The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About03388 - Technical Information Report � �1 � <� - �-�� `15/a �-� M � � TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT ' FOR THE LANDING LOT 1 RENTON, WASHINGTON Prepared for: ' Harvest Partners 8214 Westchester Drive, Suite 6�0 Dallas, TX 75225 , Revised May 25, 2007 Apri124, 2007 Prepared by: W& H PACIFIC,INC. 3350 Monte Villa Parkway Bothell, Washington 98021 (425) 951-4800 �3385 TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT FOR THE LANDING LOT 1 RENTON, WASHINGTON Prepared for: Harvest Partners 8214 Westchester Drive, Suite 650 Dallas, TX 75225 Revised May 2�, 2007 Apri124, 2007 R• STyS ,�,�� oF w,ask Engineer: �Q `��' � � o - Stephen R. Styskal, P.E. • W& H Pacific, Inc. 3350 Monte Villa Parkway 7938 Bothell, Washington 98021 w�' (425) 951-4800 .n R�I�i� ��' �`SSIO NA L E�G` ��/-� EXPIRES 07/76/OB TABLE OF CONTENTS Section 1.0 Proj ect Overview 1.1 Purpose and Scope 1.2 Existing Conditions 1.3 Developed Conditions 2.0 Preliminary Conditions Summary 2.1 Core Requirements 3.0 Off-Site Analysis 3.1 Upstream Drainage Analysis 3.2 Downstream Drainage Analysis 3.3 Berryman& Henigar Conveyance Maps 4.0 Retention/Detention Analysis and Design 4.1 Existing Site Hydrology 4.2 Developed Site Hydrology 4.3 Water Quality 4.4 Detention 5.0 Conveyance Systems Analysis and Design 5.1 Roof Downspout System 5.2 Proposed On-Site Conveyance System 6.0 Special Reports and Studies 7.0 Basin and Community Planning Areas 8.0 Other Permits 9.0 Erosion/ Sedimentation Control Desi�n 10.0 Bond Quantities Worksheet, Retention/Detention Facility Summary Sheet and Sketch, and Declaration of Covenant 11.0 Maintenance and Operations Manual i TABLE OF CONTENTS FIGURES 1 T.I.R. Worksheet 2 Vicinity Map 3 Existing Conditions 4 Developed Conditions 5 USGS Topographic Map 6 Water Quality Basins Map 7 Conveyance Map 8 100-Year Flood Map ii King County Department of Development and Environmental Services TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET , Part 1 PROJECT OWNER AND Part 2 PROJECT LOCATION AND PROJECT ENGINEER DESCRIPTION Project Owner Project Name Harvest Partners The Landing Address Location 8214 Westchester Drive Suite 650. Dallas.TX 75225 Township 23N Phone Range 55 (214) 369-0860 .............Section NW %. SECTION 8 Project Engineer Stephen Styskal Company W&H Pacific Address/Phone 425 951-4800 Part 3 TYPE OF PERMIT Part 4 OTHER REVIEWS AND PERMITS APPLICATION �' Subdivison � DFW HPA � Shoreline Management ❑ Short Subdivision ❑ COE 404 ❑ Rockery ❑ Grading ❑ DOE Dam Safety � Structural Vault ❑ Commercial ❑ FEMA Floodplain C Other ❑ Other C COE Wetlands Part 5 SITE COMMUNITY AND DRAINAGE BASIN Community City of Renton Drainage Basin Lower Cedar Drainage Basin Part 6 SITE CHARACTERISTICS � River `I Floodplain ❑ Wetlands � Stream � Seeps/Springs �' Critical Stream Reach High Groundwater Table —� Depressions/Swales ❑ Groundwater Recharge ' Lake DIRECT DISCHARGE �; Other '� Steep Slopes Part 7 SOI LS Soil Type Slopes Erosion Potential Erosive Velcoties Urban Land (URZ. ❑ Additional Sheets Attached Part 8 DEVELOPMENT LIMITATIONS REFERENCE LIMITATION/SITE CONSTRAINT ❑ Ch. 4— Downstream Analysis � ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Additional Sheets Attached Part 9 ESC REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS DURING CONSTRUCTION AFTER CONSTRUCTION 'J Sedimentation Facilities ❑ Stabilize Exposed Surface '� Stabilized Construction Entrance ❑ Remove and Restore Temporary ESC Facilities � Perimeter Runoff Control ❑ Clean and Remove All Silt and Debris '�; Clearing and Graing Restrictions ❑ Ensure Operation of Permanent Facilities ❑ Cover Practices ❑ Flag Limits of SAO and open space u Construction Sequence preservation areas � Other ❑ Other ; � ; . ,� � � � ,� 1 i '� Part 10 SURFACE WATER SYSTEM -� Method of Analysis ❑ Grass Lined ❑ Tank � Infiltration Channel WET Vault � Depression Pipe System Compensation/Mitigati ❑ Energy Dissapator L�' Flow Dispersal on of Eliminated Site ❑ Open Channel Stora e ❑ Wetland ❑ Waiver g ❑ Dry Pond ❑ Stream ❑ Regional ❑ Wet Pond Detention Brief Description of System Operation Direct Discharge, Wetvaults for water quality treatment Facility Related Site Limitations Reference Facility Limitation Part 11 STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS Part 12 EASEMENTS/TRACTS ❑ Cast in Place Vaul ❑ Drainage Easement ❑ Retaining Wall ❑ Access Easement ❑ Rockery> 4' High ❑ Native Growth Protection Easement ❑ Structural on Steep Slope ❑ Tract ❑ Other ❑ Other Part 13 StGNATURE OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER I or a civil engineer under my supervision my supervision have visited the site. Actual site conditions as observed were incorporated into this worksheet and the attachments. To the best of my knowledge the information provided here is accurate. ��, Si ned/Date � � �405 NE 12TN ST NE n � QF � -�' �� W z Zz z ;�--� . �' �'� STH S7 D > < W q �t � z � I z �{JE 51 H � j � ST � � - . - Y -� z O ( Q � � W PJE 3RD 5� �0 S AIRPORT ST NE 3 WA Y Fl G URE 2 - VI CI NI TY MAP -------- ---------- -- - NTS ath: P: Ha vest Partners 3 36\Desfgn Drawf e Clvfl\Lot CDa\lot 1 Sto Re ort\325 6—L d—FI &3. Flg.3 a . Date: 4 4 7 :i A A fl ttar.. — rf t 3 AST Sf e: ctb . • r r ' ' i b M ANadjafi i � �-. � � n� �a — —z-� ' g � , � � � I 0 0 A ��'.%, k N �O,p ; � i os�� Z , I � �o��- c� � � I �_� � � i � � _ � � ; , �� , . o � ; � �,. , � a f �� ,, � m o �� i �.. � ....I � � �aIIIi � � ��'��. ;; r" � D ,�� l�_.- . . � ' ; � n � � I � °' c� , `. o° y i `.. � _ �I , o, r,�i � �.�� i i� �� n w �� I �� i �� Zl ^'1 __..,._� , �\ ;,.�` \ b � � � � �I i � � \, < � �' O � O � � 1 � �� i� `� �, <_ � �� n , ._..�� . � = � N � , �, � � u rn �:; '�� ;' � n �' Z` � �; / i,. �/ � �j � � � + � .. .\\ j N��.. r� p� I� ... .... __ \ � � ^' cAj �! _ __ _. I L 1 1 _ � I t ; `� . - \ `� , i-- �--_ j � �} �-- - � , _ � � � � �r-r �'-`-�• '`�\ � �'� -�_ ` � p� , \ � � �-- a f r . __�_� '� O � i � y .�..._... . ._ �.. 1-� ,-�1,�..,<,_ , '� Cn �� ;�li '1 � y z [J o „ -� cnm �� -a � � `> O t �� I�. � � i ` tn � � . o � � ' ��i ��I�. O -_. � � r i � ��.�� N i::,:..._::. � 'y "�� ZJ m ..._� :; � � 2 �, G� I � ;� o ., � l , �v m z , �..� . �:��. , }y. , � II ; I ,`�� -, � � � , o z,�. � �� _f ` �. -� j . � ; � _I = y i ; -;�( V tn � 7 — i � � I � Ii : i � � � ; ��- i � I I --1 � � ; � , i � � � � �:.�':.I � I � � � � � ' � � , S � � '� � � � � ' II , I � � � I p�1�il^ i \ . � . , : i� I „ � � � i � i �� I �� i m � � � � � �� i�� I I v ,�.il��. m � ° x ' --� � jlii ! � ''�'l,. � ;i�� x,,,� . � 5 � _, �____ _�� ` i � � - � o �� D � � � � � � i � 4i I �� i �"�.. ,�, � � � y CA i � : i�,�i'. �` li � --�- � __-�_ � � ..., .. .a � c�j � � i � � � � �� ` � �� '� �. o N �.__.1__ � � � � '� m cn z � A ; i: i � I I � i.�` , , � : R7 �7 (n NO Dn � � � I � �, l �, o � � mm � �� ; ; � i , ��i y � ; � .. � P; _ � � , `,� � � I � n+� � , � x _ ...., i i .i-.s.�J. �.�..,, , , .::.__;. .. :..,..,.. . ..... � . .,:_,._ . ..�. . .... .. ` I � I I / r� i��. D � I � � o m f., �� ,, � � __� �._ � __ �. ��. i � , � , . � � i , �� ^_ < _ ` __ m � D � � � c c- -- �. —,,, ., �— � � r �� ,_ ._... ` � fn '�----'�' ��' � ~ L "-"� 1----^—_' --- �; '�n '�I I \ ,��_ ' D Z _ _ ,>; D �. __ �. �-�_ -_-_ -- " � Z Z � -- - � N ... _ __ _ �' C :_ _ _ � � n -- - -- G) _ �:_� � PARKAV_EN_. ......._._.,__.... _ �.- -- _�� _-,_ _ _ _ __ , .m:!_�--�- __. �== -- _ =_= —_ -- � -- '� ? C7 � - -- _ _ __ -----�------- . -- _ -- y __----�---------------� -- ___ _ _ rn � � � � ? Z � � o i" V y0 Z n A � � m ��zs/os cHECKEo er. _ HARVEST PARTNETS DRAWN BY: AN APPRo�o s,, t�.:�� THE LANDING � LAST EDIT: 9 11 08 PLOT DATE: 04 24/07 9360 Yonte Vllle PerYwsy � �n DA7E BY REv RENSION CKDAP�r LOT 1 Bot6ell. 1/ashloQton 98 081-88 72 z � � - EXI STI NG CONDI TIONS ��'��-� (� - RENTON WASHINCTON _ �°�O•0°� . _ SCALE: PROJECT N0. DRAWING FILE NAME: �1°a°°' ' �°"'' '8inqer '11O�01p'�"��10�' 1"=100' 32536-Land-Fi 2&3 D��DDC• .�ffi-0m � .�� IFII�4� m ,-==-�_ _ - �� 'r' a o , � E i /�/ � a , S � LOT 1 �� '�� ` TOTAL SITE AREA=6.81 ac� ' �� 3� � ASPHALT PARKING-3.31 ac `�;� BUlLDlNG =3.50 ac `' �� :` 5 LANDSCAPING=0.00 ac WEST BASIN � � (HATCHED AREA) ': � BASIN TOTAL=1.23 ac , �� !�'� ` .r',% r i ASPHALT PARKING=0.33 ac , -� �� -� �' � `Y- `� `: � � _.. ,, BUILDINGS=0.90 ac " � % ��- ��'� ` ��` ��` � � LANDSCAPING=0.00 ac ,- "�� _ -�" � , 3 �� p P�� _ , �� - `�, Z� , ✓ ., W o PN �� PROPOSED DISCHARGE POlNT p 1,OG -'" -/_,,j� z Z� F O R W E S T B A S I N P S�/� J��; `� T O L O G A N A V E N �% - � �«�� ,,�;3� PROPOSED DISCHARGE POINT � �� PR� �= � - . �,. u.-� �.«,�� _.-� FOR EAST BASIN � � � �,\'� ��G�� " TO PARK AVE N W � - '��;��", " �.es Ac � Z� � ,'j �� '� .� ,`'� Q z � O � ,; ,i --- _ . a , -�� BLDG 303 � �. � O .� �. � G.i2AC 1 . �� 2 �lDG3i� / � '�� tr' Z n U O.L�S�AC /�� P / / _ --__"_ Iy F� �i � i f _ /�`,J/ / �J _" " Q O � �/�i ; g, i J % �. j � .. ., a!�c3c? !%` i� — — W q c.;snc w�� , '�� _ > � ix. �� / 8'_:�3 3.� �.• ��f � a ��° �_�;%�' �` � w -- EAST BASIN o ; ,�� , � o �4 o.�^�5 `.�`� ,_�"JJ : , y�'`�`�� Q -; BASIN TOTAL=5.58 ac .i' �° ' �--' � - `�'" � �- ASPHALT PARKING=2.98 ac b~ � _ \ i '`""" ,�� , . Y - , &�}// j�t . , s,. � ;�� _ � ' BUILDINGS=2.60 ac � Q ,;. `,��.� �%� a -� LANDSCAPING=0.00 ac � � � - . n ' "Q� i'r� ; �.. BiDG°L2 � � /' �' "�� 3'_f3.^.,31D -- ,, �m /. - C.ZiAC /, •AO,' p.S3tiC ' , -- aLDG 3Q3 � y ` O.NAC� _ �� . —_— ,'� �_ '�� , � -_ _ � � . -. r: � ' ' `,, i� .. � .:; .__ _ y ,: .._ .`> /� � � i .', �� _._ ---- -- --- . ....� � � �� --- --�- ---' �- " – / t; m _ � ��:.� _ . p � i/� // _ � ` I i � � . � �_ __ , _ - � ��TN ST i I f; � � � , _ � � . _ _ '.�-.. — -- �� ^ � J� _ = � , ;�� - — �`— �--L-1—= ti. - � a . . 0 _ � ,_ ; ; -- o , ._- OSE� N �.. _: � . , ; ._, PRpP _.___ -- —_ _ _ - -- -_ � � : � � -- - , t : , .— -- - _ - - - - . . ; � , - - -- m _ ._ �.. � . : - , __ -- � �-. . �.�..i i .��-.-_.� �._.�-� ._.... . �' m �C .. .\. \` . , ,_- � ' '� ` ,, U _ // . ._ _ ; • ., � , ; "�-.�.'__/ _. _�._ _._ _.. , : R1 O � O � o ; _ _ , N W > oZ � b -- \,i//y/ . I 2 a a tn O � S / W � -_ - - 0 � Q M I < � .._. �Q '��F C O a� SCALE � � m b m � a� m so 0 25 so roo � w � _ �,� .z (�) � � g o Q 1 INCH =100 FT a'+ SHEE7 � co FIG. 4 � �o f 2 3 4 5 6 7 � y � �\� '� � ` a e��„e t}f� � j __.� • i•� ' — , '1�1 t� �°r_��jij.; ) ''�r , ; '�� 3_ -- --- �1 r� 1' � ° ,' i t ` 11 ?� ' ��' \ �. �;, I '..�. f ��;� Pi ,L (. { \ � - �!�• u I. `°• i ! ' �.�-� � V t' - �.t ` - � i� I � , South Point�' 3, � , �. � �, � �\� • — '� � � Kennydale i� j' � � � �. I .� '� � ;;�' � f,N �� . rJc li" �� •': j" �- ' ` �� Coleman Poinf'� � � y� � .� S � '� . `.— .r —\ � .� �]_ B�� r � ... - `V Q ' Z N. M � - e� � D � �x � -?, `' ATTLE � � � � � � _� �� ...�.-. --- �°�ti � r .S \l�/ � `-� �_ � '.. '` r c"� x255 i i �5�n� 1 L//3 .t,i`+_'� +. 1� S67 1� �'� , 1 i: �• - �• ryn Mawr SITE � :�. , �' .' ;: ��1' ., ° r,. 1\�`_ � �� •;� .� .�'� ��' ' �;i , ;• ! x. ( ,� r� r� �I • B 9� �Y-�'R�DY . `' ��'_'- �� r �j' !�. 238 .�.:. — tut.�� s �-_, �� '} A �� ,� � ,� . '' ' 1 3� :� • •',� 1"i r r. =a nP I�,��',,�. �, .0 G� �, •� �_`'� �Y� �� f, I � � �. �� AF�TON �.�, � � ��,� '�.� P 71 E � .J .�� {' - �'"`" ;� soo-� � . � � , f•,�� .+i ;� �`-'" �..� 1:, �is-. ,.� ^8 .4, � \ �\�y i "� - \' - j � y�f:F .. J N -��_. �� \� . \• 2 f �j�� _ �� k: r - � ` ,�i� �� l,.�,3� . .; � ,� ��(�`p � �� :. � � t�7 � i,f`- \ L ' 1 � � t;•, '1 � - 3 � �:. �� .yF � ` \ s i t `- � �}� , � � �.� ' 4�� r:: _ ' : },•:�� ., .:�� i._� .�1( \� .^ � �� ..-.I �>� \��, 1 yl �� .� iry ,��: _— ��I i:)��P �� '—�ti�'� ' �� l ��y �� 5 �y�� I r � /;~ �, ';�� ', �� I Y ,;sr.. � '��'i. '+�� '�'h'�,!: ;�� • � �r'F r � _ � � i;� �� . -� l � �— � � :� ff .. �1 U05 I m � � �, t ��j�l �� }�x ��,,�1 .r�� _ I1 �,`'` 1 t � s z�J � \. �. �, � � �u Y' : ti�I�' 4q 3.? :��'\, �L 1 �`�- 1� 7 �,� �:�\J'� ^ r��'��}� — — $ � 4� . � � ��' I�' ,,� _�� •� y�- � "� � •� Y� �� r . ��./� � �4�� .�. ��{,� .`�h \;�� {4 �.. ',�, I� a J�� tt t��l e� `` -_ � �s � I � �� ,-� � .� ,\i , •� � ..o. � - C` `_� � L_'� �' E T' , „!� f�— _ ::� ��-� +` ,:� _�S e t - ` � � � ��' � � � aR o ,� 1 � � _ �,'�� '� �'�� '�~ : ��'\� �� 1 �,_ �� z� � � � � , '� - � .�`- " ��';-� ��,,��'' d � � ' �`�. � `� - Q . , :�. ,;--� � � � --� � �� - . � G� , '� .�;� � •��.-��___��9 I ,� r`.`� ��: �� .�,�--� " �i r�_= n t�,+n II �' �N � :E'`� 4/y1 •.,��f ��'��1�� 'I � J`� - 4`.;� �ti I��I': � th:etic '��y _ ,'� ? . a i��il�� }+`�( �`T�, �^ ' � � _ � 5s�?``� �M ��1 1 � �1� _ I � �i,\\Id ,1+�,R = � � �_ �`�I }(, �;�`� ''"'3��> � � ' w"�`�'/ �� -y' � .<��.� II j �.� 5 ''�7'� � 'ii�� /3�.,J �� \� . � .I��'��1�'� '�a _ � � �'�_ J °t�-- � ,,� , . �f` �� p _ �',��/ ,;�,�� '.,-3:. �_ >. �- _ � '°p ; � ---- _ - �� ' �h.�.� 1'�� \ '�—- _- ��- �,a-� 'g � , ' ; ; ,- �� . -�fL� � ;'��`�. ;��' _ — `� _ .-� r x� #lQfi'w�t _ , �` --- ,,,�-� -�, � � - �� 1 \ - � �/ �� i�y�' Cemi_ x, � . " r� ,y_ - :� �, , �� _ aseb2lF �, .��1� _ i�; �. • � -.. __ aos' ,,. _. -au" 1 � e e ( �_ ' - Parlc .\NoF�..�� GRA L F _ � _ -� � � 1 .��, ��^11ry�_/•�� 11� � atw � ��'—_��" -., l,��r :ii'� � '' r� �_ . 3 °9 �° _ �i �.. Y �_ �� \• 4' \ 321:, I �� 'I'/- �./ " i .. '� �0� �� i J_ �7 —� �,r`� • � ,.� j� \ _ � �I �'. . ,—� .•• � ' , %' � �\ . ` •��\��=� '� i' .��_ -� _. �� / . %i ` ..r S � i� � y ,,,, �,�`4LL' '` �� '�� , f ; `•� ' �z }- i :; I'� 1��:xi� 1� _ �t'.. \. .U��✓. /� RAILROAO �Giq �� .. ,�� Ij�� ' � � V ' ..., . o� -`.N�� ,ao_`��; �r� �� '�'�::�e p;� ' ;t � b� � FIGURE 5 - - R%�_� r—'� :}'r' - - s � ,lack /� �\I�,,r �� , � =, ;� Us�is -f -''- = �;� �- �� B . I I— ,,� i;y�� -�tl / �I, d �•�, {I'�� TOPOGRAPHIC MAP �.�� L 1.0 PROJECT OVERVIEW 1.1 Purpose and Scope I' - The following Technical Information Report (TIR) is provided for The Landing Lot 1 development project. T'he existing site lies within a portion of NW '/4 Section 8, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, in the City of Renton, Washington (see Figure 2 — Vicinity Map). "The site is approximately 6.81 acres in size. The site stormwater currently discharges north of the site to the existing system in Pazk Ave N which is conveyed north to Lake Washington. The site is located in a direct discharge basin. The proposed development will include buildings with associated drive aisles, parking, and landscape. These buildings are to be used primarily for parking garages, retail shops and commercial purposes. As directed by the City of Renton, the hydrologic analysis and design will be based on the 2001 Department of Ecology Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington (Ecology Manual). Conveyance facilities will be based on the 1990 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM}. 1.2 Existing Conditions The existing site consists of asphalt parking lots, existing buildings, and landscape islands (See Figure 3 - Egisting Conditions). The site is composed of two drainage subbasins, all of which are part of the John's Creek drainage basin which combine in the Park Ave N tightline system before being discharged to Lake Washington. The existing site direct discharges, and does not contain flow control or water quality facilities with the exception of an oiUwater separator. A more detailed description of each subbasin can be found in Section 4. 1.3 Developed Conditions The proposed development will include buildings with associated drive aisles, parking, and landscape. These buildings are to be used primarily for parking garages, retail shops and commercial purposes. All drainage facilities and water quality treatment facilities were designed to a complete build-out condition, and were designed per the 2001 Department of Ecology Manual and the City of Renton Standards. The proposed development will consist of asphalt parking, drive aisles, buildings, and landscaping throughout the entire site (See Figure 4 - Developed Conditions). A more detailed description of each subbasin can be found in Section 4. The site was divided into two drainage subbasins per the drainage report prepared by Berryman and Henigar (BHC), titled South Lake Washington Roadway Improvements — Conveyance System Analysis and Design, dated August 2006, with approximately one- third of the site draining west into the tightline system in Logan Ave N, and two-thirds draining east into Park Ave N. Baseline and design drainage basin maps from this report are included in the Section 3 for review. W&HPac�c,lnc. TIR The Larrdin,q—Harvest Parmers ,t1ay 2007 1 I 1.0 PROJECT OVERVIEW The proposed storm system includes utilization of the existing tightline system where a licable. The site was divided into two subbasins: West, and East. Both basins are PP conveyed through a new tightline system before being routed through respective wetvaults for water quality treatment. The West basin discharges into Logan Ave N while the East basin discharges into Park Ave N. �t'&HPac�c,lnc. TIR The Landin�—Harvest Partners May 1007 2 2.0 PRELIMINARY CONDITIONS SUMMARY 2.1 Core Requirements '�, ➢ Core Requirement#1: Discharge at the Natural Location The BHC report splits Lot 1 into two drainage subbasins, both of which aze part of the John's Creek drainage basin. Approximately one-third of the site is proposed to be discharged to Logan Ave N while two- thirds is proposed to discharge to Park Ave N. The West basin, approximately one-quarter of the site, will discharge at a stub ' location into Logan Ave N. The East basin, approximately three-quarters of the site, ' discharges at a stub into Park Ave S. ' ➢ Core Requirement#2: Off-Site Analysis The off-site analysis is found in Section 3 of this report. Upstream runoff does not enter the Lot 1 site. ➢ Core Requirement#3: Runoff Control �� The project is exempt from providing formal flow control facilities because it meets I the direct discharge requirements found in the 2001 Ecology Manual. The requirements are listed in Section 4.4 of this report. , > Core Requirement#4: Conveyance System The new pipe tightline system is designed with sufficient capacity to convey and contain the 25-year, 24-hour peak flow using SBUH. A backwater analysis is included in this report which uses HGL elevations at the discharge points provided by BHC. ➢ Core Requirement#5: Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control Erosion and sediment controls were installed during demolition and pre-loading of the proposed building pads as detailed in the King County Erosion and Sediment Control (ESC) Standards. ➢ Core Requirement#6: Maintenance and Operations King County maintenance standards are included for flow restrictors, catch basins, pipe systems, landscaping, and wetvaults. bt'&H Pacifrc,Inc. TIR The Landing—Harvest Parmers .'�fay�007 3 2.0 PRELIMINARY CONDITIONS SUMMARY 2.1 Core Requirements ➢ Core Requirement#7: Financial Guarantees and Liability Bond quantities aze not included with this submittal. ➢ Core Requirement#8: Water Quality The site is required to meet Basic Treatment Facility standards. The East subbasin has a weri�ault designed to the 2001 Ecology Manual standards. 4i'&cFl Pac�c,lnc. TIR The Landing—Harvest Partners !�fay�007 4 - 3.0 OFF-SITE ANALYSIS 3.1 Upstream Drainage Analysis There is upstream flow entering the site from the Boeing Facility to the south through a 30-inch RCP located at the far western side of the site. However, this line will be connected to the city street drainage system as part of the city improvements currently under construction. Until the city connects the Boeing stub to its system the existing 30" RCP cannot be altered. Once the connection is established there is no known effective upstream flow to the site. See Figure 3 —Existing Conditions. 