Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLUA-06-172_Misc 2Y[AK I FALL CEDAR. RIVI--R C~OR.POR.ATE PAR.K PREPARLD fOR: CH'\RLIE FOUSHEE TARR:\CO~ DEVELOPMENT 1000 SECOND r\ VEi'-LIE SUITE 1200 SEATILl Wr\ 98104 (206 ! 233-9600 PREPARED BY: Cl::U:SIE BOTHA WED AND PERMUJJNG SERVICES Zo'2:5 South Norman Street. Seattle, W.i~hington ()8144 w~isp.com OCTOBER 17, 2008 LUA oep-\12. I. EXECUTIVE SUMMAR_ Y The Cedar River Corporate Park site is located east of Lind Avenue SW, as shown in Figure 1. A Wetland Buffer Mitigation Plan, dated April 16, 2007, was prepared by WPS. The plan was approved by the City of Renton and implementation was completed on February 13, 2008. The Year 1 Spring Monitoring report was completed on June 5, 2008 and the Early Summer report was completed on June 26, 2008. This report represents the monitoring results obtained on September 17, 2008. + ' \ ( \ I ' I ~- \ ~--·) I~ I .. J l . .,·, .. ,, ~:;_:·' .. "====="'== "" FIGURE 1: VICINllY MAP This report presents a summary of enhancement measures, goals, a description of the approved and actual monitoring protocol, performance standards, results of the monitoring effort including plans showing the locations of plants located within the enhanced buffer areas and tables showing survivorship as well as recommendations for accomplishing mitigation goals. 2. MITIGATION GOALS & OBJECTIVES The goal of the mitigation plan was to compensate for permanent impacts resulting from the biofiltration swales and for temporary impacts due to clearing and placement of additional fill material in wetland buffers. A total of 453 shrubs and 99 trees were specified within the temporary buffer impacts area. 704 hardy ground covers were also planted per the planting plan. In addition, 400 conifer tree seedlings were planted within the undisturbed buffer; per the approved plan, no monitoring of the seedling tree plantings within the undisturbed buffer area has been or will be performed. . . . 3. PER.FOR_MANCE'STANDAR_DS Performance standards are shown below in Table 1. TABLE 1: PERFORMANCE STANDARDS Criterion Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year4 Year 5 2 Native plant cover (%) 10 -20 Native woody plant cover (%) (for forested or 10 -20 scrub-shrub areas) Non-native, invasive plant cover(%) Plant survivorship Species diversity 3./ SPECIES DIVERSITY (see below) (see below) (see below) 20-30 20-30 30-70 40-60 70-90 60-80 100 80-85 The following minimum standards apply to species diversity of native plants, including both planted and volunteer species, within the various strata: • trees= 4 species, at least 1 of which must be coniferous • shrubs = 5 species • ground cover= 2 species 3.2 PLANT SUR VIVORSHI!' Survivorship is not a viable long-term measure of success as compared to percent cover of a diversity of native plants; however, 100% survivorship is guaranteed by the landscaping contractor for the first year after installation. Plants are considered "dead" when more than 50% of the plant is decadent, with the exception of cottonwood, willow and red osier dogwood, which will be considered live if any part of the plant is living. 3.3CCJNTROL OFNOXIOUS& INVA.SIVE_,ptcJE Noxious weeds (identified on state noxious weeds lists) including giant and Japanese knotweeds (Polygonum sachalinense~ P. cuspidatum) must be entirely and properly eliminated, and disposed of, from the site prior to installation, and throughout the monitoring period. Reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinaceae), Scot's broom (Cytisus scoparius), English ivy (Hedera helix), creeping buttercup (Ranunculus repens), and Himalayan and evergreen blackberries (Rubus discolor, R. laciniatus), may not exceed 10% total cover per species (i.e., up to 10% cover of each species may be allowed) throughout the monitoring period up to a total of no greater than 20% cover from invasive species. 3. 4 FEI\/CES AND SIGNS Fences and signs will be inspected during the maintenance visits and must be in good repair. 4_ APPR.OVED MONITOR.ING PR.OTOCO!. The city approved the monitoring protocol described herein. Within the temporary impact/mitigation area monitoring shall continue for a minimum period of five years af successful monitoring, i.e. monitoring meeting the performance standards. An as-built drawing showing five (5/ randomly-selected areas planted according to the "Typical Disturbed Wetland Buffer Planting" (shown on the Planting Plan prepared by AHBL} will be prepared within one month of completion of planting. Thereafter monitoring will commence on the next quarter according to the schedule in Table 2. Monitoring will consist of a direct plant count within these areas. Overview photos will be taken from the 3 same vantage paints each year to document overall appearance of the mitigation orea before, during, and after construction, as well as of each of the sample plots. Photo points and sample plots shall be marked with stakes to facilitate relocation from one monitoring event to the next. Specifically, the monitoring protocol will consist of the following: • Evaluate plant cover and cover from undesirable species within the typical planting areas; • Evaluate survivorship through a direct plant count within typical planting areas; Year 1 2-5 • Visually assess and record wildlife use. • Inspect all fences and signs Maintenance, monitoring and reporting will occur per the following schedule: TABLE 2: MONITORING & MAINTENANCE SCHEDULE Maintenance Visits Between January 1 and March 1 AND Between April 1 and June 1 AND Between July 1 and September 30 Between October 15 and December 30 Between April 1 and June 1 ANO Between July 1 and September 30 Monitoring Between January 1 and March 1 AND Between April 1 and June 1 AND Between July 1 and September 30 Between October 15 and December 30 Between September 1 and October 15 Report due March 30 June 30 October 30 January 31 December 30 However, the landscaping contractor installed additional plants to account for attrition that occurred between the February 2008 installation and the June 5, 2008 Year 1 Spring monitoring event. As can be seen in Table 3, below, some plant substitutions occurred. Therefore, a total plant count was conducted again to document locations of plants installed between the Spring and the Early Summer monitoring events. 5. MONITOR.ING R.ESUL TS The Fall monitoring event occurred on September 17, 2008. A summary of monitoring results listing the quantities of each planted species and the actual number located in Table 3. Results relative to Performance Standards are provided in Table 4. Detail sheets showing locations of plants are provided in Appendix 1. Detailed tables listing plants located within each of the detail sheets is provided in Appendix 2. Photographs of the enhanced buffer area are provided in Appendix 3. Plant Trees --- A/nus rubra Prunus virginiana Pseudotsuga menzeisii Rhamnus purshiana Shrubs Acer circinatum Berberis oquifolium Oemleria cerasiformis Ribes sanguineum Rosa nutkana TABLE 3: MONITORING RESULlS SUMMARY TABLE Red alder Bitter cherry Douglas fir Cascara --------~--- --.-·--·--·-------- Vine maple Tall Oregon grape Indian plum Red-flowering currant Nootka rose Symbol RA BC OF C Quantity Specified 15 41 20 23 ·------·------· --------------·------------···--- VM 23 TOG 68 IP 68 RFC 45 NR 68 4 Quantity Located 13 43 19 28 22 182 69 35 76 % Survivorship 86.67% 104.88% 95.00% 121.74% 95.65% 80.18% 101.47% 77.78% 111.76% Sambucus racemosa Red elderberry RE 68 42 Spiraea douglasii Douglas spirea DS 68 71 Symphoricarpos a/bus Snowberry SN 45 46 Rubus parviflorus* Thimbleberry TB 0 4 . --·-.. ·-. ----· Groundr:overs Berberis nervosa Short Oregon grape OG 273 60 Gauftheria shallon Salal s 227 183 Blechnum spicant** Deer fern FD 0 24 Polystichum munitum western sword fern SF 204 177 Total Ferns: 204 201 G~~~~d ~:ta!: J 1256 _I 1094 TABLE 4: MONITORING RESULTS RELATIVE TO PERFORMANCE STANDARDS: YEAR 1-FALL 2008 ------------~--,,----------------Criterion Native plant cover (%) Native woody plant cover(%) Non-native, invasive plant cover{%): Noxious weeds Reed canarygrass (Phafaris arundinoceae) Scot's broom (Cytisus scopariu~) English ivy (Hedero helix) Creeping buttercup (Ranuncufus repens) Himalayan blackberry (Rubus procerus) Evergreen blackberry (R. faciniatus) Plant survivorship Species diversity Trees Shrubs Ground covers Fences & Signs Standard Actual 10-20% 10% 10-20% 10% 0% 0% 10% 0% 10% 0% 10% 0% 10% 0% 10% 2% 10% 0% --·-------------. 100% 94% 4 5 8 9 3 4 Good repair Good repair 61.76% 104.41% 102.22% 100% 88.24% 67.03% 98.53% 93.58% The percent cover estimate provided in Table 4 is an average of the entire enhancement area; some areas have greater than the estimated 10% but others have less, as can be seen in the photographs shown in Appendix 3. The causes of attrition include predation from birds, specifically crows and geese, which uproot the smaller plants in search of food. It is difficult to say what the reason for low survivorship is in the case of red elderberry but perhaps it is due to the small sizes of the planted material. 6. RECOMMENDATIONS To ensure that the project comes into full compliance, we recommend the following measures: • Adhere strictly to the maintenance schedule provided in Section 4. • Blackberries were under much better control in June; landscapers should continue to closely monitor badly infested areas and also throughout the buffer enhancement area. 5 • All thistles and other herbaceous weeds should be removed entirely and immediately from both the enhanced and undisturbed buffer areas and disposed of at an approved site to prevent seed dispersal. • Replacement planting locations shall be designed to compensate in areas of low plant cover, such as the areas E-3 and N. Where predation of groundcovers from crows and geese has been heavy, substitute with shrubs. Because diversity standards have been exceeded, substitute another native shrub for elderberry and salal. • Remove all remaining silt fences. 7. R.EPOR. T LIMITATIONS The information contained herein is, to our knowledge, correct and accurate. We are not responsible for the accuracy of information provided by others. Within the limitations of schedule, budget, and scope-of-work, we warrant that this study was conducted in accordance with generally accepted environmental science practices, including the technical guidelines and criteria in effect at the time of this study. The results and conclusions of this report represent the authors' best professional judgment based upon information provided by the project proponent and information obtained during the course of this study. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. Signed: Celeste Botha 6 APPENDIX 1: DFT AIL SHEETS SE!'lh'v\BI R 17, 2008 7 I\ ,. NOTE: PLANTS LOCATED ON DETAIL SHEETS S -1 THROUGH S • 6, AND E • 1 THROUGH E • 3 ARE PLANTED WITHIN THE ENHANCEMENT AREA LOCATED ADJACENT TO THE INDICATED PARKING STALL. PLANTS LOCATED ON SHEETS N • 1 THROUGH N • 4 ARE LOCATED IN THE APPROXIMATE ORDER SHOWN. ',·0©0°@Jil~P,('1!HI (,.~~~'€/~· I' Shea) ,N .. · 1 : Shoe.I N · 2 Sheet N. • 3 ., " , '.f&sh~)>· J 1 ·-1 r --: 1 --,r -, -. - ---' I \) i,' ,--1 \ ........... 1 ,-J c... c··\ /1 f' '-·---, ,, /I I 1, i. ,-11 • V '~'-----, r\ J .L___ !; !1 -, I ~ i' ~·-' Sh~ :-·:) ,---::_i';-, I i [LJ~ ·:_, ,-' . J, j I I ,,~ · .· 1. / ' s~iE.; z -I -· -i' "'~.,,~\.'. •ur ID• r.n.11·111~ ITAi! . . ' ' W-::C", -~.._,. __ ) 11 ~ G~ ...... -.-~ .. ::J~ .. --.~-~-~i: shf:' ·• '.1 ', ,..1 .. ., / '\ : ) r \ ~~(j) I ,· ' • ' '. ,_1 , )., ... -.. --.... i) (_) L,../ c~----·==-=-.=-.; \ .. _~_1) \_,_·-----.-:-·: .: \ ... ...J i r -[. 1 l';J;: .. S~°"'.s_-___1 __ ff_h_• ... t .. S'.._:._:•2 1 fl. , Sheat~3 ~-. S"r't~-4 -. ['_$hHl_$·5:._ S~eet_:,~ . -·o~~~~~Ei®'<i~=llX)cG)~~~ , Overview As-Built and Monitoring Map !l!!!!!l~. CEDAR RIVER CORPORATE PARK 1 ..... 0 (D a. II) ., ;;o <" (D ., 0 0 ., "C 0 iiJ .... (D "Tl II) -N 0 0 00 ~, ... ,,,,.,.,.-1"'"' ,'////'////\ ///'////// ///////// I///'//////, !/////////.,. "////////// '////////// ;////////// ,',f'///////// ,'//,'//////// ,'/////////// //////////// ,'///,/'////// ///////////_ ,.//////////' ,'/////////1' (////////1 ,,','///////. /'//////// ///////// ;/,r//////_, ///////// :~::~;~::i"' ,'////,// '/,/,'/// '///l'/.I ///////,/' 1/////// /;I/I'////, '///////A ///////// , / / / / ,. / / ,,, ////,/'//// ,,,,,.,,.,,,,///.-\ l'////1'///.J\ /;I//////// , ,. ./ / ,, / / /,, /· l'/////1'///. r/////////,. '/////,'/// ////////// ////.'////// ;/////////,'/, '/,/////.1"//,/,r ,'///////////' '///////'///~ •'//'///////// )/////////// //'////////,' //////////v /////////// ,'///////////' '/1'1'//////// .,////////// '//////'/;'//,r. '//////~'*/./~.r ,'//////////, ,'///,'//,'// l'///,f'///// 1///////// ,,,,,,,.,,,,./// ////////// ,'///////// //////////. ,.0///.//////,f' //////////, .,,,,,.,.,,,,,,,,,,/1 ////////// 1/////////_ z n rr=== -1lEl!8 /ieif, 1 C, 3 IP, 2 OG, 3 FD, 2TB -2 C, 1 OG, 4 FD l 3 TOG, 1 SF, ,1 1 FD,:?c3 OG , j 5 SF, 2 NR, 1 OF, Ji 4S, 2 OG 1 NR, 4 SF, 2 SN, 4 S, 1 BC i j 2 OS, 2c 1 OG, :) 1 RFC 51 j pq;m~ i 2 DS, 5 SF, 1 IP, i:?c 3 OG, 1 RE ! ~. 2 IP, 1 DF, 1 I SF, ~ 2 FD, 2c 1 RE I . - 12 FD, 1 VM, 3 . TOG, 2 S, 2 OG Ice-. ~ j 1 BC, 2 S, 3 N;R\ J 3 SF, 4--R€ ; ' _ ... --, :::r !!l ro <J, 2 SN, 3 SF, 3 S, 1 OS, 2RFC CJ) :::r (D (D -m ...a. N w G) Cl) .c: UJ LJ z {( \ ~=---=-===1 l::IN ~ 'S £ 'NS Z ':) ~ S l 'l::IN £ S ~ '80 Z \)0.l £ \ co --(.J'I ...... / LO - [\ // / / / ,, // // // // // / / / // / / ., //: ~, • , 1////1 .J//// 1'////,' ////; .,///I //rl', /,'///; '/////! .,,,,,.,,,,,,, /////; //////, /////// //////; //////, /////// /////// //////; ///////; .///1'///,< ///////1 r //////,1 /,'////1 //////; //////; //////// .///////; ///////; [//////,; //////; /I'////; //////; J, ,, /. / / / / / I' / ///////, ///////1 /////,'// ////////,/ ////////, •,///////; t ////////; /////,'/// /////////,; /////////; ////////// /////////// /"/////////,; //////////; //////////; //////////; /,'///////,',' 1'//////,'//1 ,'/////////; //////////; //////////,! ///////////.' .,.,,,,,,,,,,/////; ,'//////////; \/////////// //////////; //////,'//,'; /,/////////,< ///////,'//; •,' / / / / / /" / ; / I //////////,< t/.,///////,< /////////; /,!'///////,/ /////////.! '/////////,' //////////; .,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,. CX) 0 0 N -a:s lL Cl) .... E 0 e- 0 0 ... Cl) > ii= ... a:s "C Cl) 0 w -Q) Q) .c: "' LJ z ,;;:---- I Ii 1: i I' l' 11 ' I - 0 ' I I ,/////// ///// /////// //// ///////////////////// ////////////////////// ~/////////////////////// '''f</////////////////// /// ~,,,,,,//////////// ,, .. , ~/////////////// I'// .... ,.~'"l''''''J /I'/ ////// /// ////// /// //////~ /// ,,,,,,,J // ///////l // ,,,,,,,,, // •/////// ,,, t/////1'/ // /////// //. /,'///// // //////// // .//////// '//////// t//,'///// //////// ////////. //"//////, .. , , ,, .. ,, , , , , I 1/////,//// /////////. / /,,,,,,, 'I ~~~:::;:::~;-::~ CIO 0 0 N -C'CI LL G) -f! 0 C. ... 0 0 ... ~ ix: ... C'CI 'O G) 0 OG TOG +GG BC TOG 00 ~ rue C NR s NR s BC s NR rue rue s SN s SN s C s • ,~ • I • j I f I ~ ~ IJ ii I \~L_ --)I ~ -~~ ----,.--.---,---.---="FT===-6/ --~--I LL L,~~- -- 00 0 0 N cu LL Cl) -f! 0 Q. ... 0 0 ... Cl) > il:: ... cu "C Cl) 0 ')) 1 ~, OF ' SF VM OG RE SJ"., RE RE,-Sl" C \ TOG TOG, TOG TOG,S S,R€ s BC 1 NR I NR,S s NR,BC s SN I SN co S,S,S 0 0 RA N I SF - N cu RFC LL SF,OG Q) z .... OS cu -BC • ... Cl) SF 0 a. Cl) l OG,GG l ... .c: 0 u, OS ~ 0 SF \) OS,OG ... ;/ Q) SF ·-----------~ ' OG et: C ... IP I cu OG "C Q) IP 0 ' SF I IP I ~IP -11 '::iSF----1 VM SF TOG OG ¢=Jz I • f BC OG,SF I OS, Sf- RI;, RE Sf-, BC 0G SF, IP CJ') IP ..-- OG,SF IP C, SF, SF VM,OG SF OG I OF OG,TOG TOG RE ~ 00 OG.~.OG 0 RA,S ·l 0 JJ N s,ru; -BC,S ca NR • LL I NR,S \ Cl) .. NR 1.1! BC,S 0 SN C. s .. 0 SN 0 BC .. RFC,S Cl) RFC > cnSF,OG ii:: ..--OG .. SF ca "C C Cl) "'OG, SF 0 ~OS - I • !!!os I .c f--OG SF,OS,OG SF C,OS OG • IP Sf- IP IP IP,OG ' Sheet N -4 / a 3 BC, 2 SN, & 1 OG, 6 S, 1 OF, J 2 SF, a DS, 1 VM, 3 NR, J - 0 0 Ul O Ul O :::0 Ul (J) G) "T1 (J) (J) 2l _ ~.,-2TOG ----~-~·,-, 5 OG, 3 OS, 2 S, g 3 SF, 2 RFC, J 4 IP, 1 OF,-1-SG /i Y 1 C, 3 RA, 8 7 S, 8 10 OG, 1 RFC, 3 OS, 7 SF, 1 OF, a 1 IP, 3 TOG, a 1 C, 3 NR, 2 SN, 4 5 BC, numerous volunteer cottonwood ,i \l \1c \~ ,,. ./ \ __,,, ,~ ,~ \tl \ "'\ ,.,::,::;-:>· . \ ~-;,-~----· 2 // fX(t:41\ ~ ===:---2 2 J \'o ,,;P' 3 ~--4~--/< :::/··~ 2B LJ N '~ l ~ -~--__ )) ......:;; __ =::.,--;;:::~~ Cedar River Corporate Fall 2008 -~ i I /. 1 I II If // , -I en -G) G) .c en sa ~ ·s z NS z ·sa z '(p;:issaJ\S) :)8 ( '~N > (p;:issaJ1s) sa , I ~ ·~'~NZ '£>0, i I '"''" '""''-''''\''-'''' '\ ,,,,, .......... ,. ''''''"'' ''"' ',,, ''''''''-' ,,,,,,,,,, '''"'''''' '"'''''''-' "''''''''' ,,,,,,,,,,: • ______ .,. __ ~t'''''''''' '''''''''"'. '-'-''''''''-'' '''"'''''' ,,,,,,,,,, ~i 'OOJ. ~ '.:JS Z '£>0 £ ' .:JS z '(pass~ . £)0 Z 'l/\lA , ':) , ' ::is , '£lo z '.:JS Z 'di Z ''.)8 Z i ' ''"''''''' ,,,,,,,,,,, '''''"'''' ;:,.,"''''''"" ,,,,,,,,, ''''''''! ',,,,,,, ' ,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,, ~,,,,,,,, ' '' ,,,, ,,. y ',,,,,,,, ( ::i , ·oo z , , , , , , , , ·.:is ~ ·sa z '''' '' '' ,..._ "'''''''' -..: ,,,,,,, 88 ~ '(IJ0S$QljS) e>O± ~ i '\ "-'\. '\ "-'-"-'- 'Sa ~ '.:JS Z '::J.:l~ Z '£>0 Z ti ~i\.l-'"-. '-'-' ' '' '-'-.. ______ ....,_~,..C '' '-'' ''-'' '''''''"'' ,,,,,,,,,,; ,,,,,,,,,,, ''''''''''l _______ .,. __ ~'''''''''."' (IJ0SS0Jl5 1 '\ '\. '-'\ '\ '\. '\. '\ '-'-i ~) 31"1 Z 'S £ v '' '-' '\ '-'-'-' '-'I ,,,,,,,,,,, ______ ..,. ___ ... ~''''''''''' ,,,,,,,,,,,, : I :, ' ' },,,,,,,,,,, '''''''"''' ,.._,,.,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,, ., ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' " ' ,,,,,,,,,,,,: i,,,,,,,,,,,, '"''"''''"'" ''' ''' '" ' ''( ,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,, '''''''"'''' ,,,,,,,,,, .... ,. ,,,,,,,,,,,,: \'' '' ' ' ' '" ''' ,,,,,,,,,,,L ,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,, ---~ '''''''''''''"'''~ ., '' '', , , ' , ', ·, , ', ''I "''''''''''''''''' ~,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ~ ' ' ' ~ ' ~ ~ ' ~ ~ ' ' ' ~ ~ ' ' I I I I I I co 0 0 N ca LL .! I! 0 e- 0 0 ... Cl) > il:: ... ca "O Cl) 0 II [ l ; I '! • I I ] II I -G) G) .c: tn di , 'VIJA , ·c1s £ c!S l '80 , 'di £ ---ll><fT~°l.G'...0'-'':'";;;E~Z SO , '80 l ! 'di r ·c1s , 'vH , j c!S £ '80 l ·sa z ·Jc1H , NS , 'St, S, 'NS lt' '3H, 'HN l ~ ~c!S l '80 l {( 'VIJ/\ ' 'di ' ~====;i 80 £ 'di z ·c1s £ ·sa , Jc!H l ·sa l 'VH ' '80 l ·,,,,1 ' '\ '\ ' ,,,, '' '''''t ''''''"' ........ ,,,, '"'''''" •"'-N'-"" '' '' ' '' ' ''''''! ,,,,,, ,,,,,, ,, ...... , ...... ,, ....... ,,-,,,,,, '' '' ''-' ,. ''"''''' ''''"''' ,,,,,,,, 1s.,,,, .... ,, ,,,,,,, ,,,,,,, ,,,,,,, §~~~~ "'"''''. ~:rs:'-..! ~ '~''I ,,,,,,,. '''''"'l ''''"'" ,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,, '''''''-"' '''''"''' ,,,,,,,,, a;.,>.-!.,,,,,,,,, ''"'''''-''''''''' ,,,.,,,,'-, ' ...,,,,,,, '' '-,,, '-,, , , , , ,, , ),.,''''""'' ''"''''' ',,,,,,, '-'"''.'''A ,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,, ,,,,,,, '''"''' ',,,,,, "''''' ''-''''' '"'''''' '''"'''' ''''''''"i '''''''"' "'''''''-,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,, "'''''''' ____ ,.,..,,. I ''''''"'' ,,,,,,,,, 80 , ·st, I , , , , , , , ·,, il.,....., .. .,,.,...., .... ,#-~lllilGh''''''''' "''''''' '''''''·' ,,,,,,,,_ ,,,,,,,,. ,,,,,,..,_,,. ,,,,,,,,. I I I I I I co 0 0 N -cu u.. 2 f! 0 c.. ... 0 0 ... Cl) .:::: 0::: ... cu "C Cl) 0 _J ) } !j /! / :~r,, J 1\ .. \\ \\ -JI LI _.V M UJ t; G> .c UJ ~¢=iz '\ 1 II I WA I 'S 9 'NS I :IS £ 'DO I i! 'DO.L £ DO£ 'di Z 'WA I ':IS£ ':JS l ,,-;;.c;;...;;.==:'..I fl SO Z ':IS£ I 'di I 'DO l ~==== S l ':IS ' I ·so I ':):I~ Z -t 'DO I i! 0, .S .c al 2 (j C Q) :11 ·c iii .0 "" (j .!!, co S v 'NS Z ':JS I 6u11pees 88 l 'S I '~N £ DO.LI 'DO £i! 'WA I ':IS v~ DOZ'dll~'.:IS£ .:10 I 'NS Z 'DOZ '.:IS£ 'so£ SS 'NS Z ,,,, .. ~, ........ .......... "''-'-'-'' '' ,. '-''-''' ''''''\ '''''"'-'"''"'' '''"'''' ''-'''''-' ....,,,,,,, .. '''"''-'' ''''''' "''''-'' '''''-'' ''''''' '''-'''" ''''''' ''-''''' '''"'"' ,,,,,,,, ''''''-'-' '''-''''" '''''''! ''''''' ,,,,,,, '''''"' ,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,. '''''''' ,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,, 1''-'-'I.'''' ,,,,,,, ''"'''' ,,,,,,., ,,,,,,,, µ<:"',,.~r''"'''''t ,,,,,,,; ''''"''' ''''''''I ''''''\ ,,,,,,, '''''''" ''''''''" '''''''\ ,,,,,,,, ''''''') ,,,,,,,1 '''''''/ ,,,,,, ""-"' ' ' ' ' ' ' ''''' '''''' ,,,,,, ''' ''' ,· ''"'''~' ''''' ',,,,, '''' ''''" '''''' ,,,,,,. ,-;'~~~~~~ '" '''' ' '''' '-''' ' '''''1 ''''''"' I I I I I I I 00 0 0 N n:s LL Cl) -e 0 e- 0 0 ... Cl) > ~ ... n:s 'tJ Cl) 0 ., ;} f J / I I ) I I en -Q) Q) .s::. en 80 ,i:·c1s1> 'V~ , 'VII/\ L 'di Z iiZt.';,'. .. ::> ,_ ·" -:',.f;J-/: 80 Z 'di Z '::J8 L'::1ss·so1>t ::Jj~ z '801>'St NS Z '~N l 'St S Z '::J8 L '~N 17 aa.1',H,'&Ji:zir1l'IY;t;~':;ftW.J1I ~N L '80 , !' '80.l t ':JO L V\118 l '.)8 l 'V\1/\ , '80 z t 'di z ·c1s v (( soz ':JS£·~~ Z '80 Zf "-:===:::;i S9 '80 L 'VII/\ , 'NS Z 3~ L '80 L f '80.l t ':JO l c!S Z '1111/\, '80 v 'di l ~- passa11s 1 80 z ·so L 'di Z ':JO L ':JS 17 ::Jc!~ z ·::1s c ·so z ·90 s ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ,f ,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,.,,,, A"i::"i~''''''''·' ,., ............ ....,., ........ ..,,. ,,,,,, .... ..., '''''"''f '''"''') ,,,,,,,,-= ''''''''': ''''''"'' ,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,, '''''''" ~~,.!''''''''' ''"''''' ''"''''' ,,,,,,,~ ; :i ~~r~, \. ...... '-' ' ,,,, .... , , ,, 'I ,,,,, ,,,,,,, ..... ,,,,,,- "''''"'. ,,,,,,· ' ,,,,,,1 ''''''l ,..,.O..,O.,'I',. ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ,,,,,.,,. :-..,,,,,,. ,,,,,,,.. ,,,,,, .... ',,,,,, ,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,, ''''"''' '''''"'' ,,,,,,,, '"'"''' '''''''· ,,,,,, ,,,,,, ''''''" '''''/ ,,,,,, ,,,,,, "~'''''~ '''"' ,,,, ' '''':I. '-"''J '''''-:i ,,,,,,, ,,,,,, ,,,,,,- '''''' ,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,, I I I I I I I I I l CX) 0 0 N (IS LL Cl) e 0 a. ... 0 0 ... Cl) > ii:: ... cu "C Cl) 0 ,, ''''''\ I ''\ ,,.,,,, '-(\:,, '"'''' ,,,,,, \1 '''-''') l '\ \ If 81 ~ ,,,,,, ' 'SZ'NSZ'~NZt • '''"''· I I , ~ ::m ~ ·s c ,,,,,,, I ,,,,,~ I ,,,,,,. .J ~~-~~':JS~ ''''''I '''''~ '-''''"' :)8 ~ '80.L £ '80 '''"'' Z -t '~/\ L ':JS £ ,,,,,,, ,,,,,, "'''''' ,,,,,,v ,,,,,,, di£ ':JS £1' 1''-''''1 ,,,,, ' ''''l I :!SL'80£~ ,,,, ·so v ·s r ~ '::l:1~ z ,,,,, '"''"'"' .... ,,, ..... ,,, I SO Z-t ''''''l a:, 'SI> f 'NS Z ':JO L ,,,,,, 0 ,,,,,, 0 ,,,,, N "'''' ~N c ·sv ,,,,,,, cu ''"''' LL ,,,,,,. Cl) .. ,,,,,t -80 f ':) L 'S L ,,,,,,, I!! ':JS l '80.L £ ''''"'~ 0 ,,,,,, Q. '"''''' ... NS l '80 Z ':JS v 0 ~,,,,,, I 0 'V~ l ·~/\ l 'di z "''''''' , .... ,,,,· ... Cl) .... '' '' '· > 80Z'dl l '''"'"\ I ·- ':JS£':) L ,,,,,,, 0::: ,,,,,,,, ... ,,,,,,,, cu ll) ''''"''' "C Cl) ''''''''" 0 :1s r ·soc '80 z ,,,,,,,,-.:: en ,,,,,,,, -::l:l~ 1 ·s c '80 ,,,,,, ''\ Q) ,,,,,, .... , Q) L '(passa;1s):)8 l ,,,,,,,, .c ''''''''" en ( ~ ,,,,,,,, ... , ~ ''''''"'" ¢=Jz ,,,,,,,,, I S!l "'""'""l ~ "''''''''' ' ,,,,, .. ,, I ~ ,,,,,,,, SL 'NS ,,,,,,,, ~\ £ ~ '~N l ''v'~ l ':::: ~-..,,,,,,: ,,,,,,,. ~ '-,{' '' ,,,, 'f S f ·~NZ "' ' ''' '"'' J ·.::1s z ·oo.t z ~"' ,,,,,,, '' ',,, .... , ,::,. '"''"'''' .... • ·1 I ------ ~,,,. .. If;/:~:;:;~·~ N n Sheet S -6 ///,"///' /I'/ I'/,,, ///1'//I l//1'1'//. /I//////. t'/1///1'/, r,,,,,,,,/,,.,.! ///'///// ///,'/// t/1'///// .,.,,,,,,,,.,.,,,,, / / I' ,,. / / / I /, ~ //////1/ ///'//'//,' '' ' i' / /' / / ,., / /\ /'/////// l ///,/'///,'/ /'/'//////'/ /1/////// /////////~ v,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.,,,, ///1'////,I/ ////'///////, 1/)//'/I///,'/,. ,//////////)/ ///////////,/'\ r(/1'/'/I//II// I ')/ ,, / / / //I / / /) //////////// ///////////) ///////,'///I l'/1//1)/'///I l'////////1/1, l//,/l/'/,/'///1'' ////'//////// ////)//,'/// /'/,'/////'///' ////////// ///////'/'// " .. ~ ' . ' . . , . C , , .. --" -., .. ., ~~,,- .. -,, //I'// /I'// / I' 77°17)? / / / / / / ,1 ,' / I ,' / ,' / ,' / / 0 //l//////1'///lll,'///'/,'/////,'/I/,','///,' //llll///1//////////,'///I/////I/////// ?///1///////////1//l//l'/l/,'/////,'///I/'// l/l/,'l//'//////////1,'//. /,'/~,'/////// //,1////////////I/I// / . ~~~~//,'/I// /.///.///.llll///1' /I'll'//////,''///. //, ,' I / ,/ / / / I .I / / I I / -/ , l//111////,'I/ ;/''/L/ •//,'////.1//,,1".~ ,' 'I////// I l'P ,'. /I/I//II I'/"////// ////////<~ 1 () .J" ~ ~·--I .J '>i\; ' ,; • ~ //////,' II///// /t'llrll" /////// ~II/,'/// /I/I//,'./ .,.///,'/// Sc.,; ti ~ ,vii' ' <? 2 & ' <5 ~ -~F' =d; , Ii',<-: , ,? < 1, 1 Ii', , 7 .J h "I:' 0 k lL-" \,-= .~ c a '° ~ c a·<? N o I"' u· ~r,:9,/.Joq .. ;2 ·2;/&q M> ~ u..w , , r 0 lS' s , , w:::;; c: CJ a:: o _ &1y G ' .;? Cf) > -0 N N ~ =·;:, '-:: === ' 'V ~ "'. ~ ~ <5 .. ,,.'J giw: 0 6 ¥~· 1 IP, 1 BC, .,,. ~ ~ ~N !,'///,/// //l'////!,~1 ////// I//,/// ////// '//I.I// ~////~/'AV, 'J///// ' // //// /. / ,'/.// , /II/ ,f///1/ ',///,',' //I/II /////) ,I/I/II VII/// 1 OG, 1 BC, 3 TOG, 4 FD, iz S 7 S, 1 DF, 3 NR, 2 SN J2S,3DS,J1 RFC, 1 FD, 1 TB Cedar River Corporate Fall 2008 /;,:>';::;;;: t,f"' 11/ ,I APPENDIX 2: DETAILED PLANT QUANTITIES TABLES 8 Monitoring Sheet Plant Trees A/nus rubra Red alder Prunus virginiana bitter cherry Pseudotsugo menziesii Douglas fir Rhomnus e_urshiana cascara Shrubs Acer circinatum vine maple Berberis aquifolium tall Oregon grape Oemleria cerasiformis Indian plum Ribes sanguineum red-flowering currant Rosa nutkana Nootka rose - Sombucus racemosa red_elderberry Spiraea douglassii Douglas spirea Symphoricarpos a/bus snowberry Rubus e_arvi[!orus Thimbleberry Groundcovers Berberis nervosa short Clregon grape Gau/theria shal/on salal Blechnum spicant Deer fern Pol~stichum munitum western sword fern Totals Cedar River Corporate Park Buffer Enhancement Renton, Washington September 17, 2008 S-1 S-2 S-3 Symbol Quantity Quantity Quantity RA 2 BC 5 1 6 DF 1 2 --· C 2 2 1 VM 1 3 3 TOG 1 4 6 IP 0 8 5 -- RFC 2 7 4 ------ NR 3 6 6 ------------ RE 0 2 0 ---·. --- DS 7 --------- SN 2 TB 0 OG 11 s 8 FD ----- SF 9 51 ---- 2 10 ----------- 3 ---------- 17 20 - 19 97 10/17/2008 1 12 11 21 20 107 S-4 S-5 Quantity Quantity 1 2 3 3 3 1 1 2 4 2 6 8 10 6 6 3 9 9 ·--- 1 --·--- 10 9 ------ 4 9 --···--- 22 13 18 25 25 18 123 110 S-6 Quantity TOTAL 1 6 4 22 2 9 1 9 2 15 7 32 6 35 4 26 6 39 -·- 1 4 --. ------- 9 47 - 2 32 5 5 8 82 17 109 12 12 10 101 97 585 Monitoring Sheet Plant Symbol Trees A/nus rubra Red alder RA Prunus virginiana bitter cherry BC Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas fir DF Rhamnus e_urshiana cascara C Shrubs Acer circinatum vine maple VM Berberis aquifolium tall Oregon grape TOG Oemleria cerasiformls Indian plum IP Ribes sanguineum red-flowering currant RFC Rosa nutkana Nootka rose NR Sambucus racemosa red elderberry RE Spiraea douglassii Douglas spirea DS Symphoricarpos a/bus snowberry SN Rubus e_arvi[!orus Thimbleberrl TB Groundcovers Berberis nervosa short Oregon grape OG ·---Gau/theria shallon salal s 8/echnum spicant Deer fern FD Pol't_stichum munitum western sword fern SF Totals E-1 E-2 Quantity Quantity 2 2 3 1 6 6 3 6 4 5 4 2 14 15 12 20 105 2 2 1 3 3 1 6 3 2 12 6 3 44 10/17/2008 2 E-3 Quantity TOTAL 3 5 ---- 4 6 2 4 2 7 1 3 6 15 6 15 3 7 13 25 2 6 7 15 3 9 2 7 33 8 29 12 10 33 77 226 Monitoring Sheet Plant Symbol Trees A/nus rubra Red alder RA - Prunus virginiana bitter c_herry BC Pseudotsuga men_ziesii Douglas fir DF Rhamnus e_urshiana cascara C Shrubs Acer circinatum vine maple VM Berberis aquifolium tall Gregori grape TOG Oem/eria ceraslformis Indian plum IP -- _Ribes sanguineum red-flowering currant RFC Rosa nutkana Nootka rose NR Sambucus racemosa red elderberry RE Spiraea douglassii Douglas spirea DS Symphoricarpos a/bus snowberry SN Rubus e_arvi[!orus Thimbleberr~ TB Groundcavers Berberis nervosa ___ short Oregon grape OG - Gaultheria shallon salal s Blechnum spicant Deer fern FD Pol~stichum munitum western sword fern SF Totals N-1 N-2 Quantity Quantity 2 2 2 3 0 2 1 4 16 1 3 1 2 2 4 4 1 3 3 3 2 9 9 5 52 10/17/2008 3 N-3 Quantity 1 5 1 3 1 2 7 2 3 2 4 2 15 7 11 66 N-4 Quantity TOTAL 3 5 8 18 3 5 ---- 2 9 0 3 - 5 13 5 16 3 6 6 15 5 6 13 4 10 16 41 ------ 15 35 12 28 88 222 GRAND TOTALS: Plant Symbol Trees A/nus rubra Red alder RA Prunus virginiana bitter cherry BC Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas fir DF Rhamnus eurshiana !shrubs cascara C Acer circinatum vine maple VM Berberis aquifo/ium tall Oregon grape TOG Oemleria ceroslformis Indian plum IP Ribes sanguineum red-flowering currant RFC Rosa nutkana Nootka rose NR Sambucus racemosa red elderberry RE Spiraea douglassii Douglas spirea DS Symphoricarpos a/bus snowberry SN Rubus earvl[Jorus Thimbleberr~ TB Groundcovers Berberls nervosa short Oregon grape OG Gaulther/a shallon salal s Blechnum seicant Deer fern FD Po/~stichum munitum western sword fern SF Totals Sl • S6 TOTAL 6 22 9 9 15 32 35 26 39 4 47 32 5 82 109 12 101 S8S El· E3 TOTAL 5 6 4 7 3 15 15 7 25 6 15 9 2 33 29 12 33 226 10/17/2008 4 Nl-N4 Grand Total TOTAL 5 16 18 46 5 18 9 25 3 21 13 60 16 66 6 39 15 79 5 15 13 75 10 51 0 7 41 156 35 173 0 24 28 162 222 1033 APPENDIX 3: MONITOfZJNG PI IOTOGRJ\PHS SE!' I L'v1l3LK 17, 2008 9 .I NOTE: Monitoring Photographs are Indexed to the features identified here. Raingardens . --~e~'!(n<:;~~---._ ~-. - V ' , • • ; ' • 11 ,. r--· • I r 11· ,-'~,. . • / I; ) : / ' ·-l ... -! j "O 1 ) 1·-' ! ( 1- -, ', -) /-··1 I' 1----, f 1··\ CJ C C ,so II GI 0.. (_i~·n '---- C I>:~ •GI Jii '. :I ' --=-c, ,:en [I_ J; I I i·· I ! / 11 I _; ' .§,< ' EB ~----~~--" I I '~ · ,-~. ,-, I ;r.i;< EA ,./ ( ---' : '; _·.; ' ' ----=--: \ ! ' ;___J ' ) ,, ' i'f~r-r--r\. SA SB SC SD SE SF SG _,ir..,,1~~ •~lkr, .......... , Index Sheet for Monitoring Photographs mmm11~ a:.."'!NINl'm IUt CEDAR RIVER CORPORA TE PARK ' '. '',,,j :i; . ... _p Photo 1: 5-A Looking west ' ~ .; ,·_-J,_", ·_,· ::i -~' ,.,, ~--~- ·,. -.,.;:;.,.--."; Photo 3: 5-8 Looking east Photo 2: 5-A Looking east Photo 4: 5-C Looking east Photo 5: SD looking east. Photo 7: SF looking east. Photo 6: SE looking east. :\;t'. . . L ,. ~''h".·' · .. · .. ,·-"--...-;~;-· ,~-·,t '~ Photo 8: SG looking east. ,. -'.~.~. .~--· ·,t" ""'""" -_'fL; ... ·4~.::~·· ,:.t,:.:·-~ Photo 9: SX looking west. Photo 11: EA looking north. ,,,. , ,,,1 ,-·"··: 4 '" -, ' .C • '.'i "'B ,). Photo 10: SX looking north. Photo 12: EB looking north. Photo 13: Between detention pond and bioswale rooking north Photo 14: Between detention pond and bioswale looking east Photo 14: South end of raingarden looking west Photo 15: Between raingardens, looking north Photo 16: Between raingardens, looking west .;_ ;~ . ~' £1 m TACOMA SEATTLE Preliminary Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan PREPARED FOR: Tarragon, LLC 1000 2nd Avenue, Suite 3200 Seattle, VVA 98104-1074 (206) 233-9600 Contact: Murphy McCullough PROJECT: Cedar River Corporate Park 206200.10 PREPARED BY: Charles "Ted" Hill, E.I.T. Project Engineer Matt Budsberg Project Engineer REVIEWED BY: Connie Linden, P.E. Project Manager Paul B. McCormick, P.E., S.E. Principal December 2006 Civil Engineers • Structural Engineers • Landscape Architects .. Community Planners • Land Surveyors • Neighbors I hereby state that this Preliminary Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan for Cedar River Corporate Park has been prepared by me or under my supervision and meets the standard of care and expertise that is usual and customary in this community for professional engineers. I understand that the City of Renton does not and will not assume liability for the sufficiency, suitability, or performances of drainage facilities prepared by me. Preliminary Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan PREPARED FOR: Tarragon, LLC 1000 2nd Avenue, Suite 3200 Seattle, WA 98104-1074 (206) 233-9600 Contact: Murphy McCullough PROJECT: Cedar River Corporate Park 206200.10 PREPARED BY: Charles "Ted" Hill, E.I.T. Project Engineer Matt Budsberg Project Engineer REVIEWED BY: Connie Linden, P.E. Project Manager Paul B. McCormick, P.E., S.E. Principal December 2006 TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE 1.0 Introduction .................................................................................................... 1 2.0 Project Description ........................................................................................... 2 2.1 Impacts to Endangered Species, Cultural Resources, Historical Buildings ....... 2 3.0 Erosion Control Specialist .................................................................................. 3 4.0 Existing Site Conditions .................................................................................... 5 5.0 Critical Areas ................................................................................................... 5 6.0 Soils .............................................................................................................. 5 7.0 Erosion Problem areas ...................................................................................... 6 8.0 Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention Elements ........................................ 6 8.1 Mark Clearing Limits ............................................................................... 6 8.2 Establish Construction Access .................................................................. 6 8.3 Control Flow Rates ................................................................................. 7 8.4 Install Sediment Controls ........................................................................ 7 8.4.1 Stabilize Soils .............................................................................. 7 8.4.2 Structural BMPs ........................................................................... 8 8.5 Protect Slopes ....................................................................................... 8 8.6 Protect Drain Inlets ................................................................................ 9 8.7 Stabilize Channels and Outlets ................................................................. 9 8.8 Control Pollutants .................................................................................. 9 8.9 Control Dewatering ............................................................................... 11 8.10 Maintain BMPs ...................................................................................... 12 8.11 Manage the Project ............................................................................... 12 9.0 Employee Training .......................................................................................... 13 10.0 Construction Phasing ....................................................................................... 15 11.0 Construction Schedule ..................................................................................... 15 12. O Financial/Ownership Responsibilities .................................................................. 16 13.0 Engineering Calculations .................................................................................. 16 14.0 Conclusion ..................................................................................................... 16 Appendix A AppendixB AppendixC AppendixO Appendix£ AppendixF AppendixG Appendix ff Exhibit 1 APPENDICES Vicinity Map Existing Conditions Developed Conditions Soils Information Geotechnical Engineering Studies El Prepared by Atlas Geotechnical Engineering, Inc., April 1985 E2 Prepared by Terra Associates, Inc., November 16, 2006 Wetland Analysis Engineering Calculations FEMA Flood Insurance Map EXHIBITS Inspection Logs 1.0 INTRODUCTION In 1972, Congress passed the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (FWPCA), also known as the Clean Water Act (CWA), to restore and maintain the quality of the nation's waterways. The ultimate goal was to make sure that rivers and streams were fishable, swimmable, and drinkable. In 1987, the Water Quality Act (WQA) added provisions to the CWA that allowed the EPA to govern stormwater discharges from construction sites. In 1998, the EPA published the final notice for General Permits for Stormwater Discharges from Construction Activities Disturbing 5 Acres of Greater (63 Federal Register 7898, February 14, 1998). The general permit includes provisions for development of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to maximize the potential benefits of pollution prevention and sediment and erosion control measures at construction sites. Effective 1 July 2003, EPA signed the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System General Permit for Discharges from Large and Small Construction Activities. A Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) has been prepared for this project in order to meet the intent of the permit. The King County Stormwater Management Manual for, 2005 Edition, requires a SWPPP for projects where the new, replaced, or new plus replaced impervious surfaces total 2,000 square feet or more. The proposed project will exceed this threshold; therefore, a Construction SWPPP is required. Development, implementation, and maintenance of the Construction SWPPP will provide the selected General Contractor with the framework for reducing soil erosion and minimizing pollutants in stormwater during construction of the Cedar River Corporate Park. The SWPPP will: • Define the characteristics of the site and the type of construction that will be occurring. • Identify all potential sources of pollution that may reasonably be expected to affect the quality of stormwater discharges from the construction site. • Describe the practices that will be implemented to control erosion and the release of pollutants in stormwater. • Create an implementation schedule to ensure that the practices described in this SWPPP are in fact implemented, and to evaluate the plan's effectiveness in reducing erosion, sediment, and pollutant levels in stormwater discharged from the site. • Describe the final stabilization/termination design to minimize erosion and prevent stormwater impacts after construction is complete. • Assure compliance with the terms and conditions of the permit. This SWPPP includes the following: • Identification of the SWPPP Coordinator with a description of this person's duties. 1 mmm11 • Identification of the stormwater pollution prevention team that will assist in implementation of the SWPPP during construction. • Description of the existing site conditions, including existing land use for the site, soil types at the site, as well as the location of surface waters that are located on or next to the site. • Identification of drainage areas and potential stormwater contaminants. • Description of stormwater management controls and various Best Management Practices (BMPs) necessary to reduce erosion, sediment, and pollutants in stormwater discharge. • Description of the facility monitoring plan and how controls will be coordinated with construction activities. • Description of the implementation schedule and provisions for amendment of the plan. 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Tarragon LLC, proposes to construct four ( 4) office/ retail buildings on a site comprised of approximately 12.6 acres zoned light industrial. The site is located between SW 21 '1 Street and SW 23'd Street off of Lind Avenue in the City of Renton, King County, Washington. Of the 12.6 acres, approximately 10.2 acres will be developed and the remaining 2.4 acres are to be undisturbed. The proposed project consists of approximately 143,307 square feet of retail business space in four separate buildings: Building A is 35,047 square feet and located on the west portion of the property; Building B is 29,940 square feet and located on the south portion of the property; Building C is 33,740 square feet and located on the north portion of the property; and Building Dis 44,580 square feet and located on the east portion of the property. other associated project facilities will include parking, truck loading areas, landscaping areas, and utilities. The proposed layout is illustrated in Appendix C - Developed Conditions. In the developed conditions, all drainage will be collected and conveyed to a stormwater pond via pipes and a pump system. Treatment will be provided by bioswales downstream of detention. Drainage -All storm drainage features are designed to meet all of the requirements of the 2005 King County Surface Water Design Manual with respect to detention and treatment per the request of the City during pre-construction meetings. 2.1 Impacts to Endangered Species, Cultural Resources, Historical Buildings To the best of our knowledge, this construction will have no impact on endangered species, cultural resources, or historical buildings. 2 mmmm 3.0 EROSION CONTROL SPECIALIST The Erosion Control Specialist for this project will be provided with final submittal who is employed by Tarragon. Contact information will be provided with final submittal: Name: Company: Address: Phone: Fax: The duties of the Erosion Control Specialist include: • Implement the SWPPP/TESC plan with the aid of the SWPP team. • Oversee maintenance practices identified as BMPs in the SWPPP. • Conduct or provide for inspection and monitoring activities in accordance with NPDES General Permit for Storm Water Discharges from Construction Activities, Part 3, Section 3.10 -Inspections, Section 3.11 -Maintaining an Updated Plan, and Section 3.12 -Signature, Plan Review and Making Plans Available, as follows: o Inspections shall occur at least once every 14 calendar days and within 24 hours of the end of a storm event of 0.5 inch or greater. o Inspection frequency may be reduced to at least once every month if: • The entire site is temporarily stabilized; • Runoff is unlikely due to winter conditions (e.g., the site is covered with snow, ice, or the ground is frozen); or • Construction is occurring during seasonal arid periods in arid areas and semi-arid areas. o A waiver of the inspection requirements is available until 1 month before thawing conditions are expected to result in a discharge, if all of the following requirements are met: • The project is located in an area where frozen conditions are anticipated to continue for extended periods of time (i.e., more than one month); • Land disturbance activities have been suspended; and • The beginning and ending dates of the waiver period are documented in the SWPPP. 3 mmm11 o For each inspection required above, an inspection report must be completed. At a minimum, the inspection report must include: • The inspection date; • Names, titles, and qualifications of personnel making the inspection; • Weather information for the period since the last inspection (or since commencement of construction activity if the first inspection), including a best estimate of the beginning of each storm event, duration of each storm event, approximate amount of rainfall for each storm event (in inches), and whether any discharges occurred; • Weather information and a description of any discharges occurring at the time of inspection; • Location(s) of discharges of sediment or other pollutants from the site; • Location(s) of BMPs that need to be maintained; • Location(s) of BMPs that failed to operate as designed or proved inadequate for a particular location; • Location(s) where additional BMPs are needed that did not exist at the time of inspection; and • Corrective action required, including any necessary changes to the SWPPP, and implementation dates. o A record of each inspection and of any actions taken in accordance with this Section must be retained as part of the SWPPP for at least 3 years from the date that permit coverage expires or is terminated. o The SWPPP plan, including the site map, must be amended whenever there is a change in design, construction, operation, or maintenance at the construction site, which has or could have a significant effect on the discharge of pollutants to the waters of the United States that has not been previously addressed in the SWPPP. o A copy of the SWPPP (including a copy of the permit), Notice of Intent (NOi), and acknowledgement letter from EPA must be retained at the construction site or other location easily accessible to EPA during normal working hours. o A sign or other notice must be posted conspicuously near the main entrance of the construction site. The sign or notice must contain the following information: • A copy of the completed NOi, as submitted to the EPA Storm Water Notice Processing Center; and • The current location of the SWPPP, and name and telephone number of a contact person for scheduling SWPPP viewing times. • Identify other potential pollutant sources and make sure they are added to the plan. 4 [i]CJIDII • Identify any deficiencies in the SWPPP and make sure they are corrected. • Ensure that any changes in construction plans are addressed in the SWPPP. The General Contractor will ensure that all housekeeping and monitoring procedures are implemented, while the ESC Specialist will ensure the integrity of the structural BMPs. 4.0 EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS The subject site consists of an approximately 12.6-acre, roughly rectangular shaped site located between SW 21st Street and SW 23'd Street off of Lind Avenue in the City of Renton, King County, Washington (See Appendix A -Vicinity Map). The subject property is bound to the north by a Category 2 wetland which is within the SW 21" Street right-of- way, to the south by a category 3 wetland which is within the 23'd Street right-of-way; to the east a commercial development, and to the west by Lind Avenue. (See Appendix B - Existing Conditions). The site consists of a relatively flat topography with an estimated maximum elevation change of 3 to 5 feet. The northern half of the site has an approximate elevation change of 3.5 feet across a horizontal distance of approximately 1,080 feet, flowing from the west to the east. The southern half of the site has an approximate elevation change of 3 feet across a horizontal distance of approximately 890 feet, flowing from the west to the east. The greatest estimated maximum elevation change is 5 feet across a horizontal distance of approximately 1,245 feet, flowing from the southwest corner to the northeast corner. The subject site is vegetated primarily with sparse grass, patches of miscellaneous brush, and localized small-diameter trees. 5.0 CRITICAL AREAS There are two wetlands on our parcel; to the north by approximately 1,080 feet of Category Two (2) wetlands and SW 21" Street, to the south by approximately 889 feet of Category Three (3) wetlands. Both lie on the property lines and both will be maintained with their buffers. See Exhibit F. According to FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map Panel No. 53033C0978F, the project site does lie within a 100-year flood plain. We have been told that the City of Renton has an updated flood map that show our parcel no longer included in the lOOyr flood zone (City of Renton Flood Hazard Area Map, June 1998). Since the fiood elevation is at 16' and our site is at 20'+, the City's map has been explained as such that our site is no longer included within a flood plain, but we have not officially seen the City's map. 6.0 SOILS A geotechnical engineering survey was performed on November 16, 2006 by Terra Associates, Inc (Appendix E). Their investigation confirmed soil conditions as indicated by Atlas Geotechnical performed in April 1985 (Appendix E). The upper-most layer being a brown, sandy gravely silt including some rock fragments. The gravel is primarily angular material and the fill was derived from stripping to expose rock in a rock quarry. The lower portion of the fill is generally blue-gray in color and appears to be from the same source as the upper fill, except that the rock content and sizes are larger. The rock content increased in depth. Total fill thickness varied from 6.5-to 10.5-feet, generally being thinnest near the southern boundary and thickest toward the middle. 5 mmmm Light to heavy groundwater seepage was encountered at all twelve test pit locations throughout the site. Seepage was encountered in the test pits at depths from 3.5-to 8-feet below existing grade, generally being deeper at the northeastern portion of the site. Based on observed conditions, the seepage encountered at the test pit locations was likely indicative of seasonal groundwater moving through relatively permeable lenses of sand and gravel and perched groundwater moving through relatively permeable lenses of sand and gravel and perched groundwater collecting in the soils located above the relatively low permeability silty sand interbeds. Based on the color changes and conditions observed, ground water levels appear to be 2.5-to 6-feet below the surface. The draft geotechnical engineering study prepared by Terra Associates, Inc. on November 16, 2006 has been included in its entirety as Appendix E -Geotechnica\ Engineering Study. The draft geotechnica\ engineering study and infiltration evaluation prepared by Atlas Geotechnical Engineering, Inc. in April 1985 has been included in its entirety as Appendix E -Geotechnical Engineering Study. The site soils have been classified as Map Unit 104, Indianola Loamy Sand, and Map Unit 149, Nisqually Loamy Sand according to the WA641 Soil Survey of Lewis County area, Washington, provided by the Natural Resource Conservation Service. Permeability of these soils is moderately rapid. Available water capacity is moderate. Runoff is very slow, and the hazard of water erosion is slight. See Appendix D -Soils Information for data provided by the Natural Conservation Service. 7.0 EROSION PROBLEM AREAS The proposed site will generally consist of slopes less than 5 percent. The use of retaining walls to facilitate grade changes will not be necessary, but retaining walls will be necessary for the detention pond. Steeper slopes, not to exceed 3 feet horizontal to 1 foot vertical, are present in the temporary sediment pond to the northeastern side of the project site. All exposed slopes will be seeded and additional measures will take place as discussed later in Section 8.5 -Protect Slopes. 8.0 CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION ELEMENTS The purpose of this section is to describe how each of the twelve Construction SWPP elements (as defined by the Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington, February 2005, Washington State Department of Ecology [DOE]) have been addressed, and to identify the type and location of BMPs used to satisfy the required element. If an element is not applicable, a reason is provided. Since the DOE's BMP requirements are mimicked by the King County manual, we have chosen to use the DOE's BMP numbering system. 8.1 Mark Clearing Limits Prior to beginning land disturbing activities, including clearing and grading, all clearing limits will be marked with high visibility plastic or metal fence (BMP C103). Significant vegetation to remain will be clearly marked and protected by fencing. 8.2 Establish Construction Access Two construction entrances will be provided to access the existing project site off of Lind Avenue. One construction entrance will be constructed on the northwest portion of 6 mmmm the site, and one on the southwest portion of the site. The construction entrances will be removed when the site is stabilized. If sediment tracking onto the surrounding rights-of-way from construction vehicles leaving the project site becomes an issue, provisions for wheel washing or tire baths shall be implemented on the project site. Roads shall be thoroughly cleaned at the end of each working day. Sediment shall be removed from roads by shoveling or pickup sweeping, and shall be transported to a controlled sediment disposal area. Street washing shall be allowed only after sediment is removed in this manner. 8.3 Control Flow Rates Vegetation consists primarily of sparse grass, patches of miscellaneous brush, and localized small-diameter trees. The site is being completely cleared for construction of the project. To reduce the potential of sediment laden runoff from the site, flow control devices shall be constructed as one of the first steps in grading. This includes, but may not be limited to temporary interceptor ditches, rock check dams, and the temporary sediment pond. The stormwater will travel through the temporary interceptor ditches and discharge to the temporary sediment pond at the western portion of the project site. The temporary sediment pond has been designed in accordance with the Washington State Department of Ecology Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington, February 2005 Edition. 8.4 Install Sediment Controls As part of the initial construction activities, BMPs will be installed to trap sediment on-site. The identified BMPs include a temporary sediment pond, silt fencing, stabilized construction entrances, dust control, interceptor ditches, rock check dams, plastic covering, seeding, mulching, and catch basin inlet protection. The permanent stormwater facilities will be developed during the erosion control implementation phase. In addition, the site will be graded to drain to the proposed stormwater conveyance system. The new conveyance system will be pumped to a detention pond. The permanent stormwater facility has sufficient capacity to accommodate a 100-year, 24-hour storm event without an overflow situation. 8.4.1 Stabilize Soils To prevent soil from the erosive forces of raindrops, flowing water, and wind, the following BMPs will be implemented: • From October 1 through April 30, no soils shall remain exposed and unworked for more than 2 days. From May 1 to September 30, no soils shall remain exposed and unworked for more than 7 days. This condition applies to all soils on the site, whether at final grade or not. • In cool wet weather, topsoil stabilization measures are recommended to be straw, excelsior mats, silt fences and hand seeded grass. • Soils shall be stabilized at the end of a shift before a holiday or weekend, if needed, based on the weather forecast. 7 mmm11 • After fertilizing, all areas that will not be impacted by construction of the paved areas will be seeded (BMP C120). • Topsoil stockpiles will be stabilized with plastic coverings (BMP C123). • Dust control (BMP C140) will be provided by sprinkling the site with water. • A lay down, staging, and storage area will be located on the project site. • Permanent erosion control measures will include site paving, seeding of exposed soils, and providing vegetation per the landscape plans. 8.4.2 Structural BMPs In conjunction with the soil stabilization BMPs mentioned in Section 8.4.1 - Stabilize Soils, structural erosion control measures are to be implemented to further protect soil from the erosive forces of raindrops and flowing water. The following structural BMPs will be implemented: • High Visibility Plastic or Metal Fence (BMP C103) • Stabilized Construction Entrance (BMP ClOS) • Construction Road/Parking Area Stabilization (BMP C107) • Mulching (BMP C121) • Plastic Covering (BMP C123) • Dust Control (BMP C140) • Interceptor Swales (BMP C200) • Channel Lining (BMP C202) • Rock Check Dams (BMP C207) • Storm Drain Inlet Protection (BMP C220) • Silt Fence (BMP C233) • Temporary Sediment Pond (BMP C241) 8.5 Protect Slopes Seeding (BMP C120) or plastic covering (BMP C123) shall be utilized to protect exposed soils and reduce hillside erosion by creating a natural or artificial cover. In addition, mulch (BMP C121) shall be applied to all slopes over 3H:1V. Upslope drainage and run-on waters shall be diverted with interceptors at the top of the slope. Off-site stormwater shall be handled separately from stormwater generated on the project site. Diversion of such off-site stormwater around the site is an allowable option, 8 mmm11 provided that the diverted flow is redirected to the natural drainage location at or before the property boundary. Check dams shall be used within channels and temporary interceptor ditches that are cut down a slope. Excavated material shall be placed on the uphill side of trenches, consistent with space and safety considerations. The following BMPs will be implemented: • Temporary and Permanent Seeding (BMP C120} • Interceptor Swale (BMP C200) • Check Dams (BMP C207) • Plastic Covering (BMP C123) • Mulching (BMP C121) 8.6 Protect Drain Inlets Storm drain inlet protection (BMP C220) shall be provided to all drainage collecting structures as they are installed so that stormwater runoff does not enter the conveyance system without first being filtered or treated to remove sediment. Approach roads shall be kept clean. Sediment and street wash water shall not enter storm drains without prior and adequate treatment. Inlets shall be inspected weekly, at a minimum, and daily during storm events. Inlet protection devices shall be cleaned or removed and replaced when sediment has filled one-third of the available storage (unless a different standard is specified by the product manufacturer). General rule of thumb is to clean inlets before 6 inches of sediment can accumulate. 8.7 Stabilize Channels and Outlets No temporary conveyance channels have been designed. We are proposing to sheet flow to temporary ponds/ditches on the border of the site. Outlets from temporary sediment pond(s) will be maintained and kept clean of sediment and in working condition during construction. BMP C209 -Outlet Protection shall be implemented. 8.8 Control Pollutants All pollutants, including waste materials and demolition debris, that occur on-site during construction shall be collected and stored in a securely closed metal dumpster. The dumpster shall be emptied a minimum of once per week and the trash hauled to the local landfill. No construction materials will be buried on-site. 9 mmmm Cover, containment, and protection from vandalism shall be provided for all chemicals, liquid products, petroleum products, and non-inert wastes present on the site. On-site fueling tanks shall include secondary containment. Maintenance and repair of heavy equipment and vehicles involving oil changes, hydraulic system drain down, solvent and de-greasing cleaning operations, fuel tank drain down and removal, and other activities that may result in discharge or spillage of pollutants to the ground or into stormwater runoff must be conducted using spill prevention measures, such as drip pans. Contaminated surfaces shall be cleaned immediately following any discharge or spill incident. Emergency repairs may be performed on-site using temporary tarps placed beneath and, if raining, over the vehicle. Application of agricultural chemicals, including fertilizers and pesticides, shall be conducted in a manner and at application rates that will not result in the loss of chemical due to stormwater runoff. Manufacturer's recommendations for application rates and procedures shall be followed. BMPs shall be used to prevent or treat contamination of stormwater runoff by pH modifying sources. These sources include bulk cement, new concrete washing and curing waters, waste streams generated from concrete grinding and sawing, and concrete pumping and mixing without waters. BMP C151 -Concrete Handling and BMP C152 - Sawcutting and Surfacing Pollution Prevention, shall be implemented. All personnel will be instructed regarding the correct procedure for waste disposal. Good housekeeping and spill control practices will be followed during construction to minimize stormwater contamination from petroleum products, fertilizers, and concrete. Table #1 below lists several pollutants that are commonly found on construction sites that have the potential to contaminate storm runoff. These pollutants will be present mainly in areas of building and pavement construction. The Contractor and SWPPP/TESC Coordinator will be responsible for identifying areas where these pollutants are being used, and will monitor runoff coming from these areas. All personnel shall be instructed regarding the correct procedure for waste disposal and application of appropriate BMPs should contamination occur, as defined in Section 9.0 -Employee Training. If contaminated runoff is found in soils, or if a spill or discharge to the environment occurs, the Erosion Control Specialist must immediately notify the City of Renton. A determination must be made regarding the contamination level of the soil being removed to determine the proper disposition. Upon receiving final direction from the City of Renton, the Contractor shall remove the polluted water/soil and dispose of it off-site, as directed. Table #1 -Potential Construction Site Stormwater Pollutants Chemical/ Physical Stormwater Pollutantsl'l Trade Name Material Description<1 l Pesticides (insecticides, Various colored to colorless Chlorinated hydrocarbons, fungicides, herbicide, liquid, powder, pellets, or organophosphates, rodenticides) grains carbamates, arsenic Fertilizer Liauid or solid arains Nitrooen nhosnhorous 10 mmmm Chemical/Physical Stormwater Pollutants<1 l Trade Name Material Description<1 l Plaster White granules or powder Calcium sulphate, calcium carbonate, sulfuric acid Cleaning solvents Colorless, blue, or Perchloroethylene, yellow-green liquid methylene chloride, trichloroethylene, petroleum distillates Asohalt Black solid Oil. oetroleum distillates Concrete White solid Limestone. sand Glue. adhesives White or vellow liauid Polvmers eooxies Paints Various colored liquid Metal oxides, stoddard solvent, talc, calcium carbonate. arsenic Curina comoounds Creamv white liouid Naohtha Wastewater from construction Water Soil, oil & grease, solids eauioment washina Wood preservatives Clear amber or dark brown Stoddard solvent, liquid petroleum distillates, arsenic, copper, chromium Hydraulic oil/fluids Brown oily petroleum Mineral oil hydrocarbon Gasoline Colorless, pale brown or Benzene, ethyl benzene, pink petroleum hydrocarbon toluene, xylene, MTBE Diesel fuel Clear, blue-green to yellow Petroleum distillate, oil and liquid grease, naphthalene, xvlenes Kerosene Pale yellow liquid petroleum Coal oil, petroleum hydrocarbon distillates Antifreeze/coolant Clear green/yellow liquid Ethylene glycol, propylene glycol, heavy metals (copper, lead, zinc) Erosion Solid Particles Soil, Sediment 11 > Data obtained from MSDS when available. 8.9 Control Dewatering Foundation, vault, and trench de-watering shall be discharged into a controlled conveyance system prior to discharge to the temporary sediment pond. De-watering shall be performed in such a manner that disposes clean, non-turbid water into the conveyance system. All channels must be stabilized, as defined in Section 8.7 -Stabilize Channels and Outlets. 11 mmmm Highly turbid or contaminated dewatering water from construction equipment operation, clamshell digging, and the like shall be handled separately from stormwater. 8.10 Maintain BMPs Temporary and permanent erosion and sediment control BMPs shall be maintained and repaired, as needed, to assure performance of their intended function. Maintenance and repair shall be conducted in accordance with the respective BMP. Sediment control BMPs, such as silt fence and drain inlet protection, shall be inspected weekly or after a runoff-producing event during the dry season, and daily during the wet season. Temporary erosion and sediment control BMPs shall be removed within 30 days after final site stabilization is achieved. Disturbed soil resulting from the removal of BMPs or vegetation shall be permanently stabilized. The following inspection and maintenance practices will be used to maintain erosion and sediment controls: • Built-up sediment shall be removed from silt fencing when it has reached one-third the height of the fence. • Silt fences shall be inspected for depth of sediment, for tears, to ensure that the fabric is securely attached to the fence posts, and to ensure that the fence posts are firmly embedded in the ground. • Temporary and permanent seeding shall be inspected for bare spots, washouts, and healthy growth. • The stabilized construction entrances shall be inspected for sediment tracked on the road, for clean gravel, and to ensure that the culverts beneath the entrances are working and that all traffic uses the stabilized entrances when leaving the site. The maintenance inspection report will be made after each inspection. A copy of the report form to be completed by the SWPPP Coordinator is attached as Exhibit 1 of this SWPPP. Completed forms will be provided to the City of Renton, and shall also be maintained on-site during the entire construction project. If construction activities or design modifications are made to the site plan that could impact stormwater, or the City of Renton determines that the measures are not adequate to prevent erosion and the discharge of sediment (based on turbidity measurements), this SWPPP will be amended appropriately. The amended SWPPP will have a description of the new activities that contribute to the increased pollutant loading and the planned source control activities. 8.11 Manage the Project The following practices will be required during construction to properly manage activities: • Comply with seasonal work limitations. • Inspect, maintain, and repair BMPs. • Identify an Erosion Control Specialist. • Sample and analyze surface water discharges, if necessary. 12 mmmm • Maintain the Construction SWPPP, including narrative and plans, on-site at all times. 9.0 EMPLOYEE TRAINING An employee training program will be developed and implemented to educate employees about the requirements of the SWPPP. This education program will include background on the components and goals of the SWPPP and hands-on training in erosion controls, spill prevention and response, good housekeeping, proper material handling, disposal and control of waste, equipment fueling, and proper storage, washing, and inspection procedures. All employees will be trained prior to their first day on the site. Training will be documented by recording the name and date of each individual receiving the training (see below Table 9-1 Record of Stormwater Training). 13 mmmm Table 9-1 Record of Stormwater Training Name Company Date -- 14 mmmm 10,0 CONSTRUCTION PHASING Phasing of this project is not anticipated. The construction sequence is described below: 1. Arrange and attend pre-construction conference with Applicant, Owner, Contractor, Engineer, Erosion Control Specialist, and the City of Renton. 2. Flag the clearing limits and identify all significant vegetation to remain. 3. Provide miscellaneous demolition and clear and grub within the clearing limits, as required for installation of temporary erosion control facilities. 4. Provide filter fabric fence, interceptor swales and dikes, rock check dams, and temporary sediment pond(s), as shown on the construction plans. 5. The Contractor shall inspect the erosion control measures a minimum of once weekly and after every storm event that produces runoff from the site. The Contractor shall repair or replace erosion control measures, as needed. 6. Adjust temporary interceptor swales and rock check dams, as grading progresses, as necessary to direct stormwater to the sediment pond(s). 7. Provide cover measures to include armoring, mulching, and hydroseeding to stabilize unvegetated areas and prevent the transport of sediment laden stormwater off-site. Cover measures shall be applied to all areas, as described in the standard erosion control notes located on the plans. 8. Provide catch basin sediment protection on all catch basins, debris barriers, and rock pad protection. These measures shall be installed before work begins and not removed until after the storm conveyance system is connected to the permanent detention pond and pump station is activated. 9. Provide permanent drainage facilities, other utilities, and building, as they are permitted and approved by the City of Renton. 10. Complete all utility installation and testing. 11. Fine grade site and provide final surfacing. 12. Stabilize all remaining disturbed areas. 13. Contact City of Renton for final inspection. 11,0 CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE Site stripping and the fill and grade process is anticipated to begin in April 2007 and is expected to be completed by June 2007. Final construction activities are anticipated to begin in June 2007 and are expected to be completed by December 2008. Based on the construction schedule, construction is planned during the wet seasons of 2008. Measures will be taken to prevent the transportation of sediment from the site to receiving waters. These measures include the use of: • Storm Drain Inlet Protection (BMP C220) 15 mmmm • Temporary and Permanent Seeding (BMP C120) • Silt Fence (BMP C233) • Plastic Covering (BMP C123) • Mulching (BMP C121) 12.0 FINANCIAL/OWNERSHIP RESPONSIBILITIES Tarragon, LLC is the party responsible for the initiation of bonds and other financial securities. 13.0 ENGINEERING CALCULATIONS Engineering calculations for the temporary sediment pond are presented in Appendix G - Engineering Calculations. 14.0 CONCLUSION This analysis is based on data and records either supplied to or obtained by AHBL. These documents are referenced within the text of the analysis. The analysis has been prepared using procedures and practices within the standard accepted practices of the industry. AHBL, Inc.CL 7 /r{J Charles "Ted" Hill, E.I.T. Project Engineer CTH/lsk/sca December 2006 K:\Prime\ Yr _2006 \206200 Lind Ave\STORM\Reports\206 200-CS WPPP-wp2(061215).doc 206200-CSWPPPZ (061215).doc 16 mmm11 APPENDIX A Vicinity Map SITE VICINITY MAP N NO SCALE ---- c < , ~ z 0 > t ~ C 0 'g 0 0 rn C f.; " w g ~ g z ~ oc I ~ " l u C ~ ~-~ fil~,1~~~C=E=DA=R=Rl=V=ER=C=O=RP=.=P=A=RK=~GJ=A~I~ """""""""''""""·'"""'·wA_, 2S3l83'<22m VICINITY MAP ~ 3160cc:klerttalAYlll'IU85'dl,Suile320,Saettle,WA96104 200167.2425 TR APPENDIX B Existing Conditions 8 ; N ! ; ,;. -'~-~~ oh ' " ]···· µ=I ' :!!::!::!:"· ....:I .. ..... :z:' I • ···,lflpb: <I; 0 .... ' • I"'' :;, • ... u -en ,... 0 0 "' -u iii "' .zo·08· M..1z,t1:.u)s ~ "' II ::r:: z .0: -<.> p_, ~ .s <I; 0 CJ:: - lJ ,, ~ • • -~ ,;: " ;.. • ; i j • ~ ,, ,,, IP ~-~-"J:I. -.. ! . .,~~ "o< ii\,~ I;: !! • I~ !. I I· I • N -~ ·-,. -~ ' ;; -m z I ! :, I i ' I ! :--i~ ' . I 1, 11 :I •1 I! !1 I· ,1 •i !1 g ~ 1i !i g ~ hi p g't.t..'JJ. ~ CCI • Q. a: 0 (.) u, z 0 j:: -Ci z 0 a: 0 I.LI >1" -Z a: I .:: a: u, ca: x Ci I.I.I I.LI 0 APPENDIX C Developed Conditions 0 0 N ~;; 1ii ):: l:il ~;--~~~f .. i&~b .....:i ee <r: 0 :do",,\o ~ .. ~ .. ;; u rn u 0 ~ ,zo·09· 111.iz:,;,z.ios -::r:: 0.., <r: 0 P::: 0 ~. ; • \, N ' t; g ,, • . , . • !~ z ' 51!:''. I l ~. ~. ~ ---0 /' I "' -~ • ,)ti i ' .. h:s! 1tt !~ a• • • , . ' g (.) • A. a: 0 (.) a: w -> i:i: a: C C w (.) t.n z 0 -1--C z 0 (.) C w A. 0 ...I w > w C ; ;, f I f l , ~ "' !j N ' ~! ·-•• ., ' . §1 ~:8 :=-;s iii z g !~ ' '! ' 1i "' ' -' ~~ g I I ~ 1 ., •s i i r \ ,,-. ,; '! 1~ 1, ,. in . ..... 1 ' J g't.fi.~ ~ APPENDIX D Soils Information g ~ a ! ; ~ I ~ I 8 ~ ~ 8 " ~ 557_800 557.[lOO 557800 557900 4· USDA Natural Resources :.iiii Consenation Service 558.000 558.~00 558000 558-100 SOIL SURVEY OF KING COUNTY AREA, WASHINGTON 558_2QO 558)00 558-200 558-300 0 50 100 558_4:'.JO 558400 Meters 200 Cedar River Corporate Park 558_500 558_600 558-500 558600 5M700 Web Soil Survey 1.1 National Cooperative Soil Survey 558800 558-900 0 200 400 559'000 800 1,200 Feet 1,600 J 2/l/2006 Page I of3 USDA l'\atural Resources ~, fomer•allon Servitt SOIL SURVEY OF KING COUNTY AREA, WASHINGTON MAP LEGEND Soil Map Units O Cities C=::J Detailed Counties C=:] Detailed States Interstate Highways Roads -+--+-Rails \Nater Hydrography Ocea~s .1.VA'fi.'fAY Escarpment. bedrock =:scarpment, non-bedrock G~lley 111111111111111 Levee Slope ~ Blowout S Borrow Pit ;,r, Clay Spot + Depression, closed Eroded Spot >:.. Gravel Pit Gravelly Spot Gulley /1. G .J. Lava Flow Landfill Marsh or Swamp © Miscellaneous Water v Rock Outcrop Saline Spot Sandy Spot \, Slide or Slip C Sinkhole J5 Sadie Spot ,. 0 w Spoil Area Stony Spot ® Perennial \fJa1er 1' \/\/et Spot Cedar River Corporate Park MAP INFORMATION Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey URL: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov Coordinate System: UTM Zone 10 Soil Survey Area: King County Area, Washington Spatial Version of Data: 1 Soil Map Compilation Scale: 1 :24000 Map comprised of aerial images photographed on these dates: 7/10/1990; 7/18/1990 The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit bou_~daries may be evident. \Vcb Soil Survey l. l National Cooperative Soil Survey 12/1/2006 Page2of3 Soil Survey of King County Area, Washington Map Unit Legend Summary King County Area, Washington Map Unit Symbol AgC AgD BeC BeD InC Ng Pu Py Sk So ~ Tu Ur w Wo USDA Natural Resour[~ ~ CorL~enalhm Senke Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 6 161.1 to 15 percent slopes Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 15 31.0 to 30 percent slopes Beausite gravelly sandy loam, 6 to 147.1 15 percent slopes Beausite gravelly sandy loam, 15 to 31.4 30 percent slopes Indianola loamy fine sand, 4 to 15 14.1 percent slopes Newberg silt loam 81.0 Puget silty clay loam 137.6 Puyallup fine sandy loam 87.5 Seattle muck 32.8 Snohomish silt loam 168.7 Tukwila muck 62.2 Urban land 747.5 Water 29.4 Woodinville silt loam 316.3 Web Soil Survey 1.1 National c·ooperative Soil Survey Percent of AO! 7.9 1.5 7.2 1.5 0.7 4.0 6.7 4.3 1.6 8.2 3.0 36.5 1.4 15.4 Cedar River Corporate Park 12/1/2006 Page3of3 Shalcar soils in depressions. Some areas in the vicinity of section 9, T. 26 N., R. 7 E. c1rc Ji; rnuch as 20 percent deep silty clay loams that hc1vc il VC'IY dcnk brown surface layer and a reddish-yellow to oJive-yellow subsoil. Permeability is modercJte. Roots penetrate easi 1y to the bedrock. Available wat.er cc.1pacity is r:1odero.te. Runoff is slow to medium, and the erosion hazard is slight to moderate. This Ovall soil is used for timber and pa.st-..ire. Capability unit IVe-2; woodland group 3dl. Ova} l gravell v loam, l.~ _t_o __ 2_5_ percent slopec: (OvD). --'T'his hilly soil is on up) ands. !\r t"c.1:c; are irregular in shape and range from '10 t.o 2:;c1,i1 160 acres 1n size. Some mapped areas are up to 20 pcrcenl 1rn· 1Hie:i Aldcr·wood gravelly sandy loam, and some are tsp to .2_0 per:cf'nt neausite gravelly loam. Runoff is medium, and t.he erosion hazard ::_s se- vere. This soil is used for timber. Capability unit Vle-2; wood.land group 3dl. Ovalb. gr·avelly loam, 40 to 75 percent slo~w,_; (OvF)-.--T\11:-; soil is very steep and mostly co11vi•x. The arec1s a.re irregular in shape and r·ange l r cu SO t"c about 300 acres in size. This so.i.L is similar t.c Ova,11 9ravf'lly learn, 0 to 15 percent. slopes, except th,1t depth t.o the underlying ande:-;ite averages 30 to -1,J inches. Some areas on the I ower slopes are up to I'., fJf·' r- cent included Alder wood gravelly sandy loam; s:mw are up to 15 percent Ovall soils that have 5 ln1,,, .. less than 40 percent; and some arc up to lU p,,r,·(·111 Beausit.f' gravelly sandy loam. Rur.off is rapid to very rapid, and the er~J.':H.'ll hazard is severe. This soil is used tor timber. Capab::_l1ty unit VIIe-1; woodL:md qroup ldl. The Pilchuck series is made up of excessi·v·ely drained soils t.ha1 formed in alluvium on low :;trc~\D terraces, under a r:over of hardwoods and coniferc,. Slopes arc U t.o 2 percent. The annual prccipit~ctjr.111 i:--; 35 to :i~ inches, and the mean annual ajr tempe:.~11 rP J:O about ~o· F. The frost-free season is lEO t.o ?.lJCJ ~lays. Elevation ranges from 20 l.o 800 feet. In a representative profile, layers of very clat:1-'. gray, dark grayisli-l.nown, and dark-gray fine sand o.:1ri loamy fine sand ex lend to a depth of about 38 .'..nc-hc.co. Below this is b.lac:k gravelly sand that extends tc, d depth of 60 .inches or more. Pilchuck soils are used for pilsturc and, I(: limited l'xlent, for timber. P.i lchuck loamy fine .sar1d IPc) .--This nearl•i 1,-·,,·,··l soi 1 i .s on terraces adjacent t.o streams. The an 1s c11,· long and narrow ,c1nd rar1qe from 2 to slightly :nr.,1,. tL,H1 60 cH:res in size. Slopc.s ore l!-csS than 2 peru :it Representative profile of Pilchuck loamy Line sand, in woodland, 650 feet north and 800 feet west of the sout.heast corner of sec. 28, T. 21 N., R. 5 E.· Cl--0 to 20 inches, very dark gray (lOYR 3/1) loamy fine sund, dark gray (2.5Y 4/1) dry; massive; soft, very friable, nonsticky, nonplastic; few roots; neutral; clear, smooth boundary. 15 to 2 3 inches thick. C2--20 to 25 inches, dark grayish-brown (2.SY 4/2) loamy fine sand, gray {lOYR 5/1) dry; massive; soft, very friable, nonsticky, nonplastic; few roots; neutral; abrupt, wavy boundary. 4 to 9 inches thick. C3--25 to 30 inches, very dark gray and dark-gray (lOYR 3/1 and 4/1) fine sand, dark gray (lOYR 4/1) dry; massive; soft, very friable, nonsticky, nonplastic; few roots; neutral.; abrupt, wavy bou~dary. 4 to 7 inches thick. C4--30 to 38 inches, dark-gray (lOYR 4/1) loamy fine sand, grayish brown (lOYR 5/2) dry; ma:-;sive; soft, very friable, nonsticky, nonp.lastic; few roots; slightly acid; abrupt, wavy boundary. 6 to 9 inches thick. C5--3i.l lo 60 inche.:;, black (10YR 2/1) gravelly sand, very riark gray (lOYR 3/1) dry; single grain; loose, non:-;t.icky, nonplastic; few roots; neutral. Many feet thick. The C horizon ranges from very durk qray to dark gray and grayish brown. lt is loamy fine sanri t.o fine :-;and that is up to 15 percent gravel. A few layers are more than 15 percent gro.vel or cobblestones. Some mapped areas arc up Lo l:) percent inclusions cf Ri vcrwosh; some are up lo 20 percent Pilchuck fine siJndy loam; and :-;ome are up to lS percent Briscot, Puyallup, and Oridia soils. Permeability is rapid. The effective rool. inq depth is 60 inches or more. A seasonal high water table is at a. depth of 2 to 4 feet in places. Avc1ilabJ~ water capacity is low, and runoff is slow. Streillll over! low is a severe hazard. The hc1zard of erosion and deposit.ion by stream overflow is modero.te to severe. This soil is used for timber and pasture. Capability unit VIw-1; woodland group 2sl, Pilcbuck fine sa_n(ly lo_a_r:ri {Pk). --This nearly level so:'.l is adjacent to strecm1~;. Tl is in long, narrow areas that range from 4 t.o abcrnt. 150 acres in size. The surface layer 1s fine sandy loam or sandy loam that is very dark grayish brown to very dark gray and 8 to 14 inche.:; thj ck. This soil is used for timber and pastnre. Capability unit IVw-1; woodland group 2sl. ~ Series The Pugel ser.ie:-; is made up of poorly drained soils U1at. formed in alluvium, under sedges and grass, in .small dqnessions of the river valleys. Slopes are O to 1 percent. The annual precipitation is 35 to 55 inches, and the mean annual air temperature i3 about so· F. The frost-free season is about 190 days. Elevations range from 10 to 650 feet. I!l a representative profile, the soil is cic-:n1- nantly mottled dcJrk grayish-brown and grayish-brc.,1.,.n silty clay loam to a depth of about 45 inches. TJ-,c substratu.--n is gray s1l ty clay that extends to a dcp::h of 60 inches or more. Puget soils are used for row crops and pasturts. Puget silty clay }oa~ {Pu) .--Puget soils arc 1:L nearly round or elcngated tracts that range fro:n :i to 110 acres in size. Slopes arc less than l perc02nt.. Representative profile of Puget silty clay :r.am, in pasture, 800 feet east of the west quarter cor:102r of sec. 21, T. 25 N., R. 7 E.· All--0 to l inch, very dark qray•ish-brown (2.SY 3/2} silt loam, r;rayish hrnwn (lOYR 5/2) dry; moC.- erate, thin, platy structure; hard, firm, slightJy stir:ky, slightly plastic, many rootco; medirnn acid; abrupt, smooth boundary. 1 ::o 2 inches t.hick. Al2--l to ·1 inches, dark grayish-brown (2.SY 4/2) .'.,iltv cla.y loam, light gray (SY 7/7.) drv; com111()11, fine, prominent, dark-brown (7.SYR 1/4) mcJt.r __ -_es; moderate, very coarse, prismatic struct\Jrc'; hard, firm, sticky, plr.1:c;tic; many roots; mecaur:1 acid; clear, smooth boundary. 5 to 7 inch0:, thick. B2lg--7 to n lnches, dark grayish-brown (2.SY 1)/:) .c;ilty c]ay loam, light gray (2.SY 7/2) dry; cr,1u-.r_;r'., medium, prominent, strong-brown (7.SYR .',/(, !,/Hi mottles; moderate, medium, prjsmat.ic st.rue\ 1irr'; hard, firm, sticky, plastic; ma.ny root'.'>; slightly acid; cJear, smooth boundary. '.i 1 CJ lZ inches thick. B22g--17 to 25 1nd1es, grayish-brown {2.SY 5/2) silty clay loam, Light olive gray (SY 6/21 drv; nany, medjum, prornim'!nt, yellowish-red (':i":T. ',iH, 4/8) mottles; strong, very coarse, prismcJtic: structunc,; very hard, firm, sticky, plas: .c:; common root.:c;; slightly acid; abrupt, smooth bournJr.iry. 6 to 12 inches thick. B23g--25 tu ~6 1/2 inches, dark-gray (SY 4/1) =dhrn scir1G, l iqht. grayish brown (2. SY 6/2) dry; few, mcC..:..v11, prominent, yellowish-red ( SYR 5/8) molt r.'.'."; :'l'..ngle grain; loose, nonsticky, nonp.last :,· '.f'w roots; slightly acid; abrupt, smooth bo·.11"ld2.ry. to 2 inches thjck. B24g--26 1/2 to 3~ inches, grayish,.brown (2. SY 5/2} s i L ty clay loam, light gray (SY 7/2) dry; many, mediu.11, prominent, yellowish-brown (lOYR ]/E:: rnot.t.les; moderate, mediLun, anrJular blocky structure; hard, firm, sticky, plastic; f,»:1 roots; mediu.-rn acid; abrupt, wavy boundar·;. o (-; inches thick B25g--31 to 40 inches, qr·ayish-brnwn (2.5Y 5/2) :,_; :· "j clay loam, l1ghl". gray (5Y 7/1) dry; comwor1, fine, prominf'nt, yellow, brownish-yellow IL lYl,, 7/6, G/6), and s!.rong-hrown (7.5YR 5/8) mottles; strong, very coarse, prismatic structure; hard, firm, sticky, plastic; few roots; medium acid; r.lear, smooth boundary. 8 to 10 inches Unck. Clg--40 to 4~ inches, greenish-gray (5GY 5/1) silty clay loam, light gray (SY 7/1) dry; common, fine, prominent, .c;tronq-brown (7 .SYR 5/6) mottles; massive; hare!, firm, sticky, plastic; medium acid; cl12ar, smooth boundary. 4 to 6 inches thick. C2g--45 to 60 inches, gxay {5Y 5/1) silty clay, liqht gray (SY 7/1) dry; few, medium, prominent, yellowish-red (5YR 4/8, 5/8) mottles, ye1 lowish brown (lOYR 5/8) dry; and common, medium, distinct, light olive-brmm (2.5Y 5/4) mottles, light yellowish brown (2.:>Y 6/4) dry; massive; very hard, firm, sticky, plastic; medium acid. The A horizon ranges from silty clay loam to silt loam. The B horizon is dominantly silty clay loam stratified with silt loam, silty clay, and fine sand. Some areas mapped are up to 10 percent inclusions of Woodinville and Snohomish soils. Perme2bility is slow. The seasonal high water table is at. or near the surface. In drained areas, roots penetra.te with difficulty to a depth of 60 inches or more. In undrained areas the effective rooting depth is restricted. The available water capacity is high. Runoff is slow to ponded, and the exosion hazonl i.':', .c;li1Jht. Stream overflow is a sever:e hazard. This soil is used for row crops and pasture. Capubility u11.i.l IIIw-2; woodland group 3w2. PuyalJ:.up _Ser~e~ The Puyallup series is made up of well-drained soils that formed in alluvium, under r;ra.c;s, har.dwoods, and conifers. These so.'..ls arc on the natural levees adjacent to streams in the ri vcr valley.<;. Slope.<; are O to 2 percent. The .:mnual precipil.al.ion is 3':i to 60 inches, and the mean annual air temperature is about :iO. F'. The frost-free season ranges f rorn 160 to 200 days. Elevation r.:mgcs from 20 to .':>00 feet. In a representative profile, very dark grayishbrown and dark grayish-brown fine sandy loam and very fine sandy loam extend to a depth of about 34 inches. The substratum, at a depth of 60 inches or more, is very dark grayish-brown, dark grayishbrown, und dark-brown medium sand, lo=y sand, a11d sand. Puyallup soils are used mostly lor row crops and p.:tsture. They are among the soils that are well suited tu faun.i 11q. llr ban development is occurring in many areas. Puyallup fine sandv loam (Py) .--This nearly level soil is on natural levees in the vcJlley botto~s. Areas are long a.nd narrow or somewhat rounded and Bl--7 to 25 inches, dark grayish-brown (2. 5Y 4/2) '-;Lt loam, grayish brown (2. 5Y 5/2) dry; massive; slightly hard, very friable, slightly sU,_·J.-y, slightly plastic; many roots; mednun acid; clecJr, smooth boundary. 16 to 20 inches thick. B2lg--25 to 40 inches, dark grayish-brown (2.5Y 4/2) silt loam, light brownish gray (2.5Y 6/2) ci~y; many, fine, distinct, dark yellowish-brown I lDYK 4/4) mottles, faint light yellowish brown {2 . .Ji' 6/4) dry; massive; slightly hard, very friable, slightly sticky, slightly plastic; common roots; medium acid; clear, wavy boundary. 13 to 16 inches thick. B22g--40 to 46 inches, very dark gr-ay (SY 3/1) loamy sand, grayish brown (2.SY 5/2) dry; corrunon, medium, distinct, dark yellowish-brown (lCYE 3/4) mottles; massive; soft, very friable, nonstic:~y, nonpl.:istic; few roots; slightly acid; clear, ;.:a,;y boundary. 3 to 8 inches thick. B23--46 to 60 inches, olive-griJ.y (SY 4/2) silt loillll and ve-:-y fine sandy loam, light brownish gray (2.5Y G/'.': dry; corrunon, mcdiwn, prominent, dark yellov-.'i:;:l- b.rown (lOYR 4/4) mollies, yeJlowish brown (10YI{ ~/6) and 1 iqhl ye] lowish brown (10YR 6/4) dr·y; massive; slightly hard, very friable, nons· 1·ky, nonplast.ic; few roots; slightly acid. The A horizon ranges from dark grayish brown u-,. Vf'ry dark grayish brown. The B horizon ranges from dark (Jk\-i. broi,m <md dark gray to very dark gray and olive gray, ,{nd from silt loum to very fine sandy lo=. In pluces i; contains thin lenses of fine sand, loarr,y sand, and •;;mclv loam. The number and prorninenr:e of moL.L.Jes increa:,1· hr_:low a depth of 20 inches. Some areas are up to 15 percent inclusions of u tif-'f-'r, stratified Edgewick sandy loam; some are up to S pc•i-cect the sar,dy Pilchuck so.:.ls; and some are up to 5 pc:-cent the wet Bellingham, Seattle, and Tukwila soils. Permeability is moderate. The effective rooting depth is 60 inches and more. The seasonal high water table is at a depth of 2 to 4 feet. The available watPr capacity is high. xunoff is slew, and the hazard of erosion is slight. Stream overflow is a moderate ha:::aicl. This soil is used :or row crops and pasture. Capability unit IIw-1; woodland group 201. Snohrnn i sh Seri es The Snohomish series is made up of poorly drain,~d :-;c 1. ,. that formed in alluvium ir. stream valleys. Slope:; i!rr: :J to 2 percent. Annuill precipitation is 35 to SO inchc:-;, and the mean armuul il.ir temperuture is iJ.bout so· F ';'hr_· frost-free seilson runges from 150 to 200 days. F.lf-'volion r-c1m;cs fn11n abotit sea level to :JOO feel. In 2 repre.senlative profile, the surtace layer and subsoil are very dark grayi:a;h-brown and g.rayi:a;l, brown silt. J oam and clay loam about. 17 inche:a; thj '-k Below this is black mucky peat about 10 inches thick. The substratwn is dark-gray loamy fine sand that extends Lo a depth of 60 inches or more. Snohomish soils are used for row crops, pasture, i.:l.Tld hay. Snohomish silt loam (So} .--This nearly level soil is in areas that are irregular in shape and range from 2 to about '100 ar:res in size. Representative profile of Snohomish silt loam, in pasture, 1,050 feet east and 500 feet south of the northwest corner of sec. 24, T. 21 N., R. 4 ~-- Ap--0 to 8 inches, very dark grayish-hrown OOYR 3/7.) silt loam, light grayish brown (lOYR 6/2) dry; few, fine, distinct, yellowish-brown (lOYR 5/6) mnttles, brownish yellow (lOYR 6/6) dry; moderate, fine, granular structure; slightly hard, friable, slightly sticky, plastic; many .roots; medium acid; abrupt, smooth boundary. 6 to 8 inches thick. Al--8 to 11 inches, very dark grayish-brown (10YR 3/2) silt loam; moderate, fine, granular structure; slightly hard, friable, slightly sticky, slighUy plastic; m-c1ny roots; medium iJ.cid; abrupt, wavy boundiJ.ry. 1 to 3 inc.hes thick. B2g--ll to 17 inches, grayish-br:own (2.5Y 5/2) clay loam, light grc.,y (7.5Y 7/2) dry; black {1CYR 2/1) mucky peat, very dark gray and dark ~1rc1y (lOYR 3/1 and 4/1) dry; many, medium, promjnent mottles of reddish brown and yellowish red (5YR '1/1 and 5/6), con,mon, fine, prominent mottles of brownish yellow (lOYR 6/6 and 6/8) dry; moderate, medium, granular structure; hzird, firm, sticky, plastic; few roots; medium acid; abrupt, wavy boundiJ.ry. 6 to 26 inches thick. IIOe--17 to 27 inches, black (lOYR ?/1) moist., mucky peat, very dark brown (lOYR 2/2) dry; massive; hard, very friable, nonsticky, nonplaslic; few rooLs; medium cJcid; abrupt, wavy boundary. 10 to 25 inches thick. IIICg--27 to 60 incr.es, loamy fine sand, dark qray (N 4/0) moist; gray (SY 5/1) dry; few, fine, distinct mottles of light brownish gray (2.SY 6/2) dry; massive; soft, very friable, non- sticky, nonplastic; few roots; medium acid. The A hor i z.on ranges from very dark grayish brown to dark brown. The R horizon ranlJCS from very durk grayish brown to gray and from silt loam to silty cJay loillTL and loamy sand. Depth to layers of peaty mcterial ranlJCS from 13 to 36 inches. The peaty layers are black t.o reddi.sh black and are 10 inches or more thick. Layers of silt.y clay loa111 to loamy sand occur within and below the peaty layers. Some area5 are up to 20 percent included Woodinville soils; and some are up to 5 percent Se.:ittlc, Tukwila, and Shalcar soil:a;. Permeability is moderatf' in the upper part of the profile and moderately rapid in t_he lower pa.YI 'l'hcre see1.':io11a l high water table at or near the surface. In druined areas, the effective root.inq r!ept.h ls fiD i5 a inches or more. In undrained areas, rooting depth is restricted. Available water capacity is high. Rur.o::"f is slow, and the erosion hazard is slight. Stream overflow is a severe hazard. This sail is used for row crops, pasture, and hay. Capability unit IJw-7; woodland group 3w2. Snohomish Series, 'l'hic~ Surface Variant Snohomish series, Lh.i.ck surface variant, is me.de ur of somewhat poorly drained soils that formed in allt:v,a. deposits of diatomaceous material on the flood plain of the Sanm1amish Valley. Slopes are O to 2 percent. 1'1':E' annual precipitation is 45 to 50 inches, and the mec!11 annual air temperatur·e i.'5 about so· f'. The frost· fr~·i· season is about 200 days. EJ evation ranges from ab::.·t~t :wa level to 40 feet. In a representative prol .i .le, the surface layer i:-, Vf'ry dark brown silt loam about. 11l inches thick. The next layers are very dark grayi::;h-brown and lightgray i>t l t loam and very fine sandy loam about 19 inches t:1i: k. Below this is black muck lhc1t extends to a depll1 o1 fiO inches or more. These soils are used for row crops, hay, or pc1.sture. _:;',_noh~mt__0_1 ::;ilt loam, thick surface variant (:;r: Thi.s soi J is nearly level. Areas are irregular 111 shc1pc and ranq2 from 1 acre to nearly 200 acres in sL:(' Representative profile of cultivated Snohomi~-;li :-,i It loam, 820 feet north and 250 feet cast of the we;t quarter corner of sec. 26, T. 26 N., R. 5 E. · l\p--0 to 10 inches, very dark brown ('}.~YR 2/2) silt Jodrn, gr:ayjsh brown (lOYR 5/2) dry; weak, fi.nc and coarse, crumb structure; soft, very fr i;;b.:.c, nor . .sticky, .sl igl1tly plastic; common root..s; sl-iqhtly 2cid; dbrupt, wavy boundary. 10 lo i::-iche.s thick. Cl--10 to 18 inches, very dark grayish-brown (lOY!? J/:' and brown (lOYR .'l/3) silt loam, light gray 7/2) dry; few, fine, prominent (10YR 7/6 a::-id · iH:, mottles in root casts; moderate, very coarse, prismatic structure; hard, friable, slight] y sticky, slightly plastic; common roots; mediLli:\ acid; abrupt, wavy boundary. 4 to 12 inchc.'' thick. IIC2--1H to ?U inci1es, light-gray {lOYR 1/2) and cl1~k yellowish-brown (lOYR 4/4) very fine sandy 1,1,.m (volcanic ash}, white (lOYR 8/1) and very r::1 I(' brown {lOYR 7/'1) dry; massive; slightly hard, friable, nonsticky, nonplastic; cownon roc-1 slightly acid; abrupt, wa.vy bound<Jry. 3/4 ir·,c.:!1 to inches thick. IIIC3--2D to 29 inches, very dark gray_i.'5h-brown (lOYR 3/~) and light brownish-gra.y (1[JYR ,,, silt loam, l iqht bu_iwnish gray (10YR 6/2) and V('ry pci.lr_· brown ()OYR '//4) dry; noderate, very coa.r:-;,., prismatic structure that po.rts to very coarc,.e fJ.c1t structure; slightly ha.rd, friable, nonstici'.y, slightly pL::istic; few root:-;; medium acid; clear, smooth boundary. ,J to 14 inches IVOa--29 to 60 inches, black (5YR 2/1) muck, black (SYR 2/1) dry; moderate, very coarse, prismatic structure; slightly hard, very friable, nonsticky, nonplastic; few roots; very strongly acid. Several feet thick. The mineral layers above the muck range from very dark brown to very dark grayish brown. The lower part of the mineral layer coJTU11only ranges from light brownish gray to very dark brown. Layers of very fine sandy loam volcanic ash commonly occur in the lower half ol the mineral layer. The depth to muck ranges from 20 to 40 inches. Soils included with this soil in mapping make up no more than 25 percent of the total acreage. Some a r·ea::; are up to 25 percent the very deep Earlmont silt loam; and some are up to 15 percent the very deep Tukwila muck. Permeability is moderate. There is a seasonal high water table at a deplh of 2 to 3 feet. In drained areas, the effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. Available water capacity is high. Runoff is very slow, and the erosion hazard is slight. This soil is subject to occa::;ionul flooding. This soil is used for row crops, pasture, and hay. Capc1bility unit Ilw-2; woodland qr:oup 3w2. Sultan Series The Sultan seri12s i.s made up of moderately weL. rlrained soils that formed in alluvium, under grass and ha.rdwood::;, in the major stream valleys. Slopes are Oto 2 percent. The annual precipitation is JS to 50 inches, and the mean annual air temperature is a.bout so· F. The frost-free sea::;on ranges from 150 to 200 days. Elevation ranges from about sea level to 85 feet. ln a representative profile, the surface layer i::; very dark grayish-brown silt loam about 9 inches thick. The subsoil extends lo a depth of 60 inches or more. Tl is mottled yellow1 sh-brown, light oli vebro.;n, grayish-brown, and olive-gray, stratified silty clay loam, silt loam, very fine sandy loam, and mcdiwn sand. Sultan soils are used tor row crops und pasture. Sultan ~(h! loam (Su) .--This gently undL1lating soil 1.s on bottom land. Slopes are less than 2 per.cent. Areas are irregular in shape and range from 2 to about 200 acres in s i z.c. Represer.tativc profile of Sultan silt loam, in p<Jsture, 500 feet cast, 250 feet east and 250 1eet north of the south quarter corner of sec. 9, T. 25 N., R. 7 E. · Ap--0 to 9 inches, very dark qrayish-brown (lOYR 3/2) silt loam, light brownish qray {lOYR 6/2) dry; moderate, medium, granular stn1ct.ure; hard, firm, sticky, and plastic; many roots; slightly acid; abrupt, smnoth boundary. 6 to 10 inches t.hir;k. B21--9 to 2: inches, yellowish-brown (lOYR 5/4) silty cl<Jy loam, pale brown (lOYR 6/3) dry; moderate, fine, subangula.r blocky structure; APPENDIX E Geotechnical Engineering Studies El -Prepared by Atlas Geotechnical Engineering, Inc., April 1985 E2 -Prepared by Terra Associates, Inc., November 16, 2006 REPORT OF SUPPLEMENTAL INVESTIGATION PROPOSED WAREHOUSE/OFFICE BUILDING SITE LIND AVENUE, RENTON, WASHINGTON Apr+1 15, 1985 ---. ATLAS GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING INC. Ei ATLAS GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING INC. 13125 -113TH PLACE NE .. KIRKLAND, WASHINGTON 98034 TEL. (206) 823-1030 .~pril 15, 1985 Howard and Martin See·J·ig 300, 120th Avenue NE Be ·11 ::.>vue ~ HA 98005 G1?ntl emen: I NTRODIJCTI ON: Report of Suppleme11tal Investigation Proposed Warehouse/Office Building Site Lind Avenue, Renton, riilshington This letter report summarizes the results of our geotechnical investiga- tion of your proposed warehouse and office building site on Lind Avenue in Renton, Washington. Our v,ork was undertaken in accordance with our confirma- tion of agreement dated March 2S, 1gn5 which you confirmed in our service agreement on the 2'1 th of March. The site measures approximat.ely 880' x 57..0.'. Portions of the adjacent streets rights of way to the south and east may be added to the property whicl1 would increase its size somewhat. The property outline and the adjacent streets are indicated on Plate 1, "Exploration Locations", attached to this report. The site is a filled former marsh land and is now nearly level with the exception that some of the adjacent former street rights of 1vay are at lower levels. The site is now vacant except that some trees and brush have grown up over the site. There is a previous investigation of the site made by the undersigned and summarized in a report dated March 15, 1968. The site was filled in 1968 for use as a petroleum products tank farm. This filling was done in accordance with the recommendations of the investigation report, as confirmed by engineering inspection and testing of the fill described in a report dated October 25, 1968. The proposed construction consists of 4 "L" shaped steel frame buildings with lightweight wall paneling. Slab on grade floors would be used and the fl oars would be supported on a fi 11 approximately 2' above the site grade. Shallow depressions would be provided adjacent to portions of the building to al low truck dock height loading. The '11arehouses would have an approximately 24' interior clear height and an 80' clear span. At some future date the l buildings would be converted for office use by adding an internal second story supported at the exterior ,iall lines and on interior bearing ,;alls and/or columns , Elevators would be added for access to the second fl oar level. Builct·ing co·1umns would be located about 25' on centers. Colur,m loads \rJ"il l be about 25 kips dead 1octd and 2!) kips 1ive loadD Interior and exterior 1;,1al 1 loads after oHice conve:·sion 1,011,d be about 1500 lbs per foot dead load, and 1500 lbs per foot ·1 ·i ve ·10~1rL Hat~ehouse storage ·1 o.Jds are est·imat(~d to not exceed .:1bout .!:-00 lbs per sq. ft. and consith~Y'·ing a·islt~ spQ.ce~ to avernge not t:10re than a.bout :2:)0 ·ibs per sci .. ft. The former' nrnrst1 l<..:n1d included soft and comprC?ssiiJle peat and organ·ic s'ilt deposits up to about 8' thick v1iTich v,ere underlain by less compressible silty sands and si'lts. The major concern of this investigation is to evaluate tfie thickness and condition of th,~se deposits and to estimate settlement and · different'ia·1 settlement behavior that would affect the ne\sJ construction. I IHESTI GA TI ON: Twelve test pi ts, 1 ocate<1 as shown on Plate l, were eocavated using a large tractor mounted backhoe. Th~ test pi ts were dug to depths of up to 18' and bulk or disturbed samples representative of the materials, particularly the cornpressil,le materials, were obtained for moisture content determinations to a·id comparisons with the testing rlone in the previous investigation. A log of the soils encountered was kept and is presented in typewritten form on Plates 2 through 10, One additional test pit ,,1as excavated near the southeastern corner of a small parcel also under your ownership located just east of the northeastern corner of the property, The log is presented on Plate 10, Initially a pattern of 14 test pit explorations, located with respect to the proposed buildings and their locations, was planned. Test pit excavations do disturb the foundation soils, and there is a possibility of adding portions of the adjacent street rights of way and relocating the buildings somewhat, or of an alternative building arrangement. Therefore, v,e were asked to locate the test pits along the east-west center line of the site and along the north and south property 1 ines as far frorn the buildin·gs as practical. The test pit locations were established in tlie f·ield with your assistance using a steel tape to establish distances eastward of the curb on Lind Avenue and along alignments established using i\ level with a degree scale for turning angles. The locations are shown on Plate 1. We caution that there are c number of ways in which errors can be made in field locating test pits. If future construction is planned which approaches the indicated test pit locations v1ithin 20' we recommend that there be very thorough probing and checking of building foundations to confirm that they are not overlying test pits. 2 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS GENERAL In nearly all of the test pits the fill appeared to consist of two layers. The uppermost layer is a brown sandy and gravelly silt including some rock fragments. The gravel is primarily angular material and the fill apparently was derived principally From stripping to expose rock in a rock quarry. Rock up to alrnut 200 lbs in size was encountered in our test pits. Some larger rocks are likely. Locally the fill includes a brown sand from an unk n0\\111 source. n,e lower portion of the fi Ii is generally blue or blue-gray in color and appears to be from the same source as the upper fi 11 except that the rock content and their size is greater. T lie rock content i ncrea sect with depth. In two of the test pits the lower portions of the fill consisted almost entirely of rocks, including rocks of up to 800 lb. size with dimensions of 2 to 2 1/2 feet. Total fill thicknesses variec\ from 6 1/2' to 10 1/2' generally being the thin.nest near the southern boundary of the site and thicker towards the middle and northern boundary of the si tc. The fi 11 is dense except that the fi 11 surface has been disturbed to depths of 6 to 12" as a result of traffic on the site, weathering, and to some extent by the roots of vegetation that has sprung up on the site. Beneath the fill there is a compressible former marsh deposit including peat, silty peat, and interlayered peat and organic silt. The marsh deposits vary from moderately soft to soft, are saturated, and vary from 1 1/2 to 7 1/2' thick, generally being thinnest on the south and thicker and with a higher proportion of organic materia;1 towards the north. It appears that prior to filling, the site··was higher along the southern boundary. The ·marsh deposits are thinner there, and at some time in the past they likely were exposed to drying which could significantly reduce their compressibility. The marsh deposits are underlain by sands, s_ilty sands, silt and occas- sionally by organic silts which extend to depths of at least 85' as indicated by the explorations done previously. These materials are only slightly com- pressible compared to the marsh deposits. Al though the data obtained from the recent and previous investigations are somewhat limited, they do indicate a somewhat regular variation from least compressible in the south becoming more compressible in the northerly direc- tion. There was some fine gravel found in test pit 10 near the northwestern corner of the site. It is reasonable to believe that there may have been some stream activity which accounts for the fine gravel and which may significantly alter the soil profile and compressibility locally. You have provided a sketcl1 prepared by a utility contractor showing that a ditch was dug near the western boundary of the property. The sketcfi indi- cates that the ditch lies entirely within the 60 foot wide building set back required along Lind Avenue. We caution that such sketches tend to be self serving, inaccurate and do not reflect disturbance of the adjacent ground by 3 side slopes or caving. We expect that a portion of the ground within the planned building areas may have been disturbed by this ditch excavation. Warning signs and other evidence indicates that there are buried power lines, a ·•ater line, a petroleum products line and sewer and water line stubs on tile property near Lind Avenue. There also are two petroleum products lines just south of the site and yo•.1 have advised that taere is a 60 inch City of Seattle aqueduct in the south half of the 23rd Street right of way. There may be other 1.1ti1 i ties on or adjacent to the $ite; YJe did not attempt to locate or identify a: 1 of the utilities. Test pit excavations were not left open long enough to al low ground water levels to stabilize. However, based on color changes and the conditions observed in the fill we expect that ground water levels have been about 2 1/2' below the surface in interior portions of the fill sloping downward to depths of about 6 feet to1,ards the l owu ground and drainage ditches adjacent to the site. Except for Lind Avenue, •,ir,ich is complete, the street right of ways adjacent to the property are below the site grade. Taylor Avenue on the east and 23rd Street on the south are significantly below the site grade and act as drainage ways. SETILEMENT BEHAVIOR: Settlement due to compression of the soils under the weight of the fill placed in 1968 should be essentially complete. There will be new settlement related to char,ges in site grade and fill placed for the building pads and also related to building and storage loads. There wi-11 be -variations in settlement which wil 1 tend to occu~ as differential settlements which could cause distortion and damage to the buildings. These variations will be related to variations in the soil condi- tions or building storage loads. Locally settlements could be significantly less if portions of the marsh deposits experienced drying in the past. This variable cannot be satisfactorily evaluated based on test pits or even with careful sampling and testing. We cannot know soil conditions beyond the information developed in our explorations nor can we know the possible varia- tions in warehouse storage loads. However,-our experience indicates that these variations should not be 11ajo,-and are not likely to result in noticable differential settlement or damage to the buildings. Thus, it is our opinion that it would not be economical to preload the site or to make other than minor provisions to minimize the damage that may occur due to differential settlement. It appeurs more economical to accept the risk and to repair the damage if it occurs than to bear the cost of reducing that risk. There are three low cost construction provisions that we recommend that should reduce the potential for damage or reduce the cost of repair. These are 1) providing extra long anchor bolts at column locations so that columns could be raised and shimmed if i1dividual columns settle out of line, 2) Providing access to cross bracing beb1een columns and building frames so that these may be adjusted if necessary, and 3) at the junctions between the elements of each "L" shaped building, providing construction joints of over- 4 lapping siding or spaces filled with a mastic or plastic material. We have analyzed settlement for three cases: 1) a 2' thickness of fil 1 and concrete floor slab in building ,,reas, 2) column loads of 25 kips, and 3) storage 1 oads averaging 250 1 bs per sq. ft. The anti ci pated range of settle- ment and differential settl err1cnt in inches for each of the three conditions and each of the four quadrants of the site are as f0l los,s: building pad bi;ilding storage load range di ff. r·ange di ff. range Jiff. Southwest 1-3 2 l/2-2 ' 1/2 0-1 1/2 1 1/2 L Southeast 1-3 2 1/2-2 l 1/2 0-1/2 1 1/2 Northwest 2-5 3 1-3 2 0-2 2 Northeast 2-5 3 1 li2-3 1 1/2 0-2 2 Settlements are additives, hm1evcr, a substantial portion, perhaps one half, of the building pad settlement will occur during construction and will not be noticed in the buildings. Settlements wil 1 occur fairly quickly and should be about half or two-thirds complete in 2 months. We expect that settlements will be least along the southern boundary of the property increasing somewhat uniformly in the northerly direction. Thus, the var·iation in settlement should tend to result in a tilt of the buildings rather than damaging distortion of the buildings. The tilt will be relatively minor and normally would not be noticed. FOUNDATION SUPPORT: Either a continuous strip type of foundation rein- forced ·to support concentrated column loads, or column foundations connected with wall footings founded on dense existing fill should be satisfactory. In either case we recommend that steel be provided at the top and bottom of the continuous or wal 1 footing to develop the maximum bending strength of the concrete. We understand that the building frames wil 1 be tied together from side to side through the floor slab to deal with thrust developed· at the foundation 1 eve l by the building frames. Foundations should be supported on dense fill and may be designed based on a bearing pressure of 3,000 lbs per sq. ft. for column footings with a minimum dimension of 3', and 2,000 lbs per sq. ft. for wall footings with a minimum dimension of 16''. Exterior footings should bottom at least 18" below grade except that footings depressed for truck dock height loading need be only 12" below the adjacent grade. [nterior footings for future interior office bearing walls may be thickened sections of the concrete floor slab or strip footings bottomed at least 12" below the top of the slab. Footing excavations should be made using equipment with smooth buckets. Teeth that would disturb soil below the excavation should not be used. Any soft soil or soil disturbed by the excavation equipment should be removed and the thickness of the footing increased to make up for over excavation. 