Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRS_TIR_Report_Emerald_Highlands_200129_v1 Western Washington Division Eastern Washington Division 165 NE Juniper St., Ste 201, Issaquah, WA 98027 108 East 2nd Street, Cle Elum, WA 98922 Phone: (425) 392-0250 Fax: (425) 391-3055 Phone: (509) 674-7433 Fax: (509) 674-7419 www.EncompassES.net PRELIMINARY TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT CITY OF RENTON For Emerald Highlands 1501 & 1507 Kirkland Avenue NE Renton, WA 98056 February 4, 2020 02/04/2020 Prepared By: Noah Anderson Encompass Engineering Job No. 19501 Prepared For: Genesis Homes, LLC 16220 NE 3rd Place Bellevue, WA 98008 Emerald Highlands Preliminary Technical Information Report 2/4/20 Page i TABLE OF CONTENTS I. PROJECT OVERVIEW ................................................................................................................ 1 II. CONDITIONS AND REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY ...................................................................... 5 III. OFFSITE ANALYSIS .................................................................................................................... 8 IV. FLOW CONTROL AND WATER QUALITY FACILITY ANALYSIS AND DESIGN ........................... 15 V. CONVEYANCE SYSTEM ANALYSIS AND DESIGN ..................................................................... 18 VI. SPECIAL REPORTS AND STUDIES ............................................................................................ 18 VII. OTHER PERMITS ..................................................................................................................... 18 VIII. CSWPPP ANALYSIS AND DESIGN............................................................................................ 18 IX. BOND QUANTITIES AND DECLARATION OF COVENANT ....................................................... 18 X. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE MANUAL .......................................................................... 18 List of Figures 1. TIR Worksheet 2. Vicinity Map 3. Soils Map and Legend 4. Existing Conditions Map 5. Developed Conditions Map 6. Aquifer Protection Zone Map 7. Downstream Map 8. Flow Frequency Return Periods 9. Biopod Details Appendix A Geotechnical Engineering Report by The Riley Group, Inc. dated May 17, 2019 Appendix B WWHM2012 Output Emerald Highlands Preliminary Technical Information Report 2/4/20 Page 1 I. PROJECT OVERVIEW Project: Emerald Highlands Tax Parcel #: 722780-1490 & 722780-1495 Site Address: 1501 & 1507 Kirkland Ave NE, Renton, WA 98056 Site Area: The combined tax parcel area is 0.56 Acres Zoning: R-14 Legal Descriptions: Renton Highlands # 2 Correct Plat, Plat Block: 45, Plat Lot: 4 Renton Highlands # 2 Correct Plat, Plat Block: 45, Plat Lot: 5 Figure 2: Vicinity Map Existing Site Conditions: The site is currently developed with two existing residences with associated out buildings and asphalt driveways. The remainder of the site is vegetated with grass, trees, and shrubs. The site lies within the East Lake Washington – Renton Drainage Basin which discharges to the Cedar River / Lake Washington Watershed per King County iMap. The site lies within a single drainage basin; however, it contains a high point and discharges from two separate locations. There is a natural ridge running from north to south through the existing residences. Stormwater Emerald Highlands Preliminary Technical Information Report 2/4/20 Page 2 runoff from the eastern area of the site sheet flows to the east into a curb and gutter along Kirkland Avenue NE. Stormwater runoff from the western area of the site sheet flows west to the western edge of the property. A narrow strip of overgrown vegetated area is contained between the western edge of these properties and the eastern edge of the neighboring properties to the west. This vegetated strip serves as an overflow drainage channel for stormwater runoff. Flows are conveyed for approximately 200 feet before being routed to the curb and gutter along Kirkland Avenue NE. Critical Areas: The parcel contains no critical areas or critical area buffers. Soils: Per the US Department of Agriculture (USDA), Natural Resources Conservation Service (NCRS) Web Soil Survey information, the project site is generally underlain with Arents, Alderwood material (AmC). Per the Geotechnical Engineering Report prepared by Riley Group, dated May 17, 2019, the site is underlain with loose to medium dense silty sand with trace to some gravel, over dense sand with some silt and trace gravel. A field infiltration test was performed with a calculated long term, design infiltration rate of 1.1 inches/hour. The full Geotechnical Engineering Report is included in Appendix A of this report. Figure 3: Soils Map and Legend Emerald Highlands Preliminary Technical Information Report 2/4/20 Page 5 Developed Site Conditions: The proposal incorporated the demolition, clearing, and grading of the project site to accommodate the construction of ten single-family residences. Unit homes will be constructed in townhouse configurations. Alleys connecting to Kirkland Avenue NE will be used to access the lots. The Kirkland Avenue NE frontage will be upgraded with half street improvements including a traveled lane, curb and gutters, a bioretention/planter strip, and concrete sidewalks. A combination of full infiltration trenches and a Biopod system will provide the required stormwater controls for water quality and flow control. The system will overflow into the existing storm system in Kirkland Avenue NE. Target surfaces located within the public right of ways will be mitigated using a road-side bioretention ditch. See Section IV of this report for a full discussion of the proposed stormwater controls and Figure 5 for a map of the developed site conditions. II. CONDITIONS AND REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY The 2017 City of Renton Surface Water Design Manual (RSWDM) along with the 2016 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM) were utilized for stormwater design per the City of Renton requirements. The development will result in over 2,000 SF of new plus replaced impervious surface but does not result in over 50 acres of new impervious surface within a subbasin or multiple subbasins that are hydraulically connected. Therefore, per Figure 1.1.2.A of the RSWDM, this project must meet the Full Drainage Review requirements per Section 1.1.2.4. Core Requirements: Core Requirement #1: Discharge at the Natural Location Currently, the site drains to the existing public storm system in Kirkland Avenue NE via two drainage paths which converge within ¼ mile downstream of the site discharge location (in addition to infiltrating into the underlying soil). This project proposes to preserve the existing site drainage patterns via the use of infiltration BMPs with overflow connections to the Kirkland Avenue NE system. Core Requirement #2: Offsite Analysis A Level 1 Downstream analysis has been prepared and is included in Section III of this TIR. Core Requirement #3: Flow Control Facilities Per the City of Renton Flow Control Application Map, this project site is located within the “Peak Rate Flow Control Standard (Existing Site Conditions)” area. In this area, flow control facilities are required to be designed to match the existing conditions 2-, 10-, and 100-year peak-rate runoff from the site. After applying the BMP credits for full infiltration to the applicable target surfaces per Table 1.2.9.A of the RSWDM, the WWHM output displayed an increase in peak flow runoff of less than 0.15 CFS using 15-minute timesteps. Therefore, the project meets the exemption for Peak Rate Flow Control Standard Areas per Section 1.2.3.1 of the RSWDM and no further flow control facilities are required. See Section IV for a full discussion of flow control facilities and Appendix B for full WWHM2012 Output. Emerald Highlands Preliminary Technical Information Report 2/4/20 Page 6 Core Requirement #4: Conveyance System See Section V of this report for conveyance capacity analysis. Core Requirement #5: Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention A temporary erosion and sediment control (TESC) plan will provide BMPs to be implemented during construction. This plan and included BMPs will be provided during final engineering. A Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention (CSWPP) plan will be included with final engineering. Core Requirement #6: Maintenance and Operations See Section X of this report for a full discussion of the maintenance and operations. Core Requirement #7: Financial Guarantees and Liability The owner will arrange for any financial guarantees and liabilities required by the permit. Core Requirement #8: Water Quality Facilities This project proposes the creation of more than 5,000 SF of new pollution-generating impervious surfaces (PGIS). Therefore, Enhanced Basic water quality treatment per Section 1.2.8.1 is required for the project. The water quality requirements are proposed to be met using an Oldcastle Biopod filtration device. This biofiltration device has been sized to provide enhanced water quality treatment for proposed on-site PGIS. This proprietary facility has been approved per an email from Jonathan Chavez, P.E. for the City of Renton. See Section IV of this report for full discussion of water quality facilities and Figure 9 for Biopod details. Core Requirement #9: On-Site BMPs The project is considered to be a Small Subdivision Project, and is therefore designed to comply with the Small Subdivision Project BMP Requirements detailed in Section 1.2.9.3.1 of the RSWDM. Flow Control BMPs below were considered in order of preference as prescribed by these Requirements. See Section IV for complete Flow Control details. Full Dispersion: Infeasible; site design does not allow for the minimum native vegetated flowpath lengths required per Appendix C.2.1. Full Infiltration: Feasible; per Geotech report. • Full infiltration of the 14,874 SF of on-site impervious areas is proposed for the site in the form of Gravel Filled Trenches per Appendix C.2.2.3. Bioretention: Feasible; per the City of Renton requirements. • Bioretention is required for the 4,601 SF of off-site impervious areas within the bioretention/planter strips along Kirkland Ave NE per the City of Renton Preapplication Meeting Notes (PRE18-000526). The 10’-wide strip will be constructed as a Roadside Bioretention Ditch per Appendix C.2.6.2. Soil Amendment: Feasible • Restoration of the disturbed soils will be applied to both the on- and off- site landscaped areas (approximately 11,806 SF) per Appendix C.2.13. Emerald Highlands Preliminary Technical Information Report 2/4/20 Page 7 Special Requirements: Special Requirement #1: Other Adopted Area-Specific Requirements Master Drainage Plan – N/A Basin Plan – N/A Salmon Conservation Plan – N/A Lake Management Plan – N/A Hazard Mitigation Plan – N/A Shared Facility Drainage Plan – N/A Special Requirement #2: Flood Hazard Area Delineation The limits of this project do not lie in the FEMA 100-year floodplain. Special Requirement #3: Flood Protection Facilities This special requirement is for Class 1 or 2 streams with an existing flood protection facility. The site does not contain any streams and is therefore not applicable. Special Requirement #4: Source controls Source control is not required for this project. Special Requirement #5: Oil Control This project is not considered high-use in need of oil control. Special Requirement #6: Aquifer Protection Area This site is located in Zone 2 of an Aquifer Protection Area per the City of Renton Aquifer Protection Zone Map (Figure 6). This project has been designed to meet the requirements detailed in Section 1.3.6 of the RSWDM. Per the Geotech report, the site possesses an initial infiltration rate of 2.8 inches per hour, and the soils do not meet the soil suitability criteria for groundwater protection detailed in Section 5.2.1. Therefore, the infiltration facilities shall utilize an organic soil layer per Section 6.2.4.2. Figure 6: Aquifer Protection Zone Map Emerald Highlands Preliminary Technical Information Report 2/4/20 Page 8 III. OFFSITE ANALYSIS Task 1: Study Area Definition and Maps A Level 1 Offsite Analysis has been performed for the project site per Section 2.3.1.1 of the RSWDM. The project site is comprised of two adjacent tax parcels. The site is currently developed with two existing residences with associated out buildings and asphalt driveways. The remainder of the site is vegetated with grass, trees, and shrubs. The USGS Web Soil Survey has mapped the soils on site as Arents, Alderwood material at 6 to 15 percent slopes. The site lies within a single drainage basin (East Lake Washington – Renton); however, it contains a high point and discharges from two separate locations. There is a natural ridge running from north to south through the existing residences. The study area for this analysis extends downstream for approximately one mile and includes no upstream offsite drainage area tributary to the project site. All neighboring properties have been previously developed and do not direct stormwater runoff to the subject properties. A map showing the study area is included in Figure 7. Task 2: Resource Review Encompass has reviewed the site and the applicable resources for both listed and potential problems. The project site contains no critical areas or critical area buffers per the City of Renton maps, FEMA maps, King County Sensitive Areas Folio, CED Wetlands Inventory, or the Washington State DOE Section 303d list. Task 3: Field Inspection A Level 1 Downstream Analysis was performed by Encompass Engineering and Surveying on Friday May 31, 2019. The analysis was performed under clear conditions at approximately 12 PM with a temperature of about 65°. The tributary basins detailed in Task 1 were confirmed during the site visit. Information collected during this study is included in the Task 4 system description. Task 4: Drainage System Description and Problem Descriptions There is a natural ridge running from north to south through the existing residences. Runoff from the site discharges at two separate points located at the eastern and western property edges. Stormwater runoff from the eastern drainage area sheet flows (A) to discharge location #1 and into a curb and gutter (B) along Kirkland Avenue NE. Runoff is conveyed south to a Type 1 Catch Basin (C). This CB outlets through an 8” concrete pipe (D) to a Stormdrain Manhole (E). Stormwater runoff continues south through a 12” concrete pipe (F) which collects further runoff from Kirkland Avenue NE before discharging to a Stormdrain Manhole (G) at the intersection of Kirkland Avenue NE and NE 12th Street. The combined NE 12th Street system is conveyed to the west by a 36” Corrugated Metal Pipe (H) where it continues 1,320’ downstream of the site discharge location. Stormwater runoff from the western drainage area sheet flows west to