3.2 Downstream Drainage Analysis Existing and proposed downstream drainage maps were completed by BHC and included in Section 3 for reference. These maps show the existing and proposed tightline system from Lot 1 to the Lake Washington outfall. These maps include reference to the structures located between Lot 1 and eventual outfall at Lake Washington. The proposed Lot 1 site falls within the John's Creek drainage basin tributary. In the proposed condition, approximately one-quarter of the site drains West into the tightline system in Logan Ave N, and three-quarters drains East into Park Ave N. The runoff to Park Ave N flows in a newly proposed 42-inch pipe north for approximately 200 feet before being directed to the northeast to a 48-inch pipe, and then discharging into BHC named `Pond B'. The runoff to Logan Ave N flows north in the existing 48-inch pipe approximately 750 feet before discharging into BHC named `Pond B'. The ultimate proposed site flows and volume of runoff generated will be similar to the existing condition since the site does not add any new impervious surface. Therefore, the development of Lot 1 would not aggravate a "severe flooding problem" or "severe erosion problem". K'&H Pacific,Inc. TIR The Lcmding—Harvest Partners :Lfay 2007 �I 5 � � I . .�. � �`�� '{R:'�`�r, � .. ��, ��$ C��'� � � � � ' � '. � Lakc Washin�;ton � \ �. ` ,'',':� '��, ,� � ,� � � � 1 J `1 (` � � ��j� � + � ��1�� I . � V I � + � 11 : MH02�9 ,PONQ D O �j�i�i!� 1, ,� �;. � OFOZ:' � fr � OF02-01 ' _' ,,'; , ,, �--�:� �,'� ' '� � ,'' MH02-$ POND.0 �° �'{� � { � °��r .�: POND B l � '� �1 � `�� 1 '" ,� y„ �E� '� �,_ � 0 30o sa �l�1t O �I � 1 1 � MH03-1 � 02=7 � �� _ MH02-13 � ' �i�tiP,t`��+,y{�l�t'�,��,��' ; � � � �b`,�� "r��lk��,�� F•�� OF�3-0� � � � � ' ;,� � �'�d� �f��a�ii ' � PON A � , SCAJB!R FBBt -I 6 � ��, � � MH02-12 � i 'i�1�y��y�y�S"�4�,�� ;r,�� , �Hoa-ie �p02-OZ `'r � ��1 � ,,,�� r .�. �� MHR1-7� f , � �O tiiHhl 54=,� - MHR1-35 � OFRi•�9 �� 1' 1 � CBR1 49,� � � � , �ii) {oa-�a. � O 1 \ cARt 5e OFR1-01 1 � '� _ 0 1 � MHR1-81- ; � iR1-34 ` `� )4-19 MH02-6� �� 1 \ � - CBRt- `Y OFR1-38 \ � � �. _ ` , � , ,`\ OFR1-� MHR1-61 � � � �`� 1 MHR1-53 OFR1�0 , _ 1 ' 1 rMHO�-11 , CBR1- �Q'. "� y � \ MHR1-$ � I 1 M MNRt3 37 I�` \\ � -MHo4-13. � l � ; ` �� M�79 �� MHR1 �\ / �i� ' CBR1-2 � MHRi 5 ,. � 1 ,' 7► MHR1�-77 �� MHR1_ MHR1-38 OFR1-02 ` 1 5 1 C MN02i5 MHR1�33 , � 1 O�a� , ' N l, ' MHR1 /►�� CBR1-41 � , ` //' `+ �t�� CBR1-42 ` '' t , , }� M' -9 O MHRt-36 � ' � MHR7-32 /� ''. 1 : MH02-M � � L MHR1-59 ,� ` MHRt-3� ` �" �I \ � 1 ' ,; /�''� ��, /'� MHR1-52 � 1 � 1-78 CBR1-46 Q�1,37 ` MHR1-31 �'�� ` 'r �%-MH04-12 ,, MM02-2 11 �\02 10 MWR1-76 �OFR1.33 '"'`J�` '.�� ` , ;'' _ i MHRt Tt / ti 1 L---� y MHR1-45 � �' `� r � ,�O CBR �5 CBR1-39- �.. OFR� ` \ MHo2-3 � MHF�-s2 `��".� OFR1-03 1 OFR1-46 O` � ,. � � i� CBRi-40 CBF21-3D 1 MH02-1 \ - �� '. OFR�� MHR1-30 1 MHR1-29. 1` N`` / 1 ��i/ / MHRI 90 ��CBR1-44 � CBO�R9� 1 � 'r',' ` �1 } ii; � ., i '. I � J MHR. .44 ! � CBRt-36. � MHR1-50 � � � " r, MH04-11 � OFR7•28 ' , � ,1c ` OF02-05 �� I CBR 1-37 CBR1-38 ` �` Q� MHR1-89.. IJi�i�� I 1 � / MHRi-43 �� \ " r , � �.........—� ��: J � � CBR1-28'� ,�(J ^� '� ` y1 :,, ` • .�, p � 'T I MHR1-75a I'-I �� T D�R1•27 CBR1-35 ' �pl CBR1-�7� ; i MHR�..,'2g ` �� I ` ''��,r� -1' � :� 5� F-- /' —�' MHRt-42 � , 1 �� p' � ` '...... OFR7-28 � ; �� OFR1-23 � CBR1-4 / � n � 1� 1'� ��' :, w _ u� MHR1 101 � �/� 1-8 — CBR�-34_ `�' _ CBR1-26 , MHR1-49 ` ' � k� �� MHR1 87 � � MHR1-74 � \ � Q CBR1-3 � � + a �, � � � � o cer�,-zs � ; MHR�-z7 � �� \ MHR1 �oz:,: ,�'� MHo� tn'��, ��,/ � A OFR1�04 ,r � MHR1-86 � I � C8R1-33 � ` � v � MHRt-1� �t'4r� MI104 9 ( ( � � � , I� _ MHR1-41 ` �i��I � MHR1�73 I r � �r' MHFtI-26 � MHR1-10? �� OFR1-17 � OFR7-18 � OFR1r19 � L —' � — ~- '` r�,, ; � I I OFR1-20 N CBRt-24 ��J~ ,�d�-'rs"" '� 1 OFR1�4T ; 1}t; !, � � � � .- �" ��sa;� ��;IHQ4 &, �'�� I � , � CBf21-23' � I I CBR1-32 � ' W ..� ` MHR1-40 ` CBR1-31 � CBRt 5� �,'', � MHR1-85 I I i MHR1�72 � a OFRi-22 MHRt-48 � ' I C8R1-5? ��F,;. 'l� I I '. I : ceR�-2� OFR1-08 � �� r- ceRi-zz. Y csR�-s +�.�,, � � I t � .CBR1-20 Q! I MHR1-24 O�R7-0B \ Y� �`° ) MHR1-84 + QBR1-19 Q /� CBR1�5i f� �,� MHR1-66 I ' I MHR1-71 CBR1-18 a MHR1-47 I � MHR1,11 x� ,�; MN R1-67 ��R1�18 MHR1-21 �f�i}��. ' I � I . W '. � � ( MHRt-23 � MHR1-55 MHRI; � , CBR1-8': _` MHR1-56 MHR1-22 � ` MN � 1h404-� C - - � �� _ _.� ^— � t ' �, � CBR1-55 �I__..�^- � � � OFR1-09 f_ >1 � ._. ._ ,_ �� I �4��" — , �� N STH ST I ! CBRt-16 � CBR1 MHR3-6i MHR1-46 N 8TH ST � MHR7-; rt MHR1-57�- MHR3-60 MHR1-t6 'd�...,. .. „ ' � I MHR1_65. � MHR1-100 l; t1-83 J MhiRt-69 �GBR1-it � OFR1-08 OFR1-07 MHR1=� Basin Legend: � OFR1-14 f � MHR� sa --� CBR1-15 � MMRj; OFR1-13 , ' < MHRa-ss DralnageBasln ouetau 'R1-1S I MHR�-sa f ceR�-i4 � OFR1•10 � � Area J C9R1-10 ! ._...,.,,-... • I l CBRt-13 ,� , --•', � I� � '� I ?:; t a.�� I oFoz I OFR1-12 OFR'1-'t1 �� i� _____M.a � CBR3-tA C€3R1-9 � �' �.,.......__�_...� OF03 . J LL 2� t + ` l� � i-82 �� 1 CBR3-7 I C6R3_1 Q 1 1 � �� OF04 ' MHR1-634 CBR3-8^•�- CBR3-2 MHR3-58 `�� V OF04A ' �. . . �� 1-^�� _ � � (+i �"i .:�:t � CBR3-9 "" � . (1 � f -�� R3-16 ( CeR3-a OFR3-14 -;, LS,ia....�� OF21 IncludesOFR2 ,• �.. ++ �.. � I CBR3-10, ��.�� (.� � . . . �. �i:a.�AC 1„ I 1 .� � �;i, ., �. ._ . � � ` OFR3-17 '� CBR3-4, dFR3-13 � � ( QFR3-19 �' '% �� OFR1(John's Creak) t _`� �F�+�O� �� (,� � i �� .CBR3-5,.. ...� . � � t CBR3-11 : l � f O T Z y MHR3-2 � I � � cefr3�_ ' �-��..:� OFRJ � .{ I � � ( , „� ,'� � MHR3-3 OFR1�4 � ;' � �� oFR4 . �r� � �.... MHR3-25 � CBR7-12 I O��f'�� ' � a � �J�` --�--�� I F '�r �1_�W T �egend: s-56� �� o�.s4 l � o�rts-�s �� ; R3-1Y I f MNR3-23. (� ProlectArea — f 1 MHR3-13 �� MHR3-26 MHR3-7 �T .UHR3oFFt3-09 � � o--� ExistlnyStormDnlnSystem � �`,. MHR3-10 �.��. u�C�. . �.,�'��'�. . ,.. . . . . ,.�aant_e. '. -- -- - --- ProJ�etRlgMoiWay- � � �y "'�— � `�" " �� `�� BASELINE SCENARIO PIPING AND Full Bufldouc — ._ �... _ MHR3-71 MHR3-27 MNR3-6 -------- SubBadn Bountlery 1 MHR3-9 ' MHR3-e DRAINAGE BASINS F Sub$asinD�schargePoint MHR3-12 CBR3-25-- -- P��oFl�� : I South Lake Washington Roadway Improvements uHa� .z Existlnp Manhol�Dasigmtion CBR3-24-�� OFR3-07 � � oFR3.�s Berryman & Henigar Conveyance System Report cew,_+ Existlny Catch Basin De�lynatlon ` CBR3-22 OFli�-70 Existiny Dralnape Sub$asin � �:: ( � . . . . I OFR4 ��a��oo�a�� .,-� .:�. ! �;:�.� �� 8�3-23��..��: ! FIGURE 4-3 DATED 8/l 5/06 ✓°hn's CrQek Lake Washington . � � Mr102-9 : POND D O .,,� , OF02 Z '� ' MH02�8 m' ^ POND C 1 g`f ,I,: �� OFP�3 Q 300 60C r,1; W 36 k,, � MH02-73 PUND B ��' ' � . DFP-2 MHoi-� � �� ' 1 PON A Scale in Feet i ��iO4•-16 :1�'� � MH02-12 \ � � -` 1 �k`rr � ' � + MNR1.-54 a� �' -1 �MHR1-7\ � �''�- -- N • � bF02-07 p� MHRt-J5 \ OFR1-3� ,� ,i � � v_ 1 CBRi-49. ,��' ` \ , � ��i' � � � � CBR1-50 . � ��-�� , -: 1 Mr�R7-s�- OFR1-01 \ � �� ,�r�-14 :' MNO?-6 CBR 1- , \ MHR1-34 \ � ,�'► �OFP-6 N t ca�zi=a�J � MHR7-61 � OFR1-40 \ v +. CBP-18 /. �h MHR1-53 i N 1 \ �� Q' MHR1-33 �- � � i : � �. , I�tHR�-6 \ O h MHRt-371 � � ` \ � ' MH02-11 \ pAHRt M 1-60 �' / � �R1-38 ,, '� � �' � /�, � �? � � ` MHR1-5 Q4'-1,3. _ vIN . 1 1 3 1 � . MHR 2 �,-, MHD'�7 `i ` !JH4'-�3 y;. �� (Q �` � ` � %, OFP-s \ J �,��ki � �a �� >, OFRi-02 � 1 � � �3 � ; ' , °: "�I� -9 �n �� ry MHR1-59 `� �' ` ' ! �1 'o�. ��h; OFP-4 , MHRi-ss � .r \ �+�,� , ' MH02LL� , y, � MHR1-32A � � �"3":, ,i', MHR1-52 " � ° ` � -i MHP-46 � � MHR1-31 � � � � � �n � MH04-12 I � VHO�-1D OQQ OFP• ` \�` i � � OFP�34 \ MHR1 z � ; y � t�� '� + `MHO: 1 1 Z .� �� t ' i. � � \ � MHR1-45 � � ' � e � OFP-Z9 F OFR1� � , � �,�i io, s OFP�O � r'j"( n ' > �; �z � � �; No�N - - Mt � , �� P-2 MHR1-51 MHRi-29 \ 1 � ` Ya `�7. = �� . � MNP-a4 �1 OFP-a8 � MHR1-30 �'' � � � � �J t��y "` , ii II�A��' �Q^,J , i CBP-3 \ � �' MHR1-44 � �OFP-35 .� � ' F a - �� _ � ?�J �� .�. v O MHP-1 OFP��40 � � MHR1-50 � � � � �\ MHR1-117 Z � � M!�04 cl r� �O � \ cp MHR1-2$ � / � i � / MHP-39 � � ,�- � � MHR1-110 �O ' � MHP-10 OFP$2 p, MH�'`2 � '' i � \ � � �T�j LL MHP�-$ MHR1-43 \ � .�� i MH-C O � M��Pl�� ` � � � 1 \ ��, 'i, �� MHP-9 � ,/ -,"�8 � Y/��y'lr• ��, }t�,r� '_ 0 � � � 1v 3,� �" � MHR1-42 1 � i � / ' ��i \ OFP-28 y p. j��,� ` q /� � � Z�;� , 4 � MHP�3 � OFP-50 1'� � S'� OFP-II OFP� �` MHP-4 I � 9 \ MHR1-10 CBP-7 i, ,�� MHp-8 � 1 �HR1-49 ` �G� \ �f ,� MHP-11 � � MHR1-2F r, � Q � 1 ", A � MHR1-1C �( �� I } OFP-87 \`O v� � � MHR1- ��} � I MHR1-41 � ` �rt1 � MHP-38 OFP-86 ",� �l�f�� ■ � I �b M��?B� ' MHR1 i0 � �� t' MH--p , MHR1-2�i '' ; i MHP-l2 ►� � I s, N OFP-24 � � � ��' �� ,,; 4 �, � OFP-85 . � � c � �p�i � �, � , MHR1-40 � j; o (� - - - - ceR, C�i - i� I I MHR1-48 � (' � `: � I I � OFP-88 1 CBR' � MHP-13 I MHR1-24 � OFP-48 �� caR � � \ +�$ � , �' I MHR1-47 ^ MHR �� MHP-37 r MH-A I � MHP-42 I MHR1-46 y/ MHRt-23 MHR1-21 � MH MMRt-55 b�Y MHP-14 - C�Rt-8 MHR1-56 MHR1-22 ie^ , �e' . �a" OFP-93 is — — — — \ �E�,r'� '; OFP-8 -f-- � OFP�6 �2�>l 'z�� _' - 48' Jl OFP-47 ae ` ' — — — — — — — — — ��r � ' > ��.` MHP--34 MHP-35,- MMP-43 _ � N BT.H ST MHR3-61 MF t . .. : . .. � N /� - MHP.-36 �FP-83 MHR3-60 � uua_�s.-... ,; � � � Mh � MHP-41 _ m MHR1-100 MF Basin Legend• � M Dralna9e Basin Outfall � � MHH3-59 Area Z ' OFP-89 W OFP-43 A� i ' A ��y�� oFo2 - a MHP-28 Y � _.� I ao 1..,._... M..�.�.....r oFos Y •W T .� ; � �� OFo4 a, y MHR3-58 OF04A OFP-40 � � - .. � � ... � ��»....:� � —ML� � �,�, ': i�,",��,'�y�;,A OF21(IncludesOFR2) a , Q ` .� ;, W m � � OFR7�44 � � OFR7(John's Creek) . I� � MHR3-22 ZI� MHR3-2 � OFR3 : � � . � MHR3-3 oFP�, o�P.aS Qf F._..._._.__.._._...., a�, - � I1 9........«..�....,,.._.�,...w . • . .. N � Legend• MH 3-1U WI MHR3-13 MHR3-23 0�/� N �� ProjactArea � rr,}I - — Existlnp Storm Dnin Sysbm 4 — '- — — Q�-Sf.�.,.-�., I�._�� . lMHR3-24...�� Q � - ProJ�ctRlpMofWay- � /` DESIGN SCENARIO PIPING AND Full Buildout ------- Sub-Bu�neoundary ��-1z MHR3-1 MH - MHR3-7 ' DRAINAGE BASINS N 6TH ST MHR3-8 E- Sub�asin Diseharge Pdnl MHR3-6 f- PIpeIlnoFlowDimetlon �BR3-25 South Lake Washington Roadway Improvements M�a,_.= ExlstlnyManhoNDeslpnatlon �-25 C�R��24 Berryman & Henigar Conveyance System Report carsi-� F�cfetlny CsOch Basln Dealgnatlon 3 C6R3-22 oFn�-+o Existlng Drainape Sub$a�ln ' OFP-92 oF�, ��.��90�� , :. _ rT�;T TR r 4-4 T�ATFT� R/18/06 4.0 RETENTION/DETENTION ANALYSIS AND DESIGN 4.1 Ezisting Site Hydrology The Lot 1 site currently consists of 6.81 acres of asphalt parking, plantar strips, and existing two-story, 8,000 square foot building. The site is bound to the West and North by Logan Ave N., to the East by Park Ave N, and to the south by N 10�' Street (See Figure 3 - Ezisting Conditions). The lot is relatively flat with elevations that range from 28 feet to 33 feet. The existing site area is nearly 95% impervious surface. Soils on the site consist primarily of Urban Land (Ur) which is fill soil. See the Geotechnical Report found in Section 6 for more information on site soils. The site lies outside the 500-year flood plain, per FEMA panel 53033C0977 F, dated May 16th 1995. Existin�Lot 1 => 6.81 acres Impervious surface => 6.81 acres Pervious surface => O.OQ acres 4.2 Developed Site Hydrology This proposed development of Lot 1 will consist of retail shops and restaurants with an asphalt parking lot. Some landscaping will be provided around the buildings but was calculated as impervious surfaces. The developed site consists of two subbasins: West, and East. The West subbasin dischazges into Logan Ave N, and the East subbasin discharges to Park Ave N (See Figure 4 - Developed Conditions). Developed Lot 1 => 6.81 acres Impervious surface => 6.81 acres Pervious surface => 0.00 acres 4.3 Water Quality The site is required to meet Basic Treatment Facility standards. The East subbasin has a wetvault designed to the 2001 Ecology Manual standards. The water quality sizing was performed using StormShed software. This software performs hydrologic modeling using the Santa Barbara Urban Hydrograph (SBUI� method. This method computes a 24-hour hydrograph (flow versus time) based on the W&HPac�c,Inc. TIR The LandinA—Harvest Partners ,1fay 200i 6 4.0 RETENTION/DETENTION ANALYSIS AND DESIGN inputs of precipitation data, time of concentration, contributing area, percent impervious area, and pervious area curve number. The wetvault proposed for the East subbasin will be used for water quality treatment. The vault was sized based on the volume of the water quality design storm using the 2001 Ecology Manual, or 72 percent of the 2-year, 24-hour storm volume. The entire site is routed through wetvault for water quality treatment except for roof runofF (3.50 acres total) and six small areas (0.49 acres total) of bypass which were not able to be conveyed in the proposed Lot 1 storm system. The StormShed output for each basin is found in this section along with the water quality volume and flow rate calculations. West Basin The West Basin consists only of roof runoff and bypass areas and does not require a wetvault. East Basin Impervious area => 2.82 acres Pervious landscape area => 0.00 acres Total WQ area =>2.82 acres Water Quality Volume required => 13,809 cf A two celled (15'x104' & 15'x80') concrete wetvault with interior walls is proposed. One foot of average sediment storage is provided along the entire vault bottom. Bouyancy calculations are included in this section. Preceding the wetvault is a flow splitter which is designed to send the water quality flow rate to the wetvault and flows exceeding this amount to a bypass line. The type of flow splitter used contains a baffle wall within the catch basin sized to provide the appropriate hydraulic head acting on an orifice sized for the water quality flow rate. The orifice is attached to a closed top half-tee riser which is connected to a pipe leading to the wetvault. The water quality flow rate was sized according to the 2001 Ecology Manual. This rate is computed by multiplying the 2-yr, 24-hr flow rate by a ratio found in Volume 5, Table 4.1 in the Ecology Manual. The ratio is determined by the effective impervious area for the basin. W&HPac�c,Inc. TIR The Landing—Harvest Parmers Afay 2�07 7 - -._ - 1 4.0 RETENTION/DETENTION ANALYSIS AND DESIGN The water quality flow rates for each basin are as follows: ' Water uality flow rate East Basin 0.40 cfs The flow splitter calculations are found in this section along with plan and profile views of the structure. Oil Control Facilit_y Requirements Calculations were performed to determine if Lot 1 qualified as a "high-use site�'. Based on average daily traffic (ADT) counts, it was determined this site does not require oil control facilities. The calculations are found in this section. 4.4 Detention Flow control is not required of Lot 1, since flows from the site will directly dischazge to Lake Washington. The project area meets the following requirements for exemption: � The area must be drained by a conveyance system that is entirely comprised of manmade conveyance elements and extends to the ordinary high water line of the receiving water. • Any erodible elements of the manmade conveyance system for the area must be adequately stabilized to prevent erosion. � Surface water from the area must not be diverted from or increased to an existing wetland, stream, or near-shore habitat sufficient to cause a significant adverse impact. �I ' I s � W&H Pac�c,Inc. TIR The Landing—Harvest Partners .�fay 2007 8 The Landing — Lot 1 Water Quality StormSHED Output and Calculations ABN 04/08/07 East Basin Event Summary: BasinlD Peak Q Peak T Peak Vol Area Method Raintype Event ------- (cfs) (hrs) (ac-ft) ac /�oss East Basin 1.24 8.00 0.4403 2.82 SBUH/SCS TYPE1A 2 yr Drainage Area: East Basin Hyd Method: SBUH Hyd Loss Method: SCS CN Number Peak Factor: 484.00 SCS Abs: 0.20 Storm Dur: 24.00 hrs Intv: 10.00 min Area CN TC Pervious 0.0000 ac 78.00 0.00 hrs Impervious 2.8200 ac 98.00 0.17 hrs Total 2.8200 ac Supporting Data: Impervious CN Data: IMP 98.00 2.8200 ac Impervious TC Data: Flow type: Description: Length: Slope: Coeff: Travel Time Sheet SHEET 249.00 ft 1.00% 0.0110 4.09 min Channel PIPE 775.00 ft 0.25°/a 42.0000 6.15 min WQ Volume 2-yr, 24-hr vol. = 0.4403 *43560 = 19,179 cf 6-month, 24-hr vol. = 2-yr, 24-hr vol. *0.72% 6-month, 24-hr vol. = 19,179 cf*72% = 13,809 cf WQ Flow Rate Qwq = 2-yr, 24-hr* Ratio Effective impervious Area 2.82/2.82 = 1.00 Ratio= 0.32 (from Vol. 5, Table 4.1 —'01 DOE Manual) QWq= 1.24* 0.32 = 0.40cfs LOT 1 FLOW SPLITTER CALCULATIONS QwQ = 0.40 CFS WQ WS EL = 23.88 ` 12" To v��Q Z y �co•��/�h t ' J - 4�� _ �j(v.a$(D�l o� z' 1 g" 1!V � — � �C�.��z ,� � ,. ' � 24" OUT ' ` � I•1�, 12" IN — - r �!..._�..�� __, cL=28.74 - : :a•� . .� . �, � . : � . �,:� . . . . . . . �. ' 'e • . d•• ' ' . ' �. . �4 � . _ � ,.d• , a� h=9.10' I . : --� TOP CF BAFFLE EL=24.98 ��- � � . . a .� ..� .Q�. d � � 12" IAJ E1=24.28 WQ WS EL = 23.88 � � � � ° � � � 18" 1N tE=24.09 4 ' ( ( � . � �— C . 'd . � ,�� . - . , �:. -'. , .. .a :� �. . ° 92" TO WQ V�+ULT ;� . , � \. - � EL=22.88 . ° e �--�H,4L� TEE�� 24" BYPASS lE=22.98 :. , �. . .W/SO'�!D TOP� ��' 12" PI SE,4, 3.7�"� C'Rl�1 CE . . . a . . a ... • � _ ° a �.° I d .. � � . ., ' � ° 2�' °M.l�l. . . e . � . d . d . . . C . � d � ' � ,� ' a' . . _i . d Q .a . . � �! p Q LL—�J�.U� . ��. . . �� ' . a FLOW SPLITTER DETAIL ��., CB# 8 - 54" TYPE 2 1 `� C1.5 �' `\--- ', ath: P: Ha roet Partners J 36\Deslgn Drawl a Clvtl\Lot 1 CDs\lot 1 to Re \32536-Land-Fly46 B.dwg] (Fly.6] �� . Dote: 4 4 07 11: A A fl tter.. RIC 32 C A S Full ie.ctb . • � • • � o m ANadjafi y � O � � ~ � � u�imp m 00 D � � D � � _ o � � m � � � � � 1`, u n n u � ti�., :.' oivwo � ^' � ' o ao i:, �a _, , om orvoco � � ,: $� c�ic�ic�i � c� . 0 e� ( �Y D�y �/ 7� �v� E�� ay � �A n� o�O O �% � ' �� , w I� 11�' ! 1,;� � ; ; m , - -� \`� \�` < � _ ; � . , , ; .. ` � . � �`�, ��8 ` � � Cn i �� / '� � CA 6� � � y \\�j � ..,,,\ ,` , �� Z y � �, i �� fJ p � 5 �`, � 1 , � � 0 O � � � \� \ j�l �I \ .�\\ / �,\ ; �. � . � ; u�� am � � � ;� r �-` II II II � _. , � . j I. - 1 � � . � .,, _ . �\ O O O :_ � � � � , '- _ ' � '� O O O ;:"G ',! . - , : _ �� OOO � , I r � � � o � �� '� n n n i '�� D� �o � T \�� n�� ..� ,\ 1\� ` !� �� ,`1.... O �� O i `,�\ �\, •' .,.�...\ � v � O �W\ � 1 � . � ..`. • .. ,� .� D D . ��.� �' .. �'�� . � � � , `,. , m� 2 ,, , ,, \\ � '+ -. m � Q ' a� � '. o�� \� '� y " ,D N �] , .. Z � n�A ` �' � nV1 � � n m � o� �� ', ` o o � � ';- � - ;, � D ~ � I �( ` �� ,`� i � �, ' ` .. �`, Z --� . ; , � � ,�1 \ t\ � � i o , � �. � C1 0 1 � � � ^ � .........I I "_ � '�� r. . ' ` ' ��1 Y.\\ \'� `;.,.,�.\ D � �'� ' " ` , y � I ' `" ' , r— ' ' � � 7C� � � �� ,, � �� ,. � ��r.� �'�� II II II ' • � ; • � ( . . � n � I \ � , � , � y � . , ... , ►v 4 rV � i , , n . . . + `, � , �� i tiOf�vZ �� \ � �, � , N N N m � ' � \1� �� j � � (� C) C� � � N ,� � �: I i '�.,` �j A � V ' �\ �� ,. � :� � � � ,. ,= \ I i I ,'. � �� ' � i , � i ,,.' �, � � ,. ... �. � _, � �� .. ',"r.. ..... ..........i �� . i. � � �� m . � � ��\ �' ,T � � ` 0 ,.r, �� ... s . - o�� r� � ° �� a�" � ��. \ (� y � � .� ';� � , � \ � " � '`� v � � ��,� , . �� , � _ ;, , , ,. �-- s , �": C ''�,-- , ; , , � I Ir � , , �.. _ I i. . � t. .\ , J , ... , \ ...... ... ..- _ , ,,. � � i "�\ �' ,� ' ...--..