5 Hherever building founda ti ans approach within 20' of i ndi ca ted exp l ora- tion locations, particular care should be taken to confirm that the soils in the footing area l1ave not been disturbed by the test pits. Footing excavations should be inspected by a qualified geotechnical engineer to confirm that the soil upon which the footings will bear is dense. S !TE PREPARATION: We recommend that the l oca t"ion and depths of a 11 the utilities and pipelines be determined before you establish building locations or begin site work. The site is very nearly flat and is not sloped sufficiently for drainage. As a result there are a number of ponds, particularly in the central portion of the site. The ponds are shall ow, approximately 6" or so deep, ho>1ever they wi 11 interfere with the construction work and with necessary recompaction of the upper portion of the fill. He expect that the ponds 1vil l dry rapidly during dry weather. The easiest way to get rid of these ponds is to wait for dry weather which normal l y prevail s from May through September. If it is necessary to do the work before the ponds dry, they could be ditched and drained to local sumps and the water pumped to a storm drain system. It will be necessary to very finely slope ditches by hand to get the water to the·sumps. It would not be practical to ditch to· drain the ponds to the edges of the site. For the existing fill area,we recommend the fol lowing procedures prior to beginning construction work; First, the ponds should be drained· or al lowed to dry out. Second, the vegetation should be pushed over so that the majority of the roots are removed and the vegetation should then be raked up and disposed of off site. Then, just prior to placing new fill or pavement courses, the fill should be conditioned either by al lowing it to dry or by sprinkling and harrowing to obtain a moisture content suitable for compaction and then com- pacted with heavy rollers to obtain a density of at least 95% of the maximum dry density as determined by the ASTM D 1557 compaction procedure. Trees have grown significantly larger on~he south edge of the fill and in the until led areas of 23rd Street. Portions of the original marsh and of the compressible soils that made up that marsh are exposed in this area. It probably will not be possible to operate equipment satisfactorily there. We recommend that the trees larger than 4" in diameter be removed either with dragline equipment or with cables. The remaining vegetation can simply be pushed flat ahead of fill placement. We recommend that the initial lift of fill in this area be a minimum of 2' thick or thicker as required to keep the upper 11/2' of fill above water levels. The initial lift of fill should be a coarse free draining material, either a rocky fi 11, sand and gravel, or mixes of these materials. This initial fill lift should be compacted from its surface as far as practical with fill placement and hauling equipment. Except as noted for roadway areas, succeeding layers of fill should be placed in 1 ayers no more than 8" thick, conditioned to a moisture content suitable for compaction and compacted to 95% of the maximum density. 6 The City of Seattle aqueduct is about 15 feet from the north ha 1 f of the 23rd Street right of way. We do not know how this aqueduct is supported. Filling the north half of the right of way to the level of the existing fill should not damage the aqueduct, hovicvcr as a precaution to minimize the risk of damage we recommend that f-i 11 pl accment and compaction proceed in a direc- tion parallel to the aqueduct. Lie >,Ould be glad to further unalyze the effects of this project on the aqueduct, but more information on the aqueduct would be necessary. Since fil 1 in the street areas adjacent to the existing fill wi 11 be over areas that have not previously experienced fill weight, substantially more settlement will occur in these areas than within the existing fill area. fie estimate that along 23rd Street, as n,uch as 1 1/2' of settlement could occur, which would leave a dip in roadways that cross this area. We believe that it would be best to fill the area now and if you wish, to overfill by approxi- mately 8". 1/e expect that within a few months time about half of the settle- ment will have occurred and that the area could then be leveled. Some settlement \;il 1 probably continue in the now unfilled section of 23rd Street where it may be necessary to redo driveways or roadways crossing this area in 3 or 4 years. Any clean soil material should be suitable for use as fill except for the initial lift in 23rd Street and the final 12'.' in. roadway areas. In roadways the upper foot of new fill should be a material approved by a qualified geotechnical engineer and with a CBR value of at least to provide better support for the roadways and to approximately conform with the fill. Also the final 4" of fill in building pads should be capillary break material as described in this section on SLAB ON GRADE FLOORS. UTILITY CONSTRUCTION: The existing fi 11 contains a significant number of rocks that could be difficult for small backhoes to excavate. Also, the rocks can provide uneven support for utilities and some care will be necessary to properly bed and support utilities in this fil 1. We expect that for trenches up to about 2' deep relatively few rocks wil 1 b-e encountered, however below 2' increasing percentages of and sizes of rocks wi 11 be found. At depths of more than about 6' rock pockets should be expected. Below the fill a mat of vegetation and soft compressible peat and organic silt soils will be encoun- tered. Ground water levels will be high and severe caving should be expected in some sections of utility trenches particularly in trenches more than 4' deep. For trenches more than 4' deep we recommend that the contractor pl an on shoring and dewatering. Dewatering may be accomplished by a variety of l'llethods. Perhaps the most practical would be to dig shallow pits near the trench alignment and use sump pumps to pump the water down. Water flows may be very heavy. 7 Shoring wi 11 be necessary for the safety of personnel working in trenches more than 4' deep. There is a possibility that methane gas or petroleum product fumes wi 11 be found. It is also possible that the trenches will fill with gas excluding oxygen. All of these conditions can be hazardous and potentially lethal to workmen. He recommend that a check for methane or other hydrocarbons be made in newly excavated trenches. Trenches should be thoroughly ventilated before workmen enter. Bedding for utilities wi 11 be very important because rock in the fi ·11 will likely re_sult in uneven supµort for utilities. For sewers or otl1er settlement sensitive utilities we recommend that the trench should be over excavated by 18" and that 18" of pipe bedding be provided. Elsewl1ere 6" of bedding should be sufficient. The bedding should be a medium size gravel tamped in place and shaped to conform to the invert of the utility. For sewers or utilities at depths that would extend through or nearly through the fi 11, we expect that there may be di ffi cul ty with trench bottom instability. If any utilities will requfre excavation within 18" of Vie bottom of the fi 11 we recommend that shoring or lagging be placed prior to excavating more than within 18" of the bottom of the fill. This shoring or lagging should extend through the compressible zone and into the sand or silt · beneath; Jacks and lagging should be provided to support tl1e trench sides. Locally rocks will interfere with placing lagging. In these areas the rocks wi 11 have to be dug out first. Only short sections, not more than 5 or 6 feet, of trench should be unsupported where the trenches penetrate the fi 11. Manholes also represent a significant settlement and differential settle- ment problem. To the extent possible we recommend that you avoid manholes. However if manholes are necessary they should be designed and constructed so that as far as possible they have the same kind of foundation support as the utilities they service. It is not necessary that manholes be supported on piles or that they extend through the soft compressible soils. Instead, we recommend that the manholes not be built more than 6' above their inverts before beginning backfilling. Backfilling of the manholes and of adjacent utilities should continue as the manhole is cofistructed so that there is never more than approximately 4' of manhole projecting above backfill. Otherwise, the manhole structure bearing on exposed soft soil can cause failure of the soft underlying soil. ELEVATOR SHAFT: lie anticipate that a pneumatic type lift will be used for elevators. The piston would require a 14 to 16' deep well or shaft below the elevator. Hater, rocks, soft soil and caving is likely to be encountered in excavating these shafts. ,le expect that a casing wil 1 be necessary to advance the shaf~ There is low head room equipment available to drill and place such casing from inside of buildings with a 24' clearance. However these drills are expensive compared to simply digging a pit with a backhoe. There appear to be a number of alternatives including locating the elevators on the outside of 8 the bui 1 ding 1,here conventiona 1 dri 11 ing equipment could be used, 2) pre- placing casing in the buildings no1;, 3) drilling and placing the casings from inside of the building, and finally excavation inside of the building using a backhoe. Some discussions with elevator installers may be useful in antici- pating their requirements and selecting the least costly alternative. PAVEMENT DESIGN: \•le estimate that the CBR value of the existing fi 1 ls is Pavement design may be based on this value. It is common practice to undcrdesign pavements or to design them based on a short service life. Areas of fligh traffic or heavy local traffic loads or where there are locally unfavorable soil or water conditions will fail prema- turely. However, the cost of repairing premature failures is usually less than the cost of more conservative pavement design. Typical pavement sections for areas subject only to light passenger vehicle traffic would be 4" of crushed rock base with a 1 1/2" thick asphaltic concrete surfacing. For areas subject to truck traffic we recommend a minimum of 10" of crushed rock base course and 2 1/2" of asphaltic concrete surfacing. Synthetic filter fabrics do not appear to be useful on this site. Also asphal tic treated base course does not appear to offer any special advantage for this site. Pavement subgrade should be reconditioned to the proper moisture content for compaction and recompacted to 95% of the maximum density immediately prior to placing pavement base courses. Subsurface drainage of the subgrade is important. We recommend that catch basins be perforated near their bottoms so that water, which will accumulate in pavement subgrades, can drain away. Catch basins should be back filled with filter rock or with drain rock wrapped in filter fabric. It is important to minimize the entry of surface water into the pavement subgrade. Cracks that may develop should be sealed periodically. During construction, care should be taken to assure that the pavement adjacent to catch basins is slightly above the lip of the catch basin and that cracks that develop there are kept sealed. Otherwise during rains and the frequent long intervals of wet, misty conditions so common in this area, water will drain across the pavements and instead of flowing into the catch basins w.il l drain into the subgrade. Pavement design is a complex subject involving expected traffic loads, desired levels of maintenance, the desired life of the roadway, and cost considerations. If you wish we would be glad to work with you or your designer to develop a pavement section that is appropriate for this project. Some consideration should be given to the timing of pavement placement as compared to completion of building construction. Paving is often deferred until after building construction is complete so that it wi 11 not be damaged by the construction activity or crane loads. We recommend either that the 9 pavement be completed before construction is begun or that al 1 of the pavement and select subgrade placement be deferred until after construction of the buildings is complete. Construction traffic on select subgrade or base courses should not be allowed. LIMITATIONS AND ADDITIONAL srnVICES -------------------------- You should be aware that subsurface conditions can, and often do,vary bet,.,een exploration locations and with time. In addition, unanticipated conditions that cannot be fully evaluated by a few explorations may be encoun- tered during construction. Therefore 3 we recommend.that a contingency be included in your cons true ti on budget and schedule to a 11 ow for these even- tualities. This report is prepared for use by you and your design teiim. The data and report should be provided to construction contractors for their bidding or estimating, but not as a warranty of the subsurface conditions. We cannot be responsible for the interpretation by others of the information in this report. If the plans are revised, or of other parties will build on or develop the site, we should be consulted. We recommend that you retain us to review the geotechnical aspects of the final plans and specification to see that they meet the intent of our recom- mendations. For continuity and because of the potentially troublesome soil conditions, we recommend that we be consulted during the site preparation and _grading "'ark or utility construe ti on. 4 copies submitted Attachments Yours very truly, ATLAS GEOTECHN!CAL ENGINEERING, INC. J}:;::.,,& 10 I 0 7 ~ 0 I (I ::'. I w ~ D 2 ..J 51 10 • I _,.L CONC'<ETE I CURB ~I l ! I I ' i . ,., , I ca iL. _J .__ _____ _ LE-GE.ND: ~ __.s----TEST w > <I'. rY 0 ..J ~ 0 50 100 !50 $CALE. IN FE.E.T 2-'-TEST-------,-----------1 NOTE.:S: 1) 5E.E. TEXT < AND OTHE=-REOTECHNICAL 2) SE.E. TEXT cEERING INC. EXPLORATION LOCATIONS PROPOSE.D WAREHOUSE/ OFFI C.E. PROJ E.C-T R>=NTON, WA 0 z m 0 >-m 0 ~ 3: Exp l ora ti on___l,o__,_l 0-1.5 1.5--8.5 8 .. S·-13. 5 13.5-1&.5 Brown Silty Sand (SM) (moderately dense, damp) (fill) Brown to B1ue Gray Siltwitl1 gravel, cobbles & boulders ( ML) with ocn s ion al piece of ,,ood (me-de rate l y dense >1et) (fill) rock is sr2nular Bro\•Jn Orgc.n"/,~ S~I t. (OL) ~1J·itr1 -fragrn,:nts of decayed v1ood & vegetat·ion to tt si:e. Gray Silty Fine Sand (SM) (r-1oderat~ly dense \~et). Grades fine 2nd less silty. Comp1eted J/20/85 Sample Depth ( ft) 11. 5" Moisture Content % 140 Exp1oration No. 2 0-5.5 5.5-10 10-10.5 Mixed Brown Silt and Gravel (ML-GM) with angular cobbles and boulders. (fi 11) Change to b 1 ue at 2.5' and with rock to 200 lbs. Caving at 4.5'. Seepage at 6'. Cobbles and Boulders with Silt, rock to 800 lbs. at 7' Some woody debris at 8' Wood debris, organic silt and vegetation. Terminated due to boulders and heavy caving Completed 3/28/75 Sample Depth (ft) 10' Moisture Content% 262 ~ NOTES: > -- : 1) Depths in feet. 2) Field engineer: Roger Lowe~-~,~~~~~~.~~..-~~~~~ 3) Excavation using a Ford 755 backhoe 4) Moisture content is a percentage of the sample dry weight. ATLAS GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING INC. ·---·--·-------...._ EXPLORATION LOGS PROPOSED OFFICE/WAREHOUSE PROJECT, RENT!ON, WA PLATE 2 i 0 z m 0 ,,. m 0-10.5 10.5--15.5 15.5-17 17-18 Brown Gravelly, Cobbly Silt (ML) (fill) Change to blue-gray color at 2.5' Heavy seepage at 7' · Water levels 8.25' 3/28/75 Test pit not open 1ong enough for water level to stabilize. Grown Organic Silt and Silty Peat (MH/PT) (modE,rately soft, moist) (,focayed vegetation) Gray Silt with Organic Debris (ML/MH) {moderately firm, wet). Dark Gray Fine Silty Sand (SM) (moderately dense, wet) Completed 3/28/85 Sample Depth (ft) 14 Moisture Content % 216 EXPLORATION LOGS (,,~• .c;.-. 5'..'.-©)....J.-i@.; ':~a.? c//@-.;ri../~r/Y. ?-c1~@..r·,G. .,,,,Ao,.© I . PROJECT, .RENTON , WA ~···L _1· t.Nl::ilNt.t.HINl::i !Ne..;, . J -----------+----------! PLATE 3 " -C -~· ·~------------''---------------' - 0 z m 0 0 w > w - >- E z ;t. -------------~·----------i Exploration No, 4 0-3.5 3.5-8.5 8.5-9 9-15 lS-17.5 Brown Sanely Silt (ML) with rocks & cobbles (moderatly dense, damp fill) Blue Gravel and Cobbles (moderately dense, saturated) (fill ) Water at 3.5 feet, heavy flow. Large boulders, 20D lb+ at 6' Bro,in Orcranic Silt (ML) (moderately soft, moist) (topsoil). Gradational cila11c1c to AlternatincJ Brown Organ·ic Silt and Peat (MH/PT), peat layers to 8" thick. Dark Gray Silty Sand (SM) (Moderately dense, ,iet) (6" thick silt layer at 16.5). Completed 3/213/85 Sample Depth (ft) 8.5 10 11 16.5 Moisture Content(%) 120 320 153 47 EXPLORATJON LOGS ATLAS GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING INC. PROPOSED OFFICE/WAREHOUSE PROJECT, RENTON, WA ~ PLP,TE 4 :; L-------------l-------------J....__,;. __________ .., • I ! ' l ! l ' I 0 2 ·~ 0 I I ' I I : I ~, > w ~ Exploration No. 5 0-9 9--12 12-17 Brown Sandy Gravelly Silt {ML) (moderately dense, ,.,~ist) I fi 11 l Hi th rock fra91nents at 3 feet ;:::e,ck : 1)S ' ' ' l.:; 1 :-::en:; 1 ar: \~ai:.cr at 7' BrCl>Jn an,j 1;r,1y :;n t (PL) \.rith ·Jrganic fragm21·1ts '.Ja:~j( G~~z.y ~·1::,r!i11~ S•.ncl (SP) l•!i t.h .3 tr~ce of s~ l 'f rPct:lpr- at\C.:l.Y dens2, ,,.,ct) Dark Gray r·'t f: ci i t! r,1 sun d ( SP ) ~, i t r1 a. trace G f s i l t (moderately dense, wet). Incl udcs i~:":-,y Silt layers (ML) {r:ioderately firm, i,::::t) and trac2s cif or]anic 1;1aterial belrn.; 15 feet. Explor·ation t~o. 6 0-7 7-8 8-9 9-10. 5 10.5-12 12-17 Brown Sandy and Gravelly Silt (ML) with rock fr;,,1ments (moderately firm, moist) (fill) Rocky at 4' . Broken rock (fill). Organic material at 8'. Bro,m Peat (PT) (moderately firm, saturated) ·Gr-ar Silt (ML) (moderately firm, saturated) Brown Peat (PT) (moderately firm, saturated) Gray Silt (ML) (mcderately firm, saturated) with occasional layers of P.!'at at 13.5'. Completed 3/23/25 Sample Depth ( ft) 8 Moisture Content% 236 I ,. ' i I --------~· ---'; ·-~ ---~, EXPLORATION 'LOGS i ATLAS GEOTECHNICAL PROPOSED OFFICE/WAREHOUSE,' I· ENGINEERING INC. PROJECT RElffON I ·------·!-----· _· ·_,_._· _,_w_A--'. PLATE 5 ~ ··-· ~-"--~-------------·---.JI. 0 z ~ 0 ~ I Exploration No. 7 0-3. 5 3.5-7 9-12.5 12.5-18 Brown Medium Siind (SP) with silt (moderately dense, damp) ( fi 11) Bro1sn Silty Gravel (GM) (dense damp) Change to bl uc at 6'. \·later flowing in at 6' blue ?.uci<.y i Ii~ ;t-1t:i1:il:") ~(1a1·J Ji;gi;1~) ·:at o·f v.:~;:.:t .~ ::-; :3:01.·.'n IJr'.J?.~!c \ilt IMH) (morlerately firm. saturated) Gr'aciationa 1 ,:;iic:iiijt' Lo G(own Peat (PT) {mDd21ctely fir:-:-:, saturated) Dark Blue Gray Medium Sand (SP-SM) with silt Completed 3/2B/85 Sample Depth ( ft) 8 Moisture Content I 87 Exploration No. 8 0-2.5 2.5-3.5 3. 5-9 9-9,5 9.5-14.5 14.5-16.5 Brown Silty S2nd (SM) with roots (moderately dense, moist) ( fi 11 ) Asphalt chunk from 2.5 to 3.~· Blue-Gray Gravelly Silt (ML) with rock fragments (dense moist) (fill) Brown silt (ML) with occasional rocks and fragments of vegetation. (fill) Black Organic Mat Brown Peat ( PT) Seepage at 12' grades with silt below 12. Gradctional change to Gray Silt (ML) VJith some organic debris, (moderately dense, saturated) Trace of sand at io.5. Terminated at 16.5' due to obstructions that limited excavation. Completed 3/28/85 EXPLORATION LOGS ATLAS GEOTECHNICAL PROPOSED OFFICE/WAREHOUSE ENGINEERING INC. PROJECT, RENTON, WA --PLATE 6 -· Exploration No. 9 0 z m 0 >-m z 3: --c " 0-3 3-4.5 4.5-9 J-14. 5 14.5-17 11-18 c'------- Brown Sandy Silt (ML) (fill) Blue Rocky Fi 11 I ·,cry dense) hard digging. Silty Sandy Gravel (GM) (very dense, wet) (fil 1) ~) f ·.-. ., .. ' r. Gradational cl-i<:dt~Jl-' to Mixed Peat and Gray Silt (PT/HH) (firm sa tura tcd) Gruy Silt (:\11·!) •.-;i ·ti1 ot~ganic fra9rii.ents. Uloderately firm) saturated) Completed 3/29/85 Sample Depth (ft) 10 11 . 12. 5 17 Moisture Content% 101 185 193 44 EXPLORATION LOGS ATLAS GEOTECHNICAL PROPOSED OFFICE/WAREHOUSE ENGINEERING INC. PROJECT, RENTON, WA -[ PLATE 7 0 z m 0 ,. m o I w -> w ~ I Exploration No. 10 0-8 9.5-14.5 14.5-16 16-17.5 17.5-18 Brown Sandy Gravelly Silt (ML) (dense, moist) rocks to 18" (fill) Change to bl uc at 6' Seepage and s~me civing at 6 1 Brown Peat 0r1:1 Sl 1 r. 1:?T/t":ii-/) Chunk of parria-1 !y decayed wood at 12.5 Gray Fine Gravel (GP) (moderately dense, saturated) t-\ixed Peat ,1nd Silt with Peat (PT/MH) Dark Gray Silty Sand (SM) (moderately dense, wet) Completed 3/79/85 Sample Depth (ft) 10 Moisture Content% 147 11 133 . EXPLORATION LOGS ATLAS GEOTECHNICAL PROPOSED OFFICE/WAREHOUSE ENGl~~EERING INC. PROJECT, RENTON, WA PLATE 8 -- I I Exploration No. 11 0 z ~ 0 I' :I ~ I 3: ~ z 3: -< 0-1.5 1. 5-7. 5 7.S-8 S-10 10-li 11-13.5 13.5-14.5 ~ O'--- Brown Sandy Gravelly Silt (ML) (Moderately dense, damp} ( fi 11} Rocky Fill 1'/ith Silt Color change to blue at 4.5' Snl~Hl Organ-ic r..!2_~~ [:;~~ ::-t::) r;radaT.io1:a l moist I : 0 L : •' :: L I c.. \ i, Gray Silt (ML-IIH) (1·1ith fragments of organic material (moderately r~rm, mnist) Dark Gray Sand (SF) with sor.ie silt (moderately dense, saturated} Completed 3/29/85 Sample Depth ( ft} 8,5 Moisture Content% 10.5 96 258 ATLAS GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING INC. - EXPLOR.~TION LOGS _PROPOSED OFFICE/WAREHOUSE PROJECT, RENTON, WA PLATE 9 () z m 0 :I w - ,.. m z ~ Exploration No. 12 0-3.5 3.5-8 8-2.5 9-10.5 10.5-11.5 11.5-15 15-15.5 15.5-16.5 Brown Sandy Silt (ML) (moderately dense, damp) (fill) with some ·roc 1:es J. t 2 1 Brown and Blue !.v~tJ1 Orange Layers, Sandy Gravelly Cobbly Silt (ML) (moc1eratcly dense, moist) (fill) Rocky fi ·1 l R OC ~ to 2 ' x 2 l / 2 ' ....,, ___ 1. "--~_.. ....... ,·~~ .-•,.L L.) ,.:,..._(, ~~"::i;._;,._;, .,!UJ: iiL,;... Brown Organic Si! t (i•iH) (moderately ,jense, s2tur2~2d) Gray silt (ML) (moderately dense, saturated) Gray Medium Sard (SI') (moderately dense, saturated) Gray Silt (M'.) :m2,ierately dense, saturated) Dark Gray Sand (SP) (Moderately dense, saturated) Completed 3/29/85 Exploration No. A 0-6.5 6.5-9.0 Brown Medium Sand (SP) (moderately dense -loose, moist) (fill) (caving) Vegetation mat at 6.5 Brown Peat (PT) Termination@ 9' rlue to severe caving Completed 3/29/85 ' EXPLORATION LOGS ATLAS GEOTECHNICAL PROPOSED OFFICE/WAREHOUSE ENGINEERING INC. PROJECT, RENTON, WA . PLATE 10 I I I I GEOTECHNICAL REPORT Cedar River Corporate Park SW 21st Street and Lind Avenue SW Renton, Washington Project No. T-5996 Terra Associates, Inc. Prepared for: TARRAGON Seattle, Washington December 7, 2006 TERRA ASSOCIATES, Inc. ConsultJnts in Gcotechnical Engineering, Geology and Env1mnmental Earth Sr:if'nces December 7, 2006 Project No. T-5996 Mr. Murphy McCullough TARRAGON 1000 Second Avenue, Suite 3200 Seattle, Washington 98104 Subject: References: Geotechnical Report Cedar River Corporate Park SW 21st Sh·cct and Lind Avenue SW Renton, Washington I. Report of Soil Investigation, Proposed Storage Terminal, Renton, Washington, prepared by Dames and Moore, dated May 24, 1968 2. Report of Supplemental Investigation, Proposed Warehouse/Office Building Site, Lind Avenue, Renton, Washmgton, prepared by Atlas Geotechnical Engineering, Inc., dated April 15, 1985 Dear Mr. McCullough: As requested, we have conducted a geotechnical engineering study for the subject project. The attached report presents our findings and recommendations for the geotechnical aspects of project design and construction. Results of our field exploration confinn soil conditions as indicated by previous site studies and summarized in the referenced reports. We observed eight to ten feet of silty sand/sandy silt fill overlying native soils composed of organic silt and peat followed by interbedded alluvial layers of sandy silt, silt, and silty sands. We also observed groundwater seepage in our test pits at depths of9 to 14 feet below cmTent site grades. In our opinion, the existing fill will provide suitable immediate support for conventional spread footing foundations. However, the immediate organic silt and peat layers wi11 be subject to consolidation settlement due to stresses imposed by the spread footings. Jf the risk for distortional settlement cannot be tolerated, a majority of the potential settlement can be mitigated by surchargmg the building sites. Detailed recommendations for surcharging the building pads and design of foundations along with other geotechnical design considerations are presented in the attached report. 12525 Willows Road, Suite 101, Kirkland, Washington 98034 Phone (425) 821-7777 • Fax (425) 821-4334 Mr. Murphy McCullough December 7, 2006 We trust the information presented is sufficient for your current needs. If you have any questions or require additional information, please call. Sincerely yours, TERRA ASSOCIATES, INC. Project No. T-5996 Page No. ii [ I 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 Figures TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. Project Description................... . ........................................................................ 1 Scope of Work.................... . .............................................................................. 1 Site Conditions.................. . ....................................................................... 2 3.1 Surface................... .. ............................................................ 2 3 .2 Subsurface.......... .. ............................................................................... 2 3 .3 Groundwater...... . ...................................................................... 3 Seismic................ . ........................................................................... 3 Discussion and Recommendations ...................................................................... 3 5.1 General................ .. .............................................................. 3 5.2 Site Preparation and Grading ............................................................................ 4 5 .3 Excavations ...... .. .. .. .. .. ....................................................................... 6 5.4 Foundations...................... .. ...................................................................... 7 5.5 Slabs-on-Grade......... . ....................................................................... 7 5.6 Stormwater Detention Pond .............................................................................. 8 5. 7 Drainage .. .. .. ... .. .. . .. ..................................................................... 9 5 .8 Utilities.................... . ............................................................................. 9 5 .9 Pavements ........................................................................ 9 Additional Services........... . ....................................................................... 9 Limitations ...................... . . ..................................................................... 10 Vicinity Map ...................................... .. . ........................................................... Figure 1 Exploration Location Plan ................... . .. ............................................ Figure 2 Typical Settlement Marker Detail.. ......... . .. ........................................... Figure 3 Typical Wall Drainage Detail . . ............................................. Figure 4 Appendix Field Exploration and Laboratory Testing .............................................................. Appendix A Test Pit Logs By Others ............................ .. ....................................................... Appendix B Geotechnical Report Cedar River Corporate Park SW 21st Street and Lind Avenue SW Renton, Washington 1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The approximately 11.5-acre site is located between SW 21st and SW 23rd streets, east of Lind Avenue SW in Renton, Washington. Site development will mclude constructing 4 office structures each approximately 33,000 square feet in size. Specific building design information is not yet available; however, we expect the buildings will be constructed using precast concrete tilt-up wall panels with interior isolated columns supporting the roof structure and possible mezzanine levels. Floors will be constructed at grade at elevations near current site grades. Structural loading is expected to be light to moderate, with isolated columns carrying loads of 80 lo 100 kips, and bearing walls carrying 6 lo 8 kips per foot. Stonnwater will be collected and routed for treatment and controlled discharge from a detention pond located in the northeastern panhandle of the site. Specific pond construction/design information 1s not yet available; however, we expect the pond will be constructed primaniy by excavations extending 8 to 12 feet below current site grades. The recommendations in the following sections of this report are based on our understanding of the preceding design features. We should review design drawings as they become available to verify that our recommendations have been properly interpreted and to supplement them, if required. 2.0 SCOPE OF WORK Our work was completed in accordance with our authonzed proposal, dated October 23, 2006. Accordingly, on November 1, 2006, we excavated 8 test pits to depths of 13 to 15 feet below existing surface grades. Using the results of our subsurface exploration along with existing soils data from previous studies performed at the site in 1968 and 1985, we performed analyses to develop geotechnical engineering recommendations for project design and construction. Specifically, this report addresses the following: • Soil and groundwater conditions • Seismic • Site preparation and grading • Excavations • Foundation support alternatives • Slab-on-grade support • Drainage • Utilities • Pavements December 7, 2006 Project No. T-5996 It should be noted that recommendations outlined in this report regarding drainage are associated with soil strength, design earth pressures, erosion, and stability. Design and performance issues with respect to moisture as it relates to the structure environment (i.e., humidity, mildew, mold) is beyond Terra Associates' purview. A building envelope specialist or contactor should be consulted to address these issues, as needed. 3.0 SITE CONDITIONS 3.1 Surface The project site 1s located southeast of the intersection of SW 21st Street and Lind Avenue SW in Renton, Washington. The approximate location of the site is shown on Figure 1. The site is nearly rectangular and includes a small panhandle parcel that forms the sites northeastern corner. The site is cunently vacant with surface vegetation consisting of deciduous trees with moderate blackbeny and brush understory. The site is elevated above adjacent parcels to the north, east, and south and at grade with Lind Avenue to the west. The site was filled in the late 1960s m preparation for developing the site as a fuel storage facility. Previous exploration completed at the site by others in 1985, indicated fill depths of 8 to 10 feet across the property. 3.2 Subsurface Soil conditions we observed at the recent test pit excavations confirm the earlier site studies. 1n general, we observed approximately nine to ten feet of fill matcnal composed of silty sand and sandy silt mixed in areas with fractured fragments of bedrock. Large boulder sized (two-to four-foot diameter) bedrock fragments were observed below three to four feet at all test pits. Tim fill overlies the original surface vegetation which appears to have included some small trees as logs were observed at a few of the test pits. Underlying the fill and original organic surface layer, we observed a two-to four-foot layer of organic sill and peat. Previous test pits excavated in 1985 indicated the thickness of this layer ranged from about two feet to a maximum of about seven feet. Underlying these organic soils, alternating layers of silty sand, silt, and sandy silt were observed to the test pit termination depths. The Geologic Map of the Renton Quadrangle, Washington, by D.R. Mullineaux (] 965), maps the site soils as Peat (Qlp) and Alluvium (Qaw). The native soils we observed in the test pits are consistent with these descriptions. The preceding discussion is intended as a general review of the soil conditions encountered. For more complete descriptions, please refer to the Test Pit Logs attached m .Appendix A and B. Page No. 2 3.3 Groundwater December 7, 2006 Project No. T-5996 We observed groundwater seepage at depths ranging from 9 to 14 feet below the current site elevations. The previous 1985 study at the site indicated light to heavy l,'TOundwater seepage into the test pits at depths ranging from 6 to 10 feet below site grades that existed al that time. Fluctuations in groundwater levels will occur seasonally and annually, with lowest levels and volumes occurring during late summer to early fall (July through September). Given the time of year our exploration work was completed, groundwater seepage levels observed likely represent seasonal low levels. A two-inch diameter slotted PVC pipe was installed in Test Pit TP-2 when backfilled. This installation, while crude, will allow for measuring the depth to groundwater during the upcoming winter months and obtain a better understanding of seasonal high groundwater elevation at the site. We expect the groundwater would be present at depths of five to six feet below the surface during and shortly following the wet winter season. 4.0 SEISMIC Based on the soil conditions encountered and our understanding of area geology, per Section 1615 of the 2003 International Building Code (IBC), site class "D" should be used in design of the structures. 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. Liquefaction mainly affects geologically recent deposits of loose, fine- grained sand and silty sand underlying 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, ehmmaling the soil's strength. Inf01mation obtained from our recent subsurface explo1 ation indicates that the deeper native soils at the site are alluvial in origin. Groundwater was observed at variable depths ranging from 9 to 14 feet below current site grades. Historical data indicates that the alluvial sand layers below the water table exhibit medium dense to very dense characteristics. The deeper alluvial soil strata composed of sandy or clayey silt, due to their fines content, will exhibit cohesive strength, and are not signi licantly be affected by the liquefaction phenomenon. Based on analysis, in our opinion, the risk for soil liquefaction to occur at the site and its associated hazard are low. 5.0 DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDA TJONS 5.1 General The primary geotechnical consideration that will govern site development is the potential for distortional building settlements to occur due to the compressible organic silt and peat layers that were observed across the site. These native soil layers will consolidate under static dead loads imposed by the structures and product loading on floor slabs constructed at grade. Assuming a 100-kip column load, a bearing stress of 2,000 psf, and a maximum footing depth of 2 feet below current site grades, analysis indicates settlement ranging from 1 to 4 inches could occur with differential movement of 1 to 2 inches. We estimate the differential settlement would occur over a building span of 100 feet. This settlement will likely he distortional and cause building cracking along with misalignment of doors and windows. If the nsk for distortional building settlements cannot be tolerated, a majority of the potential settlement can be mitigated by surcharging the building sites. Surcharging would involve placing additional fill on the building pads above the finished floor elevations to induce primary consolidation settlements to occur before building construction is 1nitiated. Page No. 3 December 7, 2006 Project No. T-5996 In our opinion, the existing fill soils are suffic,enlly compact to provide suitable immediate support for the buildings using conventional spread footing foundations. However, the soils are sensitive and will be easily disturbed by normal construction activity. Consideration should be given to placing a four-inch layer of crushed rock over the bearing subgrade to serve as a working mat and to protect the soils from disturbance especially if work occurs during the winter. Similar considerat10n should be given for protecting the integrity of the building floor and pavement subgrade. Cement amending the subgrade should be considered if the construction schedule results in the soil sub grade being exposed to wet weather. The filJ and native soils encountered at the site contam a significant amount of fines and will be difficult to compact as strnctural fill when too wet. The ability to use on-site soils from the site excavations as structural fill will depend on its moisture content and the prevailing weather conditions at the time of construction. The earthwork contractor should be prepared to dry the soi ls by aeration during the normally dry summer season to facilitate compaction as structural fill. Alternatively, stabilizing the moisture with cement kiln dust (CKD), cement, or lime can be considered. If grading activll1cs will take place during the winter season, the earthwork and utility contractor should be prepared to import clean granular material for use as structural fill and backfill. In addition, the utility contractors should be prepared for encountering large boulder-sized bedrock fragments within the existing fill where excavations extend to depths of four feet and greater below the site. These larger fragments will not be suitable for reuse in backfilling the utility trenches and will likely require disposal off-site. Detailed recommendations regarding these 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 Site Preparation and Grading Surface vegetation and the upper organic soil layer should be stripped and removed from the site. Based on our recent test pits, surface stripping depths of about six mches should be expected to remove the vegetation and near-surface organic layer. Once clearing and 6"·ubbing operations are complete, grading to establish desired building elevations can be initiated. Exposed sub grade should be observed by a representative of Terra Associates to verify that soil conditions are as expected and suitable for support of new construction or additional fill. Our observations may include requiring the contractor to proofroll the exposed subgrade with heavy rubber-tired construction equipment, such as a i,,,-adcr or loaded dump truck, to determine if there arc excessively soft and yielding areas. If unsuitable yielding subgrade is exposed and it cannot be stabilized in place hy aeration and compaction, the affected soils should be excavated and removed to firm bearing and grade restored with new structural fill. If the depth of excavation to remove unstab1e soils is excessive use of a geotextile reinforcing/separation fabric, such as Mirafi 500X or equivalent, can be considered in conjunction with clean granular structural fill. Our experience has shown that, in general, a minimum of 18 inches of a clean, granular structural fill over the geotextile fabric should establish a stable bearing surface. Alternatively, it may be feasible to stabilize the soils by amending with Portland cement, CKD, or lime. Page No. 4 December 7, 2006 Project No. T-5996 If grading activities are planned during the wet winter months, and the on-site soils become too wet to achieve adequate compaction, the owner or contractor should be prepared to treat soils with CKD, lime, or cement, or import wet weather structural fill. For wet weather strnctural fill, we recommend importing a granular soil that meets the following grading requirements: U.S. Sieve Size I Percent Passing ----•·-·-·-- 6 inches i JOO ' No.4 I 75 maximum No. 200 I 5 maximum* *Based on the 3/4-inch fraction. Prior to use, Terra Associates, lnc. should examine and test all materials to be imported to the site for use as structural fill. Structural fill should be placed in unifmm loose layers not exceeding 12 inches and compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of the soil's maximum dt)' density, as determined by American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) Test Desigration D-698 (Standard Proctor). The moisture content of the soil at the time of compaction should be within two percent of its op!tmum, as determined by this ASTM standard. Ill nonstructural areas or for backfill in utility trenches below a depth of 4 feet, the degree of compaction can be reduced to 90 percent. As noted earlier, if foundation subgrade is exposed to wet weather, consideration should be given to protecting the subgrade from disturbance by placing a four-mch mat of crushed rock over the sub grade to serve as a working mat. For the building pad and pavement subgrade sub3ected to dynamic loading from construction vehicle traffic, amending the top 12 inches of subgradc with Portland cement or placing 12 inches of wet weather granular structural fill on the sub grade to prevent detenoration should be considered. Surcharge As discussed earlier, if distortional settlement ranging from 2 to 4 inches in total and I to 2 inches differentially over a 100-foot span cannot be tolerated, we recommend surcharging the building areas to induce settlement in the primary consolidation range prior to building construction. For this procedure, we recommend placing fill in the building areas for a minimum height of three feet above proposed building finished floor elevations. This surcharge fill does not need to meet any special requirements other than having a minimum in place unit weight of 120 pounds per cubic foot (pcf). However, it may be advisable to use a good quality fill to raise grades in other portions of the site, such as parking and driveway areas, or use for trench backfill if necessary. The surcharge fill should extend a minimum of two feet beyond the edge of the perimeter building footings. Total settlement under the surcharge fill is estimated in the range of two to four inches. It is estimated that 90 percent of the consolidation settlement will occur in about three to four weeks following full application of the surcharge fill. Page No. 5 December 7, 2006 Project No. T-5996 To verify the amount of settlement and the time rate of movement, the surcharge program should be monitored by installing settlement markers. A typical settlement marker detail is shown on attached Figure 3. The settlement markers should be installed on the existing grade prior to placmg any surcharge fill. Once installed, elevations of both the fill height and marker should be taken daily until the full height of the surcharge is in place. Once fully surcharged, readings should continue weekly U'11Il the anticipated settlements have occurred. Monitoring data should be forwarded to us for review when obtained. It is critical that the grading contractor recognize the importance of the setllement marker installations. All efforts must be made to protect the markers from damage during fill placement. It is difficult, if not impossible, to evaluate the progress of the preload program rf the markers are damaged or destroyed by construction equipment. If the markers are impacted, it may be necessary to install new markers and extend the surcharging time period in order to ensure that settlements have ceased and building construction can begin. Following the successful completion of the surcharge program, with foundations designed as recommended in the Foundation Section of this report, maximum total post-construction settlement is estimated at about 1 Y, inches with differential movement of about one-half inch. If post-construction settlement of this magnitude is not considered acceptable, buildings should be supported on a pile foundation. 5.3 Excavations All excavations at the site associated with confined spaces, such as utility trenches must be completed in accordance with local, state, or federal requrrements. Based on current Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations, soils found on the project site would be classified as Group C soils. For properly dewatered excavations more than 4 feet but less than 20 feet in depth, the side slopes should be laid back at a minimum slope inclination of l .5: 1 (Horizontal: Vertical). If there is insufficient room to complete the excavations in this manner, or if excavations greater than 20 feet in depth are planned, using temporary shoring to support the excavations may need to be considered. Utility trench sidewalls can be supported by a properly designed and installed shoring trench box. Groundwater seepage should be anticipated within excavations extending to depths of five feet and greater below existing surface grades. For excavations below ten feet, the volume of water and rate of flow into the excavation may be significant. Shallow excavations that do not extend more than two to three feet below the groundwater table can likely be dewatered by conventional sump pumping procedures, along with a system of collection trenches. Deeper excavation may require dewatering by well points or isolated deep-pump wells. The utility subcontractor should be prepared to implement excavation dewatering by well point or deep-pump wells, as needed. This will be an especially critical consideration for any deep excavations, such as that which may be required for lift station construction or sanitary ::;ewer connections. This information is provided solely for the benefit of the owner and other design consultants, and should not be construed to imply that Tena Associates, lnc. assumes responsibility for job site safety. Job site safety is the sole responsibility of the project contractor. Also, as noted earlier, the contractor should be prepared for encountering large boulder-sized bedrock fragments within the existing fill below depths of four feet. Page No. 6 5.4 Foundations December 7, 2006 Project No. T-5996 In our opinion, the building may be supported on conventional spread footing foundations bearing on undisturbed subgrade composed of existing inorganic fill. Foundation subgrade should be prepared as recommended in Section 5.2 of this report. Foundations exposed to the weather should bear at a minimum depth of 1.5 feet below adjacent grades for frost protection. Interior foundations can be supported at any convenient depth below the floor slab, provided immediate support is obtained on a minimum of two feet of structural fill. We recommend designing foundations for a net allowable bearing capacity of 2,000 psf. For short-term loads, such as wind and seismic, a one-third increase in this allowable capacity can be used. Following successful completion of the surcharge program, with foundations bearing at a maximum depth of two feet below current site grades and with the expected building loads, estimated total settlement should not exceed 1 Y, inches with differential settlement over a 100-foot building span not exceeding one-half inch. If foundation depths will exceed two feet, stress imposed on the organic consolidating layer will increase. If footing subgrade will exceed two feet below existing site grade, we should be notified and asked to reevaluate potential foundation settlement impacts. For dcsignmg foundations to resist lateral loads, a base friction coefficient of 0.35 can be used. Passive earth pressures acting on the sides of the footings can also be considered. We recommend calculating this lateral resistance using an equivalent fluid weight of 250 pcf We do not recommend including the upper 12 inches of soil in this computation because it can be affected by weather or disturbed by future grading activity. This value assumes the foundation will be constructed neat against competent native soil or backfilled with structural fill, as described in Section 5.2 of this report. The values recommended include a safety factor of 1.5. 5.5 Slabs-on-Grade Slabs-on-grade may be supported on the subgrade prepared as recommended in Section 5.2 of this report. Immediately below the floor slab, we recommend placing a four-inch thick capillary break layer composed of clean, coarse sand or fine gravel that has less than three percent passing the 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. The capillary break layer will not prevent moisture mtrus10n through the slab caused by water vapor transmission. Where moisture by vapor transmission is undesirable, such as covered floor areas, a common practice is to place a durable plastic membrane on the capillary break layer and then cover the membrane with a layer of clean sand or fine gravel to protect it from damage during construction, and aid in uniform curing of the concrete slab. It should be noted that if the sand or gravel layer overlying the membrane is saturated prior to pouring the slab, it will be ineffective in assisting in um form curing of the slab and can actually serve as a water supply for moisture transmission through the slab and affecting floor coverings. Therefore, in our opinion, covering the membrane with a layer of sand or gravel should be avoided if floor slab construct10n occurs durmg the wet winter months and the layer cannot be effectively drained. Placement of the concrete directly on the plastic membrane may require adjustments in the concrete mix design and spacing of control joints to reduce the effects of dry shrinkage. The American Concrete !ns1ilule (AC!) Manual of Concrete Praclice, Sec/ion 302. IR, should be consulted regarding installation of vapor barriers and concrete slab-on-grade floors. Page No. 7 For design of the floor slabs-on-grade, a subgrade modulus (k,) of 100 (pci) can be used. 5.6 Stormwater Detention Pond December 7, 2006 Project No. T-5996 The stonnwater pond will be located in the northeastern pan handle of the property. The pond perimeter will be fonned by cast in place concrete retaining walls. As wc understand, the retaining wall footings will bear at a depth of about seven to eight feet below existing site grades. Two test pits, TP-1 and TP-2, were excavated withm the proposed pond area. In general, soil conditions observed consisted of three feet of loose to medium dense silty sand fill overlying fill composed of clayey silt with weathered bedrock pieces to small boulders. Beneath the fill, at depths of eight to ten feet, we observed the original organic surface layer of brown organic silt to peat. At depths of 9 to 14.5 feet, we observed gray silt to gray silty sand. We observed moderate to heavy groundwater seepage at a depth of 14 feet in the test pits. To establish suitable support for the pond perimeter walls, it will be necessary to excavate and remove the existing fill and peat from below the wall foundation. The excavation to remove this unsuitable material should extend laterally from the footing edge a minimum distance of three feet. Once removed, the foundation grade can be restored using structural fill placed and compacted as recommended in the Site Grading and Preparation section of this report (Section 5.2). The wall footings can then be designed using soil parameters outlined in the Foundation section (Section 5.5). The exception will be the lateral passive earth pressure resistance. Because the soils in front of the footing will be submerged below the stored water in the pond, the passive earth pressure used should be reduced to 180 pcf. This value requires that the footing be backfilled with structural fill and the fill extends horizontally in front of the footing a distance equal to the footing thickness or depth below the pond floor grade. The magnitude of earth pressure development on the pond retaining walls will partly depend on the quality of backfill. We recommend placing and compacting wall backfill as structural fill. To guard against the buildup of hydrostatic pressure, wall drainage must also be installed. A typical wall drainage detail is attached as Figure 4. With granular backfill placed and compacted as recommended and drainage properly installed, we recommend designing retaining walls for an earth pressure equivalent to a fluid weighing 35 pcf. When necessary, to account for traffic surcharge, the wall should be designed for an additional height of two feet. If the walls cannot be effectively drained, they should be designed to support an earth pressure equivalent to a fluid weighing 85 pcf. 5.7 Drainage Surface Final exterior grades should promote free and positive drainage away from the site at all times. Water must not be allowed to pond or collect adjacent to foundations, or within the immediate building areas. We reconunend providing a gradient of at least three percent for a minimum distance of ten feet from the building perimeters. If this 1,'Tad1ent cannot be provided, surface water should be collected adjacent to the structures and disposed to appropriate storm facilities. Page No. 8 5.8 Utilities December 7, 2006 Project No. T-5996 Utility pipes should be bedded and backfilled in accordance with American Public Works Association (APWA), or City of Renton specifications. As a minimum, trench backfill should be placed and compacted as structural fill, as described in Section 5.2 of this report. As noted, most of the existing fill and the underlying native soils will be wet of optimum moisture when excavated. The utility contractor must be prepared to dry the soil by aeration or amend with CKD, cement, or lime to stabilize the moisture to facilitate proper compaction. Alternatively, or if utility construction takes place during the wet winter months, it may be necessary to import suitable wet weather fill for utility trench backfilling. Also, the utility contractor should be prepared for encountering small to large boulder-sized fragments of bedrock contained within the fill in excavations that extend to depths of four feet and greater. These boulder-sized fragments will not be suitable for reuse in trench backfill and will likely require off-site disposal. 5.9 Pavements The pavement design section is dependent upon the supporting capability of the subgrade soils and the traffic conditions to which it will be subjected. We expect traffic at the facility will consist of mainly of cars and light trucks, with only occasional heavy traffic in the form of tractor-trailer rigs. For deSil,'11 considerations, we have assumed traffic can be represented by an 18-kip Equivalent Single Axle Loading (ESAL) of 50,000 over a 20- year design life. With a finn an unyielding subgrade prepared as recommended in Section 5.2 of this report, we recommend the following pavement section alternatives be used: • Two inches of AC over three inches of asphalt-treated base (ATB) • Two inches of AC over six inches of crushed rock base (CRB) In areas where Portland cement concrete (PCC) pavement will be considered, we recommend a minimum 28 day concrete compressive strength of 4,000 pounds per square inch (psi) be used with a minimum un-reinforced thickness of five inches. Control or construct10n joints should not be spaced at intervals of more than 20 feet. Asphalt concrete should meet the requirements for :/,-inch HMA, as outlined in Washington State Department of Transportation's (WSDOT) standard specifications. Asphalt-treated base and crushed rock base should also meet WSDOT requirements. Long-tenn pavement perfomiance will depend on surface drainage. A poorly-drained pavement section will be subject to premature failure as a result of surface water infiltrating into the subgrade soils and reducing their supporting capability. For optimum pavement performance, we recommend surface drainage gradients of at least two percent. Some degree of longitudinal and transverse cracking of the pavement surface should be expected over time. Regular maintenance should be planned to seal cracks when they occur. 6.0 ADDITIONAL SERVICES Tena Associates, Inc. should review the final design drawings and specifications in order to verify that earthwork and foundation recommendations have been properly mtcl])rcted and implemented in project design. We should also provide geotechnical services during construction to observe compliance with our design concepts, specifications, and recommendations. This will allow for design changes if subsurface conditions differ from those anticipated prior to the start of construction. Page No. 9 7.0 LIMITATIONS December 7, 2006 Project No. T-5996 We prepared this report in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. This report is the copyrighted property of Terra Associates, Inc. and is intended for specific application to the Cedar River Corporate Park project. This report is for the exclusive use of TARRAGON and their authorized representatives. The analyses and recommendations presented in this report arc based on data obtained from the test pits excavated on the site. Variations in soil conditions can occur, the nature and extent of which may not become evident until construction. If variations appear evidenl, Terra Associates, Inc. should be requested to reevaluate the recommendations m this report prior to proceeding with construction. Page No. 10 "=-il\!i!iT ' 'I' Ji ·'% ~ ~ ~ Terra Associates, Inc. Consultants in Geotechnica! Engineering Geology and Environmenl;;,I Earth Sciences VICINITY MAP CEDAR RIVER CORPORATE PARK RENTON, WASHINGTON Proj. No.T-5996 Date DEC 2006 Figure 1 NOTE: '''"' .... ,,,., C!'< "°'"" to~ ; {' i(~ .m~: THIS SITE PLAN IS SCHEMATIC. ALL LOCATIONS ANC DIMENSIONS ARE APPROXIMATE. IT IS INTENDED FO REFERENCE ONLY AND SHOULD NOT BE USED FOR DESIGN OR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES. REFERENCE: SITE PLAN PROVIDED BY CLIENT ., ,OJ "'I :,.-, w, j1 >'I LOI ,~ .. -------1,, w/ I I ! I I ---------------.. -~J 100 200 APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET EXPLORATION LOCATION PLAN CEDAR RIVER CORPORATE PARK RENTON, WASHINGTON Proj. No.T-5996 Date DEC 2006 Figure 2 NOTES: SURCHARGE OR FILL STEEL ROD HEIGHT VARIES (SEE NOTES) PROTECTIVE SLEEVE SURCHARGE OR FILL 1. BASE CONSISTS OF 1/2" THICK, 2'x2' PLYWOOD WITH CENTER DRILLED 5/8" DIAMETER HOLE. 2. BEDDING MATERIAL, IF REQUIRED, SHOULD CONSIST OF CLEAN COARSE SAND. 3. MARKER ROD IS 1/2" DIAMETER STEEL ROD THREADED AT BOTH ENDS. 4. MARKER ROD IS ATTACHED TO BASE BY NUT AND WASHER ON EACH SIDE OF BASE. 5. PROTECTIVE SLEEVE SURROUNDING MARKER ROD SHOULD CONSIST OF 2" DIAMETER PLASTIC TUBING. SLEEVE IS NOT ATTACHED TO ROD OR BASE. 6. ADDITIONAL SECTIONS OF STEEL ROD CAN BE CONNECTED WITH THREADED COUPLINGS. 7. ADDITIONAL SECTIONS OF PLASTIC PROTECTIVE SLEEVE CAN BE CONNECTED WITH PRESS-FIT PLASTIC COUPLINGS. 8. STEEL MARKER ROD SHOULD EXTEND AT LEAST 6" ABOVE TOP OF PLASTIC PROTECTIVE SLEEVE. 9. STEEL MARKER ROD SHOULD EXTEND AT LEAST 1" ABOVE TOP OF FILL SURFACE. . Terra Associates, Inc. Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences TYPICAL SETTLEMENT MARKER DETAIL CEDAR RIVER CORPORATE PARK RENTON, WASHINGTON Proj. No.T-5996 Date DEC 2006 Figure 3 12" MINIMUM 3/4" MINUS WASHED ~-, GRAVEL n 12"[ SEE NOTE 6"(MIN.) -~/_,,'/,'.'{//,//{//,/ ,//,// 0 SLOPE TO DRAIN 12" OVER PIPE EXCAVATED SLOPE (SEE REPORT TEXT FOR APPROPRIATE INCLINATIONS) '.'J/~ .,_ ,'-{/,'-(/.'....',,'.,"/,',;'/'•'/,., .... 3" BELOW PIPE 4" DIAMETER PERFORATED PVC PIPE NOTTO SCALE NOTE: MIRADRAIN G100N PREFABRICATED DRAINAGE PANELS OR SIMILAR PRODUCT CAN BE SUBSTITUTED FOR THE 12-INCH WIDE GRAVEL DRAIN BEHIND WALL. DRAINAGE PANELS SHOULD EXTEND A MINIMUM OF SIX INCHES INTO 12-INCH THICK DRAINAGE GRAVEL LAYER OVER PERFORATED DRAIN PIPE. Terra Associates, Inc. TYPICAL WALL DRAINAGE DETAIL CEDAR RIVER CORPORATE PARK RENTON, WASHINGTON Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences Proj. No.T-5996 Date DEC 2006 Figure 4 • APPENDIX A FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABO RA TORY TESTING Cedar River Corporate Park Renton, Washington On November 1, 2006, we performed our field explorations using a mid-size trackhoe. We explored subsurface soil condit10ns at the site by excavating 8 test pits to a maximum depth of 15 feet below existing surface grades. The test pit locations are shown on Figures 2. The test pit locations were approximately determined by measurements from existing site features. The Test Pit Logs are presented on Figures A-2 through A-9. An engineering geologist from our office conducted the field exploration, classified the soil conditions encountered, maintained a log of each test pit, obtained representative soil samples, and observed pertinent site features. All soil samples were visually classified in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) described on Figure A-1. Representative soil samples obtained from the test p1ls were placed in closed containers and taken to our laboratory for further examination and testing. The moisture content of each sample was measured and is reported on the Test Pit Logs. Grain size analyses were performed on four samples. The results are shown on Figures A-10 through A-11. ProJcct Ko. T-5996 I ! MAJOR DIVISIONS LEDER SYMBOL TYPICAL DESCRIPTION l------~-----~-----+----+-------------------------1 (fJ ai -' Ol ~ <ll 0 !!!_t, (fJ -U) "' GRAVELS Clean Gravels (less than 5% fines) , ___ _ GW GP GM Well-graded gravels, gravel-sand mixtures, little or no fines. Poorly-graded gravels, gravel-sand mixtures, little or no fines. Silty gravels. gravel-sand-silt mixtures, non-plastic fines. 0 ·~ ~ w ro.~ Z E"' <t 0 0::: ~o (j C)N More than 50% of coarse fraction is larger than No. 4 sieve Gravels with fines ~-----+---------------- GC Clayey gravels, gravel-sand-clay mixtures, plastic fines. 1-------l------·----------+------------------------1 SW Well-graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fines. u, . 0 SANDS Clean Sands -----1------------- ~ ~z 0:: .c C: More than 50% of coarse fraction is smaller than No. 4 sieve (less than Sp Poorly-graded sands or gravelly sands, little or no 5% fines) fines. -"' <t (I) .c: -'----------1-------------------------------1 0 ~-SM Silty sands, sand-silt mixtures, non-plastic fines. u ~ Sands with fines -----1---------------------· ------- SC Clayey sands, sand-clay mixtures, plastic fines. ---------------! Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity, (lean clay). Organic silts and organic clays of low plasticity. Inorganic silts, elastic. <fJ _ ML Inorganic silts, rock flour, clayey silts with slight -' -g!o SILTS AND CLAYS ------1--~pl_a_st_ic~ityc...· __________________ _ 0 (!JO <ii"' CL (fJ E ci (l) Liquid limit is less than 50% ----l----------- 0 ~Z.!::! OL W C) CU) Z lO rn <IJ ------------------·-------1----------------------1 <t c::5> I MH 0::: ro i... .~ : W <.'.J :5<1J~E <fl 'i SILTS AND CLAYS CH Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays. -- ZLL ~ <fl __ j Liquid l1m1t is greater than 50%>------- 0 -H---+--------------- -__ Organic clays of high plasticity. HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT Peat. •--------------------------~--------------------1 U) U) w _J z Q U) w I 0 u w > U) w I 0 u DEFINITION OF TERMS AND SYMBOLS Standard Penetration _[Je n.sit)I Resistance in Blows/Foot ---- Very loose 0-4 Loose 4-10 Medium dense 10-30 Dense 30-50 Very dense >50 Standard Penetration t:::onsistency Resistance in Blows/Foot ----- Very soft 0-2 Soft 2-4 Medium stiff 4-8 Stiff 8-16 Very stiff 16-32 Hard >32 ~ Terra ~ Associates, Inc. Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences I 2" OUTSIDE DIAMETER SPLIT SPOON SAMPLER I 2.4" INSIDE DIAMETER RING SAMPLER OR SHELBY TUBE SAMPLER :!: WATER LEVEL (DATE) Tr TORVANE READINGS, tsf Pp PENETROMETER READING, tsf DD DRY DENSITY, pounds per cubic foot LL LIQUID LIMIT, percent Pl PLASTIC INDEX N STANDARD PENETRATION, blows per foot UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM CEDAR RIVER CORPORATE PARK RENTON, WASHINGTON Proj. No. T-5996 I Date DEC 2006 I Figure A-1 I I I ·1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ~ LOG OF TEST PIT NO. 1 FIGURE A-2 PROJECT NAME: Cedar Bl~ec CQ[QQtate Eacr PROJ, NO: T-5996 LOGGED BY: QE'I LOCATION: Beotoo Wasbingtoo SURFACE CONDS: Brusb APPROX. ELEV: l:J/6 DATE LOGGED: _Nimirnt>er 1 2QQ6 DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER: H 5 Eeet DEPTH TO CAVING: tJill ;;:: "' -d c t;: z :z w CONSISTENCY/ l "' ,: --' DESCRIPTION 0. REMARKS >--0. RELATIVE DENSITY .... .. " ;: w w ., "' 0 "' '-' 0 .. FILL: gray to brown silty sand, root~, some asphalt rubble, loose to trace gravel, fine grained, moist. Medium Dense 6.2 . 25.3 5-FILL: blue gray c!ayey silt with weathered bedrock pieces Medium Stiff to 3 feet in s\2e, old roots, sticks, wet to Stiff . Brown organic S!LT to fiberous PEAT, sticks, wet (PT) Soft 10- Gray SJL T to clayey SILT, organic inclusions, moist lo Medium Stiff . wet (ML) to St\ff 43.7 . . 34.0 Gray silly to clean SAND, fine gr~ined, wet. {S/\NSP) Medium Dense . 15-Test pit terminated at 14-5 feet Moderate groundwater seepage observed at 14.5 feet. . . . 20- . ' Terra NOTE: This S\Jbsurtace m!orm:Jtion perl<1ms only to this test pit 1ocat1on <1nd should Associates, Inc. not be ln\erpreted as being indicative of other locations at lhe site Consullants in Geotechnic;.J Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences LOG OF TEST PIT NO. 2 FIGURE A-3 PROJECT NAME: Cedar River Corporate Park PROJ. NO: sI~-5~9~9~6~---LOGGED BY: -'-D,rP:.1.! __ _ LOCATION: Renton Washinotoo SURFACE CONDS: ~B:,rr.uui;suh _______ _ APPROX.ELEV:_N~l~A~- DATE LOGGED; November 1 2006 DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER: 14 Feet DEPTH TO CAVING: ~N~IQA ___ _ ci >' z "-w ,: -' .... 0. 0. " w s: C "' 5 10 15 20 DESCRIPTION FILL: gray to brown silty sand. roots, trace gravel, fine grained, moist. FILL: gray brown to blue gray silty sand to sandy silt, weathered bedrock pieces below 7 feet, moist to wet. Brown organic SILT to fiberous PEAT, wet. (PT) Gray clayey SILT, organic inclusions, wet. (ML/CL) Gray silty SAND, fine grained, wet. (SM) Test pit terminated at 14.5 feet. Moderate groundwater seepage observed al 14 feet. 2-inch slotted PVC standpipe installed. NOTE: This subsurface inforrna1ion pertains only to this test pit location and should not be interpreted as being indicative of other locations .:it the site CONSISTENCY/ RELATIVE DENSITY Loose to Medium Dense Medium Stiff to Stiff Soft Medium Stiff Medium Dense C ;< 11.6 19.0 152.2 77.0 55.9 28.7 ~ r z w 0. REMARKS .... w "' () 0 0. Terra Associates, Inc. Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences .. LOG OF TEST PIT NO. 3 FIGURE A-4 PROJECT NAME: Cedar River Corporate Park PROJ. NO: JI~-5~9~9~G~---LOGGED BY: JD~P~l __ _ LOCATION: Renton Washiooton SURFACE CONOS: ~B:u(.1Jlla>.Sb1L ______ _ DATE LOGGED: November 1 2006 DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER: N/A APPROX. ELEV: _NL.<lccAL...._ DEPTH TO CAVING: N/A ~ ci >-z '=-w X J >-.. .. ~ w " 0 "' 5 10 15 DESCRIPTION FILL: gray brown to brown silty sand with gmvel, roots, some small siicks, fine grained, moist. FILL: reddish-brown to blue gray clayey sandy silt with weathered bedrock pieces, small to medium large pieces of bedrock, wet. Brown organic SILT to fiberous PEAT, small sticks, wet. (PT) Light grayish-brown clayey SILT, orga'1ics, wet. {MUCL) Test pit terminated at 13 feet. No groundwater seepage observed NOTE: This subsurface information pertains only lo this test pit location and should no1 be interpre1ed as being indicative of other locations at the site. CONSISTENCY/ RELATIVE DENSITY Loose to Medium Dense Medium Stiff to Stiff Soft Medium Stiff "' "' t:. :i. ~ w .. REMARKS >-;: w "' " 0 "- 9.4 25.6 189.5 106.3 Terra Associates, Inc. Consultants in Geoiechnical Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences LOG OF TEST PIT NO. 4 FIGUREA-5 PROJECT NAME: Cedar River Corporate Park PROJ. NO: ~r~-5~9~9~6~---LOGGED BY: ~P~Pwl __ _ LOCATION: Renton Washington SURFACE CONDS: ~B,ir_uu"'sub _______ _ DATE LOGGED: November 1 2006 DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER: NIA APPROX_ ELEV: ~N~l~A~- DEPTH TO CAVING: ~N~{A~--- [ I >-~ "' 0 5 10 15 20 DESCRIPTION (6 inches brown organic SILT/ROOTS} FILL: brown silly sand wilh gravel to sandy silt with broken up bedrock, fine grained, moist. FILL: brown to light brown sandy clayey silt will1 broken up bedrock pieces, lots of bedrock pieces to 4 feet in size, moist. Brown organic SILT to fiberous PEAT, srna:I sticks and small logs, wet. (PT) Light gray/clayey SILT, organic inclusions, wet {ML) Test pit terminated at 14 feet. No groundwater seepage observed. NOTE: ;'his subsurface information pertains only to this test pit locatirm ,md should not be interpreted as being indicative of other locations at the si1e CONSISTENCY/ RELA TlVE DENSITY Loose to Medium Dense Medium Stiff to Stiff Soft Medium Stiff REMARKS 11.1 111,2 100.8 149.1 48.8 Terra Associates, Inc. Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering Geology and Erwironmen1al Earth Sciences LOG OF TEST PIT NO. 5 FIGURE A-6 PROJECT NAME: Cedar River Corporate Park PROJ. NO: ~r~-5~9~9~6~--- LOCATION; Renton Washington SURFACE CONOS: J8:,,re1t,sJS>1bL.. ______ _ DATE LOGGED: November 1 2006 DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER: g Feet LOGGED BY: JD~Pwl~-- APPROX. ELEV: ~N~/A~-- DEPTH TO CAVING: NIA ,-: !c. :c ,_ n. w " 5 10 15 20 0 z w J n. ~ "' DESCRIPTION (6 inches black organic SILT/ROOTS) FILL: brown to grayish-brown sandy silt with gravel, a few large boulders, broken bedrock pieces with depth to i .5 feet in size, wet. FILL: blue sandy clayey silt with bedrock pieces, small to very large sizes, occasional wood to small logs, wet. Brown organic SILT to fiberous PEAT, some sticks to small logs, wet. (PT) Light gray clayey Sll T with organics, wet. {ML) Test pit terminated at 14 feet. Slight groundwater seepage observed at 9 feet. NOTE: This subsurface information pertains only to this \es'. pil localior. and should not be interpreted as being indicative of other locations at the site. CONSISTENCY/ RELATIVE DENSITY Loose to Medium Dense Medium Stiff to Stiff Soft Medium Stiff 20.4 18.4 71.7 76.6 u. "' !::. z w n. E <.) 0 n. REMARKS Terra Associates, Inc. Consultants in Geo1schnical Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences r LOG OF TEST PIT NO. 6 FIGURE A-7 PROJECT NAME: Cedar River Corporate Park PROJ. NO: ~I~-5~9-9-6 ___ _ LOGGED BY: -P-P~l __ _ LOCATION: Renton Wasbim1ton SURFACE CONDS: _.Bu[o.lJSOJbLL ______ _ APPROX. ELEV: ~N-lA~-- DEPTH TO CAVING: ~N=/A~---DATE LOGGED: November 1 2006 DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER: 9 Feet t 0 z w :z: ~ ~ .. .. " w " 0 "' 5 10 15 20 DESCRIPTION FILL: gray silty sand with gravel, fine grained, some debris, moist. FILL: brown to gray sandy clayey sill with bedrock pieces to 2 feet in size, sticks, moist. FILL: blue clayey silt with smaH to large bedrock pieces, small fogs, moist to wet. Brown organic SILT to fiberous PEAT, wet. {PT) Gray clayey SILT, organics, wet. Test pit terminated at 14 feet. Heavy groundwater seepage observed at 9 feet. NOTE: This subsurface information pertains only to this !est p11 location and should not be interpreted as being indicative of other locations at the site. CONSISTENCY/ RELATIVE DENSITY Loose Medium Stiff Medium Stiff to Stiff Soft Medium Stiff REMARKS 15.2 17.5 86.3 257.1 Terra Associates, Inc. Consultants in Geoiechnical Engineoririg Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences LOG OF TEST PIT NO. 7 FIGURE A-8 PROJECT NAME: Cedar River Corporate Park PROJ. NO: ~I~-5_9_9_6 ___ _ LOGGED BY: -D-P~I __ _ LOCATION: Renton WashinQton SURFACE CONDS: .1.B1.1[J.d1Ja.Sb1L ______ _ APPROX. ELEV: _N-l~A~- DEPTH TO CAVING: ~N=IA~---DATE LOGGED: November 1 2006 DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER: 1 o Feet '" ~ :c ,- ~ w 0 5 ci z w -' ~ " ;ii DESCRIPTION (6 inches brown organic SILT) FILL: brown sandy silt with gravel, lots of weathered bedrock pieces to cobble size, old roots, sticks, moist. F!LL: reddish.brown to blue sandy silt to clayey silt, large weathered bedrock pieces, moist lo wet. CONSISTENCY/ RELATIVE DENSITY Medium Stiff to Stiff Medium Stiff to Stiff REMARKS 19.6 "' 10 -------!--------< 45.0 15 Brown organic SILT to fiberous PEAT, slicks, small logs, wet. (PT) Blue silty SAND, fine grained, wet. (SM) Test pit terminated at 13 feet. Slight to moderate groundwater seepage observed at 10 feet. NOTE: This subswface information pert<1ins only to this tesl pil locc1lion ;:md should not be interpreted as being indicative of other locaiions at the site Soft Medium Dense 112.0 25.7 Terra Associates, Inc. Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences LOG OF TEST PIT NO. 8 FIGUREA-9 PROJECT NAME: Cedar River Corporate Park PROJ. NO: ~I~-5~9~9~6~---LOGGED BY: ~D-P~I __ _ LOCATION: Renton Washirn;itoo SURFACE CONDS: ,B~r~w~s~h _______ _ APPROX.ELEV:~N~/~A~- DEPTH TO CAVING: NIA DATE LOGGED: November 1 2006 DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER; 1 O Feel ~ 0 >--z Se. w r ~ >--0. 0. " w "' C "' 5 ~ 10 15 20 DESCRIPTION (6 inches brown organic SILT) FILL: brown sandy silt with gravel and weathered bedrock pieces, roots, wet. FILL: blue clayey silt with weathered bedrock pieces, some pieces to 3 feet in sizes, moist. Brown organic SILT to fiberous PEAT, rams, sticks, logs, thin clay seems, wet. (PT) Blue silty clayey SAND, fine grained, wet. (SMfML) Test pit terminated at 15 feet. Slight groundwater seepage observed at 1 O feet NOTE: This subsurface inlormation pertains only to this test ~,il loc'ltion and should not be interpreted as being indicative of other locations al the site CONSISTENCY/ RELATIVE DENSITY Medium Stiff to Stiff Medium Stiff to Stiff Soft Medium Dense REMARKS 18.1 20.3 86.B 103.4 46.1 Terra Associates, Inc. Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences PERCENT COARSER BY WEIGHT ..J 0 CL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .001° ~ N "' ..,. "' <D .... a:, a, ~ .001 ~-~ ..J .002 .002 ..J ~ .003 .003 Cf) ~ l >-.004 .004 --' <( 2 2 C ~ N 2 ..; z .006 .006 ·6 $ <ri "' <( ;;:: 2 g er: UJ .008 .008 Cf) (.) N LU LU U) .01 .01 z f-u:: LU z :;; <( 0 "' er: (!) .02 .02 0 >-.03 .03 I .04 .04 .06 .06 1--'-200 .08 I--~ .1 0 ~ "' ~~~ <( 0 100 Cf) z er: UJ ;:: .2 w ;;:: C U') 60 f-u. 0 w ~ U') .3 :;; 0. ::, 5 I 40 .4 ::; ~ (.) =' -0 ;;:: ~~~ .6 :;; 0 "' z UJ .8 ~ :,,;J; 0.. 20 w ::, :r: '/ 1 t::! 0 <f) UJ w Cf) 2 2 z u. 10 2 ~ 0 -Cf) a: UJ u'j w 3 <.9 U') >-<D "' 2 <( 0 --' 4 0 z <( ::, <( z z 4 ~-0 U') <( -6 z £ 114 <( w U') ·a > 8 !,,! 3/6 10 UJ z Cf) 1/2 u: U') U') (.) 0.. 2 UJ 5/6 ..J U') U') U') :r: 3/4 -~ ::, (.) 20 ;;:: 1 "' ;;:: 1 114 30 UJ (!) :§_ --:-0 (!) 1 112 U') "' '" ;;:: 40 "' ID " -<( o-z 2 0 UJ CL 60 (.) C 0 3 0 ~ 80 ~ u. ~~ ~ .0 ri 0 4 100 o E ri w Cf) ]-i I->-r:! LU U') 6 --' UJ Q'.l 200 a, 0 (.) >, 12 300 • • 0 1--'-0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 '--"' 0 0, a, .... <O "' ..,. "' N ~ ~ PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT ~Terra GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS Associates, Inc. CEDAR RIVER CORPORATE PARK RENTON, WASHINGTON Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering Proj. No.T-5996 I Date DEC 2006 I Geology and Figure A-10 Environmental Earth Sciences PERCENT COARSER BY WEIGHT ..J 0 Q. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 lil &l 0 .001° ~ "' "' "' "' w ... ~ .001 '---~ ..J .002 .002 ..J ~ .003 .003 (/) >-.004 .004 ~ l ...J .,: " .2 C " "' " ci oi z ;: .006 .006 ·5 .$ N .,: " g .008 .008 Cl) 0:: w w u N w U) .01 .01 z f-ii: w z 2 ;;' 0 ll'. 0:: CJ .02 .02 0 >-.03 .03 I .04 .04 .06 .06 ~ ~ 200 .08 t--~ 0 .1 ll'. I/ .I <( 0 100 Cl) z 0:: w i'c .2 w z f-ii: C <J) 60 w 2 <J) C .3 2 a. :::, ·5 :i: .4 ...J w 40 ...J w u ,-. 0 ;: 11 CC 2 0 ll'. c" .6 z z w ~ .8 "<( Q. 20 w :::,<f) I 1 t:J i5 "' <f) w -~ w (/) " " " z C u. ro 0 10 2 ~ ,-. '" ~ > ll'. w ro (/) w 3 Cl <f) E, >-m ll'. £ ...J " <( "j: .,: :::, 4 0 z z 4 u 0 0 ,-.,-. z z .,: '-6 114 <( <( w <f) <J) > 8 w w 318 10 2 U) 112 ii: <f) Q. <fl u <f) (l_ w 516 ..J "' i (I) I 314 -~ :, (/) u 20 ;: 1 "' ;: 1 114 30 w" ~ Cl. '""".' 0 0 CJ 1 112 "' " ;: 40 ll'. w"' oJ v <( o--z 2 0 w Q. 60 u C 0 3 0 ii; 80 ~ ":' N u. --~ D 0 4 100 0 E Q. 0. w ra ~~ ,-. >-N U) 6 ...J w Ill 200 Ill 0 Cl >, 12 300 w • 0 ~~ 0 0 0 0 ij5 0 0 g 0 0 0 ~ "' 0 0) "' .... "' "' N ~ ~ PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT ~Terra GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS Associates, Inc. CEDAR RIVER CORPORATE PARK RENTON, WASHINGTON Consultants In Geotechnical Engineering Proj. No.T-5996 I Dale DEC 2006 I Geology and Figure A-11 Environmental Earth Sciences APPE:\'DIX B TEST PIT LOGS BY OTHERS ci z m 0 0 .. ;le Exploration No. 1 0-1. 5 I. 5-8 .. 5 8 .. 5-13.5 13_ 5-16. 5 Bl'o.wn Silty Sand (SM) (moderately dense, damp) (fill) Brown to Blue Gray Siltwitl1 gravel, cobbles & boulders (ML) with occasional piece of wood (mc,derately dense v1et) (fill) rock is granular Seepage at 8 . .5'. Brown Organic Si 1 t (OL) vith fragments of decayed VIOOd & vegetat·ion tu 6 11 size. Gray Silty Fine Sand (SM) (moderately dense wet). Grades fine and less silty. Completed 3/28/85 Sample Depth ( ft) 11. 5" Moisture Content % 140 Exploration No. 2 0-5.5 5. 5-10 10-10.5 Mixed Brown Silt and Gravel (ML-GM) with angular cobbles and boulders. (fill) Change to blue at 2,5' and with rock to 200 lbs. Caving at 4.5'. Seepage at 6'. Cobbles and Boulders with Silt, rock to 800 lbs. at 7' Some woody debris at 8° Wood debris, organic silt and vegetation. Terminated due to boulders and heavy caving Completed 3/28/75 Sample Depth (ft) 10' Mei sture Content % 262 '" NOTES.: > : 1) Depths in feet. 2) Field engineer: Roger LOWJ.-----------------------1 .. m 3) Excavation using a Ford 765 backhoe 4) Moisture content is a percentage of the sample dry weight. ATLAS GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING INC. EXPLORATION LOGS PROPOSED OFFICE/WAREHOUSE PROJECT, RENTION, WA PLATE 2 0 z z ~ .. - Exploration No. 3 0-10.5 10.5-15.5 15.5-17 17-18 Brown Gravelly, Cobbly Silt (ML) (fill) Change to blue-gray color at 2.5' Heavy seepage at 7' Water leve,s 8.25' 3/28/75 Test pit not open long enough for water level to stabilize. Brown Organic Silt and Silty Peat (MH/PT) (moderately soft, moist) (decayed vegetation) Gray Silt with Organic Debris (ML/MH) (moderately firm, wet). Dark Gray Fine Silty Sand (SM) (moderately dense, wet) Completed 3/28/85 Sample Depth (ft) 14 Moisture Content% 216 ", . EXPLORATION LOGS . . ' ' '• ·\{ . ' ,· . ' . ' ATLAS GEOTECHNICAL . PROPOSED OFFICE/WAREHOUSE ENGINEE~!_N8, !N<?,i> . 'PROJECT. RENTON. WA ':··· ;;-,··;·_;,, -· .. ' ' ' -·-------------i-------------1 PLATE 3 C ._------·----....J'-·-----------'------------' 0 z ~ 0 z Exploration No. 4 0-3.5 3.5-8.5 8.5-9 9-15 15-17.5 Brown Sandy Silt (ML) with rocks & cobbles (moderatly dense, damp fi 11) Blue Gravel and Cobbles (moderately dense, saturated) ( fi 11) vJater at 3.5 feet, heavy flow. Large boulders, 200 lb+ at 6' Bro,,n Organic Silt (ML) (moderately soft, moist) ( topsoil I. Gradational cl1ange to Alternating Brown Organic Silt and Peat (MH/PT), peat layers to 8" thick. Dark Gray Silty Sand (SM) (Moderately dense, wet) (6" thick silt layer at 16.5). Completed 3/28/85 Sample Depth (ft) 8.5 10 11 16. 5 Moistu;·e Content i:t) 120 320 153 47 ATLAS GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING INC. EXPLORATION LOGS PROPOSED OFFICE/WAREHOUSE PROJECT, RENTON, WA i ~ !---·'------. -.""---'-'1--P-L_A_TE.:..._4~--·-----t ~ 1.-__________ .;_ _ _... _____ ·_;_,-~..c..;.. ___ L,. _ _,.. ________ __, f I il I I ' I 0 z ~ 0 > w « ,------,-----··1 Exploration No. 5 0-9 9·· 12 12-17 Brown Sandy Gravelly Silt (ML) lmoderately dense, ,mist) { fi 11) With rock fragments at 3 feet Rock to 800 lbs i·;i-'.:h 2' iong dir.iension at 6.5 f2et~ \; 1 0.1.er at 7' Brown and Gray Silt {r.JL} witt1 ;)rgani-c fragments Dark Gray ~~edium S2nd (SP) \·!i th c, trece of silt f.t:_i.cder- at1?ly dense, 1·1et) Dark Gray l,1ediurn Sand {SP) with a trace of silt (moderately dense, we~. Includes Griiy Silt layers (ML) {modNately firm, ,.,t) and traces of organic !'.laterial below 15 f.el='t. Exploration No. 6 0-7 7-8 8-9 9-10.5 10,5-12 12-17 Brown Sandy and Gravelly Silt (ML) with rock fr<>~me n ts {moderately firm, moist) (fill) Rocky at 4' . Broken rock (fi11). Organic material at 8'. Brown Peat (PT) (moderately firm, saturated) ·Gr.ar silt ( ML) (moderately firm, saturated) Brown Peat (PT) (moderate 1 y fi nnt saturated) Gray Silt (ML) (moderately firm, saturated) with occasi ona 1 layers of p~a t at 13.5'. Completed 3/28/85 Sample Depth (ft) 8 Moi-sture Content % 236 I \ ' ,, 1 ; ! I I ! ' ' l i: r i I I ---·--·-----"-! EXPLORAH:01!1 HlGS 1 ATLAS GEOTECHN!CAL ENGINEERING INC. PROPOSED DFiHCE/WAREHOUSE,. PROJECT, ,Rg~TCN, WA PLATE 5 ------·---------'-·----·---------",------ 0 z ~ 0 >- G z ~ Exploration No. 7 0-3.5 3.5-7 7-B 9-12.5 12.5-18 Brown Medium Sand (SP) with silt (moderately dense, damp) If i 11 l Bro1,n Silty Gravel (GM) (dense damp) Change to blue at 6'. \later flowing in at 6' Glue ,quckv i-ili ;clerisc) { hari..i Jigging) r·:at of v,::vscit.:.ticn :';'I_:. 'j 1 Brci\·m Or0e.nic Silt (MH) {moderately firm, saturated) Gradational ci1angc: to Grown Peat (PT) {moderately firm, saturated) Dark Blue Gray Medium Sand (SP-SM) with silt Completed 3/28/85 Sample Depth (ft) 8 Mai sture Content % 87 Exploration No. 8 0-2.5 2. 5-3. 5 3,5-9 9-9.5 9,5-14.5 14.5-16.5 Brown Silty Sand (SM) with roots (moderately dense, moist} ( fil 1 } Asphalt chunk from 2.5 to 3.~' Blue-Gray Gravelly Silt (ML) with rock fragments (dense moist} (fill} Brown silt (ML) with occasional rocks and fragments of vegetation. (fill) Black Organic Mat Brown Peat ( PT} Seepage at 12' grades with silt below 12. Gradational change to Gray Silt (MU viith some organic debris. (moderately dense, saturated} Trace of sand at i6.5. Terminated at 16.5' due to obstructions that limited excavation. Completed 3/28/85 ATLAS GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING INC. EXPLORATION LOGS PROPOSED OFFICE/WAREHOUSE PROJECT, RENTON, WA : PLATE 6 I I 0 ,_ ___ __... ________ __....... ____________ ...__ ___________ ,. I 0 z m 0 :I w " w ,,. w ~ ,. m z " < ~ 0 Exploration No. 9 0-3 3-4,5 4.5-9 9-14.5 14,5-17 17-18 Brown Sandy Silt (ML) (fill} Blue Rocky Fill (very dense} ha1·d digging. Silty Sandy Gr3vel (GM) (very dense, -,et) (fill) kuCKS tu l:)"::, ile al I • Very hJ1·t ~i;;ing c:~ing i-i~;od deori s co O" d~ r..iileter -~ r C ~:., C.~. Gradational change to rlixed Peat and Gray Silt (PT/HH) (firm sa tura teci) Gray Silt (!·'H) 1·1ith 01·ganic fragments. (Moderately firm, saturated} Completed 3/29/85 Sample Depth (ft) 10 11 . 12. 5 17 Moisture Content % 101 185 193 44 EXPLORATION LOGS ATLAS GEOTECHNICAL PROPOSED OFFICE/WAREHOUSE ENGINEERING INC. PROJECT, RENTON, WA PLATE 7 I I I 0 z E 0 > w ~ z 3' Exploration No. 10 0-8 8-9 9-9.~ 9 5-]'1 5 14.5-16 16-17.5 17.5-18 Brown Sandy Gravelly Silt (ML) (dense, moist) rocks to 18' (fill) Change to blue at 6' Seepage and some civing at 6' Rocky fi·:1 '-'~~;, :;i":t E.xp·1oration ·r 1oon.1:.•c\, sev~r't." cctv"ing Vegetation m:::..(. Brown Peat and s-:lt \PT/HH) Chunk of partially decayed wood at 12.5 Gray Fine Gravel (GP) (moderately dense, saturated) Mixed Peat and Silt with Peat (PT/MH) Dark Gray Silty Sand (SM) (moderately dense, wet) Completed 3/29/85 Sample Depth (ft) 10 11 . Moisture Content% 147 133 ATLAS GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING INC. EXPLORATION LOGS PROPOSED OFFICE/WAREHOUSE PROJECT, RENTON, WA ;! PLATE 8 C 1------------.J....·--·-·--------..b.-----------...1 I I \ Exploration No. 11 0 z ,_ ~ 0 w > w " z 3: o( " 0-1.5 1.5-7.5 7.5-8 8-10 10-ll 11-13. 5 13.5-14.5 ",._ __ _ Brown Sandy Gravelly Silt (ML) (Moderately dense, damp) ( fi 11) Rocky Fill v;ith Silt Color change to blue at 4.5' RJ,1cK organic m.:1 C1c1'·;e11. Bn)wn Organic S·i 1 t d;:;~:1 ~0i '.:, t) I, .. , I \ 1,;;; ~ f i rn, Gr-adat.ional chan9e to GrO\·ill Pt:at \?L) (1;1cdt:r2..t-;::ly -fit~, moist) Gray Silt (ML-MH) (with fragments of organic material (moderately firm, moist) Dark Gray Sand (SP) with some silt (moderately dense, saturated) Completed 3/29/85 Sample Depth ( ft) 8.5 Moisture Content% 10. 5 96 258 ATLAS GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING INC. EXPLORATION LOGS PROPOSED OFFICE/WAREHOUSE PROJECT, RENTON, WA PLATE 9 0 z z ~ -< - Exploration No. 12 0-3. 5 3.5-8 8-8. 5 3.5-9 9-10. 5 10.5-11.5 11.5-15 15-15.5 15. 5-16. 5 Brown Sandy Si1 t (ML) (moderately dense, damp) (fill) with some rocks at 2' Drown and Blue with Crange Layers, Sandy Gravelly Cobbly Silt (ML) (mocerately dense, moist) (fil 11 Rocky fi 11 -l,eavy t I ov1 of \;cter Rock to 2' x 2 1/2' Brm•m Organic s~-1 t (MH) (moderately dense. sa.turated) Gray silt (ML) (moderately dense, saturated) Gray Medium Sand (SP) (moderately dense, saturated) Gray Silt (ML) (mederately dense, saturated) Dark Gray Sand ISP) (Moderately dense, saturated) Completed 3/29/85 Exploration No. A 0-6.5 6.5-9.0 Brown Medium Sand (SP) (moderately dense -loose, moist) (fill) (caving) Vegetation mat at 6.5- Brown Peat (PT) Termination@ 9' due to severe caving Completed 3/29/85 EXPLORATION LOGS ATLAS GEOTECHNICAL PROPOSED OFFICE/WAREHOUSE ENGINEERING INC. PROJECT, RENTON, WA PLATE 10 I " _____________ _.. ___________ ..... ___________ _. APPENDIX F Wetland Analysis • 2D0;; ?.El::), I o LI t\l D RvE WETLAND ANALYSIS, STREAM CLASSIHCA TION AND SHOR.Il.INE MASTER. PR.OGRAM APPLICABILCTY REPORT 300 S. 160rn STREIT PARCa #: 3340400285 & 3023059083 RENTON, WASHINGTON l'IZ.Er' J\R ED roR: MURPHY MCCUI..LOUGH TARRAGON DEVELOPMENT IOOll Sil UND AV[NUE Slll 11 3200 SI i\ l l LI , WA 98104 '.2.06) LB-9600 l'IU::J'1\RED BY: CELESTE BOTI IA WETI...AND PERMITTING SERVICES 'Io15 South Norman Street Seattle, Washingt.on g81+4 (206) ;28-7775 wp~i.sp.com OCTOBER 18, 2006 Ill TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUINESUMMAR.Y-------------------3 SITE DESCRIPTION 3 WETLAND DFLINEA TION 4 VECFl·A·1·10N.............. . ........................................................................................................................................... 4 SOILS................. ..................................... . ......................................................................................................... .5 J-IYDROLOCY ...................................... .. . .......................................................................................................... 5 WETLAND CA TEGOR.IZA TION 5 WETLAND Dll!NEATION RESULTS __ , _____________ 6 VECETATION........................ . ....................................................................................... 7 SOILS............. ....................................... . . .......................................................................................................... 7 IIYl)IZ.OL,OCY ........................................ .. ................................. ....... ............................... ...... . ........................... 8 WETLAND DETER.MINA TION & CLASSIACA TION 8 WETLANl) A........................................................................ . . ..................................................................................... 8 WEILAND R ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 8 STREAM DETERMINATION & CLASSIACATION-----------9 SHORfLINE MASTER PR.OGRAM-·-·---------------9 R.EGULATOR. Y IMPLICATIONS __ . __ ._.... 9 WETLANDS ............................................... . . ............................................................................................................... 9 SI REAMS ............................................... . ·················· ············································ ............................................ 10 SHOIZ.ELJNE CONSEIZ. VANCY ....................................................................................... 10 Page 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report presents the findings of a wetland analysis, stream characterization and applicability of Shoreline Conservancy provisions that was performed by WPS on the Seelig Lind Avenue property. Two wetlands were identified, one located on the adjacent property to the north and the other located along the south and east side of the subject property, and the boundaries of the wetland to the south and east as well as the southern boundary of the wetland to the north were delineated. SITE DESCRIPTION The 12.57-acre site, Parcels 3340400285 & 3023059083, is located between Lind Avenue South and East Valley Road, south or SW 19 1h Street in Renton, Washington. SW 21st Street is located to the north and SW 23'd Street to the south; however, both of these street ROWs have been abandoned (i'igure 1, Vicinity Map). The site is currently undeveloped. A fire station is located north of the northwest property corner (Parcel #3340400425), a commercial development is located to the cast between the subject parcel and the East Valley Road; and a gas line is located on the parcel to the south, within the abandoned SW 23'd Street ROW (Parcel# 3023059083). The parcel is nearly rectangular, with a "panhandle" at the northeast corner. + I .1 .... ;··· AGUR.E I: VICINnY MAP The site was filled prior to 1970 with from 7-to I 0-feet or dense fill material. Scrubby trees and shrubs have since become established on the site. The southeast corner and a Page 3 I I I I I I I I I • I I I I I I I I I narrow band around the entire site arc forested. The interior of the site is mostly scrubby; tree species have generally not reached 20 feet or greater. Two mapped wetlands nearly surround the site; a large wetland lies to the north and a smaller wetland wraps around the east and south property boundary. These wetlands have been included in numerous previous inventories, including the City of Renton's Rivers, Streams & Wetlands inventory. An unnamed tributary of Springbrook Creek is located on the adjacent parcel to the south, south of the abandoned SW 23"1 Street ROW. WETLAND DBJNFATION Site visits occurred on August 25, September 23, and November 7, 2004, wherein CBWE examined the study area for indicators of wetlands. The study area of the investigation included off-site areas since it was apparent that wetland buffers extend onto the subject parcel. Wetlands were identified based on the presence of hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soil, and wetland hydrology using the method outlined in the 1997 Washington State Wetlands Identification and Deli11calion Manual (Washington State Manual), and following City of Renton regulations. The "routine on-site detem1ination method" was used to make the wetlands detcm1ina1ion. The routine method is used for areas equal to or less than five acres in size, or for larger areas with relatively homogeneous vegetative, soil, and hydrologic properties. During the study area evaluation, 12 detailed data points were located in distinct representative vegetation units in order to characterize the wetland and non-wetland communities. Field observations at each data point were compiled on preformatted Wetland Data Sheets, labeled DPl through DP12. VEGETATION Vegetation was evaluated across the study area to determine the presence of hydrophytic plant communities. Plant communities arc considered hydrophytic when more than 50 percent of the dominant species in the plant community have a wetland indicator status of facultative (FAC+, FAC, & FAC-), facultative wetland (FACW+, FACW, & FACW-), or obligate wetland (OBL), as listed in the National List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands. Region 9 -Northwest (Recd, 1993 and 1988). The indicator codes for plant species are noted in Table 1. Dominant species were recorded as species comprising more than 20 percent of the plant community in each stratum (tree, shrub, andior herb layer). TABLE l. PLANT lNDlCATOR CODES Indicator Code Obligate Wetland (OBL) -occur almost always in lV ctlands --~-~ 1\ands ·ctlands or Facultative Wetland (FACW*)-usually occur m \."\·C Facultativc (FAC') -· equally likely to uccur in " non-wetlands Facultative Upland (FACU*) -usually occur in non~ wetlands Page 4 Frequency of Occurrence in Wetlands -->99(Yo 67-99% 34-66% --1-34% • Obligate Upland (UPL) -occur almost always in non-wetlands <1% Not Listed (NL) -no indicator status --- * Note: FACW, FAC, and FACU also have I and -values to represent species near the wetter end of the spectrum(+) and species near the drier end ol'thc spectrum(-). SOIL5 Anaerobic (saturated) conditions cause soils to form certain characteristics that can be observed in the field. Hydric indicators include: the presence of a matrix chroma of 1 or less in unmottled soil or 2 or less in mottled soil, gleyed soil, organic soils (peats and mucks), and the accumulation of sulfidic material. Soil pits were dug in each data point, using a shovel to depths of 16 to 18 inches below ground surface (BGS). Soils textures were characterized using Natural Resources Conservation Service protocol, and examined for hydric indicators as described by the Washington State Manual. Soil colors were identified using a Munsell soil color chart (Kollmorgen Corporation, 1988). Depth of soil saturation was recorded for each data point. Wetland Data Sheets are included in Appendix 1. Several secondary data points were examined across the wetland/upland boundary in order to determine the boundary line, although data forms were not completed at the secondary data points. The secondary data points were used to examine similarities or differences in soils between major data points and to establish mapped soil unit boundaries . HYDROLOGY At each data point, observations of direct and indirect wetland hydrology indicators were evaluated and recorded. Under nom1al conditions, hydrologic indicators are used to determine if the hydrology is either currently present or can be inferred from the guidelines provided in the Washington State :vtanual. These indicators include: recorded data, visual observation of inundation or saturation, watermarks, drift lines, sediment deposits, drainage patterns, local soil survey data, oxidized root channels, and water- stained leaves. WEILAND CATEGORIZATION Wetlands identified within 100 feet of the site were categorized using the City of Renton classification system. The city's classilication system, (RMC 4-3-050 M. 1.a., amended on December 12, 2005) is as follows: i. Category l: Category I wetlands are wetlands which meet one or more of the following criteria: (a) The presence of species listed hy Federal or State government as endangered or threatened, or the presence or essential habitat for those species; and/or (b) Wetlands having forty percent (40%) to sixty percent (60%) permanent open water (in dispersed patches or otherwise) with two (2) or more vegetation classes; and/or Page 5 .. ( c) Wetlands equal to or greater than ten ( I 0) acres in size and having three (3) or more vegetation classes, one of which is open water; and/or ( d) The presence of plant associations of infrequent occurrence; or at the geographic limits of their occurrence; and/or ii. Category 2: Category 2 wetlands are wetlands which meet one or more of the following criteria: (a) Wetlands that are not Category I or 3 wetlands; and/or (b) Wetlands that have heron rookeries or osprey nests, but are not Category I wetlands; and/or (c) Wetlands of any size located at the headwaters ofa watercourse, i.e., a wetland with a perennial or seasonal outflow channel, but with no defined influent channel, but are not Category 1 wetlands; and/or ( d) Wetlands having minimum existing evidence of human-related physical alteration such as diking, ditching or channelization; and/or iii. Category 3: Category 3 wetlands are wetlands which meet one or more of the following criteria: (a) Wetlands that are severely disturbed. Severely disturbed wetlands are wetlands which meet the following criteria: (I) Are characterized by hydrologic isolation, human-related hydrologic alterations such as diking, ditching, channelization and/or outlet modification; and (2) Have soils alterations such as the presence of fill, soil removal and/or compaction of soils; and (3) May have altered vegetation. (b) Wetlands that are newly emerging. Newly emerging wetlands are: (1) Wetlands occurring on lop of fill materials; and (2) Characterized by emergent vegetation, low plant species richness and used minimally by wildlife. These wetlands are generally found in the areas such as the Green River Valley and Black River Drainage Basin. (c) All other wetlands not classified as Category I or 2 such as smaller, high quality wetlands. WEILAND DB..INEA 110N R.ESULTS CBWE identified two wetlands within the study area. The northern boundary of Wetland A, located off site lo the north was delineated to establish the extent of its buffer lying on the Seelig site, and Wetland B. A summary of the vegetation, soils, and hydrology observed in the wetlands and the on-site upland is presented below. Page 6 .. VEGETATION The central areas of the site represented by DPs 1, 5, 10, and 12 are dominated by young black cottonwood (Populus balsamifera), with a dense understory of Douglas spirea (Spiraea douglasii) and scattered Oregon ash (Fraxinus latifolia) saplings. Cottonwoods at DP 5 were sapling rather than young trees and this central area of the site was opener, supporting primarily herbaceous species. Other species growing on the fill material in occasionally dominant cover include red-osier dogwood (Camus stolonifera), Himalayan blackberry (Rubus procerus), snowberry (Symphoricarpos alba), goldenrod (Solidago canadensis), tansy (Tanacetum vu/gare), western St. John's wort (Hypericum radicata), Scouler's willow (Salix scouleriana), and swordfern (Polystichum munitum). DP 3 represents the southern edge of Wetland A. it is dominated by Hooker's willow (S. hookeriana) and Douglas spirea; trace cover of each of the following species is also present: cattail (Typha latifolia), Pacific willow (S. lasiandra), Scouler's willow, reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinaceae), slough sedge (Carex obnupta), and sapling Oregon ash. The majority of Wetland A is dominated by reed canarygrass, yellow flag (Iris pseudacorus), deadly nightshade (So/anum dulcamara), black twinberry (Lonicera involucrata) and various willows. DP 8 represents Wetland B. Pacific and Scouler's willows and red-osier dogwood co- dominate. Douglas spirea and recd canarygrass are also present and occasionally dominant. The forested fill banks are represented by DPs 2 and 4. Red alder (Alnus rubra), black cottonwood, red-osier dogwood, stink currant (Ribes bracteosum), and Himalayan blackberry are all variously dominant. DPs 6, 7, and 9 represent the fill bank off-site south of Wetland B. Reed canarygrass and chickweed (Cerastium arvense) co-dominate within the abandoned SW 23rd Street ROW. SOILS Much of the site was filled with high-grade structural fill (primarily comprised of well- mixed sand and gravel) to depths ranging from approximately 5 to IO feet. The site is mapped in the Soil Survey of King County Area as Puget silty clay loam to the west, and Snohomish silt loam towards the east. However, it is evident from the soil survey base aerial photograph that the site had been filled and converted to urban land prior to the date of the photograph, which was taken in 1970. The Puget series is made up of poorly drained hydric soils that fanned in alluvium, under sedges and grass, in small depressions or the river valleys. In a representative profile, the soil is dominantly mottled dark grayish-brown (2.5Y 4/2) and grayish-brown (2.5Y 5/2) silty clay loam to a depth of about 45 inches BGS. The substratum is gray, silty clay that extends to a depth of 60 inches or more. Permeability is slow. The seasonal high water table is at or near lhe surface. The Snohomish series is a nearly level hyclric series made up of poorly drained soils that formed in alluvium in stream valleys. The A ( or surface) horizon ranges from very dark grayish-brown (IOYR 3/2) to grayish brown (2.5Y 5/2) silt loam, and is mottled to the surface. The B (subsurface) horimn ranges from very dark grayish brown to gray and from silt loam to silty clay loam and loamy sand. Depth to layers of peaty material Page 7 ranges from 13 to 36 inches. Layers of silty clay loam to loamy sand occur within and below the peaty layers. Permeability is moderate in the upper part of the profile and moderately rapid in the lower part. There is a seasonal high water table at or near the surface. As noted above, on-site soils do not match these mapped soils because the site was filled prior to 1970. Four data points, DP 1, 5, 10 and 12, were established on the filled area. The soil was very compacted and impermeable at all DPs. Soil chroma is 3; mottling was present at DPI within the surface 12 inches. Soil within adjacent wetlands at DPs 3 and 8 generally matched the mapped series. HYDROLOGY Wetland hydrology was not observed within the fill areas. Hydrologic indicators were present only off-site at DPs 3 (Wetland A) and in Wetland Bat DP 8. WEILAND DEfERMINA TION & G..ASSIACATION Based upon presence of the three requisite criteria, wetlands nearly surround the site on three sides. The wetland to the north, Wetland A, is an approximately 12.3 acre scrub- shrub/cmergent wetland; Wetland A does not extend onto the subject property. Wetland B, to the south and east, is a 0.6133 acre (26,714 square feet) L-shaped remnant scrub- shrub wetland surrounded by fill, 0.5117 acre (22,289 square feet) of which lies on the Seelig property. The wetland delineation is shown on the Wetland Location survey conducted by Bush, Roed & Hitchings, Inc., dated revised January 24, 2006, attached. WEILAND A Wetland A has been designated Category 2 by the City of Renton. However, this wetland could be considered severely disturbed due to hydrologic isolation and ditching (along the southern boundary), which are characteristics of Category 3 wetlands. Wetland A docs not meet the criteria for Category I for the following reasons: Criteria a: There arc no listed species; Criteria b and c: There is no open water; Criteria d: There are no p !ant associations of infrequent occurrence. The wetland is dominated by recd canarygrass, yellow flag (Iris pseudacorus), deadly nightshade (Solanum dulcamam), black twinberry (Lonicera involucrata) and various willows. On the whole, however, Wetland A meets the criteria as a Category 2 wetland. WEILANDB Wetland B meets the criteria as Category 3 on the basis of human-related hydrologic alterations such as diking, ditching, channelization and/or outlet modification; soils alterations such as the presence of lill, soil removal and/or compaction of soils; and altered vegetation. Page 8 .. •• SlRFAM DETERMINATION & G..ASSIACATION An unnamed tributary of the Springbrook Creek is located off-site approximately 150 feet south of the south property line of the subject property. The stream is included on the King County GIS Assessor's maps and is identified in WDFW SalmonScape as documented habitat for Coho salmon. Per RMC Title IV, Section 3.L.l.a., Class 2 waters are perennial or intermittent salmonid-hcaring waters which meet one or more of the following criteria: (a) Mapped on Figure Q4, Renton Water Class Map, as Class 2; and/or (b) Historically and/or currently known to support salmonids, including resident trout, at any stage in the species lifecycle; and/or ( c) Ts a water body ( e.g., pond, lake) between one half (0.5) acre and twenty (20) acres m size. Buffers for Class 2 streams are 100-fcet from the ordinary high water mark (OHWM); the OHWM of the subject stream lies greater than 100-feet south of the northern boundary of the Class 3 wetland buffer so the stream buffer does not affect site development. SHORELINE MASITR. PR.OGRAM Title TV Section 3.090 G. designates three Shoreline environments, Natural. Conservancy. and Urhan, to provide a uniform basis to apply policies and use regulations within distinctively different shoreline areas. Both Wetlands A and B have been designated Conservancy Environments. Sections K and L provide guidance on factors that must be considered in using these environments. Among the uses that must be considered, the only potential use relative to the subject property would be Environmental Effects. Such affects include pollution and Ecological Disruption, i.e. potential effects on water quality, water and land vegetation, water life and other wildlife (including, for example, spawning areas, migration and circulation habits, natural habitats, and feeding), soil quality and all other environmental aspects must be considered in the design plans for any activity or facility which may have detrimental effects on the environment. Applicants for pcm1its must explain the methods that will be used to abate, avoid or otherwise control the hannful effects. R.EGULATOR.Y IMPLICATIONS WETIANDS Title JV Section 3.M.6.c., Category 2 wetlands in Renton (i.e., Wetland A) are protected with 50-foot buffers and Category 3 wetlands (Wetland B) are protected with 25-foot buffers. Per Title IV Section 3.M.6.c., buffer averaging may be authorized only where the applicant demonstrates all of the following: i. That the wetland contains variations in ecological sensitivity or there are existing physical improvements in or near the wetland and buffer; and ii. That width averaging will not adversely impact the wetland function and values; and Page 9 I iii. That the total area contained within the wetland buffer after averaging is no less than that contained within the required standard buffer prior to averaging; and iv. A site specific evaluation and documentation of buffer adequacy based upon The Science of Wetland Buffers and Its Implications for the Management of Wetlands, McMillan 2000, or similar approaches have been conducted. The proposed buffer standard is based on consideration of the best available science as described in WAC 365-195-905; or where there is an absence of valid scientific information, the steps in RMC 4-lJ-250F are followed. v. In no instance shall the buffer width be reduced by more than fifty percent (50%) of the standard buffer or be less than twenty five feet wide. Greater buffer width reductions require review as a variance per subsection N3 of this Section and RMC 4-9-250B; and vi. Buffer enhancement in the areas where the buffer is reduced shall be required on a case-by-case basis where appropriate to site conditions, wetland sensitivity, and proposed land development characteristics. vii. Notification may be required pursuant to subsection F8 of this Section. Once the final site design has been determined, if buffer averaging is required to accomplish project goals these criteria will be addressed. S1REAMS The stream located south of the SW 23'd Street ROW is protected with a minimum l 00- foot buffer, per Title IV Section 3.L.1. Based upon an applicant's request, and the acceptance of a supplemental stream or lake study, the Administrator may approve a reduction in the minimum buffer widths where the applicant can demonstrate compliance with numerous subsections of this Section; buffer reduction to a minimum of 75 feet can be pem1ittcd pursuant to this section. However, because the 100-foot stream buffer where it crosses SW 23rd Street ROW onto the subject property lies entirely within the wetland and/or its buffer, no stream buffer reduction or averaging will be necessary on this project. SHORELINE CONSER YANCY Once the final site design has been determined, if any impacts to a Shoreline Conservancy Environment, i.e. the wetlands or stream, are proposed, code provisions of Title JV Section 3.090 G. will be addressed. Page 10 llEFER.ENCES Hitchcock, C.L., and A. Cronquist. 