the western edge of the property. A narrow strip of overgrown vegetated area is contained between the western edge of Emerald Highlands Preliminary Technical Information Report 2/4/20 Page 9 these properties and the eastern edge of the neighboring properties to the west. This vegetated strip serves as an unplanned overflow drainage channel for stormwater runoff. Flows are conveyed for approximately 200’ before being routed to the curb and gutter along Kirkland Avenue NE. Runoff then enters the existing storm system within Kirkland Avenue NE where it converges with flows from the eastern drainage area. Task 5: Mitigation of Existing or Potential Problems Both King County iMap and the City of Renton GIS Maps show no drainage complaints relevant to the project or the downstream drainage paths. No existing or potential problems were observed within the site or downstream area. Johnathan Chavez, P.E. City of Renton confirmed via email that no records of complaints were present for the subject properties. Figure 7: Downstream Map Emerald Highlands Preliminary Technical Information Report 2/4/20 Page 10 OFFSITE ANALYSIS DRAINAGE SYSTEM TABLE BASIN: East Lake Washington SUBBASIN NAME: SUBBASIN NUMBER: SYMBOL DRAINAGE COMPONENT TYPE, NAME, AND SIZE DRAINAGE COMPONENT DESCRIPTION SLOPE DISTANCE FROM SITE DISCHARGE EXISTING PROBLEMS POTENTIAL PROBLEMS OBSERVATIONS OF FIELD INSPECTOR, RESOURCE REVIEWER, OR RESIDENT (See map) Type: sheet flow, swale, stream, channel, pipe, pond; Size: diameter, surface area Drainage basin, vegetation, cover, depth, type of sensitive area, volume % 1/4 Mile = 1,320 ft Constrictions, under capacity, ponding, overtopping, flooding, habitat or organism destruction, scouring, bank sloughing, sedimentation, incision, other erosion Tributary area, likelihood of problem, overflow pathways, potential impacts A SHEET FLOW EASTERN DRAINAGE AREA 2-5% DISCHARGE LOCATION #1 NONE NONE PERMANENT DRAINAGE PATH TO BE ESTABLISHED BY RE-DEVELOPMENT. B CURB AND GUTTER WEST SIDE OF KIRKLAND AVENUE NE 2-10% 0’ – 150’ NONE NONE COLLECTS RUNOFF FROM KIRKLAND AVE NE. C CATCH BASIN #1, TYPE 1 DEPTH = 1.8', FACILITY ID NO. 105746 N/A 150’ NONE NONE COLLECTS RUNOFF FROM KIRKLAND AVE NE, PERMANENT DRAINAGE PATH TO BE ESTABLISHED BY RE-DEVELOPMENT. D 8" CONCRETE PIPE UNDER KIRKLAND AVE NE 5% 150’ – 170’ NONE NONE Emerald Highlands Preliminary Technical Information Report 2/4/20 Page 11 E CATCH BASIN #2, 54" TYPE 2 DEPTH = 4.95, FACILITY ID NO. 113354 N/A 170’ NONE POTENTIAL SEDIMENTATI ON LOCATED AT INTERSECTION OF NE 15TH PL AND KIRKLAND AVE NE. F 12" CONCRETE PIPE UNDER KIRKLAND AVE NE 5-10% 170’ – 970’ NONE NONE G CATCH BASIN #3, 54" TYPE 2 DEPTH = 10.37, FACILITY ID NO. 114081 N/A 970’ NONE NONE COLLECTS FLOWS FROM KIRKLAND AVE NE, NE 12TH ST, AND LYNNWOOD AVE NE SYSTEMS. H 36” CORRUGATED METAL PIPE UNDER NE 12TH ST 2-5% 970’ – 1,320’ NONE NONE CONVEYANCE UNDER NE 12TH ST. END OF LEVEL 1 DOWNSTREAM ANALYSIS. Table 1: Offsite Analysis Drainage System Table Site Access off Kirkland Avenue NE and Element B: Curb and Gutter Emerald Highlands Preliminary Technical Information Report 2/4/20 Page 12 Element C: Catch Basin #1 Rear yard drainage area Emerald Highlands Preliminary Technical Information Report 2/4/20 Page 13 Downstream of rear yard drainage area Approximate outfall location of rear yard drainage area Emerald Highlands Preliminary Technical Information Report 2/4/20 Page 14 Catch Basin along Kirkland Avenue NE Conveyance to intersection of Kirkland Avenue NE and NE 12th St Emerald Highlands Preliminary Technical Information Report 2/4/20 Page 15 IV. FLOW CONTROL, LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT (LID) AND WATER QUALITY FACILITY ANALYSIS AND DESIGN Part A: Existing Site Hydrology The site is currently developed with two existing residences with associated out buildings and asphalt driveways. The remainder of the site is vegetated with grass, trees, and shrubs. The project site is contained within a single drainage basin. Per core requirement #3, the pre- developed site has been modeled as “Existing Conditions” for the purposes of stormwater calculations. Table 2 below shows a breakdown of acreage of the existing land covers. See Figure 4 for a map of the existing site conditions and Appendix B for the full stormwater modeling calculations. Part B: Developed Site Hydrology The developed site will consist of two new buildings, access alleys, and frontage improvements. All stormwater runoff flows from the developed site will be discharged to the natural location or locations identified in the Offsite Analysis. Acreages of the proposed land covers are listed in Table 2 and the full WWHM outputs are attached in Appendix B of this report. Impervious areas fully infiltrated (rooftops, driveways, and sidewalks) have been subtracted from the WWHM model per Table 1.2.9.A. The Soil Amendment BMP will be implemented for onsite vegetated areas per Appendix C.2.13. Areas meeting this criterion have been modeled as “pasture” rather than “lawn” for WWHM modeling. Refer to Figure 5 for the Developed Conditions Map. Area Breakdown Existing Proposed Condition Measured (AC) Modeled (AC) Measured (AC) Modeled (AC) Roof: 0.1016 0.1016 0.1722 0.0000 Onsite Pasture: 0.4157 0.0743 0.2178 0.2178 Onsite Street: 0.0000 0.0000 0.0718 0.0000 Onsite Driveway: 0.0291 0.0291 0.0668 0.0000 Onsite Sidewalk: 0.0128 0.0128 0.0307 0.0000 Total Area: 0.5592 0.2178 0.5592 0.2178 Table 2: Area Breakdown Part C: Performance Standards Per the City of Renton Flow Control Application Map, this project site is located within the “Peak Rate Flow Control Standard (Existing Site Conditions)” area. In this area, flow control facilities are required to be designed to match the existing conditions 2-, 10-, and 100-year peak-rate runoff from the site. This project proposes the creation of more than 5,000 SF of new pollution-generating impervious surfaces (PGIS). Therefore, Enhanced Basic water quality treatment per Section 1.2.8.1 is required for the project. Emerald Highlands Preliminary Technical Information Report 2/4/20 Page 16 The project is considered to be a Small Subdivision Project, and is therefore designed to comply with the Small Subdivision Project BMP Requirements detailed in Section 1.2.9.3.1 of the RSWDM. Flow Control BMPs have been considered in order of preference as prescribed by the Small Subdivision Project BMP Requirements and are detailed in core requirement #9. Part D: Flow Control System Full Infiltration of the 14,874 SF (0.342 AC) of onsite impervious areas is proposed for the site in the form of Gravel Filled Trenches for Full Infiltration per Appendix C.2.2.3. Per the Geotech report, the site is underlain with medium dense silty sand and requires a 30-foot-long section per 1,000 SF of impervious area infiltrated. A total of 178.5 LF of 5-foot-wide trenching is required to fully infiltrate the tributary areas. Two 5-foot-wide by 90-foot-long trenches are proposed for a total of 180 LF of trenching to meet this requirement. Table 3 shows a breakdown of the trench sizing calculations. The infiltration trenches have been designed with a shared overflow connection to the existing Kirkland Avenue NE storm drainage system. All proposed residential rooftops will be comprised of non-leachable materials per the City of Renton requirements. A declaration of covenant ensuring this will be included with the final engineering submittal. See the engineering plan set for further details. TRENCH IMPERVIOUS TRIBUTARY AREA (SF) TRENCH REQUIRED (2' WIDE) (LF) TRENCH REQUIRED (5' WIDE) (LF) TRENCH PROVIDED (5' WIDE) (LF) A 7499 224.97 89.988 90 B 7375 221.25 88.5 90 TOTAL 14874 446.22 178.488 180 Table 3: Full Infiltration Trench Sizing This project has been designed to comply with the Zone 2 Aquifer Protection Area requirements detailed in Section 1.3.6 of the RSWDM. Per the Grain Size Analysis of the Geotech report included in Appendix A, the site does not meet the “soil properties required within groundwater protection areas” detailed in Section 5.2.1. Therefore, the infiltration facilities have been designed to meet the “Inside Groundwater Protections Areas” criteria detailed in Section 6.2.4. The three infiltration trenches shall utilize an organic soil layer per Section 6.2.4.2 to comply with these requirements. The remaining portion of the project improvements are located within the public right of way and will be not be tributary to the on-site flow control system. Bioretention is required for the 4,601 SF of off-site impervious areas per the City of Renton Preapplication Meeting Notes (PRE18- 000526). The off-site improvements will direct stormwater runoff to a Roadside Bioretention Ditch, designed per Appendix C.2.6.2 and located within the 10’-wide bioretention/planter strip along the west side of Kirkland Ave NE. Emerald Highlands Preliminary Technical Information Report 2/4/20 Page 17 Figure 8: Flow Frequency Return Periods After applying the BMP credits for full infiltration to the applicable target surfaces per Table 1.2.9.A of the RSWDM, the WWHM output displayed an increase in peak flow runoff of less than 0.15 CFS using 15-minute timesteps. Therefore, the project meets the exemption for Peak Rate Flow Control Standard Areas per Section 1.2.3.1 of the RSWDM and no further flow control facilities are required. Part E: Water Quality System Stormwater runoff from the 6,039 SF of on-site PGIS will be treated for Enhanced Water quality before entering the infiltration trenches. A Biopod filtration device, manufactured by Oldcastle Infrastructure, will provide the required treatment level for these target surfaces. The device has been sized using the Oldcastle sizing guidelines and the WWHM water quality outputs for the onsite areas. WWHM has calculated that an on-line facility target flow rate of 0.0546 CFS is required for the project. A 4’ by 6’ “X-46Y-Z S/P/T Internal Bypass” model with a maximum treatment flowrate of 0.074 CFS will be utilized to comply with these criteria. This design has been approved per an email from Jonathan Chavez, P.E. for the City of Renton. See Figure 9 for structure details. Emerald Highlands Preliminary Technical Information Report 2/4/20 Page 18 Figure 9: Biopod Detail V. CONVEYANCE SYSTEM ANALYSIS AND DESIGN Conveyance system analysis and design will be provided with final engineering. VI. SPECIAL REPORTS AND STUDIES Geotechnical Engineering Report by The Riley Group, Inc. dated May 17, 2019 VII. OTHER PERMITS A Building Permit and a Clearing and Grading Permit will be required. VIII. CSWPPP ANALYSIS AND DESIGN CSWPPP Analysis and Design will be provided with final engineering. IX. BOND QUANTITIES AND DECLARATION OF COVENANT Bond Quantities and Declaration of Covenant will be provided with final engineering. X. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE MANUAL An Operation and Maintenance Manual will be provided with final engineering. Emerald Highlands Preliminary Technical Information Report 2/4/20 Page 19 Appendix A Geotechnical Engineering Report Genesis Homes Renton 1501 – 1507 Kirkland Avenue Northeast Renton, Washington by The Riley Group, Inc. dated May 17, 2019 Corporate Office 17522 Bothell Way Northeast Bothell, Washington 98011 Phone 425.415.0551 ♦ Fax 425.415.0311 www.riley-group.com GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT PREPARED BY: THE RILEY GROUP, INC. 17522 BOTHELL WAY NORTHEAST BOTHELL, WASHINGTON 98011 PREPARED FOR: GENESIS HOMES, LLC 16220 NE 3RD AVENUE BELLEVUE, WASHINGTON 98008 RGI PROJECT NO. 2019-092 GENESIS HOMES RENTON 1501 - 1507 KIRKLAND AVENUE NORTHEAST RENTON, WASHINGTON MAY 17, 2019 Geotechnical Engineering Report i May 17, 2019 Genesis Homes Renton, Renton, Washington RGI Project No. 2019-092 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ............................................................................................................... 1 3.0 FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING .......................................................... 1 3.1 FIELD EXPLORATION ................................................................................................................................... 1 3.2 LABORATORY TESTING ................................................................................................................................ 2 4.0 SITE CONDITIONS ........................................................................................................................... 2 4.1 SURFACE .................................................................................................................................................. 2 4.2 GEOLOGY ................................................................................................................................................. 2 4.3 SOILS ....................................................................................................................................................... 2 4.4 GROUNDWATER ........................................................................................................................................ 3 4.5 SEISMIC CONSIDERATIONS ........................................................................................................................... 3 4.6 GEOLOGIC HAZARD AREAS .......................................................................................................................... 4 5.0 DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................. 4 5.1 GEOTECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS ................................................................................................................. 4 5.2 EARTHWORK ............................................................................................................................................. 4 5.2.1 Erosion and Sediment Control ..................................................................................................... 4 5.2.2 Stripping and Subgrade Preparation ............................................................................................ 5 5.2.3 Excavations................................................................................................................................... 5 5.2.4 Structural Fill ................................................................................................................................ 6 5.2.5 Wet Weather Construction Considerations ................................................................................. 8 5.3 FOUNDATIONS .......................................................................................................................................... 8 5.4 RETAINING WALLS ..................................................................................................................................... 9 5.5 SLAB-ON-GRADE CONSTRUCTION ............................................................................................................... 