�- " `, , i j! � PARK AVE N '� -�'"` ' �' ! , , � � I � �l _ .: , „ , � � i 1 , N - � L__ � � 0 � � �� g.. o _ _� — � � I 0 0 �/zs/oe cHECKEo sr.� HARVEST PARTNETS DRAWN BY.• AN APPRo�o er.� THE LANDING LAST EDIT.• 4 24 2007 PLOT DATE: 04/24/07 9960 Yonts Vl71a Perkwa� ^ m DA 7E BY REV REVISION CK D APPR. LOT 1 Bo��,, ,,..�on oeoa,-ea�2 �� WATER QUALITY BASIN MAP ��--� O� RENTON WASHINGTON �°•0°m SCALE: PROJECT N0. DRAWING FILE NAME: A1O°1°'' �011'''°i''•'�01 'liedisip'��'O�' 1"=100' 32536—Land—Fi 4678 s � � . . . , . � . � . %ti . F�� :h- �. �� '�, . �'i��' ~� d , . , � r�.;;��'�;�'�sri��J,_ _� ��_ , � �� , —�., 'ir►1�� , � � •r" -��,. . �.��.�� . �� `��i�� , . � - �� ,.�,� ��. �.� �� _ .., , ��, � � _ , d . .��, �� + . '�.�: � .. . �...� . �► w � �w _�� _ ��■.�JR`�� 'i��'�� '� � � � ' ��'�'111�1� �r� � -�'' � �T ,s�� ,.�,.�� i� � �� / � ( �'�`�`��..�� , '1.11�� . a * �;; �. �� '�� o � v� �!�, , , � �� P - m ,�� ; ��+�►�=-.,��:�� . �''!��►': �"�►�' !� �;i��y� / ,,11 _ ` ��1 •�a� �.� ��,��.c�.�� .��',�� :_y �}�� . �' , �ws�� r �, ��,�_�� -.. �� . '�� ,.,� � ` !�1�1 �� r .,� ��,� �a!rw..�.,� ��"�. �� - - ''"� �� +'��' '�� : _ � '�� ,1��, 1��' ��"�" ��-� � . � ::.. .. �� _ �E, �'��,�.�� r � _ �� '�; � � -1.��,� - ' �� - � � � �+E��,.�'1 � d� '�� 0 .� � ` ��I�%�1 '`�\..I� ��:�` � �,�, '� .�:��, ��; �±r•��=>� � � ��;�,�� .�,'� �l��►�� '� �;n� •��• ,"� � .� � . _� �� .�,��`�'�i;•��►�j •: , �:;��i�,��l��' i �;.��ar►.� M�� _I � o� � . `�� '�"� ��; ��I�ii��t��"� �� ' l ��i . . �� T Ik� - � ''�,,�, ..��" i �A` �IR.`I ' � �� . � �� ►�: � .��G� -a�• �� `� �,�w1�. � ,,, � , �,� � � �,. m . i � �� . , �� .� r . �_ � , .�:_�.,:.�w��m , . -��.-� ��i� •�_ j.� �� '�� . �,� . �.. ��►��u�� ; D � � '� �� ' � � �� _ , -.;�"' �w�w��`I� •�� -- � - o i� ��0'i�� ` `�� ' ,.-.. � � ,� �,..�„� _�,� � � � ��,m,� ir , v �� l ' �� i� 9 -�ir � � �� .. �r` - t +�'� 1r�,, / � `� iH �-; `�� 1� � �; �/ �, . �, � �..� '� � � -._`� � . ; � I�i�1��Y��i�� . . , . . . . . . . l��;��!�r� .. . . . - . . '� �!��. . . . . ;r . -� ��-�► ...� . . . m ____-- ��. � � � � . � . . � � � � i. � � �� ,� ' �, , ��,��i� r.�-� ��4 � `�'- � , � .��:' a ► o. � �� -�. .� � �� -� - � . : ��• '� �� .►.� �'E . , , • ; �� i�t��, ,r`.., �� ,,�►i ,��" � , . _ ��r�..�� • �� '� _ �� _�� 1!-'�� -�-.�1�,`� —a � � �- �a ��iiA� � -.�''� \ � �► �'—��13�� ,�., � � � • � � '�'.'��s� i � . ��; �� •- :.�,�. � • �:�� Y � �.� P - � � �,. ► � � �� ,:��i.�� _ �,� � � `� _ � 7 i� `,. - :,:•`.N.�� I��j�� J � o, , a'# �i.�ll�!�� ,:�� 4 :�:.. i ( ��, �-i��l�., � t i . ait �� ,�_ , ��:�� . � �� ,� ��`"'y � �■ � ��, , �►��-�''"��`' " • _ r �� j/�r��.,t �y �� ' �� i �� 1 �; ` . � �� L�-/ � � � . � '� �. � �� // _ \��.7 �E�, � � � �', �� .� '` � � � '� �. _, �� , � � `i�l , � � �. ,, �� ►�.,�'� , r�� '_: � � � ,. � ��s� ( '= �� ,.� _�,r.-� � '; �� '',� _ �� R� . .e�: I�1 0 � . � �r� ■ �w� - ,) � '�� r�ir ��1�i��* � '; ..,, ,� � �� , . 1�� ,�� !k� _ �, ...� � , ;■�� ,� � _ �►� . � ` �� i�, ��■ I � � �� , � � ._ . ��,�. �- i � � = � . � ��_ �,� . ,�� .� � � �� ,-�`�:.�r A� i � �� r r �`` �� .!s�►�!►z�� . ,� �r� ,� ' ��►�� : �� a� � � �� ,� �� _ _ ; . � — � ��,�� ,;,� , .. � � . , — � �,� J(�Y!�;E�� ,uI-' � �' ,Q�,.� _ � ` ^� • \ r � ,�� `��'� � �� $ i r � � 1. � r ` %r � l .. � ; i�► � • �--=�►��:��i�� t � t��l�i� . . . . . . . . � . ��o��,�;�,1 � ' . • ��.�►;�� _ �. �� .. . . . . . : . �� ,� . � . • -- - • . � ��..-, ' • � ��.m � ' ► --- � � � 1 '1 � � ' � . �� . • . � � � � � .��Fw A w '� • �, �� t� i � , '�.e: ,�� i � `� ' � � .!� .+ � _�+�,�i'' �1-- �. r,�,�!�:�t ��,;�� 3 �� , . ,,�� ; � �� -�� _��, ,�� . � , � ��I �� ,�� i �'.,�, ` �wn. � r�l �r � . � ' � ,�/�r�� ,��. '�1�� f �;� _ 1 � ` �.,��. �ii� �� . ` � f�� ,�• �e -�c �`� - � . �.p��a[,�� + �� ,� �� -�� E.�•� � �!,....�. �T -�.� `�'�.'��s� ;,�r� fA►��,�� ,. t ' IA� '1 � � , ��, � � �I��` �� ,� � �:, � � � - > P �I �� - � r �, �' • �.�- � ,� ��,��.�r_.,:ww1,��, !�! _ � _,.,..__ .;�-�.. '"��,,.� ��I;�y��',� � � r � . ..�.. � ,� ��'`�•, • � '��i�:f�� r�l:i��j� �►` � �:`�.- . \��.� � I, 1�� 1.� 1 .\ �,q�� ,`��, �G� — ��i� � � ��` , �iIF�� ,� ��! ��(,�/�r��'��s�,T y�y-�-�`,'j � � �►�� i�� . � ��-'`,�,�� -' �►:. � �� ``��1�� , � ��,,� � �� _ �` - � �, � .. . � �' �F . �� a> �-, �a � ,� . _ ��• �'r� .� �� \ �I �✓ !�� .�"'Y, '� 1�A' � ��'1�,7 ` [� .. uA�� ', �� o. .. ' ��1�\ ��.�� , ' �,�' ��-.�� 1 " '� �� :l� 1�� "'r►"� �`=- � � � !�'�rit�.� ( - � "�' , � �E 1��► �'-��.� ��►�1��`\�� .�� IE�l1� �'.`�.��"' s►�, "� :"+�.E. " � il/��` � ��.��,�, ''� � ��i��. �w�`��a�`� � � . �� "Y ; - � , .� �� :� �� . . �I -��,� •��,�t��1 �;, � �, �� . �� .. .� ol,� �� ' llt� _ ��L �� `�..�1� � �"��. �IR`i, I�I , �� • �` `rI ► ��1 ,�w�� i��l� - �';. �� '� ' `� �r' , ��' � ��, \"a' � � � �►�.t �� .� ,. �`�� -��- R��r .� �� i� 6 � `.;► � o 'R�� F ,�� ' (�► �� !ti�'„r� '` � �' y +�� `� � 'r ��i ��, . �� i � 't 4 . l �, . �� , � _� ..s'�"��wr�►'� �.�� 1�� __ - � 1�.� � \'� '' ��o ��.� .��►��',,�� • , �� , � ,�a �m f. ,�:� _ -, - �� , � . � _ ,. ,��Y., , . , . .,. � �. ,.: � `� �, .��` ►,� � ��,�` �� ,� !'�Fi , ♦ �� i� � 1�.�` . � �n � ��` 'm �, � t � •r � � .� . . ..�� _ � � .l . �. . �1� , .�i�I�E�IE�;�� .. � , . , � . . . • , : , ��f��l�� `a . . �� , ! , � �� I�►1R%� . . . . . �� . - . • , ��.,�� _ � , .. . . � �. ,� , � i � . ;�� . � � — — ' � ' �r`::z� �-: pro�� 1 L-t F— L1+r—f}r,vV (�7' � Sheet �Gl �- - �+,�,- ' , � 32l_J7 ; ,� �� o� �' �SITE STRUCTURES - �w �'�;,''r-. A D�vlsion of Kosnik Engineerin3. PC L�,,�J 7��-rj� �� Job No �� -ulS�'-�f� : �.�..�'7 lz�✓r.�=v F�� l��oY/-1-�✓�--Y �,.�.t--r� rfr-aLc= = 2 3 gor vr- v�� : (1�6'.35 'r /7• 5Z��2 —1 = �(o ,G vP��F; _ (y3 - 1�,�I�C� 2•y � - 3�� st�" V��.� !�(� = Lav�=lZ = j 11 3 5� = 13 5 �s�P L� � - �l� PsF �r� = c s� (�� = I z S �s,= , vv��5 = 3�1R(�Sx12•s��g��o� "15 y gox15) = jDot�,�_ so« a�� r=�c� = 3y�i(i�S�C'��J((c��-txl5 �- �s� x15� u 1yuf�r= '7'�i t�L - (a �%`t 1'�G= ; i �.-�, � �-'—'" � �. 5 �6 0�< �� I �. , i i ! , ; . i � i � ( i , i �i ;� i �,I OIL CONTROL FACILITY CALCULCATIONS Lot 1 TOTAL GROSS RETAIL AREA = 152,460 (3.50 ac) FROM TENW MEMO DATED November 4T", 2005 TRAFFIC OPERATION ANALYSIS ATTACHMENT A: DETAILED PROJECT TRIP GENERATION ESTIMATES SUBAREA A AREA TRIPS GENERATED PM PEAK HR RETAIL 203,500 sf 381 TO CORRELATE TO RETAIL AREA IN LOT 4 381 trips X trips 203,500 sf = 152,460 sf X = 285 pm peak hr trips PM PEAK HOUR TRIPS EQUATE TO APPROXIMATELY 10% OF ADT .'. ADT =4490 2850 ADT 146.4 ksf = 19.47 ADT/1000 sf .'. OIL CONTROL FACILITY IS NOT REQUIRED SINCE LESS THAN 100 ADT/1000 sf Fiarvest Partners- Lakeshore Landing PM Peak Trip Generation Subarea A-B Buildout Potential by Proponent P.M. Peak Hour Trip Generation Trip Rates Trips Generated ITE """`*PM Peak Hour`*""' "`:•'•tpM Peak Hour•""`* Land Use Area Uni+s� LUC Z In Out Total In Out Total Su6area A RETAfL �."�r �'•:-, . .. ....;-203�5D0. GFA" , 82D'.?.,46%. ,�.:52%... 3:75` " " '"366 397 763"; Intemal Trips From Residential B=1ow 8 15 23 From O�ce Below 8 2 10 Retaf!-Boeing Plan[(20%) 73 79 153 Passby 3 34% 96 100 196 Subtotal = 161 201 �?"..38.1`r} MULTIFAMILY 900 UNITS 22l 65% 35% 0.52 3D3 163 467 7ntemal Trrps Residential-Retail/Cinema(15%) 46 25 70 From O�ce Below 24 5 29 ,4etai!-Boeing Plant(2D%) 46 25 70 Subtotal = 169 110 298 Subarea A Subtotal = 369 310 680 Subarea 8 RETAIL 3�4,5D0 GFA 820 48% 529�0 3.75 520 672 1,292 lnterral Trips From Resid�tial kbove ?4 26 40 From O�ce Below 73 3 16 Retail-8ceing Plant(20%) 124 134 258 Passby 3 s"4% 163 169 332 Subtotal = 306 340 646 CINEMA 59,000 GFA 444 64°k 36% 3.60 143 B� 224 lntema!Trips From Residentia!kbove 2 4 0 , Fron Office Below 2 0 3 Retai!-Bceing Plant(20�6) 29 15 45 I SubtoUl = '112 64 176 HOTEL 150 ROOMS 3l0 53% 47% 0.61 49 43 92 lntema!Trips(not applred) D 0 0 0 0 0 Subtotal = 49 43 92 OFFICE 57,OOD GFA 710 l7% 83% 2.50 24 ll9 143 In[�m�l Trios Re[ail/Crnema-Offi��(20%) 5 24 29 Resider�fia!-O�ce(20%) 5 24 29 Subtotal = 15 71 86 Subarea B Subtotat = 482 518 1,000 Subarea D - G CONSOLIDATED OPERATIONS BOEING PLANT' 9,400 EMP -- 259'0 75% 0.29 682 2,045 2,726 !n[ernz!Trips From Retail Above 230 226 456 4esidentiaf-O�ce(15%) 25 46 70 Subtotal = 427 'I,773 2,200 Subarea D-G Subtotal = 427 1,773 2,2D0 Gross P.M. Peak Hour Trips Generated from Redevelopment Area = 2,188 3,519 5,707 Less Total lnternal Trips = 653 653 1,299 Less Total Passby Trips = 259 Z69 528 Net P.M. Peak Hour Trips Generated from Redevelopment Area = 1,276 2,597 3,880 Notes: � GFA is Gross Floor Area,GLA is Gross Leasa6le Area. Z Institute of Transportation Engineers,Trip Generation Manual,7th Edition, 2003 Land Use Ccdes. 3 Passby percent of 34 percent for proposed retail use based on documented average rate from ITE Trip Gerera.io�Handbock. � Trip generation for proposed offlce use based on ITE,with minimum ra[e of 1.20 Vips per 1,OOD sf. E�cisting Office use in Subarea C is Boeing employment that is part of the consolidated operations headcount assumed in the BRCPA EIS. Off-site Vip generation is accounted for in Subarea D,however,iMemaliiatlon between uses in other subareaz are accounted in this porucn or:he table. 5 Trip generation fhas be��proportioned to the'1990 Boeing EIS;14,000 employees and 4,060 p.m.peak hour trips. �/� t';a�z.os 'dJR La�di-:g Tri�G»�e-aiicn=O�S.A-E?I�� DEV�LQPNI�N'1'SUIVIMARY: ��^F� /;i,•; � PHASE ONE ;,; %' "�, S, /<'a;'�. ,-�:�'" E. GALLI SON QUADRANT'A' , _ `G � � E�11EPTr1111MFI�T :�� •• �1, � f3ATl0 4.B/1,000 � o�rrai r � � � � � � ��'4�� _ � 4UADRANT'B' �.j� s � . � " H � �.. RATIO:OFFICES �inos� a.ai,00a �' �,r.r; `✓,;� ��`� � F3AT10:RETAIL (91M1 ps) .A.IY7.000 .;. _ #, �..-',�-- � ��..� � �• ,ik �. �` QUADRANT+C ,� p� �' %.f"� i, 4 d y�"�t N � ' . ;i.�'4 w,'rlo a.at.aoo �� M;'�r � '�l � � i.iees r�t� �x � rf,K,�t� � . . X 8 FASIIIOJ� � 1.�': �' �I �� Ya� � � d QUADRANT'A�6�CTOTALSOFT 635,5k �n . � �` �v � ,�„ QUADRANT'A,B,C'707AL PARI(ING 2682 pr -� �r� ' � : �M• i -1 I,. � ,._ ,,i� \ co °% � � PHASETWO �;- � 'w � i �� y�t �_ � W o� r, u�r � �►!r: 4� � �a � o� N j QUADftANT'D-1' y��j ~ �. M��i ! J �� s �� \ I W �p � Rq7io a,a�.000 t n e : � y. ° � M1� t � � f� r,; ` �' ' �.'.., � .j' f'�5�-'- � �� .. �� c� W .� n�naner u M ��r _ ifl'_�M= ,�f'�r. �Ni : ".'l��M :/�i.- � �I. �._'. �� 0 w � QUADRANT'�-2' , � �fr� .�►.. �.- .�_ �►r �t�� w m i��!; F-_ �— - �� M }vm . e�' , C� � d ?. BATIp�. 5AY7.000 N E I 6 H B U R M U�'� �- ��` .��. ~.~ - ' 1 q � .ri�. � WALIt 1 �'[ � �'�. � � -`9 Z QUADRANT'D-3' � � � � � • I � D � RATIO 4.9l1.W0 �� -- -� �J : m �' � � �� . , rn�H ,��11�� s _�::,i t�:.,.. . i��t�� C� � c0 � QUADR.4NT'D`TOTALSQFT 225k � - � - " " m � �^ QUADR.4NT'D'TOTALPARKING 115A n �"��'�'�s`r$'�t'Q��h - ._�___.—_.it+(vemo � �:" P PERSPEGTIVEVIEWS: � I-h' � -� �.� y' � � e STftEEf I PEDE5TRIAN � � G� -4�-Q 1 F��:��: � 9� ��w n�a � N � � VIEYJLOOKIIJOIJOftTM,p.24 �� .�' . � -�'��"��• _ �1 p N�� REfAILANCIlURS � � � � f� D+ � � � RETAIL6HUP5 � � Q AERIALVICW,p.22 :'�.- ��v-r� ��Z��n+� .: .��« �J �. q -�� es�n�. � THEATRE W � W Q 51REEI'/PE�ESTRIAW VIEW �'Y�j�-:; -'��-" �. _ : r,,) LOOKIN6 FAST.P.23 � .�:� iki �4-��.ic q-�I �§��-�� R �� .��. .:I � HOTEL k r:_ �u��.'9 � +r. v�ty� - r �-�y Q nftEET I PEOESTRIHN VIEW � S'r �� -� Y ��7�T � • t,�p+ �� I � PARKINQ STIiUCiURE --� LOOkIIJGNOR7H�p.11 �I �!� Z Z � N . � �� .� RESIpEN71AL � `•Vi.Cl�CDsn,A,v�$�i-�r_:i H»t� r.—_ '" _ � � -� nri �- U-I-I:;l::� � 7 f - J. ,, '�''-`°y'',�"' � °. ��+n ,,,y�aP^ � f��. .S�� T a 4 y i�.��-- � � '.i� �1,.«+ rp�f+ ` � rr ,: 4 w��'��'� Z � co yF''n�,K-�'�.,.� .. �.t y,t t c-'�L ti 4 ��Z�� '^ �� -r�' "`�l _ o O I � ..o...'".1 } r� sc�N'�R 5'.... t�- ,v� �i� { �`rifr�'3"ws -t�.k '' ��u��_��_ � , ,-- .-•- , _ i 1��W� � _ + .e� 7t� 0's �t. '�7`�'fr.".�� 7K, � , m m S .,..._,�; i� '� �'� �^ � r I:.....,...;.�.._.,...�....,_..,... ��..��..=..��m:1._M..�s�.i.._�._,..b..s�a3�,b..-at;;rod,;1,ti�F�r;��_.�,t�,t , _..._�,L°�.._.t�t''.� _�u..�K:�. ..,��.� 3 ° " I � C 2 � ° `"°, I � r, � I v- Dm � � c� p m 5 I co �N � A Ut v; „�i 5.0 CONVEYANCE SYSTEMS ANALYSIS AND DESIGN 5.1 Roof Downspout System The building downspouts will bypass the water quality treatment facilities and enter the bypass line directly. The East basin receives 2.60 acres of roof tributary area which enters Park Ave N. The West basin receives 0.90 acres of roof tributa.ry area which enters Logan Ave N system. 5.2 Proposed On-site Conveyance System The project conveyance system is a conventiona.l storm drainage collection system that will collect runoff from the entire site, including asphalt, roof areas, and landscaping via catch basins and pipes. The new pipe system is designed with sufficient capacity to convey and contain the 25- year, 24-hour peak flow using the SBUH Method. Flooding does not occur for the 25- year storm . Included in this section is the complete conveyance and backwater analysis for the entire Lot 1 site for the 25-year and 100-year, 24-hour, storm peak flow using the SBUH Method. The corresponding 25-year, 24-hour HGL elevations at each discharge point, 26.39 in Park Ave N, 26.44 in Logan Ave N were obtained from BHC. The corresponding 100-year, 24-hour HGL elevations at each discharge point, 26.79 in Park Ave N, 26.84 in Logan Ave N were obtained from BHC. The 100-year flood map, Figure 8, is included in this section. At catch basin CB7, which is located in North 10�' Pl, the HGL elevation overtops the catch basin by approximately 0.14 feet and is contained onsite. The HGL elevation overtops the CB6 by 0.04 feet and CB6A by 0.54 feet. All 100-year flooding is contained onsite. See Figure 8. W&HPacrfc,Inc. TIR The Landing—Harvest Partners .�1ay 20�7 9 The Landing Lot 1 CONVEYANCE Stormshed Output and Calculations AN 04-08-07 EAST BASIN East Basin Event Summary: BasinlD Peak Q Peak T Peak Voi Area Method Raintype Event ---- (cfs) (hrs) (ac-ft) ac /Loss East Basin 2.76 8.00 1.0019 2.82 SBUHlSCS TYPE1A 25 yr East Basin 3.70 5.00 1.3540 2.82 SBUH/SCS TYPE1A 1�0 yr Drainage Area: East Basin Hyd Method: SBUH Hyd Loss Method: SCS CN Number Peak Factor: 484.00 SCS Abs: 0.20 Storm Dur: 24.00 hrs Intv: 10.00 min Area CN TC Pervious 0.0000 ac 86.00 0.00 hrs Impervious 2.8200 ac 98.00 0.17 hrs Total 2.8200 ac Supporting Data: Impervious CN Data: IMP 98.00 2.8200 ac Impervious TC Data: Flow type: Description: Length: Slope: Coeff: Travel Time Sheet SHEET 249.00 ft 1.00% 0.0110 4.09 min Channel PIPE 775.00 ft 0.25% 42.00�0 6.15 min North Bldgs (East Basin) Event Summary: BasinlD Peak Q Peak T Peak Vol Area Method Raintype Event ------ (cfs) (hrs) (ac-ft) ac /Loss North Bldgs 1.90 8.00 0.6644 1.87 SBUH/SCS TYPEIA 25 yr (East Basin) North Bldgs 2.55 8.00 0.8978 1.87 SBUH/SCS TYPEIA 100 yr (East Basin) Drainage Area: North Bldgs (East Basin) Hyd Method: SBUH Hyd Loss Method: SCS CN Number Peak Factor: 484.00 SCS Abs: 020 Storm Dur: 24.00 hrs Intv: 10.00 min Area CN TC Pervious O.00Od ac 86.00 0.00 hrs Impervious 1.8700 ac 98.00 0.12 hrs Total 1.8700 ac Supporting Data: Impervious CN Data: IMP 98.00 1.8700 ac Impervious TC Data: Flow type: Description: Length: Slope: Coeff: Travel Time Sheet SHEET 86.00 ft 1.00% 0.0110 1.75 min Channel GUTTER 127.00 ft 0.25% 42.0000 1.01 min Channel PIPE 800.00 ft 0.50% 42.0000 4.49 min South Bdlgs (East Basin) Event Summary: BasinlD Peak Q Peak T Peak Vol Area Method Raintype Event ----- (cfs) (hrs) (ac-ft) ac /Loss South Bdlgs 1.11 8.00 0.3837 1.08 SBUH/SCS TYPE1A 25 yr (East Basin) South Bdlgs 1.49 B.00 0.5185 1.06 SBUH/SCS TYPE1A 100 yr (East Basin) Drainage Area: South Bdlgs (East Basin) Hyd Method: SBUH Hyd �oss Method: SCS CN Number Peak Factor: 484.00 SCS Abs: 0.20 Storm Dur: 24.00 hrs Intv: 10.00 min Area CN TC Pervious 0.0000 ac 86.00 0.00 hrs Impervious 1.0800 ac 98.00 0.10 hrs Total 1.0800 ac Supporting Data: Impervious CN Data: IMP 98.00 1.0800 ac Impervious TC Data: Flow type: Description: Length: Slope: Coeff: Travel Time Sheet SHEET 44.00 ft 1.00% 0.0110 1.02 min Channel GUTTER 154.00 ft 0.25% 42.0000 1.22 min Channel PIPE 717.00 ft 0.50% 42.0000 4.02 min North Bldgs (West Basin) Event Summary: BasinlD Peak Q Peak T Peak Vol Area Method Raintype Event _____ (cfs) (hrs) (ac-ft) ac /Loss North Bldgs 0.57 B.00 0.1954 0.55 SBUH/SCS TYPEIA 25 yr (VIlest Basin) North Bldgs 0.76 8.00 0.2641 0.55 SBUH/SCS TYPE1 100 yr (West Basin) Drainage Area: North Bldgs (West Basin) Hyd Method: SBUH Hyd Loss Method: SCS CN Number Peak Factor: 484.00 SCS Abs: 0.20 Storm Dur: 24.00 hrs Intv: 10.00 min Area CN TC Pervious 0.0000 ac 86.00 0.00 hrs Impervious 0.5500 ac 98.00 0.09 hrs Total 0.5500 ac Supporting Data: Impervious CN Data: IMP 98.00 0.5500 ac Impervious TC Data: Flow type: Description: Length: Slope: Coeff: Travel Time Sheet SHEET 171.00 ft 1.00% 0.0110 3.03 min Channel GUTTER 36.00 ft 0.25% 42.0000 0.29 min Channel PIPE 415.00 ft 0.50% 42.0000 2.33 min � II ath: P: Ha�+sst Partners 3 36\Dealgn Dr w! e lvfl\Lot 1 CDs\lot 1 to Re 32536—Land—Flg46 8.dwg] (Flp.7] �� , Dote: 4 4 07 11: A A B tter.. RIC 32 C A Full ze.ctb • • � � � • i 6 M ANadjafi y � O � � ~ � � � mmm � � , � « � � , :;. m �� , vivcivci D N ' � �, q q �I � f�� <•� �, g� O O Q) � S �� (OON � N n n n n ' y�� • ; � o � � � ; T � D I �` ,� �� ...� `y, o� ` �� o�$ �� , � � g ; �f ' � w i ii / J � �� _i b � � I ' ' �� , , �� , ,, � mm ' - ' zb �� 0 � « ,� 0 � DOO � '�! �' � , �\ �� -o a v� c c � / i� \ '�, �� ;� � cn cn cn D - I ( ' R � II II II II ' 0 0 0 �/� .`\�� 1�� , � � O CW `�+ , ,, , � sn `�� , . �,��: ,,� �~ ; �� N� w o 0 � ' � �_ � .� ' � ; Z � � � � �� '' � g � s ,� , 4 p c� c� c� c� � ...�:. ?`: : , ,�; � } , , �r�;, � �N x .` �O � � i '�fi �o A w�X' � a , � �y, � � il ��N � . �-• � �\ I �� I i �?� O n ��.�'� C A �� ,* ,_ (.� , _..�, � 1 � p � ..I �. '� � i `� '. 1 �\ �� /� ��O g',.,' \� •..� S � ', ` \'� Z �`\ �'}'� �i' \ �� ' T�� i 1� �� , � g. � � , � , _ .. � ti \� ��'�-r- `- \`�� R� , � �� ` � � '` `� 2 , � �=" : � �. � 0��1�, � a 'o�� i-�, ' , t N� � �'� �� ` ' �. -� , �� _ �►�� =i z A � �, ' ��I.,... ,� � '' ,1 ',1._. 1�l � �y p ��\� o �1 � $D � v a�o � � , , Z , .. a � � � n � b � �n� `. ,� 1 \\\ � 1 _a '� �� i ��\ \\, � �\ � � m i ��, �� '�� ` � �' ,��` ��`,�`� 0v ,�mj ,Z�j (f� '� (1') �, ( �A �`, � � C y � � % `i /`,, �\ \ ` ,�, �� \` �'\ D O O ' � `,..'' � �V ''� � , U " ; �� fn C C � ��I � � 1 �; ,, � �� o� 1 1 � � � I � ' ` � � . ';-t,,..:. ` :\ „ � _ 1 I I I I I I I I � �I � �''ti� o� ��,r �\� 0. � � _��-- •. � O O Cn r�� i I i ` � ` ` 1 �� 1 . . . . r^ 'i. � � �\ :, , ., � -� � . , ,'� . ` � rn O N ��I J :� >, ___ < l ° , � � , � �� , � - ; , , \ �, ,, , , , � � � n c�i ��` �..� �..--�� \� ,�, �� ", ' � � , � � � o � `� ; �` , ,. , � � � ��:� N�� '� � � --. .�� . �f,i �,a't, A ,�, c�i� , A , �� .� �^ � �� , , •..; � � ,� i— �:,., _. � �� b\. C ; \� � � ,,, � . ..- __ \ ... -.A y ` ; �� ,��, N � �cy' ,� � i_ � �, .� - ,�� i1 �� `� �o� 4 :`\\ l,J-,�� . � � , � � �� , ,., ,� , � s 1 ` � '� �� \ \ -' �.- ;,� . � � , , :- ��, �;,�,4r �'' , > �..... . --. , ;.�� , _._._ _ . �- `" � " , ..: r r�� ,- � , , � --�... I . ,` .._, i � .�. .�. � i �� I�... _.... -, i;� ''� � • �� ;.. =�� I , r� ; �� .,,,....--�.' '`,, , �, ; !, PARK AVE N ',, -'�"� � �! . � � � � _ � i i '. ;, _ � , _ ,, , z o �x'� (�I v 1 � c�'i,� � 8~ .. o _ _Z — � � I 0 0 �/zs/os cHECKeo er: HARVEST PARTNETS �RAWN BY: AN APPRo�o BY: THE LANDING � LAST EDIT.• 4 24 2007 PLOT DATE: 04 24 07 9960 Yonts PLIa Parinrqy �^ = DA7E BY REV RENSION CKDAPPR LOT 1 BoL6dl, weahfnston D80E1—BD78 V, � ~ CONVEYANCE MAP "�'�'-"°° �.