Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Misc
OFFICE OF THE HEARING EXAMINER KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON 400 Yesler Way, Room 404 Seattle, Washington 98104 Telephone (206) 296-4660 Facsimile (206) 296-1654 REPORT AND DECISION May 12, 2004 SUBJECT: Department of Development and Environmental Services File No, L02PO014 Proposed Ordinance No, 2004-0160 SHAMROCK PROPERTY Preliminary Plat Application Location: Between Northeast 4th Court and Southeast 120th Street on the west side of 148th Avenue Southeast Applicant: Cam -West Development, Inc., & Shamrock Highlands, LLC represented by Sara Slatten 9720 Northeast 120th Place, Ste. 100 Kirkland, WA 98034 Telephone: (425) 825-1955 King County: Department of Development and Environmental Services represented by Kim Claussen 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Renton, Washington 98055-1219 Telephone: (206) 296-7167 Facsimile: (206) 296-6728 SUMMARY OF DECISION/RECOMMENDATION: Department's Preliminary Recommendation: Department's Final Recommendation: Examiner's Decision: EXAMINER PROCEEDINGS: Hearing Opened: Hearing Closed: Approve subject to conditions Approve subject to revised conditions Approve subject to revised conditions May 6, 2004 May 6, 2004 L02P0014 — Shamrock Property Subdivision Page 2 of 14 Participants at the public hearing and the exhibits offered and entered are listed in the attached minutes. A verbatim recording of the hearing is available in the office of the King County Hearing Examiner. FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & DECISION: Having reviewed the record in this matter, the Examiner now makes and enters the following: FINDINGS: General Information: Developer: Cam -West Development, Inc. 9720 NE 120 Place, Suite 100 Kirkland, WA 98034 425-825-1955 Engineer: Triad Associates 11814 115'h Ave NE Kirkland, WA 98034 425-821-8448 STR: Location: Zoning: Acreage: Number of Lots: Density: Lot Size: Proposed Use: Sewage Disposal: Water Supply: Fire District: 10-23-05 The site is located between NE 4`h Court and SE 120`t' St., on the west side of 148`" Avenue SE R-4 29.8 acres 118 lots Approximately 4 units per acre Lots average approximately 5,000 square feet in size Single-family detached dwellings City of Renton King County Water District #90 City of Renton School District: Issaquah School District Complete Application Date: October 29, 2002, revised October 8, 2003 2. Except as modified herein, the facts set forth in the King County Land Use Services Division's preliminary report to the King County Hearing Examiner for the May 6, 2004, public hearing are found to be correct and are incorporated herein by reference. The LUSD staff recommends approval of the application, subject to conditions. 3. Cann -West has filed a preliminary plat application to divide 29.8 acres into 118 lots for a single- family residential development. The property lies northeast of the City of Renton in a rapidly urbanizing area and consists of two minimally contiguous development pods. The Iarger northern L02POOI4 — Shamrock Property Subdivision DECISION: Page 4 of 14 The preliminary plat application for Shamrock, as revised and received on February 13, 2004, is APPROVED, subject to the following conditions of final plat approval: I . Compliance with all platting provisions of Title 19A of the King County Code. 2. All persons having an ownership interest in the subject property shall sign on the face of the final plat a dedication which includes the language set forth in King County Council Motion No. 5952. 3. The plat shall comply with the base density and minimum density requirements of the R-4 zone classification. All lots shall meet the minimum dimensional requirements of the R-4 zone classification or shall be as shown on the face of the approved preliminary plat, whichever is larger, except that minor revisions to the plat which do not result in substantial changes may be approved at the discretion of the Department of Development and Environmental Services. 4. All construction and upgrading of public and private roads shall be done in accordance with the King County Road Standards established and adopted by Ordinance No. 11187, as amended (1993 KCRS). The Applicant must obtain the approval of the King County Fire Protection Engineer certifying the adequacy of the fire hydrant, water main, and fire flow to meet the standards of Chapter 17.08 of the King County Code. Final plat approval shall require full compliance with the drainage provisions set forth in King County Code 9.04. Compliance may result in reducing the number and/or location of lots as shown on the preliminary approved plat. Preliminary review has identified the following conditions of approval, which represent portions of the drainage requirements. All other applicable requirements in KCC 9.04 and the Surface Water Design Manual (SWDM) must also be satisfied during engineering and final review. a. Drainage plans and analysis shall comply with the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual and applicable updates adopted by King County_ DDES approval of the drainage and roadway plans is required prior to any construction. b. Current standard plan notes and ESC notes, as established by DDES Engineering Review, shall be shown on the engineering plans. C. The following note shall be shown on the final recorded plat: All building downspouts, footing drains, and drains from all impervious surfaces such as patios and driveways shall be connected to the permanent storm drain outlet as shown on the approved construction drawings # on file with DDES and/or the King County Department of Transportation. This plan shall be submitted with the application of any building permit. All connections of the drains must be constructed and approved prior to the final building inspection approval. For those lots that are designated for L02P0014 — Shamrock Property Subdivision Page 3 of 14 parcel was previously the site of a nursery and contains a low -impact development proposal comprising the 76 lots that lie north of Southeast 124th Street. The southern parcel contains 7 lots within King County plus another 11 lots within the City of Renton. The Renton parcel also contains a detention and water duality treatment tract that will serve the King County lots located south of Southeast 124th Street. The Renton portion of the subdivision is being reviewed by the City contemporaneously with King County review of the instant application. 4. The Shamrock plat is within one of three demonstration project areas identified in KCC 21A.55.060 as suitable for experimentation in low impact development. As such the LID proposal has received unusually extensive review by King County staff. The primary emphasis of the experimental best management practices proposed for the LID portion of Shamrock is focused on reducing the plat's drainage impacts so that a smaller RID facility can be employed. Some of the innovations proposed include the use of cross -sloped roads with runoff sheet -flowing to swales, partial infiltration of roof and drain runoff, and the use of amended soils to increase infiltration capacity. 5. The proposed northern drainage pond complex lies adjacent to a large wetland on the west side of the LID property, the southern half of which has been significantly disturbed and filled. The Applicant has received a waiver of SAO restrictions against placing an R/D facility within a wetland buffer and is proposing that its water quality treatment cell will function as a constructed wetland. In addition, the Applicant will remove the fill and replant the wetland and buffer with native vegetation. Removal of the fill will restore the hydrologic connection between the north and south portions of the wetland and will allow flows from the wetland to revert to their historic discharge patterns. Because this wetland discharges to both the northern and southern basins for the plat, the actual flow patterns after restoration will need to be monitored to determine whether offsite releases occur as modeled. Runoff discharges to the wetland will also be monitored for toxicity to assess the efficiency of the water quality treatment system. 6. The SEPA conditions attached to this application require Shamrock to contribute a proportional share to signal and turn lane improvements at the intersection of SR 9001148th Avenue Southeast located north of the plat. These improvements will correct a level -of -service F condition and poor sight distance characteristics, as well as reduce left turns at the SR 900/I64th Avenue Southeast intersection where a high -accident location exists. CONCLUSIONS: 1. If approved subject to the conditions imposed below, the proposed subdivision makes appropriate provision for the public health, safety and welfare; serves the public use and interest; and meets the requirements of RCW 58.17.110. , 2. The conditions of approval imposed herein, including dedications and easements, will provide improvements that promote legitimate public purposes, are necessary to serve the subdivision and are proportional to its impacts; are required to make the proposed plat reasonably compatible with the environment; and will carry out applicable state laws and regulations and the laws, policies and objectives of King County. L02POO14 — Shamrock Property Subdivision Page 5 of 14 individual lot infiltration systems, the systems shall be constructed at the time of the building permit and shall comply with plans on file." A surface water adjustment (L04V0003) is approved for this subdivision. All conditions of approval for this adjustment shall be met upon submittal of the engineering plans. Note that this adjustment allows the use of low -impact designs for the stormwater facilities on the north portion of the site. The stormwater facilities shall be constructed in general conformance with the preliminary grading and storm drainage plan received February I3, 2004; unless otherwise approved by DDES. The final amended soil design shall be reviewed and approved with the engineering plans. 8. The stormwater facilities shall meet at a minimum the Level 2 flow control and basic water duality requirements in the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM). The north stormwater detention pond shall be placed in a separate tract dedicated to King County for maintenance. The south stormwater detention facility is within the City of Renton. Engineering plans for the construction of this facility shall be approved by Renton. 9. The 100 -year floodplain for any onsite wetlands or streams shall be shown on the engineering plans and the final recorded plat per the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM). 10. The following road improvements are required to be constructed according to the 1993 King County Road Standards(KCRS): a. SE 124" Street from 146h Ave SE tol48'h Ave SE shall be improved to the urban subcollector street standard. b. 144`" Place SE; 146'" Ave SE, 146`'' Ct. SE(from SE 124'" St. to SE 12151 St); SE 12151 StOrom 146'" Ct. to 148" Ave SE); 14411 Ave SEISE 1241" St.(from the145`, Ave SE extra. to 146"i Ave SE); shall be improved to the urban subaccess street standard. C. SE 125'h St/147'h Ave SE; 1461h Ct_ SE ( from SE 12151 St. to end); 14511 Ave SE (from SE 124'h St. to 1441" Ave SE); 144"i Ave SE (from 145''' Ave SE extra. to end); shall be improved to the urban minor access street standard. d. FRONTAGE: The site's property frontages along 148'h Ave SE (west side) shall be improved to the urban collector arterial standard with sidewalk. The property frontages (tax lots 9021, 9026, 9170 and 9259) along 148th Ave. SE shall be addressed at engineering plan submittal, to either provide for a paved shoulder or thickened edge section. Off-site property owners shall be contacted for design and construction coordination. The final frontage proposal shall be reviewed and approved by DDES at engineering design review. The frontage improvements shall be evaluated at engineering plan submittal for safe walking conditions per the KCRS. L02P0014 - Shamrock Property Subdivision Page 6 of 14 C. Tract N shall be improved to the private access tract standard per Section 2.09 of the KCRS. This tract shall be owned and maintained by the owners of the lots served. Notes to this effect shall be shown on the final recorded plat. f. Tracts D, J, and M shall be improved as joint use driveways per Section 3.01 of the KCRS. These driveways shall be owned and maintained by the owners of the Lots served. Notes to this effect shall be shown on the final recorded plat. g. That portion of Lot 35, lying within the 30 -feet existing easement for ingress and egress, shall be dedicated as R[W. A R/W radius shall also be provided at Lot 35 (SE quadrant 144'" PL SE) and at Lot 42 (NW quadrant 146`'' Ave SE). h. Tracts P and Q shall be dedicated as public RAW. Sixteen feet of right-of-way shall be provided along the northerly portion of lot 35. Right-of-way radius shall be provided as follows — SE corner of lot 42; SW corner of lot 34; NW corner of lot 35; SE comer of lot 26. j. Modifications to the above road conditions may be considered according to the variance procedures in Section 1.08 of the KCRS. k. Tracts A and C shall be included within the right-of-way. Road Variance L04VO004 is approved for this project. All conditions of approval for this variance shall be incorporated into the engineering plans. in. Details for waiting area for school children along 148`x' Ave SE shall be determined by the Applicant and the Issaquah School District, prior to or concurrent with the engineering plan submittal. Details of this waiting area shall be shown on the engineering plans and accompanied by correspondence from the School District. H. All utilities within proposed rights-of-way must be included within a franchise approved by the King County Council prior to final plat recording. 12. The Applicant or subsequent owner shall comply with King County Code 14.75, Mitigation Payment System (MPS), by paying the required MPS fee and administration fee as determined by the applicable fee ordinance. The Applicant has the option to either: (1) pay the MPS fee at final plat recording, or (2) pay the MPS fee at the time of building permit issuance. If the first option is chosen, the fee paid shall be the fee in effect at the time of plat application and a note shall be placed on the face of the plat that reads, "All fees required by King County Code 14.75, Mitigation Payment System (MPS), have been paid." If the second option is chosen, the fee paid shall be the amount in effect as of the date of building permit application. 13. Lots within this subdivision are subject to King County Code 21A.43, which imposes impact fees to fund school system improvements needed to serve new development. As a condition of final approval, fifty percent (50%) of the impact fees due for the plat shall be assessed and collected immediately prior to recording, using the fee schedules in effect when the plat receives final L02POO14 — Shamrock Property Subdivision Page 7 of 14 approval. The balance of the assessed fee shall be allocated evenly to the dwelling units in the plat and shall be collected prior to building permit issuance. 14. Except as modified below in condition no. 15, the proposed subdivision shall comply with the Sensitive Areas Code as outlined in King County Code 21A.24. Permanent survey marking shall be addressed prior to final plat approval. Temporary marking of sensitive areas and their buffers (for example, with bright orange plastic construction fencing) shall be shown on the engineering plans and placed on the site and shall remain in place until all construction activities are completed. Permanent signs identifying the sensitive areas shall be shown on the engineering plans and installed as part of the plat construction activities. 15. Wetlands a. Class 2 wetlands shall have a minimum 50 -foot of undisturbed or enhanced native vegetation. Wetlands and their buffers shall be placed in sensitive area tracts. A minimum 15 -foot building setback line shall be required from the edge of all sensitive area buffers. b. Buffer width averaging may be allowed if it will provide additional protection to wetlands or enhance their functions, as long as the total area in buffer does not decrease. Buffer averaging in conformance with the Code and administrative rules is proposed as shown on the preliminary plat plans. Buffer reductions of about 5,670 square feet would be compensated for by providing additional buffer area of about 23,400 square feet. Additionally, much of the buffer has been degraded by prior activities on the site, and the project would enhance the native vegetation of these wetland buffers. The enhanced wetland buffer must provide equal or greater biologic functions, including habitat, and equivalent or better hydrologic functions. C. Post -development wetland hydrology for the smaller, more frequent storm events shall match pre -development wetland hydrology to the maximum extent feasible. Calculations, graphs and text shall be included in the Technical Information Report with the engineering plans to show bow this condition will be met, to be reviewed by DDES Environmental Scientist. d. Approved alterations to wetlands or their buffers including removal of wetland fill and enhancement of buffers shall require that a detailed mitigation plan shall be submitted for review along with the engineering plans. The mitigation plan must include final grades, hydrologic calculations showing how the mitigation feature will function, and a planting plan showing plant species, sizes, quantities and locations. The plan shall list goals and objectives, construction and installation notes, performance standards, and monitoring and maintenance measures. e. A conceptual mitigation plan shall be submitted for review along with the engineering plans for the proposed wetland reconnection area west of the stormwater facility in Tract H. The conceptual mitigation plan must include proposed grades, hydrologic calculations showing how the mitigation feature will function, and a planting scheme showing plant species, sizes and quantities. The plan shall also list goals and objectives, construction L02POO14 — Shamrock Property Subdivision Page S of 14 and installation notes, performance standards, and monitoring and maintenance measures. This plan shall be conceptual to allow for in -the -field location of a few channels through the northern fill area where a young alder forest has gown, leaving some areas of alder forest to mature. This mitigation area will be shown on the engineering plans as a concept, with notes requiring field location of the channels in order to protect the larger and healthier alder trees. An as -built mitigation plan shall be submitted for this wetland reconnection area west of the proposed stormwater pond in Tract H, following construction. f. Approval of the project wetland mitigation plans will include the requirement for posting financial guarantee(s) to insure installation and success of the plan. Monitoring for up to five years from the date of installation shall be required, prior to a final inspection of the mitigation plan. Monitoring will commence upon a field inspection and approval of the installed mitigation areas by DDES Environmental Scientist. The financial guarantee(s) will be released when the performance standards have been met. If the performance standards have not been met at the conclusion of the monitoring period, a contingency plan will be required to remedy the situation, and the monitoring period may be extended. g. The western half (wet pond) of the stormwater facility pond shown in Tract H on the plans may be located within the wetland and wetland buffer restoration area, and will be considered restored wetland and wetland buffer as well as a stormwater facility. The wet pond shall be landscaped using native species at densities recommended in the Sensitive Areas Mitigation Guidelines to restore both wetland and buffer habitat. The plan for the wet pond shall be reviewed by DDES Engineering and Environmental Scientist staff. The planting plan shallge part of the wetland mitigation plans for the site, and meet the criteria for those pl s•specif.ed above. h. Post -construction monitoring of the wet pond in the stormwater facility in Tract H will include monitoring the water quality in the wet pond to evaluate its toxicity to wetland - dependent wildlife. Post -construction water level fluctuations will also be monitored along with observations of impacts on amphibians. Monitoring methods and schedule shall be included with the mitigation plans required above. The Applicant shall prepare an operations and maintenance manual for the wet pond of the northern stormwater facility, including the vegetation, to provide to either King County Facilities Maintenance or the Homeowners' Association, depending upon which group has ownership of the stormwater wet pond. This Manual will be reviewed and approved by King County DDES Engineer and Environmental Scientist at the time of engineering plan review. j. The following note shall be shown on the final engineering plan and recorded plat: RESTRICTIONS FOR SENSITIVE AREA TRACTS AND SENSITIVE AREAS AND BUFFERS Dedication of a sensitive area tract/sensitive area setback area conveys to the public a beneficial interest in the land within the tract/setback area. This interest L02POOl4 — Shamrock Property Subdivision Page 9 of 14 includes the preservation of native vegetation for all purposes that benefit the public health, safety and welfare, including control of surface water and erosion, maintenance of slope stability, and protection of plant and animal habitat. The sensitive area tract/setback area imposes upon all present and future owners and occupiers of the land subject to the tract/setback area the obligation, enforceable on behalf of the public by King County, to leave undisturbed all trees and other vegetation within the tract/setback area. The vegetation within the tract/setback area may not be cut, pruned, covered by fill, removed or damaged without approval in writing from the King County Department of Development and Environmental Services or its successor agency, unless otherwise provided by law. The common boundary between the sensitive area tract/sensitive area setback area and the area of development activity must be marked or otherwise flagged to the satisfaction of King County prior to any clearing, grading, building construction or other development activity on a property subject to the sensitive area tract/setback area. The required marking or flagging shall remain in place until all development proposal activities in the vicinity of the sensitive area and buffer are completed. No building foundations are allowed beyond the required 15 -foot building setback line, unless otherwise provided by law. 16. Suitable recreation space shall be provided consistent with the requirements of KCC 21 A.14.180 and KCC 2IA. 14.190 (i.e., sport court[s], children's play equipment, picnic table[s], benches, etc.). a. An overall detailed recreation space plan shall be submitted for review and approval by DDES, prior to or concurrent with the engineering pians. This plan shall include location, area calculations, dimensions, and landscape specs, equipment specs, etc b. A performance bond for recreation space improvements shall be posted prior to recording of the plat. 17. A homeowners' association or other workable organization shall be established to the satisfaction of DDES which provides for the ownership and continued maintenance of the recreation, open space and/or sensitive area tract(s). 18. Street trees shall be provided as follows (per KCRS 5.03 and KCC 21A.16.050): a. Trees shall be planted at a rate of one tree for every 40 feet of frontage along all roads. Spacing may be modified to accommodate sight distance requirements for driveways and intersections. . b. Trees shall be located within the street right-of-way and planted in accordance with Drawing No. 5-009 of the 1993 King County Road Standards, unless King County L02P0014 — Shamrock Property Subdivision Page 10 of 14 Department of Transportation determines that trees should not be located in the street right-of-way. C. If King County determines that the required street trees should not be located within the right-of-way, they shall be located no more than 20 feet from the street right-of-way line. d. The trees shall be owned and maintained by the abutting lot owners or the homeowners association or other workable organization unless the County has adopted a maintenance program. Ownership and maintenance shall be noted on the face of the final recorded plat. e. The species of trees shall be approved by DDES if located within the right-of-way, and shall not include poplar, cottonwood, soft maples, gum, any fruit -bearing trees, or any other tree or shrub whose roots are likely to obstruct sanitary or storm sewers, or that is not compatible with overhead utility lines. The Applicant shall submit a street tree plan and bond quantity sheet for review and approval by DDES prior to engineering plan approval. g. The Applicant shall contact Metro Service Planning at 684-1622 to determine if 148'h Ave SE is on a bus route. If so, the street tree plan shall also be reviewed by Metro. h. The street trees must be installed and inspected, or a performance bond posted prior to recording of the plat. If a performance bond is posted, the street trees must be installed and inspected within one year of recording of the plat. At the time of inspection, if the trees are found to be installed per the approved plan, a maintenance bond must be submitted or the performance bond replaced with a maintenance bond, and held for one year. After one year, the maintenance bond may be released after DDES has completed a second inspection and determined that the trees have been kept healthy and thriving. 