10 5.6 DRAINAGE .............................................................................................................................................. 10 5.6.1 Surface ....................................................................................................................................... 10 5.6.2 Subsurface .................................................................................................................................. 10 5.6.3 Infiltration .................................................................................................................................. 10 5.7 UTILITIES ................................................................................................................................................ 11 6.0 ADDITIONAL SERVICES .............................................................................................................. 11 7.0 LIMITATIONS ................................................................................................................................. 11 LIST OF FIGURES AND APPENDICES Figure 1 ..................................................................................................................... Site Vicinity Map Figure 2 ............................................................................................... Geotechnical Exploration Plan Figure 3 ............................................................................................... Retaining Wall Drainage Detail Figure 4 ....................................................................................................Typical Footing Drain Detail Appendix A .......................................................................... Field Exploration and Laboratory Testing Geotechnical Engineering Report ii May 17, 2019 Genesis Homes Renton, Renton, Washington RGI Project No. 2019-092 Executive Summary This Executive Summary should be used in conjunction with the entire Geotechnical Engineering Report (GER) for design and/or construction purposes. It should be recognized that specific details were not included or fully developed in this section, and the GER must be read in its entirety for a comprehensive understanding of the items contained herein. Section 7.0 should be read for an understanding of limitations. RGI’s geotechnical scope of work included the advancement of 3 test pits to approximate depths of 10 feet below existing site grades. Based on the information obtained from our subsurface exploration, the site is suitable for development of the proposed project. The following geotechnical considerations were identified: Soil Conditions: The soils encountered during field exploration include loose to medium dense silty sand with trace to some gravel, over dense sand with some silt and trace gravel. Groundwater: No groundwater seepage was encountered during our subsurface exploration. Foundations: Foundations for the proposed building may be supported on conventional spread footings bearing on medium dense to dense native soil or structural fill. Slab-on-grade: Slab-on-grade floors and slabs for the proposed building can be supported on medium dense to dense native soil or structural fill. Geotechnical Engineering Report 1 May 17, 2019 Genesis Homes Renton, Renton, Washington RGI Project No. 2019-092 1.0 Introduction This Geotechnical Engineering Report (GER) presents the results of the geotechnical engineering services provided for the Genesis Homes Renton in Renton, Washington. The purpose of this evaluation is to assess subsurface conditions and provide geotechnical recommendations for the construction of new single family residences. Our scope of services included field explorations, laboratory testing, engineering analyses, and preparation of this GER. The recommendations in the following sections of this GER are based upon our current understanding of the proposed site development as outlined below. If actual features vary or changes are made, RGI should review them in order to modify our recommendations as required. In addition, RGI requests to review the site grading plan, final design drawings and specifications when available to verify that our project understanding is correct and that our recommendations have been properly interpreted and incorporated into the project design and construction. 2.0 Project description The project site is located at 1501 - 1507 Kirkland Avenue Northeast in Renton, Washington. The approximate location of the site is shown on Figure 1. The site is currently occupied by two single family residences, along Kirkland Avenue Northeast, with associated outbuildings. RGI understands that the current structures will be demolished for new single family residences. Stormwater infiltration on part of the site is also being considered. At the time of preparing this GER, building plans were not available for our review. Based on our experience with similar construction, RGI anticipates that the proposed building will be supported on perimeter walls with bearing loads of two to six kips per linear foot, and a series of columns with a maximum load up to 30 kips. Slab-on-grade floor loading of 250 pounds per square foot (psf) are expected. 3.0 Field Exploration and Laboratory Testing 3.1 FIELD EXPLORATION On May 2, 2019, RGI observed the excavation of 3 test pits. The approximate exploration locations are shown on Figure 2. Field logs of each exploration were prepared by the geologist that continuously observed the excavation. These logs included visual classifications of the materials encountered during excavation as well as our interpretation of the subsurface conditions between samples. The test pits logs included in Appendix A, represent an interpretation of the field Geotechnical Engineering Report 2 May 17, 2019 Genesis Homes Renton, Renton, Washington RGI Project No. 2019-092 logs and include modifications based on laboratory observation and analysis of the samples. 3.2 LABORATORY TESTING During the field exploration, a representative portion of each recovered sample was sealed in containers and transported to our laboratory for further visual and laboratory examination. Selected samples retrieved from the test pits and hand auger were tested for moisture content and grain size analysis to aid in soil classification and provide input for the recommendations provided in this GER. The results and descriptions of the laboratory tests are enclosed in Appendix A. 4.0 Site Conditions 4.1 SURFACE The subject site is a rectangular-shaped parcel of land approximately 0.5 acres in size. The site is bound to the north, south, and west by residential property, and to the east by Kirkland Avenue Northeast. The existing site is two single family residences with outbuildings, and covered by trees and grass. The yards contain a few trees and bushes but are mostly grass or gravel. The site is relatively flat with an overall elevation difference of approximately 5 feet. 4.2 GEOLOGY Review of the Preliminary Geologic Map of Seattle and vicinity, Washington, by H. H. Waldron, etc. (1962) indicates that the soil in the project vicinity is mapped as Vashon till (Qt), which is light to dark gray, nonsorted, nonstratified mixture of clay, silt, sand, and gravel. The deposit is generally very stiff and impermeable, often resulting in poorly drained bogs developing in relatively flat area. The deposit is usually 1 to 2 meters thick, but locally can be as much as 25 meters. These descriptions are generally similar to the findings in our field explorations. 4.3 SOILS The soils encountered during field exploration include medium dense silty sand with trace gravel over dense sand with silt. More detailed descriptions of the subsurface conditions encountered are presented in the test pits logs included in Appendix A. Sieve analysis was performed on two selected soil samples. Grain size distribution curves are included in Appendix A. Geotechnical Engineering Report 3 May 17, 2019 Genesis Homes Renton, Renton, Washington RGI Project No. 2019-092 4.4 GROUNDWATER No groundwater seepage was encountered during our subsurface exploration. It should be recognized that fluctuations of the groundwater table will occur due to seasonal variations in the amount of rainfall, runoff, and other factors not evident at the time the explorations were performed. In addition, perched water can develop within seams and layers contained in fill soils or higher permeability soils overlying less permeable soils following periods of heavy or prolonged precipitation. Therefore, groundwater levels during construction or at other times in the future may be higher or lower than the levels indicated on the logs. Groundwater level fluctuations should be considered when developing the design and construction plans for the project. 4.5 SEISMIC CONSIDERATIONS Based on the 2015 International Building Code (IBC), RGI recommends the follow seismic parameters for design. Table 1 2015 IBC Parameter Value Site Soil Class1 D2 Site Latitude 47.506044° N Site Longitude 122.178948° W Short Period Spectral Response Acceleration, SS (g) 1.426 1-Second Period Spectral Response Acceleration, S1 (g) 0.537 Adjusted Short Period Spectral Response Acceleration, SMS (g) 1.426 Adjusted 1-Second Period Spectral Response Acceleration, SM1 (g) 0.805 1. Note: In general accordance with Chapter 20 of ASCE 7-10. The Site Class is based on the average characteristics of the upper 100 feet of the subsurface profile. 2. Note: The 2015 IBC and ASCE 7-10 require a site soil profile determination extending to a depth of 100 feet for seismic site classification. The current scope of our services does not include the required 100 foot soil profile determination. Test pits extended to a maximum depth of 10 feet, and this seismic site class definition considers that similar soil continues below the maximum depth of the subsurface exploration. Additional exploration to deeper depths would be required to confirm the conditions below the current depth of exploration. Liquefaction is a phenomenon where there is a reduction or complete loss of soil strength due to an increase in water pressure induced by vibrations from a seismic event. Liquefaction mainly affects geologically recent deposits of fine-grained sands that are below the groundwater table. Soils of this nature derive their strength from intergranular friction. The generated water pressure or pore pressure essentially separates the soil grains and eliminates this intergranular friction, thus reducing or eliminating the soil’s strength. Geotechnical Engineering Report 4 May 17, 2019 Genesis Homes Renton, Renton, Washington RGI Project No. 2019-092 RGI reviewed the results of the field and laboratory testing and assessed the potential for liquefaction of the site’s soil during an earthquake. Since the site is underlain by glacially consolidated deposits, RGI considers that the possibility of liquefaction during an earthquake is minimal. 4.6 GEOLOGIC HAZARD AREAS Regulated geologically hazardous areas include erosion, landslide, earthquake, or other geological hazards. Based on the definition in the Renton Municipal Code, the site does not contain geologically hazardous areas. 5.0 Discussion and Recommendations 5.1 GEOTECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS Based on our study, the site is suitable for the proposed construction from a geotechnical standpoint. Foundations for the proposed building can be supported on conventional spread footings bearing on medium dense to dense native soil or structural fill. Slab-on- grade floors and pavements can be similarly supported. Detailed recommendations regarding the above issues and other geotechnical design considerations are provided in the following sections. These recommendations should be incorporated into the final design drawings and construction specifications. 5.2 EARTHWORK The earthwork is expected to include excavating and backfilling the building foundations and preparing slab subgrades. 5.2.1 EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL Potential sources or causes of erosion and sedimentation depend on construction methods, slope length and gradient, amount of soil exposed and/or disturbed, soil type, construction sequencing and weather. The impacts on erosion-prone areas can be reduced by implementing an erosion and sedimentation control plan. The plan should be designed in accordance with applicable city and/or county standards. RGI recommends the following erosion control Best Management Practices (BMPs):  Scheduling site preparation and grading for the drier summer and early fall months and undertaking activities that expose soil during periods of little or no rainfall  Retaining existing vegetation whenever feasible  Establishing a quarry spall construction entrance  Installing siltation control fencing or anchored straw or coir wattles on the downhill side of work areas Geotechnical Engineering Report 5 May 17, 2019 Genesis Homes Renton, Renton, Washington RGI Project No. 2019-092  Covering soil stockpiles with anchored plastic sheeting  Revegetating or mulching exposed soils with a minimum 3-inch thickness of straw if surfaces will be left undisturbed for more than one day during wet weather or one week in dry weather  Directing runoff away from exposed soils and slopes  Minimizing the length and steepness of slopes with exposed soils and cover excavation surfaces with anchored plastic sheeting  Decreasing runoff velocities with check dams, straw bales or coir wattles  Confining sediment to the project site  Inspecting and maintaining erosion and sediment control measures frequently (The contractor should be aware that inspection and maintenance of erosion control BMPs is critical toward their satisfactory performance. Repair and/or replacement of dysfunctional erosion control elements should be anticipated.) Permanent erosion protection should be provided by reestablishing vegetation using hydroseeding and/or landscape planting. Until the permanent erosion protection is established, site monitoring should be performed by qualified personnel to evaluate the effectiveness of the erosion control measures. Provisions for modifications to the erosion control system based on monitoring observations should be included in the erosion and sedimentation control plan. 5.2.2 STRIPPING AND SUBGRADE PREPARATION Stripping efforts should include removal of pavements, vegetation, organic materials, and deleterious debris from areas slated for building, pavement, and utility construction. The test pits encountered 6 to 8 inches of topsoil and rootmass. Deeper areas of stripping may be required in heavily vegetated areas of the site. Subgrade soils that become disturbed due to elevated moisture conditions should be overexcavated to reveal firm, non-yielding, non-organic soils and backfilled with compacted structural fill. In order to maximize utilization of site soils as structural fill, RGI recommends that the earthwork portion of this project be completed during extended periods of warm and dry weather if possible. If earthwork is completed during the wet season (typically November through May) it will be necessary to take extra precautionary measures to protect subgrade soils. Wet season earthwork will require additional mitigative measures beyond that which would be expected during the drier summer and fall months. 