�,�� y RENTON WASHINCTON "�10�0•O0� SCALE: PROJECr N0. DRAWING FILE NAME: �°°°°" ' �O'°" '�"^yO1 'LOa'0�'�"d�'0�' 1"=100' 32536—Land—Ff 4678 CONVEYANCE ANALYSIS WORK SHEET (25 YEAR) , ; �i DESIGN STORM 25.00 DATE 5/242007 DESIGNER ABN PROJECT 'Ibe Lau ' Lot 1 i LOCAT[ON NW 1/4 OF SEC:8 'I'WP: 23 N OS E i NE 1/4 OF SEC: 7'WP: i � ROOF COt�'TRIB Method DESIGN PIPE PIPE PIPE P�E PIPE VELOCITY DESIG?�T TIME Q� �[iTpPER STRUCIL Depth COVER LACATE ; DR.4IN ARFA FLOW MAT SIZE SIAPE LENGTH CAPACITY PULL QlQf VELOCITY PIPE IM'ERTELEVATIOh 'IEtoGE �O\'ER FROM 'f0 CFS) ' ACRES (CFS I CFS S) (FPS) in Dro ou[ G.E. TOP/PIPE i I EAST BASL1 CB#13 TO PARK i CB 13 �CB 12 0.27 SBUH ' 0.3 P 12 0.0027 37 ; 2.0 2.6 0.13 1.4 ' 0.45 25.39 0.00 25.39 28.50 3.11 1.96 , CB 12 CB 11 0.00 SBiJH 0.3 P 12 0.0025 129 1.9 2.5 0.14 13 ' 1.62 25.29 0.00 25.29 30.00 4J1 3.56 � CB 11 CB]0 0.00 SBUH 0.3 P 12 ' 0.0025 � 69 1.9 2.4 0.14 1.3 I 0.87 24.97 0.00 24.97 29.33 ' 4.36 3.21 CB 10 CB 9 0.20 SB[JH 1.9 P 18 0.0046 , 74 7.7 I 4.4 0.25 2.8 0.43 24.80 ' 0.00 24.80 28.00 3.20 1.55 CB 9 CB 8 0.43 SBUH ; 2.6 P 18 0.0051 73 8.1 4.6 0.32 3.4 0.36 24.46 0.00 24.46 28.00 3.54 ', 1.89 CB 8 CB 7 0.00 SBUH Z.8 P 24 0.0596 � 54 60A 19.1 0.05 8.2 0.11 24.09 0.00 24.13 28.74 4.65 2.46 CB 7 CB 6 1.11 0.00 ' SBL1�I 3.9 P ' 24 0.0025 77 12.2 3.9 032 2.8 0.45 20.91 0.00 20.91 2R.58 7.67 5.52 CB 6 CB 2 1.9 0.00 SBUH 5.8 P 24 0.0028 206 13.0 4.1 0.44 3.2 1.06 20.72 ' 0.00 20.72 28.14 7.42 5.27 CB 2 CB 1 0.00 SBUH 5.8 P 24 0.0025 61 12.2 3.9 0.47 3.2 0.32 20.14 0.00 20.]4 2 i.71 7.57 5.42 CB 1 EX.#P-8 0.00 SBUH 5.8 P � 18 0.0037 19 ! 6.9 3.9 0.83 3.8 0.08 ; 19.99 0.00 19.99 27.76 7.77 6.12 EX.11P-8 ' I 19.92 i 0.90 � ' � CB#8A TO C&t8 I CB 8A CB 8 0.14 SBUH 0.1 'i P 12 0.0074 78 3.3 4.2 0.05 1.8 0.7] 24.67 0.00 24.67 27.77 3.10 i 1.95 CB 8 24.09 I i i CB#9A TO CB#9 � CB 9A CB 9 0.28 SBLJH 03 P 12 0.0025 198 19 2.5 0.14 1.3 2.47 24.96 0.00 I 24.96 27.10 2.14 0.99 CB 9 24.46 CB#lOB TO CB#10 i CB lOB CB l0A 1.29 SBLJH 1.3 P 12 0.0188 85 5.3 6.8 0.24 4.4 � 0.32 26.90 0.00 26.90 30.22 332 2.17 CB l0A CB]0 0.21 SBUH 1.5 P 18 0.0042 119 ; 7.4 4.2 0.20 2.5 0.79 2530 0.00 25.30 28.50 3.2� 1.55 CB 10 ' 24.80 � - i ' I CorveyQ ' BACKWATER ANALYSIS WORK SHEET (25 YEAR) ;p�;� Lanaiag�.a t � ' ' ! � Dau -07 DFSIG�STORM , 25.000 �Is the OuNet ' S T I Des a SRS DATE S/242007 If Yes TW Elev=Waza Sarface Elev. ' DESIG\'ER SRS JOB NO. 209.032563 , I �}'Na'['W E►w,_ +(nvert Elev ' PROJECT The Lan Lot 4 ' � i (1) (2 '(3 4 (5) (6) ( 18) (9 I(10) 11) l2) (13) (14 (15 (1� (1'n 18 Est. �Q9) 0 �(21) (22 Barel Ba¢l F�ta Fnta ' Exit Oorlet OoBet � InIU Inld Bend Jmction ]mction R'.L i Pi Q Pi "n" Oada ; Inlet Barrel VeL Vel ! TW Fricm HGL Head Head HW � Ctr1 ' Ctr] Vel Head Cross Head HW Below Above 5 25 Size Value Elevatiou i Elevation Area 'Q/A Head Elcv L.oss Elev Ke Loss Loss Qn. D Elcv Head Kb Loss Flow I,oss fi]ev G.E. Crown iControl TW Q/AD^.5 Inlet HW CB to CB (cfs) (ft) , (m) (ft) (ft) (sfl ( ) (fps) (8) (ft) (R) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) i � ; CB#13 TO PARK ' CB 13 CB 12 0.3 37 12 0.012 2529 2539 0.785 034 0.00 27.10 0.00 27.11 0.2 0.00 0.00 0.00 27.11 0.20 25.59 0.00 0.00 , 0.00 0.00 0.00 27.11 139 0.72 OiTIT.ET �PREVIOUS P1PE 0.34 0.20 CB 12 CB 11 03 129 ; 12 0.012 24.80 2529 0.785 034 0.00 27.10 0.01 27.10 0.2 0.00 0.00 0.00 27.11 0.20 25.49 0.00 0.50 �� 0.00 0.00 0.00 ' 27.10 2.90 0.81 OUTLE'I' PREVIOUS PIPE ' 0.34 0.20 CB 11 'CB 10 0.3 69 ' 12 0.012 24.80 24.97 OJSS 034 0.00 27.09 ' 0.00 27.10 0.2 0.00 0.00 0.00 27.10 0.20 25.17 0.00 0.00 '' 0.00 0.00 0.00 27.10 223 1.13 OUTLET PREVIOUS PIPE o.34 0.20 CB 10 CB 9 1.9 74 18 0.012 24.09 24.80 1.766 1.09 0.02 27.05 0.02 27.07 0.2 0.00 0.02 0.02 27.09 0.53 2533 0.00 1.20 0.00 1.50 0.00 27.09 091 0.79 ,OUTLET PREVIOUS PIPE 0.69 0.53 CB 9 CB 8 2.6 73 18 0.012 24.09 24.46 1J66 1.49 0.03 26.97 0.04 . 27.01 0.2 0.01 0.03 � 0.04 ' 27.05 0.60 25.06 0.02 0.80 0.01 030 0.00 27.05 0.95 ' 1.09 �OiTI'LET PREVIOUS PIPE ' 1.21 0.60 CB 8 CB 7 2.8 54 � 24 0.012 20.72 24.13 3.14 0.88 0.01 26.96 0.01 �, 26.96 0.2 0.00 ', 0.01 0.01 26.98 0.36 24.49 0.03 0.20 0.01 0.10 0.02 26.97 1 J7 0.84 OUTLET PREVIOUS PIPE 0.62 0.36 CB 7 CB 6 3.9 77 24 0.012 20.72 20.91 3.14 1.23 0.02 26.90 0.02 26.92 0.2 0.00 0.02 0.03 26.95 0.54 , 21.45 0.01 1.10 0.0] 1.11 0.00 26.96 1.62 4.05 OUTLET PREVIOUS PIPE 0.87 0.54' CB 6 CB 2 5.8 206 24 0.012' 20.14 20.72 3.14 1.84 0.05 26.74 0.11 26.85 0.2 OA1 0.05 , 0.06 ' 26.92 0.58 ! 2130 � 0.02 0.20 0.00 I 1.90 0.01 26.90 1.24 4.18 OUTLET PREVIOUS PIPE 1.30 0.56 CB 2 CB l 5.8 61 24 0.012 19.99 20.14 3.14 1.84 0.05 26.65 0.03 26.69 ' 0.2 I OA1 0.05 0.06 26J5 0.58 ' 20.72 i 0.05 0.80 0.04 0.00 0.00 26.74 0.97 4.60 OUTLET PREVIOUS PIPE 1.30 D.56 CB 1 EX.#P-8 5.8 19 18 0.012: 19.92 19.99 1.766 � 3.27 � 0.17 2639 0.05 26.44 0.2 ' 0.03 0.17 0.20 26.64 0.77 20.76 ' 0.05 1.30 0.07 0.00 0.00 26.65 1.11 5.16 OUTLET PREVIOUS P�E 2.s� o.n EX.�P-8 2639 ' CB#8A TO CB#8 ' ' i CB 8A CB 8 0.1 78 12 0.012 24.09 24.67 OJ85 0.17 0.00 26.97 0.00 26.97 02 0.00 0.00 0.00 26.97 0.20 24.87 0.00 0.00 0.00 �.00 0.00 26.97 0.80 � 130 OUTLET PREVIOUS PIPE 0.17 020' CB S ' 26.97 CB#9A TO CB#9 I i I CB 9A CB 9 0.3 198 12 0.012 24.46 24.96 0.785 035 0.00 27.05 0.01 27.06 D2 0.00 0.00 0.00 , 27.06 0.20 25.16 0.00 � 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 27.06 ' 0.04 1.10 OUTLET PREVIOUS PIPE ! 0.35 0.20 CB 9 � i i ' 27.05 � ' ' I i , , , i CB#lOB TO CB#10 ' ' CB]OB CB l0A 13 85 12 OAl2 25.30 26.90 0.785 1.61 0.04 ' 27.14 0.09 27.23 0.2 0.01 0.04 0.05 27.28 0.51 27.41 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 27.41 2.81 -0.49 '1NLET PREVIOUS PIPE 1.61 0.51 CB]OA CB]0 1.5 119 18 0.012 24.80 2530 1.766 0.83 0.01 27.09 i OA2 27.11 , 0.2 0.00 ', 0.01 0.01 27.13 I 0.46 25J6 0.04 130 0.05 0.00 ' 0.00 27.14 1.36 0.34 OUTLET PREVIOUS PIPE 0.68 0.46 CB 10 � 27.09 i I� i - � I ConveyQ CONVEYANCE ANALYSIS WORK SHEET (100 YEAR) , � DESIGN STORM ]00.00 DATE snanoo� i DESIGNIIt SRS PROJECT 1Le I.�din Lot I LOCATION NW 1/4 OF SEC:8 TR�P: 23 N OS E ! NE 1/4 OF SEC:' TWP: I i , ROOF CONTRIB iMethod DESIGN PIPE PIPE PIPE PIPE PIPE VEIACIT'Y DFSIGN TIMEW [UPPERSTRUCTURE] D COVER IACAT'E DRAIN AREA j FLOR' I MAT SIZE SLOPE LENGT'H CAPACITY F[JLL Q/Qf VELOCTCY PIPE 1�'VERT ELEVAITON IE ro GE OVER FRO�I TO CFS� , ACRES CFS (Fi' (CFS� (FPS (MIIv in oiu G.E. I'OP/PIPE EasT sasuv CBf#10 TO PARK CB 10 CB 9 0.27 I SBUH 0.4 P 12 0.0027 37 2.0 2.6 0.18 1.5 0.40 25.39 0.00 ! 2539 I 28.25 . 2.86 1.71 CB 9 CB 8 0.00 SBUH 0.4 P 12 ' 0.0025 129 1.9 2.5 0.18 1.5 1.46 25.29 0.00 25.29 29.54 4.25 3.10 CB 8 CB 7 0.00 SBLTI-I 0.4 P 12 0.0025 69 1.9 2.4 0.18 I.5 OJ8 24.97 0.00 24.97 29.33 4.36 3.21 CB 7 CB 6 020 SBLTI-i Z.6 P 18 0.0047 73 7.8 4.4 0.33 3.2 038 24.80 � 0.00 � 24.80 27.87 3.07 1.42 CB 6 CB 5 0.43 SBLTH 3.5 P 18 ' 0.0051 73 8.1 4.6 0.43 3.6 034 24.46 0.00 � 24.46 27.88 3.42 1.77 CB 5 CB 4 0.00 SBiJH 3.7 P 24 0.035? 58 46.4 14.8 0.05 6.4 0.15 24.09 Q00 22.98 28.74 4.65 3.61 CB 4 CB 3 1.49 0.00 SBUH 5.2 P 24 0.0021 91 11.2 3.6 0.46 2.9 0.52 20.91 0.00 20.9] 28.41 7.50 5.35 CB 3 CB 2 2.55 0.00 SBLJH 7J P 24 0.0033 183 14Z 4.5 0.55 3.8 0.80 20.72 0.00 20.72 28.47 7.75 5.60 CB 2 CB 1 0.00 SBUH 7.7 P 24 0.0020 61 j 10.9 3.5 OJl 3.3 0.31 20.11 0.00 20.11 27.61 7.50 5.35 CB 1 EX.#P-8 0.00 SBiJH 7.7 P 18 0.0037 19 i 6.9 3.9 1.12 4.1 0.08 ' 19.99 0.00 19.99 27.72 7J3 6.08 EX.#P-8 , 19.92 ; 0.90 I CB#SA TO CB#5 � CB SA CB 5 j 0.14 3BiJH 0.2 P 12 0.0074 78 3.3 4.2 0.05 1.8 0.71 24.67 0.00 24.67 I 28.20 3.53 238 CB 5 ' � ; 24.09 I CB#6A TO CB#6 I ' CB 6A CB 6 �I 0.28 SBiJH 0.4 P 12 0.0025 133 1.9 2.5 0.19 1.5 1.51 24J9 0.00 24J9 27.40 I 2.61 1.46 CB 6 24.46 I i CB#7B TO CB#7 i CB 7B CB 7A ].29 SBiJH ' 1.7 P 12 0.0188 85 5.3 6.8 032 4.9 029 26.90 0.00 26.90 3032 3.42 2.27 CB 7A CB 7A 0.21 SBiJH 2.0 P ]8 0.0042 119 7.4 4.2 ' 0.27 2.9 0.69 25.30 0.00 25.3� 28.44 3.14 1.49 CB 7 ' 24.80 I , � , � i ConveyQ � BACKWATER ANALYSIS WORK SHEET (100 YEAR) Projxt Landing Lot 1 i Dau M -0� � DFSIG?�STORM 100.000' I Is the Oudet ' Submcr ed? Desi Q SRS i DATE 5/242007�I ' If Yes TW Elev=Wazer Surfacc Elev. DFSIG��ER SRS JOB NO. 209.032563 � ffNo TVV Elev._(D+dc)/2-Invert F1cv � '� PROJEC'f 'Ihe Lan ' Lot 4 I j (1) (2) 3) !(4) (5) (6) (7) IC8) (9 (10) (ll (12) (13) (14) IS) (16) (17) (l8) Eu. (19) 2D) (21) �(22) ' i Baixel Bmrl Enter Entcr Exit Outiet puvet Inlet ' Inlet A Bend Jnnctian ]unction W.L.D D I i Pi Q Pi 'n" Ouda Inlet Barrel ; Vd. Vel TW Fricm HGL Head Heed HW �1 Ctrl Ctrl Vd Heed i Crou Head HW Bdow Above Se ent � 25 Siu ' Value Elevuation Eleverion Area Q/A Head I Elev Loss Elev Ke Loss l.oss th E1ev � D Elev �, Head Kb Loss ! Flow Loss Elev G.E. Csown Control TW ,Q1AD^.5 InI�HW CB to CB I (cfs) I �ft) �in) (ft) (ft) �S� ' (fps) � 5) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) I �ft) (ft) �ft) (ft) i (cfs) �ft) I �ft) �R) � �ft) � , � I I CB#10 TO PARK �I CB 10 CB 9 0.4 37 12 OAl2 25.29 2539 0.785 0.45 0.00 28.03 ' 0.00 28.03 0.2 � 0.00 0.00 0.00 28.03 0.20 25.59 j 0.00 0.00 0.00 � 0.00 0.00 28.03 0.22 1.64 OUTLET' PREVIOUS PIPE 0.45 0.20; CB 9 CB 8 0.4 129 12 0.012 24.80 2529 0.785 0.45 0.00 28.01 0.01 28.02 ' 0.2 I 0.00 0.00 0.00 28.03 0.20 25.49 0.00 i 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 28.03 1.51 1.74 OUTLET 'PREVIOUS PIPE 0.45 0.20' CB 8 CB 7 0.4 69 12 0.012 24.80 24.97 0.785 0.45 0.00 28.01 i 0.01 28.01 0.2 ! 0.00 0.00 0.00 28.02 0.20 25.17 0.00 � 0.10 0.00 0.00 ' 0.00 28.01 132 2.04 OUTLET PREVIOUS PIPE 0.45 0.20i CB 7 CB 6 2.6 i 73 18 0.012 24.09 24.80 1.766 1.46 0.03 2792 ' 0.04 27.96 I 0.2 �.01 0.03 0.04 28.00 0.55 25.35 0.00 1.30 0.00 2.00 0.00 28.01 ' -0.14 1.71 OITIT.ET PREVIOUS PIPE 1.19 0.55' CB 6 CB 5 3.5 73 18 OAl2 24.09 24.46 1 J66 1.99 0.06 27.78 ' 0.07 27.85 0.2 0.01 0.06 0.07 ' 27.93 0.65 25.11 0.03 0.80 0.03 0.40 0.00 27.92 -0.04 1.96 OUTLET PREVIOUS PIPE 1.63 0.65 CB 5 ICB 4 3.7 58 24 0.012 20.72 22.98 3.14 1.18 0.02 27.77 � 0.01 27J9 0.2 0.00 '', 0.02 0.03 , 27.81 0.40 23.38 0.06 0.50 , OA3 0.20 j 0.00 27.78 0.96 2.80 'OUTLET 'PREVIOUS PIPE , 0.83 0.40 CB 4 CB 3 5.2 I 91 24 �.012 20.72 j 2091 3.14 1.65 0.04 27.69 � 0.04 I 27.73 0.2 0.01 0.04 0.05 ' 27J8 0.57 21.48 OA2 0.40 OA1 1.49 0.01 27.77 0.64 4.86 OUTLET PREVIOUS PIPE 1.17 0.57 CB 3 'CB 2 7.7 ' 183 24 0.012 20.11 20.72 3.14 2.46 0.09 27.42 0.18 27.60 0.2 . 0.02 0.09 ' 0.11 27.71 0.65 21.37 0.04 0.10 0.00 2.55 0.01 27.69 0.78 4.97 OUTLET PREVIOUS PIPE 1.74 0.65 CB 2 'CB 1 7.7 61 24 0.012 19.99 20.11 3.14 2.46 0.09 27.26 0.06 2732 0.2 ' 0.02 0.09 0.1I 27.44 0.65 20.76 0.09 0.80 0.08 0.00 0.00 27.42 0.19 531 OUTLET PREVIOUS PIPE 1.74 0.65 CB 1 IEX.#P-8 7.7 19 I8 0.012 19.92 19.99 1J66 438 0.30 26.79 0.09 26.88 0.2 � 0.06 0.30 036 27.24 I 0.98 20.97 0.09 1.30 0.12 0.00 0.00 27.26 0.46 5.77 OUTLET PREVIOUS PIPE 3.58 0.98 EX.#P-8 26.79 ' i I ' ; CB#SA TO CB#5 � ' ' i � CB SA CB 5 0.2 ' 78 12 0.012 24.09 24.67 0.785 0.23 0.00 27.78 0.00 27.79 0.2 0.00 0.00 0.00 27.79 020 24.87 '. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 27.79 0.41 2.12 'OiTIT.ET PREVIOUS PIPE ' 023 020 CB S 27.78 ; i i � � �� CB#6A TO CB#6 ' CB 6A CB 6 0.4 ; 133 12 0.012 24.46 24J9 ,0.785 U.47 0.00 27.92 0.01 27.94 0.2 0.00 0.00 0.00 I 27.94 0.20 24.99 0.00 0.00 ', 0.00 0.00 0.00 27.94 -0.54 2.15 OUTLET PREVIOUS PIPE 0.47 0.20 ,CB 6 ! ' 27.92 ' ' I , , i � CB#7B TO CB#7 ' CB 7B CB 7A ' 1.7 85 12 0.012' 2530 26.90 0.785 2.16 ' 0.07 28.12 I 0.16 28.28 0.2 , 0.01 0.07 0.09 2836 0.56 27.46 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2636 1.96 0.46 Oi1TLET PREVIOUS PIPE 2.16 0.56� CB 7A CB 7A 2.0 119 18 0.012' 24.80 2530 1.766 1.11 0.02 ' 28.01 0.04 28.04 0.2 ! 0.00 ' 0.02 0.02 28.07 0.48 25.78 0.07 1.70 0.12 0.00 0.00 28.12 0.32 132 OUTLEI' PREVIOUS PIPE ' 0.91 0.48 ,CB 7 ' I 28.01 ' � i � � I ' � ConveyQ �� ath: P: Ha st Partnera 36\Oeafgn Drawi gs Clvfl\Lot CDe\lot 1 St Re ort 325 6—L d—�79467B wfl Fl. � 4 07 11:1 A A R ttx.. — — AST St e: , • � � . . , M ANadjafi � � � O � � � D � � I / � N �J; � ,:.'!� i o' . � • d 1,1�` � j ; � Ui � � � Gl � g iV ''�`"� I �� J w � r i - � :-fa � i � � � b __ �.. \ � G) ,'� m (.� y l(�,� \I ��, -- . � � o �', .-C / ..., \ a ; �. \ \ \` N � � 1� O �� \� ��x� � :{I �i'r� /%�� .,� �. •� `; i: � --� �,y1 :�`` �', � � /� ;�NCn � ` ' O I ; , ,� � . . , ; , , � � �, . ...; � �, , � ; ; Z �„ � �J `\\,�p \ �� C,t J'�` � w � .-� � a � i ° � ��-`]I� �y? m (�� , _.. � ! � Yj /.� ..L��i� i i �� \\ Z �� '0 , � \ , 7� � � :��: �'" � - � � , �L A '� o " , Oo � , ,, ' � �, �, �� :, = � ��. �`, ��i i � Q �` �o w�� ` A� � \ � "' � � " , � � �� E; Z � ��'` .�1, `�' �� _', � � m ��, � � � �-1 � �� m , Z �'�� '��', �„ , (n � � \\ \ �� , , -1 � �' ,�' ,N V �, � ;:,, o ; . , �� 0 . � � , �1 . o , .�, ,; � . , _ ;' , , � , � � 1 �, ;l, �. �, , , I ; �yw, v \ � �� `� �� 'r � 't�� ," � �\ i �� -- - :�; � �-� _ � � ; � �_�\ ; ;� �__ . �., °� �;.--rn '� , .,. � ,�, _ , . �, � . , �, _ _ _ . --- � ' - .,, � , o , , , , , , ; _ ; �. , n o ` ` ,�� ti � ;�, ��, s��,,:. `�_ *, \ � � ' , ,� \` ' ,-,: a , `, ` � c� �� r- �� \�', �'� � ,,� g . �� ;. � � � �::;: i �li � � p ��, � ,- �� ,. - � i � �+ O�'�,;,� ,r�' �, � , ; `, � / � �� ` � o I;- \ � � v �"� "'�,: ' �' � �`�� \�� , ,�� -� � --� ' �.�- ��', , � " � � '�i''�� S.r- .�. � ,..... ,., i 1 '" ='' ,' �_. � .\ ,\' ; ; �: :..�- .. ..-. .. . �, , ...._ .__ .. . ..-r' ��- �`� _ _ =_ . , � , .� �__ �, ,\ �",..-- t ...--'' I � � . I ��; ;i PARKAVE N `,, , , �� ; � , , , � , _ �.,�., ;4_ _ ! . I__ i __ :_ 1_ i i_ .. N 0 _-_. �� V 1 � U� I p�1 0�.. —`--1 U _ � � O 1 � 8 7/25/O6 CHECKED BY: DRAWN BY.• AN APPRo�o er� HARVEST PARTNETS LAST EDIT.• 4 24 2007 PLOT DATE: 04 24 07 THE LANDING 9960 Yonts {711e Per1�1 ^ � DA TE BY REV REV1510N CK D APPR L O T 1 Bothdl, wuhinQton 88081-8098 �� 100-YR FLOOD MAP ��-� � RENTC)N WASHINCTON '�1O�O0m SCALE: PROJECT N0. DRAWING FILE NAME: �1O°1" ' °iN°"" 'a""yO" 'f'm1O'P'1ia°��'0�' 1"�f00' 32536-Land-Fl 4678 6.0 SPECIAL REPORTS AND STUDIES 6.0 Special Reports and Studies ➢ Kleinfelder, Supplemental Geotechnical Engineering Report, March 1, 2006. I W&I�Pacific,lnc. TIR The l.unding—HarvestParmers May 200 i 10 �� KLEINFELDER An empfo�•ce owned tompany January 5, 2007 Kleinfelder Project No. 66677 Harvest Partners clo Mr. Rob King R.C. Construction and Management Inc. 2503 88�'Avenue West ' Edmonds, WA 98026 Subject: Geotechnical Engineering Report The Landing Development: Pods 2, 3 and 4 Renton, Washington Dear Mr. King: This letter transmits one electronic copy and one hard copy o# our final geotechnical engineering report for the Pods 2, 3 and 4 portions of The Landing development in Renton, Washington. The atfached report includes a summary of our explorations and the site soil and groundwater conditions, and recommendations for design and construction of the planned improvements. This report supercedes our draft report dated July 15, 2005. A final geotechnical report was issued for Pod 1 on September 15, 2006, and for the adjacent Target parcel on May 11, 2006. Sincereiy, KLEINFELDER, INC. Y V 1 c.,,.�,_ Marcus Byers, P. . Senior Geotechnical Engineer Attachment: Geotechnical Engineering Report dated January 5, 2007 66677/SEA7R002.doc Page 1 of 1 January 5,20D7 Copyright 2007 Kleinfelder,Inc. KLCINFELDER 2405 140th:1venue NE, SuiteA101, Bellevue,VVA 930(l5 1-�25)5G�-4200 (4251 562-4201 tax KLEINFELDER EKPECT MORE•� Prepared for. Hanrest Partners c/o R.C. Construction and Management Inc. 2503 88th Avenue West Edmonds, WA 98026 Geotechnical Engineering Report The Landing Development Pods 2, 3 and 4 Renton, Washington Prepared by: ��s��, �� Marcus Byers, P.E. ` ,� � :.� ,�,;;� Senior Geotechnical Engineer � + " ~ �;�:,�� .—..� � � � �' \ — 1 .'t � _ ��'� � ,5�0'1 , � , ��:��. � - :`� ;,� _b � Bob L. Plum, P.E. � �� o-� Principal Geotechnical Engineer Kleinfelder, Inc. 2405 - 140th Avenue NE Suite A101 Bellevue, WA 98005 Phone: (425) 562-4200 Fax: (425) 562-4201 January 5, 2007 Copyright 2007 Kleinfelder, Inc. All Rights Reserved UNAUTHORIZED USE OR COPYING OF THIS DOCUMENT IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED BY ANYONE OTHER THAN THE CLIENT FOR THE SPECIFIC PROJECT. KLEINFELDER EXPECT MORE` i TABLE OF CONTENTS Page SUMMARY................................................................................................ ......1 ................ GENERAL 1 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS...............:....... .......................................................1 FOUNDATION DESIGN RECOMMENDATfONS..................................................2 OTHER DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS.............................................................3 CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS...........................................................3 1.0 1NTRODUCTION...................................................................................................4 1.1 GENERAL......................................................................:...........................4 '1.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION .........................................................................4 1.3 SCOPE OF SERVICES..............................................................................4 2.0 FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING .....................................6 2.1 FIELD EXPLORATION.............................................:.................................6 2.2 LABORATORY TESTING ..........................................................................6 3.0 S1TE CONDITIONS...............................................................................................6 3.1 SURFACE CONDITlONS...........................................................................6 3.2 REGIONAL GEOLOGY..............................................................................7 3.3 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ...................................................................7 3.3.1 General.............................................................................................7 I 3.3.2 Soif Types........................................... ..............................................9 3.3.3 Engineering Units...........................................................................10 3.3.2 Groundwater Conditions.................................................................10 4.0 CONCLUSiONS AND DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS....................................11 4.1 GENERAL................................................................................................11 4.2 SEISMIC CONSIDERATIONS .................................................................'