19. The following have been established under SEPA authority as necessary requirements to mitigate the adverse environmental impacts of this development. The Applicants shall demonstrate compliance with these items prior to final approval. a. To mitigate the significant adverse impact the plat of Shamrock will have on the intersections of SR 900/148' Ave SE and SR 900/164' Ave SE, the Applicant shall install, either individually or in conjunction with other development projects in this area, the following improvements at the SR 900/148` Ave intersection: + A traffic signal, and • Eastbound and westbound left turn lanes The design for the SR 900/148'h Ave intersection improvements shall be approved by the Washington State Department of Transportation (and by King County to the extent such improvements are located in County right-of-way). In addition, at a minimum, the existing entering sight distance looking east for the north and south legs of the intersection (602 feet and 386 feet, respectively) shall not be reduced as part of the L02P0014 — Shamrock Property Subdivision Page 11 of 14 intersection improvements. Documentation shall be submitted to show this requirement is met. All construction work associated with the intersection improvements shall be completed between April I" and September 30`h. This seasonal restriction shall be clearly shown on the final engineering plans. In lieu of the installation of the above -noted intersection improvements prior to final plat approval, the Applicant may post a financial guarantee with WSDOT which assures the installation of these improvements within two years of the recording of Shamrock. In this event, intersection improvement design must be approved by WSDOT prior to King County approval of the engineering plans for Shamrock. If the above -noted intersection improvements have already been made by others prior to the recording of Shamrock, or a financial guarantee has been posted by others which assures the installation of these improvements, then the Applicant for Shamrock shall pay a pro -rata share dollar amount to the developer who has made the improvements or "bonded" for the improvements, in an amount proportional to the impacts of Shamrock. The pro -rata share dollar amount to be paid shall be set by WSDOT, and documentation shall be provided by the Shamrock Applicant to the King County Land Use Services Division to show this payment has been made, prior to final plat recording. The pro -rata dollar amount to be paid shall be based on the following: The final Shamrock lot count The trip distribution for Shamrock The total trips contributed to the intersection of SR 900.14e Ave by the plats of Aster Paris (LOOP0024), Stone Ridge 9L99P3008), East Renton (1,02P0005), Shamrock (1,02P0014), Rosemonte (aka Ironwood — L03P0018) and any future land use applications submitted to King County for which compliance with the King County Intersection Standards (KCC 14.80) is required at either the SR 900/14811 Ave intersection, or the SR 900/164"i Ave High Accident Location. In the event that either King County or WSDOT adopts a formal "latecomer's" system prior to final plat recording, that system may be followed in lieu of the approach described above, at the discretion of the Applicant, as long as at a minimum there is a financial guarantee which assures the above -noted intersection improvements will be installed within two years of the date of recording of the plat of Shamrock. [Comprehensive PIan Policy T-303 and King County Code 21A.28.060A] b. Documentation shall be provided to demonstrate to the satisfaction of WSDOT that stopping sight distance (360 feet) is available on the east leg of the SR 900/148`h Ave intersection. The intersection shall be modified by the Applicant, if necessary, so that this stopping sight distance requirement is met on the east leg. In addition, the Applicant shall clear vegetation within the right-of-way along SR 900, east of 148h Ave., to maximize the entering sight distance for the north and south legs of the intersection. [Comprehensive Plan Policy T-303 and King County Comprehensive Policy T-303 and King County Code 21 A.28.060A] L02POO14 — Shamrock Property Subdivision Page 12 of 14 21. The northerly portion (north of SE 124 h St.) shall comply with the Build Green requirements of Ordinance 14662 (Low Impact Development). Applicable notes, as necessary shall be shown on the engineering plans and final plat. ORDERED this 12th day of May, 2004 King County Hearing Examiner TRANSMITTED this 12th day of May, 2004, to the parties and interested persons of record: Terra Behan Rick Boston Eric Campbell William Condrey Jeffrey Cox Rebecca Cushman Claudia Donnelly John Eliason Pat Flattum Jeff Foster Mike Fraser John Graves Bryant Kelly Rebecca Lind Kenneth Martin Anna Nelson Todd Oberg Seattle KC Health Dept. Sara Slatten Gregg Zimmerman Greg Borba Laura Casey Kim Claussen Steve Foley Kristen Langley Lary West Carol Rogers Bruce Whittaker Steve Townsend In order to appeal the decision of the Examiner, written notice of appeal must be filed with the Clerk of the King County Council with a fee of $250.00 (check payable to King County Office of Finance) on or before May 26, 2004. If a notice of appeal is filed, the original and six (6) copies of a written appeal statement specifying the basis for the appeal and argument in support of the appeal must be filed with the Clerk of the King County Council on or before June 2, 2004. Appeal statements may refer only to facts contained in the hearing record; new facts may not be presented on appeal. Filing requires actual delivery to the Office of the Clerk of the Council, Room 1025, King County Courthouse, 516 3'd Avenue, Seattle, Washington 98104, prior to the close of business (4:30 p.m.) on the date due_ Prior mailing is not sufficient if actual receipt by the Clerk does not occur within the applicable time period. The Examiner does not have authority to extend the time period unless the Office of the Clerk is not open on the specified closing date, in which event delivery prior to the close of business on the next business day is sufficient to meet the filing requirement. If a written notice of appeal and filing fee are not filed within fourteen (14) calendar days of the date of this report, or if written appeal statement and argument are not filed within twenty-one (21) calendar days of the date of this report, the decision of the hearing examiner contained herein shall be the final decision of King County without the need for further action by the Council. L 02POOl4 — Shamrock Property Subdivision Page 13 of 14 MINUTES OF THE MAY 6, 2004, PUBLIC HEARING ON DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES FILE NO. L02P0014. Stafford L. Smith was the Hearing Examiner in this matter. Participating in the hearing were Kim Claussen, Laura Casey, Kristen Langley, Steve Foley and Bruce Whittaker representing the Department; Sara Slatten representing the Applicant; and Jeffrey L. Cox and Rebecca Cushman. The following exhibits were offered and entered into the record: Exhibit No. i DDES File No. L02P0014 Exhibit No. 2 DDES Preliminary Report dated May 6, 2004 Exhibit No_ 3 Application received August 1, 2002 Exhibit No. 4 Environmental checklist received August 1, 2002 Exhibit No. 5 Mitigated Declaration of Non -significance dated March 26, 2004 Exhibit No. 6 Affidavit of Posting indicating November 18, 2002 as date of posting and November 18, 2002 as the date the affidavit was received by DDES Exhibit No. 7 Plat Map and Conceptual Drainage Plan received by DDES on February 13, 2004 (Revision) Exhibit No. 8 Concurrency Certificate received August 1, 2002 Exhibit No. 9 Assessors Maps; NE/SE 10-23-05 & SW 11-23-05 Exhibit No. 10 Ordinance No. 14662 Exhibit No. I 1 Low Impact Development Proposal from Triad Associates; received by DDES on October 8, 2003 Exhibit No. 12 Level 1 Downstream Analysis by Triad Associates, received by DDES on August 1, 2002 Exhibit No. 13 Land Use Map Exhibit No. 14 Revised Level I Downstream Analysis by Triad Associates, received by DDES on January 21, 2004 Exhibit No. I5 Revised Level i Downstream Analysis by Triad Associates, received by DDES on January 26, 2004 Exhibit No. 16 There was no exhibit Exhibit No. 17 Technical Information Report prepared by Triad Associates, received by DDES on October 8, 2003 Exhibit No. 18 Traffic Impact Analysis by Garry Struthers Associates, Inc., received by DDES on August 1, 2002 Exhibit No. 19 Memo from Joan M. Smelser of Garry Struthers dated January 6, 2003; Addendum Traffic Study Exhibit No. 20 Menlo from Jeff Haynie of Transportation Engineering NorthWest to Kim Claussen Dated February 12, 2004 on MPS Fee Credits Exhibit No. 21 Email from Kristen Langley to Kim Claussen and Bruce Whittaker dated April 28, 2004 re an addendum to the traffic study Exhibit No. 22 Letter to Camwest from Paulette Norman dated March 19, 2004 on King County Road Services Division's on Variance Decision Exhibit No. 23 Email to Camwest and Kim Claussen from Jeff Lee dated March 22, 2004 On MPS credit Exhibit No. 24 Wetland Determination prepared by Camwest Development, Inc., received by DDES on August 1, 2002 L02P0014 — Shamrock Property Subdivision Page 14 of 14 Exhibit No, 25 Letter to Laura Casey form C. Gary Schulz dated October 6, 2003; Addendum Wetland Study Exhibit No. 26 Letter to DDES from the City of Renton dated November 27, 2002 Exhibit No. 27 Letter to Sara Slatten and Rebecca Cushman from DDES dated March 25, 2004 Re: drainage adjustment decision Exhibit No. 28 Revised condition 10 d. Exhibit No. 29 PowerPoint Presentation photographs Exhibit No. 30 Low Impact Development Plan Exhibit No. 31 Overall site pan SLS:ms L02P0014 RPT +1 Shamrock Technical Information Report �b King County, Washington Date: 3/10/04 Job # 01-159 Revision Date(s) 5/26/04 Prepared By: Ben Rutkowski Reviewed By: Rebecca Cushman, PE King County Department of Development and Environmental Services 900 Oakesdale Avenue SW Renton, WA 98055-1219 March 25, 2004 Sara Slatten CamWest, Inc. 9720 NE 120''' Place Kirkland, WA 98034 Rebecca Cushman, P.E. Triad Associates 11814— 115th Avenue NE Kirkland, WA 98034 RE: Shamrock Subdivision 1998 KCSWDM Adjustment and Shared Facility Plan Request (File No. L04VQD03) Dear Applicant and Engineer: The Land Use Services Division, Engineering Review Section, has completed review of the adjustment and shared facility plan approval request for the Shamrock subdivision. You are requesting an adjustment from the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM), Core Requirement No. 1, Section 1.2.1, Discharge at the Natural Location for an on-site diversion, an adjustment from Section 3.3, Hydrologic Design Procedures and Considerations and Section 6.4, Wetpool Facility Design, concerning modification of hydrologic coefficients in acknowledgment for low -impact design (LID) enhancements and mitigations. You are also requesting approval for an adjustment from Core Requirement No. 3, Section 1.2.3 to utilize an off-site storm water facility and formalize its shared use through Special Requirement No. 1, Section 1.3.1, Shared Facility Drainage Plans with the Shared Facility Plan Guidelines published in a memo dated September 15, 1999._Our review of the information and a site visit provides the following findings: The proposed Shamrock subdivision is located between approximately SE 120'h and 125'h Streets on the west side of 148th Avenue SE, The 118 lot, 29.8 acre, proposed Shamrock subdivision is filed under Land Use Services Division (LUSD) file number L02P0014. 2. The runoff from the northern edge of the site, tributary to both the northern part of Wetland B and the north -central wetland (Wetland C), flows north to the Honey Creek subbasin of the May Creek basin and is subject to Level One flow control. The remaining majority of the site is located in the Maplewood subbasin of the Lower Cedar River basin and is subject to Level Two flow control. The entire site is subject to the Basic water quality requirements of the 1998 KCSWDM. 3. The Shamrock subdivision is included as one of the three demonstration projects listed in King County Ordinance 14662, signed June 2, 2003, to promote low impact development techniques. Shamrock Subdivision/L04V0003 March 25, 2004 Page 2 of 5 4. Approximately two acres adjacent to the north property line are tributary to Wetland C and the northern portion of Wetland B which both drain north to Honey Creek. See Exhibit 1, Existing Conditions. The remainder of the site sheetflows in a west to southwest direction toward the southern portion of Wetland B and other hydraulically - connected wetland areas to the west and south of the site. A wetland hydrology report indicates that for significant storm events (greater than the 1.1 year storm event) Wetland B drains to both the north and south. It is assumed that the southern wetland complex eventually drains to its natural discharge location at the southern property line and crosses under 128th Avenue SE through a 42 -inch culvert and continues south. Flows from the Honey Creek and Maplewood subbasins do not recombine. 5. From the SE 124th Street entrance road north, the Shamrock subdivision proposes 76, low -impact lots to be tributary to a reduced -volume North Pond shown at the southern end of Wetland B. Please see Exhibit 2, Developed Conditions. Although most of the rooftop and backyard lot areas surrounding Wetland C will be utilized for hydraulically maintaining Wetland C, the proposal is to collect most runoff from the remaining Honey Creek subbasin area to be developed and divert it to the North Pond located in the Maplewood subbasin. The North Pond will be a combined detention and water quality facility and is intended to be designed with a stormwater wetland. The allowed release would then outlet to the southern end of Wetland B. Because wetland areas south of Wetland B were filled, the wetland mitigation plan will require hand digging out the fill material so that Wetland B will reestablish direct hydraulic connectivity to the wetland complex to the south. 6. Site areas south of the SE 124`h Street entrance road will be directed to the South Pond. Sheetflow to the west will be intercepted by standard conveyance and diverted to the South Pond. Some nuisance sheetflow will be reduced along -the western site boundaries in the south half of the site. Frontage improvements are included in the conceptual drainage plan. Flows from the South Pond are released into the storm drainage system of SE 128`h Street. 7. No decorative ponds or shallow wells have been identified that would be affected by the proposed diversions. 8. The Level One Downstream Analysis identified no restrictions or problems associated with the proposed discharge location. 9. A consolidation of facilities for the proposed subdivision will be more economical in long term maintenance. 10. As previously mentioned, the northern 76 lots are being design to incorporate low impact best management practices (BMPs). The proposal includes all lot and common landscape areas to contain amended soils, that roof downspout perforated pipe lengths within the amended soil be 25-40 feet long and that nearly all pervious and impervious drainage will be directed to grass -lined and bioretention swales which will Shamrock Subdivision/L04V0003 March 25, 2004 Page 3 of 5 significantly increase the flow path length to the stormwater facility. In addition, a rain garden is proposed for additional pre -storage and treatment before runoff is directed to the North Pond. 11. The proposal is to allow the cumulative benefits of the low -impact designs to translate into reduced North Pond stormwater facility size based on modest reduction of key hydrologic parameters used in the KCRTS model. This precedence is already established in the 1998 KCSWDM through Core Requirement No. 3 which allows peak flow exemptions for flow control BMPs and in Section 5.2.2 for BMPs that can reduce facility size. Specifically, the applicant is asking that a) the roofs be modeled as 50% till grass and 50% impervious, b) the amended soil landscape areas be modeled as `pasture' instead of `grass', and c) the coefficient associated with the `area of till soil covered with grass' in equation 6-13 used for wetpool sizing be reduced from 0.25 to 0.20. The applicant cites studies where extended use of amended soils has significantly reduced post -development runoff volumes. 12. South of the SE 124"' Street entrance, two ad hoc parcels compose the southern 42 lots of the King County Shamrock development proposal. Adjacent immediately to the south, is another 11 lot development within the City of Renton also referred to as Shamrock. Both the southern portion of the King County Shamrock development and the contiguous City of Renton Shamrock development are to be served by conventional conveyance and detention in a shared facility along SE 128'h Street referred to as the South Pond. This parcel is owned by the applicant and the proposed shared facility will be dedicated to the City of Renton. An existing pond along the eastern edge of where the South Pond will be constructed appears to be an abandoned pond which now passes existing flows from the City of Renton Shamrock site to SE 128'h Street. This pond will be expanded within the limits of the City of Renton Shamrock parcel to accommodate the southern portion of the King County and Renton Shamrock subdivisions. The City of Renton has adopted the 1998 KCSWDM for its storm water drainage standards, simplifying the design of the South Pond. 13. The applicant has submitted to the City of Renton a subdivision permit to develop the parcel and expand the current drainage facility. It is acknowledged that the City of Renton has review and approval jurisdiction over.the South Pond drainage modifications. This shared facility plan approval by King County is to acknowledge the accommodation of a King County subdivision's runoff by a Renton stormwater facility and the design assumptions used for the facility's expansion. The assumed land cover for the design of the King County's portion of the pond is to be calculated based on maximum zoning impervious coverage. The developer of the King County Shamrock subdivision will expand the facility to its final configuration. Both the North and South Ponds would utilize the Level Two flow control and Basic water quality requirements of the 1998 KCSWDM since they both drain south to the Maplewood subbasin. Based on these findings, we hereby approve this adjustment to allow a) the diversion of runoff to two facilities ultimately draining to SE 128th Avenue, b) modification of hydrologic Shamrock Subdivision/L04VO003 March 25, 2004 Page 4 of 5 modeling coefficients used in the wetpool and KCRTS facility sizing methodology for the North Pond whose tributary area utilizes low impact BMPs, and c) use of an off-site, shared facility in the City of Renton with the following conditions: 1. The release rates for the North Pond detention facility will be based on the tributary area being directed to the facility including the area of diversion. The release rates for the South Pond detention facility will be based on the tributary area being directed to the facility and the area within the City of Renton that the city deems appropriate. 2. The volume for both detention facilities will be based on all flows directed to the facilities at full development under current zoning. The allowed release rates will be reduced by any undetained flows that would bypass the proposed subdivision drainage facilities as specified in the 1998 KCSWDM. The detention volumes shall be sized using the Level Two flow control standard in the 1998 KCSWDM. A 10 to 20 percent volumetric factor of safety must be applied to all storm events requiring detention. The design Technical Information Report shall state the factor of safety selected and the basis of that determination. 3. Water quality facilities must be sized based on the entire proposed subdivision draining to. the facilities including any required frontage improvements. 4. The North Pond drainage facility to be maintained by King County must be located in a public right-of-way, recreation space tract with easement or storm drainage tract dedicated to King County. The City of Renton will determine tract requirements for the South Pond. 5. Amended soils will be used throughout all non -impervious, developed area tributary to the North Pond. Gravel encased perforated pipes shall be a minimum of 25 feet long, and be designed to meet Figure 5.1.3.A in the 1998 KCSWDM for all lots intending fo use the 50% impervious/50% till grass credit. 6. All amended soil areas shall be located on private property and be privately maintained. 7. The attached "Guidelines & Resources" Manual 2002 shall be used as minimum standards for implementing amended soil depth and quality for the Low Impact Development portion of the King County Shamrock site. This manual was established to implement Washington State's Department of Ecology guidelines for soil quality to improve stormwater retention. The accompanying "Field Guide" will be used to facilitate field inspection of the amended soil areas. 9. To document the impact of low impact development design, the North Pond's outflow stage/discharge shall be continuously monitored for three years starting at 75% buildout of that portion of the site. The data and interpreted results shall be presented Shamrock Subdivision/L04VO003 March 25, 2004 Page 5 of 5 to King County WLRD Stormwater Services Section at the end of each full year of monitoring. 10. The developer of the South Pond facility is responsible for all costs associated with the implementation of the shared facility plan. Engineering plans for the King County Shamrock subdivision shall note this approved shared facility plan. 11. The South Pond shall be expandedibuilt to full facility size during development of the south portion of the Shamrock development. 12. Any proposed modification to the existing storm water facility adjacent to SE 128th Street will require approval of a valid land use permit from the City of Renton. A note on the engineering plans shall state that on-site construction south of SE 124`h Street shall not commence without an approved land use permit from the City of Renton. 13. The South Pond facility shall be inspected and receive approval for operation by the City of Renton prior to recording of the King County Shamrock subdivision. 14. Additional storm drainage requirements identified by SEPA or the plat hearing will apply to this project. Any additional storm drainage requirements identified by the City of Renton will apply to the South Pond. If you have any further questions regarding this KCSWDM adjustment or the design requirements, please contact Mark Bergam at (206) 296-7270. Sincerely, Gt�_� James Sanders, P.E. Development Engineer Engineering Review Section Land Use Services Division Jim Chan, P.E. Supervising Engineer Site Engineering and Planning Section Building Services Division CC' Curt Crawford, P.E., Managing Engineer, Stormwater Services Section, KCDNR Bruce Whittaker, Senior Engineer, Engineering Review Section, LUSD Kim Claussen, Project/Program Manager III, Current Planning Section, LUSD Mark Bergam, P.E., Senior Engineer, Engineering Review Section, LUSD Surface Water Design Manual eppunty DarRequirements 1 Standards Department of Development and Environmental Services 964 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Renton, W3shingtoa98055-1219 Adjustment` Request Project Name: DDES Project File No.: DDES Engineer/Planner Name 51-� mcod< L02DM 4 0 0 ��V� Project Address: Design Fngineer: hone: 122M 148th -Ave SE/1=591742 Raffia 425-M 4Yx48 Applicant/Agent: Phone: Date: calrllbst 425-B25-1955 Signatur Date: ngin ri rrri ams: )l Triad Associates Address: City, State, Zip ode: Address: City, State, Zip Code: gM W 1'3 ] h Placa Kirkland, WA 980.34 11B14 -115th Ave iE Kirkland, 1iA 9BO34 INSTRUCTIONS TO APPLICANTIDESIGN ENGINEER: Please be sure to include all plans (T.I.R., if available), sketches, photos and maps that may assist in complete review and consideration of this adjustment request. Failure to provide all pertinent information may result in delayed processing or denial of your request. Please submit two complete copies of this request, application form, and applicable fee to the DDES Intake Counter, at 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest, Renton, Washington 98055-1219. For additional information, phone Randall Parsons, P.E., at (246) 296-7207. R$FER TO SECTION 1.4 IN CHAPTER 1 OF THE SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL FOR ADJUSTMENTS DESCRIPTION OF ADJUSTMENT REQUEST: 0 Standard ❑ Complex ❑ Experimental ❑ Blanket 13 Pre -application 1. Provide an offsite-sfiared facility 2. Land cover ass-rrptions for lei:► upact develgmmt ccuditions APPLICABLE VERSION KCSWDM: ❑ 1990 (11/95) * IX 1998 (9198) * (Note: the term "variance" replaced by "adjustment") APPLICABLE SECTION(S) OF STANDARDS: Core ReWirearlent #3; Special Requires ent ;u1 JUSTIFICATION PER KCSWDM SECTION 1.4.2 99 See attachments listed below. Prelimi=y Technical Inforrratim Report Pralirrtiriary plat i'1ap Late Ir;pact De n lolxmt project Ppport AUTHORIZATION SIGNATURES: DETERMINATION: ❑ Approval ❑ DNR/WLRD Approval Signed: Staff Recommendation Signed: :ions of Approval: El See attached Memo Dated: 'AL7.conditional Approval (see below) conditional 1 /7 1 A Date DDES D Cover Letter ❑ Denial (Experimental & Blanket variances only) Date: 5 - Z -- -' meTal DDES, Land Use Services Div., Engineering Review Supervisor: DDES, Bldg. Serv. Div., Site Engineering & Planning Supervisor: gned: Signed: ate: Date: r—, r•,nnn nr1r— %. F'19 'E -c,c ISK"NDi c3•.� E�.S;-WL`Mr'.-S.^_o':•�2.90 C_[ gtgL� k V/ 1�9 Ln� JAN 2 Z 2004 K.C. D.D.E.S. January 19, 2004 Mark Bergam King County DDES 900 Oakesdale Ave MS 1B Renton, WA 98055-1219 RE: Shamrock KC Project 4 L02POO14 Triad Job No. O 1-159 Dear Mark: TRLAD ASSOCIATES 11814 115th Avenue NE Kirkland, WA 98434-6923 42 5.821.8449 425.821.3481 fax 800.488.0756 rob free vvww.triadassoc.com This request is to approve the following adjustments to the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual. 1. Allow stormwater quantity and water quality treatment controls to be provided in an offsite facility (Adjustment to Core Requirement 93). And requesting permission to utilize the offsite facility as a shared facility within City of Renton jurisdiction (Special Requirement #I)- 2. )- 2. Allow modification to Land Cover assumptions used in modeling runoff for the Low Impact Development (L.I.D.) portion of the project. (Adjustment to Core Requirement #3). To assist in the review of the adjustment request, please see the enclosed project description, preliminary Technical Information Report, Preliminary Plat Map submittal and a Low Impact Development Demonstration Project Report. Project overview: The project proposes to create 118 single-family lots on an approximately 34.5 acre property. Approximately 30.5 acres will be developed, with the remainder left as protected wetlands and associated buffers. The site is north of 128th St. SE, west of 148th Avenue SE in King County, Washington. The portion of the site between SE 124th Street and the northern boundary will incorporate Low Impact Development (L.I.D.) measures. The portion of the site between SE 124th Street and the southern boundary will be designed assuming standard development methods. Land Development Cansl.iftants Page 2 Mark Bergar► King County DDES January 19, 2004 Two detention/water quality facilities are proposed, one located centrally onsite (referred to as the North Pond), the other located within the City of Renton Jurisdiction at the southernmost property line (referred to as the South Pond). The North Pond receives runoff from those portions of the site designated as L.I.D. only, where the South Pond serves the remainder of the project which has been designed following tradition standards. Both ponds have been designed to a Level 2 flow control standard with Basic Water Quality. Adjustment Discussion: The first item requested for adjustment is to provide an offsite facility. In addition to the request for an offsite facility, permission is being requested to utilize the offsite facility as a shared facility. Core Requirement #3 states that all proposed projects must provide onsite flow control facilities to mitigate the impacts of increased storm and surface water runoff generated by the addition of new impervious surface and any related land cover conversion. Special Requirement #1 states that shared facility drainage plans shall be approved by King County to allow two or more projects to share drainage facilities required by this manual. This request is for the "South Pond" only. The location of the pond is at the natural discharge point for the entire area proposed to be developed utilizing "standard development methods" within the site (non L.I.D. portion). The parcel containing the proposed offsite facility lies within City of Renton jurisdiction. The developer has applied to the City for a subdivision permit for this parcel to be developed concurrently with the King County parcel. In the event that engineering plan approval within the City of Renton is delayed, a grading permit or equivalent will be obtained to construct the pond and conveyance lines_ The City of Renton has adopted the 1998 King County Surface Water Drainage Manual with the same Level 2 detention standard and basic Water Quality standard for the site. The assumed land cover for the design of the pond has been calculated based on maximum zoning impervious coverage. An existing drainage pond is located at the south east comer of the south parcel. The area tributary to the existing pond has been accounted for in the new design. In addition to the designed volume, a conservative factor of safety has been applied. The flow control facility was analyzed and designed using KCRTS as approved by King County and the City of Renton. Water quality will be provided using a basic wetpond design_ Benefits to the public are as follows: Page 3 Mark Bergam King County DDES January 19; 2004 • Maintenance costs for a single facility are lower than maintaining two facilities. f The existing detention pond in the south east corner will be incorporated into the design of the shared facility with upgraded detention standards. • In addition to savings in pond maintenance, the conveyance system maintenance will be streamlined since less pipe and appurtenances will be required. Also, a bypass system to a second pond is eliminated. The second item requested for adjustment is to utilize modified land cover assumptions for the Low Impact Development portion of the site. This request may be broken down into three subtopics. A. Effective impervious assumptions used in modeling roofs. B. Modeling of landscape as "pasture" in sizing detention volume (due to use of amended soil). C. Utilization of a modified land cover runoff coefficient in the water quality volume calculation (VO. A. The average proposed lot size within the portion of the site is 5,000 square feet. The maximum impervious coverage allowed per zoning is 55%, providing 2,750 square feet of impervious area per lot. of this area, driveways and patios account for an estimated 500 square feet. Runoff from the remaining roof area (2,250 sf/lot) is proposed to be modeled using modified land cover assumptions. The 1998 KCSWDM allows the use of "effective impervious area" in modeling existing rural residential development, or where dispersed flow paths exceed 50 feet in urban residential development. In addition, the manual cites use of projects utilizing roof downspout controls as a flow control BMPs. Standard subdivisions with this size lot typically include only a perforated stub averaging ten feet in length and are not able to utilize any flow control credit. This project's roof drains have been designed with perforated pipe having lengths of 25 to 40 feet. The perforated pipe will be encased in an envelope of drain rock and amended soil, which will increase the soil/water contact area providing additional opportunity for infiltration. The majority of the perforated pipes will be directed to bioretention swales to increase the flow path significantly over traditional closed pipe conveyance systems prior to entering the detention facility. The lots that do not have their roof runoff directed to bioretention swales either discharge to a wetland providing Page 4 Mark Bergam King County DDE.S January 19, 2004 recharge with dispersion facilities located at the end of the perforated pipe, or are provided with additional length of perforated pipe to connect to the grassed swales conveying street drainage. Given the increased opportunities for infiltration and lengthened flow travel times resulting with this proposal, modeling the roofs as 50% till grass/ 50% impervious is an appropriate cover assumption. Benefits to the community are as follows. • Increased soil/water contact time to mimic the natural function of the pre -developed watershed. • Increased areas of open space between back yards with a more naturalistic appearance. • Increased time of concentration for the storm water to reach the detention facility, therefore reducing the peak flow and decreasing the size of the facility to be maintained. B. This project is requesting approval to model the required detention volume for the north pond using a modified developed land cover classification for pervious areas. The current cover of the site is a pasture condition. In the developed condition, pervious areas are typically modeled as "grass". This project proposes to utilize the King County Runoff Time Series to model the pervious areas as "pasture" due to extensive soil amendment. Amended soils promote runoff absorption, storage and infiltration. Soil amendment has been documented to decrease peak runoff rates and volumes by increasing the time of concentration, thus justifying a decrease of the curve number for a given hydrologic soil group when modeling runoff. Given the depth and degree of soil amendment proposed, the developed pervious condition of the site more closely simulates a pastured condition than that of a grassed condition. Amending soil to decrease runoff has been studied and documented not only in the Puget Sound Area, but