable codes as specified in King County Code (KCC) 19A.08.060. The short subdivision is granted preliminary approval subject to the Conditions of Preliminary Approval attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. Any aggrieved party may appeal this decision by the appeal deadline, which is October 4, 2004. The appeal procedure is enclosed for your information.· The preliminary approval is valid for a period of 60 months from the date of th.is letter, unless an appeal is filed. In the event that an appeal is filed, the preliminaty approval is valid for a period of 60 months from the date of the appeal decision. Enclosed are th_e following: o Notice of Decision o Conditions of Preliminary Approval o Appeal Procedure If you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact Fereshteh Dehkordi, Program Manager, at (206) 296-7173 and Curt Foster, Engineer, at (206) 296-7106. Sincerely, ~~-~ Curt Foster, P.E., Senior Engineer Engineering Review Section, LUSD Enclosures cc: Applicant File L'c../~~ . /~d::n:senio;;roject/Prograrn Manager Current Planning Section, LUSD MAIN FILE COPY Letter.frm/CoverLtr2000.SP.doc 3/9/00 ~I ®· Dcpartmem of Development and Environmental Services · Land Use S<rvlces Division l\lbtice of Decision 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest · Renton, Washington 98055-1219 (Type 2) Appeal Procedure: Except for shoreline permits which are appealable to the State Shorelines Hearings Board, this decision may be appealed in writing to the King Cowity Hearing Examiner. A notice of appeal must be filed with the Land Use Services Division at the address listed below prior to 4:30 p.m. on October 4, 2004, and be accompanied with a filing fee of$250.00 payable to the King Cowity Office of Finance. If a timely Notice of Appeal has been filed, the appellant shall also file a Statement of Appeal with the Land Use Services Division at the address listed below prior to 4:30 p.m. on October 11, 2004. The Statement of Appeal shall identify the decision being appealed (including the file number) and the alleged errors in that decision. Further, the Statement of Appeal shall state: 1) specific reasons why the decision should be reversed or modified; and 2) the harm suffered or anticipated by the appellant, and the relief .· sought. The scope of an appeal shall be based on matters or issues raised in the Statement of Appeal. Failure to timely file a Notice of Appeal, appeal fee or Statement of Appeal, deprives the Hearing Examiner of jurisdiction to consider the appeal. Appeals must be submitted. to the Department ofDevelopmertt and Environmental Services (I)DES) at the following address: September 171 2004 Date Mailed DDES--Land Use Services Division Attn: Permit Center 900. Oakesdale A venue Southwest Renton, Washington 98055-1219 If you have any questions regarding the appeal procedures, please contact the DDES Planner at the telephone . . . nwnber listed above. If you require this material in Braille, audiocassette, or large print, call (206) 296-6600 (voice) or (206) 296-7217 (TTY). · · P96\apra\Notice of Doci•ion.Type2.doc 7/27/99 clc KING COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF. DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES LAND USE SERVICES DIVISION 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Renton, WA 98055-1219 REPORT AND DECISION SHORT SUBDIVISION . File No. L04S0003 A. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED SHORT SUBDIVISION: B. This is a short subdivision of 2.2 acres into 9 lots for detached single-family dwellings in the .R-6 zone. The proposed density is six dwelling units per acre. The proposed lot sizes range from approximately 16,427 square feet to 5,690 square feet. Please see Attachment 1 for a copy_of the short plat map. GENERAL INFORMATION: Owner/Applicant: Engineer: STR: · Location: Zoning: .Aoreage: Number of Lots: Density: Lot Size: Proposed Use: Sewage Disposal: Water Supply: .Fire District: School District: Sharmila Rathinam 24006 SE 101h Street Sammamish, WA 98015 (425) 369-2198 . · Cramer Northwest Inc. 945 North Central Suite 104 Kent, WA 98032 (253) 852-4880. . SW Y. 33-23-05 11634 192"d Street, Renton R-6 2.2 9 Six du/acre Ranges from 16,427 to 5,690 square feet Single family · Soos Creek Water & Sewer District Soos Creek Water & Sewer District Fire District 40 Renton School District Complete Application Date: March 10, 2004 Associated Application: Road Variance File No. L04V0017 C. NATURAL ENVIRONMENT 1. Topography: The site is relatively flat. It slopes down gently from west to southeast. 2. Soils: One soil type is found on this site per King County Soil Survey, 1973. The entire site is classified as Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam (AgB). The following is the soil characteristics: " Report & Decision Page I of9 L04S0003 . ' AqB -Alderwood gravely, sandy loam; 0-6% slopes. Runoff is slow and the erosion hazard is slight. This soil'type has a moderate limitation for low building foundations due to a seasonally high water table, and severe limitations for septic tank filter fields due to very slow permeability in the substratum. 3. According to the King County Sensitive Areas Folio, no·mapped hydrographic · features exist on or near this site.· The site lies within the Soos Creek drainage basin. · 4. Vegetation: This site.is primarily covered in combination of weeds and grasses. Scattered evergreen/deciduous trees and brush occur in limited numbers. 5. Wildlife: Small birds and animals inhabit this site; however, their population and species are limited due to nearby development. No threatened or endangered species are known to exist on or near the property. 6. Mapped Sensitive Areas: The Sensitive Areas Folio does not identify any mapped sensitive areas as being present on this site. D. DESIGN FEATURES E. F. 1. Density, Lot Pattern, Comprehensive & Community Plan/SDO: The site has a · density of six dwelling units per acre. The proposal is for 9 lots which is less than the base density afforded by the zone. The proposed lot sizes ranges from approximately 6,000 square feet to 16,000 square feet. Lot 7 is the largest which can be subdivided in the future to achieve the base density of the original parcel. · The proposal is subject to S0-220-significant tree retention requirements. 2. Access/Roadway Section: Access to the short subdivision will be via a newly constructed road which will be extended north from SE 192"d Street. A temporary cul-de-sac will be constructed at the north terminus of this road. All lots will have direct access to the newly constructed road. 3. Drainage: Surface water runoff leaves the site at the SE property corner and is conveyed along SE 192"d Street in an easterly direction. The proposed drainage facility will be located on-site near the property low point. It will be required to meet the level II flow control and basic water quality requirements. 