[1 4.2.1 Code Based Design........................................................................11 4.2.2 Liquefaction....................................................................................12 4.2.3 Fault Rupture..................................................................................13 4.3 FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS....................................................13 4.3.1 Structure 204.............................................................................13 4.3.2 Remaining Structures................................................................14 4.3.3 Lateral Resistance..........................................................................16 4.4 FLOOR SL�4B RECOMMENDATIONS.....................................................17 4.5 DRAINAGE RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................17 4.6 EARTHWORK..........................................................................................17 4.6.1 Existing Subgrade Conditions ........................................................18 4.6.2 Excavation......................................................................................18 4.6.3 Grading Recommenda#ions............................................................19 4.7 STRUCTURAL FILL MATERIALS AND COMPACITON ..........................19 4.8 RETAINING WALLS........................:........................................................20 4.9 UTfLITY RECOMMENDATIONS..............................................................21 66677/SEA7ROD2.doc Page i of ii January 5,2007 Copyright 2007 Kleinfelder,Inc. I KLEINFELDE6Z EXP'cCT MORE� 4.10 STORM WATER VAULTS........................................................................21 4.11 TEMPORARY EXCAVATIONS, SLOPES AND DRAINAGE....................22 4.12 PAVEMENTS...........................................................................................23 4.13 PRELOAD SURCHARGE ........................................................................24 5.0 CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS.........................................................25 5.1 DRIVEN GROUT PILE INSTALLATION...................................................25 5.2 SUBGRADE PREPARATION...................................................................25 5.3 ADDITIONAL SERVICES........................................................................25 6.0 LIMITATIONS .....................................................................................................26 7.0 REFERENCES....................................................................................................27 FfGURES Figure 1 —Vicinity Map Figure 2 — Site and Exploration Plan Figure 3 — Pile Deflection Versus Depth Figure 4 — Pile Bending Moment Versus Depth Figure 5 — Pile Shear Versus Depth APPENDICES A Field Exploration B Geotechnical Laboratory Testing C Recommended Test Pile Program D Liquefaction Risk Regal Cinema Site E Important Information About Your Geotechnical Engineering Report � 6fi677/SEA7R002.doc Page ii of ii January 5,2007 Copyright 2007 Kleinfelder,Inc. KLEINFELDE €Z EXPECT MORE`- SUMMARY GENERAL This report presents the results of the geotechnical engineering study performed by Kleinfelder, Inc. (Kleinfelder) for the planned Pods 2, 3 and 4 portions of The Landing mixed use development in Renton, Washington. Specifically, design and construction recommendations are provided for structures 200 through 205, 300 through 310, 400 through 406 and storm water vaults and paving. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS The nature of the deposition of the soils underlying the site results in variable conditions with limited lateral or vertical continuiiy. The Pods 2, 3 and 4 portion of the project site is generally underlain by 6 to 12 feet of fill, which is underlain by highly variable, discontinuous layers and lenses of alluvial and lacustrine soils extending to the full depth explored, or over 140 feet. For engineering purposes, the subsurface conditions can be divided into three major units: . Upper Dense Fill: For pavement support purposes, this zone includes the upper few feet of very dense fifl, some of which consists of a 18- to 24- inch thick layer of recycled concrete derived from demolition of Boeing structures which occupied the s�te previously. This material is expected to provide an excellent subgrade for the asphalt pavement areas. . Upper Laose/Soft Soils (Includes some lower fill): This zone extends to a depth of about 40 to 70 feet in the Pod 2 and 3 areas, and, with some exceptions, extends to over 100 feet deep in the Pod 4 area. These materials are generally composed of loose/soft silty sands and organics with zones of compact sands. ' These soils are considered weak, compressible and/or susceptible to liquefaction. � . Lower Primarily Dense Sands: Below depths of about 40 to 70 feet (locally deeper), the soils can be assumed to be composed primarily of very dense sands with zones of sand and gravel. However, these dense soil layers can be thin or contain layers of softer or loose materials. fn the Pod 4 area, these dense layers generally range in thickness from about 5 to 15 feet. 66677/SEA7R�02.doc Page 1 of 27 January 5,2007 Copyright 2007,Kleinfelder,Inc. KLEINF � LDE �2 EXPECT MORE• The depth to groundwater is 6 to 10 feet below the ground surface based on piezometer readings in December 2005 and temporary excavations made for utility instaflation in the surrounding streets in 2006. FOUNDATION DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS . Foundation Tvqes: Structure 204 is underlain by 11 to 12 feet of inedium dense to dense sand and silt and the footprint of this structure has been preloaded with a surcharge to reduce the potential for static settlement. Shallow spread footings are appropriate for supporting this structure provided that the depth and size of the foundations are limited so that stresses induced below the dense upper crust are limited. . The remaining proposed structures are underlain by a thin crust of dense fill and then by the unit described as upper loose/soft soils; the main structural loads should be supported on a pile foundation bearing in the lower very dense granular soils. Several deep foundation types including driven and auger cast piles are feasible and have been considered for design. The DeWitt driven-grout pileT"' is also an appropriate pile type and the one that we understand #he owner is planning to utilize. Since the Dewitt driven-grout pileTM' is a proprietary pile type, pile design, incfuding the required driving resistances and depths will be developed in cooperation with the contractor and a pile load test program will be performed to verify pile capacities before production piles are installed. The contractor's design must reflect certain site characteristics including the potential for liquefaction-induced down drag loads in the upper 60 feet and the presence of some thin bearing layers that are underlain by softicompressible layers. . Lateral Load Resistance: Lateral load resistance for structure 204 can be developed as base friction between the footings and subgrade soil and passive pressures against buried portions of the foo#ings. Lateral load resistance for the pile supported structures can be developed as passive pressure against the pile caps and grade beams and in the lateral stiffness of the piles. Base friction cannot be relied upon for pile-supported structures. Section 4.3.3 presents design recommendations for laterai laad resistance, including effects of liquefaction. . Concrete Slab-On-Grade Floors: Subgrade for all Pod 2, 3 and 4 structures has been, or is in the process of being pre-loaded with a surcharge to reduce the 66677ISEA7R002.doc Page 2 of 27 January 5, 2007 Copyriahf 2007,Kleinfelder,Inc. KLEtNFELDER. EXP'cCT MORE` potential for static settlement and permit the floors to be supported on the subgrade without a need for piles. The floors will stilf be subject to potential liquefaction induced . settlement. Section 4.4 presents a discussion of slab-on-grade performance, design and construction. OTHER DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS The remaining sections of this report present general design recommendations rated to concrete slab-on-grade floors, under drains, retaining walls, earthwork, utilities, storm water vaults and pavements. CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS � Section 5.0 presents general geotechnica{ construction recommendations for driven grout piles and subgrade preparation. 66677/SEA7R002.doc Page 3 of 27 January 5, 2007 Copyright 2007,Kf>infelder,Inc. KLEINFEL � E � EXPECT MORE'-� 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 GENERAL This reporE presents the results of the geotechnical engineering study performed by Kleinfelder, Inc. (Kleinfelder) for the planned Pods 2, 3 and 4 portions of The Landing mixed use development in Renton, Washington. The Lading is located north of North 8tn Street between Logan Avenue North and Garden Avenue North in Renton, Washington, as shown on the Viciniiy Map, Figure 1. Specifically, Pods 2, 3 and 4 will be located between Park and Logan Avenues North and will comprise structures 200 through 205, 300 through 310 and 400 through 408. Additionally, the project wil! include construction of under ground utilities and storm water vaults, a large sign structure, and paving. The purpose of this report is to provide geotechnical data and recommendations suitable for design and construction of these structures. 1.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Based on the site plan provided by Harvest Partners on November 29, 2006, Pod 2, 3 and 4 will consist of the structures shown on the Site and Exploration Plan, Figure 2. Based on information provided by Mr. Eric Anderson of Magnusson Klemencic Associates, colurnn loads for the single-story retail structures are expected to be 112.5 kips or less and slab loads on the order of 125 psf or less. For the parking garage, structure 301, column dead loads are expected to be 400 kips and live loads 125 kips. Based on information provided by Mr. Jim Wiseman of Wiseman + Rohy Structural Engineers, the maximum anticipated vertical loads for the cinema, structure 300, are 250 kips at .columns and 12 kips/ft at walls. Based on infarmatian provided by Mr. Ken Rust of VLMK Consulting Engineers, the maximum anticipated vertical loads for the fitness center, structure 404, are 200 kips at interior columns and 170 kips at exterior columns; maximum lateral column loads are expected to be 14 kips. 1.3 SCOPE OF SERVICES Kleinfelder pertormed a preliminary geotechnical evaluation of The Landing project site during the summer of 2005, the results of which are presented in a preliminary report titled "Draft Geotechnical Engineering Report, Proposed Lakeshore Landing Development" and dated July 15, 2005. This report supercedes the July 15, 2005 report. A final geotechnical report was issued for Pod 1 on September 15, 2006, and for the adjacent Target parcel on May 11, 2006. Since completion of the preliminary report, Kleinfelder has provided the following geotechnical services: 66677/SEA7R002.doc Page 4 of 27 January 5, 2G�7 Copyright 2067,Kleinfelder,Inc. KLEfNFELDER EXPECT MORE° - , 1. Preliminary auger-cast pile design for cost estimating purposes; I! 2. Additional site exploration to fill in data gaps where the preliminary borings were widely spaced and where deeper data was considered necessary for completion of design-level analyses; 3. Devefopment of pad-specific recommendations for preload surcharges, , including monitoring of surcharge settlements providing direction for removal of the surcharges when apprapriate; 4. Evaluation of shal{ow subgrade along the alignment of Narth 10th Street, which will be an entirely new road through The Landing; 5. Development of design recommendations for storm water vaults to be constructed west of Park Avenue; 6. Consultation with DeWitt Construction to discuss site soil conditions and development of a recommended test pile program; and 7. Observation of placement and compaction of structural fill in building pads and around storm water vaults east of Park Avenue No�th. The scope of work compfeted for this project is in accordance with that presented in our May 15, 2006 proposal. It included a subsurface exploration program consisting of 20 mud rotary borings, in addition to. 5 drilled at the Target site; one cone penetration test (CPT) sounding, in addition to the 3 advanced at the Target site; laboratory testing, and engineering analyses to develop geotechnical recommendations; and preparation of this report. Information from previous geotechnical studies completed for the genera! project area has been utilized in preparing this report. These other studies included: . Draft Geotechnica! Engineering Report, Proposed Lakeshore Landing Development, Renton, Washington prepared by Kleinfelder dated July 15, 2005. . Geotechnical Report, South Lake Washington Roadway Improvements, Renton, Washington prepared by Kleinfelder dated January 23, 2006. . Supplemental Geotechnical Engineering Report, Proposed Target Facility, The Landing Development, 8th Street and Garden Avenue NE, Renton, WA prepared by Kleinfelder dated May 11, 2006. 66677/SEA7R002.doc Page 5 of 27 January 5,2007 Copyright 2007, Kleinfelder, Inc. KLEIRJF � � D � �& � EXPECT MORcE . Geotechnical Engineering Report, The Landing Development: Pod 1, Renton, Washington, prepared by Kfeinfelder dated September 15, 2006. 2.0 FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTtNG 2.1 FIELD EXPLORATION In total, all phases of investigation for The Landing development have included 77 borings, 4 cone penetration test {CPT) sounding and 2 test pits. In addition, several excavations made during site grading and excavation of material for preload surcharges has been observed by us. All explorations were performed under full-time observation of a Kleinfelder geotechnical engineer or geologist. The exploration locations were determined in the field by taping distances from site features and should be considered approximate. The site layout and exploration locations. are shown on the Site and Exploration Plan, Figure 2. Appendix A presents a summary of our exploration program incfuding boring and cone penetration test logs. 2.2 LABORATORY TESTING Laboratory testing was conducted on selected samples obtained from the borings to help characterize the site soils and determine relevant engineering and index properties. The tests were conducted in general accordance with appropriate American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) Standards and the results are presented in Appendix B and displayed on the boring logs in Appendix A, as appropriate. 3.0 SITE CONDITIONS 3.1 SURFACE CONDITIONS The general project area is bordered on the north by Lake Washington, on the west by the Cedar River, which is located about '/ mile from the site and flows north into Lake Washington, on the east by Interstate 405, and on the south by commercial and residential development that extends into downtown Renton. . The project area is primarily used for retail and industrial purposes. The Pods 2, 3 and 4 portions of site are bordered on the north and west by Logan Avenue North, on the south by North 8th Street, on the east by Park Avenue North. The site is relatively flat and ranges in elevation from approximately 27 to 30 feet (Mean Sea Le�el Datum, MSL) with no trending slope; the average elevation of the site is approximately EI. 29 feet. 66677/SEA7R002.doc Page 6�f 27 January 5,2007 Copyright 2007,Kfeinfelder,lnc. KLEINFELDEP EXPECT MORE° Much of the Pods 2, 3 and 4 area was previously occupied by a Boeing manufacturing building. The building was demolished and the site covered with an 18- to 24-inch thick layer of crushed concrete derived from the demolished building. Pife caps for the structure were also demolished and the steel pipe piles were left in place with tops located approximately 2 to 5 feet below the existing graund surface. 3.2 REGIONAL GEOLOGY The project sife is located at the north end of the Cedar River Valley approximately '/ mile from where the river enters Lake Washington. Post-glacial geologic conditions at the site are dictated by the presence of Lake Washington and the Cedar River. The channel of the Cedar River is believed to have migrated.across the full width of the �alley several times since the end of the last Puget Sound glaciation. The river used to flow out of Lake Washington before the level of the lake was lowered about 23 feet. Accordingly, site soils are expected to consist of a variable mixture of alluvial (river} and lacustrine ()ake) deposits. In general, the river is slow flowing near the lake; therefore, low energy alluvial anci over-bank deposits are expected. These generally include clay, silt, peat, organic silt and sand and are typically loose and soft. Lacustrine deposits are lake deposits deposited in a very low energy environment and generally consist of silt and clay and are typically very loose and soft. Organics can be found within both types of deposits and can range from non-fibrous plant matter to fibrous partially decayed timber. Because of the migration of the Cedar River channel and the inherent variability of alluvial deposits, site soils are expected to be highly variable. General geologic information for the project site was obtained from the Geologic Map of King County (Booth, et. al., in press). According to the map, suficial soils at the project site consist of modified land, or fill. Su�ciat soils near the site that are not covered with fill are mapped as Holocene AUuvium. Holocene Alluvium is a post-glacial river deposit that has not been consolidated by glaciers. 3.3 SUBSURFACE COND{TIONS 3.3.9 General As discussed in Section 3.2, the nature of the deposition of the soils tends to result in variable conditions with limited lateral or vertical continuity. The Pods 2, 3 and 4 areas are underlain by 6 to 12 feet of fill underlain by highly variabfe, discontinuous layers and 66677lSEA7R002.doc Page 7 of 27 January 5,2007 Copyright 2007, Kleinfelder,Inc. KLEIf'�fFELDER � EXPECT MORE° lenses of alluviaf and lacustrine soils extending to the full depth explored by our borings, ar over 140 feet. In the vicinity of Pod 2, structures 2Q0 through 205, the generally continuous loose/soft native soifs exfend to depths of about 40 to 70 feet. Soils below these depths vary from dense to very dense or stiff with some layers of looselsoft zones. The dense to very dense' or stiff soils are generally 15 to 40 feet thick, with a few locations.over. 50 feet thick. ln the eastern portion of Pod 3, structures 300 and 306 through 308, the generally continuous loose/soft native soils extend to depths of about 60 to 70 feet. Below these depths, a fairly consistent layer of dense to very dense or stiff soils was encountered. Where explorations terminated in these soils, at least 15 feet �f this material was encountered. Where explorations extended through this materiaf, it was found to be at least 20 feet thick. In the western po�tion of Pod 3, structures 301 through 305, the generally continuous loose/soft native soils extend to depths of about 40 to 65 feet. Below these depths, a fairly consistent layer of dense to very dense or stiff soifs was encountered. Where explorations terminated in these soils, at least 17 feet of this material was encountered. , Where explora#ions extended through this material, it was found to be at least 24 feet thick, with a few locations over 40 feet thick. In the western portion of Pod 4, structure 404, the generally continuous foose/soft native soils extend to depths of about 40 feet. Below this depth, a layer of dense to very dense soil was encountered and extended to the bottom of the borings, or about 20 feet thick. In the central and eastern portion of Pod 4, structures 400 through 403 and 404 through 407, the generally continuous loose/soft native soils extend to depths ranging fram 75 to 125 feet. Dense to very dense or stiff layers are generally less frequent, thinner, and vary in depth considerably between adjacent explorations. In most instances, these soils are about 10 feet thick, or fess, and are underlain by very soft deposits, making them generally poor for supporting end-bearing piles. Based on SPT (Standard Penetration Tests} values generally over 50 blows/foot (b/ft), the granular soils below 50 to 60 feet appear to be advanced deposits over ridden by the glaciers. However, because the lower blow count material including some soft soils fi6677/SEA7R002.doc Page 8 of 27 January 5,2007 Copyright 2007,Kleinfelder,Inc. KLEINFELDE �Z EXPECT MORE` and organics were encountered within these soiis even at depths over 125 feet, the soils are considered geologically recessional in nature and are not thought to be glacialiy overridden. 