throughout the nation. Hydrologic Response of Residential Scale Lawns on Till Containing Various Amounts of Compost Amendment, by Kosti, Burges, and Jensen, 1995 showed that beneficial effects on runoff response behavior was observed from test plots containing compost amended soils. The plots generated 53% and 70% of the runoff volume observed from un -amended control plots; thus showing a reduction of runoff from standard practices of residential lawn construction. Page 5 Mark Bergam King County DDES January 19, 2004 Several Jurisdictions throughout the United States have adopted Low Impact Development Requirements. Island County, Maryland Surface Water Ordinance provides special performance requirements for mimicking pre -development runoff volume and peals runoff rates by using specific retention and/or detention BMPs (e.g., rain gardens, open drainage systems, and amended soils) throughout the site. These methods assist in providing equivalent runoff curve numbers (CN) and increasing the time of concentration to pre - developed lengths for reduced detention volumes and peak flows. The EPA published Innovative Uses of Compost, October 1997 stating that soil amendments provides storm water quantity control with attenuation of peak flows and decreasing runoff; maintenance of base flows; increases groundwater recharge; increases soil structure and stability and increases infiltration capacity. The publication cites results from a Richmond, Washington, 1995 study showing that compost amended soils consistently had longer lag times to response, longer times to peak flow, higher base flows, higher storage and smaller total runoff than un -amended soils_ Benefits to the Community are as follows: • A more naturalistic appearance to the backyard conveyance areas. • Providing a media that supports vigorous plant growth without added fertilizers. • Decreased irrigation costs due to the moisture retentive properties of composted soils. • Retaining the existing soil on site, reducing the amount of export thus reducing the amount of wear to surrounding infrastructure. • Reducing the amount of surface area required for a "standard pond" thus reducing maintenance costs. C. The project proposes to utilize a modified land cover runoff coefficient in the water quality volume sizing calculation (V,). The project is providing basic water quality treatment per Core Requirement #8 utilizing a wetpond_ Equation 6-13 in the 1998 KCSWDM provides a weighted coefficient specific to four soil cover types depending upon their generation of amounts of runoff. Impervious cover is the most heavily weighted area (0.9) where outwash grass or forest is the least weighted area (0.01). The two remaining coefficients between impervious cover and outwash forest are for till grass (0.25) or till forest (0.1). The Page 6 Mark Bergam King County DDES January 19, 2004 coefficient proposed to be used in sizing the water quality portion of the facility is 0.20. This coefficient is a hybrid between grass and forest, consistent with a pasture condition as described in Table 3.2. LA of the 1998 KCSWDM Runoff Coefficients -- "C" Values for the Rational Method. Many studies have shown that amending soils with compost decrease peak runoff rates and runoff volumes (see studies cited above). Additional studies show that compost has benefits in providing water quality as well as water quantity controls. Innovative Uses of Compost; EPA, October 1997 states that soil amendments break down potential pollutants; immobilize and degrade pollutants by holding them in place so that soil microbes can decompose them; increases soil stability, leading to less potential erosion; and reduces thermal pollution by maintaining runoff in the soil and on-site longer. The EPA also cited studies showing that composted soils had 10% less total Phosphorus, 58% less soluble reactive Phosphorous, and 7% less total nitrate. This citation was obtained from Harrison, R.B., M.A Grey, C.L., 1997: Field Test of compost Amendment to Reduce Nutrient Runoff. It should be noted that for these reasons, use of a hybrid coefficient to size the water quality treatment facility is appropriate. Although additional water quality enhancing L.I.D. measures are proposed (bioretention swales, perforated pipe, rain gardens), additional facility sizing credits are not requested. Taking credit for these measures would require redundant conveyance systems in order to separate "treated" storm water from the "untreated" road runoff. The project is providing the additional L.I.D. features, however, the water quality calculations have been conservatively provided in a single detention/water quality facility. Benefits to the public are: • A more naturalistic appearance to the conveyance features located in the rear yard areas more commonly landscaped with grass only. • Providing a media that supports vigorous plant growth without added fertilizers. • Decreased irrigation costs due to the moisture retentive properties of composted soils. • Retaining the existing soil on site, reducing the amount of export thus reducing the amount of wear to surrounding infrastructure. • Reducing the amount of surface area required for a "standard wet pond" thus reducing maintenance costs. Page 7 Mark Bergam King County DDES January 19, 2004 Please review the supporting material provided to assist you in your decision. Let me know if you require any further information for your consideration of this request. Sincerely, TRIAD ASSOCIATES Rebecca . Cushman, P.E. i >i DOHPV VHS 4 s� o y Mo .Y Z .IIBIHX3 � � 6 2� SNOLLIGNOO `]M1SIX3 K 19 NOISIma sirs .0 tF 1,4 Vvc LL 1 . I I , t -. 7.._." 4..qK ce I � � � '-! � I 1 111 `♦ "r..� r ,' i- ��co �4 r . cc Pj La i y J 1 tad 1 I 1 �P � � . I lJ :, 4 r }} II �1 ~ 11 11 tlI ? I r It '.> � •` \ `I � � . h . � , CL zi It WIM O kN ti.l `` \11 15 fi 1 I 14 11 fl I t ' ' "� • ��•'~. ..... `r"��-� ' '- � '` � •• Lj � ��' `I 1 �r II�� I }� 1 / � fJ r, 1. � `� I 1 ,,.1.• � I—J \4 �5. :• 1 Y ` I I I f n f / f': � �.` �,.: Nry(.. ,0. 5:,�.-. Jew, ir+. I , .•""•1 1 .tvl I \ 1 } r 1 t t ' '.••„� � r f� \ 1:': / , � � f � . r ( � � I If f 1 ` I 1 ,� 1 1'1"--....,I } 1�=�� �'rc� � ...1_, _•�\ 1 `_� � '�^�.:..: +,J� 4 �`.1i tl \f 4 II II 3 4 Il+^� 1 + 11 ?\ `♦ µ~ r .�, 1 \ , — _ ��.' , 1� \ I� EIEIR .� 1 � t l ; I ` 1 5 1 j �\ 1 '� \': , � I � \ } ' • 1 �I•, nIIV T� I \ t} 1 , 1,\ \ \ � � Ir ��;. r 1 � jl ••'� ---� '." ' 11�>, ',' ♦ ii Itl l } 1 11+ \\ a lr t� , --I — f �' `, + `..k .dial ` 1 1 } i i jII' �,,a L:, ,,,� , 1 11 1 1 1 , 1 1 t l.. 1 fl ` 1 \. .:. ♦` .ri r t•, � .F':.- : r � - . : 4 .. x � � t \ � 1 1 1 1 , 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 t III1 ♦ I • i '-- � �^ ' j:;,.,...f"::,y .. + + ,. - - l-77-7., •:>:'. r ,. 1 1 \ , \ t , Iil y y I � ♦11)\l \r r \ ` f��/�JUR _iTL��^� 1\t, C 111r j � � � ,1 \ I I , ,1 y '• , ._.�:�11'i'..<� r� I t �\\r` \ r 1 I, t i -,� J.. `�/,/ /! � �.y`�• �f r r, + + + + .. ',I:...,.. t �,,, 1,111+t,, 1 \ , �• �,- � 1 : � i a' ,l- iIIP..';. r �, \ \ I ♦ Itll1 lirlll , 1 t / I \Y ti\• .-,�.-"-,.�.. yr: �:�` 1 , � 1 11\x♦ t 11,111111,11111 , I ,� `I r�,-� \��. ` I • �•. t+ \' ,. .. ,. + i. .: l�......1,1.. t \ ',�;,*\ ; 11 1, 1',11 111}1, 11 'yI / j•, \ 1 j } � , + . ' tt ' \ `\4' \ iyt �i, 4 1 \, 1 \ 1 11 1 1 1� 1�1 \ l }� y L �I \I ;m.y /• ` `' � .... '�,•y { J i � + ., . [ {;� , r L 11,y 1 r `.::<♦�ti + I ! r i�ii�iiiiiiimmm # `6MP',?3-17 65110\ 1 73/137\sPT4x3 6u1)aau16u31 sa1.r3DM016S' _ 133!'Odd\ '3 uldef:g — fooe 'g, uawysna _ MOOSHMS SNOILIONOD G3dO73A3C A3 NOUN &VII 1111 IS- RLIll, 3111 L i Fj- c J- im Fill W� 14 "'A fQ 4- Z &Aga Ld LU k Q Z 0 0 0 N P, NN 0 L7 I LUli oj It klk\\ 1, Jolt 7M jU J% N o�% 'k oF T Too, I V1, lit' • i 41x.\,1 WIT oil fill: 'A Jim" .1 'Emp-00-11 65LLO\L 13A31\s1!q!I4x3 5uI-JaOu15u3\s@ I!JDM(]\F- ;I:D3r08d\:3 LudLC:g — �OOZ �.s UowqsflDj— • • • Shamrock —Technical Information Report Prepared For: CamWest Real Estate Development, Inc. 9720 NE 120th Place, Suite 100 Kirkland, Washington 98034 Prepared By: Ben Rutkowski Reviewed By: Rebecca Cushman, PE X5126/2004 Job #01-238 Issued March 10, 2004 Revised May 26, 2004 D6(�_ EXPIRES 1 f/15lo r • Shamrock — Technical Information Report TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 PROJECT OVERVIEW........................................................................................................................1-1 1.1 LOW IMPACT DEVFLOPMENT METHODOLOGY (AREAS TRIBUTARY TO THE NORTH POND) ............. 1-3 2 CONDITIONS AND REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY.......................................................................2-1 2.1 HEARING CONDITIONS..................................................................................................................... 2-1 2-2 CORE REQUIREMENTS................................................................................................................... 2-10 3 OFFSITE ANALYSIS............................................................................................................................ 3-1 4 FLOW CONTROL AND WATER QUALITY DESIGN....................................................................4-1 4.1 NORTH POND.................................................................................................................................... 4-2 4.2 SOUTH POND..................................................................................................—.............................4-13 5 CONVEYANCE SYS'T'EM ANALYSIS & DESIGN........................................................................... 5-1 5.1 PIPE SYSTEM.................................................................................................................................... 5-1 5.2 SWALE SYSTEM ............. ....................... --................................ ....................................................... . 5-7 6 SPECIAL REPORTS AND STUDIES..................................................................................................6-1 6.1 WETLANDRECHARGE........................ --- ... ..................................................... ............................... 6-1 6.2 WEST WETLAND DIRECTIONAL FLOW ANALYSIS............................................................................ 6-9 6.3 NORTH POND DETENTION COMPARISON........................................................................................ 6-13 7 OTHER PERMITS .................................................... ........................................................... .................. 7-1 8 TESL ANALYSIS AND DESIGN......................................................................................................... 8-1 9 BOND QUANTITIES, FACILITY SUMMARIES, AND DECLARATION OF COVENANT ......9-1 9.1 BOND QUANTITIES.......................................................................................................................... 9-1 9.2 FACILITY SUMMARIES...................................................................................................................... 9-1 9.3 DECLARATION OF COVENANT ....... ...................................................................................................9-1 10 OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE.............................................................................................10-1 95126/2004 Job ##01-159 /TRLkD 1 .1 ., • • 0 King County Department of Development and. Environmental Services TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET Part 1_.: PROJFGT OWNER AND... : PRWEGT. ENGINEER Project Owner Cam West Real Estate Address 9720 NE 120th Pl #100, Kirkland Phone 425 825-1955 Project Engineer Rehor.r.a ri ishman, PF Company Triad ASSnr.iates Address/Phone(425) 821-8448 Part 3.. TYP.EOF PERMIT . ,APPLICATION XSubdivison Short Subdivision Grading Commercial Other Palet 2- PROJECT LOCATION AND> DES.CRIPTION� . Project Name Shamrock Location Township 23 N Range S i .............Section 10 Part 4. OTHER REVIEWS AND PERMITS DFW HPA COE 404 DOE Dam Safety FEMA Floodplain COE Wetlands Shoreline Management X Rockery Structural Vaults X Other Keystone Wall Part 5. SITE COMMUNITY AND -DRAINAGE BASIN Community Newcastle lu-ommunity—Plannin2 Area Drainage Basin Cedar River Drainage_Basin May reek Drainage Basin _- Part 6 SITE .CHARACTERISTICS: River Stream Critical Stream Reach D e press io ns/Swales Lake Steep Slopes Floodplain X Wetlands Seeps/Springs X High Groundwater Table Groundwater Recharge Other • • Soil Type Slopes Erosion Potential Erosive Velcoties Alderwood _ Q-6% Y ight _ Sln..r Additional Sheets Attached Part 8, : DEVELO:PIVIENT LIMITATIONS' .. REFERENCE LIMITATION/SITE CONSTRAINT Ch. 4 — Downstream Analysis Additional Sheets Attached Part9 ESC REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS DURING CONSTRUCTION AFTER CONSTRUCTION XSedimentation Facilities X Stabilize Exposed Surface XStabilized Construction Entrance X Remove and Restore Temporary ESC Facilities Werimeter Runoff Control X Clean and Remove All Silt and Debris XClearing and Graing Restrictions X Ensure Operation of Permanent Facilities XCover Practices X Flag Limits of SAO and open space XConstruction Sequence preservation areas Other Other • 0 ;Part 10 SUR'FACEWATER SYSTENF ; X Grass Lined M fl-, d # A Channel X Pipe System XOpen Channel Dry Pond XWet Pond Tank Infiltration e o o nalysis vauik iCCRTS Energy Dissapator X Wetland Stream Depression x Flow Dispersal Waiver Regional Detention Compensation/Mitigati on of Eliminated Site Storage Brief Description of System Operation Cin -site conveyance system (Pipe/swale) will convey runoff to the Detention/Dater Quality Ponds Facility Related Site Limitations Reference Facility Limitation Part -11 STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS' Cast in Place Vault X Retaining Wall X Rockery 7 4' High Structural on Steep Slope Other Part:12 . EAS EM ENTS/TRACTS: X Drainage Easement Access Easement Native Growth Protection Easement X T ract Other Part 13 SIGNATURE OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER I or a civil engineer under my supervision my supervision have visited the site. Actual site conditions as observed were incorporated into this worksheet and the attachments. To the best of m7kne the information provided here is accurate. • • :7 Shamrock — Technical Information Report 1 PROJECT OVERVIEW Shamrock is a 34.5 acre site spanning both King County and the City of Renton jurisdictions. The total proposed project will contain 129 lots. The King County portion of the project proposes to create 118 single-family lots (74 lots will utilize Low Impact Development) on an approximately 29.8 acre property. This Technical Information Report (TIR) is for the King County and Renton portions of the project. The Vicinity Map below shows the City of Renton boundary. The part of the site outside the City of Renton boundary is subject to King County DDES review. The site is north of 128th Street SE, west of 148'h Avenue SE. The property is within Section 10, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., King County, Washington. Please see the Vicinity Map below_ @512612004 ,lob #01-159 q 70 ` \ nrA r vAr t , i 776?h T D - �_ � SE 1201r, �fa SCOALFFTLO +� f24 th v`"i PARK _ KIN r'— U1LT o e rp 1— 4 S REN lON ~ ` —� PY�'K �l�F7 ++ �`T Y o- U se r�z�c sz —+— { VICINITY MAP Not to Scalc Page 1-1 • Shamrock —Technical Information Report Site visits were performed on July 2, 2001, July 15, 2002 and July 14, 2003. Refer to the Level 1 Downstream Analysis in Section 3 for description of the site under predeveloped conditions. The portion of the site between SE 124th Street and the northern boundary will incorporate Low Impact Development (LID) measures. These measures include: use of amended soils throughout the project; use of open channel conveyance elements (vegetated swales) in lieu of pipe systems where feasible; use of flow dispersion trenches and perforated stub -outs to manage roof and footing drainage from individual lots; and the incorporation of a rain garden. The portion of the site between SE 1241h Street and the southern boundary will be designed assuming standard development methods. See Existing Conditions Exhibit (Figure 3) and soils maps (Figure 4) in Section 3. ©5!26!2004 Page 1-2 Job #01-159 TRlAJ) • Shamrock — Technical Information Report 1.1 Low Impact Development Methodology (Areas Tributary to the North Pond) Low Impact Development practices help to reduce developed site runoff using distributed source control and treatment practices. Native vegetation, landscaping, and small-scale storxnwater controls capture, treat, infiltrate, evaporate, and transpire rainfall at the parcel or subdivision level. This section will highlight the specific designs used to achieve this goal. Amended Soils Amended soil is the result of tilling compost in with the natural soil. By doing so, the amended soil has more capacity to treat, store and infiltrate water. This is turn will reduce runoff, promote plant health and decrease the need for landscape watering and fertilization. This project will incorporate 5-10 inches of amended soil on top of inches of scarified soil. Lot Drain Lot drainage will be addressed in three different ways throughout the site. Runoff from some lots will bypass the proposed detention pond and provide recharge to the wetland areas. This will be accomplished by connecting the roof and footing drains to a backyard dispersion trench designed to discharge overflow runoff to the wetland in sheet fashion evenly back into the wetland. Other lots will discharge roof and footing drainage to an open Swale via a gravel -encased perforated pipe. This "perforated stub -out" will provide increased opportunity for infiltration. These lots will be graded to promote sheet flow across the yard and toward the open Swale. All yards will contain amended soils to increase attenuation. The lots where an open swale is not accessible will discharge into the street conveyance system via perforated stub -outs and perforated connecting pipe. The driveways will be sloped towards the access roadway. ©512612004 Job #01-159 TRIAD Page 1-3 • Shamrock —Technical Information Report Open Swalles Open swales lined with vegetated and amended soils are used wherever possible as a means of surface water conveyance. This maximizes the opportunity for water quality treatment and infiltration. The open swales are designed as wide as possible and as shallow as feasible to provide a natural appearance, while still providing adequate conveyance capacity. Slopes are designed to be less than 5%, with flatter areas and shallow berms provided to encourage ponding. Some swales will be designed as bioretention areas with additional depth of amended soils. These areas will provide additional runoff storage capacity and further help to attenuate flow rates. Underdrains will be incorporated to prevent ponding for an excessive period of time. Where feasible, swales are provided to convey runoff from the access roadways. Runoff is introduced to these swales either by using a series of narrow curb drops, or by using shallow curb inlets and connecting pipe. The open swales will be located in private tracts and will be maintained by a home owners association. Please see the illustration below. r� e - (OT OPEN 5PACF1VZVNAGE TRACT COT a McJAOLE 501L I M015TURE TOLERANT �y \ s / PLAN77NG TONF -CROSS SECTION • �V\ ���\I��/ \ / \ L7AMeNOED 561L MIX NAT1Vl= 501L MIX 0 ; .\� DRAIN UNE FOR ROOF & FOOTING, OkWNAC,E STORFTFNTlON SLAC (1NDER GRAIN BIO,RL r�i'v' T'o1��i SWAL E Not Jv 5cNe 05/26/2004 Jots #01-159 ARIA Page 1-4 • Shamrock — Technical Information Report Rain Garden Rain gardens are small depressions constructed near stormwater flow sources. They consist of different layers of gravel, amended soils and mulch beneath a vegetation cover. Rain gardens collect and soak up rainwater, capture pollutants, and detain or infiltrate standing water. This project will incorporate a rain garden located in the open space near the northeast intersection of 145`h Avenue SE and SE 124`h Street. The grading in the north east portion of the site will direct most of the runoff to this feature via open swales. The rain garden will be planted with native species that are wet and dry tolerant and will add to the biodiversity of the area. Please see the illustration below. 0RNAMENrAL PLANTING ZONE VARIABLE NO15TWE PLANTING, ZONE RAIN GAl'I)EIV Not to 5cale 501L MIX IL mix Y S TORM ZONE 70N 501L MIX 11-11 U�"AIN 05/26/2004/tRJAD Page 1-5 Job #01-159 Shamrock — Technical Information Report 2 CONDITIONS AND REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY 2.1 Hearing Conditions DECISION: The preliminary plat application for Shamrock, as revised and received on February 13, 2004, is APPROVED, subject to the following conditions of final plat approval: Compliance with all platting provisions of Title 19A of the King County Code. Conditions Noted. All persons having an ownership interest in the subject property shall sign on the face of the final plat a dedication which includes the language set forth in King County Council Motion No. 5952. Condition Noted. The plat shall comply with the base density and minimum density requirements of the R-4 zone classification_ All lots shall meet the minimum dimensional requirements of the R-4 zone classification or shall be as shown on the face of the approved preliminary plat, whichever is larger, except that minor revisions to the plat which do not result in substantial changes may be approved at the discretion of the Department of Development and Environmental Services_ Condition Noted_ All construction and upgrading of public and private roads shall be done in accordance with the King County Road Standards established and adopted by Ordinance No. 11187, as amended (1993 KCRS). Condition Noted. The Applicant must obtain the approval of the King County Fire Protection Engineer certifying the adequacy of the fire hydrant, water main, and fire flow to meet the standards of Chapter 17.08 of the King County Code. Condition Noted_ 6. Final plat approval shall require full compliance with the drainage provisions set forth in King County Code 9.04. Compliance may result in reducing the number and/or location of lots as shown on the preliminary approved plat. Preliminary review has identified the following conditions of approval, which represent portions of the drainage requirements_ All other applicable requirements in KCC 9.04 and the Surface Water Design Manual (SWDM) must also be satisfied during engineering and final review. a. Drainage plans and analysis shall comply with the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual and applicable updates adopted by King County. DDES approval of the drainage and roadway plans is required prior to any construction. The drainage plans and analysis have been provided in compliance to the 1998 KCSWDM and applicable updates. ©512612404 Page 2-1 Job 40 1 -159 /TRLAI)' ,, 0 Shamrock —Technical Information Report b. Current standard plan notes and ESC notes, as established by DDES Engineering Review, shall be shown on the engineering plans. The current standard plan notes and ESC notes have been provided on Sheets 10 and 26. The following note shall be shown on the final recorded plat: All building downspouts, footing drains, and drains from all impervious surfaces such as patios and driveways shall be connected to the permanent storm drain outlet as shown on the approved construction drawings # on file with DDES and/or the King County Department of Transportation. This plan shall be submitted with the application of any building permit. All connections of the drains must be constructed and approved prior to the final building inspection approval. For those lots that are designated for individual lot infiltration systems, the systems shall be constructed at the time of the building permit and shall comply with plans on file_" Condition Noted. A surface water adjustment (1,04V0003) is approved for this subdivision. All conditions of approval for this adjustment shall be met upon submittal of the engineering plans. Note that this adjustment allows the use of low -impact designs for the stormwater facilities on the north portion of the site. The stormwater facilities shall be constructed in general conformance with the preliminary grading and storm drainage plan received February 13, 2004; unless otherwise approved by DDES. The final amended soil design shall be reviewed and approved with the engineering plans. Condition Noted_ 8. The stormwater facilities shall meet at a minimum the Level 2 flow control and basic water quality requirements in the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM). The north stormwater detention pond shall be placed in a separate tract dedicated to King County for maintenance. The stormwater facility has been designed to a Level 2 flow control and basic water quality per the 1998 KCSWDM and is shown in a tract_ The south stormwater detention facility is within the City of Renton. Engineering plans for the construction of this facility shall be approved by Renton. Condition Noted. The 100 -year floodplain for any onsite wetlands or streams shall be shown on the engineering plans and the final recorded plat per the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM). The 100 year floodplain has been shown on the engineering plans. 10. The following road improvements are required to be constructed according to the 1993 King County Road Standards(KCRS): a. SE 124`x' Street from 146'h Ave SE to 140 Ave SE shall be improved to the urban subcollector street standard. SE 124th Street from 146th Ave SE to 148th Ave SE has been designed to the urban subcollector street standard. Cc 5/26/2004 Page 2-2 Job #01-159 /TRIAD • Shamrock — Technical Information Report b. 144"' Place SE; 146' Ave SE, 146" Ct. SE(from SE I24'' St. to SE 12151 St); SE 1215` St.(firom 146`h Ct. to 148'h Ave SE); 144'h Ave SEISE 124'h St.(from the 145'h Ave SE extra, to 140 Ave SE); shall be improved to the urban subaccess street standard. These streets have been designed to the urban subaccess street standards with the approved Road Variance conditions. SE 125" St/147"' Ave SE; 146"' Ct. SE ( from SE 12151 St. to end); 145'" Ave SE (from SE 120 St. to 144'' Ave SE); 144"' Ave SE (from 1451" Ave SE extn. to end); shall be improved to the urban minor access street standard_ These streets have been designed to the urban minor acces street standards with the approved Road Variance conditions. d. FRONTAGE: The site's property frontages along 148'' Ave SE (west side) shall be improved to the urban collector arterial standard with sidewalk. The property frontages (tax lots 9021, 9026, 9170 and 9259) along 148th Ave. SE shall be addressed at engineering plan submittal, to either provide for a paved shoulder or thickened edge section. Offsite property owners shall be contacted for design and construction coordination. The final frontage proposal shall be reviewed and approved by DDES at engineering design review. The frontage improvements shall be evaluated at engineering plan submittal for safe walking conditions per the KCRS. e. Tract N shall be improved to the private access tract standard per Section 2.09 of the KCRS. This tract shall be owned and maintained by the owners of the lots served. Notes to this effect shall be shown on the final recorded plat. Tract N has been designed to the private access tract standard. f. Tracts D, J, and M shall be improved as joint use driveways per Section 3.01 of the KCRS. These driveways shall be owned and maintained by the owners of the Lots served. Notes to this effect shall be shown on the final recorded plat. Tracts D, J and M have been designed to the joint use driveway standard. g_ That portion of Lot 35, lying within the 30 -feet existing easement for ingress and egress, shall be dedicated as R/W. A R/W radius shall also be provided at Lot 35 (SE quadrant 1441" PL SE) and at Lot 42 (NW quadrant 146" Ave SE). The area in question will be dedicated as RAW and a radius has been shown on Lots 35 and 42. h. 'Tracts P and Q shall be dedicated as public RAW. Sixteen feet of right-of-way shall be provided along the northerly portion of lot 35. Tracts P and Q will be dedicated as public RAW. Right-of-way radius shall be provided as follows -- SE corner of lot 42; SW corner of lot 34; NW corner of lot 35; SE corner of lot 26. Radii have been provided on Lots 42, 34, 35 and 26. Modifications to the above road conditions may be considered according to the variance procedures in Section 1.08 of the KCRS. Condition noted. 05126!2004 Page 2-3 Job #01-159 RLAD T • Shamrock — Technical Information Report k. Tracts A and C shall be included within the right-of-way. Tracts A and C contain right-of-way language. 1. Road Variance L04VO004 is approved for this project. All conditions of approval for this variance shall be incorporated into the engineering plans. Condition Noted. in. Details for waiting area for school children along 148'h Ave SE shall be determined by the Applicant and the Issaquah School District, prior to or concurrent with the engineering plan submittal. Details of this waiting area shall be shown on the engineering plans and accompanied by correspondence from the School District. A waiting area will be shown on the plaits and correspondences with the school district will be submitted once obtained. 11. All utilities within proposed rights-of-way must be included within a franchise approved by the King County Council prior to final plat recording. Condition Noted_ 12. The Applicant or subsequent owner shall comply with King County Code 14.75, Mitigation Payment System (MPS), by paying the required MPS fee and administration fee as determined by the applicable fee ordinance. The Applicant has the option to either: (1) pay the MPS fee at final plat recording, or (2) pay the MPS fee at the time of building permit issuance. If the first option is chosen, the fee paid shall be the fee in effect at the time of plat application and a note shall be placed on the face of the plat that reads, "All fees required by King County Code 14.75, Mitigation Payment System (MPS), have been paid." If the second option is chosen, the fee paid shall be the amount in effect as of the date of building permit application. Condition Noted. 