4. Other Design Features: the proposal include a 4,500 square -foot tract for play and recreational activities. A conceptual recreation tract detailing the play faculties and landscaping will be required atthe engineering plan submittal. ' 5. Utilities: The proposed lots will be served by public water and sewer managed by the Soos Creek Water and Sewer District. A certificate of water and sewer availability dated June 19, 2003 has been issued for this proposal. SEPA THRESHOLD DETERMINATION: This short subdivision application is exempt from review under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), RCW 43.21C. FINDINGS/CONCLUSIONS: The subject subdivision will comply with the goals and objectives of the King. County Comprehensive Plan and will comply with the requirements of the Subdivision and Report and Decision LOAS0003 Zoning Codes and other official land use controls of King County (i.e. 1993 King County Road Standards, 1998 Surface Water-Oesign Manual, etc.), based upon the conditions for final short plat approval. · · G. DECISION: Proposed Short Plat revised and received August 26, 2004 (Attachment 1) is GRANTED PRELIMINARY APPROVAL; subject to the following conditions of final· approval: 1. . Title 19A A. .. Compliance with all platting provisions of Title 19A. of the King County Code B. All persons having an ownership interest in the subject property shall sign on the face of the final short subdivision. · C. All utilities within proposed rights-of-way must be included within a franchise approved by the King County Council prior to final short plat recording D. Modifications to the approved preliminary site plan (Attachment 1) are needed to allow for the extension of JUDT to lots 3 and 5. A revised site plan shall be submitted to DOES for review and approval. If additional modifications are required to accommodate engineering conditions;then those must be included in the revised plan. The revised site plans shall be submitted with the engineering plans or the final short plat submittal; · 2. Surface Water Management (KCC 9) 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual (SWDM) The proposed short plat qualifies for full drainage review as outlined in Chapter One of the Surface Water Design Manual. Final short plat approval shall require full compliance with the drainage provisions set forth in King County Code 9.04. A professional civil engineer licensed in the State of Washington shall prepare drainage plans and a technical information report as outlined in Chapter 2 of the drainage manual. The drainage plan submittal shall demonstrate compliance with all applicable · Core and Special Requirements. Compliance may result in reducing the number and/or location of lots as shown on the preliminary approved short plat. Preliminary review has identified the.following conditions of approval,which represent portions of the drainage requirements. All other applicable requirements in KCC 9;04 and the Surface Water Design Manual (SWDM) must also'be satisfied during engineering and final· review. · A. Drainage plans and analysis shall comply with the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual. Prior to short plat recording, the applicant shall submit drainage and engineering plans to address the required short plat improvements. King County approval of drainage and roadway plans is required prior to any construction. Permit fees for review and inspection shall be paid as required by County codes and policies. Bonding for the drainage plans will also be established as determined by ODES prior to plan approval. After receiving drainage plan·approval, the applicant·shall contact the DOES Land Use Inspection Section to schedule a pre-con·struction meeting prior to performing work on the site. · B. Current standard plan notes and ESC notes, as established by ODES Engineering Review shall be shown on the engineering plans. C. The following note shall be shown on the final recorded plat: "All. building downspouts, footing drains, and drains from all impe·rvious surfaces such as patios and driveways shall be connected to the permanent storm drain Report and Decision · LO,lfS0003 outlet as shown on the approved construction drawings # on file with DDES and/cir the Department of Transportation. · This plan shall be submitted with the application of any building permit. All connections of the drains must be constructed and approved prior to the final building inspection approval. For those lots designated for perforated stubouts, dispersion, or infiltration systems, the designs shall be constructed at the. time of the. building permit and shall comply with the plans on file." 3. 1993 King County Road Standards (KCRS): Final short plat approval shall require full compliance with the provisions set forth in the KCRS, including engineering plans for all road improvements. The engineering plans shall be. prepared. by a professional civil engineer licensed in the state of Washington. DOES strongly recommends the engineering plans be submitted at least two years prior to the expiration date of the project. All construction and. upgrading of public and private roads within this short plat shall be done in accordance with KCRS established and adopted by Ordinance No. 11187, as amended (1993 KCRS) and shall comply with the following requirements:· A. B. C. D. .E. F. G. H. I. J. K. L. _A road variance application regarding intersection spacing was approved by King County on May 1 ?1\ 2004. The final engineering plans for the short plat shall comply with all conditions of approval for the road variance decision. That portion of the north half of SE 192"d Street adjoining the subject property shall be improved to an urban principal arterial standard per KCRS Section 1.03. ' Twenty feet (20) of additional right-of-way for SE 194"d Street shall be dedicated along the south property line, allowing for 50 feet of right-of-way from centerline. The on-site road shall be constructed to a public urban subaccessLstandard per KCRS Section 2.03. \ . A 25-foot property line radii shall be dedicated at the intersection of the on-site road and SE 192"d Street per KCRS Section 2.10. The joint-use-driveway tract (JUDT) shall be extended to reach lots5 and 3. Lots 3 and 5 shall have undivided ownership of the access Tract and be responsible for its maintenance. A note to this effect shall be placed on the engineering plans and final plat. · The minimum roadway improvements within the JUDT shall be 18 feet wide and 20 feet long with.controlled drainage: This tract shall also meet the Fire Marshal requirements (See Fire marshal requirements for additional access standards): A temporary cul-de-sac shall be provided at the north terminus of the on-site road perKCRS Section 2.08). The proposed road improvements shall address the cequirements for road surfacing outlined in KCRS Chapter 4. As noted in section 4.01 F, fuH. wi?th pavement overlay is required when widening existing asphalt. .._ Street trees shall be included in the design of all road improvements, and shall comply with Sectibn 5.03 of the KCRS. Street illumina~~n ~a1(be provided at intersections with arterials in accordance with KCRS 5.0/1()0 . . · · . Modifications to the above road conditions may be considered by King County pursuant to the variance procedures in KCRS 1.08. Report and Decision ~0003· M. I The following notes'shall tie shown on the final recorded short subdivision: (1) All private easements and/or tracts to be maintained, repaired, and/or rebuilt by the owners of the parcels having legal access there from and their heirs, assigns or successors, unless and until such roads are improved to King County standards and are dedicated and accepted by King County for maintenance: (2) Ttiere shall be no direct vehicular access to and from SE 192"d Street from the abutting lots (KCRS Section 2.02). Access shall be from the on-site road. (3) Removal of the temporary cul-de-sac and extension of the sidewalk shall be the responsibility of the developer who extends the road. (4) All utilities within proposed rights-of-way shall be.included within a franchise approved by the King County Council prior to final short subdivision recording. (5) All restrictions, easements, tracts, and their purpose shall be shown on t he final recorded short subdivision. 