3.3.2 Soil Types The site soils can be grouped into a total of five different types as follows: • Fill: Fi11 material was encountered at the ground surface or below the pavement in all borings and generally extended ta depths ranging from 6 to 10 feet, but extended to depths of 11 to 12 feet below structure 204. Over much of the area, the top of the fill layer consisted of an 18- to 24- inch thick layer of recycled concrete derived from demolition of Boeing structures. The remaining fill generally consisted of silty sand with gravel or sandy silt with gravel. � . Orqanic Silt and Peat: The borings encountered layers of peat and organic silt ranging from less than a foot to over 10 feet thick. Wthin the upper 50 to 60 feet, these soils were generally soft to medium stiff with SPT blow counts in the range of 2 to 6 blft. Encountered be{ow depths greater than about 60 feet, the organic layers were generally medium stiff to very stiff with SPT values in the range of 10 to 25 b/ft. The geologic explanation of these stiff organic soils is not welf understood but may have involved drying and desiccation in a near surface environment before being buried under sediment. . Clay: Severat borings encountered 5- to 10-foot thick clay layers at depths below 100 feet. The clay was very soft to soft with SPT values in the range of 1 to 6 b/ft. . Silt and Siltv Sands: The borings encountered zones consisting of silt, sandy silt and silty sands. These soil fypes were predominate in the upper 40 to 70 feet and decreased in frequency below these depths. !n the upper 40 to 70 feet, the soils tended to be very loose to loose with SPT values in the range of 2 to 10 b/ft. At depth, the material became medium dense to dense with SPT values in the range of 10 to 30 b/ft. • Sand and Gravel: The borings encountered zones consisting of clean sand and sand and gravel. These soil types were limited in the upper 40 to 70 feet but were more predominant below these depths. In the upper 40 to 70 feet, the soils tended to be medium dense to dense with SPT values in the range of 10 to 30 66677/SEA7R002.doc Page 9 of 27 January 5,2007 Copyrighf 2007, Kleinfelder,Inc. KLEINFELDER EXPECT MORE° � b/f�. At depth, the material became dense to very dense with SPT values generally over 30 bl/ft. 3.3.3 Engineering Uni�.s For engineering purposes, the subsurface conditions can be divided into three major engineering units: . Upper Dense Filf: For pavement support purposes, this zone includes the upper few feet of very dense fill, some of which consists of a 18- to 24- inch thick layer of recycled concrete derived from demolition of Boeing structures which occupied the site previously. This material is expected to provide an excellent subgrade for the asphalt pavement areas. . Upper Loose/Soft Soils (Includes sorne lower fill): This zone extends to a depth of about 40 to 70 feet in the Pod 2 and 3 areas, and, with some exceptions, extends to over 100 feet deep in the Pod 4 area. These materials are generally composed of loose/soft silty sands and organics with zones of compact sands. These soils are considered weak, compressible andlar susceptible to fiquefaction. . Lower Primarily Dense Sands: Below a depth of about 40 to 70 feet (locally deeper), the soils can be assumed to be composed primarily of very dense sands with zones of sand and gravel. However, these dense soil layers can be thin or contain layers of softer or loose materials. In the Pod 4 area, these dense layers generally range in thickness from about 5 to 15 feet 3.3.2 Groundwater Conditions The depth to groundwater was not identified in the majority of borings due to use of mud rotary drilfing techniques. Mud rotary drilling involves circulation of a drilling fluid within the bo�ehole, thereby obscuring groundwater seepage thaf may otherwise be observed in samples and on equipment. However, as part of our work for the adjacent roadway improvement report, we installed and monitored nine piezometers around the general site area. Based on piezometer readings obtained in December 2005 for the adjacent roadway project, the depth to groundwater is 6 to 10 feet below ground surface. Groundwater , levels will fluctuate depending the time of the year and are likely to be highest during the wet winter months. It should be noted that Kleinfefder did not install groundwater level 66677/SEA7R002.doc Page 10 of 27 January 5,20D7 I Copyright 2007,K1=infelder, Inc. , KlEINFELDER ; EXPECT MORE` i piezometers, nor did we perForm a hydrogeologic evaluation at this site. The annual I variabifity in groundwater depth at this site has not been measured, but an annual high � : ground water level of about Elevation 23 is likely. 4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS 4.1 GENERAL As discussed in Section 3.3, structure 204 is underlain by 11 to 12 feet of inedium dense to very dense sand and gravel. The remaining structures in Pods 2, 3 and 4 ' areas are underlain by relatively deep zones of loose/soft soils composed primarily of ' sifty sands and organics and are considered weak, compressible and susceptible to ' liquefaction. Below these upper soifs, the borings generally encountered a zone of very dense sands with zones of sand and gravel. However, these lower soils can contain zones of inedium stifflstiff organics, compact silt, and soft/stiff clay. We recommend that the planned structures be founded on DeWitt driven-grout pilesTa' that bear in the soils primarify comprised of very dense sands. Due to the presence of some variabfe layers of organics and soft to stiff clay in the lower dense sand, the piles should be designed, in our opinion, as friction piles with relatively low end bearing capacity. In addition, the pile design should account for potential liquefaction induced down drag. Structure 204 can be supported on shallow spread footings that bear on the medium dense to very dense fill soils. Static settlement of the compressible soils underlying these structures and for the floor slabs of afl four structures has been mitigated by application of preload surcharges. The following sections present recammendations for seismic design considerations, pile foundation design and construction, floor slabs, earthwork, drainage, retaining walfs, storm water vaults and pavements. 4.2 SEISMIC CONSIDERATIONS 4.2.9 Code Based Design I, We understand that the project will be designed in accordance with the 2003 1BC. I Portions of the site soils are liquefiable and therefore the site is classified as Site Cfass F, which can require that a site-specific response spectrum be developed. Section 1615.1 of the IBC does not require that a site-specific response spectrum be 66677lSEA7R002.doc Page 11 of 27 Januay 5,2D07 Copyright 2007,Kleinfelder,Inc. lCLEINFELDER EXPECT MORE`� developed unfess the period of the structure will be greater than %2 second. Based on our understanding of the proposed structures and conversations with the structurai engineers, we anticipate that the building periods will be less than '/z second and a site-specific response spectrum is not necessary. Accordingly, in this case, the IBC will allow for use of Site Class D. Table 1 presents seismic coefficients for use with the General Procedure described in Section 1615 of the 2003 IBC. The seismic ground motion procedure contained in IBC 2003 is based upon a Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCE) with a 2 percent probability af exceedance in 50 years (i.e. recurrence interval of approximately 2500 years). Ground motions for the MCE in the 2003 IBC are linked to probabilistic earthquake hazard mapping efforts that have been conducted by the United Stated Geologic Survey (Frankel, et. al., 1996, 2002). Parameters presented in Table 1 are based on the latitude and longitude lookup for the 2002 maps provided on the USGS web site. Table 1: Recommended Design Parameters for 2003 IBC - Shoit-Period 1-Second= Design Spectral - Site � Control Periods - � ; � {0:2-sec) ; Penod = ,Response - _, -Coefficients, (sec) Desi n PGA Site Class Spectral i Spectral: Parameters{g) ��)� - Acceleration, Acceleration, Ss�9) : � _S� �9)�_ ' Fa F�. Sos : So, ';.To _ T$ ,. D 1.45 0.50 1.00 1.50 0.97 0.50 0.10 0.51 0.39 I Notes 1. Design PGA (g) =Sos/2.5 4.2.2 Liquefaction Seismic design parameters in the 2003 IBC are based on a Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCE) with ground motions having a 2 percent chance of being exceeded in a 50 years. This corresponds to an event with a return period of about 2,50Q years. As a minimum, all structures must meet fife safety requirements when liquefaction is considered for the 2,500 year event. Based on the soil fypes and !ow SPT values, the native sand and silty sands in the upper 50 to 60 feet have a high probability of liquefying under the design event. Liquefaction potential was estimated using the latest available, widely accepted empirical relationships that relate SPT blaw counts to liquefaction resistance (Youd et. 65677/SEA7ROD2.doc Page 12 of 27 January 5,2D�7 Copyr�ght 2007,Kleinfelder,Inc. KLEiNFELDER EXPECT HORE^ al, 2001). The corresponding ground surface settlement was estimated using a volumetric strain method (Ishihara and Yoshimine, 1992). Under the 2,500-year design event, ground surface seftlements could range from be on the order of 2 to 6 inches, or more. Liquefaction induced settlement estimates assume a uniform liquefiable layer and should only be considered approximate. Additional discussion of liquefaction estimates, particularly for structure 300 is presented in Appendix D. 4.2.3 Fault Rupture In our opinion, the probability af fault rupture at the site is low because there are no documented active faults near the project site. Landslidinq and Lateral Spreadinq In our opinion, the probability of landsliding or lateral spreading at the site is low due to the relative flatness of the site and lack of a widely continuous layer of liquefiable soil. 4.3 FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS 4.3.1 Structure 204 Structure 204 may be supported on shallow spread footings that bear on the medium dense to very dense fill soils. The footprint of this structure has been covered with a ' preload surcharge to reduce the potentiaf for static settlement of the structures and floor slabs. Recommended combinations of bearing pressures and footing sizes have been developed through collaboration with the project structural engineer, Eric Anderson of Magnusson Klemencic Associates, and have been chosen to limit the stress on the very loose to loose soils encountered below the fill to less than the pressure that was induced in these soils by the preload surcharge. We recammend that foundations bearing on the medium dense to very dense fill be sized for a maximum allowable bearing pressure of 4,000 psf and that the maximum footing width be 7 feet. The aflowable bearing pressure may be increased by 1l3 when considering earthquake and wind transient loading conditions. The footings should bear at least 18 inches below the lowest adjacent finished grade and have minimum widths of 18 and 24 inches for continuous strip and isolated column footings, respectively. Settlement of buifding foundations is expected to be low due the preload surcharge that was previously placed over the building footprint. At most, settlements are expected to be 1 inch, or less, and will essentially occur as the structures are constructed. (n our 66677/SEA7R002.doc Page i 3 oi 27 January 5,2D07 Copyright 2D07,Kleinfelder,fnc. KLEINFELDE6� EXPECT MORE6 opinion, foundation drains are not necessary. Subgrade prepara#ion for spread footings should be performed in accordance with Section 5.2. 4.3.2 Remaining Structures Structures other than 204 should be supported on a pife foundation bearing in fhe lower medium dense to very dense granular soiis. Several deep foundation fypes including driven and auger cast piles are feasible and have been considered for design. The DeWitt driven-grout pile'-"' is also an appropriate pile #ype and the one that we understand the owner is pianning to use. Since the Dewitt driven-grout pi{eT"" is a proprietary pife type, pile design, including the required driving resistances and depths will be developed in cooperation with the contractor. Based on discussions with Mr. Guy Banks of the DeWitt Foundation Company,� we understand that 14-inch diameter piles can typically achieve allowable capacities of about 1Q0 tons with 10 to 12 feet of penetration into 4Q/bpf material. The contractor's design mus# re#fect ce�tain site characteristics including the potential for liquefaction induced down drag loads in the upper 40 to 70 feet and the presence of some thin bearing layers that are underlain by soft/compressible layers. A test pile program will be perFormed to ver'rfy piie capacity prior to installation of production piles. Appendix C presents our test pile program recommendations. � �I, In general, we anticipate that piles in the Pod 2 and 3 areas will encounter an adequate thickness of bearing soils to be designed assuming a significant end-bearing capacity, in addition to friction. In the Pod 4 area, the location of the softer, looser zones is variable and does not appear to be laterally continuous, the pile capacity calculations for this area need to assume that some zones of organics and soft clays may be present and the piles shou{d be designed as friction piles with a relatively low end bearing capacity. In addition, piling support should be developed below any zones that can potentially liquefy. Based upon our review of the bormgs in the vicinity of the structures, we have estimated the pile lengths required to develop the design capacities. These estimates are summarized in Table 2. Due to the potentiai for variability in the subsurface conditions, some piles possibly could meet refusal above the desired bearing level, or for other reasons, not appear to be suitably founded. Consequently, an additionaf pile, or piles, possibly may be required at some locations. In cases where additional piles are required, the pile cap - may have to be redesigned. Determination of fhe need for additional piles would be ' ' 66677/SEA7R002.doc Page 14 of 27 January 5,2007 Copyright 2007, Kleinfetder,1nc. KLEINFELDER EXPECT MORE^ based on an interpretation of the pile driving records. Due to the uncertainty in required total pile lengths, we recommend that the bid for foundation construction be based upon a unit price. Table 2: Estimated Pile Lengths Assuming 115 kip Design Load - Estimated Depth to Estimated Pile Length ; ; Structure - -Upper-Most Bearing Assuming 10 feet _ - - - Layer of Soils (feet} Embedment into Bearing* - : _ , � 200 60 to 70 70 to 80 201 50 60 202 60 70 203 70 80 204 . Shallow Spread Footings 205 �0 60 300 50 to 70 60 to 70 301 40 to 50 48 to 58 302 — 304 50 60 305 65 75 306 50 to 60 60 to 70 307 — 308 70 80 400—403 Primarily friction piles 90 to 100 404 40 50 405 —4Q6 40 to 60 50 to 70 407 ! Primarily friction piles 90 *Length estimates to be evaluated based on test pile program and actual driving conditions. Pile Load Tesf: A test pile program wilf be conducted prior to the start of construction, under the full-time observation of Kleinfelder, and final pile driving criteria and lengths will be determined under Kleinfelder's direction, accordingly. Appendix C presents a test pile program recommended by Kleinfelder. However, since development of this program, pile driving records for the Fai�eld site, located immediately east of this site, have been obtained and are under review. Based on this, Kleinfelder may recommend changing the location of some test piles. 66677/SEA7R002.doc Page 15 of 27 January 5,2007 Copyright 2007,Kleinfelder,Inc. KLEINFElDER EXPECT MORE� 4.3.3 Lafera!Resisfance Lateral load resistance can be developed as passive pressures against the footings and pile caps and in the lateral stiffness of the piles. Slab and spread footing base friction i shoufd only be used for structure 204. Base friction may be used only for portions of the loading dock retaining walls that rest on grade without pile support. For resisting lateral loads we recommend the following: . Slidinq Resistance: Allowable sliding resistance between subgrade soils and portions of the structure that rest on grade can be evaluated using a coefficient of friction of 0.46. This allowable value incorporates a factor of safety of 1.5 based on an ultimate coefficient of friction of 0.70. . Passive Pressures: Allowable passive pressures on the sides of the footings, pile caps, and portions of the loading dock retaining wall below finished grade can be � calculafed assuming a fluid with a density of 250 pcf with a 1/3 increase for transient loads. This alfowable value includes a factor of safety of 2.0 and assumes that any backfill against the foundation elements wifl be properly compacted as discussed in Section 4.7. For exterior foundation elements, the , upper 18-inches should be neglected unless the paving extends up to the ' building. Mobilization of the passive pressure will require a lateral deflection of about 0.02H where H is the height of the below grade portion of the structure. The deflectio�s required to mobilize passive resistance are generally higher than those required to mobilize lateral pile resistance. Kleinfelder should be contacted to provide an assessment of displacement compatibility if both passive pressure and lateral pile resistance are utilized in design for the same structure. . Lateral Pile Resistance: The lateral resistance on vertical piles was evaluated using the program LPILE, which models the load-deformation behavior of the soil-pile system. The analyses assume a 14-inch diameter concrete pile with 6 number 8 reinforcing bars, a fixed-head condition, and a vertical load of 100 kips applied to the top of the pile. The soil profile used in our analyses consisted of a dense upper crust 7 feet thick. Below this depth, soft soils were assumed. Intermittent layers of sand were modeled as soft cfay to simulate lateral pile behavior for the liquefied case. Plots of pile head deflection, bending moment and shear versus depth are presented in Figures 3 through 5. 