1973. Flora of the Pacific Northwest. Univ. of Washington Press, Seattle. King County Planning Division. 1986. King County Wetlands Inventory Notebook, Volume 2 East. King County, Washington. Sensitive Areas Map Folio, December, 1990. Metro King County Website. GIS Center. www5.metrokc.gov/servlet/corn.esri.csrimap.Esrirnap?ServiceName=overview& Client. ... Microsoft TcrraServer Imagery. http://tcrrascrver.horneadvisor.msn.com Munsell Color. 1992. Munsell Soil Color Charts. Kollmorgen Instruments Corp., Baltimore, MD. Reed, P.B., Jr. 1988. National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: National Summary. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C. Biol. Rpt. 88(24). 244 p. 1993 Northwest Supplement, Region 9, December 1993. Snyder, D.E., P.S. Gale, and R.F. Pringle. 1973. Soil Survey of King County Area, Washington. U.S. Soil Conservation Service, Washington, D.C. Soil Conservation Service. 1985. Hy<lric Soils of the State of Washington. U.S. Soil Conservation Service, Washington, D.C. Soil Conservation Service. 1987. Hydric Soils of the United States. In cooperation with the National Technical committee for Hydric Soils. U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service, Washington, D.C. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1993. No1ihwest Supplement to National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlamls: Region 9. Biol. Rpt. 88(24). Washington State Department of Ecology. 2004. Revised Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual. Ecology Publication #04-06-025. Washington State Department ofl-'ish and Wildlife SalmonScape. http://wdfw.w_a,gov/maJJJJing.'salmonscape/in<lex.hLrnl Page 11 .. APPENDIX I: WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORMS Page 12 APPENDIX G Engineering Calculations - /~ '17 Project L£12AI<. /<\ ;JG,IL. Project No. :lfxr:iZCQ • iO Subject :S&Q, ·70;..1.D With!To _________ _ Fax# ________ _ Address---.~~----- Date -~' z'--//~r=?-_,_j=D&,~--- # Faxed Pages By~L·JJ:Tl ~- S C:D1 1tt ENT PoN D :'.:>rz:i ...J~ D Page __ of __ D Calculations 0Fax D Memorandum D Meeting Minutes D Telephone Memo 5°/l'JC.E w E AR.E P/2D?Ct:>i~h NL\Uf:12()0".:, bED1VW=r-1, Kif'.-IP:::> 4lOAJ.0 1t-1F FER>vvtf::T£f2... 01=' ~E.. SITE. J :IT WOOL-0 N6i V'-\AK.E. ~N5£ To HAIIE A DE lAJATEP-lr-l(i DPJ-·1cc 1/J EAC-4 o"'-1E. -:'.'::0, 1,0E:. A-RE. f7/<.DW.:;,1Nci /0 LET Tr\~ li'-l DJ.JI DJAL l-0/\l/):;, "FILL OP ,t; :'.:PILL 6\lE\2-A <:xll.Lu)A'-/ Tl-I~ It-IE wf\-TEfZ. 5HD01.,D H Av"£. 11 "'LE. To -:'.:'.:E11cE OllT Bf::"Fcl2f l.£Av1rJ&i -ft-iE-Rit-lD:::>,, Ll:::wr--l ~fZ.EAtv\ of THE f=bA-l O FILL YiLL wA-'/S \.'C>il-L Di~CHH-f<'l:.£ T6 =¥$IL P'.v&-E 2iLT FDJC.~~ f;EFbQ£ ALLOLul1-l<'=? li-tE ;Jrorz.M 1,-:,A,E::.P-w IFAJE 'Ti-t £. :S iTE, \0111--l :>v<-H A Pr.rnc.::-...,-,.r?tt/ DDO 'CEt:>IC-'->,-J 1 wE HAVE-C1-lci:;.EA-J 10 r-c'll.LD~v 'TtlE "D.o,i;:::, 11\,\(.WuA-L l-012-. 6fDilA-l£=N1 l-0'4D 6rc.,/\L~ . .::::£ E 'B£Lc,1,'\J F'o/2.. U4U-0 lATtc,,,J";:,, (;, ib ::.· 2 :n CPS .:)A=-IZ-,.. Ci10 / {),oco";& :: ..&lt./0 FTz. fee., PE:'.. PRc> ... ,oiz Pi=Prl-J $fo(2.A°" E, If this does not meet with your understanding, please contact us in writing within seven days. THANK YOU. Civil Engineers Structural Engineers Landscape Architects Community Planners Land Surveyors Neighbors 0TACOMA 2215 N. 30th St Suite 300 Tacoma, WA 98403-3305 253.383.2422 253.383.2572 FAX OsEATILE 1200 6th Avenue Suite 1620 Seattle, WA 98101-3123 206.267.2425 206.267.2429 FAX APPENDIX H FEMA Flood Insurance Map · 1 JOINS PANFL 0976 ---->-------------=-a-o._~--NORTt_lEfl.N3 --i uNGTON __ --+_..------ -RENTON WAS1[WATER su~ __ ,------- \ ~ \ . !~ 7 r NE ZONE AH-f::; l lfl lGi I ~ I\~ " ,- h "' 21ST , Cu!,ert)· I NE AH , I ([L 161 II TREATMENT PLANT -+---z- \ .. ·~·. ~ /)< ....r--_ \ ZONE X -. ' \ \ . I / \ ( \· --. -l---1----- l l ' ZONE X ZONE X SOUTHWEST ZONE X O\ s ~ w " 122°13'07" ----~----.---------.-----T-~------~-------r, 47°28'07" °" SW 12TH ~ l ~\f'J 15___:_:..:.- SIREET ~ ----=" :--~:-.--':!': ',"i'_:;_rc::2' :e 16TH "" u w 2 w ~ 1;,/ 19 I ,- ~ w ,- C, ~ ~ G'C' SW 29TH ; 9 STRE:El 1- ~ w ~ ~ 4 ;, ZONE X w lmfm!ii~ ~ C, z w > 4 0 z :0 ,:..vBZ,wJl,ffi?:,;;/;S;;S:: L..!r4D A.,V&-T&D 500 • APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET 0 500 FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON AND INCORPORATED AREAS PANEL 978 OF 1725 [St.E MAP iNDEX FOR f-'AN[LS !'..:01 P'i:NlLD1 !(ENT. CITY OF A~NTON. CITY OI' 1UKWILA. CITY OF NUMBER ~~~ SUFFIX 530080 0078 530083 VfJ78 530091 0978 MAP NUMBER 53033C0978 F MAP REVISED: MAY 16, 1995 Federal Emergency Management Agency This is an official copy of a portion of the above referenced flood map. It wcis extracted using F-MIT On-Line. This map does not reflect changes or amendments which may ha.e been made subs·equent to the date on the title block For the latest product informat,on about National Flood Insurance Program flood maps check the FEMA Flood Map Store~ www m,c;c fc-ma gov ' ~9 Cul,en 1 , ZONE AH - ([L 16) . ZONE X J :' ~ I <( z -.J ~ 0 f- "' z 1~ :J w f-a: §;! lL LL 0 0 \ >->- t:: I t:: u u 1 I I ~\ I / ,-1~ w ~~-~ Q :I] () ~~ I I : I ,0 SI ~,,1 w l. s ~ I @ ~ ! ZONE AE 25 CITY OF RENTON 530088 0 'I SOUTHWEST / / 39TH ~ v; cc G "' SW 29TH STREET 0 STREET ~ v; ~ I ~ " 0 v; w " z w " 0 z ::, 1, ZONE X 34TH S1REET 30 c, ,. CT: u '~ I,., ~ I" :t c ' ZONE AE --_ / ) / /~-~-~-l~L~_,_.,../ I • APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET 500 0 500 FIRM FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON AND INCORPORATED AREAS PANEL 978 OF 1725 {:',(E MA~ INOE:X rOR l'ANFl s NC r PRINT[Cj ~~T/\IN~ COMMUNITY. KENT C!lY OF RENTON CITY OF TUKWILA. CITY OF NUMB0_ PANE~ _SUFF:X '.;30080 0978 530088 os1e ~30091 0978 MAP NUMBER 53033C0978 F MAP REVISED: MAY 16, 1995 Federal Emergency Management Agency This is an ol'ficial copy of a portion of the abo= referenced flood map It was extracted us,ng F-MIT On-Line This map does not reflect changes or amendments which may ha~ been made subsequent to the date on the title block For the late-st prodvct information about National Flood insurance Program nood maps check the FEMA Flood Map Store al www msc fem.i gov EXHIBIT 1 Inspection Logs Inspection Logs On the following pages are sample inspection logs. These are only samples. Your inspection logs can be of your own design There must be an inspection log for each BMP. The log must indicate: a. The date of the inspection. b. Noted conditions. c. If any discrepancies are noted indicate: 1) Who is supposed to make the correction? 2) The date by which the corrections will be completed. Cedar River Corporate Park Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Inspection and Maintenance Report Form To be completed at least once every 7 calendar days and within 24 hours of the end of a storm event greater than 0.5 inch. Inspector: Date: Inspector's Qualifications: Days since last rainfall: ____ Amount of last rainfall: inches Soil Stabilization Measures Location on site Date of Last Stabilized Stabilized With Condition Disturbance (Yes/No) Stabilization required: To be performed by: ___________ _ On or before: -------- Date Cedar River Corporate Park Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Inspection and Maintenance Report Form Perimeter Structural Controls Silt Fence Has Silt Is Fence Is There Evidence of Reached 1/3 Location Properly Washout or of Fence Hei<1ht? Secured? Overtopping? Maintenance required for silt fence and straw bales: To be performed by: ___________ _ On or before: _______ _ Cedar River Corporate Park Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Inspection and Maintenance Report Form In let Protection Date Depth of Sediment Condition of Fabric Maintenance required for inlet protection: To be performed by: ___________ _ On or before: -------- Date Cedar River Corporate Park Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Inspection and Maintenance Report Form Stabilized Construction Entrance Does much Is the gravel Does all traffic use the sediment get clean or is it stabilized tracked on to filled with entrance to leave road? sediment? the site? Maintenance required for stabilized construction entrance: Is the culvert beneath the entrance working? To be performed by: ___________ _ On or before: _______ _ Date Cedar River Corporate Park Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Inspection and Maintenance Report Form Check Dams Evidence of Sediment Higher Erosion or Significant than 1/2 Sump Submergence Erosion Between Depth? Around the Edges Dams? of the Dam? Maintenance required for check dams: Is There Evidence of Washout? To be performed by: ___________ _ On or before: _______ _ Cedar River Corporate Park Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Inspection and Maintenance Report Form Changes required to the pollution prevention plan: Reasons for changes: I certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction or supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel properly gathered and evaluated the information submitted. Based on my inquiry of the person or persons who manage the system, or those persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the information submitted is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete. I am aware that there are signification penalties for submitting false information, including the possibility of fine and imprisonment for knowing violations. Signature:-----------------Date: 9.0 BOND QUANTITIES, FACILITY SUMMARY, AND DECLARATION OF COVENANT See the enclosed following pages. 9.A Bond Quantity (To be included with Final Report) 9.B.1 Facility Summary Sheet 9.B.2 Technical Information Report (TIR) Worksheets 9.C Record of Covenant (To be included with Final Report) 18 mmm11 9.A Bond Quantity (To be included with Final Report) 19 mmmm 9.8.1 Facility Summary Sheet 20 mmm11 KING COUNTY, WASJll'JGTON. SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL STORM\VATER ,FACILITY SU:\t:\JARY SHEET DOES Permit Number -~.1-____ _ (provide one Stormwater Facility Summary Sheet per Natural Discharge Location) Overview: Date 1Z/i5}txo~ Downstream Drainage Basins Major Basin Name ::lpr1n3\:xtDlL CeEt,IL Immediate Basin Name , ---------___ ,_ Flow Control: Flow Control Facility Name/Number Th:, Vo.uD -~=~~==~------- Fa c i Ii t y Location tJ01<r1-l J'.cfl;:::,f (bG!FJ E.2 C}F PA IZC£L- If none, Flow control provided in rcgionahhared facility (give location) tsloRn-J f(-nT (Ol<•-K,c cf i?ef<{Ei No flow control required Exemption number General Facility Information: Type/Number of detention facilities: Type/Number of infiltration facilities: 1 ponds ~-----ponds vaults tanks --- tanks trenches --- Control Structure Location Type of Control Structure _ 2-1Z'' D1(\ f\4A;J 1-lOLE/'2 Number of Orifices/Restrictions 2 Efl Size of Orifice/Restriction: No. 2 No. 3 No.4 J..k,R.TH :;Jo 1 :,. 33'' 0,t"_ l''/1~) -------- Flow Control Performance Standard Lf 1.eE L--'JL 2005 Surface Water Design Manual 1 }Jc,. I f.Jo. l z I/ I/ l/05 KING COUNTY, WASIIINCiTU1', Sil/FACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL Live Storage Volume Depth _______ Volume Factor of Safety Number of Acres Served )-Z, ~---__ Number of Lots ____ iJ_/ 13__ ___ _ Dam Safety Regulations (Washington Stat,· Ucpartmcnt of Ecology) Reservoir Volume above natural grade Depth or Reservoir above natural grade Facility Summary Sheet Sketch All detention, infiltration and water quality facilities must include a detailed sketch. (11 "xl 7" reduced size plan sheets may be uscJ) Ii l/05 2005 Surface Water Design Manual 1 KING COUNTY. W.ASJl!>..:GTON. SURfACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL \Valer Quality: Type/l'iumher of water quality facilities/BMPs: 2 biofiltration swale large) above large) --- --- (regular@or continuous inflow) combined dctcntion/wctpond (wet pond po1iion basic or large) combined dctention/wetvault ___ filter strip ___ flow dispersion ___ !'arm management plan ___ landscape management plan oil/water separator --- (baffle or coalescing plate) Liner'/ catch basin inserts: --- Manufacturer ___ sand filter (basic or large) ___ sand filter, linear (basic or --- ----sand filter vault (basic or sand bed depth ___ (inches) stom1water wetland storm filter ___ wetpond (basic or large) wetvault ls facility Lined? lf so, what marker is used -------------------- ___ pre-settling pond ___ pre-settling structure: Manufacturer high flow bypass structure (e.g., flow-splitter catch basin) --- source controls --- Design Information Water Quality design flow Q, l ":;> CrS C'Ot"1f;,/_Af£1) "'LA-Water Quality treated volume (sandfilter) ___ --+-'---'----- Water Quality storage volume (wctpool) ______ _!}~/~A~---- Facility Summary Sheet Sketch 2005 Surface Water Design Manual 1/1/05 KING COUNTY. WASHJNCTO'c. Sl,llFACE WATER DESIC,N MANUAL All detention, infiltration and water quality facilities must include a detailed sketch. ( l 1 "x 17" reduced size plan sheets may be used) I /1/0\ 2005 Surface \~later Design Manual a I . ". '1 W ,ITT '-., ~ .. 1 \\r}'' 11-t1 1~ t~ ~i >\g qi:' C i ! ! I> i ' '"! ,1 ~i'if .. " E~~ ~-· ,,; ··" II.I ':, E II= =3~ ~~~~ li~g ~If 0 i,~ EJ,,t i ~ en a· :j:. {:\t. -~~ m II \,!i rj) '•W ·-~ ·<cl i, al r ... tf:™ !!' r .~$ ·, ... ~~ m ·~ !l,lllfj.' ~· ~f .. \I~ -0 --~~ : 1:E~ J--. 1~ f' . " .~ I, i I~ tl 1 · ·•·. s I§ · § [ Ii 1. 1, 1' •,1 ! H !!I~ ~~ ;;l;;I f 1 Jii111 ~I 1,,1.t !' '.!'.!. ' l !,~, a~~I! ~~~: ., 1, :, : · 11 .~· JI " ' ~ ;;_2 tjg f '.::'.:.::? t;C~ l!:!JP: II i ,J ... -r-·-- -~ ., 0 m C > :a . ill I 'ill I I ~·--, .,~ ' '"'"!a· ijijf I ::1 1t ~§ \ ·1 !; l1 ;:<i. • t· :a -< -m :a 0 0 :a -a • -a I ;::Ill: " 1, ! ~···~ ·,j1;1'll () ~ :::tJ 0 :i:,. s-"1j (> -~ ::r z II ._,, >-, trl ~ 0 ~ trl 0 >-l UJ 0 -0 -0 ,. 0 :i:,. r M a i ' -a.i·,:p ~ iii [ E ::::! ,~ m r Ui;· .! -:~ I! ~' ' z ! . Ill . ~ . ' . ,.; .. ~ • -i ,,.,_ . $ 6 • ·- • "' 0 • • ·~ .:!II~,., "' '.!QQI 2 .. ~_ ---!' t!;~i ,, .. " ~ ' IL!!>. ,~:a i I 'I I I ~rl r! ~ ~ l ~ .~~ I I .. '"rti::s~ ~ ~· l]J U:IP\2006\206200 Lind Ave Slte\Exhiblte\206200 Existing Condlllons.dwg, DEVELOPED CONDITIONS, 12/15/2006 9:47:38 AM, lhlll, Oc:e TOS600 HOI_Half-Slza_TAC2.pc3, ANSI B (17.00 x 11.00 Inches). 1:1 9.8.2 Technical Information Report {TIR) Worksheets 21 mmmm KING COUNTY, WASHING TO:\, S LIRF ACE WATER DESIGN MAN LAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET Part 1 PROJECT OWNER AND PROJECT ENGINEER Project Owner ·/AR.RAC10,.J ij, LLC. Phone (ZulJ?J 733-'f,;,()0_ Address /(X)O ;'.:;ECC,u O AvE. jT 3zc,o :5cB'TTLE, LOA, 9B)DY Project Engineer LhN-/-es T. H; I/ Company AHBl Phone / Z-03 l -38':::> -z;j?Z Part 3 TYPE OF PERMIT APPLICATION D Landuse Services Subdivison / Short Subd. / UPD ~ Buildinn Services M/F i(Commerical) I SFR J2.l Clearing and Grading ~ Right-of-Way Use 0 Other Part 5 PLAN AND REPORT INFORMATION Technical Information Report Type of Drainage Review (£0l)i Targeted I (circle): Large Site Date (include revision Vfe. 7oc,Lt., dates): Date of Final: Part 6 ADJUSTMENT APPROVALS Part 2 PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION Project Name j(_J~[·OOJLhlJil!1u'~::,{L~(i9'd1.U'.P'.:._, }:'.V.J:li:IOgllll_l DDES Permit# ---------- Location Township Range SE Section 19 ------- Site ABBFE3S .3?Ljot..j Co-ZS'.5 ~f<CcL ~ ~~~~~~~~--- Part 4 OTHER REVIEWS AND PERMITS D DFWHPA 0 COE404 D DOE Dam Safety ~ FEMA Floodplain D COE Wetlands D Other --- D Shoreline Management }z1 Structural RockeryNault/ la@ D ESA Section 7 Site Improvement Plan (Engr. Plans) Type (circle one): ~ I Modified I II Site Date (include revision Tue.. z z ' (O<.'>C. dates): Date of Final: Type (circle one): Standard / Complex / Preapplication / Experimental / Blanket Description: (include conditions in TIR Section 2) /JI(.) Date of Aooroval: 2005 Surface Water Design Manual 1/1/05 KlNG COLNTY, WASlllNGTON, SLRFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET Part 7 MONITORING REQUIREMENTS Monitoring Required: Yes / No Descri~r ER. 'U, c, . i;: Start Date: Completion Date: Part 8 SITE COMMUNITY AND DRAINAGE BASIN Community Plan: _____________ _ Special District Overlays:------~----------------- Drainage Basin /:70·))1[( brcolL Cm,ftL Stormwater Req u i rement;:J-----"L..,£;2 1_.,/ f<C--LI ~+l--'±t=__----,,__1-Z-'-'cr::t2""~_,,_!::il.ecC..::..:·-1:'.:k\.~lt:!(.l~.u~<e,:c' A='--=-------- Part 9 ONSITE AND ADJACENT SENSITIVE AREAS ,.El River/Stream :Spr\~ broolL D Lake )El Wetlands __________ _ 0 Closed Depression ~ Floodplain -/O_D_'/_C----cr*---- 0 Other ______________ _ Part 10 SOILS D Steep Slope ________ _ D Erosion Hazard _______ _ D Landslide Hazard ______ _ D Coal Mine Hazard ______ _ D Seismic Hazard _______ _ 0 Habitat Protection ______ _ D _________ _ Soil Type Slopes Erosion Potential J...l Oi-,\E PEA, (Oly) . 8 lli2v1u1'l/l (C¥ ... 0 J i/(1Clc,l,e_rc9: -:xi, I 0 -'O <> 0 High Groundwater Table (within 5 feet) D Sole Source Aquifer D Seeps/Springs D Other _________ _ D Additional Sheets Attached 2005 Surface Water IJcsign Manual 2 l / l /05 KINC, COUNTY, WASHINC;HJN, SLRFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET Part 11 DRAINAGE DESIGN LIMITATIONS REFERENCE LIMITATION/ SITE CONSTRA!i~T D Core 2 -Offsite Anal~sis 0 Sensitive/Critical Areas D SEPA D Other D 0 Additional Sheets Attached Part 12 TIR SUMMARY SHEET (provide one TIR Summary Sheet per Threshold Discharqe Area) Threshold Discharge Area: (name or description) Core Requirements (all 8 apply) Discharae at Natural Location Number of Natural Discharae Locations: ? Offsite Analysis Level: 1 /@/ 3 dated: Flow Control Level: 1 /(].)/ 3 or Exemption Number (incl. facility summary sheet) Small Site BMPs Conveyance System Spill containment located at: Erosion and Sediment Control ESC Site Supervisor: Contact Phone: To bE Pf<'cVtlJFD After Hours Phone· Maintenance and Operation Responsibility: (Private j / Public If Private. Maintenance Loa Required: Yes / No Financial Guarantees and Provided Yes / No Liability Water Quality Type: (Basil}/ Sens. Lake / Enhanced Basicm / Bog (include facility summary sheet) or Exemption No. Landscape Manaqement Plan: Yes / No Special Requirements (as annlicable) Area Specific Drainage Type: CDA / SDO /MOP/ BP/ LMP / Shared Fae. / None Reauirements Name: Floodplain/Floodway Delineation Type: Ma1or / Minor / Exemption / None 100-year Base Flood Elevation (or range): J <..: Datum \=E:-1''11\ A Flood Protection Facilities Describe tJ / A Source Control Describe landuse: ;J /A (comm./industrial landuse) Describe any structural controls: 2005 Surface Water Design Manual 1/1/05 I KING COUNTY, WASHIJ\GTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET Oil Control High-use Site: Yes/~ Treatment BMP: Maintenance Agreement: Yes/@) with whom? Other DrainaQe Structures Describe: ?ol'V\p \:x6ii'\ Part 13 EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS DURING CONSTRUCTION Clearing Limits Cover Measures Perimeter Protectic:1 Traffic Area Stabilization Sediment Retention Surface Water Control Dust Control Construction Se uence MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS AFTER CONSTRUCTION Di\ Stabilize Exposed Surfaces 0 Remove and Restore Temporary ESC Facilities ~ Clean and Remove All Silt and Debris Ensure Operation of Permanent Facilities 0 Flag Limits of SAO and open space preservation areas D Other _________ _ Part 14 STORMWATER FACILITY DESCRIPTIONS (Note: Include Facilitv Summarv and Sketch\ Flow Control Type/Description Water Quality Tvne/Descrintion ~ Detention vc"-1 o ~ Biofiltration bw ~::, ;,,.)( J.e<:;, 0 Infiltration D Wetpool 0 Regional Facility 0 Media Filtration 0 Shared Facility D Oil Control 0 Small Site BMPs 0 Spill Control D Other D Small Site BMPs D Other 2005 Surface Water Design Manual 4 1/1/05 KINCi COUNTY, WASHJNC,TON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET Part 15 EASEMENTS/TRACTS Part 16 STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS ~ Drainage Easement j Cast in Place Vault ::J Access Easement Retaining Wall D Native Growth Protection Covenant D Rockery> 4' High D Tract D Structural on Steep Slope D Other D Other Part 17 SIGNATURE OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER I, or a civil engineer under my supervision, have visited the site. Actual site conditions as observed were incorporated into this worksheet and the attached Technical Information Report. To the best of my knowledge the intor:::iatio~ rovided here is accurate. ~Bfr'lc:~ S1nned!Oate 2005 Surface \.\later Design Manual l / l/05 5 9.C Record of Covenant {To be included with Final Report} 22 mmm11 10.0 OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE MANUAL See the enclosed Operations and Maintenance (O&M) sections that follow. 23 mmm11 KING ((ll_:NTY. WASIIIN(,TON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR FLOW CONTROL, CONVEYANCE, AND WQ FACILITIES NO. 1 -DETENTION PONDS Maintenance Defect or Problem Conditions When Maintenance Is Needed Results Expected When Component Maintenance ls Performed General Trash & Debris Any trash and debris which exceed 1 cubic foot Trash and debris cleared from site. per 1.000 square feet (this is about equal to the amount of tr;:ish it would take to fill up one standard size office garbage can). In general, there should be no visual evidence of dumping. Poisonous Vegetation Any poisonous or nuisance vegetation which may No danger of poisonous vegetation or Noxious Weeds constitute a hazard to County personnel or the where County personnel or the public public might normally be. Coordination with Seattle-King County Health Department Contaminants and Oil, gasoline. or other contaminants of one gallon No contaminants present other than Polluhon or mon-:, or ..ir1y <:1mount found that could: a surface film. (Coordination with 1) cause damage to plant, animal, or marine life: Seaitle/King County Health 2) constitute a fire hazard; or 3) be flushed Department) downstr·earn during rain storms. Unmowed If facil1ty 1s locnted 1n private residential area, When mowing is needed, Grass/Ground Cover mowir,g 1s needed when grass exceeds 18 grass/ground cover should be inches in height. In other areas, the general mowed to 2 inches in height. policy 1s to make the pond site match adjacent Mowing of selected higher use areas ground cover and terrain as long as there is no rather than the entire slope may be interference with the function of the facility. acceptable for some situations. Rodent Holes Any evidence of rncJent holes if facility is acting Roden1s destroyed and dam or berm as a dam or berm. or any evidence of water repaired. (Coordination with piping through dam or berm via rodent holes or Seattle/King County Health other causes Department) Insects When insects such as wasps and hornets Insects destroyed or removed from interfere w1tt1 maintenance activities. Mosquito site. Mosquito control: Swallow complaints ;.;ccompanied by presence of high nesting boxes or approved larvicide mosquito larvae concentrations (aquaiic phase). applied. Tree Growth Tree grow1h tt,renlens integrity of berms acting Trees do not hinder maintenance as d;;m1s, doP-s not allow maintenance access, or activities. Harvested trees should interferes with maintenance activity (i.e., slope be recycled into mulch or other mowing, silt removal, vactoring, or equipment beneficial uses (e.g., alders for movements). If trees are a threat to berm firewood). integrity or not interfering with access. leave trees alone. 2005 Surface Water Design Manual -Appendix A I 12412005 A-I APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS n.ow COl\TROL, CONVEYANCE, AND WQ FACILITIES NO. 1 -DETENTION PONDS Maintenance Defect or Problem Conditions When Maintenance Is Needed Results Expected When Component Maintenance Is Performed Side Slopes of Pond Erosion Eroded damage over 2 inches deep where cause Slopes should be stabilized by using of damage 1s still present or where there is appropriate erosion control potential for continued erosion. measure(s); e.g., rock Any erosion observed on a compacted berm reinforcement, planting of grass, embankment. compaction If erosion is occurring on compacted berms a licensed civil engineer should be consulted to resolve source of erosion. Storage Area Sediment Accumulated sediment that exceeds 10% of the Sediment cleaned out to designed designed pond depth. pond shape and depth; pond reseeded if necessary to control erosion. Liner Damage Liner is visible and has more than three %-inch Liner repaired or replaced. (If Applicable) holes in it. Pond Berms (Dikes) Settlement Any pan of berm that has settled 4 inches lower Dike should be built back to the than the design elevation. Settling can be an design elevation. indication of more severe problems with the berm or outlet works. A licensed civil engineer should be consulted to determine the source of the settlement Emergency Tree Growth Tree groVllih on emergency spillways create Trees should be removed. If root Overflow/Spillway blockage problems and may cause failure of the system is small (base less than 4 and Berms over 4 berm due lo ur1controlled overlapping inches) the root system may be left feet in height. Tree growth on berms over 4 feet in height may in place. Otherwise the roots should be removed and the berm restored. lead to p1p1ng through the berm which could lead A licensed civil engineer should be to failure of the berm. consulted for proper berm/spillway restoration. Emergency Rock Missing Only one layer of rock exists above native soil m Replace rocks lo design standards. Overflow/Spillway area five square feet or larger, or any exposure of native soil at the top of out flow path of spillway. Rip-rap on inside slopes need not be replaced. 1/24/2005 2005 Surface Water Design Manual -Appendix A r\-2 APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE RE()t:TRH1INTS FOR FLOW CONTROL, CONVEYANCE, AND WQ F ACJLJTJES NO. 4 -CONTROL STRUCTURE/FLOW RESTRICTOR Maintenance Defect or Problem Condition When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Component Maintenance is Performed General Trash and Debris Distance between debris build-up and bottom of All trash and debris removed. {Includes Sediment) orifice plate is less than 1.5 feet. Structural Damage Structure is not securely attached to manhole Structure securely attached to wall wall and outlet pipe structure should support at and outlet pipe. least 1,000 lbs of up or down pressure Structure is not in upright position (allow up to Structure in correct position. 10% from plumb). Connections to outlet pipe are not watertight and Connections to outlet pipe are water show signs of rust tight; structure repaired or replaced and works as designed. Any holes-other than designed holes-in the Structure has no holes other than structure designed holes. Cleanout Gate Damaged or Missing Cleanout gate is not watertight or is missing Gate is watertight and works as designed. Gate cannot be moved up and down by one Gate moves up and down easily and maintenance person_ is watertight. Chain/rod leading to gate is missing or damaged. Chain is in place and works as designed. Gate 1s rusted over 50% of its surface area. Gate is repaired or replaced to meet design standards. Orifice Plate Damaged or Missing Control device 1s not working properly due to Plate is in place and works as missin~. oul of place, or bent orifice plate. designed. Obstructions Any trc3sf1, debris, sediment, or vegetation Plate is free of all obstructions and blocking the plate. works as designed. Overflow Pipe Obstructions Any tras!1 or debris blocking (or having the Pipe is free of a!I obstructions and potential of blocking) the overflow pipe. works as designed Manhole See "Detention Tanks See "Detention Tanks and Vaults" Table No. 3 See "Detention Tanks and Vaults" and Vaults" Table No. 3 2005 Surface Water Design Manual Appendix A 1/24/2005 I A-5 Al'l'EKDTX A MATNTEKANC:E REQUJREMEKIS 1-1 < JW CONTROL, CONVEYANCE, AND WQ F ACTLTTTES NO. 5 -CATCH BASINS Maintenance Defect or Problem Conditions When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Component Maintenance is performed General Trash & Debris Trash or debris of more than 'h cubic fool which No Trash or debris located (Includes Sediment) is located immediately in front of the catch basin immediately in front of catch basin opening or 1s blocking capacity of the basin by opening more than 1 0%. Trash or debris (in the basin) that exceeds 1 /3 the No trash or debris in the catch depth from the bottom of basin to invert the basin. lowest pipe into or out of the basin Trash or debris 1n any inlet or outlet pipe blocking Inlet and outlet pipes free of trash or more than 1 /,3 of its height. debris. Dead animals or vegetation that could generate No dead animals or vegetation odors that could cause complaints or dangerous present within the catch basin. gases (e.g .. methone). Deposits of garbage exceeding 1 cubic foot in No condition present which would volume attract or support the breeding of insects or rodents Structure Damage to Corner of frame extends more than % inch past Frame is even with curb. Frame and/or Top curb fcJce into the street (If applicable) Slab Top slab has holes larger than 2 square inches Top slab is free of holes and cracks. or cracks wider than ';;, inch (intent is to make sure ali material is running into basin). Frame not s1lt1r1g flush on top slab, i.e., Frame is sitting flush on top slab. separation of more than :Y., inch of the frame from the lop slab. Cracks in Basin Cracks wider t11an % inch and longer than 3 feet, Basin replaced or repaired to design Walls/Bottom any evidence of soil particles entering catch standards. basin through cracks, or maintenance person judges that structure is unsound. Cracks wider than /2 inch and longer than 1 foot No cracks more than 1 /4 inch wide at at the joint of any inleUoutlet pipe or any the joint of inleUoutlet pipe. evidence of soil particles entering catch basin through cracks. SettlemenU Basin has settled more than 1 inch or has rotated Basin replaced or repaired to design Misalignment more than 2 inches out of alignment. standards. Fire Hazard Presence of chemicals such as natural gas, oil No flammable chemicals present. and gasoline. Vegetation Vegetation growing across and blocking more No vegetation blocking opening to than 10% of the basin opening. basin. Vegetation growing in inleUoutlet pipe joints that No vegetation or root growth is more than 6 inches tall and less than 6 inches present. apart Pollution Nonflammable chemicals of more than 1h cubic No pollution present other than foot per three feet of basin length. surface film Catch Basin Cover Cover Not in Place Cover 1s missing or only partially in place. Any Catch basin cover is closed open cnlch hasin requires maintenance. Locking Mechanism Mechanism c;mnot be opened by on Mechanism opens with proper tools. Not Working maintenance person with proper tools. Bolts into frame have less than Y::, inch of thread. Cover Difficult to One maintenance person cannot remove lid after Cover can be removed by one Remove applying 80 lbs. of lift; intent is keep cover from maintenance person. sealing off access to maintenance. Ladder Ladder Rungs Unsafe Ladder is unsafe due to missing rungs, Ladder meets design standards and misalignment, rust. cracks, or sharp edges. a!lows maintenance person safe access. 1/24/2005 2005 Surface Water Design Manual -Appendix A A-6 APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE RF()\ IRl'\IF"JTS FOR FLOW CONTROL CONVEYANCE. AND WQ FACILJTTES NO. 5-CATCH BASINS Maintenance Defect or Problem Conditions When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Component Maintenance is performed Metal Grates Unsafe Grate Grate with opening wider than 7 /8 inch. Grate opening meets design (If Applicable) Opening standards. Trash and Debris Trash and debris that is blocking more than 20% Grate free of trash and debris. of grate surfc1ce Damaged or Missing. Grate missing or broken member(s) of the grate Grate is in place and meets design standards. NO. 6 -DEBRIS BARRIERS (E.G., TRASH RACKS) Maintenance Defect or Problem Condition When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Component Maintenance is Performed. General Trash and Debris Trash or debris that is plugging more than 20% Barrier clear to receive capacity of the openings in the barrier. flow. Metal Damaged/Missing Bars are bent out of shape more than 3 inches. Bars in place with no bends more Bars. than .Y,. inch. Bars cJre missing or entire barrier missing. Bars in place according to design. Bars are loose and rust is causing 50% Repair or replace barrier to design deterior;:ition to any part of barrier standards. NO. 7 -ENERGY DISSIPATERS Maintenance Defect or Problem Conditions When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Component Maintenance is Performed. External: Rock Pad Missing or Moved Only one layer of rock exists above native soil in Replace rocks to design standards. Rock area five square feet or larger, or any exposure of nat1VP. soil Dispersion Trench Pipe Plugged with Accumulated sed1rnent that exceeds 20% of the Pipe cleaned/f!ushed so that it Sediment design depth matches design. Not Discharging Visual evidence of water discharging at Trench must be redesigned or Water Properly concentrated points along trench (normal rebuilt to standards. condition is a "sheet flow" of water along trench). Intent 1s to prevent erosion damage. Perforat10ns Plugged. Over% of perfor..it1ons in pipe are plugged with Clean or replace perforated pipe. debns nnd sed1men1 Water Flows Out Top Maintenance person observes water flowing out Facility must be rebuilt or of "Distributor" Catch during any storm less lhan the design storm or redesigned to standards. Basin. its causing or appears likely to cause damage. Receiving Area Over-Water in receiving area is causing or has No danger of landslides. Saturated potential of causing landslide problems. Internal: Manhole/Chamber Worn or Damaged Structure d1ss1pating flow detenorates to}'.. or Replace structure to design Post. Baffles, Side of original size or nny concentrated worn spot standards. Chamber exceeding one scuare foot which would make structure unsound. 2005 Surface Water Design Manual -Appendix A 1/24/2005 ;\-7 APP!'NDIX A M.~INTENANCE REQCIREMENTS fl U\V COKTROL, CONVEYANCE, AND WQ FACILITIES NO. 8 -FENCING Maintenance Defect or Problem Conditions When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Component Maintenance is Performed General Missing or Broken Any defect in the fence that permits easy entry to Parts in place to provide adequate Parts a facility. security. Erosion Erosion more than 4 inches high and 12-18 No opening under the fence that inches wide permitting an opening under a fence. exceeds 4 inches in height. Wrre Fences Damaged Parts Post out of plumb more than 6 inches. Post plumb to within 1% inches. Top ri3ils bent rnore than 6 inches. Top rail free of bends greater than 1 inch. Any prn1 of fence (mcluding post, top rails, and Fence is aligned and meets design fabric) more than 1 foot out of design alignment. standards. Missing or loose tension wire. Tension wire in place and holding fabric. Missing or loose barbed wire that is sagging Barbed wire in place with less than more than 2 1 /, inches between posts 3/.i inch sag between post. Extension mm missing, broken, or bent out of Extension arm in place with no shape more them 1 :,-; inches bends larger than :Y,, inch. Deteriorated Paint or Part or parts ttrnt have a rusting or scaling Structurally adequate posts or parts Protective Coating condition that has affected structural adequacy. with a uniform protective coaling. Openings in Fabric Openings in fabric ;::ire such that an 8~inch No openings in fabric. diameter ball could fit through. N0.9-GATES Maintenance Defect or Problem Conditions When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Component Maintenance is Performed General Damaged or Missing Missing gate or locking devices. Gates and Locking devices in place. Members Broken or missing hinges such that gate cannot Hinges intact and lubed. Gate is be easily opened and closed by a maintenance working freely. person Gate is out of plumb more than 6 inches and Gate is aligned and vertical. more than 1 foot out of design alignment. Missing stretcher bar, stretcher bands, and ties. Stretcher bar, bands, and ties in place. Openings in Fabric See "Fencing" Table No. 8 See "Fencing" Table No. 8 1/2412005 2005 Surface Water Design Manual -Appendix A A-8 APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE REQUREMENTS FOR FLOW CONTROL, CONVEYANCE, AND WQ F AC!LITTES NO. 10 -CONVEYANCE PIPES AND DITCHES Maintenance Defect or Problem Conditions When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Component Maintenance is Performed Pipes Sediment & Debris AccumulatcC sediment that exceeds 20% of the Pipe cleaned of all sediment and diameter of the pipe debris. Vegetation Vegetation that reduces free movement of water All vegetation removed so water through pipes. flows freely through pipes. Damaged Protective coat1n~ 1s damaged; rust is causing Pipe repaired or replaced. more than 50% deterioration to any part of pipe. Any dent that decreases the cross section area Piµe repaired or replaced. of pipe by mmc thun 20%. Open Ditches Trash & Debris Trash and debris exceeds 1 cubic foot per 1,000 Trash and debris cleared from square feet of ditch and slopes. ditches. Sediment Accumulated sediment that exceeds 20% of the Ditch deaned/flushed of all design depth. sediment and debris so that it matches design. Vegetation Vegetation that reduces free movement of water Water flows freely through ditches through ditches. Erosion Damage to See "Detention Ponds" Table No. 1 See "Detention Ponds'· Table No. 1 Slopes Rock Lining Out of Maintenance person can see native soil beneath Replace rocks to design standards. Place or Missing (If the rock lining Applicable). NO. 11 -GROUNDS (LANDSCAPING) Maintenance Defect or Problem Conditions When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Component Maintenance is Performed General Weeds Weeds growing in more than 20% of the Weeds present in less than 5% of (Nonpoisonous, not landscaped area (trees and shrubs only). the landscaped area. noxious) Safety Hazard Any presence of poison ivy or other poisonous No poisonous vegetation present in vegetation landscaped area. Trash or Litter Paper, cans. bottles, totaling more than 1 cubic Area clear of litter. foot within a landscaped area (trees and shrubs only) of 1,000 square feet. Trees and Shrubs Damaged Limbs or parts of trees or shrubs that are split or Trees and shrubs with less than 5% broken which affect more than 25% of the total of total foliage with split or broken foliage ot the tree or shrub. limbs. Trees or shrubs that have been blown down or Tree or shrub in place free of injury. knocked over Trees or shrubs which are not adequately Tree or shrub in place and supported or arc leaning over, causing exposure adequately supported; remove any of the roots. dead or diseased trees. 2005 Surface Water Design Manual -Appendix A 1/24/2005 A-9 APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS f LllW CONTROL, CONVEYANCE, AJ\D WQ f ACILTTJES NO. 12 -ACCESS ROADS Maintenance Defect or Problem Condition When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Component Maintenance is Performed General Trash and Debris Trash cmd debris exceeds 1 cubic fool per 1,000 Roadway free of debris which could square feet (i.e., trash and debris would fill up damage tires. one standnrds size garbage can). Blocked Roadway Debris which could damage vehicle tires (glass Roadway free of debris which could or meta!) damage tires. Any obstruction which reduces clearance above Roadway overhead clear to 14 feet road surface to less than 14 feet. high. Any obstruc:t1on restricting the access to a 10-to Obstruction removed to allow at 12-foot w1dH1 for a distance of more than 12 feet least a 12-foo\ access. or any point rP.strict1ng access to \ess than a 10- foot width Road Surface Settlement, Potholes, When any suriacc defect exceeds 6 inches in Road surface uniformly smooth with Mush Spots. Ruts depth ;-md 6 square feet in area. In general, any no evidence of settlement, potholes, surface defect which hinders or prevents mush spots, or ruts. maintenance access. Vegetation in Road Weeds growing in the road surface tha1 are more Road surface free of weeds ta!ler Surface than 6 inches tall and less than 6 inches tall and than 2 inches. less than 6 inches apart within a 400-square foot area. Modular Grid Build-up of sediment mildly contaminated with Removal of sediment and disposal Pavement petroleum hydrocarbons. in keeping with Health Department recommendations for mildly contaminated soils or catch basin sediments. Shoulders and Erosion Damage Erosion within 1 fool of the roadway more than 8 Shoulder free of erosion and Ditches inches wide and G inches deep. matching the surrounding road. Weeds and Brush Weeds and brush exceed 1B inches in height or Weeds and brush cul to 2 inches in hinder maintenance access. height or cleared in such a way as to allow maintenance access. 1/24/21105 2005 Surface Water Design Manual Appendix A A-10 APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE REQl:IRFMl'NTS FOR FLOW CONTROL, CONVEYANCE, AND WQ FACTLJTTES NO. 13 -BASIC BIOFIL TRA TION SWALE Maintenance Defect or Problem Condition When Maintenance is Needed Recommended Maintenance to Component Correct Problem Swale Section Sediment Sediment depth exceeds 2 inches Remove sediment deposits on grass Accumulation on treatment area of the b1oswale Grass When finished, swale should be level from side to side and drain freely toward outlet. There should be no areas of standing water once inflow has ceased. Standing Water When water stands 1n the swa!e between storms Any of the following may apply: and does not drain freely remove sediment or trash blockages, improve grade from head to foot of swale, remove clogged check darns, add underdrains or convert to a wet biofiltration swale. Constant Baseflow When small qucmti1ies of water continually flow Add a low-flow pea-gravel drain the through the swale, even when it has been dry for length of the swale or bypass the weeks, and an eroded, muddy channel has baseflow around the swale. formed 1n thP. swale bottom. Poor Vegetation When gr..-Jss 1s sparse or bare or eroded patches Determine why grass growth is poor Coverage occur in more than 10% of the swale bottom and correct that condition. Re-plant with plugs of grass from the upper slope: plant in the swale bottom at 8-inch intervals, or re-seed into loosened, fertile soil. Defective Vegetation When the grass becomes excessively tall Mow vegetation or remove nuisance (greater than 1 O inches) or when nuisance weeds vegetation so that flow not impeded. and other vegetation starts to take over. Grass should be mowed to a height of 3 to 4 inches. Remove grass clippings. Excessive Shading Grass grovvth I'.:: poor because sunlight does not If possible, trim back over-hanging reach swnle limbs, remove brushy vegetation on adjacent slopes. Trash and Debris Trash and debris accumulated in the bioswale. Remove trash and debris from Accumulation bioswale. Erosion/Scouring Eroded or scoured swale bottom due to flow For ruts or bare areas less than 12 channelization, or higher flows. inches wide, repair the damaged area by filling with crushed gravel. The grass will creep in over the rock in time. If bare areas are large, generally greater than 12 inches wide, the swale should be re-graded and re-seeded. For smaller bare areas, overseed when bare spots are evident, or take plugs of grass from the upper slope and plant in the swale bottom at 8-inch inter,;als. Inlet/Outlet Sediment and Debris Inlet/outlet oref!s clogged with sediment and/or Remove malenal so that there is no debris. clogging or blockage in the inlet and outlet area. Flow Spreader Concentrated Flow Flow spreader uneven or clogged so that flows Level the spreader and clean so that are not uniformly distributed through entire swale flows are spread evenly over entire width. swale width. 2005 Surface Water Design Manual -Appendix A 1124/2005 A-11 APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS Fl .OW CONTROL, CONVEYANCE, A;.:D WQ f ACIL!TIES NO. 14-WET BIOFILTRATION SWALE Maintenance Defect or Problem Condition When Maintenance is Needed Recommended Maintenance to Component Correct Problem Swale Section Sediment Sediment depth exceeds 2 inches in 10% of the Remove sediment deposits in Accumulation swale treatment area. treatment area. Water Depth Water not retained to a depth of about 4 inches Build up or repair outlet berm so that during the wet season. water is retained in the wet swale. Defective Wetland VegetcJtion becomes sparse and does not Determine cause of lack of vigor of Vegetation provide adequate filtration, OR vegetation is vegetation and correct. Replant as crowded out by very dense clumps of cattail needed. For excessive cattail which do not allow water to flow through the grovvth, cut cattail shoots back and clumps compost off site. Note: normally wetland vegetation does not need to be harvested unless die-back is causing oxygen depletion in downstream waters Trash and Debris Trash and debris accumulated in the wet swa\e. Remove trash and debris from wet Accurnulatlon swale. Erosion/Scouring Swale has eroded or scoured due to flow Check design flows to assure swale channelization, or higher flows. is large enough 1o handle flows. Bypass excess flows or enlarge swale. Replant eroded areas with fibrous-rooted plants such as Juncus effusus (soft rush} in wet areas or snowberry (Symphoricarpos afbus) in dryer areas. Inlet/Outlet Sediment and Debris Inlet/outlet area clogged with sediment and/or Remove clogging or blockage in the debris inlet and outlet areas. N0.15-FILTER STRIP Maintenance Defect or Problem Condition When Maintenance is Needed Recommended Maintenance to Component Correct Problem Grass Strip Sediment Sediment depth exceeds 2 inches. Remove sediment deposits, re.level Accumulation on so slope is even and flows pass Grass evenly through strip. Defective Vegetation When the grass becomes excessively tall Mow grass, control nuisance (greater than 10 inches) or when nuisance weeds vegetation such that flow not and other vegetation starts to take over. impeded. Grass should be mowed to a height between 3-4 inches. Trash and Debris Trash and debris accumulated on the filter strip. Remove trash and debris from filter. Accumulation Erosion/Scouring Eroded or scoured areas due to flow For ru1s or bare areas less than 12 channel1zat1on, or higher flows. inches wide, repair the damaged area by filling with crushed gravel. The grass will creep in over the rock in time. If bare areas are large, generally greater than 12 inches wide, the filler strip should be re- graded and re-seeded. For smaller bare areas, overseed when bare spots are evident. Flow Spreader Concentrated Flow Flow spreader uneven or clogged so that flows Level the spreader and clean so that are not uniformly distributed through entire filter flows are spread evenly over entire width. filter width. [/24/2005 2005 Surface Water Design Manual -Appendix A A-12 11.0 CONCLUSION This analysis is based on data and records either supplied to or obtained by AHBL. These documents are referenced within the text of the analysis. The analysis has been prepared using procedures and practices within the standard accepted practices of the industry. Charles "Ted" Hill, E.l.T. Project Engineer CTH/lsk/sca December 2006 K: \Prime\ Yr _2006 \206 200 Lind Ave\STORM\Reports\206 200tir-w p. doc 206200Rep Storm Drainage 061212.doc 24 mmmm T/1(:t),H/, 2215 North 30th Street Suite 300 Tacarna, WA 98403"3350 253.383.2422 TFI 253.363.2572 FA( 1200 61h Avenue Suite 1620 Seattle, WA 98101·3123 206.267.2425 'LL 206.267.2429 IAX www.ahbf.com , , GEOTECHNICAL REPORT Cedar River Corporate Park SW 21st Street and Lind Avenue SW Renton, Washington Project No. T -5996 Terra Associates, Inc. Prepared for: TARRAGON Seattle, Washington December 7, 2006 TERRA ASSOCIATES, Inc. Conc;ultants ,n Geotechnical Engineering, Geology and [1iv11onmental Earth Scie.r.ce.s December 7, 2006 Project No. T-5996 Mr. Murphy McCullough TARRAGON 1000 Second Avenue, Suite 3200 Seattle, Washington 98104 Subject: References: Geotechnical Report Cedar River Corporate Park SW 21st Street and Lind Avenue SW Renton, Washington 1. Report of Soil Investigation. Proposed Storage Terminal, Renton, Washington, prepared by Dames and Moore. dated May 24, 1968 2. Report of Supplemental Investigation. Proposed Warehouse/Office Building Site, Lind Avenue, Renton, Washington, prepared by Atlas Geotechnical Engineering, lnc., dated April 15, 1985 Dear Mr. McCullough: As requested, we have conducted a geotechnical engineermg study for the subject project. The attached report presents our findings and recommendations for the geotechnical aspects of project design and construction. Results of our field exploration confirm soil conditions as indicated by previous site studies and summarized in the referenced reports. We observed eight to te1, feet of silty sand/sandy silt fill overlying native soils composed of organic silt and peat followed by interbedded alluvial layers of sandy silt, silt, and silty sands. We also observed groundwater seepage in our test pits at depths of 9 to 14 feet below current site grades. 1n our opinion, the existmg fill will provide suilable immediate support for conventional spread footing foundations. However, the immediate organic silt and peat layers will be subject to consolidation settlement due to stresses imposed by the spread footings. If the risk for distortional settlement cannot be tolerated, a majority of the potential settlement can be mitigated by surcharging the building sites. Detailed reconunendations for surcharging the building pads and design of foundations along with other geotechnical design considerations are presented m the attached report. 12525 Willows Road, Suite 101, Kirkland, Washington 98034 Phone (425) 821-7777 • Fax (425) 821-4334 Mr. Murphy McCullough December 7, 2006 We trust the information presented rs suffic•ent for your cunent needs. If you have any questions or require additional information, please call. Project No. T-5996 Page No. iiO TABLE OF CONTENTS Page "lo. 1.0 Project Descnpt10n........... . .... 1 2.0 Scope of Work.... . .................................... 1 3.0 Site Conditions. .................... . ... 2 3.1 Surface..... . ........................................... 2 3.2 Subsurface......... . ... 2 3 .3 Groundwater...... . ... 3 4.0 Seismic .................. . ............ 3 5.0 Discussion and Recommendat,ons ............ 3 5.1 General.............. ................................................................................ . ..... 3 5.2 Site Preparation and Gradmg .. . ................................... 4 5.3 Excavations ....... .. . ........................................................................................ 6 5.4 Foundations...... . ............................................................................ 7 5.5 Slabs-on-Grade.... . .............................................. 7 5.6 Stom1water Detention Pond ..................................... 8 5. 7 Drainage ................. 9 5.8 Utilities. . ....................... 9 5.9 Pavements.. .................................. . ............ 9 6.0 Additional Services ..... ... ........ .................. . ............ 9 7.0 Limitations Figures Vicinity Map .................................. . Exploration Location Plan ................. . Typical Settlement Marker Detail. ...... . Typical Wall Drainage Detail ............. . Appendix Field Exploration and Laboratory Testing ... Test Pit Logs By Others .................... . ····································································· 10 ........................................................................ Figure 1 . .............................................. Figure 2 ........... Figure 3 . .. Figure 4 . ....................................... Appendix A . ....................................... Appendix B Geotechnical Report Cedar River Corporate Park SW 21st Street and Lind Avenue SW Renton, Washington LO PROJECT DESCRIPTION The approximately 11.5-acre site 1s located between SW 21st and SW 23rd streets, east of Lind Avenue SW in Renton, Washington. Site development will mclude constructmg 4 office structures each approximately 33,000 square feet in size. Specific building design i11fom1ation is not yet available; however, we expect the buildings will be constructed using µrecast concrete tilt-up wall panels with interior isolated colunms supporting the roof structure and possible mezzanine levels. Floors will be constructed at grade at elevations near current site grades. Structural loading is expected to be light to modcrale, with isolated colunms carrying loads of 80 to I 00 kips, and bearing walls carrying 6 to 8 kips per foot. Stonnwater wi11 be collected and routed for treatment and controlled discharge from a detention pond located in the northeastern panhandle of the site. Specific pond construction/design information 1s not yet available; however, we expect the pond will be constructed pnmanly by excavations extending 8 to 12 feet below current site grades. The recommendations in the following sections of this report are based on our understanding of the preceding design features. We should review design drnwmgs as they become available to verify that our recommendations have been properly interpreted and to supplement them, if requ1ted. 2.0 SCOPE OF WORK Our work was completed in accordance with our au'.honzed proposal, dated October 23, 2006. Accordingly, on November I, 2006, we excavated 8 test pits to depths of 13 to 15 feet below existing surface grades. Using the results of our subsurface exploration along with existing soils data from previous studies performed at the site in 1968 and 1985, we performed analyses to develop geotechnical engineering recommendations for proJect design and construction. Specifica11y, this report addresses the following: • Sml and groundwater conditions • Seismic • Site preparation and grading • Excavations • Foundation support alternatives • Slab-on-grade support • Drainage • Utilities • Pavements December 7, 2006 Project No. T-5996 It should be noted that recommendations outlmcd m this report regarding drainage are associated with soil strength, des-ign earth pressures, erosion, anC stahility. Design and performance issues with respect to moisture as it relates to the structure environment (1.e., humidity, mildew, mold) is beyond Terra Associates' purview. A bu tiding envelope specialist or contactor should he consulted to address these issues, as needed. 3.0 SITE CONDITIONS 3.] Surface The project site is located southeast of the mtersectio~ of SW 21st Street and Lind Avenue SW in Renton, Washington. The approximate location of the si le is shown on Figure I. The site is nearly rectangular and includes a small panhandle parcel that forms the sites northeastern comer. The site is currently vacant with surface vegetation consisting of deciduous trees with moderate blackberry and brush understory. The site is elevated above adpcent parcels to the north, east, and south and at grade with Lmd Avenue to the west. The site was filled in the late 1960s in preparation for developing the site as a fuel storage facility. Previous exploration completed at the stte by others in 1985, indicated fill depths of 8 to 10 feet across the property. 3.2 Subsurface Soil conditions we observed at the recent test pit excavations confirm the earlier site studies. In general, we observed approximately nine to ten feet of fill material composed of silty sand and sandy silt mixed in areas with fractured fragments of bedrock. Large boulder sized (two-to four-foot diameter) bedrock fragments were observed below three to four feet at all test pns. This ft]] overlies the original surface vegetation which appears to have mcluded some small trees as logs were observed at a few of the test pits. Underlying the fill and original organic surface layer, we observed a two-to four-foot layer of organic silt and peat. Previous test pits excavated in 1985 indicated the thickness of this layer ranged from about two feet to a maximum of about seven feet. Underlying these organic soils, alternating layers of silty sand, silt, and sandy silt were observed to the test pit termination depths. The Geologic Map of the Renton Quadrangle. Washington, by D.R. Mullineaux (1965), maps the site soils as Peat (Qlp) and Alluvium (Qaw). The native soils we observed in the test pits are consistent with these descriptions. The preceding discussion is intended as a general review of the soil conditions encountered. For more complete descnptions, please refer to the Test Pit Logs attached rn Appendix A and B. Page No. 2 3.3 Groundwater December 7, 2006 ProJect No T-5996 We observed groundwater seepage at depths rangi:1g from 9 to 14 feet below the current site elevations. The previous 1985 study at the site indicated light to heavy groundwater seepage into the test pits at depths rangmg from 6 to 10 feet below site grades that existed at that time. Fluctuations in groundwater levels will occur seasonally and annually, with lowest levels and volumes occumng durmg late summer to early fall (July through September). Given the time of year our explo:·at,o,: work was completed, groundwater seepage levels observed likely represent seasonal low levels. A two-inch diameter slotted PVC pipe was installed in Test Pit TP-2 when backfilled. This installation, while crude, will allow for measuring the depth to b"·oundwater during the upcoming winter months and obtain a better understanding of seasonal high groundwater elevation at the site. We expect the groundwater would be present at depths of five to six feet below the surface dunng a:1d shortly following the wet winter season. 4.0 SEISMIC Based on the soil condit10ns encountered and our understanding of area geology, per Section 1615 of the 2003 International Building Code (!BC), site class "D" should be used in design of the structures. Liquefaction is a phenomenon where there is a reduction or complete loss of soil strength due to an increase in water pressure mduced by vibrations. Liquefaction mainly affects geologically recent deposits of loose, fine- gramed sand and s,]ty sand underlying the !,'TOUndwater table. Soils of this nature derive their strength from mtergranular frict10n. The generated water pressure or pore pressure essentially separates the soil grains and eliminates this intergranular friction; thus, elirnmatmg the soil's strength. Inf01mation obtained from our recent subsurface exploration indicates that the deeper native soils at the site are alluvial in origin. Groundwater was observed et variable depths ranging from 9 to 14 feet below current site grades. Histoncal data mdicates that the alluvial sand layers below the water table exhibit medium dense to very dense characteristics. The deeper alluvial soil strata composed of sandy or clayey silt, due to their fines content, will exhibit cohesive strength, and are not signi ficar.tly be affected by the liquefaction phenomenon. Based on analysis, in our opinion, the risk for soil liquefaction to occur at the site and its associated hazard are low. 5.0 DISCUSSION AND RECOMMEND A TIO NS 5.1 General The primary geotechnical consideration that will govern stte development is the potential for distortional building settlements to occur due to the compressible organic silt and peat layers that were observed across the site. These native soil layers will consolidate under static dead loads imposed by the structures and product loading on floor slabs constructed at grade. Assuming a 100-kip column load, a bearing stress of 2,000 psf, and a maximum footing depth of 2 feet below current site grades, analysis indicates settlement ranging from I to 4 inches could occur with differential movement of I to 2 inches. We estimate the differential settlement would occur over a building span of l 00 feet. This settlement will likely be distortional and cause building cracking along with misalignment of doors and windows. If the risk for distortional building settlements cannot be tolerated, a majority of the potential settlement can be mitigated by surcharging the building sites. Surcharging would involve placing additional fill on the bmldmg pads above the finished floor elevations to induce primary consolidation settlements to occur before buildmg construction is initiated. Page 'lo. 3 December 7, 2006 Project No. T-5996 In our opinion, the existing fill soils are sufficiently compact to provide smtable immediate support for the buildings using conventional spread footmg foundations. However, the soils are sensitive and will be easily disturbed by normal construction activity. Co:isiderat10n should be given to placing a four-inch layer of crushed rock over the bearing subgrade to serve as a workircg mat and to protect the soils from disturbance especially if work occurs during the winter. Similar considerat10n should be given for protectmg the integrity of the building floor and pavement subgrade. Cement amend:ng the subgrade should be considered if the construction schedule results in the soil sub grade being exposed to we: weather. The fill and native soils encountered at the site contam a significant amount of fines and will be difficult to compact as structural fill when too wet. The ability to use on-site soils from the site excavations as structural fill will depend on its moisture content and the prevailing weather conditions at the time of construction. The earthwork contractor should be prepared to dry the soils by aeration during the normally dry summer season to facilitate compaction as structural fill. Alternatively. stabilizing the moisture with cement kiln dust (CKD), cement, or lime can be considered. If grading activllics will take place during the winter season, the earthwork and utility contractor should be prepared to import clean granular material for use as structural fill and backfill. In addition, the utility contractors should be prepared for encountering large boulder-sized bedrock fragments within the existing fill where excavations extend to depths of four feet and greater below the site. These larger fragments will not be suitable for reuse in backfill mg the utility trenches and will likely require disposal off-site. Detailed recommendations regarding these 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 Site Preparation and Grading Surface vegetation and the upper organic soil layer should be stnpped and removed from the site. Based on our recent test pits, surface stripping depths of about six inches should be expected to remove the vegetation and near-surface organic layer. Once clearing and grubbing operations are complete, grading to establish desired building elevations can be initiated. Exposed subgrade should be observed by a representative of Terra Associates to verify that soil conditions are as expected and suitable for support of new construction or additional fill. Our observations may include requiring the contractor to proofroll the exposed sub grade with heavy rubber-tired construction equipment, such as a grader or loaded dump truck, to determine if there are excessively soft and yielding areas. If unsuitable yielding subgrade is exposed and it cannot be stabilized in place by aeration and compaction, the affected soils should be excavated and removed to fim1 bearing and grade restored with ·new structural fill. If the depth of excavation to remove unstable soils is excessive use of a geotextile reinforcing/separation fabric, such as Mirafi 500X or equivalent, can be considered in conjunction with clean granular structural fill. Our experience has shown that, in general, a minimum of 18 inches ofa clean, granular structural fill over the geotextile fabric should establish a stable bearing surface. Alternatively, it may be feasible to stabilize the soils by amending with Portland cement, CKD, or lime. Page No. 4 December 7, 2006 Project No. T-5996 If grading activities are planned during the wet wmter months, and the on-site soils become too wet to achieve adequate compaction, the owner or contractor should be prepared to treat s01ls with CKD, hme, or cement, or import wet weather structural fill. For wet weather structural fill, we recommend importing a granular soil that meets the following grading requirements: U.S. Sieve Size Percent Passing 6 inches 100 No.4 75 maximum No. 200 . 5 maxlmum* *Based on the 3/4-inch fraction. Prior to use, Terra Associates, Inc. should examine and test all materials to be imported to the site for use as structural fill. Structural fill should be placed in uniform loose layers not exceeding 12 inches and compacted to a minimum of95 percent of the soil's maximum d1y density, as determined by American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) Test Designation D-698 (Standard Proctor). The moisture content of the soil at the time of compaction should be within two percent of its optunum, as determined by this ASTM standard. In nonstructural areas or for backfill m utility trenches below a depth of 4 feet, the degree of compaction can be reduced to 90 percent. As noted earlier, if foundation subgrade is exposed to wet weather, consideration should be given to protecting the subgrade from disturbance by placing a four-inch mat of crushed rock over the subgrade to serve as a working mat. For the building pad and pavement sub grade sLbjected to dynamic loading from construction vehicle traffic, amending the top 12 inches of subgrade with Portland cement or placing 12 inches of wet weather granular structural fill on the sub grade to prevent detenornt10n should be considered. Surcharge As discussed earlier, 1f distortional settlement ranging from 2 to 4 inches in total and 1 to 2 inches differentially over a 100-foot span cannot be tolerated, we recommend surcharging the building areas to induce settlement in the primary consolidation range prior to building construction. For this procedure, we recommend placing fill in the building areas for a minimum height of three feet above proposed building finished floor elevations. This surcharge fill does not need to meet any special reqmrements other than having a minimum in place unit weight of 120 pounds per cubic foot (pcf). However, 1t may be advisable to use a good quality fill to raise grades in other portions of the site, such as parking and dnveway areas, or use for trench backfill if necessary. The surcharge fill should extend a minimum of two feet beyond the edge of the perimeter building footings. Total settlement under the surcharge fill is estimated m the range of two to four inches. It is estimated that 90 percent of the consolidation settlement will occur in about three to four weeks following full application of the surcharge fill. Page No. 5 December 7, 2006 Project No. T-5996 To verify the amount of settlement and the wne rate of movement, the surcharge program should be morntored by installing settlement markers. A typical settlement marker detail is shown on attached Figure 3. The settlement markers should be installed on the existing grade pnor to placing any surcharge fill. Once installed, elevations of both the fill height and marker should be taken dally until the full height of the surcharge is in place. Once fully surcharged, readings should continue weekly until the anticipated settlements have occurred. Monitoring data should be forwarded to us for review when obtained. It is critical that the grading contractor reco;;nize the importance of the settlement marker installations. All efforts must be made to protect the markers from da;nage during fill placement. It is difficult, if not impossible, to evaluate the progress of the preload program 1f the markers are damaged or destroyed by construction equipment. If the markers are impacted, it may be necessary to install new markers and extend the surcharging time period in order to ensure that settlements have ceased and building construction can begin. Following the successful completion of the surcharge program, with foundations designed as recommended in the Foundation Section of this report, maximum total post-construction settlement is estimated at about l Y, inches with differential movement of about one-half inch. If post-construction settlement of this magnitude is not considered acceptable, buildings should be supported on a pile foundation. 5.3 Excavations All excavations at the site associated with confined spaces, such as utility trenches must be completed in accordance with local, state, or federal re~uirements. Based on current Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulat10ns, soils fomd on the project site would be classified as Group C soils. For properly dewatered excavations more than 4 feet but less than 20 feet in depth, the side slopes should be laid back at a minimum slope inclination of 1.5:1 (Honzontal:Vertical). If there is insufficient room to complete the excavatwns in this manner, or if excavations greater than 20 feet in depth are planned, using temporary shoring to support the excavations may need to be considered. Utility trench sidewalls can be supported by a properly designed and installed shoring trench box. Groundwater seepage should be anticipated within excavations extending to depths of five feet and greater below existing surface grades. For excavations below ten feet, the volume of water and rate of flow into the excavation may be significant. Shallow excavations that do not extend more than two to three feet below the groundwater table can likely be dewatered by conventional sump pumping procedures, along with a system of collection trenches. Deeper excavation may require dewatering by well points or isolated deep-pump wells. The utility subcontractor should be prepared to implement excavation dewatering by well point or deep-pump wells, as needed. This will be an especially critical consideration for any deep excavations, such as that which may be required for Ifft station construction or sanitary sewer connections. This information is provided solely for the benefil of the owner and other design consultants, and should not be construed to imply that Tena Associates, Inc. assumes responsibility for job site safety. Job site safety is the sole responsibility of the project contractor. Also, as noted earlier, the contractor should be prepared for encountering large boulder-sized bedrock fragments within the existing fill below depths of four feet. Page 'io. 6 5.4 Foundations December 7, 2006 Proiect No. T-5996 In our opinion, the building may be supported on conventional spread footing foundations bearing on undisturbed subgrade composed of existmg inorganic fill Foundation subgrade should be prepared as recommended in Section 5.2 of this report. Foundations exposed to the weather should bear at a minimum depth of 1.5 feet below adjacent grades for frost protection. Interior foundations can be supported at any convenient depth below the floor slab, provided immediate support is obtained on a minimum of two feet of structural fill. We recommend designing foundations for a net allowable bearing capacity of 2,000 psf. For short-tenn loads, such as wind and seismic, a one-third increase m ih1s allowable capacity can be used. Following successful completion of the surcharge program, with foundations bearing at a maximum depth of two feet below current site grades and with the expected building loads, estimated total settlement should not exceed 1 Y, inches with differential settlement over a l 00-foot building span not exceeding one-half inch. If foundation depths will exceed two feet, stress imposed on the organic consolidating layer will increase. If footing subgrade will exceed two feet below existing slle grade, we should be notified and asked to reevaluate potential foundation settlement impacts. For designing foundations to resist lateral loads, a base fric110n coefficient of 0.35 can be used. Passive earth pressures acting on the sides of the footmgs can also he considered. We recommend calculating this lateral resistance using an equivalent fluid weight of 250 pcf. We do not recommend including the upper 12 mches of soil in this computation because it can be affected by weather or disturbed by future grading activity. This value assumes the foundation will be constructed neat against competent native soil or backfilled with structural fill, as described in Section 5.2 of this report. The values recommended include a safety factor of 1.5. 5.5 Slabs-on-Grade Slabs-on-grade may be supported on the subgrade prepared as recommended in Section 5.2 of this report. Immediately below the floor slab, we recommend plac,ng a four-mch thick capillary break layer composed of clean, coarse sand or fine gravel that has less than three percent passing the 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. The capillary break layer will not prevent moisture intrusion through the slab caused by water vapor transmission. Where moisture by vapor transmission is undesirable, such as covered floor areas, a common practice is to place a durable plastic membrane on the capillary break layer and then cover the membrane with a layer of clean sand or fine gravel to protect it from damage during construction, and aid in uniform curing of the concrete slab. It should be noted that if the sand or gravel layer overlying the membrane is saturated prior to pouring the slab, it will be ineffective in assistmg in uniform curing of the slab and can actually serve as a water supply for moisture transmission through the slab and affecting floor coverings. Therefore, in our opinion, covering the membrane with a layer of sand or gravel should be avoided if floor slab construct10n occurs durmg the wet winter months and the layer cannot be effectively drained. Placement of the concrete directly on the plastic membrane may require adjustments m the concrete mix design and spacing of control joints to reduce the effects of dry shrinkage, The American Concrete Ins,itule (AC!) Manual of Concrete Practice, Section 302.JR, should be consulted regarding installation of vapor ba1Tiers and concrete slab-on-grade floors. Page 'lo. 7 For design of the floor slabs-on-grade, a sub grade modulus (ks) of 100 (pci) can be used. 5.6 Stormwater Detention Pond December 7, 2006 Project No. T-5996 The stonnwater pond will be located in the northeastern pan handle of the property. The pond perimeter will be formed by cast in place concrete retaining walls. As we understand, the retaining wall footings will bear at a depth of about seven to eight feet below existmg site grades. Two test pits, TP-1 and TP-2, were excavated w1thm the proposed pond area. In general, soil condrtrons observed consisted of three feet of loose to medrum dense silty sand fill overlying fill composed of clayey silt with weathered bedrock pieces to small boulders. Beneath the fill, at depths of eight to ten feet, we observed the original organic surface layer of brown orgamc silt to peat. At depths of 9 to 14.5 feet, we observed gray silt to gray silty sand. We observed moderate to heavy groundwater seepage at a depth of 14 feet in the test pits. To establish suitable support for the pond penmeter walls, it will be necessary to excavate and remove the existing fill and peat from below the wall foundation. The excavation to remove this unsuitable material should extend laterally from the footing edge a minimum distance of three feet Once removed, the foundation grade can be restored using structural fill placed and compacted as recommended in the S1te Grading and Preparation section of this report (Section 5.2). The wall footings can then be designed using soil parameters outlined in the Foundation section (Section 5.5). The except10n will be the lateral passive earth pressure resistance. Because the soils m front of the footmg will be submerged below the stored water in the pond, the passive earth pressure used should be reduced to 180 pcf. This value requires that the footing be backfilled with structural fill and the fill extends horizontally in front of the footing a distance equal to the footing thickness or depth below the pond floor grade. The magnitude of earth pressure development on the pond retaining walls will partly depend on the quality of backfill. We recommend placing and compacting wall backfill as structural fill. To guard against the buildup of hydrostatic pressure, wall drainage must also be installed. A typical wall drainage detail is attached as Figure 4. With granular backfill placed and compacted as recommended and drainage properly installed, we recommend designing retaming walls for an earth pressure equivalent to a fluid weighing 35 pcf. Wben necessary, to account for traffic surcharge, the wall should be designed for an additional height of two feet. If the walls cannot be effectively drained, they should be designed to support an earth pressure equivalent to a fluid weighing 85 pcf. 5.7 Drainage Surface Final exterior grades should promote free and pos1t1ve drainage away from the site at all times. Water must not be allowed to pond or collect adjacent to foundat1ons, oc within the immediate building areas. We recommend providing a gradient of at least three percent for a minimum distance of ten feet from the building perimeters. If this gradient cannot be provided, surface water should be collected adjacent to the structures and disposed to appropriate storm facilities. Page No. 8 5.8 Utilities December 7, 2006 Pro1ect No. T-5996 Utility pipes should be bedded and backfilled m accordance with American Public Works Association (APWA), or City of Renton specifications. As a mimmcm, trench backfill should be placed and compacted as structural fill, as described in Section 5.2 of this report. As noted, most of the existing fill and the underlying native soils will be wet of optimum moisture when excavated. The utility contractor must be prepared to dry the soil by aeration or amend with CKD, cement, or lune to stabilize the moisture to facilitate proper compaction. Alternatively, or if utility construction takes place durmg the wet winter months, it may be necessary to import suitable wet weather fill for utility trench backfilling. Also, the utility contractor should be prepared for encountering small to large boulder-sized fragments of bedrock contained within the fill in excavations that extend to depths of four feet and greater. These boulder-sized fragments will not be suitable for reuse in trench backfill and wil] likely require off-site disposal. 5.9 Pavements The pavement design section is dependent upon the supportmg capability of the subgrade soils and the traffic conditions to which it will be subJected. We expect traffic at the facility wi11 consist of mainly of cars and light trucks, with only occasional heavy traffic in the form of tractor-trailer rigs. For design considerations, we have assumed traffic can be represented by an 18-kip Equivalent Single Axle Loading (ESAL) of 50,000 over a 20- year design life. With a finn an unyielding subgraJc prepared as recommended in Section 5.2 of this report, we reconunend the fo11owing pavement section alternatives be used: • Two inches of AC over three inches of asphait-n-eated base (ATB) • Two inches of AC over six inches of crushed rock base (CRB) In areas where Portland cement concrete (FCC) psvement wi11 be considered, we recommend a minimum 28 day concrete compressive strength of 4,000 pounds per square inch (psi) be used with a minimum un-reinforced thickness of five inches. Control or construction Joints should not be spaced at intervals of more than 20 feet. Asphalt concrete should meet the requirements for \!2-inch HMA, as outlined in Washington State Department of Transportation's (WSDOT) standard specifica:,ons. Asphalt-treated base and crushed rock base should also meet WSDOT requirements. Long-tenn pavement performance will depend on surface drainage. A poorly-drained pavement section will be subject to premature failure as a result of surface water infiltrating into the subgrade soils and reducing their supporting capability. For optimum pavement pcrfonnance, we recommend surface drainage gradients of at least two percent. Some degree of longitudinal and transverse cracking of the pavement surface should be expected over time. Regular maintenance should be planned to seal cracks when they occur. 6.0 ADDITIONAL SERVICES Te1Ta Associates, Inc. should review the final design drawings and specifications in order to verify that earthwork and foundation recommendations have been properly mterpreted and implemented in project design. We should also provide geotechnical services during construction to observe compliance with our design concepts, specifications, and recommendations. This will allow for design changes if subsurface conditions differ from those anticipated prior to the start of construction Page No. 9 7.0 LIMITATIONS December 7, 2006 Project No. T-5996 We prepared this report in accordance with grne:·aJ]y accepted geotechnical engineering practices. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. This report is the copyrighted property of Terra Associates, Inc. and is intended for specific application to the Cedar Rrver Corporate Park project. This report is for the exclusive use of TARRAGON and their authonzed representat:ves. The analyses and recommendations presentec in elm report are based on data obtained from the test pits excavated on the site. Variations in soil condi:ions can occur, the nature and extent of which may not become evident until construction. If variations appear cvrdcnt, Terra Associates, Inc. should be requested to reevaluate the recommendations in this report prior to proceedmg wilh construction. Page No. 10 ?;:; 1\1~1 SJ ·'"'[, 1, ~ -, J:.r1~1 ~1~ i,~.-}i ,. , ir, L --,,_._ Terra Associates, Inc. Consultants in Geotechnical Eng1neenng Geology and Envjronment~J Earth Sciences VICINITY MAP CEDAR RIVER CORPORATE PARK RENTON, WASHINGTON Proj. No.T-5996 Date DEC 2006 Figure 1 ,,. (,r:-"r.::v:~:--: ~ I[ i·rv:: N 1?.I I! I NOTE: THIS SITE PLAN IS SCHEMATIC. ALL LOCATIONS ANC DIMENSIONS ARE APPROXIMATE. IT IS INTENDcD FO REFERENCE ONLY AND SHOULD NOT BE USED FOR DESIGN OR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES. REFERENCE: SITE PLAN PROVIDED BY CLIENT APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET EXPLORATION LOCATION PLAN CEDAR RIVER CORPORATE PARK RENTON, WASHINGTON Proj. No.T-5996 Date DEC 2006 Figure 2 NOTES: SURCHARGE OR FILL STEEL ROD HEIGHT VARIES (SEE NOTES) PROTECTIVE SLEEVE SURCHARGE OR FILL 1. BASE CONSISTS OF 1/2" THICK, 2'x2' PLYWOOD WITH CENTER DRILLED 5/8" DIAMETER HOLE. 2. BEDDING MATERIAL, IF REQUIRED, SHOULD CONSIST OF CLEAN COARSE SAND. 3. MARKER ROD IS 1/2" DIAMETER STEEL ROD THREADED AT BOTH ENDS. 4. MARKER ROD IS ATTACHED TO BASE BY NUT AND WASHER ON EACH SIDE OF BASE. 5. PROTECTIVE SLEEVE SURROUNDING MARKER ROD SHOULD CONSIST OF 2" DIAMETER PLASTIC TUBING. SLEEVE IS NOT ATTACHED TO ROD OR BASE. 6. ADDITIONAL SECTIONS OF STEEL ROD CAN BE CONNECTED WITH THREADED COUPLINGS. 7. ADDITIONAL SECTIONS OF PLASTIC PROTECTIVE SLEEVE CAN BE CONNECTED WITH PRESS-FIT PLASTIC COUPLINGS. 8. STEEL MARKER ROD SHOULD EXTEND AT LEAST 6" ABOVE TOP OF PLASTIC PROTECTIVE SLEEVE. 9. STEEL MARKER ROD SHOULD EXTEND AT LEAST 1" ABOVE TOP OF FILL SURFACE. . Terra Associates Inc. Consultants in Geotechnical ~ngineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences TYPICAL SETTLEMENT MARKER DETAIL CEDAR RIVER CORPORATE PARK RENTON, WASHINGTON Proj. No.T-5996 Date DEC 2006 Figure 3 SEE NOTE 6"(MIN.) 4" DIAMETER PERFORATED PVC PIPE ..J SLOPE TO DRAIN 12" OVER PIPE 3" BELOW PIPE EXCAVATED SLOPE (SEE REPORT TEXT FOR APPROPRIATE INCLINATIONS) NOT TO SCALE NOTE: MIRADRAIN G100N PREFABRICATED DRAINAGE PANELS OR SIMILAR PRODUCT CAN BE SUBSTITUTED FOR THE 12-INCH WIDE GRAVEL DRAIN BEHIND WALL. DRAINAGE PANELS SHOULD EXTEND A MINIMUM OF SIX INCHES INTO 12-INCH THICK DRAINAGE GRAVEL LAYER OVER PERFORATED DRAIN PIPE. Terra Associates, Inc. TYPICAL WALL DRAINAGE DETAIL CEDAR RIVER CORPORATE PARK RENTON. WASHINGTON Consultants in Geotechnica! Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences Proj. No.T-5996 Date DEC 2006 Figure 4 APPENDIX A FIELD EXPLORATION A:\'D LABORATORY TESTING Cedar River Corporate Park Renton, Washington On November 1, 2006, we performed our field explorat10ns using a mid-size trackhoe. We explored subsurface soil conditions at the site by excavating 8 test pits to a maximum depth of 15 feet below existing surface grades. The test pit locations are shown on Figures 2. The test pit locations were approximately determined by measurements from existmg site features. The Test Pit Logs are presented on Figures A-2 through A-9. An engineering geologist from our office conducted the field exploration, classified the soil conditions encountered, maintained a log of each test pit. obtamed representative soil samples, and observed pertment site features. All soil samples were visually class1f1ed 111 accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) described on Figure A-1. Representative soil samples obtained from the test pits were placed in closed containers and taken to our laboratory for fwther examination and test1rcg. The moisture content of each sample was measured and is reported on the Test Pit Logs. Grain size analyses were performed on four samples. The results are shown on Figures A-IO through A-1 l. Pro_iect No. T-5996 MAJOR DIVISIONS I LEITER 1· SYMBOL TYPICAL DESCRIPTION i •-------------------------+--------------------~-- ! Well-graded gravels, gravel-sand mixtures, little or no (fJ ai GRAVELS ...J 0, O _li1 _§ More than Clean Gravels (less than 5% fines) GW GP · fines. Poorly-graded gravels, gravel-sand mixtures, little or no fines. 1---------------------- (f) _ "' 50% of coarse ct GM Silty gravels, gravel-sand-silt mixtures, non-plastic 0 -~ ~ fraction is _ Gravels fines. UJ -:;; .!!! I larger than No. with fines f-, ------+----------------------, Z "' 4 sieve GC E "' 1 1 1 1 Clayey gravels, gravel-sand-clay mixtures, plastic fines. <l'. 0 ' 1· 13 ~ ~ --Clean -SW Well-graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fines. "'0 SANDS Sands 1-----+---------_______________________ __, ~ ffi Z (less than I SP Poorly-graded sands or gravelly sands, little or no a:: £ ;;; More than 5% fines) 1 fines. <l'. a, .2: 50% of coarse 1 , l--------------------- 0 0 -fraction is SM Silty sands, sand-silt mixtures, non-plastic fines. U :::, smaller than Sands '1-----+--------------------1 ·------f--N-o. __ 4 _siev_:__1 _with fines_ -+I' --~~--+---------------------_, ,-______ _ __ Clayey sands, sand-clay mixtures, plastic fines. I :3 ~o SILTS AND CLAYS I ML Inorganic silts, rock flour, clayey silts with slight plasticity. ~-----+-~-~-------------------1 Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity, (lean clay). a,O o 1uN CL (/) 0 E o IIJ Liquid limit is less than 50%r ,_ ----+--------------------1 UJ ?f-Z .to! 1 OL Organic silts and organic clays of low plasticity. 0 c u:i I 1 '.:; "'~ ~ 1,----'1,---M-H----1---~---------------------; -.. c ....... a:i I Inorganic silts, elastic. 13 :S ~ iii l SILTS AND CLAYS L--------t------------------- UJ E! E CH Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays. ·-Z~-:::,-o_"' __ --L1qu1d hm,t is greater than 5--0'A-,-+--_?~--+---------------------1 ,-_ Organic clays of high plasticity. Cf) Cf) w -' z 0 cii w I 0 (j w ;::: Cf) w I 0 (j - HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT Peat. J ----~------------- DEFINITION OF TERMS AND SYMBOLS Very loose Loose Medium dense Dense Very dense <::onsistency Very soft Soft Medium stiff Stiff Very stiff Hard Standard Penetration Resistance in Blows/Foot 0-4 4-10 10-30 30-50 >50 Standard Penetratioo Resistance in Blows/Foat 0-2 2-4 4-8 8-16 16-32 >32 .. ---~- ~ Terra ~ Associates, Inc. Consultants in Geotechnical En8i·'ieering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences T 2" OUTSIDE DIAMETER SPLIT -SPOON SAMPLER JI 2.4" INSIDE DIAMETER RING SAMPLER OR SHELBY TUBE SAMPLER :!'. WATER LEVEL (DATE) Tr TORVANE READINGS, ts! Pp PENETROMETER READING, ts! DD DRY DENSITY, pounds per cubic foot LL LIQUID LIMIT, percent Pl PLASTIC INDEX N STANDARD PENETRATION, blows per foot UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM CEDAR RIVER CORPORATE PARK RENTON, WASHINGTON Proj. No. T-5996 I Date DEC 2006 I Figure A-1 LOG OF TEST PIT NO. 1 FIGURE A-2 PROJECT NAME: Cedar River Corporate Park PROJ. NO: ~I~-6~9~9~6~---LOGGED BY: _.D.sP.Jl __ _ LOCATION: Renton Washington SURFACE CONDS: .QJ.J.L>lL ______ _ APPROX. ELEV: .JN,,i~A....__ DEPTH TO CAVING: NIA DATE LOGGED: November 1 2006 DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER: 14 5 Feet 5 10 15 20 0 z w .., a. ~ DESCRIPTION FILL: gray to brown silly sand, roots, some asphalt rubble, trace gravel, fine grained, moist. FILL: blue gray clayey silt with weathered bedrock pieces to 3 feet in size, old roots, sticks, wet Brown organic SILT to fiberous PEAT, sticks, wet. (PT) Gray SJLT to clayey SILT, organic inclusions, moist to wet. (ML) Gray silty to clean SAND, fine grained, wet. (SM1SP) Test pit terminated at 14.5 feet. Moderate groundwater seepage Gbserved at 14,5 feet. NOTE: This subsurface information perlains only to this test ;:,11 loccticn and should not be interpreled as being indicative of other localions al the site CONSISTENCY/ RELATIVE DENSITY Loose to Mediurn Dense Medium Stiff to Stiff Soft Medium Stiff to Stiff Medium Dense ;: 6.2 25.3 43.7 34.0 .. f z UJ a. ,_ UJ S'. g a. REMARKS Terra Associates, Inc. Consultanls in Geotechnical Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences LOG OF TEST PIT NO. 2 FIGURE A-3 PROJECT NAME: Cedar River Corporate Park PROJ. NO: JJ_cc·5c,9o_9"6"------LOGGED BY: J2~P~L __ _ LOCATION: Renton Wasbinotoo SURFACE CONDS: ..tlIJJ>S[L ______ _ APPROX. ELEV: ~N~l~A~- DEPTH TO CAVING: N/A DATE LOGGED: November 1 2006 DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER: 14 Feet ci ~ z '=-w :,: ~ ;-0. 0. ~ w ~ 0 "' 5 10 15 20 DESCRIPTION FILL: gray to brown silty sand, rocls, trace gra-.,el, fine grained, moist. F!LL: gray brown to blue gray silty sand tc sandy silt, weathered bedrock pieces below 7 feet. mois; to wet. Brown organic SILT tofiberous PEAT, wet. (PT) Gray clayey SILT, organic inclusions, wet. (ML/CL} Gray silty SANO, fine grained, wet. (SM) Test pit lerminated at 14.5 feet. Moderate groundwater seepage observed at 14 feet. 2-inch slotted PVC standpipe installed NOTE: This subsurface inforrnation pertains only lo ihis test ::i11 loca!ion and should not bs interpreted as being indicative of other locations at the site, CONSISTENCY/ REI.ATIVE DENSITY Loose to Medium Dense Medium Stiff to Stiff Soft Medium Stiff Medium Dense ~ ;,: 11.6 19.0 152.2 77.0 55.9 28.7 [c ~ z w 0. REMARKS ;-w "' () 0 0. Terra Associates, Inc. Consultants in Geo\echnical Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences LOG OF TEST PIT NO. 3 FIGURE A-4 PROJECT NAME: Cedar River Corporate Park PROJ. NO: sicc-,.15,,9,,961L ___ _ LOGGED BY: -.1P./.JP:.il __ _ LOCATION: Renton WashioQton SURFACE CONDS: .t6'1[:UU"S[1.h _______ _ APPROX.ELEV:~Nu/A~-- DEPTH TO CAVING: N/A DATE LOGGED: November 1 2006 DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER: N/A ~ ~ "'- :i: ~ 0. w Q 5 J I 10 15 ci z w -' 0. " < V, DESCRIPTION FILL: gray brown to brown silty sand witl-i gravel, roots, some small sticks, fine grained, moist. FILL: reddish-brown to blue gray clayey sandy silt with weathered bedrock pieces, small to medium large pieces of bedrock, wet. Brown organic Sll T to fiberous PE.A.T, srr,all sticks, wet. (PT) Light grayish-brown clayey SILT, orgariics, wet. (ML/CL) Test pit terminated at 13 feet. No groundwater seepage observed NOTE. This subsuliace information pertains only to this test pi'. location cmd should not be interpreted as being indicative of other locations at 1he s,te CONSISTENCY/ RELATIVE DENSITY Loose to Medium Dense Medium Stiff to Stiff Sofl Medium Stiff ~ V, t:. :i w C 0. REMARKS ~ ;: w "' " 0 0. 9.4 25.6 189.5 106.3 Terra Associates, Inc. Consultants in Geotechnica! Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences LOG OF TEST PIT NO. 4 FIGUREA-5 PROJECT NAME: Cedar River Corporate ParL______ PROJ. NO: ,I.c·5.,.90c9.,6.,__ __ _ LOGGED BY: JD~PJI __ _ LOCATION; Renton wac::bincton DATE LOGGED; November 1 2006 SURFACE CONDS: J>!:u.sl"-----------APPROX. ELEV: ~N~/A~-- DEPTH TO CAVING: NIA DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER: NIA 5 10 15 20 0 z "' J i " V, DESCRIPTION (6 inches brown organic SILT/ROOTS) FILL: brown silty sand with gravel to sandy s:lt with broken up bedrock, fine grained, moist. FILL; brown to light brown sandy clayey sill wili'J broken up bedrock pieces. lots of bedrock pieces 10 4 ieet in size, moist Brown organic SILT to fiberous PEAT, small s:1cks and small logs, wet. (PT) Light gray/clayey SILT, organic inclusions, wet. (ML) Tes! pit terminated at 14 feet. No groundwater seepage observed. NOTE. This subsurface information pertains only to this lest pit loc2licn and should not be interpreted as being indicative of other locations a11he site CONSISTENCY/ RELATIVE DENSITY Loose to Medium Dense Medium Stiff to Stiff Soft Medium Stiff REMARKS 4.2 11.1 111.2 100.8 149.1 48.8 Terra Associates, Inc. Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences ~ LOG OF TEST PIT NO. 5 FIGURE A-6 PROJECT NAME: Cedar River Corporate Park_ PROJ. NO: iiea-5.o9a;9,i6,_ __ _ LOGGED BY: ~P=P~l __ _ LOCATION: Renton Washington SURFACE CONDS: ~s~c~w~suh _______ _ APPROX.ELEV:~N=/~A~- DEPTH TO CAVING: ~N=/A~---DATE LOGGED: November 1 2006 DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER: 9 Feet ~ >- !:. ,: >- 0. w " 10_J I J I ' I ' ' i 15~ I 20 d z w ~ 0. " " "' DESCRIPTION (6 inches black organic SILT/ROOTS) Fill: brown to grayish-brown sandy silt with gravel. a few large boulders, broken bedrock pieces with deptr to 1.5 feet in size. wet. FILL: blue sandy clayey silt with bedrock pieces, small to very large sizes. occasional wood to sm3ll lo9s, wet Brown organic SILT to fiberous PEAT, scrne sticks to small logs, wet. (PT) Light gray clayey SILT with organics, wet. (M:...) Test pit terminated at 14 feet. Slight groundwater seepage obsen;ed at 9 feet. NOTE: This subsurface information pertains only to this lest pii location a1d should not be inlerpre\00 as being indicative of other locations at the si'.e CONSISTENCY/ RELATIVE DENSITY Loose to Medium Dense Medium Stiff to Stiff Soft Medium Stiff 20.4 18.4 71.7 76.6 u:: ~ z w .. ~ u 0 0. REMARKS Terra Associates, Inc. Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences ,. LOG OF TEST PIT NO. 6 FIGURE A-7 PROJECT NAME: Cedar River Corporate Park PROJ. NO: oI--5~9~9~6~---LOGGED BY: aD'""'-PL.._ __ APPROX. ELEV: --"'Nuc/A,.____ DEPTH TO CAVING: N/A LOCATION: Renton Wasbincton SURFACE CONDS; ;B:,i[JJlJi,Suh _______ _ DATE LOGGED: November 1 2006 DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER: 9 Feet >-' 0 z !t. w ~ ~ .... 0. 0. " w " 0 " 5 10 15 20 DESCRIPTION FILL: gray silty sand with gravel, fi'1e grcineo some debris, moist. Fill: brown to gray sandy clayey silt w:tr, bedrock pieces to 2 feet in size, sticks, moist. FILL: blue clayey silt with small le large bedrock pieces, sma/1 logs, moist to wet. Brown organic Sil T to 1iberous PEAi, wet. (PT) Gray clayey SILT, organics, wet. Test pit terminated at 14 feet. Heavy groundwater seepage observed at 9 feet NOTE: This subsurface information pertains only to this test r1t locc1tion ard should not be interpreted as being indicative of other loca1ions at the s.te CONSISTENCY/ RELATIVE DENSITY Loose Medium Stiff Medium Stiff to Stiff Soft Medium Stiff 15.2 17.5 86.3 257.1 ii:' ~ z "' 0. .... "' "' " 0 0. REMARKS Terra Associates, Inc. Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences LOG OF TEST PIT NO. 7 FIGURE A-8 PROJECT NAME: Cedar River Corporate Park PROJ. NO: ..cl.c-5"'9~9~6~---LOGGED BY: -'D~P~I __ _ LOCATION: Renton Wasbiootoo SURFACE CONDS: _.B,;[;.U.,.suh _______ _ APPROX. ELEV: _Nwi~A~- DEPTH TO CAVING: N/A DATE LOGGED: November 1 2006 DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER: 10 Feet "' 10 15 DESCRIPTION (6 inches brown organic SILT) FILL: brown sandy silt with gravel, lots of weathered bedrock pieces to cobble size, old roots, sticks, moist. FILL: reddish-brown to blue sandy silt to clayey silt, large weathered bedrock pieces, moist to wet Brown organic SILT to fiberous PEAT, sticks, small logs, wet. (PT) Blue silty SAND, fine grained, wet (SM) Test pit terminated at 13 feet. Slight to moderate groundwater seeoage observed at 10 feet. NOTE: This subsurface informalion pertains only to this test pil location and should not be interpreted as being indicative of other locations at tr,e site CONSISTENCY/ RELATIVE DENSITY Medium Stiff to Stiff Medium Stiff to Stiff Soft Medium Dense REMARKS ;: 19.6 45.0 112.0 25.7 Terra Associates, Inc. Consultants in Geotechnical Er;gineering Geology and Envlronmental Earlh Sciences LOG OF TEST PIT NO. 8 FIGUREA-9 PROJECT NAME: Cedar River Como rate Park PROJ. NO: sI~-5~9~9~6~---LOGGED BY: ~D~P~L __ _ LOCATION: Renton WashioQton SURFACE CONDS: ~s~c~w~silh _______ _ DATE LOGGED: November 1 2006 DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER: 1 o Feet APPROX.ELEV:~N~/A~-- DEPTH TO CAVING: N/A ~ ... '=-:c ... 