4. Health (KCC 13) A. This project is exempt from further King County Heath Department review. However, if improvements are required .from the Sewer and/or the Water District, then verification shall be required from said Oistrict(s) that the improvements have been bonded and/or installed, prior to final recording of the short plat. 5. Building and Construction Standards (Title 16) A. The applicant shall comply with all applicable provisions of KCC 16.82. · B. The applicant shall demonstrate compliance with KCC 16.82.150 requirements at engineering and final short plat. 6. Fire Code (KCC 17)-Section 902 of the 1997 Edition of Uniform Fire Code: A. All portions of the exterior ~alls (at grade) of future residences constructed within this short plat must be within 150 feet (as a person would walk via an approved ~cute around the building) from approved fire apparatus access. Approved access is a mi.nimum 20-foot wide driving surface that supports 25 tons in all weather, is not over 150 feet in length if dead-end and with no gradient in excess of 15%. I B. · If a suitable access as described above .is not provided, any future residences constructed on lots 3, 5 and 9 MAY have to be sprinklered per-NFPA 130 · ' ' . The proposed driveways serving .the main body of these. lots does not meet I he minimum 20-foot width requirement and portions of the exterior walls may be over 150 feetfrom approved access as ou,tlined above. C. The applicant must obtain the approval of the King County Fire Protection Engineer for the adequacy of the Jire hydrant, water main and fire flow standards of Chapter 17 .08 of the King County Code. · 7. Zoning Code (KCC 21A) A. ·oensity and Dimensions (KCC 21A.12) All lots shall meet the density and dimer:isions requirements of the R-6 zone classification or shall be as shown on the face of the approved preliminary short subdivision, whichever is larger. Minor revisions to the short subdivision, which Report and Decision L()ll:S0003 '· B. C. · do not result in substantial changes and/or do not create additional lots may be approved at the discretion of the Department of Development and Environmental Services. · Three additional lots may be created through the subdiv_ision of Lot 7 as long as the zoning of the site remains R-6. This shall be noted· on the recorded short plat. Lot 7 shall be developed in such a way that does not prevent any future short subdivision. Street Trees (KCC 21A.16) Street trees shall be provided along the street frontage and the new on site road as follows (per KCRS 5.03 and KCC·21A.16.050): 1. Trees shall be planted at a rate of one tree for every 40 feet of frontage along all roads. Spacing may be modified to accommodate sight distance requirements for driveways and intersections.· · 2. Trees shall be located within the street right-of-way and planted in accordance with Drawing No. 5-009 of the 1993 King County Road Standards, unless King County Department of Transportation determines that trees should not be located in the street right~of-way'. 3. If King County determines that the required street trees should not be located within the right-of-way, they shall be located no more than 20 feet from the street right-of-way line. 4. The trees shall be owned and maintained by the abutting lot owners or the homeowners asscici?1tion or other wor~able organization unless the County has adopted a maintenance program. Ownership and maintenance shall be noted on the face of the final recorded plat 5. . The species of trees shall be approved by DDES if located within the right-of-way, and shall not include poplar, cottonwood, soft maples, gum, any fruit-bearing trees, or any other tree or shrub whose roots are likely to obstruct sanitary or storm sewers, or that is not compatible with overhead utility lines. 6. The applicant shall submit a street tree plan and bond quantity sheet for review and approval by DDES prior to engineering plan approval. 7. The applicant shall contact Metro Service Planning at 684-1622 to determine if SE 192nd is on a bus route. If it is a bus route, the street tree plan shall also be reviewed by Metro.· 8. The street trees must be installed and inspected, or a performance.bond · posted prior to recording .of the short plat. If a performance bond is · ·posted, the street trees must be installed and inspected within one year of recording of the plat. At the time ·of inspection, if the trees are found to be installed per the approved plan, a maintenance bond must be submitted . or the performance bond replaced with a maintenance bond, and held for one year. After one year, the maintenance bond may be released after DDES has completed a second inspection and determined that the trees have been kept-healthy and thriving. D. P-Suffix/ SDO Conditions (KCC 21A.38)-To implement KCC 21A.38.230 which applies to the site, a detailed tree retention plan shall be submitted with the engineering plans for the subject plat. The tree retention plan and the engineering plans shall be·consistent with the requirements of KCC 21A.38.230, as well as the conceptual tree retention plan which is part of the hearing record for this project. No clearing of the subject property is permitted until the final tree retention plan is approved by LUSD. Flagging and temporary fencing of trees to be retained shall be Report and Decision LO/iS0003 provided, consistent with KCC 21A.38.230B4. The placement of impervious surfaces, fill material, excavation work, or the.storage of construction materials is prohibited within the fenced areas around preserved trees, except for grading work permitted pursuant to KCC 21A.38.230B4d(2). E. The 4500-square-foot recreation tract is consistent with the requirements of KCC 21A.14.180 and KCC 21A.14.190 (i.e., sport court[s], children's play equipment, picnic table[s], benches, etc.). (1). (2). (3). An overall conceptual recreation space plan shall be submitted for review and approval by ODES, with the submittal of the engineering plans. This plan shall include location, ar.ea calculations, dimensions, and general improvements. The approved engineering plans shall be consistent with the.overall.conceptual plan. A detailed recreation space