13_ Lots within this subdivision are subject to King County Code 21A.43, which imposes impact fees to fund school system improvements needed to serve new development. As a condition of final approval, fifty percent (50%) of the impact fees due for the plat shall be assessed and collected immediately prior to recording, using the fee schedules in effect when the plat receives final approval. The balance of the assessed fee shall be allocated evenly to the dwelling units in the plat and shall be collected prior to building permit issuance. Condition Noted. 14. Except as modified below in condition no. 15, the proposed subdivision shall comply with the Sensitive Areas Code as outlined in King County Code 21A.24. Permanent survey marking shall be addressed prior to final plat approval. Temporary marking of sensitive areas and their buffers (for example, with bright orange plastic construction fencing) shall be shown on the engineering plans and placed on the site and shall remain in place until all construction activities are completed. Permanent signs identifying the sensitive areas shall be shown on the engineering plans and installed as part of the plat construction activities. Condition Noted. 15. Wetlands Class 2 wetlands shall have a minimum 50 -foot of undisturbed or enhanced native vegetation. Wetlands and their buffers shall be placed in sensitive area tracts. A 95/26/2004 Page 2-4 Job #01-159 Z'R11AD Shamrock — Technical Information Report minimum 15 -foot building setback Sine shall be required from the edge of all sensitive area buffers. The onsite wetlands have been provided with. buffers. Tracts and building setbacks are shown on the engineering plans. b. Buffer width averaging may be allowed if it will provide additional protection to wetlands or enhance their functions, as long as the total area in buffer does not decrease. Buffer averaging in conformance with the Code and administrative rules is proposed as shown on the preliminary plat plans. Buffer reductions of about 6,670 square feet would be compensated for by providing additional buffer area of about 23,400 square feet. Additionally, much of the buffer has been degraded by prior activities on the site, and the project would enhance the native vegetation of these wetland buffers. The enhanced wetland buffer must provide equal or greater biologic functions, including habitat, and equivalent or better hydrologic functions. Buffer averaging has been shown on the plans as well as buffer enhancement. Please see the Landscape plans for the enhancement plan. C. Post -development wetland hydrology for the smaller, more frequent storm events shall match pre -development wetland hydrology to the maxirnuzn extent feasible. Calculations, graphs and text shall be included in the Technical Information Report with the engineering plans to show how this condition will be met, to be reviewed by DDES Environmental Scientist. Seasonal volumes have been provided for maintaining post -development hydrology. See Sections 4 and 6 in the TIR for details. d. Approved alterations to wetlands or their buffers including removal of wetland fill and enhancement of buffers shall require that a detailed mitigation plan shall be submitted for review along with the engineering plans. The mitigation plan must include final grades, hydrologic calculations showing how the mitigation feature will function, and a planting plan showing plant species, sizes, quantities and locations. The plan shall list goals and objectives, construction and installation notes, performance standards, and monitoring and maintenance measures. The mitigation plan has been submitted. Please see the Landscape plans. The details of the re -connection will be coordinated in the field with the KC Environmental Scientist. Final Constructed plans will contain the details of the grading and the calculations of function. e. A conceptual mitigation plan shall be submitted for review along with the engineering plans for the proposed wetland reconnection area west of the stormwater facility in Tract H. The conceptual mitigation plan must include proposed grades, hydrologic calculations showing how the mitigation feature will function, and a planting scheme showing plant species, sizes and quantities. The plan shall also list goals and objectives, construction and installation notes, performance standards, and monitoring and maintenance measures_ This plan shall be conceptual to allow for in - the -field location of a few channels through the northern fill area where a young alder forest has grown, leaving some areas of alder Forest to mature. This mitigation area will be shown on the engineering plans as a concept, with notes requiring field location of the channels in order to protect the larger and healthier alder trees. An as - built mitigation plan shall be submitted for this wetland reconnection area west of the proposed stormwater pond in Tract H, following construction. 10 ©512612004 Page 2-5 Job #01-159 /TRJAD Shamrock —Technical Information Report The mitigation plan has been submitted. Please see the Landscape plans. The details of the re -connection will be coordinated in the field with the KC Environmental Scientist. Final Constructed plans will contain the details of the grading and the calculations of function. Approval of the project wetland mitigation plans will include the requirement for posting financial guarantee(s) to insure installation and success of the plan. Monitoring for up to five years from the date of installation shall be required, prior to a final inspection of the mitigation plan. Monitoring will commence upon a field inspection and approval of the installed mitigation areas by DDES Environmental Scientist. The financial guarantee(s) will be released when the performance standards have been met. If the performance standards have not been met at the conclusion of the monitoring period, a contingency plan will be required to remedy the situation, and the monitoring period may be extended. Condition Noted. g_ The western half (wet pond) of the stormwater facility pond shown in Tract H on the plans may be located within the wetland and wetland buffer restoration area, and will be considered restored wetland and wetland buffer as well as a stormwater facility. The wet pond shall be landscaped using native species at densities recommended in the Sensitive Areas Mitigation Guidelines to restore both wetland and buffer habitat. The plan for the wet pond shall be reviewed by DDES Engineering and Environmental Scientist staff. The planting plan shall be part of the wetland mitigation plans for the site, and meet the criteria for those plans specified above. Condition noted. h. Post -construction monitoring of the wet pond in the stormwater facility in Tract H will include monitoring the water quality in the wet pond to evaluate its toxicity to wetland -dependent wildlife. Post -construction water level fluctuations will also be monitored along with observations of impacts on amphibians. Monitoring methods and schedule shall be included with the mitigation plans required above. The monitoring plan will be submitted under separate cover. The Applicant shall prepare an operations and maintenance manual for the wet pond of the northern stormwater facility, including the vegetation, to provide to either King County Facilities Maintenance or the Homeowners' Association, depending upon which group has ownership of the stormwater wet pond. This Manual will be reviewed and approved by King County DDES Engineer and Environmental Scientist at the time of engineering plan review. The maintenance manual will be submitted tinder separate cover. The following note shall be shown on the final engineering plan and recorded plat: RESTRICTIONS FOR SENSITIVE AREA TRACTS AND SENSITIVE AREAS AND BUFFERS Dedication of a sensitive area tract/sensitive area setback area conveys to the public a beneficial interest in the land within the tract/setback area. This interest includes the preservation of native vegetation for all purposes that benefit the public health, safety and welfare, including control of surface water and erosion, maintenance of slope stability, and protection of plant and @512612004 Page 2-6 Job #01-159 4RIAD • Shamrock — Technical information Report animal habitat. The sensitive area tract/setback area imposes upon all present and future owners and occupiers of the land subject to the tract/setback area the obligation, enforceable on behalf of the public by King County, to leave undisturbed all trees and other vegetation within the tract/setback area. The vegetation within the tract/setback area may not be cut, pruned, covered by fill, removed or damaged without approval in writing from the King County Department of Development and Environmental Services or its successor agency, unless otherwise provided by law. The common boundary between the sensitive area tract/sensitive area setback area and the area of development activity must be marked or otherwise flagged to the satisfaction of King County prior to any clearing, grading, building construction or other development activity on a property subject to the sensitive area tract/setback area. The required marking or flagging shall remain in place until all development proposal activities in the vicinity of the sensitive area and buffer are completed. No building foundations are allowed beyond the required 15 -foot building setback line, unless otherwise provided by law. This note has been placed on Sheet 26 of the final engineering plans. 16. Suitable recreation space shall be provided consistent with the requirements of KCC 21A.14.180 and KCC 21A_14.190 (i -e., sport court[s], children's play equipment, picnic table[s], benches, etc.). a. An overall detailed recreation space plan shall be submitted for review and approval by DDES, prior to or concurrent with the engineering plans. This plan shall include location, area calculations, dimensions, and landscape specs, equipment specs, etc Condition noted. b. A performance bond for recreation space improvements shall be posted prior to recording of the plat_ Condition Noted. 17. A homeowners' association or other workable organization shall be established to the satisfaction of DDES which provides for the ownership and continued maintenance of the recreation, open space and/or sensitive area tract(s)- Condition Noted. 18. Street trees shall be provided as follows (per KCRS 5.03 and KCC 2IA. 16.050): a. Trees shall be planted at a rate of one tree for every 40 feet of frontage along all roads. Spacing may be modified to accommodate sight distance requirements for driveways and intersections. . b. Trees shall be located within the street right-of-way and planted in accordance with Drawing No. 5-009 of the 1993 King County Road Standards, unless King County Department of Transportation determines that trees should not be located in the street right-of-way. ©512612004 Page 2-7 Job #01-159 TRIAD Shamrock -- Technical Information Report C. If King County determines that the required street trees should not be located within the right-of-way, they shall be located no more than 20 feet from the street right-of- way line. d. The trees shall be owned and maintained by the abutting lot owners or the homeowners association or other workable organization unless the County has adopted a maintenance program.. Ownership and maintenance shall be noted on the face of the final recorded plat. C. The species of trees shall be approved by DDES if located within the right-of-way, and shall not include poplar, cottonwood, soft maples, gum, any fruit -bearing trees, or any other tree or shrub whose roots are likely to obstruct sanitary or storm sewers, or that is not compatible with overhead utility lines. f, The Applicant shall submit a street tree plan and bond quantity sheet for review and approval by DDES prior to engineering plan approval. g. The Applicant shall contact Metro'Service Planning at 684-1622 to determine if 148'h Ave SE is on a bus route. If so, the street tree plan shall also be reviewed by Metro. h. The street trees must be installed and inspected, or a performance bond posted prior to recording of the plat. If a performance bond is posted, the street trees must be installed and inspected within one year of recording of the plat. At the time of inspection, if the trees are found to be installed per the approved plan, a maintenance bond must be submitted or the performance bond replaced with a maintenance bond, and held for one year. After one year, the maintenance bond may be released after DDES has completed a second inspection and determined that the trees have been kept healthy and thriving_ Conditions Noted. 19. The following have been established under SEPA authority as necessary requirements to mitigate the adverse environmental impacts of this development_ The Applicants shall demonstrate compliance with these items prior to final approval. To mitigate the significant adverse impact the plat of Shamrock will have on the intersections of SR 900/148`' Ave SE and SR 900/164'h Ave SE, the Applicant shall install, either individually or in conjunction with other development projects in this area, the following improvements at the SR 900/148" Ave intersection; A traffic signal, and Eastbound and westbound left turn lanes The design for the SR 900/148`' Ave intersection improvements shall be approved by the Washington State Department of Transportation (and by King County to the extent such improvements are located in County right-of-way). In addition, at a minimum, the existing entering sight distance looking east for the north and south legs of the intersection (602 feet and 386 feet, respectively) shall not be reduced as part of the intersection improvements. Documentation shall be submitted to show this requirement is met. All construction work associated with the intersection improvements shall be completed between April I" and September 30'h. This seasonal restriction shall be clearly shown on the final engineering plans. @5126/2004 Page 2-8 Job #01-159 4MAD Shamrock —Technical Information Report In lieu of the installation of the above -noted intersection improvements prior to final plat approval, the Applicant may post a financial guarantee with WSDOT which assures the installation of these improvements within two years of the recording of Shamrock. In this event, intersection improvement design must be approved by WSDOT prior to King County approval of the engineering plans for Shamrock. If the above -noted intersection improvements have already been made by others prior to the recording of Shamrock, or a financial guarantee has been posted by others which assures the installation of these improvements, then the Applicant for Shamrock shall pay a pro -rata share dollar amount to the developer who has made the improvements or "bonded" for the improvements, in an amount proportional to the impacts of Shamrock. The pro -rata share dollar amount to be paid shall be set by WSDOT, and documentation shall be provided by the Shamrock Applicant to the King County Land Use Services Division to show this payment has been made, prior to final plat recording. The pro -rata dollar amount to be paid shall be based on the following! • The final Shamrock lot count • The trip distribution for Shamrock • The total trips contributed to the intersection of SR 900.148'" Ave by the plats of Aster Park (LOOP0024), Stone Ridge 9L99P3008), East Renton (L02P0005), Shamrock (L02P0014), Rosemonte (aka Ironwood — L03POO 18) and any future land use applications submitted to King County for which compliance with the King County Intersection Standards (KCC 14.80) is required at either the SR 900/148`h Ave intersection, or the SR 900/164`h Ave High Accident Location. In the event that either King County or WSDOT adopts a formal "latecomer's" system prior to final plat recording, that system may be followed in lieu of the approach described above, at the discretion of the Applicant, as long as at a minimum there is a financial guarantee which assures the above -noted intersection improvements will be installed within two years of the date of recording of the plat of Shamrock. [Comprehensive Plan Policy T-303 and King County Code 21 A.28.060A] Condition noted. b_ Documentation shall be provided to demonstrate to the satisfaction of WSDOT that stopping sight distance (360 feet) is available on the east leg of the SR 900/148`h Ave intersection. The intersection shall be modified by the Applicant, if necessary, so that this stopping sight distance requirement is met on the east leg. In addition, the Applicant shall clear vegetation within the right-of-way along SR 900, east of 148`h Ave., to maximize the entering sight distance for the north and south legs of the intersection. [Comprehensive Plan Policy T-303 and King County Comprehensive Policy T-303 and King County Code 21A.28.060A] Condition noted. 21. The northerly portion (north of SE 124`h St.) shall comply with the Build Green requirements of Ordinance 14662 (Low Impact Development). Applicable notes, as necessary shall be shown on the engineering plans and final plat. Condition Noted_ ©512612004 Page 2-9 Job #01-159 /TRMD Shamrock —Technical Information Report 0 2.2 Core Requirements • 2.2.1 Core Requirement #1: Discharge at the Natural Location Runoff from the existing site naturally discharges to three different places. Please refer to the Level 1 Downstream Analysis in Section 3 for a description of each sub -basin. In the developed condition, a portion of the flow will be routed to two onsite ponds (the southern pond is located within the City of Renton boundary) and a portion will be allowed to bypass the detention facilities as wetland recharge. The northern pond releases to the adjacent wetland. The southern pond releases to the existing conveyance system located along S.E. 128"' Street. Also see the Drainage Adjustment #L03VO03. 2.2.2 Core Requirement #2: Offsite Analysis Please see Section 3. 2.2.3 Core Requirement #3: Flow Control See Section 4. A level 2 detention standard has been applied. 2.2.4 Core Requirement #4: Conveyance System See Section 6 - Conveyance System Analysis and Design. 2.2.5 Core Requirement #5: Erosion and Sediment Control See Section 8 — Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Analysis and Design. 2.2.6 Core Requirement #6: Operations and Maintenance This is a publicly maintained system. 2.2.7 Core Requirement #7: Bonds and Liability See Section 9 — Bond Quantity Work Sheet, Retention/Detention Facility Summary, and Declaration of Covenant. ©5126/2004 Job #01-159 RIAD r Page 2-10 U n LJ • Shamrock —Technical Information Report 2.2.8 Core Requirement #8: Water Quality See Section 4 — This project will use the Basic Water Quality Menu and will utilize the "Dead Storage" method. 2.2.9 Special Requirement #1: Other Adopted Area -Specific Requirements 2.2.9.1 Critical Drainage Areas Not applicable. 2.2.9.2 Master Drainage Plan Not applicable. 2.2.9.3 Adopted Basins or Community Plans According to the King County Basin Reconnaissance Program, the site is located within the May Creek and Lower Cedar sub -basins of the Cedar River Basin, 2.2.9.4 Lake Management Plans Not applicable. 2.2.9.5 Shared Facility Drainage Plans Not applicable. 2.2.10 Special Requirement #2: FloodplainlFloodway Delineation The limits of this project do not lie in a 100 -year floodplain. 2.2.11 Special Requirement #3: Flood Protection Facilities This special requirement is required for projects with a Class 1 or 2 streams with an existing flood protection facility. The site does not contain the above-mentioned items. X5/2612004 Job #01-159 �TRJAD V-, Page 2-11 • Shamrock — Technical Information Report 2.2.92 Special Requirement #4: Source Controls Not applicable. This project is not a commercial, industrial, multifamily or a redevelopment of a commercial, industrial or multifamily project. 2.2.93 Special Requirement #5: Oil Control Not applicable. This project is not proposing to develop or redevelop a high -use site. ©512612004 Job #01-159 /TRIAD Page 2-12 • • ♦� -yam King Colin", !fond Servicvs Division 1)vparti wo( of Trauspor la Finn 201 SouthJ;IdtNOn Slrrel zcaI dc, -M), 9910,1-3856 March 19, 2004 C amwest 9720 N F 120`x' Place, # 100 Kirkland, WA 98034 RE: Road Variance L04VO004 — Shamrock — Related File L02P0014 Dear Sir/Madam: Thank you for submitting your application for a road variance from the King County Road Standards (KCRS). You requested a variance from Section 2.03 of the KCRS concerning the requirement for a crowned road cross-section_ The Shamrock project is a demonstration project that King County Ordinance 14662 approved as a low -impact development. We have reviewed the one directional road cross -slope that is proposed for minor access and subaccess classification roads. The one direction cross slope on these local access streets will allow for an alternative drainage design with discharge to adjacent water quality swales. I approve a variance to allow the one -directional road cross slope on ininor access and subaccess classification roads with the condition that slotted drains be utilized in the vertical curb to direct flows to the water quality swales. A copy of the staffs analysis, findings and conclusions is enclosed. If you have any questions, please call Craig Comfort, Road Variance Engineer, Traffic Engineering Section, at 206 -263 -6109 - Sincerely, 0QA Paulette Norman, P.E. County Road Engineer PN:CC:kc cc: lames Sanders, P.E.. Development Engineer, Land Use Services Division (LUSD), Department of Development an(] Environmental Services (I)DES) Pete Dye, Y.E., Senior Engineer, LUSD, DDI~S Linda Dougherty, Director, ]toad Services Division (RSD), Depaxtnient of Transportation (DOT) Norton Posey, P_E., Acting County 'Traffic Fngineer, Traffic Fngineering Section, RSD, DOT Fatin Kara, P.E., Supervising vngineer, Tralfic Lngineering Section. RSD, DOT Kris Langley, Senior Engineer, `I raffic Engineering Section, RSD, DOT Craig Comfort, P.k., Road Variance Engineer, Traffic Fngincering Section, RSD, DOT King County Road Services Division L7epartlnent of'!'r,inS{xn'tritinii Traffic Engineering Section MS KS(, TR -0222 20! South Jackson street Seattle, WA 1)8104 March 19, 2004 TO: Variance File FM: Craig Comfort, P.E., Road Variance Engineer, Traffic Engineering Section RE: Road Variance L04 V0004 -- Shamrock - Related File L021`0014 Applicant's Presentation: I . Shamrock is a preliminary plat Low Impact Demonstration (LID) Project with 118 lots located on the west side of 148"' Avenue SF. at the 12400 block. The variance request is to apply a one du-ectional cross slope for suba.ccess and minor access streets within the Low Impact Development portion of the project. The King County Road Standards requires a crowned road at 2% cross -slope. A variance is also requested for curb drops (notches) that convey surface water flow from the one directional cross slope pavement to the roadside grass -lined swales. 2. The design with otic -directional road cross slope and notched curb.will allow for swales in lieu of closed pipe and provide increased contact of runoff with soils, facilitating opportunities for infiltration and water duality treatment and resulting in increased travel time and time of concentration. The natural linlction of the watershed is more closely mimicked resulting in reduced detention pond size and thus helping to minimize the impacts of development. The project will utilize vertical curb on the roads and the sidewalks will be on the upper side of the one -directional roads so that drainage will not run across the sidewalks. The grass -lined swales will be in privately maintained tracts. 3. The variance approval will not result increased County maintenance costs because the swales are in private tracts and fewer drainage appurtenances will be maintained by King County. Staff's Findings and Conclusions: Concurrence with the applicant's presentation. 2. The one -direction cross -slope on these low classification roads (minor access and subaccess) would not compromise the traffic or maintenance functions of the roads. 3. The proposed notched curb should be replaced with slotted drains that extend through the vertical curb. Slotted drains will allow fora continuous top of vertical curb and no 110tClllllg. Shamrock — Technical Information Report Is 3 OFFSITE ANALYSIS Please refer to Level 1 Downstream Analysis prepared by Triad Associates and dated July • • 29, 2002, revised January 19, 2004 enclosed. ©5126/2004 Page 3-1 Job #01-159 /TRIAD 0 Shamrock Level 1 Downstream Analysis King County, Washington Date: 1119104 Job # 01-159 Revision Date(s) is 6/29/2002 9/12/2003 5/26/2004 Prepared By: Ben Rutkowski Schwin Chaosilapakul Reviewed By: Rebecca Cushman, PE is 0 Shamrock LEVEL 1 DOWNSTREAM ANALYSIS King County, Washington Prepared For: Prepared For: CamWest Real Estate Development, Inc. 40 Issued July 29, 2002 Revised September 12, 2003 Revised January 19, 2004 Revised May 26, 2004 Prepared By: Schwin Chaosilapakul Ben Rutkowski Reviewed By: is Rebecca Cushman, PE Shamrock — Level 1 Downstream Analysis 0 Table of Contents 1 INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................1 2 SITE....................................................................................................................2 3 UPSTREAM DRAINAGE ANALYSIS.................................................................2 3.1 Upstream Basin...................................................................................................... ... 2 4 DOWNSTREAM DRAINAGE ANALYSIS...........................................................3 4.1 Onsite Runoff...................................................................................................................... 3 4.2 Offsite Runoff...................................................................................................................... 4 4.3 Downstream Capacity ........................................................................................................ 4 4.4 Downstream Drainage Problems ...................................................................................... 7 5 RESOURCES USED FOR ANALYSIS...............................................................8 5.1 Sensitive Areas Folio................................................................................... 5.2 King County Basin Reconnaissance Program................................................................ 8 5.3 Soils Survey for the King County Area............................................................................ 8 5.4 King County Community Planning Area.......................................................................... 8 6 DRAINAGE CONCEPT.......................................................................................9 0 Appendix.................................................................................................................. A Existing Conditions Exhibit Developed Conditions Exhibit Downstream Drainage Exhibit Tributary Areas Exhibit Soils Map and Legend, Hydrologic Soils Group Table Sensitive Areas Folio King County Basin Reconnaissance Program King County Community Planning Area Complaints Excerptfrom Sienna Improvement Plans (6 Sheets) 0 • Shamrock — Level 1 Downstream Analysis 1 INTRODUCTION Shamrock is a 34.5 acre site spanning both King County and the City of Renton jurisdictions. The total proposed project will contain 129 lots. The King County portion of the project proposes to create 118 single-family lots (74 lots will utilize Low Impact Development) on an approximately 29.8 acre property. This Technical Information Report (TIR) is for the King County and Renton portions of the project. The Vicinity Map below shows the City of Renton boundary. The part of the site outside the City of Renton boundary is subject to King County DDES review. The site is north of 128`h Street SE, west of 148"' Avenue SE. The property is within Section 10, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., King County, Washington. Please see the Vicinity Map below. .c iSf 777th 4� � SC 12Gtl� { SE,�� COALFE�LU 724th �n FARK H �y TO 1-4REN ION PAfxK NE 41h S7- �+ HOE SITE TE w Sf rJho CT Q - VICINITY MAP Not to Scale Site visits were performed on July 2, 2001 and July 15, 2002 and July 14, 2003 to observe the upstream and downstream drainage conditions. The following analysis is based on these site visits and related research of available records. May 26, 2004 Job # 0 1 -159 Page 1 Shamrock — Level 1 Downstream Analysis 2 SITE ! The existing site is a wholesale nursery with two residences and several outbuildings that will • be demolished (see Existing Conditions Exhibit, in Appendix). The site generally slopes from the east to west_ An onsite wetland exists on the northwestern portion of the site. Slopes range from. 2-12 % with pasture ground cover. The site exists within two basins. 3 UPSTREAM DRAINAGE ANALYSIS 3.1 Upstream Basin There are several upstream areas that are tributary to the site. Areas 1 and 2 are tributary to the portion of the site that is within the May Creek sub -basin. Please see Section 5 in the Technical Information Report (TIR) for detention/water quality issues. Area 3 is tributary to the Lower Cedar River sub -basin portion of the site located in both King County and the City of Renton. Please see Section 5 in the TIR for detentioWwater quality issues. Area 4 is tributary to the wetland only and will not affect drainage. Areas 5 and G were previously assumed to be tributary. However, additional topography revealed that it is not tributary. Upstream from the southeast section of the site is a development called Morgan Place which contributes approximately 3 acres. The site contains slopes ranging from 2-10%, predominately in the westerly direction consisting primarily of pasture, some light forest, wetland and two existing houses. Refer to the Tributary Areas Exhibit at the end of this report. May 26, 2004 Job # 01-959 /TRMD Page 2 • Shamrock — Level 1 Downstream Analysis 4 DOWNSTREAM DRAINAGE ANALYSIS Refer to the Downstream Drainage Exhibit and Upstream Tributary Map from the Loken/Johnson Report, Sheets 1 and 2 from the approved King County Project L02SR037 and Sheets 10, 11 and 15 from the approved City of Renton Project of Sienna at the end of this report. 