5.2.3 EXCAVATIONS All temporary cut slopes associated with the site and utility excavations should be adequately inclined to prevent sloughing and collapse. The site soils consist of medium dense silty sand with trace gravel over dense glacial till. Geotechnical Engineering Report 6 May 17, 2019 Genesis Homes Renton, Renton, Washington RGI Project No. 2019-092 Accordingly, for excavations more than 4 feet but less than 20 feet in depth, the temporary side slopes should be laid back with a minimum slope inclination of 1H:1V (Horizontal:Vertical). If there is insufficient room to complete the excavations in this manner, or excavations greater than 20 feet in depth are planned, using temporary shoring to support the excavations should be considered. For open cuts at the site, RGI recommends:  No traffic, construction equipment, stockpiles or building supplies are allowed at the top of cut slopes within a distance of at least five feet from the top of the cut  Exposed soil along the slope is protected from surface erosion using waterproof tarps and/or plastic sheeting  Construction activities are scheduled so that the length of time the temporary cut is left open is minimized  Surface water is diverted away from the excavation  The general condition of slopes should be observed periodically by a geotechnical engineer to confirm adequate stability and erosion control measures In all cases, however, appropriate inclinations will depend on the actual soil and groundwater conditions encountered during earthwork. Ultimately, the site contractor must be responsible for maintaining safe excavation slopes that comply with applicable OSHA or WISHA guidelines. 5.2.4 STRUCTURAL FILL RGI recommends fill below the foundation and floor slab, behind retaining walls, and below pavement and hardscape surfaces be placed in accordance with the following recommendations for structural fill. The structural fill should be placed after completion of site preparation procedures as described above. The suitability of excavated site soils and import soils for compacted structural fill use will depend on the gradation and moisture content of the soil when it is placed. As the amount of fines (that portion passing the U.S. No. 200 sieve) increases, soil becomes increasingly sensitive to small changes in moisture content and adequate compaction becomes more difficult or impossible to achieve. Soils containing more than about 5 percent fines cannot be consistently compacted to a dense, non-yielding condition when the moisture content is more than 2 percent above or below optimum. Optimum moisture content is that moisture that results in the greatest compacted dry density with a specified compactive effort. Non-organic site soils are only considered suitable for structural fill provided that their moisture content is within about two percent of the optimum moisture level as determined by ASTM D1557. Excavated site soils may not be suitable for re-use as structural fill depending on the moisture content and weather conditions at the time of construction. If soils are stockpiled for future reuse and wet weather is anticipated, the stockpile should be Geotechnical Engineering Report 7 May 17, 2019 Genesis Homes Renton, Renton, Washington RGI Project No. 2019-092 protected with plastic sheeting that is securely anchored. Even during dry weather, moisture conditioning (such as, windrowing and drying) of site soils to be reused as structural fill may be required. Even during the summer, delays in grading can occur due to excessively high moisture conditions of the soils or due to precipitation. If wet weather occurs, the upper wetted portion of the site soils may need to be scarified and allowed to dry prior to further earthwork, or may need to be wasted from the site. The site soils are moisture sensitive and may require moisture conditioned prior to use as structural fill. If on-site soils are or become unusable, it may become necessary to import clean, granular soils to complete site work that meet the grading requirements listed in Table 2 to be used as structural fill. Table 2 Structural Fill Gradation U.S. Sieve Size Percent Passing 4 inches 100 No. 4 sieve 22 to 100 No. 200 sieve 0 to 5* *Based on minus 3/4 inch fraction. Prior to use, an RGI representative should observe and test all materials imported to the site for use as structural fill. Structural fill materials should be placed in uniform loose layers not exceeding 12 inches and compacted as specified in Table 3. The soil’s maximum density and optimum moisture should be determined by ASTM D1557. Table 3 Structural Fill Compaction ASTM D1557 Location Material Type Minimum Compaction Percentage Moisture Content Range Foundations On-site granular or approved imported fill soils: 95 +2 -2 Retaining Wall Backfill On-site granular or approved imported fill soils: 92 +2 -2 Slab-on-grade On-site granular or approved imported fill soils: 95 +2 -2 General Fill (non- structural areas) On-site soils or approved imported fill soils: 90 +3 -2 Pavement – Subgrade and Base Course On-site granular or approved imported fill soils: 95 +2 -2 Geotechnical Engineering Report 8 May 17, 2019 Genesis Homes Renton, Renton, Washington RGI Project No. 2019-092 Placement and compaction of structural fill should be observed by RGI. A representative number of in-place density tests should be performed as the fill is being placed to confirm that the recommended level of compaction is achieved. 5.2.5 WET WEATHER CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS RGI recommends that preparation for site grading and construction include procedures intended to drain ponded water, control surface water runoff, and to collect shallow subsurface seepage zones in excavations where encountered. It will not be possible to successfully compact the subgrade or utilize on-site soils as structural fill if accumulated water is not drained prior to grading or if drainage is not controlled during construction. Attempting to grade the site without adequate drainage control measures will reduce the amount of on-site soil effectively available for use, increase the amount of select import fill materials required, and ultimately increase the cost of the earthwork phases of the project. Free water should not be allowed to pond on the subgrade soils. RGI anticipates that the use of berms and shallow drainage ditches, with sumps and pumps in utility trenches, will be required for surface water control during wet weather and/or wet site conditions. 5.3 FOUNDATIONS Following site preparation and grading, the proposed building foundation can be supported on conventional spread footings bearing on dense native soil or structural fill. Loose, organic, or other unsuitable soils may be encountered in the proposed building footprint. If unsuitable soils are encountered, they should be overexcavated and backfilled with structural fill. If loose soils granular soils are encountered, the soil should be moisture conditioned and compacted to the requirements of structural fill. Table 4 Foundation Design Design Parameter Value Allowable Bearing Capacity - Structural Fill Dense native soils 2,500 psf1 4,000 psf Friction Coefficient 0.30 Passive pressure (equivalent fluid pressure) 250 pcf2 Minimum foundation dimensions Columns: 24 inches Walls: 16 inches 1. psf = pounds per square foot 2. pcf = pounds per cubic foot The allowable foundation bearing pressures apply to dead loads plus design live load conditions. For short-term loads, such as wind and seismic, a 1/3 increase in this allowable capacity may be used. At perimeter locations, RGI recommends not including the upper 12 Geotechnical Engineering Report 9 May 17, 2019 Genesis Homes Renton, Renton, Washington RGI Project No. 2019-092 inches of soil in the computation of passive pressures because they can be affected by weather or disturbed by future grading activity. The passive pressure value assumes the foundation will be constructed neat against competent soil or backfilled with structural fill as described in Section 5.2.5. The recommended base friction and passive resistance value includes a safety factor of about 1.5. Perimeter foundations exposed to weather should be at a minimum depth of 18 inches below final exterior grades. Interior foundations can be constructed at any convenient depth below the floor slab. Finished grade is defined as the lowest adjacent grade within 5 feet of the foundation for perimeter (or exterior) footings and finished floor level for interior footings. With spread footing foundations designed in accordance with the recommendations in this section, maximum total and differential post-construction settlements of 1 inch and 1/2 inch, respectively, should be expected. 5.4 RETAINING WALLS If retaining walls are needed in the building area or for vaults, RGI recommends cast-in- place concrete walls be used. The magnitude of earth pressure development on retaining walls will partly depend on the quality of the wall backfill. RGI recommends placing and compacting wall backfill as structural fill. Wall drainage will be needed behind the wall face. A typical retaining wall drainage detail is shown in Figure 3. With wall backfill placed and compacted as recommended, and drainage properly installed, RGI recommends using the values in the following table for design. Table 5 Retaining Wall Design Design Parameter Value Allowable Bearing Capacity - Structural Fill Dense native soils 2,500 psf 4,000 psf Active Earth Pressure (unrestrained walls) 35 pcf At-rest Earth Pressure (restrained walls) 50 pcf For seismic design, an additional uniform load of 7 times the wall height (H) for unrestrained walls and 14H in psf for restrained walls should be applied to the wall surface. Friction at the base of foundations and passive earth pressure will provide resistance to these lateral loads. Values for these parameters are provided in Section 5.3. Geotechnical Engineering Report 10 May 17, 2019 Genesis Homes Renton, Renton, Washington RGI Project No. 2019-092 5.5 SLAB-ON-GRADE CONSTRUCTION Once site preparation has been completed as described in Section 5.2, suitable support for slab-on-grade construction should be provided. RGI recommends that the concrete slab be placed on top of medium dense native soil or structural fill. Immediately below the floor slab, RGI recommends placing a four-inch thick capillary break layer of clean, free-draining sand or gravel that has less than five percent passing the U.S. No. 200 sieve. This material will reduce the potential for upward capillary movement of water through the underlying soil and subsequent wetting of the floor slab. Where moisture by vapor transmission is undesirable, an 8- to 10-millimeter thick plastic membrane should be placed on a 4-inch thick layer of clean gravel. For the anticipated floor slab loading, we estimate post-construction floor settlements of 1/4- to 1/2-inch. 5.6 DRAINAGE 5.6.1 SURFACE Final exterior grades should promote free and positive drainage away from the building area. Water must not be allowed to pond or collect adjacent to foundations or within the immediate building area. For non-pavement locations, RGI recommends providing a minimum drainage gradient of 3 percent for a minimum distance of 10 feet from the building perimeter. In paved locations, a minimum gradient of 1 percent should be provided unless provisions are included for collection and disposal of surface water adjacent to the structure. 5.6.2 SUBSURFACE RGI recommends installing perimeter foundation drains. A typical footing drain detail is shown on Figure 4. The foundation drains and roof downspouts should be tightlined separately to an approved discharge facility. Subsurface drains must be laid with a gradient sufficient to promote positive flow to a controlled point of approved discharge. 5.6.3 INFILTRATION RGI understands that an infiltration system is being considered for the on-site disposal of storm water run-off. A field infiltration test at test pit TP-2 was performed in general accordance with a Small-Scale Pilot Infiltration Test described in the 2017 City of Renton Surface Water Design Manual (CRSWDM). Geotechnical Engineering Report 11 May 17, 2019 Genesis Homes Renton, Renton, Washington RGI Project No. 2019-092 Table 6 Measured Infiltration Rates Test Location Test Depth Measured Rate (Inches per hour) Design Rate (Inches per hour) TP-2 6’ 2.8 1.1 CRSWDM correction factors were applied to the field measured rate of 2.8 inches per hour. No groundwater was encountered in the test pits. Idesign = Imeasured x Ftesting x Fplugging x Fgeometry Correction factors of 0.5 (Ftesting) for the PIT test method and 0.8 (Fplugging) for fine sands were applied to the field measured rate to estimate the long-term design infiltration rate. We assumed Fgeometry = 1. The application of the correction factors yield a long-term design rate (Idesign) of 1.1 inches per hour. 5.7 UTILITIES Utility pipes should be bedded and backfilled in accordance with American Public Works Association (APWA) specifications. For site utilities located within the right-of-ways, bedding and backfill should be completed in accordance with City of Renton specifications. At a minimum, trench backfill should be placed and compacted as structural fill, as described in Section 5.2.4. Where utilities occur below unimproved areas, the degree of compaction can be reduced to a minimum of 90 percent of the soil’s maximum density as determined by the referenced ASTM D1557. As noted, soils excavated on site may not be suitable for use as backfill material. Imported structural fill meeting the gradation provided in Table 2 should be used for trench backfill. 6.0 Additional Services RGI is available to provide further geotechnical consultation throughout the design phase of the project. RGI should review the final design and specifications in order to verify that earthwork and foundation recommendations have been properly interpreted and incorporated into project design and construction. RGI is also available to provide geotechnical engineering and construction monitoring services during construction. The integrity of the earthwork and construction depends on proper site preparation and procedures. In addition, engineering decisions may arise in the field in the event that variations in subsurface conditions become apparent. Construction monitoring services are not part of this scope of work. 7.0 Limitations This GER is the property of RGI, Genesis Homes, LLC, and its designated agents. Within the limits of the scope and budget, this GER was prepared in accordance with generally Geotechnical Engineering Report 12 May 17, 2019 Genesis Homes Renton, Renton, Washington RGI Project No. 2019-092 accepted geotechnical engineering practices in the area at the time this GER was issued. This GER is intended for specific application to the Genesis Homes Renton project in Renton, Washington, and for the exclusive use of Genesis Homes, LLC and its authorized representatives. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. Site safety, excavation support, and dewatering requirements are the responsibility of others. The scope of services for this project does not include either specifically or by implication any environmental or biological (for example, mold, fungi, bacteria) assessment of the site or identification or prevention of pollutants, hazardous materials or conditions. If the owner is concerned about the potential for such contamination or pollution, we can provide a proposal for these services. The analyses and recommendations presented in this GER are based upon data obtained from the explorations performed on site. Variations in soil conditions can occur, the nature and extent of which may not become evident until construction. If variations appear evident, RGI should be requested to reevaluate the recommendations in this GER prior to proceeding with construction. It is the client’s responsibility to see that all parties to the project, including the designers, contractors, subcontractors, are made aware of this GER in its entirety. The use of information contained in this GER for bidding purposes should be done at the contractor’s option and risk. USGS, 2014, Mercer Island, Washington USGS, 2014, Renton, Washington 7.5-Minute Quadrangle Approximate Scale: 1"=1000' 0 500 1000 2000 N Site Vicinity Map Figure 1 05/2019 Corporate Office 17522 Bothell Way Northeast Bothell, Washington 98011 Phone: 425.415.0551 Fax: 425.415.0311 Genesis Homes Renton RGI Project Number: 2019-092 Date Drawn: Address: 1501 Kirkland Avenue Northeast, Renton, Washington 98056 SITE TP-1 TP-2/ IT-1 TP-3 N Geotechnical Exploration Plan Figure 2 Approximate Scale: 1"=40' 0 20 40 80 = Test pit by RGI, 5/2/19 = Site boundary 05/2019 Corporate Office 17522 Bothell Way Northeast Bothell, Washington 98011 Phone: 425.415.0551 Fax: 425.415.0311 Genesis Homes Renton RGI Project Number: 2019-092 Date Drawn: Address: 1501 Kirkland Avenue Northeast, Renton, Washington 98056 Incliniations) 12" Over the Pipe 3" Below the Pipe Perforated Pipe 4" Diameter PVC Compacted Structural Backfill (Native or Import) 12" min. Filter Fabric Material 12" Minimum Wide Free-Draining Gravel Slope to Drain (See Report for Appropriate Excavated Slope 05/2019 Corporate Office 17522 Bothell Way Northeast Bothell, Washington 98011 Phone: 425.415.0551 Fax: 425.415.0311 Genesis Homes Renton RGI Project Number: 2019-092 Date Drawn: Address: 1501 Kirkland Avenue Northeast, Renton, Washington 98056 Retaining Wall Drainage Detail Figure 3 Not to Scale 3/4" Washed Rock or Pea Gravel 4" Perforated Pipe Building Slab Structural Backfill Compacted Filter Fabric 05/2019 Corporate Office 17522 Bothell Way Northeast Bothell, Washington 98011 Phone: 425.415.0551 Fax: 425.415.0311 Genesis Homes Renton RGI Project Number: 2019-092 Date Drawn: Address: 1501 Kirkland Avenue Northeast, Renton, Washington 98056 Typical Footing Drain Detail Figure 4 Not to Scale Geotechnical Engineering Report May 17, 2019 Genesis Homes Renton, Renton, Washington RGI Project No. 2019-092 APPENDIX A FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING On May 2, 2019, RGI performed field explorations using a rubber tired backhoe. We explored subsurface soil conditions at the site by observing the excavation of 3 test pits to a maximum depth of 10 feet below existing grade. The test pits locations are shown on Figure 2. The test pits locations were approximately determined by measurements from existing property lines and paved roads. A geologist from our office conducted the field exploration and classified the soil conditions encountered, maintained a log of each test exploration, obtained representative soil samples, and observed pertinent site features. All soil samples were visually classified in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS). Representative soil samples obtained from the explorations were placed in closed containers and taken to our laboratory for further examination and testing. As a part of the laboratory testing program, the soil samples were classified in our in house laboratory based on visual observation, texture, plasticity, and the limited laboratory testing described below. Moisture Content Determinations Moisture content determinations were performed in accordance with ASTM D2216-10 Standard Test Methods for Laboratory Determination of Water (Moisture) Content of Soil and Rock by Mass (ASTM D2216) on representative samples obtained from the exploration in order to aid in identification and correlation of soil types. The moisture content of typical sample was measured and is reported on the test pits logs. Grain Size Analysis A grain size analysis indicates the range in diameter of soil particles included in a particular sample. Grain size analyses was determined using D6913-04(2009) Standard Test Methods for Particle-Size Distribution (Gradation) of Soils Using Sieve Analysis (ASTM D6913) on two of the samples. Project Name:Genesis Homes Renton Project Number:2019-092 Client:Genesis Homes, LLC Test Pit No.: TP-1 Date(s) Excavated:05/02/19 Excavation Method:Excavation Excavator Type:Mini-Excavator Groundwater Level and Date Measured Not encountered Test Pit Backfill:Native Soil Logged By LC Bucket Size: Excavating Contractor:Kelly's Excavating Sampling Method(s)Grab Location 1501 Kirkland Avenue Northeast, Renton, Washington 98056 Surface Conditions:Grass Total Depth of Excavation:10 feet bgs Approximate Surface Elevation n/a Compaction Method n/a USCS SymbolGrass SM SP-SM REMARKS AND OTHER TESTS 7% Moisture 14% Moisture 9% Moisture 11% MoistureGraphic LogMATERIAL DESCRIPTION Grass Reddish brown, silty SAND with trace gravel, medium dense, moist Gray, SAND with silt, dense, moist Test pit excavated to 10 feet bgs No groundwater encounteredDepth (feet)0 5 10 15 Sample NumberTP1-1 TP1-5 TP1-7.5 TP1-10Sample TypeElevation (feet)Sheet 1 of 1 The Riley Group, Inc. 17522 Bothell Way NE, Bothell, WA 98011 Project Name:Genesis Homes Renton Project Number:2019-092 Client:Genesis Homes, LLC Test Pit No.: TP-2/IT-1 Date(s) Excavated:05/02/19 Excavation Method:Excavation Excavator Type:Mini-Excavator Groundwater Level and Date Measured Not encountered Test Pit Backfill:Native Soil Logged By LC Bucket Size: Excavating Contractor:Kelly's Excavating Sampling Method(s)Grab Location 1501 Kirkland Avenue Northeast, Renton, Washington 98056 Surface Conditions:Grass Total Depth of Excavation:11 feet bgs Approximate Surface Elevation n/a Compaction Method n/a USCS SymbolGrass SM SP-SM REMARKS AND OTHER TESTS 4% Moisture 8% Moisture 14% MoistureGraphic LogMATERIAL DESCRIPTION Grass Reddish brown, silty SAND with trace gravel, medium dense, moist Gray, SAND with some silt and trace gravel, medium dense to dense, moist Infiltration test, IT-1, performed 6 feet bgs Test pit excavated to 11 feet bgs No groundwater encounteredDepth (feet)0 5 10 15 Sample NumberTP2-1 TP2-3 TP2-6Sample TypeElevation (feet)Sheet 1 of 1 The Riley Group, Inc. 17522 Bothell Way NE, Bothell, WA 98011 Project Name:Genesis Homes Renton Project Number:2019-092 Client:Genesis Homes, LLC Test Pit No.: TP-3 Date(s) Excavated:05/02/19 Excavation Method:Excavation Excavator Type:Mini-Excavator Groundwater Level and Date Measured Not encountered Test Pit Backfill:Native Soil Logged By LC Bucket Size: Excavating Contractor:Kelly's Excavating Sampling Method(s)Grab Location 1501 Kirkland Avenue Northeast, Renton, Washington 98056 Surface Conditions:Grass Total Depth of Excavation:11 feet bgs Approximate Surface Elevation n/a Compaction Method n/a USCS SymbolGrass SM SM REMARKS AND OTHER TESTS 6% Moisture 10% MoistureGraphic LogMATERIAL DESCRIPTION Grass Reddish brown, silty SAND with trace gravel, medium dense, moist Gray, silty SAND with trace gravel, medium dense, moist Test pit excavated to 11 feet bgs No groundwater encounteredDepth (feet)0 5 10 15 Sample NumberTP3-1 TP3-5Sample TypeElevation (feet)Sheet 1 of 1 The Riley Group, Inc. 17522 Bothell Way NE, Bothell, WA 98011 Project Name:Genesis Homes Renton Project Number:2019-092 Client:Genesis Homes, LLC Key to Logs USCS SymbolREMARKS AND OTHER TESTSGraphic LogMATERIAL DESCRIPTIONDepth (feet)Sample NumberSample TypeElevation (feet)1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 COLUMN DESCRIPTIONS 1 Elevation (feet): Elevation (MSL, feet). 2 Depth (feet): Depth in feet below the ground surface. 3 Sample Type: Type of soil sample collected at the depth interval shown. 4 Sample Number: Sample identification number. 5 USCS Symbol: USCS symbol of the subsurface material. 6 Graphic Log: Graphic depiction of the subsurface material encountered. 7 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION: Description of material encountered. May include consistency, moisture, color, and other descriptive text. 8 REMARKS AND OTHER TESTS: Comments and observations regarding drilling or sampling made by driller or field personnel. FIELD AND LABORATORY TEST ABBREVIATIONS CHEM: Chemical tests to assess corrosivity COMP: Compaction test CONS: One-dimensional consolidation test LL: Liquid Limit, percent PI: Plasticity Index, percent SA: Sieve analysis (percent passing No. 200 Sieve) UC: Unconfined compressive strength test, Qu, in ksf WA: Wash sieve (percent passing No. 200 Sieve) MATERIAL GRAPHIC SYMBOLS Grass and/or topsoil Silty SAND (SM) Poorly graded SAND with Silt (SP-SM) TYPICAL SAMPLER GRAPHIC SYMBOLS Auger sampler Bulk Sample 3-inch-OD California w/ brass rings CME Sampler Continuous Grab Sample 2.5-inch-OD Modified California w/ brass liners Pitcher Sample 2-inch-OD unlined split spoon (SPT) Shelby Tube (Thin-walled, fixed head) OTHER GRAPHIC SYMBOLS Water level (at time of drilling, ATD) Water level (after waiting) Minor change in material properties within a stratum Inferred/gradational contact between strata ?Queried contact between strata GENERAL NOTES 1: Soil classifications are based on the Unified Soil Classification System. Descriptions and stratum lines are interpretive, and actual lithologic changes may be gradual. Field descriptions may have been modified to reflect results of lab tests. 2: Descriptions on these logs apply only at the specific boring locations and at the time the borings were advanced. They are not warranted to be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations or times. Sheet 1 of 1 The Riley Group, Inc. 17522 Bothell Way NE, Bothell, WA 98011 THE RILEY GROUP, INC. 17522 Bothell Way NE Bothell, WA 98011 PHONE:  (425) 415‐0551      FAX:     (425) 415‐0311 GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS ASTM D421, D422, D1140, D2487, D6913  PROJECT TITLE Genesis Homes Renton SAMPLE ID/TYPE  TP3‐5  PROJECT NO.2019‐092 SAMPLE DEPTH  5 feet TECH/TEST DATE LW/CM 5/8/2019 DATE RECEIVED 5/2/2019   WATER CONTENT (Delivered Moisture) Total Weight Of Sample Used For Sieve Corrected For Hygroscopic Moisture   Wt Wet Soil & Tare (gm)  (w1)548.2   Weight Of Sample (gm)511.0   Wt Dry Soil & Tare (gm) (w2)511.0   Tare  Weight  (gm) 133.2   Weight of Tare (gm) (w3)133.2 (W6)  Total Dry Weight (gm) 377.8   Weight of Water (gm) (w4=w1‐w2) 37.2   SIEVE ANALYSIS   Weight of Dry Soil (gm)  (w5=w2‐w3) 377.8 Cumulative   Moisture Content (%)  (w4/w5)*100 10 Wt Ret  (Wt‐Tare) (%Retained)% PASS +Tare {(wt ret/w6)*100}(100‐%ret)   % COBBLES 0.0 12.0"133.2 0.00 0.00 100.00 cobbles   % C GRAVEL 0.0 3.0"133.2 0.00 0.00 100.00 coarse gravel   % F GRAVEL 8.2 2.5"       coarse gravel   % C SAND  5.3 2.0"       coarse gravel   % M SAND 35.6 1.5"133.2 0.00 0.00 100.00 coarse gravel   % F SAND 36.4 1.0"       coarse gravel   % FINES 14.5 0.75"133.2 0.00 0.00 100.00 fine gravel   % TOTAL 100.0 0.50"       fine gravel 0.375"147.3 14.10 3.73 96.27 fine gravel D10 (mm)#4 164.2 31.00 8.21 91.79 coarse sand D30 (mm)#10 184.1 50.90 13.47 86.53 medium sand D60 (mm)#20       medium sand Cu #40 318.7 185.50 49.10 50.90 fine sand Cc #60     fine sand #100 432.4 299.20 79.20 20.80 fine sand #200 456.4 323.20 85.55 14.45 fines PAN 511.0 377.80 100.00 0.00 silt/clay 322 188.8 49.973531 50.026469     DESCRIPTION  Silty SAND with trace gravel USCS  SM Prepared For: Reviewed By: KW Genesis Homes, LLC 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.0010.010.11101001000 % P A S S I N G Grain size in millimeters 12"3" 2" 1" .75" .375" #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200 THE RILEY GROUP, INC. 17522 Bothell Way NE Bothell, WA 98011 PHONE:  (425) 415‐0551      FAX:     (425) 415‐0311 GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS ASTM D421, D422, D1140, D2487, D6913  PROJECT TITLE Genesis Homes Renton SAMPLE ID/TYPE  TP2‐6  PROJECT NO.2019‐092 SAMPLE DEPTH  6 feet TECH/TEST DATE LW/CM 5/8/2019 DATE RECEIVED 5/2/2019   WATER CONTENT (Delivered Moisture) Total Weight Of Sample Used For Sieve Corrected For Hygroscopic Moisture   Wt Wet Soil & Tare (gm)  (w1)583.5   Weight Of Sample (gm)528.9   Wt Dry Soil & Tare (gm) (w2)528.9   Tare  Weight  (gm) 125.2   Weight of Tare (gm) (w3)125.2 (W6)  Total Dry Weight (gm) 403.7   Weight of Water (gm) (w4=w1‐w2) 54.6   SIEVE ANALYSIS   Weight of Dry Soil (gm)  (w5=w2‐w3) 403.7 Cumulative   Moisture Content (%)  (w4/w5)*100 14 Wt Ret  (Wt‐Tare) (%Retained)% PASS +Tare {(wt ret/w6)*100}(100‐%ret)   % COBBLES 0.0 12.0"125.2 0.00 0.00 100.00 cobbles   % C GRAVEL 2.9 3.0"125.2 0.00 0.00 100.00 coarse gravel   % F GRAVEL 8.3 2.5"       coarse gravel   % C SAND  8.0 2.0"       coarse gravel   % M SAND 33.5 1.5"125.2 0.00 0.00 100.00 coarse gravel   % F SAND 42.3 1.0"       coarse gravel   % FINES 5.1 0.75"137.0 11.80 2.92 97.08 fine gravel   % TOTAL 100.0 0.50"       fine gravel 0.375"150.4 25.20 6.24 93.76 fine gravel D10 (mm)0.18 #4 170.5 45.30 11.22 88.78 coarse sand D30 (mm)0.28 #10 202.7 77.50 19.20 80.80 medium sand D60 (mm)0.77 #20       medium sand Cu 4.3 #40 337.8 212.60 52.66 47.34 fine sand Cc 0.6 #60     fine sand #100 495.9 370.70 91.83 8.17 fine sand #200 508.5 383.30 94.95 5.05 fines PAN 528.9 403.70 100.00 0.00 silt/clay 322 196.8 48.749071 51.2509289     DESCRIPTION  Medium to fine SAND with some silt and trace gravel USCS  SP‐SM Prepared For: Reviewed By: KW Genesis Homes, LLC 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.0010.010.11101001000 % P A S S I N G Grain size in millimeters 12"3" 2" 1".75" .375" #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200 Emerald Highlands Preliminary Technical Information Report Appendix B WWHM2012 Output WWHM2012 PROJECT REPORT 19501 - Emerald Highlands 1/8/2020 3:47:38 PM Page 2 General Model Information Project Name:19501 - Emerald Highlands Site Name: Site Address: City: Report