plan (Le., landscape specs, equipment specs, etc.) consistent with the overall conceptual plan, as detailed in item a., shall be submitted for review and approval by DOES and King County Parks prior to or concurrent with the submittal of the final plat documents. The landscape plan shall be prepared in accordance with KCC 21A.16. A performance bond for recreation space improvements shall be posted prior to recording of the plat. 8. Road Mitigation Payment System The applicant or subsequent owner shall comply with Road Mitigation Payment System (MPS), King County Code 14.75, by paying the required MPS fee and administration fee as determined by King County Department of Transportation. The applicant has an option to either: A. Pay the MPS fee at final short plat recording, or (B.) pay the MPS fee at the time of building permit issuance. If the first option is chosen, the fee paid shall be the fee in effect at the time of short plat application and a note shall be placed on the face of the short plat that reads, "All fees required by King County code 14:75; Mitigation Payment System (MPS) have been paid:" If the second option is chosen, the fee paid shall be the amount in effect as of the date of the building · permit application. 9. A homeowner's association or other workable organization shall be established to the satisfaction of ODES which provides for the ownership and continued maintenance of the Recre.ation Tract. · Other Considerations A. Preliminary approval of this application does not limit the applicant's responsibility to obtain any required permit or license from the State or other regulatory body. This may include, but not be limited to, obtaining a forest practice permit ,an HPA permit, building permits, and other types of entitlements as necessitated by circumstances B. The short subdivision shall conform to KCC 16.82 relating to grading on private property. · C. Development of the subject property may require registration with the Washington State Department of Licensing, Real Estate Division Report and Decision L01S0003 . Rathinam, Shannila 24006 SE 10th Street Sammamish, WA 98075 Wilson, Terry Cramer Northwest Inc. 945 N. Central, Suite #104. Kent,.WA 98032 Report and Decision LQ&S0003 r / l ' Appeal Information and Parties of Record RIGHT TO APPEAL This action may be appealed in writing to the King County Hearing Examiner, with a fee of $250 (check payable to King County Office of Finance). · As required by KCC 20.20.090 and 20.24.090, the appeal period shall be fourteen (14) caJendar days and shall commence on the third day after the notice of decision is mailed. . . . Filing an appeal requires actual delivery to the King County Land Use Services Division prior to the close of business (4:30 p.m.) on October 4, 2004. Prior mailing is not sufficient if actual receipt by the Division does not occur within the applicable time period. The Examiner does not have authority to extend the time period unless the Division is not open on the specified closing date, in which event delivery prior to the close of business on the next business day is sufficient to meet the filing requirement. . If a timely Notice of Appeal has been filed, the appellant shall file a statement of appeal within a 21-day calendar period commencing three days after the notice of decision is mailed. The statement of appeal shall identify the decision being appealed (including file number) ahd the alleged errors in that decision. · The statement of appeal shall state: 1) specific reasons why the decision should be reversed or modified; and 2) the harm suffered or anticipated by the appellant, and the relief sought. The scope of an appeal shall be based on matters or issues raised in the statement of appeal. Failure to timely file a notice of appeal, appeal fee, or statement of appeal deprives the Examiner of jurisdiction to consider the appeal. Appeals must be submitted to the Department of Development and Environmental Services, addressed as follows: LAND USE APPEAL. Land Use Services Division Department of Development and Environmental Services BlackRiver Corporate Park 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Renton, WA98055-1219 Any party may make a request for a pre-hearing conference .. For more information regarding appeal proceedings and pre-hearing conferences, please contact the Office of the Examiner for a Citizens' Guide to the Examiner Hearings and/or read KCC 20.20 and 20.24. Parties and Persons of Interest: Dehkordi, Fereshteh Project Manager II DDES/LUSD Foster, Curt Sr. Engineer DDES/LUSD Hudson, Rich Program Manager m DDES/LUSD Kokesh, Robert & Arlene 7695 SWWestrnoorWay Portland, OR 97225 Report and Decision - _J ' . ... ''\_ ,,,,.. .. -I \ • ,n.u• I ,/. . \ . / . :. . .. ! . . I ; 4Jaa:L,Z:1 .$1 ' ...:r:.. I p \ I i l ' I \ · I,, I ,/ . ',,, ; . ,t!'Jllli I \. . ".;f;.,#4.,S, --~51'11'~ . ,(_.. ',,.·~-1'0.tl!S'·. ,. ID •· . \/ , ffl" DP . ' ' ii .T-<4 17} \ \ '~~~-~-1\= ,, / ' . ' . \ ' l~-'<1 ,, ~ . . . Ji . ,r,; I if {:d' ,lj fl . 0.1'.i. BA!l1S OFBB&Rl!IGB: 8f.WlfG$ $H(ftffl IElttlH Allt IMalP c, U. 1fZNI sr. tlE1Nt1 SW40'8f!"I PW' OF MJffflMESmlH tMRllel 'IMC FUDN\Q..l.lilE41'0F~ATN COllffl'; ~ . I.BG.4L DJlBCRIPTION: ~stta~~~ 1H ~ '1 OF~ AT PJrGE. 74 """1Y. - SfflWI' 1H 1>E CCUl1Y OF QIG. STX NomB: 1. JIOHUIEh1S WT WSl'1!D ~1+-03 .t. 1HS 1111' IS 8GD OH AH ACMI.. VEllT1llAL DAn1ll: HORrH ~ mnJCAI. OOt.11' ·r, "BEm::lDIARK: EMIOIH : ·: .J' IRAs$ DISK AT H.W." QIMQIWU ta U tf2M) _s;r. El.• 46«.f.3 U.S. FEE I .i i I ,J. .! •·.«>snt a.as• (/ I / -5 r ·.:c ::;,(::;'-;;~"' . ~t-5 ..... \ \j I "'t SITE BENCB1lA.RK: l • S£'f IUt Sf'I([ N I/TI.J1'f PQE EL• • l sf/I" I "". -~ • h:-Jk-~ ~ -~-· ~l' ; . a § ~ . I -,, ffl.30' °"', !.: .. ;..~..:.:-:::-::· ;_:.:;:~1-: • Im9 r,,r~,uo.~ a:·~;?~:\ Cl'ABU'l'PAB<IHri) C --<-·.\ . I . -~,.. . I c::=.J . ,. ·.·-.,! ' ~· ~ 1:·· :.?) , ~ ti r-.JS ... 5."5t $;I. n:.. ,_,, ,,,,,,. ,,.,,.. ~ 11 . i. ,,._,., .. 'f: ...,. ....•. , ... , .. ' J~n. -(:::-•:i·r-Je_ ;-. ~~ . . ,-:;'.:i~ (. . I~ '• I ·~ ' . I . I' -· ' . . ~ : .· . 'i ~ . ij P-JI ~:,, n; !!. ijft . CON'l'OtJR INTlmVAL: j a.DO U.S. f&T . L8GEND: @ FOl.N) wauEJff AS DEScimED _ 0 R:JVHj "°" I'll'£ • REBM .1: ~ l m FOiJMJ .. --' -... co.-r. ~ uc ~ / HI ' ¥' 1'--40 I .... N) 0 8 V) + () ·~ C vrurt_ PO/.E . GI • wr Al«:HOR l'Q£ 1' --·-0~ .. ,.,.....,,.. . ...,. '""" H """' OEER m Cll.n:H~ ff r 1000 FDa" * r OfAN.HC ffMCE' + 4'-ME fE1ClE" a ... ..,,. ~ L8GEND: ~""""""' me: • """""' T-1: XI' LOCUST. T-17; 2 Ill' r-2: ur nt r-1e: 2.t' MA T-ll Z..t' Flf T-19: Hf" J,J T-4< YI' 1.0C(.ISt T-20: Ill' ~ T-& "1' UXUS1 T-21: 12" 11A T-0: te" L.OalST T-22: 14'! Al.I T-7: 12" lOCtJST T-2.J': 13° 11A _ ---_A____.A T-(l: J 12"-2<' ,ww; T-24; 12" Ju . . -r.:::l'-r~.1,r_~ r-~ !