66677/SEA7R002.doc Page 16 of 27 January 5,2007 Copyright 2007,Kleinfelder,Inc. � K � EINFELDEEt EXPECT MORE• 4.4 FLOOR SLAB RECOMMENDATIONS Concrete sfab-on-grade floors are appropriate for the planned structures because the potential for static settlement has been mitigated by placement of a preload surcharge. Additional discussion of the preload is presented in Section 4.12. The concrete slab-on-grade floors will be subject to liquefaction induced settlement under the design earthquake. Such settlement would likefy result in damage ranging from minor cracking requiring patching to complete demolition and replacement. We understand that this option is preferred by Harvest Partners over pile supported structural floor slabs due to the initial costs. We recommend that all slabs be underlain by a capillary break consisting of 3/4 inch minus welf graded crushed base course materiai containing no more than 5 percent passing the number 200 U.S. standard size wet sieve. Typically, we recommend a minimum 6-inch thickness to account for variances in constructed thickness and ensure effective capillary break performance. We understand that a GPS controlled grader will be used to achieve a precisely graded building pad and that a 4-inch capillary break thickness is desired as a cost saving measure. Use of a 4-inch thickness is acceptable from a geotechnical standpoint, provided that the subgrade will be graded precisely and special care taken to prevent the formation of areas where the capillary break is less than 4 inches. In areas where the installed capillary break is fhinner, there will be an increased potential for moisture to come into contact with the bottom of slabs. Typically, we recommend the capillary break be overlain by a vapor barrier consisting of a minimum 10-mil plastic sheet. lNe understand that 6-mil vapor barrier will be used as a cost saving measure and concur that this is acceptable provided that the reduced durability is taken into account during constructian and that measures are taken to prevent puncture of the vapor barrier. 4.5 DRAiNAGE RECOMMENDATIONS Building underdrains are generally not required since the slabs will be at or above the adjacent exterior ground surface. Footing drains are recommended only adjacent to a depressed loading dock area as discussed in Section 4.8. 4.6 EARTHWORK 65677/SEA7P.002.doc Page 17 of 27 January 5,2007 Copyright 2007,Kleinfelder,I.�c. KLEINFELDER EXPECT MORE° 4.6.� Exisfing Subgrade Conditions The buifding pads were constructed over the past year by placing and compacting recycled concrete, asphalt and base course grindings to establish subgrade. In general, site grades were raised about 2 feet or less. Subgrade exposed during construction of the building pads and other site work, including demolition of old utilities, consisted of a variable mixture of silt, sand, gravel _ and recycled concrete materiaf. The subgrade was very compact as evidenced by firm and unyielding perFormance and lack of rutting under heavy construction equipment traffic including scrapers and off-road dump trucks. Excavation was accomplished by a large track-hoe excavator with ripping teeth and a D-9 Bulldozer. Fill placed to raise the building pads was evaluated by Kleinfelder on a perFormance basis rather than by density testing due to the highly variable grain size content that would have made re(iable testing difficult. Pad earthwork was observed on a part-time basis. Based on visual evaluations, the fill consisted of a well-graded mixture of sand, gravel and recycled asphalt and concrete, and was placed in lifts with a maximum thickness of approximately 8-inches. The fill was trafficked by scrapers and continuously compacted during placement with a ride-on doubfe smooth drum roller. Following construction of the pads, the preload surcharges were placed and compacted. The surcharges extended approximately 6 feet above the finished floor elevation, or about 7 feet above the pad level, and beyond the edges of the pads by at least 5 feet. After the settlement period, the preload surcharges were removed and the exposed pad soils re-compacted to repair minor surface disturbance. During prolonged heavy rains, the pads have remained firm and provided solid support for drilling equipment. In our opinion, unless disturbed, the pads will provide adequate support for construction activates and material !ay down areas. 4.6.2 Excavation Kleinfelder performed part-time observation of excavation and demolition of the existing storm water utilities within the building pad. The excavations encountered dense to very dense fill soils that exhibited a cemented behavior. Excavation for site utilities will encounter the dense to very dense building pad and pre-existing fill soils. These soils will require significant excavation effort. We recommend use of large track-hoe excavators, such as a Komatsu PC300, with narrow buckets and/or ripping teeth. Rubber tired backhoes will generally be inefficient at excavating through the hard layer 66677/SEA7ROD2.doc Page 18 of 27 January 5,2007 Copyright 2007,Kleinfelder,Inc. KLEINFELDER ' EXPECT MOREf I �, 1 I of fill soils and the contractor should be aware of these potentially difficult excavation I conditions. 4.6.3 Grading Recommendafions The site is essentially flat, thus, design permanent cut and fill slopes are not required. We anticipate that fills to re-esfiablish grade around the building pad wi(I be on the order of 2 feet or less. Typicafly, the recommended maximum landscape. slopes would be 3H:1V, depending on landscape requirements. . 4.7 STRLiCTURAL FILL MATERIALS AND COMPACITON All material to be placed in parking lots and below structures should be considered structural fill. Structural fll should cansist of well-graded, free-draining sand and gravel free from organics or other deleterious matter and have a maximum particle size of 6 inches or less. We anticipate that any materiaf graded from the existing pad will be suitable for use as structural fill. Imported structural fill material should conform to Section 9-03.14(1), Gravel Borrow, of the WSDOT Standard Specifrcations. The contractor should submit samples of each of the required earthwork materials to the geotechnical engineer for evaluation and approval prior to use. The samples should be subrnitted at least 4 days prior to their use and sufficiently in advance of the work to allow the contractor to identify alternative sources if the material proves unsatisfactory. Structural fill should be moisture conditioned to within 3 percent of the optimum moisture content prior to compaction and should be placed in maximum 12-inch thick loose lifts. All structural fill should be compacted to a dense and unyielding condition and to the minimum percentages of the modified Proctor maximum dry density as determined per ASTM D1557 presented in Table 3. 6o577/SEA7R002.d�c Page 19 of 27 January 5,2007 Copyright 2007,K4einfelder, lnc. KLEINFELDER EXPECT MORE° ' Table 3: Minimum Compaction Requirements Minimum Area Percentage Compaction Required Fill befow sidewalks 95 Pavement subgrade within 2 feet of finished subgrade 95 Pavement subgrade more than 2 feet below finished subgrade 90 Trench backfill placed within 4 feet of finished subgrade 95 j Trench backfi{I placed more than 4 feet below finished subgrade 90 II 4.8 RETAINING WALLS �I The site is essentially flat thus retaining walls will generally not be required. Localfy, such as adjacent to the loading dock area, low retaining walls may be required. The i, walls can be designed based on the following: I . Active Earth Pressure (wall free to rotate): Design based on a fluid with a density of 35 pcf plus any surcharge loads. �, . At Rest Earth Pressure (wall not free to rotate): Design based on a fluid with a �I density of 55 pcf plus any surcharge loads. . Surcharqes: Surcharges due to floor loads shoufd be accounted for by adding an additional foot of wall height. Surcharges due to traffic loads should be accounted for by adding an additional two feet of wall height. . Lateral Resistance: See section 4.3.4. Where lightly loaded screening walls are constructed, in areas that have been pre-loaded, they may be supported on shallow spread footings. These walls should not be connected to the pile supported structures, to allow for minor settlement, which is expected to be on the order of 1-inch, or less. An allowable bearing pressure of 1,000 psf is appropriate, and may be increased buy 1/3 to account for transient loading conditions. We recommend a minimum footing embedment of 18 inches and a minimum footing width of 24 inches. 66677ISEA7R002.doc Page 2D of 27 January 5,2007 Copyright 2007,Kleinfelder,Inc. KLEINFELDER EXPECT MORE� 4.9 UTILITY RECOMMENDATIONS i Utilities can be designed in general accordance with the City of Renton Standards, unless modifications are recommended herein. � As discussed in Section 4.2, there is a potential for liquefaction-induced settlement at � the site on the order of 6 inches, or more. For structure 204, that is entirely supported � on shallow subgrade soils, the utilities and structure will generally undergo similar settlements. For the remaining structures that will be pile supported, any portion of the utilities that run through pile caps or grade beams may be impacted by settlement of the ' ground adjacent to pile supported portions of the structure. To minimize the risk for utility damage, the design should use flexible connections wherever a utifity runs . � through a portion of the structure that is pile supported. Liquefaction induced settlement is likely to be non-uniform and may result in some utility damage after a major seismic event. These types of risks are normally accepted by the owners since it is considered uneconomical to eliminate the risks. However, the risks can be reduced by providing flexible pipes and connections as appropriate. 4.10 STORM WATER VAULTS We understand that storm water vaults will be constructed on the west side of Park Avenue and that the vaults will be founded at about Elevation 16 to 18 feet, or about 12 to 14 feet below the final ground surface. Bea�ing soils at these depths are generally soft silt, peat or loose sand; therefore, we recommenc! an allowable bearing pressure of 1,200 psf be used for design of footings or mats. The subgrade should be covered with a geotextile for stabilization conforming to the requirements of Section 9-33 Table 3 Stabilization, of the WSDOT Standard Specifrcations. A minimum of 6 inches of crushed rock should be placed over the geotextile to provide a suitable surface to support casting the foundatioris. The crushed rock should be compacted to the extent practical without softening the subgrade. Assuming that the on-site .soils are used for backfill, we recommend designing the vaults for an at-rest earth pressure based on a fluid with a density of 65 pcf above the ground water table and 93 pcf below the water table. The actual burial depth should be used to calculate earth pressures, as opposed to the height of the structure. A design ground water elevation of 23 feet is recommended. 65677/SEA7R002.doc Page 21 of 27 January 5, 20G7 Copyright 2�07,Kleinfelder, In�. KLEINFELDER . EXPECT MORE` A density of 135 pcf should be assumed for fill placed over the vaults. We understand that H25 traffic loading wifl be assumed, or a minimum of 150 psf, on top of the vaults. We understand that lateral surcharge loads due to traffic will be determined in accordance with standard H25 traffic loading design charts. The design should account for buoyancy and uplift based on the design ground water elevation. Buoyancy and uplift may be resisted by the dead weight of the structures, soii cover, and 150 psf skin friction acting down and distributed along portions of the structure above the design ground water elevation. We understand that a pressure relief valve may be installed to prevent build up of unbalanced hydrostatic pressures as a'n afternative ta designing for buoyancy and uplift. A uniform rectangular seismic surcharge equal to 7H, where H is the height of the wall, was provided for vault design. In our experience, utility vaults designed for at-rest earth pressures do not include a seismic surcharge. 4.11 TEMPORARY EXCAVATlONS, SLOPES AND �RAINAGE In general, there will be limited cut or fill slopes except as required for utilities or to place foundation elements. All excavations and slopes must comply with applicable local safety regulations. Construction site safeiy is the sole responsibility of the Contractor, who shall also be solely responsible for the means, mefhods, and sequencing of construction operations. The contractor should be responsible for the safety of personne[ working in utifity trenches. We recommend all utility trenches, but par�icularly those greater than 4 feet in depth, be suppo�ted in accordance with OSHA regulations. The contractor is also responsible to maintain a dry excavation including all utility work. This may require dewatering for the deeper utiiities. The contractor should be made responsible for insuring proper drainage of surface runoff during construction. The contractor should maintain grades such that there.is not unwanted ponding of water anywhere on #he site. AIf colfected water should be conveyed under control to a positive and permanent discharge system, such as a storm sewer. The contractor should be required ta submit in writing their plan for construction drainage. 6557?lSEA7R�02.doc Page 22 of 27 January S,2007 Copyright 2007,Kleinfelder,Inc. KlEI NFELDER EXPECT MORE� 4.12 PAVEMENTS A majority of the Pod 2, 3 and 4 area site is currently unpaved. The existing subgrade soils are generally very dense and are anticipated to provide good support to the new pavements. For pavements supporting low valumes of traffic, such as parking lots, minirnum structural sections are often governed by constructability concerns and are designed, in part, to resist environmental distresses. We have provided standard pavement section recommendations and alternative minimum pavement section recommendations, While the alternative minimum pavement sections may prove adequate from the standpoint of supporting traffic, less protection against environmental distresses will be provided, and good construction practices become more important. In areas where the pavements will be subject only to loading from passenger vehicles, and not heavy trucks, reduced pavement sections will be appropriate provided the following conditions exist: . Pavement subgrade soils are very dense and unyielding when proof rolled with a fully-loaded dump truck; . Subgrade evaluation and proof-rolling are performed under full-time observation of a Kleinfelder geotechnical engineer; . Any soft or yielding areas are over-excavated to the depth determined by ! K(einfelder, . Subgrade is graded to provide proper drainage with no areas where standing water could form within the overlying base course rock; . Special care will be taken during subgrade grading and pavement placement to minimize variances in pavement thickness and to obtain the minimum design thickness; and . An increased likelihood of periodic and/or localized pavement maintenance is acceptable. 66677lSEA7R002.doc Page 23 of 27 January 5,2007 Copyright 2007,Kleinfelder,Inc. KLEIfVFELDER EXPECT MORE'� Revised recommended pavemen# sections are presented in Table 4. Table 4: Pavement Section Recommendations ;, , __ _ _: "� �_� . Standard Pavement „ Alternafive Minimum , _ -_ - -, , : , .. , �� `'- 5ection Recommendatron; .. - Pavement,Section ' Pavements Subject to 4 inches HMA over 6 inches 4 inches HMA over 4 inches Truck Traffic Crushed Surfacing Crushed SurFacing Passenger Traffic and 3 inches of HMA over 2'/2 inches of HMA over Not Subject to Truck 4 inches of Crushed 3 inches of Crushed Traffic Surfacing Surfacing ' Hot mix asphalt {HMA) should conform to Secfion 5-04 and crushed rock Section , 9-03.9(3) of the WSDOT Standard Specifications. For pavement section thicknesses of 2'/z inches or less, we recommend a maximum aggregate partic(e size of'/z inch. , As a minimum we recommend that heavy-duty rigid pavements for the loading dock area consist of 6 inches of Portland cement concrete reinforced with #3 bars spaced 16 inches on center at mid depth. These pavement design recommendations are based on generalized sections and do not reflecf site-specific cEesign based on traffic and loading data. Refned pavement recammendations can be developed based on traffic data and the desired pavement life span and level of performance. 4.13 PRELOAD SURCHARGE The footprints of the Pods 2, 3 and 4 structures are in the process of or were subject to a preload surcharge to consolidate the underlying compressible soils and reduce the potential for static settlement of the floor slabs and the superstructure of structure 204. The surcharge was placed to a thickness of about 7 feet, or about 6 feet above finished floor elevation for each structure, and extended at fufl height at least 5 feet beyond the building footprints with 2H:1V side slopes. Settlement monitoring points were established prior to placing the preload surcharge to measure the rate and magnitude of the settlement. The surcharge was in place at full height and monitored for 40 to 5� days. The surcharge pads were constructed based on site plans prepared by W&H Pacific and survey control provided by the contractor. 66677lSEr17R002.doc Page 24 of 27 January 5,20D7 Copyri�ht 2007, Kleinfelder,Inc. - iCLEINFElDER EXPECT MORE� i 5.0 CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS 5.1 DRIVEN GROUT PILE fNSTALLATION Since the DeWitt driven-grout pileT"' is a proprietary pile, design of the piles, including the required depth of penetration, required driving resistance and pile pertormance should be developed in cooperation with the contractor. Pile installation should be monitored on a full-time basis by a representative of Kleinfelder. 5.2 SUBGRADE PREPARATION � Prior to pacing fill in parking and sidewalk areas, the exposed subgrade soils should be proofrolled with a minimum of two passes of fully loaded dump truck, scraper, or front- end loader. Proofrolling should be performed under the full-time observation of a representative of Kleinfelder. Any areas that are identified as being soft �r yietding during proofrolling should be over-excavated to a firm and unyielding subgrade or to the depth determined by the geotechnicaf engineer. Based on our observation of the existing subgrade soils, we do not anticipate that significant over-excavation will be required. 