Date:1/8/2020 Gage:Seatac Data Start:1948/10/01 Data End:2009/09/30 Timestep:15 Minute Precip Scale:1.000 Version Date:2019/09/13 Version:4.2.17 POC Thresholds Low Flow Threshold for POC1:50 Percent of the 2 Year High Flow Threshold for POC1:50 Year 19501 - Emerald Highlands 1/8/2020 3:47:38 PM Page 3 Landuse Basin Data Predeveloped Land Use Basin 1 Bypass:No GroundWater:No Pervious Land Use acre C, Lawn, Flat 0.0743 Pervious Total 0.0743 Impervious Land Use acre ROOF TOPS FLAT 0.1016 DRIVEWAYS FLAT 0.0291 SIDEWALKS FLAT 0.0128 Impervious Total 0.1435 Basin Total 0.2178 Element Flows To: Surface Interflow Groundwater 19501 - Emerald Highlands 1/8/2020 3:47:38 PM Page 4 Mitigated Land Use Basin 1 Bypass:No GroundWater:No Pervious Land Use acre C, Pasture, Flat 0.2178 Pervious Total 0.2178 Impervious Land Use acre Impervious Total 0 Basin Total 0.2178 Element Flows To: Surface Interflow Groundwater 19501 - Emerald Highlands 1/8/2020 3:47:38 PM Page 5 Routing Elements Predeveloped Routing 19501 - Emerald Highlands 1/8/2020 3:47:38 PM Page 6 Mitigated Routing 19501 - Emerald Highlands 1/8/2020 3:47:38 PM Page 7 Analysis Results POC 1 + Predeveloped x Mitigated Predeveloped Landuse Totals for POC #1 Total Pervious Area:0.0743 Total Impervious Area:0.1435 Mitigated Landuse Totals for POC #1 Total Pervious Area:0.2178 Total Impervious Area:0 Flow Frequency Method:Log Pearson Type III 17B Flow Frequency Return Periods for Predeveloped. POC #1 Return Period Flow(cfs) 2 year 0.059488 5 year 0.077062 10 year 0.089236 25 year 0.105271 50 year 0.117709 100 year 0.130583 Flow Frequency Return Periods for Mitigated. POC #1 Return Period Flow(cfs) 2 year 0.007634 5 year 0.013106 10 year 0.017491 25 year 0.023902 50 year 0.029319 100 year 0.035292 Annual Peaks Annual Peaks for Predeveloped and Mitigated. POC #1 Year Predeveloped Mitigated 1949 0.082 0.010 1950 0.078 0.012 1951 0.051 0.015 1952 0.040 0.005 1953 0.043 0.004 1954 0.048 0.006 1955 0.054 0.010 1956 0.053 0.008 1957 0.063 0.007 1958 0.048 0.007 19501 - Emerald Highlands 1/8/2020 3:48:09 PM Page 8 1959 0.046 0.006 1960 0.053 0.012 1961 0.053 0.006 1962 0.043 0.004 1963 0.052 0.006 1964 0.048 0.008 1965 0.066 0.006 1966 0.041 0.005 1967 0.073 0.013 1968 0.082 0.007 1969 0.060 0.007 1970 0.056 0.005 1971 0.066 0.007 1972 0.075 0.012 1973 0.038 0.006 1974 0.062 0.007 1975 0.064 0.009 1976 0.048 0.007 1977 0.047 0.002 1978 0.059 0.005 1979 0.079 0.003 1980 0.085 0.019 1981 0.061 0.005 1982 0.090 0.013 1983 0.068 0.008 1984 0.045 0.005 1985 0.062 0.003 1986 0.052 0.012 1987 0.079 0.011 1988 0.046 0.005 1989 0.058 0.003 1990 0.125 0.038 1991 0.095 0.015 1992 0.044 0.006 1993 0.037 0.006 1994 0.039 0.002 1995 0.054 0.008 1996 0.063 0.019 1997 0.060 0.014 1998 0.056 0.006 1999 0.123 0.024 2000 0.060 0.005 2001 0.061 0.001 2002 0.080 0.009 2003 0.063 0.012 2004 0.114 0.012 2005 0.053 0.008 2006 0.047 0.008 2007 0.112 0.031 2008 0.094 0.027 2009 0.071 0.012 Ranked Annual Peaks Ranked Annual Peaks for Predeveloped and Mitigated. POC #1 Rank Predeveloped Mitigated 1 0.1254 0.0382 2 0.1234 0.0311 3 0.1144 0.0267 19501 - Emerald Highlands 1/8/2020 3:48:09 PM Page 9 4 0.1121 0.0237 5 0.0953 0.0195 6 0.0936 0.0192 7 0.0899 0.0154 8 0.0848 0.0152 9 0.0824 0.0144 10 0.0816 0.0129 11 0.0805 0.0125 12 0.0793 0.0124 13 0.0787 0.0123 14 0.0783 0.0122 15 0.0746 0.0122 16 0.0731 0.0119 17 0.0709 0.0118 18 0.0683 0.0118 19 0.0664 0.0115 20 0.0661 0.0104 21 0.0640 0.0096 22 0.0634 0.0091 23 0.0629 0.0086 24 0.0626 0.0084 25 0.0621 0.0082 26 0.0617 0.0081 27 0.0615 0.0080 28 0.0608 0.0077 29 0.0600 0.0076 30 0.0596 0.0073 31 0.0595 0.0072 32 0.0586 0.0071 33 0.0579 0.0068 34 0.0556 0.0068 35 0.0555 0.0067 36 0.0540 0.0066 37 0.0538 0.0062 38 0.0533 0.0062 39 0.0533 0.0061 40 0.0527 0.0059 41 0.0526 0.0059 42 0.0516 0.0059 43 0.0515 0.0057 44 0.0508 0.0056 45 0.0485 0.0056 46 0.0481 0.0055 47 0.0481 0.0054 48 0.0480 0.0053 49 0.0474 0.0051 50 0.0467 0.0050 51 0.0464 0.0049 52 0.0463 0.0048 53 0.0449 0.0048 54 0.0445 0.0043 55 0.0435 0.0040 56 0.0435 0.0034 57 0.0414 0.0031 58 0.0402 0.0030 59 0.0386 0.0024 60 0.0380 0.0019 61 0.0371 0.0015 19501 - Emerald Highlands 1/8/2020 3:48:09 PM Page 10 19501 - Emerald Highlands 1/8/2020 3:48:09 PM Page 11 Duration Flows The Facility PASSED Flow(cfs)Predev Mit Percentage Pass/Fail 0.0297 1673 2 0 Pass 0.0306 1515 2 0 Pass 0.0315 1350 1 0 Pass 0.0324 1207 1 0 Pass 0.0333 1090 1 0 Pass 0.0342 994 1 0 Pass 0.0351 920 1 0 Pass 0.0360 828 1 0 Pass 0.0369 747 1 0 Pass 0.0377 692 1 0 Pass 0.0386 642 0 0 Pass 0.0395 585 0 0 Pass 0.0404 546 0 0 Pass 0.0413 506 0 0 Pass 0.0422 462 0 0 Pass 0.0431 422 0 0 Pass 0.0440 394 0 0 Pass 0.0448 368 0 0 Pass 0.0457 352 0 0 Pass 0.0466 323 0 0 Pass 0.0475 301 0 0 Pass 0.0484 281 0 0 Pass 0.0493 259 0 0 Pass 0.0502 241 0 0 Pass 0.0511 224 0 0 Pass 0.0520 206 0 0 Pass 0.0528 197 0 0 Pass 0.0537 182 0 0 Pass 0.0546 171 0 0 Pass 0.0555 160 0 0 Pass 0.0564 149 0 0 Pass 0.0573 140 0 0 Pass 0.0582 131 0 0 Pass 0.0591 125 0 0 Pass 0.0600 110 0 0 Pass 0.0608 108 0 0 Pass 0.0617 102 0 0 Pass 0.0626 97 0 0 Pass 0.0635 91 0 0 Pass 0.0644 83 0 0 Pass 0.0653 81 0 0 Pass 0.0662 77 0 0 Pass 0.0671 76 0 0 Pass 0.0680 76 0 0 Pass 0.0688 70 0 0 Pass 0.0697 64 0 0 Pass 0.0706 63 0 0 Pass 0.0715 59 0 0 Pass 0.0724 57 0 0 Pass 0.0733 54 0 0 Pass 0.0742 51 0 0 Pass 0.0751 48 0 0 Pass 0.0759 45 0 0 Pass 19501 - Emerald Highlands 1/8/2020 3:48:09 PM Page 12 0.0768 41 0 0 Pass 0.0777 39 0 0 Pass 0.0786 37 0 0 Pass 0.0795 32 0 0 Pass 0.0804 31 0 0 Pass 0.0813 29 0 0 Pass 0.0822 27 0 0 Pass 0.0831 25 0 0 Pass 0.0839 23 0 0 Pass 0.0848 21 0 0 Pass 0.0857 21 0 0 Pass 0.0866 20 0 0 Pass 0.0875 19 0 0 Pass 0.0884 17 0 0 Pass 0.0893 17 0 0 Pass 0.0902 13 0 0 Pass 0.0911 13 0 0 Pass 0.0919 12 0 0 Pass 0.0928 12 0 0 Pass 0.0937 10 0 0 Pass 0.0946 9 0 0 Pass 0.0955 8 0 0 Pass 0.0964 8 0 0 Pass 0.0973 8 0 0 Pass 0.0982 8 0 0 Pass 0.0990 8 0 0 Pass 0.0999 8 0 0 Pass 0.1008 7 0 0 Pass 0.1017 7 0 0 Pass 0.1026 7 0 0 Pass 0.1035 7 0 0 Pass 0.1044 7 0 0 Pass 0.1053 7 0 0 Pass 0.1062 7 0 0 Pass 0.1070 7 0 0 Pass 0.1079 7 0 0 Pass 0.1088 6 0 0 Pass 0.1097 5 0 0 Pass 0.1106 5 0 0 Pass 0.1115 5 0 0 Pass 0.1124 4 0 0 Pass 0.1133 3 0 0 Pass 0.1142 3 0 0 Pass 0.1150 2 0 0 Pass 0.1159 2 0 0 Pass 0.1168 2 0 0 Pass 0.1177 2 0 0 Pass 19501 - Emerald Highlands 1/8/2020 3:48:09 PM Page 13 Water Quality Water Quality BMP Flow and Volume for POC #1 On-line facility volume:0 acre-feet On-line facility target flow:0 cfs. Adjusted for 15 min:0 cfs. Off-line facility target flow:0 cfs. Adjusted for 15 min:0 cfs. 19501 - Emerald Highlands 1/8/2020 3:48:09 PM Page 14 LID Report 19501 - Emerald Highlands 1/8/2020 3:48:18 PM Page 15 Model Default Modifications Total of 0 changes have been made. PERLND Changes No PERLND changes have been made. IMPLND Changes No IMPLND changes have been made. 19501 - Emerald Highlands 1/8/2020 3:48:18 PM Page 16 Appendix Predeveloped Schematic 19501 - Emerald Highlands 1/8/2020 3:48:19 PM Page 17 Mitigated Schematic 19501 - Emerald Highlands 1/8/2020 3:48:19 PM Page 18 Predeveloped UCI File RUN GLOBAL WWHM4 model simulation START 1948 10 01 END 2009 09 30 RUN INTERP OUTPUT LEVEL 3 0 RESUME 0 RUN 1 UNIT SYSTEM 1 END GLOBAL FILES <File> <Un#> <-----------File Name------------------------------>*** <-ID-> *** WDM 26 19501 - Emerald Highlands.wdm MESSU 25 Pre19501 - Emerald Highlands.MES 27 Pre19501 - Emerald Highlands.L61 28 Pre19501 - Emerald Highlands.L62 30 POC19501 - Emerald Highlands1.dat END FILES OPN SEQUENCE INGRP INDELT 00:15 PERLND 16 IMPLND 4 IMPLND 5 IMPLND 8 COPY 501 DISPLY 1 END INGRP END OPN SEQUENCE DISPLY DISPLY-INFO1 # - #<----------Title----------->***TRAN PIVL DIG1 FIL1 PYR DIG2 FIL2 YRND 1 Basin 1 MAX 1 2 30 9 END DISPLY-INFO1 END DISPLY COPY TIMESERIES # - # NPT NMN *** 1 1 1 501 1 1 END TIMESERIES END COPY GENER OPCODE # # OPCD *** END OPCODE PARM # # K *** END PARM END GENER PERLND GEN-INFO <PLS ><-------Name------->NBLKS Unit-systems Printer *** # - # User t-series Engl Metr *** in out *** 16 C, Lawn, Flat 1 1 1 1 27 0 END GEN-INFO *** Section PWATER*** ACTIVITY <PLS > ************* Active Sections ***************************** # - # ATMP SNOW PWAT SED PST PWG PQAL MSTL PEST NITR PHOS TRAC *** 16 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 END ACTIVITY PRINT-INFO <PLS > ***************** Print-flags ***************************** PIVL PYR # - # ATMP SNOW PWAT SED PST PWG PQAL MSTL PEST NITR PHOS TRAC ********* 19501 - Emerald Highlands 1/8/2020 3:48:19 PM Page 19 16 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 9 END PRINT-INFO PWAT-PARM1 <PLS > PWATER variable monthly parameter value flags *** # - # CSNO RTOP UZFG VCS VUZ VNN VIFW VIRC VLE INFC HWT *** 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 END PWAT-PARM1 PWAT-PARM2 <PLS > PWATER input info: Part 2 *** # - # ***FOREST LZSN INFILT LSUR SLSUR KVARY AGWRC 16 0 4.5 0.03 400 0.05 0.5 0.996 END PWAT-PARM2 PWAT-PARM3 <PLS > PWATER input info: Part 3 *** # - # ***PETMAX PETMIN INFEXP INFILD DEEPFR BASETP AGWETP 16 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 END PWAT-PARM3 PWAT-PARM4 <PLS > PWATER input info: Part 4 *** # - # CEPSC UZSN NSUR INTFW IRC LZETP *** 16 0.1 0.25 0.25 6 0.5 0.25 END PWAT-PARM4 PWAT-STATE1 <PLS > *** Initial conditions at start of simulation ran from 1990 to end of 1992 (pat 1-11-95) RUN 21 *** # - # *** CEPS SURS UZS IFWS LZS AGWS GWVS 16 0 0 0 0 2.5 1 0 END PWAT-STATE1 END PERLND IMPLND GEN-INFO <PLS ><-------Name-------> Unit-systems Printer *** # - # User t-series Engl Metr *** in out *** 4 ROOF TOPS/FLAT 1 1 1 27 0 5 DRIVEWAYS/FLAT 1 1 1 27 0 8 SIDEWALKS/FLAT 1 1 1 27 0 END GEN-INFO *** Section IWATER*** ACTIVITY <PLS > ************* Active Sections ***************************** # - # ATMP SNOW IWAT SLD IWG IQAL *** 4 0 0 1 0 0 0 5 0 0 1 0 0 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 0 END ACTIVITY PRINT-INFO <ILS > ******** Print-flags ******** PIVL PYR # - # ATMP SNOW IWAT SLD IWG IQAL ********* 4 0 0 4 0 0 0 1 9 5 0 0 4 0 0 0 1 9 8 0 0 4 0 0 0 1 9 END PRINT-INFO IWAT-PARM1 <PLS > IWATER variable monthly parameter value flags *** # - # CSNO RTOP VRS VNN RTLI *** 4 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 END IWAT-PARM1 19501 - Emerald Highlands 1/8/2020 3:48:19 PM Page 20 IWAT-PARM2 <PLS > IWATER input info: Part 2 *** # - # *** LSUR SLSUR NSUR RETSC 4 400 0.01 0.1 0.1 5 400 0.01 0.1 0.1 8 400 0.01 0.1 0.1 END IWAT-PARM2 IWAT-PARM3 <PLS > IWATER input info: Part 3 *** # - # ***PETMAX PETMIN 4 0 0 5 0 0 8 0 0 END IWAT-PARM3 IWAT-STATE1 <PLS > *** Initial conditions at start of simulation # - # *** RETS SURS 4 0 0 5 0 0 8 0 0 END IWAT-STATE1 END IMPLND SCHEMATIC <-Source-> <--Area--> <-Target-> MBLK *** <Name> # <-factor-> <Name> # Tbl# *** Basin 1*** PERLND 16 0.0743 COPY 501 12 PERLND 16 0.0743 COPY 501 13 IMPLND 4 0.1016 COPY 501 15 IMPLND 5 0.0291 COPY 501 15 IMPLND 8 0.0128 COPY 501 15 ******Routing****** END SCHEMATIC NETWORK <-Volume-> <-Grp> <-Member-><--Mult-->Tran <-Target vols> <-Grp> <-Member-> *** <Name> # <Name> # #<-factor->strg <Name> # # <Name> # # *** COPY 501 OUTPUT MEAN 1 1 48.4 DISPLY 1 INPUT TIMSER 1 <-Volume-> <-Grp> <-Member-><--Mult-->Tran <-Target vols> <-Grp> <-Member-> *** <Name> # <Name> # #<-factor->strg <Name> # # <Name> # # *** END NETWORK RCHRES GEN-INFO RCHRES Name Nexits Unit Systems Printer *** # - #<------------------><---> User T-series Engl Metr LKFG *** in out *** END GEN-INFO *** Section RCHRES*** ACTIVITY <PLS > ************* Active Sections ***************************** # - # HYFG ADFG CNFG HTFG SDFG GQFG OXFG NUFG PKFG PHFG *** END ACTIVITY PRINT-INFO <PLS > ***************** Print-flags ******************* PIVL PYR # - # HYDR ADCA CONS HEAT SED GQL OXRX NUTR PLNK PHCB PIVL PYR ********* END PRINT-INFO HYDR-PARM1 RCHRES Flags for each HYDR Section *** 19501 - Emerald Highlands 1/8/2020 3:48:19 PM Page 21 # - # VC A1 A2 A3 ODFVFG for each *** ODGTFG for each FUNCT for each FG FG FG FG possible exit *** possible exit possible exit * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *** END HYDR-PARM1 HYDR-PARM2 # - # FTABNO LEN DELTH STCOR KS DB50 *** <------><--------><--------><--------><--------><--------><--------> *** END HYDR-PARM2 HYDR-INIT RCHRES Initial conditions for each HYDR section *** # - # *** VOL Initial value of COLIND Initial value of OUTDGT *** ac-ft for each possible exit for each possible exit <------><--------> <---><---><---><---><---> *** <---><---><---><---><---> END HYDR-INIT END RCHRES SPEC-ACTIONS END SPEC-ACTIONS FTABLES END FTABLES EXT SOURCES <-Volume-> <Member> SsysSgap<--Mult-->Tran <-Target vols> <-Grp> <-Member-> *** <Name> # <Name> # tem strg<-factor->strg <Name> # # <Name> # # *** WDM 2 PREC ENGL 1 PERLND 1 999 EXTNL PREC WDM 2 PREC ENGL 1 IMPLND 1 999 EXTNL PREC WDM 1 EVAP ENGL 0.76 PERLND 1 999 EXTNL PETINP WDM 1 EVAP ENGL 0.76 IMPLND 1 999 EXTNL PETINP END EXT SOURCES EXT TARGETS <-Volume-> <-Grp> <-Member-><--Mult-->Tran <-Volume-> <Member> Tsys Tgap Amd *** <Name> # <Name> # #<-factor->strg <Name> # <Name> tem strg strg*** COPY 501 OUTPUT MEAN 1 1 48.4 WDM 501 FLOW ENGL REPL END EXT TARGETS MASS-LINK <Volume> <-Grp> <-Member-><--Mult--> <Target> <-Grp> <-Member->*** <Name> <Name> # #<-factor-> <Name> <Name> # #*** MASS-LINK 12 PERLND PWATER SURO 0.083333 COPY INPUT MEAN END MASS-LINK 12 MASS-LINK 13 PERLND PWATER IFWO 0.083333 COPY INPUT MEAN END MASS-LINK 13 MASS-LINK 15 IMPLND IWATER SURO 0.083333 COPY INPUT MEAN END MASS-LINK 15 END MASS-LINK END RUN 19501 - Emerald Highlands 1/8/2020 3:48:19 PM Page 22 Mitigated UCI File RUN GLOBAL WWHM4 model simulation START 1948 10 01 END 2009 09 30 RUN INTERP OUTPUT LEVEL 3 0 RESUME 0 RUN 1 UNIT SYSTEM 1 END GLOBAL FILES <File> <Un#> <-----------File Name------------------------------>*** <-ID-> *** WDM 26 19501 - Emerald Highlands.wdm MESSU 25 Mit19501 - Emerald Highlands.MES 27 Mit19501 - Emerald Highlands.L61 28 Mit19501 - Emerald Highlands.L62 30 POC19501 - Emerald Highlands1.dat END FILES OPN SEQUENCE INGRP INDELT 00:15 PERLND 13 COPY 501 DISPLY 1 END INGRP END OPN SEQUENCE DISPLY DISPLY-INFO1 # - #<----------Title----------->***TRAN PIVL DIG1 FIL1 PYR DIG2 FIL2 YRND 1 Basin 1 MAX 1 2 30 9 END DISPLY-INFO1 END DISPLY COPY TIMESERIES # - # NPT NMN *** 1 1 1 501 1 1 END TIMESERIES END COPY GENER OPCODE # # OPCD *** END OPCODE PARM # # K *** END PARM END GENER PERLND GEN-INFO <PLS ><-------Name------->NBLKS Unit-systems Printer *** # - # User t-series Engl Metr *** in out *** 13 C, Pasture, Flat 1 1 1 1 27 0 END GEN-INFO *** Section PWATER*** ACTIVITY <PLS > ************* Active Sections ***************************** # - # ATMP SNOW PWAT SED PST PWG PQAL MSTL PEST NITR PHOS TRAC *** 13 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 END ACTIVITY PRINT-INFO <PLS > ***************** Print-flags ***************************** PIVL PYR # - # ATMP SNOW PWAT SED PST PWG PQAL MSTL PEST NITR PHOS TRAC ********* 13 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 9 END PRINT-INFO 19501 - Emerald Highlands 1/8/2020 3:48:19 PM Page 23 PWAT-PARM1 <PLS > PWATER variable monthly parameter value flags *** # - # CSNO RTOP UZFG VCS VUZ VNN VIFW VIRC VLE INFC HWT *** 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 END PWAT-PARM1 PWAT-PARM2 <PLS > PWATER input info: Part 2 *** # - # ***FOREST LZSN INFILT LSUR SLSUR KVARY AGWRC 13 0 4.5 0.06 400 0.05 0.5 0.996 END PWAT-PARM2 PWAT-PARM3 <PLS > PWATER input info: Part 3 *** # - # ***PETMAX PETMIN INFEXP INFILD DEEPFR BASETP AGWETP 13 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 END PWAT-PARM3 PWAT-PARM4 <PLS > PWATER input info: Part 4 *** # - # CEPSC UZSN NSUR INTFW IRC LZETP *** 13 0.15 0.4 0.3 6 0.5 0.4 END PWAT-PARM4 PWAT-STATE1 <PLS > *** Initial conditions at start of simulation ran from 1990 to end of 1992 (pat 1-11-95) RUN 21 *** # - # *** CEPS SURS UZS IFWS LZS AGWS GWVS 13 0 0 0 0 2.5 1 0 END PWAT-STATE1 END PERLND IMPLND GEN-INFO <PLS ><-------Name-------> Unit-systems Printer *** # - # User t-series Engl Metr *** in out *** END GEN-INFO *** Section IWATER*** ACTIVITY <PLS > ************* Active Sections ***************************** # - # ATMP SNOW IWAT SLD IWG IQAL *** END ACTIVITY PRINT-INFO <ILS > ******** Print-flags ******** PIVL PYR # - # ATMP SNOW IWAT SLD IWG IQAL ********* END PRINT-INFO IWAT-PARM1 <PLS > IWATER variable monthly parameter value flags *** # - # CSNO RTOP VRS VNN RTLI *** END IWAT-PARM1 IWAT-PARM2 <PLS > IWATER input info: Part 2 *** # - # *** LSUR SLSUR NSUR RETSC END IWAT-PARM2 IWAT-PARM3 <PLS > IWATER input info: Part 3 *** # - # ***PETMAX PETMIN END IWAT-PARM3 IWAT-STATE1 <PLS > *** Initial conditions at start of simulation # - # *** RETS SURS END IWAT-STATE1 19501 - Emerald Highlands 1/8/2020 3:48:19 PM Page 24 END IMPLND SCHEMATIC <-Source-> <--Area--> <-Target-> MBLK *** <Name> # <-factor-> <Name> # Tbl# *** Basin 1*** PERLND 13 0.2178 COPY 501 12 PERLND 13 0.2178 COPY 501 13 ******Routing****** END SCHEMATIC NETWORK <-Volume-> <-Grp> <-Member-><--Mult-->Tran <-Target vols> <-Grp> <-Member-> *** <Name> # <Name> # #<-factor->strg <Name> # # <Name> # # *** COPY 501 OUTPUT MEAN 1 1 48.4 DISPLY 1 INPUT TIMSER 1 <-Volume-> <-Grp> <-Member-><--Mult-->Tran <-Target vols> <-Grp> <-Member-> *** <Name> # <Name> # #<-factor->strg <Name> # # <Name> # # *** END NETWORK RCHRES GEN-INFO RCHRES Name Nexits Unit Systems Printer *** # - #<------------------><---> User T-series Engl Metr LKFG *** in out *** END GEN-INFO *** Section RCHRES*** ACTIVITY <PLS > ************* Active Sections ***************************** # - # HYFG ADFG CNFG HTFG SDFG GQFG OXFG NUFG PKFG PHFG *** END ACTIVITY PRINT-INFO <PLS > ***************** Print-flags ******************* PIVL PYR # - # HYDR ADCA CONS HEAT SED GQL OXRX NUTR PLNK PHCB PIVL PYR ********* END PRINT-INFO HYDR-PARM1 RCHRES Flags for each HYDR Section *** # - # VC A1 A2 A3 ODFVFG for each *** ODGTFG for each FUNCT for each FG FG FG FG possible exit *** possible exit possible exit * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *** END HYDR-PARM1 HYDR-PARM2 # - # FTABNO LEN DELTH STCOR KS DB50 *** <------><--------><--------><--------><--------><--------><--------> *** END HYDR-PARM2 HYDR-INIT RCHRES Initial conditions for each HYDR section *** # - # *** VOL Initial value of COLIND Initial value of OUTDGT *** ac-ft for each possible exit for each possible exit <------><--------> <---><---><---><---><---> *** <---><---><---><---><---> END HYDR-INIT END RCHRES SPEC-ACTIONS END SPEC-ACTIONS FTABLES END FTABLES EXT SOURCES <-Volume-> <Member> SsysSgap<--Mult-->Tran <-Target vols> <-Grp> <-Member-> *** <Name> # <Name> # tem strg<-factor->strg <Name> # # <Name> # # *** WDM 2 PREC ENGL 1 PERLND 1 999 EXTNL PREC WDM 2 PREC ENGL 1 IMPLND 1 999 EXTNL PREC 19501 - Emerald Highlands 1/8/2020 3:48:19 PM Page 25 WDM 1 EVAP ENGL 0.76 PERLND 1 999 EXTNL PETINP WDM 1 EVAP ENGL 0.76 IMPLND 1 999 EXTNL PETINP END EXT SOURCES EXT TARGETS <-Volume-> <-Grp> <-Member-><--Mult-->Tran <-Volume-> <Member> Tsys Tgap Amd *** <Name> # <Name> # #<-factor->strg <Name> # <Name> tem strg strg*** COPY 1 OUTPUT MEAN 1 1 48.4 WDM 701 FLOW ENGL REPL COPY 501 OUTPUT MEAN 1 1 48.4 WDM 801 FLOW ENGL REPL END EXT TARGETS MASS-LINK <Volume> <-Grp> <-Member-><--Mult--> <Target> <-Grp> <-Member->*** <Name> <Name> # #<-factor-> <Name> <Name> # #*** MASS-LINK 12 PERLND PWATER SURO 0.083333 COPY INPUT MEAN END MASS-LINK 12 MASS-LINK 13 PERLND PWATER IFWO 0.083333 COPY INPUT MEAN END MASS-LINK 13 END MASS-LINK END RUN 19501 - Emerald Highlands 1/8/2020 3:48:19 PM Page 26 Predeveloped HSPF Message File 19501 - Emerald Highlands 1/8/2020 3:48:19 PM Page 27 Mitigated HSPF Message File 19501 - Emerald Highlands 1/8/2020 3:48:19 PM Page 28 Disclaimer Legal Notice This program and accompanying documentation are provided 'as-is' without warranty of any kind. The entire risk regarding the performance and results of this program is assumed by End User. Clear Creek Solutions Inc. and the governmental licensee or sublicensees disclaim all warranties, either expressed or implied, including but not limited to implied warranties of program and accompanying documentation. In no event shall Clear Creek Solutions Inc. be liable for any damages whatsoever (including without limitation to damages for loss of business profits, loss of business information, business interruption, and the like) arising out of the use of, or inability to use this program even if Clear Creek Solutions Inc. or their authorized representatives have been advised of the possibility of such damages. Software Copyright © by : Clear Creek Solutions, Inc. 2005-2020; All Rights Reserved. Clear Creek Solutions, Inc. 6200 Capitol Blvd. Ste F Olympia, WA. 98501 Toll Free 1(866)943-0304 Local (360)943-0304 www.clearcreeksolutions.com WWHM2012 PROJECT REPORT 19501 - Emerald Highlands Water Quality Sizing 1/8/2020 4:06:18 PM Page 2 General Model Information Project Name:19501 - Emerald Highlands Water Quality Sizing Site Name: Site Address: City: Report Date:1/8/2020 Gage:Seatac Data Start:1948/10/01 Data End:2009/09/30 Timestep:15 Minute Precip Scale:1.000 Version Date:2019/09/13 Version:4.2.17 POC Thresholds Low Flow Threshold for POC1:50 Percent of the 2 Year High Flow Threshold for POC1:50 Year 19501 - Emerald Highlands Water Quality Sizing 1/8/2020 4:06:18 PM Page 3 Landuse Basin Data Predeveloped Land Use Basin 1 Bypass:No GroundWater:No Pervious Land Use acre C, Lawn, Flat 0.4157 Pervious Total 0.4157 Impervious Land Use acre ROOF TOPS FLAT 0.1016 DRIVEWAYS FLAT 0.0291 SIDEWALKS FLAT 0.0128 Impervious Total 0.1435 Basin Total 0.5592 Element Flows To: Surface Interflow Groundwater 19501 - Emerald Highlands Water Quality Sizing 1/8/2020 4:06:18 PM Page 4 Mitigated Land Use Basin 1 Bypass:No GroundWater:No Pervious Land Use acre C, Pasture, Flat 0.2178 Pervious Total 0.2178 Impervious Land Use acre ROADS FLAT 0.0718 ROOF TOPS FLAT 0.1722 DRIVEWAYS FLAT 0.0668 SIDEWALKS FLAT 0.0306 Impervious Total 0.3414 Basin Total 0.5592 Element Flows To: Surface Interflow Groundwater 19501 - Emerald Highlands Water Quality Sizing 1/8/2020 4:06:18 PM Page 5 Routing Elements Predeveloped Routing 19501 - Emerald Highlands Water Quality Sizing 1/8/2020 4:06:18 PM Page 6 Mitigated Routing 19501 - Emerald Highlands Water Quality Sizing 1/8/2020 4:06:18 PM Page 7 Analysis Results POC 1 + Predeveloped x Mitigated Predeveloped Landuse Totals for POC #1 Total Pervious Area:0.4157 Total Impervious Area:0.1435 Mitigated Landuse Totals for POC #1 Total Pervious Area:0.2178 Total Impervious Area:0.3414 Flow Frequency Method:Log Pearson Type III 17B Flow Frequency Return Periods for Predeveloped. POC #1 Return Period Flow(cfs) 2 year 0.083755 5 year 0.121406 10 year 0.149834 25 year 0.18991 50 year 0.222901 100 year 0.258684 Flow Frequency Return Periods for Mitigated. POC #1 Return Period Flow(cfs) 2 year 0.134409 5 year 0.170549 10 year 0.195191 25 year 0.227242 50 year 0.251833 100 year 0.277069 Annual Peaks Annual Peaks for Predeveloped and Mitigated. POC #1 Year Predeveloped Mitigated 1949 0.132 0.179 1950 0.135 0.182 1951 0.081 0.115 1952 0.049 0.094 1953 0.048 0.101 1954 0.067 0.110 1955 0.070 0.123 1956 0.070 0.121 1957 0.096 0.141 1958 0.060 0.111 19501 - Emerald Highlands Water Quality Sizing 1/8/2020 4:06:48 PM Page 8 1959 0.047 0.110 1960 0.086 0.120 1961 0.077 0.120 1962 0.051 0.101 1963 0.075 0.116 1964 0.065 0.109 1965 0.103 0.143 1966 0.054 0.096 1967 0.137 0.161 1968 0.112 0.181 1969 0.093 0.129 1970 0.077 0.126 1971 0.092 0.149 1972 0.129 0.158 1973 0.046 0.090 1974 0.093 0.136 1975 0.099 0.152 1976 0.071 0.109 1977 0.066 0.111 1978 0.079 0.135 1979 0.086 0.185 1980 0.153 0.179 1981 0.081 0.140 1982 0.150 0.197 1983 0.081 0.156 1984 0.061 0.101 1985 0.083 0.136 1986 0.080 0.119 1987 0.090 0.182 1988 0.046 0.110 1989 0.058 0.138 1990 0.254 0.270 1991 0.176 0.201 1992 0.061 0.101 1993 0.045 0.086 1994 0.039 0.092 1995 0.069 0.124 1996 0.114 0.140 1997 0.093 0.134 1998 0.072 0.127 1999 0.191 0.259 2000 0.084 0.133 2001 0.067 0.141 2002 0.132 0.173 2003 0.103 0.140 2004 0.173 0.247 2005 0.081 0.118 2006 0.077 0.105 2007 0.232 0.236 2008 0.172 0.198 2009 0.102 0.168 Ranked Annual Peaks Ranked Annual Peaks for Predeveloped and Mitigated. POC #1 Rank Predeveloped Mitigated 1 0.2538 0.2701 2 0.2316 0.2592 3 0.1914 0.2474 19501 - Emerald Highlands Water Quality Sizing 1/8/2020 4:06:48 PM Page 9 4 0.1755 0.2359 5 0.1728 0.2007 6 0.1719 0.1976 7 0.1531 0.1971 8 0.1502 0.1854 9 0.1370 0.1822 10 0.1354 0.1815 11 0.1319 0.1811 12 0.1318 0.1790 13 0.1293 0.1786 14 0.1144 0.1725 15 0.1121 0.1683 16 0.1032 0.1606 17 0.1026 0.1581 18 0.1015 0.1562 19 0.0995 0.1521 20 0.0960 0.1487 21 0.0931 0.1435 22 0.0927 0.1414 23 0.0925 0.1413 24 0.0925 0.1402 25 0.0896 0.1402 26 0.0858 0.1400 27 0.0856 0.1377 28 0.0844 0.1363 29 0.0829 0.1362 30 0.0811 0.1354 31 0.0807 0.1337 32 0.0806 0.1333 33 0.0806 0.1291 34 0.0800 0.1270 35 0.0787 0.1265 36 0.0771 0.1235 37 0.0769 0.1229 38 0.0768 0.1209 39 0.0748 0.1205 40 0.0722 0.1200 41 0.0711 0.1187 42 0.0701 0.1184 43 0.0699 0.1157 44 0.0694 0.1146 45 0.0674 0.1108 46 0.0669 0.1107 47 0.0657 0.1104 48 0.0653 0.1104 49 0.0609 0.1101 50 0.0607 0.1088 51 0.0602 0.1088 52 0.0580 0.1054 53 0.0535 0.1013 54 0.0507 0.1012 55 0.0495 0.1010 56 0.0477 0.1007 57 0.0466 0.0965 58 0.0465 0.0938 59 0.0464 0.0919 60 0.0445 0.0904 61 0.0387 0.0855 19501 - Emerald Highlands Water Quality Sizing 1/8/2020 4:06:48 PM Page 10 19501 - Emerald Highlands Water Quality Sizing 1/8/2020 4:06:48 PM Page 11 Duration Flows Flow(cfs)Predev Mit Percentage Pass/Fail 0.0419 294 1929 656 Fail 0.0437 273 1730 633 Fail 0.0455 251 1598 636 Fail 0.0474 226 1444 638 Fail 0.0492 210 1296 617 Fail 0.0510 197 1185 601 Fail 0.0528 178 1085 609 Fail 0.0547 165 993 601 Fail 0.0565 151 911 603 Fail 0.0583 141 823 583 Fail 0.0602 130 753 579 Fail 0.0620 120 697 580 Fail 0.0638 116 652 562 Fail 0.0656 109 594 544 Fail 0.0675 101 553 547 Fail 0.0693 97 516 531 Fail 0.0711 94 470 500 Fail 0.0730 91 436 479 Fail 0.0748 85 409 481 Fail 0.0766 78 372 476 Fail 0.0784 70 352 502 Fail 0.0803 66 330 500 Fail 0.0821 63 312 495 Fail 0.0839 61 286 468 Fail 0.0858 58 270 465 Fail 0.0876 54 246 455 Fail 0.0894 51 230 450 Fail 0.0912 48 214 445 Fail 0.0931 47 202 429 Fail 0.0949 44 188 427 Fail 0.0967 40 170 425 Fail 0.0986 39 159 407 Fail 0.1004 39 154 394 Fail 0.1022 38 142 373 Fail 0.1040 37 135 364 Fail 0.1059 34 129 379 Fail 0.1077 33 119 360 Fail 0.1095 30 113 376 Fail 0.1114 27 104 385 Fail 0.1132 27 101 374 Fail 0.1150 24 90 375 Fail 0.1168 24 84 350 Fail 0.1187 23 83 360 Fail 0.1205 21 80 380 Fail 0.1223 20 77 385 Fail 0.1242 19 71 373 Fail 0.1260 17 66 388 Fail 0.1278 15 64 426 Fail 0.1296 14 61 435 Fail 0.1315 14 59 421 Fail 0.1333 14 56 400 Fail 0.1351 14 53 378 Fail 0.1370 14 51 364 Fail 0.1388 13 49 376 Fail 19501 - Emerald Highlands Water Quality Sizing 1/8/2020 4:06:48 PM Page 12 0.1406 10 45 450 Fail 0.1424 10 44 440 Fail 0.1443 10 41 410 Fail 0.1461 8 36 450 Fail 0.1479 8 34 425 Fail 0.1498 7 34 485 Fail 0.1516 5 28 560 Fail 0.1534 4 26 650 Fail 0.1552 4 22 550 Fail 0.1571 4 19 475 Fail 0.1589 3 18 600 Fail 0.1607 3 18 600 Fail 0.1626 3 17 566 Fail 0.1644 2 16 800 Fail 0.1662 2 16 800 Fail 0.1680 2 14 700 Fail 0.1699 2 12 600 Fail 0.1717 2 12 600 Fail 0.1735 2 9 450 Fail 0.1754 2 9 450 Fail 0.1772 2 8 400 Fail 0.1790 2 8 400 Fail 0.1808 2 8 400 Fail 0.1827 2 8 400 Fail 0.1845 2 8 400 Fail 0.1863 2 8 400 Fail 0.1882 2 8 400 Fail 0.1900 2 8 400 Fail 0.1918 2 8 400 Fail 0.1936 2 7 350 Fail 0.1955 2 7 350 Fail 0.1973 2 7 350 Fail 0.1991 2 7 350 Fail 0.2010 2 7 350 Fail 0.2028 2 7 350 Fail 0.2046 1 6 600 Fail 0.2064 1 5 500 Fail 0.2083 1 3 300 Fail 0.2101 1 3 300 Fail 0.2119 1 3 300 Fail 0.2138 1 3 300 Fail 0.2156 1 3 300 Fail 0.2174 1 3 300 Fail 0.2192 1 2 200 Fail 0.2211 1 2 200 Fail 0.2229 1 2 200 Fail The development has an increase in flow durations from 1/2 Predeveloped 2 year flow to the 2 year flow or more than a 10% increase from the 2 year to the 50 year flow. The development has an increase in flow durations for more than 50% of the flows for the range of the duration analysis. 