4.1 Onsite Runoff North Approximately 17.0 acres of the northern portion of the site slope from east to west. Slopes range from 2-12 %. This northern portion of the site is tributary to two onsite wetlands located in the northwestern portion and north -central portion of the site. The northwestern wetland discharges to the north and south, whereas the north -central wetland discharges to the north only. South The remainder of the site drains in a southwest to south direction over gentle slopes_ Runoff is collected in an existing detention pond located north of the intersection of SE 128'h Street and 146"' Ave. SE. Specifically, at the southeast corner of the southernmost parcel of the site. Runoff from the pond discharges south offsite beneath SE 128`n Street through a 42 - inch pipe. May 26, 2004 Job # 01-169 Page 3 1] Shamrock — Level 1 Downstream Analysis 4.2 Offsite Runoff North Discharge from the north half (+/-) of the onsite northwestern wetland flows offsite to the north through a 12 -inch CMP and a 6 -inch concrete culvert and into a pond in the adjacent property. The pond discharges north into a wetland, then to Honey Dew (Honey) Creek which, according to the December 1990 King County Sensitive Areas Map Folio, is an unclassified stream in the May Creek Sub -Basin. The north -central wetland discharges to the north and connects with the off-site wetland described above. Honey Dew Creek combines with May Creek over two miles downstream (north) of the site_ May Creek is in the Cedar River Drainage basin and ultimately discharges into Lake Washington. South Runoff to the south flows through a 42 -inch pipe then into a ditch behind a residence at 14415 SE 128th St. The ditch ranges from 2 to 3 feet deep and then travels under a driveway via an 18 -inch culvert. The storm water enters the north property line of a new development (Sienna). The flow is then picked up by the 36 -inch bypass conveyance pipe within the Sienna development and continues in a southerly direction until passing the quarter -mile downstream point at its intersection with SE 132"d Street. From there, the flow continues to travel in the 36 -inch pipe approximately 200 feet west on SE 132"d Street before changing course to the south on 144th Avenue SE. The flow then travels south on 144`h Avenue SE for approximately 600 feet where it connects to a 24 -inch cross culvert. The flow then continues to the west in a defined stream channel. 4.3 Downstream Capacity The Sienna project included the design of an upstream bypass conveyance line. The sizing of this pipe system was based on assumptions made of the upstream basin. These assumptions were made based on limited topography. As a result of more detailed topography, it is found that the original assumptions are conservative. Please see the Tributary Areas Exhibit located at the end of this report. May 26, 2004 Job # 01-159 TRIAD Page 4 • Shamrock - Level 1 Downstream Analysis The following is an excerpt from the Final Corrected Technical Information Report provided to King County under Permit #L02SR037 dated September 16, 2002. Begin Excerpt Conveyance for Upstream Flows The KCRTS 15 -minute time step was used to determine the overall flows tributary to the pipe system conveyance. 67.2 acres upstream area has been recently developed_ Those areas pertaining to new development were modeled using the information obtained from previous Technical Information Reports. The remaining areas were modeled using approved Technical Information Reports, Aerial maps and actual survey. All of NE 4rh Street right-of- way was assumed impervious. An additional 7.81 efs from the 100 -year outflow of the detention pond from the City of Renton approved project of Sienna was added at CB 4 making the total flows piped at 75.41 efs. Please see the upstream tributary map. The following is the ground cover breakdown of the 159.43 -acre tributary area upstream and the KCRTS 15 -minute time step printout. Till Forest: 74.94 acre Wetland: 4.81 acre Till Pasture: 9.76 acre Impervious: 36.06 acre Till Grass: 33.86 acre Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series Fi1e:jan28.tsf Project Location:Sea-Tac ---Annual Peak Flow Rates --- Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak (CFS) Period 67.60 20.50 6 2/09/01 12:30 14.40 7 1105/02 15:00 44.13 2 12108102 17:15 13.82 8 8/23/04 14:30 25.62 3 11/17/04 5:00 21.65 5 10/27/05 10:45 24.49 4 10/25/06 22:45 67.60 1 1/09/08 6:30 Computed Peaks 50.00 0.980 -----Flow Frequency Analysis ------- - - Peaks - - Rank Return Prob (CFS) Period 67.60 1 100.00 0.990 44.13 2 25.00 0.960 25.62 3 10.00 0.900 24.49 4 5.00 0.800 21.65 5 3.00 0.667 20.50 6 2.00 0.500 14.40 7 1.30 0.231 13.82 8 1.10 0.091 59.78 50.00 0.980 This conveyance system has been designed to convey flows up to the 100 year storm without overtopping. May 26, 2004 Job # 01-159 1 TRl� Page 5 • is Pi Shamrock -- Level 1 Downstream Analysis Freeboard Fables frons Storm Sewer Output Upstream Tributary Pipe .system Catch Basin Rini Elev. HGL Bev. Freeboard outfall -1 410.00 409.08 0.92 1-u stream 410.00 409.10 0.90 2 415.80 409.96 5.84 3 420.10 411.96 8.14 4 421.84 419.37 2.46 5 428.50 423.27 5.23 6 430.65 424.72 5.92 7 431.32 425.43 5.88 8 432.52 429.49 3.02 9 433.00 430.17 2.82 10 431.25 430.88 0.37 End Excerpt Additional survey and analysis of the onsite wetland located on the west property line of Shamrock determined that approximately 22 acres of assumed tributary area to the bypass conveyance system flows to the north as apposed to the south. Therefore, the designed flows to the bypass conveyance system are more conservative with less tributary area. May 26, 2004 Job # 01-159 /TRUSD Page 6 Shamrock — Level 1 Downstream Analysis 4.4 Downstream Drainage Problems North According to King County Water & Land Resources Division, there have been no recent problems downstream of this project. The complaints that have been documented are associated with downstream properties near the East Renton project. These complaints are over 12 years old. King County suggests not following up on any complaints before 1994 due to their age, development that has occurred, etc. Additionally, no complaints have been documented at those addresses for 12 years, so the problem most likely has been corrected. The complaints are linked to a private home drainage system and a private road washout due to no drainage system rather than flooding, or erosion of the large drainage course that our site will discharge to. Since no complaints have been documented at this location in the last 12 years, it is assumed that corrections have been made as a result of subsequent development. South ! According to complaints compiled by the King County Water and Land Resources Division, 17A several instances of flooding have been reported in areas near the downstream drainage path of the site. Problems of flooding and drainage in these areas seem to have been alleviated with the recent installation of a 36 -inch pipe system shown in the Downstream Drainage Exhibit. Details of complaints are included at the end of this report. Since the installation of the 36 -inch conveyance system there has been one downstream complaint. This complaint comes from the resident at the address of 5511 NE 2nd Street. The resident complains of the roadside ditch overtopping. Per conversations with Ron Straka with the City of Renton, this is not considered a major issue and the City currently does not have plans for maintenance. In addition, available topography suggests that potential over- flows from the Sienna project would flow east along 3rd Street to Lyons Avenue, then south along the west side of Lyons Avenue rather than further east to the subject property. A copy of this complaint along with photographs can be found in the Appendix. Also see the Downstream Drainage Map #2 included at the end of this report. May 26, 2904 Job # a1-159 TR11AD Page 7 Shamrock — Level 1 Downstream Analysis 5 RESOURCES USED FOR ANALYSIS 0 Refer to the appendix for a copy of the following maps and figures. �J 5.1 Sensitive Areas Folio Maps from the King County Sensitive Areas Folio, dated December 1990, show that the site is not in a sensitive area with regards to seismic hazards, coal mines, landslide hazard, erosion hazard, streams or wetlands. 5.2 King County Basin Reconnaissance Program According to the King County Basin Reconnaissance Program, the site is located within the Lower Cedar River sub -basin of the Cedar River Drainage Basin and the Honey Creek sub - basin of the May Creek Drainage Basin. 5.3 Soils Survey for the King County Area The site is underlain with Alderwood gravelly sandy loam according the Soils Survey for the King County Area_ 5.4 King County Community Planning Area The site is located within the Newcastle Community Planning Area. May 26, 2004 Job # 01-159 /'fRl Page 8 Shamrock — Level 1 Downstream Analysis • 6 DRAINAGE CONCEPT • The proposed drainage system will consist of road and ditch section to convey the street runoff. Roof and footing drains serving individual lots will be directed to swale systems which will increase travel times, convey runoff, as well as provide water quality treatment. All conveyance, detention, and water duality systems will be designed per the 1998 King County Surface Water Drainage Manual. It is anticipated that there will be two detention facilities. One facility will be near the western border of the site at the end of SE 124'h St. The second facility will be located south of the site on the Bales Property (reviewed under the City of Renton jurisdiction). A public storm drainage easement will be required to convey site runoff across the Bales Property to the detention facility. This facility will be sized to accommodate both the Shamrock Plat and the Bales Plat. The portion of the site between SE 124th Street and the northern boundary will incorporate Low Impact Development (LID) concepts. The LID concepts utilized are amended soils for increases infiltration, open swalcs used for the conveyance system to attenuate flow rates and roadways slopes in one direction to decrease the need for cross culverts. Roof and footing drains will drain to open swales or dispersion trenches via a perforated drain pipe. This will increase the time of concentration to the proposed pond. Additionally, the public right-of- way has been narrowed and private drainage tracts have been created to reduce the need for public maintenance. The portion of the site between SE 124th Street and the southern boundary will be designed using standard development methods. May 26, 2004 Job # 01-159 �7'RIAD Page 9 U • May 26, 2004 Job # 01-159 Shamrock — Level 1 Downstream Analysis Appendix /TRIAD Page A NOIVNIHSIYM AIMO0 VNIN Qj "a m SISA7VNV kVV3H.LNSMOQ I 731137 � a XOOHW VHS �s 1S3MWb'O SNOr11QN00 ONl1SIX3 as as Norsuaa siru 'axLn M 1331&1 S m ZLLj —� o f 1 Li r i F 7¢ t• 6 ' trr XM omm s. . :....... N41w A1I0 - f _ AI N1700 JNDiI Ll C - bung_`,S1,0♦ �o`vZil aGOZ '9Z J 'uowys,^�_; � V) Hit 0 V) < < u CD 0 I Uff 111XIIIIIIiIIII mmov WIN Iry miiiiiiii &1`11111101 mw mv"mj Jv ji -vi4vw NOJ-9N1HSVA1 'AiNnoD qmm MW AA!l ....... 0) I I SISA 7 VAf V N V3H.L SNM 00 1 73A 9 7 tr XOOHPVVHS ls3mmv;D 113.19. L A ll -L161HX3 SNOIDGNOO CgdO7-4A30 NOISIMH. UM .11 0 X % V) Hit 0 V) < < u CD 0 I Uff 111XIIIIIIiIIII mmov WIN Iry miiiiiiii &1`11111101 mw mv"mj Jv ji -vi4vw z LU MW AA!l ....... F-1 AIN/700 &NIX L X % --- a 2 L 4, Li —J 1 7 Ld LA . k F7 AUJ cr-- 2E ,kms.. . . . . . . N Z .7 H % 0 pot .Vj5k_ z LU F-1 L X % --- a 2 k H % `5mP'30—L� 69LLO\L -13A37\s;iq!L4x3 103 11 0L_j wRo tocz 'vZ d t F iA a W LO W U z a x x F cc 0 z V) cv a- z z O F O z 0 H U W N o 18 N1► ae :4 L338f1S H -1P 3N ILU�]J 7.1t n n 0 NOJONNSYM :UN170o 9NIY d SJSA7VNV W4'3111SNMOO ! 73A37 o � vAA yy 1 S3MNYO U aha 118IHX3 Sb'38t/ .t if F/1f1B1t11 xa Aa Noisinaa H1Yd 'DN a s w u7 w i � i _a U O N i C!7 4 a ¢ Q F iA a W LO W U z a x x F cc 0 z V) cv a- z z O F O z 0 H U W N o 18 N1► ae :4 L338f1S H -1P 3N ILU�]J 7.1t n n 0 NOIJNIHSVM AiNROO ONIN v SISA7VNV WV-9HlSNMDQ L 79A37 ,� o o p xooH1NaHS z a ��r M 1S3MWVO =a D 3DVNlvbfa NV381SM0c X31 ae I arra 'aw v� w a 3 U o Lo Q 0 0 frT I ¢ N w li L �7 �- li I 77HTT-I f Li T- TTT� zFi _.... s N 9 1t --l" o W9012 na+ x 1111*+3 .7 x ue7A& U x tt!'J7 O x I r x x N TS stare U x K t!,t x teras x 1ef 06 Ditch tease C3 x tr?.% x x lR7 7Z tt7.7+ x>84� lL7� xttraae x lR'J x IM30 rs. x 127" x rare x sea.++ xLIMUR x Tse � snu x It x um" U Lxx x o0 x tt+at o z 114 x x t24b6 O v x s U x x x sea.+s sea % x it A4 x um oral Sttcan' � --r to+. c�eaS x 1!+ x IKta fI x s M x 1117 4 x IH �R tas'J! x x x r x xtr�.rs x tea.+s S It3li a x xin" � 1� Linsfllas xtM x Co xl�r,n 1aa n � x 4a v x LM I�J.7s 1 "" ursr w a x .Lix x" x x L'� llrnt I ex xLe1J1 xlt4Ap I14A4 \V x x tttx y x x tta.e! i IJ%A x LIM !t 110 x!tSL7 x + X 14.+4 x IM7s x 1aai7 x 1, x AL44 l x 189.+7 x teaal x la7.70 x 19444 IN M It pit x x x Xfl�14 xUlm x 117.+1 x ur,er x ►sear LEC." x ssfi,si x x x x ta+,7 x c� ttxi 71t t tie n x s�E 17 x1 ! r� 7 last x x 187x x IN x MAlf Fps p x �t x lawn SITE x tt7.1'.3 � x x taar3 Jut „ 3 x !� CJS o W9012 na+ x 1111*+3 .7 x ue7A& U x tt!'J7 O x I r x x N TS stare U x K t!,t x teras x 1ef 06 Ditch tease C3 x tr?.% x x lR7 7Z tt7.7+ x>84� lL7� xttraae x lR'J x IM30 rs. x 127" x rare x sea.++ xLIMUR x Tse � snu x It x um" U Lxx x o0 x tt+at o z 114 x x t24b6 O v x s U x x x sea.+s sea % x it A4 x um oral Sttcan' � --r to+. c�eaS x 1!+ x IKta fI x s M x 1117 4 x IH �R tas'J! x x x r x xtr�.rs x tea.+s S It3li a x xin" � 1� Linsfllas xtM x Co xl�r,n 1aa n � x 4a v x LM I�J.7s 1 "" ursr w a x .Lix x" x x L'� llrnt I ex xLe1J1 xlt4Ap I14A4 \V x x tttx y x x tta.e! i IJ%A x LIM !t 110 x!tSL7 x + X 14.+4 x IM7s x 1aai7 x 1, x AL44 l x 189.+7 x teaal x la7.70 x 19444 IN M It pit x x x Xfl�14 xUlm x 117.+1 x ur,er x ►sear LEC." x ssfi,si x x x SHEET Na_ 11 KING COUNTY AREA, WASHINGTON (RENTON QUADRANGLE) I680000 FEET 122°fl713011 47°30' AgQ _ �AgCr .4130."-1'- - =BII-•9i5 L .. J ra,l4r .. n'7 P .EYB 11- P: ark... j .B 'n8 - B •t- . 3 3 42a— r - $46 SITE 180000 FEET C !or. ASL _ 14 A 5' 37 \. Py - T AkF I fih o cc. PY 'r Ma •L-_ �\_ ��� I ._' l�n AkF n PY � � I h • • Pc ri P C A l �i~ n o• O- W ap J a n= [r�lliok PC Rn Vr pS a _AkF 1 ea Sf�� _ - s i Park Ng pY I CI' �. `I - •" n I AgD _ AkF M 8 P Agc i Ago. AgD AkF - Ap A .6 i AMB g 1 A B_ PrPECrrvE_ AgC g ; 27 f�t� r S 2ET�—��_,� 492 ! }. PARIMENT OF AGRICULTURE INSf�RVATION SERVICE SOIL LEGEND Ih, fast ropiral lenrr :s rhe -i,;.1 o..e of rhe soil •,o A s[rord capital lcrrer, A, B, C. p, V, W F i•d:rnr[s 0" '1." of scope. Symbols++--rhave a slope lcf re, o,[ rhos[ of ar 0' Irvc! sols. SYMBDE NAME T.• Tu1,,., i6 ms [h - Uh-bon land WP Waod:nv:ISe sat fvom • The arnP_;It n of vo,ioble +hon lhat v! th[ o11,e.s rhe area, E"t ,+ hos h=+, s an+rollr.d ..ell rnn.�k ra + e. ptrs for rh. rep -r+ -d ,,, of r4 sous. KING COUNTY AREA, WASHINGT{ E3v„ndor Y.-.ativr-.o! Srb1r.....:. _._..... terra Po. Dred c:ry 'moll pv,k, r -me T o..ns hip li••r, no B as.nJa�t •tea„v e r V^•+ed S�o•rs m,nrr, Sr koa r, s>•..•rl,, o•,d Bo:ld-.ass Ibn: r, wo pPwer i c..y m:33�0.. Lor ortA a lo�d••v,L No:row+vl and •r +�< T obh sn�,.r le,r �+t•rs ter n,e rob le . Ho�yonr olco.,rrv1 sr, Any .rr r•.eroblr r•s Vcr>4of rt*+u of srori Qrhe+ ret a+red le r C 1�trLrd spar rlr-ot:• lJar hr[ ked s Pot r te••r A98 Alder cd grope Ily sandy Isom, 0 to 6 percent slopes AgC Alde,d .9,—elly sondy root••, 6 to 15 p--1 slopes A90 Alderwood g,ovrlly sandy loom, 15 ra 30 prrcrm slopes ALF A1,1 , ood and Ki+sap soils, +•my steep AmB A-1., Aldrin --d ma+er:nl, 0 ro 6 pr,rrrd sioprs 'L -'c Ar rnr s, Aldec,.p od molnial, 6 fo 15 Per'en+ 'lopes An Awns, E^•r1[tt rr,otaio! - BrC Efrous-oe g,ovelly so.•dy lvotn, 6 rP 15 pr,rrnr stapes Bei Broosirr g•ovrlly sv+•dy 1aaa,, 15 to 30 p[rc rnr sla rxs B. F Baa c g•o rrly ao.•dy loo 40 10 75 pr•rrnr ,ropes gA S.rr'..yr_—• •ua•w slpom Br &;sew sill By B.r Flry s01 loom _ Cb Cvosrol 0rar 7,rs Iia En•I,.,o•,t s�lr loom Fd Edgr..,rx I- sandy Ivaco E-6 r. rsr gra-111y sondy loam, Oro.5 p.11en+ slopes ESC E,r•rtr g•a-r lly .or,dy IPnm, S ro 15 yr. 1 s lope' E p E.r rn g•a-. Ily wady lwm, IS 10 30 pr,crnr slopes E ^{ E *'r Alder.- 4 g ver lly sandy looms, 6 ry l5 P.rr eat srnp[s hA InA;ano to r«„ny Ione pond, U+a a pr�senr slopes r.,C I..d:vnvto Inomr i,ne ;and, ❑ ra 15 Pe "t slop's #gyp Ld o•oiv Immq l- sand_ 1.5 in 30 lovts Y.Pg K r'Pa :.�1� loo. , 1 to 8 Pr•rr tont' KpC Kilsap sih loam, 8 15 prat c..r s [.pre KPD r,,—p tl 30 P[rr cat slopes KsC Kln„s e, a�.-rly loamy sant. 6+o IS Pr'r[nt slopes mo Mb ed oll.,...vl tons h)r[ 1, 15 pr r slopes Nri119r•y g. ore fly toa•••y s J. 2ee l3q Tlrwbr•gya�lr !ou ••, lAk Nvr+t sort s,l, loom tlo P4 r sondy t_- w...p-C 0- Ic p+a 119,0 elly foo m, Gro 15 perc rnr slopes p..0 p,oll j,o- lk, ]oom, 35 rc 75 Perr—r slopes C>" f prop g,o,clty loom, eo so 7-$ pr,rrnr slopes N Pi10'+ ,' loony I;— sord Pk P:khvrk fine sandy loom Po Ps•grr silty slay Ioam Py Pvyallvp fine sandy loam Pac Ragnor fine sondy loam, 6 1a 15 percent slopes Rap Ragrwr I;ne sondy Imm, 15 ro 25 Prtcmr a lopes Rd[ Rvgr+ar Ir.Oionala ossa iv+i m, slop irg r ROE Rog,ro,-Ind:oraly ossoe:Pe; P,, ,nada only sIt, rp Re Renton silt loom >tih Ri..c,wosh 5o Salol silt loan S jom..Qmish silt loom Sk Yore l[ muck 5m Shorea invck Sn Si silr loom So Snohomish ash loom . S Saohom:sh sof+ lam, rh;<k sot FP<e vaio.,r T.• Tu1,,., i6 ms [h - Uh-bon land WP Waod:nv:ISe sat fvom • The arnP_;It n of vo,ioble +hon lhat v! th[ o11,e.s rhe area, E"t ,+ hos h=+, s an+rollr.d ..ell rnn.�k ra + e. ptrs for rh. rep -r+ -d ,,, of r4 sous. KING COUNTY AREA, WASHINGT{ E3v„ndor Y.-.ativr-.o! Srb1r.....:. _._..... terra Po. Dred c:ry 'moll pv,k, r -me T o..ns hip li••r, no B as.nJa�t •tea„v e r V^•+ed S�o•rs m,nrr, Sr koa r, s>•..•rl,, o•,d Bo:ld-.ass Ibn: r, wo pPwer i c..y m:33�0.. Lor ortA a lo�d••v,L No:row+vl and •r +�< T obh sn�,.r le,r �+t•rs ter n,e rob le . Ho�yonr olco.,rrv1 sr, Any .rr r•.eroblr r•s Vcr>4of rt*+u of srori Qrhe+ ret a+red le r C 1�trLrd spar rlr-ot:• lJar hr[ ked s Pot r te••r • Tt 1BLE 3 �', -E39QTT1lf� LK`iCFr 3LI3YEE _ CS ��3 LYPES D KCR S C}I?1xT3'PES ; SCS Soil Type SCSKCRTS Hydrologic Soil Group Soil Group Notes. Alder -wood (AgB, AgG, AgD) C Till Arenas, Alder,vood Material (AmB, AmG) G Till Arenis, Everett Material (An) B Outwash 1 Beausile (BeG, DeD, BeF) C Till 2 Bellingham (Bh) D Till 3 B6scol (lar) D Till 3 Buckley (Bu) D Till 4 Earlrnont (Ea) D Till 3 Edgewick (Ed) C Till 3 Everett (EvB, EvC, EvD, EwC) AIB Outwash 1 Indianola (InC, InA, InD) A Outwash i Kitsap (KpB, KpC, KpD) G Till Klaus (KsC) C Outwash 1 Neillon (NeC) A Oulwash 1 Newberg (Ng) B Till 3 Nooksack (Nk) C Till 3 Norma (No) D Till 3 Occas (Or) - �T D Welland Oridia (OS) U 3 Oval[ (O-rG, OvD, OvF) C , -Till Till -- 1 T - Pilchuck (Pc) C Till 3 Puget (Pfi) _ _— D t lit 3 Puyallup (Py) -- B Till 3 Ragnar (Ra G, Ra D, RaC, RaE) B OL1i1Va517 Renton (Re)D Titl 3 Sala! (Sa) --- � C Till 3 Sammarmsh (Sh) fill 3 Seattle (Sk) --_D D Wetland Shalcar (Srn) D Till 3 Si (5n) -- C Till 3 Snohomish (So, Sr) D Till 3 Sultan (Su) G Till 3 Tukwila (Tu) D Till 3 Woodinville (Wo) I D Till 3 !Votes: 1. Where outwash soils are saturated or underlain a1 shallow depfh (<5 feet) by glacial till, they should be treated as till soils - 2. -These are bedrock soils, but calibration of HSPF by King County DNR shows bedrock soils to have similar hydrologic response to till soils. 3. These are alluvial soils, some of which are underlain by glacial till or have a seasonally high water table. In the absence of detailed study, these soils should be treated as till soils. 4. Buckley soils are formed on the low -permeability Osceola mudflow- Hydrologic response is assumed to be similar to that of till soils. 1999 Surface W31cr vcsiLn Manual 911/99 3-25 1'SIN i 1 ' z ' X17YT- 1 rZ�U�� •�,-b '� f - 'Nh3h�E.�'\= �y�k: � �t='� i � I `� =� � -�'�! � {� _i � ` SITE' i lc- t;iY itti �NJI`,_ 7 0 777 R s •.� moi_. A- i _ iri excE bt ,n„te qtr. ar. y L�.F*amfS ton a+e Cd .uen lne flnd Wetl�rnds lends In 'fon' The ds designated -''a rare ie bya �peYl Water d "b -2j t3� yes ''” are T.an-.-3;i n ;i!d!Ite Se, ;ire Basin Boundaries r sJlei rr� but the+r lcc2 tie! +ied. 1. =�- s in nurnCe•inc se. 5ubbasin 6cvndaries 45y��11 F - l•'�1. '�E y'�.. � - \ art `a` �" J. RV `� -' 1 "� al is ^, . � ,� w ��\~•��- �%� - , C-- 44 SITEf! ll I �- ����•a,. �-� �?� �'_- � -- J- � ' Imo- � -�. -1 » ..$: ..{ I'• •i "~ ]4� - r- Ir% .aE,{ \ S -t. �sl7 6 �� 1 1 1 j •�:- rl� Y t F. -- . cis 1 Qs,-uamish Q ?e flood Plains fkiP_nd bP- r�c`III].s and ,- -�--, C1mu 2(w� salmonid-s)'NR Oh Indj.'S. F7 �P5 do not alw2y5 show IMP ' lP head v:aters of screams. Class 2 ke"DiaE; salmonid �� ?'^—` Iz Year �E'loo p ns s� ��,ljuse undeterminecijBar dpialt�s ��—Unclas' Erosion Hazard Areas Duxamish � 731 jC•3' ,8 14 � `_ 't 4 17-7 Landslide Areas hazard •ndp5 t ris e;sr.r}c are haaard as. s' Seismic Hazard al ed5 a r E 5L, 5C a pt ible luaRP. Oth Er s?i5rni[ Aeas r,n tris mau are la< re setlirncnl�; li: tion. - M • DRAINAG King ( MONCOM Major Bas Sub -Basin Source: King Co r3e,colinaissanct! 3 2 3 4 5 6 7 El M --les a 30q),L,()O Figure .l KING COUNTY o-•rNaAl►M U►iIt-�/ PLANN11V I'llING King County 19$5 O 3 2 3 4 3 6 7 S Mites 1: 3oa,000 Do couM water and land Dosoums Diwi8inn - Stormwater sorvicoe soctlnm CAmp1814188BMh Printed : 7/18/2002 4:10;45 PM Type of Prebiem AditU rl Prd*m Amwnhinp Colt earllmelrts Thros FI3pe lqw 1993-0224 C PONDING 12217 148TH AV SE POSSIBLE SAO VIOLAA TIONIDITCH ENCRO 658.11 1995-0788 C DISCHARG 14328 SE 128TH ST COMPLAINT REQU NO INV@ THIS TIME 656,11 1995-0991 WOC DUMPING 12516 142ND AVE SE. APPARENT PROPERTY DISPUTE 656.11 1996-0880 WQC EROSION 14328 -SE 128TH ST 65611 1996-1401 C FE-DG --SE 128TH & 142ND A SE MAINTENANCE OF EXISTING CHANNNEL_ 656J1 1997-1625 WQA UMP'S 14413 SE 128TH ST 65617 • Page 1 of 1 0 No County Water and tend 098gurms olvislim - Swrmwwr Services S8cfian rJImRIaIRt SBBMh Printed: 7/2212002 2:14:22 PM I Odee Aftmh Tyne it Problem Address of Preblam G �� Tbrns PBUp 1975-0135 C FLDG 13921 SE 136TH PL SWAMP/SE 136TH PLIHIDEWAY HTS 656J2 1981-0197 C DRNG 13832 SE 131 ST ST BLKED 6g6J2 1982-0341 C FLDG 14005 SE 133RD ST 656J2 1982-0386 C DRNG 12608 138TH AVE SE & FLDG 656,12 1982-0491 C FLDG 14009 SE 128TH ST MAPLEWOOD HTS 656,12 1982-0525 C DVR 16935 116TH AVE SE @a SE 132ND/144TH AVE SE 656J2 1983-0353 C FLDG 13224 1447H AVE SE 656J2 1984-0221 C [)VR 140XX SE 132ND ST FLDG 656J2 1985-1010 C DRNG 14100 SE 132ND ST SEE 84-10051TO ROADS 656J2 1986-01D9. C DRNG 94011 SE 132ND ST SURFACE WATER 856J2 1985-0256 C 656J2 1986-0256 F 6b6J2 1986-0256 S1 COMMITTED DATE -IST QTR 1989. 656J2 1986-03A4 C DRNG 138TH AVE SE SYSTEM SILTED 656J2 i986 -03A4 E PROS CRTD. 656J2 1996-0739 C FLDG 13323 146TH AVE SE WATER FROM SCHOOL 656-12 1987-0255 C FLDG 14639 SE 132ND ST STANDING WATER 8 MUD 656_2 1087-0328 C DRNG 13323 146TH AVE SF CO DIVERTED DRNG ONTO PROPERTY 656J2 .'-0405 C FLDG 13025 138TH AVE SE SEE 87-0463 OVER STREE'C 656-12 ' 0445 G FLDG 13837 SE 128TH ST FILLING OF LOT 656J2 0445 ER FLDG 13837 SE 128TH ST SEE 86-D3A4 PENTON. 87-0707 656,12 1987-4463 X FLDG 13025 138TH AVE SE ON 138TH AVE SE 656J2 1988-0280 C DRNG 14106 SE 135TH ST STRORM DRAIN FAILURE 656J2 1989-0036 C DEBRIS 14DO3 SE 132ND ST OEBRI ON RD TO DET POND 656-12 1989-0113 C DRNG 13852 SE 128TH AVE DRAINAGE OF NEIGHBORS FILLIROAD CO 656J2 1989-0200 C SETTLING 13120 138TH AVE SE SINK HOLE IN YARD 656J2 1989-0461 S2 FLDGIDVR 14011 SE 132ND ST SEE:86-0256 YAHN PH I 656J2 1989-0472 X INQUIRY 14105 SE 133RD ST STATUS OF STUDY(YAHN STUDY) 656.12 1988-0636 X DRNG 14103 SE 132ND 5T YAHN STUDY COMPLAINTS 656JZ 1990-0209 C FLDG 14639 SE 132ND ST DITCH OVERFLOWISTORM EVENT 656.12 1990-0388 C DRNG 14105 SE 133RD ST FLOODING IN NBRHD 656J2 1990-0512 C DRNG 13600 138TH AVE SE CROSS PIPE ERODING RAVINE 656J2 1990-0556 C DRNG 13323 146TH AVE SE DITCH ENDS/DIVERTED WATER 656J2 1990-0556 ER DRNG 13323 146TH AVE SE XP€PE AND PONDIDITCH ENDS 656,12 1990-0804 X FLDG 14105 SE 133RD ST COMPLETION OF STUDY 656J2 1990-1511 X FLDG 14105 SE 133RD ST CAPACITY OF PLAT DRNG 656J2 1991-0081 SR DRNG 14105 S 133RD ST PUGET COLONY HOMES 656J2 Page 1 of 3 L J Gu*emf Tyda Nwlber CodaTbm fypa of pPr3�1l9Il1 Addrasa of PrIbkn Cur111F1e1ts Pam )1-0081 X DRNG 14105 S 133RD ST CCF4191-32/YAI IN STUDY/FLOODED YAR 656J2 SIR DRNG 1.4105 SE 133RD ST CCF#SWM0124 PUGET COLONY HOMES 656,12 031-0098 1-0098 X DRNG 14105 SE 133RD ST CCF#SWMQ124/DEVELOPEMEiTT 656,12 1991-0246 C DRNG 14013 SE 133RD ST PLUGGED 656J2 1991-0246 SR DRNG 14013 SE 133RD ST PLUGGED PUGET COLONY HOMES 656J2 1991-0315 C FLOG 14011 SE 132ND DIVERSIONlCULVFRT OVERFLOW 65612 1991-0619 NDA DRAINAGE 10403 147TH AVE SE STORM EVENT - D/W FLOODING 656J2 1991-0636 NDA FLDG 14105 SE 133RD ST CCF#491-32 NOT NDA PUGET COLONY H 656J2 1991-0636 X FLDG 14105 5E 133RD ST CCF#491-32/PLAT DRAINAGE 656J2 1991-0650 NDA DRNG 14105 SE 133RD ST CCF#591-2 NOT NDA PUGET COLONY HO 656,12 1991-0650 X DRNG 14105 SE 133RD ST CCF.#591-2 SAME OLD PROB 656J2 1991-0682 CL FLDG 14105 SE 133RD ST CCF# 591-2 DUE JULY 656J2 1991-0712 NDA DRNG 14103 SE 132ND ST CCF# SWM 0520 NOT NDA PUBET COLON 656J2 1091.0712 X DRNG 14103 SE 132ND ST CCF# SWM 0520 MANY COMP 656J2 1991-0715 C DRAINAGE 14105 SE 133RD 5T NEIGHBORHOOD FLOODING 656J2 1991-0715 SR DRAINAGE 14105 SE 133RD ST PUGET COLONY HOMES 656,!2 1991-0723 SR DRAINAGE 14105 SE 133RD ST CCF# 591-37 PUGET COLONY HOMES 656J2 1991-0723 X DRAINAGE 14105 SE 133RD ST CCF# 591-37 656-12 1991-0732 C DRAINAGE 14024 SE 133RD ST /LAMB (CLAIM) 656J2 1991-0732 SR DRAINAGE 14024 SE 133RD ST /LAMB (CLAIM) NOT NDAP 656,12 1991-0739 SR DRNGFID 14103 SE 132ND ST CCI=# SWM -0610 NOT NDAP 656J2 1-0777 NDA FLOODING 14103 SE 132ND ST CCF# 591-39 NOT NDA PUGET COLONY 656J2 X FLOODING 14103 SE 132ND ST CCF# 591-39 656,12 *G777 0812 C DRAINAGE 14639 SF 132ND ST 656J2 1991-0868 SR DRAINAGE 14010 SE 134TH ST CCF# SWM0279 NOT NDAP 656J2 1991-0866 X DRAINAGE 14010 SE 134TH ST CCF# SWM0279/PUGET COLONY 656J2 1991-08135 X FLOODING 13405 142NO AVE 5E CCF# SWM-0854/DRAINAGE= IMPROVEME 656,12 1991-0888 SR FLOODING 13800 SE 128TH ST CCF#SWM-0852-NOT NDA-PUGET COLON 656J2 1991-0888 X FLOODING 13800 SE 128TH ST CCF# SWM-0852WETLAND PROBLEMS 656-12 1991-0946 X DRAINAGE 14105 SE 133RD ST CCF#: 91-0822/GRANTING EASEMENTS 656J2 1991-1214 X DRAINAGE 14105 SE 133RD CCF# SWM 12171PROJECT SCHEDULE 656,12 1993-0179 C DIVERSON 137XX 144TH AVE SE PO5S CLEARING VIOLATION 636,12 1993-1064 C FLDG 14400 SE 136TH ST GROUND WATER !ANDER ROADWAY 656-12 1993-1085 E DRNG 14600 SE 132ND ST CHKSTATBYCMDT 656J2 19931085 ER DRNG 14600 SE 132ND ST 656J2 1997-0055 C FLDG 14105 SE 133RD ST PUGET COLONY HOME -S 656J2 1997-0055 NDA FLDG 14105 SE 133RD ST PUGET COLONY HOMES 656J2 1997-0055 R FLDG 14105 SE 133RD ST PUGET COLONY HOMES 656J2 1998-0360 C DRAINAGE 14454 SE 132ND ST APPEARS PRE GRADING ACTIVITY NO PE 656--J2 1998-0534 WQC WASHWAT 13224 144TH AVE SE APPARENT GREY WATER DISCHARGE 65612 0 Page 2 of 3 CompleUt TYi� Type of Problam Addross cif Prodom sommalts Mern�or Coda � �raa � 143-u-1.34 VV(. H VVQI 13114 1441" AV&- ... ,9.0609 C C©NS7RUC 14606 SE 136TH ST . tol-0625 C STND H2O 13741 14BTH P1. -0697 C DOM 13309 146TH AVE F • I i r I SE APPARENT GREY WATER DISCHARGE 656.12 CONCERNS RE NEW DEVELP CITY OF RE 656J2 SE SOGGY BACKYARD SOURCE OF WATER 656J2 656J2 Page3of3 "i 1RE OF COMPLAINT: SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT DIVISION r COMPLAINT INVESTIGATION REPORT 1 �>t-xl t I� ✓ice-�- i L ATJON: SEG (E TVUP 23 RGE T KROLL PG. COMPLAINANT:. 1� _ �L� �' 1�'� `-t� 'COUNCIL DIST. f Address f 3 3 �-5 �{ 1 � � f � Prd � � � Clly Stale Zlp P140NE No - HOME: 7j 1 J Gj i WO�rc r DETAILS OF COMPLAINT: C-4 v yr -t c1 Vw r�Le C11- e J, �) (I- a-_ -1 S k _ f ✓w. c cv a ., COMPLAINT RECEIVED BY:---- C Y:__ C L -S OF JHVE517GATION: l site 3-8-90 Pk & Sketch on reverse side: Yes ED' No 0 Photos: Yes ET � No I) _had been raining earlier in the day and there#was considerable run off at the time_ Topo-- aPhic maps for this area indicates run off should flour towards the Wofford property, and ditches direct the flow in this direction. Woff4 d has approx 30 loads of fill in the north east corner of his lot. The lot to the north has'a ponded area adjacent to the fill_ Part of that pond drains to the west and part over tops the drive to WOffords house and drains to the east into the newly cleared area (photo 4). 4 was told by Wofford that fill had been brought into the back portion of the cleared lot.and the owner ditched run off to the south (photo 5 & 6), diverting it from the original drainage direction, southeasterly. This im- pacts Wofford's 5 acre parcel to the south of the newly cleared area, and to other parcels in that area. Photo 1) Looks south on 146th from SE 132nd. 2) Shows fill at the northeast corner of W'fforts lot. 3) Shows culvert outlet on east side of 146th at cleared lot_ 4) Cleared lot. Area beyond gravel is saidito have been a 3'porid before fill with out- let in staled background. 5) Said to be diverted drainage flow. 6 Diverted flow into Wofford's acreage. 1CTION TAKEN: as ;ol !pant advised of action possible or taker: by: PhoneEl L.etiar o ;om dint Action Handled By �, Name OAT F: Personal Contact / Glased: t) /_ �� C � D OK'd: Daae Inl[}nls • JVT4 S� i 4D 0 1' 1v I i I I -i INS✓ N r KIND C.VUN IT ;3LIKFAC-t LVA, T EH MANAL3=MGrY 1 U) VI. U L U U p y NA. DRAINAGE �VESTIGTIONT REPO UL 1: IN'vEST►GATION REDUEST TYPF � F ived by Dale: .! 0}Cd by. File No.j W&d from, tpl+as-r pr;m Plainly 1D7 Ljn� nmpl. @-Y} NAME:%G� r�4ryi✓[72 _ PHONE -7 ADDRESS= f.O!`}�3� //r7'/ytf� ^ Crry Sate 7jp Location of proUem, H different: G� ���.✓d `.