0. w " -l i 5--< ' :r 10 15 20 ci z w ~ .. " " "' DESCRIPTION (6 inches brown organic SILT) FILL: brown sand}'' silt with gravel and weathere·j bedrock pieces, roots, wet, FILL· blue clayey silt with weathered bedrock pieces, some pieces to 3 feet in sizes, rro1st Brown organic SILT to fiberous PEAT, roots. sticks, logs, thin clay seems, wet. (PT) Blue silty clayey SAND, fine grair:ed, wet (SM.IML) Test pit terminated al 15 feet. Slight groundwater seepage observed at 1 O feet. NOTE: This subsurface information pertains only to this test pil localio~ c1nd should not be 1nterpreied as being indicative of other locations at t'1e site CONSISTENCY/ RELATIVE DENSITY Medium Stiff to Stiff Medium Stiff to Stiff Soft Medium Dense ;;:: "' t::. z w C .. REMARKS ... ;: w " " 0 .. 18.1 20.3 86.8 103.4 46.1 Terra Associates, Inc. Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering Geology and Environmenlal Earth Sciences ~- .__,_ 0 ~ ~ U) ::, I () ,e; 0: UJ 0. I U) w :; u. 0 ~ 0: ~ ~ <( ::, z z <( L.... LJ.J > !!,! (/) U) U) I () ,e; ,e; <'.> z z U) 0. 0 u. 0 U) N iii '--'- PERCENT COARSER BY WEIGHT 0 o No 9 E o g 9 ~ 2 o .001 ° ........... ~ ......... .,.:,: ..... .,.,.;,;··· ..... .,.,..;:-.,.,...,...,..:;"'.:..,..,...,...,,.::-;:.......,..,.:·-,:;.,..,....,.:-;:.,..T"T",.:v:;:..,.,...,..., ........ 001 .002 l+l+H--H-iH-i-l-l-l-l+++++++++++++++-+H--H-iH-i-1-1-1-1-1-1++++++-I .002 .003 1+++++++++++++++++++++-H-H-!-1-1-i-l-l-l-lH-l+l+-l+-++++++++-H .003 .004 .004 .006 .006 .006 .008 .m .01 .02 1+++++++++++++++++++--H--H-l-l-1-i-H-I-IH-H-1+1+-1+-++++++++-H . 02 m .m ~ .w .OB .06 B ~ • . 1 100 l-l--W--W-l+l+l+~b,la!4=!:++++++-l-l--l-l--l-l--W-l+l+l+l-hl-h+l+l~ ~ LLW-l+ttT" ~ so H<f"++++++-H-H-H-H-H-Hf+f+l+l+H--H--H--+++++++++±,lef'+f++j .z ~ .3 2 - (/) LJ.J z u: U) z u: .4 ::f L.._ 40 ~ -~1-1-1-1-1-1-I-.6 ~ 20 H++++ttl"ff.l+f-Hf-Hf-H-H-H-H++++++++++H--H--f-Hf-Hf-Hf-H-+-13 .a w 1 bl (/) z 10 H-11-Hill+l++-H-+-l+H++Hl+++Hl+++-H++-H-+-l+H++HH++-H--H 2 ~ 4 l+Hfl++-++++++1+1++-++++++i+!H-!-++++++H-1+!-++++++H-Hd 3 (9 4 1N 6 8 3/6 l-+-lol--H-H-l-l-li-1-1--H++++-+++1--1-+-1-+++++H-H-H-l-l-l-l-l++++-++-l-EI 10 1121+1H-1-+-l-++++++1-H-+-l-t+++++1-HH-!-++++++H-H-!-++++++t-+-f-+1 516 l+.ff+++++++++++++++-H-H-1-1-H-I-IH-H-H-l+l+-++++++++++++-H 314 l+IH-<++-++++++1+1++-++++++1-HH-!++++++H-l+l++++++H-Hd 20 11+.H-++++++++++++++-H-H-1-1-H+H-H-H-l+-l+-++++++++++++-H 11N m 1112 ~ 2 1+1+1++-++++++1+1++++++++H-iH-!-++++++++1+1++++++++f-+1 60 31+++++++++++++++++++-I-I-I-IH-H-1+-1+-1+-1+-++++++++++++++++ao 4 100 6 1+1-Hl+l++++++I-H++++++++I-HH-!++++++-H-l+l++++++-H-1--H 200 12 LJ...U..U.i.L.i.L.U..U.. ..................... .._._.J..J..J..J..U.1.L..U.i.L.U..U....U .......... .J..U 300 8 8 g g ~ ~ ~ g ~ ~ 0 ~ PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT U) z u: j U) ::, 0. U) • GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS CEDAR RIVER CORPORATE PARK RENTON, WASHINGTON Proj. No.T-5996 I Date DEC 2006 I Figure A-10 0 0 ~ 0 z ~ U) => r u ;:; er: w ll. I (fJ w :; LL 0 ~ cr: ~ ~ ~~ <1'. t- w > w ci5 (fJ w I u ;:; ;:; Cl z z w a_ 0 LL 0 ~ ui PERCENT COARSER BY WEIGHT 0 NO o,O O ~ 0 e O O 8 . 001 °..,."T'T.,..,.~"T'T"T'T'T'T"T'T-r'i.,.,..,.,-;"'-T,n-r'"'ri-n-r''°i',-T"T"r'T"T" -T"T""r"T"l""T'T.,.,;;;°'',,-,..,.,.;'r" . 001 .002 l+++++++++++++++++-H-HH-H-H-t-+t-+1-+-H--H-+++++++++++++-t .003 l+++++++++++++++++-H-HH-H-H-t-+1-+-H--H--H-+++++++++++++-t .004 l+H-1-H+++tt+H-1-H++++++H-1-H-++++++H-1-H-++++++++1-H .002 .003 .004 .006 .008 .01 .006 .008 .01 .02 l+++++++++++++++++-H-HH-H-H-t-+1-+-H--H--H-+++++++++++++-t .02 ! .03 l+++++++++++++++++-H-HH-H-H-t-+1-+-H--H--H-++++++++++++-H .03 .04 .04 .06 .06 200 .08 I/ '1 I, I, 100 ~1-t-t-++++-1-t-t-++++-1-t-t-++++-+f-1f++++--J-l,f++-t+-+-l-l-t-t-+-llift.l>f-1-J-j ~ 60 (/) er .2 ~ LU .I--....... .3 :a: 40 l-l;<H==H--H--H--H--l+-l+-l+-H-H+l+l+l4-1~fl:'.11+1+1+1+1+-H--H--1+4'1 .4 ;;j L--~ L--.6 ~ 20 H++++++++++-H-H--H--Ho,RH-/H-H-H-H-H-H-H-H-H-++++++++-t! .8 ~ 1 !:,! ii (/) z 10 .+-i-+++-+++H-++H+-J«-.j-+++--f+++l-l+l++++l-l+l++++l++l++-1+-1 2 ~ 4+ft+t+-H-l-H-t+~t+-H-l-H-t+-t+++H-lH-l-H-t+t+H-lH-l-H-t++w4 114 H-++++++++++++++++-H-HH-1-+H-t-++-++-+-H--H-++++++++++++-!d 6 8 318 l+t+t+H-I-HH111-H+t-H++++++++++tt++t+H-H-I-HI-HI-H+t+a 1 O 112 518 314 l+t+t+t+l-9'1-HI-H+t+t++++++++++++ttt+H-H-1-HI-H+t+t+i=I 20 1l+H-1-H-++'H-t+H-1-H-++++++++1-H+t++-++++1-H+t++-++++1-H 1m ~ 1112 40 2 H-tt~VH-l+t-tt-tt++tttttttttt-tt-H-H-1-HH-l+t-H-tt+++++t-t 60 3.t"ft+t+I-H-++++-++H-1-H-++++++++1-HI-H-++-++++1-HI-H-+++++t:leo 4 100 6 1-HI-H++++t+H-1-H-++++++++1-H+t++-++++1-H-++-++++t+I-HI-H 200 121.J..U..u..JU-I.U..J..J..U..u..Ju..J..U..J..J.J..l.u..Ju..J,.J.J..J..J.J..1.u..Ju..J,.J.J..J..J.J..1..L.J.J300 ~ g ~ R g ~ i ~ ~ ~ o PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT '-' CJ) LU z u:: w z iI w z iI - :J "-0. . ~e:, " ci 0 N N o'. I- • GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS CEDAR RIVER CORPORATE PARK RENTON, WASHINGTON ProJ. No.T-5996 I Date DEC 2006 I Figure A-11 Cl. U) 0 ':' Cl. I- 0 APPEl'iDIX B TEST PIT LOGS BY OTHERS 0 z ~ 0 >-.. C w ;I: Exploration No. l 0-1.5 1. 5-8 .. 5 8,5·13, 5 13.5-16.5 Brown Silty Sand /511) (moderately dense, damp) (fill) Brown to Blue Gray Silt with gravel, cobbles & boulders ( ML) with oc ca s iDna l piece of wood (moderate 1 y dense >1e t) (fill) rock is gra:iu1ar Seepage at 8.,5'. Brown Organic Si, t (OL) •.ith fragments of decayed viood & \!egetat·ion to 6" :;;ize. Gray Si 1 ty Fine Sand (SM) (moderately dense wet). G,·ades fine and less silty. Completed 3/23/85 Sample Depth I ft) 11. 5" Moi stu,·e Content % 140 Exp 1 ora ti o_~_o.--1_ 0-5.5 5.5-10 10-10. 5 Mixed Brown Silt and Gravel (ML-GM) with angular cobbles and boulders. I fi 11) Change to blue at 2.5' and with rock to 200 lbs. Caving at 4. 5'. Seepage at 6'. Cobbles and Boulders with Silt, rock to 800 lbs. at 7' Some woody debris at 8' Wood debris, organic silt and vegetation. Terminated due to bou1 ders and heavy caving Completed 3/28/75 Sample Depth (ft) 10' Moisture Cont.Ent% 262 ~ NOTES.: > ~ 1) Depths in feet. · 2) field engineer: Roger Low.!;__, _________ ..,.-----------~ 3) Excavation using a ford 755 backhoe 4) Moisture content is a percentage of the sample· dry weight. ATLAS GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING INC. EXPLORATION LOGS PROPOSED OFFICE/WAREHOUSE PROJECT, RENT!ON, WA z ;I: ! PLATE 2 ol,..------·----·-...J,,---·--------.....,,'-------------' 0 z ,. .. z Exploration No. 3 0-10.5 10.5-15.5 15.5-17 17-18 Brown Gravelly, Ccbbly Silt (ML) (fill) Change to blue-gray color at 2.5' Heavy seepage at 7' Water levels 8.25' 3/28/75 Test pit no·, open 1ong enough for water level to stabilize. Grown Organic Siit and Silty Peat (MH/PT) (moderately soft, moist) (decayed vegetation) G,ay Silt with Organic Debris (ML/MH) (moderate 1 y firm, wet). Dark Gray Fine Silty Sand (SM) (moderately dense, wet) Completed 3/28/85 Sample Depth (ft) 14 . Moisture Content% 216 . . : ;,: ·i/ .: • • EXPLORATION LOGS ATLAS GEOTECHNICAI,. .' PROPOSED OFFICE/WAREHOUSE ENGINEE~IN~.Jr?:(; PROJEeT. RENTON, WA ;, :"(:''"'. ~ • PLATE 3 C ,._------·----.....1--------------L-_:_:. _______ _, 0 z > w ~ z ~--·-·--·----------------·-------------,! Exploration No. 4 0-3.5 3.5-8.5 8.5-9 9-15 15-17.5 Brown Sandy Silt (ML) with rocks & cobbles (rnoderatly dense, damp fi 11 I Blue Gravel and Cobbles (moderately dense, saturated) ( f il 1 ) \later at 3.5 feet, heavy fl ow. Large boulders, 200 lb+ at 6' Bro,in Oryanic Silt (ML} (moderately soft, moist} (topsoil). Gractationa1 cl•a1190 to Alternating Brown Organic Silt and Peat (MH/PTi, peat layers to 8" thick. Dark Gray Silty Sand (SM) (Moderately dense, wet) I 6" thick s i lt I ayer at 16. 5). Completed 3/28/55 Sample Depth ( ft) 8. 5 10 11 16. 5 Moi stu;"e Content (%) 120 320 153 47 ATLAS GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING INC. EXPLORATION LOGS PROPOSED OFFICE/WAREHOUSE PROJECT, RENTON, WA ~ . PLATE 4 ~ ._ _________ .;__..1.. _______ .....,......; ___ ..1.. __ .,,_ ________ ..., . f , d I I I 0 z ~ 0 -, Exploration No. 5 0-9 9-12 12-17 Brown Sandy Gravei ly Silt (ML) /moderately dense, ,mist) I fi 11 l With rock fragnients at 3 feet Roe~ tc Dec, 'l,s ;-.;i ~h 2' i,x1g dir::ension at 6.5 feet_ \~01.er at 7' Bro111n and 1--;ray s-:lt (t.ll} witll ·)rganic f1·agmer:ts Da:~k G.ray ~':ediu!T! S:::nd (SP) 1.,iith ~-trf.ce of si'lt fPGder- ati::ly dense, 1-:et) Dark Gray 1.1 e di .. ,,,1 Sand (SP ) w i th a trace cf s i i t (moderately dense, wet). Includes G•ay Silt layers (ML) (mod;arately firm, ;;,t) and tr2ces of or~anic !'.',aterial bclo1>1 15 feet. Exploration No. 6 0-7 7-8 8-9 9-10.5 10.5-12 12-17 Brown Sandy and Gravelly Silt (ML) with rock fr&;ments (moderately firm, moist) (fil1) Rocky at 4' . Broken rock (fill). Organic material at 8'. Brown Peat (P'") (moderately firm, saturated) •Gsr.ay Silt (ML) (moderately firm, saturated) Brown Peat (PT) (moderately fin.n, saturated) Gray Silt (ML) (moderately firm, saturated) with occasional layers of p.Jeat at 13.5'. Completed 3/28/85 Sample Depth (ft) 8 Moisture Content % 236 1i ' '.j l i l i. I I I .------------~.-E-X-PL-O-RAn:tJN_rn_G_s----'-1 ATLAS GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING INC. PROPOSE!l llf1fIC£/WAREH0USE. PROJECT, .Rl:iNHJN, WA PLATE 5 0 2 I ~ I Exploration No, 7 0-3. 5 3. 5-7 7-B 9-12.5 12.5-18 Brown Medi'J~. Sand (SP) with silt (moderately dense, damp) ( fi 11) Grown Silty Gravel (GM) (dense damp) Change to bl ·,,e at 6'. l,ater flo1,ing in at 6' Di:..ie ?ucKy 1 1 r, ll-,e!-1312-1 ~iiiii"'~ Jig;;in~) ::at of \'('.'S:"~>.:i,~.;i ::L :,' 2\'"0 1:!n Ora~~~c. S1 It (MH) (mo<lerately firm, saturated) Gt'adational c!1ul'igc to Drown Pi2ut (PT) (moderately firm, sa wra ted) Dark Blue Gray Medium Sand (SP-SM) with silt Completed 3/28/85 Sample Depth (ft) 8 Moisture Content % 87 Exploration No. 8 0-2. 5 2.5-3.5 3, 5-9 9-9.5 9,5-14.5 14.5-16.5 Brown Silty Sand (SM) with roots (moderately dense, moist) ( fi 11) Asphalt chunk from 2.5 to 3.~· Blue-Gray Gravelly Silt (ML) with rock fragments (dense moist) ( fi l 1 ) Brown si 1 t (ML) w!th occasional rocks and fragments of vegetation. (fill) Black Organic Mat Brown Peat ( PT) Seepage at 12' grades with silt below 12. Gradationa 1 cr,ange to Gray Silt (MLl viith some organic debris. (noderately dense, saturated) Trace of send at 16.5. Terminated at 16.5' due to obstructions that limited excavation. Completed 3/28/85 ATLAS GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING INC. EXPLORATION LOGS PROPOSED OFFICE/WAREHOUSE PROJECT, RENTON, WA PLATE 6 ------·-----..I.----------'-_;:;...:_ _____ __, 0 z ~ 0 ~I ; > ~ z 3c -< ~ 0 Expl oration No. 9 0-3 3-4.5 4. 5-9 9-14.5 14.5-17 17-18 Brown Sandy Silt (ML) (fill) Blue Rocky c;·,1 (very dense) ha,·d digging, Silty Sandy :revel (GM) (very dense, 1,et) (fi 11) " t Kuci<s to :~r· ~ iL:=' ct 7'. Gradational cha,,ge to i•lixed Peat and Gray Siit (PT/l·'H) (firm satura:ecl) Gray Silt (1·\H) \·Jith orgcnic fragments. (Moderate1y firm, saturated) Completed 3/29/85 Sample Depth (ft) 10 11 12.5 17 Moisture Content% 101 185 193 44 EXPLORATION LOGS ATLAS GEOTECHNICAL PROPOSED OFFICE/WAREHOUSE ENGINEERING INC. PROJECT, RENTON, WA PLATE 7 I 0 z m 0 > w ~ 0-8 8-9 9-9.S 9.5-14.5 14.5-16 16-17.5 17.5-18 Brown Sandy Gravelly Silt (ML) (dense, moist) rocks to 18" ( fi 11 ) Change to ~lue ~t 6 1 Seepage and sane civing at 6' bro!'Jn F'ea-c c.r,;_. J1, i: iPT/HH) Chunk of partial ·,y jecayed wood at 12.5 Gray Fine Gravel (SP) (moderately dense, saturated) Mixed Peat and Silt with Peat (PT/MH) Dark Gray Silty Sand (SM) (moderately dense, 11et) Completed 3/29/85 Sample Depth (ft) 10 11 Moisture Content% 147 133 ATLAS GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING INC. EXPLORATION LOGS PROPOSED OFF ICE/WAREHOUSE PROJECT, RENTON, WA z ~ ! PLATE 8 "._ ___________ J.. ________ __; ___ ..,i. ___________ _. • 0 z > m 0 ~ " ~ > ~ " > m z :t ..,, " " Exploration No. 11 0-1. 5 1.5-7.5 7.5-8 8-lO 10-li 11-13. 5 13.5-14.5 Brown Sandy Gravelly Silt (Ml) (Moderately dense, damp) ( fi 11 ) Rocky Fill 1·;ith Silt Color change to blue at 4.5' . ' a I. Bt"O\,J!l Orga1·1~C s·:·i·t (;;;-:) h''itll 0!"92..1";1( i:i2."::2t·i:l_ '.f·irn, dC:::-!f' f:1'.)1 s~) Gradcl1iona·, cha 1 ,9e to Blu'l-.:11 f:t:at (?I) (ffiOdc(at:::1y -fit:-.:-:, moist) Gray Silt (l>.L-Mn) (with fragments of organic material (moderately firm, moist) Dark Gray Sand (S?) with some silt (moderately dense, saturated) Completed 3/29/85 Sample Depth (ft) 8.5 Moisture Content% 10, 5 - 96 258 ATLAS GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING INC. EXPLORATION LOGS PROPOSED OFFICE/WAREHOUSE PROJECT, RENTON, WA PLATE 9 I I • 0 z "' 0 ~ z Exploration No. 12 0-3, 5 3.5-8 S-8.5 9-10.5 10.5-11.5 11.5-15 15-15.5 15,5-16.5 Brown Sandy Sii: (ML) (moderately dense, damp) (fill) 1vith some reeks ct 2 1 Brown and Blue w' t~ Crange Layers, Sandy Grave 11 y Cobb l y Silt (ML) !moderately dense, moist) (fil 1 I Rocky fill -!''23\.'.V 7·101/J of \~12.ter Rock to Z' x 2 l1i: 'I~-~.._~..,~-•-~ C" ::';;; c.i, ~ I ·~•I: I '-;, Brown Orgcr:ic s;··1 t (i"1H) {moderately aense, sat:_;rc.ted) Gray silt (.11,L) (rncdcrately dense, saturated) Gray Medium S2r,c'. (SD) (moderately dense, saturated) Gray Silt (ML) (mederately dense, saturated) Dark Gray Sane !SP! (Moderately dense, saturated) Completed 3/29/85 Exnloration No. A 0-6.5 6.5-9,0 Brown Medium Sand (SP) (moderately dense -loose, moist) (fill) (caving) Vegetation mat at 6,5_ Brown Peat (PT) Termination@ 9' due to severe caving Completed 3/29/85 ATLAS GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING INC. EXPLORATJON LOGS PROPOSED OFFICE/WAREHOUSE PROJECT, RENTON, WA ~ . I ;:; PLATE 10 C ,_ ____________ ....._ ___________ ...J.. __ ;:_;;.;;._ _______ .J <( u ZONE AE ~, J "' z 19 "' ~ SOUTHWEST j 16TH ZONE X - w > <( f-~, t; ~ ~ cc :, rj' SW 29TH ~ I STREET 1, zo • APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET 500 o 500 NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON AND INCORPORATED AREAS !SEE MAP l"JOEX F0/1 PANELS NOT PR1NT!;01 NUMBER PANEL SUFFIX 53()(8.) (19)8 """" -5.lQOOJ Q&>Q MAP NUMBER 53033C0978 f MAP REVISED: MAY 16, 1995 Federal Emergency Management Agency ., ' This i8 an official cor:,r of a portion of the abo~ referenced fiood map. It was extracted using F-MIT On-Line. This map does not reflect change1;, or amendments which may have been made subsequent to the date on the title block. For the latest product infcrmatjor, about National Flood Insurance Program flood maps check the FEMA Flood Map Store at www.msc fema gov @ CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY 701 FIFTH A VENUE, #3400, SEATTLE, WA %104 Order No.: 001218970 PROPERTY ADDRESS: LJNDAYENUE Your No.: TARRAGON/ 621 COMPANY RENTON, WASHINGTON TARRAGON 1000 SECOND A VENUE, #3200 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98104 ATTN: JOE BLATTNER 1/1 Enclosed are your materials on the above tran:-.action. If you have. any questions regarding these materials, please contact us. Thank you for this opportunity to serve you. <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<~>>>>>>>>>>>>>>~>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> TITLE UNff 6 TELEPHONE: (206) 628-5610 TOLL FRE!l (800) 627-0530 FAX: (206) 628-9717 DARYL SA VIDIS BARBARA. WAGNER DAVID P. CAMPBELL l:Hl.A.I) ~CHABEl{T MEI.AN!E MINOR SENIOR TITLE OFFJCERAND UNIT MANAGER (P,L\IL DARYLSAVIDIS@CIT.COM) SENIOR TITLE OFFICER (E-\L\lL BARB.WAGNER@CJT.COMJ Sf'.NlOR.'!Tl"LE OFFICER I E-~v1A1L: DAV1D.CA.MPBELL@C1T.COM) SENIOR TffLF OFFJCER (E-\!AIL BRAD.SCHABERT@ClT.COM) TITLE O FFI CEK 11'-MAIL MELANIE.MINOR@CIT.COM) <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<·· <<<· <>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tl1l.ETI t/RDA/0999 • ,, --~--~~-~--- Sf ,;_ '~ ,;' ·""·~~ -<; fj COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, a Missouri corporation, herein called the Company, for a valuable consideration, hereby comm.its to issue its policy or policies of title insurance. as identified in Schedule A, in favor of the proposed Insured named in Schedule A, as owner or mortgagee of the estate or interest covered hereby in the land described or referred to in Schedule A, upon payment of the premiums and charges therefore; all subject to the provisions of Schedules A and B and to the Exclusions from Coverage (appearing herein) and to the Conditions and Stipulations hereof. This Commitment shall be effective only when the identity of the proposed Insured and the amount of the policy or policies committed for have been inserted in Sche.dule A hereof by the Company, either at the time of the issuance of this Commitment or by subsequent endorsement. This Commitment is preliminary to the issuance of such policy or policies of title insurance and all liability and obligations hereunder shall cease and terminate six months after the effective date hereof or when the policy or policies committed for shall issue, whichever first occurs, provided that the failure to issue such policy or policies is not the fault of the Company, In Witness Whereof, CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY has caused this commitment to be signed and sealed as of the date of policy shown in Schedule A, the policy to become valid when countersigned by an authorized signatory. Issued by: CI-!ICAGO TfTLE INSURANCE COMPANY 3400 BANK OF AMERICA TOWER 701 STHAVENUE SEATTLE, WA 98104 (206) 628-5666 CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY Prtsidem ! I' I ,• ,, 1· I ., : ~r ,· '"II CI--!n.-:AGO TITLE INSURANCE C01,JPANY 701 FIFTJI /1VU<l.ll.'.. # y:J\1(1, SFATfLE, WA 98104 AL.TA COMMITMENT SCHEDULE A Title Unit: U-06 Phone: (206)628-5610 (206)628-9717 Fax: Customer Numl1c1. Buyer(s): TAR:V,GON / 6 21 TARllsGON, LLC Officer: SA VIDIS/WAGNER/CAMPBEI.I /Ml NOR/SCHABERT Commitment Effective Date: SEPTEMBER 2S, 200(, l . Policy or Policies to be issued: at 8:00AM. Order No.: COMPANY 1218970 ALTA Owner's Policy 19 92 EXTENDED COMMERCIAL PRIOR POLICY/COMBINATION RATE Amount: Premium: Tax: $5,392,728.00 $9,241.00 $ 813.21 Proposed Insured: TARRAGON L. L C. , A WASHINGTC'.•1 :Cl!,l TED LIABILITY COMPANY Pohcy or Policies to be issued: AL TA Loan Policy Proposed Insured: Policy or Policies to be issued: ALTA Loan Policy Proposed Insured: Amount: $0. oo Premium: Tax: Amount: $0. oo Premium: Tax; 2 . The estate or interest in the land which is covereJ Uy thls Comm-itment is: FEE SIMPLE 3 . Title to the estate or interest in the land is at the effecti\'c. date hereof vested in: 621 COMPANY, A PARTNERSHJ P 4 . The land referred to in this Commitment is Je::,cnbed as follows: SEE ATTACHED LEGAL DESCRIPCIOU E:,I::3IT COMMAM.5/KLC/JJ.l.05 CHJCAGO TI rLE INSURANCE COMPANY A.LT A. COMMITMENT SCHEDULE A (Continued) OrderNo.: 1218970 Your No.: TARRAGON / 621 coMPANY LEGAL DESCRIPTION EXHIBIT (Paragraph 4 of Schedule A continuation) ALL OF BLOCKS 2 AND 3, AND LOTS 27 AN'.J 28 IN BLOCK 1, ALL IN C. D. HILLMAN' S &'.RLINGTON GARDENS ADDITION TO THE er:·; OF SEATT;_,E, DIVISION :-10. 1, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 17 OF PLATS, PAGE (S) 74, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; EXCEPT THE WEST 10 FEET OF LOTS 15 TO 28, INCLUSIVE, IN SAID BLOCK 3, CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF RENTON FDR .S'J'iffET, ALLEY AND OTHER PUBLIC USES AND PURPOSES BY DEED RECORDED UNDER P..UDI TC)R.' S FILE NIB•1BER 63 91019; TOGETHER WITH THE VACATED PORTIC,l-J OF '•1APLE AVENUE SOUTHWEST (89TH AVENUE SOUTH) LYING SOUTH OF TEE SOUTfi':>-'!Y ',CN:-: OF SOUTHWEST 21ST STREET AND NORTH OF THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SOUTHWEST 23~[! STREET; AND TOGETHER WITH THE VACATED PORTIC!c 0£' TAYLOR AVENUE SOUTHWEST (91ST AVENUE SOUTH) HAVING A WIDTH OF 60 FEE,, MORE JR LESS, LYING SOUTH OF THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY MARGIN OF SOUTHWES, ;2E:'f STREET EXTENDED, AND KORTH OF THE NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY MARGIN OF SOUTHWEST 23RD STREET EXTENDED, AND LYING BETWEEN 3LOCKS 1 AND 2; A.ND TOGETHER WITH THE V.~CATED PORTH;r, C•F 50\JTHWEST 23RD STREET (SOUTH 160TH STREET) HAVING A w:DTH OF 30 FEET, LY:IJG ADJACENT TO THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF BLOCKS 2 AND 3, EAST OF THE WESTERLY LIKE OF BLOCK 3 EXTENDED SOUTHERLY, A..~D WEST OF THE WESTERLY LINE OF BLOCK 1 EXTENDED SOUTHERLY. CLTACMAl>/RDA/0999 CHICAGO TITLE INSUR4NCE COMPANY A.LT A. COMMITMENT SCHEDULEB Order No.: 1218970 Your No.: TARRAoou / 6:n coMI>ANY Schedule B of the policy or policies to be issued will contain exceptions to the following matters unless the same are disposed of to the satisfaction of the Company. GENERAL EXCEPTIONS A. Rights or claims of parties in possession not shown by the public records. B. Encroachments, overlaps, boundary line disputes, or other matters which would be disclosed by an accurate survey and inspection of the premises. C. Easements, or claims of easements, not .shnwn by the public records. D. Any lien, or right to a lien, for contributions to employee benefit funds, or for state workers' compensation, or for services, labor, or material heretofore or hereafter furnished, all as imposed by law, and not shown by the public records. E. Taxes or special assessments which arc not shown as existing liens by the public records. F. Any service, installation, connection, maintenance, tap, capacity or construction charges for sewer, water, electricity, other utilitiesi or garbage collection and disposal. G. Reservations or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof; Indian tribaJ codes or regulations, Indian treaty or aboriginal rights, including easements or equitable .servitudes. H. Water rights, claims, or title to water. I. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any,created, fu.st appearing in the public records, or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof but prior to the date the proposed insured acquires of record for value the e::;tate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS FOLLOW WLTAC.OMB/f<DA/W:E CHICAGO TITLE INSL:RANCE COMPANY A.LTA COMMITMENT SCHEDULEB (Continued) Order No.: 001218970 Your l\o.: SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS A l. EASEMENT AND THE TER"1S i"--ND CCtJDITIONS THEREOF: GRANTEE, ViJRPOSE: AREA AFFECTED: RECORDED, RECORDING NUMBER: P.Z,CI FI C NORTfniEST BELL TELEPHONE COMPANY, A WASHINGTON CORPORATION UNDERGROUND COMMUN I CATION LINES, CONDUITS AND MANHOLES WITH WIRES, C.ABLES, FIXTURES AND APPURTENANCES ATTACHED THERETO THE EASTERLY 10 FEET OF THE WESTERLY 20 FEET OF LOTS 15 THRU 29, BLOCK 3, C.D. HILLMANS EARLINGTON GARDENS ADDITION DIV. NO. 1 MAY l, 1979 7905011034 B 2 . EASEMENT AND THE TERM'.:; .~:J.:J C:.:L'Ul TI ONS THSREOF: RESERVED BY: PURPOSE: AREA AFFECTED: RECORDED, RECORDING NUMBER: CITY OF RENTON I>; ORDINANCE NUMBER 3978 UTILITY AND RELATED PURPOSES PORTION OF SAID PREMISES LYING WITHIN VACATED SOUTHWEST 23RD STREET (SOUTH 160TH STREET) MARCH 27, 1986 8603270854 c 3. PAYMENT OF THE REAL ESTATE Exc:sE TAX, IF REQUIRED. THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED HEP.El ;-J :s SITUATED WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF LOCAL TAXING AUTHORITY OF Cl TY OF RENTON. PRESENT RATE IS 1. 78%. ANY CONVEYANCE DOCUMEHT >ltJcT ~E ACCOMPANIED BY THE OFFICIAL WASHINGTON STATE EXCISE T!',X AFFIDAVIT-THE APPLICABLE EXCISE TAX MUST BE PAID AND THE ,~F': :l.'V'"' APPROVED AT THE TIME OF TEE RECORDING OF THE CONVEYANCE DOCUMEU'S. n 4. GENERAL AND .SPECIAL TAZE~' A!(:i CHARGES, PAYABLE FEBRUARY 15, DELINQUENT IF FIRST lFsV :;1;p;,_:IJ ON MAY 1, SECOND HALF DELINQUENT lF CLTACM81/RDA/r:!)9') CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY A.L.T.A. COMMITMENT SCHEDULEB (Continued) OrderNu.: 1218970 Your No.: TARRAooN ; 621 coMPANY SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS UNPAE) ON NOVEMBER 1 (W TcE ·;11x YE/\R (AMOUNTS DO NCT INCLUDE INTEREST /\ND FENALTIES) , YE/\R, TAX ACCOUNT NUMBER, LEVY CODE, ASSESSED V/\LUE-LAND c" ASSESSED VALUE-I MPRO\IE!,l:i::~-~T::_; · GENERAL & SPECIAL TAXES. 2006 334040-0285-01 2110 $ 1,612,800.00 $ 0.00 RILLED: $ 19,567.74 PAID, $ 9,783.87 UNPAID, $ 9,783.87 B 5. UNRECORDED LEASEHOLDS, ff ANY, RIGHTS OF VENcJORS AND HOLDERS OF SECURITY INTERESTS ON rn°5JNAL P'/OPERTY INSTALLED UPON SAID PROPERTY AND RIGHTS OF TEN/\NTS TC• REMOVE TRADE FIXTURES AT THE EXPIRATION OF THE TERM. F 6. TERMS AND CONDIT JONS OF "'.'HE PA?.TN3RSHI P .>.GREEMENT FGR 621 COMPANY. c NOTE, A COPY OF THE P.>YJ'lllcRS~ IP AGREEMENT, AND AMENDMENTS THERETO, IF ANY, MUST BE SUBMITTED. H 7. ANY CONVEYANCE OR MORTC]!,GE BY 621 COMPANY, MUST BE EXECUTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PARTKERSHI? AGREEMENT AND BY ALL THE GENERAL PARTNERS AND THEIR RESPEGTIVE SPOUSES AS OF THE DATE OF ACQUISITION, OR EVIDENCE MUST BE SUB'iITTED THAT CERTAIN DESIGNATED PARTNERS HAVE EEEN AUTHOR! ZED TO ACT FOR ·;·,:z PARTNERSfiI P. I 8. MATTERS OF RECORD, IF /\tcY, t,l;,~INST THE NAMES OF THE UNDISCLOSED GENERAL PARTNERS OF 6::::::._ CCMP . .'.\..;"JY. 9. TITLE IS TO VEST IN TJl,RRT,:.;::_\t'~ =-, L.C., P. •. ND WILL THEN BE SCBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING MATTERS SHOl-,;N A''.' P;1.Rl,GRAPH (S) 10. 10. TERMS AND CONDITIONS GF T:-JE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY AGREEMENT FOR TARRAGON L.L.C. L 11. THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION IN THIS COMMITMENT IS BASED ON INFORMATION PROVIDED WITH THE APPLICATION AND THE PUBLIC RECORDS AS DEFINED IN THE C'LTACMBI.-/RDA/0999 CHICAGO TITLE IN~URANCE COMPANY ALT A. COMMITMENT SCHEDULEB (Continued) Order No.: 1218 97 U Your No.: n.RmaoN ; 621 coMPANY SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS POLICY TO ISSUE. THE PARTIES TO THE FORTHCOMING TRANSACTION MUST NOTIFY THE TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY PRIOR TO CLOSING IF THE DESCRIPTION DOES NOT CONFORM TO THEIR EXPECTATIONS. " 12. TO PROVIDE AN EXTENDED COVER.I\GE OWNER'S POLICY GENERAL EXCEPTIONS A THROUGH D WILL BE CONSIDERED WEEN OUR INSPECTION AND/OR REVIEW OF SURVEY, IF REQUIRED, IS COMPLETED. GENERAL EXCEPTIONS E THROUGH H WILL REMAIN IN THE owm;w s POLICY TO ISSUE. A SUPPLEMENTAL COMMITMENT >ii LL FOLLOW . IP THE ANTICIPATED CLOSHl3 DPi:'E IS LESS THAN 4 WEEKS FROM THE DATE OP THIS COMMITMENT, PLF..ASE C:JN~ACT YOUR TITLE OFFICER IMMEDIATELY. N 13. PRIOR TO ISSUING AN EXTEN'.JED FORM OWNER'S POLICY THIS COMPANY REQUIRES 0 p THAT THE PARTIES TO THE T?J>J,s.o.:TION PROVIDE AN ALTA/ACSM CERT!FlED, AS-BUILT SURVEY. NOTE 1, THE PREM! UM FOR THE EZTE:IJDE:U COVERAGE OlvNER' S PCL! CY IS ITEM! ZED AS FOLLOWS, DESCRI PT! ON STANDARD COVERAGE, SALES TAX, EXTENDED COVERAGE SURCHARGE, SALES TAX ON SURCHARGE, TOTAL PREMIUM, INCLUDING TAX, NOTE 2, AMOUNT $ 6,313.00 $ 555.54 $ 2,928.00 $ 257.66 $ 10,054.20 IN THE EVENT THE OWNER'S POLICY COVERAGE !S CHANGED FROM EXTENDED TO STANDARD COVERAGE A CHARGE OF $200.00, PLUS $17.60 SALES TAX, WILL BE ADOED TO COVER THE COSTS F.EL',TING TO THE EXTENDED COVERAGE INSPECTION. NOTE 3, Ec'FECTI VE JANUARY· 1, 199 i, CClC:.JMENT RORMAT AND CONTENT -REQUIREMENTS HAVE BEEN IMPOSED BY WASHINGTON LA.W. FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE FOLLOWING REQUIREMENTS MA, RESULT IN REJECTION OF THE DOCUMENT BY THE CCUNTY RECORDER OR IM?OSITION OF A $50. 00 SCRCHARGE. CLTACMB2/RDA/0999 CHICAGO TITLE lN:,URANCE CO!v!PANY A.LT A COMMITMENT SCHEDULEB (Continued) Order No.: 12:8 970 Your No.: TARRAGON / 621 coMPANY SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS FOR flETA TJ,S OF THESE .STA':'EIFI DF; REQUIREMENTS PLEASE v:sIT THE KING COUNTY RECORDER'S OFP1C'E WEBSITE AT WWW.METROKC.GOV/RECELEC/RECORDS AND SELECT ONLINE FORMS AND DOCUMENT STANDARDS. THE FOLLOW:NG flll.AY BE USE::C ;:,..5 IV~ ABBREVIATED LEGAL DESCRIPTION ON THE DOCUMENTS TO BE RECORr,c, TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF ROI 65. 04. SAID ABBREVIATED LEGAL :~SCRIPTION IS NOT A SUBSTITUTE FOR A COMPLETE LEGAL DESCRIPTIO:-.T WH!Gl '11JST ALSO APPEAR IN THE BODY OP THE DOCUMENT, 1,0TS 27 & 28, BLOCK 1, fa.LL no BLOCK 2 AND A PORTION OF BLOCK 3, VOLUME 17 OF PLATS, PAGE 74; TCCETHE:!< WITH VAO..TED STREETS ADJOINING. END OF SCHEDULE B CLTACMB2/RDA/0999 CHICAGO TITLE 1N,t1RANCE COMPANY ALT.A. COMMITMENT SCHEDULEB (Continued) Order No.: 1218970 Your No.: TARRAGON ; 621 coHPANY SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS s THE FOLLOWING PARTIES f,.~VE 3EEN SENT A COPY OF THIS COMMITMENT: CHICAGO TITLE ESCROW -SUE JT::;\1ENS 701 F'IFTH AVENUE, sur:·i-: :?>1 DD SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98104 SUE STEVENS CB RICHARD ELLIS 16400 SOUTHCENTER PKWY TUKWILA, WASHINGTON 9f3H,g JOHN SULLIVAN (206) 575-2553 TARRAGON 1/1 1/ 1 1000 SECOND AVENUE, #J2CO SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98104 JOE BL/1.TTNER 1/1 (206) 233-9600 521 COMPANY P.O. BQX 1925 BELLEVUE, WASHINGTON S,3CJO':i-192.'J HOWARD SEELIG 1/1 (425)454-0885 ClTACMB2/RDA/099'l 0 ' > ( @ / CHICAGO TITLL NSURANCE COMP ANY 701 FIFTH A VENUE, #3400, SEA'ITLE, WA 'l,JO,l PHONE: FAX: (206)628-5610 (206)628-9717 IMPORT ANT~ This is not a Survey. It is furnished a.s a convenience to locate the land indicated hereon with reference to streets and other land. No liability is assumed by reason of reliance hereon. ' ' ' J j ·' ;j : ! j!:S, :,Lll • " • ' ~ ·l,· ,, ~ I. . ! ,. ,.. ' ~ ' 'll! 5 ~ 1----1----+----+--,,--j~ ~ ,, " I '. I I ,. " ;;;:r .. ,,. _. ,,:: ;~., ' '"" ,. ~ • l+---"""''-'1-=4=='-'--+=c__-,-i ~- ;27 ftl"'°~ <s: l------1----4----+-"'-' --, t """"'"--+-'-''"'_tt_-·r---< 1 , ~"': " ~ ,1, I ,,, -~~ ;1: .':'!"' s ; ., ' "' ' ~ ' z_z.~ " " ,o -" "' 0 ~ " ,..,"Ii .. " .. ,. . ' ,, "'=-" ' ¥ ' ' a " " --~ " -"'""-+---+---i-----; " ----'-"-"'--l--e----+----l ' ,--• -- .. .. ,. ·' ..• -. -,s,,' ~- .f ~,., ,~.~ g ~ 25 1--,---,'i----+-=-'i--,-''.'.....-_<7',4 -1 4 • 24 z, "' Z2 Z/.L, -"',F.--1,--'---+----1--,----< ~~i);/ ' •• \ . ', " \ 1\ !: ~ ': ' ' ' ' ·~ : : ~ ~ ,, 0 .. 1, .. ) w " > . \ " ' " 20 ,o I-"' ,. in ,. is " ' ,, . 'If''' ,1<>'1) ,. . " 1-----,-.~-/ \ .. \--~'---j ·, ------1-----'-v·' _ _____.!____ 1 s, • ' --f------jf-----+--.,-·---. : ~, : If.ts IC<-, .•I ,.,~ I 1-•· '"0 190 . a ,, '° " ,. " .. • ,, j ' EXCLUSIONS (Cont'd.) 4. Any claim, which arises out of the transaction vesting in the Insured the estate or interest insured by this policy, by reason of the operation of federal bankruptcy, state insolvency, or similar creditors' rights laws, that is based on: (i) the transaction creating the estate or interest insured by this policy being deemed a fraudulent conveyance or fraudulent transfer: or (ii) the transaction creating the estate or interest insured by this policy being deemed a preferential transfer except where the preferential transfer results from the failure: (a) to timely record the instrument of transfer; or (b) of such recordation to impart notice to a purchaser for value or a judgment or lien creditor. ALTA LOAN POLICY FORM (10-17-92) The following matters are expressly excluded from the coverage of this policy and the Company will not pay loss or damage, costs, attorneys' fees or expenses which arise by reason o': - 1. (a) Any law, ordinance or governmental regulation (including but not limited to building and zoning laws, ordinances, or regulations) restricting, regulating, prohibiting or relating to (i) the occupancy, use, or enjoyment of the land; (ii) the character, dimensions or location of any improvement now or hereafter erected on the land; (iii) a separa- tion in ownership or a change in the dimensions or area of the land or any parcel of which the land is or was a part; or (iv) environmental protection, or the effect of any violation of these laws, ordinances or governmental regulations, except to the extent that a notice of the enforcement thereof or a notice of a defect, lien or encum- brance resulting from a violation or alleged violation affecting the land has been recorded in the public records at Date of Policy. (b) Any governmental police power not excluded by (a) above, except to the extent that a notice of the exercise thereof or a notice of a defect, lien or encumbrance resulting from a violation or alleged violation affecting the land has been recorded in the public records at Date of Policy. 2. Rights of eminent domain unless notice of the exercise thereof has been recorded in the public records at Date of Policy, but not excluding from coverage any taking which has occurred prior to Date of Policy which would be binding on the rights of a purchaser for value without knowledge. 3. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters: (a) created, suffered, assumed or agreed to by the insured claimant; (b) not known to the Company, not recorded in the public records at Date of Policy, but known to the insured claimant and not disclosed in writing to the Company by the insured claimant prior to the date the insured claimant became an insured under this policy; (c) resulting in no loss or damage to the insured claimant; (d) attaching or created subsequent to Date of P0licy (except to the extent that this policy insures the priority of the Hen of the insured mortgage over any statutory lien for services, labor or material); or (e) resulting in loss or damage which would not have been sustained if the insured claimant had paid value for the insured mortgage. 4. Unenforceabi!ity of the lien of the insured mortgage because of the inability or failure of the insured at Date of Policy, or the inability or failure of any subsequent owner of the indebtedness, to comply with applicable doing business laws of the state in which the land is situated. 5. Invalidity or unenforceability of the lien of the insured mortgage, or claim thereof, which arises out of the transaction evidenced by the insured mortgage and is based upon usury or any consumer credit protection or truth in lending law. 6. Any statutory lien for services, labor or materials (or the claim or priority of any statutory lien for services, labor or materials over the lien of the insured mortgage) arising from an improvement or work related to the land which is con- tracted for and commenced subsequent to Date of Policy and is not financed in whole or in part by proceeds of the Indebtedness secured by the insured mortgage which at Date of Policy the insured has advanced or is obligated to advance. 7. Any claim, which arises out of the transaction creating the interest of the mortgagee insured by this policy, by reason of the operation of federal bankruptcy, state insolvency, or similar creditors' rights laws, that is based on: (i) the transaction creating the interest of the insured mortgagee being deemed a fraudulent conveyance or fraudulent transfer; or (ii) the subordination of the interest of the insured mortgagee as a result of the application of the doctrine of equitable subordination; or (iii) the transaction creating the interest of the insured mortgagee being deemed a preferential transfer except where the preferential transfer results from the failure: (a) to timely record the instrument of transfer; or (b) of such recordation to impart notice to a purchaser for value or a judgment or lien creditor. .;_ Return to: Martin A. Seelig P. 0. Box 1925 Bellevue, WA 98009 • • O:JJT CLAIM DE~D COVERSHEET FILED BY iww;IJ.,2. 1i/s GRANTOR: Mar1ia A. Sttl1g and How•rd L. Sedi1, presumptively !l.lbject to lhe interest of thclr respective spouses, Annice B. Stt.lig and Bfflrict J. SttUg GRANTEE: 621 Company ABREVIAnD LEGAL DESCRIYTIONS, BATIERSDY STREET· SOUTH PROPERTY, TAX PARCEL I. D. #lnD07-9031-09 That portion of the Nortbwt ·~ oftbe Soutbwe,t % ofSrcrion l9, Town,bip 20 North, Rlogt 7 Eau, W.M., ETC. BATTERSB}' STREttJ • NORm PROPERD'; TAX PARCELL D, #192Q07~9116-9f An irregularly shaped tract of land in the Northtat Quarter of the Southal Quaner (:'".(f: 'h orsw 7~) ofSedioP i9, io·,nuhip 26 Noria, Ra.ace i Eut oiW,M .• in King County, Washington, being all that portion of said NEV. of SW~~ lying, etc. WATSON STREET PROPERTY; TAX PARCELL D, #l520%-9l2l:J)6 Lot J, City of Enumclaw revised Short Plat No. 8013, m::orded under Recording Nos. 8107290505 and 8209160469, being a portion of the North 620 feec of the South 740 feet oftht! wen Ila# of the N"1Mfft qHrterof theNDf11teatt llfltlrtffof 8ecdotl t!, Towmhip 20 North, Ran1e 6 F.ul Will.t.mffl.t' Meridian, i.n King County, Washington; LIND AVENUE PROPERTY TAX PAijCEL; L D. "33~}01 ALL Wl1HJN the SW V. ofS«-tioa l!i, To.-iullip 13 Nort.Ji, Rla1e 5 bt, W.M. [1~93993 02/i8/9B .oo .00 ·- I . . . r, ... _ ... N t• ~-. N N .. II'.) • ... ' ,, N 0 ~ a, • • QUIT CLAIM DEED THE GRANTORS, MARTIN A SEELIG and HOWARD L. SEELIG, presumptively subject to the community inlerest of their re~pecti'>'e 1pouSC3, ANNlCE 8. SEELIG and BEATRICE J. SEELIG, for consideration of achieving the correction of the public record 10 show the true ownerstiip, hereby convey and quit claim 1heir entire interest in certain: properties to 621 COMPANY, 1he owning pannersh.ip The public record previOU!ly !howed title in the names of MARTIN A. SEELIG AND HOWARD L SEELIG, imtcad of the name oftheowning partnmhip, 621 COMPANY. The certain propertie, to which the corrtaion applie, are u follows BATIERSBY STREET· SOUTH PROPERTY TAX PARCEL I D, Nl91007~903f:-09 That portion of the Northeast V. oft!1e Southwest 'h of Section 19, Towmhip 20 North, Range 7 East, W.M., lying South of a line whlch i1 100 feet Southerly of and paralltl to the ,~tert.i.'l-e afW=-r~..eeu~ CQrr-.f'~Y·~ ~ S"Wc:d t::.ck a: i: ,".C'o-\' cros= .;:;.i.;:! subdivision; and lying Westerly of A.Jpinc Ridge, a.s per plat recorded in Volume 84 of Pla1s, on p&BC 5, records of King County; !lrld lying Westerly of a line extended North, paraJJel to the.Eut line of said Northeast Y, of the iOUthwest Y. from the Northwest corner or Lot 1 oha.id Plat of Alpine Ridge; and lying Westerly of a line, extended Soo1h. parallel to the Eut line of:Wd Northeast '.'4 of the Southwest 1/.., from the SoL.thwC:51: comer of Lot 7 or said Plat of AJptn(: Ridge; EXCEPT those portioru thereof condemned in King County Superior Court Cause No 117413 for Drainage District No. 5, AND EXCEPT all coal and minetab and the righl to explore for and mine the !l4IDe as excepted by dttd recorded under King CQunty Recording No. 12~ 18; Pttge I of 4 ., ~ r,, r- -~ N ~ " ( /lj 1f. ... ~· ~ (l) ~ • • TOGETHER WJTIJ an casement for ingress and egres., 60 fttt in width, abuning 1Jpon and parallel with the Northerly boundary of Lot I of »id Alpine Ridge (Southeast 441. Street, extended Westerly); Situ11te in the City of Enumcb,w, County of King. State ofWa.,tlingian. BATIERSDY STREET -NORTH PROPERTY TAX PARCELL D. #192007-9126-03 An irregularly shaped tract of land in t~ Northeast Quart.er of the S0u1hwe,1 Quarter (NE 1/4 of SW Vt.) ofSoction 19, Towrnhip 20 Nort~ Range 7 East ofW.M., in King County, Wa.diington, being all that portion of!.8.ld NE 1h of SW Vt lying (I) Nonh of the tract of land conveyed to WiUiam H. Dunning by Deed date.c:1 March 3, 1982, recorded March 19, 1982. File No. 8203190229. Records of King County, Washington, and (2) West ofa line, extended North, parallel 10 the East liru: ofu..id NE Y4 of SW 1/t, from the Northwest comer of Loi l oft.JN: Plat of Alpine Ridge, u recorded in Volume 84 of Plats, at Page 5, Records of King County, Wuhington, and (J) Soulh of1 line wtuch. is JOO feet Northerly of and paralld lo the c.cnterlinc of Weyerhaeuser Compllfly's railroad track (Hid line being the touth line of the trlCt ofland conveyed lo Charles D. Carr and Edith M. Carr, husband and wifie, by the Quadrant Corporation by DC<d dated July 9, l97l). WATSON STREET PROPERJY TAX PARCEL 11 D #252006:;912]:06 Loi J. t:1ty ot hnumcl1w rev11,ed ShOrt f'lal No. BOB, rcconied under Reconling Not. 8107290505 and 8209160469, being n. portion of the North 620 feet of the South 740 feet of lhc West half of the Northie&Jt qu!.rler of the NortheaJt quaner of S«:r:ion 15, Township 20 North, Junge 6 Eut Wiliame<te Mttidian, in King County, Wuhini!on: EXCEPT the West JO feet conveyed lo King County by Deed recoolcd under Reoording No. 6l41749, TOGETHER WITH AN AGREEMENT FOR USE OF-NEIGIIBOIUNG PROPERTIES recorded under Auditor'• File No. 9504270669 whii:h granu the owner of the property adjacern 10 the west of said Lot 3 the righl to place cert&in signs on said Lot 3 in c;,;:changc for the right by the owner of ii.id Lot 3 lo U.JC a ponion of uid adja.cent property for driveway accetJ 10 Watson St LIND AVENUE PROPERJY JAX PARCEL I. D NJ3:1?:f9::921YU Page 2 of 4 -- I~ i I. • ALL OF BLOCKS 2 AND J; AND LOTS 27 AND 28 IN BLOCK I, al.I in C.D. Hillman', Earlington G&rdens Addition to the City ofSeettle., OiYi,ion No. 1, a.ccording to the Plat rcoorded in Volume 17 of Plats, page 74, in Kmg County, Wehington, EXCEPT the West. 10 feet of Lw 15 l:O 2S, inclusive., in Yid Block J, conveyed to the City of Renton for ,trct:t, alley and other public LUC!I and pwpoKS by Deed recorded undtt Auditor's Ftle No. 6391019; TOGETHER WJTII TIIE VACA TED PORTION OF MAPLE A VENUE SW. (89"' A VENUE SW) lying South of the Soulherty line of SW21" St. and North of the NortJierly line of SW 23.,i St; ANDTOGET!IER WITII TilE VACATED PORTION OF TAYLOR AVENUE S.W. (91n A VENUES.) having a width -0f 60 feet more or less, lying South of the Soutllerty right-of-way nwgin of SW 21" St. t:XtCJ1dod, and North of the Northerly right-of-way margin of SW 23"' St. ext.ended, and lying between Blocks I and 2; AND TOGETIIER WTl1l THE VACA TED PORTION OF SW 2.3"' STREJff (S. 160m STREET) ha,ing a width of JO feet, lying adjacent to the Southerly line of Biocl<a 2 and 3, Eu1 of the W-ly Imo of Block l extended Soutlta1y, and West of th< We,1erly lin• of Block I extended Southerly; AND TOGET!IER WTl1l AN OPTION TO PURCHASE OR OPTION TO PUROIASE EASEMENT the aouth half of S.W. 21" St. !yins WCI! ofEul Valley Road and adjacall to the north lidt: of LOI 1,. should aaid portion of said sued be vacauid. recorded under Auditor's File No 9103250027, and a, said OYnON i1 modified by Agreemfflt dated J11mwy 23, 1981 and alto recorded under Auditor's File No. 9I032S0027. AND SUBJECT TO an ea,cment o,.,. th< easlttly ten (IO) l<d oflhe -my twenty (20) im oiLots i 5 iitru 20, 6iocll; 3 oi the a00YC ~ prupcriy fQJ iRC pii<:;,aTrm'Ji., operation, maintenance and repair of UOOcrground communication linea. conduits ml rnanbolu u recorded Wider Auditor', FJe No. 790501103'1. ALL AS SHOWN in C.D. Hillman', Earlington Gard""' Addition to the City of Swtle, Division No. 1; P1&e 3 of 4 ·'----·-·-"" I ' ·, ' - ST A TE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING On this day per,onally appeared before me MARTIN A. SEELIG, ANNICE B. SEELIG, HOWARD L. SEELlG, and BEA TRICE l. SEELIG, to me onown I<> be Ibo illdividulb de><rib«i in and who executed the foregoing uutrument and acknowledged that they signed the same a.s 1heir free llM volunaary act and deed, for the uses and purpru.es therein merilioned. Page4of 4 .-. 5128 e,lf PH qngporatiRP 6 P@Dn1Yll'!Pi• Con>o-rtlt1on wl X b. 1 ¥e4 l t•+, for a.nd in consid..,.raiion of the SUJ1 of One !$LOO) Dollar to UII U!. h.4hd ;,aid &nd in further consideration of t.he genera.1 public 1relf11N and the specal b-eMfite accu:lr~ to UB therefrom, d!>, by these pr~:1i:,nt11 grant, C01IYl.'IT and quit--claim. to the City of Ren:t<rn, a municipal corporetion oi the Stl.UI of We.:i.hington, fer street, A.J.:.~y 8Jld an;y other , public u11e11 and pu.rpoeoa, tho fol2.ov1ng lots, piec&5 ,and parcels r ·; land J.yu,..g and , ', \xling in :;aid King County, Stl!ltfl o!' Washington, a.nd ducrit-ed as f,lllowa: nic west 10 ft>'ot o! Lots 15 to 2d iP.clusive, Block 3, C.D. Hillmar,'s fanlington G~rr:ler.s Addition Division 1-,'o. l according to fr,E' Plat recorded in Volume 17 of P.lab, Pas.e 74, Records of King County, Washington. \., I J 2J TC J-L4.,·£ il.Iffi TO HOLD the ,,a'.-ci Jc,·,cr.Lbcd. prcmh-..cs unto the said City of Rentor>, its successor or :'iuccl."~Sc:;,rs for the u:i·· ::,f the public forever. WITNI.3.sETI-l our :land.'i .md :::edl._, this -~·"-'--day of ___ J_u_l·~-----19_e.L, ~(SEAL) ~(SEAL) lffiNESSE:S: L_...-¥. t' Ll:'.)age. -"Attorney rn Fact ';;IA n: or c/,LJFORN[A COC:\"T'i ur LOS ANCELF,S On __ ~, .. _,()'_..2.,~ /'f"c'/l , hciDrf' me, the undersigned, a Notary Public a1,U fer ~a:< 5::i(,e, perso11all1 <lfJpC;Hed J. F, LeSagc:: l<r,ov.:1, tu nH• 10 U!c' th,:, persun who"',: 1~am-,--_ 0 -_-_" 0 ;"s::=~::::=.ucbc,-c-,-,b-ecd-tn-,-h-e-- w,t:\1 l'l5~rumeni. <H, the Attorney 1:: rac-t or Gulf Oil Corpo~ation ~--_ , arirl arlrnnw--i--;dge<i to rne that~-,sub11crlb~d the name ·" . ___ Gulf o .. _il C(Jrporation th ---ereto al!I principal_ and~ ·,an-;c 1 ri !a,~t. ,, -' CITY CF F.LN·:·c~>J. <.\A)/-iJNCTON OR'.'l,'.'f•.'"\'C[ r--,O 3 2 9 2 A!',; ORDINANC'.: c,;: THF C.Tf OF RENTON, WASHJNGTON, VACATJNG A P01,;;·10."i OF bvlor Ave. S.W. between S.W. 21st St. and 23rd 5t. ·. ·, r, C ;; -7 ,; ) WHEREAS ;:i proper pc-·,t, ;r /0· v.,ot1ng a ror1ion of Taylor Av"nuc S.W. bc1wcen S.W. 2Jst St. Jnd 7Jrd ,;;, 1~<:'r,tor. r:ing County, Washin,i;ton, was duly filed with '.he Cit~ Cler~ on or ;:,.bout J.,~,· ;:·y I c;. '-' · ancl said peti(1on having been signed by owners representing rnor~ th.in t·.<.'('·t! ire-'~ 0'. :he-_::irorertr .1buttlng upon such .street sought to be vacated; and WHERE/\$ the City Counc,; !.l1 ,;~"-ulucion No. 2242 p,1Ss(>d .:i.nd approved on d fix ;ind dt:krrnJnc the 2t;:h day of February, l97'J, at the hour of &:(i', I' :'w City Cco.;ncil Cha111b'!rs of 1hc City of Rentcn to !)e lr.e timC' ,rnd ptaCt' huving giv~11 due no1ice of such hca· 11 l: ,: :t,c ,na,·,ncr pro1:ir.kc· by !Jw, and all persom haY1ng been :~eard appearing in f;:i.1.·n, r1 c:,:~0.1:rion thereto; and WHEREAS the Oepartr,ocn'. ( l'ubi1c \\/orks and the Plnnning Oep3rt1ncnt of the City of Renton h;:wing duly c_,;·,:1c'crc::J ;a,C ,:1ctition for said vacation, and h,wing found sa:ne to be in 1hr' public: in•erc",t 21,J i<)r the public benefit, and no injury or darn.:ige '.o any person er propertJ::5 will ·n·"l: f·om such vacations; NOW THEREFORE, TH[ CITY COU"lCJL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHJNGTO/'.', 00 ORDAIN AS FOl.LCJ/}. See Exhibit "A" uttacheci h'rcto ,H·d rnudc a pan hereof as j{ fuJ/y set forth herein. 13[ AND TH[ SAME IS HEREBY Vi\C:-.Tfn 51_11).JECT ·~a an casement over, across, under and on all of the ilforedescrib('(! r:roDCI"\)' in favor of the City for utiJi1y and related purposes. SECTION 11: The City ,..,.ouncil licrchv cle<:ts to charf!,e a fee of $8,523.90 to Peti:ioncr-Owners, said ;imo,mt not cxr(·cdi"f.', (1l'('-hc1if of the City's apprai.rn) of the right-of w.:iy intcrcsi !wrcin Y<lCc<tcc:', :ir ·.i ~·.H 1, c'1Mgc-being rc.:isonub!e ,ind proper. SECTION lll: This Ordin:i;1C:' ·i·,.:i!! be cflcc(ive upon its pussage 1 app,ovc.1 ' J ' V 0 co 0 " ;ind five da:,s .:iftc-r ils publication. A cert1!ied copy of rt::s Cr:linarc:t• shall 1,c flierl wj1h the Of!ice of Records PASSED BY THE CITY C01_11\!::-:!L tfi.;_, APPROVED BY THE MP.YO({ ::·i:; Lawrence J. V.a.rd!71, City 1\norney Date of Public;ition: March 'J, 1979 Sth day of Mnrch, 1979. REVIS(O LEGAL 0Esn1r'IM ~(:,IHI H. STONE'S PORTION OF VACATE: T~YLJ~ AVE S. W. VAC 2-7'' ORDINI\NCE n2'l2 The easterly one hdlf of Taylr,r r,vP SW (g\q Ave. S), 1-aviny <1 wicJti; of 30 ft, more or less, lying south..:,· y ol the westerly production of the nortl,erly line of Lot 26, 51t,~k I, C. D. Hillman's Earlington Gardens Addition Division No. 1 ,15 recorded in Volume 17 of Plals, page 7~ records of King County ~~,hingtcn a~d lying northerly of the north righc-of·way 1in~ of S\.I t)r,: ,,,-1c,,,Jt'U i,nJ ,.:idjacent to lots 1S through 26 inclusive, Block 1, ~.-,i,J µI.:.'. s;tuJted w1Ll1in th(' SW 1/11 or Sc·(.tiu, '.!, Town~hip 23 tlonh, R<Jngc ~ [ as t , \.I. H, Arca m Vauition Fee,. $J,66l.95 ~ ::-, ([) 0 .. ~ d C') .. , :, 0 ~ " C c· ,., ·-··----~------·-.. _CITY or H[NTON, WASHINGTON OIH)lN.'\NCE NO. _3317 AN ORDINANGF. OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHJN<JTON, VA(;ATING A PORTION CF TAYIAOR AVENUE S.W. BETWEEN S.I'.". 21ST ST. ANil 23RD ST. (VAC-Z-79) WIIERF.AS a prorc>r petition fc,r vae11Ung e. portion of Taylor-Avenue S.W. Renton, King County, Wtishingtcn, was du!:,; filed with the City Clerk on or about J,rnuary 3. 1979, ar,d said pe•.it"ion havinr,-been signed by owners representing more than two-third~ of the prooertv ributtin)! upon !-ueh street sought to be vacate<'l1 and WHEREAS the City Coun('il by Rego)utlon No. 2242 passed nnd approved on January 22, ! 979, and Arter due investigation, did fix and determine the 26th day of rcbrw1ry, J')79, at the hOur or 8:00 r.M. in the City Council Chambers of the City of Renton to be the Lime and plllcc ror 11 public hearing thereon, and the City Clerk havir.g givt'n due notice of st=..:h l1ear!r.~ In the manner provided by law, and all person., hAving been hell.rd nppenring \n f_qvor or in o;-ipositlon thereto; and WHEREAS the Department or Pu~lic Works and the Planning Department of the Ci!y of Renton having duly e0nsicic~ed said petition for said vacation, and having round same to be in the public interest .md (or the public benefit, and no injury or damage to aJl:,' person tir propertiPs will result from sueh vacations; and WHEREAS the City r:cuncil of t'rc City or Renton diG by Ordlne:ice No. 32!12 unrler dete of Morch 5, 1979, vac11.te fl ponion or said Taylor Avenue S.W. between s~· 21st St. r.nd SW 23rd Street. nnd WHERE!.S the City Council of ~~e City o! Renton ordered this portion or th(· vaeation held ~ubjt'.'1't to pRymPnt of thr vaea!ion fee, and tha.t fee now being rec:-eived; NOW THERE~ORE, Tl!E C(TY i::ouNClL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DO ORD/IN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I: Th<' following dc~cribcd portion o! street, to-wit: See E,:hlbit "A" attached hereto nnd mode a pa.rt hereof RS ir rull,' '>C'I forth lwr~in. AF. AND THE SA~E rs HF.REAY \'ACATUl sunJE(;T to an easement over, 1:1cr0:M, unrlf"r 11n<1 on all of th" 11forcde~cri~d ;:irnpl'rlv in favor of th~ City tor utility and I ' I / j I I I I related purposes. SECTION II: The City Council hereby elects to eharf:~ a fee of $4,861.96 to Petitioner-Owners, said amount not exceeding one-half of the City's appra.isfil of the right-of-way interest herein vacated, and such eharge being reru;onnble and proper. SECTION Ill: This Ordinance shall be effective upon its passage, approval and five days after its publication. A certified copy of this Ordinance shill be filed with the Office of Recorda and Elections, King County, and as otherwise provided by law. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 14th day of May, 1979. APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this 14th day of May, 1979. Approved as to form: La~rr~~ey Date of Publication: 5/ 18/7 9 -2-0 #3317 EXHIBIT "A" SEEL JG'S PO~TIDN of Taylor Ave. S.W. Street Vacation 2-79 Ordinance #3317 That portion of Taylor /'>.ve. SI,/ (91st Ave. S.) having a width of 60 ft. more or less, lying southerl-. of the southerly right-of·way margin of SW 21st extended and northerly of the northerly right-of~way margin of SW 23rd extended and lying between Blocks 1 e1nd 2, C. D. Hillman 1 s Earlington Gardens Addition Division No. l, ~s recorded in Volume 17 of plats, page 74, records of King County Washington. Except that portion of the E~st l/2 of said right-of-way lying southerly of the westerly production of the northerly I ine of Lot 26, Block I, said plot and northerly of the westerly production of the north margin of SW 23rd St. as previously vacated uncier City of Renton Ordinance No. 3292. As situated within the SW 1/4 of Section 19, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, 11.M. "----~OF~r~··-~r~9,....,,.,.l'l.~;e,::n-.-,,,.,.,,,,... __ --RENTON Mu~~ e, ]. ,_ C[fAA 200 Nill[ IPAL Bl 0G "' '"" .-i 0 0 ·;1• OR OJN ANCE N0. -11:i.L > 1 AN onm<./ANCI'. OP 'f'IIE CITY OP rtENTOH, wri.smNnToN, Yi'i.CAT!Hn A rnRTIOI~ OF MAPU AVE. SW (\',\G 7-79/SEf.l,l(l) WHEREAS II proper pell lion for ne&ling e portion of Meple Ave. SW R.ento~· · King County, Wuhlngton, WM duly rlll'!<I with lhe City Cl<trk Ofl or about March I~:,-.\., 1979, and uil:1 petltlon havint ~E>n 11;lgned by ownel'! representing more lhon two-thi!'m; of the p~rty abutting upon a\Jeh Street sought to be 1,11cated1 and WHEREAS the City Counell by Re,olutlon No. 2280 pused tind approved on April 2, 19'19, and arter duo lnvcs.tlgathm, did fix and determine the Ust doy of May, 19'19t 1:11 the hour or 8:00 P.M. In the City Council Chambers of the City ()f Renton to be tbe timP. and place for a public hMring thereon, and tho City Clerk htwlng given due notitt of ,ueh hearing In the manner provldecl by law, and aU persorui h1wing beien hean:l 11ppearing in l.6.vot o.-In Oj)J)Ofllllon th1L1reto1 and WHEREAS the Oe,partment or PubllC! Works and the Planning Oepnrtmf'nt of the Cily or Ri:mton he.vl:1g duly eoMidered said petition for Nlid vacation, e.nd tiavl~ rounc1 ,ame to be In the publ\<"! mterHt and for tile publl~ benent, &nd no Injury nr demage to any person or properties w!U rJ 1lt trom !:ltieh vecetlon!I; NOW THEREFORE:, THE: CITY COUNCIL OP THE. crrv OF RENTON, WASHINGTON', DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION' I: The following dH!crJt,e.j portion of Street, to-wit: See Exhibit 1'A" 11Ueched hereto and !llade a part hereof as IC fully ael forlii herein. BE A.ND THB SAME JS HEREBY VACATED SUBJECT to e.n easement over, flr!.rO!l~, uMer and on t.ll ot tM, aforf'tde,i~rlbe<l proper"ty In f1vor of the City for utility o.nd related purpoee1. SECTION DI The City Coancl! hereby elel'!te to (:l\argt a fee of $13tSe.2.40 to PetHiontr-Ownera, &aid amount not uceedlng ona-half of tho Cllyla appraisal (Jr lhe rirht~f-way JnterMl herein vae!ted, and such eharg& being rea.Jnable and proper, SECT10H m1 Thi., OrdlMn,ce 11hall be efleetlve upon Its passage, 11pprov11l Md fi\le daya after Ila l)IJbl!catian, ;fM[ lJf WASHMC'TUlfl t:UUNTY OF Kll'tG '!l,_- , ., ,. ·-- l.·.c( ".,ar:?.,ii~ .•. ,.JJ. ..... ilJ.e.H..i."}CHy Cltr!t ,n •r¥J ltl' 1M Clil' of Jltnt<in. wuhinR\on. do heieby c&1!1!y n,11 tht toni1olnc ~dintnc• ~ • true Ind C.J1H_c; wpy ct U1i!inar1u No .. 33S..!. .. :,, ... ol t~ CitY ol f'toton, u II ll)~nrs oi'\ !11> rn nq, .,11,,~. ,rid do fu!lhllf tiw!lfy ,1n1t tt\41 :!lime ht1 blen J-1Jblish1d 1tccrd,n1. I\ cC"rllflet.l ,...,,r.v or lhh Ordi11nncc shall be ril~ witll th!,' Ofri,.,, ,,r 11,.,-,,..,rd.:; fllld Elrcllnn,, H:log Cn11nty, n1HI ntt olhcrwi!5C provided by l11w. PASSEi} nv TIii: CITY f:OUNCII, 11,1.1 l.OL-11 ruiy nf !'luqu,;t , 1979. APPROVED lH' THE MAYOR lh!e 20th day o! l\u1111at., 19.'"l, Approved es to form: u~' . .....t wren~ Date !'.>f Publi<!Atlon: 11.LJ,;iugt ~4, 1q79 01119ll A 11r~inanc~ No. JlSl M,q,I,· f\,1,· SIi • St,,not ~.i,,,1""' ((l<J1h /11":. '.i,) ( 'JAC 1-79, Th,ll wwtio,1 oi M,,ple /'we ~"' (ll'.}:J, Ave. )\,,I) lyi11;i :nrutl, of th,. ~oulh 1illll ol ~ • .,., 2hl S\ . .urul nurll• of 1l1t• 11ortlt !i11c ol :;11 2}nJ St..:,~ ~how11 in C. O. !lillm.;,n', E.:irllr.~ion (..or.Jc·ll~ AU.Jitlon, Divi:,iun No. I, il5 rc(.ordell in Vol. 17 uf plot, page 711 ,-.,u,P<.h or Kin•I lj,unty \,,I.J'>h1f1gtun ,.,_ = C'l N "' "' rl CERTiflCAiE ·~ mm rnR ilECORO AT iiti[~;' 3f f,_H'le undmfgned, Maxine £. Motor Cll!:!'k ofthn Crty of RentDn, Washington, certify Ul4t thf&. !s a tn.:e andco:l"«Ctcopyof Ordinance No. 3978 -ct St.J~scribed tmd Se.lied thls--12!1: dsy of~ 19~. ~ ""'" 6''-22 ,.4.,, Cl TY OF RENTON, WASHIN6'1/01'f~.,--;·,:";· r.:aFJ:L• f ORDINANCl'. NU. 3'.r/8 r:.<=-6H:~L- City Cler~ AN ORDINANC !~ cw THE Cl Tl OF l{'::N'rON I WASHING'roN VACATING .1\ P0R'1'J;JN OF' S.W. 23RD S'1'REET (VAC- 003-85 -M .. AH'l'Jt,1 SCEL:IG) WHEREAS a proper petition fer vacating a portion of >/·,J--h-l: '?, (1(1 -<c:;5 S •1-J. 23rd Street, Renlcm I Ki. rig Coutil_y, Washington, was duly filed wjth the City Clerk on or about May 7, 1985, and said petition having been s.'.,;Jned by the ·owners n'--'r,r12senting more--th::1n two-thirds cf U, the property abutting upon S'Jct1 street sought to De vacated; and a) ~ ~'iHEREAS t!1E· City ~ouncil i.Jy Resolution No. 2607 passed ('J 8 o..nd appro·ved 0'1 May 20, l9RS, cind after due investigation, did fix --iJ ro ,:rnd dete1:rninc U-1e 2-~th d,.,y o[ June, 1983 at the ho-.:!r of 8:00 P.M. in the City Council Churr-J.:iers t='f the City of Renton to bG the time and place for 3. publ:ic hcuri1·,~ thereon, und th•.?. C':!.ty Clerk h~ving given due notice of such h~i1ri11g ir1 the manner provided by l~w, and a.11 µersons having betc:.:1 !led.rd :1ppearing in favor or in o(;lposition thereto; and the City Co1.w--:il having conside~ed all information an.<l argument presented to it; ::rnd having duly considered so10 petition for said vacation~ and having found sa~e to be in the ~)ublic interest and for the public benefit and no injury or damage tc a:.y person or propei:ti~s wl.ll result fi·om such vacations; NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COLJNCIL OF 'J'IHE CI'l'Y lW RENTON, WASHINGTON, DO ORDA!N AS FOLLOWS: SECTION L_ The followtng descdbe.d porti1:m of street~ to-wit: -<]' LO ro 0 -N l"l ·~ co ORDIKA~CE NO. 3973 ---- See Exhibit "An .;itta.ched her·eto and made a part hereof as if fu]ly set forth herein. BE AND '!'HE SA.ME IS HEREBY VACATED SUB,JECT ~o an easement ov~r 1 across, ur.der and on all of lhe nforE'described property in favor of the City for utility an,3 t"elat.ed purposes. SECTION I[: The City Council hereby elects to cParge a fee of $8,245.50, said ~Mount not exceedj_ng one-quarter (1/4) of the City 1 s appzaisal of the right-of-way interest herein vacated, arid such chargt:" being reasonable. c.rnd proper. SECTI.ON__Il!~ This Ordinance shall be effective upon its passage, approval and tive days after its publication. A certified ~opy of this Ordi:1an(ce shall be filed with the Office of Records ar.G Elcct1.or:is, and as otherwise provided by law. PASSED BY Tfft CI'l'Y COUNCIL this lOthday of March, 198£. ~)?b,27,L Maxine E. Motor, City Cler).. APr"ROVED BY 'LHE MAYOR this J...Q.th_day of March, 1986, Approved as to form: "' m ,-, ,"''I' Date of Publication: M.nrch 14, 1986 :: ... ,.,... ::::~ ca ' _,·.--.. c;v, OR.DINlu"iCE NO. 3978 EX!JIBI7 "A .. All that portioo of SW lJrd Str~ct (S. 160th St.) having a width of 30 ft. lyJng "djaeent to the aoutherly line of Blocks 2 ,md 3, C. O. Hj1J.ru.an 1 s Earl!ngt:on r.11:rdens Addo., DJy, No. 1, 2H recorded tu Volume 17 of pht:!!i, pa~e 11,. n:wnls uf ting Countyt Washington~ e.ost of t.l1e vest line Rlock 3 extendeJ south~rly <!ind west of the west line of Hlaek l e:.::tentled southerly .;;mi withtn the S\.J 1/4 of Sec. 19, 1\fp. 2) N., R. SE ~.H. Additlona) Conments: Portion -to be vacated is m)t filled arid is cu1Tc11t-J y cride!"' water. It is Bepa.o'ated from usable land to the sou.th by the City of Seattle pipe line <r.-asemeut and the proroscU P-9 flood control che.nn<el. /1.l!F 7 I ;3S?, <>I KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, For good a11.:I ·,a1uable cons1Gera:,on .,,.~~1r,1 wh,;-,.-o! is twreby ad<nowledged. 1~.e undersigned hereby grant;; e- owoelual c.isemenl ia Pac,r,c Northv,.~si 8,111 r,..·~1.,h,_,ue Cvmpan1:, a waan;nglon Cocpo,at•on. ils successors and as!1Q'1S wi1h the right to place. con~1,uct or<'r;il1c a,,u rnamla·,n. m~pecl. •flcons1r.;c1. repa,r. replace and kP.ep s,lear unden,;"'ound cmmrunica~n......liJ1_g_a_,,_£.Qllru!_il...a.....--.Wd manholes _______ _ ______ _____ --.. ~-----witt1 ,...", .. , cable$. 'IX1ures ;ind ar,~ur1ena11ces a!1acned 1.111n!!o. as thf> granlee may lrom limn s,tu;iled in _ lo time 1eq11irc. u,:nr, 'C\c~ over and/()r undt• the ___ .King____ co,..nly_ ,.wtc of Wa!:lh:iu,g-_,on followin; dt1~crihec! property The S0ut..hwest Q,uarter cf the .:::·...!:.!-".ea:J-:. Quarter of the Southwest Q.ua::ter (.s'\ol''t-SF,&- SW?,) of .'kct.:io11 19, To ... TI:5/'.J.µ :') E'2::th, d.ange 5 East, W.M. Said eaaement being the e;,.finly tni (10) feet of the \.lo?s't.erly fifty (SO) feet of i.he abQVe descrihed property 2...-1::1 als:) Cescribed as the easterly ten (10) fee':. uf "the w!'slnly twenty (20) fro~. c'." Let~ J'.5 thru 28, Dlock J, C.D. HlWilANS EARLINGTON 8ARDEN"S ADDITION DIV. NO. 1 113 t"!:c'c.:on.!e·.l in Vulwije 17 at pa.ge 74. C: /' ,~; ''· / r.,::1W-', / .. , ·--- 1% EXCISE TAX NOT REQUIREJ King Co. Records Division By ,.-, ~.---, : I ' p · I ,,-i;-f,y( , Depu~ Grantee shall a,1 illl l,m"s have tt,e ,,ut' l'I full ciro'.J /rer• ,n9r~s~ lo anc'.-'.·gre~s trc,m said property for 311 purposes he1ein n1e•11ian!!d and 10 remove a\ any lime ,,nv c ,-<'' o! :P0 ___ ll:ldercromd cmowmic<G-i.QU ] i nes, c;qpQi.:i ts ·anrl. :M.rhcl.es ____________ .. ~nd/or w1res. cables. hxlures and ap~;Jrl~n~r·,cc~. irc.n, •Le said prope<ly. wtlh llie u11derstanct111g 1h~1 gran1ee shall be ,espon;.,ble for all cam age ca~sP.d lo c;r<1,tu: by 1hr •·•~rc,sc o1 l!rn righls and privllegP.s herein granted. The righlS. ccndllions ond ~r()vrsion~ n' In,, ,,..,.,,,.,...,e.,t sha!: ir,ure 10 ln8 oene!,; ol a,d be bindinq upon the heirs P.1flCUto,s. a'.lrnmistwlors, i;ucces~ors ;,nd :iss gw, u! !lie re~pective pafl,es hereto. In w,tness whereol lhe undersi!-ll;!!d h«~ 1-~ucul0cd 1t 1 1s nstrumcnt lh•S 5-;,, ,19.zs__ w;,oes,-"''-::_-==?;{::'.;Z'lL~- ~-----·-----_I .!f""'1lf.P .. ,L :; £~· OGc 3y ~-~-5==--= -//1/"i .r,-1....J _LL __ };:c-z J.. 1 &- si:ii\/oF_Lj;~~ .. STATE Of __ _ <rici~jJr)' .. b, ~AL&.&:._ _______ ---COIJlJTY o; 1 • ' . -. , .,..Pri.l~_~ d~J·f,Crsonall','<!ul.learod belor~ me J On 1his __ dai· of---------_____ ,19 --· \. ':', 1, ,!...,;,::..". ~: _.#f~ /,,\) A· 5'£~.I. ~d:...._ "'J'.!J !~-<-IJe!l!re me personJliy ;>.p()ea,ed __ _ '"'"-c'__,, I~.,,~-ttf.+A) "·-~-.--5.Q(,;_::_-___ j/..f'~'1::,_~/,, _______ _ \ -i,~ / · lo ;:,1e-. k,i'o'wn lo be Ille lndivi,jua I __ ,.ll?'cribe'l ,.-sn-i "i,'., ~,,.( 1~~ '\..,_ 0 t'het•>l'llh"' and h;>re\;Jmr,;i ms1rumerit. 1111a a~~ncw·r.r1or-d :na1 -------------------~--------- '· ___ &'.£.___:s,gned !h" ~aMe a~ ___ _//_i__;;;_ ____ ir~r ,wo lo me known lo be the --------~---·----- '-,~ulunlary 3c, and dee<l. lor t~e l!5es ,.,.,,J p,·rro,e:; 1r,e,~,n tnen!lor,eo /f ol lhc ~orpo,.,tion lh;:>\ e>ecu'ce~ lhP !ore~o1•,g lnSlrumef\l, 3r\d ac.~nowled~ed sa•rl ,ns\rurnent 10 t<e lhe rroc and volurllary ac1 .;ind d,,r,rl ol said cc,rpo,,01,on. In, lhe <Jie~ ~nd p~·,oo~e~ lhere,n mPnloonP.;, and on oatb slal~d t~~I -----•. _____ wa~l"'ere authorized :o e,('<'.:clle ~a,~ rslwmr~l 1~ wi\nes, whernol I h~ve ne,eunlo sci 'Tl)' hand And 3r!illed m·f ol/,cio! scol 1he dny ~rod ye8r hrs! abo .. e ,.,itten Nulary Pvt,ilc ,r, ar,d lo, 11,"' Sl31t? o/ ____ _ rnsidin9.>1 ___ ----------·---·---------m I "' M 0 0 in 0 o-r- 1,, ; ,'If./. RE: EASEMENT, M,\RTJ.N A. i;u:uG, GRANTOR; PACIFIC NORTHWEST BELi.,. GRANTEE, DC.TOBER I 978. 1. Tliis easement cxclu<!P~ any rights to the surface of the ?. soil eXC€,pt. those needed f(lr installation and maintenance of the underground coJJ~1 r1H:t.ion. Work int.he easement sp,ice is to be coordinated .is t.o 1;:cthocl and timj ng to minimize .ad- verse effects and .i.ntci ft·'~'''ncr wjth respect to operations on ~ran~oris land. If grantee cEast·s to t1!:c'C the easement for~ purposes as de-scribed herein, g:r,111tee' ·"-J·1ghlt:i c1ut.omatically become null and void, a11rl upon rr>(lucst. by grantor, gra.ntec sb}lll 1 at grante-2 1 s expense, remove Lhe j nstallation and re.st or~ con- ditions ex.if.ting bf'fr,t'C r,,moval commenced, Gr.ante~ n~ree.ec 1 11 rwovj <iE" compl~te "Hold llarmlessH prot,ection t.o g1·anl or· \.o/.i.th r·l':;pect to any occurrerJ~:e or occurrences arising uni ol' ex.lstence of c;ubject ,;asemEnt so that grant or wi JI be tc,t.,d Ly isolated from any effects of ar",y claims whic], t11,·z•l ""-' ,~.i.bject e,isP.:ne-nc. 4. Grantee agreer-to t::u.i·,· i .•0 e his rights in a mar.ner t..h.at wiJ I comply .,,.-iT.h, cirn! i :.i,:ili L,te compliance by tbe gr.antor with; the requireme,.t..'> of all author'ities having juris(:..1..:::!tion. Defects arf: to be ruPr'cct..,:,d by grantee without delay, ) Shot1Jd tlie grRnto:·1 s 11se of the property require rnodi- ficat:ion of grantee's ln.c;ta:.tatjou, modification shall be m,:ide at the grantP.(' 1 s ,:xpf!rl!',<?. To determine whether use of the proper·ty req11 ires rno<l if i c,:1tlon, the grantor Rhc1ll fir.st .:1.LLt!mpt to adapt to t,h<:.· grantee 1 s existing installa- tion by using altenwtives i,hat would have been sntisfactory to the granter in thf' ah-"ence of the granteP.'s installation, If grantor encountt:·r~ diffjculties using such allernative.s, then grantee ,igree!:: to make modifications :suit.able to the gra.ntor, withnnt, rJ.,];1~0 ~, Changes in t.h,:, configuration of grantee 1 s instal]at:lon are subject to appr·ova 1. of Lhc ~rantol". .,, N n 0 0 .1 ,-- 'I -,, [ o· z • f • ~ "' " . -o ;;< • -,, g • j • , ' ~ i I I' ii -m w~ -m ~ ;: o m c Z -'-~ ( '. .... , WE1LAND ANALYSIS, STREAM CLASSIFICATION AND SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM APPLICABILITY REPORT 300 S. 160 Tl I STREET PARCEL#: 3340400285 & 3023059083 RENTON, VI/ ASHINGTON PREP/,RED FOR: MURPHY MCCULLOUGH TARRAGON DEVELOPMENT !Olll1 ~[Cc_"''.D .AVENUE ~Lll/1 3200 ::T\ ITU .. WA. 98104 r2Ll6) 233·9600 PREP.AR ED BY: OU.'IL BOTH.\ w~ WETL\.':-.'/J ::"'iliKiV'.J.TTlNG SERVICES (106) 328-7775 wps@i.sp.com OCTOBER 18, 2006 ',.. TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SU'v\MAR Y ....................................................................................................................................................... 3 SITE DESCRIPTION ......................................................................................................................................................................... 3 WElLAND DELINEATION ........................................................................................................................................................ 4 VLGEl.,\ I 10"-.; .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 4 c;orr.c; ..................................................................................................................................................................................................................... s HYDROLOGY .................................................................................................................................................................................. .5 WElLAND CATEGORIZATION ......................................................................................................................................... 5 WElLAND DELINEATION RESULTS ............................................................................................................................. 6 VLGLf .. -\.l 10\J ............................................. .. ................................................................................................................................... 7 "OIL"··················································································································································································································· 7 HYDROL'->GY ............................................................................................................................................................................................. 8 WElLAND DETERMINATION & CLASSIFICATION ....................................................................................... 8 WETLAND .-\ ................................................................................................................................................................................................ 8 WElLAND 8 ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 8 STREAM DETERMINATION & CLASSIFICATION ............................................................................................. 9 SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM .................................................................................................................................... 9 REGULA TORY IMPLICATIONS ............................................................................................................................................ 9 WElL-\'sD" ................................................................................................................................................................................................ 9 STRE•\,V\5 .................................................................................................................................................................................................... 10 51 IORELI\JE CONSERVANCY ........................................................................................................................................... 10 Page 2 . ' . ' .. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report presents the findings of a wetland analysis, stream characterization and applicability of Shoreline Conservancy provisions that was performed by WPS on the Seelig Lind Avenue property. Two wetlands were identified, one located on the adjacent property to the north and the other located along the south and east side of the subject property, and the boundaries of the wetland to the south and east as well as the southern boundary of the wetland to the north were delineated. SITE DESCRIPTION The 12.57-acre site, Parcels 3340400285 & 3023059083, is located between Lind Avenue South and East Valley Road, south of SW 19th Street in Renton, Washington. SW 21st Street is located to the north and SW 23rd Street to the south; however, both of these street ROWs have been abandoned (Figure I, Vicinity Map). The site is currently undeveloped. A fire station is located north of the northwest property comer (Parcel #3340400425), a commercial development is located to the east between the subject parcel and the East Valley Road; and a gas line is located on the parcel to the south, within the abandoned SW 23rd Street ROW (Parcel# 3023059083). The parcel is nearly rectangular, with a "panhandle" at the northeast corner. ±~-:J. ;_ C ~-1~ : FIGUR.E I: VICINITY MAP The site was filled prior to 1970 with from 7-to IO-feet of dense fill material. Scrubby trees and shrubs have since become established on the site. The southeast corner and a Page 3 ' ' narrow band around the entire site are forested. The interior of the site is mostly scrubby; tree species have generally not reached 20 feet or greater. Two mapped wetlands nearly surround the site; a large wetland I ies to the north and a smaller wetland wraps around the east and south property boundary. These wetlands have been included in numerous previous inventories, including the City of Renton's Rivers, Streams & Wetlands inventory. An unnamed tributary of Springbrook Creek is located on the adjacent parcel to the south, south of the abandoned SW 23'd Street ROW. WETLAND DELINEA TIOJ'\ Site visits occurred on August 25, September 23, and November 7, 2004, wherein CBWE examined the study area for indicators of wetlands. The study area of the investigation included off-site areas since it was apparent that wetland buffers extend onto the subject parcel. Wetlands were identified based on the presence of hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soil, and wetland hydrology using the method outlined in the 1997 Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual (Washington State Manual), and following City of Renton regulations. The "routine on-site determination method" was used to make the wetlands determination. The routine method is used for areas equal to or less than five acres in size, or for larger areas with relatively homogeneous vegetative, soil, and hydrologic properties. During the study area evaluation, 12 detailed data points were located in distinct representative vegetation units in order to characterize the wetland and non-wetland communities. Field observations at each data point were compiled on preformatted Wetland Data Sheets, labeled DP! through DP12. VEGETATION Vegetation was evaluated across the study area to determine the presence of hydrophytic plant communities. Plant communities are considered hydrophytic when more than 50 percent of the dominant species in the plant community have a wetland indicator status of facultative (FAC+, FAC, & FAC-). facultative wetland (FACW+, FACW, & FACW-), or obligate wetland (OBL), as listed in the National List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands, Region 9 -Northwest (Reed, 1993 and 1988). The indicator codes for plant species are noted in Table 1. Dominant species were recorded as species comprising more than 20 percent of the plant community in each stratum (tree, shrub, and/or herb layer). TABLE I. PLANT INDICATOR CODES Indicator Code Frequency of Occurrence in Wetlands Obligate Wetland (OBL)-occur almost always in wetlands >99% Facultative Wetland (F ACW*) -usually occur in wetlands 67-99% Facultative (FAC*) -equally likely to occur in wetlands or 34-66% non-wetlands Facultative Upland (FACU*) -usually occur in non-wetlands 1-34% Page 4 . ' Obligate Upland (UPL) -occur almost always in non-wetlands <1% Not Listed (NL)-no indicator status --- * Note: FACW, FAC, and FACU also have -and -values to represent species near the wetter end of i the spectrum (+)and species near the drier end of the spectrum (-). i SOILS Anaerobic (saturated) conditions cause soils to form certain characteristics that can be observed in the field. Hydric indicators include: the presence of a matrix chroma of I or less in unmottled soil or 2 or less in mottled soil, gleyed soil, organic soils (peats and mucks), and the accumulation of sulfidic material. Soil pits were dug in each data point. using a shovel to depths of 16 to 18 inches below ground surface (BGS). Soils textures were characterized using Natural Resources Conservation Service protocol, and examined for hydric indicators as described by the Washington State Manual. Soil colors were identified using a Munsell soil color chart (Kollmorgen Corporation, 1988). Depth of soil saturation was recorded for each data point. Wetland Data Sheets are included in Appendix I. Several secondary data points were examined across the wetland/upland boundary in order to determine the boundary line, although data forms were not completed at the secondary data points. The secondary data points were used to examine similarities or differences in soils between major data points and to establish mapped soil unit boundaries. HYDROLOGY At each data point, observations of direct and indirect wetland hydrology indicators were evaluated and recorded. Under nonnal conditions, hydrologic indicators are used to determine if the hydrology is either currently present or can be inferred from the guidelines provided in the Washington State Manual. These indicators include: recorded data, visual observation of inundation or saturation, watermarks, drift lines, sediment deposits, drainage patterns, local soi I survey data, oxidized root channels, and water- stained leaves. WElLAND CATEGORIZATION Wetlands identified within 100 feet of the site were categorized using the City of Renton classification system. The city's classification system, (RMC 4-3-050 M. I .a., amended on December 12, 2005) is as follows: i. Category 1: Category I wetlands are wetlands which meet one or more of the following criteria: (a) The presence of species listed by Federal or State government as endangered or threatened, or the presence of essential habitat for those species; and/or (b) Wetlands having forty percent (40%) to sixty percent (60%) permanent open water (in dispersed patches or otherwise) with two (2) or more vegetation classes; and/or Page 5 (c) Wetlands equal to or greater than ten (IO) acres in size and having three (3) or more vegetation classes, one of which is open water; and/or (d) The presence of plant associations of infrequent occurrence; or at the geographic limits of their occurrence; and/or ii. Category 2: Category 2 wetlands are wetlands which meet one or more of the following criteria: (a) Wetlands that are not Category 1 or 3 wetlands; and/or (b) Wetlands that have heron rookeries or osprey nests, but are not Category wetlands; and/or ( c) Wetlands of any size located at the headwaters of a watercourse, i.e., a wetland with a perennial or seasonal outflow channel, but with no defined influent channel, but are not Category I wetlands; and/or (d) Wetlands having minimum existing evidence of human-related physical alteration such as diking, ditching or channelization; and/or iii. Category 3: Category 3 wetlands are wetlands which meet one or more of the following criteria: (a) Wetlands that are severely disturbed. Severely disturbed wetlands are wetlands which meet the following criteria: (I) Are characterized by hydrologic isolation, human-related hydro logic alterations such as diking, ditching, channelization and/or outlet modification; and (2) Have soils alterations such as the presence of fill, soil removal and/or compaction of soils: and (3) May have altered vegetation. (b) Wetlands that are newly emerging. Newly emerging wetlands are: (I) Wetlands occurring on top of fill materials; and (2) Characterized by emergent vegetation, low plant species richness and used minimally by wildlife. These wetlands are generally found in the areas such as the Green River Valley and Black River Drainage Basin. (c) All other wetlands not classified as Category I or 2 such as smaller, high quality wetlands. WETLAND DELINEATION R.ESUL TS CBWE identified two wetlands within the study area. The northern boundary of Wetland A, located off site to the north was delineated to establish the extent of its buffer lying on the Seelig site, and Wetland B. A summary of the vegetation, soils, and hydrology observed in the wetlands and the on-site upland is presented below. Page 6 VEGETATION The central areas of the site represented by DPs I, 5, I 0, and 12 are dominated by young black cottonwood (Populus bolsami/era), with a dense understory of Douglas spirea (Spiraea douglasii) and scattered Oregon ash (Fraxinus latifolia) saplings. Cottonwoods at DP 5 were sapling rather than young trees and this central area of the site was opener, supporting primarily herbaceous species. Other species growing on the fill material in occasionally dominant cover include red-osier dogwood (Camus stolonifera), Himalayan blackberry (Rubus procerus), snowberry (Symphoricarpos alba), goldenrod (Solidago canadensis), tansy (Tanacetum vu/gore), western St. John's wort (Hypericum radicata), Scouler's willow (Salix scouleriana), and swordfern (Polystichum munitum). DP 3 represents the southern edge of Wetland A. it is dominated by Hooker's willow (S. hookeriana) and Douglas spirea; trace cover of each of the following species is also present: cattail (Typha latifolia), Pacific willow (S. lasiandra), Scouler's willow, reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinaceae), slough sedge (Carex obnupta), and sapling Oregon ash. The majority of Wetland A is dominated by reed canarygrass, yellow flag (Iris pseudacorus), deadly nightshade (So/anum dulcamara), black twinberry (Lonicera involucrata) and various willows. DP 8 represents Wetland 8. Pacific and Scouler's willows and red-osier dogwood co- dominate. Douglas spirea and reed canarygrass are also present and occasionally dominant. The forested fill banks are represented by DPs 2 and 4. Red alder (A/nus rubra), black cottonwood, red-osier dogwood, stink currant (Ribes bracteosum), and Himalayan blackberry are all variously dominant. DPs 6, 7, and 9 represent the fill bank off-site south of Wetland B. Reed canarygrass and chickweed (Cerastium arvense) co-dominate within the abandoned SW 23rd Street ROW. SOILS Much of the site was filled with high-grade structural fill (primarily comprised of well- mixed sand and gravel) to depths ranging from approximately 5 to IO feet. The site is mapped in the Soil Survey of King County Area as Puget silty clay loam to the west, and Snohomish silt loam towards the east. However, it is evident from the soil survey base aerial photograph that the site had been filled and converted to urban land prior to the date of the photograph, which was taken in 1970. The Puget series is made up of poorly drained hydric soils that formed in alluvium, under sedges and grass, in small depressions of the river valleys. In a representative profile, the soil is dominantly mottled dark grayish-brown (2.5Y 4/2) and grayish-brown (2.5Y 5/2) silty clay loam to a depth of about 45 inches BGS. The substratum is gray, silty clay that extends to a depth of 60 inches or more. Permeability is slow. The seasonal high water table is at or near the surface. The Snohomish series is a nearly level hydric series made up of poorly drained soils that formed in alluvium in stream valleys. The A ( or surface) horizon ranges from very dark grayish-brown ( 1 OYR 3/2) to grayish brown (2.5Y 5/2) silt loam, and is mottled to the surface. The B (subsurface) horizon ranges from very dark grayish brown to gray and from silt loam to silty clay loam and loamy sand. Depth to layers of peaty material Page 7 ranges from 13 to 36 inches. Layers of silty clay loam to loamy sand occur within and below the peaty layers. Permeability is moderate in the upper part of the profile and moderately rapid in the lower part. There is a seasonal high water table at or near the surface. As noted above, on-site soils do not match these mapped soils because the site was filled prior to 1970. Four data points, DP L 5, 10 and 12, were established on the filled area. The soil was very compacted and impem1eable at all DPs. Soil chroma is 3; mottling was present at DP I within the surface 12 inches. Soil within adjacent wetlands at DPs 3 and 8 generally matched the mapped series. HYDRDLOGY Wetland hydrology was not observed within the fill areas. Hydrologic indicators were present only off-site at DPs 3 (Wetland A) and in Wetland Bat DP 8. WETLAND DETERMINATION & CLASSIFICATION Based upon presence of the three requisite criteria, wetlands nearly surround the site on three sides. The wetland to the north, Wetland A, is an approximately 12.3 acre scrub- shrub/emergent wetland; Wetland A does not extend onto the subject property. Wetland B, to the south and east, is a 0.6133 acre (26,714 square feet) L-shaped remnant scrub- shrub wetland surrounded by fill, 0.5117 acre (22,289 square feet) of which lies on the Seelig property. The wetland delineation is shown on the Wetland Location survey conducted by Bush, Roed & Hitchings, Inc., dated revised January 24, 2006, attached. WE1LANDA Wetland A has been designated Category 2 by the City of Renton. However, this wetland could be considered severely disturbed due to hydrologic isolation and ditching (along the southern boundary), which are characteristics of Category 3 wetlands. Wetland A does not meet the criteria for Category I for the following reasons: Criteria a: There are no listed species; Criteria b and c: There is no open water; Criteria d: There are no plant associations of infrequent occurrence. The wetland is dominated by reed canarygrass, yellow flag (Iris pseudacorus), deadly nightshade (Solanum du/camara), black twinberry (lonicera invo/ucrata) and various willows. On the whole, however, Wetland A meets the criteria as a Category 2 wetland. WE1LA!\D B Wetland B meets the criteria as Category 3 on the basis of human-related hydrologic alterations such as diking, ditching, channelization and/or outlet modification; soils alterations such as the presence of fill, soil removal and/or compaction of soils; and altered vegetation. Page 8 STREAM DETERMINATION & CLASSIFICATION An unnamed tributary of the Springbrook Creek is located off-site approximately 150 feet south of the south property line of the subject property. The stream is included on the King County GIS Assessor's maps and is identified in WDFW SalmonScape as documented habitat for Coho salmon. Per RMC Title IV, Section 3.L. l .a., Class 2 waters are perennial or intermittent salmonid-bearing waters which meet one or more of the following criteria: (a) Mapped on Figure Q4, Renton Water Class Map, as Class 2; and/or (b) Historically and/or currently known to support salmonids, including resident trout, at any stage in the species lifecycle; and/or ( c) Is a water body ( e.g., pond, lake) between one half (0.5) acre and twenty (20) acres m size. Buffers for Class 2 streams are I 00-feet from the ordinary high water mark (OHWM); the OHWM of the subject stream lies greater than 100-feet south of the northern boundary of the Class 3 wetland buffer so the stream buffer does not affect site development. SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAlv\ Title IV Section 3.090 G. designates three Shoreline environments, Natural, Conservancy, and Urban, to provide a uniform basis to apply policies and use regulations within distinctively different shoreline areas. Both Wetlands A and B have been designated Conservancy Environments. Sections K and L provide guidance on factors that must be considered in using these environments. Among the uses that must be considered, the only potential use relative to the subject property would be Environmental Effects. Such affects include pollution and Ecological Disruption, i.e. potential effects on water quality, water and land vegetation, water life and other wildlife (including, for example, spawning areas. migration and circulation habits, natural habitats, and feeding), soil quality and all other environmental aspects must be considered in the design plans for any activity or facility which may have detrimental effects on the environment. Applicants for permits must explain the methods that will be used to abate, avoid or otherwise control the hannful effects. REGULATORY IMPLICATIONS WElLAJ\iDS Title IV Section 3.M.6.c., Category 2 wetlands in Renton (i.e., Wetland A) are protected with 50-foot buffers and Category 3 wetlands (Wetland B) are protected with 25-foot buffers. Per Title IV Section 3.M.6.c., buffer averaging may be authorized only where the applicant demonstrates all of the following: i. That the wetland contains variations in ecological sensitivity or there are existing physical improvements in or near the wetland and buffer; and ii. That width averaging will not adversely impact the wetland function and values; and Page 9 iii. That the total area contained within the wetland buffer after averaging is no less than that contained within the required standard buffer prior to averaging; and iv. A site specific evaluation and documentation of buffer adequacy based upon The Science of Wetland Buffers and Its Implications for the Management of Wetlands, McMillan 2000, or similar approaches have been conducted. The proposed buffer standard is based on consideration of the best available science as described in WAC 365-195-905; or where there is an absence of valid scientific information, the steps in RMC ,l-9-250F are followed. v. In no instance shall the buffer width be reduced by more than fifty percent (50%) of the standard buffer or be less than twenty five feet wide. Greater buffer width reductions require review as a variance per subsection N3 of this Section and RMC 4-9-2508; and vi. Buffer enhancement in the areas where the buffer is reduced shall be required on a case-by-case basis where appropriate to site conditions, wetland sensitivity, and proposed land development characteristics. vii. Notification may be required pursuant to subsection F8 of this Section. Once the final site design has been determined, if buffer averaging is required to accomplish project goals these criteria will be addressed. STREAMS The stream located south of the SW 23rd Street ROW is protected with a minimum I 00- foot buffer, per Title IV Section 3.L.1. l3ased upon an applicant's request, and the acceptance of a supplemental stream or lake study, the Administrator may approve a reduction in the minimum buffer widths where the applicant can demonstrate compliance with numerous subsections of this Section; buffer reduction to a minimum of 75 feet can be permitted pursuant to this section. However, because the I 00-foot stream buffer where it crosses SW 23rd Street ROW onto the subject property lies entirely within the wetland and/or its buffer, no stream buffer reduction or averaging will be necessary on this project. SHORELINE CONSER. V ANCY Once the final site design has been determined, if any impacts to a Shoreline Conservancy Environment, i.e. the wetlands or stream, are proposed, code provisions of Title IV Section 3.090 G. will be addressed. Page JO RFFERENCES Hitchcock, C.L., and A. Cronquist. 1973. Flora of the Pacific Northwest. Univ. of Washington Press, Seattle. King County Planning Division. I 986. King County Wetlands Inventory Notebook, Volume 2 East. King County, Washington. Sensitive Areas \1ap Folio, December, 1990. Metro King County Website. GIS Center. www5.metrokc.gov/servlet/com.csri.esrimap.Esrimap?ServiceName=overview& Client .... Microsoft TerraServer Imagery. http: •tcmbcrver.homeadvisor.msn.com Munsell Color. 1992. Munsell Soil Color Charts. Kollmorgen Instruments Corp., Baltimore, MD. Reed, P.B., Jr. 1988. National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: National Summary. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C. Biol. Rpt. 88(24). 244 p. 1993 Northwest Supplement, Region 9, December 1993. Snyder, D.E., P.S. Gale, and R.F. Pringle. 1973. Soil Survey of King County Area, Washington. U.S. Soil Conservation Service, Washington, D.C. Soil Conservation Service. 1985. Hydric Soils of the State of Washington. U.S. Soil Conservation Service, Washington, D.C. Soil Conservation Service. I 987. Hydric Soils of the United States. ln cooperation with the National Technical committee for Hydric Soils. U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service, Washington, D.C. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. I 993. Northwest Supplement to National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: Region 9. Biol. Rpt. 88(24). Washington State Department of Ecology. 2004. Revised Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual. Ecology Publication #04-06-025. Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife SalmonScape. http://wdfw.wa.gov/mappinc'.'. sa lmon,cape/index.html Page I I APPENDIX I: WEllAND DErERMINATION DATA FORMS Page 10 I Project/Site. l-rnd ~ Appl ic:i. ntlo\.l,T1cr: "s-~c,_~ [n\·e::;1 i !.:Jtorl s; (>(~"Uz£Jc DAT..\ FOR'.111 (Raised) Routine \\'etland Detennination (\L\. State \\'etland Delineation Manual or 198 orns et ~n e me.atrnn . anua 7 C \\ I d D r "1 ll Dati:: 'i< /?5 I Olf County: f;:__/;,,°)_ StJte: SfTIR: Ro~,<:i"'~ Do Normal Circums1ance~ i!'-is.t on the site': r~e_s) n9 Cornmunit; ID: ' ls the ~i1e significamly dis curbed (atypical situ::nion i·~ ye:, no ' Tr:i.nsect lD: DP-I.s the .Jiea a prnemiJ.! Problem Area? ~~~:, no 1j)J ID' Pim ID: 1 Exolanation of atvpical or problem area: OYr__Jz_g._ / c{Q_s,__,Q • \'EGETA TIO/Ii (For :;;:u,:ita, indica1e. T = tree: S = shr~b: H = herb: V;. vi!le) Domino.n1 Pl.:m! Species SrrJtum % co,·er [n(:!'1c.:11or Dominant Pl.am Soecies Str.:itum 9c CO\'C'f p ,')ffi,, , J~--I Zn Pf,C ~(J_.)< Lvi cYAfi) -IQ r}\ON Sni. h, ~(;:y I s' 0(} 1:_:: ;\( l..f',/ . I (_) HYDROPITTTIC VEGETATIO:'s l:'sDIC..\TORS: Sr of dominants OBL. FACV.'. & F..\C /(]() Check all indicators thJt apply&:. expLiin below· Visual observ~lion of pl;mt spe:cies grO\ving in Phys iologicJ.1/reproducti ve ::idapralions ar!~ of prolonged inunLiJ.1ion/.:satur;:nion --\\-,:ii.ind p!JJ1t database Morphoiogic:i.l adaptations. --P~rsonal knowledge of regional pl.ant ccimmur.i11es Te:-hnical LiltratuTe Q,hcr (e,plain) . Hydrophytic vegetation present? CV no Rationale for decision/Rern::rrks: . HYDROLOGY . ls il th!! growing. season: @ no Water Marks: yes@ s~dimi:nr Deposits: k~-soil ttmp (record tc:mp on Based or.: ! Drift Lines: yes ~o/ Drain::ige P"jtterns: othtr ( ~x olain) De.pt. ·of inundJtion: -=:::::::: inches Oxid'tz.ed Roo_t (li\·e r°?6t) Local Soil Survey: Channels <!2 in. ves ho '. - ,~-... lndii.:;:i.tor ------. ycsc§::.) yes 0:) yes~ ck~,/,v· Depth to fret water in pir; ----F AC Neutral: yes C Wail!f·Stilined Lc;a\·es yest) __ inchr:s Dep1h to satu.ated soil: ,,,,.-~-inches /! ' . Check all tha1 apply & explain below: O,her (explain): Srn:am, Lake or g.ag.e data: --Aerial photo!?.raohs:: Other: Wetland hydrolog_v present? yes /no Rationale for decision/Remarks: ·- - SOILS Map Unit c'<:tme ------------ (Series & Phase) Taxononw (subrrrou Profile De5Sription Depth Horizon (inches) j Matrix color (Munsell mois1) 'rZ 5/} ~otile colocs (Munsell moist) I Hydric Soil Indicators: (check all 1hat apply) __ Histosol __ Histic Epipedon __ Sulfidic Odor __ Aquic Moismre Regim~ __ Reducing Conditions __ Gleyed or Low-Chroma i=l) matrix H}dric soils present? yes Rationak for decision/Remarks: Wetland Determination (circle) Hydmphytic vegetation present 1 Hydric soils present? Wetland h\'drolo~v resent" Rationale/Remarks: no Drainage Class---------- Field observations confirm Yes No :-.1011k abundance siz~ &. contrast ma d t e 1 TcxIUre. concretions.. strucrure.·etc. ii __ Matrix chroma $ 2 wi1h monies __ Mg or F~ Concretions Drawing of soil profile ( match de5cription) __ High Organic Content in Surface Layer of Sandy Soils __ Organic Streaking: in Sandy Soils __ Listed on '.iational/Local Hydric Sc,ils list __ Other (ex lain in remarks) Is the sampling point within a wetland: !'-OTES: C»rA'Uvj {)fu,c ~-A· RtA,6--u..,~ ()Ac!7C(2ft,c/cf--· dt;f'')'\.f,tMriA t:tV,0'}1.c:J 6/19 / 'J '<~,.,It-( c cl ·-·-I I cuY 1 f-cetu r(1 App! it.·:inUov,:nc:r: Irwes1 i!:Jtor(s ): DA TA FOR\! I (Rnised) Routine \\'etland Detennination (\\ A State Wetland Delineation Manual or 1987 Corns\\ etland Delineation Manual\ Do ~ormal Circums1;:i:1ces ~xist on the site? (}:.';.{)· ~- ls the !.ite signitic:rncly di::;curbed (atypical :;ituJtion r' ye:. (_~-:) 15 the .area a po1emi.:il Problem Area·~ ,,~.:c:,).X----, ye-s _L~) Exol:in:ition of atvpic:il or problem are,: /-n's fo-v1 C .c:'i:P O >?!, )/, VEGETATION <For sirata. indicJte T = tree: s = shrub: H =iicrt,: v = vinel ' . Dominani Pl,rn~ Species Str.a1um 9c CO\ er 1rlr1l( r1..~r r 50 u;rn ;rL1{ 5 qo -n h1 !<..,u,{) iDw,, I \I -r I HYDROPHYTIC \.EGETAT!O!', J;-.;DICATORS, ,:7, of dominants 0BL FACW. & f.-",C /60 Check :ill indic:itors that Jpply & cxpl:iin below lndic:i.tor D0minan1 Plant Soecies J-A-c- f:,4c\!'/ f~C{A Community ID: Tr.1r.stc! ID: Plot ID: Srr;:itum Phys i ol ogi cal/rej:,roducti ·i;e ::i.d.J.ptations W ~ti and plant database 'ic cm·er Visual obser.-;ition of p!J.m spc:cie:s growing ln are;i,s of prolonged inund:ition/s..J.rnrJ.uOn Morphologic:i.J .1dap1J.1ion:i. Technical Literature Pr:rs6nJ.! knowledge of refion:t.l plant c0mmunlties Other (nolainJ Hydroph)·tic vegetation present? Rationale for d~cision/Rem;:irks: HYDROLOGY ~ no 1ndii:Jtor ls it the grov,:ing sea.son·~ @ no () --~- W.:uer Marks: _CV no on Sediment D~posir~no Based on: giJ:j__, soil t~mp {record t~mp ____ ) other (explain) ~pt. ·of inund::uion: Depth w frer! ,-;ater in pir: Depth to satur.itcd soil: ~inches __ inches inches Check all that apply & explain below; Stream, Lake or gag.e da[a: __ Aerial photoeraphs: Wetland hydrology present? Rationale for decision/Rt!r.iart.:s.: Other: no Drift Lines: yes~ Oxidi2ed Root (li\"C: rDOJ.S~ Channels < 12 in. \'es ( l'lo) FAC Neutr.il: yes E) Other (explain): DrainJ_gc: P.:incrns:~ no Loc:t.J Soil Survey: yet no SOILS Map Unit C'J.me ------------ (Serie, & Phase) Taxonom,· (suborou Profile Des,:ription D,,pth Horizon Matrix color ~ottk colors (inches) (Munsell (Munsell moist) moist) {)-]!-~' i/}1 A-1011?. lf 12J1'-, 11~4/11 . ' . I I I I Hydric Soil Indicators, (check all that apply) __ Histosol __ Histic Epipedon __ Sulfidic Odor __ Aquic Moisture Regim~ _. _ Reducing Conditions Gkyed or Low.Chroma (=I I matri, Hydric soils present? ~ no Rationak for decisiorlfR.emarks: Wetland Detennination (circle) . Hydrophytic vegetation present' GiP no Hydric soils present? (fj§9 no Wetland h,·drolo!'V oresenr' dff) no Rationale/Remarks: .. -· At ,,e/1e ~ .foJJ_ V !'-OTES: Drainage Class---------- Field observations conErm Yes No mao d t e? ;,,. tonk abundance T~xrure. concretions. Dr.iwing of soil -siz~ & contril.St structure. etc. profile ( march descriQtion f .{--r L ' ~ l~!J ,J,(r -.~? ,:-c:.,A I A :1-;J-;-j p . l~ JC( ., ! J...a--14)1 </!7--'Z.. ~atrix chroma $ 2 with monies __ Mg or Fi: Concretions __ High Organic Content in Surface Layer of Sandy Soils __ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils --Listed on :--iational/Local Hydric S,,ils List Other (explain in remarks) a Is the sampling point no within a wetland': /Ji_g~~- ' Ud.,.,j) e.__ (_./ - Revised 4/97 I DAT A FOR.\1 I (Revised) Routine Wetland Detennination {WA State\\ ct\and Delineation Manual or 1987 Corns \\etland Delineation Manual) Pruject/Site: /,<)..-'.,)') // / ,' ti 4 ·:.:-~~~-)C.,t..,,f_,::.'Z.. / ,-, fr . h'[ ,-,,,, AppliL'Jnt/o\1,,-n~:-: r;f 'I',._..,- In\·e:;l i !:.'.ltor( s) dZ -~ -th f :!>c, . tv -Do ~ormaJ Circumstances c:\is.t on the: site? -(_i;TT no ls the si1c si~nific;rntly di:>turbed (a1ypic.1.J $itu~nion i·~ yes Cw) ls the area :a potential ?roblcm Area: )'C'S D::i.1i::: CJ/P·'f /OLf Councy: j<,.~1,1 S1:i.1e: /~~ SrTIR: Community ID· '. T r:m::;ect ID: l)f'-: Plot ID: .3 E.xolan~tion of arvoical or oroblcm area: ® ·. --... 'VEGETATION (For strata. indic.1ce T = tree: S := s.h:-ub; H = hi:::rb; V = vine) Domin.;:im Plant Snecies Stratum 9c CO\·er IndicJtor Dominant Plant Soccies 5[rJ!Um c;, co,·er Lndk::nor 1''"' f . /, , ~ v __ . c:: "2$" f/1 ·(Ji,/ ....,,. L;r, t ,t /tJ,-/7 Ir "r---,,. , .... .,,, ', ~ • .;:> I ~ I ~ • '/)_g,1 •= ' c:: J! I •• /4.,5'1 I ~ S?Jvt )5' FA / C I :,10/\J ./ ' I 71 l..J I I I ,--I , s :_.,., '/ s~ -I I Pki! H ! /,L,, ,, --t' 0.fo.o,,.{}_!f O ' ' -R,r,l:xs I, / 5 r LJ. ~ Jbri, I ,:;{,, 'r1' H Ctut-e.k j I \.~ J-, I. I HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION INDICATORS: 'Fro.A I . -1 f,.' I ' y~ 'a../;[ -C:-.[,·, I ·-·' J !._o{) -------------j,_ " of dominanrs OBL. FACV.'. & F . .\C ·, . &v_j_ DP ~-w..WL lt./.i:C lh{__. Check ;1ll indic;:i.tors that J?ply & ~xpliin beiow· Visual obse:rv:uion of pl:lm s.~cic:s growing in Phy_:; i ol ogical/reproducti ,..e J.dapra1i ans --areas of prolonged inundJ.tion/sJtur::i.tion --\':~1bnd plant database --Morphologic:i.1 adapt:i.tion::, --Pc:rsonal knowledge of reg:ion::i.l plant crimmur.i1ies --Technical Lit~rature Othe, (exnlain) Hydrophytit vegetation present:' Cev no Rationale for decision/Remm:$: ' HYDROLOGY -- Ls it tho growing season/ @ no \.\'~ter Mark.s:lvno Sc:dimtnt Dtposirs(i::JlO cf!,apl~ 'n ~, .. _ on. · - Ba5ed on. __.,, soil te~~ 1recQrd 1emp ) Drif.tLincs: yesv· Dr;,ii n:i.ge Po1terns:( y:_0' no othtr (e:o:.Dlain) Dept. Of inund::ition: <fJ inches f'vr)--µ_e_ .. O:tidized Root {li,:e roo~ Local Soil Survey\y°V no Channels < 12 in. ves no Depth to frei! water in pit: ~nches FAC Neutral: yes(~'!) \\/;:ner-s.taini:d Lea\·el!_ei)no r,.;,th to sacurated soil: inches Check all 1hat apply & explain below: Other (explain): Stream, Lake or gage data: -- Aerial ohotoeraohs: Other· Wetland hydrologJ' present:' D no Rationale for dt-cision/Rc:marks.: SOfLS Map Unit :--;asne ------------ (Se:--ics & Phase) Taxonom,· (suborou Profile Des,:ription D:pth Honzon Matrix color Mottle colors (inches) (Munsell (Munsell moist) moist) Cl· Zf () l~J' ,, ,fl._ c:tv/-z- '# . u) Drainage Class ---------- Field observations confirm Yes No ma d r e 0 \!ottk abundance Texture, concretions. DrJwing of ::.oil size & contrast structure. etc. profile (match descriQtion) f-- -?'.>/1: "i 41 frUJ-, , i~ c.--/v ,ut,(/ tf-!Lf ~ A-1 vi rz!f-/-'2 W1··,,,'1 +-· I , I I (I 1 i ! H,·dric Soil Indicators: (check all that apply) ~Matrix chroma S 2 with monies --Histosol __ Histic Epipedon __ Mg or Fe Concretions __ Sulfidic Odor __ High Organic Content in Surface byer of Sandy Soils -·--Aquic i\-1oisture Regim~ __ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils __ Reducing Conditions __ Listed on ~ational/Local Hydric s,,ils List \ Gleyed or Low-Chroma l=I I matris Other I< s plain in remarks) Hydric soils present? -~ no Rationak for decision/Remarks: Wetland Determination (circle) Hydrophytic vegetation pr,:sent 0 l no @ Hydric soils present" no Is the sampling point no Wetland hvdrolo<!v present' no within a wetland': s Rationale/Remarks: - f/of re;rve:._~ ((~+ C /;~ ' ,, :; ' -. NOTES: f+d d 1 1 r~/Nh /r/c; /::,eu.__ [~' In vo S,__,o I rt cWA c_.. Revised 4/97 I I I DATA FOR"1 I (Revised) Routine \\' et land Determination (\\ .. .\. State \\'etland Delineation Manual or I oms et an e meat10n. anua 987 C \\ I d D I' M ll Projecl/S 1te: ;;~~·L~_lz A-uz .. Appl it.:".1nlfo\,l,T1cr: l n \·~st i !:J.!Or( :-1 c...,/2::w 11Cc Do Normal Circumsr.o.nce~ ~xist on rhe si1e': (;§1 no D::i.t~: CJ /:t3/0 f Counry: ,k.1nq S1a1e: ~ SIT/R: Community ID: , .. ls the 5-ite si};nific:imly di::>turbcd iatyp1c:1l .situJLioni·~ vc; ~ Transect [D: DP L/ ., ls c.he .:irea a potenti::il Proble:m Are:1·~ ,,-. )' _j)/7 ye:~ n_i.? ' Plot ID: Cc. ' p o-ld. "' Exobnation of arvpic:il or problem are:aJ, .,o / v,) ~ ·-.,. VEGETATION {For 5tf.:!.!::J.. indic::i.te T:: tree': S ==-s.hfut. H = hi:rb: {j = vine) Dominant Plant Species Strarnm 9'c C:O\"Cf Indicator Dominant Plar.t $pe.ci~s StrJtum '7c: co,·er lndii.:-::nor p 1)-xi,,1/ "' T J.o /.) 0].f, C 'fr ·i:;-!~--P~'\C Cfµuy,_, .. 11\cvtl r!:.11/f /at ~ T .r:-1+-/)J/ ... R[HL t/1 'r-vr T r 1#,/A I , i , L.· " ' Kth-eA ,~ = fl j-¥-j K,,L, ,/ \/ ; s Ir:.; r---., ffYO'Jr". . 1'.::At',I 1 i--11 <' . .. 5;,J<A . J2v .. )j .. "./ "" ! V /) !5-,.,. "Ii /' ) ; J f-I? _.t ../ ~ \/,~ 4 V ,,,--r ·/, / i 0\ ,...) r··/· V. :_/\ ?,byh / -; r-..-p,.,-1 r 0-,UJ'.',.4, --p "··· ,.,,, -'( ___ (/, ~' HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATfO:s; J:s;DICATORS: Sc of dominonts OBL FAC\\', & F.>.C B@ Chtck all indicators that .1pply &. e.xpl:iin bc:!o,.~·: Visual obser,:::nion of p!.:i.nt species gro\ving in Ph _ys i ologichl/reprod uc1i ve ::idapt::nions --areas of prolonged inun1.fation/s.1turation --\\·c:\~nd plan! d.atabase -- Morphological adapt:nion:i. --P~rsonal knowledge of refion.1! plant comrnunicies -- Technical Lireraturc: Other le,plain) Hydrophytii: vegetation present? & no Rationale for decision/Rem:irks: HYDROLOGY ls it lht: growing se:i.son? 6[) no i Water Marks: ·yes ta) Sediment Deposit~: yes ~) Based on: ~-soil cemp (record temp on ) Drift Lines: yes ~I Dr.1in.:i.ge P.:i.tterns: yes~ oth~r ( e., pl.l.in l Dept. ·or inund:uion: ----==--i n ch es d, lf O.,idized Root (live roo~ Loc,I Soil Survey: yes(".':) Channels <l2 in. ves ·n -Waier-stain~d Le~xes yes D Depth {O fre~ water in pit: --inches --FAC Neutral: yes (".5 Denth to saturated soil: inches . . -Check all th>t apply & explain below: Other (e,;ploinJ: Stream, Lake or gage data: --' Aerial ohotoeraphs: Other: I , W ctland hydrolog)' pre.sent'? yes ((no) Rationale for decisiorv'Rcmari:s· ! / , __ ,, . I SOILS Map Unit ~ame ------------- (Series&: Phase) Taxonom\' (suborou Profile D~ription lxpth Horizon . Matrix color Monie colocs (inches) (Munsell (Munsell mois{) moist) 0-]0r A JDYf<-'1 /3 - I I Hydric Soil Indicators: (check all that apply) --Histosol __ Histic Epipedon __ Sulfidic Odor __ Aguie Moisture Regime __ Reducing Conditions Gky.:d or LoY,-Ciuoma (: Umatri, Hydric soils present? ~·es/~ Rationale for decision/Remarks: Wetland Determination (circle) Hydrophyric vegernrion present? (P no Hydric soils present? yes~ Wetland h,·drolo~v oresent 0 yes no Rationale/Remarks: ~ <i2-~-J] p . !'-OTES: Drainage Class---------- Field observations confirm Yes No ma d t e 0 \loctk abundance Texture. con.::relions... DrJwing of soil size & contra.st structure. etc:. prnfik t ma1ch descri~tion 1 -'?~ /o&,yy >--~ . j I --Matrix chroma $ 2 with monies __ Mg or Fe Concretions __ H,gh Organic Content in Surface Layer of Sandy Soils __ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils --LlSted on :sianonal/Local Hydric S,>i!s Lisi Other (e.,plnin in remarks) CE) Is the sampling point ;cs within a wetland'? u;/~ ~ W/L- ' - Revised 4197 DA TA FOR:Sl l (Revised) Routine Wetland Detennination (\\ .. .\ State \\ et land Delineation Manual or 198 Ort)S et.and Dehneation , anua 7 C \\ M ll Pruject/Si1e: c' c:>ec20 L~d A-z;.e_ /1..A.l__.Q...___ Doti:· (i I ;;2 3 / cu; Appl iJ:Jnt/ov."Tia: County: /<1:-r.q St:ite: In\ i:sti!.:J.tor{ s ): (" 72.o tl,,:;c_; SfTIR: IZ ep2'T-?-J Do ~ormal Circumst.alice~ ,xist on th!! si,e'? (~_! no Communi1y ID: i l.s the site significJ.ntly disturbed {atypical situ.:i.tion I"~ ye:, c:::ii'b"' Tr:i.nsect ID: .. ls th~ :irea a po1enti:il Probiem Arc:a·, ~1 , 0. Y;°S .