~ ~- UJ -1--1(!) • <( a.. f-;,' . I ·~· ~· :c: w (.) (!) <( .. <( ~ a. < I ! .; t ' I j j i """"I :\. ® King County Department of Development and Environmental Services Land Use Services Division 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Renton, Washington 98055-1219 PROJECT INFORMATION Project Name: /?ttOIIAJAd S'Jldef f>L/J-/() Activity Number: Lt) <f £1</J 7 7 Project Number: L01 (otJo :3 Development Number: · DDES Review Engineer: ~ , V/!frltJ/U ( Notes: Date: 5-3-0&:> [ J Hearing Exarniner"s Report .... Date: q-/ 7-lalr/Revised Report ..... Date: ~ -ze -200 ~ [ ) Plat Ordinance Number: Date: ____ _ [ ) Preliminary Plat Map ......... Date Approved by Hearing Examiner: ___ _ [ J Revised Preliminary Plat Map ......... Date Approved by ODES: ____ _ . [ J 5-year Expiration .......... Date: (Show on engineering cover sheet) [ l [ l [ l [ l [ l [ l [ l [ l ROUTING TO OTHER KING COUNTY SECTIONS Wetland Report/Plans: A J IA--- Route Date:~ Response date: ____ _ Geotechnical Report/Plans: . J ( A Route Date: rr Response date: ____ _ Grading Report/Plans: , J / /)- Route Date:~ Response date: ____ _ Structural Designs/Calculations/Civil Plans/Soils Report Route Date: Response date: ____ _ (Vaults, Retaining Walls, Brid:!res) Landscape/Recreation/Street Treelfti__ f ( ff\ L Route Date: ,-J rr Response date: _____ N ,. Traffic Improvement Plan/Report: Route Date: ___ _ Response date: Tree Retention/Forestry/Plan: Route Date: Response date: 4-Z.f -Olo 7-11-0< • Other Report/Plan . ) h Route Date:~ Response date: ____ _ [ ] All required routing stations shown and updated on PRMS Notes: Updated 05/05 ChecklistUpdate/forms Activity Number: _______ _ GENERAL SUBDIVISION REQUIREMENTS [~ ·site plan layout matches preliminary plat approved by Hearing Examiner (Check for same lot count, tract configuration, road alignments, etc ... ) ~ Compliance with conditions of preliminary approval LJ-Compliance with Mitigated Determination of Non-Significance [ 1Jf Tract Table if three or mme tracts. Identify name, size and purpose. [ ] _. rwow and label all SAO tracts, buffers, and 15' BSBL. [ ] fV ~:view maximum height of 6-feet for rockeries and retaining walls per KCC 2 IA.12.030, 110-170, 220) Also show standard note per policy on web site. [ Jtf~e updated cover sheet showing designation for highly sensitive sites per Appendix, 044. [ ] i,K,Pefermine if HP A fisheries permit required-contact CAO staff. dt<l/]rree Retention Plans -Show standard plan note (see policies on we 0 b site). SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL (1998) CORE AND SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS OK [-1 (i ~ [-Y SWDM 1.2.1 1.2.2 . 1.2.3 1.2.6 1.2.8 1.3.1 1.3.2 Core #1 -Evaluate diversion of drainage within subbasins and/or tightline requirements for landslide hazard drainage areas. Core #2 -Offsite analysis. Evaluate adequacy and conclusions. Core #3 -Flow control. Determine design standard based upon mapping.and/or offsite analysis. Evaluaie exemptions from flow control if applicable. Core #6 -All drainage facilties and road access shall be located in public tracts, right- of-way and/or drainage easements dedicated to King County. For private facilities, specify the required Declaration of Covenant and drainage easements for final recording. Core #8 -Water Quality. Determine design standard based upon mapping and/or offsite analysis. Evaluate exemptions if applicable and untreated areas per page l-57. Special #1 -Area specific requirements. Perform P-suffix search on computer, evaluate grading code restrictions, and review for shared facility drainage plan. Special #2 -Floodplain boundaries shown on plans. DRAINAGE VARIANCES J [ ] 1.4 Activity No.--'~-,.,,.~---Approval Date: _____ _ Design Issues TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT 2.3. l.l Updated 05/05 Section 1 -Project Overview Figure l: TIR Worksheet Figure 2: Site Location Figure 3: Drainage Basins a. Acreage of subbasins. b. Identify all site characteristics c. Show existing discharge points to and from the site d. Show routes of existing, construction, and future flows at all discharge points and downstream hydraulic structures. e. Use a minimum USGS I :2400 topographic map as a base f. Show and cite the length of travel from the farthest upstream end of a proposed storm system in the development to any proposed flow control facility. Page 2,of 13 Activity Number: _______ _ TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (cont.) OK SWDM 2.3.1.1 Figure 4: Soils . a. Show the project site. b. the area draining to the site. c. the drainage system downstream for the distance of the downstream analysis. Section 2 -Preliminary Conditions Summary with responses Section 3 -Off-Site Analysis Section 4 -Flow Control and Water Quality Facility Analysis and Design Existing Site Hydrology (Part A) Developed Site Hydrology (Part B) Performance Standards (Pa.rt C) Flow Control System (Part D) Water Quality System (Part E) Section 5 -Conveyance System Design and Analysis Section 6-Special Reports and Studies -Geo, Wetlands, Floodplain analysis (4.4.2) Section 7 -Other Permits ( HPA, Special Use, WSDOT, etc .... ) Section 8 -Erosion/Sedimentation Control Design Section 9 -Bond Quantities Worksheet and RID Facility Summary Section 10 -Maintenance and Operations Manual (Section IO for privately maintained or special non-standard features) SITE IMPROVEMENT PLANS OK SWDM ~2.3.1.2 V Vertical Datum NAVO 1988-show benchmark Horizontal Control NAD 1983/91 2.3.1.2 General Plan Format Updated 05/05 (]) (2) (3) Sheet size 24" X 36"; quality reproducibles King Co. Standard Map Symbols; existing/proposed (Reference 7 A) Project Information/Cover Sheet a. Tide: Project name and ODES file number b. Table of Contents if more than 3 plan sheets c. Vicinity Map d. Name & Phone of Utility field contacts and One Call Number: 1-800-424-5555 (water, sewer, gas, power ... ) e. Preconstruction/Inspection notification requirements f. Name and Phone of erosion control supervisor g. Name & Phone of Surveyor h. Name & Phone of Owner/Agent i. Name & Phone of Applicant j. Legal description k. Plan approval block for ODES I. Name & Phone of engineering firm preparing plans m. Fire Marshal's approval stamp (ifrequired) n. Mailbox location approval by U.S. Postal Service o. List of conditions of preliminary approval on all site improvements An overall site plan if more than three plan sheets are used. a. The complete property area development b. Right-of-way information c. Street names and road classification d. All project phasing and proposed division boundaries Page 3 of 13 Activity Number: _______ _ SITE IMPROVEMENT PLANS /cont.) SWDM (5) (6) e. All natural and proposed drainage collection and conveyance systems with catch basin numbers shown Each sheet and TIR is stamped, signed, and dated by a Professional ~ngineer licensed in Washington State Detail Sheets Provided (7) ;)tie block on each sheet /a, Development title A_,,Name, address and phone number of engineering firm /c. Revision block rage numbering . e. Sheet title (e.g., road and drainage, grading, etc.) King County approval block on each plan sheet. The location and label for each section or other detail shall be provided. Sensitive Area Setbacks per KCC21A.24 All match lines correspond to the sheet referenced Division phase lines with limits of construction Standard Plan Notes -General, Drainage, & Structural notes (Reference 7B), Survey control plan sheet stamped by licensed PLS in Washington State 2.3.1.2 Plan