19501 - Emerald Highlands Water Quality Sizing 1/8/2020 4:06:48 PM Page 13 Water Quality Water Quality BMP Flow and Volume for POC #1 On-line facility volume:0.0466 acre-feet On-line facility target flow:0.0546 cfs. Adjusted for 15 min:0.0546 cfs. Off-line facility target flow:0.0306 cfs. Adjusted for 15 min:0.0306 cfs. 19501 - Emerald Highlands Water Quality Sizing 1/8/2020 4:06:48 PM Page 14 LID Report 19501 - Emerald Highlands Water Quality Sizing 1/8/2020 4:06:57 PM Page 15 Model Default Modifications Total of 0 changes have been made. PERLND Changes No PERLND changes have been made. IMPLND Changes No IMPLND changes have been made. 19501 - Emerald Highlands Water Quality Sizing 1/8/2020 4:06:57 PM Page 16 Appendix Predeveloped Schematic 19501 - Emerald Highlands Water Quality Sizing 1/8/2020 4:06:58 PM Page 17 Mitigated Schematic 19501 - Emerald Highlands Water Quality Sizing 1/8/2020 4:06:58 PM Page 18 Predeveloped UCI File RUN GLOBAL WWHM4 model simulation START 1948 10 01 END 2009 09 30 RUN INTERP OUTPUT LEVEL 3 0 RESUME 0 RUN 1 UNIT SYSTEM 1 END GLOBAL FILES <File> <Un#> <-----------File Name------------------------------>*** <-ID-> *** WDM 26 19501 - Emerald Highlands Water Quality Sizing.wdm MESSU 25 Pre19501 - Emerald Highlands Water Quality Sizing.MES 27 Pre19501 - Emerald Highlands Water Quality Sizing.L61 28 Pre19501 - Emerald Highlands Water Quality Sizing.L62 30 POC19501 - Emerald Highlands Water Quality Sizing1.dat END FILES OPN SEQUENCE INGRP INDELT 00:15 PERLND 16 IMPLND 4 IMPLND 5 IMPLND 8 COPY 501 DISPLY 1 END INGRP END OPN SEQUENCE DISPLY DISPLY-INFO1 # - #<----------Title----------->***TRAN PIVL DIG1 FIL1 PYR DIG2 FIL2 YRND 1 Basin 1 MAX 1 2 30 9 END DISPLY-INFO1 END DISPLY COPY TIMESERIES # - # NPT NMN *** 1 1 1 501 1 1 END TIMESERIES END COPY GENER OPCODE # # OPCD *** END OPCODE PARM # # K *** END PARM END GENER PERLND GEN-INFO <PLS ><-------Name------->NBLKS Unit-systems Printer *** # - # User t-series Engl Metr *** in out *** 16 C, Lawn, Flat 1 1 1 1 27 0 END GEN-INFO *** Section PWATER*** ACTIVITY <PLS > ************* Active Sections ***************************** # - # ATMP SNOW PWAT SED PST PWG PQAL MSTL PEST NITR PHOS TRAC *** 16 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 END ACTIVITY PRINT-INFO <PLS > ***************** Print-flags ***************************** PIVL PYR # - # ATMP SNOW PWAT SED PST PWG PQAL MSTL PEST NITR PHOS TRAC ********* 19501 - Emerald Highlands Water Quality Sizing 1/8/2020 4:06:58 PM Page 19 16 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 9 END PRINT-INFO PWAT-PARM1 <PLS > PWATER variable monthly parameter value flags *** # - # CSNO RTOP UZFG VCS VUZ VNN VIFW VIRC VLE INFC HWT *** 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 END PWAT-PARM1 PWAT-PARM2 <PLS > PWATER input info: Part 2 *** # - # ***FOREST LZSN INFILT LSUR SLSUR KVARY AGWRC 16 0 4.5 0.03 400 0.05 0.5 0.996 END PWAT-PARM2 PWAT-PARM3 <PLS > PWATER input info: Part 3 *** # - # ***PETMAX PETMIN INFEXP INFILD DEEPFR BASETP AGWETP 16 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 END PWAT-PARM3 PWAT-PARM4 <PLS > PWATER input info: Part 4 *** # - # CEPSC UZSN NSUR INTFW IRC LZETP *** 16 0.1 0.25 0.25 6 0.5 0.25 END PWAT-PARM4 PWAT-STATE1 <PLS > *** Initial conditions at start of simulation ran from 1990 to end of 1992 (pat 1-11-95) RUN 21 *** # - # *** CEPS SURS UZS IFWS LZS AGWS GWVS 16 0 0 0 0 2.5 1 0 END PWAT-STATE1 END PERLND IMPLND GEN-INFO <PLS ><-------Name-------> Unit-systems Printer *** # - # User t-series Engl Metr *** in out *** 4 ROOF TOPS/FLAT 1 1 1 27 0 5 DRIVEWAYS/FLAT 1 1 1 27 0 8 SIDEWALKS/FLAT 1 1 1 27 0 END GEN-INFO *** Section IWATER*** ACTIVITY <PLS > ************* Active Sections ***************************** # - # ATMP SNOW IWAT SLD IWG IQAL *** 4 0 0 1 0 0 0 5 0 0 1 0 0 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 0 END ACTIVITY PRINT-INFO <ILS > ******** Print-flags ******** PIVL PYR # - # ATMP SNOW IWAT SLD IWG IQAL ********* 4 0 0 4 0 0 0 1 9 5 0 0 4 0 0 0 1 9 8 0 0 4 0 0 0 1 9 END PRINT-INFO IWAT-PARM1 <PLS > IWATER variable monthly parameter value flags *** # - # CSNO RTOP VRS VNN RTLI *** 4 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 END IWAT-PARM1 19501 - Emerald Highlands Water Quality Sizing 1/8/2020 4:06:58 PM Page 20 IWAT-PARM2 <PLS > IWATER input info: Part 2 *** # - # *** LSUR SLSUR NSUR RETSC 4 400 0.01 0.1 0.1 5 400 0.01 0.1 0.1 8 400 0.01 0.1 0.1 END IWAT-PARM2 IWAT-PARM3 <PLS > IWATER input info: Part 3 *** # - # ***PETMAX PETMIN 4 0 0 5 0 0 8 0 0 END IWAT-PARM3 IWAT-STATE1 <PLS > *** Initial conditions at start of simulation # - # *** RETS SURS 4 0 0 5 0 0 8 0 0 END IWAT-STATE1 END IMPLND SCHEMATIC <-Source-> <--Area--> <-Target-> MBLK *** <Name> # <-factor-> <Name> # Tbl# *** Basin 1*** PERLND 16 0.4157 COPY 501 12 PERLND 16 0.4157 COPY 501 13 IMPLND 4 0.1016 COPY 501 15 IMPLND 5 0.0291 COPY 501 15 IMPLND 8 0.0128 COPY 501 15 ******Routing****** END SCHEMATIC NETWORK <-Volume-> <-Grp> <-Member-><--Mult-->Tran <-Target vols> <-Grp> <-Member-> *** <Name> # <Name> # #<-factor->strg <Name> # # <Name> # # *** COPY 501 OUTPUT MEAN 1 1 48.4 DISPLY 1 INPUT TIMSER 1 <-Volume-> <-Grp> <-Member-><--Mult-->Tran <-Target vols> <-Grp> <-Member-> *** <Name> # <Name> # #<-factor->strg <Name> # # <Name> # # *** END NETWORK RCHRES GEN-INFO RCHRES Name Nexits Unit Systems Printer *** # - #<------------------><---> User T-series Engl Metr LKFG *** in out *** END GEN-INFO *** Section RCHRES*** ACTIVITY <PLS > ************* Active Sections ***************************** # - # HYFG ADFG CNFG HTFG SDFG GQFG OXFG NUFG PKFG PHFG *** END ACTIVITY PRINT-INFO <PLS > ***************** Print-flags ******************* PIVL PYR # - # HYDR ADCA CONS HEAT SED GQL OXRX NUTR PLNK PHCB PIVL PYR ********* END PRINT-INFO HYDR-PARM1 RCHRES Flags for each HYDR Section *** 19501 - Emerald Highlands Water Quality Sizing 1/8/2020 4:06:58 PM Page 21 # - # VC A1 A2 A3 ODFVFG for each *** ODGTFG for each FUNCT for each FG FG FG FG possible exit *** possible exit possible exit * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *** END HYDR-PARM1 HYDR-PARM2 # - # FTABNO LEN DELTH STCOR KS DB50 *** <------><--------><--------><--------><--------><--------><--------> *** END HYDR-PARM2 HYDR-INIT RCHRES Initial conditions for each HYDR section *** # - # *** VOL Initial value of COLIND Initial value of OUTDGT *** ac-ft for each possible exit for each possible exit <------><--------> <---><---><---><---><---> *** <---><---><---><---><---> END HYDR-INIT END RCHRES SPEC-ACTIONS END SPEC-ACTIONS FTABLES END FTABLES EXT SOURCES <-Volume-> <Member> SsysSgap<--Mult-->Tran <-Target vols> <-Grp> <-Member-> *** <Name> # <Name> # tem strg<-factor->strg <Name> # # <Name> # # *** WDM 2 PREC ENGL 1 DIV PERLND 1 999 EXTNL PREC WDM 2 PREC ENGL 1 DIV IMPLND 1 999 EXTNL PREC WDM 1 EVAP ENGL 0.76 PERLND 1 999 EXTNL PETINP WDM 1 EVAP ENGL 0.76 IMPLND 1 999 EXTNL PETINP END EXT SOURCES EXT TARGETS <-Volume-> <-Grp> <-Member-><--Mult-->Tran <-Volume-> <Member> Tsys Tgap Amd *** <Name> # <Name> # #<-factor->strg <Name> # <Name> tem strg strg*** COPY 501 OUTPUT MEAN 1 1 48.4 WDM 501 FLOW ENGL REPL END EXT TARGETS MASS-LINK <Volume> <-Grp> <-Member-><--Mult--> <Target> <-Grp> <-Member->*** <Name> <Name> # #<-factor-> <Name> <Name> # #*** MASS-LINK 12 PERLND PWATER SURO 0.083333 COPY INPUT MEAN END MASS-LINK 12 MASS-LINK 13 PERLND PWATER IFWO 0.083333 COPY INPUT MEAN END MASS-LINK 13 MASS-LINK 15 IMPLND IWATER SURO 0.083333 COPY INPUT MEAN END MASS-LINK 15 END MASS-LINK END RUN 19501 - Emerald Highlands Water Quality Sizing 1/8/2020 4:06:58 PM Page 22 Mitigated UCI File RUN GLOBAL WWHM4 model simulation START 1948 10 01 END 2009 09 30 RUN INTERP OUTPUT LEVEL 3 0 RESUME 0 RUN 1 UNIT SYSTEM 1 END GLOBAL FILES <File> <Un#> <-----------File Name------------------------------>*** <-ID-> *** WDM 26 19501 - Emerald Highlands Water Quality Sizing.wdm MESSU 25 Mit19501 - Emerald Highlands Water Quality Sizing.MES 27 Mit19501 - Emerald Highlands Water Quality Sizing.L61 28 Mit19501 - Emerald Highlands Water Quality Sizing.L62 30 POC19501 - Emerald Highlands Water Quality Sizing1.dat END FILES OPN SEQUENCE INGRP INDELT 00:15 PERLND 13 IMPLND 1 IMPLND 4 IMPLND 5 IMPLND 8 COPY 501 DISPLY 1 END INGRP END OPN SEQUENCE DISPLY DISPLY-INFO1 # - #<----------Title----------->***TRAN PIVL DIG1 FIL1 PYR DIG2 FIL2 YRND 1 Basin 1 MAX 1 2 30 9 END DISPLY-INFO1 END DISPLY COPY TIMESERIES # - # NPT NMN *** 1 1 1 501 1 1 END TIMESERIES END COPY GENER OPCODE # # OPCD *** END OPCODE PARM # # K *** END PARM END GENER PERLND GEN-INFO <PLS ><-------Name------->NBLKS Unit-systems Printer *** # - # User t-series Engl Metr *** in out *** 13 C, Pasture, Flat 1 1 1 1 27 0 END GEN-INFO *** Section PWATER*** ACTIVITY <PLS > ************* Active Sections ***************************** # - # ATMP SNOW PWAT SED PST PWG PQAL MSTL PEST NITR PHOS TRAC *** 13 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 END ACTIVITY PRINT-INFO <PLS > ***************** Print-flags ***************************** PIVL PYR 19501 - Emerald Highlands Water Quality Sizing 1/8/2020 4:06:58 PM Page 23 # - # ATMP SNOW PWAT SED PST PWG PQAL MSTL PEST NITR PHOS TRAC ********* 13 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 9 END PRINT-INFO PWAT-PARM1 <PLS > PWATER variable monthly parameter value flags *** # - # CSNO RTOP UZFG VCS VUZ VNN VIFW VIRC VLE INFC HWT *** 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 END PWAT-PARM1 PWAT-PARM2 <PLS > PWATER input info: Part 2 *** # - # ***FOREST LZSN INFILT LSUR SLSUR KVARY AGWRC 13 0 4.5 0.06 400 0.05 0.5 0.996 END PWAT-PARM2 PWAT-PARM3 <PLS > PWATER input info: Part 3 *** # - # ***PETMAX PETMIN INFEXP INFILD DEEPFR BASETP AGWETP 13 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 END PWAT-PARM3 PWAT-PARM4 <PLS > PWATER input info: Part 4 *** # - # CEPSC UZSN NSUR INTFW IRC LZETP *** 13 0.15 0.4 0.3 6 0.5 0.4 END PWAT-PARM4 PWAT-STATE1 <PLS > *** Initial conditions at start of simulation ran from 1990 to end of 1992 (pat 1-11-95) RUN 21 *** # - # *** CEPS SURS UZS IFWS LZS AGWS GWVS 13 0 0 0 0 2.5 1 0 END PWAT-STATE1 END PERLND IMPLND GEN-INFO <PLS ><-------Name-------> Unit-systems Printer *** # - # User t-series Engl Metr *** in out *** 1 ROADS/FLAT 1 1 1 27 0 4 ROOF TOPS/FLAT 1 1 1 27 0 5 DRIVEWAYS/FLAT 1 1 1 27 0 8 SIDEWALKS/FLAT 1 1 1 27 0 END GEN-INFO *** Section IWATER*** ACTIVITY <PLS > ************* Active Sections ***************************** # - # ATMP SNOW IWAT SLD IWG IQAL *** 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 4 0 0 1 0 0 0 5 0 0 1 0 0 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 0 END ACTIVITY PRINT-INFO <ILS > ******** Print-flags ******** PIVL PYR # - # ATMP SNOW IWAT SLD IWG IQAL ********* 1 0 0 4 0 0 0 1 9 4 0 0 4 0 0 0 1 9 5 0 0 4 0 0 0 1 9 8 0 0 4 0 0 0 1 9 END PRINT-INFO IWAT-PARM1 <PLS > IWATER variable monthly parameter value flags *** # - # CSNO RTOP VRS VNN RTLI *** 1 0 0 0 0 0 19501 - Emerald Highlands Water Quality Sizing 1/8/2020 4:06:58 PM Page 24 4 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 END IWAT-PARM1 IWAT-PARM2 <PLS > IWATER input info: Part 2 *** # - # *** LSUR SLSUR NSUR RETSC 1 400 0.01 0.1 0.1 4 400 0.01 0.1 0.1 5 400 0.01 0.1 0.1 8 400 0.01 0.1 0.1 END IWAT-PARM2 IWAT-PARM3 <PLS > IWATER input info: Part 3 *** # - # ***PETMAX PETMIN 1 0 0 4 0 0 5 0 0 8 0 0 END IWAT-PARM3 IWAT-STATE1 <PLS > *** Initial conditions at start of simulation # - # *** RETS SURS 1 0 0 4 0 0 5 0 0 8 0 0 END IWAT-STATE1 END IMPLND SCHEMATIC <-Source-> <--Area--> <-Target-> MBLK *** <Name> # <-factor-> <Name> # Tbl# *** Basin 1*** PERLND 13 0.2178 COPY 501 12 PERLND 13 0.2178 COPY 501 13 IMPLND 1 0.0718 COPY 501 15 IMPLND 4 0.1722 COPY 501 15 IMPLND 5 0.0668 COPY 501 15 IMPLND 8 0.0306 COPY 501 15 ******Routing****** END SCHEMATIC NETWORK <-Volume-> <-Grp> <-Member-><--Mult-->Tran <-Target vols> <-Grp> <-Member-> *** <Name> # <Name> # #<-factor->strg <Name> # # <Name> # # *** COPY 501 OUTPUT MEAN 1 1 48.4 DISPLY 1 INPUT TIMSER 1 <-Volume-> <-Grp> <-Member-><--Mult-->Tran <-Target vols> <-Grp> <-Member-> *** <Name> # <Name> # #<-factor->strg <Name> # # <Name> # # *** END NETWORK RCHRES GEN-INFO RCHRES Name Nexits Unit Systems Printer *** # - #<------------------><---> User T-series Engl Metr LKFG *** in out *** END GEN-INFO *** Section RCHRES*** ACTIVITY <PLS > ************* Active Sections ***************************** # - # HYFG ADFG CNFG HTFG SDFG GQFG OXFG NUFG PKFG PHFG *** 19501 - Emerald Highlands Water Quality Sizing 1/8/2020 4:06:58 PM Page 25 END ACTIVITY PRINT-INFO <PLS > ***************** Print-flags ******************* PIVL PYR # - # HYDR ADCA CONS HEAT SED GQL OXRX NUTR PLNK PHCB PIVL PYR ********* END PRINT-INFO HYDR-PARM1 RCHRES Flags for each HYDR Section *** # - # VC A1 A2 A3 ODFVFG for each *** ODGTFG for each FUNCT for each FG FG FG FG possible exit *** possible exit possible exit * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *** END HYDR-PARM1 HYDR-PARM2 # - # FTABNO LEN DELTH STCOR KS DB50 *** <------><--------><--------><--------><--------><--------><--------> *** END HYDR-PARM2 HYDR-INIT RCHRES Initial conditions for each HYDR section *** # - # *** VOL Initial value of COLIND Initial value of OUTDGT *** ac-ft for each possible exit for each possible exit <------><--------> <---><---><---><---><---> *** <---><---><---><---><---> END HYDR-INIT END RCHRES SPEC-ACTIONS END SPEC-ACTIONS FTABLES END FTABLES EXT SOURCES <-Volume-> <Member> SsysSgap<--Mult-->Tran <-Target vols> <-Grp> <-Member-> *** <Name> # <Name> # tem strg<-factor->strg <Name> # # <Name> # # *** WDM 2 PREC ENGL 1 PERLND 1 999 EXTNL PREC WDM 2 PREC ENGL 1 IMPLND 1 999 EXTNL PREC WDM 1 EVAP ENGL 0.76 PERLND 1 999 EXTNL PETINP WDM 1 EVAP ENGL 0.76 IMPLND 1 999 EXTNL PETINP END EXT SOURCES EXT TARGETS <-Volume-> <-Grp> <-Member-><--Mult-->Tran <-Volume-> <Member> Tsys Tgap Amd *** <Name> # <Name> # #<-factor->strg <Name> # <Name> tem strg strg*** COPY 1 OUTPUT MEAN 1 1 48.4 WDM 701 FLOW ENGL REPL COPY 501 OUTPUT MEAN 1 1 48.4 WDM 801 FLOW ENGL REPL END EXT TARGETS MASS-LINK <Volume> <-Grp> <-Member-><--Mult--> <Target> <-Grp> <-Member->*** <Name> <Name> # #<-factor-> <Name> <Name> # #*** MASS-LINK 12 PERLND PWATER SURO 0.083333 COPY INPUT MEAN END MASS-LINK 12 MASS-LINK 13 PERLND PWATER IFWO 0.083333 COPY INPUT MEAN END MASS-LINK 13 MASS-LINK 15 IMPLND IWATER SURO 0.083333 COPY INPUT MEAN END MASS-LINK 15 END MASS-LINK END RUN 19501 - Emerald Highlands Water Quality Sizing 1/8/2020 4:06:58 PM Page 26 Predeveloped HSPF Message File ERROR/WARNING ID: 215 118 The source/target transformation function, specified in the following entry which appeared in the ext sources, network or ext targets blocks, is invalid: Transf Stkind Case | Opn-ID Grp-Name Member-ID Function | Source: WDM1 , 2 PREC 31 1 DIV 2 1 | Target: PERLND, 16 EXTNL PREC 1 1 ERROR/WARNING ID: 215 118 The source/target transformation function, specified in the following entry which appeared in the ext sources, network or ext targets blocks, is invalid: Transf Stkind Case | Opn-ID Grp-Name Member-ID Function | Source: WDM1 , 2 PREC 31 1 DIV 2 1 | Target: IMPLND, 4 EXTNL PREC 1 1 ERROR/WARNING ID: 215 118 The source/target transformation function, specified in the following entry which appeared in the ext sources, network or ext targets blocks, is invalid: Transf Stkind Case | Opn-ID Grp-Name Member-ID Function | Source: WDM1 , 2 PREC 31 1 DIV 2 1 | Target: IMPLND, 5 EXTNL PREC 1 1 ERROR/WARNING ID: 215 118 The source/target transformation function, specified in the following entry which appeared in the ext sources, network or ext targets blocks, is invalid: Transf Stkind Case | Opn-ID Grp-Name Member-ID Function | Source: WDM1 , 2 PREC 31 1 DIV 2 1 | Target: IMPLND, 8 EXTNL PREC 1 1 19501 - Emerald Highlands Water Quality Sizing 1/8/2020 4:06:58 PM Page 27 Mitigated HSPF Message File 19501 - Emerald Highlands Water Quality Sizing 1/8/2020 4:06:58 PM Page 28 Disclaimer Legal Notice This program and accompanying documentation are provided 'as-is' without warranty of any kind. The entire risk regarding the performance and results of this program is assumed by End User. Clear Creek Solutions Inc. and the governmental licensee or sublicensees disclaim all warranties, either expressed or implied, including but not limited to implied warranties of program and accompanying documentation. In no event shall Clear Creek Solutions Inc. be liable for any damages whatsoever (including without limitation to damages for loss of business profits, loss of business information, business interruption, and the like) arising out of the use of, or inability to use this program even if Clear Creek Solutions Inc. or their authorized representatives have been advised of the possibility of such damages. Software Copyright © by : Clear Creek Solutions, Inc. 2005-2020; All Rights Reserved. Clear Creek Solutions, Inc. 6200 Capitol Blvd. Ste F Olympia, WA. 98501 Toll Free 1(866)943-0304 Local (360)943-0304 www.clearcreeksolutions.com