@ Plot ID: {Y' / E.xolanation of arvoic:il or oroblem are:i.: f'/1 tf_!!JiA..49_{} --/0 ·. ·-.,. VEGETATION (For stratil. indic.::He T d-iree: 5 = shrub: H = herb: V = vine) D0min:rn1 Plant Soecies Scrotum 9c cm·er ln:)i:J.10r Dominant Plant Soecies Str:itum 7c cm·er lndk:nor ..--7 !J--i1__!t; c;L1) • Jr) r11r-. ?itw 1~ H--/{) R\-c.--(D,11,c-t c f /.I· ' ,J)...-ir. I~/, u I I " f'/1( [Ii/ loAYI., f/J._i_d-~. /tJ NI -, / L/ . V V I tl, ~ Al..r.!c/.-H /0 /\./ L.-' i () f ( {; I I ;ll...A:1 _ ,fyy;JC I \/ r r),:: ,,_,.," hs!-V rufi-r fl /o t--)1/-I ,t/ --' l __ ,/ . A<T.i~o -fe--;vA.. I--/ ;v FA/ ____ I HYJ)ROPITTTJC VEGETATIO:-. 1:-.DIC..\TORS: ,("_,,--,__, "° of dominants OBL. FACV.', & FAC ';! I.. /.. I Check all indi:amrs that o.pp!y & -::xp!iin be]Q\.\·: Visual observation of pbnl spe:ci~s growing in Physiol Clgical/reproductive adaptations --areas of prolonged inunda1ion/5:icur:iuon --W~!l:ind pl:int databas~ --Morphological adap1J1ion:; --Pcrsor.al knowledge of regionJl plant commur:.ities --Te:hnical Lirt:::rature Other (esolain) Hydrophytic vegetation present? C:,o/ no Rationale for dtcision/Remarks: HYDROLOGY ls it thi:: growing_ season·~ {!!) no Water Marks: yes@ Scdim~nt Dt'.'posits: yes~ ~ soi~;;ord t~mp on - Based on: ) Drift Line:s: yes 0fJ Dr.::.in.1ge P.1nerns:: yes (iii) othi:!r ( ~~ olain J Dt:pt. ·or inund:ition: -inches Oxidized Root (li,·e roo~ Local Soil Survey; yes~ ---I Channels < 12 in. vi=s o Depth to free water in pit: --inches. 0-.,,,{) FAC Neutral; yes~ \Vater-stained Le:i ... ·es ye~ Denth to satur.ited soil: -iriches i Check all thot apply & exploin below: Other (explain): Stream, Lake or gage dara: -- Aerial nhotoeraohs: Other: Wetland h_ydrolo~· present? yes .// .... no', Rationale for decision/Remarks: (/ ~- . .··. ' SOILS Map Unit :-,iame ------------- (Series & Phase) Taxonom, ( suborou Profile D~ription D,,pth Horizon Matrix color \1otrle colors (inches) (Munsell (Munsell moist) moist) () I&-. L,L 1-1 O"/ 4 !?i - /) I J I I I I Hydric Soil Indicators: (check all that apply) --Histosol __ Histic Epipedon ____ Sulfidic Odor __ Aquic Moisture Regime __ Reducing Condi[ions Gkyed or Low-Chroma !=ll.tnatri, Hydric soils present? Rationale for decision/Remarks: yes 6v Wetland Determination (circle) Hydrophytic vegetation present" ~© Hydric soils present" I I ' I Wetland hvdrolo~v present? ~ yes - Rationale/Remarks: '--.___,/ . NOTES: Drainage Class---------- Field observations confirm Y cs ma d t e 1 No '.\ lank abundance Texture, concretion5:. Dra\,·ing of soil size & contrast strucrure. etc. profile ( march de:scri121ion) /?,,, •(}£!, -/} A ~ /t>'--., -~ - --Matrix chroma S: 2 with mottles __ Mg or Fe Concretions __ High Organic Content in Surface byer of Sandy Soils __ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils --Listed on ~ational/Local Hydric Soils Lisi Other (e,plain in remarks) ® Is the sampling point yes within a wetland':' Revised 4/97 Projccl/Site: DATA FOR~! 1 (Revised) Rot1tine \\ etland Determination (\YA State Wetland Delineation Manual or 1987 Corns \I etbnd Deline2tion Manual) 11/7/0L.j Coumv: L/ . I Stotc -p:__.,_,t,{.Q Re_ -,4.- SrT/R: . .) ' -«-t'.6)1..., Do Nonna] Circumswnces c:\iSt on [he sile': ls !.he ~ile S.ifnifi.::;:i.ntly di:;rnrbed (atypical s.ituaLion 1·; Ls the area a pOlenti:il Problem Area? E.xci!;m;:ition of ar\'pic;:il or nroblem area: no~ no · ® Comrnunit;· ID: Tr:i.nscct ID: Plot JD: \"EGETA TIO:-/ (For str:na. indicate T = uee: S = shrub: H = hdi: V = vine) Domin;:ini ?!ant Species StrJ.tum JOO HYDROPHYTJC \'EGETATIO:--. 1:-.DICATORS: Sc of dominants OBL. FACW, & FAC ___ _ Check all indic;nors that :ipply & e:xpl:lin below: Visual obser-Y.:t.tion of pL::m1 specie:s growing 1n ar,e::i., of prolonged inundation/saturation Morphological adapt:itions Te-:hnic;il Literature Hydrophytk vegetation pr-esent:' Rationale for decision/Remarks: HYDROLOGY IndicJ.;::::ir Dominant Plam Soccies S1ratum 'ic CQYC'f t:4(.11 J I no Phys io logiccl/reproduc:ti \"e adap!ations \Y i:tl.Jnd plant dar:ibase Pl!rsonal knowledge of region:il pl.o.n[ communities Other le,olain) lndk::itor ls it the grou·ing se:ison' 0----~ , __ \ W ;uer Marks: yes .e) Stdiml!nt D~posits: yes~ on rlJ:?-6v.d::, ;ii...,tQ ~,, . ~-~ B~d on: soil rem ~(recOrd terrip) ~-0 --J DrainJge Plnerns: yes( ri'o.I''i l--c-~-~====-'o::;th~o:.!r...:l.::<::,rni::.1:.::a~in::;l~----------'--l-------------1--~ Drift Lines: yes 0V Dept. ·of inundation: ~---inches Oxidized Root _(li\"e roo~, (--'y',;f/Y'JL. Channels <12 m_ \'tS '.--~l'lij _:-_-_ inches FAC Neutral: yes ,'.'.'.'.') ~ inches Depth to fret water in ·pit: Deoth to saturoted soil: Check all that apply & explain below: Other (explain): Stream. Lake or gage data: Aerial ohoto~raohs: Wetland hydrolo~· pr~ent'? Rationale for decision/Remarks: Other: Local Soil Survey: yes ev Warer-s.taintd Lean:s yes~ SOILS Map Unit '.'iarne ------------- (Series & Phase) Taxonon1\' (suborou ?rofile D~ription I Depth Horizon Matrix color !\,lottk colocs (inches) (Munsell (Munsell moist) moist) o~JJ -4 /!//~ 3/3 . I Hydric Soil Indicators: (check all that apply) --His1osol __ Histic Epipedon _· __ Sulfidic Odor __ Aguie Moisture Regim~ __ Reducing Conditions Gkyed or Low-Chroma(= I I matrix Hydric soils present: ~·es -cv Rationak for decision/Remarks: Wetland Detennination (circle) Hydrophytic ve:getation presern? @ no Hydric soils present" yes @ Werland hvdrolo!!v present" yes (116\ I RationaleJRemarks: . NOTES: Drainage Class---------- Field observations confirm Yes No ma I ;,louk abundance Texture. concretion5. Drawing of soil size & contr.ist structure. etc. profik I ( match descri2tion I I r I A--z-~ I I I I I I --Matrix chroma::: 2 with mottles __ Mg or Ft: Concretions __ High Organic Content in Surface Layer of Sandy Soils __ Organic Streaking in S.mdy Soils __ Listed on ~ational/Loc:tl Hydric Soils List Other re,pbin in remarks) G Is the sampling point : ts within a wetland" ' - Revised 4/97 Projrct/Siie: l-1 ,,,,_~ DA TA FOR\! I (Revised) Routine Wetland Determination (\I.A State \\"e<land Delineation Manual or 1987 Coros et and Delineatwn . anua \\ l M ll 4u-e-__ Datl: IJ/7/of App! ic::i.nUov.'11,:::r: cSot!:1{__ Councy: t ' ~ S1:1.1e: ~ 1/c-1_v:&fi~ ln\·e::;1 i ~:l!Or( s): (:!__.. pfl?~\../ SfTIR: Do NonnaJ Circumst;:rnces e:\ist on th!! s.ite': ~ ~~~ Community tD: '. l5 Ihe ~i[e signific:i.mly disturbed (J.typicJ.l 5iLU:itionl"~ Tr::msecl LD: Dr-7 . ·.:. . ls c.hc area a pmenti:t! Prob!tm Area·~ ye:~ @ ( --Plot lD: Ex.ol;m::nion of arvpical or oroblem area: --.. -- \'EGETA TION (For :itrata. indicace T = uee: S = shrub. H::: h.':rb: V = vine) Dominant Plant Soecies S1ri'.ltum 9c co,·er lnji:::-;:i.:or Dominant Plant Soecies S1r:11um 'ic CO\"Cf lndi~.1tor :~a. (J)v():(_ c /f ,,.JJo'":f . J,t-r ':{" FAt,LA ~-c;, A-<, s J-~ FAf' rw. /1/..., J -, rt JO FA(A;\/ C o-;t 'w I L--O j . ,\ I -"· { ),,-t-,' t?t-1 c)-1 !-t-~ F'Ac..-\;. (_'ire.--V1,<l.n /--1 T F)v / I ' ) I . ' "' HYDROPHYTJC VEGETATION INDICATORS: • S<"of dominants OBL. FACV.', & F.AC fa( t' Chtd.: all indicator.. th;:it ::ipply & expbin be:!ow: Visu.2.J obser::nion of p\.:mt species growinf in Phys1ol.ogical/reproducti\·e adaptations -- areas of prolonged in.uni:btion/$:ituraucn --\\. ctiJ.nd plant d;:itabase -- Morphologic::.i.! adapt:nion·~ --Pc:rsonal knowledge of refional pl.int commur.ities -- Technical Litc:r:a.ture O<her (explain) Hydrophytic v~get.ation present'! (Y__,~ no Rationale for decis.ion/Remarks: HYDROLOGY ls il the-iro\J.-ing season·~ _,es ~-r-_) j Water Marks: yes ev Sediment Deposits: yese) Wc..Unvr fr0t~-, on Bo.,ed on: soi 1 temp ( record ti!mp i Drift Lines: yes~ Dr::iin.:ige P.:i.nerns: )'CS~ othc:r (ex.plain) -Dept. Of inundJtion: -inches Oxidized Root (\h·e roo~ Local Soil Sur,ey: yes~ -- •• '71.)!\\J.-Channels <12 in. ,·es n Depth to free wa1er in -pie: ~ inches FAC Neutral: ye(:_) Water·stain~d Le::ises yese} -- Deoth to saturated soil: -inches Check all tha< apply & explain below: Other (e_,plainJ: Strt:am. Lake or gage data: -- Aerial ohotoeraphs: Other: Wetland hydrolOg)' pre.sent? yes ~-) Rationale for decis.ion/Rt:marL:s: \:h_zt ofJJ.<J_.( '--/u 1/1//L 12tl5~ SOILS Map Uni! :,.;;i;ne ------------- (Serie., & Phase) Taxononw (suborou Profile Description Depth Horizon Matrix color Mouk colors (inches) (Munsell (Munsell moist) moist) -·-· 4 t>trz ./f7 I"?-f) -1 R;_ I Hydric Soil Indicators: (check all that apply) __ His!osol __ Histic Epipedon __ Su!fidic Odor __ Aquic Moisture Regime __ R~ducing Conditions Gkyed or Low-Chroma I= I) matrix Hydric soils present? yes (.'V Rationak for decision/Remarks: Wetland Determination (circle) . Hydroph,·!ic vege!ation present" no ®· Hydric soils present? yes ~. Wetland h"drolo~v oresent 0 yes . Rationale/Remarks: - Drainage Class---------- Field observations confirm Yes No ma d r pe 0 ~!m:lc abundance Texture. concretions. Drnwing of soil <;ize &. ::ontra.st strucwn:. etc. profi k : ( match destriQ{ion 1 I S1.,, (/ I I I I __ Matrix chroma $ 2 with monks __ Mg or Fe Concretions __ High Organic Content in Surface Loyer of Sandy Soils __ Organic S!reaking in Sandy Soils --Listed on :,.;;itional/Local Hydric S,,ils List O!her (e.\plain in remarks) e ls !he sampling point y~s \,·nhin ;:i wetland? @_, ~ J) ,//I f f2c~-~- I) . ,, - !'.OTES: Revised 4/97 ?:uji:cl1Si1c:: l-!~cd! /~ Applic:rnt/o"'-ner: &i";J· ~ DAT A FOR~ 1 l ( Revised) Routine Wetland Determination (\\'.-\ State Wetland Delineation Manual or 1 orps et an e meation. anua 987 C \ \ I d D r VI ll ln\·es.ti!.:.J.tor( s ): C lt!n fir#-- Date:'.:: 11 /7 jaf Councy: ~· StJte: vij/~r0 SfT/R: De NormaJ Circ:umsrnnce~ cxis.l on thi: site? ~ no Community ID: ' I.s the ~itC' signific:rntly disturbed (atypic.1.! ~icu:nionr? y~s ~:thJv Tr.1r.:;~ct lD: .. is the J.re.a a pctemiJ\ Problem Area~ yes Plot ID: PP-6 Exola.n:llion of atvoic.::il or oroblem area: ·--.. VEGETATION (For :;tr.Ha. indicate T = uee: S =-s.hrub: H :::: htrb: V = vim:) Domin.1nt Plant Species Stratum 9c cm·er Indlc::..tor Domir.anc Plant SDecies Stratum Ci, co\·er lndii:amr p Gn (r, 'fJ?l,,10 D~· ot.y-v '" Uf:f t:--Ac. ~ Ip • 1/ P111i: ' a.a r.:1\<t1V C;._~ 0 .. Y,t'..J.)~ I c::-, ,21) -:4 ' / ,;,·· '(./ " I C l_'t$--vV\ ~L ;;v F:;,, a/ _,,, .. \• . £pt-A. ,)l/t/).c, ~) 10 FA{!\/V ~ <J HYDROPHYTJC \'EGETAT!OS 1;,,;DICATORS: '"\ '·,;.. Si of dominants OBL. FACV.', & FAC Joo Check all mdi,awr, that apply & expl;iin below Visual obsen:ation of pbnt s~cie"s gro~\·inf in Physiological/n:producti\·,: ad.Jptations -- ar~a..i::. of prolonged i nund.1rion/~.::itur.:n1on \\'c-1!J.nd plant darnbase .• ---- Morphological adaptations --P~rsonal knowledge of re;ion;il plant communities -- Te:hnic.i.l Literature Other (ewlain) H:·drophytic vegetation present'? cs.:> no Rationale for decision/Rem::irls. HYDROLOGY ls it th!! gro\l,:ing season: yts § Water Marks: yes· V Sediment Deposi1s:~ no ~~d on Bas.ed on: soil ump ( record temp ) Drift Lines: yes~ Dr;:iin:ige Pauerns: Ci:!)-no other {~:t:.olainl Dept. Of inundation: ~ inches O,idized Root (live r~ Local Soil Survey.ve{rJn'o) -- Channels <12 in. ves · Depth to free v.:ater in pit: _:==_ in~hes FAC Neutral: yes~ V,la.ttr•stained Lea.Yes y~ Depth to saturated soil: inches Check all !hat apply & explain b<:low: Other (explain): Stream. Lake or gag~ data: -- Aerial phoroeraphs: = Other: Wetland hydrology present? CJ no Rationale for decision/Remarks: SOILS Map Unit '.'iciJne ------------- (Series & Phase) Ta.xonom,· (subarou Profile Des,:ription Depth Horizon Matrix color !'viottle colors (inches) (Munsell (Munsell moist) moist) ()~/'r;t A-JD YR cf JJ--~ I Hydric Soil Indicators: (check all that apply) --Histosol __ Histic Epipedon · __ Sulfidic Odor __ Aguie Moisture Regime __ Reducing Conditions Gleyed or Low-Chroma l=l I matrix Hydric soils present? Q:_~ no Rationak for decision/Remarks: '~ ? ' Wetland Determination (circle) Hydrophyric vegeration presem? (fu) no Hydric soils presenr 0 ~ no \.V etland h\'drolo~v oresent 0 s no Rationale/Remarks: -= . !\'OTES: Draimge Class---------- Field observations confirm Yes No ma dt \ Ion le obundJnce Texture. concretions. Dr..iwing of soil size & contrn.st strucrur~. etc. profile ( match descrigtion 1 -----r,. _ _.;/J s )_, ~ ~·~ k0 7o ~~ ! ~ i I I __ Matrix chroma $ 2 with monies ___ Mg or Fe Concretions __ High Organic Content in Surface Loyer of Sandy Soils __ Organic Stre,9,king ·m Sandy Soils __ Listed on :-Sational/1..ocal Hydric s,,ils List Other iernlain in remarks) @ Is ihe sampling point no within a wetland: ' . Revised 4/97 Project/Site: l-Jf-1 d Av,: _ __, Applicantlowncr:,.9-z_d~/ lnvestigator(s): 12_ 'f:,.;,,,fk,.. Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? DATA FORM 1 (Revised) Rouline Wetland Determination (WA State Welland Delineation Manual or 1987 Corps Welland Delineation Manuall Dale: Counly: State: S/T,R: l//7 /cJ'-! ~ ( ye~ no Community ID: ls the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)? Yes ~. Transect ID: {:>;JO Is the area a potential Problem Area? ;{s yes no Plot ID: Exnlanationofatvnicalorproblem area: 'A ~'J),,0; 6.) VEGETATION (For strata, indicate'-T 0 qree; s ~ l'hrub; If~ herb; v~ vine) Dominant Plant Species Stratum % cover Indicator Dominant Plant Snecies Stratum % cover Indicator rpl,.4,(] ~ 'I.....O .,.. .J-+ 6Q /:'7\(.l,{ f~J l'J" /I ~ c,niJ /0 FAc . ?0; Q {U1.k(.AA./ r+ JO rAcu HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION INDICATORS: % of dominants OBL, F ACW, & F AC t;1) Check all indicators that apply & explain below: Visual observation of plant species growing in PhysiologicaL'reproductive adaptations ~--areas of prolonged inundation/saturation --Wetland plant database --Morphological adaptations ------~-Personal knowledge of regional plant communities -~ T ecbnical Literature Other (explain) Hydrophytic vegetation present? yes (!'y Rationale for decisiont:Remarks: HYDROLOGY -Is it the growing season? yes ~ Water Marks: yes~ Sediment Deposits: ye(3g) Based on: ~oil temp (record temp-~--) on -Drift Lines: yes~} Drainage Patterns: yes (iili:;I other (exolain) -Dept. of inundation: ~ inches Oxidized Root (live r°O Local Soil Survey: yes(t) ---d 3 Channels <12 in. ves Depth to free water in pit: --. inches .,L-1.,.--L ,.,· F AC Neutral: yescj Water-stained Leaves yese.J Depth to saturated soil: ,,..-inches Check all that apply & explain below: Stream, Lake or gage data: __ Other (explain): Aerial ohoto=nhs: Other: -;::::, Wetland hydrology present? yes 0.1.". Rationale for decision/Remarks: SOILS Map Unit Name _____________ _ Drainage Class ___ _ (Series & Phase) Yes No Taxonom (subgrou Profile Description Depth Horizon Matrix color Mottle colors Mottle abundance Texture, concretions, Drawing of soil (inches) (Munsell (Munsell size & contrast structure, etc. profile moist) moist) ( match descri11tion) i -/, ·'~-·~!"' ....., .. D-!2F j, J /} ID '!f2-?/?; ~ -.. V ' JI V i-, 9,~l, 1 h ,,/ f (;J ----/2-'/ / u Hyd_ric Soil Indicators: (check all that apply) Histosol Matrix chroma :; 2 with mottles __ Histic Epipedon -- _____ Mg or Fe Concretions --S ulfidic Odor __ High Organic Content in Surface Layer of Sandy Soils __ Aquic Moisture Regime __ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils --Reducing Conditions ___ Listed on National/Local Hydric Soils List Gleyed or Low-Chroma (-1) matrix Other ( explain in remarks) Hydric soils present? yes e Rationale for decision/Remarks: Wetland Determination (circle) ,,.,.,-, Hydrophytic vegetation present? yes ~) &v Hydric soils present? yes :;e~' ls the sampling point yes Wetland hvdroloov present? yes 'nol' within a wetland? Rationale/Remarks: - NOTES: Revised 4/97 Project/Si IC: l_; M ~ DA TA FOR\1 I (Revised} Routine Wetland Determination (\\"A State \\"etland Delineation Manual or 1987 Coros Wetland Delineation Manual) Date:: ft/7/oi Applic:int/01,1,--:11:r: c:?o., /) 1 ·_.,, In·•esti~::itor(st (:!__ .. -"'f' ~frj/ ~ 1 County: St.Jte: smR: !~/~ Do Normal Circumst;:rnce5 i:'.',;.is1 on th~ si[e: I.s the 5ite s.ignific;mt!y disturbed (aiypic::i.l situation r~ ls the .1!'ea a pcnemi::il Probk:m Area·~ E.xol:::i.nation of arvoical or problem area: no Communi1,· ID: -ii£( Transect ID: 1Jp _ ..,,,.,.,..,1, Plot!D: · , ""-' ,s ,,., , ~ . , r~ ID VEGETATION (For ;rr.ita. rndicate T = tree: S = shrub: H = hero: V = vine) D0min.1n1 Pbnt Soeci~s S1r;11um 9c CO\·er Fo,fu, btclr T s-o cl/ , \.._) D,.1, • )) f), ,u. :;: -;J.o \ /(UM J" .c .),. i H-; ~ ., (µ-/Ir 12 ./ c_ _ _.; T I ~L r<e,1<-R H-T _,.,,-, L V -(:::::,1.k. . w,,q-:s µ-J HYDROPHYTIC \'EGETATJO:S I:SDICATORS: 'k of dominants OBL. FACV-', & FAC / rt) Check ::i.11 indicators thilt .1.pply & expliin below: r----- Visual observJ.tion of pl.:lni specii:::s growing in areas of prolonged inundJ.llon/5a.tur.'.l.llOn Morphologic.:i.l adapt::i.tiom. Technical Literature H:·drophytk "'egeution present? Rationale for decision/Remarks: HYDROLOGY indic:.tor Dominant Plam Soecies Stratum PA-r./ t;;AoA! :::-1t.1,1,I fl-1cVv' P:,Af"V/ P',k:v/ Physiologic.illreproducti,..e .:idaptations \\"c:tlJnd p!J.nt darnbase Sc co,·er Pc::rsonal knowledge of region::i.i plant communities Other fernlain) . no lndkator Si:dimi:::m D~posirs: .yes~ is it the growing sea.son? yes Q B:i.sed on:~ soil «mp I record temp ____ ) Water Marks: yes (!§J on Drift Lines: yes 0:3} Drain.:1ge P::merns: yes no other {e,plainJ Dept. ·or inund::i.tion: --=::: inches Depth to free water in pit: __ inch!!:S Dffith to saturated soil: 0-=Cz_ inches Check all that apply & explain below: SITT:am, Lake or gage dara: __ Aerial ohotoeraohs: Wetland hydrology present? Rationale for decision/Rt!marks: Other: Oxidized Root (li\"e rootj,h Channels <12 in. vcs I/no) FAC Neutral: yes ei Other (explain): LocJ.l Soil Sur.ey: y~i_Ji) SOILS Map Unit c\ame ------------- (Series & Phase) T"-\onom,· (subcrou Profile Despiption Depth Horizon Matrix color ~ottk colors (inches) (Munsell (Munsell moist) moist) 0 ~-!&r -0U. /0'/fl-3/; I Hydric Soil Indicators: (check all that apply) __ Hisrosol __ Histic Epipedon ,--Sulfldic Odor __ Aguie Moisture Regime --Reducing Conditions Glcyed or Low-Chroma I= l \ matri, Hydric soils present? ~'es ~ Rationale for decision/Remarks: 1.\'etland Determination (circle) Hydroph,lic vegetation present" C£} no Hydric soils present? yes ~ Wetland hvdrolo~v present" ves o Rationale'Remarks: - . . 1'.'0TES: ! I I Drainage Class---------- Field observations confirm Y cs No \!onk abundance Texture. concretions. Drawing of ~oil siz.e & contras{ structur~. etc. profile ( maich descrigtion 1 /0'/A 'l;i/4 1sL v .. --Matrix chroma $:?. with monies __ Mg or Fe Concretions __ High Organic Content in Surface L:iyer of Sandy Soils __ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils __ Listed on :,.iational/Local Hydric S,,ils List Other (explain in remarks) es ls the sampling point ~cs wilhin J wetland? ' . Revised 4/97 Prujecl/S 1le. n& Av.e__ .. DATA FOR.\! 1 (Revised) Routine \\' et land Determination (\\'.A State Wetland Delineation Manual or I 987 Corns \\ et and Delineation . anua I M ll D;i.tc::: I/ /7/0L/- App lil-:int/ 01,1, Tier-: s ' County:/(, / (:~ Stole. 1/1'7 Ka.,~u 1m·esti"J!Or{ s): SrTIR. . Do !',;ormal Cir:umst.::rnces i!:Aist on the site? (;es) no~-Cornmuni!)· ID: : ls the site signific::r.ntly di:.,.iu~d (atypical 5,itu:.i.Lionf~ ·5,;, ~'b« Trans.eel ID: Df /J . l5 the .:irea a potential Prob km A~a ·7 vts .t2_. ., ... , Pim ID: Exobn::nion of arvnic::i! or problem area: . '--... '\'EGETATION (For :itr.Jta, indic::J.Ie T = tree: S = s.:lrub: H = ht:rb: V = vine) Domin::r.nt Pl:mt Snecies Stratum 9, co,·e:r lndi.::i.tor Dominant Plani Soecies Str:i.tum W coq::r indicator p to//h.-1,< /J. .. T _ i,?) F;A,-c_, _ ,,,, ~n ~-~ 3o Fi4c-lV ' f2v4n lfh'""C),.. J V )0 p4.,.,, V ' HYDROPHYTIC \'EGETATIO:S INDICATORS: 0ic of dominants OBL. FACV-', & FAC /{)0 Cht:ck all indi~::r.tors th;:n ::ipply &. expl:iin below Visual obse:n:ation of pL:m1 species g:ro".:ing in Phys i o logical.lreproducti ve adapt.J1i ons -- area_, of prolonged inundJtion/s.:i:cur.:i:tion --W etl.:::ind plam da[abase -- Morphologic:::d adaptation~ --Personal knowledge of re,;:ional pl.mt communities --Technical U1o:!rature Other lernlain) H5-·drophytic vegetation present? o no Rationale for decis.ion/Rem:irk.s: HYDROLOGY is it th~ growing. se::::i..son-~ yo:!S €) Water Marks: yes·~ Sitdiment Dr:posits: yes~ B05edon~ on soil temp I record t~mp I Drift lines: yes e) Dr.:i.in:if'e P.J.tterns: yes~ other {e;.;.nlain! . Dept. Of inundation: _:::_ inches O,idized Root (li"e rooa,1 Local Soil Survey: yes eJ tUY)'V...s Channels <12 in. vts Depth to fret v:ater in-pit: -FAC Neutral: yesB Wa1er·stainc:d LeaYes ycs[j --inchts =th to satur.ued soil: --·inches Check all that apply & explain below: Other (expiainJ: Stream. Lake or gage data: --Aerial ohotoeranhs: Other: Wetland hydrolo~· present'? yes ~ Rationale for decision/Rl!marks: . Jni1 ~ame ------------- ,, & Phase) Taxonom,· (sub£rou Profile De5!'ription Depth Horizon Matrix color !',iottk colors (inches) (Munsell (Munsell moist) moist) .I -'• A O;t;; ~f?}T /OYR3// b-ll11f-µ_, /{)'ff< 3/2, Iv ( v' l>J ' {' .1,fYi ~ ) l I I I Hydric Soil Indicator.;: (check all that apply) --Hisrosol __ Histic Epipedon _. __ Sulfidic Odor · __ Aguie Moisture Regime __ Reducing Condition; Gleyed or Low-Chroma <=llmatri, Hydric soils present? Rationale for decision/Remarks: yes ~~) Wetland Detennination (circle) Hydrophytic vegetation present" @ no Hydric soils present" yes ~· Wetland h\'droio!!v present 0 ves 6 Rationale/Remarks: . !\'OTES: Drainage Cl.iss ---------- Field observations confirm Yes No map :-lottk abundance Texture. concretions.. Drawing of soi! size & contrast structure. ere. profile \ match descriQiion 1 rJJ., J .i! / uu ;rs JbC.@.\ J --Matrix chroma $ 2 with mottles __ Mg or F~ Concretions __ High Organic Content in Surface Layer of Sandy Soils __ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils --Listed on :S,:ational/Local Hydric S,,ils Li,1 Other (explain in remnrl.:sJ e) ls the sampling point y~s \\'ithin a wetland 0 ' - Revised 4/97 Project/Site. {_;/J) A~ Appl ic:int/ov.-n,:>.r. ,,-----, ~ In q:s Li !.:J.Lor( s): DATA FOR,1 l (Revised) Routine \\'etland Detennination (WA State\\ etland Delineation Manual or 1987 C ll oms\\ etland Deiine2tion Manua Dilt1:: I 1/ 7 I u '-+ County: K0-S JR_n .,,J--OK-St:i.te: S/TIR: Do Normal Circ:umswnce~ c::xist on tht sile'? (~9:· no riff) Community ID: ' ''· 1.5 the ~ite s.ignific;:mtly di~1urbed (ilrypic::i.1 situation 1·~ :,'6 @~~ Tr::i.ns~ct lD: PPl2-',. 1.5 the .:irea a pot~nti:il Problem Area:~ ye:. Pl01 rD: E.J:.ol:in::i.tion of atvnic=i.l or problem area: --, .. VEGETATION (For s.tr-ata. indicJ.te T; u-ee: S = shrub: H = hat: V: vine) Dominant Plani Snecies Stratum % co,·er !ndiCJ.\Of Dominanl Plam Soecies Str:Hum 'ic co\·er lndii:;nor -R-. In:/) A _ .. i Inn r:.::A-c C,,,' ,1 i,]/ !?.. s I F.Ar , ,cW r!i .. 4i)J ) I . <:' /0 -rAv,V Rwt-H ([}, I a; . I V i Ffa{Ll \/ I HYDROPH\TIC VEGETATIO~ l~DICATORS: Sic of dominants OBL. FACV,'. & FAC 10:() Chock all indico10r; that apply & explain below: Visu:al obs~n·:ttion of p!::m spe:cie:s growinf in Phys i o\ogical/reproducti ...-e adaptati ans -- arc::is of prolonged inund.11ion/satur.:nion --\\" et land plan: database -- Morphologic.:il adapt:ition~ --Pason.al knowledge of regional pl:ant commur.ities --Te:-hnic.al Literature Other (ernlainl Hydrophytic vegetatjon present'? yes no Rationale for decision/Remarks: HYDROLOGY ls it th~ growing se:i.son "! ye:s (9 W Jter Marks: yes ® Sedimi!nt Deposits: yes~ B;is..ed on:~soil temp (record temp on I Drift Lines: yes €_0 Drain.::ige P.:i.nerns: yes~· othi!r ( e.xolain) . Dept. ·or inu!'lC.J.tion: .::=__ inches Oxidized Root {liYe roo~ Loc.:il Soil Survey: yes~ Channels <l 2 in. ves n D::ptb rn fre~ water in pit: =-inche;YlJ5)\JL FAC Neutral: yes0_v Water·Slaine:d Lea\·es ye~ Deuth to saturJ.ted soil: ~ inches Check all that apply & explain below: Other (explain): Stream, Lake or gage data: -- Aerial nhotoeranhs: Other Wetland hydrology present? ~·es C'V Rationale for d~cis.ion/Remarks: . I SOILS Map Uni, ~ame ------------- (Series 8: Phase) Taxonom,· (suborou Profile Desi:ription D<pth Horizon Matrix color Monk coloG (inches) (Munsell (Munsell moist) moist) () :7 /;J -I L-o u ;J,, S; L.f /3 - V { I Hydric Soil Indicators: (check all that apply) __ Histosol __ Histic Epipedon __ Sultidic Odor __ Aquic Moisture Regime! --Reducing Conditions Gleyed or Low-Chroma l=l I matri, Hydric soils present? yes (§ Rationale for decision/Remarks: Wetland Determination (circle) Hydroph, tic vegetation present" @ no Hydric soils present? yes ~ Wetland hvdroloev present~ yes Rationale/Remarks: . . NOTES: Drainage Class ---------- Field observations confirm Yes No map ;,..tonk abundance Texture. concretions. Drawing of soil 5iz.e & contrast strucmre. etc. profile [ march descri~tion 1 J,s -c.,c:i. ,. ~ ~ • ... I __ Matrix chroma S 2 with monies __ Mg or Fe Concretio~s __ High Organic Content in Surface Layer of Sandy Soils __ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils --Listed on '<ational/Local Hydric s,,ils LiS! Other ( explain in remarks) Is the sampling point yes e::i within a wetland'? ; - Revised 4/97 APPENDIX 2: WETI..AND RA TING FOR.,\1 -WESTERN WASHINGTON (DRAFT -AUGUST 2004) Page 11 WETLAND RATING FORM -WESTERN WASH1NGTON Name of wetland (ifknov,;n): Location: SEC:_ TV/NSHP: _ R.NGE: __ (attach map witli outline of wetland to rating form) Person(s) Rating Wetland: G Po 1tt:i Affiliation: WP 5 Date of site visit: 8/:J,;;/o 'f DRAFT SV;"vII\!IARY OF RATING Category base~on CTIONS provided by wetland I Il III IV ------- Category I= Score >70 Category II= Score 51-69 Category 111 = Score 30-50 Category N =Score< 30 Score for Water Quality Functions Score for Hydrologic Functions Score for Habitat Functions TOT AL score for functions Category based on SPECIAL CR&.RACTERISTICS of wetland I TI Does not Apply_ f(,, ;u Final Category (choose the "highest" category from above) lli Check the appropriate type and class of wetland being rated. Estuarine Natural Herita e Wetland Bo Mature Forest Old Growth Forest Coastal La oon Freshwater Tidal lnterdunal None of the above Wetland Rating Form-western Washington August 2004 Docs the wetland being rated meet any of the criteria below? If you answer YES to any of the questions below you will need to protect the wetland according to the regulations regarding the special characteristics found in the wetland. SP!. Has the wetland been documented as a habiratfor any Federally listed Threatened or Endangered plant or animal species (FIE species)? For the purposes of this rating system, "documented" means the wetland is on the appropriate state or federal database. SP2. Has the wetland been documented as hahitar for any State listed Threatened or Endangered plant or animal species? For the purposes of this rating system, "doci.:men:ed" means the wetland is on the ap ro riate state database. SP3. Does the wetland contain individuals o(Priurity species listed by the WDFW for the state? i SP4. Does the wetland have a local sig11itica11c~~i---;, addition to its functions? For ! example, the wetland has been iden1ified in the Shoreline Master Program, the Critical Areas Ordinance, or in a local management plan as having special significance. To complete the next part o(lhe data sheet you will need to determine the Hydrogeomorphic Class o( the wetland being rated. The hydrogeomorphic classification groups wetlands into those that function in similar ways. This simplifies the questions needed to answer how well the wetland functions. The Hydrogeomorphic Class of a wetland can be detennined using the key below. See p. 24 for more detailed insh·uctions on classifying wetlands. Wetland Rating Fom1 ~ western Washington 2 August 2004 Classification of Vegetated \\;etlands for Western Washington Wetland ~:ime: D~tc: 1. A~ water levels in the wetland usually controlled by tides (i.e. except during floods)? CT go to 2 YES -the wcrland class is Tidal Fringe If yes, is the salinity of the water during periods of annual low flow below 0.5 ppt (parts per thousand)? YES -Freshwater Tidal fringe NO -Saltwater Tidal Fringe (Estuarine) If your wetland can be classified as a Freshwater Tidal Fringe use the forms for Riverine wetlands. If it is Saltwater Tidai Fringe ii is rated as an Estuarine wetland. Wetlands that were called estuarine in the first and second editions of the rating system are called Salt Waler Tidal Fringe in the Hydrogeomorphic Classification. Estuarine wetlands were categorized separately in the earlier editions, and this separation is being kept in this revision. To maintain consistency between editions, the term "Estuarine" wetland is kept. Please note, however, that the charncleristics that define Category land II estuarine wetlands have changed (seep. ). 2. Is the topography within tl~nd flat and precipitation is only source (>90%) of water to it. NO -go to 3 ~Y The wetland class is Flats If your wetland can be classified as a "Flats" wetland, use the form for Depressional wetlands. 3. Does the wetland meet both of the following criteria? __ The vegetated part of the wetland is on the shores of a body of open water (without any vegetation on the surface) where at ieast 20 acres (8 ha) are permanently inundated (ponded or flooded); _At least 30% of the open water area is deeper than 6.6 ft (2 m)? NO-go to 4 YES -The wetlrnd cbss is Lake-fringe (Lacustrine Fringe) 4. Does the wetland meet all of the following criteria? The wetland is on a slope (siope can be very gradua[), __ The water flows through the wetland in one direction (unidirectional) and usually comes from seeps. It may !low subsurface, as sheetflow, or in a swale without distinct banks. __ The water leaves the wetland without being impounded? NOTE: Swface water does no/ pond in these type of wetlands except occasionally in very small and shallow depressions or behind hummocks( depressions are usually <Jft diameter and less than 1 foot deep). NO -go to 5 YES -The wetland class is Slope· S. Is tlie wetland in a valley, or stream channel. where it gets inundated by overbank flooding from that stream or river? The flooding should occur at least once every two years, on the average, to answer "yes. ·· The wetland can contain depressions that are filled with water when the river is not flooding. NO -go to 6 YES -The wetlanJ class is Riverine Wetland Rating Form-western \Vashington 3 August 2004 6. Is the wetland in a topographic depression in which water ponds, or is saturated to the surface, at some time of the year. This means thui un_r u;i/lct, if present, is higher than the interior of the wetland. NO -go to 7 YES -The wetland class is Oepressional 7. Is the wetland located in a very flat area with no obvious depression and no stream or river rwming through it and providing water. rhe wetland seems to be maintained by high groundwater in the area. The wetland may be ditched, but bas no obvious natural outlet. NO-go to 8 YES -The wetland class is Depressional 8. Your wetland seems to be difficult to classify. For example, seeps at the base of a slope may grade into a riverine floodplain, or a small stream within a depressional wetland has a zone of flooding along its sides. Sometimes we find characteristics of several different hydrogeomorphic classes within one wetland boundary. Lse the following table to identify the appropriate class to use for the rating system if you have several HG'd classes present within your wetland. NOTE: Cse this table only if the class that is recommended in the second colunm represents l 0% or more of the total area of the wetland being rated. lf,he area of the second class is less than 10% classify the wetland using the first class. ;'l;i'{!fjti?Jlj/fcii'rlE~i':fiff_tilfi'ii;}f-E>,Jf./i)~'gt~ij We tldlid .Bo!l&i~!,if~i~~]ft ~~lfifi[@J\~;:;m!/J&ii!{J!'i'ft)f!l~'~t! Slope+ Riverine Riverine Slope+ Depressional Depressional Slope+ Lake-fringe Lake-fringe Depressional + Riverine along stream within boundary Depressional . Depressional + Lake-fringe Depressional Salt Water Tidal Fringe and any other class of freshwater Treat as ESTUARINE under wetland wetlands with special characteristics If you are unable still to determine which of the above criteria apply to your wetland, or you have more than 2 HOM classes within a wetland boundary, classify the wetland as Depressional for the rating. Wetland Rating Form-western Washington 4 August 2004 D D D D D 1. Does the wetland have the potential to improve water quality? (seep. 38) D 1.1 Characteristics of surface water flows out of the wetland: Wetland is a depression with no surface water outlet Wetland has an intermittently flowing, or highly constricted, outlet Wetland has an unconstricted surface outlet Wetland is flat and has no obvious outlet and/or outlet is a ditch points =A, pointst_3) points= 1 oints = 1 D 1.2 The soil 2 inches below the surface is clay, organic, or smells anoxic (hydrogen sulfide or rotten eggs). YES points@ NO points= 0 D 1.3 Characteristics of persisten'. vegetation ( emergent, shrub, and/or forest class): Wetland has persistent, ungrazed, vegetation>= 95% of area points=,>---, Wetland has persistent, ungrazed, vegetation>= 1/2 of area points c\.l) Wetland has persistent, ungrazed vegetation>= 1 /IO of area points= 1 Wetland has persistent, ungrazed vegetation <1/10 of area points= 0 D 1.4 Characteristics of seasonal ponding or inundation. This is the area of the wetland thm is ponded for at least 2 months, but dries out sometime during the year. Do not coum the area that is permanently ponded. Estimate area as the average condition 5 out of IO yrs. r ", Area seasonally ponded is> 11; total area of wetland points~ Area seasonally ponded is>'/., total area of wetland points= 2 Area seasonally ponded is< '.I, total area of wetland points= 0 NOTE: See text for indicators of.seasonal and ermanent inundation .. D Total for D 1 Add the points in the boxes above J ?J D D 2. Does the wetland have the opportunity to improve water quality? (seep. 44) Answer YES if you know or believe there are pollutants in groundwater or surface water coming into the wetland that would otherwise reduce water quality in streams, lakes or groundwater dovmgradient from the wetland? Note which of the fol/owi';! conditions provide the sources of pollutants. -~azing in the wetland or within 150 ft D -Untreated stormwater discharges to wetland -Tilled fields or orchards within I 50 ft of wetland -A stream or culvert discharges into wetland that drains developed areas, residential areas, farmed fields, roads, or clear-cut logging -Residential, urban areas, golf courses are within 150 ft of wetland -Wetland is fed by groundwater high in phosphorus or nitrogen Other ------------------ NO multi lier is 1 Multiply the score from Dl by D2 Add score to table on . 1 Wetland Rating F onn -western Washington 5 August 2004 multiplier D D D D a.foators. ,t i!tidi{ " . . .. D 3. Does the wetland have the potential to reduce flooding and erosion? (see . 46 D 3.1 Characteristics of surface water flows out of the wetland Wetland has no surface water outlet points= 4 Wetland has an intennittently flowing, or highly constricted, outlet points W Wetland is flat and has no obvious outlet and/or outlet is a small ditch points~ Wetland has an unconstricted surface outlet oints = 0 D 3.2 Depth of storage during wet periods Estimate the height o.f ponding above rhe bottom of the outlet Marks of ponding are 3 ft or more above the surface points= 7 The wetland is a "headwater" wetland" points= 5 Marks of ponding between 2 ft to < 3 ft from surface point~ Marks are at least 0.5 ft to < 2 ft from surface points ~ Wetland is flat but has small depressions on the surface that trap water points= 1 Marks of ponding less than 0.5 ft points = 0 D 3. 3 Contribution of wetland to storage in the watershed Estimate the ratio of the area of upsrream basin contributing surface water to the wetland to the area of the wetland itself The area of the basin is less than l O times the area of wetland The area of the basin is 10 to 100 times the area of the wetland The area of the basin is more than 1 00 times the area of the wetland Wetland is in the FLATS class (basin~ the wetland, by definition) points= 5 po~ts¥1'3\ pomts~ oints = 5 Total for D 3 Add the points in the boxes above 3 D D 4. Does the wetland have the opportunity to reduce flooding and erosion? D (seep. 49) Answer YES if the wetland is in a location in the watershed where the flood storage, or reduction in water velocity, it provides helps protect downstream property and aquatic resources from flooding or excessive and/or erosive flows. Answer NO if the water coming into the wetland is controlled by a structure such as flood gate, tide gate, flap valve, reservoir etc. OR you estimate that more than 90% of the water in the wetland is from groundwater. Note which of the following indicators of opportunity apply. ~etland is in a headwater of a river or stream that has flooding problems -Wetland drains to a river or stream that has flooding problems multiplier -Wetland has no outlet and impounds surface runoff water that might otherwise flow into a river or stream that has flooding problems ;)--- ther _________________ _ multiplier is 2 NO multiplier is 1 TOTAL -Hydrologic Functions Multiply the score from D 3 by D 4 Add score to table on p. 1 Wetland Rating Form-western Washington 6 August 2004 H 1. Does the wetland have the potential to provide habitat for many species? H 1.1 Vegetation structure (seep. 72) Check the types of vegetation classes presem (as defined by Cowardin) if the class covers more than 10% of the area a/the wetland or JI, acre. ----,L Aquatic bed v' /Emergent plants -;:;r __ SC:crub/shrub (areas where shrubs have >30% cover) __ Forested (areas where trees have >30% cover) __ Forested areas have 3 out of 5 strata (canopy, sub-canopy, shrubs, herbaceous, moss/ground-cover) Add the number of vegetation types that qualifj,. .H 1.2. Hydroperiods (seep. 73) if you have: 4 types or more 3 types 2 types 1 type points= 4 points =)h pointscfV points= 0 Check the types 4water regimes (hydroperiods) present within the wetland. The water regime has to cover more than 10% a/ the wetland or JI, acre to count. (see text for descriptions of hydroperiods) /Permanently flooded or inundated llSeasonally flooded or inundated "77occasionally flooded or inundated _V-_!Saturated only 4 or more types present 3 types present 2 types present __ Permanently flowing stream or river in, or adjacent to, the wetland __ Seasonally flowing stream in, or adjacent to, the wetland __ Lake-fringe wetland = 2 points __ Freshwater tidal wetland= 2 points H 1.3. Richness of Plant Species (seep. 75) po~ts= 1'1 pornts~ point= I Count the number of plant species in the wetland that cover at least 10 ft 2 • (different patches of the same species can be combined to meet the size threshold) You do not have to name the species. Do not include Eurasian Mi/foil, reed canarygrass, purple loosestrife, Canadian Thistle If you counted: List species below if you want to: Wetland Rating Form-western Washington 13 > 19 species 5 · 19 species < 5 species points= 2 points@ points= 0 August 2004 I I H 1.4. Interspersion of habitats (seep. 76) Decide from the diagrams below whether interspersion between types of vegetation ( described in H 1.1 ), or vegetation types and unvegetated areas (can include open water or mudflats) is high, medium, low, or none. None= 0 points Low= 1 point Moderate = 2 points [riparian braided channels J High = 3 points NOTE: lfyou have four or more vegetation types or three vegetation types and open water the rating is always "high". H 1.5. Special Habitat Features: (seep. 77) Check the habitat features that are presenl in the wetland. The number of checks is the number of points you put into 1he next column. __ Large, downed, woody debris within the wetland (>4in. diameter and 6 ft long). __ Standing snags (diameter at the bottom> 4 inches) in the wetland __ Undercut banks are present for at least 6.6 ft (2m) and/or overhanging vegetation extends at least 3.3 ft (Im) over a stream for at least 33 ft (10m) __ Stable steep banks of fine material that might be used by beaver or muskrat for -¥nning (>30degree slope) OR signs of recent beaver activity are present _J __ At l least V. acre of thin-stemmed persistent vegetation or woody branches are present in areas that are permanently or seasonally inundated (structures for egg-laying by amphibians) __ Invasive plants cover less than 25% of the wetland area in each stratum of plants Comments H I. TOT AL Score -potential for providing habitat Add. the scores in the column above Wetland Rating Form -western Washington 14 August 2004 H 2. Does the wetland have the opportuni~' to provide habitat for many species? H 2, 1 Buffers (seep. 80) Choose the description that best represents condition of buffer of wetland. The highest scoring criterion that applies to the wetland is lo be used in the rating See text for definition of "undisturbed " ~ 100 m (330ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water >95% of circumference. No developed areas within undisturbed part of buffer. (relatively undisturbed also means no-grazing) Points= 5 ~ l 00 m (330 ft) ofrelatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water > 50% circumference. Points = 4 ~ 50 m (170ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water >95% circumference, Points= 4 ~ 100 m (330ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water > 25% circumference, . Points= 3 ~ 50 m (170ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water for> 50% circumference, Points = 3 If buffer does not meet any of the criteria above -No paved areas (except paved trails) or buildings within 25 m (80ft) of wetland> 95% circumference. Light to moderate grazing, or lawns are OK. Points= 2 ~ No paved areas or buildings within 50rn of wetland for >50% circumference. ' t to moderate grazing, or la'kns arc OK. Points = 2 vy grazing in buffer. Points= 1 Vegetated buffers are <2m wide (6,6ft) for more than 95% oftbe circumference (e.g, tilled fields, paving, basalt bedrock extend to edge of wetland Points= 0, ~ Buffer does not meet any of the criteria above. Points= 1 H 2.2 Corridors and Connections (seep. 81) H 2.2, 1 ls the wetland part of a relatively undisturbed and unbroken vegetated corridor (either riparian or upland) that is at least 150 ft wide, has at least 30% cover of shrubs, forest or native undisturbed prairie, that connects to estuaries, other wetlands or undisturbed uplands that are at least 250 acres in size? (dams in riparian corridors, heavily used gravel roads, paved roads, are considered breaks in the corridor), YES= 4 points (go to H 2,3) NO= go to H 2.2.2 H 2.2.2 Is the wetland part of a relatively undisturbed and unbroken vegetated corridor ( either riparian or upland) that is at least 50ft wide, has at least 30% cover of shrubs or forest, and connects to estuaries, other wetlands or undisturbed uplands that are at least 25 acres in size? OR a Lake-fringe wetland, if it does not have an undisturbed corridor as in the question above? YES= 2 points (go to H 2.3) NO= H 2.23 H 2.2.3 ls the wetland: within 5 mi (8km) of a brackish or salt water estuary OR within 3 mi of a large field or pasture (>40 acres) OR within 1 mi of a lake greater than 20 acres? YES= 1 point Wetland Rating Form-western Washington 15 August 2004 0 H 2.3 Near or adjacent to other prioritv habitats listed by WDFW (seep. 82) \Vbich of the following priority habitats are within 330ft (100m) of the wetland? I (see text/or a more detailed description 0(1hese priority habitats) __ Riparian: The area adjacent to aquatic systems with flowing water that contains elements of both aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems which mutually influence each other. __ Aspen Stands: Pure or mixed stands of aspen greater than 0.8 ha (2 acres). __ Cliffs: Greater than 7.6 m (25 ft) high and occurring below 5000 ft. __ Old-growth forests: (Old-growth west of Cascade crest) Stands of at least 2 tree species, forming a multi-layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 20 trees/ha (8 trees/acre)> 81 cm (32 in) dbh or> 200 years of age. __ Mature forests: Stands with average diameters exceeding 53 cm (21 in) dbh; crown cover may be less that 100%; cro\\11 cover may be less that I 00%; decay, decadence, numbers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is generally Jess than that found in old-gro'wih; 80 -200 years old west of the Cascade crest. __ Prairies: Relatively undisturbed areas (as indicated by dominance of native plants) where grasses and/or forbs form the natural climax plant community. __ Talus: Homogenous areas of rock rubble ranging in average size 0.15 -2.0 m (0.5 - 6.5 ft), composed of basalt, andesite, and/or sedimentary rock, including riprap slides and mine tailings. May be a.ssociated with cliffs. __ Caves: A naturally occurring cavity, recess, void, or system of interconnected passages __ Oregon white Oak: Woodlands Stands of pure oak or oak/conifer associations where canopy coverage of the oak component of the stand is 25%. __ Urban Natural Open Space: A priority species resides within or is adjacent to the open space and uses it for breeding and/or regular feeding; and/or the open space functions as a corridor connecting other priority habitats, especially those that would otherwise be isolated; and/or the open space is an isolated remnant of natural habitat larger than 4 ha (10 acres) and is surrounded by urban development. __ Estuary/Estuary-like: Deepwater tidal habitats and adjacent tidal wetlands, usually semi-enclosed by land but with open, partly obstructed or sporadic access to the open ocean, and in which ocean water is at least occasionally diluted by freshwater runoff from the land. The salinity may be periodically increased above that of the open ocean by evaporation. Along some low-energy coastlines there is appreciable dilution of sea water. Estuarine habitat extends upstream and landward to where ocean-derived salts measure less than 0.5ppt. during the period of average annual low flow. Includes both estuaries and lagoons. __ Marine/Estuarine Shorelines: Shorelines include the intertidal and subtidal zones of beaches, and may also include the backshore and adjacent components of the terrestrial landscape (e.g., cliffs, snags, mature trees, dunes, meadows) that are important to shoreline associated fish and wildlife and that contribute to shoreline function ( e.g., sand/rock/log recruitment, nutrient contribution, erosion control). If wetland has 3 or more priority habitats = 4 points If wetland has 2 priority habitats= 3 points If wetland has 1 priority habitat= 1 point No habitats= 0 points Wetland Rating Form -western Washington 16 August 2004 0 I H 2.4 Wetland Landscape (choose the one descrip1ion of the landscape around the wetland that bestfits) (~ee p. 84) There are at least 3 other wetlands within '/, mile, and the connections between them are relatively w1disturbed (light grazing between wetlands OK, as is lake shore with some boating, but connections should 1' OT be bisected by paved roads, fill, fields, or other development. points= 5 The wetland is Lake-fringe on a lake with little disturbance and there are 3 other lake- fringe wetlands within Y, mile points= 5 There are at least 3 other wetlands within Y, mile, BUT the connections between~ are disturbed points 3 The wetland is Lake-fringe on a lake with disturbance and there are 3 other lake- fringe wetland within Y, mile points= 3 There is at least I wetland within Yi mile. points= 2 There are no wetlands within Yi mile. points= 0 3 H 2. TOTAL Score· opportunity for providing habitat Add the scores in the column above 3 Total Score for Habitat Functions -add the points for H 1, H 2 and record the result on P. I /0 Wetland Rating Form-western Washington 17 August 2004 CATEGORIZATION BASED ON SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS Please determine if the wetland meets the attributes described below and circle the appropriate answers and Catego1)'. SC 1.0 Estuarine wetlands (seep. 86) Does the wetland meet the following criteria for Estuarine wetlands? -The dominant water regime is tidal, -Vegetated, and -With a salinity greater than 0.5 ppt. YES= Go to SC 1.1 NO SC 1.1 Is the wetland within a National Wildlife Refuge, National Park, National Estuary Reserve, Natural Area Preserve, State Park or Educational, Environmental, or Scientific Reserve designated under WAC 332-30-151? YES = Category I NO go to SC 1.2 SC 1.2 Is the wetland at least l acre in size and meets at least two of the following three conditions? '{ES 0~ Category I NO= Category IJ -The wetland is relatively w1disturbcd (has no diking, ditching, filling, cultivation, grazing, and has less than 10% cover of non-native plant species. lfthe non-native Spartina spp. are the only species that cover more than I 0% of the wetland, then the wetland should be given a dual rating (I/II). The area of Spartina would be rated a Category II while the relatively undisturbed upper marsh with native species would be a Category I. Do not, however, exclude the area of Spartina in determining the size threshold of l acre. -At least% of the landward edge of the wetland has a JOO ft buffer of shrub, forest, or nu-grazed or un-rnowed grassland. -The wetland has at least 2 of the following features: tidal channels, depressions with open water, or contiguous freshwater wetlands. Wetland Rating Form-western Washington 18 August 2004 Cat. I Cat. I Cat. Il Dual rating L1I WETLAND RATING FORM-WESTERN WASHINGTON Name of wetland (if known): we)Hwrtd Q & ry s ) !And Aue_ / Location: SEC:_ TWNSHP: _ RNGE: _ (attach map with outline of wetland to rating form) Person(s) Rating Wetland: C,,Fzo""'llv<-, Affiliation: 'VJF S Date of site visit: "ojPc/D 1f DRAFT SUM.'VIARY OF RATING Category based on FUNCTIONS provided by wetland I II III IV Category I= Score >70 Category II= Score 51-69 Category )1\.. = Score 30-50 Categor{JV)= Score< 30 Score for Water Quality Functions Score for Hydrologic Functions Score for Habitat Functions TOTAL score for functions Category based on SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS of wetland I II Does not Apply_ (,, q' 1,,,-I Final Category (choose the "highest" category from above) Ip l Check the appropriate type and class of wetland being rated. Natural Heritage Wetland Bo Mature Forest Old Growth Forest Flats Coastal La oon Freshwater Tidal Interdunal None of the above Wetland Rating Form-western Washington 1 August 2004 Does the wetland being rated meet any of the criteria below? If you answer YES to any of the questions below you will need to protect the wetland according to the regulations regarding the special characteristics found in the wetland . . "'\at N~~4:§!tf'. ndyq~·i1 ir.i?tlti!J SP!. Has the wetland been documented as a habiratfor any Federally listed Threatened or Endangered plant or animal species (TIE species)? For the purposes of this rating system, "docurncn1cd" means the wetland is on the appropriate state or federal database. SP2. Has the wetland been documented as habitat for any State listed Threatened or Endangered plant or animal species? · For the purposes of this rating system, "documented" means the wetland is on the appro riate state database. SP3. Does the wetland comain individuals o(I'riorityspecies listed by the WDFW for the state? SP4. Does the wetland have a local sign(!icancc in addition to its functions'! For example, the wetland has been identified in the Shoreline Master Program, the Critical Areas Ordinance, or in a local management plan as having special significance. To complete the next part o(lhe data sheet you will need to determine the Hydrogeomorphic Clgss of the wetland being rated. The hydrogeomorphic classification groups wetlands into those that function in similar ways. This simplifies the questions needed to answer how we] I the wetland functions. The Hydrogeomorphic Class of a wetland can be determined using the key below. Seep. 24 for more detailed instructions on classifying wetlands. V../etland Rating Fonn-western \Vashington August 2004 Classification of Vegetated Wetlands for Western Washington Wetland Name: \J/vj1tvvuQ P __ Date: _jj.[..;./LJ_,.,Q4 t-"O'..-'ift'--------/ I 1. Are the water levels in the wetland usually controlled by tides (i.e. except during floods)? NO -go to 2 YES -the \\etlancl class is Tidal Fringe If yes, is the salinity of the water during period~ual low flow below 0.5 ppt (parts per thousand)? YES -Freshwater Tidal Fringe ~ Saltwater Tidal Fringe (Estuarine) I/your wetland can be classified as a Freshwater Tidal Fringe use the forms for Riverine wetlands. £(it is Saltwater Tidal Fringe it is rated as an Estuarine wetland Wetlands that were called estuarine in the first and second editions of the rating system are called Salt Water Tidal Fringe in the Hydrogeomorphic Classification. Estuarine wetlands were categorized separately in the earlier editions, and this separation is being kept in this revision. To maintain consistency between editions, the term "Estuarine" wetland is kept. Please note, however, fuat the characteristics that define Category I and II estuarine wetlands have changed (seep. ) . . 2. ls)~!CjPography within the wetland flat and precipitation is only source (>90%) of water to it. t~go to 3 YES-. The wetl,and cl:ss is Flats . If your wetland can be classified as a ·flats' wetland, use the form for Depress10nal wetlands. 3. Does the wetland meet both of the following criteria? _The vegetated part of the wetland is on the shores of a body of open water (without any vegetation on the surface) where at least 20 acres (8 ha) are permanently inundated , (ponded or flooded); /,,..,,)__At least 30% of the open water area is deeper than 6.6 ft (2 m)? (___:!9'-go to 4 YES -The wetland class is Lake-fringe (Lacustrine Fringe) 4. Does th~ ')'etland meet all of the following criteria? V The wetland is on a slope (slope can be very gradual), _ ~he water flows through the wetland in one direction (unidirectional) and usually / comes from seeps. It may flow subsurface, as sheetflow, or in a swale without distinct banks. ___ · _The water leaves the wetland without being impounded? NOTE: Swface water does nor pond in these type of wetlands except occasionally in very small and shallow depressions or behind hummocks( depressions are usually <3ft d~-· and less than 1 foot deep). NO -go to 5 YES1 The wetland class is Slope 5. Is fue wetland in a ey, or stream channel, where it gets inundated by overbank flooding from that stream or river? The flooding should occur at least once every two years, on the average, to answer "yes. " The wetland can conrain depressions that are filled with water when the river is not flooding. NO -go to 6 YES -The wetland class is Riverine Wetland Rating Form-western Washington 3 August 2004 6. ls the wetland in a topographic depression in which water ponds, or is saturated to the surface, at some time of the year. This means thm any 0111/et, ifpresent, is higher than the interior of the wetland. NO -go to 7 YES -The wetland class is Depressional 7. Is the wetland located in a very flat area with no obvious depression and no stream or river rwming through it and providing water. The wetland seems to be maintained by high groundwater in the area. The wetland may be ditched, but has no obvious natural outlet. NO -go to 8 YES -The wetland class is Depressional 8. Your wetland seems to be difficult to classify. For example, seeps at the base of a slope may grade into a riverine floodplain, or a small stream within a depressional wetland has a zone of flooding along its sides. Sometimes we find characteristic~ of several different hydrogeomorphic classes within one wetland boundary. Use the following table to identify the appropriate class to use for the rating system if you have several HGM classes present within your wetland. NOTE: Use this table only if the class that is reconuncndcd in the second colunm represents 10% or more of the total area of the wetland being rated. If the area of the second class is less than 10% classify the wetland using the first class. \JJt<J!lf;,~tMt/.~{rf4flii¥ii,'f/:J:;7);~1il{/g}jJ:fiJ. Wet I and· Boi<~ilroil:J~ia~!lt i~iflff;'fjJfifffl.tiJtf1/iiv.'cfJJJ#f!l'Jl,:9J~t/'f;i) Slope+ Riverine Riverine Slope + Depressional Depressional Slope+ Lake-fringe Lake-fringe Depressional + Riverine along stream within boundary Depressional Depressional + Lake-fringe Depressional Salt Water Tidal Fringe and any other class of freshwater Treat as ESTUARINE under wetland wetlands with special characteristics . If you are unable still to determine which of the above criteria apply to your wetland, or you have more than 2 HGM classes within a wetland bouttdary, classify the wetland as Depressional for the rating. Wetland Rating Fonn ~ western Washington 4 August 2004 s s s s s s S 1. Does the wetland have the potential to improve water quality? (seep. 64) S 1.1 Characteristics of average slope of wetland: Slope isl% or less (a 1 % slope has a 1 foot vertical drop in elevation for every 100 ft horizontal distance) . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . .. .. . .. . . . . . . points~ Slope is I% -2% points ~ Slope is 2% -5% points= 1 Slope is greater than 5% points= 0 S 1.2 The soil 2 inches below the surface is clay, organic, or smells anoxic (hydrogen sulfide or rotten eggs). YES = 3 points NO = 0 oints S 1.3 Characteristics of the vegetation in the wetland that trap sediments and pollutants: Choose the points appropriate.for the description that best fits the vegetation in the wetland. Dense vegetation means you have trouble seeing the soil surface. Dense, ungrazed, herbaceous vegetation> 90% of the wetland area points= 6 Dense, ungrazed, herbaceous vegetation > 1/2 of area points= 3 Dense, woody, vegetation> V, of area points= 2 Dense, ungrazed, herbaceous vegetation> 1/4 of area points= I Does not meet any of the criteria above for vegetation points= 0 Total for S 1 Add the points in the boxes above S 2. Does the wetland have the opportunity to improve water quality? (seep. 67) Answer YES if you know or believe there are pollutants in groundwater or surface water coming into the wetland that would otherwise reduce water quality in streams, lakes or groundwater dovmgradient from the wetland? Note which of the following conditions provide the sources of pollutants. -Grazing in the wetland or within 150ft -Untreated stonnwater discharges to wetland f Tilled fields, logging, or orchards within 150 feet of wetland -Residential, urban areas, or golf courses are within 150 ft upslope of wetland multiplier is 2 Comments NO multiplier is 1 Multiply the score from S 1 by S2 Add score to table on . I Wetland Rating Form-western Washington 11 August 2004 0 0 multiplier S 3. Does the wetland have the potential to reduce flooding and stream erosion? (see . 68) S S 3.1 Characteristics of vegetation that reduce the velocity of surface flows during storms. Choose the points appropriate for the description that best fit conditions in the wetland. Dense, uncut, rigid vegetation covers > 90% of the area of the wetland. (stems of plants should be thick enough (usually> I/Sin), or dense enough, to remain erect during surface flows) points= 6 Dense, uncut, rigid vegetation> 1/2 area of wetland points= 3 Dense, uncut, rigid vegetation > J/4 area points~ More than 1/4 of area is grazed, mowed, tilled or vegetation is not rigid oints = 0 S S 3.2 Characteristics of slope wetland that holds back small amounts of flood s s s flows: The slope wetland has small surface depressions that can retain water o~ at least 10% of its area. YES points @ NO oints = 0 Add the points in the boxes above S 4. Does the wetland have the opportunity to reduce flooding and erosion? (seep. 70) Is the wetland in a landscape position where the reduction in water velocity it pro~·id s helps protect downstream property and aquatic resources from flooding or ex essive and/or erosive flows? Note which of the following conditions apply. Wetland has surface runoff that drains to a river or stream that has flooding problems -Other ________________ _ (Answer NO if the major source of water is controlled by a reservoir (e.g. wetland is hat is on the downstream side of a dam) Comments multi lier is 2 NO multi lier is 1 -Hydrologic Functions Multiply the score from S 3 by S 4 Add score to table on p. 1 Wet land Rating F onn -western Washington 12 August 2004 multiplier H I. Docs the wetland have the potential to pro~ide habitat for many species? H 1.1 Vegetation structure (seep. 72) Check the types of vegetation classes present (as defined by Cowardin) if the class covers more than 10% of the area of the wetland or Y, acre. quatic bed mergent plants __ crub/shrub (areas where shrnbs have >30% cover) __ Forested (areas where trees have >30% cover) __ Forested areas have 3 out of 5 strata ( canopy, sub-canopy, shrubs, herbaceous, moss/ground-cover) Add the number of vegetation types that qualify. H 1.2. Hydroperiods (seep. 73) Jfyou have: 4 types or more 3 types 2 types 1 type points= 4 points =k pomts~ points= 0 ' Check the types of water regimes (hydroperiods) present within the wetland. The water regime has to cover more than I 0% of the wetland or Y, acre to count. (see text for descriptions of hydroperiods) ________,L.Permanently flooded or inundated v /Seasonally flooded or inundated 7/0ccasionally flooded or inundated 4 or more types present 3 types present 2 types present _~_!Saturated only _ 7 ,(Permanently flowing stream or river in, o; adjacent to, the wetland _cJ-Seasonally flowing stream in, or adjacent to, the wetland Lake-fringe wetland = 2 points __ Freshwater tidal wetland= 2 points H 1.3. Richness of Plant Species (seep. 75) points@ points= 2 point= 1 Count the number of plant species in the wetland that cover at least 10 ft 2• (different patches of the same species can be combined to meet the size threshold) You do not have to name the species. Do not include Eurasian Mi/foil, reed canary.grass, purple looses/rife, Canadian Thistle If you counted: List species below if you want to: v,.,r etland Rating Form -western Washington 13 > 19 species 5 -19 species < 5 species points=_k, pointsEJ) points= 0 August 2004 I 3 I H 1.4. lnterspersion of habitats (seep. 76) Decide from the diagrams below whether interspersion between types of vegetation (described in H 1.1), or vegetation t,pes and unvegetated areas (can include open water or mudflats) is high, medium, low, or none. None = 0 points Low= 1 point Moderate = 2 points [riparian braided channels J High = 3 points NOTE: If you have four or more vegetation types or three vegetation types and open water the rating is always "high". H 1.5. Special Habitat Features: (seep. 77) Check the habitat features that are present in the wetland. The number of checks is the number of points you put into the next column. __ Large, downed, woody debris within the wetland (>4in. diameter and 6 ft long). __ Standing snags (diameter at the bottom> 4 inches) in the wetland __ Undercut banks are present for at least 6.6 ft (2m) and/or overhanging vegetation extends at least 3.3 ft (lm) over a stream for at least 33 ft (!Om) __ Stable steep banks of fine material that might be used by beaver or muskrat for denning (>30degree slope) OR signs of recent beaver activity are present __ At least 1/. acre of thin-stemmed persistent vegetation or woody branches are present in areas that are permanently or .seasonally inundated (structures for egg-laying by amphibiam) __ Invasive plants cover less than 25% of the wetland area in each stratum of plants Comments B 1. TOT AL Score -potential for providing habitat Add the scores in the column above Wetland Rating Form -western Washington 14 August 2004 ( C • H 2. Does the wetland have the opportuniry to provide habitat for many species? H 2.1 Buffers (seep. 80) Choose the description that best represents condition of buffer of wetland. The highest scoring criterion that applies to the wetland is to be used in the rating. See text for definition of "undisturbed " -100 m (330ft) of relatively undisturhed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water >95% of circumference. No developed areas within undisturbed part of buffer. (relatively undisturbed also means no-grazing) Points = 5 -100 m (330 ft) of relatively undismrhed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water > 50% circumference. Points= 4 -50 m (170ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water >95% circumference. Points= 4 -100 m (330ft) ofrelatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water > 25% circumference, . Points = 3 -50 m (170ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water for> 50% circumference. Points = 3 If buffer does not meet any of the criteria above -No paved areas (except paved trails) or buildings within 25 m (80ft) of wetland> 95% circumference. Light to moderate grazing, or lawns are OK. Points = 2 -No paved areas or buildings within 50m of wetland for >50% circumference. Light to moderate grazing, or lawns are OK. Points = 2 -Heavy grazing in buffer. Points = l -Vegetated buffers are <2m wide (6.6ft) for more than 95% of the circumference (e.g. tilled fields, paving, basalt bedrock extend to edge of wetland Points= 0. -Buffer does not meet any of the criteria above. Points= 1 H 2.2 Corridors and Connections (seep. 81) H 2.2.1 Is the wetland part of a relatively undismrbed and unbroken vegetated corridor ( either riparian or upland) that is at least 150 ft wide, has at least 30% cover of shrubs, forest or native undisturbed prairie, that connects to estuaries, other wetlands or undismrbed uplands that are at least 250 acres in size? · (dams in riparian corridors, heavily used gravel roads,paved roads, are considered breaks in the corridor). YES= 4 points (go to H 2.3) NO= go to H 2.2.2 H 2.2.2 Is the wetland part of a relatively undisturbed and unbroken vegetated corridor ( either riparian or upland) that is at least 50ft wide, has at least 30% cover of shrubs or forest, and connects to estuaries, other wetlands or undisturbed uplands that are at least 25 acres in size? OR a Lake-fringe. wetland, ifit does not have an undisturbed corridor as in the question above? YES= 2 points (go to H 2.3) NO= H 2.2.3 H 2.2.3 Is the wetland: within 5 nti (8km) of a brackish or salt water estuary OR within 3 nti of a large field or pasture (>40 acres) OR within 1 nti of a lake greater than 20 acres? YES= 1 oint Wetland Rating F onn ~ western Wac.;hington 15 NO= 0 oints August 2004 0 0 • I: • H 2.3 Near or adjacent to other priority habitats listed by WDFW (seep. 82) Which of the following priority habitats are within 330ft (100m) of the wetland? (see text for a more detailed description of these priority habitats) __ Riparian: The area adjacent to aquatic systems with flowing water that contains elements of both aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems which mutually influence each other. __ Aspen Stands: Pure or mixed stands of aspen greater than 0.8 ha (2 acres). __ Cliffs: Greater than 7.6 m (25 ft) high and occurring below 5000 ft. __ Old-growth forests: (Old-growth west of Cascade crest) Stands of at least 2 tree species, forming a multi-layered c,mopy with occasional small openings; with at least 20 trees/ha (8 trees/acre)> 81 cm (32 in) dbh or> 200 years of age. __ Mature forests: Stands with average diameters exceeding 53 cm (21 in) dbh; crown cover may be less fhat 100%; crown cover may be less that 100%; decay, decadence, numbers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is generally less than that found in old-growth; 80 -200 years old west of the Cascade crest. __ Prairies: Relatively undisturbed areas (as indicated by dominance of native plants) where grasses and/or forbs fonn the natural climax plant community. __ Talus: Homogenous areas of rock rubble ranging in average size 0.15 -2.0 m (0.5 - 6.5 ft), composed of basalt, andesitc, and/or sedimentary rock, including riprap slides and mine tailings. May be associated with cliffs. __ Caves: A naturally occurring cavity, recess, void, or system of interconnected passages __ Oregon white Oak: Woodlands Stands of pure oak or oak/conifer associations where canopy coverage offhe oak component of the stand is 25%. __ Urban Natural Open Space: A priority species resides within or is adjacent to the open space and uses it for breeding and/or regular feeding; and/or the open space functions as a corridor connecting other priority habitats, especially those that would otherwise be isolated; and/or the open space is an isolated remnant of natural habitat larger than 4 ha (10 acres) and is surrounded by urban development. __ Estuary/Estuary-like: Deepwater tidal habitats and adjacent tidal wetlands, usually semi-enclosed by land but wifh open, panly obstructed or sporadic access to the open ocean, and in which ocean water is at least occasionally diluted by freshwater runoff from the land. The salinity may be periodically increased above that of the open ocean by evaporation. Along some low-energy coastlines there is appreciable dilution of sea water. Estuarine habitat extends upstream and landward to where ocean-derived salts measure less than 0.5ppt. during the period of average annual low flow. Includes both estuaries and lagoons. Marine/Estuarine Shorelines: Shorelines include the intertidal and subtidal zones of beaches, and may also include the backshore and adjacent components of the terrestrial landscape (e.g., cliffs, snags, mature trees, dunes, meadows) that are important to shoreline associated fish and wildlife and that contribute to shoreline function (e.g., sand/rock/Jog recruitment, nutrient contribution, erosion control). Ifwetland has 3 or more priority habitats = 4 points If wetland has 2 priority habitats= 3 points If wetland has 1 priority habitat= 1 point No habitats= 0 points Wetland Rating Form-western Washington 16 August2004 I . '.' . H 2.4 Wetland Landscape (choose the one descrip1ion of the landscape around the wetland that best fits) (seep. 84) ' There are at least 3 other wetlands within 1/2 mile, and the connections between them are relatively undisturbed (light graLing between wetlands OK, as is lake shore with some boating, but connections should NOT be bisected by paved roads, fill, fields, or other development. points= 5 The wetland is Lake-fringe on a lake with little disturbance and there are 3 other lake- fringe wetlands within Y, mile points= 5 There are at least 3 other wetlands within \1, mile, BUT the connections between them are disturbed points= 3 The wetland is Lake-fringe on a lake with disturbance and there are 3 other lake- fringe wetland within Y, mile points= 3 There is at least 1 wetland within Y, mile. points= 2 There are no wetlands within V, mile. points= 0 !J H 2. TOT1\L Score -opportunity for providing habitat 3 Add the scores in the column above Total Score for Habitat Functions -add the points for H I, H 2 and record the result on q p, l Wetland Rating F onn -western Washington 17 August2004 CATEGORIZATION BASED ON SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS Please determine if the wetland meets the attributes described below and circle the appropriate answers and Category. SC 1.0 Estuarine wetlands (seep. 86) Does the wetland meet the following criteria for Estuarine wetlands? -111e dominant water regime is tidaL -Vegetated, and -With a salinity greater than 0.5 ppt. YES= Go to SC I.I NO SC 1.1 ls the wetland within a National Wildlife Refuge, National Park, National Estuary Reserve, Natural Area Preserve, State Park or Educational, Environmental, or Scientific Reserve designated under WAC 332-30-151? YES = Category I NO go to SC 1.2 SC 1.2 Is the wetland at least I acre in size and meets at least two of the following three conditions? YES ~ Category I NO = Category II -The wetland is relatively w1disturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, cultivation, grazing, and has Jess than 10% cover of non-native plant species. lfthe non-native Spartina spp. are the only species that cover more than I 0% of the wetland. then the wetland should be given a dual rating (I/II). The area of Spartina would be rated a Category II while the relatively undisturbed upper marsh with native species would be a Category I. Do not, however, exclude the area of Spartina in determining the size threshold of I acre. -At least '/., of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft buffer of shrub, forest, or un-grazed or ur1-mowed grassland. -The wetland has at least 2 of the following features: tidal channels, depressions with open water, or contiguous freshwater wetlands. Wetland Rating Form -western Was bin gt on 18 August 2004 Cat. I Cat. I Cat. II Dual rating I/II Renton CEDAR RIVER CORPORATE PARK TRAFFIC IM PACT ANALYSIS Prepared for Murphy McCullough, Senior Development Manager TARRAGON 1000 Second Avenue, Suite 3200 Seattle, WA 98104 JTE, Inc. JAKE TRAFFIC ENGINEERING, INC. December 11, 2006 Mark J. Jacobs, PE, PTOE, President 77318'" Ave. SW -Seattle, WA 98106 -2007 Tel. 206.762.1978; Cell. 206.799.5692 Facsimile 206. 762.1978 Email -jaketraffic@comcast.net J J E . Jake Traffic Engineering. Inc. . Hark J. Jacobs, PE, PTOE President 7131 s• Ave IW -Seattle, WA 98106 -1007 Tel. 106.761.1978 • Cell 106.799.5692 -Facsimile 106.761.1978 E-mail 1aketrallic@ comcast.net December 11, 2006 Murphy McCullough, Senior Development Manager TARRAGON LLC 1000 Second Avenue, Suite 3200 Seattle, WA 98104 Re: Cedar River Corporate Park -Renton Traffic Impact Analysis Dear Mr. McCullough; We are pleased to submit this Traffic Impact Analysis for the proposed Cedar River Corporate Park project in Renton. The proposed project would provide a total 142,434 sq. ft. to be developed as follows: » Building A: 34,615 sq. ft. » Building B: 29,751 sq. ft. » Building C: 33,551 sq. ft. » Building D: 44,517 sq. ft. We understand that the proposed development is to be comprised of -60% warehousing use and -40% office use. The project site is located east of Lind Ave. SW and south of SW 21" Street. Access to the site is proposed via two driveways on Lind Ave. SW: the north driveway likely to be limited to right in/out only and the south driveway providing full access. We have conducted a field review of the site and surrounding street system. The study scope was determined pursuant with our correspondence with Kayren Kittrick, Development Engineering Supervisor of the City of Renton. The following arterial intersections are analyzed in this report: » Lind Ave SW/SW 16'" St. » Lind Ave. SW/SW Grady Way In addition the site access intersections are evaluated in this report. Frontage improvements to SW 21st St. and SW 23'' St. are not proposed. City code requires an explanation to why frontage improvements are not provided along Wetland Permitting prepared a Wetland Analysis. Stream Classification and Shoreline Master Program Applicability Report dated October 18, 2006. This report identified both SW 21st St. and SW 23'' St. as wetlands thus making frontage improvements on SW 21" and 23,, St. not practical. Murphy McCullough, Senior Development Manager TARRAGON LLC December 11, 2006 Page -2- JTE, Inc. The general format of this report is to describe the proposed project, identify existing traffic conditions (baseline), project future traffic conditions and identify Agency street/road improvements (future baseline), calculate the traffic that would be generated by the project and then add it to the future baseline traffic volumes. Operational analyses are used to determine the specific project traffic impact and appropriate traffic mitigation measures to reduce the impact. Additionally Agency traffic impact fees are addressed in this report. The summary, conclusions and recommendations begin on page seven of this report. PROJECT INFORMATION Figure 1 is a vicinity map showing the location of the proposed site and surrounding street network. Figure 2 shows a preliminary site plan prepared by AHBL. The plan consists of the site layout developed into four buildings as identified earlier in the report. Parking for 459 vehicles is provided. Access to the site is proposed via two driveways on Lind Ave. SW; the north driveway likely to be limited to right in/out only and the south driveway providing full access. Full development and occupancy of the proposed Cedar River Corporate Park project is anticipated to occur by 2008/2009, presuming the permits are issued in a timely manner. However, to ensure a conservative analysis 2011 has been used as the horizon year. EXISTING ENVIRONMENT Project Site The project site is presently undeveloped. Street System Figure 3 shows the existing traffic control. number of street lanes, number of approach lanes at the intersections and other pertinent information. The primary streets within the study area and their classifications per the City of Renton Comprehensive Plan are as follows: J;> SW Grady Way J;> Lind Ave. SW J;> SW 16th St. J;> SW 19th St. J;> SW 21st St. Traffic Volumes Principal Arterial Minor Arterial Collector Arterial Unclassified Unclassified Figure 4 shows the existing PM peak hour traffic volumes for the analysis intersections. Trafficount, a firm that specializes in the collection of traffic data, collected the existing PM JTE, Inc. Murphy McCullough, Senior Development Manager TARRAGON LLC December 11, 2006 Page -3- peak hour turning movement count at the analysis intersections on the date shown in Figure 4. The count data sheets are attached in the appendix. Transit Services We reviewed Metro Transit website (www.trans,t.metrokc.gov) for bus services in the vicinity of the proposed project. Metro bus routes #153, 161 and 24 7 provides service along Lind Ave. SW in the vicinity of the proposed proJect. Additional information on these routes can be obtained on the Metro Transit website. Intersection Operations Traffic engineers have developed criteria for intersection operations called level of service (LOS). The LOS's are A to F with A and B being very good and E and F being more congested. LOS C and D correlate to busy traffic conditions with some restrictions to the ability to choose travel speed, change lanes and the general convenience comfort and safety. The procedures in the Transportation Research Board Highway Capacity Manual, 2000 were used to calculate the level of service at the study intersections. The following table depicts the LOS and corresponding average delay in seconds at signalized and stop control intersections: Intersection Level of Service Type A B C D E Signalized <10 >10 and >20 and >35 and >55 and <20 <35 <55 <80 Stop Control <10 >10 and >15 and >25 and >35 and <15 <25 <35 <50 LOS Criteria Conversation with City of Renton staff 1dent1fied that no LOS standards is set in the City of Renton. However, the desired LOS is LOS 'D' with the acknowledgement that a number of intersections in the City are fully developed that do not lend themselves to further improvements. LOS Analysis Software The LOS of the study intersections were calculated using the following software program: >' SIGNAL 2000 by Strong Concepts (signalized) F >80 >50 Murphy McCullough. Senior Development Manager TARRAGON LLC December 11, 2006 Page -4- ~ Highway Capacity Software (HCS) 2000 by McTrans (stop control) Accident History JTE, Inc. Field review of the site and study intersections did not reveal any apparent accident problems. The City was contacted via e-mail (on 11.14.06) inquiring of any known problems; no response was provided. STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS We have reviewed the City of Renton·s web site at (www.rentonwa.gov) for a listing of City street improvement projects. The data on-line provides the "Six Year Transportation Improvement Program 2005 -2010" (attached in the appendix) for street improvement projects in the vicinity of the proposed project. The following improvement projects are identified in the vicinity of the proposed project ~ Grady Way Corridor Study, TIP number 35, project cost estimate is $3,300,000. ~ Lind Ave. SW from SW 16th St. to SW 43rd Street, TIP number 45 and project cost estimate is $2,555,000. Per discussion with City we understand that the City's Lind Ave. SW TIP project would widen the existing street to five lanes at sections where five lanes do not currently exist and provide pedestrian improvements at sections where needed. HORIZON YEAR CONDITIONS "WITHOUT" THE PROJECT Figure 5 shows the projected 2011 PM peak hour traffic volumes "without" the project. These volumes include the existing traffic volume counts plus background growth. A growth factor of two percent per year was applied based on WSDOT historic traffic volumes at the SR -167 after the SW 43'" St. ramp (mile post 24.77). The actual growth factor calculated was less than two percent per year (-1.1%), thus utilizing a two percent per year growth factor ensures a conservative analysis. TRIP GENERATION AND DISTRIBUTION Definitions A vehicle trip is defined as a single or one direction vehicle movement with either the origin or destination (existing or entering) inside the proposed development. Traffic generated by development proJects consists of the following types: Pass-By Trips: Trips made as intermediate stops on the way from an origin to a primary tnp destination. JTE, Inc. Murphy McCullough, Senior Development Manager TARRAGON LLC December 11, 2006 Page -5- Diverted Link Trips: Captured Trips: Primary (New) Trips: Trip Generation Trips attracted from the traffic volume on roadways within the vicinity of the generator but require a diversion from that roadway to another roadway to gain access to the site. Site trips shared by more than one land use in a multi-use development. Trips made for the specific purpose of using the services of the project. The proposed Cedar River Corporate Park project is expected to generate the vehicular trips during the average weekday, street traffic AM and PM peak hours as shown in Table 2. The trip generation for the project is calculated using trip rates from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation, Seventh Edition, for Warehousing and General Office Building (ITE Land Use Code 150 and 710, respectively). All site trips made by all vehicles for all purposes, including commuter, visitor, and service and delivery vehicle trips are included in the trip generation values. Warehousing and General Office generate predominantly primary trips. There would be some captured/pass-by trips that already exist within the vicinity; such as mail delivery, garbage, and other service/delivery traffic. Based on our traffic engineering experience we have seen captured/pass-by trip rates of 5 to 10 percent for office and warehouse uses. For analysis purposes we have applied a 5% factor that we believe to be conservative. Based on our analysis, the trips generated by the Cedar River Corporate Park project are calculated to be 999 net new daily and 119 net new trips during the PM peak hour. For analysis purposes we have used 125 trips during the PM peak hour. Trip Distribution Figure 6 shows the site generated traffic assigned to the street system. Trips to and from the site were distributed to the surrounding street network based on the characteristics of the street network, existing traffic volume patterns, the location of likely trip origins and destinations (residential, business, shopping, social and recreational opportunities) and previous traffic studies. HORIZON YEAR CONDITIONS "WITH" THE PROJECT Traffic Volumes Figure 7 shows the 2011 PM peak hour traffic volumes "with" the proposed project at the analysis and site access intersections. The site generated PM peak hour traffic volumes shown on Figure 6 were added to the projected background traffic volumes shown on Figure 5 to obtain the Figure 7 volumes. Murphy McCullough, Senior Development Manager TARRAGON LLC December 11, 2006 Page-6- Level of Service JTE, Inc. Table 1 shows the calculated LOS for the horizon year (2011) "with" and "without" project conditions at the pertinent intersections. Based on our analysis the analysis the Lind Ave. SW/SW 16th St. would continue to operate at LOS 'D' for both "with" and "without" project conditions. The Lind Ave. SW/SW Grady Way intersection would operate at LOS 'E' for both "with" and "without" project conditions. The northbound to eastbound movement at the Lind Ave. SW/SW Grady intersection is currently a yield controlled movement. Our field reconnaissance indicate that an add lane is provided for the northbound to eastbound movement thus making it a free flow movement. Replacing the yield sign with an add lane sign to properly facilitate this movement is suggested. The added lane sign is used to indicate a free flow movement and would improve (reduce vehicle delay, as seen in Table 1) the operation at the intersection. The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, 2003 Edition, Section 2C.32 Added Lanes Signs (W4 -3, W4 -6) identifies its guidelines in installing add lanes signs as follows (taken from the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices): Set'lion 2l'.32 .\dckd Lan,· Sign, (\\'-1-J. \\ -l-6) ( 1Uld:li1L"L' Tl1,· .-\d;.h·d I.an,· i \\'4-11-.1.i,:11 i"L'l' h_~ui. :.( .f->1 --.h,1uld Ix· 111,.,1:ilkd 111 ;1d,:111<.:L· 111 :1 p,11111 wh,'h' [\\11 1n:1i.lw:i~" L·,1m·L·1rl· :111d mc1.!!in_!! m1)h'llh"111, :11.· n,,1 h·,11111,·d \\"lwn J'la.h~1hk. 1Jw :\dd,·d l.:11k· "i.!!n ~h1,ukl hl· pl:1.;,:d ,.,ud1 thal II I\ YP,1hk lrnm h,lth ru.1th :1\ ,. ii Ill!, 1, nnt p1.1v,1hlc. ;111 .0\dlkd Lml' ,1~11 ..,IJ,111ld hL· plaL·,·d 1m lilL' -.1d,· "' l',1,·h 1.i,1d" ;i~ \\'hdl :m .\tkkd Lalk.' <,[).!II I" Ill hL· IIJ',t.dl,·J ,'II .I l"-td,,:1y th:ll l'll!h', h,,_.1,111..· l"Oll\<..'IJ!in~ \~Ith :tlllllhcr 1,1:id\\':L~ lh:11 h:l', a lail~l'lll :il1f!nnw11t :1l llll' l'''llll ,,I ,,,11•.,·1~~·11 .. .-c. lh,: l-.nll"rlll_~ H.o:1J\\;1y _,\ddcd l.:11K· 1\\-l-hJ -.1gr11,,,.l. Fi~u1<..· ~(·-h1,ht1111,I h.· u-..,·d h1 h,.·11,·1 l"-'111.i\ 1!1, :11..·tu:1l .f2,·1111k'lnv 1..11ndi11,111-. h) road lt-.cr-. ,111 !Ill· <..'llf\ Ill),' 11•:u.h1 ,l~ Site Access Access to the site is provided via two driveways on Lind Ave. Southwest. The north driveway is likely to be limited to right in/out only due to the proximity to the Lind Ave. SW/SW 21" St. intersection. Having full access at the north access intersection would create a conflict between the northbound to westbound and southbound to eastbound left turn motorists. Thus limiting the north access to right in/out would provide better operation. The south driveway would provide full access. For analysis purposes we have assigned all the project trips to use the south site access to Lind Avenue Southwest. Based on our analysis the south site access intersection is expected to operate at LOS 'C' or better for all movements. The north site access would operate satisfactorily based on traffic engineering judgment and inspection. Murphy McCullough, Senior Development Manager TARRAGON LLC December 11, 2006 Page -7- JTE, Inc. We have reviewed the WSDOT Design Manual, May 2001, Figure 910-8b "Left Turn Storage Guidelines (Four Lane, Unsignafized)" for the Site Access intersection. The data indicates that left turn storage is not needed at the site access intersection with Lind Avenue Southwest. The City has a project to ultimately provide a two way left turn lane on Lind Ave. SW from SW 16'" St. to SW 43rd Street; reference TIP number 45. Left turn channelization is not needed to serve the subject proJect; thus the existing 4 -lane street section is sufficient to serve the site. Traffic engineering review/inspection of the traffic volumes on Lind Ave SW in the site vicinity indicate that consideration of a 3 -lane street section in lieu of the existing 4 -lane street could be made. The operation of the south driveway with a 3 -lane street would be slightly better than with the 4 -lane street. City TIP number 45 to widen to 5 -lanes and improve Lind Ave SW has a project cost estimate of $2,555,000 that could be reduced if a 3 -lane street section was determined to be appropriate. If a 3 -lane street section was determined appropriate the existing curb along the sites street frontage to Lind Ave. SW should remain unchanged and thus stay put. AGENCY TRAFFIC IMPACT MITIGATION REQUIREMENTS The City of Renton requires a traffic impact fee for new developments based on the number of new average daily trips generated. The current fee is $75.00 per new average daily trip. The proposed development is projected to generate 947 net new daily trips thus contribute $74,925 (999 net new daily trips x $75) towards the City of Renton's transportation improvement program. Lind Ave SW is identified in the City's street improvement program; thus credits against the traffic impact fee may be available. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS This report analyzed the traffic impact of the proposed Cedar River Corporate Park project generally located east of Lind Ave. SW and south of SW 21" Street. Existing traffic data was collected at the pertinent street intersections identified for analysis. Future horizon year traffic volumes were derived using a growth factor of three percent per year. Level of service analyses were performed for existing and proJected future horizon traffic volumes. The evaluation of the traffic impact of the proposed project included adding project generated traffic to the future traffic volume projections and calculating the level of service. The "with" project traffic operations were then compared to the "without" project operations. The comparison of traffic operations "with" and "without" the project identified that the project would not cause a significant adverse affect on the operation of the study intersections. Based on our analysis we recommend that the Cedar River Corporate Park project be allowed with the following traffic impact mitigation measures. 1. Construct site in accordance with applicable City requirements. Murphy McCullough, Senior Development Manager TARRAGON LLC December 11. 2006 Page -8- JTE, Inc. 2. The north site driveway on Lind Avenue Southwest should be restricted to right in/out only operation due to poor off-set with the City Lind Ave. SW/SW 21" Ave. intersection to the north. 3. Construct frontage improvements to Lind Ave. SW per City code criteria leaving the existing curb along the site·s frontage. The existing 4 -lane street section is sufficient to serve the project. Our initial street section analysis indicates that converting the 4 -lane street to 3 -lanes as potentially viable. 4. Maintain the existing 'non-built out" condition of SW 21" Street and SW 23'' Street right-of-ways (ROW's). Wetlands exist within the SW 21" and 23,a Street right of ways that makes street frontage improvements not practical; see Wetland Analysis, Stream Classif1cat1on and Shoreline Master Program Applicability Report. 5. Contribute towards the City of Renton traffic impact mitigation fee program. 6. Replace the "Yield" sign on the northbound to eastbound movement at the Lind Ave. SW/SW Grady Way intersection with an "Added Lane Sign" in accordance with the MUTCD criteria. No other traffic mitigation should be necessary. Please contact me at (206) 762-1978 or email me at jaketraffic@comcast.net if you have any questions. Sincerely, Mark J. Jacobs, PE, PTOE, President JAKE TRAFFIC ENGINEERING, INC !2.//,u( JTE, Inc. PM PEAK HOUR LEVEL OF SERVICE TABLE 1 CEDAR RIVER CORPORATE PARK -RENTON TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS INTERSECTION APPROACH EXISTING 2011 W/0 2011 W/ PROJECT PROJECT Existing Added Lane Sign 2 Lind Ave. SW/ SW Grady Way Overall D (47.0) E (57.9) E (59.9) E (55.5) Lind Ave. SW/ Overall C (22.4) C (25.3) C (26.0) SW 16th St. Existing 4-Re-striped to Lanes 3-lanes Site Access Intersection SBLT --A (9.1) A (9.1) WB --C (19.5) C (17.0) Number shown in parenthesis is the average control delay in seconds per vehicle for the intersection as a whole or approach movement. which determines the LOS per the Highway Capacity Manual. 2 -Replacing the "Yield"" sign (currently existing) for the northbound to eastbound traffic movement with an "Added Lane" sign. JTE, Inc. VEHICULAR TRIP GENERATION TABLE 2 CEDAR RIVER CORPORATE PARK -RENTON TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS TIME TRIP TRIPS TRIPS TOTAL PERIOD RATE ENTERING EXITING Warehousing (ITE Land Use Code 150, 85, 459 sq. ft.) Average Weekday T = 4.96X 212 (50%) 212 (50%) 424 AM Peak Hour T = 0.45X 31 (82%) 7 (18%) 38 PM peak Hour T = 0.47X 10 (25%) 30 (75%) 40 General Office Building (ITE Land Use Code 710, 56,975 sq. ft.) Average Weekday T = 11.01X 314 (50%) 314 (50%) 628 AM Peak Hour T = 1.55X 77 (88%) 11 (12%) 88 PM peak Hour T = 1.49X 14 (17%) 71 (83%) 85 Total Average Weekday -526 526 1,052 (9991) AM Peak Hour -108 18 126 PM peak Hour -24 101 125 (119) T = trips X = per 1,000 sq. ft. A vehicle trip is defined as a single or one direction vehicle movement with either the origin or destination (existing or entering) inside the study site. The above trip generation values account for all the site trips made by all vehicles for all purposes, including commuter. visitor. recreation, and service and delivery vehicle trips 1 Applied 5% captured/pass-by trip percentage to account for trips that already exist within the vicinity (ie, mail delivery, garbage, and other service/delivery traffic). I 1800 \~ : \i, : I\\~\ _ : 400 ft----.----',--Y',---'---f-f---+----1 i \ \\~<\. 0 '< ' \ ', 1600 t-- e 1200 1r-,;-·-\:; \ ...... ~--~--~----+---~--~ ~ ::, ~ 1000 H-----+----i -C Ol ::, 0 800 i: I- Cl .!. 600 "' 0 ! a. a. Site access/Lind Avenue SW SBLT's: 13 Opposing Through Volume: 685 _,.-,.._ . ·---+-- JTE, Inc. 0 400 S2\ ~l ~~.----+--~~~"---c-t---,~\-.,--t--,,--~-:i,_~_~,--s~,~~~--,_-s-,---~------- ~ ',, %,, 'c,,, ""_ t:tt,,,. '·,1,:so 0~ ,, 200 ! I '-"-,, \ "-.___ : 8. ', '---"" . "---. 50 100 I SC 2JC -250 300 350 400 Left Turnmg Volume (OH\/) S = Left-Turn storage .ength Left-Turn Stor;1ge Guidelines {Four-Lane, Unsignalized) Figure 910-!lb 450 500 fmersec11011s Ar Grade Page 910-20 Design Manual M 22.01 January 2005 Project: Location: -· .- Cedar River Corporate Park -Renton East of Lind Ave. SW and south of SW 21st Street t NORTH SI; 12Blh St JTE, Inc. FIGURE 1 I ;(,~ E ·H 1 • a ,.-If)~ r·c,t, !I 0 ~- i:,~-1641!:_1_$t i ' .;1~ ll E,,tff5<1 . ~i«'fflJ l Ci • ff '::W .':1h SI i . ,[; ·~ < J:s ~ ! ~ ,?\f\, .14th SI ! t ~ l ~ CEDAR RIVER CORPORATE PARK -RENTON TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS VICINITY MAP Project: Cedar River Corporate Park -Renton Location: East of Lind Ave. SW and south of SW 21st Street. . ------_.-·· SW 23RD ST (sc.,1'1•H ~\.!) Note: An 8.5 x 11" preliminary site plan ,s included with this report JTE, Inc. FIGURE 2 CEDAR RIVER CORPORATE PARK -RENTON TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN t NORTH _J 1--=-:___ -=--~---:-j :i, 111 LI/ . J I_._ -~::---:c?-scw-::·:c2-1ii''~i'.=:;~.vt~-~=-~---:_~-~~-~~~-:: ~~-~-:-~r:.= , , I -----~---11 -11, -------c___c~_;-7'"_, -:= _-_:'--:cc·=--""=~-"?--1 ---~--PON~ -_!$:; -' t ---~-__ d -' _;::: l11Jf1~1i. :.:.~ ~·==-=-~~~~1~1~ _./ i= :r;.~~-C,~,;"cc ' l > 1 a ' " •OO • -· 11 11 \" " =oe -"·"' ' '' ' ' '"' " -"·"' ~ 11 I . : 0 u' I ' ~ --142,434 S.F. I · 1 -""''""" " ' 00 ,, -m•o ,,, ' 1, ' ' --' ' " C • ' ' ' : 1·11 " • ,o,os, SC • ?,1-n-•i,.2.434/541.125-2629% ~:l l.1 1 ·1: /-W j O '5. j /' ff PARKING 3.?7 i<ATIO ''' . . "'' ' ' . """"""'~ •:: "' I I I '" I •I -~ ,, \ ~ -(JI 11( D 1111111 D 11,111 !p 11111 D _, /: ' ' ,I , ., '-J J~l I; 1 1 -el "° -> 90' I I 't w 11- <[ u. . -~ (')U z -I{). :3:::; 1 " ' I ' ~ ' I, I . • -8"1CO,C C i I 11 J...-""lT"T1 \I< ~3. 5511 S.P _ I / 11 =) m ~- 1 & :.J · I : ii 'I ' ' ' e ii ii ', ' ' f•J '' i::I I ' Qll~lilllD f ' i\ \ :: I ' ------_--_ ,--,-,-, -, J IL. -- : " & 1* ' :<l ~----=---------· ---:; I ·1 56' --------=----------__ ------•. ,: r--_.---_-''" -- 1;. I I r/------ ,1,c I -~~-'Ji /; --~-=--- !/ t. I, ~ ., /; '"-'"-.... ,., \ _ Lind Ave. Business Plaza -----------~ ·------------- SW 23RD ST. ( ::'.:<;,;:,; :'..'.; ;.."'~"~,~"!.,':"'Z."' I (S£v£NTH AVE.) \ l l/02/06 ~ ii TARRAGON SCALE: 1"=120' ~~ rff8-m~ JTE , Inc . FIGURE 3 Reprint In Color Only CEDAR RIVER CORPORATE PARK TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS -RENTON EXISTING STREET CONDITIONS t NORTH LEGEND Approach .... Lane & Direction § Traffic Slgnal V Yield Sign JTE, Inc. FIGURE 4 Reprint In Color Only '\ 31 .-142 ~205 ~,, 266 ~ 139-+ 75' CEDAR RIVER CORPORATE PARK TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS -RENTON EXISTING PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES t NORTH LEGEND PM peak -+ hour traffic volum es & direction JTE, Inc. FIGURE 5 Reprlat In Color Only '35 +-&20 ~225 ~ "' 295 ~ 155-+ 85' CEDAR RIVER CORPORATE PARK TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS -RENTON PROJECTED 2011 PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES W/0 PROJECT t NORTH LEGEND PM peak -+ hour traffic volumes & d lrectlo n JTE, Inc. FIGURE 6 Aeprlat I• Color Oaly 1ft ' ~ 4 '" '" ' 2 ' ,t PM Peak Hour Trips: 125 t NORTH LEGEND PM peak -+ hour traffic v ol umes & d l r ectlon Entering: 24 ~ Aer i al Image Exiting: 101 ] obtained from ',s r~ -~;!611..t-m:11&2.lifi-ZSf!IL ~-s King County % dletrlbutlo'.' -enter/exit PM pHk flour trip IM a p ____ _, ...... .,..,.,.,,._,.,11,""1™1!~.r.<IP!lr.t. CEDAR RIVER CORPORATE PARK TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS -RENTON PROJECT GENERATED PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES AND DISTRIBUTION JTE, Inc. FIGURE 7 Reprint In Color Only '35 .-s20 ~229 '56 ,, I ~ 45 ,~ 295 ~ 155-+ 87' CEDAR RIVER CORPORATE PARK TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS -RENTON PROJECTED 2011 PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES W/ PROJECT t NORTH LEGEND PM peak -+ hour traffic volumes & direction APPENDIX RENTON, WASHINGTON LIND AVE SW SW GRADY WAY LOC# 01 JTE06303M LIND AVE SW From North Start Time Right Toru Left Peak Hour From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM. Peak 1 of 1 lrrtelSectiOfl 04:30 PM Volume 29 281 140 Percent 6.4 62.4 31.1 05:00 Volume 8 77 46 Peak Factor H1g11 int. os·oo PM Volume 8 Peak Factor 77 46 App. Total 450 131 131 0.859 TRAFFICOUNT, INC. PO BOX 2508 OLYMPIA, WASHINGTON 98507 (360) 491-8116 Right 31 3,2 10 04:30 PM SW GRADY WAY From East Thru 742 75.9 189 195 left App Total Right 205 978 534 21.0 42.7 48 247 147 05:00 PM 62 254 147 D 926 LINU t..Vt. SW Oot ,,, Total 767 450 1217 29 281 140 Reght Thru Left • Nor1h 1013112006 4-30-00 PM 10131/2006 5 15:00 PM PRIMARY • • Left Thru Righi 173 543 534 583 1250 1833 0,1 le Total LIND AVE SW LIND AVE SW From South Thru left 543 173 43.4 13.8 151 48 151 48 App. Total Right 1250 97 7 1 346 24 04:45 PM 346 24 0.903 • File Name Site Code Start Date Page No : JTE30401P : 00000001 : 10/31/2006 :2 SW GRADY WAY From West Thru Lelt App. Total Int. Total 1083 193 1373 4051 78.9 14.1 266 35 325 1049 0.965 282 55 361 0.951 TRAFFICOUNT, INC. PO BOX 2508 RENTON, WASHINGTON OLYMPIA, WASHINGTON 98507 File Name : JTE30401P LIND AVE SW (360) 491-8116 Site Code : 00000001 SW GRADY WAY Start Date : 10131 /2006 LOC# 01 JTE06303M Page No 1 Groups Printed-PRIMARY LIND AVE SW SW GRADY WAY LIND AVE SW SW GRADY WAY From North From East From South From West Start Time Right Thru left Truck App, Right Thru left Truck Apµ Right Thru Left Truck App. Right Thru left TNCk App. ""'" Jnclu. Im. Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Factor 1.0 LO LO LO LO 10 1.0 1.0 LO LO LO LO 1.0 LO LO LO 04:00 PM 10 TO 25 8 105 11 160 56 17 221 169 69 30 12 268 20 24T 31 11 298 48 89' 946 04:15 PM 15 61 24 T 100 7 15' 46 8 207 181 73 32 8 286 24 279 61 12 364 35 957 992 04:30 PM 62 25 4 94 7 195 62 13 264 152 114 39 9 305 23 279 40 9 342 35 1005 1040 04:45 PM 7 80 39 2 126 7 187 49 10 243 106 142 44 11 292 24 282 55 8 361 31 1022 1053 Total 39 273 113 21 425 32 696 213 48 941 608 398 145 40 1151 91 1087 187 40 1365 149 3882 4031 05:00 PM 8 77 46 7 131 10 189 48 8 247 147 151 48 4 346 24 266 35 8 325 27 1049 1076 05:tSPM 7 62 30 8 99 7 171 46 224 129 136 42 9 307 26 256 63 2 345 23 975 998 05:30 PM 4 68 31 0 103 9 208 53 13 270 116 120 36 5 272 21 240 42 8 303 26 948 974 05:45 PM 3 39 29 3 71 9 174 60 9 243 113 116 35 5 264 17 279 55 351 24 929 953 Total 22 246 136 18 404 35 742 207 34 984 !:.>05 523 161 23 1189 88 1041 195 25 1324 100 3901 4001 GranrtTota! 61 519 249 39 829 67 1438 420 82 1925 1113 921 306 63 2340 179 2128 382 65 2689 249 7783 8032 Apprcll % 7.4 62.6 30.0 3.5 74.7 21.8 47.6 39.4 13.1 6.7 79.1 14.2 Total% 0.8 67 3.2 10.7 0.9 18.5 5.4 24 7 14.3 11.8 3.9 30.1 2.3 27.3 4.9 34.5 3.1 96.9 LIND AVE SW SW GRADY WAY LIND AVE SW SW GRADY WAY From North From Easl From South From West start Time Right Thro Leff App. Total Right Thru Lett App. Total Right Thru Leff App. Total Right Thru Left App. Total lnt. Total Peak Hour from 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM -i>eak 1 of 1 lnterwction 04:30 PM Volume 29 281 140 450 31 742 205 978 534 543 173 1250 97 1083 193 1373 4051 Percent 6.4 62.4 31.l 3.2 75.9 21.0 42.7 43.4 13.8 7.1 78.9 14.1 05:00 Volume 8 77 46 131 10 189 48 247 147 151 48 346 24 266 35 325 1049 Peak Fad:or 0.965 Highlnt. 05:00 PM 04:30 PM 05:00PM 04:45 PM Volume 8 77 46 131 195 62 264 147 151 48 346 24 282 55 361 Peak factor 0.859 0 926 0.903 0.951 Peak Hour from 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM -Peak 1 of 1 By Approach 04:45 PM 04:45PM 04:30 PM 04:lSPM Volume 26 287 146 459 33 755 196 984 534 543 173 1250 95 1106 191 1392 een,,,i 5.7 62.5 31.8 3.4 76.7 19.9 42.7 43.4 13.8 6.8 79.5 13.7 High Int. 05:00 PM 05:30 PM 05:00PM 04:lSPM Volume 8 77 46 131 9 208 53 270 147 151 48 346 24 279 61 364 Peak Factor 0.876 0 911 0.903 0.956 (> RENTON, WASHINGTON LIND AVE SW SW 16TH ST LOC# 02 JTE06303M LIND AVE SW From North Start Time Right Thru Left App. Total Peak Hour From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM -Peak 1 of 1 Intersection 04:30 PM Volume 49 420 162 Percent 78 66.6 25.7 05:00 Volume 13 105 41 Peak factor High Int. 04:45PM Volume 8 107 46 Peak factor ~lli >- ~ 0 I ro I-~ "<t ~ ,: "' m -ro 8- 631 159 161 0.980 $.:= N. --< ~ 2 -~ >-~-~~ .o> "' . TRAFFICOUNT, INC. PO BOX 2508 OLYMPIA, WASHINGTON 98507 (360) 491-8116 Right 395 82.6 101 05:00 PM 101 SW 16TH ST From East Thru 74 15.5 24 24 LC, App Total Right 9 478 9 19 14 2 127 2 05:00 PM 2 127 2 0.941 LiND AVt:. -;;;W Out '" Total 1219 631 1850 49 420 162 Righi Thru Left • North 10131/2005 4 30.00 PM 10131/2005515:00PM PRIMARY Left Thru Right 66 558 9 504 633 1137 Out In Total LIND AVE SW / \ LIND AVE SW From South Thru Leff 558 66 88.2 10.4 171 18 171 18 App. Total Right 633 75 15.6 191 17 04:30 PM 191 23 0.829 • " cc· w ,~ -~ --< • " 2~ r !'l, ~ File Name Site Code Start Date Page No • JTE30402P • 00000002 • 10/31/2006 •2 SW 16TH ST From West Thru left App. Total Int. Totat 139 266 480 2222 29.0 55.4 43 69 129 606 0.917 35 77 135 0.889 wO -" 0 "' :;; .:,.-~ ~a--< m I "' -< -< ~2 m• m- TRAFFICOUNT, INC. PO BOX 2508 RENTON, WASHINGTON OLYMPIA WASHINGTON 98507 File Name : JTE30402P LIND AVE SW (360) 491-8116 Site Code : 00000002 SW 16TH ST Start Date : 1 0/31 /2006 LOG# 02 JTE06303M Page No : 1 Groups Printed-PRIMARY LIND AVE SW SW 16TH ST LIND AVE SW SW 16TH ST From North From East From South From Wesl Start Time Rigl!t Thru L,ft Truck App. Right Thru Left Truck Ao, Righi TOru Loft Truck App. Right Thru Left Truck App. Exclu. lnclu. lnt. Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Factor 1.0 1.D 1.D LO l.D LO LO LO 1 0 1.0 1.0 LO LO 1.0 LO LO 04:00PM 15 103 33 14 151 70 12 1 3 83 130 10 7 141 22 32 83 3 137 27 512 539 04:15PM 6 73 32 6 lll 88 14 0 5 102 113 6 5 123 17 17 73 4 107 20 443 463 04:30PM 14 102 4D 10 156 100 23 5 124 141 13 6 156 23 35 77 3 135 24 571 595 04:45PM 8 107 46 8 161 97 15 4 6 116 J 109 8 1 120 20 27 63 7 110 22 507 529 Total 43 385 151 38 579 355 64 6 19 425 10 493 37 19 540 82 111 296 17 489 93 2033 2126 05:00PM 13 105 41 9 159 101 24 2 2 127 2 171 18 4 191 17 43 69 3 129 18 606 624 05:15 PM 14 106 35 10 155 97 12 ' 111 137 27 8 166 15 34 57 106 22 538 560 05:30PM 8 87 37 5 132 90 14 2 5 106 1 134 12 1 147 13 28 45 1 86 12 471 483 05:45PM 13 59 50 5 122 99 13 2 3 114 2 116 5 6 123 20 32 2 59 16 418 434 Total 48 357 163 29 568 387 63 8 13 458 558 62 19 627 52 125 203 380 68 2033 2101 Grand Total 91 742 314 67 1147 742 127 14 32 883 17 1051 99 38 1167 134 236 499 24 869 161 4066 4227 Apprch % 7.9 64.7 27.4 84.0 14.4 L6 1.5 90.1 8.5 15.4 27.2 57.4 Total% 2.2 18.2 7.7 28.2 18.2 31 03 21 7 0.4 25.8 2.4 28.7 3.3 5.8 12.3 21.4 3.8 96.2 LIND AVE SW SW 16TH ST LIND AVE SW SW 16TH ST From North From East From South From West Start Time Right Thru Left App. Total Right Thru Left App_ Total Right Thru Left App. Total Right Thru Left App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM. Peak 1 of 1 Intersection 04:30 PM Volume 49 420 162 631 395 T4 9 478 9 558 66 633 75 139 266 ,so 2222 Percent 7.8 66.6 25.7 82.6 15.5 1.9 1.4 88.2 10.4 15.6 29.0 55.4 05:00 Volume 13 105 41 159 101 " 2 127 2 171 18 191 17 43 69 129 606 Peak Factor 0.917 High Int. 04:45PM 05:00PM 05:00 PM 04:30 PM Volume 8 107 46 161 101 24 2 127 2 171 18 191 23 35 77 135 Peak Factor 0.980 a 941 0.829 0.889 Peak Hour From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM Peaklofl By Approach 04:30PM 04:30 PM 04:30 PM 04:00PM Volume 49 420 162 631 395 74 9 478 9 558 66 633 82 111 296 489 Percent 7.8 66.6 25.7 82.6 15.5 1.9 14 88.2 10.4 16.8 22. 