5.3 ADDITIONAL SERVICES We should be retained to review the project plans and specifications to evaluate if they are in substantial conformance with the conclusions and recommendations contained in our report, and to evaluate if they are compatible with site geotechnical conditions. Unless we have the opportunity during the final design preparation and construction to confirm our assumptions, interpretations and analyses, we cannot be held responsible for the applicability of our conclusions and recommendations to subsurface conditions that are different from those anticipafed. Additionally, we recommend that material gradation and all construction operations relating to pile driving, proof-rolling, probing the exposed subgrade, and compaction be observed and tested by us to evaluate if the work is proceeding in accordance with the intent of the design concepfs, specifications and/or recommendations, and to allow for design changes in the event that subsurface conditions differ from those anticipated. Specifically, we anticipate the following special inspection items will be performed by Kleinfelder: 68677/SEA7R002.d�c Page 25 0127 January 5, 2�07 Copyright 2007,Kleinfelder, Inc. KLEINFELDER EXPEGT MORE` 1. Site excavation and grading; 2. Placement of structural fill and soil compaction below pavements and slab-on-grade floors and around pile caps and grade beams; 3. Placement and compaction of foundation and retaining wall backfill; 4. Installation of driven grout piles; 5. Verification of driven group pile capacities via test pile program; 6.0 LlMITATIONS The scope of the investigation presented herein is limited to an investigation of the subsu�face condi#ions for suitably founding the Pfld 2,3 and 4 portions of The Landing mixed use project in Renton, Washington. This repor� has been prepared to aid Harvest Partners in the evaluation of the site and to assist the architect and engineer in the design of the facilities, in accordance with currently accepted geotechnical engineering practice. No warranty based on #he contents of this repor� is intended, and none shall be inferred from the statements or opinions expressed herein. Our description �f he project represents our understanding of the significant aspects of the project relevant to the design and construction of earthwork, foundations and related issues. In the event that any changes in the basic design or location of the structures as outlined in this report are planned, we should be given the opportunity to review the changes and to modify or reaffirm in writing the conclusions and recommendations of this report. The scope of our services did not include any environmental assessment or investigation for the presence or absence of wetlands or hazardous or toxic materials in the soil, surface water, groundwater or air, on or below or around this site. The analyses and recommendations represented in this report are based on the data obtained from the borings made at the locations indicated on the Site and Exploration Plan and from other information discussed herein. This report is based on the assumption that the subsurface conditions everywhere are not significantly different from those disclosed by the borings. However, variations in soil conditions may exist befinreen the boring locations; afso, general groundwater levels may fluctuate from time to time. The nature and extent of the variations may not become evident until construction. If subsurface conditions different frorn those encountered in the explorations are observed or encountered during construction or appear to be present 66677/SEA7R002.doc Page 26 of 27 January 5,2D07 Copyright 2007,Kleinfelder,Inc. KLEI NFELDER EXPECT MORE° beneath or beyond excavations, we should be advised at once so that we can observe and review these conditions and reconsider our recommendations where necessary. The scope of our services does not include services related to c�nstruction safety precautions and our recommendations are not intended to direct the contractor's methods, techniques, sequences or procedures, except as specifically described in our report for consideration in design. � This report may be used only by Harvest Partners and their design consultants and onfy for the purposes stated within a reasonable tirne from its issuance, but in no event later than one year from the date of the report. Land or facility use, on and off-site conditions, regulations, or other factors may change �ver time, and additional work may be required with the passage of time. Any party other than Harvest Partners who wishes to use this report shall notify Kleinfelder of such intended use. Based on the intended use of the report, Kleinfelder may require that additional work be performed and that an updated report be issued. Non-compliance with any of these requirements by the client or anyone else will release Kleinfelder from any liability resulting from the use of this report by any unauth�rized parly and client agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless Kleinfelder from any claim or liability associated with such unauthorized use or '', non-compliance. �, Harvest Pa�tners is responsible to see that all parties to the project, including the 'I designer, contractor, subcontractors, etc., are made aware of this report in its entirety. The use of information contained in this report for bidding purposes should be done at the contractor's option and risk. Further guidefines and information on this geotechnical report can be found in the ASFE publication entitled Important Information About Your Geote�hnical Engineering Report, which is included for your refierence in Appendix D of this report. 7.0 REFERENCES International Code Council (ICC), 2003, Intemational Building Code, 2003, International Code Council, Falls Church, VA. Washington State Department of Transportation, 2006, Standard Specifications for Road, Bridge, and Municipal Construction, American Public Works Association. 66677/SEA7R002.doc Page 27 of 27 January 5,2007 Copyright 2007,Kleinfelder, Inc. - , �._:,_ � I � �� l ' � , �� _ ��, � I i! II i � t� .- _-�) (, _ ` � �� i,�� I � � �i � � W _ !�l � (� " \ . --_-:� �� Y_I� I _._ i � ._ �..�- _-�..� � � , �� onroe Ave NE _,� --- .___ � � � . O '.,� "• '� � , �� s�`-. _ _, � � ,, ( � �'�. '� - _� Kirkland Kve �1F� 2 � '.�j ° �3'�I ��►��K��l�!�� S� i< <a , ,�„ � i , ;...:1 , i ( �,o�' � �' � �A - � i«..�., .J '� � . ' ��,- i 1_. � j� � � �^ � r � � � t �� "c' +� ..._��(i ` Jl . 4�'� -:� �'aA ��d � '� � �` Z +tt` ;� 31�� d ,�Buw �, �� (t.�_ � t� � _. :,;� � __.. � _-__- �� -'-.!� `,� , r/ ��_ � ( �� _ ._ � � ( � � �, � �i� � , ,, ,,�� I� �,'`� _ � � � I.�I. ._��li_l!- '� --- _� � �r--,( � , �-� '�, �.. ,�._ �i ona i Ave-N � ..._ �N �l�'tf �P�4., P� ;�. . � 1� �� (_� I �� ...� 1� � � '� `�`' �� '�S� `'1 `� >t� , __ , � ,I �� ( _ _� �� Ikr �` ( � o c I f .; �, cul � _. . ? �E! � � � ��__, �, 1� ` � ' � � I� ��I ii lI �� '�1�'� �� C �A1� �+?� �tj� � , �Bla ne-Ave ,� �� +, :�t J , � rn ,'`1' � .. ,: � _. � ��,y � �;� - ��:�. �, �;, � c _� �berd�e�► �rre: N�: .. ...... ��.�: �,. g ;�Un� : ,`� u. � ; � °� , _S ^. tl p_ S �� _,� " _ � . .., �� w� . , 1 ( , �,. ` L C cn . _ , -� . , , �'- ��`�-�:,,T''�,,�'" >, �� _ 7 i I� �� `� � '� � � �""'�o!'Kt elV► j��,.�, •- � J� 1 i � � J c._. � /� �8$�1Q _ � ; ; - . , � _ �; - -. �l :_ � _�� 11 `` ° � , — a� 4 .___ �� J� es AvQ-NE� � �- � . �� ,. -��'� ��I� � r' _ s � ' c . . . _.,... . ` :% T,�-x + �. -% l� i� � i.� � H�«- � ; � :. ' _ . �(�::: • R�!�-.N ��i— _l l 1 i {',;'� � �.. _.. ,� �] r (f I i I � n.B�y(I�x.N'-.--_.. W��.r G`'S�C��n �- "- � - -_�I-�11.tf-(��N��i C�\� � „ , sr,�gt� �� _ �_ _�l 1� �. 1 r___�� , v`�.��_: � ��,:. �,�.:,aNa N any ijied�i .l�!! �� o��y�� ' • �'� - � � �� - i ` E .... ��' �' � ' I � j.� _ �� l(�ti.,;' -' ' - �� -� � ' "' t�__ � �` � a IVZ' a . a� I�_� �i�� S �tf Slla! I '_ �s � 'Logan Ave N �N H ��60�, �S any �auJng �� •-� �, - S a^b! U��o'71 �s o � O � �� 'y ;� � II �' o N � n f^ �� .. � ! �I � ' .i I :_ � Z' � i?�, a:� ._., g �L t�J � �:�� . . �J16 L.flli j � � .R �. f0 � N ,ve�►8e E._.� �.3 , �� . F� � I a ` _� i �. � W = � ' �i�� o �; �i �� 0 � � ai a � }-- - a� � ` , Ren�on Mu '� _.,EQ � �___-�1 � �� nicp � g� � x ,�,��. _ �_ _ r— �� z� � �r r �r_,r ;}o s ro � Rainier-Ave N , �, �T�ylo� bv�=1�W �� ( �w�', �� ( . "'' � � Ilri�t� . .. ...., f)�,{�1�� \\ �N eXy pur� `i ;r� :�r' 1,��--'"'�/ � �� `1 _ , m '_ �- N S(��br �1 1i�-::. .. __ 7 I t i ._il.._.%� - ;� , � � �l�� ; �} '( i� � '� r, i ! �1�� - �� _� j�_.�� .�J�� i i; ,t I, �� ..>�I � ,1i � ��_1 � � P,�_;i; ��IL ( �( "_'( II�I a'^�' i4�5$' fi )l;�m' Y•� ^�� 5�� . __._ _ .�� t.�..l_�I1IL:l�L1� ._ .,,a� ,y�� . �� .,__ �l a �as ° .0 �� '�'� I� i C $,$4 } ve �; , _:.Ri.. °� z qa�c ��'�: , 4?s i'.-, ��__�__ -�t f.. I,I 1' ( �I'i� f� �c�,° s*��'/ o�� , � - .�, , ,(.th � ,-, �` _ �._ . .__. �, '�,o�}�, 7 � I (� ��_ �f �:�.- ,. , �u�_ �b ./ � � � , : ' , Q+ t1..��.� y �4�D8.� � �� -_ .. �1�' �� _.�� ,. �.,,,�' �ao � �� iCil`fi`li��tl i( �� I�Ofhil�ve S� -;� �r�, I! __:� � 11 �� , a -�_� �_._, J —° --_=-�—� n� N __ _ _ �l _----- . , �'A�NN � fi�" �� I t1E f� !._:—��ROE��s ��\\� " � �� =�" �scc�'�' ��\�� \k� � � � �.,_'� " 8� s ' � \ ��`\\Q E\\�'`\��"'� � . ; �� , 1�t�� ,,,,,��'mm � � � � � ��'��w��a��"��\ �1\F�� p � x � � � �``m�� \�1��9 ; � � ° � o �—� �\E\k��4�t� q�� , _ � ��\\�� u�"�� <, .. .,<.�,: � � ,�,v� � �.�� d �� i �� z . �= � ,�<r .'`��1�`\1\y��o n� �� ^;,�r� rx,��\ "__ �Ul��\`\�� :��r��+x"�� 1 e 2 » m\ � '^'�',T � � ��:` �Illl.ttll� �((R�� ^ �.^;� . - 4} j�' �,�, . .�.��1�� - � _ ��;$ �`: l�� i r- lrtuaoN 3nNanv Navd_�__-�-- - --�- -J �— 5� � � � � �` —� �� i-�� - - , . �� <<� �� tmimrn — �� — � �' �� c� �h nI�I�'II'IIIIn { � . 'r e �. ;rv� [ �� '�(�"Y - x`� �� ' �� L` � i ��: �`t t t`- � UT�IIT'1,T,f,�AT,U1 a �I � 1 � '��,. ,y•,�i� iiiiii f � �� k+ �w• \` �'�<<<< `,Y��s �� - ��f��1�Jt�t1� �� 1��I � q � � � �� y,� ,�` ��'��,� g � a,� � �,, ,4;�,, � , v �> �inuuiui�+iiiuiiniiiirn•� o (� � I � � ��]j p �iw w u r� �m rr�mmn�u� I{ �� ` � � {f { ' % ��r�YJ�s � Y Q � �ff`I� = 1� I I �� I I� I x 3 �� ,�r� , z, �,�'�y��,r� �-_ ��I II II II�UI+I��H HH}NN+ � �, , , �, � � �i� � `�.`�r ,� �; ��', m ��'�'I �1 �i7�� = CfffIFIIlUTI1T11T� C 2#,-�-_�� z �. � � ��+:r�� (�.�J.�� 1IIIIIIII(� � �� '�d�-i�. �6 r�r��.'�� ' �i`r�ti�� IIIII�IIIIIIIIIUIH��-��f� �� .-�i �� I �3�� u � � ��I:■ @� ..l1LLLLL11LlIll1fLl1 I I �� . �.� ��n: 2�.-.�� ^�(!(�� TffTTI � �� S I �, `� ;1 � i� i'Li� � !V (��H��{�{��1µI'�I-I�'-I��`}�I f I � �� i ! 1\ � �� + 4I � �� \ 1(A,;Yl i`�}�,��`�� \ ��\ f��T�-� �1�� UIIUII111111}'U I� j I� l I.��' 'i � 25 /� l ,�� R��``�`�``�-�GI I II I�+IH+�H�L1� ��t m x � f � f (� � •��_ �� 4, � '��1Ul��ll��l� �� _ `-�� I� ��,�y'�b t <�S ��„� �i��4i�'i5'�1��/�1��«`�� I�� ' �.i i','�F� =_ `�/�"`�1� � .� � .:';��?� �.r'�;��"_ L�Q� r � �� :a�_� � � / , �„Z ��'/� �"""'Nmn`i,� i-�� .i�if� \ f `"�i � r`j��i�� ffl�l{�UlffH}_ I I�� >I ;I �`�{ �..tf�i� �'�/l�� A��7�j� �G(((Jj� II�� .�. -I U � � � i �: �7I �� ``�ti�`�,;:��(J-''''�''�`�i?��Nff��'n" ` I �� $� � ''� .''�<<;•;�`�ti�ff �HfNfl�{Hffflfl�l '� � ! a � S $ 6 rd&' v`m [�,� ff/n, r � m"�' �m Q �� `�� 2 E €�3 \g� `'�..r(!��"�([[(1 r�(rl��I'��Uf'iTfn� I �� m "-S 8 m LL �s m°s' �� E$ � �� \��1cU1 L�- � o _ �g 5.6 5 L 6� 5 F b�- 'S� 'S� � ��` \,_�(l11�W.I1LL� � �'�' $g 8� €.p� €`� SP�" �m 6a � � ' -_-_—` _ � 3 N �� tl �� p� p`� O� �� '_-_ ¢ �� "' a 9e S� �a �� n ��o -------___= � � �� a �a �a �a �a �$ �~ �� :� '{o= mg ag bg ag m5 br r�5 ga.c � v�B �� $ �g� g� �s � `s�� i a �s �h i� �� z h �a z�� z�o� a a a a ��' � � .1 1 _I 9 " � : 1� : : : : � � �� ' €' � � U Lateral Deflection(in) -0.1 -0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 D.4 0.45 Q.5 0.55 o � � � � � � � � � � � � , � � � � � � � , � � � � � � . . , . . . � , , . . . .... ..... ...__. _...--- , . . , . . . . : . , . o , . . . . . , . . . . . . : . . . . . . . . . . . . : : �n _...._...,,.,- -� ---�-- • •......----�----•---•%•--......s---�---•;--•-•••-••:-••-----�------...;.••------ , . . . . . . . . . . . . . o , . . . . . ....-- ..... ...... ..... ..... -------• ....-............................. . . N """_.r."'.. .............._....._.--.. ._.... ""'. ..... ; , . . . . . . . . � . . tO .. _"'" """ """ '_"' . . . . . . fV "'......�."""" '_......:...............""'�...""'.._._...'"'.............._""'"""""'... ..... .: � . . . . - . . . . . . . . . . . . � . . . . . . . . . � � , � "'"".............. .........t...._.._.p..........}.""""�"...'""'.""'"'"..:........._i......._._...........}.........{.....'"'"''""'...... � t �n ...-----..----...p.-�--•---�.........:..._-•--i.---••-•.:-------- �-•-• •---. ..... ._..._ ..... ...•-- •---•- -�.. ..s-- ...-.- m � o p o . . . . . , d . . , . . . . , . . . � ---- ..... ...... ......- -...- - •---•• ------ , . . . . . . � •-.•--.._....---�a----...-•�----�---------------------------•-----�-• ----� _ �. _ . . : : . . `o � � ` ...... ..... ...... ..... ...• ---••- • ----•- -..... .._... .--- - ,a _.......:--•-- ..�................�--- . . . . , , . . . . . . . Q . . . . . : : . . : ; . . . . . . � � . . . . . . : : ' : , . . . . � . Q . . � . . . . . : . . . . , � . . . . . . . a . . . � . . : : . . . . . . . � . . . . . � ; . . . . . O ._...._''.-"-'-..R_...._...;..""'._:..._.....�..........:...'--..,........-;."-"-"-;'-"-"•'•,•-_-'-"•.'•--•"";..........;_._...._ u� p 4 ' b ' . . . . � � . . d . . � . . . . . . . . . , � --'-" -"-- •-•-'- ------ . � � . , ..-'-= --'-----'--...........'--'._.......... • � ------'-t"-'---..._... -'---...... ..,..-------------'----•-' P 0 O """"L."""0 : : ""....:._"'._ ...... .._' "'.. ...... .""' ""' ""' '_.'__ ..:.. ..:.. ..:"' t0 : Q""'_"""""""' : : : : ""' '.: , p : : . � . . : : ' "." " " 0 � O i � p : : : : ; � � ' ' : : : : . : � � : O �n .......-�•-�----...o---�-. .........:..........:......•••.{.-----...,....----.;...--•---•��--..._...E......._.;..v 20 kip lateral load � 0 o � 0 25 iGp lateral load o a o 30 kip lateral load n • Pod 1-Structures 101 8�102,14"dia.pile :�; � _ Lateral Deflection vs. Depth FIGURE KLEINFELDER Pod 1 The Landing 3 PROJECT NO.66677 September 2006 Renton, Washington Unfactored Bending Momer�t(in-kips) -1200 -10D0 -8D0 -600 -400 -200 0 200 400 o � � , � � . � � � . . . . . I � ---�--=--��--•-------�.:.................�--••-------.:......---------:•--..........-•_•----•---••--•-=------•---•-- � -•--•----��---•- . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . o , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : . , . . . . . . , . . . . . . , . . . . . . . : . � . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , p . . . . . . . . : """•....."""..."•"•_'..._......_......"""'_"""_"""...""._"_'..._..._"•""....... .......................................... , N . . , . . . . . �p • • """"____ ....""'_ '.. . . . N '.............""'......._._......._...........""""""._...""""""""""""__..._......_. .. ... . . . O ."""' � ""_.. .'"','"""'"""""""' ':...............:............"" ""'........_:.....'_""' "' � � {""...""""''' ••' . ;--......"""', "`" " � . . . . . . . = 1D . . . . . : .......' "'"'""'_. ....""""' '""" . . . � � """"""""""""""'•""""'""'"""........._.."""""'...""'......,....""'""'".,...... "' '" C m 0 . . . . . . � . . , . O .-'-":'--'--'--_'_---'_........"1-'--:...."-"'1'..............:.'•"'--"-•'-----•-'--'...."' -----"-"'....:.......-_""'L'...... d' • , . . . . . . . . . � . . . . . . ......""" "' � ""'_'""_"'"'"""""""'..........................."""""""""'`"""""'._...................... ..._._....""'"'"' .,... . . . . � � . . � . . . ..... .._..."'_ _"""_""' "" ...."'""......_'....:...............� ......_..'_'�'"""'...'"'.....:"""'"""" � ';"' "".:......._ "'"' ", ' "'""' "' W .""'L""_'........:......."""".:._.._........_..:."'........'""C""".._'_"J__' ' . � ............ .............._'..........""'_"""' . . . . � . . . . . � . . . . � . I . . . . p .. ............. "'....'_' ....."""" "' I . . � • � � "'..........""'__.....""""'"""""""..."'_'"""'"""""'"...... ....""... .. _ .. � ."""`"'"'"'..........'""'...'__'..:""""_'"""'{"""'...""""}'"""""""":'............" '_"' fD v 20 kip lateral bad 0 25 kip lateral bad 0 0 30 kip lateral bad n Pod 1-Structures 101�102,14"dia.pile Bending Moment vs. Depth F�GURE ' KLEINFELDFR Pod 1 The Landing L� PROJECTN0.66677 September2006 Renton, Washington Shear Force(kips) -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 o � � � � � � � , � � � � � � � � � � � � � . . . . � . , . . . . _ i . . . . . . I . . . . . . o . . . . . ................: . ...................................•---.._....._.,.....-�------�-�--�---------------...._.._......._.....,.....--------....-; . . ;. , . . , . : . . . . . � . . . . . •............ .............. . . , . . • . , , . . , . o ..--��--.......:............. :......-�---�-�--•:--•••---•••-•...--:...........--•---��---...-�------�....----�--...---i...__...........-- N , . . : � . . . """"_"'" '_"""""'_ . N """"""'.....'.___........'_.: •""__"""_"""""'................."""""_.""""""""""" _:-' O .""'..........:"""""""".. .""""_"'..:.........._""'.:.............""'"'_"""""""{"""""""""i..........._"'.'. . � � . . . . . . � Z' 4� � """"""....' '"_"""""'"' __.....""' . . • "_"""'" ..... .."""' """""""""............."""'"' � "".. .. ...... ......... ..... ' � .""" " "`"" � Q. m 0 . . . O . � . . ' '"""... ....."'"'"""' . � . . � _........................"""""" """""""'"'._...._.....""""""""........................._......"""""' . O O � . . ' O ' . , � � � . � � ' ' : ............. ......_......' """....... ......._.."'. � ........."_"......__""""""Q""'•"'........................... .. ..:... 0 q I 4 . . , . p . . . . . . .--'---'-'---- � ................:....'---.......... ....----..........I�----..............--.....-----..._.;__...............;...._...........;._ . . . . . , . . . . . � . . . . � . � ""'......"""_"""""_"_"" """""""'...._...""...................."""""""'....."'"""""""'•.-."""...........-..........'"""' , . . . . . . . O � ' � _..._....... """"""_' . � ............."'�"""""'""""" ._.. ................_._...._�."' � ""........"'".' ..._.... ._....'"""...... ..... LL� ............'__'"""""'....... ......""""""'""..._...._..."'.}-..._._........"'""................�_...' ' fO o 20 kip laierai load 0 25 kip laleral load 0 0 3D kip lateral load r Pod 1 -Structures 101 8�102,14"dia.pile Shear Force vs. Depth F�GURE KLEINFELDER Pod 1 The Landing 5 PROJECT NO.66677 September 2006 Renton, Washington 7.0 BASIN AND COMML�NITY PLANNING AREAS _ 7.0 Basin and Community Planning Areas Not applicable � bf'&HPac�q Inc. TIR The Landing—Hanest Parmers .'vlay 2007 11 8.0 OTHER PERMITS S.0 Other Permits Not applicable __, � , i , � i _ i W&HPac�c,Inc. TIR The Landing-Harvest Pariners May 1007 12 9.0 EROSION/SEDIMENTATION CONTROL DESIGN 9.0 Erosion/Sedimentation Control Design Erosion and sediment controls were installed during demolition and pre-loading of the proposed building pads as detailed in the King County Erosion and Sediment Control (ESC) Standards. The Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan (ESCP) for The Landing has been developed utilizing the King County Storm Water Design Manual and City of Renton standards. Temporary erosion and sedimentation control requirements shall be maintained and are specifically addressed in the King County Core Requirement No. 5 (SWDIVn. Erosion and sediment control notes per City of Renton standards are provided on the Erosion Control plans. ➢ ESC measures will be maintained and inspected daily during non rainfall events and hourly during rainfall events. An ESC supervisor will be assigned to oversee the standards, as directed on the construction documents and in the KCSWDM 5.4.10. The City inspector will be given the ESC supervisor's name and 24-hour emergency contact phone number prior to start of construction. The name and 24- hour emergency phone number of the designated ESC supervisor will be posted at the primary construction entrance to the site. A written standard ESC maintenance report will be used to record all maintenance activities and inspections for the site. W&HPac�c,Inc. 77R The LandinR—Harvest Parmers May 2007 13 ' 10.0 BOND QUANTITIES WORKSHEET,RETENTION/DETENTION FACILITY SUMMARY SHEET AND SKETCH,AND DECLARATION OF COVENANT 10. Bond Quantities Worksheet I�ot included at this time. '� [G'dHPacrfrc,Inc. TIR The Landing—Harvest Partners ,'�fay 20�7 14 11.0 MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS MANUAL 11.4 Maintenance and Operations Manual ➢ King County, Washington Surface Water Design Manual, Appendix A— Maintenance Requirements for Privately Maintained Drainage Facilities. (selected pages) 1998 W&fI Pacific,Inc. TIR ITre Landing-Harvest Parn�ers .1fay 2007 15