�%t f6�-CHARGE F ` Details of P>'oblam. f—;'C_W 13z'j. Z-0 7 7 DtheY agencies involved: (Give details) Reported ImDecrs_ 0 Progenies= ii 0711 e Access road Septic system Outbuildings, garage Yard/ land scabing other property Streak, lake, vet -land Comm en rs i Dates/I;eavency of occurrences: l - '_0rB60n1"1,rack;ng 1r7f0: _LL1/4 S_L�:_TA-7 Parcel No. 0$47/2 C. - -- I?pe ( CA P -o L vi P6-TCjr_si;* ) s2sin council Dist Dln Rei/Chg No: Crtij, Field inve5tir,2tion needed? PI21 game: Qlrr1C L- pt?r� �v f3' -G1'-'' Tf=-5 i • taker*. Assigned ro: Turned to on a T[AQS BROS NEW- 3Z DATE CLOSED, 540ck No lnillals: OK'd - Lot No: KROLL DRAINAGF, T Y L' STIGATIOl■ REPORT Page 1: INVESTIGATION REQUEST Type C- Date: _ -�. F�L� T�ECEIVD t3Y_ �� 2. 2 OK d bv: ILE N4- J" Received from: (Day) 4"�5 (Eve) NAME: PHaNE Z�c - cvlD�T 30 2° l'o - -t '1 c4( r� ADDRESS: ��h� C �� _ City_`l"�- State ZipR�'f L ocation of problem, if different: Reported Problem: CALL FIRST ❑ (Would Like To Be Nltscnt) Iya, , h l U4� l MW aifT ill i Sb�' S YJC�r r`� �tf � �.�71.�L . ` �.y c, . . ? Cn-b 11-clK p-T F V-� !,� h ccs CU• �fit�7o�� Gl �t UJI zrL. 'lai name: Lot No: '7 Block No - Other agencies involved_ No field investigation required 1 • 23 cx C, -,-p o s (initials) T© BE COPIPLET.EU BY cor9PLA3NT PRoCRAM s-rAFF V S T R Parcel No. tai 4`k lc� --Qs� �� Kroll 2,10 t= - h.Bros: New ` '�.• Old 35D� Basin=- Council District (P Charge No. RFSPONSE: Citizen notified ori by: L!,:` phone letter in' person D D� S - G7r' ujo1-k) Foss= Lje , r&C DISPOSITION. Turned to on ! / by OR: No further action recommended because: / Lead agency has been notified: Problem has been corrected. No problem has been identified_ Prior investigation addresses problem - SEE F11'r roblem:SEE1'11'r of Private problem - NDAP A�11 not consider because: Water originates onsite and/or on neighboring parcel. Location is outside WLRD Serv' ea Other (Specify): WE CLOSED: ��71 �� By: .� • • 1 1 I i l I Complaint 98-0360 Meyer Irvestigatod by Robert Manns on 5-27-99 F I found -bat a large area had been cleared, approxirnal�ly 1/2 acre. An existing depression with water is located at the south sidt of Tax parcel 08471 -0045, next to Meyer's property. Some dirt and debris has been pushrd into the water front the grladmg work being done on parcel --0045.1 checked Sierra and found no peannits for the gradieg svork Clarence Weyer is the property owner of this parcel. His house is on the adjoining parcel; house # 14602, ltiieyer's property is not impacted by the worm beca�ise of the higher elevation above the grading. Graded area I a, cone_ Lines 12" cont. McYcr 14454 12" cont. SE. 132nd ST_ Tax Lot � QS4110-0045 Barn Weyer 14602 12" cone. 146th AVE. SE- NTS I 1�JAINAGE VgVESJ 1C;AT1UN JKEFU RT Pagel: INVE-S A -110N REQUEST Type P?0BLEM; F-CEIVED BY: Date. g - s� OK'd by- F11 -E No. .,eceived from: (Day). PAME, AI]DRE55: ry zip Location of problem, if di$ererit: Reported Problem: CALL FIRST F� (Would Lice To Be Present) te0-'V &-7 ,'7 /` 1.1�'�!�' `✓ �" �- / � l �1-C� �4 QD �� / oo . F lame: � o G0 Pfl-L �r �Q! a,14 Lot Nc)- f� Block No: agencies involVed. r No field investigation required (initials) TO BE COMYLETEP ;BY COMPLAINT PROGRAM STAFF 12 S T R Parcel No. _og ` a Kroll Th"Bros: New 654,' C� Old J5-0 Basin G 'Council Ch District arge No. RFspoNsE. Citizen notified on by: phone letter in'peTson DISPOSITION: Tumed to on 1 I by OR: No further action: recommended because - Lead agency has been notified: Problem has bern.correcicd. No preblem has been identified. Priof investigation addresses problem: Private problem - NDAP wit] not consider because, - Water originates onsite andlor on neighboring parcel. Location is outside WL.RD Service Area. Other (Specify): ?CLOSED: l " / By: Utl.. C7. CesvJ� lYJ • CJ✓1-11 f n�. av�ftt� •• • ••.•�• KING C0UNTrVVXfZR AND LAND REs©uRcEs Dmsim DRAINAGE DwESTIGAT im REPORT INVESTIGATION REQUEST PROBLF- mbm&�2,* - &CEIVED BY: Tute- 1 L P/17 C)Krri by J Fsr.� Nr Received from:' NAME; h, A r4nnnnn. I iri+ , LOCATION OF PROBLEM Il' DIPPERENT: Type U _ cor74A ' (Day) ' (Eve) PHONi J-113 K- c' ':..state _ 7-i ',9 . ..5,1. , Access Permission Granted ❑ Gatt' }rsl [Would Like To Be Present) 4"(_ TI &"_� %t1��In +moi, .. J • PIat name: Other aizertcies involved: Lot No: No field i LE --4:5- _a3 -5— 1/a S T R Parcel No. (Dq,U=IT��.,r7 Kroll?/0 Th Bros: New Basin LC,,)2- Council District,, ![ Charge No. Block No. - AMPONSB_ Citizen notified/own by: phone /letter in person 1,5 C 05•5 =0" .W % AJ DISPOSMON: Turned to on ! I by OR No further action recommended because: Lead agency has been notified: Problem has been corrected. No problem has been identified. �_ Prior investigation addresses problem: SEE FILE # Private problem - NDAP will not consider because: 10 Water originates onsite and/or on neighboring parcel. Location is outside WLPD Selvice,4Area. Other (Specify): DATE CLOSED: , �Y 3 / ! _ By. LIt4. C7 . CY U -D L U • U -W IFI r"- "L -nu Complaint No 00-0763 Nae Investigated By: Virgil Pacwnpnra Data; D23TAILS OF INVESTIGATION I went to the residence of Mrs. Lola Archer on 1 W9100 at 3:00 PK Sbe was not home at time of the visit. -I was able to spoke with Mr. Rene Treadwell (neighbor of Mrs. Archer) who lives at # 14005 SE 133'd St. He is also concern on the damaged gate and people enterin&sing the easement as a traiVaccess which is located at tha backtrear side of his property. 144r. Treadwell showed me the damaged !torn down gate. He informed me that the King county has installed the fence gate and showed the also drainage catch basin aloy the undeveloped trail. Investigation shows that the gate is located at the south end of the culdesac of SE 132' St_ The gate is made of aluminum griW round bar and attached to a wooden post (4"by f by 6 feet). The gate is at the comer of 1400' Ave. SE and SE 132'' Ave, St_ ne fence gate is detached from the #boden post and beat Inquiry reveals that the access road Is not included in the list of KC maimained mad. It is a dirt road and undeveloped and no sweet vehicular access. r TO R1D POND Trail Crrav l ■ ■ r T .+.r I PIT s F 7�- '� 9 Archer 44 #14004 ZTreadwell X14005 18 31 32 33 0 1 A al Road N Damage Feace Gate DNTS SM 0�� SE. 134TH ST. KING COUNTY WATER AND LAtm RES0VRCES D>MSTON• DRAINAGE INVESTIGATION REPORT IrrvaRnvrrREQUEST LIvD BY: Date: f/ /(I�OK'd bv: FILn P Received from: PHONEt A-ciiOK� A / City State_ Type C/ (Eve) f Zip YZ4�v LOCATION O1: PROBLEM, IF DIFFERENT: Access Permission Granted Call First (Would Like To BeYresent) ! y r of t *. _ FILE COPY PIat name: k�� 3� �} J� �j ff Lot No: .Block No: Other a encies involved: - r) `' � � ,LS No field >.nvcsttgatzss required !4 S T R Parcel No. O B 4 '1 11>0 077 _ -Kroll . Th.Bros: New -� RDP Basin Council District 1Z_ Charge No_ RESPONSE: Citizerrot on by: phone letter in person DisposiTION: Turned to on ! / by OR: No further action recommended because: Lead ageney leas been notified: Problem has been corrected_ No problem has been identified. Prior investigation addresses problem: SEE FILE # -*Private problem - NDAP will not consider because; Water originates onsite and/or on neighboring parcel. Other(Specify): naTF f'I.OSED: 1 I By: INSTIGA'T'ION REPORT . fff MESMAnON P QuEsr Type C c— PRJPLE/ from: 4/Je'E7 •'76e�or7' �iAt+s�: _ ��C.�.y.� f.•�Y ��(Dar) (true) i'� PHONE 6. _— ?_ o ADDRESS: / R•fSC' f33,<V _ City i�c�•t/To�i State I1 Zips LOCAMN OF PROBLEM, IF DIFFERENT: Access Permission -Granted El Call First (Would Like To De Present) .SGS J�����D C G.�r� ;�" ,�� �•o� .Ce<G-�T�O • paleZ..C.6" Other a envies involved; /4 S T R RDF C-� AUPOME: FIL Utorr Lot No: No BIock No. 3don r uired Basin Council District „��, Charge No. _ Citizen notified on by: phone Ietxer in person DISPOS17Tom Turned to on /.: ;;' s:w _,•-t;a *:, i : , ---_ by OF. No further action recommended because• �: - ••. -e been yffie& ,= f' '1. Problem has been corrmtod... No problem has been identified. TfJ:Y +SiM•J[+ _._. Prior imrestigation'addre�s"s problem: Private problem AP r : - ND will not consider because: SEE FELE # star 4ri&ates onsite and/or , r�;: on neighboringparcei. ' • %. - n a:. .r .: f �'4•.: . - -!' :7"y !C'i~�C K 1.L.01711: ';.:'••-":4.i''4F a 'r.ir �' 'i`::'� �� •t_- is -k ti•rj,.':,T _` •:r-�ti,%.'iV.!_ .; <Tf,+ +';iR' .fi'. :F� ir'.� .'i.4 .:n. •Ifs' ;.L�,'.• -�.`- 1'i• J ����•1 r�J" C • 0 Drainage Problems Start Date problem strladdr 10/23/2003 5511 NE 2nd St Category minor cross street Lyons Ave NE Description from Mr. Brad Pugsley at 5511 NE 2nd Street: The corner lot SE of the intersection with Lyons Ave NE. Reportedly The open ditches to the South of the intersection have capacity problems_ The property at 5511 NE 2nd St. has experienced flooding- He was not paying storm water bill because of ditch flooding Investigation Status active First game Last Name Brad Pugsley City Renton Friday, January 16, 2004 House number Address Street 5511 NE 2nd St Page 1 of I y �j CL A U a z z W 3N a S Qrg � � � 3d'NOUKLVM'I113VHCM-BDrNYL6 133rOad N014N1149VM `A1Nnoo umix seaguanN 6J� j X}Unoc taa ❑OO , WOO was aaiOwrooa '�4a4c4van sawiuOa� s�►ru9�v � T� V N N 3I � @@ I r i 910Ml1Z07 �a4�unN ��a o�d . $ ear S[143MRIa?77 d a3a�3a Ha u/ L an'w49LL14a44 I SNV7d 1N3W3AOHdW1 AVMUVOII r� �� � p Za.7 aagLUnN XPNI�:)V X) As SNOMMv"H- 3Lv0 111N CL A U a z z W 3N a S Qrg � � � � a taa ❑OO , WOO MONO CL 4 l arra r . $ agsn{y ❑ JaweO O CL MSpO a PODA Ill I I Q) N as g , o= Z C w 0]�LL- liil [' f I E I CL A U a z z W 3N N1 .. was 3rm�4r H18iL�...� z� m � q g $ `9 1d gilyDam 1AIW mea WN ='j �R W � a taa ❑OO , WOO MONO dffi��kl s�♦ r� 4 l arra r muu� agsn{y ❑ JaweO O JC46A a PODA Ill I I Q) N as g , o= Z C w 0]�LL- liil [' f I E I II! 5 `m QI,J C U O CL a c O ; o N1 .. was 3rm�4r H18iL�...� z� m � q g $ `9 1d gilyDam 1AIW mea WN ='j �R P 3 4 0 okcRt `•N a77 UW P M� a taa ❑OO , WOO P 3 4 0 okcRt `•N a77 UW P M� a MONO dffi��kl s�♦ r� 4 l arra r muu� agsn{y ❑ JaweO O JC46A 'M49MU*0 PODA P 3 4 0 okcRt `•N a77 UW P M� MONO dffi��kl s�♦ r� 4 l arra r lit >? Wine'! Ill I I g El ;e®.■® Ilj000 liil [' f I E I II! IYOLiJNIHSOrM :11x/109 J1V1Jl E utw�k 9tOM&CO7 WOMM NO/AVO17ddV 11N83d VNN31S k1,11313 1 UP °• 1NV7d LN3W3AOUdNl F � ¢W AYMOVOH ONV 3'J° VN/VVO MYO1S una roK y��zg 111 A NO I Q 6 It �§Rg" N§1 -a a z Q: c uj x o�x H ° , WNx SN I II } ISS 4 , 132ND 4 17, Lt II%, 2 KNO cacavn x K � 14 :....11 v d r J uj Z NSI I'Irk'I xHV EI ! Wh� arm LdLU El ��� �,� i�r •� SII � ww W �a sK Fp. V :7 Iix a 61 W i 44W R- 0 a t2 w , r 4 , 4 I 1 4 4 CS N IY3h LiiEf(S Bl'1et16 9 ff•JNf I 4 zj I ii ' 4 x 1 IP I I I l l c i i. . 4 l � � SSSy 4 � 4 G s { i 1 I i i i i ~ a t� i i lIP 4 4 4 S • , s � . l t 4 i I � O r s , 1 4 1 . t s $ i 3 , 4 t2 w Y LU y NOIOMHSYM 'NOM38 d0 Alid w . � aNN31S m NV7d 30VNIY'NO nMO1S ON Y' OYO 23 � iiia-SS-ddd a ZWQ alrx rma ren — 0 .o.rwsrna �.. addr 31va 1,B Nrnsin3a � •nH wi=sltdw 17e0uaLSrn�VYd1 3 • �a=rr , � •rn m �oorr rolwu e t ovaaw an role mbar suwlef.um rm �r tMA mvLt '1 . urooln� um � � � p}�g� NOSY SIQ VY ��II rq 6i iiia-SS-ddd a ZWQ alrx rma ren — 0 .o.rwsrna �.. addr 31va 1,B Nrnsin3a � •nH wi=sltdw 17e0uaLSrn�VYd1 3 • �a=rr , � •rn m Ma L W N ieweu ween NOIDAUMSI/Ai IVOIN3N ,gyp Auo r rur�rne0 itd e®r mnx ay9/` � J w � m m eaoam Aye nr � pars �p®yy JD' 41��0 AIY IOY �lif W NV7d JVNIVNQ .HHOIS WV OVOd xe cm rox ee ear �e4 ' Gini ham Dna mu nom , �rsee anee fMs teu�o Yi[I,LYp 31YO 1 .la N06SIAM .0N 'ld1+e i4PJ 1O55I7A30.4�3 e^?G� Ll -IDOL 't0 +W NCUONIHSYM NO1N3M dO AllO -- VPVN31S I rrf aa• v.n� eaNv W�.LSIiS 33Nt+`A3/1N0J WtlQ1S 311S�,�Q TMJ' mwomunfeumoyrioarr 1641 nl-4O Jd-40YNIYJfG PV801S nae v�� Roue xmm VwK N X II II MA -Ma MMel U Id d S S v.w addr 3Aw l46 NOSSV3Lt f } MMOMWi i—SS—ddd l2M LT- f � I 1I T V !r • H V I 1 -1 � a Toi i N f .f10 1 • 6 L b ti 77F,W MI I t r I m r r � Ir � 1 i� n s V 1 W Id d .��.� w. v.w addr 3Aw l46 NOSSV3Lt f } MMOMWi i—SS—ddd l2M LT- f � I 1I T V !r • H V I 1 -1 O Toi Id d waw• .aa.: .7f7f If7VfL !'/i q .��.� w. v.w addr 3Aw l46 NOSSV3Lt f } MMOMWi i—SS—ddd l2M LT- weaPonlp+� udv�anaa H I 1 LZ ti .. ti. Z r r � Ir � 1 V it e ti waw• .aa.: .7f7f If7VfL !'/i q .��.� w. v.w addr 3Aw l46 NOSSV3Lt i—SS—ddd �.. weaPonlp+� udv�anaa u N01JNlNSVM N01N3N 30 ADD � w 133 dVW Asyin91M1 WVgb.LShc? LEI Narsrn siva s�vrrteounh+umw+l +rod-alcawhuav�a uAO➢C4� — SAot 7P£ 0 0 0 Shamrock —Technical Information Report • 4 FLOW CONTROL AND WATER QUALITY DESIGN The detention facilities were sized using King County's computer program KCRTS. The site will release water at the stream protection standard (KCRTS Level 2). The 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM) does not require the use of a factor of safety, yet one will be applied as a conservative measure. A combined detention/wet pond will be used for water quality treatment. The facility will be designed using sizing criteria from the 1998 KCSWDM. The King County Runoff Time Series (KCRTS) program was developed as a hydrologic modeling tool for western King County. The runoff files have been pre -simulated for a range of land cover conditions and soil types for different regions of King County using the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's HSPF10 model. The HSPF10 model was calibrated with regional parameters developed by the U.S. Geologic Survey and King County Basin Planning. The KCRTS program simulates the project hydrology through the scaling, summing, lagging, and level -pool routing of runoff files. The KCRTS program includes a 0 group of analytical tools to provide statistical data on the generated time series files. 11 'The KCRTS Level 2 standard requires the project to maintain the developed peak release rates at their pre -developed peak runoff rates for the 2 -year and 10 -year storm events_ In addition to matching peak runoff rates, durations to pre -developed durations for the range of predeveloped discharge rates from 50% of the 2 -year peak flow up to the full 50 -year peak flows will be matched. The KCRTS modeling is summarized in the following sections. The scale factor for the site is SeaTac 1.0 (See KCSWDM Figure 3.2.2.A Rainfall Regions and Regional Scale Factors, at the end of this Section)_ There will be two separate detention/water quality facilities. The detention facilities are designed per Section 5.3.1 — Detention Ponds, of the KCSWDM. The onsite conveyance systems will be tributary to the ponds. The proposed detention facilities will also contain basic water quality treatment with the use of a constructed wetland for the north facility and a basic wetpond for the south facility. The water quality is designed per Sections 6.4.1, 6.4.3 @5126/2004 Job #01-159 Page 4-1 • • • Shamrock — Technical Information Report and 6.4.4 — Wetponds Basic and Combined Detention and Wetpool Facilities and Stormwater wetlands. 4.1 North Pond The North Pond receives runoff from the portions of the site depicted on the Developed Drainage Basins Exhibit, located at the end of this section. This includes the out parcels located on the west side of 148`'' Avenue SE. In the developed state, there are two areas that are allocated to provide wetland recharge. These areas are labeled as Recharge NI and Recharge on the exhibit. Recharge NI includes the entire area of lots 80-81, 85-88 and 100-104. Recharge N2 includes lots 72-79 and will direct runoff to the wetlands to the west, with the exception of the driveways, which will drain toward 144`h Avenue SE, then to the detention pond via the conveyance system. In both cases roof and footing drains will collect runoff and convey it to a backyard dispersion trench. The runoff directed to the wetland areas will be used as wetland recharge. Predeveloped Basin The predeveloped condition has been modeled based on the existing conditions of the site. The onsite existing ground cover is Till Pasture. The portion of 148`� Avenue SE that will be improved has been modeled as impervious in the predeveloped condition. The land cover associated with the out parcels has been calculated based on zoning regulations for maximum impervious coverage. The existing ground cover characteristics and resulting flow is listed in the following table. Existing Impervious Pavement (148`x` Ave SE) 0.19 acres Existing Structures 0.23 acres Till Pasture 17.38 acres 05!2612004 Job #01-159 TRIAD Total 17.80 acres Page 4-2 • • • Shamrock — Technical Information Report The following is the KCRTS Output Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:exist.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 1.27 2 2/09/01 18:00 2.24 1 100.00 0.990 0.523 7 1/05/02 16:00 1.27 2 25.00 0.960 1.20 3 2/28/03 3:00.x' 3 _.-_�U 0.900 0.161 8 3/24/04 19:00 1"12 4 5.00 0.800 0.672 6 1/05/05 8:00 1"08 5 3.00 0.667 1-12 4 1 18/06 / 16:00 T Ec• E E o.a1" a; �.nS 'S ... . - _ '© 0.500 1.08 5 11/24/06 4:00 0.523 7 1"30 0.231 2.24 1 1/09/08 6:00 0.161 8 1.10 0.091 Computed Peaks 1.92 50.00 0.980 Allowable Release Rate QZ = 0.67 efs Q10 = 1.20 efs The North Central Wetland has been excluded from the calculations due to the drainage flowing to the north and offsite. The drainage combines with the large wetland located along the western property line. Discussions with King County staff and the enclosed drainage adjustment provide an agreement to combine the developed areas of the North (LID portion) into one detention pond. Recharge to the wetland is provided to prevent the depletion of the wetland. The area utilized as recharge has been modeled as bypass to the pond. Developed Basin LID methods have be incorporated in the developed condition of the area tributary to the north pond. The soils will be amended and plantings will be used to decrease compaction. In addition to the soil amendment, bioretention swales and open channel conveyance systems will attenuate the drainage to the pond. This will result in an absorption time similar to that of the predeveloped condition, which is Till Pasture. The ground cover conditions for the lots in the developed condition have been calculated based on an average lot size of 5,000 square feet. The maximum impervious coverage allowed is 55%, which is 2,750 square feet for the average lot. Since the roof drains will be routed through perforated pipe, the actual time of concentration will increase" As a result, the roofs have been modeled as 50% impervious and 50% lawn. The driveways were modeled O5/26/2004 Job #01-159 /_eRLAD Page 4-3 • • • Shamrock — Technical Information Report as impervious with an assumed size of 500 square feet. The following table shows the breakdown of ground cover associated with each lot. Impervious (Driveway) 500 square feet Impervious (Root) 1,125 square feet Till Grass (Root) 1,125 square feet Till Pasture 2,250 square feet Total 5,000 square feet This information has been used to calculate the ground cover for the entire developed basin, minus the bypass areas. The following table shows this breakdown. Impervious 5.71 acres Lots 2. 15 acres Roads and Sidewalks 2.73 acres Pond Surface 0.61 acres Existing Structures 0.13 acres Till Grass 1.44 acres Till Pasture 10.56 acres Total 17.71 acres llie to] lowing is the KC'RTS Qut ut Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:dev.tsf Project Location:5ea-Tac ---Annual Peak Flow Rates --- Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak (CFS) Frequency Analysis ------- 2.09 5 2/09/01 2:00 1.56 7 1/05/02 16:00 2.46 2 2/27/03 7:00 1.50 8 8/26/04 2:00 1.81 6 10/28/04 16:00 2.25 3 1/18/06 16:00 2.14 4 10/26/06 0:00 4.28 1 1/09/08 6:00 Computed Peaks 5 3.00 05/26/2004 Job #01-159 -----Flow Frequency Analysis ------- - - Peaks - - Rank Return Pro} (CFS) Period 4.28 1 100.00 0.990 2.46 2 25.00 0.960 f 0.900 2.14 4 5.00 0.800 2.09 5 3.00 0.667 20 0 .500 1.56 7 1.30 0.231 1.50 8 1.10 0.091 3.67 50.00 0.980 TRIAD Page 4-4 • • Shamrock - Technical Information Report Facility Output The resulting facility summary is shown below. Please refer to the end of this section for the complete KCRTS Output. The control structure detail is shown on the following page. 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 0 Elevation: Storage Volume: Riser Head: Riser Diameter: Number of orifices: Detention Pond 3.00 H:1V 160.00 ft 124.00 ft 19840. sq_ ft 28237. sq. ft 0.648 acres 3.50 ft 0.00 ft 80392. Cu. ft 1.846 ac -ft 3.50 ft 12.00 inches 2 Full Head Pipe Orifice # Height Diameter Discharge Diameter (ft) (in) (CFS) (in) 1 0.00 3.06 0.475 2 1.70 3.56 0.461 6.0 Top Notch Weir: Rectangular Length: 2.40 in Weir Height: 2.50 ft Outflow Rating Curve: None Hyd Inflow Outflow Peak Storage Target Calc Stage Elev (Cu -Ft) (Ac -Ft) 1 4.28 ******* 2.99 3.80 3.80 88291. 2.027 2 2.09 ******* 1.35 3.50 3.50 80359. 1.845 3 2.14 1.20 1.04 3.10 3.10 69950. 1.606 4 2.25 ******* 0.94 2.94 2.94 66002. 1.515 5 2.46 ******* 0.85 2.78 2.78 62117_ 1.426 6 1.34 0.67 0.60 2.16 2.16 46914. 1.077 7 1.56 ******* 0.33 1.65 1.65 34998. 0.803 8 1.50 ******* 0.24 0.90 0.90 18489. 0.424 Note that the post -developed peak runoff rates (0.60 cfs for the 2 -year and 1.04 cfs for the I0 -year) are less than the predeveloped runoff rates (0.67 for the 2 -year and 1.20 for the 10 - year). The proposed facility therefore also satisfies the KCRTS Level 1 peak flow requirements. The required detention volume for live storage is 80,392 cubic feet. The provided detention volume is 103,221 cubic feet, which includes a 28% factor of safety. 05/26/2004 Job #01-159 Page 4-5 • • Shamrock — Technical Information Report SECURE AU,IUSTABLF HOOK LOCK TO S IEP STANDARD STEPS OR LADDER SEE KCR.S DING 2-006 INLET 26,—)2" g' O 509 (AD ✓r RSF SLOPE) )2" iL 443_87 d" 511L AY GATE W/ CONTRGL RnJ FOR CLEANOUIIORAIN.. SEE KCRS DWC 2-026 80TTOM OF STRUCTURE FL. 9RI.00 ©5/2612004 Job #01-159 FP AVE, C4AIL 8c SGLID (,-,-,VER MARKFLJ DRAIPd 6VI LOCKING BOI fS SL -E NOTE 3 & KC17S LHAN1Ni • • Shamrock - Technical Information Report Due to limitations of running the KCRTS program with reduced runoff record files, information for the 50 -year duration curves is not available. Because of this, the upper limit of the target duration curve is based on the 25 -year existing design storm event. Based on discussions with King County personnel responsible for creating the KCRTS program, the difference in volume of a detention facility sized using the 25 -year duration curve versus a facility sized using the 50 -year duration curve is negligible. Through several iterations, both the detention facility size and flow restrictor configuration were adjusted until the required flow duration and peak outflow criteria were met for the facility. Duration Comparison Anaylsis Base File: exist.tsf New File: pond_tsf Cutoff Units: Discharge in CFS Cutoff 0.337 0.409 0.480 0.552 0.624 0.696 0.768 0.839 0.911 0.983 1.05 1.13 1.20 -----Fraction of. 'Time ----- Base New %Change 0.82E-02 0.70E-02 -15.4 0.59E--02 0.50E-02 -14.6 0.47E-02 0.46E-02 -2.8 0.35E-02 0.40E-02 15.9 0.27E-02 0.26E-02 -1.6 0.19E-02 0.20E-02 1.7 0.14E-02 0.14E-02 0.0 0.20E-02 0.85E-03 -16.1 0-73E-03 0.55E-03 -24.4 0.46E-03 0.38E-03 -17.9 0.26E-03 0.24E-03 -6.3 0.15E-03 0.18E-03 22.2 0.65E-04 0.13E-03 100.0 ---------Check of Probability Base 0.82E-02 0.337 0.59E-02 0.409 0.47E-02 0.480 0.35E-02 0.552 0.27E-02 0.624 0.19E-02 0.696 0.14E-02 0.768 0.10E-02 0.839 0.73E-03 0.911 0.46E-03 0.983 0.26E-03 1.05 0.15E-03 1.13 0.65E-04 1.20 Maximum positive excursion = 0.112 cfs ( 9.7%) occurring at 1.16 cfs on the Base Data:exist.tsf and at 1.27 cfs on the New Data:pond.tsf Maximum negative excursion = 0.052 cfs (-12.3%) occurring at 0.422 cfs on the Base Data:exist_tsf and at 0.370 cfs on the New Data:pond.tsf Tolerance ------- New %Change 0.327 -2.8 0.363 -11.3 0.451 -6.1 0.574 4.0 0.621 -0.5 0.697 0.2 0.768 0.0 0.813 -3.2 0.866 -4.9 0.945 -3.9 1.04 -1.3 1.19 5.3 1.31 9.2 Note: Since the proposed North Pond will discharge into the wetland located on the west portion of the property (to maintain a natural drainage path), the bottom of live storage (live/dead interface elevation) will be set at the 100 -year water surface elevation of the west wetland. This elevation is 445.00. Refer to Section 6.1 for complete wetland analysis. @5126!2004 Job #01-159 /TRIAD Page 4-7 Shamrock — Technical Information Report Water Quality Facilities Sizing Calculations North Pond 40 The stormwater runoff that is tributary to the North Pond will be treated by a stormwater wetland. A stormwater wetland is a shallow man-made pond that is designed to treat stormwater through the biological processes associated with emergent aquatic plants. It is designed to meet the Basic Water Quality goal of 80% TSS removal and the Resource Stream Protection goal of 50% total zinc removal. The design of the stormwater wetland occupies about the same surface area as a wetpond. In a stormwater wetland, the dominant treatment process is the pollutant removal mediated by aquatic vegetation and the microbiological community associated with that vegetation. Therefore, the primary concern regarding stormwater wetland is not water volume, but factors that affect plant vigor and biomass. The following steps are outlined in the 1998 KCSWDM (Section 6.4.3 — Stormwater Wetlands) for the design of the stormwater wetland. The areas utilized for wetland recharge are not tributary to the detention pond. However, these areas will be taken into account when sizing the stormwater wetland. 0 Steps 1 through 5: Determine the volume of a basic wetpond. The calculations for the wetpond volume are shown below. ©5!26!2004 Page 4-8 Job #01-159 4MAD • • • Shamrock — Technical Information Report Vb =f Vr where: f — Volume Factor (3.0 for "basic" wetponds) V, = Volume of runoff from mean annual storm (cf) Vr—(0.9AI+0.25 A(9+0,10Ay+0.01A,)xR where: A; = Area of impervious surface (sf) Ai& = Area of till soil covered with grass (sf) A,f — Area of till soil covered with forest (sf) A„ = Area of till soil covered with outwash (so R = Rainfall from mean annual storm, (feet) (0.041' for all facilities see Figure 6.4. ].A in the Appendix) Total Area = 17.71 acres A, = 5.71 acres (248,728 ft) A,� = 12.00 acres (522,720 ft) Vr = 14,536 cubic feet Vt, = 43,608 cubic feet Step 6: Calculate the surface area of the stormwater wetland. The surface area of the wetland shall be the same as the top area of a wetpond sized for the same site conditions. The minimum surface area is the required volume, Vb, divided by an average depth of feet. 43,608 _ 10,902 square feet 4 Required Surface Area = 10,902 sf Provided Surface Area = 20,100 sf Step 7: Determine the surface area of the first cell of the stormwater wetland. The first cell should contain the volume of runoff from the mean annual storm, V, = 14,536 cubic feet, assume depth of 4 feet. 14,536 = 3,634 square feet 4 ©512612004 Job #01-159 /TRIAD Page 4-9 C: Shamrock — Technical Information Report Step 8: Determine the surface area of the wetland cell. Subtract the surface area of the first cell (step 6) from the total required surface area required (step 7)_ 10,902 — 3,634 = 7,268 square feet. Required Surface Area = 7,268 sf Provided Surface Area = 12,100 sf Step 9: Determine water depth distribution in the second cell. Two options are provided for grading the bottom of the wetland cell. Option A, an evenly graded slope has been chosen. The maximum depth of the second cell is 2.5 feet. Step 10: Chose plants. Table 6.4. LA in the 1995 KCSWDM lists recommended plants for wetpond water depth zones. Please refer to the landscaping/wetland mitigation plan for plant selections. Please see the pond details included in the plan set for stormwater wetland cross sections. Emergency Overflow In the event the control structure fails, back-up overflow devices are in place to ensure the pond discharge direction is controlled. The primary back-up is an 18 -inch stand pipe structure. The secondary back-up is an overflow spillway. Each back-up measure is designed to convey the 100 -year, 24 hour storm event of 4.28 cfs. ®r 5/26/2004 Job #01-159 /TRLA'D s Page 4-10 • 0 Shamrock — Technical Information Report Overflow Structure The 18 -inch stand pipe structure is designed to convey the developed 100 -year, 24-hour peak flow in overflow conditions. The head above the top of the riser is 0.5 feet, providing weir flow conditions. The weir equation below shows that flow capacity for the riser exceeds that of the 100 -year flow. Please rcfer to Figure 5.3.4.H — Riser Inflow Curves at the end of this section. QWe;r = 9.739 D H312 where: D = diameter (feet) --) 1.5 feet (18 -inches) H = head above riser (feet) —> 0.5 feet QWeir = 9.739 (1.5') (0.5)312 QW6, = 5.16 cfs Qrequired = 4.28 cfs Qprovided — 5-16 cfs 05/26!2004 Page 4-11 Job #01-159 /TRIAD • • • Shamrock — Technical Information Report Overflow Spillway Calculation An emergency overflow spillway is provided in the event that the overflow structure becomes obstructed. The spillway is sized according to equation 5-3 of the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM) using the 100 -year developed flow and a height of water over the spillway to be 0.7 feet. Equation 5-3, King County Surface Water Design Manual: L = Q00 - 2.4H 3.21H3�z where: L= length of spillway (ft, minimum 6 feet) Q100 = developed 100 year, 24-hour storm event (cfs) 4 4.28 cfs H = head (ft) -> 0.7 feet L = 4.28 _ 2.4 x 0.7 = 0.60 — Actual length will be 15 feet 3.21 x 0.7"" (55/2612004 Job #01-159 Emergency Overflow Spillway Length = 15 feet Page 4-12 • • • Shamrock —Technical Information Report 4.2 South Pond The South Pond receives runoff from the portions of the site depicted on the Developed Drainage Basins Exhibit, located at the end of this section. An existing stormwater pond is located in the south east corner of the parcel located within the City of Renton. Upon review of available information, it appears that this pond was constructed to provide detention for the NE 4th Street improvements and areas located north and east of the pond. When Morgan Place was developed, drainage from NE 4th Street was directed to the Morgan Place pond located closer to the intersection of 148'' Avenue NE and NE 4th The existing areas shown on the Developed Drainage Basins Exhibit have been included in the modeling of the proposed pond. The backyards are modeled as grass and the portion of the parcel Iocated north of Morgan Place that is tributary to the site is modeled as pasture. Due to the South Pond's location residing in the City of Renton, a drainage adjustment was applied for and granted. See Section 2 for a copy of the adjustment. Predeveloped Basin The predeveloped basin has been modeled based on the existing conditions of the site. The resulting predeveloped flows will be the maximum discharge rate in the developed condition. The existing ground cover characteristics and resulting flow are listed below. The offsite parcel north of Morgan Place and west of 148t' Ave SE is included in the offsite calculations and is shown below as having a Till Pasture ground cover. Impervious (NE 5``' St, Morgan Place, 148``' Ave SE) 0.10 acres Till Pasture 14.09 acres Offsite 2.96 acres Remainder of site 11.03 acres Till Grass back half lots 40-46Mor an Place 0.56 acres 0512612004 Job #01-159 Total 14.75 acres /TRLAd) Page 4-13 40 • • Shamrock — Technical Information Report 1he following is the KCK"1 N output Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:pre.tsf Project Location:Sea-Tac ----Annual Peak Flow Rates --- Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak (CFS) 1.05 2 2/09/01 18:00 0.418 7 1/05/02 16:00 0.989 3 2/28/03 3:00 0.120 8 3/24/04 19:00 0.549 6 1/05/05 8:00 0.923 4 1/18/06 16:00 0.884 5 11/24/06 4:00 1.87 1 1/09/08 6:00 Computed Peaks ------Flow Frequency Analysis ------- - - Peaks - - Rank Return Prob (CFS) Period 1.87 1 100.00 0.990 1.05 2 25.00 0.960 P7,:00 0.900 0.923 4 5.00 0.800 0.884 5 3.00 0.667 0.500 0.418 7 .1.30 0.231 0.120 8 1.10 0.091 1.60 50.00 0.980 Allowable Release Rates Q2 = 0.549 efs Q10 = 0.989 efs The South Weiland has been excluded from the calculations due to the drainage flowing to the west and offsite_ Recharge to the wetland is provided to prevent the depletion of the wetland. Developed Basin The following has been used to determine the peak developed flows for the south basin. Impervious coverage has been calculated base on the maximum zoning, which is 55% impervious (non -LID assumptions). The 3.15 acre upstream parcel was assumed to remain undeveloped or will provide its own detention pond for future development. Impervious Lots Roads and Sidewalks (including Morgan Place) Pond Surface Till Pasture (upstream parcel) 6.26 acres 3.20 acres (roofs considered impervious) 2.66 acres 0.50 acres 3.15 acres Till Grass including back halilots 40-46, Mogan Place} 5.5 acres @5/26/2404 Job #01-159 Total 14.92 acres TRIAD Page 4-14 • • • Shamrock — Technical Information Report The following is the KCRTS Output Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:dev.tsf Project Location:Sea-Tac ---Annual Peak Flow Rates --- Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak (CFS) (CC'S) Period 2.18 5 2/09/01 2:00 1.67 8 1/05/02 16:00 2.62 2 2/27/03 7:00 1.68 7 8/26/04 2:00 2.04 6 10/28/04 16:00 2.32 4 1/18/06 16:00 2.43 3 10/26/06 0:00 4.51 1 1/09/08 6:00 Computed Peaks 50.00 -----Flow Frequency Analysis ------- - - Peaks - - Rank Return Prob (CC'S) Period 4.51 1 100.00 0.990 2.62 2 25.00 0.960 2 43 x 3lEi D .900 2.32 4 5.00 0.800 2.18 5 3-00 0.667 0-500 1.68 7 1.30 0.231 1.67 8 1.10 0.091 3.88 50.00 0.980 Wetland Recharge The roof and footing drain from lot 38 will be utilized as wetland recharge. Therefore it will not be accounted for as areas tributary to the south pond. It is assumed that this lot will have a maximum of 55% impervious (0.10 acres total). O5/26l2004 Job #01-159 /TRIAD Page 4-15 • Shamrock - Technical Information Report Facility Output The resulting facility summary is shown below. Please refer to the end of this Section for the complete KCRTS Output. The control structure detail is included on the Following page. (Retention/Detention Facility Type of Facility: Detention Pond Side Slope: 3.00 14:1V Pond Bottom Length: 280.00 ft Pond Bottom Width: 132.00 €t Pond Bottom Area: 36960, sq. ft Top Area at 1 ft_ FS: Effective Storage Depth: Stage 0 Elevation: Storage Volume: Riser Head: Riser Diameter: Number of orifices: 46053. sq. ft 1.057 acres 2.50 ft 0.00 ft 100313. cu. ft 2.303 ac -ft 2.50 ft 12.00 inches 3 Full Head Pipe Orifice # Height Diameter Discharge Diameter (ft) (in) (CFS) (in) 1 0.00 2.88 0.356 2 1.20 3.75 0.435 6.0 3 1.60 2.25 0.130 6.0 Top Notch Weir: Rectangular Length: 1.25 in Weir Height: 1.95 ft Outflow Rating Curve: None Hyd Inflow Outflow Peak Storage Target Calc Stage Elev (Cu -Ft) (Ac -Ft) 1 4.51 ******* 2.45 2.77 2.77 111992. 