7 60.5 High Int 04:45PM 05:00 PM 05:00 PM 04:00PM Volume 8 107 46 161 101 24 2 127 2 171 18 191 22 32 83 137 Peak factor 0.980 0.941 0.829 0.892 Lind Ave. Business Park SW Grady Way/Lind Ave. SW Existing (GWLAEX) 11/15/06 12:09:43 SIGNAL2000/TEAPAC[Ver 2.02.12] -Capacity Analysis Summary Intersection Averages for Int# 1 - Degree of Saturation (v/c) 0.76 Vehicle Delay 47.0 Level of Service D Sq 65 **/** /1\ I I North I Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Phase 4 Phase 5 Phase 6 * I + + A A * I + + ++++I ++++I *> I<++ <++++I <++++I I V A ++++I ****I I A I A I**** V I V I I <+ <* + +>I + *>I +>I +>I****> I + * + + I + * I + I + I**** I + * + + I + * I + I + I V I G/C=0.091 G/C=-.005 G/C=0.211 G/C=0.129 G/C=-.022 G/C=0.396 G= 11.0" G= -0.6" G= 25.3" G= 15.5" G= -2.6" G= 47.5" Y+R= 4. 0" Y+R= 4.0" Y+R= 4. Q II Y+R= 4. 0" Y+R= 4. 0" Y+R= 4. 0" OFF= 0.0% OFF=l2.5% OFF=l5.3% OFF=39. 7% OFF=56.0% OFF=57.1% C=120 sec G= 96.0 sec= 80.0% Y=24.0 sec= 20.0% Ped= 0.0 sec= 0.0% I Lane IWidth/1 g/C I Service Ratel Adj I I HCM I L I Queue I v/c I Delay I S !Model 11 Group I Lanesl Reqd Used I @C (vph) @E !Volume! N Approach 59.4 E+ =========--======================------------~------=-=-====-------~--==-===- IRT+TH I LT I 24/2 10.275 10.211 I I 12/1 10.272 10.091 I 1 I 735 I 327 10.444 I 41.6 I D+I 231 ftl 1 I 133 I 147 10.907 I 98.9 l*F I 272 ftl S Approach 48.4 D =============================================================================== RT TH LT I 12/1 10.446 10.413 I I 24/2 10.306 10.239 I I 12/1 10.201 10.120 I 494 I 28 I 1 I 654 I 847 I 183 I 562 10.859 I 572 10.675 I 182 10.858 I 43.2 l*D+I 787 ftl 43.6 I D+I 419 ftl 79.7 l*E I 313 ftl E Approach 38.3 D+ IRT+TH I LT I 24/2 10.345 10.407 I 1159 I 1433 I 814 10.568 I 28.0 I C I 488 ftl I 12/1 10.290 10.140 I 1 I 220 I 216 10.871 I 77.3 l*E I 367 ftl W Approach 47.9 D -------~---------------~----------------~----------------~----~----~--~ -----~~-------~------~----~-----------~---------~----------~----~---- IRT+TH I LT I 24/2 10.426 10.396 I 1093 I 1384 I 1242 10.897 I 42.1 l*D+I 942 ftl I 12/1 10.287 10.129 I 1 I 199 I 203 10.890 I 83.6 l*F I 354 ftl Lind Ave. Business Park SW Grady Way/Lind Ave. SW Existing (GWLAEX) SIGNAL2000/TEAPAC[Ver 2.02.12] -Summary of Parameter Values Intersection METROAREA Parameters for NonCBD LOS Targets 35 80 5 90 100 5 Priorities 0 0 0 0 0 0 Approach Parameters APPLABELS GRADES PEDLEVELS BIKEVOLUMES PARKINGS IDES PARKVOLUMES BUSVOLUMES RIGHTTURNONREDS UPSTREAMVC Movement MOVLABELS VOLUMES WIDTHS Parameters RT 29 0.0 0 N 0.0 0 0 None 20 0 0 0.00 TH 281 24.0 2 LT 140 12.0 1 LANES GROUPTYPES UTILIZATIONS TRUCKPERCENTS PEAKHOURFACTORS ARRIVALTYPES ACTUATIONS REQCLEARANCES MINIMUMS STARTUPLOST ENDGAIN Norm Norm Norm 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.95 0.95 0.95 3 3 3 STORAGE INITIALQUEUE IDEALSATFLOWS FACTORS DELAY FACTORS NSTOPFACTORS SATURATIONFLOWS Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1.00 1.00 1.00 0 Phasing Parameters Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 3489 SEQUENCES 65 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1770 ALL Int # 1 - NETWORK North NETWORK East NETWORK South NETWORK West NODELOCATION RT 31 0.0 0 E 0.0 0 0 None 20 0 0 0.00 TH 742 24.0 2 LT 205 12.0 1 Norm Norm Norm 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.95 0.95 0.95 3 3 3 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 0 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 3518 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1.00 1.00 1.00 1770 PERMISSIVES No No No No Yes Yes Yes 120 30 0 0 0 0 RT 534 12.0 1 0 0 0 0 s 0.0 0 0 None 20 0 0 0.00 TH 543 24.0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LT 173 12.0 1 Norm Norm Norm 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.95 0.95 0.95 3 3 3 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1. 00 1.00 1.00 1583 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1. 00 1. 00 1.00 3539 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1770 LEADLAGS OFFSET PEDTIME OVERLAPS CYCLES GREENTIMES YELLOWTIMES CRITICALS Yes 120 10.96 4.00 3 -0.61 25.33 4.00 4.00 9 7 15.46 4.00 12 -2. 64 4.00 6 47.51 4.00 11 (0· 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 RT 97 0.0 0 11/15/06 12:09:48 0 0 0 0 0 Def No Def No Def No Def No w 0.0 0 0 None 20 0 0 0.00 TH 1083 24.0 2 LT 193 12.0 1 Norm Norm Norm 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.95 0.95 0.95 3 3 3 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 0 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 3496 None 0.00 0.0 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1770 None 1 0 Lind Ave. Business Park SW Grady Way/Lind Ave. SW Without Project (GWLAWO) 11/15/06 12:10:21 SIGNAL2000/TEAPAC[Ver 2.02.12] -Capacity Analysis Summary Intersection Averages for Int# 1 - Degree of Saturation (v/c) 0.84 Vehicle Delay 57.9 Level of Service E+ Sq 65 **/** Phase 1 * * Phase 2 Phase 3 I + + I + + Phase 4 Phase 5 Phase 6 I " I " I I ++++I ++++I /1\ *> I<+ + I <++++I <++++I I I North I <+ + + G/C=0.091 G= 11.0" Y+R= 4. 0" OFF= 0.0% I " I <* + +>I * + + I * + + I G/C=-.005 G= -0.6 11 Y+R= 4. 0 11 OFF=12.5% V " ++++I ****I I " I**** V I V I I + *>I +>I +>I****> I + * I + I + I**** I + * I + I + I V I G/C=0.211 G/C=0.129 G/C=-.022 G/C=0.396 G= 25.3" G= 15.5" G= -2.6" G= 47.5" Y+R= 4. Q II Y+R= 4.0" Y+R= 4. 0" Y+R= 4. 0 11 OFF=15.3% OFF=39. 7% OFF=56.0% OFF=57.1% C=120 sec G= 96.0 sec= 80.0% Y=24.0 sec= 20.0% Ped= 0.0 sec= 0.0% I Lane !Width/I g/C I Service Ratel Adj I I HCM I L I Queue I v/c I Delay I S !Model 11 Group I Lanes! Reqd Used I @C (vph) @E !Volume! N Approach 68.6 E ~~======, -==================------------~----============================== IRT+TH I LT I 24/2 10.279 10.211 I I 12/1 10.277 10.091 I S Approach RT TH LT I 12/1 10.474 10.413 I 24/2 10.315 10.239 I 12/1 10.286 10.120 E Approach 1 I 736 I 358 10.486 I 42.1 I D+I 256 ftl 1 I 133 I 163 11.006 I 126.9 l*F I 332 ftl 494 28 1 654 847 183 621 10.950 632 10.746 200 10.943 58.1 E+ 57.5 l*E+I 967 ftl 45.9 I D I 477 ftl 98.4 l*F I 369 ftl 43.2 D+ IRT+TH I LT I 24/2 10.359 10.407 I 1158 I 1432 I 900 10.628 I 29.2 I c I 556 ftl I 12/1 10.296 10.140 I 1 I 220 I 237 10.956 I 96.1 l*F I 434 ftl W Approach IRT+TH I LT I 24/2 10.452 10.396 I 12/1 10.293 10.129 1093 I 1384 1 I 199 1369 10.989 226 10.991 64.9 E+ 57.5 l*E+l1171 ftl 109.2 l*F I 434 ftl Lind Ave. Business Park SW Grady Way/Lind Ave. SW Without Project (GWLAWO) SIGNAL2000/TEAPAC[Ver 2.02.12] -Summary of Parameter Values Intersection Parameters for Int# 1 - METROAREA NonCBD NETWORK North LOS Targets 35 80 5 NETWORK East 90 100 5 NETWORK South Priorities O O O O O O NETWORK West NODELOCATION Approach Parameters APPLABELS GRADES PEDLEVELS BIKEVOLUMES PARKINGS IDES PARKVOLUMES BUSVOLUMES RIGHTTURNONREDS UPSTREAMVC Movement MOVLABELS VOLUMES WIDTHS Parameters RT 30 0.0 0 N 0.0 0 0 None 20 0 0 0.00 TH 310 24.0 2 LT 155 12.0 1 LANES GROUPTYPES UTILIZATIONS TRUCKPERCENTS PEAKHOURFACTORS ARRIVALTYPES ACTUATIONS REQCLEARANCES MINIMUMS STARTUPLOST ENDGAIN Norm Norm Norm 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.95 0.95 0.95 3 3 3 STORAGE INITIALQUEUE IDEALSATFLOWS FACTORS DELAY FACTORS NSTOPFACTORS SATURATIONFLOWS Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 0 Phasing Parameters Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1. 00 1.00 1. 00 3492 SEQUENCES 65 PERMISSIVES No Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1.00 1.00 1.00 1770 RT 35 0.0 0 E 0.0 0 0 None 20 0 0 0.00 TH 820 24.0 2 LT 225 12.0 1 Norm Norm Norm 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.95 0.95 0.95 3 3 3 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 0 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 3517 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1770 No Yes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 RT 590 12.0 1 s 0.0 0 0 None 20 0 0 0.00 TH 600 24.0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LT 190 12.0 1 Norm Norm Norm 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.95 0.95 0.95 3 3 3 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1583 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 3539 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1.00 1.00 1.00 1770 LEADLAGS OFFSET PEDTIME OVERLAPS CYCLES GREENTIMES YELLOWTIMES CRITICALS Yes 120 10.96 4.00 3 ALL No Yes 120 -0.61 4.00 9 No Yes 30 25.33 4.00 7 15.46 4.00 12 -2.64 4.00 6 47.51 4.00 11 11/15/06 12:10:26 0 0 Def No 0 0 Def No 0 0 Def No 0 0 Def No RT 105 0.0 0 0 w 0.0 0 0 None 20 0 0 0.00 TH 1195 24.0 2 LT 215 12.0 1 Norm Norm Norm 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.95 0.95 0.95 3 3 3 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 0 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 3496 None 0.00 0.0 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1770 None 1 0 Lind Ave. Business Park SW Grady Way/Lind Ave. SW With Project (GWLAWP) 11/15/06 12:10:48 SIGNAL2000/TEAPAC[Ver 2.02.12) -Capacity Analysis Summary Intersection Averages for Int# 1 - Sq 65 **/** /1\ I I North I Degree of Saturation (v/c) 0.85 Vehicle Delay 59.9 Level of Service E+ Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Phase 4 Phase 5 Phase 6 * I + + I A A * I + + I ++++I ++++I *> I<++ I <++++I <++++I I V A ++++I ****I I A I A I**** V I V I I <+ <* + +>I + *>I +>I +>I****> I + * + + I + * I + I + I**** I + * + + I + * I + I + I V I G/C=0.091 G/C=-.005 G/C=0.211 G/C=0.129 G/C=-.022 G/C=0.396 G= 11. 0" G= -0.6" G= 25.3" G= 15.5" G= -2.6" G= 47.5" Y+R= 4. 0" Y+R= 4. 0" Y+R= 4. 0 IT Y+R= 4. 0 IT Y+R= 4. 0" Y+R= 4.0 11 OFF= 0.0% OFF=12.5% OFF=15.3% OFF=39. 7% OFF=56.0% OFF=57.1% C=120 sec G= 96.0 sec= 80.0% Y=24.0 sec= 20.0% Ped= 0.0 sec= 0.0% I Lane !Width/ I g/C I Service Rate I Adj I I HCM I L I Queue I Group I Lanes! Reqd Used I @C (vph) @E !Volume! v/c I Delay I S !Model 11 N Approach IRT+TH I LT I 24/2 10.280 10.211 I 12/1 10.277 10.091 S Approach 68.4 E 1 I 736 I 364 10.494 I 42.2 I D+I 260 ftl 1 I 133 I 163 11.006 I 126.9 l*F I 332 ftl 63.3 E+ -============================================================ RT TH LT I 12/1 10.485 10.413 I I 24/2 10.318 10.239 I I 12/1 10.288 10.120 I 494 I 28 I 1 I 654 I 847 I 183 I 643 10.983 I 654 10.772 I 207 10.976 I 65.7 l*E+ll050 ftl 47.0 I D I 500 ftl 107.5 l*F I 395 ftl E Approach 44.3 D+ IRT+TH I LT ===========================================--===--================== I 24/2 10.359 10.407 I 1158 I 1432 I 900 10.628 I 29.2 I c I 556 ftl I 12/1 10.297 10.140 I 1 I 220 I 241 10.972 I 100.5 l*F I 448 ftl W Approach 65.2 E+ IRT+TH I LT I 24/2 10.452 10.396 I 12/1 10.293 10.129 1093 1 1384 I 1371 10.991 I 57.9 l*E+l1175 ftl 199 I 226 10.991 I 109.2 l*F I 434 ftl ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Lind Ave. Business Park 11/15/06 SW Grady Way/Lind Ave. SW 12:10:53 With Project (GWLAWP) SIGNAL2000/TEAPAC[Ver 2.02.12] -Summary of Parameter Values Intersection Parameters for Int# 1 - METROAREA NonCBD NETWORK North 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Def No LOS Targets 35 80 5 NETWORK East 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Def No 90 100 5 NETWORK South 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Def No Priorities 0 0 0 0 0 0 NETWORK West 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Def No NODELOCATION 0 0 Approach Parameters APPLABELS N E s w GRADES 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 PEDLEVELS 0 0 0 0 BIKEVOLUMES 0 0 0 0 PARKINGS IDES None None None None PARKVOLUMES 20 20 20 20 BUSVOLUMES 0 0 0 0 RIGHTTURNONREDS 0 0 0 0 UPSTREJ\MVC 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Movement Parameters MOVLABELS RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT VOLUMES 30 315 155 35 820 229 611 621 197 107 1195 215 WIDTHS 0.0 24.0 12.0 0.0 24.0 12.0 12.0 24.0 12.0 0.0 24.0 12.0 LANES 0 2 1 0 2 1 1 2 1 0 2 1 GROUPTYPES Norm Norm Norm Norm Norm Norm Norm Norm Norm Norm Norm Norm UTILIZATIONS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 TRUCKPERCENTS 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 PEAKHOURFACTORS 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 ARRIVALTYPES 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 ACTUATIONS Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes REQCLEARANCES 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 MINIMUMS 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 STARTUPLOST 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 ENDGAIN 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 STORAGE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 INITIALQUEUE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 IDEALSATFLOWS 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 FACTORS 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1.00 1. 00 1.00 1. 00 DELAYFACTORS 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1.00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 NSTOPFACTORS 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1.00 1. 00 SATURATIONFLOWS 0 3493 1770 0 3517 1770 1583 3539 1770 0 3495 1770 Phasing Parameters SEQUENCES 65 ALL PERMISSIVES No No No No LEADLAGS None None OVERLAPS Yes Yes Yes Yes OFFSET 0.00 1 CYCLES 120 120 30 PEDTIME 0.0 0 GREENTIMES 10.96 -0.61 25.33 15.46 -2.64 47.51 YELLOWTIMES 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 CRITICALS 3 9 7 12 6 11 Lind Ave. Business Park SW Grady Way/Lind Ave. SW With Project (GWLAWP) 11/15/06 12:11:16 SIGNAL2000/TEAPAC[Ver 2.02.12) -Capacity Analysis Summary Intersection Averages for Int# 1 - Degree of Saturation (v/c) 0.84 Vehicle Delay 55.5 Level of Service E+ Sq 65 **/** /1\ I I North I Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Phase 4 Phase 5 Phase 6 * I I + + A A I * I I + + ++++I ++++I *> I I<++ <++++I <++++I I I V A ++++I ****I I I A I A I**** V I V I I <+ +>I <* + *>I * *>I *>I *>I****> *>I + + I * + * I * * I * I * I**** * I + + I * + * I * * I * I * I V * I G/C=0.113 G/C=-.006 G/C=0.170 G/C=0.152 G/C=-.023 G/C=0.393 G= 13.6" G= -0. 7 II G= 20.4" G= 18.2" G= -2.7" G= 47.2" Y+R= 4.0" Y+R= 4. 0" Y+R= 4.0° Y+R= 4. 0" Y+R= 4 • 0 II Y+R= 4. 0 11 OFF= 0.0% OFF=l4.7% OFF=l7.4% OFF=37.8% OFF=56.3% OFF=57.4% C=120 sec G= 96.0 sec= 80.0% Y=24.0 sec= 20.0% Ped= 0.0 sec= 0.0% I Lane !Width/ I g/C I Service Rate I Adj I I HCM I L I Queue I v/c I Delay I S !Model 11 Group I Lanes I Re_qd Used I @C (vph) @E !Volume I N Approach IRT+TH I LT I 24/2 10.200 10.170 I I 12/1 10.277 10.113 I S Approach TH LT I 24/2 10.318 10.198 I I 12/1 10.288 10.141 I E Approach 56.1 E+ 1 I 580 I 364 10.612 I 48.0 I D I 279 ftl 1 I 171 I 163 10.815 I 74.2 l*E I 274 ftl 67.8 E 1 I 696 I 654 10.933 I 66.8 l*E+I 581 ftl 1 I 221 I 207 10.831 I 70.8 l*E I 342 ftl 37.6 D+ IRT+TH I LT I 24/2 10.359 10.404 I 1140 I 1420 I 12/1 10.297 10.162 I 1 I 262 900 10.634 I 29.6 I c I 559 ftl 241 10.837 I 67.7 l*E I 391 ftl W Approach 61. 5 E+ IRT+TH I LT I 24/2 10.452 10.393 I 1077 I 1374 I 1371 J0.998 I 60.1 l*E+ll189 ftl I 12/1 10.293 10.152 I 1 I 242 I 226 J0.840 I 70.0 l*E I 371 ftl ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ([() Lind Ave. Business Park SW Grady Way/Lind Ave. SW With Project (GWLAWP) SIGNAL2000/TEAPAC[Ver 2.02.12] -Summary of Parameter Values Intersection METROAREA LOS Targets Priorities 0 Parameters for NonCBD 35 80 5 90 100 5 0 0 0 0 0 Approach Parameters APPLABELS N 0.0 0 0 None 20 0 0 0.00 GRADES PEDLEVELS BIKEVOLUMES PARKINGS IDES PARKVOLUMES BUSVOLUMES RIGHTTURNONREDS UPSTREAMVC Movement MOVLABELS VOLUMES WIDTHS Parameters RT 30 0.0 0 LANES GROUPTYPES UTILIZATIONS TRUCKPERCENTS PEAKHOURFACTORS ARRIVALTYPES ACTUATIONS REQCLEARANCES MINIMUMS STARTUPLOST ENDGAIN TH 315 24.0 2 LT 155 12.0 1 STORAGE INITIALQUEUE IDEALSATFLOWS FACTORS DELAYFACTORS NSTOPFACTORS SATURATIONFLOWS Norm Norm Norm 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.95 0.95 0.95 3 3 3 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 0 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1.00 1. 00 1.00 3493 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1770 Phasing Parameters SEQUENCES 65 PERMISSIVES No OVERLAPS CYCLES GREENTIMES YELLOWTIMES CRITICALS Yes 120 13.59 4.00 3 ALL No Yes 120 -0.68 4.00 9 Int # 1 - NETWORK North NETWORK East NETWORK South NETWORK West NODELOCATION RT 35 0.0 0 E 0.0 0 0 None 20 0 0 0.00 TH 820 24.0 2 LT 229 12.0 1 Norm Norm Norm 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.95 0.95 0.95 3 3 3 Yes Yes Yes 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 0 0 0 1900 1900 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 0 3517 0 1900 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1770 No Yes 0 0 0 0 RT 611 12.0 1 0 0 0 0 s 0.0 0 0 None 20 0 0 0.00 TH 621 24.0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LT 197 12.0 1 Fflo Norm Norm 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.95 0.95 0.95 3 3 3 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 0 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 3539 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1770 LEADLAGS OFFSET PEDTIME No Yes 30 20.43 4.00 8 18.21 4.00 12 -2.71 4.00 6 47.16 4.00 11 ([J) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 RT 107 0.0 0 11/15/06 12:11:20 0 0 0 0 0 Def No Def No Def No Def No w 0.0 0 0 None 20 0 0 0.00 TH 1195 24.0 2 LT 215 12.0 1 Norm Norm Norm 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.95 0.95 0.95 3 3 3 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 0 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1.00 1. 00 1. 00 3495 None 0.00 0.0 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1770 None 1 0 Lind Ave. Business Park SW 16th St./Lind Ave. SW Existing (16LAEX) SIGNAL2000/TEAPAC[Ver 2.02.12] -Capacity Analysis Summary Intersection Averages for Int# 1 - 11/15/06 12:03:11 Degree of Saturation (v/c) 0.38 Vehicle Delay 22.4 Level of Service C+ Sq 11 **I** /1\ I I North I Phase 1 Phase 2 I + + * A I + + * ++++I I<++ *> <++++I I V A ++++I I A I**** V I I <+ + +>I++++> I I I + + + + + + G/C=0.443 G= 53.1" Y+R= 4.0" OFF= 0. 0% C=l20 sec I++++ I V G/C=0.491 G= 58.9" Y+R= 4.0" OFF=47.6% I I G=112.0 sec= 93.3% Y= 8.0 sec= 6.7% Ped= 0.0 sec= 0.0% I Lane I Width/ I g/C I Service Rate I Adj I I HCM I L I Queue I v/c I Delay I S !Model 11 Group I Lanesl Reqd Used I @C (vph) @E IVolumel N Approach 23.7 c+ IRT+TH I LT I 24/2 10.296 10.443 I 1320 I 1542 I 494 10.320 I 21.8 I C+I 256 ftl I 12/1 10.404 10.443 I 202 I 279 I 171 10.600 I 28.9 l*C I 212 ftl S APproach 22.4 c+ IRT+TH I LT I 24/2 10.309 10.443 I 1340 I 1563 I 596 10.381 I 12/1 10.201 10.443 I 243 I 333 I 69 10.206 22.6 I C+I 316 ftl 20.8 I C+I 68 ftl E APProach 18.6 1357 I 1517 I 494 10.326 I 18.6 B IRT+TH I LT I 24/2 10.305 10.491 I 12/1 10.240 10.491 453 I 556 I 9 10.016 I 15.7 B I 241 ftl B I 7 ftl W APproach 24.6 C+ IRT+TH I LT I 24/2 10.264 10.491 I 1480 I 1645 I 225 10.137 I 16.7 I B I 101 ftl I 12/1 10.471 10.491 I 300 I 385 I 280 10.727 I 31.0 l*C I 358 ftl Lind Ave. Business Park 11/15/06 SW 16th St./Lind Ave. SW 12:03:15 Existing (16LAEX) SIGNAL2000/TEAPAC[Ver 2.02.12] -Summary of Parameter Values Intersection Parameters for Int# 1 - METROAREA NonCBD NETWORK North 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Def No LOS Targets 35 80 5 NETWORK East 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Def No 90 100 5 NETWORK South 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Def No Priorities 0 0 0 0 0 0 NETWORK West 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Def No NODE LOCATION 0 0 Approach Parameters APPLABELS N E s w GRADES 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 PEDLEVELS 0 0 0 0 BIKEVOLUMES 0 0 0 0 PARKINGS IDES None None None None PARKVOLUMES 20 20 20 20 BUSVOLUMES 0 0 0 0 RIGHTTURNONREDS 0 0 0 0 UPSTREAMVC 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Movement Parameters MOVLABELS RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT VOLUMES 49 420 162 395 74 9 9 558 66 75 139 266 WIDTHS 0.0 24.0 12.0 0.0 24.0 12.0 0.0 24.0 12.0 0.0 24.0 12.0 LANES 0 2 1 0 2 1 0 2 1 0 2 1 GROUPTYPES Norm Norm Norm Norm Norm Norm Norm Norm Norm Norm Norm Norm UTILIZATIONS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 TRUCKPERCENTS 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 PEAKHOURFACTORS 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 ARRIVALTYPES 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 ACTUATIONS Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes REQCLEARANCES 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 MINIMUMS 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 STARTUPLOST 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 ENDGAIN 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 STORAGE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 INITIALQUEUE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 IDEALSATFLOWS 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 FACTORS 1. 00 1.00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1.00 1. 00 1.00 1. 00 DELAY FACTORS 1. 00 1.00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1.00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1.00 1. 00 NSTOPFACTORS 1. 00 1.00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1.00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1.00 1. 00 SATURATIONFLOWS 0 3483 644 0 3092 1133 0 3531 758 0 3353 784 Phasing Parameters SEQUENCES 11 ALL PERMISSIVE$ No Yes No Yes LEADLAGS None None OVERLAPS Yes Yes Yes Yes OFFSET 0.00 1 CYCLES 120 120 30 PEDTIME 0.0 0 GREENTIMES 53.11 58.89 YELLOWTIMES 4.00 4.00 CRITICALS 3 12 <ff) Lind Ave. Business Park SW 16th St./Lind Ave. SW Without Project (16LAWO) SIGNAL2000/TEAPAC[Ver 2.02.12] -Capacity Analysis Summary Intersection Averages for Int# 1 - 11/15/06 12:02:20 Degree of Saturation (v/c) 0.44 Vehicle Delay 25.3 Level of Service c+ Sq 11 **/** II\ I I North I Phase 1 Phase 2 I + + * A I + + * ++++I I<+ + *> <++++I I V A ++++I I A I**** V I I <+ + +>I++++> I I I + + + + + + G/C=0.443 G= 53.1" Y+R= 4.0" OFF= 0.0% C=l20 sec I++++ I V G/C=0.491 G= 58.9" Y+R= 4.0" OFF=47.6% I I G=112.0 sec= 93.3% Y= 8.0 sec= 6.7% Ped= 0.0 sec= 0.0% ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I Lane IWidth/1 g/C I Service Ratel Adj I I HCM I L I Queue I v/c I Delay I S IModel 11 Group I Lanes! Reqd Used I @C (vph) @E JVolumeJ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- N Approach IRT+TH I LT I 24/2 J0.303 J0.443 I 12/1 J0.457 J0.443 1320 I 1542 180 I 250 26.3 C+ 547 10.355 I 22.3 I C+I 287 ftl 189 10.735 I 38.1 l*D+I 262 ftl ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- S Approach IRT+TH I LT I 24/2 J0.319 J0.443 I 1340 I 1563 I 12/1 J0.294 J0.443 I 221 I 304 22.9 658 J0.421 I 23.1 79 J0.256 I 21.5 C+ C+I 355 ftl C+I 80 ftl ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- E Approach 19.0 IRT+TH I LT ---------~---------- I 24/2 10.314 10.491 I 1357 I 1517 I 542 10.357 I 19.0 I 12/1 J0.241 10.491 I 436 I 537 I 11 10.020 I 15.7 B B I 268 ftl B I 9 ftl ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- W Approach 33.2 C IRT+TH I LT I 24/2 10.267 10.491 I 1480 I 1645 I 252 10.153 I 16.9 I B I 114 ftl I 12/1 10.529 10.491 I 278 I 359 I 311 10.866 I 46.5 l*D I 465 ftl ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Lind Ave. Business Park 11/15/06 SW 16th St./Lind Ave. SW 12:02:24 Without Project (16LAWO) SIGNAL2000/TEAPAC[Ver 2.02.12] -Summary of Parameter Values Intersection Parameters for Int # 1 - METROAREA NonCBD NETWORK North 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Def No LOS Targets 35 80 5 NETWORK East 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Def No 90 100 5 NETWORK South 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Def No Priorities 0 0 0 0 0 0 NETWORK West 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Def No NODE LOCATION 0 0 Approach Parameters APPLABELS N E s w GRADES 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 PEDLEVELS 0 0 0 0 BIKEVOLUMES 0 0 0 0 PARKINGS IDES None None None None PARKVOLUMES 20 20 20 20 BUSVOLUMES 0 0 0 0 RIGHTTURNONREDS 0 0 0 0 UPSTREAMVC 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Movement Parameters MOVLABELS RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT VOLUMES 55 465 180 435 80 10 10 615 75 85 155 295 WIDTHS 0.0 24.0 12.0 0.0 24.0 12.0 0.0 24.0 12.0 0.0 24.0 12.0 LANES 0 2 1 0 2 1 0 2 1 0 2 1 GROUPTYPES Norm Norm Norm Norm Norm Norm Norm Norm Norm Norm Norm Norm UTILIZATIONS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 TRUCKPERCENTS 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 PEAKHOURFACTORS 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0. 95 0. 95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 ARRIVALTYPES 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 ACTUATIONS Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes REQCLEARANCES 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 MINIMUMS 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 STARTUPLOST 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 ENDGAIN 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 STORAGE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 INITIALQUEUE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 IDEALSATFLOWS 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 FACTORS 1.00 1. 00 1.00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 DELAYFACTORS 1. 00 1.00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1. 00 1. 00 NSTOPFACTORS 1.00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1. 00 1. 00 SATURATIONFLOWS 0 3483 580 0 3091 1093 0 3530 697 0 3352 731 Phasing Parameters SEQUENCES 11 ALL PERMISSIVE$ No Yes No Yes LEADLAGS None None OVERLAPS Yes Yes Yes Yes OFFSET 0.00 1 CYCLES 120 120 30 PEDTIME 0.0 0 GREENTIMES 53.11 58.89 YELLOWTIMES 4.00 4.00 CRITICAL$ 3 12 (l]) Lind Ave. Business Park SW 16th St./Lind Ave. SW With Project (16LAWP) SIGNAL2000/TEAPAC[Ver 2.02.12] -Capacity Analysis Summary Intersection Averages for Int# 1 - 11/15/06 12:01:16 Degree of Saturation (v/c) 0.45 Vehicle Delay 26.0 Level of Service C+ Sq 11 **/** /1\ I I North I Phase 1 Phase 2 I + + * " I + + * ++++I I<++ *> <++++I I V " ++++I I " I**** V I I <+ + +>I++++> I I I + + + + + + G/C=0.443 G= 53.1" Y+R= 4.0" OFF= 0.0% C=120 sec I++++ I V G/C=0.491 G= 58.9" Y+R= 4.0" OFF=47.6% I I G=ll2.0 sec= 93.3% Y= 8.0 sec= 6.7% Ped= 0.0 sec= 0.0% I Lane IWidth/1 g/C I Service Ratel Adj I I HCM I L I Queue I v/c I Delay I S !Model 11 Group I Lanesl Reqd Used I @C (vph) @E IVolumel N Approach 28.6 C IRT+TH I LT I 24/2 10.305 10.443 I 1320 I 1542 I 559 10.363 I 22.3 I C+I 295 ftl I 12/1 10.486 10.443 I 162 I 226 I 189 10.804 I 47.1 l*D I 283 ftl S Approach 23.4 c+ IRT+TH I LT I 24/2 10.327 10.443 I 1340 I 1563 I 710 10.454 I 23.5 I 12/1 10.300 10.443 I 217 I 298 I 86 10.284 I 21.8 C+I 388 ftl C+I 89 ftl E Approach 19.0 B ===================================---=================--======================= IRT+TH I LT I 24/2 10.314 10.491 I 1357 I 1517 I 542 10.357 I 19.0 I B I 268 ftl I 12/1 10.241 10.491 I 433 I 534 I 11 10.021 I 15.7 I B I 9 ftl W Approach 33.2 C =============================================================================== IRT+TH I LT I 24/2 10.268 10.491 I 1478 I 1643 I 255 10.155 I 16.9 I B I 115 ftl I 12/1 10.529 10.491 I 278 I 359 I 311 10.866 I 46.5 l*D I 465 ftl Lind Ave. Business Park 11/15/06 SW 16th St./Lind Ave. SW 12:01:24 With Project (16LAWP) SIGNAL2000/TEAPAC[Ver 2.02.12] -Summary of Parameter Values Intersection Parameters for Int# 1 - METROAREA NonCBD NETWORK North 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Def No LOS Targets 35 80 5 NETWORK East 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Def No 90 100 5 NETWORK South 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Def No Priorities 0 0 0 0 0 0 NETWORK West 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Def No NODELOCATION 0 0 Approach Parameters APPLABELS N E s w GRADES 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 PEDLEVELS 0 0 0 0 BIKEVOLUMES 0 0 0 0 PARKINGS IDES None None None None PARKVOLUMES 20 20 20 20 BUSVOLUMES 0 0 0 0 RIGHTTURNONREDS 0 0 0 0 UPSTREAMVC 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Movement Parameters MOVLABELS RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT VOLUMES 55 476 180 435 80 10 10 664 82 87 155 295 WIDTHS 0.0 24.0 12.0 0.0 24.0 12.0 0.0 24.0 12.0 0.0 24.0 12.0 LANES 0 2 1 0 2 1 0 2 1 0 2 1 GROUPTYPES Norm Norm Norm Norm Norm Norm Norm Norm Norm Norm Norm Norm UTILIZATIONS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 TRUCKPERCENTS 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 PEAKHOURFACTORS 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 ARRIVALTYPES 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 ACTUATIONS Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes REQCLEARANCES 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 MINIMUMS 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 STARTUPLOST 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 ENDGAIN 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 STORAGE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 INITIALQUEUE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 IDEALSATFLOWS 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 FACTORS 1. 00 1. 00 1.00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1.00 1. 00 DELAYFACTORS 1.00 1.00 1.00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 NSTOPFACTORS 1. 00 1.00 1.00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1.00 1. 00 SATURATIONFLOWS 0 3484 530 0 3091 1089 0 3531 683 0 3348 731 Phasing Parameters SEQUENCES 11 ALL PERMISSIVES No Yes No Yes LEADLAGS None None OVERLAPS Yes Yes Yes Yes OFFSET 0.00 1 CYCLES 120 120 30 PEDTIME 0.0 0 GREENTIMES 53.11 58.89 YELLOWTIMES 4.00 4.00 CRITICALS 3 12 @ Two-Way Stop Control Page I of2 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY r.eneral Information Site Information ~nalyst Chris Valdez Intersection Lind/SA 11.gency/Co. JTE, INC Jurisdiction Renton Date Performed 11/13/2006 Analysis Year with project ~nalvsis Time Period nm neak Proiect Descrintion Lind Ave Business Park (SALAWP) East/West Street: Site Access North/South Street: Lind Ave. SW Intersection Orientation: North-South Studv Period /hrsl: 025 Vehicle Volumes and Adiustments Maior Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R "olume 0 685 11 13 545 0 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourlv Flow Rate, HFR 0 721 11 13 573 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 ---0 ---- Median Tvpe Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 2 0 0 2 0 ,,onfiauration T TR LT T Unstream Sinnal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 45 0 56 0 0 0 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0 95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourlv Flow Rate, HFR 47 0 58 0 0 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N ~torage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 0 0 ronfiguration LTR Dela" Queue Lennth and Level of Service Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LTR Iv (vph) 13 105 t (m) (vph) 882 352 Ivie 0.01 0.30 AS% queue length 0.04 1.23 C.ontrol Delay 9.1 19.5 LOS A C Approach Delay ----19.5 Approach LOS ----C > Cop~ right tL .::n!HJ l. 111\~r,11\ ur Flonda. All Rights Reserved Vers1on4 lc ~"' ~~/ file://C:\Documents and Settings\Owner\Local Settings\Temp\u2k443.tmp 11/22/2006 Two-Way Stop Control Page I of2 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information 11.nalyst Chris Valdez Intersection Lind/SA 11.gency/Co. JTE, INC Jurisdiction Renton Date Performed 11/13/2006 Analysis Year with project ll.nalvsis Time Period pm peak Project Description EasUWest Street: Site Access North/South Street: Lind Ave. SW Intersection Orientation: North-South Study Period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Ma ior Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 0 685 11 13 545 0 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0 95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 721 11 13 573 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 ----0 ---- Median Tvpe Two Way Left Turn Lane RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 1 1 0 Configuration TR L T Uostream Sianal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 45 0 56 0 0 0 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 47 0 58 0 0 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 0 0 ::onfig u ration LTR Delav. Queue Lenath, and Level of Service l\pproach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 Lane Configuration V (vph) :: (m) (vph) vie ~5% queue length ::ontrol Delay LOS l\pproach Delay -- ll.pproach LOS -- > 4 7 8 L LTR 13 105 882 404 0.01 0.26 0.04 1.03 9. 1 17.0 A C --170 --C Cop~ right t,' 21111n l.n1,~rc.11, or Florida. All R1gh1s Resef\·ed ~-1.__(. (J' .. ·7 9 file://C:\Documents and Settings\HP _ Owncr\Local Settings\Templu2kl E91.tmp 10 11 12 Version 4_ !c 11/24/2006 Mark Jacobs From: To: Sent: "Mark Jacobs" <jaketraffic@comcast net> "Kayren Kittrick" <Kkittrick@ci. renton wa. us> Tuesday, November 14, 2006 9 36 AM Subject: Re: Fw: lind avenue business park Kayren Any accident issues that you are aware of at the study I/S's you identified or on Lind Avenue SW? Also my Engineer's review of the City's web site showed the City's 2005 to 2010 TIP that might be dated. A copy of the current six year TIP would be mce. One TIP project in particular is #45 Lind Ave. SW 16th to 43rd. Does this project widen Lind Avenue to provide a TWLTL'' Or is the City considering re-striping the 4-lanes to 3 (my look at the traf1ic data indicates a 3-lane street as viable) Contact me if you have any questions. Mark -----Original Message ----- From: "Kayren Kittrick" <K~i1trid. u ci.k , .: , ,> To: ~j~d""i..'lr:1!"1lc a cumca:--t.ni:l> Sent: Wednesday. October 25. 2006 12:43 PM Subject: Re: Fw: !ind avenue business park Hi Mark. The first one did get to me. but I had an extraordinarily busy day. And this one has been the same. In looking it over. I am only concerned on the cflcct the proposed project would have on Lind and the SW 16th to Grady Wa) intersections. Mostly this will need traffic generation and probable traffic turning movement and routes. Will there be one or two driveways rcq uired for fire and general access? If the intent is to leave 23rd and 21st in the same condition (no development of frontages) remember that current code requires defending why not. rather than why the city needs it. So have the information regarding wetlands. lack of traffic, or any other justification ready when it is time to ask for a modification or even to ask for fee-in-lieu of improvements. So1Ty this took so long. @ Page I of2 12/11/2006 Kayren Kittrick Development Engineering Supervisor Public Works Inspections & Permits 425-430-7299 >>> "Mark Jacobs" <i,1kdrarticdw11Ka,, ,1ci> 10/25/2006 1 :15 PM>>> Kayren Sending again in case first e-mail did not get to you. Mark -----Original Message ----- From: "Mark Jacobs" <iakctraJ'liL· u comcc1,i ,;,!> To: "Kayren Kittrick" <Kkinrick II ci.rcnl<ll '"' ,,,> Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2006 I :44 PM Subject: !ind avenue business park > Kayren > > Attached is information on an warehouse (-60% )/office (-40%) park (the > plan > is still in flux) project. > > Please review the attached and let me kmm what the CoR will require in > the > TIA? > > Contact me if you have any questions. > > Mark > 206. 762.1978 > Page 2 of2 12/1112006 STATE OF WASHINGTON -DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION T R I p s SYSTEM ANNUAL TRAFFIC REPORT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUME STATE ---------------------------------- ROUTE FUNCT TRUCK PERCENTAGES 2002 2003 2004 2005 STATE ROUTE MILEPOST LOCATION COUPLET CLASS SNGL DBL TRIPLE TOTAL UNITS UNITS UNITS UNITS 167 006.52B BEFORE JCT N LEVEE RD 1 34000* 34000* 34000 167 .. 005.26 AFTER JCT SR 167 COUPLET C 1 21000 21000 20000" 20000 167 005.73 BEFORE RAMP SR 512 1 41000* 42000 167 005.98 AT SR 512 1 29000 30000 28000* 28000 167 006.44 AFTER RAMP SR 512 1 93000 96000 97000* 98000 167 007.03 AT SR 410 BRIDGE 1 55000* 56000 167 007.49 AFTER RAMP SR 410 1 79000* 80000 167 011.84 BEFORE RAMP ~LLINGSON RD 1 92000* 167 012. 26 AT ELLINGSON RD BRIDGE 1 82000* 1(,7 (;) 2 BC t\c'iE?. K.l,Y!P ::::::..L:NGSCN ;rn 1 91000* 167 C 1,1 . '14 !1:·"~'EH :U\..MP S.-~ lii V'E:l j l(Vi0()[, :.. 0 (, JO ,J 11 JODC 11'1000* J 67 015. r1 A": l ~,:'I-! ST N',I 1 5 '.HJ O 0 J ,J'JO ,J 9.-lC·OU 98000* i~ HJI 01G.~:c AF':'ER Rl'IJ'"IP l.;,Tl! OT NW l :}8000 1 1--:;.::,Q.:)>< 11 sooo 110000* 167 017.93 AT S 277TH ST 1 97000 103000* 103000 104000"' 167 018.24 AFTER RAMPS 277TH ST 1 113000 118000* 120000 122000• 16' 019.60 AT SR 516 BRIDGE l 87000 93000* 96000 97000* 167 019.93 AFTER RAMP SR 516 1 99000 105000* 109000 109000"' 167 021 . 31 AT 84TH AVE SE BRIDGE 1 83000 92000"' 94000 95000* 167 021.78 AFTER RAMP N CENTRAL AVE 1 109000 112000• 116000 119000* 167 02 2 . 4 0 ATS 212 ST 1 92000 96000* 98000 99000* 167 023.70 AT ADC LOCATION P6 1 111000• 113000"' 117000* 119000"' 167 024.77 AFTER RAMP SW 43RD ST 1 117000 119000* 120000 122000* ~ 167 027.16 BEFORE JCT SR 900 WYE CONN 1 38000* 38000 167 027 .18 AFTER JCT SR 900 WYE CONN 1 37000* 37000 167 027.27 BEFORE JCT SR 900 COUPLET WYE CONN 1 38000* STATE RO~TE NO 167 COUPLET PUYALP MILWAUKEE AVE TO SR 167 167COPUYALP ** 005.72 MILWAUKEE AVE BRIDGE*BEG ROUTE 1 21000 21000 21000* 21000 ** COUPLET SKETCH IN BACK OF BOOK • BASED ON ACTUAL COUNT + SOURCE OF TRUCK PERCENTAGES PAGE 14 7 Adopted 11 /0 I /()4 Table 7-1 _ 2005 -2010 Six-Year TIP-1"' Total Project Costs <>r<1viovs s,x,'r'u, Tou,1 Cos.11 20\;,, 2co~ 2007 2008: 2009 2010 P•rlocl Tot:af Cost 111-14 m TACOMA SEATTLE Preliminary Storm Drainage Report PREPARED FOR: Tarragon, LLC 1000 2nd Avenue, Suite 3200 Seattle, WA 98104-1074 (206) 233-9600 Contact: Murphy McCullough PROJECT: Cedar River Corporate Park 206200.10 PREPARED BY: Charles "Ted" Hill, E.I.T. Project Engineer Matt Budsberg Project Engineer REVIEWED BY: Connie Linden, P.E. Project Manager Paul B. McCormick, P.E., S.E. Principal December 2006 Civil Engineers • Structural Engineers • Landscape Architects • Community Planners • Land Surveyors • Neighbors I hereby state that this Preliminary Storm Drainage Report for Cedar River Corporate Park has been prepared by me or under my supervision and meets the standard of care and expertise that is usual and customary in this community for professional engineers. I understand that the City of Renton does not and will not assume liability for the sufficiency, suitability, or performance of drainage facilities prepared by me. Preliminary Storm Drainage Report PREPARED FOR: Tarragon, LLC 1000 2nd Avenue, Suite 3200 Seattle, WA 98104-1074 (206) 233-9600 Contact: Murphy McCullough PROJECT: Cedar River Corporate Park 206200.10 PREPARED BY: Charles "Ted" Hill, E.l.T. Project Engineer Matt Budsberg Project Engineer REVIEWED BY: Connie Linden, P.E. Project Manager Paul B. McCormick, P.E., S.E. Principal December 2006 TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE 1.0 Project Overview ............................................................................................. 1 1.1 Purpose and Scope ................................................................................ 1 1.2 Existing Conditions ................................................................................. 1 2.0 Conditions and Requirements Summary .............................................................. 2 2.1 Pumps .................................................................................................. 2 2.2 Pond .................................................................................................... 2 2.3 Wetlands .............................................................................................. 2 2.4 Frontage Improvements .......................................................................... 2 3.0 Off-Site Analysis .............................................................................................. 3 3 .1 Downstream Descriptions ........................................................................ 3 4.0 Flow Control and Water Quality Facility Analysis and Design .................................. 4 5.0 Conveyance System Analysis and Design ............................................................. 5 6.0 Special Reports And Studies .............................................................................. 6 7.0 Otherpermits ................................................................................................. 16 8.0 ESC Analysis and Design .................................................................................. 17 9.0 Bond Quantities, Facility Summary, And Declaration of Covenant .......................... 18 10.0 Operations and Maintenance Manual ................................................................. 23 11.0 Conclusion ..................................................................................................... 24 ", 1.0 PROJECT OVERVIEW 1.1 Purpose and Scope This report accompanies the civil engineering site grading and utility plans for site development of the proposed project, Cedar River Corporate Park, to be constructed on Parcel 3340400285, which is located in the City of Renton. Development includes construction of a parking lot, storm conveyance system, a 10 inch watermain extension through the site, an 8 inch sanitary main and side sewer to serve the proposed office facilities, and landscaping. Drainage from the site will be collected via a 12-, 18-, 24-, and 30-inch closed conveyance system and conveyed to a pump chamber. Drainage will then be pumped to a detention pond. Release from the detention pond will be controlled via two multi-orifice control structures and released to bioswales for treatment prior to release to the north and south wetlands at the property perimeter. This Technical Information Report (TIR) accompanying the civil grading and utility plans is being submitted to the City of Renton for review and approval. The storm drainage design conforms to the 2005 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM}. There are two wetlands bordering the site along with buffers that, for the most part, will not be impacted during construction. For the final site configuration, the treatment of the developed site stormwater will occur within the buffers, which is allowed under the City of Renton Municipal Codes 4-3-050 Critical Areas Regulations Section C. Due to the flat nature of the site, it is crucial to use the buffer of the wetland for the treatment of the stormwater via two bio-swales. There will be two bio-swales used to treat the stormwater for the site, one within the north buffer on the site and the other within the east buffer within the site. The next section will describe the wetlands in more detail. 1.2 Existing Conditions The subject site consists of an approximately 12.6-acre, roughly rectangular shaped site located between SW 21 51 Street and SW 23'd Street off of Lind Avenue in the City of Renton, King County, Washington (See SWPPP for Vicinity Map). The subject property is bounded to the north by approximately 1,080 feet of Category 2 wetlands and SW 21" Street, to the south by approximately 889 feet of category 3 wetlands, to the east by approximately 598 feet of private commercial development, and to the west by Lind Avenue for approximately 599 feet. (See SWPPP for Existing Conditions). The site consists of a relatively flat topography with an estimated maximum elevation change of 3 to 5 feet. The northern half of the site has an approximate elevation change of 3.5 feet across a horizontal distance of approximately 1,080 feet, flowing from the west to the east. The southern half of the site has an approximate elevation change of 3 feet across a horizontal distance of approximately 890 feet, flowing from the west to the east. The greatest estimated maximum elevation change is 5 feet across a horizontal distance of approximately 1,245 feet, flowing from the southwest corner to the northeast corner. The subject site is vegetated primarily with sparse grass, patches of miscellaneous brush, and localized small-diameter trees. 1 mmm11 2.0 CONDITIONS AND REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY The project stormwater system is subject to the City of Renton's requirement to meet the 2005 KCSWDM. All core requirements have been fulfilled and can be found within this report. No special requirements appear to be applicable to this report. 2.1 Pumps The site drainage will gravity flow to a pump vault, where the stormwater will be pumped to a detention pond. The pump chamber will be a pre-fabricated Utility Vault No. 816. Two 15 hp pumps are sized to pump site developed flows to the detention pond. The proposed pump system is a duplex system equipped with floats and a control panel to call lead and lag pumps on and off. The proposed control panel will be equipped with audio and visual alarms for pump failure or malfunction. The pump system will also be equipped with a connection for a portable backup generator. The control panel will also provide an auto dialer and message to maintenance staff in the event of pump malfunction or failure. The pump vault will be equipped with overflow pipe to the south wetland. See the following section for pump design and specifications. 2.2 Pond The proposed detention pond is sized using Level II criteria in accordance with the KCSWDM. In the existing condition, the site is divided into two drainage basins, which drain to the north and south to a Category 2 wetland to the north and a Category 3 wetland to the south. This drainage pattern will be maintained in the developed condition. Discharge from the pond is regulated via two control manholes used to convey discharge to two separate bioswales that convey and outlet discharge to the north and to the south. See Section 4 of this report for bioswale design. 2.3 Wetlands Two wetlands border the property, one to the north (Category 2) and one to the south and east (Category 3). The wetlands will be protected during construction activities. However, buffers, per discussions with City Staff (Ron Straka), will be graded to provide bioswales proposed as treatment facilities of the stormwater. Section 4-3-0SOC of City ordinance allows for this particular work to occur in wetland buffers. 2.4 Frontage Improvements Frontage improvements will consist of two driveway approaches for the site, and construction of a sidewalk along the frontage with applicable ADA accessibility. Frontage landscaping will also be provided per City of Renton requirements. 2 mmm11 .ROM.: FRX NO. :2539835009 Dec. 03 2006 10: 53RM Pl A§ , 1;;;,;;f;;fl;.;;:;;'C,...;l;.~.;l_, ___ :-:A-MV-;-:G-AL-:-:-E&•p:-:-~-F~-~C-:-O-R_~_H_w_E_S_T __ 12 _ 1 _ 01 . 10 _ 6 __ _ Attn:Ted Hill Quote# 5953 Fax: 253/383-2572 0 2, ,-{L -> Ref: City of Renton Storm Water Pumps ·1 -1 7t, "' Preliminary Budget Proposal The following proposal includes Pumps with Guide Rail Systems and Duplex Pump Control Panel System Design Point: 1125 GPM@ 30 FT. TDH Ted The ABS pumps I have selected can generate l 112 GPM @29.9 FT. IDH with 12 HP motors. lfwe have to meet the full 1125 GPM@ 30 FT I'll have to select pumps with 28 HP motors. 2ea. ABS model AFP 1546 M90 all iron submersible sewage pumps. hnpeller is 3" solids handling ContraBlock style with adjustable self cleaning spiral grooved wear plate. Dual mechanical seals with Silicon Carbide lower seal and Carbon vs Chrome Steel upper seal. Motor is 12 HP, Air filled, 1660 RPM, FM Labeled Explosion Proof, 360/3/60. 2ea. Guide rail systems with cast iron Base elbow, Stainless steel guide rails lll!d lifting chains I ea. Duplex pump control panel, Nema 4X Cabinet, UL Labeled with the following major components: );, Dead front cabinet door );, Circuit breaker for each Pump );, Control voltage transformer , HOA switch for each pump. );, Intrinsically safe relays for the float switches );, Alarm light and horn with push-to-test switches and horn silence switch );, High water alarm with Telemetry contacts );, Low water redundant off alarm with Telemetry contacts , Power fail alarm with Telemetry contacts );, Pump fail alarm with Telemetry contacts );, Seal fail alann with Telemetry conracts );, Motor heat sensor with manual reset );, Seal fail lights :, Lag pump start time delay >" GFl receptacle 120 volt, I-phase iyGnicipal ~.umpJ"ech Int:. 0 PurnpTech lr.r. lndu5trli:11 P.O. Box 365/S. 910 Lake St. Colfa)(, WA 99111-0365 12020 S,E. 32nd Street, Suite 112 Bellevue, WA 98005 Ph: (509) 397-6000 Ph: (425) 644-8501 Fax: (425) 562-9213 0 PunipTed. Inc~ 2425 S.E. Ochoco Poruaoo, OR 97222 Pn: {503) 659-6230 Fax: (503) 659-8718 Fax: (509) 397·2105 pumptech@i;:oltq:x;.com purnptech@pumptechnw.com inquiri@.s@pumptechnw.com WA CONTRACTORS# PUMPTl~148LF ELEC. CONTRACTORS # PUMP"fr99S05 ·. www.pumptechnw.com Packaged Systel'Tls D Pump Tedi Inc. 530 E. Broadway. Sul!e 8 Moses Lake, WA 98837 Ph: (509) 766·6330 Fax: (509) 766-6331 pumptech@gcpower.ne: OR CONTRAGIOAS # 154997 12/03/06 SUN 11:54 [TX/RX NO 7314] 'ROM ,: FAX NO. :2539835009 >-Anti condensation heater with thermostat ;, Power monitor with light ,> Lightning arrestor , Pump run lights , Generator n:ceptacle with Manual transfer switch Dec. 03 2006 10 : 53RM P2 , Telephone Auto Dialer with at least 5 channels ( alarms ) with ammmt of called phone mnnbers to yet be determined ;, Phone dialer surge arrestor ~ 5-Float switches with 50 ft. cords ;, I-Float holder bracket Contractor price for the above equipment ................................... $ 22,411.00 Note: motor cooling jackets available for$ 850.00ea additional cost • FOB Factory, full freight allowed to job site • Shipment estimated 10 to 12 weeks after receipt of purchase order and approved submittals • Submittals ready estimate 2 to 3 weeks after receipt of approved purchase order • Purchase of above equipment subject to Pumptech, Inc. standard terms and conditions • Pricing valid for 30 Days Don McCurtain Thank you for the opportunity to offer Pmnptech, Inc. equipment and services Please call me with any questions or concerns 12/03/06 SUN 11 :54 [TX/RX NO 7314] ROM FAX NO. :2539835009 Dec. 03 2006 10: 54RM P3 the upper and lower st:al faces, any system f9(1Uiring .a pressure differential to seat the seal and ensure sealing. Bearings: Each pump shaft. shan rotate on permanently lubricated. greased bearings. The upper bearing shan be a deep grooved ball b@arlng and the lower baarings shaU be heavy duty double row angular contact ball bearing. Bearings sttan be of sufficient size and propeny spaced ID transfer all radial and axial loads ID the pump housing and minimize shaft deflection. L-10 bearing life shall be a minimum of 50,000 hours at flows ranging from "% of BEP flow to 1 % 1im8$ BEP flow (BEP is bM.t &ffici@ncy point). MOTOR The motor housing shall be gray cast iron, ASTM A48 Cls£S 40 81'1d the motor shall be of the squirrel-cage induc:tion shell type deSi9n, hou&M in an air filled, water tight chamber (NEMA. B type) and shall be capable of continuous submerged operation underwater to a depth of 65 feet. The stator windil'\g& and st.;;ttor leads shall be insulated with moisture resistant Class F insulation rated for 155°C (311 °F). The stator shall be heat-shlink fitted into the stator housing. The use of bolts, pins or other fastening devices requiring penetration of the stator housing i$ uf'Jaceeptable. TM motor .shall be designed for continuous duty handling pumped media of 40°C (104 °F) and eopsble of l>andllng up to 12 evenly spaced ,tar1s per hour. Tho 5ervioe factor (as defined by NEMA) ghall b@ a minimum of 1 .10 (1.0 for M90/4). The motor shall have a voltage tolertmoe of +/~ 10% fmm nominal. The rotor bars and short circuit rings sh.all be made of ca.st aluminum. The motor shall be designed for continuous duty, completely submerged or unsubmerged. fer wu J~Mor,gaa (fiil;y r,:~ veplk:aUons a cooli=:9 jo;kat th+II ha titted t th.a 11Reler kl ellt1 thf'.! fr mpod ilYlfiil Ci8 h oiF&ulCllad aJaYRi ,.,. mor tier u aliR8 • tr e fi1Fmriskms :mder the ·cool" 11 k)'lil•w,,r &&atls:12 Clf #lie opooifrHli,n~ The explosion proof variant shall be FM approved for uS8 in NEC AFP 1546 with M2 Motor POW1tr Cables: The power cables shall be sized according to NEC and CSA stand;ird& and shell be of sufficient lftngth to reach the junction box without requiring splices. The outer jac.ket of Ulo ceble shall be Oil PJSistant chlomprttne rubber, and shall be capable of continuous sut::irnefg&d operation underwa.ter to a depth of 65 feet cable EnllylJuncllon Chambe<: Tre cable entty deSign snall not require :spedfic: torque requirements to insure a watertight seal. The cable entry sl>all consist of a cylindrical elastomer grommet, flanked by stainless steel washers. A cable cap incorporating a strain relief shall rnnunt M lh8 t:.1ble 1tntry bo&& compressing the grommet ID to the cable whi~ the grommet OD seals against the bore of the atble entry_ The entry as part of the motor snail be FM approved for ue,e In NEC Cl9s& I, Division I, Groups C & D hazafdous locations. As afl option a removable explosion proof junction chamber shall be available. The jundion ch.amber with terminal board shall fit 10 the cable entry boss. The junction Chamber sh.all be equipped with e removabk!i cover allowing for cable, removal or voltage change without opening the motor. TIie junction dlamber shaU be sealed from the motor by means of a sealing gland. Class I, Division I, Group& C & 0 hazardous locations. / .. ; 0o-r, 4,,., .2 Q»<,K-"-·/ 1/11,&,;.1-/H!,.,<ff Cooling System: Each un~ shall be ab1" to be pmvid8d with an 1 / &. adequately designed cooling system. The cooling jodrnt shaU, r,,,-r LLo(i!t -~ a.u-. surround the stator housing, thereby providing heat dissipation of the rT / r.T 1 / /Oll · motor. Impeller back vanes is.hall o,rovkle the necessary circulation of the ouml)OO media through the eoolnf] )acket_ The impel!Rr and mitck plate interface ~hall incof'pQrate dimenaiooel tolerances designed 1o prevent damaging particles from entering the cooling Jackal. In addtt.lon, the back of the lmpall8r shall incorporate a cuttm design whi<.h ensures that stringy or fibrous material can not enter the cooling Jacket. The cooling jacket shaU be a non-dog design by virtue of these features. and clean out ports on ll\e cooling jael<.ct shall not be required. Provisions for external cooling can be provided as an option. Thennal Proteetio.-.; Each phase of lhe motor shall contain a bi- metallic temperature monitor in the upper portion of ttie 5tator windings. These thermal switches ahal be connected in SEtries and set to open at 140°C +/-5°C. n,ey shall be connected to the control panel, and used in conjunction with and supplemenhil to external motor ovefload protectton. Seal Failure Early Warning System: An elec:triall probe shall b8 provided in the oil chamber for detecting ttie presence of water in the oil chamber. This probe shall be provkkld for both standard and explosion proof versions.. A solid~state device mounted in the pump oontrol panel or in a S8parata endosure shall Sffl'ld II low voltage, low ampera~ gignal to the probe. If water enMrs the oil dlamber, the probe shaH signal the solid sletEI relay in the control panel. The relay shall then energize a warning light on the control panel. or cause the pump to be shut down (optional). Float switches, dual probes, or any other monitoring devices located in the sbntor housing are not consk18fed to be early warning systems, and &hall not be c.onsidered equal. ---·-·-- 12/03/06 SUN 11:54 [TX/RX NO 73141 "ROM FAX NO. :2539835009 Dec. 03 2005 10:54AM P4 ~[?Jr.~ , .2..._ ABS Model AFP 1546 M90/4 submersible non.clog wastewater pump(s). The pump(s) sli;•" be supplied with a mating cast iron six inch di&charge connection and be capable of delivering 1112 U.S. GPM at a total dynamic head of 29.3 feet. An additional point on the same curve shall be llQ!! U.S. GPM at a total dynamic head of 24 i-t. Shut off head shall be 58 feet (minimum). The motor shall be an integral part of the pump unit. The motor shall be 12 HP cor,n..cted for operation on a 460 volt. throe phase, 60 hem electrical supply service. Pumps intended for wet p~ installation shall be supp,ed with a sta.-n:1 cast iron guide rail system with an integrated six inch discharge elbow. Pw~pG iRtBR riilaft fer 9F) JJk: iRe1ellaliaA Bl=lall he 1r111i,lpliud urittt =a steal p;g1 nl:iRg fl:eFRe. Each pump unit shall be fitted with a stainless s-1 chain assembly, 20 feet long for lifting the pump. The working load rating of the lifting system shall be a minimum of 50% greater than tt-.e pump weight. Each pump motor shell be equipped with 65 feet of power and contml cable sized in accordance with NEC standards PUMP DESIGN nie pump(•) sholl be C<lpable of 11.lndllng r.>w unscreened sewage, storm water, and other similar sclid5-laden fluids \Arithout dogging. The discharge base and ttlbow shall be permanentty installed in the wet well arn:I connected to the discharge piping. In order to prevent binding or sepa,.atioo of the pump from the guide raif system, the pump(s) shall connect to the guide rail base automatically and firmly, guided by one guide bar (two bars optional) extending frnm th" top of the station to the discharge base elbow. Systems using guide cable in lieu of rigid guide ba,s or pipes shall not be eonsid9red acctaptabl&. Th@ sliding guide bradcet shall be a .separate part of the pumping unit, capable of being at1ached to standard ANSI or DIN pump Hanges so that the base is intcrchangeabk: witl'I other pumps .and not limrted to 8 specific pump. Non standard flange dimensions shall not be oonsidered acceptable. "there shell 00 no n~ for !)8toonnel to enter the wet WBlt to remove or reinstml the pump{s). A field mpleceable Nitrile rubMr profile gask&t or o-fing shall .accompli&h positive sealing of the pump flangetgukte rail bracket to the discharge elbow. Metal to metal contact between the pump and discharge base elbow as a means of sealing.shall not be consK:lered ace&ptable. No portion of the pump shall bear directly on the floor of the sump. The guide rail system shaU be avaaabte in an optional non-sparking version, approved by Factory Mutual for use in NEC Class 1 , DMslon 1, Group C&O hm:ardous loe.atit,ns PUMP CONSTRUCTION Major pump componenb shall be of grey ceist lroo, ASTM A--48, Class 40, with smooth surfaces devoid of porosity or other irregularities. All exposed nuts and botts shall be AISI type 316 stainfess Gtoot eortstruc:tion. All metal $Urlaee6 coming into contact with the pumped media (other than the stainless stee/: components) ghall bG protocted by a fndo,y appllM gpray coating of acrylic dispersion zinc phosphate primer witti a high solid& ™'° part epoxy paint finish on the exterior of the pump_ Sealing d-eslgn for the pumpJmotor assambly shall incorporate M19lal to metal contact between machined surfaces. Critical mating surfaces where a waht:rtight seal ts n,quired shall b8 machined and fitt&d with Nltril& t"tr Viton I\Jbber 0-ring.&. Sealing will be the l'Et5ult of controlled comprttSSion of rubber 0-rings in two plan&& and 0-ring contact of four sides without requiring a specific torque limit Rectangular cross sectioned gask8ts requlring specific torque limits to aehi@Wt etimpMS&ion ahall not be oonsidered adecauate or equal. No secondary r.ealing compoun(IS shtllll be used. '4PP~R. S~it-L 19-/,;1 6/~ ( JJ >d, I L "' ""' CJ'J-R.13 tr! "-- AFP 1546 with M2 Motor Paga ~~-'-o_f_2~~ Impeller: The impeller shall be o! gray c:ut iron. ASTM A-48, Ci83S. 40 and shaU be of the serm..open. non-,ciogglng dynamically balal'leed dual vane design capable of passing a minimum of 3~ diametBr spherical sor.is. The impeller shall have a slip fit into the motor shaft and drive key .and shall be fastened to the shafi by a stainless steel bolt which i& mechanically prevented from loosening by a posiliwtly angaged ratcheting washer assembly. Self Cleenlng wear Plate; (CB System) The pump shall be equipped vtril:h a self clear'ling weer plate constructed from gray cast iron, A$1M A-48, Class 40. The -wear plate shall be mounted to the volute with four stainless steel/brass adjusting SC'Jews to pennit dOse tOleranoe adjustment between the wear plate aoo impeller fot maximum pump efficieucy. The wea, plate shall be easily adjustabk!, without ,equilin:g disassembly of the pump. The wear p~ shall be designed with a wave shaped Inlet and an outward gparal V~ _groove on the IEioide facing the impeller, to shred and ~ stringy solids outward from ~he irnpell8r and through the pump disctnnge. The use of non-ad.1ustabl8 waar rings shall not bl;: cormdered equal. Pump Volute; The pump volute ~hall be single pieoo groy cast iro(I, ASTM MB. Class -40, non-eon-centric design with centerline -discharge. Passages shaU be smooth and large enough to pass any solids which may enter the irnpener. Minimum discharge slze shall be as specified. The discharge flange design shall permit attachment to standard ANSI or DIN flanges/.appurtenances. Rotating Assembly:: The rotating assembly (impeller, shaft. and rotor) 31181 be tfynamically bahmced such that undue vibration m other uns.et:ishidory dlaractertstic:s will not result when the pump is in operation. Shaft; The pump shaft and motor shaft shall be an integral unit Each $haft $hall be of 420 stanlles.s steel material and adequately designed to meet the maximum torque required at any normal 1;7,tart- up C¢11dition or operating point in the system. Maximum deflection shall not exceed .OOT at the IOW8r seal. Each pump shaft .,;hall have a polished fini:sh and ha-ve accurately machined shoulders to accommodate beafings, seals i!nd impeller. Carbon steel or chrome plated shafts shall not be considered adequate or equal. Mechunical Seals: Each pump shall be equipped with a tandem mecha".ccll shaft seal system consisting of two totally independsnt seal aSS8ffltllias_ The seals shall operate in a lubricant reservoir that hydro-dynamically h.Jbricatas the lapped seal face& at a constant rate. The lower, primary seal unit. located between the pump and the lubricant. dlamber. shaU contain one stationary industrial dt.rty silicon-carbide $831 ling and one rotating industrial duty sillcon- carbtdlt :seal ring_ The upper, secondary seol unit, located between the lubricant chamt>et and motor housing, shall contain one stationary earbon · and one rotating g,eal ring m.ad:e from corrosion resistant I. Each seal interface shall be hek:1 in con own system. The seals shall not require routitte maintenance, or adjustment, and shall not be dependent on the direction af rotation for proper seattng. Each pump shall be provieled wittl a lubricant chamber for the shafl: sealing systttm which 5hu~I provide superior heat transfer and maximum seal cooling. The lub~ chamber shall b6 designed to prevent overfilling, and to provide lubricant exponstOO capacity. The drain and inspection plug shall have a pQSmve anti-leak seal, and shall b8 easily aCC8Ssible from the outsxie of the purnp. The seal system shell not rely upon the pumped media for lubrication and shall not be damaged wtien the pump i& run dry. The fo/kMing 5"81 types shall not bo considerod acceptable or fKIUBI: ~15: of proprietary design, or seals manufactured by other than majOf independent seal manufacturing companies. Seats requiring set screws. pins. or other mechanical locknlg devices. to hokj the ~ in placa. conventional dou~e mechanical seals containing enher a common £ingle or double spring acting between --=-•w.--• 12/03/06 SllN 11:54 [TX/RX NO 73141 I FAX NO. :2539835009 al:,s AFP 1546 60 HZ o.S-'11--.o.b--+----1---l-----l-+--f----- A-~ 11(), ----1------. L-----~-.___. 1---...__ c::._ ' 25 ---->--;;;c,._. " ...... 67. ----Ii!! 't-,...__ '< ......... " "-20-~--·--··· ~,Ul t-,...__ t-,...__ " " ......_ '-2 --.::-':"-, ' -.... 1 , P2 EhP. 1 12 . --- 4 ---~=-• , .... : ~ 1----4 -. 2 .. ,; 20 . : ' .. C 100 200 $00 40050060070080090010001100120013001-4001500 Q[USg.p..m.) Operat~ng data 9peefflaltton FloW 1112 US g.p.m. Head Efficiency 68.4% Shaft_.- NPSH. 14A ft Auid Temperature 39'F Nature of..,..... No. of pun,ps -----··--- Pump dab Typo AFP 1546 60 HZ ..... Series AFP M1.ME3 (1kW-22kW) Im- N° of vanee. 2 lmp,8Jler &iza Free pee,~ge 3• --Di'1,,d"IBrge port DN1SO Dec. 03 2006 10:55AM PS Testnorm Hydraulic lnatib.ita 2005-06-14 29.3ft. 12 hp Water Singk't head pump ABS 2-ChanMI ContraBloek Impeller 9.25 inch 5• -----------------1------------------------ Motor data Rated voltage 460V Frequoncy Retod powor P2 12.1 hp Nomraspeed Number of pol&s • Effioency Power factor OJ\75 Rated ..._ Starting cumuit 65.BA """"''°"'"" ST:fllrttng torque 4S.1 lbr1t ~"'-Insulation d988 C ABS IBHerYOS ltti rigl1L to~.._., l2ala and t:&amrmkllaalllfthal..R pr'D" ncflctt anti can nc,I bee held. 1 ; .sit*, io,"the-l,$llt d inn::wm11tJoo COfflSined In lhm sol'lw&re. 12/03/06 SUN 11:54 60Hz 1680 t)'>m 80.5% 16A 36.2 lbfft ·- ABSEL PRO 1.7.1 I 21Xl&-03--17 [TX/RX NO 73141 "ROM FAX NO. :2539835009 Dec. 03 2005 10:55AM P5 Curve number ----- Pump performance curves AFP 1546 60 HZ Refemnce curve AFP1546 Dens~ 62.43 lb/fl' Flow Vi~rl;Y 0.0000169 fl'/5 Teolnonn Hydraulic Institute --DN1SO Rat@d Speed 1660 rpm Frequency 60 Hz Dato 2006-12-02 NPSH 1112 us g.p.m. Hood 29.3 ft Ralodpo,,,er 12hp Hydraulk efficiency 68.4% 14.4 ft H fft'l-r---,---,---,--,---,---,,--,---,--,.---r--,---,---,--,---,---,--,---,,--, 88-+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+----t---l---t---tl---f----· · ----t--+---+---+------1 ; --·--·--~' ""' -.. -····-·--t----+----- 1H "1---+---+---+-~-~---'"·-+----+----+----t--+---+---+-- 4,-+---+----tl---t--+---+--+----t--l---+---+---+---+----t--+--+---+---+---+----t ~~~~-+-+-+-~-r-~-t----i---i-,--t---t--+-+-+-~-r-~~ 16-, 12-1---~·-·· t- 8-~--~--I- --- •+~-c.,-c::·+-= :_,_·-+-+--+--1---t--+---+----+---+--t--l-- 1'I (%] Hyd:um ie effi s: 7: 60- ney 2 4 ' • . ' - > • , _4 .. ~+-~·~2--t -4-~--+-""11,'b~--+-+--t--t----i--t-+--t--t----1--t----1- 30,+----+-_,,,.F----1----t-•••~--M~•'> t--------• -----• -+---+--I---+--+----+----+-••• r•• , . -----:-~ .-20 _t--·-i'~-+---+---+--1---~ -----,------__ ,,_ • 1u ,' O 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800. -900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 Q [US g.p.m.J Impeller$~ I N~ of vanes -----·· 1·1~~ rSoild ~ I R•_v_is~~ 200S.OfM41 9.25 inch I 2 2~hannel CootraBlock impellM I 3• _ ASS ~ the rightfo chMge any data and dlmeMiol'I$ ~ ~ ~ ;11nd aa1·niiif'iiioo,J,-;;;.,n, iii4oai-iiiii,i""'""""'iici ... ~of lntormat,on==------'.A.8SEL PRO 1 :r-:, t 2005-03-17 a:intalnM 1ri trli8 ~re. 12/03/06 SUN 11: 54 [TX/RX NO 73141 ROM FRX ND. :2539835009 Dec. 03 2005 10:55AM P? abs ----- AFP 1546 60 HZ AFPIM1--ME3 Robust, reliable ABS submersible sewage purnps from 1 .3 to 30 kW for the dewatering of buildings and sites in privaht, comrM<tial and communal areas. and in industry_ Water pressure-tight encapsulated fully flood-pmof motors in •tandard or explosion-proof versions. HydraulicS with CB (COntraBlock) system or vortex impeUe,s. can also be suppl1ecl with cooling jacket on 11:lquest fo.,. dry sump applications. Capacity up to Head, max. Type: AFP 1546 60 HZ Technical data Delivery rate Delivery head Hydr. efficiency Total efficiency Shaft power Speed lmpellf:llr type Motor output Voltage Frequency : 60 Hz Suction outtet Discharge outlet 820m3/h 92m : 1112 US g.p.m. : 29.3 ft :68.4% :55.1 % : 12 hp : 1660 rpm : 2--Channel ContraBlodi: impeller : 12.1 hp :460V : 5• PN 10 : DN150 ABS reservM the rigti[ to dlengit. any data and d~·wilhoul prht l'lOtiGe and c;¥1 r.:iit tic, hOtc:I 1e:oc.RiUe b Uwr -of lnfomia1i0rl contained !n trils ~re. ABSEL. PRO 1.7.1 / 2005-03-17 12/03/06 SUN 11:54 [TX/RX Nil 7314] ROM,: FAX NO. :2539835009 Dec. 03 2005 10:55AM PB ~a_! s.!i_ l~t !_ ~Ff> __15~ 6_ t!a£S~if!§t_sil!_C1.!_io_ri _ _ _J----;No;;::'---"'AN"--'--'M"'.22"".2c.c9.::.0 _-.::.03,__---I Dimension sheet WET-WELL Installation c, r· 0 '",. -~ (50 Hz) T yr, \\r'wir ht T YPl' Weifdlil Tip,) Punl:: Pi:-•_;c, (lb] M9011. H8.5 MMJ/J. Vl5 8 111. ll II. 789.S M3H/J} 789. r:., (60 Hz) I yp l.1ewirht Type Weiqt,1 ll •:i) 30 7 78.8 78.B /8.8 H . . 11; I '~ I -C ;-: 22.4 it~- 1 1 I•, . rm -3.3-1--+4- l~,;l,Jt, Llllk. 16 II/ 111 (U.S.) min ':,cr,oci1t,'.,ffr,,Jr") rn,11 '.:,ump oµer11nq [);rr,pr,,;i\"ini min. h111ci111 min <l(H_•,·l l)l"U ,J,:l µl'L() Larqeor min du pui:ard Tir,n µo,d·, Peso -3.9 12.2 (lh) (i) M'IOC,/1. ~) IVi rn.1 M90/I, )05.8 18.8 M /':,IL 189.':i 28.B M3':i/6 ,as.I ll:!.8 • fOr Skt-Holz- schraube 10 x 70 Oilbel ~12 11.2 9.4 6" PN16 OIN2633 Uew1cnt: Oeinhaltet Pu1npe u11d llolterung W,~i<Jlol lru.1 uU..:1., IJ'J111p ,,,nJ ~_;lrrk•· IJ1·1Jr.h:I II rir·,.o in(l.,li1' il fH'17r, ,nr1,rm<'riio rr-,.,~: lndt,yl" h<Ht1ho y 1ii'ifJ 11oir1;;: 1'1omnP F>t routi:=;;;pm, 6" :r: ~J '- D .,.; ' fius:.-Allqerneintoleru11Le11 11atli D1N!680 "1T81b ' General folrroncr,$ tor (!'Vilinq::: i11 Ull lo DINl680 fiTHlt [ TollerarirQ gPnnnli d1:>ll~ ru':i"il111i '~etorido D1N168Q lilhh lJ Tol~ran(ia:. ~.,hf'ril!~,; µurn la iurid1c160 scg di:-fl1Mb80-(ii>,1 1, T o\1>ronu, g~n~t,"'..\e de l(.I londcr1e sclcn C Nltt:c r Ir, Ir, 12/03/06 SUN 11:54 [TX/RX NO 7314) ROM.: Ra*I power 12.1 hp 1.4 -·· 1.3 FAX NO. :2539835009 Dec. 03 2005 10 : 57AM P9 Frequency 60 Hz --·--------------1660rpm Numbe<of- 4 --460V DO!O 2006-12--02 P{hp] -+-,=:_-+---135 1.2 +----+--·---··-t-----t-----+------/-~-1--30 Loading P1 (hp] P2 [hp] l[A) gff [%] cos n [rpm] M Pbffll , 1.1 -27.5 1 o.a+----f-~-~--t ••• 1 20 0.6 12.5 -·-------········-f---j 10 --7.5 ' ------1 5 0.1 /_ .. -----~ ---+---+---+----+I-__ ~---=+ -.-2.5 1 0 ------.. -·- 20 40 60 80 100 120 ------------25% 50% 75% No load 0.7315 3.765 7.08 10.67 0 3.017 6.035 9.052 100% 1125 % 15 20.23 12.07 i 1509 5.727 6.618 8.849 ___ -· 11.89 16.04 , 22.38 0 80.14 85.24 84.82 80.49 ' 74.58 0.1196 0.5325 0 7488 ·o:8403 1794 1778 1754 1718 0 8.912 18.07 21:-68 0.8749 , 0.8462 1659 I 1563 --~1~3=s~.2~---·-· r so.69 0.3193 c.-•~[%~]~---+--------1.202 2.569 4.561 i ~018IT,trlce clCCOrd-i-ngL' 7to'VD=;E~0~5~30=T"'1~1~2!-.84=7for~ra~ted"'-pow--e-, L_ __ _ -17 .. 813 ··1-1316 " ----' i ~~~n: °',,..;·i ·1 :.f;~ -;.; I ~.247~: ~.-. I -r ASS roserYOS tf10 rig:htto change anydeta end di~-wttf>out poor notll":9 ~cannot be l'lelo ,e.,x,,.JIN bthe LDl8cl I~ ecintained ABSEL PRO ·1.7 .1126c:is.6i:i·7- 1n tnlB OOftWaf'Q. 12/03/06 SUN 11:54 [TX/RX NO 7314] FAX NO. :2539835009 Dec. 03 2006 10: 57AM P10 abs ----- AFP 1546 60 HZ AFPIM1-M!c3 Robust, reliable ABS submersible sewage pumps from 1.3 to 30 kW for the dewt11ering of buildings and 6ites in privallO, commercial and communal al'eas and in Industry. Water pressure-li9ht encapsulated fully fl~ motors in standard or explosion-proof versions. Hydraulics with CB (Contr.aBlock) system or vortex impellers. Can al60 be supplied with cooling jacket on request for dry sump applications. Gapacit)' up to Head, ma)(. Type: AFP 1546 60 HZ Technical data Delivery rate Delivery head Hydr. efficiency Total efficiency Shaft poww Speed Impeller type Motor Output 1 Voltage Frequency : 60 Hl': Suction ouHet Discharge outlet 820m3/h 92m : 1112 USg.p.m. : 29.3 ft ·.68.4% : 55.1 % : 12 hp : 1660 rpm : 2~hannel CorrtraBloci< impeller :12.1t,p :460V : 5' PN 10 : DN150 A6S !'0$Crve:$ the riQht to Change any data and dimensiomi Wdhcd priof" 00009 and can nor be he'd ~ ·b 1he uae ~ lnlottnaition corrt1,i11.ed in this sottw.re. A8SEL PRO 1.7.1 / 200&-03-ii' 12/03/06 SUN 11: 54 [TX/RX NO 7:!14 J !Si COST-EFFECTIVE PUMPING Submersible Pumps AFP Series Models AFP 0831 -AFP 2006 Robust, reliable sewage pumps from 2 hp to 31 hp for pumping sewage and wastewater in municipal, commercial and industrial applications . · 3" to 8" For wastewater, sewage, and sludge containing solid or fibrous particles Hydraulic design with ' ContraBlock® Solids Handling System or vortex impellers Water jacket cooling system as option for dry installation Automatic, continuous seal leakage and motor temperature monitoring Highly reliable, even under continuous operating conditions High performance and output Available in standard and explosion proof versions ' ' .' 4.5149 U.S. 07.02 6DHz I I ContraBlock® Impeller Vortex Impeller Two Channel CB-Impeller Two Channel Closed 2 Innovative Engineering Meeting the Needs of the Municipal and Industrial Wastewater Markets pumping flow through suction Superior Solids Handling ContraBlock® System (CB) The ContraBlock® System was developed by ABS to pump typical wastewater solids without clogging. This system is used in the 3" through 6" AFP waste water pumps. The CB System utilizes the combined effects of these various components: 1. Open single or two channel impeller with sloped deflector edge at the impeller blade. 2. Adjustable bottom plate with sharp spiral shearing edges. 3. Large suction inlet with wave-shaped tearing edges. 4 Coarsely toothed shearing ring on the upper side of the impeller. Vortex Impellers Vortex impellers are offered for special applications, including: D Liquids containing entrained air or gas. D Gentle pumping of sensitive materials. LJ Low flows with stringy solids content. Monitoring System Temperature Monitoring For Motor Shutdown l. Bi-metallic switch in stator winding, each phase Electronic Moisture Leakage Check System 2. Di-electrode in motor and oil chamber for warning or shutdown Leakage Detection (DI System) The ABS DI Sealminder leakage detection system is an electronic moisture detection system. If water_ should enter the pump motor or oil chamber, the probe activates a warning light, audible alann or telemetering system. This warning allows ample time to repair the pump before water damages the motor. All AFP models contain a probe in the seal oil chamber. Thermal Control System (TCS) All AFP series pumps are equipped with thermal protection sensors in each phase of the stator. If the motor is subjected to overheating, the sensors will signal the control panel to shut the motor down, preventing costly damage. Reliability Regular inspections are minimized because the DI and TCS systems give a reliable indication that an inspection is needed regardless of the number of hours these units run. When activated, both of these systems can shut the motor down before costly damage can occur. ABS control panels monitor the sensors and provide maximum protection for the motor. Simple and inexpensive installation of the AFP ContraBlock® pump. 3 AFP 0831 to 1034 AFP Series 0031 ... w 0834 ... w 1031 ... w 1032 .. J§ 1034 ... w o/J = Vortex impeller AFP 0831 to 1032 AFP Series 0831 ... 'W 1031 .. .10' 1032 .. J0' VJ= Vortex impeller 4 250 200 100 BO 60 50 40 € 30 § I 20 10 B 6 5 4 3 200 100 BO 60 50 40 g 30 § I 20 10 B 6 5 4 3 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.8 1 I I I I 11 10 4 · ". ,e • 10~ 214E91e I I I 11 e , . o,. " " 4 5 6 8 10 0.3 0.4 0.50.6 0.8 1 I I I I I I " 2 -6 o " ' " I '° 1 6 08 4 s 6 a 10 ·--··--- AFP VORTEX (2 & 4 POLE) Vsec 2 3 4 5 6 8 10 I JI 1 '-......_ - ' - ~~r--... ~ DN 80/3" to DN 100/4" 20 30 40 50 60 SO 100 I I I I I' i"- ~ " \ ~ ' ~I\ ' ' ' \ ' I V 200 I ~ '- ~ ~ ~ ~ '- ~ 50 40 30 20 10 ]: 5 4 3 2 20 30 40 50 60 BO 100 200 300 400500000 8001000 2000 3000 .. (USGpm) AFP VORTEX {6 POLE) I/sec 2 3 4 5 6 8 10 ' ' ''II 20 30 40 50 60 80 100 I I I I I'' 200 ' '- ~ 50 40 30 20 I g ~ 10 ]: ~~~ ~ ' ' ' ' " ' \ 'I. ' \'\ i I \.c V I 20 30 40 50 60 80 100 200 300 400500600 8001000 (USGpm) ~ - - - 5 4 3 2 AFP 0841 to 1547 AFP Series 0841 ... ©llll 0844 ... ©llll 1040 ... ©~ 1041 ... ©@ 1042 ... ©@ 1047 ... ©~ 1048 ... ©@ 1049 ... ©~ 1541 .. ©18l 1546 ... ©llll 1547 ... ©~ ~~ = ContraBlock.® System AFP 0841 to 2006 AFP Series 0841 ... ©@ 1040 ... ©18l 1041 ... ©@ 1042 ... ©~ 1047 .. .(~@ 1541 . .cc;~ 1546 ... ©18l 1547 ... ©:i';l 2006 ... ?2((;; © Bl = Contra Block® System ~(G = 2 Channel Closed DN 80/3" to DN 200/8" 300 200 100 60 60 50 40 ! 10 1 8 6 5 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.8 l I I I I I 0844 -4 Pt1IP. e l' l,q . 1( 0 4 P)IE 084" 4 Pol<ci AFP CB (2 & 4 Pole) """ ' 5 6 6 10 I I I I 1048 -4 Pole - 1(141 -4 Pole ~~ ~~ ,0 I ' I'---- ' = ~'" ' " -....... ' ' ,0 40 50 60 60 100 200 I I I I I --~ - I ' ' ' ' I 1547 4 Pole " f '\. - ' 1\ -'\ ' -- \~ 12, - t'.. ' \ \ - 4 Pole I 4 --·----·-~------+--+--+-+-+-+-+-+--1--------'----1--+-+-,-++-<-I----~ 3 -+--+--+-+-+++-------l---1---1---1--1---1-1--l------l-----l--(-(--l--HH--l----+-___j- 4 5 6 8 10 20 30 40 50 60 80 100 ~------------------~----- AFP CB (6 Pole) "'"' 0.3 0.4 0.50.6 0.8 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 10 200 100 80 60 50 40 g 30 § I 20 I I ' . 10 1 · +, II II I I I I I I 11 i I • 1':,,1/ SCo 11:,L! (,·-,,]·· 200 300 400 500 600 600 1000 20 30 40 50 60 80 100 I I 11 2006 . 6 Pole I .... --...__" ..... ;:-:::: ... '\ ' ~ ,,, ' ,000 3000 200 '- - - \ -- - 50 40 30 20 10 5 I I 11 \ ~ ~ - 114o~~P~1.j ~ ~ 4 10 8 6 5 4 3 > I I I 0 I e 0 4 5 6 8 10 ' 20 30 40 50 60 BO 100 (USGpm) ~---------··-·---·-- "' 1546-6P le ~ 3 ' ' 1541 -6 Pole 2 \I ' - 200 300 400 500000 8001000 2000 3000 5(1 40 30 20 i i 10 5 4 I g I 5 AFP1 Features All models available as explosion proof, FM & CSA approved for Class I, Division 1, Groups C & D locations. Upper rotor shaft ball bearing -----t""---- with permanent maintenance- free lubrication Air-filled motor , Watertight cable entry with cable gland and strain relief Maintenance-free oversized double row ball bearing is ________ _oc,,,"""l~irf':i permanently lubricated Upper mechanical shaft seal ANSI flange for horizontal or vertical guide rail mounting Dynamically balanced open non-clog impeller with chamfered edge Bi-metallic thermal overload protection incorporated into each phase of motor Dynamically balanced rotor and shaft assembly Optional cooling jacket for continuous dry running under full load Stator insulated against heat and moisture to Class F, 155°C All 0-Ring static sealing DI Sealminder electronic seal monitor probe Oil chamber Silicon carbide lower mechanical seal Adjustable spiral bottom plate with waved cutting edge Spiral bottom plate adjustment screw 6 Optional motor and materials of construction allow the user the ahility tu match the pump with the applil.:atiun. Whether ii be continuous d111y submersible ur dry pit operntion, ABS has a pump for every requirement. Optional Cable Entries Watertight cable entry with cable gland and strain relief Sealed junction chamber with terminal board The rugged construction of ABS submersible pumps make it the ideal choice for tough pumping environments. AFP Submersible Pumps for every application l __ AFP pumps are compact submersibles which may be installed in either wet or dry pits. AFP submersible pumps are ideal for use in dry pits because they continue to run even if the dry pit floods. When used in dry pits, the optional cooling jacket keeps the motor cool. AFP pumps are suitable for both fixed and transportable applications, and can be mounted either vertically or horizontally. There are four basic types of installations of the AFP series pump. Custom designed mounting systems are also available. • Fixed Wet Installation: Using the patented ABS Guide Rail System, the pump is lowered into the liquid, guided by a single guide rail tube. As the pump nears the bottom, it is automatically brought into perfect alignment with the discharge connection sealed against the base. • Fixed Dry Installation, Horizontal: Using the motor and volute mounting brackets, the pump is bolted to a horizontal surface, and the suction and discharge connections are bolted to the pump flanges. • Fixed Dry Installation, Vertical: Pump is mounted on a vertical dry pit stand, with a suction elbow attached to the suction flange. Discharge piping is bolted to the pump discharge flange. • Transportable Configuration: Pump is supplied with a stand and discharge elbow for connection to a discharge hose. When equipped with optional cooling jacket, the pump motor need not be submerged for proper cooling. Transportable pumps are used for temporary bypass work, emergencies, flood control, etc. 7 AFP 60 Hz Technical data Type Phase Impeller Discharge P2 P1 RPM Amps Weight lbs HP Kw 230V 460V 575V wilhoutlwlth Cooling Jkt (approx.) AFP 0831 M15/6 3 .1.2.3 3" 2.0 2.1 1180 7.4 3.7 3.0 172/198 AFP 0831 M18/4W 1 .5 3" 2.4 2.7 1780 12.1 172/198 AFP 0831 M2214 3 .5 3" 3.0 2.7 1780 8.8 4.4 3.5 172/198 AFP 0831 M28/4W 1 .4.5 3" 3.7 4.1 1780 17.9 176/202 AFP 0831 M35/4 3 .4 3" 4.7 4.4 1780 13.6 6.8 5.5 176/202 AFP 0834 M125/2 3 .5.6.7 3" 16.8 14.4 3480 42.4 21.2 1.7 210/227 AFP 0841 M15/6 3 .1.2.3.4 3" 2.0 2.1 1180 7.4 3.7 3.0 172/198 AFP 0841 M18/4W 1 .2.3.4 3" 2.4 2.7 1780 12.1 172/198 AFP 0841 M22/4 3 .2.3.4 3" 3.0 2.7 1780 8.8 4.4 3.5 172/198 AFP 0841 M28/4W 1 1 3" 3.7 4.1 1780 17.9 176/202 AFP 0841 M35/4 3 .1 3" 3.4 4.4 1780 13.6 6.8 5.5 176/202 AFP 0844 M125/2 3 .2 3" 16.7 14.5 3480 42.6 21.3 17.0 242/264 AFP 0844 M10D/2 3 .3 3" 13.4 11 .8 3480 24.0 17.0 13.6 210/227 AFP 0844 MB0/2 3 .4 3" 10.9 9 4 3480 26.2 13.1 10.5 220/242 AFP 1031 M1S/6 3 .1.2.3 4" 2.0 2.1 1180 7.4 3.7 3.0 172/198 AFP 1031 M18/4W 1 .5.6 4" 2.4 2.7 1780 12.1 172/198 AFP 1031 M22/4 3 .6 4" 3.0 2.7 1780 8.8 4.4 3.5 172/198 AFP 1031 M25/4 3 .5 4·· 3.4 3 2 1780 9.8 4.9 3.9 176/202 AFP 1031 M28/4 W 1 .4 4•• 3.7 4.1 1780 17.9 176/202 AFP 1031 M35/4 3 .4 4" 4.7 4.4 1780 13.6 6.8 5.5 176/202 AFP 1032 M35/6 3 .1.2 4" 4.7 4.6 1180 15.2 7.6 6.1 176/202 AFP 1032 M40/4 W 1 .4 4" 5.4 5.3 1780 22.9 235/270 AFP 1032 M46/4 3 .4 4" 6.0 5.9 1780 16.8 8.4 6.72 235/270 AFP 1032 M70/4 3 .3 4" 9.4 8.4 1780 24 12 9.6 242/277 AFP 1032 M105/4 3 .1.2 4" 14.0 12.6 1780 38.8 19.4 15.5 257/293 AFP 1034 M230/2 3 .5.6.7.8.9 4" 30.8 26.5 3480 75.5 37.0 30.2 277/313 AFP 1040 M15/6 3 .1.2.3.4 4" 2.0 2.1 1180 7.4 3.7 3.0 172/198 AFP 1040 M18/4 W 1 .3.4 4" 2.4 2.7 1780 12.1 172/198 AFP 1040 M25/4 3 .2.3.4 4" 3.0 2.7 1780 8.8 4.4 3.5 176/202 AFP 1040 M28/4 W 1 .1.2 4" 3.7 4.1 1780 17.9 174/200 AFP 1040 M35/4 3 .1 4" 4.7 4.4 1780 13.6 6.8 5.5 180/206 AFP 1041 MlS/6 3 .1.2.3.4 4" 2.0 2.1 1180 7.4 3.7 3.0 178/204 AFP 1041 M28/4 W 1 .3.4 4" 3.7 4.1 1780 17.9 174/200 AFP 1041 M35/4 3 .3.4 4" 4.7 4.6 1780 13.6 6.8 5.5 180/206 AFP 1042 M35/6 3 .1.2.3 4" 4.8 4.6 1180 15.2 7.6 6.1 176/202 AFP 1 042 M40/4 W 1 .6 4" 5.4 5.3 1780 22.9 242/277 AFP 1042 M46/4 3 .6 4" 6.0 5.9 1780 16.8 8.4 6.7 235/270 AFP 1042 M70/4 3 .4.5 4" 9.40 8.4 1780 24 11.2 9.6 241/276 AFP 1047 M130/4 3 3 4" 17.5 15.2 1780 46.6 23.3 18.6 489/551 AFP 1047 M185/4 3 .2 4" 25 21.2 1780 58.8 29.4 23.5 489/551 AFP 1047 M210/4 3 .1 4•• 28 24.2 1780 67.4 33.7 27 489/551 AFP 1047 M70/6 3 .1.2.3 4" 9.5 9.2 1180 31.8 15.9 12.7 479/541 AFP 1048 M230/2 3 .3 4" 31.3 26.5 3480 75.4 37.7 30.2 469/530 AFP 1048 M200/2 3 .4 4" 27.2 23 1 3480 66.4 33.2 26.6 458/519 AFP 1048 M185/2 3 .5 4" 25.2 21 4 3480 62.2 31.1 24.9 447/508 AFP 1049 M75/4 3 .4.5 4" 10.2 8.9 1780 26.2 13.1 10.5 242/277 AFP 1049 M90/4 3 .2.3 4" 12.0 11.5 1780 33.3 16.6 13.3 252/287 AFP 1049 M 105/4 3 .1 4" 14.0 12.6 1780 38.8 19.4 15.5 257/293 AFP 1541 M40/4 W 1 .6 6" 5.4 5.3 1780 22.9 242/277 AFP 1541 M46/4 3 .6 6" 6.0 5.9 1780 16.8 8.4 6.7 235/270 AFP 1541 M70/4 3 .4.5 5•· 9.4 8.4 1780 24 12 9.6 242/277 AFP 1541 M105/4 3 .1.2 6" 14.0 12.6 1780 38.8 19.4 15.5 257/293 AFP 1541 M35/6 3 .1 6" 4.7 4.6 1180 15.2 7.6 6.1 242/277 AFP 1546 M35/6 3 .1 6" 4.7 4.6 1180 15.2 7.6 6.1 176/202 AFP 1546 M75/4 3 .4.5 6" 10.2 8.9 1780 26.2 13.1 10.5 242/277 AFP 1546 M90/4 3 .2.3 6" 12.0 11.5 1780 33.3 16.6 13.3 252/287 AFP 1546 M105/4 3 .1 6" 14.0 12.6 1780 38.8 19.4 15.5 257/293 AFP 1547 M130/4 3 .3 6" 17.5 15.2 1780 46.6 23.3 18.6 500/562 AFP 1547 M185/4 3 .2 6" 25 21.2 1780 58.8 29.4 23.5 500/562 AFP 1547 M210/4 3 .1. 6" 28 24.2 1780 67.4 33.7 30 500/562 AFP 1547 M70/6 3 .1.2.3 6" 9.5 9.2 1rno 31.8 15.9 12.7 479/541 AFP 2006 M130/6 3 .2 8" 17 16 1180 54.2 27.1 21.7 586/648 AFP 2006 M160/6 3 .1 ff' 21.5 19.4 1180 65.4 32.7 26.2 586/648 Additional combinations available. Consult factory. 8 Performance Ranges 60 Hz H[ft] "' " 5 .• Q[USGPM] 0 AFP 08316P Qfl\sJ H[M) 10 15 w ·--'. ! -----,---{ --•• ----i : ' ~ __ __;_J :. - Ii I! i "" ""' ·---. i . ": ... ,DN 80/3 · i ___ JB-pall,(1180 min-') ,,r'=:=:- '····/' .. ,--· l I . : I VOrte~ lmpalit,r / _,_J __ ;_ ' " ,0 oe oe " [k~! H[ft] 0 '"' 00 "' L_ AFP0834 2P Q[l\sj 5 " " H = Total head a= DischarQe volume P2 , Power at motor shaft. HiMJ 20 "' ' p, 7 [kW] I I H[ft] 0 "' " AFP08314P Q Ills! " "' ··-:1 " ~IMJ I "' ---,12.5 iDN 80/3" " : : /4-pote (1780 min-•} . 1solld11Z1180mmrr IV#" "' "' " " . ' . I ii Ii. i' ; ' IQ[USGPM]' 1 I:.:_ ';,., ··t: I: 'i I I : j ~-~r \ :-h~--::·'. i I p, ,~-:;. 1··· [HP] so 160 240 320 400 -----------------. H[ft] AFP 0841 6P Q[l\sJ 2.5 S ,, " "'. " . I I I' !_ i I · ·' ·Iii IQ[USGP~( •..• OO ' 00 ,oo 0.6 • -· '" = - l ,.i ;: - p, " -:.·.c..c.c------'-'-'-'-'-'-'- IHPJ ,, '' . i I 600 . ' HiMJ 15 17.5 20 IDN 80/3"1 , 16-J>ole (1180 mfn-•) I==..--=,. lfj ... : '' " ' ·05 ' ...... o.s . ,,_ . 0.4 • 0.2 p, (kW] p, [kW] curves to hydraulic institute Curves tor 50 H..:. arc available on request 9 Performance Ranges 60 Hz H[ft] 0 ,0 0 Q[USGPM]0 AFP 0841 4P O[l\s) --• __ ._L __ J . ' '-'_ I -' '--- H>O '"° 300 ;oo '"° H[MJ ,oo 3 _5 !-!-:--:--: __ J I.; I + --~1'-· :t;:.' !--! 1-! ! ! ; l i 2 5 I 2.5 i -: ~- ! 5 --e= . • I • • 1-1 ~ ,- ~ ~~LlJj ___ ~ { _h Jj J ~: ~ {HP] [".WJ L ________ -------- AFP 1031 6P H[ft] a Ills[ HJM[ " 10 15 '" -·-_J_~' ~~~-+i,: ! '! j ! : ii :DN100/4" _ _ : 1 ] I I LJ _ I 16-pole (1180mln•! ---;-TITTi , 11 1 I ieolld size 100mm/4" 1 1 [ Nar1e• system -'i 1111_J_J1,. l I I I I I I ,i I ; _ l Vortex Impeller · "fi ... ~:;· v-~, :·· -·--- I , :r f[USGPM]° '" '"' '" .I " " -·--+-· . --:------ I " ' P, OA L_IHP~----- H-'-To1al head Q = D,scharge volume P2 = Power at motor shalt 10 " " " 0.6 Pi [kW] AFP 0844 2P HittJ Q[Vs) HimJ rn " ~ ~o DN 8L0/3" " ·"°··--·, I aold size 45mmf1 B" ' "'"""""" -' ' til ' \ '\ I " " ' I 1-chllnnel Impeller ., !',, 1 Opan " \ " "' ' • ' ,-- ' " ' " " " " " "' " \. ' ' ' " R !Hp] j~I i 111111-111111·:P, ' [kW] I H[ft] 0 " rn ' 0 b[USGPM] 0 P, [HP] -------------------! AFP 1031 4P Q[l\sl HIM] rn , I mo •\ ·t l; :. J:i [ __ : :: L~: DN100/4" 10 ·' · · 1' · 11' ! ,.1 j 1 .4,-pole(176Dmlrl"') -.~ .j. .... :. !. . i -· l .'. J _: _ 11<1ld !112:ll 100mm/4'" 9 -.: ·'··;·-f. :.··. '. ~·-1-,-Ly:···: V,;,rtex_11v-m ._.""<,lt:J111+11. tC'~. ,' !.~~: : Vorte~~~;J 1 !1i;1'1:1; l i. . ' l! !.Ll!. ii !i .. i '.: l . : t ·1 .. l ,oo '' c~rves 10 hydraulic ins1ilule Curves for 50 Hz. are available on request. Performance Ranges 60 Hz H[ft] AFP 1032 SP O('-'] HIM] " " " I ' ! '" ,oo ·1 ·r I " " "' " ·----, rn 1---~ ---i-. ---·-· _!_ • : : . :·· 25 .1_; ... !.i' . . P,' [HP] Cl_,___u_.u_·_-_~~J_J _ _l ' J_ )__ -------------------- AFP 1034 2P H[ft] 0 21075 200-~ ~ 1~& ..... ,.,_ "' 150~ _ ""- 140-""-"""-.---j- a [l\sl .L -_, 2'IJ T :- -+ j"c • • -~ '; " " 130-· 120-, ---h, I'. ' 3€ ' ' ! 1 ~-,--+ )1~ ,,,-+-++-f- 100Y---l"-~c.-t-..J.-+-..L-'-..c...+_J_ ___ co ..... ~ -..J..i 28 90+--- sol ----" " " ,,~, -+--+-+-+-+-+-f- ----20 . ' ~-~·-+-+-+-+-+-~--+--~---+--+-~+J-_J..~--+~--+~-J-_-1"'..._". 40;------ ------ 201-··------· 10·: ,. .. . ------l--+--J-j....j_ -------- Q[USGPMJ1~ 'L 00 ~~'~ 00 - " soo ~-rnf 1! P, [kW] ~{Hp] ~[kW] H = Total head Q = Discharge volume P2 = Power al motor shaft 1.-- 1 H[ft) P, (HP] " AFP 1032 4P a 1r.s1 ' '" HiMI " 6 P, [kW] ~-----------------------------------" AFP 1040 SP H[ft] a [t\sJ HIM] " " " 30 3' J_ DN100/4" I . -&-pole (1180 min--) IIOlld size 100mml4" ,., + .,,,._._., I •,.ril '' P, [HP] Curves to hydraulic institute Curves ior 50 Hz. are available on request 11 Performance Ranges 60 Hz ' H[ft] 0 "' 35 " " ' 0 Q[USGPMJ'.- P., (HPJ AFP 1040 4P a1e.1 " 15 20 25 ,oo ,00 H[M[ 30 35 40 ·-· , ____ ., __ ,oo ------~- AFP 1041 4P ~ lkW] H[ft] a [l\sJ HIM] P., [HP] "' " " ,oo I'! ~ I '-1 15 20 25 30 11 ,oo I I I 'I rn I H = Total head Q = Discharge volume P2 = Power at motor shall 12 _I 1 .. 1..l 1', 'I I I I_ 11 . I! I 600 71)0 " P;. i [kW]! H[ft] " " " ,Q[USGPM]" P., (HPJ " AFP10416P a 1e.1 H(MJ rn 15 20 25 "' : I• ,oo ,00 AFP 1042 6P ------w . DN100/4" • --·• ~ &-pole 11180 min•) • .:_ solid sim t00mml4- . ! i c:oitra8b:lt9 ~ ,oo fit : 1~nelJmpeller I 0 " ,j "" -; -- Q[l\s] H(MJ ,, ' , • -I Q[USGPM]" P., [HPJ .. ' ,oo = ,oo ,oo ,oo ,oo ,00 P, JkWJ Cuives to hydraulic ins11tute Curves for 50 Hz. are available on request Performance Ranges 60 Hz AFP 1042 4P H[fl] a 111s1 H[MI 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 " ., -~~+-+----+-~ J I 14 , , I• --•~+,---,-~el,mpeller 1 , __ +t+ I ___ I : I ' "'7.(l...' ' i f : · ' I ' ! 12 -;'--+-: ::41-q HT:.--'---r-:-t. a - " " •. 10 "' " " " " O 100 200 [USG PM]~----+ 500 600 100 800 ----'t-------+-----·-· soo p, (HPJ p, 3 [kWJ AFP 1047 4P H[ft] Q [Vs] H[MJ " .. ~ ~ 00 , ' - ~ ' ' ' ', " "(, ~ ~ ' ~ ... '-~-- " ' ,, ~ ! ' ' -....._4,.Jo., a ', i " ~ 1 - -- '- '- ~70_·=----, -L'ccc DN1 00/4"1 min') i'" OOmm/4" W~1I" 4-pole (1780 solid size 1 -,. ts_:. p, I 2-channel Im peller 1·,rJ ~ ............... -'" -- ."'-. -i ' --:--1 ' -1------f•·~ -· ' ' " -, I ' ! I I ! ' ' I ' ' I " ,,-· -'. --t~ 'I ~ 1 i i i ' ! i ~,, Q"'G~1iutrt~~": 1 P, 1 [HP] kW _________ j H = Total head Q-=-Discharge volume P2 = Power at motor shaft AFP 1047 6P H[ft] Q[Os] so o __ ~---~--~ <!5 40 45 DN100/4" S1J01e (1180 min->} eolld sta:e 1011mnv,r H[M] ';....c+--t--+--ti. " 1---1-=~~1---1-~--'-"'"-~· ~linlpeller 00 20-· - AFP 1048 2P 0[1/s] H[fl]= ____ L_ \ '• \, ' ", • "' ' 5 "'----r" f-I ' ! r ---- ~I .. " ~ ----''' ---- '- " ~ ' ' --,~ ~-- ~ ,, ' "' ,, - 0-•• .,_ ------'----------- " ~ " ~ " -:-DN100/4" ' 2-pole (3480 min-') solid tiff SOmm1'2" 90H[M] -----·m-" ' ' ' 1-channtll impellef" - "" ---_, I ' I ' " ' "-:: 'i"-i "' "s. ' ' "-' '' .iiillilll~ [HP] [kW] Curves to hydraulic 1nst1tute Curves for 50 Hz. are available on requesl. 13 Performance Ranges 60 Hz i AFP 1049 4P H[ft]~0 ~,_,___.._~~--r1'-..--'',--------""'c....._""ro HIM) DN100/4" 20 +--+---+----j- " 4-t)oi. (1780 min-,} 35 -t--+--J' aoMd size eommr.r """"""'°-(il so 1~nel lmp,tli.r 25 Opo, I s O O 100 200 300 400 ~-" -~ 700 800 900 1000 -2.J~ O OOIBG~!litilJfl:' • [HP] [kW] Improved version of AFP 1046 H[M] " 1<t111nnel Impeller· -+-~°""';cc~~~ a -~-,--. ' ' 0 1000 1100 I I~--- H = Total head Q"' Discharge volume P2 = Power at motor shalt 14 AFP 1541 4P Hitt] 0(1/s] H1m1 " • • " ·-" • • I 1DN150/6" ' !4-pola (1780 mln·•J i,olld .tze 100mmf4" ' ! i~""""' .R '"' --' &l '~ --- " . "' ,_ ' • ' ' t-,;hl!lnnel 1....,.11er -'"'JJ'. " " I I "' ' " . ~ I" ". I:::: r--... " t'-.. c---.. ' 1'-' ~ I".:: ,.... I'-.. "~ • "' ---" ...... ~ " f--. ',._ ; '-I'-.. '--...... --;,,.. '- i rs,._ ' I 0 \ ---i __ _J__L --'------ O[USGPM]?", .'~ "' '" .! 11 i i I _ t~:, [Hp] [kW] L___ AFP1 ,, .. , . . . ""' C H[ft] '° " ., __ 10. l' a ~1\sl" " oo ,oo "' HIM] . P, (HP] ---DN150/6" ,, ----4-pol11 {1780 min-•) .,.~i'scsi;:-=1-=--1-----l=+:J:::+=1 ,aolkl size t00mm'4 .. ~~ "l' ., -+--+-i-"_--+--"' iff 50 ., 1"" -.-• : 15 ,o,f-H-+-j " " ·' ' ---1 2-00ann~,-I Impeller Open . -,,--- " Curves to hydraulic ms1itute Curves for 50 Hi. are available on request. Performance Ranges 60 Hz AFP 1546 6P a.-, H[rn1 H1«1 10 0 'lO 10 ~ \0 70 "' 'I° I DN150/6" 1------L &,pole (1180 min') I -~ IIOlld alze 100mm14·• --I 'VI ' - i ---2-chllnnel Impeller ' -' cc, 1 ' 'I"-. ~ ..... d .... ' ' ' ' -' r ' " -l. 10-..... ,, r--.. i -- ---+ -,_ --- I - I " ---------0 0 Q11uSGPMJl I I , · I 1000 500 1 , 1 , , 1 ..,,,Luu' Cill~~"""'="'"·Ji......J P2 (Hp) 8-r-·-' ' --I I I I I ' I ~ ~1 i I 4 ' ' ~ I ' I \- ,. f ' ' ·r· ' !: -f;[kW) AFP 1547 6P H[lt] a111s1 HIM] 0 [O -'--'-·-·~?-'. .. ,.1!··---r-~ -'------"' '" DN150/6"1 ,, "~ ! 6-polo{1180 min') IIOlld~100mrn/4"' ~~' i '-W' ' .,. --N . .... ~ ' I 4~-......... -I ' "' ~ r--... a-channel 1mpet1er [ ' .... o""' " " " ' ! " ' r--... " I ~ '- "' • "'-' ......... ~-......... -' ' .... ~ +-, w r-.....,.___ i 1S --' . t--I ' ; ----, ' _L_-' ,-- I I ------_l__ --·- 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 BOO 900 19()0 l,tOIJ 121.)0 Q[USGPM] -~-~--~---··-----~ R[HP] iffifiml I 1 11 · H = Total head Q = Discharge volume P2 = Power at motor shaft AFP 1547 4P a IIISJ H[M] 10203(1<0S06,07(1 AFP 2006 6P H1tt1 ' ' ....... ~ K ~ '- N ~ ~. I"- "" --~ " ' r-.... ',, Q(VsJ .... I'... ' ,...... !IC 90 100 110 _,, ---~- I H1m1 DN200/8" &,-pole (1180 min-•) IIOlldlllD1:z!il 100mm/5"ll4n I-.,., ~g· 2-channel lmpellw """"' ' ; ' ' ' ' " " ' ' ' ' '--' 'I',. --.... ~ ' r,,._ ' '\ ' ' l~~~il'Jill I l ii lj, I [HP] [kW] [ ________ ~ -------------' Curves to hydraulic 1nst1tute Curves !or 50 Hz. are available on request. 15 Other ABS Products ------- Par1 No. 16005149 DISTRIBUTED BY --------- ~IEl!Si COST-EFFECTIVE PUMPING L------ Corporate Office: ABS Pumps Inc. 140 Pond View Drive Meriden, CT 06450 (203) 238-2700 Regional Offices: ABS Pumps Inc. 111 Maritime Drive Sanford, FL 32771 (407) 330-3456 Odell's Pump & Motor Service 1650 Bell Avenue, Suite 140 Sacramento, CA 85838 (916) 925-8508 FAX (203) 238-0738 www.abspumps.com FAX (407) 330-3404 FAX (916) 925-3914 Companies also 1rr Austna Belgium Brazil Ireland Italy Netherlands 16 Deninark Norway EstM,a Fir,1,rnc1 Pola·id l--'or1u!'.]al France Singapore D Spark Proof Guide Rails are optional for use with all explosion proof model pumps. These guide rails are listed by Factory Mutual for use with ABS pumps in hazardous locations. fl Piranha Grinder Pumps in higher horsepower series are designed to pump heads to over 200 feet at low capacities. Available with standard and FM rntc<l motors. EJ Control panels are specifically engineered and manufactured by ABS Pumps. Each panel contains a visual or audible indicator for the pump safety devices. These control panels arc designed to meet the requirements of the specifying engineer and controlling agencies and arc available in NEMA 3R or NEMA 4X enclosures with UL or CSA approval available. El YUP Series pumps are specifically designed to handle large volumes of waste or process water and arc ideally suited for storm water protection and dewatering. Pumps heads to 30 feet, with flows to 200,0W GPM, Horsepower ranges to 700. El RW Series suhmcrsible mixers are available in cast iron or stainless steel construction. These mixers can be installed in tanks of all shapes and dimensions and are designed for a wide range of mixing applications. CH&EPumps ABS Pumps Corp. 3849 N. Palmer St. Milwaukee, WI 53212 (414) 964-3400 FAX (414) 964-0677 1215 Meyerside Drive, Unit #7 Mississauga, Ontario Canada LST 1 H3 (905) 670-4677 FAX (905) 670-3709 Germany South Africa Great Bntam Greece Hungary Spa,n Sweden Switzerland Turkey 3.0 OFF-SITE ANALYSIS 3.1 Downstream Descriptions A Level 1 Downstream Analysis has been completed and can be found on the following pages. In general, site drainage sheet flows to wetlands located along the north, south, and eastern property boundaries. Drainage is conveyed from the wetlands via ditches and closed conveyance systems to Springbrook Creek. See the following pages in this section for the Downstream Map, and Off-Site Analysis Drainage System Table. 3 mmm11 N I N C!) ' :-·:;\;_, ·V ·--··-.= .... = .. :-..,..:.. . __ ,, . ...,..,=.;.-:: ... • ,ay:::~\'t. h21,!;l".'_18 _L _,. )i'·, :S ~- >,--, ~- --< ......: :::'' VI trj "" ,_ y " \t. \\ '•J~ ~~~ ·\~~ (PQ£J.9, i?D 3---:·1:1 ;.,, 'fl'.)f ' ~I "':'! ,{ 't' '\1.'"" ! ,'~u,--4, ' ;t ~:~-·. I . l!l,!6-3 I I I l!l.!17-:l i\.e,1~1-2 . il_'h_ -'u H I, [ ,d 21.DE.-u ! l!l,D6.:7 :/ 21.C6-I! "l,DE--12 2J.M-1!5-' 21,J)6_-ii' Zl,32E tt.1)6-!t'lf! 21Ji6-l ~-~>-· 1'1.£6-6 ', --. ' \ .. ', ' \ .'.'.° l!l.[6.:.1 ' , •i i -"Ln~--> ', . ,i-c __ -i-1 -,' ,;,. ... ' ' ~ I .. . ) '. 1, : II Ii ......e . ii' )· ,:,:' i (°' il!l,C"-1 _; ,\ . ' '~' !.l.116-10 21.£6-2 ( .' ,, ! ,_: .. f 1;, · t,; 'j ' ., Ii a;c~v 1~11 2L.D6-9 /~f-_ \ i: I . ' ~ . . -,: S'J 19th St n.c7.:.3 21.C7-ll 21,C7-l0 j ~. ;·J C ~ ~l-1 ' I 1~-~--t 'j . I' ' ./ ', 1 ' ' ' ..a-et..CJ-2 c;,c:~=:: ~ --:,- .!1,(6~ _l!L,D_!.:- 21,1)6-8 .;_ ).!. 21,Dl,-3 ,,,,._,1- .' ,,,,. -., . '"'"' • ( ,. I ·""'-·-;.) tr,;:~ ... .,,~ I ···-/ t·· ~ "t,,,-'; : ... ,, :21, ''I ,r I \ 1-blcn-j ::: ; Ill ':( ;,'ll ,, rl ,; "'. '_ ,·,,, -12f E_ M at.:. ~I' : ": ',I ts', ~, 1, !))1· -l''1~I w.\t\1 = t0'i .,. ,121t l-e . · 1·--'!'i·· . '.\ I )I : 1 ,,,;,,, 21,E:7-3 2LE7-~ \! ; :;) Ji 2Lt7-~ -l1 \WE::T~VA 'I ,1', ·1: . . i :/ ,.,.., ; ;: i .1/\ e1,cu-20' . 21,ce-1, ·--ui ei..ce-1, ii :,, :_\: I '"f ~. •-· , ' & . y, ;~! . '. .· i . j' il/.lj 1fi1 :';-. , !. --, i, :1 ,, 1'.' I h ilii·, ,•\_'' ,, _I --~,·. i \· __ :_.'_·.' __ ·1·:· ,,. i I ,, ' . ~"' d·•. I ;, \ >\ 1111 Q' ---\ J ,, :, ,,-,_,(! ·I 111 : . ·\ ,· 21 c,-(0 , !', __ 1 ·\. '-,;:·~ • , ,, ' '" .,., ' . "· ' ,, ' ,, * 'r ··\·,._.·.·-·. I ~r. -..~., I J ,' •-, . ·-;,; Ii,/ J. I_:: tt..ce-,_ _ ,,co-, e,,cH :,,I ~ i'_·· ;;"\·,1\':·_,._-_-_ \ ! -"'' .,., '"" ' I » ,,,,, "'' . '"' : I '"''' ·-'l "• \t, '' 0 ~ ,., ,I I ·. ~ ',L ,11_ '~-. 21,ce-~ , '/, ·:, 21,CS-l:I /. '\ ; 21..c9-.1 , \ '·---•;c": .. -=· ·--, .,,,"" ·,r, , • ' 'Ill',,,\; , r\\ \~\<'J\ __ , /il,...$:,W» ,, 1··~-/i \ .,,,.--:, : \. ~,h~'--..J · -1 ., , 4 1 wm' 11 ';\, ____ \•,_ \;/ ,, \ ', )\l\f\• . \\ \f:...·-..., \ 1llUI.\. "I\ t I.. \ " .... -)'c I lll~'""'' -~: ':-',_-,, , w:.\' 1_,,.-, f_.\ -1\11·' '---~ ;;> -~>::.t~: f ',}·l -~ Q) Storm System =,.,rH. -~.~! ,t~' c--f~~~-~ -. j --1,,>E-TLAolO ~ H3 -30 T23N R5E W 1/2 ~ fil£, ;go 1:4800 ,_ \-1 G3 Comoar hurnll O.J or 1.0 meten Datum: NA VD 1988 Yeten 19 T23N R5E W 1/2 trj .... ' ~ P/B/PW TECHNICAL SERVICES O.f/18/06 .r:"'21n Basin: 6i:ZTH Symbol Drainage Component Type, Name, and Size see map Type: sheet flow, swale, slrea_m, channel, pipe, pond; Size: diameter, surface area 5'-lu-r ~, DvJ \,0.Cl. t.. f'\" ! P 1:J1 PC r, r-, ,·ii . ;')0tnM . <') . ;a"' c-(<',1rx,v.. CR . • OFF-SITE ANALYSIS DRAINAGE SYSTEM TABLE SURFACE \VATER DESIGN J\IIANUAL, CORE REQUIREMENT #2 Subbasin Name: Subbasin Number: Drainage Slope '· Distance Existing Potential Observations of field Component · from site Problems Problems inspector, resource Descriotion dischar~e reviewer, or resident drainage bas1n,_vegetation, %· '/~ ml -1,320 ft. constrictions, under capacity, pondirg, tributary area, likelihood of problem, coVer. depth, type of sensitive overtopping, flooding, habitat or organism overflow pathways, potential impacts area, volume destruction, scouring, bank sloughing, sedimentation, incision, other erosion -- T'lr:'. W""TL1:J,-J f) ii,:(, 1"t.b Vv\ ~ ·r (".., ·:... 100 'Ill r u:::o n , ,.J c1 rrr,1,,~ Ii; ";'/-';n· ·1 V\ 1, e·» ~"\ r.:Yt:. l't"'·;, • J ' ' . , - 1/1/05 c:: Basin: ;:)D() T\-\ Symbol Drainage Component Type, Name. and Size see map Type: sheet flow, swale, stream, channel, pipe, pond; Size: diameter, surface area '5H E ET \=tow WFTcA,-11) P1 >c: I .·.• C5 Y:)1ric n '> u /, ;i<I /;\" I lfC~ ( ULV\;; f2:f V1vt:~ 73r!O ".:)I i)\1C'1 ~on 1J11brc,ik .. Cf<.. ' OFF-SITE ANALYSIS DRAINAGE SYSTEM TABLE SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL, CORE REQUIREMENT #2 Subbasin Name: Subbasin Number: Drainage Slope Distance Existing Potential Observations of field Component from site Problems Problems inspector, resource Description dischar(le reviewer, or resident drainage basin, vegetation, %· 'h ml -1,320 ft. constrictions, under capacity, ponding, tributary area, likelihood of problem, cover, depth, type of sensitive overlapping, flooding, habitat or organism overflow pathways, potential impacts area, volume destruction, scouring, bank sloughing, sedimentation, incision, other erosion 3b11r2. 01.-D Grow,..\ 0-2% - () -?~!, l? ()() 100 'la. 1'-ff'. wi:cTl.-l'i,.J !) \)ft:, Rc,()Yl\J'.(c, i".\) E: ,?_ Co--':\" H, D LINE I,'/./ ~ • ,( f ~':) ... (0 ItJ?:'J~"' P.o,w. -_ .. t\, Ir,,<;~ f-t,',.<.. LJNr;:"'_, Dib 1: 56 ,(+ pJ DEP•H o7i+ 0-2S l'fl<•I l'/f',c-,, D11 Cc:,o /.J{!Lf? !='VLL- .,.i10i11 J o<;;+ R?o \!~1<'11,Jr~ , -' "'-,, -- 1/ I /05 4.0 FLOW CONTROL AND WATER QUALITY FACILITY ANALYSIS AND DESIGN Flow control will be provided by a detention pond facility. Discharge from the pond will be controlled via two control structures discharging to bioswales for treatment prior to outletting to the northern and southeastern wetlands. Drainage discharged to the northern and southern wetlands is held to existing drainage patterns. Site = 12.6 acres 9.7 acres drains to the south = 77 % 2. 90 acres drains to the north = 23% Now, using this ratio, it will be applied to the design. 4.1 Flow Control Design Flow Control Table Design Orifice North 1. 1.45" 0.33" (5/16") 2. 2.70" 0.7" (11/16") See section that follows for full design. 4.2 Bioswales Design Bioswale Table Years Total Flows Leaving Pond Amount in cfs 2-Year 0.237 25-Year 0.572 100-Year 0.739 South 1.11" (1 1/16") 2" North South 0.055 0.182 0.132 0.440 0.170 0.569 See following sections. For final design see previous sheet. 4 mmm11 I SECTJON 3.2 RUNOFF COMPUTATJON AND ANALYSIS METHODS FIGURE 3.2.2.A RAINFALL REGIONS AND REGIONAL SCALE FACTORS ST 1.1 ST 1.1 ST1.0 Rainfall Regions and Regional Scale Factors D t~~.,;_--:-~~J Incorporated AreaO ~ River/LakeO Major RoadO D 1/24/2005 ST 1.0/ LA 0.8 3-22 ST 1.0/ LA 1.0 2005 Surface Water Design Manual Project [/;./0 !C£'7flt:?. f<VJZ I Subject __________ _ With/To __________ _ Address--~-------- Date __ _..11_,_I~/~· ;:;c--,• /~:'.)~· ~'..,;,~---- ( ' • '"',. --·,~/\ ID Project No. ___;;1:_/-e: ( c._. _v, __ _ Phone ________ _ Fax# ________ ~ # Faxed Pages_ By -~C~, !-IJ_,__ __ _ 0Page __ of_ ~ Calculations 0Fax D Memorandum D Meeting Minutes D Telephone Memo / ' / 2. 0 G::, ?J Al /2£"::, ( lF:"f::, •_,.)£Ti..J:J;.J D) -fol< 1?'=51" • 0,511 At.R.F::.., ~ I • ' /, 32~ "i( -VJ E,<-AN o JJ'--, 0_1<<-0: ;:",'-' hi {!plc r..JlY-i 1.1 ~~ $ If this does not meet with your understanding, please contact us in writing within seven days. THANK YOU. CMI Engineers Structural Engineers Landscape Architects Community Planners Land Surveyors Neighbors 0TACOMA 2215 N. 30th St Suite 300 Tacoma, WA 98403-3305 253.383.2422 253.383.2572 FAX D SEATTLE 1200 6th Avenue Suite 1620 Seattle, WA 98101-3123 206.267.2425 206.267.2429 FAX L.,,., ....... ng .......... JU ........ .._,um ....... ,/ Ce __ , .tiv-. -..Jrp .. _.k Till Forest! A~:~o~ ~-~r-e:\ I . Till Pasture[ 0.00 acres Till Grassl 0.00 acres Outwash Forest 0.00 acres Outwash Pasture 0.00 acres• Outwash Grass 0.00 acres Wetland: 0.00 acres; I , Impervious! O.OOacresl I T1o:~~~-==~J l--·-----------~J Scale Factor: 1.00 Hourly Reduced Time Series: !exist I Compute Time Series ! Modify User Input __ _J --~------------·----------"--·------,-----------·--· ---------·-------- File for computed Time Series [.TSF] ,:;,.,,,,,,, r~n'""' 1 ()1·11nm. Th1or<rl~v 11/1Mll\ 471\w v 444/, L-,-lopvu Ldnu ~~~ SL,,,,,,ar,, ~ Ce--, :iivv, vvrp.' _.k Till Forest 1.10 acres Till Pasture 0.00 acres Till Grass 1.32 acres Outwash Forest\ 0.00 acres Outwash Pasture 0.00 acres ' Outwash Grass 0.00 acres Wetland! 0.00 acres Impervious! 9.611 acres[ \. .. ·---···---"··----~ I-Total ----- 1 ! 12.06 acres1 [ ______________ I Scale Factor: 1.00 Hourly Reduced Time Series: ldev I Compute Time Series _ J Modify User Input J File for computed Time Series [.TSF] "--·"--,-·~ -------.J .;,,..-,,nn .-:~nt,,~ f·lld·.1Rnm. n,.,,.,rl~v f flff;ff!P. 4.77w ~ 441'.h I ·-•• FrE .. -,--· lCV Ce ___ .l.iv-. _Jrp .. _,k Time Series File:dev.tsf Project Location:Sea-Tac ---Annual Peak Flow Rates--------Flow Frequency Analysis------- Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak --Peaks --Rank Return Prob (CFS) (CFS) Period 2.50 6 2/09/01 2:00 4.91 1 100.00 0.990 2.14 8 l/05/02 16:00 3.53 2 25.00 0.960 2.99 3 12/08/02 18:00 2.99 3 10.00 0.900 2.43 7 8/26/04 2:00 2.89 4 5.00 0.800 2.89 4 10/28/04 16:00 2.67 5 3.00 0.667 2.67 5 l/18/06 16:00 2.50 6 2.00 0.500 3.53 2 10/26/06 0:00 2.43 7 1. 3 0 0.231 4.91 1 l/09/08 6:00 2.14 8 1. 10 0.091 Computed Peaks 4.45 50.00 0.980 Flow Frequency Analysis ----------------------------------------------------- Time Series File:exist.tsf Project Location:Sea-Tac ---Annual Peak Flow Rates--- Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak (CFS) 0.761 0.206 0.564 0.020 0.335 0.584 0.492 0.973 2 7 4 8 6 3 5 1 2/09/01 l/06/02 2/28/03 3/24/04 l/05/05 l/18/06 ll/24/06 l/09/08 18:00 3:00 3:00 20:00 8:00 21:00 4:00 9:00 -----Flow Frequency Analysis------- -Peaks (CFS) 0.973 0.761 0.584 0.564 0.492 0.335 0.206 0.020 0.902 Rank 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Return Prob Period 100.00 0.990 25.00 0.960 10.00 0.900 5.00 0.800 3.00 0.667 2.00 0.500 1.30 0.231 1.10 0.091 50.00 0.980 Computed Peaks ~ <;:;t>'?c, 2 --t r [ ,;. 