View: Site Plan and Roadway Elements 2.3.1.2 2.3.1.2 2.3.1.2 Updated 05/05 (I) Property lines, R/W lines, roadway widths shown (2) Existing/Proposed road features; CL, edge pavement, edge shoulder, ditches, curb, sidewalk, & access pts (3) Existing/Proposed Topographic Contours@ 2', S'> 15% slope, I 0'>40% slope (4) All affected utilities are shown; utility poles marked (5) All roads and adjoining subdivisions identified (6) Existing/Proposed R/W dimensioned and shown (7) Existing/Proposed surfacing shown (8) Scale generally I "=SO' (l "=100' for lots> l Acre) Plan View: Drainage Conveyance Sequentially number all catch basins and curb inlets Show length, diameter, and material for all pipes, culverts, and stubouts Label catch basin size and type Show stub out locations for roof drains Label all drainage easements, access easements, tracts, and building setbacks Provide flow arrows for drainage direction. Plan View: Other Show all buildings, property lines, streets, alleys, and easements. Verify condition of public right-of-way. Show structures on abutting properties within SO feet Identify fencing for drainage facilities Provide section details of all retaining walls and rockeries Show all wells on site and within I 00-feet of site. For well abandonment, include notes referencing DOE procedures. Profiles: Roadway and Drainage Existing/Proposed roadway centerline (CL) at 50' stations increasing, reading from left to right. Show stationing of points of smooth vertical curve, with elevations Page 4 of 13 ,_ Activity Number:. _______ _ SITE IMPROVEMENT PLANS (cont.) SWDM Show vertical curve data including stopping sight distance Show all pipes and detention tanks with slope, length, size, type Show all pipe inverts and elevations of catch basins or lids Minimum cover dimensions if less than 2.0' Indicate roadway stationing and offset for all catchbasins. Show vertical and horizontal scales (vertical I"= 5') Label all profiles with street names and reference numbers to plan sheet. Show all property boundaries and match line locations. Provide profiles for conveyance systems of 12" and larger pipes or channels other than roadway ditches Catch basin lids are flush with ground line 2.3.1.2 Plan Details V ~ Jk:' ~ V ~ -~ ~ ~ [ l Provide scale drawing of each pond, vault, or water· quality facility. Include all pipe details for size, type, slope, length, etc. Show existing and final grade contours at 2-foot intervals. Sho_w maximum design water elevation. Dimension all berm widths. Provide two cross sections through pond, including one section through restrictor. Specify soils and compaction requirements Show location and detail of emergency overflows, spillways, and bypasses. _ Specify rock protection/energy dissipation details - Provide inverts for all pipes, grates, etc. and spot elevations on pond bottom. Show location of access roads to control manholes and pond/forebay bottoms. Provide plan and section views of all energy dissipaters. Specify size and thickness of rock. Show bollard locations (Typically at entrance to drainage facility and walking trails). Restrictor and control structures must have section and plan view dr.awn to scale ,---- 2.3.1.2 Structural Plan Details [ l Verify that designer is a licensed structural P.E. for vaults or bridges. Notes: EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL (SWDM Appendix D) OK SWDM 2.3.1.3 General Specifications [~ H- H- .Ll-w--- .::n-J A-- ~ ;,y-· µ-- ;tr= Updated 05/05 Separate plan sheet showing entire site w/features. · Show sensitive areas and buffers in separate tracts. Show existing contours and final grades if scope of work includes grading. Pertinent information from soils report is added to plans . Drainage features identified (streams, wetlands, bogs, springs, seeps, swales, ditches, pipes, & depressions) . Utility corridors other than roads shown. Show drainage divides and flow directions. Specify best management practices. Show cut and fill slopes with catch lines indicated. Sufficient conceptual details to convey design intent. Standard ESC plan notes shown on plans (Page D-69). For grading and structural fill within lot areas -show standard notes for geo hazards. (See web site for geo notes) Page 5 of 13 Activity Number:. _______ _ EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL (SWDM Appendix D) (cont.) SWDM D.4.1 D.4.2 [ l [ l [ l D.4.5 [ l [ l [ l [ l [ l [ l ~D.4.6 w [ l [ l [ l [ l Updated 05/05 Clearing Limits (I) Delineate clearing limits -colored survey tape may be used. Sensitive areas require plastic/metal safety fence or stake and wire fences. (2) Provide detail offencing Cover Measures (I) Specify the type and location of temporary and permanent cover measures. Mulch, erosion control nets, blankets, plastic, seeding and sodding. (2) Specify the seed mixes, fertilizers, and soil amendments to be used and applications rates. (3) Areas receiving special treatment are specified (jute netting, rock lining, or sod). ( 4) Soil cover practices and locations of disturbed areas. Perimeter Protection (I) Specify the location and type of perimeter protection to be used -silt fence, brush barriers, and/or vegetated strips. (2) Provide details and specify type of fabric for silt fence. Traffic Area Stabilization (I) Show construction entrance with detail (Fig. D.4.G). (2) Show proposed construction roads and parking areas. Specify details for stabilization. Sedimeut Retention (I) Show location of sediment pond or sediment trap. Very small areas can be treated with only perimeter protection (See D-.4.3). (2) Sediment Trap -Can be used for drainage areas 3 acres or less. Calculate surface area using 2-year design storm. Show detail per Figure D.4.H. (3) Sediment Pond -Determine pond geometry and show details on plan for required storage, depth, length, and width. ( 4) Show sediment pond cross section and detail (Figures D.4.J and K) (5) Provide details of cell dividers and stabilization techniques for inlet/outlet. ( 6) Specify mulch or recommended coverof berms & slopes. (7) Specify the I-foot marker for sediment removal. (8) Indicate catch basins for protection and show design details (Fig. D.4.L, M). Surface Water Control (I) Show conveyance of all surface water to a sediment pond or trap. (2) Discharge location shall be downslope from disturbed areas. (3) Show details for conveyance with interceptor dike, swales. (Figures D.4.0, P,). ( 4) For ditches, determine capacity for I 0-year storm with 0.5 feet freeboard. Show details for check dams (Fig. D.4.R.). Determine check dam spacing and as needed, show inverts and minimum slopes ofopen channels. Also show direction of open channel flow. (5) For pipe slope drains, determine capacity for IO-year storm. Show details per Fig. D.4.Q. (6) Determine level of protection for outlet (rock pad, outfall design, or level spreader). See requirements in D-38 through D-40. (7) Evaluate offsite flows entering the site and assure bypass of disturbed areas. Page 6 of 13 Activity 1'1umber: _______ _ 2.3.1.3 EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL (cont.) ~ [ l SWDM D.5.1 ESC Report ( 1) Show detailed construction