2.571 2 2.16 ******* 1.07 2.52 2.52 101133. 2.322 3 2.43 0.99 0.84 2.18 2.18 86784. 1.992 4 2.32 ******* 0.74 1.99 1.99 76435. 1.801 5 2.62 ******* 0.71 1.91 1.91 75261. 1.728 6 2.04 0.55 0.49 1.52 1.52 58987_ 1.354 7 1,67 ******* 0.26 1.25 1.25 48236. 1.107 8 1.68 ******* 0.20 0.78 0.78 29764_ 0.683 Note that the post -developed peak rates of runoff (0.49 efs for the 2 -year and 0.84 cfs for the 10 -year) are less than the predeveloped peak rates of runoff (0.55 cfs for the 2 -year and 0.99 cfs for the 10 -year). The proposed facility therefore also satisfies the KCRTS Level 1 peak flow requirements. 05/26/2004 Job #01-159 TRIAD Page 4-16 lJ C7 Shamrock — Technical Information Report Due to limitations of running the KCRTS program with reduced runoff record files, information for the 50 -year duration curves is not available. Because of this, the upper limit of the target duration curve is based on the 25 -year existing design storm event. Based on discussions with King County personnel responsible for creating the KCRTS program, the difference in volume of a detention facility sized using the 25 -year duration curve versus a facility sized using the 50 -year duration curve is negligible. The following is a detail of the proposed control structure. TOA 0£ GRA TL- EL. F£L. 4-3.9 5O CV£RFL OW rRAhit/ GRATE CIPCUMI 11x1 NCI I r NCTN- 4 0' \_ BOTTOM O]- CRATE EL 438.5 1hPx / 1 / / STANGARD STEPS OR.�� I AIXDIN_ SEE KCRS DWG. 2 006 rNIFT 19'-r2" P o ox 2" ;F 435 00 S" S.4FAR (,ATF W/ CONTROL Rao FOR CLEANOUT/vfi'A.rN SFE KCF, 5 OWG. --026 L'OTTOM OF STRUCTURE EL. 432.00 fRAME, GRATE & SOLID COVER MARKED 17PAIN WITH LOCKING BOL TS SEf NOTE 3 & KCR.S DRAWINGS 2-022 AND 2- 023 R!M EL. 440.75 (MIN,) 6 - - 7. j 12 ORrFICE #1, 2 7/8"z � EL 434 OC • N TOP OF 12 RISER EL. 438.5 BOLTOM O!T-2S" NOTC1-r EL 457. -'?5 .... GRfRC'F P, 2-1/4-0 EL. 4 i7 6O 6'" 1-i.P.OW OW111CC (2,_,3-,7/4 Fi. 437.20 6" EL80N OUTLET 26'-72" ® 1-DO9� 4,3600 3"'a090 GAG£ SUPPORT BRACKET ANCHO;?WG STANDPIPF LO CAICN BASIN WALL 4 OB S-2 FL O W RES TRIO TOR_ NOT TO SCALE Through several iterations, both the detention facility size and flow restrictor configuration were adjusted until the required flow duration and peak outflow criteria were met for the facility. ©512612004 Job #01-159 TRJAD Page 4-17 Ol • Shamrock -Technical Information Report Duration Comparison Anaylsis Base File: pre.tsf New File: spond.tsf Cutoff Units: Discharge in CFS Cutoff 0.274 0.334 0.394 0.454 0.514 0.574 0.634 0.694 0.754 0.814 0.874 0.934 0.994 1.05 Fraction of Time ----- Base New %Change 0.87E-02 0.83E-02 -4.3 0.62E-02 0.54E-02 -11.9 0.48E-02 0.43E-02 -11.5 0.36E-02 0.38E-02 5.5 0.27E-02 0.27E-02 -1.8 0.20E-02 0.22E-02 6.5 0.15E-02 0.19E-02 26.7 0.11E-02 0.11E-02 7.7 0.77E-03 0.68E-03 -10.6 0.47E-03 0.42E-03 -10.3 0.26E-03 0.23E-03 -12.5 0.16E-03 0.16E-03 0.0 0.65E-04 0.65E-04 0.0 0.16E-04 0.16E-04 0.0 ---------Check of Probability Base 0.87E-02 0.274 0.62E-02 0.334 0.48E-02 0.394 0.36E-02 0.454 i 0.27E-02 0.514 0.20E-02 0.574 0.15E-02 0.634 0.11E-02 0.694 0.77E-03 0.754 0.47E-03 0.814 0.26E-03 0.874 0.16E-03 0.934 0.65E-04 0.994 0.16E-04 1.05 Maximum positive excursion = 0.047 cfs ( 7.9%) occurring at 0.596 cfs on the Base Data:pre.tsf and at 0.643 cfs on the New Data:spond.tsf Maximum negative excursion = 0.040 cfs (-10.3%) occurring at 0.386 cfs on the Base Data:pre_tsf and at 0.347 cfs on the New Data:spond.tsf Tolerance - New %Change 0.268 -2.3 0.313 -6.1 0.355 -9.8 0.474 4.4 0.512 -0.3 0.596 3.9 0.668 5.4 0.705 1.6 0.743 -1.5 0.803 -1.4 0.870 -0.4 0.949 1.6 1.00 0.8 1.07 1.6 In addition to the pond providing detention for the areas tributary to it, an extra 3,000 cubic feet has been added to the live storage volume to account for the existing detention pond_ Since the areas north of NE 4`h Street and likely tributary to the existing pond have been included in the proposed pond modeling, this may be viewed as an additional factor of safety. Therefore the total required detention volume is as follows: Detention required for areas conveyed to pond 100,313 fe Detention required compensating for existing pond 3,000 ft' Total Detention Required 103,313 ft3 The actual detention volume provided is 116,040 cubic feet. This includes a 12 percent factor of safety. 05126/2004 Job #01-159 /TRLAD Page 4-18 • • • Shamrock — Technical Information Report Water Quality Facilities Sizing Calculations (South Pond) The proposed water quality facilities were designed to comply with the KCSWDM's Basic Water Quality Menu requirements. This menu provides several options for water quality facilities, which are designed to remove 80% total suspended solids for flows or volumes up to and including the WQ design flow or volume. The combined detention and wetpool facilities option was selected for the project's facility, and was designed per sections 1.2.8, 6.4.1, and 6.4.4 of the 1998 KCSWDM, as applicable to the combination detention and wetpond facility. A summary of the water quality facility sizing calculations is provided below. Section 6.4.1.1 of the KCSWDM specifies that the following equation be used when sizing wetpond facilities. The areas utilized as wetland recharge are not tributary to the detention pond. However, these areas will be taken into account when calculating the required water quality volume. Vt, =f Vr where: f = Volume Factor (3.0 for "basic" wetponds) Vr = Volume of runoff from mean annual storm (ft) V,.—(0.9Ai+M5A,9+0.10A,f+O.OIA,)xR where: At = Area of impervious surface (ft) Aig = Area of till soil covered with grass (ft) A�f = Area of till soil covered with forest (ft) R = Rainfall from mean annual storm, (feet) (0.041' for all facilities see Figure 6.4. LA in the Appendix) Total Area = 15.04 acres A, — 6.40 acres (278,784 ft2) A(F = 8.64 acres (376,358 ft2) ©512612004 Job #01-159 Vr = 14,145 cubic feet Vi, = 42,435 cubic feet Required Water Quality Volume = 42,145 cubic feet Provided Nater Quality Volume = 46,435 cubic feet TRIAD Page 4-19 F" -I L J • Shamrock —Technical Information Report Redundant Overflow Measures In the event the control structure fails, back-up overflow devices are in place to ensure the pond discharge direction is controlled. The primary back-up is a 18 -inch stand pipe structure. The secondary back-up is a birdcage overflow structure. Each back-up measure is designed to convey the 100 -year, 24 hour storm event of 4.55 cfs. Stand Pipe Overflow Structure The 18 -inch stand pipe structure is designed to convey the developed 100 -year, 24-hour peak flow in overflow conditions. The head above the top of the riser is 0.5 feet, providing weir flow conditions. The weir equation below shows that flow capacity for the riser exceeds that of the 100 -year flow. Please refer to .Figure 5.3.4_H — Riser Inflow Curves at the end of this section. Ql,eir 9.739 D H3`' where: D = diameter (feet) 4 1.5 feet (18-inclies) H = head above riser (feet) --> 0.5 feet Qweir = 9.739 (1.5') (0.5)3/2 Qweir — 5.16 cfs ©5126!2004 Job #01-159 Qrequired — 4.55 efs Qprovided = 5.16 cfs 4R'LAD Page 4-20 • Shamrock — Technical Information Report Birdcage Overflow Structure The 48 -inch overflow structure is designed to convey the developed 100 -year, 24-hour peak flow in overflow conditions. The head above the top of the riser is 0.7 feet, providing w=eir flow conditions. The weir equation below shows that flow capacity for the riser exceeds that of the 100 -year flow. Please refer to Figure 5.3.9.H- Riser Inflow Curves in the Appendix. Qwei, = 9.739 D H"' where: D = diameter (feet) -> 4 feet H = head above riser (feet) � 0.5 feet Qweir — 9.739 (4') (0.5)312 Qweir = 13.77 cfs Qrequired — 4.55 cfs Qp,,,Wd = 13.77 efs ©512612004 Page 4-21 Job #01-159 TRIAD 0 0 King County Department of Development and Environmental Services 900 Oakesdale Avenue SW Renton, WA 98055-1219 March 25, 2004 Sara Slatten CamWest, Inc. 9720 NE 120th Place Kirkland, WA 9804 Rebecca Cushman, P.E. Triad Associates 11814-115 1h Avenue NE Kirkland, WA 98034 RE: Shamrock Subdivision 1998 KCSWDM Adjustment and Shared Facility Plan Request (File No. L04V0003) Dear Applicant and Engineer: The Land Use Services Division, Engineering Review Section, has completed review of the adjustment and shared facility plan approval request for the Shamrock subdivision. You are requesting an adjustment from the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM), Core Requirement No. 1, Section 1.2.1, Discharge at the Natural Location for an on-site diversion, an adjustment from Section 3.3, Hydrologic Design Procedures and Considerations and Section 6.4, Wetpool Facility Design, concerning modification of hydrologic coefficients in acknowledgment for low -impact design (LID) enhancements and mitigations. You are also requesting approval for an adjustment from Core Requirement No. 3, Section l .2.3 to utilize an off-site storm water facility and formalize its shared use through Special Requirement No. 1, Section 1.3.1, Shared Facility Drainage Plans with the Shared Facility Plan Guidelines published in a memo dated September 15, 1999. Our review of the information and a site visit provides the following findings: The proposed Shamrock subdivision is located between approximately SE 120`x' and 125'h Streets on the west side of 1481h Avenue SE. The 118 lot, 29.8 acre, proposed Shamrock subdivision is filed under Land Use Services Division (LUSD) file number L02P0014. 2. The runoff from the northern edge of the site, tributary to both the northern part of Wetland B and the north -central wetland (Wetland C), flows north to the Honey Creek subbasin of the May Creek basin and is subject to Level One flow control. The remaining majority of the site is located in the Maplewood subbasin of the Lower Cedar River basin and is subject to Level Two flow control. The entire site is subject to the Basic water quality requirements of the 1998 KCSWDM. 3. The Shamrock subdivision is included as one of the three demonstration projects listed in King County Ordinance 14662, signed June 2, 2003, to promote low impact development techniques. Shamrock Subdivision/L04V0003 March 25, 2004 Page 2 of 5 4. Approximately two acres adjacent to the north property line are tributary to Wetland C and the northern portion of Wetland B which both drain north to Honey Creek. See Exhibit 1, Existing Conditions. The remainder of the site sheetflows in a west to southwest direction toward the southern portion of Wetland B and other hydraulically - connected wetland areas to the west and south of the site. A wetland hydrology report indicates that for significant storm events (greater than the 1.1 year storm event) Wetland B drains to both the north and south. It is assumed that the southern wetland complex eventually drains to its natural discharge location at the southern property line and crosses under 128th Avenue SE through a 42 -inch culvert and continues south. Flows from the Honey Creek and Maplewood subbasins do not recombine. 5. From the SE 124`h Street entrance road north, the Shamrock subdivision proposes 76, low -impact lots to be tributary to a reduced -volume North Pond shown at the southern end of Wetland B. Please see Exhibit 2, Developed Conditions. Although most of the rooftop and backyard lot areas surrounding Wetland C will be utilized for hydraulically maintaining Wetland C, the proposal is to collect most runoff from the remaining Honey Creek subbasin area to be developed and divert it to the North Pond located in the Maplewood subbasin. The North Pond will be a combined detention and water quality facility and is intended to be designed with a stormwater wetland. The allowed release would then outlet to the southern end of Wetland B. Because wetland areas south of Wetland B were filled, the wetland mitigation plan will require hand digging out the fill material so that Wetland B will reestablish direct hydraulic connectivity to the wetland complex to the south. 6. Site areas south of the SE 124`h Street entrance road will be directed to the South Pond. Sheetflow to the west will be intercepted by standard conveyance and diverted to the South Pond. Some nuisance Sheetflow will be reduced along the western site boundaries in the south half of the site. Frontage improvements are included in the conceptual drainage plan. Flows from the South Pond are released into the storm drainage system of SE 1281h Street. 7. No decorative ponds or shallow wells have been identified that would be affected by the proposed diversions. 8. The Level One Downstream Analysis identified no restrictions or problems associated with the proposed discharge location. 9. A consolidation of facilities for the proposed subdivision will be more economical in long term maintenance. 10. As previously mentioned, the northern 76 lots are being design to incorporate low impact best management practices (BMPs). The proposal includes all lot and common landscape areas to contain amended soils, that roof downspout perforated pipe lengths within the amended soil be 25-40 feet long and that nearly all pervious and impervious drainage will be directed to grass -lined and bioretention swales which will Shamrock Subdivision/L04V0003 March 25, 2004 Page 3 of 5 significantly increase the flow path length to the stormwater facility. In addition, a rain garden is proposed for additional pre -storage and treatment before runoff is directed to the North Pond. 11. The proposal is to allow the cumulative benefits of the low -impact designs to translate into reduced North Pond stormwater facility size based on modest reduction of key hydrologic parameters used in the KCRTS model. This precedence is already established in the 1998 KCSWDM through Core Requirement No. 3 which allows peak flow exemptions for flow control BMPs and in Section 5.2.2 for BMPs that can reduce facility size. Specifically, the applicant is asking that a) the roofs be modeled as 50% till grass and 50% impervious, b) the amended soil landscape areas be modeled as `pasture' instead of `grass', and c) the coefficient associated with the `area of till soil covered with grass' in equation 6-13 used for wetpool sizing be reduced from 0.25 to 0.20. The applicant cites studies where extended use of amended soils has significantly reduced post -development ninoff volumes. 12. South of the SE 124`h Street entrance, two ad hoc parcels compose the southern 42 lots of the King County Shamrock development proposal. Adjacent immediately to the south, is another 11 lot development within the City of Renton also referred to as Shamrock. Both the southern portion of the King County Shamrock development and the contiguous City of Renton Shamrock development are to be served by conventional conveyance and detention in a shared facility along SE 128`h Street referred to as the South Pond. This parcel is owned by the applicant and the proposed shared facility will be dedicated to the City of Renton. An existing pond along the eastern edge of where the South Pond will be constructed appears to be an abandoned pond which now passes existing flows from the City of Renton Shamrock site to SE 128"' Street. This pond will be expanded within the limits of the City of Renton Shamrock parcel to accommodate the southern portion of the King County and Renton Shamrock subdivisions. The City of Renton has adopted the 1998 KCSWDM for its storm water drainage standards, simplifying the design of the South Pond. 13. The applicant has submitted to the City of Renton a subdivision permit to develop the parcel and expand the current drainage facility. It is acknowledged that the City of Renton has review and approval jurisdiction over the South Pond drainage modifications. This shared facility plan approval by King County is to acknowledge the accommodation of a King County subdivision's runoff by a Renton stormwater facility and the design assumptions used for the facility's expansion. The assumed land cover for the design of the King County's portion of the pond is to be calculated based on maximum zoning impervious coverage. The developer of the King County Shamrock subdivision will expand the facility to its final configuration. Both the North and South Ponds would utilize the Level Two flow control and Basic water quality requirements of the 1998 KCSWDM since they both drain south to the Maplewood subbasin. Based on these findings, we hereby approve this adjustment to allow a) the diversion of runoff 40 to two facilities ultimately draining to SE 128`x' Avenue, b) modification of hydrologic Shamrock Subdivision/L44V0003 March 25, 2004 Page 4of5 modeling coefficients used in the wetpooi and KCRTS facility sizing methodology for the North Pond whose tributary area utilizes low impact BMPs, and c) use of an off-site, shared facility in the City of Renton with the following conditions: 1. The release rates for the North Pond detention facility will be based on the tributary area being directed to the facility including the area of diversion. The release rates for the South Pond detention facility will be based on the tributary area being directed to the facility and the area within the City of Renton that the city deems appropriate. 2. The volume for both detention facilities will be based on all flows directed to the facilities at full development under current zoning. The allowed release rates will be reduced by any undetained flows that would bypass the proposed subdivision drainage facilities as specified in the 1998 KCSWDM. The detention volumes shall be sized using the Level Two flow control standard in the 1998 KCSWDM. A 10 to 20 percent volumetric factor of safety must be applied to all storm events requiring detention. The design Technical information Report shall state the factor of safety selected and the basis of that determination. 3. Water quality facilities must be sized based on the entire proposed subdivision draining to the facilities including any required frontage improvements. 4. The North Pond drainage facility to be maintained by King County must be located in a public right-of-way, recreation space tract with easement or storm drainage tract dedicated to King County. The City of Renton will determine tract requirements for the South Pond. 5. Amended soils will be used throughout all non -impervious, developed area tributary to the North Pond. Gravel encased perforated pipes shall be a minimum of 25 feet long and be designed to meet Figure 5.1.3.A in the 1998 KCSWDM for all lots intending to use the 50% impervious/50% till grass credit. 6. All amended soil areas shall be located on private property and be privately maintained. 7. The attached "Guidelines & Resources" Manual 2002 shall be used as minimum standards for implementing amended soil depth and quality for the Low Impact Development portion of the King County Shamrock site. This manual was established to implement Washington State's Department of Ecology guidelines for soil quality to improve stormwater retention. 8. The accompanying "Field Guide" will be used to facilitate field inspection of the amended soil areas. 9. To document the impact of low impact development design; the North Pond's outflow stage/discharge shall be continuously monitored for three years starting at 75% buildout of that portion of the site. The data and interpreted results shall be presented • 0 Shamrock SubdivisionlL04VO003 March 25, 2004 Page 5 of 5 to King County WLRD Stormwater Services Section at the end of each full year of monitoring. 14. The developer of the South Pond facility is responsible for all costs associated with the implementation of the shared facility plan. Engineering plans for the King County Shamrock subdivision shall note this approved shared facility plan. 11. The South Pond shall be expanded/built to full facility size during development of the south portion of the Shamrock development. 12. Any proposed modification to the existing storm water facility adjacent to SE 128`h Street will require approval of a valid land use permit from the City of Renton. A note on the engineering plans shall state that on-site construction south of SE 124`h Street shall not commence without an approved land use permit from the City of Renton. 13. The South Pond facility shall be inspected and receive approval for operation by the City of Renton prior to recording of the King County Shamrock subdivision. 14. Additional storm drainage requirements identified by SEPA or the plat hearing will apply to this project. Any additional storm drainage requirements identified by the City of Renton will apply to the South Pond. If you have any further questions regarding this KCSWDM adjustment or the design requirements, please contact Mark Bergam at (246) 296-7270. Sincerely, James Sanders, P.E. Development Engineer Engineering Review Section Land Use Services Division Jim Chan, P.E. Supervising Engineer Site Engineering and Planning. Section Building Services Division cc: Curt Crawford, P.E., Managing Engineer, Stormwater Services Section, KCDNR Bruce Whittaker, Senior Engineer, Engineering Review Section, LUSD Kim Claussen, Project/Program Manager III, Current Planning Section, LUSD Mark Bergam, P.E., Senior Engineer, Engineering Review Section, LUSD • Surface Water Design Manual King County Requirements 1 Standards Department of Developmentrr and Environrenlai Services 4sdale Avenue Southwest Ad`ustment* Re uest Rentoneiiwn,l Washingson 9$055-1214 � q Project Name: DDES Project File No.: DDES Engineer/Planner Name; 0 0 _913-flrock L02FM 4 Project Address: Design Engineer: hone: 122R-, 1ARth Ave V102a)5917407 RebaCca CudTrEn 425-M —WV48 Applicant/Agent: Phone: Date: ca*bst Signaler . Dale: ngi eri r me: l04Triad Associat- Address: City, Stale, Zip ode: Address: City, State, Zip Code: 9720 i E 120th Place Ki_rklartd, WA 99034 11B14 -115th Ave i�F_ Kirkland, WA 90034 INSTRUCTIONS TO APPLICANTIDESIGN ENGINEER: Please be sure to include all plans (T.I.R., if available), sketches, photos and maps that may assist in complete review and consideration of this adjustment' request. Failure to provide all pertinent information may result in delayed processing or denial of your request. Please submit two complete coijes of this request_ application form, and applicable fee to the DDES Intake Counter, at 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest, Renton, Washington 913055-1219. For additional information, phone Randall Parsons, P.E., at (206) 296-720T REFER TO SECTION 1.4 IN CHAPTER 1 OF THE SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL FOR ADJUSTMENTS DESCRIPTION OF ADJUSTMENT REQUEST: W Standard ❑ Complex Fl Experimental ❑ Blanket ❑ Pre -application 1. PrDtjide an offsite -shared facility 2. Lard cover asst -options for low kpact develc:rrmt omditims APPLICABLE VERSION KCSWDM: 0 1990 (11/95)' EX 1998 (9198) ❑ ' (Note: the term "variance" replaced by "adjustment") APPLICABLE SECTION(S) OF STANDARDS: Core R3gArur mt #3' Special Requirmertt #11 JUSTIFICATION PER KCSWDM SECTION 1.4.2 A See attachments listed below - Preliminary Ted nicai Infanration Report Cover Letter Preelim—cry Plat ftp Law TFpact Daela mEnt Project Report AUTHORIZATION S#GNATURES: DETERMINA-nON: Q Approval Conditional Approval (see below) 11 Denial Q DNRIW LRD Approval Signed: Date: (yExppeerimental & Blanket variances only) DOES Staff Recommendation Signed: Dale: 15 0 See attached Memo Dated: 4 " 14-- DDES DDES, Land Use Services Div„ Engineering Review Supervisor, ODES, Bldg. Serv. Div., Site Engineering & Planning Supervisor. gned: Signed: ate: Dale: y nn n = ria F99'E,"SHDM-A.DJAh - i5: �HCM.'.-5. _0�;2 do 11"l, I p)L�IgmUE� (11 Lfl] yaw 2? 2ml�l K.G. D.D.E.S. L7 - C] • January 19, 2004 Mark Bergam King County DDES 900 dakesdale Ave MS 1B Renton, WA 98055-1219 RE: Shamrock KC Project# L02P0014 Triad Job No_ 01-159 Dear Mark: TRLAD ASSOCIATES 11814 115th Avenue NE Kirkland. WA 90034 692 3 425.821.8448 4258213481 fax a00 468 0756 tok free vvv,r y.triaoassocwrn This request is to approve the following adjustments to the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual. 1. Allow stormwater quantity and water quality treatment controls to be provided in an offsite facility (Adjustment to Core Requirement #3). And requesting permission to utilize the offsite facility as a shared facility within City of Renton jurisdiction (Special Requirement #1). 2. Allow modification to Land Cover assumptions used in modeling runoff for the Low Impact Development (L_I.D_) portion of the project. (Adjustment to Core Requirement #3). To assist in the review of the adjustment request, please see the enclosed project description, preliminary Technical Information Report, Preliminary Plat Map submittal and a Low Impact Development Demonstration Project Report. Project overview: The project proposes to create 118 single-family lots on an approximately 34.5 acre property. Approximately 30.5 acres will be developed, with the remainder left as protected wetlands and associated buffers. The site is north of 128th St. SE, west of 148th Avenue SE in King County, Washington_ The portion of the site between SE 124th Street and the northern boundary will incorporate Low Impact Development (L.I_D.) measures_ The portion of the site between SE 124th Street and the southern boundary will be designed assuming standard development methods. Land Development Consultants Page 2 Mark $ergam King County DDES January 19, 2004 0 Two dctentionlwater quality facilities are proposed; one located centrally onsite (referred to as the North Pond), the other located within the City of Renton Jurisdiction at the southenunost property line (referred to as the South Pond). The North Pond receives runoff from those portions of the site designated as L.I.D. only, where the South Pond serves the remainder of the project which has been designed following tradition standards. Both ponds have been designed to a Level 2 flow control standard with Basic Water Quality. Adjustment Discussion: The first item requested for adjustment is to provide an offsite facility. In addition to the request for an offsite facility, permission is being requested to utilize the offsite facility as a shared facility. Core Requirement 43 states that all proposed projects must provide onsite flow control facilities to mitigate the impacts of increased storm and surface water runoff generated by the addition of new impervious surface and any related land cover conversion. Special Requirement 41 states that shared facility drainage plans shall be approved by King County to allow two or more projects to share drainage facilities required by this manual. This request is for the "South Pond" only. The location of the pond is at the natural discharge point for the entire area proposed to be developed utilizing "standard development methods" within the site (non L.I.D. portion). The parcel containing the proposed offsite facility lies within City of Renton jurisdiction. The developer has applied to the City for a subdivision permit for this parcel to be developed concurrently with the King County parcel. In the event that engineering plan approval within the City of Renton is delayed, a grading permit or equivalent will be obtained to construct the pond and conveyance lines. The City of Renton has adopted the 1998 King County Surface Water Drainage Manual with the same Level 2 detention standard and basic Water Quality standard for the site_ The assumed land cover for the design of the pond has been calculated based on maximum zoning impervious coverage. An existing drainage pond is located at the south east comer of the south parcel. The area tributary to the existing pond has been accounted for in the new design. In addition to the designed volume, a conservative factor of safety has been applied. The flow control facility was analyzed and designed using KCRTS as approved by King County and the City of Renton. Water quality will be provided using a basic wetpond design. 