1' ""C) F11Z01 J;J1t:'Kl)AL -6 '::D )( c, 33S "--o.1&7 S . lf'.l1f'i2/11c. 0 1-ZE = :.::D 'I r -:36? o Z 1 ~ 5'5 --:7 CJ. ')OZ -o.11o?-0 "':; ---------~ -----::: 0. 0 Z I D .-,c2..c: (..J • .J 1;,,,.,.,,,, /"',>n/""' 1·n~·?•mn. n,,.,,.rl~u 11/1~//l~ ~r'Mw ~ 4~4~ ,-............ s C1.. __ , Riv_, _Jrp .. _,k Return Period 2 5 10 20 50 100 100--,-~~-::J~-t~,~.~~~-T~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ \.. r·l OU . p,<S 111 088-ac • --(J) LL u --(l) 0) L.. al .c. u (/) 0 + existsouth pks L[) , ... 10 ·1 ' L[) • 10 ·2 2 5 10 ,:;,,,,.,.,.,,., (",-n/w'A j .'1/'i·.lQnm. Th,ir<ri~v 1ff1f;A')F, 7F.Rw ~ .~'Uh R • ...-:--_ • <> <> ~ • 00 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Cumulative Probability • . ,·, • 90 95 98 99 -" l /". ·./ • 0 0. 0 ~ "") L L ,,- ) ::J ::J /·, ' D D /l ) > _....., _....., ;.;;; ::J (l) ·/ . 0 0) /! l D L f l L ITT y) _....., u ~ ' 0 ,,- Q) u N C ;> ' w ~-.. 0 "'C ,,.,...,-,/ ,,-w ./ w u X w >, ........ C0 ..Cl ' en 0 ..Cl :s: ~ -.. N /! ,_Q ~ N )/ ( ..,. ' 0 ,,- '•. <> r .,,/ er: 0 0 0 I[') ' L"O g·o g·o 1:·0 £"0 c;·o ~ ·a o·o 0 ,,- C (S .::18) ::)0JB4~S!0 0 l i _J Cedar River Corp. Park (206200.10) 11/16/06 Retention/Detention Facility Type of Facility, Side Slope, Pond Bottom Length: Pond Bottom Width: Pond Bottom Area: Top Area at 1 ft. FB, Effective Storage Depth: Stage O Elevation: Storage Volume: Riser Head: Riser Diameter: Number of orifices: Orifice# 1 2 Height (ft) 0.00 5.70 Detention Pond 0.00 H,lV 350.00 ft 59.00 ft 20650. sq. ft 20650. sq. ft 0.474 acres 9.70 tt 14.00 ft 200305. cu. ft 4.598 ac-ft 9.70 18.00 2 Diameter I in) l. 45 2.70 ft inches Full Head Discharge (CFS) 0.178 0. 395 Top Notch Weir: None Outflow Rating Curve; None Pipe Diameter (in) 6.0 Stage Elevation Storage Discharge Percolation (ft) (ft) (cu. ft) (ac-ft) (cfs) (cfs) 0.00 14. 00 0. 0.000 0.000 0.00 0.02 14 .02 413. 0.009 0.007 0.00 0.03 14. 03 620. 0. 014 0.010 0.00 0.05 14. 05 1033 . 0.024 0.012 0.00 0.06 14. 06 1239. 0.028 0. Ol4 0.00 0.08 14. 08 1652. 0.038 0.016 0.00 0.09 14 . 09 1859. 0.043 0.017 0.00 0 .11 14 .11 2272. 0.052 0.019 0.00 0.12 14. 12 2478. 0.057 0.020 0.00 0.29 14.29 5989. 0 .137 0.030 0.00 0. 45 14.45 9293. 0 .213 0.038 0.00 0.61 14. 61 12597. 0. 289 0.045 0.00 0.78 14. 78 16107. 0.370 0.050 0.00 0.94 14. 94 19411. 0.446 0.055 0.00 1.11 15 .11 22922. 0. 526 0.060 0.00 l. 27 15.27 26226. 0 .602 0. 064 0.00 1.44 15.44 29736. 0 .683 0. 068 0.00 1.60 15.60 33040. 0 . 7 58 0. 072 0.00 1.76 15.76 36344. 0 .834 0.076 0.00 l. 93 15. 93 39855. 0 . 915 0.079 0.00 2.09 16.09 43158. 0.991 0.083 0.00 2.26 16.26 46669. 1.071 0.086 0.00 2.42 16.42 49973. 1.147 0.089 0.00 2.59 16.59 53483. 1.228 0. 092 0.00 2.75 16.75 56788. 1 . 3 04 0.095 0.00 2.92 16. 92 60298. 1. 3 84 0.097 0.00 3.08 17.08 63602. l. 460 0.100 0.00 Page I of6 Surf Area (sq. ft) 20650. 20650. 20650. 20650. 20650. 20650. 20650. 20650. 20650. 20650. 20650. 20650. 20650. 20650. 20650. 20650. 20650. 20650 . 20650. 20650 . 20650. 20650. 20650. 20650. 20650. 20650. 20650. 3.24 17.24 66906. 1.536 0.103 0.00 20650. 3.41 17.41 70417. 1.617 0.105 0.00 20650. 3.57 17.57 73721. 1. 692 0.108 0.00 20650. 3.74 17.74 77231. l.773 0.110 0.00 20650. 3.90 17.90 80535. 1. 849 0 .113 0.00 20650. 4. 07 18.07 84046. 1.929 0 .115 0. 00 20650. 4.23 18.23 87350. 2.005 0 .117 0.00 20650. 4.40 18.40 90860. 2.086 0.120 0.00 20650. 4.56 18.56 94164. 2.162 0.122 0.00 20650. 4. 72 18.72 97468. 2.238 0.124 0.00 20650. 4. 89 18.89 100979. 2.318 0.126 0.00 20650. 5.05 19.05 104283. 2.394 0.128 0.00 20650. 5.22 19.22 107793. 2.475 0.130 0.00 20650. 5.38 19.38 111097. 2.550 0 .132 0.00 20650. 5.55 19.55 114608. 2.631 0 .134 0.00 20650. 5.70 19.70 117705. 2.702 0 .136 0.00 20650. 5.73 19.73 118325. 2.716 0 .138 0.00 20650. 5.76 19.76 118944. 2.731 0.144 0.00 20650. 5.78 19.78 119357. 2.740 0.154 0.00 20650. 5.81 19.81 119977. 2.754 0.167 0. 00 20650. 5.84 19.84 120596. 2.769 0.183 0.00 20650. 5.87 19.87 121216. 2.783 0.203 0.00 20650. 5.90 19.90 121835. 2.797 0.225 0.00 20650. 5.92 19.92 122248. 2.806 0.233 0.00 20650. 5.95 19.95 122867. 2.821 0.239 0.00 20650. 6.12 20.12 126378. 2.901 0.269 0. 00 20650. 6.28 20.28 129682. 2.977 0.294 0.00 20650. 6.45 20. 45 133193. 3.058 0.316 0.00 20650. 6.61 20.61 136497. 3.134 0.335 0.00 20650. 6.78 20.78 140007. 3 .214 0.353 0.00 20650. 6. 94 20.94 143311. 3.290 0.370 0.00 20650. 7.10 21.10 146615. 3.366 0.386 0. 00 20650. 7.27 21. 27 150126. 3.446 0.401 0.00 20650. 7.43 21. 43 153430. 3 . 522 0.416 0.00 20650. 7.60 21.60 156940. 3.603 0.430 0.00 20650. 7.76 21. 76 160244. 3.679 0.443 0.00 20650. 7. 93 21.93 163755. 3. 759 0.456 0.00 20650. 8.09 22.09 167059. 3 .835 0.468 0. 00 20650. 8.25 22.25 170363. 3. 911 0.480 0.00 20650. 8.42 22.42 173873. 3.992 0.492 0.00 20650. 8.58 22.58 177177. 4.067 0.503 0.00 20650. 8.75 22.75 180688. 4 .148 0.514 0.00 20650. 8.91 22.91 183997. 4.224 0.525 0.00 20650. 9.08 23.08 187502. 4.304 0.535 0.00 20650. 9.24 23.24 190806. 4.380 0.545 0.00 20650. 9.41 23.41 194317. 4.461 0.556 0.00 20650. 9.57 23 . 57 197621 . 4.537 0.565 0.00 20650. 9.70 23.70 200305. 4. 598 0.573 0.00 20650. 9.80 23.80 202370. 4.646 1. 040 0.00 20650. 9.90 23.90 204435. 4.693 1.890 0. 00 20650. 10.00 24.00 206500. 4. 741 2.990 0.00 20650. 10.10 24.10 208565. 4.788 4.290 0.00 20650. 10.20 24.20 210630. 4.835 5.770 0.00 20650. 10.30 24.30 21269:J. 4.883 7.200 0.00 20650. 10.40 24.40 214760. 4.930 7.730 0.00 20650. 10. 50 24.50 216825. 4.978 8.230 0.00 20650. 10.60 24.60 218890. 5.025 8.700 0.00 20650. Page 2 of6 10.70 24.70 220955. 10.80 24.80 223020. 10.90 24.90 225085. 11. 00 25.00 227150. 11.10 25.10 229215. 11. 20 25.20 231280. 11. 30 25.30 233345. 11. 40 25.40 235410. 11. 50 25.50 237475. 11. 60 25.60 239540. Hyd Inflow Outflow Peak Target Cale Stage 1 2.50 0.97 0.74 9.74 2 4.91 ******* 0.57 9.69 3 2.99 ******* 0.49 8.33 4 3.53 ******* 0.45 7.90 5 2.67 ******* 0.30 6.33 6 2.89 ******* 0.23 5.93 7 2.14 ******* 0.24 5.94 8 2.43 ******* 0.11 3.92 Route Time Series through Facility Inflow Time Series File:dev.tsf Outflow Time Series File:rdout Inflow/Outflow Analysis Peak Inflow Discharge: Peak Outflow Discharge: Peak Reservoir Stage: Peak Reservoir Elev: Peak Reservoir Storage: 4.91 0.739 9.74 7.3.'/4 201039. 5.072 5.120 5.167 5.215 5.262 5.309 5.357 5.404 5.452 5.499 Elev 23.74 23.69 22.33 21. 90 2 0. 33 19.93 19. 9•1 17. 92 CFS at CFS at Ft Pt Cu-Ft 4.615 Ac-Ft Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:rdout.tsf Project Location:Sea-Tac 9.140 0.00 9.560 0.00 9. 960 0.00 10.350 0.00 10.720 0.00 11. 080 0.00 11. 42 0 0.00 11. 760 0.00 12.090 0.00 12.400 0.00 Storage (Cu-Ft) (Ac-Ft) 201039. 4.615 200055. 4.593 172075. 3.950 163104. 3.744 130760. 3.002 122405. 2.810 122659. 2.816 80848. 1.856 6:00 on Jan 9 in 20:00 on Feb 9 in Year 8 Year 1 20650. 20650. 20650. 20650. 20650. 20650. 20650. 20650. 20650. 20650. ---Annual Peak Flow Rates--------Flow Frequency Analysis------- Flow Rate Rank (CFS) 0.739 1 0.237 6 0.486 3 0 .113 8 0.234 7 0.301 5 0.454 4 0. 572 2 Computed Peaks F}ow Duration Cutoff Count CFS 0.011 0.031 24344 8708 Time of Peak Peaks --Rank Return (CFS) (ft) Period 2/09/01 20:00 0.739 9.74 1 100.00 1/06/02 21: 00 0. 572 9.69 2 25.00 3/06/03 22:00 0.486 8.33 3 10.00 8/26/04 8:00 0.454 7. 90 4 5.00 1/08/05 3:00 0.301 6.33 5 3.00 1/19/06 0:00 0.237 5.94 6 2.00 11/24/06 8:00 0.234 5.93 7 1. 30 1/09/08 16:00 0 .113 3. 92 8 1.10 0.683 9.72 50.00 from Time Series F11e:rdout.tsf Frequency CDF Exceedence_Probability % ."1, % 39.700 14.201 39.700 53.901 60.300 46.099 Page 3 of6 0.603E+OO 0.461E+OO Prob 0.990 0 .960 0.900 0.800 0.667 0.500 0.231 0. 091 0.980 0.052 0.073 0. 094 0 .114 0 .135 0.156 0.177 0.198 0.218 0.239 0.260 0.281 0.301 0.322 0. 343 0.364 0.385 0.405 0.426 0.447 0.468 0.488 0.509 0.530 0.551 0. 572 0.592 0.613 0.634 0.655 0.675 0.696 0.717 0.738 8295 7499 5489 3581 2712 173 39 32 19 42 56 59 52 28 30 26 12 15 20 17 17 15 8 15 6 8 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 Discharge Volume 13. 527 12,229 8.951 5.840 4.423 0.282 0.064 0.052 0.031 0.068 0.091 0. 096 0.085 0.046 0. 049 0.042 0.020 0.024 0.033 0.028 0.028 0.024 0. 013 0.024 0.010 0.013 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 67.128 79.658 88.609 94.149 98.871 99.154 99.217 99.269 99.300 99.369 99.460 99.556 99.641 99.687 99.736 99.778 99.798 99.822 99.855 99.883 99.910 99.935 99.948 99.972 99.982 99.995 99.997 99.997 99.997 99.998 99.998 99.998 99.998 99.998 Discharge Volume from Time Series rdout.tsf 32. 572 20.342 11 . 3 91 5.551 1.129 0. 846 0.783 0.731 0.700 0.631 0.540 0.444 0.359 0. 313 0. 264 0.222 0.202 0.178 0.145 0.117 0.090 0.065 0.052 0.028 0.018 0.005 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 between 10/01/00 00,00 and 09/30/08 23,59 8846223. Cu-Ft or 203.081 Ac-Ft in Route Time Series through Facilily Inflow Time Series File:dev.tsf Outflow Time Series File:rdout Inflow/Outflow Analysis Peak Inflow Discharge: 4. 91 Peak Outflow Discharge: 0.739 Peak Reservoir Stage, 9.74 Peak Reservoir Elev: 23.74 Peak Reservoir Storage: 20103 9. 4.615 Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:rdout.tsf CFS at CFS at Ft Ft Cu-Ft Ac-Ft 0.326E+OO 0.203E+OO 0 .114E+OO 0.555E-01 0 .113E-01 0.846E-02 0.783E-02 0.731E-02 0.700E-02 0.631E-02 0.540E-02 0.444E-02 0.359E-02 0.313E-02 0.264E-02 0.222E-02 0.202E-02 0.178E-02 0.145E-02 0.117E-02 0.897E-03 0.652E-03 0.522E-03 0.277E-03 0.179E-03 0.489E-04 0.326E-04 0.326E-04 0.326E-04 0.163E-04 0.163E-04 0.163E-04 0.163E-04 0.163E-04 2920.0 days 6,00 on Jan 20,00 on Feb Page 4 of6 9 in Year 8 9 in Year 1 Project Location:Sea-Tac ---Annual Peak Flow Rates--------Flow Frequency Analysis------- Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak --Peaks --Rank Return Prob (CFS) (CFS) (ft) Period 0.739 1 2/09/01 20:00 0. 739 9.74 1 100.00 0.990 0.237 6 1/06/02 21:00 0.572 9.69 2 25.00 0. 960 0.486 3 3/06/03 22:00 0.486 8.33 3 10.00 0.900 0 .113 8 8/26/04 8:00 0.454 7.90 4 5.00 0.800 0.234 7 1/08/05 3:00 0.301 6. 3 3 5 3. 00 0.667 0.301 5 1/19/06 0:00 C.237 5. 94 6 2.00 0.500 0. 454 4 11/24/06 8:00 0.234 5.93 7 l. 30 0.231 0.572 2 1/09/08 16:00 0, 113 3. 92 8 l. 10 0.091 Computed Peaks 0.683 9.72 50.00 0.980 Flow Duration from Time Series F.ile:rdout.tsf Cutoff Count Frequency CDF Exceedence_Probability CFS % % % 0. 011 24344 39.700 39.700 60.300 0.603E+OO 0.031 8708 14. 2 01 53.901 46.099 0.461E+OO 0.052 8295 13. 527 67.428 32. 572 0.326E+OO 0.073 7499 12.229 79.658 20.342 0.203E+OO 0. 094 5489 8.951 88.609 11.391 0 .114E+OO 0 .114 3581 5.840 94 . 4 4 9 5.551 0.555E-01 0 .135 2712 4.423 98.871 1.129 0. 113E-01 0.156 173 0.282 99.154 0.846 0.846E-02 0.177 39 0.064 99.217 0.783 0.783E-02 0.198 32 0.052 99.269 0.731 0.731E-02 0.218 19 0.031 99.300 0.700 0.700E-02 0.239 42 0.068 99.369 0.631 0.631E-02 0.260 56 0. 091 99.460 0.540 0.540E-02 0.281 59 0. 096 99.556 0.444 0.444E-02 0.301 52 0.085 99.641 0.359 0.359E-02 0.322 28 0.046 99 .687 0. 313 0.313E-02 0.343 30 0.049 99 .736 0.264 0. 264E-02 0.364 26 0.042 99 . T/8 0.222 0.222E-02 0.385 l2 0.020 99 .798 0.202 0.202E-02 0.405 l5 0.024 99.822 O.l78 0.178E-02 0.426 20 0.033 99.855 0.145 0.145E-02 0.447 17 0.028 99.883 0 .117 0.117E-02 0.468 17 0.028 99.910 0.090 0.897E-03 0, 4 88 15 0.024 99.935 0.065 0.652E-03 0.509 8 0, 013 99.948 0.052 0.522E-03 0.530 15 0.024 99.972. 0.028 0.277E-03 0.551 6 0.010 99.982 0.018 0.179E-03 0.572 8 0. 013 99.995 0.005 0.489E-04 0 .592 1 0.002 99.997 0.003 0.326E-04 0.613 0 0.000 99.997 0.003 0.326E-04 0.634 0 0.000 99.9n 0.003 0.326E-04 0.655 1 0.002 99.998 0.002 0.163E-04 0.675 0 0.000 99.998 0.002 O.l63E-04 0. 696 0 0.000 99.998 0.002 0.163E-04 0.717 0 0.000 99.998 0.002 0.163E-04 0.738 0 0.000 99.998 0.002 0.163E-04 Discharge Volume Page 5 of 6 Discharge Volume from Time Series rdout.tsf between 10/01/00 00,00 and 09/30/08 23,59 8846223. Cu-Ft or 203.081 Ac-Ft in 2920.0 days Page 6 of 6 Biofiltration Swale Worksheet 1998 Surface Water Design Manual (:;.()ft}" r~a.rk .-,,·,,-,H~~_,..,,.,..,.,,-,.,,_,../_,..,,..,,)<,--,.-s•X,;,"M'<•O" North Swale Method of Analysis (Section 6.3.1.1 l Step 1) Calculate Design Flows Preceeding Detention Following Detention Owq = 60% 2-yr, developed, KCRTS flow with 15-min. step Owq = 2-yr release rate from the detention facility If no high ffow bypass : 01 OO-yr = 025-yr = 02.yr = Water quality design flow.-Owq = cubic feet per second, cfs cfs Rainfall Region : {Select One) Soil Type: (Select One) Forest: Pasture: Grass: Wetland: Impervious : Scale Factor : Time Step : (Select One) Data Type : (Select One) Step 2) Calculate Swale Bottom Width Owq = water quality design flow nwq = Manning's Roughness Coefficient y = Design Flow Depth s = longitudinal slope, along flow b = swale bottom width 0 Seatac 01111 0.-:)55 cfs 0.055 cfs D Landsburg Ooutwash acres --------- _________ acres ____ ,_.~:,--'2'----___ acres acres --------- 9.54 acres --------- ________ c..unitless D 15 -minute 0 Reduced G]Hourly D Historic 0 DG cfs 0.2G unitless 0.1:~ ft 0.01 feet/ foot Use minimum 2 feet! 2.:·:::: n feet F1/ena11ie Kmg Crmfll)' N1o.1wafe Worksheet 98 Mamwl.x!s Tab.\/( JI(/'/! iii( !,\'/J".·IU'.' J 2115.12(){)6 9_· I 5 ;1Jvf 2' < b < 10' Step 3) Determine Design Flow Velocity V -:.: Qwq / .Awq Flow Continuity Equation z A.,,q Vwq 3 uni!less ---------0.99 sf 0.06 fps Step 41 Calculate Swale Length Swale Length ( 540 represents residence time in seconds.) L Use minimum 100 feet! 30.1 ft -------- Step 5) Adjust swale layout to fit on the site. Reduce swale length and increase bottom width to provide an eqwvalent top area. A,,p = (b, + b,1o,,)L = (b, + b,,,.,JL, 378.00 b1 (Increased bottom width) 3.00 bslope (Top width above sides) 0.78 L, (Reduced swale length) 100 Step 6) Provide conveyance capacity for flows highter than a .... A) Gr -1 49 / • A R G.S? • 0.5 . ,f\; -~~ ~: s 0.79 -------- nc (Manning's roughness coefficient) 0.07 Ac bye +Zy" 2 0.98 Re (Ac/( b +2y,: ( Z 2 + 1)G 5 )) 0.23 -------- s (Longitudinal slope along flow) 0.01 -------- Ye (Depth of the 25 or 100-yr flows) 0.31 8) V100;;; O:i:io, A~oc: -------- Size Summary Land area is needed for the channel, access, setbacks, and, 1t necessary, area to convey high flows (Water surface at conveyance dep(h) Cross section includes depth, channel slope x length, and, if necessary, underdrain and high flows. Slope x Length (From Steps 3, 4 and 6) Filename Kmg, (.'011nry Jiwswale Wmk.1heet 1)8 Man11a/.xls "/'ah \ ( )i{!l--f /!/( JS HAU:: 11! I 5/:!006 9: I 5 A1\ f sf ft ft ft els unitless sf ft ft/ft ft fps sf ft 0100-y, Oi,-y, e.-rr -cu:.: Biofiltration Swale Worksheet 1998 Surface Water Design Manual South Swale Method of Analysis (Section 6.3.1.1 l Step 1 l Calculate Design Flows Preceeding Detention Following Detention Owq = 60% 2-yr, developed, KCRTS flow with 15-min. step Owq = 2-yr release rate from the detention facility If no high flow bypass 0100-yr = 025-yr" 02-yr = Water quality design flow. Owq = 0.+4 cubic feet per second, cfs cfs Rainfall Region : (Select One) Soil Type : (Select One) Forest: Pasture: Grass: Wetland: Impervious : Scale Factor : Time Step : (Select One) Data Type : (Select One) Step 2) Calculate Swale Bottom Width Owq = water quality design flow n.,,.q = Manning's Roughness Coefficient y == Design Flow Depth s == longitudinal slope, along flow b == swale bottom width 0 Seatac 01111 D.1B2 cfs 0.182 cfs D Landsburg Ooutwash acres -------- ________ acres ___ _:': ·_:_~L=-' ___ acres ------'-1 .-'-::;_1 ___ acres '.:l.64 acres -------- ----------'-unitless D 15 -minute 0 Hourly 0 Reduced D Historic CJ. ei? cfs -------- 0 2G unittess -------- ___ _:_o :.::. 2_:_? ___ tt ____ 0_0_1 ___ feet/ foot Use minimum 2 feet! ___ :.:::i:.c.c.:.::·,5_~t:;_. ___ feet f/ilename King County Rwswule Wol'ksheet 98 klamial.xls Tob ,'-,'()//'/Ii JW )SW,iLE I 2/]51)()()6 9: 15 AM 2' < b < 10' Step 3) Determine Design Flow Velocity ' ... Q I A "',".''-1 -,-'f,'q ' l{iq Flow Continuity Equation -----'3'----unitless 0.99 sf -------- 0.18 fps -------- Step 4) Calculate Swale Length Swale Length ( 540 represents residence time in seconds.) L Use minimum 100 feet! ___ __c9.c9:.:.6:_ ___ ft Step 5) Adjust swale layout to fit on the site. Reduce swa/e length and increase bottom width to provide an equivalent top area. bslope (Increased bottom width) {Top width above sides) (Reduced swale length) ____ o_.o:co'-___ sf ft 168 ft ft Step 6) Provide conveyance capacity for flows highter than O,.,q A) Or -1 4S ' ' A R 0 67 • s"5 • I f\~ ;,: , ,: 073 ____ ...;:c:_ ___ cfs nc (Manning's roughness coefficient) 0.07 unitless Ac bye +Zy., ' 0.92 sf Re (A,!( b + 2y, ( Z 2 + 1)''JJ 023 ft ----- s (Longitudinal slope along flow) 0.01 _c:..:_ ___ ftlft Ye (Depth of the 25 or 100-yr flows) 0.31 ft B) V1c{: ... O:oo: A:oc ________ fps Size Summary Land area is needed for the channel, access. setbacks, and, if necessaty, area to convey high flows. Atop (Water surface at conveyance depth) O.GC sf Cross section includes depth, channel slope x length, and, 1f necessary underdrain and high flows. Slope x Length (From Steps 3, 4 and 6) ft Filename King Cormry Bin.male Worksheer 98 Afumwl.xl.1· Toh S< Jin i I h'/OS/F,1!/,E I 2115/}UfJ6 Y: ! 5 AM a,oo-yr 02;.y, !;,$7 li.44- 5.0 CONVEYANCE SYSTEM ANALYSIS AND DESIGN The proposed storm conveyance system sizing ranges from 12-inch CPEP to 30-inch CPEP at the proposed pump station. Collected site drainage will gravity flow to the pump station that will "lift" the stormwater to the pond. See Section 2 of this report. See following section for conveyance and backwater using the Rational Method. Conveyance Analysis Criteria: The storm sewer capacity analysis is based on the following assumptions: 1. The Modified Rational Method was used in conformance with Section 3.2.1 of the KCSWDM. 2. Runoff Coefficients -"c" values for the Rational Method are given below. Calculations were simplified to remain conservative. C = 0.90 for impervious surfaces, roofs and paving C = 0.25 for pervious surfaces 3. The time of concentration for all areas is a fixed 6.3 minutes. 4. The peak rainfall intensity for the 100-year, 24-hour storm, P100 = 4.0 inches, as determined from Figure 3.2.l.D of the KCSWDM. 5. Mannings roughness coefficient for the backwater analysis: n = 0.012. 6. Flow analysis and backwater calculations are performed using Rational Method and are attached on the following pages. Backwater analysis is being used to set pump floats for the 100-year. 5 mmm11 JOB MAME. Cedar River Corp. Park JOB# 206200.1 REVISED: 12/13/2006 A= Contributing Area (Ac) C= Runoff Coefficient Tc= Time of Concentration (min) I= Intensity at Tc (in/hr) d= Diameter of Pipe (in) L= Length of Pipe (ft) D= Water Depth at Qd (in) FROM TO A 5 ·===== ====== ====== ===• SOUTH PIPE RUN CB#1 C6#2 0.15 0.30 C6#2 C6H3 0.:::!1 0.30 C6#3 C6#4 0.10 0 30 CB#S CB#4 0 15 i 07 CB#4 CB#6 0.14 0.33 CB#6 CB#? 0.60 0.20 CB#8 C8#7 0.16 2.09 CB#7 CB#9 0.25 0.20 C8#8 CB#10 0.23 0.20 CB#10 CB#11 0.12 0.20 CB#11 CB#12 0.-15 0.20 CB#12 CB#13 0.-12 0.20 CB#13 CB#14 0.15 0.20 CB#14 CB#15 0.22 0.20 NORTH PIPE RUN CB#18 CB#19 0.16 0.30 CB#19 CB#20 0.16 0.30 CB#20 CB#21 0. '14 0.30 CB#21 CB#22 0.32 0.30 CB#23 C8#22 0.48 0.80 C8#22 CB#27 0.32 0.40 C8#27 CB#28 0.26 0.20 CB#28 CB#29 0.37 0.20 CB#25 CB#24 0.46 1.50 CB#24 CB#26 0.29 0.20 206200 KCSWM RATJONAL.xls RATIONAL PIPE FLOW CALCULATOR using the Rational Method & Manning Formula KING COUNTY DESIGN FOR ~YEAR STORM NOTE· ENTER rn:::r,-!J,,:JLTS /l.ND STORM DAT fa. GETCiRE 8EGIN!·~1w:; Qd= Design Flow (cfs) Qf= Full Capacity Flow (cfs) Vd= Velocity at Design Flow (fps) Vf= Velocity at Ful! Flow (fps) s= Slope of pipe(%) n= Manning Roughness Coefficient Tt= Travel Time at Vd (min) L 84 93 69 55 168 174 48 158 88 90 81 81 90 74 81 70 81 152 80 176 136 48 78 95 ·:.:; I 09I 0.013 I -12 6.3 COEFFICIENTS FOR THE RATIONAL METHOD "lr"-EQUATION STORM IN 2"YR iOYR ;~;~YR SOY!~ :co·,-'R 1.53 2.44 :? .. 65 2.T:, 2.1:11 SUM A I A'C I SUM A'C G.','.:· Q_.'.,:. n_:;1;. 0 H.3 0.f.6 1 4S o.:,:i U::6 :.'.:.08 .2.2 i 2_37 7.-42 2.G4 2.lVi C.1574 0.3~5 U 4!"~42 Q_"i'GS6 0.4:"; 1 t,;•, -· I .8324 2 "1995 0.4G 0 ,,, 0.13 0.28 0.09 0.15 0.13 0.54 0.14 0.22 0.21 0.11 0.14 0.11 0.14 0.20 0.14 0.14 0.13 0.28 0.43 o.a 0.24 o.n 0.41 0.26 Ci.13 C·.41 0.5:) c.::::., 0 77 ·1 31 0.14 ':.68 U.J8 : .':1~; 2 13 7. 2.4 2.33 2.57 D.1.e: 0 ?6 C-41 U.68 0.-:n 0.C:18 1.::'.:2 i 5S U.41 C-67 age 1 Br (: c::s ;·;,j ,-I P_R_E_C_IP-=-l--3~.4 I 0 t'i~~IAr= 2.f;il;i 0.65 Br= 0.65 0.63 2.5-1 ' ') ·.,3 2.41 :';.24 2 7:": ::i Of UH3 ;.90 1.35 .80 . i'6 7~ .73 .55 .44 2.33 2 73 L.1"? 2.05 U)4 2.:13 2.86 Qd ,'.; J[) 1.04 ·, 20 ?lj 1.$6 Ls:: 0.39 3.4e :.Hi";:/ 3.79 3.~3 4 G3 4.13 4.4: 0.39 0 72 ·1 (1G 1.61 !8 2.14 2.49 :-~.00 ;_ 13 L78 Of ,, '::iS ' S•S 1 s:s '.3.!33 6.03 4.i'O ~-~5 A.?Q 4.70 4.70 4.70 4.70 4.i'O .,.?o 1.95 1.::15 1.:,15 1.95 -3.rn 6.G4 4.10 4.70 """ ,;_?G QdiQf C-.188 0.534 Q.517 C.2:Ji C ZOO 0-522 O.OT! 0.741 c.rns 0.!(07 0 $37 C:.$69 Oo99 0.93!3 e.~99 0 371 C.5":1 (U.l2H G.371 G.321 1}_Sto 0 639 0.259 G.330 Did 02:JS G.52·J C,_5;-1 ,._<;(·'... ,') J?6 D 58-': 0. HF D :.._i_Jf; G.22- 5.85 ?._(;;' 6 f.~ 10.4() 2.2•\ C..64"1 ~ 1.:.:'..i O.%i' :2.0: 0.<::<81 "':2.26 n 683 :2_57 C· 713 12 .. 63 G.73': JJ.113 .CL7G3 13.7,! 0.:2~!£· 0 ,!2~ ;; :.iGS U.6S3 G.42·: 0.-38& D.51? 0 537 0.J4"? C-.42G :;"°, 59 $.C-5 6 08 3 32 5.05 1.01 :;1_3i :0.57 4."il 7.G7 Vf :c . .;;8 2.-if: ),'1";: ,;.Hi 3_,l:-; 2 Sf: 6.56 2.f;s 2.86 :2.66 2.Jl6 2.$6 2.66 2.G'~ 2.49 2.A8 2 .. 42 2.49 4.08 .i'f.l 86 86 5.513 2.\)1_'.; Vd 1 39 2.~:2 ?. ,:,3 ., C..:0 3.GO ?.81 3.7•1 ?. 91 2.94 :2.95 2.98 2.89 3.00 3.01 1.92 2.30 :?.51 2.'18 3.76 3.J:5 2.70 2.63 4.13'1 2.'\t'. Tt 0.74 0.61 0.44 0 )c:; 0.93 1.03 0.21 0.90 0.50 0.51 0.45 0.45 0.50 0.41 0.70 0.51 0.54 0.91 0.35 0.87 0.84 0.28 0.28 0.54 JOB NAME: Cedar River Corp. Park JOB#: 206200.1 REVISED 12/13/2006 A= Contributing Area {Ac) C= Runoff Coefficient Tc= Time of Concentration (min) I= Intensity at Tc (in/hr) d= Diameter of Pipe (in) L= Length of Pipe (ft) D= Water Depth at Qd {in) FROM TO A s CB#26 CB#33 0.96 D.20 C6#33 C8#32 0 96 O.'.'.'O C6#32 C8#31 0.22 0 2Cl C8#34 CB#31 0.45 1.12 C8#31 C8#30 0.53 0.20 CB#30 CB#29 0.48 1.15 C8#29 CB#35 0.00 0.20 CB#35 CB#36 0.11 0.20 C6#36 C8#·15 0.17 1.02 COMBINATION C8#15 VAULT 0.00 0.20 206200 KCSWM RATIONAL.xis RATIONAL PIPE FLOW CALCULATOR using the Rational Method & Manning Formula KING COUNTY DESIGN FOR ~YEAR STORM NOTE: ENTER DET,-<\ULTS AND STORM DATA GEfOf'~E BE.GINNlr,,i,:3 Qd= Design Flow (cfs) Of= Full Capacity Flow (cfs) Vd= Velocity at Design Flow (fps) Vf= Velocity at Full Flow (fps) s= Slope of pipe(%) n= Manning Roughness Coefficient Tt= Travel Time at Vd (min) L ------ 90 9G 83 76 JG 124 I 63 i , 72 85 ·15 I OSI 0.013 I 12 6.3 COEFFICIENTS FOR THE RATIONAL METHOD "lr''-EQUATION s·roRM!1V 2YR ~OYR :~:)YR SOYI:.: IOO'(R 1.53 :?.44 t..65 2.'?S 2 G1 SUM A. I A'C I SUM A'C ,..?".· I 0.87 2 Si 0.87 2 0~' 0.20 o 4:_: I 0.,:1: ~ 27 I 0.48 '~ 3-175 0.43 G.S5 I 0.00 6.GS I 0.10 a.r,2 I 0.1s 8.ea I o.oo ! 54 /. 40 2.50 ('.4. 3 ..::c 3.81 S.i.lS 5.99 6.14 e 71 age 2 B: ~:~~I PRECIP= I I J,4 0 i3~)~ G.GS[Br= 0.53 ::::. ~.li ' '·;S ' ,, ' _'. "'' /. ?3 2.24 2.·1s Uc:: ',86 ': 35 ~ .58 Qd "3 -35 :S "IS 6 ,:)(; !"! 7.79 B ,if: ; 1.24 l 1.25 i I .:';;3 : ,: 52 2.66 0.65 Qf 4.TC, : :) ~ 1 J "_l / ,o " 24.2.'5 8.:J4 f,.34 : A~ ~ 8.3,1 Qd/Qf C.8~ C.o:3 0.59 0.2% ()_770 0 ~j~ !J.6'i3 (L613 (/.274 0.79B Did D {; 6.38 :2.38 C.S!S : 2.8:.'.· C.553 : 3.21:', t~.3 ;'·: 4.4G :':5;' : ,c 7.,,. 0 ,:oa 8 ,79 U.$'/1 ;? 11 0.571 17. L'.; G.358 10./e 0 87S 20.25 Vf 7..66 J.:.::2 3.22 4.>)) :<22 7.73 3.7-'l 3.7,: 3.4.~ :3 74 Vd :?..95 3 .~:: 3 .~.~ 4 :i' :~.ss 7.05 3.84 3.9,; 7.21 .-us Tt 0.51 c,_45 C,.41 0.30 0.45 0.29 027 0.30 0.20 0.06 Cedar River Corp. Park um.ite Back ... ater Analysis for 25-Ycar De,·eloped 12113/201)6 ' 1Q 11 " 13 " 15 16 " 1B 20 Entrance Exit "'" Outlet Inlet I Approach I """' Vel. Head Oell "'"I ,w "' CB to_cB COMBINATION : ~:~~:~~::::r _~¥1:~ .. l .. 1.1 ... ?.~ .. I !.? 25-YE.J.'.R. ~J.9R~. Sout_h l"ipe ~u.n . °ci?,#15 CB#',4 " cei;·:.:: ... · cBtl~:3 C8#13 cB#,2 "CBii'i":i"" cett11 C8#1J :·:. _gg:;_1!): CB#10 C8#9 CB#? ... ¢}iitL CB/t9 C6#7 . C:.6#_8 C6/t6 . C:.B/t;' CSt', cc:~· 25-YEAR STORM ·ij::;:~·t, :Pi~-R,U·~· .. c ... ".· .. ·.1···'·······.1.· .. " .• "'.·.··.·. ,.· .. 5··.·.·· CB#36 C8#35 C8#35 .. ·c8#::::i_ c.··:·8#·· •. 2.t .. :J: .. :.::;:. $.· #. '. 9. CB#30 CE'.#_;t1. CB#:l1 CB#31 . ·cB#':i'.: CB#33 .... CB#26 ··~8#2'(. _ c8#28 -··cB#28 c~21:· C:.~34 c8#ii C3#33 C24:2.6 C3#::'4 _ i;::_~25 CB#i'B·· · c3#n 9.s.it;~,. . ·caj,};; ..... J. ~3#:3 ·c6#22 C8it21 'c'0Ei. C3#20 C3#"9 "' . .'.''. .. :§.. 4 C:'.l 3 93 3 '19 3.~p_ 3.48 1 :s 1 cl~ .-. ,,;; '° 31 S1 'PG 18 ,3 ,e " 18 "i'8. C 01 0.::1 ci 0·1· Cl.01 '.J __ 01 C.01 . "CS#20 ·cstt1·0·· . Q.Q#j··J· 0 3S s1 J: ··.2. -1-p.cn ... 1 'S .'/ 16 C·C ·:; co ·;; ~s oos ·1s·:4r ... o·os· 15.55 15.61 .. "ij'"'6i"" ... "i'"s".68 0.07 15 79 . o:oo 15 84 "'b-:i)6" 15.95 D.00 ..... ··:;·5"Qj" 'ii"S'ii .. ·-r :· .. ) ... 99 16 07 16_07 .l ii'5c'" 0 50 0.50 . 6.'5Q_" 0.50 """Q,50_ 0.50 HL ft) O.os _'.0"04'"':: 0.04 "i,:i'.'ii':i'" '"if04'" 0 03 ci."Q3. ... O'S ::: I !:: i'Ei"'O+ .. 16 09 . :,'i';"·-~ 0 00 ·o·oo 0.90 0 00 0.02 0.01 -~·01 D 7 0 7 0 , 1 53 1 32 0 4C "2)1... + 2.50 .. ?,?.~ ·- 2,!;9 . 2.,.1.§ .. "' 1.91 "1""ii':i, 21B 266 s. ·.,;'5_ C, °' 00 0.08 fS:10 · o··os"" 16 "6 -~ 1~.33 0 ,)J o o_::; "i5"04.: 15.48 I.· .0 .. ' .. ' .. 1573 ... 9,0:t . ~:·~·6 -+ ~; ;; :l ~:~~ 15.37 ·1 .. s·:s·f "1"5"76 .. -~5.84" . "'1'6"0"i'" 0 59. 0 50 a.SQ.:.: .Q..9} ..... J ... _1(.0.8. 0.04 __ l ::i:t1f . ...L. _0.50 006 j "lla'ii" . .Q.-.9? .. · ... 1 .. ' ... ' .. ' 0.07_ . . . 1'?.,?~ . ·J:,;;_ : :!. _J; :~ , ..... i:i./J.3. 0 03_, 0 a, 0. 11 ·:o.61X ... ..ii'.Sf:.:., .... 1611 16 25 0 50 "'1if36" I 0.50 · ;;Jt : : _"X!~ 02 01 go J.:.?.O .... 1 41 .. _1 21 oo, · ·o.os · ·o.·02 .. ···olJ:i .o _0_4_ 15 76 15.83 ··:i-s··ef . -~:.:if :1: · ··!:~; i"'ifo""" -. 9,.CJ.4: ... 15 91 ' · ·:(,i~ [ . o._01 I 15 91 . i .,.·i ··1·· .• •· .9 ... ·.·'.·.·.·.' .. · .. 1 .. 1.6 .. ·1·,·· 0 S2 1 . O . .Q1 ... 1619 Q50 _ooo ... 1.6}.4 .... . '6'"65"""1 '::jf~$.: ... 016 064 002 .. 0.Q1 16 09 . "iiii7 . "i'i3"'2i '16"35'" 0 50 . o··qf ... 0.03 0 01 0 01 0 00 ;c.H4 HL ''Cosf _fil . Oj{J: .... !.~.,?? ...... I ;_o·, 010 1:::g.~i -:~~}~ r -~··;~ 0 "I 1t:: ·1111 ti: ::·:.11--il . ~]~ ,s."4:f 13 76 i':i92 14"6e"'" ""14"23 . "'1;('.';fo· 14' 5i:i" 14.89 o.oo. .f. .. '"i'6.;6t.:::-:r::I~1 ..... 1 .... 16,_4_2_ .!!. ,' HL Elev ft) (fl: 0.01 ·15 47 -o·:i:i'i ......... i"s''il'i" .. . ().'i:i'i"" ... \5.'7":i , .. :§]·~ ....... ~-;,-:: a'.05' .. 'i'i§i"6:f" Q .. .9.1.. 1f6i" . .Q.09.I 16.41 ''19"ii"" 18 21 18.?.L. _19_2_1 19.21 -·-··,s.eo· . "i'ii45" "i'-5:'i'i""" 15._72 "'6'.'0"1" ·o oo 1tIT +:::::1}::¢.¢.. 0 01 C, 1)4 C, 03 C, 00 16.13 m 19 '3 "f;,:;i:·"· '., L\) ' LJ ··9.·Qe. 16.54 ·e 1a ·5 45 ·sea 0.01 D 04 0 03 J.00 :· ,:5 :) 39 -0.02 0 00 0 00 0 DD 15 55 .. -;·5 82 15.8..1. .. . I::• 1 L llffl]!r 15 64 "··1·. "'i:i'11 1s. .. ~.:2 .. : ci":frj""" . 55 :~ .. -~_~_JI~::t·· 15 11_ I :·:I~~ .... 1 11.30 y.o;, .. .c ..... ,.". ]§\:f1:o.:<:iii . ""16.20 C.62 c.61 .. ~!:!f r::1:~:::::, 0 °' 0 03 . 9,.Q? J.§&t ... 17.98 . ""i"S.82 "1'5'8'if"" . .. 1.5_ 93 .. O_Q41 16.01 1:.Hj .. ·1 · -~.·-i····.·i.·:.::1·· :tii:: 0.99_ ... W .3.5 o 44 "1{94 16.10 16.37 "16 . .$9. _ 17 .. ~.1 o.'06 0.05 ci."Oi.". 0.11 . 6."48. ... 90-+ 1.33 008 o · ·6'"1·2 -o.cn 0 012 001 ·o---0.12 o 01 .. S..Q:.. . 6:"Sf . 0 ·41 . Jt~:: l· :·ti. : .. :1-:1: ::I!lt g:§i+ 16 46 15 93 16 15 16 35 "\~)t .. ·o:~.: 0.07 ·9;·9r·· 0 01 0 00 90+_ J .1.33fO:Qt[::.: 54 050 001 1.·.' .. · .·1.·.·.·., .. ·.·.• .. ·.1···.'.·.·.·.···1.·· •• 9 ..... o.•.·.'.•·.T ··24 o 1e oo6 ···o· .. 9.1? _900 16:s5 ·;·9···1·0·· Ced11r River Corp. Pnrk offsite Backwater Analysis for 100-Year De~·~loped 12/1312006 Pipe Segment CB to CB COMBINATION Y.A.U:~!:·:l :C:~1.5. .. 100-YEAR STORM §Q_l{t_ti . .P.IJ>~ .~!-'.n ....... . CBi/'.5 C2J:14 C8#14 i)?.#13 CB#13 C3#'2 . ·cBih:i"'.. i:'tjf i. c:iii;··1· ... C'Bi(.'6 .. .C!3:/'1_0 c6#9 C:8#9 .. C:8#7 C6#7 .. G.~/.1? ..... ·c::$¥.i.: .. ·:s"~ CG,12 CBllt G.Ei"S :;~:; :i;,2 !:'11" 100.YEAR STORM N_c,rth.~iP.1:: R~m ........ . CB#15 I :6#36 :·.:}t;;.: .. : : · E~~; c .. •.°'.•·.·.)s.:-: .. : 1 ,. :.¢:?#~9.... . G~~c CB#,31 CB#3' c~~{: C8#3.'.: OAS . ~3 . :0 ~ ~~< 5~ . CB#31 C8#~2 CB#33 CB#26 . Ce:#Jfl I,' 95 '?(' I C3#25 'CCA :·¢w.;}(,. CB#29 CB#28 .?~~n.. .. C:.8#22 "¢.$#2 CB#2 C.8#2 "(ji'; C8#24 CB#25 c:a:i;:~e:: 1 '" ''" C.8#27 CB#22 C3#23 C8#2" CB#ici CB#:9 C~1_8 "' 1 86 1 2C 0 87 .9 .. :~ ·so 15::: S1 " 91 12 2 2 ' ' ~ 01 ~ C. : C' o c· 18 I o.O' · '.:s·:·i··:~:·o;·: 12 . o o· 2 ! ·~:·~·;"· r 1 1·:i,r.· 2 0 o- ' 15 5~ 72 1 6'.;. 1 73 1 .0.9. ... .1t0.0. [)0 . 46 "hi °' ··1·6··~F- ,r; :-:o '6 25 Barrel o.n. 0 79 0 79 0 79 11 Barrel Barrel Friction Vel Head Loss (fl) t«: 2.S7 1 · ii."i'4' ·;·;f\fo] .. 'O'i'i··· 281 0.12 17C·cl :i:71 0.11 ' 1728 ~:t: l : .. : ~:.::I~ : .. t: :1}:r· 2 46 "i3i . _0_.60_ 0 61 1'5 1 60 0 55 009 o o~. 0 01 0 Q1 0 :J5 0 :J4 0 02 17 68 E.s.~ 1~ 93 °" 0 10 . ··o .. oi· · ··o.oc 009 o .. oo 0"6'6"" l2 Entrance HGL Elev !1 .!.?.ti .. 1icii 17 21"' 17 38 17 55 17.81 . 1i'"/6 17 88 ··;·fiiC .,, I i81 :.~; : . I~.; .... 1,€/.95 ... 17 08 17. 19 '!'"""""""""''" "4.70 314 4"88'" . ":f i4 s 56 1·:-1r 575 177 ~ .. ~5 0 79 "{Ti. 177 177 231 2.21 ""if63 1";i'i', 1 12 r 2.€4 ·;fiQ:.: 21_2 17.30 ··;7 56: 0.11 111 ·51 o:os ·1 "if2i" ·:t9§: .. : ... 1?...2>l. 012. 1741 o 01 .1I!it ... .Q.J}. .... 17. ~9 -HL """ 0.50 'Q}j~" 0 5C 0 5[) .9,.§9 .. 0.50 0 50 ,O.?O 13 Entra"nce HL •: 0.07 0.07 0:-1.16""" o'c:Wf 0.05 0 05 · ... o:os···· "i:i'i);i""" Q ... :?9. I O C6 t;··":"··t~·· :J.50 q .. ?!J 0 50 0.50 ·9:~9.... 0 50 0 50 0.08 9.g.7. o.02 · 0.04 0.04 . Q,.Q§ 9,91 9,9:.l 0.05 ~~~·-1--J:gi ··ri"~ci' .... I · :g,:C5.? '6':79'" 0.79 . '6'°?9'" 0 '9 .O..?~ .. "i""ifo: iifo i "5"j 11' .9:.~.~-·- o.o, I ",, I 0.07 ~:.~~-... ;;~~ ::~:~·cj::··:·11~~ -1-1;~ .. .1.?,.Q!. ........ Q§Q .. I 0 02 0.01 18 05 18 0~ 0.02 0 01 0.05 0.02 . 0.01 0.00 18,0~ ... . osol 14 ·e,iit·1 Exit 'HL HL CO$f (ft) o,_,_4 D.14 0.12 ·o:·1·1 0. 11 ·r:110 o oo o:oe 0 01 006 0 00 001 15 Outlet Cntrl Elev It 17.0:.l 17 98 0:5118 OS 0 24 18 '.E 0;9 .... 180_3 i .9,.®: 001' 0.11 0.02 :9/i~ 17.82 · 1·e·:q1.. 18.2_1_ 18.17 1_8.29 1e 17 ,Inlet I lnlel Conlrd Cntrl .. Elev HWIO (ft Approach Vel. Head ft -,Deft ') ,'.q 13.97 14 12 . ·;:f2f" 14.44 o .. ).~ ... I .... _o 0. 12 0. 11 0.11 0.10 . 14"61 14 92 T~··l:t: \6j}. J ... _9.01 ... 1 ...... ~ .. 1 .. t5c.?.3 I 15 66 I 0 06 9,.90 . ::,:~:.;~: :'f .. 0.01 16 1e 16 4e 16 65 j O 05 I O 04 . 0.00 0 . .9 SO• 0 23 /,5 " 0.02 0.01 0.12 ··o:o.,- o. 12 0.01 0.1·2 'ii'i:i'i" 2.73 007 . (12 0 Oi 20 HW Elev ft Top Up,tream - -~··73 ·0·9~·1 ,,,,··+········,,., ·o·:1·? -~i;Q:i... ... ~.1.:.~1. J ... 11_9s 0 12 o 00 17 97 19.00 . r··· 1 33 -~:~~ ..... ?':::::: :i ... 19 10 0 12 0 ::1 '·8 00 1,) }·= 0 1f, I O C1 ·I 16 03 '9 2:C C·59 080 "803 ·8.:'~ 15.51 16.04 i"61"6 : ... : .. 2 .2. ·"·:·1 ·.~.·.·· ···1 .... ~ .•. ·.1.·;.•.::.1:.{~.i.. _912 ... -~4 026_ 0.03 17 03 1715 ·:,t:?:(. 16 DO 1_§,.9.8 9 .. ~12 ... 1 11.31 57 ;J ?! .... ri 46 '.J ~G . i'6."65 16.20 . iEl."41 ·1·5:·4·3 iT4.i' ... ~:1·: .. · I '5 j ~;;I ~~~I :.I:r 004"" 20 0_12 001 _1774·+·····,·,·,,· .. 9. .. 9.t .. ooe 011 o.02 . : :9. .. PS 1 33 0.11 0 ,2 0.01 '"0"1.'{ "o'.'i:i"i 'ii"i'{ "6.'qq Q 86 0.04 ""17"s5 17 95 18 12 .. i8."15 19.35" . ··19.35· 19.35 19.25 14.58 f . 1'7":'i'7 ...... I OS/ ~ .. t~· :r · 1-H~ · 0.22 0.02 ·0 .. 1":1:· "ci'.'C:i"1 . ;j··41;-· ().~~ ... ·1 46 1.~,.4JL l 15.94 16.16.+· i:::;t[: .. ;,;:_; Q .. .9.! .. ·I··· . .Cl .. +:~.?: ?:-:~.?:.·:·1 ...... ,····1····'·'··· i .i .. ~ ... :;J? ...... 1 1 33 ow. . f?,.8.0:. SECTTON 4.3 CULVERTS AND BRIDGES TABLE 4.3.1.B ENTRANCE LOSS COEFFICIENTS Type of Structure and Design Entrance Coefficient, K, PiQe, Concrete PVC, SQiral Rib, DI and LCPE Projecting from fill, socket (bell) end 0.2 Projecting from fill, square cut end 0.5 --------.. -----. ---·-·· ----------•s-•-·-··-···-- Headwall, or headwall and wingwalls Socket end of pipe (groove-end) 0.2 Square-edge 0.5 Rounded (radius= 1/.,D) 0.2 Mitered to conform to fill slope 0.7 End section conforming to fill slope' 0.5 Beveled edges, 33.7° or 45° bevels 0.2 Side-or slope-tapered inlet 0.2 PiQe or PiQe-Arch, Corrugated Metal and Other Non-Concrete or D.I. Projecting from fill (no headwall) 0.9 Headwall, or headwall and wingwalls (square-edge) 0.5 ---·--··-· -·-·~-·----------··--·-·· --------,.·---~--~ --"----·-·--,.. -------'--- Mitered to conform to fill slope (paved or unpaved slope) 0.7 End section conforming to fill slope' 0.5 Beveled edges, 33.7° or 45° bevels 0.2 Side-or slope-tapered inlet 0.2 Box Reinforced Concrete Headwall parallel to embankment (no wingwalls) Square-edged on 3 edges 0.5 Rounded on 3 edges to radius of 1 /12 barrel dimension or beveled 0.2 edges on 3 sides Wingwalls at 30° to 75° to barrel Square-edged at crown 0.4 Crown edge rounded to radius of 'I,, barrel dimension or beveled top 0.2 edge Wingwall at 10° to 25° to barrel Square-edged at crown 0.5 Wingwalls parallel (extension of sides) Square-edged at crown 0.7 Side-or slope-tapered inlet 0.2 . Note: "End section conforming to fill slope" are the sections commonly available from manufacturers. From limited hydraulic tests they are equivalent in operation to a headwall in both inlet and outlet control. Some end sections incorporaUng a closed taper in their design have a superior hydraulic performance. ] /24/2005 2005 Surface Water Design Manual 4-42 I I SECTIO'l 4.2 PIPES, OUTFALLS, AND PUMPS FIGURE 4.2.1.L JUNCTIO'l HEAD LOSS IN STRUCTURES ,\ ) ' / 3.4 3.2 3.0 2.8 2.6 2.4 2.2 -2.0 £ "" : 1.8 .2 "t:I "' ., :,: 1.6 1.4 1.2 1.0 .8 .6 .4 ) .2 . :'i (~:ff-;~··=-; 0 l/24/2005 '---- / " ~ Q, -~ I I ,~ '---' Q, , 1--u '--- '--- Q,t '--- 1--Typical junction chamber 1-- Q3 = 130, Q2 = 195, Qi= 65 v, = 13.5, v, = 12.3 1-- Q,+Q,= 0.50(50%) 1--Head Loss= 0.94' 1-- 1-- 1-- I J l J 7 j j I Graphic Example .....__ ----,_ ,__ ,_ -II[ • ,_ -J I J ' I I/ / ~ I I) / I/ I .I / , ~ / I/ :,,; 1 .... ~ ~ .• V I,, ... ;W~~ 1.,..--- 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 Velocity in upstream pipe, V (fps) 4-28 I I ' I I / I/ I/ _,,,. .... 16 ' I J I J I I , I/ ~ ,,,. 18 I I I ) ,,,. 20 Q, = 100% Q, Q, = 30% Q, Q, = 10% Q, 2005 Surface Water Design Manual SECTfON 4.2 PfPES, OUTFALLS, AND PUMPS FIGURE 4.2.1.L JUNCTIO'< HEAD LOSS IN STRUCTURES I I / , .. ;/ _r...,: r p 11/~; -,..,, 3.2 /J 3.0 ·:\~};;- /· .. -, C.-,' I-·/ ); ' ~- 2.8 2.6 2.4 2.2 _ 2.0 ,s ,ii <1> 1.8 0 " "' Cl> :I: 1.6 1.4 1.2 1.0 .8 .6 .4 . ·.2 0 1/24/2005 - Q, r-'\ --· I I A--Q2 - - Q3 t ---Typical junction chamber Q3 = 130, Q2 = 195, Q3 = 65 -V1 = 13.5, V2 = 12.3 ----Q,+Q,= 0.50(50%) ----Head Loss = 0. 94' ------ I r I I J , j ) r Graphic Example ----------. ---f . I ) ' / I I , ~ ., / / ~ / / , ., / " / / ~ ,; . ,,, .... ~~...-, ..... ~ 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 Velocity in upstream pipe, V (fps) 4-28 I I J I I I .. / / ..,,,,. ,,, 16 I r J I J I I , ~ I/ ./ ,,, 18 I I I Q Q - 3 = 100% 1 QJ = 50% Q, - I ,, 20 Q -3 = 30% Q Q Q ___! = 10% /7 / / '\' / (. J f ,f 2005 Surface Water Design Manual I 4.2.1 PIPE SYSTEMS~ METHODS OF ANALYSIS FIGURE 4.2.1.K BE!\ll llEAll LOSSES IN STRUCTURES I , :.~:o -0, . 0.6 ( , 2005 Surface Water Design Manual Bend at Manhole,.--sc-<'C/ _.J,o Special Shaping_ Curved Sewer r/0;2 i Sewer r1D>6 Deflection Angle Y, Degrees 4-27 .. ,_.,;! 1/24/2005 6.0 I SPECIAL REPORTS, STUDIES AND OPERATIONAL DOCUMENTATION 1. Wetland Analysis 2. Geotechnical Report 3. Traffic Report 4. BMP Implementation 5. Material Inventory 6. Potential Pollutant Source Identified 7. List of Significant Spills and Leaks 8. Employee Training 9. Pollution Prevention Team Forms 4 through 9 will be provided to property owner for implementation during site operations. 6 mmmm 1. Wetland Analysis 7 mmm11 WElLAND ANALYSIS, STREAM CLASSIFICATION AND SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM APPLICABILITY REPORT 300 S. 160TI I STREET PARCEL #: 3340400285 & 3023059083 RENTON, WASHINGTON PR.El'AR.ED FOR: MUR_PHY MCCULLOUGH TAR.RAGON DEVELOPMENT 1000 SFCOND A VENUE SUITF 3200 SEi\ TILF, WA 98104 (206) 2339600 PREPARED BY: C[L[:'lT BOTHA . I I w~ WETLAND PERMITTING SERVICES ·,. ~~-;;,,,,,11"!, r.:oin1..-,n Su<:et :;~,.,-,: !I,,, v-,·.,,~·hnn1,;; 1.,:r-11 '4S:.4,:; (206) 3Z8-7775 wps(~isp.com OCTOBER. 18, 2006 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUM'v\AR Y ............................................................................................................................................................... 3 SITE DESCR.IPTION ....................................................................................................................................................................... 3 WEll.AND DELINEA TION ........................................................................................................................................................ 4 VEGETATION ............................................................................................................................................................................. ..4 SOILS ................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 5 HYDROLOGY........................................................ .. . ............................................................................................................... 5 WEll.AND CA TEGOR.IZA TION ......................................................................................................................................... 5 WEll.AND DELINEATION R.ESUL TS ............................................................................................................................. 6 VEGETATION ................................................................................................................................................................................. 7 SOILS ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 7 HYDROLOGY................................................ .............................................................................. . ................................................ 8 WEll.AND DETER.MINA TION & CLASSIFICATION ....................................................................................... 8 WETLAND A ................................................................................................................................................................................. 8 WEll.AND 8..................................................... . ......................................................................................................................... 8 STR.EAM DETERMINATION & CLASSIFICATION ............................................................................................. 9 SHORELINE MASTER. PR.OGRAM .................................................................................................................................... 9 REGULATOR. Y IMPLICATIONS ............................................................................................................................................ 9 WETLANDS .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 9 STREAMS.......................................................... . ......................................................................................................................... 10 SHOR.EL!l\E CONSERVANCY .............................................................................................................................................. 10 Page 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report presents the findings of a wetland analysis, stream characterization and applicability of Shoreline Conservancy provisions that was performed by WPS on the Seelig Lind Avenue property. Two wetlands were identified, one located on the adjacent property to the north and the other located along the south and east side of the subject property, and the boundaries of the wetland to the south and east as well as the southern boundary of the wetland to the north were delineated. SITE DESCRIPTION The 12.57-acre site, Parcels 3340400285 & 3023059083, is located between Lind Avenue South and East Valley Road, south of SW 19th Street in Renton, Washington. SW 21'' Street is located to the north and SW 23'd Street to the south; however, both of these street ROWs have been abandoned (Figure I, Vicinity Map). The site is currently undeveloped. A fire station is located north of the northwest property comer (Parcel #3340400425), a commercial development is located to the east between the subject parcel and the East Valley Road; and a gas line is located on the parcel to the south, within the abandoned SW 23'd Street ROW (Parcel# 3023059083). The parcel is nearly rectangular, with a "panhandle" at the northeast comer. \,, .. -,. _\Gr:,·2~lifi?:::: .. ., " :,:_F:~;l~-~h ~, ··~. ,. :: -: ,:;;;: :: " :~'.'.'\ ~,, f" i~· -... · ·: ,,~ i · ;-;-,/( ·,1r > ~::-,, .• ,,~~ -:.:~ ' ... · .-.. -\' <r ._,,~_, ~NY -> I• ==4rs'~1 ~-~,,---_ ~ - :a::· ,~, H;t.1 r---. .-_~;·~~:·:;\ L~~:::=:-.~:-.. -~~~2;;1, ~: ~1z,r~-f - •= '\~ ''" t-----~"---~ii/. :)~~-t§]lf~~Jff::t;::, ~ JJJ.< ""'" -i ~ ,,,~z,~·="-''"'· __ ,,~ . --. --f -. \_--~~-=_:,~;::::_~" .. !!I ; __ '~~,;~:;~tJ~lEL~;::: ~«'-: ~a \ : :\ l ·. ,,,,_;_ ·mgc; --~-c86'_ci:.d n:~_-,,,r,,, ___ .. L '"',:;! . .----. \ ~~ _!·- IW~~---<...:Wi, The site was filled prior to 1970 with from 7-to JO-feet of dense fill material. Scrubby trees and shrubs have since become established on the site. The southeast comer and a Page 3 narrow band around the entire site are forested. The interior of the site is mostly scrubby; tree species have generally not reached 20 feet or greater. Two mapped wetlands nearly surround the site; a large wetland lies to the north and a smaller wetland wraps around the east and south property boundary. These wetlands have been included in numerous previous inventories, including the City of Renton's Rivers, Streams & Wetlands inventory. An unnamed tributary of Springbrook Creek is located on the adjacent parcel to the south, south of the abandoned SW 23'd Street ROW. WElLAND 08..JNEA TION Site visits occurred on August 25, September 23, and November 7, 2004, wherein CBWE examined the study area for indicators of wetlands. The study area of the investigation included off-site areas since it was apparent that wetland buffers extend onto the subject parcel. Wetlands were identified based on the presence of hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soil, and wetland hydrology using the method outlined in the 1997 Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual (Washington State Manual), and following City of Renton regulations. The "routine on-site determination method" was used to make the wetlands determination. The routine method is used for areas equal to or less than five acres in size, or for larger areas with relatively homogeneous vegetative, soil, and hydrologic properties. During the study area evaluation, 12 detailed data points were located in distinct representative vegetation units in order to characterize the wetland and non-wetland communities. Field observations at each data point were compiled on prcformatted Wetland Data Sheets, labeled DPl through OP12. VEGETATION Vegetation was evaluated across the study area to determine the presence of hydrophytic plant communities. Plant communities are considered hydrophytic when more than 50 percent of the dominant species in the plant community have a wetland indicator status of facultative (FAC+, FAC, & FAC-), facultative wetland (FACW+, FACW, & FACW-), or obligate wetland (OBL), as listed in the National List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands, Region 9 -Northwest (Reed, 1993 and 1988). The indicator codes for plant species are noted in Table 1. Dominant species were recorded as species comprising more than 20 percent of the plant community in each stratum (tree, shrub, and/or herb layer). TABLE 1. PLANT INDICATOR CODES Indicator Code Frequency of Occurrence in Wetlands Obligate Wetland (OBL)-occur almost always in wetlands >99% Facultative Wetland (FACW*) -usually occur in wetlands 67-99% Facultative (FAC*) -equally likely to occur in wetlands or 34-66% non-wetlands Facultative Upland (FACU*) -usually occur in non-wetlands 1-34% Page4 Obligate Upland (UPL)-occur almost always in non-wetlands <1% Not Listed (NL) -no indicator status --- * Note: FACW, FAC, and FACU also have + and -values to represent species near the wetter end of the spectrum (+) and species near the drier end of the spectrum (-). SOILS Anaerobic (saturated) conditions cause soils to form certain characteristics that can be observed in the field. Hydric indicators include: the presence of a matrix chroma of I or less in unmottled soil or 2 or less in mottled soil, gleyed soil, organic soils (peats and mucks), and the accumulation of sulfidic material. Soil pits were dug in each data point, using a shovel to depths of 16 to 18 inches below ground surface (BGS). Soils textures were characterized using Natural Resources Conservation Service protocol, and examined for hydric indicators as described by the Washington State Manual. Soil colors were identified using a Munsell soil color chart (Kollmorgen Corporation, 1988). Depth of soil saturation was recorded for each data point. Wetland Data Sheets are included in Appendix I. Several secondary data points were examined across the wetland/upland boundary in order to determine the boundary line, although data forms were not completed at the secondary data points. The secondary data points were used to examine similarities or differences in soils between major data points and to establish mapped soil unit boundaries. HYDROLOGY At each data point, observations of direct and indirect wetland hydrology indicators were evaluated and recorded. Under normal conditions, hydrologic indicators are used to determine if the hydrology is either currently present or can be inferred from the guidelines provided in the Washington State Manual. These indicators include: recorded data, visual observation of inundation or saturation, watermarks, drift lines, sediment deposits, drainage patterns, local soil survey data, oxidized root channels, and water- stained leaves. WETLAND CA TEGORJZA TION Wetlands identified within I 00 feet of the site were categorized using the City of Renton classification system. The city's classification system, (RMC 4-3-050 M. I.a., amended on December 12, 2005) is as follows: i. Category I: Category I wetlands are wetlands which meet one or more of the following criteria: (a) The presence of species listed by Federal or State government as endangered or threatened, or the presence of essential habitat for those species; and/or (b) Wetlands having forty percent (40%) to sixty percent (60%) permanent open water (in dispersed patches or otherwise) with two (2) or more vegetation classes; and/or Page 5 (c) Wetlands equal to or greater than ten (10) acres in size and having three (3) or more vegetation classes, one of which is open water; and/or ( d) The presence of plant associations of infrequent occurrence; or at the geographic limits of their occurrence; and/or ii. Category 2: Category 2 wetlands are wetlands which meet one or more of the following criteria: (a) Wetlands that arc not Category I or 3 wetlands; and/or (b) Wetlands that have heron rookeries or osprey nests, but are not Category wetlands; and/or ( c) W ctlands of any size located at the headwaters of a watercourse, i.e., a wetland with a perennial or seasonal outflow channel, but with no defined influent channel, but are not Category 1 wetlands; and/or ( d) Wetlands having minimum existing evidence of human-related physical alteration such as diking, ditching or channelization; and/or iii. Category 3: Category 3 wetlands are wetlands which meet one or more of the following criteria: (a) Wetlands that are severely disturbed. Severely disturbed wetlands are wetlands which meet the following criteria: (I) Are characterized by hydrologic isolation, human-related hydro logic alterations such as diking, ditching, channelization and/or outlet modification; and (2) Have soils alterations such as the presence of fill, soil removal and/or compaction of soils; and (3) May have altered vegetation. (b) Wetlands that are newly emerging. Newly emerging wetlands are: (I) Wetlands occurring on top of fill materials; and (2) Characterized by emergent vegetation, low plant species richness and used minimally by wildlife. These wetlands are generally found in the areas such as the Green River Valley and Black River Drainage Basin. (c) All other wetlands not classified as Category I or 2 such as smaller, high quality wetlands. WETLAND DBJNEA TION R.ESUL TS CBWE identified two wetlands within the study area. The northern boundary of Wetland A, located off site to the north was delineated to establish the extent of its buffer lying on the Seelig site, and Wetland B. A summary of the vegetation, soils, and hydrology observed in the wetlands and the on-site upland is presented below. Page 6 VEGETATION The central areas of the site represented by DPs I, 5, 10, and 12 are dominated by young black cottonwood (Populus balsamifera), with a dense understory of Douglas spirea (Spiraea douglasii) and scattered Oregon ash (Fraxinus latifolia) saplings. Cottonwoods at DP 5 were sapling rather than young trees and this central area of the site was opener, supporting primarily herbaceous species. Other species growing on the fill material in occasionally dominant cover include red-osier dogwood (Cornus stolonifera), Himalayan blackberry (Rubus procerus), snowberry (Symphoricarpos alba), goldenrod (Solidago canadensis), tansy (Tanacetum vulgare), western St. John's wort (Hypericum radicata), Scouler's willow (Salix scouleriana), and swordfem (Polystichum munitum). DP 3 represents the southern edge of Wetland A. it is dominated by Hooker's willow (S. hookeriana) and Douglas spirea; trace cover of each of the following species is also present: cattail (Typha latifolia), Pacific willow (S. lasiandra), Scouler's willow, reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinaceae), slough sedge (Carex obnupta), and sapling Oregon ash. The majority of Wetland A is dominated by reed canarygrass, yellow flag (Iris pseudacorus), deadly nightshade (Solanum dulcamara), black twinberry (Lonicera involucrata) and various willows. DP 8 represents Wetland B. Pacific and Scouler's willows and red-osier dogwood co- dominate. Douglas spirea and reed canarygrass arc also present and occasionally dominant. The forested fill banks are represented by DPs 2 and 4. Red alder (A/nus rubra), black cottonwood, red-osier dogwood, stink currant (Ribes bracteosum ), and Himalayan blackberry are all variously dominant. DPs 6, 7, and 9 represent the fill bank off-site south of Wetland B. Reed canarygrass and chickweed (Cerastium arvense) co-dominate within the abandoned SW 23'd Street ROW. SOILS Much of the site was filled with high-grade structural fill (primarily comprised of well- mixed sand and gravel) to depths ranging from approximately 5 to 10 feet. The site is mapped in the Soil Survey of King County Area as Puget silty clay loam to the west, and Snohomish silt loam towards the east. However, it is evident from the soil survey base aerial photograph that the site had been filled and converted to urban land prior to the date of the photograph, which was taken in 1970. The Puget series is made up of poorly drained hydric soils that formed in alluvium, under sedges and grass, in small depressions of the river valleys. In a representative profile, the soil is dominantly mottled dark grayish-brown (2.5Y 4/2) and grayish-brown (2.5Y 5/2) silty clay loam to a depth of about 45 inches BGS. The substratum is gray, silty clay that extends to a depth of 60 inches or more. Permeability is slow. The seasonal high water table is at or near the surface. The Snohomish series is a nearly level hydric series made up of poorly drained soils that formed in alluvium in stream valleys. The A ( or surface) horizon ranges from very dark grayish-brown (I OYR 3/2) to grayish brown (2.5Y 5/2) silt loam, and is mottled to the surface. The B (subsurface) horizon ranges from very dark grayish brown to gray and from silt loam to silty clay loam and loamy sand. Depth to layers of peaty material Page 7 ranges from 13 to 36 inches. Layers of silty clay loam to loamy sand occur within and below the peaty layers. Permeability is moderate in the upper part of the profile and moderately rapid in the lower part. There is a seasonal high water table at or near the surface. As noted above, on-site soils do not match these mapped soils because the site was filled prior to 1970. Four data points, DP I, 5, 10 and 12, were established on the filled area. The soil was very compacted and impem1eable at all DPs. Soil chroma is 3; mottling was present at DP I within the surface 12 inches. Soil within adjacent wetlands at DPs 3 and 8 generally matched the mapped series. HYDROLOGY Wetland hydrology was not observed within the fill areas. Hydrologic indicators were present only off-site at DPs 3 (Wetland A) and in Wetland Bat DP 8. WElLAND DETERMINATION & CLASSIFICATION Based upon presence of the three requisite criteria, wetlands nearly surround the site on three sides. The wetland to the north, Wetland A, is an approximately 12.3 acre scrub- shrub/emergent wetland; Wetland A does not extend onto the subject property. Wetland B, to the south and east, is a 0.6133 acre (26,714 square feet) L-shaped remnant scrub- shrub wetland surrounded by fill, 0.5117 acre (22,289 square feet) of which lies on the Seelig property. The wetland delineation is shown on the Wetland Location survey conducted by Bush, Roed & Hitchings, Inc., dated revised January 24, 2006, attached. WE1LANDA Wetland A has been designated Category 2 by the City of Renton. However, this wetland could be considered severely disturbed due to hydrologic isolation and ditching (along the southern boundary), which are characteristics of Category 3 wetlands. Wetland A does not meet the criteria for Category I for the following reasons: Criteria a: There are no listed species; Criteria b and c: There is no open water; Criteria d: There are no plant associations of infrequent occurrence. The wetland is dominated by reed canarygrass, yellow flag (Iris pseudacorus), deadly nightshade (Solanum dulcamara), black twinberry (Lonicera invo!ucrata) and various willows. On the whole, however, Wetland A meets the criteria as a Category 2 wetland. WE1LANDB Wetland B meets the criteria as Category 3 on the basis of human-related hydrologic alterations such as diking, ditching, channelization and/or outlet modification; soils alterations such as the presence of fill, soil removal and/or compaction of soils; and altered vegetation. Page 8 STREAM DETERMINATION & CLASSIFICATION An unnamed tributary of the Springbrook Creek is located off-site approximately 150 feet south of the south property line of the subject property. The stream is included on the King County GIS Assessor's maps and is identified in WDFW SalmonScape as documented habitat for Coho salmon. Per RMC Title IV, Section 3.L. l .a., Class 2 waters are perennial or intermittent salmonid-bearing waters which meet one or more of the following criteria: (a) Mapped on Figure Q4, Renton Water Class Map, as Class 2; and/or (b) Historically and/or currently known to support salmon ids, including resident trout, at any stage in the species lifecycle; and/or (c) ls a water body (e.g., pond, lake) between one half (0.5) acre and twenty (20) acres m size. Buffers for Class 2 streams are I 00-feet from the ordinary high water mark (OHWM); the OHWM of the subject stream lies greater than JOO-feet south of the northern boundary of the Class 3 wetland buffer so the stream buffer does not affect site development. SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM Title IV Section 3.090 G. designates three Shoreline environments, Natural, Conservancy, and Urban, to provide a uniform basis to apply policies and use regulations within distinctively different shoreline areas. Both Wetlands A and B have been designated Conservancy Environments. Sections K and L provide guidance on factors that must be considered in using these environments. Among the uses that must be considered, the only potential use relative to the subject property would be Environmental Effects. Such affects include pollution and Ecological Disruption, i.e. potential effects on water quality, water and land vegetation, water life and other wildlife (including, for example, spawning areas, migration and circulation habits, natural habitats, and feeding), soil quality and all other environmental aspects must be considered in the design plans for any activity or facility which may have detrimental effects on the environment. Applicants for permits must explain the methods that will be used to abate, avoid or otherwise control the ham1ful effects. REGULATORY IMPLICATIONS WETLANDS Title IV Section 3.M.6.c., Category 2 wetlands in Renton (i.e., Wetland A) are protected with SO-foot buffers and Category 3 wetlands (Wetland B) are protected with 25-foot buffers. Per Title IV Section 3.M.6.c., buffer averaging may be authorized only where the applicant demonstrates all of the following: i. That the wetland contains variations in ecological sensitivity or there are existing physical improvements in or near the wetland and buffer; and ii. That width averaging will not adversely impact the wetland function and values; and Page 9 iii. That the total area contained within the wetland buffer after averaging is no less than that contained within the required standard buffer prior to averaging; and iv. A site specific evaluation and documentation of buffer adequacy based upon The Science of Wetland Buffers and Its Implications for the Management of Wetlands, McMillan 2000, or similar approaches have been conducted. The proposed buffer standard is based on consideration of the best available science as described in WAC 365-195-905; or where there is an absence of valid scientific information, the steps in RMC 4-9-250F are followed. v. In no instance shall the buffer width be reduced by more than fifty percent (50%) of the standard buffer or be less than twenty five feet wide. Greater buffer width reductions require review as a variance per subsection N3 of this Section and RMC 4-9-2508; and vi. Buffer enhancement in the areas where the buffer is reduced shall be required on a case-by-case basis where appropriate to site conditions, wetland sensitivity, and proposed land development characteristics. vii. Notification may be required pursuant to subsection F8 of this Section. Once the final site design has been detennined, if buffer averaging is required to accomplish project goals these criteria will be addressed. STREAMS The stream located south of the SW 23'd Street ROW is protected with a minimum I 00- foot buffer, per Title IV Section 3.L. l. Based upon an applicant's request, and the acceptance of a supplemental stream or lake study, the Administrator may approve a reduction in the minimum buffer widths where the applicant can demonstrate compliance with numerous subsections of this Section; buffer reduction to a minimum of 75 feet can be permitted pursuant to this section. However, because the 100-foot stream buffer where it crosses SW 23'd Street ROW onto the subject property lies entirely within the wetland and/or its buffer, no stream buffer reduction or averaging will be necessary on this project. SHOR.ELI NE CONSER. V ANCY Once the final site design has been determined, if any impacts to a Shoreline Conservancy Environment, i.e. the wetlands or stream, are proposed, code provisions of Title IV Section 3.090 G. will be addressed. Page 10 REFERENCES Hitchcock, C.L., and A. Cronquist. 1973. Flora of the Pacific Northwest. Univ. of Washington Press, Seattle. King County Planning Division. 1986. King County Wetlands Inventory Notebook, Volume 2 East. King County, Washington. Sensitive Areas Map Folio, December, 1990. Metro King County Website. GIS Center. www5.metrokc.gov/servlet/com.esri.esrimap.Esrimap?ServiceName~overview& Client. ... Microsoft TerraServer Imagery. http://terraser-ver.homcadvisor.msn.com Munsell Color. 1992. Munsell Soil Color Charts. Kollmorgen Instruments Corp., Baltimore, MD. Reed, P.B., Jr. 1988. National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: National Summary. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C. Biol. Rpt. 88(24). 244 p. 1993 Northwest Supplement, Region 9, December 1993. Snyder, D.E., P.S. Gale, and R.F. Pringle. 1973. Soil Survey of King County Area, Washington. U.S. Soil Conservation Service, Washington, D.C. Soil Conservation Service. 1985. I!ydric Soils of the State of Washington. U.S. Soil Conservation Service, Washington, D.C. Soil Conservation Service. 1987. Hydric Soils of the United States. In cooperation with the National Technical committee for Hydric Soils. U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service, Washington, D.C. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1993. Northwest Supplement to National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: Region 9. Biol. Rpt. 88(24). Washington State Department of Ecology. 2004. Revised Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual. Ecology Publication #04-06-025. Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife SalmonScape. http:/ /wd fw. wa. gov /mapping/sa I monscape/index.htm 1 Page 11 Al'l'ENDIX I: WElLAND DETFRMINATION DAT A FOR.MS Page 12 2. Geotechnical Report 8 mmm11 GEOTECHNICAL REPORT Cedar River Corporate Park SW 21st Street and Lind Avenue SW Renton, Washington Project No. T-5996 Terra Associates, Inc. Prepared for: TARRAGON Seattle, Washington December 7, 2006 TERRA ASSOCIATES, Inc. Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering, Geology and E11vironmental Earth Sciences December 7, 2006 Project No. T-5996 Mr. Murphy McCullough TARRAGON 1000 Second Avenue, Suite 3200 Seattle, Washington 98104 Subject: References: Geotechnical Report Cedar River Corporate Park SW 21st Street and Lind Avenue SW Renton, Washington I. Report of Soil Investigation, Proposed Storage Terminal, Renton, Washington, prepared by Dames and Moore, dated May 24, 1968 2. Report of Supplemental Investigation, Proposed Warehouse/Office Building Site, Lind Avenue, Renton, Washington, prepared by Atlas Geoteehnical Engineering, Inc., dated April 15, 1985 Dear Mr. McCullough: As requested, we have conducted a gcotechmcal engineering study for the subject project. The attached report presents our findings and recommendations for th<..'. gcotechnical aspects of project design and construction. Results of our field exploration confirm soil conditions as indicated by previous site studies and summarized in the referenced reports. We observed eight to ten feet of silty sand/sandy silt fill overlying native soils composed of organic silt and peat followed by interbecldcd alluvial layers of sandy silt, silt, and silty sands. We also observed groundwater seepage in our test pits at depths of9 to 14 feet below current site grades. In our opinion, the existing fill will provide sunablc immediate support for conventional spread footing foundations. However, the immediate organic silt and peat layers will be subject to consolidabon settlement due to stresses imposed by the spread footings. If the risk for distortional settlement carmot be tolerated, a majority of the potential settlement can be mitigated by surcharging the building sites. Detailed recommendations for surcharging the build111g pads and design of foundations along with other gcotechnical design considerations are presented in the attached report. 12525 Willows Road, Suite 1 Cll, Kirkland, Washington 98034 Phone (425) 1121-7777 • Fax (425) 821-4334 Mr. Murphy McCullough December 7, 2006 We trust the infonnation presented is sufficient for your current needs. If you have any questions or require additional information, please call. Sincerely yours, TERRA ASSOCIATES, INC. Project No. T-5996 Page No. iiD TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. 1.0 Project Description................ .. .............................................................................. 1 2.0 Scope of Work .............................................................................................................. 1 3 .0 Site Conditions..................... .. ......................................................................... 2 3.1 Surface.................... . .......................................................................... 2 3.2 Subsurface............ . .......................................................................... 2 3.3 Groundwater.......... . ..................................................................................... 3 4.0 Seismic ............................... .. .................................................... 3 5.0 Discussion and Recommenciations ................................................................................. 3 5.1 General...................... . ................................................................................ 3 5.2 Site Preparation and Grading ............................................................................. 4 5.3 Excavations.............. . ........................................................................... 6 5.4 Foundations.......... . .................................................................................. 7 5 .5 Slabs-on-Grade........... .. .......................................................................... 7 5.6 Stormwater Detention Pond .............................................................................. 8 5.7 Drainage............. . .................................................................................. 9 5.8 Utilities............... .. ................................................................ 9 5.9 Pavements............. .. ....................................................................... 9 6.0 Additional Services.......... .. ............................................................... 9 7 .0 Limitations ... ...................... . ...................................................................... 10 Figures Vicinity Map ...................................................................................................................... Figure 1 Exploration Location Plan ................... .. ............................................................. Figure 2 Typical Settlement Marker Detail.... .. ............................................................. Figure 3 Typical Wall Drainage Detail..... .. ....................................................... Figure 4 Appendix Field Exploration and Laboratory Testing ................................................................... Appendix A Test Pit Logs By Others .................... . .. ......................... Appendix B Geotechnical Report Cedar River Corporate Park SW 21st Street and Lind Avenue SW Renton, Washington 1.0 PROJECT DESCIUPTION The approximately 11.5-acre site is located between SW 21st and SW 23rd streets, east of Lind Avenue SW in Renton, Washington. Site development will include constructing 4 office structures each approximately 33,000 square feet in size. Specific building design infonnation is not yet available; however, we expect the buildings will be constructed using precast concrete tilt-up \Vull p;mels with interior isolated columns supporting the roof structure and possible mezzanine levels. Floors will be constructed at grade at elevations near cunent site b'Ta<lcs. Structural loading is expected to be light to moderate, with isolated columns can-ying loads of 80 to 100 kips, and bearing walls carrying 6 to 8 kips per foot. Stonnwater will be collected and routed for Lrc"tmcnt and controlled discharge from a detention pond located in the northeastern panhandle of the site. Specific pond construction/design information is not yet available; however, we expect the pond will be constructed primanly by excavations extending 8 to 12 feet below current site grades. The recommendations in the following sections of this report are based on our understanding of the preceding design features. We should review design drawings as they become available to verify that our recommendations have been properly interpreted and to supplement them, rf required. 2.0 SCOPE OF WORK Our work was completed in accordance with our authorized proposal, dated October 23, 2006. Accordingly, on November 1, 2006, we excavated 8 test pits to depths of 13 lo 15 feet below existing surface grades. Using the results of our subsurface exp1oration along with existing soils data from previous studies performed at the site in 1968 and 1985, we performed analyses to develop geotcchnical engineering recommendations for project design and construction. Specifically, this report addresses the following: • Soil and groundwater conditions • Seismic • Site preparation and grading • Excavations • Foundation support alternatives • Slab-on-grade support • Drainage • Utilities • Pavements December 7, 2006 Project No. T-5996 It should be noted that recommendations outlined 111 this report regarding drainage are associated with soil strength, design earth pressures, erosion, and stability. Dcsi1,'ll and performance issues with respect to moisture as it relates to the structure environment (i.e., humidity, mildew, mold) is beyond Terra Associates' purview. A building envelope specialist or contactor should be consulted to address these issues, as needed. 3.0 SITE CONDITIONS 3.1 Surface The project site is located southeast of the intersection of SW 21st Street and Lind Avenue SW in Renton, Washington. The approximate location of the site 1s shown on Figure 1. The site is nearly rectangular and includes a small panhandle parcel that forms the sites northeastern corner. The site is cunently vacant with surface vegetation consisting of deciduous trees with moderate blackberry and brush understory. The site is elevated above adiaccnt parcels to the north, cast, and south and at grade with Lind Avenue to the west. The site was fjlled in the late 1960s in preparation for developing the site as a fuel storage facility. Previous exploratwn completed at the site by others in 1985, indicated fill depths of 8 to 10 feet across the property. 3.2 Subsurface Soil conditions we observed at the recent test pit excavations confinn the earlier site studies. In general, we observed approximately nine to ten feet of fill ma ten al composed of silty sand and sandy silt mixed in areas with fractured fragments of bedrock. Large boulder sized (two-to four-foot diameter) bedrock fragments were observed below three to four feet at all test pits. This fill overlies the original surface vegetation which appears to have included some small trees as logs were observed at a few of the test pits. Underlying the fill and original organic surface layer, we observed a two-to four-foot layer of organic silt and peat. Previous test pits excavated in 1985 indicated the thickness of this layer ranged from about two feet to a maximum of about seven feet. Underlying these organic soils, alternating layers of silty sand, silt, and sandy silt were observed to the test pit termination depths. The Geologic Map of the Renton Quadrangle. Wa.1hi11gton, by D.R. Mullineaux ( 1965), maps the site soils as Peat (Qlp) and Alluvium (Qaw). The native soils we observed in the test pits are consistent with these descriptions. The preceding discussion is intended as a ge11eri..ll review of the soil conditions encountered. For more complete descriptions, please refer to the Test Pit Logs attached 111 Appendix A and B. Page No. 2 3.3 Groundwater December 7, 2006 Project No. T-5996 We observed groundwater seepage at depths ranging from 9 lo 14 feet below the current site elevations. The previous 1985 study at the site indicated light to heavy groundwater seepage into the test pits at depths ranging from 6 to 10 feet below site grades that existed al that time. Fluctuations in groundwater levels will occur seasonally and annually, with lowest levels and volumes occurring during late summer to early fall (July through September). Given the time of year our exploration work was completed, 6~·oundwater seepage levels observed likely represent seasonal low levels. A two-inch diameter slotted PVC pipe was installed in Test Pit TP-2 when backfilled. This installation, while crude, will allow for measuring the depth to groundwater during the upcoming winter months and obtain a better understanding of seasonal high groundwater elevation at the site. We expect the groundwater would be present at depths of five to six feet below the surface during and shortly following the wet winter season. 4.0 SEISMIC Based on the soil conditions encountered and our understanding of area geology, per Section 1615 of the 2003 International Building Code (!BC), site class "D" should be used in design of the structures. 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. Liquefaction mainly affects geologically recent deposits of loose, fine- grained sand and silty sand underlying the groundwater table. Soils of this nature derive their strength from intergranular friction. The generated waler pressure or pore pressure essentially separates the soil grains and eliminates this intergranu1ar friction; thus, eliminating the soil's strength. lnfo1mation obtained from our recent subsurface exploration indicates that the deeper native soils at the site are alluvial in origin. Groundwater was observed at variable depths ranging from 9 to 14 feet below current site grades. Historical data indicates that the alluvial sand layers below the waler table exhibit medium dense to very dense characteristics. The deeper alluvial soil strata composed of sandy or clayey silt, due to their fines content, will exhibit cohesive strength, and arc not sil,milicantly be affected by the liquefaction phenomenon. Based on analysis, in our opinion, the risk for soil liquefaction to occur at the site and its associated hazard are low. 5.0 DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATI01'S 5.1 General The primary geoteclmical consideration that will govern site development is the potential for distortional building settlements to occur due to the compressible organic silt and peat layers that were observed across the site. These native soil layers will consolidate under static dead loads imposed by the structures and product loading on floor slabs constructed at grade. Assuming a 100-kip column load, a bearing stress of 2,000 psf, and a maximum footing depth of 2 feet below current site grndcs, analysis indicates settlement ranging from 1 to 4 inches could occur with differential movement of 1 to 2 inches. Wt: estimate the differential settlement would occur over a building span of I 00 feet. This settlement will I ikely be distortional and cause building cracking along with misalignment of doors and windows. If the risk for distortional building settlements cannot be tolerated, a majority of the potential settlement can be mitigated by surcharging the building sites. Surcharging would involve placing additional fill on the building pads above the finished floor elevations to induce primary consolidation settlements to occur before building construction is initiated. Page No. 3 December 7, 2006 Project No. T-5996 In our opinion, the existing fill soils are sufficiently compact to provide suitable immediate support for the buildings using conventional spread footing foundations. However, the soils are sensitive and will be easily disturbed by normal construction activity. Consideration should be given to placing a four-inch layer of crushed rock over the bearing subgrade to serve as a working mat and to protect the soils from disturbance especially if work occurs during the winter. Similar consideration should be given for protecting the integrity of the building floor and pavement subgrade. Cement amending the sub grade should be considered if the construction schedule results in the soil sub grade being exposed to wet weather. The fill and native soils encountered at the site contam a significant amount of fines and will be difiicult to compact as structural fill when too wet. The ability to use on-site soils from the site excavations as structural fill will depend on its moisture content and the prevailing weather conditions at the time of construction. The earthwork contractor should be prepared to dry the soils by aeration during the normally dry summer season to facilitate compaction as structural fill. Alternatively, stabilizing the moisture with cement kiln dust (CKD), cement, or lime can be considered. If grading activities will take place during the winter season, the earthwork and utility conn·actor should be prepared to import clean granular material for use as structural fill and backfill. In addition, the utility contractors should be prepared for encountering large boulder-sized bedrock fragments within the existing fill where excavations extend to depths of four feet and greater below the site. These larger fragments will not be suitable for reuse in backfil!mg the utility trenches and will likely require disposal off-site. Detailed recommendations regarding these 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 Site Preparation and Grading Surface vegetation and the upper organic soil layer should be stripped and removed from the site. Based on our recent test pits, surface stripping depths of about six inches should be expected to remove the vegetation and near-surface organic layer. Once clearing and b"·uhbing operations are complete, grading to establish desired building elevation8 can be initiated. Exposed subgrade should be observed by a representative of Terra Associates to verify that soil conditions arc as expected and suitable for support of new construction or additional fill. Our observations may include requiring the contractor to proofroll the exposed subgrade with heavy rubber-tired construction equipment, such as a grader or loaded dump truck, to determine if there arc excessively soft and yielding areas. If unsuitable yielding subgrade is exposed and it cannot be stabilized in place by aeration and compaction, the affected soils should be excavated and removed to fim1 bearing and grade rc:_,;tnrcd with new structural fill. lf the depth of excavation to remove unstable soils is excessive use of a gcotextile reinforcing/separation fabric, such as Mirafi 500X or equivalent, can be considered in conjunction ,vith clean granular structural fill. Our experience has shown that, in general, a minimum of 18 mches of a clean, granular strnctural fill over the geotextile fabric should establish a stable bearing surface. Alternatively, it may be feasible to stabilize the soils by amending with Portland cement, CKD, or lime. Page No. 4 December 7, 2006 Project No. T-5996 If grading activities are planned during the wet winter months, and the on-site soils become too wet to achieve adequate compaction, the owner or contractor should be prepared to treat soils with CKD, lime, or cement, or import wet weather structural fill. For wet weather structural fill, we recommend importing a granular soil that meets the following grading requirements: IJ.S. Sieve Size Percent Passing ------------ 6 inches 100 No.4 75 maximum No. 200 I 5 maximum* *Based on the 3/4-inch fraction. Prior to use, Terra Associates, 1nc. should examine and test all materials to be imported to the site for use as structural fill. Sn·uctural fill should be placed in uniform loose layers not exceeding 12 inches and compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of the soll 's maximum dry density, as determined by American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) Test Designation D-698 (Standard Proctor). The moisture content of the soil at the time of compaction should be within two percent of its optimum, as determined by this ASTM standard. In nonstructural areas or for backfill in utility trenches below a depth of 4 feet, the degree of compaction can be reduced to 90 percent. As noted earlier, if foundation subgrade is exposed to wet weather, consideration should be given to protecting the sub grade from disturbance by placing a four-inch mat of crushed rock over the subgradc to serve as a working mat. for the building pad and pavement subgrndc suh3cctcd to dynamic loading from construction vehicle traffic, amending the top 12 inches of subgradc with Portland cement or placing 12 inches of wet weather granular structural fi]I on the subgrade to prevent detenoration should be considered. Surcharge As discussed earlier, if distortional settlement ranging from 2 to 4 inches in total and 1 to 2 inches differentia11y over a 100-foot span cannot be tolerated, we recommend surcharging the building areas to induce settlement in the primary consolidation range prior to building construction. For this procedure, we recommend placing fill in the building areas for a minimum height of three feet above proposed buildmg finished floor elevations. This surcharge fill does not need to meet any special requirements other than having a minimum in place unit weight of 120 pounds per cubic foot (pcf). HoweYer, 1t may he advisable to use a good quality fi]I to raise grades in other portions of the site, such as parking anJ driveway areas, or use for trench backfill if necessary. The surcharge fill should extend a minimum of two feet beyond the edge of the perimeter building footings. Total settlement under the surcharge fi]I is estimated in the range of two to four inches. Jt is estimated that 90 percent of the consolidation settlement will occur m about three to four weeks following full application of the surcharge fill. Page No. 5 I December 7, 2006 Project No. T-5996 To verify the amount of settlement and the time rale of movement, the surcharge program should be monitored by installing settlement markers. A typical settlement marker detail is shown on attached Figure 3. The settlement markers should be installed on the existing grade prior to placing any surcharge fill. Once installed, elevations of both the fill height and marker should be taken darly until the full height of the surcharge is in place. Once fully surcharged, readings should continue weekly until tire anticipated settlements have occurred. Monitoring data should be forwarded to us for review when obbned. It is critical that the grading contractor recognize lhc importance of the settlement marker installations. All effo11s must be made to protect the markers from damage during fill placement. It is difficult, if not impossible, to evaluate the prob,ress of the preload program ,f the markers are damaged or destroyed by construction equipment. If the markers are impacted, it may be necessary to install new markers and extend the surcharging time period in order to ensure that settlements have ceased and building construction can begin. Following the successful completion of the surcharge program, with foundations designed as recommended in the Foundation Section of this report, maximum tota! post-construction settlement is estlmated at about 1 Y2 inches with differential movement of about one-half inch. If post-construction settlement of this magnitude is not considered acceptable, buildings should be supported on a pile foundation. 5.3 Excavations All excavations at the site associated with confined spaces, such as utility trenches must be completed in accordance with local, state, or federal requirements. Based on current Occupational Safely and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations, soils found on the project site would be classified as Group C soils. For properly dewatered excavations more than 4 feet but less than 20 feet in depth, the side slopes should be laid back at a minimum slope inclination of 1.5: 1 (Ilorizontal:Vertical). Jf there is insufficient room to complete the excavations in this manner, or if excavations greater than 20 feet in depth are planned, using temporary shoring to support the excavations may need to be consrdereu. Ctility trench sidewalls can be supported by a properly designed and installed shoring trench box. Groundwater seepage should be anticipated within excavations extending to depths of five feet and greater below existing surface grades. For excavations below ten feet, the volume of water and rate of flow into the excavation may be significant. Shallow excavations that do not extend more than two to three feet below the groundwater table can likely be dcwatered by conventional sump pumping procedures, along with a system of collection trenches. Deeper excavation may require dcwatcring by well points or isolated deep-pump wells. The utility subcontractor should be prepared to implement excavation dewatering by well point or deep-pump wells, as needed. This will be an especially critical consideration for any deep excavations, such as that which may be required for lift station construction or sanitary sc\vcr connections. This information is provided solely for the bcncfll of tl--,c owner and other de.sign consultants, and should not be construed to imply that Tena Associates, Inc. assumes responsibility for job site safety. Job site safety is the sole responsibility of the project contractor. Also, as noted earlier, the contractor should he prepared for encountering large boulder-sized bedrock fragments within the existing fill below depths of four feet. Page No. 6 5.4 Foundations December 7, 2006 Project No. T-5996 In our opinion, the building may be supported on conventional spread footing foundations bearing on undisturbed subgrade composed of existing inorganic fill. Founda11on subgrade should be prepared as recommended in Section 5.2 of this report. Foundations exposed to the weather should bear at a minimum depth of 1.5 feet below adjacent grades for frost protection. Interior foundations can be supported at any convenient depth below the floor slab, provided immediate support is obtained on a minimum of two feet of structural fill. We recommend designing foundations for a net allowable bearing capacity of 2,000 psf. For short-tenn loads, such as wind and seismic, a one-third increase in tlus allowable capacity can be used. Following successful completion of the surcharge program, with foundations hearing al a maximum depth of two feet below current site grades and with the expected building loa<ls, estimated total settlement should not exceed 1 Y, inches with differential settlement over a I 00-foot building span not exceeding one-half inch. If foundation depths will exceed two feet, stress imposed on the organic consolidating layer will increase. If footing sub6>rade will exceed two feet below existing site grade, we should be notified and asked to reevaluate potential foundation settlement impacts. For designing fom1dations to resist lateral loads, a base friction coefficient of 0.35 can be used. Passive earth pressures acting on the sides of the footings can also be considered. We recommend calculating this lateral resistance using an equivalent flui<l weight of 250 pcf. We do not recommend including the upper 12 inches of soil in this computation because it can be affected by weather or disturbed by future grading activity. This value assumes the foundation wi11 be constructed neat against competent native soil or backfi11ed with structural fill, as described in Section 5.2 of this report. The values recommended include a safety factor of 1.5. 5.5 Slabs-on-Grade Slabs-on-grade may be supported on the subgradc prepared as recommended in Section 5.2 of this report. Immediately below the floor slab, we recommend placing a four-inch thick capillary break layer composed of clean, coarse sand or fine gravel that has less than three percent passing the 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. The capillary break layer will not prevent moisture intrusion tlrrough the slab caused by water vapor transmission. Where moisture by vapor tTansmission is undesirable, such as covered floor areas, a common practice is to place a durable plastic membrane on the capi11ary break layer and then cover the membrane with a layer of clean sand or fine gravel to protect it from damage during construction, and aid in uniform curing of the concrete slab. It should be noted that if the sand or gravel layer overlying the mc'Tllbrane is saturated prior to pouring the slab, it will be ineffective in assisting in uniform curing of the slab and can actually serve as a water supply for moisture transmission through the slab and affecting floor coverings. Therefore, in our opinion, covering the membrane with a layer of sand or gravel should be avoided if floor slab construction occurs during the wet winter months and the layer cannot he effectively drained. Placement of the concrete directly on the plastic membrane may require adjustments in the concrete mix design and spac]ng of control joints to reduce the effects of dry shrinkage. The American Concrete Jnsti111te (AC!) Manual of Concrete Practice, Section 302.JR, should be consulted regarding installation of vapor barriers and concrete slab-on-grade floors. Page No. 7 For design of the Ooor slabs-on-grade, a sub grade modulus (k,) of I 00 (pci) can be used. 5.6 Stormwater Detention Pond December 7, 2006 Project No. T-5996 The stonnwater pond will be located in the northeastern pan handle of the property. The pond perimeter will be formed by cast in place concrete retaining walls. /\s we understand, the retaining wall footings will bear at a depth of about seven lo eight feet below existing site grades. Two test pits, TP-1 and TP-2, were excavated withm the proposed pond area. 1n general, soil conditions observed consisted of three feet of loose to medium dense silty sand fill overlying fill composed of clayey silt with weathered bedrock pieces to small boulders. Beneath the fill, at depths of eight to ten feet, we observed the original organic surface layer of brown organic slit to peat. At depths of 9 to 14.5 feet, we observed gray silt to gray silty sand. We observed moderate to heavy b'Toundwater seepage at a depth of 14 feet in the test pits. To establish suitable support for the pond perimeter walls, it will be necessary to excavate and remove the existing fill and peat from below the wall foundation. The excavation to remove this unsuitable material should extend laterally from the footing edge a minimum distance of three feet. Once removed, the foundation grade can be restored using structural fill placed and compacted as recommended in the Site Grading and Preparation section of this report (Section 5.2). The wall footings can then be designed using soil parameters outlined in the Foundation section (Section 5.5). The exception will be the lateral passive earth pressure resistance. Because the soils in front of the footing will be submerged below the stored water in the pond, the passive earth pressure used should be reduced to 180 pcf. This value requires that the footing be backfilled with structural fill and the fill extends horizontally in front of the footing a distance equal to the footing thickness or depth below the pond floor grade. The magnitude of earth pressure development on the pond retaining walls will partly depend on the quality of backfill. We recommend placing and compacting wall backfill as structural fill. To guard against the buildup of hydrostatic pressure, wall drainage must also be installed. A typical wall drainage detail is attached as Figure 4. With granular backfill placed and compacted as recommended and drainage properly installed, we recommend designing retaining walls for an earth pressun: equivalent to a fluid weighing 35 pcf. When necessary, to account for traffic surcharge, the wall should be designed for an additional height of two feet. If the walls cannot be effectively drained, they should be designed to support an earth pressure equivalent to a Ouid weighing 85 pcf. 5.7 Drainage Swface Final exterior grades should promote free and posi'.ive drainage away from the site at al1 times. Water must not be allowed to pond or collect adjacent to foundations, or within the immediate huilding areas. We recommend providing a gradient of at least three percent for a mirmnum distance of ten feet from the building perimeters. If this gradient cannot be provided, surface waler should be collected adjacent to the structures and disposed to appropriate stonn facilities. Page No. 8 5.8 Utilities December 7, 2006 Project No. T-5996 Utility pipes should be bedded and backfilled in accordance with American Public Works Association (APWA), or City of Renton specifications. As a minimum, trench backfill should be placed and compacted as structural fill, as described in Section 5.2 of this report As noted, most of the existing fill and the underlying native soils will be wet of optimum moisture when excavated. The utility contractor must be prepared to dry the soil by aeration or amend with CKD, cement, or lime to stabilize the moisture to facilitate proper compaction. Alternatively, or if utility construction takes place during the wet winter months, it may be necessary to import suitable wet weather fill for utility trench backfilling. Also, the utility contractor should be prepared for encountering small to large boulder-sized fragments of bedrock contained within the fill in excavations that extend to depths of four feet and greater. These boulder-sized fragments will not be suitable for reuse in trench backfill and will likely require off-site disposal. 5.9 Pavements The pavement design section is dependent upon the supporting capability of the subgrade soils and the traffic conditions to which it will be subjected. We expect traffic at the facility will consist of mainly of cars and light trucks, with only occasional heavy traffic in the fom1 of tractor-trailer rigs. For design considerations, we have assumed traffic can be represented by an 18-kip Equivalent Single Axle Loading (ESAL) of 50,000 over a 20- year design life. With a firm an unyielding sub grade prepared as recommended in Section 5 .2 of this report, we reconunend the following pavement section alternatives be used: • Two inches of AC over tlrree inches of asphalt-treated base (ATB) • Two inches of AC over six inches of crushed rock base (CRB) In areas where Portland cement concrete (PCC) pavement will be considered, we recommend a minimum 28 day concrete compressive strength of 4,000 pounds per square inch (psi) be used with a minimum un-reinforced thickness of five inches. Control or construct10njoints should not be spaced at intervals of more than 20 feet. Asphalt concrete should meet the requirements for Y,-mch HMA, as outlined in Washington State Department of Transportation's (WSDOT) standard specifications. Asphalt-treated base and crushed rock base should also meet WSDOT requirements. Long-tcm1 pavement perfon11ance will depend on surface drainage. A poorly-drained pavement section will be subject to premature failure as a result of surface water infiltrating into the subgrnde soils and reducing their supporting capability. For optimum pavement performance, we recommend surface drainage gradients of at least two percent. Some degree of longitudinal and transverse cracking of the pavement surface should be expected over time. Regular maintenance should be planned to seal cracks when they occur. 6.0 ADDITIONAL SERVICES Tena Associates, Inc. should review the final rJcsign drawings and specifications in order to verify that earthwork and foundation recommendations have been properly interpreted and implemented in project design. We should also provide geotechnical services during construction to observe compliance with our design concepts, specifications, and recommendations. This wrll allow for design changes if subsurface conditions differ from those anticipated prior to the start of construction. Page No. 9 I 7.0 LIMITATIONS December 7, 2006 Project No. T-5996 We prepared this report in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. This report is the copyrighted property of Terra Associates, Inc. and is intended for specific application to the Cedar River Corporate Park project. This report is for the exclusive use of TARRAGON and their authorized representatives. The analyses and recommendations presented in this report are based on data obtained from the test pits excavated on the site. Variations in soil conditions can occur, the nature and extent of which may not become evident until construction. If variations appear evident, Terra Associates, Inc. should be requested to reevaluate the recommendations in this report prior to proceeJing with construction. Page No. 10 Terra Associates, Inc. Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences VICINITY MAP CEDAR RIVER CORPORATE PARK RENTON, WASHINGTON Proj. No.T-5996 Date DEC 2006 Figure 1 ca,.,," " ,., s.·o•,, ~ ,;o NOTE: THIS SITE PLAN IS SCHEMATIC. ALL LOCATIONS ANC DIMENSIONS ARE APPROXIMATE. IT IS INTENDED FO REFERENCE ONLY AND SHOULD NOT BE USED FOR DESIGN OR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES. REFERENCE: SITE PLAN PROVIDED BY CLIENT \' Bl OCK 5 , ------- ' ' .. ________ i ________ _ ' ' ' ' ' ,o,' ' ' ' • -------,r----· ' ' 11 I -1 -- ' '°'' \ 1' ------------.. ,o~,, ~;; ;,_;i.:.,---=...-~ --' I ' ' ' ' ' ' e:,n,,,,u r tOT C ~ ~;t.~~ ! :~: : ''"' _____ i __________ _ I ------------_j ' ' ' ---r ---·---------------------___ _j BLCJCK 1 ' ' ------'-----. ---·-I ' ' ----:------------------ ' ' ' ' ,01 at -------T---------·------ ' ' ' ' lD1 11 ' ----------------~ "''" ---·------~------ 100 200 APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET 'I I' 1 I ., '°r Q: ' :,.., CJ' jJ ,;/ w' I 11 ' I I i i ' ' ! I ' i I i ' JI EXPLORATION LOCATION PLAN CEDAR RIVER CORPORATE PARK RENTON, WASHINGTON Proj. No.T-5996 Date DEC 2006 Figure 2 NOTES: SURCHARGE OR FILL STEEL ROD HEIGHT VARIES (SEE NOTES) PROTECTIVE SLEEVE SURCHARGE OR FILL 1. BASE CONSISTS OF 1/2" THICK, 2'x2' PLYWOOD WITH CENTER DRILLED 518" DIAMETER HOLE. 2. BEDDING MATERIAL, IF REQUIRED, SHOULD CONSIST OF CLEAN COARSE SAND. 3. MARKER ROD IS 1/2" DIAMETER STEEL ROD THREADED AT BOTH ENDS. 4. MARKER ROD IS ATTACHED TO BASE BY NUT AND WASHER ON EACH SIDE OF BASE. 5. PROTECTIVE SLEEVE SURROUNDING MARKER ROD SHOULD CONSIST OF 2" DIAMETER PLASTIC TUBING. SLEEVE IS NOT ATTACHED TO ROD OR BASE. 6. ADDITIONAL SECTIONS OF STEEL ROD CAN BE CONNECTED WITH THREADED COUPLINGS. 7. ADDITIONAL SECTIONS OF PLASTIC PROTECTIVE SLEEVE CAN BE CONNECTED WITH PRESS-FIT PLASTIC COUPLINGS. 8. STEEL MARKER ROD SHOULD EXTEND AT LEAST 6" ABOVE TOP OF PLASTIC PROTECTIVE SLEEVE. 9. STEEL MARKER ROD SHOULD EXTEND AT LEAST 1" ABOVE TOP OF FILL SURFACE. . Terra Associates, Inc. Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences TYPICAL SETTLEMENT MARKER DETAIL CEDAR RIVER CORPORATE PARK RENTON, WASHINGTON Proj. No.T-5996 Date DEC 2006 Figure 3 12" MINIMUM 3/4" MINUS WASHED ~, GRAVEL n 12"[. SEE NOTE 6"(MIN.)l 4" DIAMETER PERFORATED PVC PIPE SLOPE TO DRAIN 12" OVER PIPE 3" BELOW PIPE EXCAVATED SLOPE (SEE REPORT TEXT FOR APPROPRIATE INCLINATIONS) NOTTO SCALE NOTE: MIRADRAIN G100N PREFABRICATED DRAINAGE PANELS OR SIMILAR PRODUCT CAN BE SUBSTITUTED FOR THE 12-INCH WIDE GRAVEL DRAIN BEHIND WALL. DRAINAGE PANELS SHOULD EXTEND A MINIMUM OF SIX INCHES INTO 12-INCH THICK DRAINAGE GRAVEL LAYER OVER PERFORATED DRAIN PIPE. Terra Associates, Inc. TYPICAL WALL DRAINAGE DETAIL CEDAR RIVER CORPORATE PARK RENTON, WASHINGTON Consultants in Geotechnical Engin1::ering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences Proj. No.T-5996 Date DEC 2006 Figure 4 APPENDIX A FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING Cedar River Corporate Park Renton, Washington On November 1, 2006, we performed our field explorations using a mid-size trackhoe. We explored subsurface soil conditions at the site by excavating 8 test pits to a maximum depth of 15 feet below existing surface grades. The test pit locations arc shown on Figures 2. The test pit locations were approximately determined by measurements from existing site features. The Tcsl Pit Logs are presented on Figures A-2 through A-9. An engineering geologist from our office conducted the field exploration, classified the soil conditions encountered, maintained a log of each test pi( obtained representative soil samples, and observed pe11inent site features. All soil samples were visually classified in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) described on Figure A-1. Representative soil samples obtained from the test pits were placed in closed containers and taken to our laboratory for further examination and testing. The moisture content of each sample was measured and is reported on the Test Pit Logs. Grain size analyses \:vcrc performed on four samples. The results are shown on Figures A-10 through A-11. Project No. T-5996 MAJOR DIVISIONS I LETTER SYMBOL TYPICAL DESCRIPTION ------~-------~-------;-----1----------,------------------·- (J) L Q) _, Ol 0 L Q) .I9 .~ (J) -UJ (1l 0 ·c GJ Q) > w -Q) z <1l·- E"' <( D 0:: :,S: D (') c:,N "' ci w ~z (J) 0:: ..C C <( -rn (I) ..c 0 L- 0 u 2 (J) ~o _, 0 a,D OJN (J) E ci Q) 0 ~z.~ w 0 C (IJ z "' rn <lJ <( C: £i ~ 0:: m .... -- (') :5~ {/) w a, rn LE z 0"' -2 LL -------- Clean GRAVELS Gravels (less than More than 5% fines) 50% of coarse ------ Gravels with fines fraction is larger than No. 4 sieve - GW Well-graded gravels, gravel-sand mixtures, little or no fines. e-----__j-=-'-'-----------------------< GP GM I GC Poorly-graded gravels, gravel-sand mixtures, little or no fines. Silty gravels. gravel-sand-silt mixtures, non-plastic fines. ,------------------------1 Clayey gravels. gravel-sand-clay mixtures, plastic fines. --------1---------------------• •---a· SANDS More than 50% of coarse fraction is smaller than No. 4 sieve Clean Sands (less than 5% fines) Sands with fines SW l ----- Well-graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fines. SP Poorly-graded sands or gravelly sands, little or no fines. ---------------------------------- SM Silty sands, sand~silt mixtures, non-plastic fines. ---------+---------------------------- SC Clayey sands, sand-clay mixtures, plastic fines. I ------------- SILTS AND CLAYS ML Inorganic silts, rock flour, clayey silts with slight plasticity. ---· ----------------------- CL Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity, (lean clay). Liquid limit is less than 50% 1--------l---------------------- OL Organic silts and organic clays of low plasticity. ~---------------------•----------------------··-----------• SILTS AND CLAYS Liquid limit is greater than 50% MH Inorganic silts, elastic. e-------1--------------·-------------! CH OH Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays. Organic clays of high plasticity. ----------------,-------1------------------------- HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT Peat. -------------------------~-----~------------------------- (/) (/) w _J z Q (/) w I 0 u -- w ;:: (/) w I 0 u DEFINITION OF TERMS AND SYMBOLS Standard Penetration Densitx Resistance in Blows/Foot -- Very loose 0-4 Loose 4-10 Medium dense 10-30 Dense 30-50 Very dense >50 ----- Standard Penelration Consistency Resistance in Blmvs/F_ool Very soft 0-2 Soft 2-4 Medium stiff 4-8 Stiff 8-16 Very stiff 16-32 Hard >32 Terra Associates, Inc. Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences I 2" OUTSIDE DIAMETER SPLIT SPOON SAMPLER I 2.4" INSIDE DIAMETER RING SAMPLER OR SHELBY TUBE SAMPLER '!' WATER LEVEL (DATE) Tr TORVANE READINGS, tsf Pp PENETROMETER READING, tsf DD DRY DENSITY, pounds per cubic foot LL LIQUID LIMIT, percent Pl PLASTIC INDEX N STANDARD PENETRATION, blows per foot UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM CEDAR RIVER CORPORATE PARK RENTON, WASHINGTON Proj. No. T-5996 j Date DEC 2006 j Figure A-1 LOG OF TEST PIT NO. 1 FIGURE A-2 PROJECT NAME: Cedar River Corporate Park PROJ. NO: sI~-~59~9~G~---LOGGED BY: ~D-"P'--'L __ _ LOCATION: Renton Washinnlon SURFACE CONDS: .tiJ:U.S]L ______ _ APPROX. ELEV: ~Nwl,cAc__ DATE LOGGED: November 1 2006 DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER: 14 5 EeeL DEPTH TO CAVING: N/A [;' 0 z w ~ _, ~ .. .. " w <( 0 "' 5 10 15 20 DESCRIPTION FILL: gray to brown silty sand, routs, some asptrnll rubble, trace gravel, fine grained, moist. FILL: blue gray clayey sill with weathered bedrock pieces to 3 feet in size, old roots, sticks, wet. Brown organic SILT to fiberous PEAT, sticks, wet. (PT) Gray SILT to clayey SILT, organic inclusions, moist to wet. (ML) Gray silty lo clean SAND, fine grnined, wet {SM/SP) Test pit torminated at 14.5 feet. Moderate groundwater seepage otJ:serveU at 14.5 feet. NOTE: This subsurface information pertains only to this test pit location and should not be interpreted as being indicative of other locations at the site CONSISTENCY/ RELATIVE DENSITY Loose to Medium Dense Medium Stiff to Stiff Soft Medium Stiff to Stiff Medium Dense ~ ~ ;i w REMARKS ~ .. iii ;: "' u 0 .. 