sequence (page D-70). (2) All required calculations and soils reports contained in TIR. Wet Season Requirements (I) Provide a list of all applicable wet season requirements. (Details on page D-42) [ l ~.5.3 Sensitive Area Restrictions t,J, /I ,/ (!) Consider phased construction during the dry season. See special ff recommendations on page D-43. [ l [ l [ l [ l [ l [ l [ l [ l [ l [ l [ l [ l D.5.4 Maintenance (I) Plans shall list the name, address and phone number of the ESC Supervisor. A sign shall also be posted on the construction site with information for contacting the ESC supervisor. (2) Determine if site is Highly Sensitive (Soil Types C or D, 5 acres of disturbance, large areas with slopes> I 0%, proximity to streams, wetlands, or lakes). (3) On cover sheet of engineering plans, designate if highly sensitive site. Di/·7 NPDES Requirements · /J. / ~ Determine if project will disturb more than 5 acres. , /f (2) If disturbed area is greater than 5 acres, show the following note on the plans: "No construction or site disturbance for this project may begin before the applicant first obtains a General Permit to Discharge Stormwater Associated with Construction Activity permit from the Washington State Department of Ecology (DOE). For more information or application form, please visit DOEs web site at www.ecy. wa.govlpubs/9937.pdf" :;~ , Forest Practices Permit (I) Determine if project needs FPA permit. Contact DOES grading section. (2) Provide a reference note on the cover sheet indicating whether or not a FPA permit has been obtained. Early Start Plan Review (!) Standard Cover sheet included with Title for Phased Early Start. (2) List the scope of work for early start (Scope of work will vary for each project - Evaluate clearing, grading for roads, lot grading, utility installation, vault construction, offsite work) (3) Update the sheet index to identify all plans with updated page numbers. (4) Include standard ESC plan prepared in accordance with all requirements listed above for erosion and sediment control. (5) Include detailed construction sequence and identify ESC supervisor. ( 6) Show st.indard erosion control notes. (7) Show early start activity number on all plan sheets. DESIGN REQUIREMENTS SWDM 3.2 \Y [ l Runoff Computation Rational Method required for onsite conveyance (See Table 3.2) KCRTS used for flow control design Evaluate correct data: Rainfall region, scale factor, time step, record type, acreages, soil cover groups, and percent impervious. [ ] 3-27 For urban areas, unprotected forest modeled as pasture or grass Page 7 of 13 Updated 05/05 Activ11y Number:. _______ _ DESIGN REQUIREMENTS (cont) [ l [ l [ l [ l [ l [ l _µ----- [ ] 3.3.6 [ ] 3.3.7 0 4.0 ~ K ::; , [,Y 4-9 Y 4-10 4-27 [ l [ ] 4-69 4-53 5.0 ~ 5-3 ~ [ ] 5-11 [ ] 5-14 For rural areas, unprotected forest assumes 50% grass, 50% pasture All pre developed grassland modeled as pasture All post developed grassland modeled as grass Impervious coverage calculated based upon specific project -clearly summarize types and amounts of impervious. For urban development, impervious for each Jot,>= 4,000 sq ft or maximum allowed in zoning code. For rural development, impervious for each Jot,>= 8,000 sq ft or maximum allowed in zoning code. Evaluate requirements for modeling with effective impervious area. Point of compliance -evaluate for onsite bypass and offsite closed depression. Onsite closed depressions and ponding areas. Conveyance System Analysis and Design Conveyance systems are in easements with BSBL's Offsite easements must be recorded using standard forms (Reference 8H) Determine which easements are public and private, label and dimension. Pipes are parallel to and alongside property lines Minimum pipe size 12-inch, for private systems may allow 8 inch. Easements for pipes outside of right of way. For connecting pipes at structures, match crowns, 80% diameter, or inverts Minimum velocity at full flow 3.0 feet per second. Minimum cover for pipes 2 feet. Debris barrier for pipes 18-36 inch Outfall design criteria Surcharges (backwater analysis may be required) Maximum headwater allowed for culverts Bridge design Floodplain analysis Open channels Flow Control Design Mandatory requirements for roof downspouts in order of preference. Must evaluate feasibility of each. * Infiltration * Dispersion * Perforated stubouts Dispersion system criteria including vegetated flow path. Perforated stub out, if used show detail per Fig. 5 .1.3 .A Forested open space flow control BMP's. • Show tracts or easements for FOS * Show required notes on plan for plat recording [ ] 5-15 Roadway dispersion BMP's, check design criteria [ ] 5-17 BMP's for reducing facility size. Note: facility sizing credit allowed for dispersion only ifflowpath from roofs ultimately drain to RID facility. ~5.3 )Y Detention Facilities Emergency overflow -Evaluate flow path for safe and adequate conveyance Setbacks Flow-through system V lYDetention Ponds ri Dam Safety Compliance Two cross-sections through pond ( one x-section to include control structure) [ Y Review pond details in Figures 5.3.1.A and B. ~/ Designed as flow-through system /t' J Side slopes interior 3H: 1 V or fenced [ ] J k, Vertical interior retaining walls Stamped by licensed structural civil engineer. [ ] ,-} por pond walls, min. 25% of perimeter vegetated and no steeper than 3: I. f'I · Page8ofl3 Updated 05/05 Activity Number: _______ _ DESIGN REQUIREMENTS /cont.) OK w SWDM Berms greater than 4 feet require key excavation. Minimum berm width of 6 feet. ~ Primary overflow (control structure with riser). ~ Secondary Inlet to the control structure. ft . / Emergency Overflow Spillway, I 00 year developed peak flow [ ] N K" Soil and compaction requirements described (95% modified proctor) ~ Access road min. turning radius, maximum grade, min. width, fences or gates. Y' Pond sign (Figure 5.3.1.D) ~ Fencing and planting requirements. Setbacks -S feet from tow of exterior slope or S feet from water surface for cut slope [ l [ l [ l [ l [ l [ l [ l [ l [ l [ l [ l [ l [ l [ l [ l [ l [ l [ l [ l 5.3.2 Detention Tanks Flow-through system required 6" of dead storage in tank bottom. j ~ Minimum pipe diameter of36". Materials and structural stability. Control structure per Section S .3 .4 Buoyancy Access risers and CBs are spaced properly with max. depth from finished grade to tank invert shall be 20 feet and accessible by maintenance vehicles. 5.3.3 Detention Vaults 5.3.4 Structural package submitted for approval Flow-through system required · eview design details per Fig. 5.3.3.A, Note: grate over sump with 2' x 2' hinged ccess door. ccess positioned a maximum of SO.feet from any location. (if over 3 foot cover use cone riser). · Access required to inlet pipe and outlet Removable SxlO panel if vault greater than 1250 sq. ft. floor area. maximum depth from finished grade to vault invert to be 20 feet. Minimum internal height shall be 7 feet, min. width shall be 4 feet min. Ventilation pipes provided in all four comers. Control Structures ~ Section and plan view shown to scale Orifice size and elevation on plans match calculations. Minimum orifice 0.5'' (Note : Information Plate details are no longer required -See policy on web site.). [ l [ l 5.4 [ l [ l ~ [ l [ l [ l [ l [ l [ l [ l 6.0 [ ) 6.1 [/6.2. {J 6.2.2A Updated 05/05 Infiltration Facilities Appropriate soils logs and testing procedures in TIR. Pond bottom at least 3 feet above seasonal high water Permeable soil extends minimum 3 feet below bottom of pond. Geotechnical report states suitability and determines design infiltration rate. Overflow route identified with I 00-yr overflow conveyance. Spill Control device upstream of facility. Presettling Review setback requirements, page 5-60. Design water surface setback of 20 feet from external tract, easement or property lines. Show the standard note regarding public rule for in operation facility (see web site) Water Quality Design Water Quality Menus Water Quality facilities Water Quality Sequencing Page 9 of 13 Activity Number:. ______ _ DESIGN REQUIREMENTS (cont.) OK [ l [ l [ l [ l [ l [ l [ l [ l [ l SWDM 6.2.3 Setbacks, slopes and embankments 6.2.4 Facility Liners 6.2.5 Flow Splitter Designs 6.3 6.3.1 6.3.1.1 6.3.1 6.3.4 Biofiltration Facility Biofiltration swales and soil amendments Methods of Analysis Swale geometry, plantings, flow conveyance, high flows, velocity. Road access requirements, page 6-43. Filter strip geometry (slopes) . [[ V,] 6.4 Wetpool Facility Designs ~ Wetpool geometry, 2 cells, minimum depth of first cell 4 feet. [ ] Flowpath length to width ratio 3:1, Note: If flow path achieved with berms or walls, --/ top of berm must be at 2-year water surface elevation. )1 6.4.1.2 Berms, Baffles, Slopes [ J Inlet/Outlet Design [ l 6.4.1.1 Access, setbacks, and plantings [ ] 6.4.2 Wetvaults [ J 6.4.1.1 Sizing basic or large [ J 6.4.1.1 Berms, Baffles, Slopes [ ] 6.4.2.2 Two cells separated by wall or removable baffle. [ J Vault bottom forms a broad "V" with 5% sideslopes. [ ] Inlet is submerged and outlet pipe designed for I 00-year overflow. [ J Gravity drain provided if grade allows [ J Minimum 50 square feet of grate over second cell. [ ] 6.4.3 Stormwater Wetlands [ ] 6.4.3.1 Methods of Analysis [ ] 6.4.3.2 Design Criteria -Wetland geometry, liners, access, plantings [ ] 6.4.4 Combination Detention and Wetpool facilities [ ] 6.4.4.1 Methods of Analysis [ ] 6.4.4.2 Design Criteria -Detention and wetpool geometry, berms; baffles, slopes [ ] 6.4.4.2 Access and plantings [ ] 6.5 Media Filtration Facility Designs [ J 6.5. I Presettleing/pretreatment [ ] 6.5.2 Sandfilters -Basic and Large [ ] 6.5.2.1 Methods of analysis [ ] 6.5.2.2 Design Criteria-Geometry, overflow/bypass, underdrain, and access [ ] 6.5.3 Sandfilter Vaults [ ] 6.5.3.2 Design Criteria-geometry, pretreatment, flow-spreading, energy dissipation, [ ] 6.5.3.2 Overflow/bypass, underdrain and access NOTES: Page 10 of 13 Updated 05/05 Activity Number:. ______ _ KING COUNTY ROAD STANDARDS (1993) GENERAL REOUIRMENTS 1.03 A, B 1.03 D Offsite and frontage improvements determined by reviewing agency. Note: For grading permits, the required extent of road improvements must be determined during engineering review. For subdivisions, the requirements are determined during preliminary review. Subdivisions must have recorded public access except for private roads. DESIGN REQUIREMENTS 1.08 Road Variances: Activity No. ______ _ Approval Date: ____ _ Design Issues . . ROAD CLASSIFICATION TABLE Naine·ofRoadwav . . .. [ J 2.03C ~2.03D Maximum Superelevation (2.05) Horizontal curvature (2.05) 2.03E Maximum grade (2.11) 2.03F Stopping Sight Distance (2.05, 2.12) 2.03G Entering Sight Distance (2.05, 2.13) KCRS Classification 2.03H Minimum pavement width (Note: Footnote 9 -Neighborhood collectors require 36-feet at approach to intersections with arterials) [~2.03! [_,{ /.03J v{ 2.03J [..y° 2.03K Updated 05/05 Minimum roadway width Minimum R/W width Min. R/W width (Footnote 12 and 2. l 9B -include 1 foot extra ROW behind curb or sidewalk) Curb or shoulder type road (2.01) Page 11 of13 Activity Number.:_------- KING COUNTY ROAD STANDARDS (1993) DESIGN REQUIREMENTS (Cont.) [ ] 2.03L Minimum Half-Street width [ ] 2.06 Private Street Design Standards [ ] Jfrro687 Verify maximum potential of 16 lots [ 1;}k5-.91 HalfStreets [ ] ~ 8 Minimum Cul-de-Sac diameters [ ] ~ .088 Maximum Cul-de-Sac length [ ] 2.08E Maximum Cross Slope 6% [ ] 2.08F Bulb island shall be offset 2-feet Alleys [ 10~9 [] J~o9B Private Access Tracts (Note: Must meet all standards for minor access street, except curb cut driveway design is allowed with property line radii dedication) ~JOA ,k1 2.IOA Angle of intersection between 85 and 95 degrees Intersection curb radius ~2.1 OA. Intersection right-of-way radius ~ 2.108 K 2.IOC [ l~/fi!OE ~: Intersection spacing Intersection landing Low Speed Curves Maximum Grade-Use AC for grades >12%, Use PCC for grades >20% Grade Brakes -maximum I% at intersections [ ] 2.120 Intersection stopping sight distance (125' SSD allowed for local access streets) [ ] 2.16 llfkz(s [1JA-£o ;;J~ ~3.02A 0028 [.,(,' 3.05 [ ] 3.09 []J~ ;ifi}.ri' ?14.01 Updated 05/05 Bus zones -For arterials and neigh. collectors, the designer shall contact metro. Intersections with State Highways Single access serving more than 100 lots Driveways Joint Use Driveways Sidewalks (both sides for subcollectors and higher classification) Location and width Handicapped access ramp (Use updated detail from KC Road Engineer, 3/26/04) School Access -asphalt walkway, sidewalk, or delineated shoulder. Bikeways Equestrian Facilities Road Section and Surfacing (Drawings 1-00 I --1-006) Note: Neighborhood collectors require 3-inch asphalt concrete Page 12 of 13 Activity Number: ______ _ KING COUNTY ROAD STANDARDS (1993) DESIGN REQUIREMENTS (Cont.) OK KCRS ~ 4.0 IF Perform saw cut of pavement at fog line. /4.0IF [ l 4.02 [ ) 4.02 [) /03 [/ 4.05 [] rw-01 [ ) 5.02 0 5.03 [/5.04 ·~ 5.05 9 5.06 ¥o7 5.08 [ l 5.11 Pavement overlay for widening and channelization (show special note as approved by Development Engineer -see web site) Residential street design Poor subgrade evaluation Arterial pavement design Pavement markings, channelization, and tapers (Requires DOT review) Rock facings (Dwg. Nos. 5-004 -5-007) Side slopes, generally 2H: 1 V Street trees and landscaping Mail boxes (Dwg. Nos. 5-010-5-012) Street illumination Survey Monuments to be disturbed are shown Roadway Barricades Bollards for walkways or maintenance roads Roadside obstacles (Note: If variance required for utility pole, the utility company must apply for the variance. [ ] 6.00 Bridges (minimum width 28-feet) [ )~ fp.02A-D Grass-lined, pipe or rock lined, special designed ditch Beveled ends for culverts in ROW Maximum spacing between catch basins 04E CBs taller than 5' (grate to invert) are Type II, Max. depth 12-feet per Dwg. 2-005 .~ 7.05A Vaned grates /J 7.05B Through curb inlet frames for sag curves and intersections> 4%. Notes:.a) Through curb inlet not used on rolled curb, b) See web site for policy on three flanking inlets [ ] 7.05E All covers and grates shall be locking ~ 8.02 Utility pole locations and other obstacles. / 8.03B Open cuts on existing roadways, patch requirements NOTES: Page 13 of 13 Updated 05/05