6.2 25.3 43.7 34.0 Terra Associates, Inc. Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences LOG OF TEST PIT NO. 2 FIGURE A-3 PROJECT NAME: Cedar River Corporate Park PROJ. NO: T-5996 LOGGED BY: DPI LOCATION: ..&nton Washington SURFACE CONDS: Brush APPROX. ELEV: NIA DATE LOGGED: t-Jotember j 2QQ6 DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER: H Ecet DEPTH TO CAVING: NIA Cc' -d ~ ..: z z ~ w CONSISTENCY/ w JC ~ DESCRIPTION ~ 0. REMARKS ... 0. RELATIVE DENSITY ... 0. ~ ;: w w ~ s: " "' " 0 ._ FILL: gray to brown silty sand, roots, trace gravel, fine Loose to grained, moist. Medium Dense 11.6 5- 19.0 FILL: gray brown to blue gray silty sand to sandy silt, Medium Stiff weathered bedrock pieces below 7 feet, moist to wet. to Stiff -~ ---·-- Brown organ le SILT to fiberous PEAT, wet. (r'T) Soft 152.2 77.0 10-- - Gray cl.:1yey SILT, organic inclusions, wet. (MUCL) Medium Stiff 55.9 - - Gray silty SAND, tine grained, wet (SM) Medium Dense :.--28.7 15-Test pit terminated at 14.5 feet. Moderate groundwater seepage observed at 14 feet. -2-irich slotted PVC standpipe installed. - - - 20- .. Terra NOTE: This subsurface informalion pertains only lo this !cs( pit loc,,lion nnd should Associates, Inc. not be interpreted as being indicniive of other locations at lhe site . Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences LOG OF TEST PIT NO. 3 FIGURE A-4 PROJECT NAME: Cedar River Corporate Park PROJ. NO: aI~-5~9~9~6~--- LOCATION: ....Renton Washington SURFACE CONDS: _B.[US.·~------- DATE LOGGED: November 1 2006 DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER: NIA LOGGED BY: ...,D~Pwl~-- APPROX. ELEV: ~Nl~A~- DEPTH TO CAVING: NIA ci ~ z le. "' ~ -' >-.. .. :,; "' " 0 "' 5 10 15 DESCRIPTION FILL: gray brown to brown silty sand with gravel, roots, some small sticks, fine grained, moist. FILL: reddish·bro'NTl to blue gray clayey sandy silt with weathered bed,ock pieces, small to medium large pieces of bedrock, wet. Brown organic Sil T to f1berous PEAT, small sticks, wet. (PT) Light grayish·brown clayey SILT, organics, wet. (Ml/CL) Test pit terminated at 13 feet. No groundwater seepage observP.d. NOTE: This subsurface information pertains only to this lest pit location and should no1 be interpreted as being indica1h1e of other locations al lhe site CONSISTENCY/ RELATIVE DENSITY Loose to Medium Dense Medium Stiff to Stiff Soft Medium Stiff ~ "' t:. z "' C .. REMARKS >-3: "' "' " 0 .. 9.4 25.6 189.5 106.3 Terra Associates, Inc. Consultants in Geolechnical Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences LOG OF TEST PIT NO. 4 FIGURE A-5 PROJECT NAME: Cedar River Corporate Park PROJ. NO: al.c-5>L9.,9.,,6.,___ __ _ LOGGED BY: _..p"-p_..i ~-~ APPROX. ELEV: """N~t~AL__._ DEPTH TO CAVING: N/A LOCATION: Renton Washinoton SURFACE CONDS: Jl[J.lS_[L ______ _ DATE LOGGED: November 1 2006 DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER: NIA ,.: '=-t w a 5 10 15 20 DESCRIPTION (6 Inches brown organic S!LT/ROOTSj FILL: brown silly sand with gravel to sandy silt with broken up bedrock, fine grained. moist. FILL: brown to light brown sandy cloyey silt wilh broken up bedrock pieces. lots of bedrock pieces to 4 feet in size, moist. Brown organic SILT to fiberous PEAT, sma:I sticks and small logs, wet {PT) light gray/clayey SILT, organic inclusions, wet. (ML) Test pit terminated at 14 feet. No groundwater seepage observed. NOTE: This subsurface informalion pertains only to this test pil location and should nol be in1erpre1ed as being indicative of other locations at the site CONSISTENCY! RELATIVE DENSITY Loose to Medium Dense Medium Stiff to Stiff Soft Medium Stiff REMARKS 4.2 11.1 111.2 100.8 149.1 48.8 Terra Associates, Inc. Consultants in Geo\€chnical Engineering Geology and Environmental Earlh Sciences LOG OF TEST PIT NO. 5 FIGURE A-6 PROJECT NAME: Cedar River Corporate Park PROJ. NO: ~r-"-5"'9ac9a,6.,_ __ _ LOCATION: Renton Washington SURFACE CONDS: ,B.,rc;l,;JS>J.hL_ ______ _ DATE LOGGED: November 1 2006 DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER: 9 Feel LOGGED av: ~o~eL1.._ __ APPROX. ELEV: ~N~l~A~- DEPTH TO CAVING: ~N~IA~--- 5 10 15 20 d z "j 0. " <( "' DESCRIPTION (6 inches black organic SILT/ROOTS) FILL: brown to grayish-brown sandy silt with grave(, a few large boulders, broken bedrock pieces witll depth to 1.5 feet in size, wet. FILL: blue sandy clayey silt with bedrock pieces, small to very large sizes, occasional wood to small logs, wet. Brown organic SILT to fiberous PEAT, some sticKs to small logs, wet. (PT} Light gray clayey SILT with orgBnics, wet. (ML) Test pit terminated at 14 feet. Slight groundwater seepage observed a; 9 foot. NOTE: This subsurface information pertains only to this test pil location and should not be interpreted as being indicative of other locations al the site CONSISTENCY/ RELATIVE DENSITY Loose to Medium Dense Medium Stiff to Stiff Soft Medium Stiff 20.4 18.4 71.7 "' ~ :i w 0. ~ u 0 0. REMARKS Terra Associates, Inc. Consultants in Geolechnical Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences "' LOG OF TEST PIT NO. 6 FIGURE A-7 PROJECT NAME: Cedar River Corporate Park PROJ. NO: oI~-5~9~9~5~---LOGGED BY: ~P~P~l~-- APPROX. ELEV: ~N=l~A~- DEPTH TO CAVING: ~N~(A~--- LOCATION: ...Renton Washinoton SURFACE CONDS: .Bim,u_ ______ _ DATE LOGGED: November 1 2006 DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER: g Feet t 6 z w I J ~ ~ ~ " w " C "' 5 10 15 20 DESCRIPTION FILL: gray silty sand with gravel, fine grained, some debris, moist. FILL: brown to gray sandy clayey silt with bedrock pieces to 2 feet in size, sticks, moist. FILL: blue clayey silt with small to large bedrock pieces, smal/ logs, moist to wet. Brown organic SILT to fiberous PEAT, wet. (PTi Gray clayey SILT, organics, wet. Test pit terminated at 14 feet. Heavy groundwater seepage observed at 9 tee!. NOTE: This subsurlace information per1ains only to this lest pit locat;on and should no1 be interpreted as being indicative of other locations at tt1e sile CONSISTENCY/ RELATIVE DENSITY Loose Medium Stiff Medium Stiff to Stiff Soft Medium Stiff 15.2 17.5 86.3 257.1 ;;:- "' t::. z w ~ t;; "' g ~ REMARKS Terra Associates, Inc. Consultants in Geolechnical Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences LOG OF TEST PIT NO. 7 FIGURE A-8 PROJECT NAME: _Gfiliar.River Corpuratel'arL . PROJ. NO: -1.J-c.6t.29"'96L_ __ _ LOGGED BY: JD~PLL..._ __ APPROX. ELEV: ___Nu,IAi__ LOCATION: Renton Wasbinoton DATE LOGGED: __Nm/ember 1 2006 SURFACE CONDS; ~B21ruu'"sh0-______ _ DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER: 1 o Feet DEPTH TO CAVING: _._N,,_/,,A ___ _ 5 DESCRIPTION (6 inches brown organic SJL T} FILL: brown sandy silt with gravel, lots ofwec1lhercd bedrock pieces to cobble size, old roots, sticks, moist. FILL: reddish·brown to blue sandy silt to clayey s:11, large weathered bedrock pieces, moist to wet CONSISTENCY/ RELATIVE DENSITY Medium Stiff to Stiff Medium Stiff to Stiff REMARKS 19.6 '°' 10 f----------------------1--------J 45.0 15 Brown organic SILT to fiberous PEAT, sticks, small logs, wet. (PT} Blue silty SAND, fine grained, wet. (SM) Te.st pit terminated at 13 feet. Slight to moderate groundwater sceoage obser~ed at 10 feet. NOTE: This subsurface information pertains only lo this lest pil location .;nd s1ould no! be interpreted as being indicative ol o1her loca1ions a1111e sile. Soft Medium Dense ~;1,1 .. '!:f .. ~, -,- 112.0 25.7 Terra Associates, Inc. Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences LOG OF TEST PIT NO. 8 FIGUREA-9 PROJECT NAME: Cedar River Corporate Pack ----PROJ. NO: T-5996 LOGGED BY: DPI LOCATION: Beotuo Was!Jiootoo SURFACE CONDS: Bnisb APPROX. ELEV: t:l/8 DATE LOGGED: ~oYember :I 2QQ6 DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER: :1Q Eeei DEPTH TO CAVING: U/8 ;;:: "' ~ ci !::. ,_ z :i "-w CONSISTENCY/ w :,: ~ DESCRIPTION C 0. REMARKS ,_ 0. RELATIVE DENSITY ,_ 0. " ~ w w "' "' Cl "' u 0 0. (6 inches brown organic SILT) . Flll: brown sandy silt with gravel and weathered bedrock pieces, roots, wet. Medium Stiff to Stiff 18. 1 5- . 20.3 FILL: blue clayey silt with weathered bedrock pi1cces, Medium Stiff some pieces to 3 feet in sizes, moist. to Stiff . '!" 10-1---------------· ·-- 86.8 - Brown organic SILT to fiberous PEAT, roots, sticks, logs, Soft -thin clay seems, wet. (PT) - 103.4 Blue silty clayey SAND, fine grained, wet ISM/ML) Medium Dense 46.1 15- Test pit terminated at 15 feet. -Slight groundwater seepage observed at 1 O feel. - - 20- -Terra NOTE: This subsurface information pertains only lo this lest pil lccalion and should Associates, Inc_ not be in1crprc1ed as being indicati11e of o1her locations at the site Consultants in Geotechnlc;:il Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences -~ -- 0 ~ D z " u-, u-, :::, :r' <.) z ll'. w Q_ r u-, w :, "- 0 !!2 ll'. ~i ~~ <( >- w > ~ en en w I <.) '" '" '-' z z w Q_ 0 "-0 ~ vi -- PERCENT COARSER BY WEIGHT 0 o No 2 o o o p .,o o"' o .001 °rrT"Tr~i-rrr...=r'T"Ti-r'rr·'rr-r",.,..,..,..,."',:.,..,..,..,.:;:"'.,..,..,..,.;;;·-.,..,..,..,.:;;.,..,.,.,_;;;.,.,..,..,.;..-.001 .002 t+++++++++++++++++-t+-t+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-1 .002 .003 .003 .004 .004 .006 .006 .008 .008 m ~1 .02 l+t+-t+-t+-t+-t+-t+-t+-t+-t+++tt++++++++++++++++++++tt-H-H-1 .02 .03 .03 .04 .04 .06 .06 200 .08 ~ ~ ~ .1 100 l+l-t-1-1-il-l-l-t-t-+t-t:1,~t-+++++H-t-t-l-l-l-t-t++++++++t+-l-l-ll-l-lrll'l--t-l [! .,,, .2 W 601--f'l-+t+t+++++++++++++++++++i ~~~l+l+l+l+l+l+t-±cfl>f-H-t-t-1 t;j .3 2 40 H-H-H-H-H-H-t-t-t-t-H-t+t+++H..+4"1++++++++++++++++++++'1 .4 ::l -~ ,_,_,_1-1-1-1-1-1-.6 ~z ~~~ .8 20~++++-ilt'f'l-+++++++++++-l+-l-+-l-+-l-+-l-+-l-+-lf-H-+-lf-Hf-Hf-Hf-H-+-l-+-lel w 1 !:,! en z 10 IH-lf+-1111+-t++++t++++t+++++--H--H-t--H--H-t--H--H-t--H--H-t--H--H-++-H 2 r?_ 4 H-+-ill+++++++++++++++++++++++++-++-+--+-+--+-+--+-+--+-+--+-+--+-+--+-+--+-+-+-1e! 3 <.9 4 1N 6 8 3/8 l+*l-+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-l-+-1-+-l=I 10 1/2 H-il++++++++++++++++++++++-+--+-+--+-+-H--+-+-++-++-++-++-++-++-H-H-1 5/B 1+11+-t+-t+++-t+-t+-t++++++++++++++t+t+l+t+l+t+l+l+l+l+l--l 3/4 H-tttttttt++tt++++++++-t-t-H-H-H--H--H--H--H--H--H--H--H--H--H=l20 1 tt,tt-t+-t+-t+++++++++++++-H+l+l+l+l+l+l+l+l+l+l+l+l+-1--l 1 1/4 30 11~ ~ 2 l--+-l--+-l--+-l--+-1--+-t+t+t+t+++t+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-t 60 3t--Hl-l-l-t-t-t-t++++++++++++t-t-l-l-ll-l-l--H-+t-++++++++H-I-I-I--H--H-tl00 4 100 6 l--+-1--+-l--+-t+t+t+t+t++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++t-+t-l 200 12..._ ........................................................................... ..u...u...u...u...u...u...u...u...u...u...u.J30Q g ~ g R g ~ ~ g ~ ~ o ~ PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT - en w z u:: w z u: w z u: -- en w _, g;i 8 C ,g t ~ .D o E -" ~z w 0 z <: u-, Q_ u-, • GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS CEDAR RIVER CORPORATE PARK RENTON, WASHINGTON 0 oi 0 Proj. No.T-5996 I Date DEC 2006 I Figure A-10 ~- 0 Q'. <( 0 ~ U) ::, 5 z a'. w "- I U) w ::; LL 0 f!l a'. ~ ~ ~ ~ <{ - w [ij Cf) (f) w :r () :;; :;; 0 z z UJ "-0 LL 0 UJ N u5 PERCENT COARSER BY WEIGHT o o o o o a o o o 8 .001 o,:..._.,;~:;:.,_-..:N;,::.,.._.,:"':;:._-.,.'<t .... _.,.:'°::.:,.-.,.<0:;:.,._.,. ... :;:....,.,..,."':;a._.,_,..,.<»:;:.,..,_,..,.;,,-,001 .002 1+++1+t++++++++++++++++1+t++++++++++++++1+1+t++++++ .002 .003 1+++1+t++++++++++++++1+1+tc-H++++++++++++1+1+t++++++ .003 .004 .004 .006 .008 .01 .006 .008 .01 .02 1-1-+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++l-l . 02 .03 .03 .04 .04 -.00 200 .08 ,, .1 100 1+1-H++++++I-H-++++++1-H-++++++++1-H-++++++1-HH,!:Pi',f-f-f-i 60 1-"l...-I-" .6 ::?;- 20 .+-++++++++++++++++-HIF++~++++++++++++++++++-H++-H-H-EI 8 ~ 1 t:, Cf) z 1 o H-H-J.++-H-J.+I-H-J.ttl-H+l-+-H-1+++1-l+++lf++++lf++++lf++++-H 2 ~ 3 (9 4~++++++++1+t>+-<1+-t++++++++++++++1+1+t++++++++++++l-ld4 114 H-+++++++++++¥"++++++++++++-H-H-H-H-H-H-H++++++++++d 6 B 318 l+++++++++++tt+++++++++++++-t+-t+-t+-t+-t+t+t+t-H+t-H-H=l 10 112 1+1-H-++++++l'+i-++++++++1-H-++++++++-++++++++1-H+++++-l 518 H-++l+l+tl+tlf-l++++++++++++H-H-l+t++++++++++++H-l+l+t 314 1++++++++1111+++++++++++++-H+-t+-t+-t+t+t+t+t+t-H+t-H-H=I 20 1 l-l-++++++44-++++++++++++++++++++--H--H--H--l-l--l-l--l-l--1-1--1-1--1-1--1-1-I 11M ~ 11~ ~ ~ 2 l+H-Jl4-l++++t+11+t-H+++t-1-H++-H++++1+t+++++t-t-H+++++1 I., 60 31"4::++++++++++++H-1+t+++++++++++++++t-++1-+-1+t++++++++180 4 100 6 l-l-++++++++++++++++++++++---H+4--I-I--H--I-I--H--I-I--I-I--I-I--H--1-1--H--HH 200 12 U.U..U..U..L.UL.U..U..U.U..U.U..U..U..U..L.J...L.UL.U...W..U..U..U..U..U..I.J..I 300 8 g ~ R g ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT - w z u: 0 z ~~ 0 w ::; -w (fJ ~ !:?_ w z u: 3l a:: CD 8 -' Q C t ·~ 0 (fJ () if) ::, N ci._ >- • GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS CEDAR RIVER CORPORATE PARK RENTON, WASHINGTON Proj. No.T-5996 I Date DEC 2006 I Figure A-11 "' '" N 0 z <( V) 0. U) N ri_ >- 0 APPENlllX B TEST PIT LOGS BY OTHERS 0 z ~ 0 C ~ cf. Exploration No. 1 0-1. 5 J,5-8.5 8.,5--13.5 13.5-16.5 Brown Silty Sand (SM) (moderately dense, damp) (fill) Brown to Blue Gray Silt with gravel, cobbles & boulders (ML) with occasional piece of wood (moderately dense 11et) (fill) rock is granular 3rmrn Organic Silt (Ol.) wi ti1 fragments of decayed ,iood & vegetation tu 6'' s·lze. Gray Silty Fine Sand (SM) (mo(lerate.ly dense wet). Grades fine end less silty. Completed 3/23/85 Sample Depth ( ft) 11. 5" Moisture Content % 140 Exploration No. 2 0-5.5 5. 5-10 10-10.5 Mixed llrown Silt and Gravel (ML-GM) with angular cobbles and boulders. (fill) Change to blue at 2.5' and with rock to 200 lbs. Caving at 4.5'. Seepage at 6'. Cobbles and Boulders with Silt, rock to 800 1 bs. at 7' Some woody debris at 8' Wood debris, organic si 1 t and vegetation. Terminated due to boulders and heavy caving Completed 3/28/75 Sample Depth (ft) 10' Moisture Content X 262 ~ NOTES.: > : 1) Depths in feet. 2) Field engineer: Roger Lowe ... .. 3) Excavation using a Ford 755 backhoe 4) Mai sture content is a percentage of the sample dry weight. ATLAS GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING INC. EXPLORATION LOGS PROPOSED OFFICE/WAREHOUSE PROJECT, RENT! ON, WA -----------+-----------! PLATE 2 .,----·-··----------'....._ ___________ _.... 0-10. 5 10.5-15.5 15.5-17 17-18 0 z Brown Gravelly, Cobbly Silt {ML) (fill) Change to blue-gray color at 2.5' Heavy seepage at 7' Water levels 8. 25' 3/28/75 Test pit not open long enough for water level to stabilize. Brown Organic Silt and Silty Peat (MH/PT) {moderately soft, moist) (decayed vegetation) Gray Silt with Organic Debris (ML/MH) (moderately firm, wet). Dark Gray Fine Silty Sand (SM) (moderately dense, wet) Completed 3/28/85 Sample Depth (ft) 14 Moisture Content% 216 .... EXPLORATION LOGS ATLAS GEOTECHNtCAl. •···. PROPOSED OFFICE/WAREHOUSE ENGINEERING lNC.i PROJfCT, RENTON, WA _,.:.; .,: .. ··:: .... )'">::_;:.~.~{t_·.:; '-" D z ~ D .----,----,,------------------·-------------, ! Exploration No. 4 0-3.5 3.5-8,5 8. 5-9 9-15 15-17,5 Brown Sandy Silt (ML) with rocks & cobbles (moderatly dense, damp fill) Blue Gravel and Cobules (moderately dense, saturated) ( fil 1) Hater at 3.5 feet, heavy flow. Large uouldcrs, 200 lb+ at 6' Drown Organic Silt (ML) (moderately soft, rnoi st) (topsoil). Gradational change to Alternating Brown Organic Silt and Peat (MH/PT), peat layers to 8" ttiick. Dark Gray Silty Sand (SM) (Moderately dense, >iet) (6" thick silt luyer at 16.5). Completed 3/2R/85 Sample Deptl1 I ft) 8,5 10 11 16.5 Moisture Content i:Z) 120 320 153 47 ATLAS GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING INC. EXPLORATION LOGS PROPOSED OFFICE/WAREHOUSE PROJECT, RENTON, WA z ~ "' PLATE 4 :; .... ---------'---'--------~-'-·---A--'----------...J I I il I I I I 0 z ~ 0 ~ I : I ~, > w ~ ___ , __ _ .. 1 Exploration No. 5 0-9 9-12 12-17 Brown Sandy Gravelly Silt (ML) ,!moderately dense, ,,oist) [fill) With rock fragn,cnts at 3 feet Rock tc GOO 1 bs ;,;j th 2' 1 ong dlr.1ensi on at 6.5 feet \Un.er at 7' Brc~vn and Gr<1y Silt (ML) with 0r_gan1c fragments Da:~k Gray ~·:-2-:J iurn s~.nd (SP) 1vith 8. trace nf silt. (Pc:t·Jer- ately dense, 1~ct) Dark Gray Medi urn Sand (SP) with a trace ,,f silt (moderately dense, wet). Includes GtiiY Silt layers (ML) (moderately firm, "'d.rt) and traces of orsanic !;10:terial belot>v 15 f.eet. Exoloration No. 6 0-7 7-8 8-9 9-10. 5 10.5-12 12-17 Brown Sandy and Gravelly Silt (ML) with rock fra,Jments (moderately firm, moist) (fill) Rocky at 4'. Broken rock (fill). Organic material at 8'. Brown Peat (PT) (moderately firm, saturated) ,c,r:ai Silt (ML) (moderately firm, saturated) Brown Peat (PT) (moderately firm, saturated) Gray Silt (ML) (moderately firm, saturated) with occasional layers of 11eat at 13,5'. Completed 3/2il/85 Sample Depth ( ft) 8 Moi-sture Content % 236 ATLAS GEOTECHN!CAL ENGINEERING INC. EXPLORAH:bN 1..0GS PROPOSE!l OPflCE/WAREHOUSE .· PROJECT, M;M!ON, WA PLATE 5 ., i ! l l I I 0 z C 0 : I ~ '< - > ~ >-c ~ Exploration No. 7 0-3.5 3. 5-7 7-8 s--9 9-12, 5 12.5-18 Brown Medium Sand (SP) with silt (moderately dense, damp) ( fi 11 ) Gr01,n Silty Gravel (GM) (dense damp) Change to b·: ue at 6'. Hater f101,ing in at 6' b·1ue Kuci<.y rill ;l;t:,13€.") ;i1arJ Jigging) ;·:at oi \'c:sct:.:::i~'.Tl ;1t ~·.1 f3~ci,,tn Or!J~nic Si-It 01H) (moderately firm, saturated) Gradational c:1i:ri'::l2 to 8rown P~at (PT) (moderately firm, sa "LU rated) Dark Blue Gray Medium Sand (SP-SM) with silt Completed 3/28/85 Sample Depth (ft) 8 Mai sture Content % 87 Exploration No. 8 0-2. 5 2.5-3.5 3.5-9 9-9.5 9,5-14.5 14.5-16.5 Brown Silty Sand (SM) with roots (moderately dense, moist) ( fi 11 ) Asphalt chunk from 2.5 to 3.~' Blue-Gray Gravelly Silt (ML) with rock fragments (dense moist) (fil 1) Brown silt (ML) >1ith occasional rocks and fragments of vegetation. (fill) Black Organic Mat Grown Peat (PT) Seepage at 12' grades with silt below 12. Gradationa, change to Gray Silt (ML) with some organic debris. (moderately dense, saturated) Trace of sand at 16.5. Terminated at 16.5' due to obstructions that limited excavation. Completed 3/28/85 EXPLORATION LOGS ATLAS GEOTECHNICAL PROPOSED OFFJCE/WAREHOUSE ENGINEERING INC. PROJECT, RENTON, WA 1-- PLATE 6 I 0 z Q 0 Exploration No. 9 0-3 3-4.5 4. 5-9 '.1-14. 5 14.5-17 17-18 Brown Sandy Silt (ML) (fill) Blue Rocky Fill (v2ry dense) hard digging. Silty Sandy Gravel (GM) (very dense, ,;et) (fil 1) KoCKS tu l:)" :;iLt: aL 7'. ~ery !111·t ~~J~i11; (J~ing ' . ' , • -~ I: ' ' ' \-i~)OU {}2i"ff1 $ co o CI F..i",iE-ter Gradationa l change ta Mixed Peat and Gray Silt (PT/HH) (firm saturated) Gray Silt (:\Hi) 1·.!i~,:l1 orgQnic fragments. (Moderately firm 1 saturated) Completed 3/29/85 Sample Depth (ft) 10 Moisture Content% 101 11 . 12. 5 17 185 193 44 ATLAS GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING INC. . ,.{. EXPLORATION LOGS PROPOSED OFFICE/WAREHOUSE PROJECT, RENTON, WA PLATE 7 I I 0 z \ m 0 I I I ' I ,_ m 0 w ~ ~ > w ~ ,_ m z ~ ,( ~ 0 Exploration No. 10 0-8 8-9 9-9. 5 9 5-14.5 14.5-16 16-17.5 17.5-18 Brown Sandy Gravelly Silt (ML) (dense, moist) rocks to 18" ( fi 11 ) Change to blue at 6' Seepage and some cjv1ng at 6' C:ncf:y r1·11 · . ..-~-;::·: :~1:t £xp1oration ·fioodeiJ, sev~r·e cavir1g Vo.::getat.ion i:1.:i~. Bro\'jn Peat anti Silt (?T/i"H-l) Chunk of partially decayed wood at 12.5 Gray Fine Gravel (GP) (moderately dense, saturated) Mixed Peat and Silt ,ith Peat (PT/MH) Dark Gray Silty Sand (St-\) (moderately dense, wet) Completed 3/29/85 Sample Depth ( ft) 10 11 I - Moisture Content % 14 7 133 EXPLORATION LOGS ATLAS GEOTECHNICAL PROPOSED OFFICE/WAREHOUSE ENGINEERING INC. PROJECT, RENTON, WA PLATE 8 ,~-- . I I I I I I I I I I 0 z m 0 ~ ,_ m a w 3c w > w ~ z 3c Exploration No. 11 0-1.5 1.5-7 .5 8-10 10-ii 11-13.5 13.5-14.5 Brown Sandy Gravelly Silt (ML) (Moderately dense, damp) ( fi 11 l Rocky Fill ,;ith Silt Color change to blue at 4.5' Bt·ovrn Organic S·il·~-(;;;.;) 1-:·lHi oi .. 9:::;1i-.: i:i~·!.:2:,·!,:.l. ~f·irTi, C~r:~f' r:-:~i ~-t:) G~·ada-ciona.l c!1t111(_j:2 tu Grorrn Ft.:at (~i} {;;10 .... ~t:ta"'c;::ly fit~, moi s ti Gray Silt (ML-MH) (11ith fragments of organic material (moderately firm, moist) Dark Gray Sand (SP) with some si 1 t (moderately dense, saturated) Completed 3/29/85 Sample Depth ( Ft) 8.5 10. 5 Moisture Content % - 96 258 EXPLOR~TION LOGS ATLAS GEOTECHNICAL PROPOSED OFFICE/WAREHOUSE ENGINEERING INC. PROJECT, RENTON, WA ~ PLATE 9 0 1-------------..L.-·-·----------!..------------i ci z .. 0 z 3: -< ~ Exploration No. lZ 0-3. 5 3. 5-8 S-8.5 8. 5-9 9-10. 5 10.5-11.5 11.5-15 15-15.5 15.5-lG.5 Brown Sandy Silt (ML) (moderately dense, damp) (fill) with some rocks at 2' Brown and Blue with Orange Layers, Sandy Gravelly Cobbly Si 1 t (ML) (moderately dense, moist) (fil 1) Rocky fill -l',e:i.vy floi,.1 of \;.fater Roe k to 2' x 2 l / 2' Brown Organic sn t (i~H) (moderately dense, sacu,·a,ed) Gray silt (ML) (moderately dense, saturated) Gray Medium Sand (SP) (moderately dense, saturated) Gray Silt (ML) (mederately dense, saturated) Dark Gray Sand (SP) (Moderately dense, saturated) Completed 3/?9/AS Exploration No. A 0-6.5 6.5-9.0 Brown Medium Sand (SP) (moderately dense -loose, moist) (fill) (caving) Vegetation mat at 6.~ Brown Peat ( PT) Termination@ 9' due to severe caving Completed 3/29/85 ATLAS GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING INC. EXPLORATION LOGS PROPOSED OFFICE/WAREHOUSE PROJECT, RENTON, WA Cl,__ ______ _ PLATE 10 3. Traffic Report 9 mmm11 Renton CEDAR RIVER CORPORATE PARK TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS Prepared for Murphy McCullough, Senior Development Manager TARRAGON 1000 Second Avenue, Suite 3200 Seattle, WA 98104 JTE, inc. JAKE TRAFFIC ENGINEERING, INC. December 11, 2006 Mark J. Jacobs, PE, PTOE, President 77318'" Ave. SW -Seattle, WA 98106 -2007 Tel. 206.762.1978; Cell. 206.799.5692 Facsimile 206.762.1978 Email -jaketraffic@comcast.net JT E . Jake Traffic En~neering, Inc. . Hark J. Jacobs, PE, PTOE President 7731 8• Ave SW -Seattle. WA 98106 -l007 Tel. 206.762.1978 · Cell 206.799.5692 -facsimile 106.762.1978 E-mail jaketraffic@comcast.net December 11, 2006 Murphy McCullough, Senior Development Manager TARRAGON LLC 1000 Second Avenue, Suite 3200 Seattle, WA 98104 Re: Cedar River Corporate Park -Renton Traffic Impact Analysis Dear Mr. McCullough; We are pleased to submit this Traffic Impact Analysis for the proposed Cedar River Corporate Park project in Renton. The proposed proJect would provide a total 142,434 sq. ft. to be developed as follows: :., Building A: 34,615 sq. ft. :., Building B: 29,751 sq. ft. :., Building C: 33,551 sq. ft. :.. Building D: 44,517 sq. ft. We understand that the proposed development is to be comprised of -60% warehousing use and -40% office use. The project site 1s located east of Lind Ave. SW and south of SW 21st Street. Access to the site is proposed via two driveways on Lind Ave. SW; the north driveway likely to be limited to right in/out only and the south driveway providing full access. We have conducted a field review of the site and surrounding street system. The study scope was determined pursuant with our correspondence with Kayren Kittrick, Development Engineering Supervisor of the City of Renton. The following arterial intersections are analyzed in this report: :., Lind Ave SW/SW 16th St. :., Lind Ave. SW/SW Grady Way In addition the site access intersections are evaluated in this report. Frontage improvements to SW 21st St. and SW 23•0 St. are not proposed. City code requires an explanation to why frontage improvements are not provided along Wetland Permitting prepared a Wetland Analysis, Stream Classification and Shoreline Master Program Applicability Report dated October 18, 2006. This report identified both SW 21st St. and SW 23•0 St. as wetlands thus making frontage improvements on SW 21st and 23•d St. not practical. Murphy McCullough, Senior Development Manager TARRAGON LLC December 11, 2006 Page -2- JTE, Inc. The general format of this report is to describe the proposed project, identify existing traffic conditions (baseline), project future traffic conditions and identify Agency street/road improvements (future baseline), calculate the traffic that would be generated by the project and then add it to the future baseline traffic volumes. Operational analyses are used to determine the specific project traffic impact and appropriate traffic mitigation measures to reduce the impact. Additionally Agency traffic impact fees are addressed in this report. The summary, conclusions and recommendations begin on page seven of this report. PROJECT INFORMATION Figure 1 is a vicinity map showing the location of the proposed site and surrounding street network. Figure 2 shows a preliminary site plan prepared by AHBL. The plan consists of the site layout developed into four buildings as identified earlier in the report. Parking for 459 vehicles is provided. Access to the site is proposed via two driveways on Lind Ave. SW: the north driveway likely to be limited to right in/out only and the south driveway providing full access. Full development and occupancy of the proposed Cedar River Corporate Park project is anticipated to occur by 2008/2009, presuming the permits are issued in a timely manner. However, to ensure a conservative analysis 2011 has been used as the horizon year. EXISTING ENVIRONMENT Proiect Site The project site is presently undeveloped. Street System Figure 3 shows the existing traffic control, number of street lanes, number of approach lanes at the intersections and other pertinent information. The primary streets within the study area and their classifications per the City of Renton Comprehensive Plan are as follows: J;> SW Grady Way J;> Lind Ave. SW J;> SW 16th St. J;> SW 19th St. J;> SW21"St. Traffic Volumes Principal Arterial Minor Arterial Collector Arterial Unclassified Unclassified Figure 4 shows the existing PM peak hour traffic volumes for the analysis intersections. Trafficount, a firm that specializes in the collection of traffic data, collected the existing PM JTE, Inc. Murphy McCullough, Senior Development Manager TARRAGON LLC December 11, 2006 Page -3- peak hour turning movement count at the analysis intersections on the date shown in Figure 4. The count data sheets are attached in the appendix. Transit Services We reviewed Metro Transit website (www.tr9 nsit.metrokc.gov) for bus services in the vicinity of the proposed project. Metro bus routes #153, 161 and 247 provides service along Lind Ave. SW in the vicinity of the proposed project. Additional information on these routes can be obtained on the Metro Transit website. Intersection Operations Traffic engineers have developed criteria for intersection operations called level of service (LOS). The LOS's are A to F with A and B being very good and E and F being more congested. LOS C and D correlate to busy traffic conditions with some restrictions to the ability to choose travel speed, change lanes and the general convenience comfort and safety. The procedures in the Transportation Research Board Highway Capacity Manual, 2000 were used to calculate the level of service at the study intersections. The following table depicts the LOS and corresponding average delay in seconds at signalized and stop control intersections: ·- Intersection Level of Service Type A B C D E Signalized <10 >10 and >20 and >35 and >55 and <20 <35 <55 <80 Stop Control <10 >10 and >15 and >25 and >35 and <15 <25 <35 <50 LOS Criteria Conversation with City of Renton staff identified that no LOS standards is set in the City of Renton. However, the desired LOS is LOS' D' with the acknowledgement that a number of intersections in the City are fully developed that do not lend themselves to further improvements. LOS Analysis Software The LOS of the study intersections were calculated using the following software program: }> SIGNAL 2000 by Strong Concepts (signalized) F >80 >50 Murphy McCullough, Senior Development Manager TARRAGON LLC December 11, 2006 Page-4- i-Highway Capacity Software (HCS) 2000 by McTrans (stop control) Accident History JTE, Inc. Field review of the site and study intersections did not reveal any apparent accident problems. The City was contacted via e-mail (on 11.14.06) inquiring of any known problems; no response was provided. STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS We have reviewed the City of Renton's web site at (www.rentonwa.gov) for a listing of City street improvement projects. The data on-line provides the "Six Year Transportation Improvement Program 2005 -2010" (attached in the appendix) for street improvement projects in the vicinity of the proposed project. The following improvement projects are identified in the vicinity of the proposed project: );.. Grady Way Corridor Study, TIP number 35, project cost estimate is $3,300,000. l-Lind Ave. SW from SW 16" St. to SW 43rd Street, TIP number 45 and project cost estimate is $2,555,000. Per discussion with City we understand that the City's Lind Ave. SW TIP project would widen the existing street to five lanes at sections where five lanes do not currently exist and provide pedestrian improvements at sections where needed. HORIZON YEAR CONDITIONS "WITHOUT" THE PROJECT Figure 5 shows the projected 2011 PM peak hour traffic volumes "without" the project. These volumes include the existing traffic volume counts plus background growth. A growth factor of two percent per year was applied based on WSDOT historic traffic volumes at the SR -167 after the SW 43,, St. ramp (mile post 24. 77). The actual growth factor calculated was less than two percent per year (-1.1%), thus utilizing a two percent per year growth factor ensures a conservative analysis. TRIP GENERATION AND DISTRIBUTION Definitions A vehicle trip is defined as a single or one direction vehicle movement with either the origin or destination (existing or entering) inside the proposed development. Traffic generated by development projects consists of the following types: Pass-By Trips: Trips made as intermediate stops on the way from an origin to a primary trip destination. JTE, Inc. Murphy McCullough, Senior Development Manager TARRAGON LLC December 11, 2006 Page-5- Diverted link Trips: Captured Trips: Primary (New) Trips: Trip Generation Trips attracted from the traffic volume on roadways within the vicinity of the generator but require a diversion from that roadway to another roadway to gain access to the site. Site trips shared by more than one land use in a multi-use development. Trips made for the specific purpose of using the services of the project. The proposed Cedar River Corporate Park proJect is expected to generate the vehicular trips during the average weekday, street traffic AM and PM peak hours as shown in Table 2. The trip generation for the project is calculated using trip rates from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation, Seventh Edition, for Warehousing and General Office Building (ITE Land Use Code 150 and 710, respectively). All site trips made by all vehicles for all purposes, including commuter, visitor, and service and delivery vehicle trips are included in the trip generation values. Warehousing and General Office generate predominantly primary trips. There would be some captured/pass-by trips that already exist within the vicinity; such as mail delivery, garbage, and other service/delivery traffic. Based on our traffic engineering experience we have seen captured/pass-by trip rates of 5 to 10 percent for office and warehouse uses. For analysis purposes we have applied a 5% factor that we believe to be conservative. Based on our analysis, the tnps generated by the Cedar River Corporate Park project are calculated to be 999 net new daily and 119 net new trips during the PM peak hour. For analysis purposes we have used 125 trips during the PM peak hour. Trip Distribution Figure 6 shows the site generated traffic assigned to the street system. Trips to and from the site were distributed to the surrounding street network based on the characteristics of the street network, existing traffic volume patterns, the location of likely trip origins and destinations (residential, business, shopping, social and recreational opportunities) and previous traffic studies. HORIZON YEAR CONDITIONS "WITH" THE PROJECT Traffic Volumes Figure 7 shows the 2011 PM peak hour traffic volumes "with" the proposed project at the analysis and site access intersections. The site generated PM peak hour traffic volumes shown on Figure 6 were added to the proJected background traffic volumes shown on Figure 5 to obtain the Figure 7 volumes. Murphy McCullough, Senior Development Manager TARRAGON LLC December 11, 2006 Page -6- Level of Service JTE, Inc. Table 1 shows the calculated LOS for the horizon year (2011) "with" and "without" project conditions at the pertinent intersections. Based on our analysis the analysis the Lind Ave. SW/SW 16th St. would continue to operate at LOS 'D' for both "with" and "without" project conditions. The Lind Ave. SW/SW Grady Way intersection would operate at LOS 'E' for both "with" and "without" project conditions. The northbound to eastbound movement at the Lind Ave. SW/SW Grady intersection is currently a yield controlled movement. Our field reconnaissance indicate that an add lane is provided for the northbound to eastbound movement thus making it a free flow movement. Replacing the yield sign with an add lane sign to properly facilitate this movement is suggested. The added lane sign is used to indicate a free flow movement and would improve (reduce vehicle delay, as seen in Table 1) the operation at the intersection. The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, 2003 Edition, Section 2C.32 Added Lanes Signs (W4 -3, W4 -6) identifies its guidelines in installing add lanes signs as follows (taken from the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices): S,ction 2('.32 .\dded Lme Signs <Wci-J. \\ "-6) (iuiJ:Ull'.L''. ThL' .-\JJ;,_·J L:tne i\\'.+-.lt sign \'it:L' Fi~un' ~C-hi ,hould he im,L;1lleJ in :1(h:u1.;c Lif .1 p4-1irH wlwn .. · 1v .. ·1) rn:1d~\·:1y~ c,1m'crgc aml mcr~ing mon~llh'llh :11\· 1111\ l'L'ljUirL'LL \\'hen poo.;:,;1hk'.. thL' :l.ddcd Lml· -.ign 'ihould I"-.' plan:-J 'iuch that it is yj~ihk r1\1m hoth ro;11.h\ ;1) ,;·. 11" lh1,; i, nol JlL1-.:sihlt'. a11 .Added Linc ~ig-n ~hou!J hl' plaL'nl <)U tlw ,;ide ,1r l':t..:h roadway Wh...:n :m AJd~d Lim: ~•i;n 1:,,. lo hL' 1ns1alk:d 1111 .1 n1;1Jw:1y th~tl ~·urv ... ·<, hdnri: \.'llll\'ergin& \~ith :molh,:r roadwa) tll:11 ha._, a l:m~l'lll aliglllHl'1ll al tht' pninL 11!' c,)Jll't:rg,:ni:e. th .. ' En1l·ri11g Rnad,vay ,-\JJcd Lafk.' t\\'4-fiJ :-ig11 i -...--..... Fi~tir..: ~C-61 ~h(1tild Ix• u-;cd 111 hl'.lkr p,n1r:1y thv ;i,,:tu:.il !;('l1m..--1ric l·onditil•n,; It) rnad tl'i<.'r~ on the 1:urving rc1ad\\·ay. Site Access Access to the site is provided via two driveways on Lind Ave. Southwest. The north driveway is likely to be limited to right in/out only due to the proximity to the Lind Ave. SW/SW 21,, St. intersection. Having full access at the north access intersection would create a conflict between the northbound to westbound and southbound to eastbound left turn motorists. Thus limiting the north access to right in/out would provide better operation. The south driveway would provide full access. For analysis purposes we have assigned all the project trips to use the south site access to Lind Avenue Southwest. Based on our analysis the south site access intersection is expected to operate at LOS 'C' or better for all movements. The north site access would operate satisfactorily based on traffic engineering judgment and inspection. Murphy McCullough, Senior Development Manager TARRAGON LLC December 11, 2006 Page -7- JTE, Inc. We have reviewed the WSDOT Design Manual, May 2001, Figure 910-8b "Left Turn Storage Guidelines (Four Lane, Unsigna/ized)" for the Site Access intersection. The data indicates that left turn storage is not needed at the site access intersection with Lind Avenue Southwest. The City has a project to ultimately provide a two way left turn lane on Lind Ave. SW from SW 16th St. to SW 43rd Street; reference TIP number 45. Left turn channelization is not needed to serve the subject proJect; thus the existing 4 -lane street section is sufficient to serve the site. Traffic engineering review/inspection of the traffic volumes on Lind Ave SW in the site vicinity indicate that consideration of a 3 -lane street section in lieu of the existing 4 -lane street could be made. The operation of the south driveway with a 3 -lane street would be slightly better than with the 4 -lane street. City TIP number 45 to widen to 5 -lanes and improve Lind Ave SW has a project cost estimate of $2,555,000 that could be reduced if a 3 -lane street section was determined to be appropriate. If a 3 -lane street section was determined appropriate the existing curb along the sites street frontage to Lind Ave. SW should remain unchanged and thus stay put. AGENCY TRAFFIC IMPACT MITIGATION REQUIREMENTS The City of Renton requires a traffic impact fee for new developments based on the number of new average daily trips generated. The current fee is $75.00 per new average daily trip. The proposed development is projected to generate 94 7 net new daily trips thus contribute $74,925 (999 net new daily trips x $75) towards the City of Renton's transportation improvement program. Lind Ave SW 1s identified in the City's street improvement program; thus credits against the traffic impact fee may be available. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS This report analyzed the traffic impact of the proposed Cedar River Corporate Park project generally located east of Lind Ave. SW and south of SW 21" Street. Existing traffic data was collected at the pertinent street intersections identified for analysis. Future horizon year traffic volumes were derived using a growth factor of three percent per year. Level of service analyses were performed for existing and projected future horizon traffic volumes. The evaluation of the traffic impact of the proposed project included adding project generated traffic to the future traffic volume projections and calculating the level of service. The "with" project traffic operations were then compared to the "without" project operations. The comparison of traffic operations "with" and "without" the project identified that the project would not cause a significant adverse affect on the operation of the study intersections. Based on our analysis we recommend tl1at the Cedar River Corporate Park project be allowed with the following traffic impact mitigation measures. 1. Construct site in accordance with applicable City requirements. JTE, Inc. Murphy McCullough, Senior Development Manager TARRAGON LLC December 11, 2006 Page -8- 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. The north site driveway on Lind Avenue Southwest should be restricted to right in/out only operation due to poor off-set with the City Lind Ave. SW/SW 21st Ave. intersection to the north. Construct frontage improvements to Lind Ave. SW per City code criteria leaving the existing curb along the site's frontage. The existing 4 -lane street section is sufficient to serve the project. Our initial street section analysis indicates that converting the 4 -Jane street to 3 -lanes as potentially viable. Maintain the existing 'non-built out" condition of SW 21st Street and SW 23,ct Street right-of-ways (ROW's). Wetlands exist within the SW 21st and 23,ct Street right of ways that makes street frontage improvements not practical; see Wetland Analysis, Stream Classification and Shoreline Master Program Applicability Report. Contribute towards the City of Renton traffic impact mitigation fee program. Replace the "Yield" sign on the northbound to eastbound movement at the Lind Ave. SW/SW Grady Way intersection with an "Added Lane Sign" in accordance with the MUTCD criteria. No other traffic mitigation should be necessary. Please contact me at (206) 762-1978 or email me at jaketraffic@comcast.net if you have any questions. Sincerely, Mark J. Jacobs, PE, PTOE, President JAKE TRAFFIC ENGINEERING, INC IJ.Jf,u(; JTE, Inc. PM PEAK HOUR LEVEL OF SERVICE TABLE 1 CEDAR RIVER CORPORATE PARK -RENTON TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS INTERSECTION APPROACH EXISTING 2011 W/0 2011 W/ PROJECT PROJECT Existing Added Lane Sign 2 Lind Ave. SW/ SW Grady Way Overall D (47.0) E (57.9) E (59.9) E (55.5) Lind Ave. SW/ Overall C (22.4) C (25.3) C (26.0) SW 16th St. Existing 4-Re-striped to Lanes 3-lanes Site Access Intersection SBLT --A (9.1) A (9.1) WB --C (19.5) C (17.0) Number shown in parenthesis is the average control delay in seconds per vehicle for the intersection as a whole or approach movement, which determines the LOS per the Highway Capacity Manual. 2 -Replacing the "Yield" sign (currently existing) for the northbound to eastbound traffic movement with an "Added Lane·· sign. JTE, Inc. VEHICULAR TRIP GENERATION TABLE 2 CEDAR RIVER CORPORATE PARK -RENTON TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS TIME TRIP TRIPS TRIPS TOTAL PERIOD RATE ENTERING EXITING Warehousing (ITE Land Use Code 150, 85, 459 sq. ft.) Average Weekday T = 4.96X 212 (50%) 212 (50%) 424 AM Peak Hour T = 0.45X 31 (82%) 7 (18%) 38 PM peak Hour T = 0.47X 10 (25%) 30 (75%) 40 General Office Building (ITE Land Use Code 710, 56,975 sq. ft.) Average Weekday T = 11.0lX 314 (50%) 314 (50%) 628 AM Peak Hour T = 1.55X 77 (88%) 11 (12%) 88 PM peak Hour T = 1.49X 14 (17%) 71 (83%) 85 Total Average Weekday -526 526 1,052 (9991) AM Peak Hour -108 18 126 PM peak Hour -24 101 125 (119) T = trips X = per 1,000 sq. ft. A vehicle trip is defined as a single or one direction vehicle movement with either the origin or destination (existing or entering) inside the study site. The above trip generation values account for all the site trips made by all vehicles for all purposes. including commuter, visitor, recreation, and service and delivery vehicle trips 1 Applied 5% captured/pass-by trip percentage to account for trips that already exist within the vicinity (ie, mail delivery, garbage, and other service/delivery traffic). I JTE, Inc. 1800 1600 -----,·--~ I I . i . i --+-----i---+----- 1 l ' --------+-----+-----:------. 1 I I : ' I c"-S .. it-e--a-c=c_,·~Ls-s/=L~i-nd_,-_A_v_e-nu-e-'-S-W _ ___,_ ___ ---i---.,, ---T SBLT's: 13 I----~----~----- .c Opposing Through Volume: 685 Ol ::, 0 800 ~ .c f- Ol .£ 600 "' (I)\ 0 Q_ Q_ s\ 0 400 'i. ~: -, 200 it- g_ \ 8. . I 00 I -"'·-+------+-----+---+-, -----1-- i i --",+-----+----+-----+--------~ '\ °"' ?<b 'l \- \ & ..s, ,s i '_'f _ '?s~? __ ?r~ : ! -·-------~l _____ L_ ____ ~----------·- 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 ~-~~ _____ _L___ __ 50 mo 1so Left Turning Volume (DHV) S = Left-Tum storage iength Left-Turn Storage Guidelines {Four-Lane, Unsignalized} Figure 910-!!_b lmerseccioos AI Grade Page 910-20 Design Manual M 22-01 January 2005 -~ ' Project: Cedar River Corporate Park -Renton Location: East of Lind Ave. SW and south of SW 2151 Street. a , t NORTH ; :-, ~1,. :·~---~ -·. _· t:: ~ tMi ~-. .,,; . . ! JTE, Inc. CEDAR RIVER CORPORATE PARK -RENTON TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS FIGURE 1 VICINITY MAP Project: Cedar Ri"er Corporate Park -Renton Location: East of Lind Ave. SW and south of SW 21st Street. Note: An 8.5 x 11" preliminary site plan is included with this report JTE, Inc. FIGURE 2 CEDAR RIVER CORPORATE PARK -RENTON TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN t NORTH I~ I // C:CJ ! if i I ---------------------_ J I_ -~~-=-:?---=~~-~----=--J--.1-~-----=---== -,---~ _____ - 11 ) ______ --~~ ________ ?W 21S_T _~S~lH ~v't.~--=------_"b'_:_=-:._-=.-:::_---·~~.=.=_-_-_-___ -~-_ ~-1::, rll+ , ----------------_ ---77 ~----~-~-------------= -"I I I• I,----,,~--~-~.::::-=-~--~-~,,..-'/ /7"--------------r-=--=~----__.51"" ~~1-_,,~c;~e:- !1: lif 111J r '~---------------0~1Mfn1~1~,----/-~ 0 0 = L __ =:~:~ .,, -d~J r :,vv 11 1' 1' :, .cj ~---11:--~~~~=±!J ----1 -5l } I I : I I : i I I JO' I I I --...1 I I I I I I I I ~ BLDG A -34,615 ~, 1 . 1 , BUI ~DIN Q 8 ! 1 I \ I BLDG B -29.751 < 11 I I :;, "' . 29 751 <,: F" I Ou..: I)) I ~ BLDG C -33,551 tjll .1· JO' "' I 'i Y· · 1 · ~'I,...,, , BLOG0-44,517 0:il '!'\ I J12' (_9(/) I( I '---...... ,_; 11 1 I 1 ~ ~-1'-=-I ..._ __ .~-.-TOTAL -142,434 S.F. :i I ,I f '-'t> b...:.. I n 1] ~ :_,_ 1 ,_1 1 ~--go· <)ow 63 ' 3~ 1 1 , / 142.434/541,725 = 26.29:; • 1 U I O <l'. U.: CO si" \ , ( / PARKING Wl·\J\/i(1 I II ~ :_1}.. !'\ ·J f I ~ (/) -\: 1 · 459 STALLS SHOWN, .3.22 RATIO o,;I II j,, oc{)"< ' s:1:i_: I. 11/ 1 J'1i : g~ ~ /: I j I I_ \I I I CD I") I d I .. ,+ . I ' ... ... I. ·1" I I 40' ' 90' I I { I :: 'I ! -~ lilUILD)NG C : ! , ,, ',, , '_· I ;33 551 S.F' I ' I 1 I I I ' I ' I I I I I !1 I I I I I ;, I b I I ( I. ~ 11 ,, :rn I : : : : l. 1/ir I lj l/ : j .. I M :<l I .. i \ ' I 'ii u u l N I I " I I' · ~I ~ I 56' I I' , /I/(--:,-_---:.==~-:--:-:::::::~-==-:----._:::-_-}~---_~;;--~---__ ~~===-=::::-_~-=;;,==------=-=-==~:---.-~~~~~---~-_J ~-----·--·-·--·------- 1. ------------=-~=---=-,-=~ /'II I I ./ l·.;: _____ ,_._ ,, -~~ _. ___ -.. ~-- SW 23RD ST. (SEVENTH Av£.) '""""'"'"""""~ '<-f ·r;i:...:r;.~ ~ ~..,.;;.."'if! .~"f.,"t".::~ ---''.~'. •°' -:_ --'i_ Lind Ave. Business Plaza 11/02/06 ~ &'i TARRAGON ~Ill ell"" m~11 SCALE: I" 0 120· JTE, Inc. FIGURE 3 Reprln~ In Color Only t NORTH LEGEND ~ ---·::::·:· ~ ,, . Direction CEDAR RIVER CORPORATE PARK TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS -RENTON EXISTING STREET CONDITIONS ~ Traffic Signal V Yield Sign Aerial Image obtained from King County IMap JTE, Inc. FIGURE 4 Reprint In Color Only '\ 31 4-742 t/'205 1\395 4-74 ; 9 ,t, CEDAR RIVER CORPORATE PARK TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS· RENTON EXISTING PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES f NORTH LEGEND PM peak -hour traffic volumes & direction Aerlal Image obtained from King County IMap JTE, Inc. FIGURE 5 Reprint In Color Only '35 +-820 . ~225 ,435 +-so ~ 10 CEDAR RIVER CORPOR~TE PARK TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS· RENTON PROJECTED 2011 PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES W/0 PROJECT t NORTH LEGEND PM peak -hour traffic volumes & direction Aerlal Image obtained from King County IMap .ITE, Inc. FIGURE 6 Reprint In Color Only .. ... .2 " ~ 4 ~ ... 2 " ,t PM Peak Hour Trips: 1.26 t NORTH LEGEND PM peak -+ hour traffic volumes & direction Entering: 24 ~ Aerlal Image ~ ,.._-~•v•:~· King County Exiting: 1.01. d obtained from ; % dl1trlbutlol'.' . enter/exit PM P••.k hour trip. IM a p ™LE,.¥ .Wt:: CEDAR RIVER CORPORATE PARK TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS -RENTON PROJECT GENERATED PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES AND DISTRIBUTION JTE, Inc. FIGURE 7 Reprint In Color Only ,58 .a., I , 45 29&~ 15&~ 87 '11 .. ,435 +-so , 10 CEDAR RIVER CORPORATE PARK TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS -RENTON PROJECTED 2011 PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES W/ PROJECT t NORTH LEGEND PM peak ,.. hour traffic volumes & direction Aerlal Image obtained from King County IMap I J I"- APPENDIX II RENTON, WASHINGTON -~ND AVE SW WGRADYWAY LOC# 01 JTE06303M LINO AVE SW From North TRAFFICOUNT, INC. PO BOX 2508 OLYMPIA, WASHINGTON 98507 (360) 491-8116 SW GRADY WAY From East LIND AVE SW From South Start Time Right Thru lell: App Total Right Thru left App. Total Right Thru left App. Total ,.~ 1 ak Hour from 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM -Peak 1 of 1 Intersection 04:30 PM Volume 29 2Bl 140 450 31 742 Percent 6.4 62.4 05:00 Volume 8 77 Peak Factor High lnl 05:00 PM Volume 8 77 Peak F<K-1or -~ ·--~ >-~"" ! ~ 6EM ~ -13 ~ :5 ~ Orn 31.1 46 46 3.2 75.9 131 10 189 04:JOPM 131 7 195 0.859 ~ m,c -~ :;J 2 Or ->- ~-rn r rn ii' ~ 205 21.0 48 62 978 534 42.7 247 147 05:00PM 264 147 0.926 lhu AVE ~W Out In Total 757 450 1217 29 281 140 R 1ght Thru Left Nor.h 1013112006 4 '.30·00 PM 1013112006 5 15·00 PM PRIMARY Lett rhru Right 173 543 534 583 1250 1833 Out In Total LIND AVE SW (j) 543 173 1250 43.4 13.8 151 48 346 151 48 346 0.903 Right 97 11 24 04:45 PM 24 . "' " 3: ~ -< ~~ '~ C hl r • hl "0 ~ File Name Site Code Start Date Page No SW GRADY WAY Frnm West • JTE30401P • 00000001 • 10/31/2006 •2 Thru ten App. Total lnl Total 1083 193 1373 4051 78.9 14.1 266 35 325 1049 0.965 282 55 361 0.951 -o ~c ~ -"' ~ " " "' ~ S" fj rn -< ~ hl -< -< ~a ~" ~- TRAFFICOUNT, INC. P.O. BOX 2508 lcNTON. WASHINGTON OLYMPIA, WASHINGTON 98507 File Name : JTE30401P IND AVE SW (360) 491-8116 Site Code : 00000001 ~W GRADY WAY Start Date : 10/31/2006 LOC# 01 JTE06303M Page No : 1 Groups Printed-PRIMARY LIND AVE SW SW GRADY WAY LIND AVE SW SW GRADY WAY From North From East From South From West Start Time Right Thru Left Truck App. Right Thru Left Truck App Right Thru Left Truci< App. Right Thru left Truck App. Exclu. lnclu. lot Tota! Total Total Total Total Total Total Factor 1.0 10 1.0 LO LO 1.0 1.0 1.0 10 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 04:00 PM 10 TO 25 8 105 11 160 56 17 227 169 69 30 12 268 20 247 31 11 298 48 898 946 04:15 PM 15 61 24 100 7 154 46 8 207 181 73 32 8 286 24 279 61 12 364 35 957 992 04:30 PM 7 62 25 94 195 62 13 264 152 114 39 9 305 23 279 40 9 342 35 1005 1040 ~ 04:45 f'M 7 80 39 2 126 187 49 10 243 106 142 44 11 292 24 282 55 8 361 31 1022 1053 Total 39 273 113 21 425 32 696 213 48 941 608 398 145 40 1151 91 1087 187 40 1365 149 3882 4031 05:00 PM 8 77 46 7 131 10 189 48 8 247 147 151 48 4 346 24 266 35 8 325 27 1049 1076 05:lSPM 7 62 30 8 99 7 171 46 4 224 129 136 42 9 307 26 256 63 2 345 23 975 998 05:30 PM 4 68 31 0 103 9 208 53 13 270 116 120 36 5 272 21 240 42 8 303 26 948 974 05:45 PM 3 39 29 3 71 9 174 60 9 243 113 116 35 5 264 17 279 55 351 24 929 953 Total 22 246 136 18 404 35 742 207 34 984 505 523 161 23 1189 88 1041 195 25 1324 100 3901 4001 Gra11dTotal 61 519 249 39 829 67 1438 420 82 1925 1113 921 306 63 2340 179 2128 382 65 2689 249 7783 8032 Apprch % 7.4 62.6 30.0 3.5 74.7 21.8 47.6 39.4 13 1 6.7 79.l 14.2 Total% 0.8 6.7 3.2 10.7 0.9 18.5 5.4 24. 7 14.3 11.B 3.9 30.l 2.3 27.3 4.9 34.5 3.1 96.9 LIND AVE SW SW GRADY WAY LIND AVE SW SW GRADY WAY From North From East From South From West Start Time Right Thru left App. Tota! Right Thru Left App_ Total 1k Hour From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM. Peak 1 ol l Right Thru Left App. Total Right Thru Left App. Total !flt. Total lnter.;ection 04:30PM Volume 29 281 140 450 31 742 205 978 534 543 173 1250 91 1083 193 1373 4051 Percent 6.4 62.4 31.1 3.2 75.9 21.U 42.7 43.4 13.8 7.1 78.9 14.l 05:00 Volume 8 77 46 131 10 189 48 247 147 151 48 346 24 266 35 325 1049 Peak Factor 0.965 High Int 05:00PM 04:30PM 05:00PM 04:45 PM Voluml'! 8 77 46 131 195 62 254 147 151 48 346 24 282 55 361 Peak Factor 0.859 i reak Hour From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM -Peak 1 of 1 0.926 0.903 0.951 By Approach 04:45 PM 04:45PM 04:30 PM 04:15PM "' Volume 26 287 146 459 33 755 196 9B4 534 543 173 1250 95 1106 191 1392 Percent 5.7 62.5 31.8 34 76.7 19.9 42.7 43.4 138 6.8 79.5 13 7 Higll Int. 05:00 PM 05:30 PM 05:00 PM 04:lSPM Volume 8 77 46 131 9 208 53 270 147 151 48 346 24 279 61 364 Pei!II Factor 0.876 0.911 0.903 0.956 ~ENTON, WASHINGTON ND AVE SW N 16TH ST LOC# 02 JTE06303M LIND AVE SW From North Start Time Right Thru Left App. Total 1~ Hour From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM -Peak 1 of 1 lnlersection 04:30 PM Volume " 420 162 631 Percent 7.8 66.6 25. 7 05:00 Volume 13 105 41 159 Peak Factor Highlnt. 04:45PM Volume 8 107 46 161 Peak Factor 0.980 -m •w aw $.::: .... N• .... ~ "' 0 I ro m I-..!: ...,. MC ~ -L .... " ~ -"' m ~L -~ ~ or " ~ - TRAFFICOUNT, INC. PO BOX 2508 OLYMPIA, WASHINGTON 98507 (360) 491-8116 SW 16TH ST From East LINO AVE SW From South Right Thru Left App. Total Right Thru Left App. Total 395 74 82.6 15.5 101 24 05:00 PM 101 24 9 478 9 1.9 1.4 2 127 2 05:00PM 127 ' 0.941 LIND AVE"'" Oot '" Total 1219 63~ 1850 49 420 162 Right Thru Left Nor111 10131/2006 4-30 00 PM 10/31/2006 5: 15 00 PM PRIMARY ,.efl Tllr~ Right 66 558 9 504 633 1137 Out 'r-Total LIND AVE SW /7i I.__-?/ 558 66 633 88.2 10.4 171 18 191 171 18 191 0.829 Right 75 15.6 17 04:30 PM 23 . 0, "'w "© -~ .., " -~ C ~ r ~ ~ File Name Site Code Start Date Page No : JTE30402P : 00000002 : 10/31/2006 :2 SW 16TH ST From West TI>ru Left App. Total Int. Tlltal 139 266 480 2222 29.0 55.4 43 69 129 606 0.917 35 77 135 0.889 ~~ 0 "' "' .i,.5 O') ~ .., ro I (n .., .., ~~ ro • ro - ENTON. WASHINGTON ND AVE SW ~N 16TH ST LOC# 02 JTE06303M LIND AVE SW -From North St;utlime Right Thru Left Truck App. Right Total Factor 1.0 1.0 10 1.0 1.0 04:00 PM 15 103 33 14 151 70 04:15 PM 6 73 32 6 111 88 OUOPM 14 102 40 10 156 100 04·45 PM 8 107 46 8 161 97 Total 43 385 151 38 579 355 05:00PM 13 105 41 9 159 101 05:15 PM 14 106 35 10 155 97 05:30 PM 8 87 37 5 132 90 05:45 PM 13 59 50 5 122 99 Total 48 357 163 29 568 387 Grand Total 91 742 314 67 1147 742 Appictl % 7.9 64.7 27.4 84.0 Total% 2.2 18-2 7. 7 28.2 Hl.2 LIND AVE SW I From North · Start Time Right Thru Left llj.ak Hour From 0'1:00 PM to 05:45 PM Peak 1 ofl App. Total lntersect,on 04:30PM Volume 49 420 162 631 Percent 7.8 66.6 25.7 05:00 Volume 13 105 41 159 Peak Factor High Int. 04:45 PM Volume 8 107 46 161 Pe;:ik Factor 0.980 . _ak Hour Flom 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM -Peak 1 al 1 By Approach 04:30 PM Volume 49 420 162 631 Percent 7.8 66.6 25.7 High Int. 04:45 PM Volume 8 107 46 161 Peak Factor 0.980 TRAFFICOUNT, INC. PO BOX 2508 OLYMPIA, WASHINGTON 98507 (360) 491-8116 Groups Printed-PRIMARY SW 16TH ST From East Thru left Truck App Total 1.0 1.0 1.0 12 1 3 83 14 0 5 102 23 5 124 15 4 6 116 64 6 19 425 24 2 2 127 12 2 3 111 14 2 5 106 13 2 3 114 63 8 13 458 127 14 32 883 14.4 1.6 3 1 0.3 21.7 SW 16TH ST From East Right Thru Lett 395 74 9 82.6 15.5 1.9 101 24 2 05:00PM 101 24 04:30 PM 395 74 9 82.6 15.5 1.9 05:00 PM 101 24 LIND AVE SW From South R1P,ht Thru "' 1.0 1.0 1.0 130 10 113 6 1'1 13 109 8 10 493 37 171 18 137 27 134 12 2 116 5 558 62 17 1051 99 15 90.1 8.5 04 25.8 2.4 App. Total Right 478 9 1.4 127 2 05:00 PM 127 2 0 !)41 04:30 PM 478 9 1.4 05:00 PM 127 2 0.941 /7: "-._l/ Truck App. Total 1.0 7 141 5 123 6 156 1 120 19 540 4 191 8 166 147 6 123 19 627 38 1167 28.7 LIND AVE SW From South Thru left 558 66 88.2 10.4 171 1B 171 1B 558 66 88.2 10.4 171 18 File Name : JTE30402P Site Code : 00000002 Start Date : 10/31/2006 Page No : 1 SW 16TH ST From West Right Thru left Truck App. U.ctu. tnclu. lot Total Total Total Total LO LO 1.0 1.0 22 32 83 3 137 27 512 539 17 17 73 4 107 20 443 463 23 35 77 3 135 24 571 595 20 27 63 110 " 507 529 82 111 296 17 489 93 2033 2126 17 43 69 3 129 18 606 624 15 34 57 106 22 538 560 13 28 45 86 12 471 483 7 20 32 2 59 16 418 434 52 125 203 380 68 2033 2101 134 236 499 24 869 161 4066 4227 15.4 27.2 57.4 3.3 5.8 12.3 21.4 3.8 96.2 SW 16TH ST From West App. Total Right lhru : left App. Total Int. Total 633 75 139 266 480 2222 15.6 29.0 55.4 191 17 43 69 129 606 0.917 04:30PM 191 23 35 77 135 0.829 0.889 04:00 PM 633 82 111 296 489 16.8 22.7 60.5 04:00PM 191 22 32 83 137 0.829 0.892 Lind Ave. Business Park SW Grady Way/Lind Ave. SW Existing (GWLAEX) SIGNAL2000/TEAPAC[Ver 2.02.12] -Capacity Analysis Summary Intersection Averages for Int# 1 - Degree of Saturation (v/c) 0.76 Vehicle Delay 47.0 11/15/06 12:09:43 Level of Service D Sq 65 **/** Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Phase 4 Phase 5 Phase 6 /1\ I I North I * * *> <+ + + I + + I + + I<++ I V " I " <* + +>I + * + + I + * + + I + I " " I ++++I ++++I I <++++I <++++I " ++++I ****I I I**** V I V I I *>I +>I +>I****> I * I + I + I**** I * I + I + I V I G/C=0.091 G/C=-.005 G/C=0.211 G/C=0.129 G/C=-.022 G/C=0.396 G= 11.0" G= -0.6" G= 25.3" G= 15. 5" G= -2.6 11 G= 47.5" Y+R= 4. 0 II Y+R= 4.0" Y+R= 4. 0 11 Y+R= 4. 0" Y+R= 4. 0" Y+R= 4. Q II OFF= 0.0% OFF=12.5% OFF=l5.3% OFF=39. 7% OFF=56.0% OFF=57.1% C=120 sec G= 96.0 sec= 80.0% Y=24.0 sec= 20.0% Ped= 0.0 sec= 0.0% I Lane !Width/I g/C I Service Ratel Adj I Group I Lanesl Reqd Used I @C (vph) @E IVolumel I HCM I L I Queue I v/c I Delay I S !Model 11 N Approach 59.4 E+ =====================---------------------------=------------------------------ IRT+TH I LT I 24/2 10.275 10.211 I I 12/1 10.272 10.091 I S Approach 1 I 1 I 735 I 133 I 327 10.444 I 147 10.907 I 41.6 I D+I 231 ftl 98.9 l*F I 272 ftl 48.4 D ========================----------------=========------------------------==-=-- RT TH LT I 12/1 10.446 10.413 I I 24/2 10.306 10.239 I I 12/1 10.201 10.120 I E Approach 494 I 28 I 1 I 654 I 847 I 183 I 562 10.859 I 572 10.675 I 182 10.858 I 43.2 l*D+I 787 ftl 43.6 I D+I 419 ftl 79.7 l*E I 313 ftl 38.3 D+ ======================------------------=========-------=---------------===--~ IRT+TH I LT I 24/2 10.345 10.407 I 1159 I 1433 I I 12/1 Io. 290 Io .140 I 1 I 220 I W Approach 814 !0.568 I 216 10.871 I 28.0 I C I 488 ft! 77.3 l*E I 367 ft! 47.9 D ======================-----------------------====-----=======================-- IRT+TH I LT I 24/2 10.426 10.396 I 1093 I 1384 I 1242 10.897 I I 12/1 10.287 10.129 I 1 I 199 I 203 10.890 I 42.1 l*D+I 942 ftl 83.6 l*F I 354 ftl Lind Ave. Business Park SW Grady Way/Lind Ave. SW Existing (GWLAEX) SIGNAL2000/TEAPAC[Ver 2.02.12] -Summary of Parameter Values Intersection METROAREA LOS Targets Priorities 0 Parameters for NonCBD 35 80 5 90 100 5 0 0 0 0 0 Approach Parameters APPLABELS N GRADES 0.0 PED LEVELS 0 BIKEVOLUMES 0 PARKINGS IDES None PARKVOLUMES 20 BUSVOLUMES 0 RIGHTTURNONREDS 0 UPSTREAMVC O. 00 Movement MOVLABELS VOLUMES WIDTHS Parameters RT 29 0.0 0 LANES GROUPTYPES UTILIZATIONS TRUCKPERCENTS PEAKHOURFACTORS ARRIVALTYPES ACTUATIONS REQCLEARANCES MINIMUMS STARTUPLOST TH 281 24.0 2 LT 140 12.0 1 ENDGAIN STORAGE INITIALQUEUE IDEALSATFLOWS FACTORS DELAY FACTORS NSTOPFACTORS SATURATIONFLOWS Norm Norm Norm 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.95 0.95 0.95 3 3 3 Yes Yes Yes 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1900 1900 1900 1.00 1.00 1.00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0 3489 1770 Phasing Parameters SEQUENCES 65 PERMISSIVES No OVERLAPS CYCLES GREENTIMES YELLOWTIMES CRITICALS Yes 120 10.96 4.00 3 ALL No Yes 120 -0.61 4.00 9 Int# 1 - NETWORK North NETWORK East NETWORK South NETWORK West NODELOCATION RT 31 0.0 0 Norm 0.00 2.0 0.95 3 E 0.0 0 0 None 20 0 0 0.00 TH 742 24.0 2 LT 205 12.0 1 Norm Norm 0.00 0.00 2.0 2.0 0.95 0.95 3 3 Yes Yes Yes 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1900 1900 1900 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0 3518 1770 No Yes 0 0 0 0 RT 534 12.0 1 0 0 0 0 s 0.0 0 0 None 20 0 0 0.00 TH 543 24.0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LT 173 12.0 1 Norm Norm Norm 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.95 0.95 0.95 3 3 3 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1583 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 3539 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1.00 1.00 1.00 1770 LEADLAGS OFFSET PEDTIME No Yes 30 25.33 4.00 7 15.46 4.00 12 -2.64 4.00 6 47.51 4.00 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 RT 97 0.0 0 11/15/06 12:09:48 0 0 0 0 0 Def No Def No Def No Def No w 0.0 0 0 None 20 0 0 0.00 TH 1083 24.0 2 LT 193 12.0 1 Norm Norm Norm 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.0 2.0 ·2.0 0.95 0.95 0.95 3 3 3 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 0 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 3496 None 0.00 0.0 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1770 None 1 0 Lind Ave. Business Park SW Grady Way/Lind Ave. SW Without Project (GWLAWO) 11/15/06 12:10:21 SIGNAL2000/TEAPAC[Ver 2.02.12] -Capacity Analysis Summary Intersection Averages for Int# 1 - Degree of Saturation (v/c) 0.84 Vehicle Delay 57.9 Level of Service E+ Sq 65 **/** I\\ I I North I Phase 1 * * *> <+ + + G/C=0.091 G= 11. 0" Y+R= 4.0 11 OFF= 0.0% Phase 2 Phase 3 Phase 4 I + + I + + I<++ I V " ++++I A I A I**** V I <* + +>1 + *>I +>1 * + + I + * 1 + I * + + I + * 1 + I G/C=-.005 G/C=0.211 G/C=0.129 G= -0. 6 11 G= 25.3 11 G= 15. 5" Y+R= 4. 0 11 Y+R= 4 • 0 II Y+R= 4. 0" OFF=l2.5% OFF=l5.3% OFF=39. 7% Phase 5 Phase 6 " " ++++I ++++1 <++++I <++++I ****\ I V I 1 +>1****> I + I**** I + I V 1 G/C=-.022 G/C=0.396 G= -2. 6 11 G= 47.5" Y+R= 4 • 0 II Y+R= 4. 0" OFF=56. 0% OFF=57.1% C=l20 sec G= 96.0 sec= 80.0% Y=24.0 sec= 20.0% Ped= 0.0 sec= 0.0% 1 Lane IWidth/1 g/C I Service Ratel Adj 1 I HCM 1 L I Queue I v/c 1 Delay I S !Model 11 Group 1 Lanesl Reqd Used 1 @C (vph) @E IVolumel N Approach 68.6 E ======================--==--=---=------===-=---===-=---======--===-==--===-==-- IRT+TH I LT I 24/2 10.279 10.211 I 1 12/1 10.277 10.091 1 S Approach RT TH LT I 12/1 10.474 10.413 I 1 24/2 10.315 10.239 I I 12/1 10.286 10.120 I E Approach l I 736 I 1 I 133 I 494 I 28 I l I 654 I 847 1 183 I 358 10.486 I 42.l I D+I 256 ftl 163 11.006 1 126.9 l*F 1 332 ftl 621 IO. 950 I 632 10.746 1 200 10.943 I 58.1 E+ 57.5 l*E+I 967 ftl 45.9 I D I 477 ftl 98.4 l*F I 369 ftl 43.2 D+ ==================--==------=--=---=-------------------==--==------=-------=--- IRT+TH 1 LT I 24/2 10.359 10.407 I 1158 I 1432 1 I 12/1 10.296 10.140 1 l I 220 I 900 Io. 628 1 237 10.956 I 29.2 I c 1 556 ftl 96.1 l*F I 434 ftl W Approach 64.9 E+ =======================-======-===-===-===-=---======--=======-================ IRT+TH I LT I 24/2 \0.452 \0.396 I 1093 I 1384 I 1369 10.989 I 57.5 \*E+\1171 ftl I 12/1 10.293 10.129 I 1 I 199 I 226 10.991 I 109.2 l*F 1 434 ftl Lind Ave. Business Park SW Grady Way/Lind Ave. SW Without Project (GWLAWO) SIGNAL2000/TEAPAC[Ver 2.02.12] -Summary of Parameter Values Intersection METROAREA Parameters for NonCBD Int # 1 - NETWORK North NETWORK East NETWORK South NETWORK West NODELOCATION LOS Targets 35 80 5 90 100 5 Priorities 0 0 0 0 0 0 Approach Parameters APPLABELS N GRADES O .0 PED LEVELS 0 BIKEVOLUMES 0 PARKINGS IDES PARKVOLUMES BUSVOLUMES RIGHTTURNONREDS UPSTREAMV'C None 20 0 0 0.00 Movement MOVLABELS VOLUMES WIDTHS Parameters RT 30 0.0 0 LANES GROUPTYPES UTILIZATIONS TRUCKPERCENTS PEAKHOURFACTORS ARRIVALTYPES ACTUATIONS REQCLEARANCES MINIMUMS STARTUPLOST ENDGAIN TH 310 24.0 2 Norm 0.00 2.0 0.95 STORAGE INITIALQUEUE IDEALSATFLOWS FACTORS DELAYFACTORS NSTOPFACTORS SATURATIONFLOWS Norm 0.00 2.0 0.95 3 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 0 Phasing Parameters 3 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 3492 SEQUENCES 65 PERMISSIVE$ No LT 155 12.0 1 Norm 0.00 2.0 0.95 3 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1770 E 0.0 0 0 None 20 0 0 0.00 RT TH LT 35 820 225 0.0 24.0 12.0 0 2 1 Norm Norm Norm 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.95 0.95 0.95 3 3 3 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 0 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 3517 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1.00 1. 00 1. 00 1770 No Yes 0 0 0 0 RT 590 12.0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 s 0.0 0 0 None 20 0 0 0.00 TH 600 24.0 2 0 0 0 0 LT 190 12.0 1 Norm Norm Norm 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.95 0.95 0.95 3 3 3 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1583 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 3539 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1770 LEADLAGS OFFSET PEDTIME OVERLAPS CYCLES GREENTIMES YELLOWTIMES CRITICALS Yes 120 10.96 4.00 3 ALL No Yes 120 -0.61 4.00 9 No Yes 30 25.33 4.00 7 15.46 4.00 12 -2.64 4.00 6 47.51 4.00 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/15/06 12:10:26 0 0 0 0 0 Def No Def No Def No Def No w 0.0 0 0 None 20 0 0 0.00 RT TH LT 105 1195 215 0.0 24.0 12.0 0 2 1 Norm Norm Norm 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.95 0.95 0.95 3 3 3 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1.00 1. 00 1. 00 0 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1.00 1. 00 1. 00 3496 None 0.00 0.0 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1. 00 1.00 1. 00 1770 None 1 0 I - Lind Ave. Business Park SW Grady Way/Lind Ave. SW With Project (GWLAWP) 11/15/06 12:10:48 SIGNAL2000/TEAPAC[Ver 2.02.12] -Capacity Analysis Summary Intersection Averages for Int# 1 - Degree of Saturation (v/c) 0.85 Vehicle Delay 59.9 Level of Service E+ Sq 65 **/** /1\ I I North I ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Phase 4 Phase 5 Phase 6 * I + + A A * I + + ++++I ++++I *> I<++ <++++I <++++I I V A ++++I ****I I A I A I**** V I V I I <+ <* + +>I + *>I +>I +>I****> I + * + + I + * I + I + I**** I + * + + I + * I + I + I V I G/C=0.091 G/C=-.005 G/C=0.211 G/C=0.129 G/C=-.022 G/C=0.396 G= 11.0" G= -0.6" G= 25.3" G= 15.5" G= -2.6 11 G= 47.5" Y+R= 4. Q II Y+R= 4. 0 u Y+R= 4. 0'' Y+R= 4.0 11 Y+R= 4.0" Y+R= 4 .0" OFF= 0.0% OFF=12.5% OFF=l5.3% OFF=39. 7% OFF=56.0% OFF=57.1% C=120 sec G= 96.0 sec= 80.0% Y=24.0 sec= 20.0% Ped= 0.0 sec= 0.0% I Lane IWidth/1 g/C I Service Ratel Adj I I HCM I L I Queue I v/c I Delay I S !Model 11 Group I Lanesl Reqd Used I @C (vph) @E IVolumel N Approach 68.4 E =============================================================================== IRT+TH I LT I 24/2 10.200 10.211 I I 12/1 10.277 10.091 I S Approach 1 I 736 I 1 I 133 I 364 10.494 I 42.2 I D+I 260 ftl 163 11.006 I 126.9 l*F I 332 ftl 63.3 E+ =============================================================================== RT TH LT I 12/1 10.485 10.413 I I 24/2 10.318 10.239 I I 12/1 10.288 10.120 I E Approach 494 I 28 I 1 I 654 I 847 I 183 I 643 10.983 I 654 Io. 772 I 207 10.976 I 65.7 l*E+l1050 ftl 47.0 I D I 500 ftl 107.5 l*F I 395 ftl 44.3 D+ =================================================----========================== IRT+TH I LT I 24/2 10.359 10.407 I 1158 I 1432 I I 12/1 10.297 10.140 I 1 I 220 I 900 10.628 I 29.2 I c I 556 ftl 241 10.972 I 100.5 l*F I 448 ftl W Approach 65.2 E+ -====================--------------------====--==------======================~ IRT+TH I LT I 24/2 10.452 10.396 I 1093 I 1384 I 1371 10.991 I 57.9 l*E+ll175 ftl I 12/1 10.293 10.129 I 1 I 199 I 226 10.991 I 109.2 l*F I 434 ftl ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Lind Ave. Business Park SW Grady Way/Lind Ave. SW With Project (GWLAWP) SIGNAL2000/TEAPAC[Ver 2.02.12] -Summary of Parameter Values Intersection METROAREA LOS Targets Priorities 0 Parameters for NonCBD 35 80 5 90 100 5 0 0 0 0 0 Int # 1 - NETWORK North NETWORK East NETWORK South NETWORK West NODELOCATION Approach Parameters APPLABELS GRADES PEDLEVELS BIKEVOLUMES PARKINGS IDES PARKVOLUMES BUSVOLUMES RIGHTTURNONREDS UPSTREAMVC Movement MOVLABELS VOLUMES WIDTHS Parameters RT 30 0.0 0 LANES GROUPTYPES UTILIZATIONS TRUCKPERCENTS PEAKHOURFACTORS ARRIVALTYPES ACTUATIONS REQCLEARANCES MINIMUMS STARTUPLOST ENDGAIN STORAGE INITIALQUEUE IDEALSATFLOWS FACTORS DELAYFACTORS NSTOPFACTORS SATURATIONFLOWS Norm 0.00 2.0 0.95 3 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1.00 1. 00 1.00 0 Phasing Parameters N 0.0 0 0 None 20 0 0 0.00 TH 315 24.0 2 LT 155 12.0 1 Norm Norm 0.00 0.00 2.0 2.0 0.95 0.95 3 3 Yes Yes 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 0 0 1900 1900 1. 00 1. 00 1.00 1.00 1. 00 1. 00 3493 1770 SEQUENCES 65 PERMISSIVES No RT 35 0.0 0 E 0.0 0 0 None 20 0 0 0.00 TH 820 24.0 2 LT 229 12.0 1 Norm Norm Norm 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.95 0.95 0.95 3 3 3 Yes Yes Yes 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1900 1900 1900 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 0 3517 1770 No Yes 0 0 0 0 RT 611 12.0 1 0 0 0 0 s 0.0 0 0 None 20 0 0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 TH 621 24.0 2 0 0 0 0 LT 197 12.0 1 Norm Norm Norm 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.95 0.95 0.95 3 3 3 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1583 Yes Yes 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 0 0 1900 1900 1.00 1.00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 3539 1770 LEADLAGS OFFSET PEDTIME OVERLAPS CYCLES GREENTIMES YELLOWTIMES CRITICALS Yes 120 10.96 4.00 3 ALL No Yes 120 -0.61 4.00 9 No Yes 30 25.33 4.00 7 15.46 4.00 12 -2.64 4.00 6 47.51 4.00 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 RT 107 0.0 0 11/15/06 12:10:53 0 0 0 0 0 Def No Def No Def No Def No w 0.0 0 0 None 20 0 0 0.00 TH 1195 24.0 2 LT 215 12.0 1 Norm Norm Norm 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.95 0.95 0.95 3 3 3 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 0 3495 1770 None 0.00 0.0 None l 0 ......... Lind Ave. Business Park SW Grady Way/Lind Ave. SW With Project (GWLAWP) SIGNAL2000/TEAPAC[Ver 2.02.12] -Capacity Analysis Summary Intersection Averages for Int# 1 - 11/15/06 12:11:16 Degree of Saturation (v/c) 0.84 Vehicle Delay 55.5 Level of Service E+ Sq 65 **/** /1\ I I North I ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Phase 4 Phase 5 Phase 6 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- * I I + + A A * I I + + ++++I ++++I *> I I<+ + <++++I <++++I I I V A ++++I ****I I I A I A I**** V I V I I <+ +>I <* + *>I * *>I *>I *>I****> *>I + + I * + * I * * I * I * I**** * I + + I * + * I * * I * I * I V * I ------------------------------------------------------------------------ G/C=0.113 G/C=-.006 G/C=0.170 G/C=0.152 G/C=-.023 G/C=0.393 G= 13.6" G= -0. 7" G= 20.4" G= 18. 2" G= -2.7" G= 47.2" Y+R= 4. 0 11 Y+R= 4. a" Y+R= 4.0" Y+R= 4. 0 II Y+R= 4. 0 II Y+R= 4. 0" OFF= 0.0% OFF=l4.7% OFF=17.4% OFF=37.8% OFF=56.3% OFF=57.4% ------------------------------------------------------------------------- C=l20 sec G= 96.0 sec= 80.0% Y=24.0 sec= 20.0% Ped= 0.0 sec= 0.0% ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I Lane !Width/I g/C I Service Ratel Adj I Group I Lanes! Reqd Used I @C (vph) @E IVolumel I HCM I L I Queue I v/c I Delay I S !Model 11 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- N Approach 56.1 E+ ==============================------===---======-------===---======-----====-== IRT+TH I LT I 24/2 10.280 10.170 I I 12/1 10.277 10.113 I 1 I 580 I 1 I 171 I 364 10.612 I 163 10.815 I 48.0 I D I 279 ftl 74.2 l*E I 274 ftl ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- S Approach 67.8 E --===================~--~-==------===--------=-----====-------===--=======--- TH LT I 24/2 10.318 10.198 I I 12/1 J0.288 10.141 I 1 I 696 I 1 I 221 I 654 10.933 I 207 10.831 I 66.8 l*E+I 581 ftl 70.8 l*E I 342 ftl ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- E Approach 37.6 D+ ===========-----===---------------------------------------------===-------=---- IRT+TH I LT I 24/2 J0.359 10.404 I 1140 I 1420 I I 12/1 10.297 10.162 I 1 I 262 I 900 10.634 I 241 J0.837 I 29.6 I c I 559 ftl 67.7 l*E I 391 ftl ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- W APproach 61. 5 E+ ===========----===-=------====--------=-----====-------==-===================== IRT+TH I LT I 24/2 J0.452 J0.393 I 1077 I 1374 I 1371 J0.998 I I 12/1 J0.293 10.152 I 1 I 242 I 226 10.840 I 60.1 l*E+Jl189 ftl 70.0 l*E I 371 ftl ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- i I Lind Ave. Business Park SW Grady Way/Lind Ave. SW With Project (GWLAWP) SIGNAL2000/TEAPAC[Ver 2.02.12] -Summary of Parameter Values Intersection METROAREA LOS Targets Priorities 0 Parameters for NonCBD 35 80 5 90 100 5 0 0 0 0 0 Approach Parameters APPLABELS N GRADES O. 0 PEDLEVELS 0 BIKEVOLUMES 0 PARKINGS IDES PARKVOLUMES BUSVOLUMES RIGHTTURNONREDS UPSTREAMVC Movement MOVLABELS VOLUMES WIDTHS LANES Parameters RT 30 0.0 0 Norm 0.00 2.0 GROUPTYPES UTILIZATIONS TRUCKPERCENTS PEAKHOURFACTORS ARRIVALTYPES ACTUATIONS REQCLEARANCES MINIMUMS STARTUPLOST ENDGAIN STORAGE INITIALQUEUE IDEALSATFLOWS FACTORS 0.95 3 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 None 20 0 0 0.00 TH 315 24.0 2 LT 155 12.0 1 Norm Norm 0.00 0.00 2.0 2.0 0.95 0.95 3 3 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 DELAY FACTORS NSTOPFACTORS SATURATIONFLOWS 0 3493 1770 Phasing Parameters SEQUENCES 65 PERMISSIVES No OVERLAPS CYCLES GREENTIMES YELLOWTIMES CRITICAL$ Yes 120 13.59 4.00 3 ALL No Yes 120 -0.68 4.00 9 Int # 1 - NETWORK North NETWORK East NETWORK South NETWORK West NODELOCATION RT 35 0.0 0 Norm 0.00 2.0 0.95 3 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 E 0.0 0 0 None 20 0 0 0.00 TH 820 24.0 2 Norm 0.00 2.0 0.95 3 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 LT 229 12.0 1 Norm 0.00 2.0 0.95 3 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 0 3517 1770 No Yes 0 0 0 0 RT 611 12.0 1 Fflo 0.00 2.0 0.95 3 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1. 00 1. 00 1.00 0 No Yes 30 20.43 4.00 8 18.21 4.00 12 -2.71 4.00 6 @ 0 0 0 0 s 0.0 0 0 None 20 0 0 0.00 TH 621 24.0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LT 197 12.0 1 Norm Norm 0.00 0.00 2.0 2.0 0.95 0.95 3 3 Yes Yes 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 0 0 1900 1900 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 3539 1770 LEADLAGS OFFSET PEDTIME 47.16 4.00 11 0 0 0 0 11/15/06 12:11:20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Def No Def No Def No Def No RT 107 0.0 0 w 0.0 0 0 None 20 0 0 0.00 TH 1195 24.0 2 LT 215 12.0 1 Norm Norm Norm 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.95 0.95 0.95 3 3 3 Yes Yes Yes 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 0 0 0 1900 1900 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0 3495 None 0.00 0.0 0 1900 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1770 None 1 0 Lind Ave. Business Park SW 16th St./Lind Ave. SW Existing (16LAEX) SIGNAL2000/TEAPAC[Ver 2.02.12) -Capacity Analysis Summary Intersection Averages for Int# 1 - 11/15/06 12:03:11 Degree of Saturation (v/c) 0.38 Vehicle Delay 22.4 Level of Service C+ Sq 11 **/** /1\ I I North I Phase 1 Phase 2 I + + * A I + + * ++++I I<++ *> <++++I I V A ++++I I A I**** V I I <+ + +>I++++> I I I + + + + + + G/C=0.443 G= 53.1" Y+R= 4.0" OFF= 0.0% I++++ I V G/C=0.491 G= 58.9" Y+R= 4.0" OFF=47.6% I I C=120 sec G=ll2.0 sec= 93.3% Y= 8.0 sec= 6.7% Ped= 0.0 sec= 0.0% ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I Lane IWidth/1 g/C I Service Ratel Adj I I HCM I L I Queue I v/c I Delay I S !Model 11 Group I Lanesl Reqd Used I @C (vph) @E IVolumeJ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- N Approach 23.7 c+ ===================================---========================--=============== IRT+TH I LT I 24/2 10.296 10.443 I 1320 I 1542 I I 12/1 10.404 10.443 I 202 I 279 I 494 10.320 I 171 10.600 I 21.8 I C+I 256 ftl 28.9 l*C I 212 ftl ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- S Approach 22.4 c+ ================================================-============================== IRT+TH I LT I 24/2 10.309 10.443 I 1340 I 1563 I I 12/1 10.281 10.443 I 243 I 333 I 596 10.381 I 69 10.206 I 22.6 I C+I 316 ftl 20.8 I C+I 68 ftl ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- E Approach 18.6 B ================================================--============================= IRT+TH I LT I 24/2 10.305 10.491 I 1357 I 1517 I I 12/1 10.240 10.491 I 453 I 556 I 494 10.326 I 9 10.016 I 18.6 I B I 241 ftl 15.7 I B I 7 ftl ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- W Approach 24.6 c+ -======-------~=====---------=====--------=---=----===-======----============= IRT+TH I LT I 24/2 10.264 10.491 I 1480 I 1645 I I 12/1 10.471 10.491 I 300 I 385 I 225 10.137 I 200 10.121 I 16.7 I B I 101 ftl 31.0 l*C I 358 ftl ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Lind Ave. Business Park 11/15/06 SW 16th St./Lind Ave. SW 12:03:15 Existing (16LAEX) SIGNAL2000/TEAPAC[Ver 2.02.12] -Summary of Parameter Values Intersection Parameters for Int# 1 - METROAREA NonCBD NETWORK North 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Def No LOS Targets 35 80 5 NETWORK East 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Def No 90 100 5 NETWORK South 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Def No Priorities 0 0 0 0 0 0 NETWORK West 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Def No NODELOCATION 0 0 Approach Parameters APPLABELS N E s w GRADES 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 PEDLEVELS 0 0 0 0 BIKEVOLUMES 0 0 0 0 PARKINGS IDES None None None None PARKVOLUMES 20 20 20 20 BUSVOLUMES 0 0 0 0 RIGHTTURNONREDS 0 0 0 0 UPSTREAMVC 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Movement Parameters MOVLABELS RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT VOLUMES 49 420 162 395 74 9 9 558 66 75 139 266 WIDTHS 0.0 24.0 12.0 0.0 24.0 12.0 0.0 24.0 12.0 0.0 24.0 12.0 LANES 0 2 1 0 2 1 0 2 1 0 2 1 GROUPTYPES Norm Norm Norm Norm Norm Norm Norm Norm Norm Norm Norm Norm UTILIZATIONS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 TRUCKPERCENTS 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 PEAKHOURFACTORS 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0. 95 ARRIVALTYPES 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 ACTUATIONS Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes REQCLEARANCES. 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 MINIMUMS 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 STARTUPLOST 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 ENDGAIN 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 STORAGE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 INITIALQUEUE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 IDEALSATFLOWS 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 FACTORS 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1.00 DELAY FACTORS 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1.00 NSTOPFACTORS 1.00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1.00 SATURATIONFLOWS 0 3483 644 0 3092 1133 0 3531 758 0 3353 784 Phasing Parameters SEQUENCES 11 ALL PERMISSIVES No Yes No Yes LEADLAGS None None OVERLAPS Yes Yes Yes Yes OFFSET 0.00 1 CYCLES 120 120 30 PEDTIME 0.0 0 GREENTIMES 53.11 58.89 YELLOWTIMES 4.00 4.00 CRITICALS 3 12 Lind Ave. Business Park SW 16th St./Lind Ave. SW Without Project (16LAWO) SIGNAL2000/TEAPAC[Ver 2.02.12] -Capacity Analysis Summary Intersection Averages for Int# 1 - 11/15/06 12:02:20 Degree of Saturation (v/c) 0.44 Vehicle Delay 25.3 Level of Service c+ Sq 11 **/** /1\ I I North I Phase 1 Phase 2 I + + * A I + + * ++++I I<++ *> <++++I I V A ++++I I A I**** V I I <+ + +>I++++> I I I + + + + + + G/C=0.443 G= 53.1" Y+R= 4.0" OFF= 0.0% I++++ I V G/C=0.491 G= 58.9" Y+R= 4. 0" OFF=47.6% I I C=120 sec G=112.0 sec= 93.3% Y= 8.0 sec= 6.7% Ped= 0.0 sec= 0.0% ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I Lane !Width/I g/C I Service Ratel Adj I I HCM I L I Queue I v/c I Delay I S !Model 11 Group I Lanesl Reqd Used I @C (vph) @E IVolumel ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- N Approach 26.3 c+ =====================-----======-==------------=-----=========--=============== IRT+TH I LT I 24/2 10.303 10.443 I 1320 I 1542 I I 12/1 10.457 10.443 I 180 I 250 I 547 10.355 I 189 10.735 I 22.3 I C+I 287 ftl 38.1 l*D+I 262 ftl ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- S Approach 22.9 c+ ===================================---========================================= IRT+TH I LT I 24/2 10.319 10.443 I 1340 I 1563 I I 12/1 10.294 10.443 I 221 I 304 I 658 10.421 I 79 10.256 I 23.1 I C+I 355 ftl 21.5 I C+I 80 ftl ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- E Approach 19.0 B ===================================-===-======================================= IRT+TH I LT I 24/2 10.314 10.491 I 1357 I 1517 I I 12/1 10.241 10.491 I 436 I 537 I 542 10.357 I 11 10.020 I 19.0 I B I 268 ftl 15.7 I B I 9 ftl ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- W Approach 33.2 C ---====--------------------------------~-------------========---============== IRT+TH I LT I 24/2 10.267 10.491 I 1480 I 1645 I I 12/1 10.529 10.491 I 278 I 359 I 252 10.153 I 311 10.866 I 16.9 I B I 114 ftl 46.5 l*D I 465 ftl ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Lind Ave. Business Park SW 16th St./Lind Ave. SW Without Project (16LAWO) SIGNAL2000/TEAPAC[Ver 2.02.12] -Summary of Parameter Values Intersection METROAREA LOS Targets Priorities 0 Parameters for NonCBD 35 80 5 90 100 5 0 0 0 0 0 Int # 1 - NETWORK North NETWORK East NETWORK South NETWORK West NODE LOCATION Approach Parameters APPLABELS N GRADES O .0 PED LEVELS 0 BIKEVOLUMES PARKINGS IDES PARKVOLUMES BUSVOLUMES RIGHTTURNONREDS UPSTREAMVC Movement MOVLABELS VOLUMES WIDTHS Parameters RT 55 0.0 0 LANES GROUPTYPES UTILIZATIONS TRUCKPERCENTS PEAKHOURFACTORS ARRIVALTYPES ACTUATIONS REQCLEARANCES MINIMUMS STARTUPLOST ENDGAIN STORAGE INITIALQUEUE IDEALSATFLOWS FACTORS DELAYFACTORS NSTOPFACTORS SATURATIONFLOWS Norm 0.00 2.0 0.95 3 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 0 Phasing Parameters 0 None 20 0 0 0.00 TH LT 465 180 24.0 12.0 2 1 Norm Norm 0.00 0.00 2.0 2.0 0.95 0.95 3 3 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 3483 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1. 00 1. 00 1.00 580 SEQUENCES 11 ALL Yes Yes 120 PERMISSIVES No OVERLAPS CYCLES GREENTIMES YELLOWTIMES CRITICALS Yes 120 53.11 4.00 3 58.89 4.00 12 E 0.0 0 0 None 20 0 0 0.00 RT TH LT 435 80 10 0.0 24.0 12.0 0 2 1 Norm Norm Norm 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.95 0.95 0.95 3 3 3 Yes Yes 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 0 0 1900 1900 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0 3091 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1093 No Yes 30 Yes Yes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 s 0.0 0 0 None 20 0 0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 RT TH LT 10 615 75 0.0 24.0 12.0 0 2 1 Norm Norm Norm 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.95 0.95 0.95 3 3 3 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 0 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 3530 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 697 LEADLAGS OFFSET PEDTIME 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 RT 85 0.0 0 Norm 0.00 2.0 0.95 3 Yes 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 1900 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/15/06 12:02:24 Def No Def No Def No Def No w 0.0 0 0 None 20 0 0 0.00 TH LT 155 295 24.0 12.0 2 1 Norm Norm 0.00 0.00 2.0 2.0 0.95 0.95 3 3 Yes Yes 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 0 0 1900 1900 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 3352 731 None 0.00 0.0 None 1 0 Lind Ave. Business Park SW 16th St./Lind Ave. SW With Project (16LAWP) SIGNAL2000/TEAPAC[Ver 2.02.12] -Capacity Analysis Summary Intersection Averages for Int# 1 - 11/15/06 12:01:16 Degree of Saturation (v/c) 0.45 Vehicle Delay 26.0 Level of Service C+ Sq 11 **/** /1\ I I North I Phase 1 Phase 2 I + + * A I + + * ++++I I<++ *> <++++I I V ~ ++++I I A I**** V I I <+ + +>I++++> I I I + + + + + + G/C=0.443 G= 53.1" Y+R= 4.0" OFF= 0.0% I++++ I V G/C=0.491 G= 58.9" Y+R= 4.0" OFF=47.6% I I C=l20 sec G=ll2.0 sec= 93.3% Y= 8.0 sec= 6.7% Ped= 0.0 sec= 0.0% ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I Lane I Width/ I g/C I Service Rate I Adj I I HCM I L I Queue I v/c I Delay I S !Model 11 Group I Lanesl Reqd Used I @C {vph) @E IVolumel ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- N Approach 28.6 C ====================================-----~=-==================-----============ IR1'+TH I LT I 24/2 10.305 10.443 I 1320 I 1542 I I 12/1 10.486 10.443 I 162 I 226 I 559 10.363 I 189 10.804 I 22.3 I C+I 295 ftl 47.1 l*D I 283 ftl ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- S Approach 23.4 c+ ===================================-----------==---===========--------======--- IRT+TH I LT I 24/2 10.327 10.443 I 1340 I 1563 I I 12/1 10.300 10.443 I 217 I 298 I E Approach 710 10.454 I 86 10.284 I 23.5 I C+I 388 ftl 21.8 I C+I 89 ftl 19.0 B =====================----==========-----========----=--========--===========--= IRT+TH I LT I 24/2 10.314 10.491 I 1357 I 1517 I I 12/1 10.241 10.491 I 433 I 534 I 542 10.357 I 11 10.021 I 19.0 I B I 268 ftl 15. 7 I B I 9 ft I ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- W Approach 33.2 C ==================================----==========--============================= IRT+TH I LT I 24/2 10.268 10.491 I 1478 I 1643 I I 12/1 10.529 10.491 I 278 I 359 I 255 10.155 I 311 10.866 I 16.9 I B I 115 ftl 46.5 l*D I 465 ftl ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ~. 1....!_.V Lind Ave. Business Park 11/15/06 SW 16th St./Lind Ave. SW 12:01:24 With Project (16LAWP) SIGNAL2000/TEAPAC[Ver 2.02.12] -Summary of Parameter Values Intersection Parameters for Int # 1 - METROAREA NonCBD NETWORK North 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Def No LOS Targets 35 80 5 NETWORK East 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Def No 90 100 5 NETWORK South 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Def No Priorities 0 0 0 0 0 0 NETWORK West 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Def No NODELOCATION 0 0 Approach Parameters APPLABELS N E s w GRADES 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 PEDLEVELS 0 0 0 0 BIKEVOLUMES 0 0 0 0 PARKINGS IDES None None None None PARKVOLUMES 20 20 20 20 BUSVOLUMES 0 0 0 0 RIGHTTURNONREDS 0 0 0 0 UPSTREAMVC 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Movement Parameters MOVLABELS RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT VOLUMES 55 476 180 435 80 10 10 664 82 87 155 295 WIDTHS 0.0 24.0 12.0 0.0 24.0 12.0 0.0 24.0 12.0 0.0 24.0 12.0 LANES 0 2 1 0 2 1 0 2 1 0 2 1 GROUPTYPES Norm Norm Norm Norm Norm Norm Norm Norm Norm Norm Norm Norm UTILIZATIONS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 TRUCKPERCENTS 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 PEAKHOURFACTORS 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 ARRIVALTYPES 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 ACTUATIONS Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes REQCLEARANCES 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 MINIMUMS 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 STARTUPLOST 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 ENDGAIN 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 STORAGE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 INITIALQUEUE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 IDEALSATFLOWS 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 FACTORS 1. 00 1.00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 DELAYFACTORS 1. 00 1.00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1.00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 NSTOPFACTORS 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1.00 1. 00 1. 00 SATURATIONFLOWS 0 3484 530 0 3091 1089 0 3531 683 0 3348 731 Phasing Parameters SEQUENCES 11 ALL PERMISSIVES No Yes No Yes LEADLAGS None None OVERLAPS Yes Yes Yes Yes OFFSET 0.00 1 CYCLES 120 120 30 PEDTIME 0.0 0 GREENTIMES 53.11 58.89 YELLOWTIMES 4.00 4.00 CRITICAL$ 3 12 Two-Way Stop Control Page I of2 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY r.eneral Information Site Information "-nalyst Chris Valdez Intersection Lind/SA l\gency/Co. JTE, INC urisdiction Renton Date Performed 11/13/2006 Analysis Year with project l\nalvsis Time Period omoeak Proiect Descriotion Lind Ave Business Park (SALAWP) East/West Street: Site Access North/South Street: Lind Ave. SW Intersection Orientation: North-South Studv Period fhrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adiustments Maior Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 0 685 11 13 545 0 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 721 11 13 573 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 .. -0 .. .. Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 2 0 0 2 0 C:onfiguration T TR LT T Uostream Sinnal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 45 0 56 0 0 0 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0 95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourlv Flow Rate, HFR 47 0 58 0 0 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade(%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 0 0 Configuration LTR Delav. Queue Lenoth and Level of Service Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LTR Iv (vph) 13 105 C (m) (vph) 882 352 Ivie 0.01 0.30 !15% queue length 0.04 1.23 Control Delay g 1 19.5 LOS A C Approach Delay .. .. 19.5 Approach LOS .. .. C > Cop~ right ·C .2000 l ln1vcrs11~ of Florida. All R1gh1s Reserved Version4 lc (J!D file://C:\Documents and Settings\Owner\Local Settings\Templu2k443.tmp 11/22/2006 Two-Way Stop Control Page I of2 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst Chris Valdez Intersection Lind/SA Agency/Co. JTE, INC Jurisdiction Renton Date Performed 11/13/2006 Analysis Year with project Analvsis Time Period omoeak -Proiect Descriotion East/West Street Site Access North/South Street Lind Ave. SW Intersection Orientation: North-South Studv Period /hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adiustments Maior Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R rvolume 0 685 11 13 545 0 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 721 11 13 573 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 ---0 ---- Median Type Two Way Left Turn Lane RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 1 1 0 C::onfiguration TR L T Unstream Siqnal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Jolume 45 0 56 0 0 0 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 095 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 47 0 58 0 0 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade(%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 0 0 Configuration LTR Delav, Queue Lenoth, and Level of Service li\pproach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L LTR Iv (vph) 13 105 C (m) (vph) 882 404 Ivie 0.01 026 95% queue length 004 1 03 Control Delay 9. 1 17.0 LOS A C Approach Delay ----17.0 li\pproach LOS ----C > Copynghl '.f.:' 20fl0 l }n1n:rs;1v or rlonda. All Rights Reserved Vcrsion4.lc Czct •./ file://C:\Documents and Settingsll-!P _ Owner\Local Settings\ Templu2k I E91. tmp I 1/24/2006 Mark Jacobs From: To: Sent: Subject: Kayren "Mark Jacobs" <jaketraffic@comcast.net> "Kayren Kittrick" <Kkittrick@ci.rentonwa.us> Tuesday, November 14, 2006 9:36 AM Re: Fw: lind avenue business park Any accident issues that you are aware of at the study I/S's you identified or on Lind Avenue SW9 Also my Engineer's review of the City's web site showed the City's 2005 to 20 IO TIP that might be dated. A copy of the current six year TIP would be mce. One TIP project in particular is #45 Lind Ave. SW 16th to 43rd. Does this project widen Lind Avenue to provide a TWL TL? Or is the City considering re-striping the 4-lanes to 3 (my look at the traffic data indicates a 3-lane street as viable) Contact me if you have any questions. Mark -----Original Message ----- From: "Kayren Kittrick" <KkinridJii:ci.rtmo11.\, a.us> To: <jak<?i ra ftic·u:c,,rncast.net> Sent: Wednesday. October 25, 2006 12:43 PM Subject: Re: Fw: !ind avenue business park Hi Mark, The first one did get to me, but I had an extraordinarily busy day. And this one has been the same. In looking it over, l am only concerned on the effect the proposed project would have on Lind and the SW 16th to Grady Way intersections. Mostly this will need traffic generation and probable traffic turning movement and routes. Will there be one or two driveways required for fire and general access? lfthe intent is to leave 23rd and 21st in the same condition (no development of frontages) remember that current code requires defending why not, rather than why the city needs it. So have lhe information regarding wetlands, lack of traffic, or any other justification ready when it is time to ask for a modification or even to ask for fee-in-lieu of improvements. Sorry this took so long. Page I of2 --'-<::::.::-- 12/11/2006 Kayren Kittrick Development Engineering Supervisor Public Works Inspections & Permits 425-430-7299 >>> "Mark Jacobs" <jak.;traflic:\i;comcast.nct> I 0/25/2006 I: 15 PM>>> Kayren Sending again in case first e-mail did not get to you. Mark -----Original Message ----- From: "Mark Jacobs" <jak.:traflicJ,. co_111ca:-;t.nct> To: "Kayren Kittrick" <Kkittricbi-ci.renton.,,a.lls> Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2006 I :44 PM Subject: !ind avenue business park > Kayren > > Attached is information on an warehouse (-60%)/office (-40%) park (the > plan > is still in flux) project. > > Please review the attached and let me know what the CoR will require in > the > TIA') > > Contact me if you have any questions. > > Mark > 206.762.1978 > Page 2 of2 12/11/2006 STATE OF WASHINGTON -DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION T R I p s SYSTEM ANNUAL TRAFFIC REPORT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUME STATE --------------------------- ROUTE PUNCT TRUCK PERCENTAGES 2002 2003 2004 2005 STATE ROUTE MILEPOST LOCA~ION COUPLET CLASS SNGL DBL TRIPLE TOTAL UNITS UNITS UNITS UNITS 167 006. 52B BEFORE JCT N LEVEE RD 1 34000* 34000* 34000 167 .. 005.26 AFTER JCT SR 167 COWPLET C 1 21000 21000 20000* 20000 167 005.73 BEFORE RAMP SR 512 1 41000* 42000 167 005.98 AT SR 512 1 29000 30000 28000* 28000 167 006.44 AFTER RAMP SR 512 1 93000 96000 97000* 98000 167 007.03 AT SR 410 BRIDGE 1 55000* 56000 167 007. 4 9 AFTER RAMP SR 410 1 79000* 80000 167 011.84 BEFORE RAMP ELLINGSON RD 1 92000* 167 012.26 AT ELLINGSON RD BRIDGE 1 82000* 167 C 12 . 8 0 AF':'ER ?.J.J.1P ELLINGSON RD I 91000* 167 0 14 . 94 A!'TER R.;.MP SR :_ 5 W3 1 105000 :.osooo 110000 114000* 1 :i 7 015.77 AT 15TH ST NW 1 89000 9QOCO 9}000 98000 .. I~ 167 Cl6.2C li.?TER RA.MP 1 STH ST NI'/ 1 108COO 115000* ]150:)Q 116000* 167 017.93 ATS 277TH ST 1 97000 103000* 103000 104000* '\:, 167 019.24 AFTER RAMPS 277TH ST 1 113000 118000* 120000 122000* 167 019.60 AT SR 516 BRIDGE 1 87000 93000* 96000 97000* 167 019.93 AFTER RAMP SR 516 1 99000 105000* 109000 109000* 167 021. 31 AT 84TH AVE SE BRIDGE 1 83000 92000· 94000 95000* 167 021.79 AFTER RAMP N CENTRAL AVE 1 109000 112000* 116000 119000* 167 022.40 ATS 212 ST 1 92000 96000* 98000 99000* 167 023.70 AT ADC LOCATION P6 1 111000* 113000• 117000* 119000* 167 024.77 AFTER RAMP SW 43RD ST 1 117000 119000* 120000 122000* <C 167 027.16 BEFORE JCT SR 900 WYE CONN 1 38000• 38000 167 027.18 AFTER JCT SR 900 WYE CONN I 37000* 37000 167 027.27 BEFORE JCT SR 900 COUPLET WYE CONN 1 38000· STATE ROVTE NO 167 COUPLET PUYALP MILWAUKEE AVE TO SR 167 167COPUYALP "* 005.72 MILWA~KEE AVE BRIDGE•3EG ROUTE I 21000 21000 21000* 21000 .. COUPLET SKETCH IN BACK OF BOOK • BASED ON ACTUAL COUNT + SOURCE OF TRUCK PERCENTAGES PAGE 147 Adopted 11/01104 2005 Table 7-1 .. -2010 Six-Year TIP..-'/(" Total Project Costs Te:ital Prolect Cost~ 1 Pr('viou~ I Cosl:S 2005 2005 2007 2008 2009 1 s1,..,tOv01rl~vPro,uram 1.0S0.002 ~05,00(11 J05.000 405.000 405.000 -'05,00Ci' J SR 161!:S.W 27th .StlSlri.r+dn Bv 355. 174 10 000 · 10 000 10 000 1 10.000 10,000 [:,t:~s~"~'"~'t•i•~•~,,istw~,~'~'"~'~'~c~,~"f"'f,~,.==t==~,~-'~'~'-~'~'"~=====~,co~foo'ci;;cot-'. ___ ".:'.'.';::::':;:;;::.f'c·"'f'.e'"·,''ic'~'J::"_-2-i·d.000.000 ~ SR 169 HOV· 140ltl lo SRSOO 2,000,392 10.0001 55 100 3,680,000 2,350.000 2010 ~05 000 5.000 26 500.000 Slx•Yo<1r Total P•rlod Total Cost 2,430,000 3 48l'.JO:.; 55.000 4.JO'i_] B4.69M40 66,~0(?.~ 6 095,100 8,095,492 5 Renton Urban Shuttlu tFWSHi 20J~9 5.0001 5.COO' 5.000 5.000 5.000 5.000 30,000 50. 169 , Tn1risitPr,:,<>ram 32'.!XJJ 20.40Di 20,400 20400 2-0AOO 20.400 20,400 122.~00 154,91!4 1 Rainier Av Corridor St ! lmoroy. 267 _710 20.000) ?O.CluO 20.000 261.000 2,9&.:.000 3,165.000 5,450 000 6,717.710 l-,"'-l"~"~",;..""";"""';,o:s .. •c,,;e~c"c"e 0e'----i--";c:ar',:c~~a----'c~362"c:~2:,c:'1°'·---:Ci"~~":t:~:t::.::.::.;:,",eo;:.oo~}ot, ::.::.~·~:~;t;":~:00c00/a-=~~'~:S.~00t:~~co~'+==;'~-t;~~oi·.:~oo00J~---"a10",c·.";c.:~:i::o~00;f----_"1c'.~:!~:i:0:"'.,:a;~ 10 SLaklWuh.Rotdw;ivlmorov. 1,500,000 I ' 1 1.650000 14.300.000 23.200.000 39,950000 41,450.000 11 SR 1G9 Corridor 51 50.000I ----f--'----'f---==cct----+----+--c.'c'·"aOC0""1---cc'°"''"''°c!J f--'<'-fc'c'c"'chCRa•oa<eoc"s's'•=Kc<===---\·--'c56a'i"8~00,\---~,aC.2aoOaOC[--c ! 240.000 258,200 415,000 u 1-405 1morov-nt1 tn R11nlon 42.186 30.000: 26.coo 10.000! 60,000 102.186 ,~ Pml-.ctDevelooment/Pn1de>1:i1rn 271.363 ,',",-~o·oo"· __ ,cl2So-OsOOef--"2eOO=-OC0"','-->'00=.CO=Oj---··c2e0oOo.OCO'°'r---'2>01Je,eOOO""J---''>'c'°',·cOC0~--'-1'c<c2'c,3aG~3 l--'"'-l~"'"'-'"c"0'?'0"~-·o•~·m""'""o"c''..--+--~"c·~'00~--f,:i-,"~l-...,-=,~,t---.,,-,=f-----+------+----+-""'"'"'a',·~a0,t--.;'a0 , 0 ··,00a0 16 fbini11r Av• SW711'l lo <!Ith Pl 80.000 585,000 2.150.000 855.000 [ 3.590.000 3 670 000 ,r 6e<1•on Rd. S 261h lo Main 20 000 459,400 2,500 I 461 900 481 900 11 Marl.al C!rcuh•Uon Pro<1.,am 195.30B 200,000 200.000 200.000 200.000 2"50.000 250 000 1.300.000 1,495 308 11 e,1da1 tnu•Ktkin& R-a•, 120.•11 .tO.ooo ,~_0 0 _00 000 _,,+----',,o,ooo,.,,,__",<'s'·s''e.'+--'s'a°'""''+----s'e'eooos,af----'°SSc's·ocos,af--~'"·'s's'·s's"• ~ loopR1olac1m1ntP ram 57.441 20.00C , ioooo 2(),000 20.000 20.000 120000 177441 t• S1r.n RanlaC41m~nl Prooram 13.427 7 SOC 7,500 7 500 7.500 1.;-00 7.500 45.000 58.427 z:z PollProonim 47.9r4 25000 48.4CO! 25000 25.oo:i 25.000 25.000 HJ,400 221,J74 ll S0undTranaltHOVO!r<1ctAce1U •6.523 10,000 5.000 ' 15.000 61,523 l• 'trarncs.a-r.tvPro,,ram 1 233791 aoooo 40.0oo 40.000 40,000 ,o.ooo 40,000 280.000 513.19\ 2r. TrafflcEfficien,;vProntam 250.S<lS 2$1.900 1HAOO, 75,000 30.000 J0.000 30.000 531,300 781,805 21 CB0Blke&P11<1.Connec1lons 25.212 50.000 ~0.0001 10000 590.000 ~10000 5,000 1115,000 1.1.to.2i~ 21 Arterial Rallab. P I 537 .!00 195.0001 240 000 ! 205.000 340.000 230,000 180.0-00 1.390.000 l ,927 ,800 667.781 1,258.700 1.592.0001' 2950,700 3,618.~81 :, Sunnl/Ovv;allln~actlon 115.000 38,1,000 381,000 496000 10 RR cross Inti S..ferv Pron. S, 19a s.ooo ~ ~·-',:.0 0 1 !---_ __,000.0000,t---~=+' ---=71---s's'e'"=1--~300.0cooea--"'"s·s"ea' I-''"' t'°e"e.c';'"'-"°'""m"-------+---'1"'°c·*"'°''t-----06S4c·20cc0i---0 -0,0:c,,_0., .,.c: --'6'c'c·200"."!+----,6'c'·.,''°'2cl--06'c'c-'c0c0 c' --c.,2'200~1--0 '0"c'c·2c00of-----c'c'c'·s''c'°~ J2 Trans Con,;,1rn1nc" 1)84 40.000' ,, • 40,000; 10,000 10 000 J0,000 140.000 141,7B4 Jl M1s1lno Links Pro<1r:am J6.J50 J0.000 <oCrJo, 30.000; 30.000 30:000 ---c3~o'i_o~oo,t---,o,a,'i_oco""--s,c,cc_,,,a,~ '--'~'-'"•"~"""•'•",.=.,0,".",."m",",",----+---~,.s_s.,s,+---",",".0°00e+--·-30:000: 20.0001 20.000 20,<ioo 20.000 1so.ooo t94.aH 3S Graav CorridorSludu 5.000 35.0001 120000 80,0001 230.000 1.e,0.000 1.020.000 J,295,000 3300,000 ""''"'+e"•"•>'•"~"s'"•'e•cOe••a·.;.'c""'e'c'mc-~-+----24,79a 20.000 1s.noor n.ooo 110.000. so.coo 80.000 J~.000 350,798 µ;c;.J"~'•~•;,",:".:":":."· ~",~"~",,:"~","~".;";c_"•"c'c'c'o....,.' -~'~;:c:7~c,+---";'c;2c;:~::::;;1----~---1c•a9-c'009----+-----+----l----'':'~~c:~=t--~5~c:c:~c;~: 1--''"' .;a'c°'c'c0-;,'cms"""'s'c' "°F"""s'c'1M=,~--t--1 -02=20s·a1e11+---"'s5s·0e00c+----""c·0c0a0c1 -->5c0c-0c00=t---"'='=·'°='~'----2c'o·0=00c.t--a's'=-000=>----~"s's·0a00a-r--~'s'-a's-'s"~ •o Trant.V~llev & Soas CrHk Corr. 1 7,300 :5.000 5 ooc 12.JOO !j,,:,jw~s@o~o~r'jc~oe,~"~'"''""~•t,'e,~~"~m~=t:1=:::j,t,.i,,~,'/::===,~o~.o~o~ol==:Jirnl].00"0"1--0,00.000°a+--,c,c.,.oo•J1+---c,-s,._o<oo+--o,o<.o<oocct---.aoc.coaiio"---,","·'"'"'' 42 1%forlheAm I 20.000 50,000 30,000i 30,000 50.000i 30000 30.0oo 220.000 2-lQ,OOo 4l Arterfal HOV Pm"Dm 12S.354 10,000 10.:JOC ; 20.000 145 354 "" Park-Sun,etCqrrld<tr ! 7,88~ 25.000! 50.00G, 390COO ~.591.000 1.059.000 3.215.000 3.222.889 ,~'"'-ta"c'adc•c•·cScWcJcSe~c·cScWc,e,ac"~---.,.' --c,eSSOOO,,a---,;'s·°°'°"c' --"~/J.OcCl+------+--1".9"J"<".OOC.C.C.,'--c6"26"0C0=+-----t--"2,a5',,sO.OSCSOt--~'s·'c'e'S00eO~ H Benson Rd SIS l1.at St 138,500 61 500 61.SOC ~00 000 u Liv.an Av Con,;rat• PaMI R•o.alr ! 460.000 i 460 000 460 000 4~ c,,,.INllll 51anal 5.000 ,.o.oco; 20.000\ 3<JJ OC.01 400,000 10.000 1,~.000 785,000 a T~nslt Priority S"'niil s.-tam 1 280.315 30 OOC I J JOOOO 1 J10 315 ~j~f~irin~"~"~'i'°;"j'"~';,;•~~~~~~~~~~===t==~;!'~'-!''~'~======'~'~·"""!!t==::;:;;;t-=-======i::::.::,",-,:.coc:c1:--·========t=======:j;::::j,f, •. cocofj::::.="·<",.f~c-:.,c,], 1--,, Mo usu S · Main to Burnett l , 8 10.000 ~ 10.000 s2 TraM Vallo~ rrs , 50.000 5,000 s.ooo , 10,000 so.coo :u Lak• w .. ,r,. e..-Sli" Plano I 829.•00 10.e«t -I 10,600 640.000 12.000 512.000 :.Jt~!~---,,.,"'O"e7(:"c---~----l--- 1 986 4S~. s.:1 o me· ·-·J:354300-28 9S4 54.:l; · • ·ss·iff~-·:o~ ~.12:z.1~2 l..c'_(,,.;'_~ ~8 36-/ 100j ~;;4214 130~. lT~.H:.,,;1 Ir <:.f i .s t .s ./ -' f1'r ~ ,",-__;t <"" -~.s: J~ J.Z 111-14 I 4. BMP Implementation 10 mmm11 Completed by: BMP Implementation Title: Date: Develop a plan for implementing each BMP. Describe the steps necessary to implement the BMP (i.e., any construction or design), the schedule for completing those steps (list dates), and the nersonls\ resnonsible for imnlementation. Scheduled Milestone and BMPs Description of Action(s) Completion Date(s) Required for lmalementation Good 1. Housekeeping 2. 3 Preventive 1. Maintenance 2. 3. 4. Spill 1. Prevention and 2. Emergency Cleanup 3. Inspections 1. 2. 3. 2005 Surface Water Design Manual (CSWPP Forms) Page 1 Person Responsible for Action 1/1/2005 BMPs Description of Action(s) Required for lmolementation Source Control 1. BMPs 2. 3 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Treatment 1. BMPs 2. 3. 4. Emerging 1. technologies 2. Flow Control 3. BMPs 4. 2005 Surface Water Design Manual (CSWPP Forms) Page 2 Schedule Milestone Person and Completion Responsible Datels\ for Action 1/1/2005 5. Material Inventory 11 mmm11 . . Completed by: . . Title: ' > Date:.·. ·. ..· . . . · Material lnventorv List materials handled, treated, stored, or disposed of at the project site that may potentially be exposed to precipitation or runoff. Quantity (Units) Likelihood of contact with stormwater Past Spill or Used Produced Stored If Yes, describe reason Leak Material 'uroose/Location /indicate oer/wk. or vr.) Yes I No 2005 Surface Water Design Manual (CSWPP Forms) Page 1 1/1/2005 6. Potential Pollutant Source Identified 12 mmm11 - . . . .· Completed by: Title: . . · Potential Pollutant Source Identification Date: .. . . .. . List all potential stormwater pollutants from materials handled, treated, or stored on-site. Likelihood of pollutant being present in your Potential Stormwater Pollutant Stormwater Pollutant Source stormwater discharge. If yes, explain 2005 Surface Water Design Manual (CSWPP Forms) Page 1 7. List of Significant Spills and Leaks 13 mmm11 -. . . . . Completed by: Title: . List of Significant Spills and Leaks Date: .. · '.-_. : ., ' . . . . List all spills and leaks of toxic or hazardous pollutants that were significant but are .!!2! limited to, release of 2i.! or hazardous substances in excess of reportable guantities. Although not required, we suggest you list spills and leaks of non-hazardous materials. Description Response Procedure Date Location Type of Quantity Source Reason for Amount of Material No Preventive Measure Taken (as Material , If Spill/Leak Material longer (month/day/yea indicated Known Recovered exposed to r) on site Stormwater map) (Yes/No) 2005 Surface Water Design Manual (CSWPP Forms) Page 1 8. Employee Training 14 mmmm . . Completed by: .. Employee Training Title: . . ' . . . . .. . ·. . · . Date: Describe the annual trainino of emolovees on the SWPPP, addressing soi II res1 onse, oood housekeeoina, and material manaaement oractices. Training Topics Brief Description of Training Program/Materials Schedule for Training (e.g., film, newsletter course) {list dates) Attendees 1.) LINE WORKERS Spill Prevention and Response Good Housekeeping Material Management Practices 2.l P2 TEAM: SWPPP Implementation Monitoring Procedures 2005 Surface Water Design Manual (CSWPP Forms) Page 1 1/1/2005 9. Pollution Prevention Team 15 mmm11 Completed by: Pollution Prevention Team Title: Date: . . Responsible Official: Title: Team Leader: Office Phone: Cell Phone #: Pager#: Responsibilities: ( 1 ) Title: Office Phone: Pager#: Cell Phone: Responsibilities: (2) Title: Office Phone: Pager#: Cell Phone #: Responsibilities: 2005 Surface Water Design Manual (CSWPP Forms) 1/24/2005 Page 1 7 .0 OTHER PERMITS • Watermain Extension Permit • Private Main Extension and Side Sewer Permit • Building Permits • Washington State Department of Ecology NPDES Permit Number (to come at a later date). • Right-of-Way Permit 16 mmm11 8.0 ESC ANALYSIS AND DESIGN See the enclosed Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (CSWPPP) in the following pages. 17 mmmm TA C () I,! i\ 2215 North 30th Street Suite 3DO Tacoma, WA 98403"3350 253.383 2422 -, . 253.383.2572 Fix SEATTLE 1200 6th Avenue Suite 1620 Seattle, WA 98101-3123 206.267.2425 TEI 206.257.2429 fl! www.ahbl.com