0 Benefits to the public are as follows- Page 3 Mark Bergarn King County DDES January 19, 2004 • Maintenance costs for a single facility are lower than maintaining two facilities. • The existing detention pond in the south east corner will be incorporated into the design of the shared facility with upgraded detention standards. • In addition to savings in pond maintenance, the conveyance system maintenance will be streamlined since less pipe and appurtenances will be required, Also, a bypass system to a second pond is eliminated. The second item requested for adjustment is to utilize modified land cover assumptions for the Low Impact Development portion of the site. This request may be broken down into three subtopics. A. Effective impervious assumptions used in modeling roofs. B. Modeling of landscape as "pasture" in sizing detention volume (due to use of amended soil). C. utilization of a modified land cover runoff coefficient in the water quality volume calculation (V,). A. The average proposed lot size within the portion of the site is 5,000 square feet. The maximum impervious coverage allowed per zoning is 55%, providing 2,750 square feet of impervious area per lot_ Of this area, driveways and patios account for an estimated 500 square feet. Runoff from the remaining roof area (2,250 sf/lot) is proposed to be modeled using modified land cover assumptions. The 1998 KCSIWDM allows the use of "effective impervious area" in modeling existing rural residential development, or where dispersed flow paths exceed 50 feet in urban residential development. In addition, the manual cites use of projects utilizing roof downspout controls as a flow control BMPs. Standard subdivisions with this size lot typically include only a perforated stub averaging ten feet in length and are not able to utilize any flow control credit_ This project's roof drains have been designed with perforated pipe having lengths of 25 to 40 feet. The perforated pipe will be encased in an envelope of drain rock and amended soil, which will increase the soil/water contact area providing additional opportunity for infiltration. The majority of the perforated pipes will be directed to bioretention swales to increase the flow path significantly over traditional closed pipe conveyance systems prior to entering the detention facility_ The lots that do not have 40 their roof runoff directed to bioretention swales either discharge to a wetland providing Page 4 ; Mark Bergam King County DD.F.S January 19, 2004 recharge with dispersion facilities located at the end of the perforated pipe, or are provided with additional length of perforated pipe to connect to the grassed swales conveying street drainage. Given the increased opportunities for infiltration and lengthened flow travel times resulting with this proposal, modeling the roofs as 50% till grass/ 50% impervious is an appropriate cover assumption. Benefits to the community are as follows: • Increased soil/water contact time to mimic the natural function of the pre -developed watershed. • Increased areas of open space between back yards with a more naturalistic appearance. * Increased time of concentration for the storm water to reach the detention facility, therefore reducing the peak flow and decreasing the size of the facility to be maintained. B_ This project is requesting approval to model the required detention volume for the north pond using a modified developed land cover classification for pervious areas. The current cover of the site is a pasture condition. In the developed condition, pervious areas are typically modeled as "grass". This project proposes to utilize the King County Runoff Time Series to model the pervious areas as "pasture" due to extensive soil amendment. Amended soils promote runoff absorption, storage and infiltration. Soil amendment has been documented to decrease peak runoff rates and volumes by increasing the time of concentration, thus justifying a decrease of the curve number for a given hydrologic soil group when modeling runoff. Given the depth and degree of soil amendment proposed, the developed pervious condition of the site more closely simulates a pastured condition than that of a grassed condition. Amending soil to decrease runoff has been studied and documented not only in the Puget Sound Area, but throughout the nation. Hydrologic Response of Residential Scale Lawns on Till Containing Various Amounts of Compost Amendment, by Kosti, Burges, and Jensen, 1995 showed that beneficial effects on runoff response behavior was observed from test plots containing compost amended soils_ The plots generated 53% and 70% of the runoff volume observed from un -amended control plots; thus showing a reduction of runoff from standard practices of residential lawn iconstruction. Page 5 Mark Bergam King County DDES January 19, 2004 Several Jurisdictions throughout the United States have adopted Low Impact Development Requirements. Island County, Maryland Surface Water Ordinance provides special performance requirements for mimicking pre -development runoff volume and peak runoff rates by using specific retention and/or detention BMPs (e.g., rain gardens, open drainage systems, and amended soils) throughout the site. These methods assist in providing equivalent runoff curve numbers (CN) and increasing the time of concentration to pre - developed lengths for reduced detention volumes and peak flows. The EPA published Innovative Uses of Compost, October 1997 stating that soil amendments provides storm water quantity control with attenuation of peak flows and decreasing runoff; maintenance of base flows; increases groundwater recharge; increases soil structure and stability and increases infiltration capacity. The publication cites results from a Richmond, Washington, 1995 study showing that compost amended soils consistently had longer lag times to response, longer times to peak flow, higher base flows, higher storage and smaller total runoff than un -amended soils_ Benefits to the Community are as follows: • A more naturalistic appearance to the backyard conveyance areas_ • Providing a media that supports vigorous plant growth without added fertilizers. • Decreased irrigation costs due to the moisture retentive properties of composted soils. • Retaining the existing soil on site, reducing the amount of export thus reducing the amount of wear to surrounding infrastructure. • Reducing the amount of surface area required for a "standard pond" thus reducing maintenance costs. C. The project proposes to utilize a modified land cover runoff coefficient in the water quality volume sizing calculation (Vr). The project is providing basic water quality treatment per Core Requirement 48 utilizing a wetpond_ Equation 6-13 in the 1998 KCSWDM provides a weighted coefficient specific to four soil cover types depending upon their generation of amounts of runoff. Impervious cover is the most heavily weighted area (0.9) where outwash grass or forest is the least weighted area (0.01)_ The two remaining coefficients between impervious cover and outwash forest are for till grass (0.25) or till forest (0.1). The Page 6 Mark Bergam King County DDES January 19, 2004 coefficient proposed to be used in sizing the water quality portion of the facility is 0.20. This coefficient is a hybrid between grass and forest, consistent with a pasture condition as described in Table 3.2, LA of the 199$ KCSWDM Runoff Coefficients — "C" Values for the Rational Method. Many studies have shown that amending soils with compost decrease peak runoff rates and runoff volumes (see studies cited above). Additional studies show that compost has benefits in providing water quality as well as water quantity controls. .Innovative Uses of Compost; EPA, October 1997 states that soil amendments break down potential pollutants; immobilize and degrade pollutants by holding them in place so that soil microbes can decompose them; increases soil stability, leading to less potential erosion; and reduces thermal pollution by maintaining runoff in the soil and on-site Ionger. The EPA also cited studies showing that composted soils had 10% less total Phosphorus, 58% less soluble reactive Phosphorous, and 7% less total nitrate. This citation was obtained from Harrison, R.B., M.A Grey, C.L., 1997: Field Test of compost Amendment to Reduce. Nutrient Runoff It should be noted that for these reasons, use of a hybrid coefficient to size the water quality treatment facility is appropriate. Although additional water quality enhancing L.I.D. measures are proposed (bioretention swales, perforated pipe, rain gardens), additional facility sizing credits are not requested. Taking credit for these measures would require redundant conveyance systems in order to separate "treated" storm water from the "untreated" road runoff. The project is providing the additional L.I_D. features, however, the water quality calculations have been conservatively provided in a single detention/water quality facility. Benefits to the public are: 0 A more naturalistic appearance to the conveyance features Iocated in the rear yard areas more commonly landscaped with grass only. Providing a media that supports vigorous plant growth without added fertilizers. + Decreased irrigation costs due to the moisture retentive properties of composted soils. • Retaining the existing soil on site, reducing the amount of export thus reducing the amount of wear to surrounding infrastructure. 0 Reducing the amount of surface area required for a "standard wet pond" thus reducing maintenance costs. Page 7 Mark Bergam King County DDES January 19, 2004 r1 Please review the supporting material provided to assist you in your decision Let me know if you require any further information for your consideration of this request. Sincerely, TRIAD ASSOCIATES Rebecca . Cushman, P.E. • 40 MINUTES OF THE MAY 6, 2004, PUBLIC HEARING QN DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES FILE NO. L02P0014. Stafford L. Smith was the Hearing Examiner in this matter. Participating in the hearing were Kim Claussen, Laura Casey, Kristen Langley, Steve Foley and Bruce Whittaker representing the Department; Sara Slatten representing the Applicant; and Jeffrey L. Cox and Rebecca Cushman. The following exhibits were offered and entered into the record: Exhibit No. 1 DDES File No. L02P0014 Exhibit No. 2 DDES Preliminary Report dated May 6, 2004 Exhibit No, 3 Application received August 1, 2002 Exhibit No. 4 Environmental checklist received August 1, 2002 Exhibit No. 5 Mitigated Declaration of Non -significance dated March 26, 2004 Exhibit No. 6 Affidavit of Posting indicating November 18, 2002 as date of posting and November 18, 2002 as the date the affidavit was received by DDES Exhibit No. 7 Plat Map and Conceptual Drainage Plan received by DDES on February 13, 2004 (Revision) Exhibit No. 8 Concurrency Certificate received August 1, 2002 Exhibit No. 9 Assessors Maps; NE/SE 10-23-05 & SW 11-23-05 Exhibit No. 10 Ordinance No. 14662 Exhibit No. 11 Low Impact Development Proposal from Triad Associates; received by DDES on October 8, 2003 Exhibit No. 12 Level 1 Downstream Analysis by Triad Associates, received by DDES on August 1, 2002 Exhibit No. 13 Land Use Map Exhibit No. 14 Revised Level 1 Downstream Analysis by Triad Associates, received by DDES on January 21, 2004 Exhibit No. 15 Revised Level I Downstream Analysis by Triad Associates, received by DDES on January 26, 2004 Exhibit No. 16 There was no exhibit Exhibit No. 17 Technical Information Report prepared by Triad Associates, received by DDES on October 8, 2003 Exhibit No. 18 Traffic Impact Analysis by Garry Struthers Associates, Inc., received by DDES on August 1, 2002 Exhibit No, 19 Memo from Joan M. Smelser of Garry Struthers dated January 6, 2003; Addendum Traffic Study Exhibit No. 20 Memo from Jeff Haynie of Transportation Engineering NorthWest to Kim Claussen Dated February 12, 2004 on MPS Fee Credits Exhibit No. 21 Email from Kristen Langley to Kim Claussen and Bruce Whittaker dated April 28, 2004 re an addendum to the traffic study Exhibit No. 22 Letter to Camwest from Paulette Norman dated March 19, 2004 on King County Road Services Division's on Variance Decision Exhibit No. 23 Email to Camwest and Kim Claussen from Jeff Lee dated March 22, 2004 On MPS credit Exhibit No. 24 Wetland Determination prepared by CamWest Development, Inc., received by DDES on August 1, 2002 Exhibit No. 25 Letter to Laura Casey form C. Gary Schulz dated October 6, 2003; Addendum Wetland Study Exhibit No. 26 Letter to DDES from the City of Renton dated November 27, 2002 Exhibit No. 27 Letter to Sara Slatten and Rebecca Cushman from DDES dated March 25, 2004 Re drainage adjustment decision Exhibit No. 28 Revised Condition 10 d. Exhibit No, 29 PowerPoint Presentation Photographs Exhibit No. 30 Low Impact Development Plan Exhibit No. 31 Overall Site Plan .SOC A 4 Pa{,c 1 of 1 Claussen, Kimberly From: Langley, Kristen Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2004 12:09 PM To: Whittaker, Bruce, Claussen, Kimberly Subject: RE: Shamrock TIA Update - Memo FYI, for next week's hearing -----Original Message ----- From: Curtis Chin [mailto:chin@tenw.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2004 11:35 AM To: 'Langley, Kristen' Cc: 'Sara Slatten'; 'Jeff Haynie' Subject: RE: Shamrock TIA Update - Memo Kristen, File-- LCOPCO14 Per your conversation with Jeff Haynie this morning, attached is the Shamrock TIA Update memo. As documented in the memo, the current traffic volumes at the study intersections are less than those documented in the original traffic study. As a result, the analysis/conclusions included in the August 1, 2002 Shamrock traffic study are still valid and could be considered conservative. Please let us know if you have any questions. Curtis Chin, P.E. Transportation Engineering Northwest, LLC 16625 Redmond Way, Suite M, PMB 323 Redmond, WA 98052 Phone: 206-714-7421 Fax: 425-398-5779 Email: chin cr tenw.com Poo 4 fl)( -Id 6 rbb kScu- Exhibit No. Item No. L— Received King County Hearing Examiner MAIN FILA COSY y� 05/03/2004 %9 Transportation Engineering NorthWest Memorandum DATE: April 28, 2004 TO: Kristen Langley King County FROM: Jeff Haynie, P.E. Transportation Engineering Northwest RE: Shamrock TIA - Update TENW Project No. The purpose of this memorandum is to assess whether traffic conditions have significantly changed since the completion of the Shamrock traffic study dated August 1, 2002, Our assessment compares projected 2004 p.m. peak hour traffic volumes (based on assumptions included in the traffic study) to 2004 existing p.m. peak hour traffic volumes. Also included in this memorandum are updated collision histories at the study intersections. Based on the information in this memorandum, it is our opinion that the analysis/conclusions included in the August 1, 2002 Shamrock traffic study are still valid and could be considered conservative. Traffic Volumes A comparison was made between the p.m. peak hour traffic volumes used in the August 1, 2002 Shamrock traffic study and existing 2004 traffic volumes at the following four study intersections: • 1481h Avenue SE/SR 900 • 1481" Avenue SEISE 116'' Street 1481h Avenue SEISE 128" Street • Lyons Avenue SEISE 1281h Street To estimate 2004 traffic volumes, the 2002 traffic volumes documented in the Shamrock traffic study were increased by an annual growth factor of 2.57 percent. Actual 2004 p.m. peak hour traffic volumes at the four study intersections were collected on April 21, 2004. Table 1 compares the 2004 estimated volumes (based on assumptions included in the original Shamrock traffic study) and the 2004 existing volumes. Transportation Engineering/Operations r Impact Studies # Design Services ♦ Transportation Planning/Forecasting 16625 Redmond Way, Suite M, PMB 323 ♦ Redmond, WA 98052 # Office (425) 485.4663 ♦ Fax (425) 398-5779 %9 Transportation Engineering Northwest Page 2 of 3 Table 1 Comparison of PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 2004 Projected 2004 Existing Intersection Volumes' Volumesz Percent Chan 148'0 Ave SE/SR 900 1,311 1,171 -11% 148'" Ave SEISE 1161' St 286 270 -6% 1481h Ave SEISE 128"' St 1,956 1,836 -6% Lyons Ave SEISE 128th St 1,888 1,782 -6% Notes: 1. Projected 2004 volumes based on 2002 volumes with 2,57 percent annual growth rate (per Shamrock traffic study). 2. 2004 existing traffic volumes conducted by Traffic Smithy Aril 21, 2004. As shown in table 1, the 2004 existing p.m. peak hour traffic counts are 6 to 11 percent less than the projected 2004 p.m. peak hour volumes. Attachment A includes more detailed traffic volume data. Collision Histories Collision data at the three intersections included in the Shamrock traffic study has been updated using recent data from the Washington Sate Department of Transportation (WSDOT) and King County. The collision data obtained was obtained for the three year period between January 1, 2000 and December 31, 2002. The following table 2 compares the collisions reported in the August 1, 2002 Shamrock traffic study (1998- 2000) and the recently obtained collision data (2000-2002). Attachment B includes more detailed collision data for the January 1, 2000 and December 31, 2002 time period. Table 2 Comparison of Collision Data I Reported Collisions I (three year period) i Intersection 1998-2000' 2000-2002 Change SR -9001148" Ave SE 8 13 +5 SR -900/164"' Ave SE 21 27 +6 SE 116th St/1481h Ave SE 1 0 -1 Notes? 1. Per August 1, 2402 Shamrock traffic study. 2. Collision data provided by wSDOT and King County. Transporration Engineering/Operations ► Impact Studies ► Design Services ► Transportarion Planning/Forecasting 16625 Redmond Way, Suite M, PMB 323 ► Redmond, WA 98052 a Office (425) 485-4663 ► Fax (425) 398-5779 %9 Transportation Engineering Northwest Page 3 of 3 The intersection of SR -900/164'h Avenue SE is a high accident location (HAL). However, with the addition of the proposed traffic signal at SR -9001148`" Avenue SE, safety is expected to improve at this intersection as well as the intersection of SR - 900/164'" Avenue SE due to the potential shift in traffic to the proposed traffic signal. Please call me at (425) 485-4663 if you have any questions regarding the information presented in this memorandum. cc: Sara Slatten, CamWest Development, Inc. Transportation Engineering/Operations • Impact Studies • Design Services ♦ Transportation Planning/Forecasting 16625 Redmond Way, Suite M, PMB 323 + Redmond, WA 98052 •Office (425) 485-4663 r Fax (425) 398-5779 0 ATTACHMENT A 2004 PM Peak Hour Volume Comparison Transportation Engineering/Operations ♦ Impact Studies o Design Services # Transportation Planning/Forecasting 16625 Redmond Way, Suite M, PMB 323 ♦ Redmond, WA 98052 # Office (425) 465-4663 # Fax (425) 398-5779 Intersection Direction Movement 148th Ave SE/SR-900 Northbound Left 34 Through 26 Right Southbound Left 15 Through 65 Right Eastbound Left 29 Through 36 Right Westbound Left 424 Through 66 Riqht 148th Ave SEISE 116th St Northbound Left Through Right Southbound Left Through Right Eastbound Left Through Right Westbound Left Through Richt 'AL 148th Ave SEJSE 128th St Northbound Left Through Right Southbound Left Through Right Eastbound Left Through Right Westbound Left Through Riciht PM Peak Hour Turnina Movement Volumes 2002 Existing' Projected Existing' 39 41 11 32 34 75 26 27 28 14 15 42 65 68 37 28 29 12 36 38 24 403 424 511 66 69 7 4 4 25 522 549 335 12 13 64 1,247 1,311 1,171 Percent Change` III 6 6 4 2 73 77 77 11 15 16 12 55 15 16 10 60 125 132 132 95 6 6 3 935 5 5 4 2 1 1 1 608 2 2 3 28 13 14 14 0 0 0 10 11 10 271 286 270 -6% 21 22 33 2 2 5 10 11 11 36 38 55 2 2 15 60 63 68 90 95 69 1,028 1082 935 9 9 63 2 2 10 578 608 544 21 22 28 1,859 1,956 1,836 Lyons Ave SLiS; 128th St Northbound Left 1 1 Through 1 1 Right 6 6 Southbound Left 3 3 Through 0 0 Right 1 1 Eastbound Left 4 4 Through 1,119 1177 Right 2 2 Westbound Left 1 1 Through 657 691 Right 1 1 INTERSECTION TOTAL = 1,796 1,888 3 0 2 0 1 5 6 1,097 7 3 655 3 1,782 Notes. 1, 2002 traffic counts per Shamrock traffic study dated August 1, 2002, 2. Projected 2404 veiumes based on 2002 volumes with a 2.57 percent annual growth rate (consistent with growth rate assumed in August 1, 2002 Shamrock traffic study). 3- 2004 traffic counts conducted by Traffic Smithy April 21. 2004, 4. Percent change compares 2004 Estimated vs. 2004 Existing volumes. 4128 7 2 00 4 Shamrock - Volume Comparison 2002 vs 2004 PA ATTACHMENT B January 1, 2000 - December 31, 2002 Collision Data Transportation Engineering/Operations + Impact Studies r Design Services # Transportation Planning/Forecasring 16625 Redmond Way, Suite M, PM8 323 o Redmond, WA 78052 # Office {425) 485-4663 • Fax (425) 398-5779 Three Year Collision History January 1, 2400 - December 31, 2002 2000 2001 Collision Type Injury' PDOZ Injury' PDOZ Injury' 2002 PDOZ Total WSDOT Collision Data SR -9001148th Avenue SE Fixed Object 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 Rear End 0 0 0 3 0 0 3 Enter at angle 1 2 2 2 1 1 9 Opposite Direction 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pedestrian 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Intersection Total 1 2 2 6 1 1 13 SR -9001164th Avenue 5E Fixed Object 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 Rear End 2 1 1 4 1 1 10 Enter at angle 1 0 1 0 0 0 2 Opposite Direction 1 2 1 3 2 4 13 Pedestrian 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 Intersection Total 4 4 4 7 3 5 27 King County Collision Data SE 116'h Street/148th Avenue SE Fixed Object 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Rear End 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Enter at angle 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Opposite Direction 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pedestrian 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Intersection Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Notes: 1. Injury accident 2. Property damage only Transportation Engineering/Operations ♦ Impact Studies a Design Services a Transportation Pfanning/Forecasting 16625 Redmond Way, Suite M, PMS 323 a Redmond, WA 98052 a Office (425) 485-4663 a Fax (425) 398.5779 King County Department of Development and Environmental Services 900 Oakesdale Avenue SW Renton, WA 98055-1219 March 25, 2004 Sara Slatten CamWest, Inc. 9720 NE 120th Place Kirkland, WA 98034 Rebecca Cushman, P.E. Triad Associates 11814 — 115th Avenue NE Kirkland, WA 98034 r f iel t�o,,eoof RE: Shamrock Subdivision 1998 KCSWDM Adjustment and Shared Facility Plan Request (File No. L04V0003 Dear Applicant and Engineer: The Land Use Services Division, Engineering Review Section, has completed review of the adjustment and shared facility plan approval request for the Shamrock subdivision. You are requesting an adjustment from the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM), Core Requirement No. 1, Section 1.2.1, Discharge at the Natural Location for an on-site diversion, an adjustment from Section 3.3, Hydrologic Design Procedures and Considerations and Section 6.4, Wetpool Facility Design, concerning modification of hydrologic coefficients in acknowledgment for low -impact design (LID) enhancements and mitigations. You are also requesting approval for an adjustment from Core Requirement No. 3, Section 1.2.3 to utilize an off-site storm water facility and formalize its shared use through Special Requirement No. 1, Section 1.3.1, Shared Facility Drainage Plans with the Shared Facility Plan Guidelines published in a memo dated September 15, 1999. Our review of the information and a site visit provides the following findings: 1. The proposed Shamrock subdivision is located between approximately SE 1201h and 125` Streets on the west side of 1481h Avenue SE. The 118 lot, 29.8 acre, proposed Shamrock subdivision is filed under Land Use Services Division (LUSD) file number L02P0014. 2. The runoff from the northern edge of the site, tributary to both the northern part of Wetland B and the north -central wetland (Wetland C), flows north to the Honey Creek subbasin of the May Creek basin and is subject to Level One flow control. The remaining majority of the site is located in the Maplewood subbasin of the Lower Cedar River basin and is subject to Level Two flow control. The entire site is subject to the Basic water quality requirements of the 1998 KCSWDM. 3. The Shamrock subdivision is included as one of the three demonstration projects listed in King County Ordinance 14662, signed June 2, 2003, to promote low impact development techniques. Exhibit No. ? Item No. L-�gRnnd Received `' � - a COPY King County Hearind4ner Shamrock Subdivision/LO4W03 March 25, 2004 Page 2 of 5 4. Approximately two acres adjacent to the north property line are tributary to Wetland C and the northern portion of Wetland B which both drain north to Honey Creek. See Exhibit 1, Existing Conditions. The remainder of the site sheetflows in a west to southwest direction toward the southern portion of Wetland B and other hydraulically - connected wetland areas to the west and south of the site. A wetland hydrology report indicates that for significant storm events (greater than the 1.1 year storm event) Wetland B drains to both the north and south. It is assumed that the southern wetland complex eventually drains to its natural discharge location at the southern property line and crosses under 12$`h Avenue SE through a 42 -inch culvert and continues south. Flows from the Honey Creek and Maplewood subbasin do not recombine. 5. From the SE 124"' Street entrance road north, the Shamrock subdivision proposes 76, low -impact lots to be tributary to a reduced -volume North Pond shown at the southern end of Wetland B. Please see Exhibit 2, Developed Conditions. Although most of the rooftop and backyard lot areas surrounding Wetland C will be utilized for hydraulically maintaining Wetland C, the proposal is to collect most runoff from the remaining Honey Creek subbasin area to be developed and divert it to the North Pond located in the Maplewood subbasin. The North Pond will be a combined detention and water quality facility and is intended to be designed with a stormwater wetland. The allowed release would then outlet to the southern end of Wetland B. Because wetland areas south of Wetland B were filled, the wetland mitigation plan will require hand digging out the fill material so that Wetland B will reestablish direct hydraulic connectivity to the wetland complex to the south. 6. Site areas south of the SE 124`h Street entrance road will be directed to the South Pond. Sheetflow to the west will be intercepted by standard conveyance and diverted to the South Pond. Some nuisance sheetflow will be reduced along the western site boundaries in the south half of the site. Frontage improvements are included in the conceptual drainage plan. Flows from the South Pond are released into the storm drainage system of SE 128th Street. 7. No decorative ponds or shallow wells have been identified that would be affected by the proposed diversions. 8. The Level One Downstream Analysis identified no restrictions or problems associated with the proposed discharge location. 9. A consolidation of facilities for the proposed subdivision will be more economical in long term maintenance. 10. As previously mentioned, the northern 76 lots are being design to incorporate low impact best management practices (BMPs). The proposal includes all lot and common landscape areas to contain amended soils, that roof downspout perforated pipe lengths within the amended soil be 25-40 feet long and that nearly all pervious and impervious drainage will be directed to grass -lined and bioretention swales which will Shamrock Subdivision/L04003 i March 25, 2004 Page 3 of 5 significantly increase the flow path length to the stormwater facility. In addition, a rain garden is proposed for additional pre -storage and treatment before runoff is directed to the North Pond. 11. The proposal is to allow the cumulative benefits of the low -impact designs to translate into reduced North Pond stormwater facility size based on modest reduction of key hydrologic parameters used in the KCRTS model. This precedence is already established in the 1998 KCSWDM through Core Requirement No. 3 which allows peak flow exemptions for flow control BMPs and in Section 5.2.2 for BMPs that can reduce facility size. Specifically, the applicant is asking that a) the roofs be modeled as 50% till grass and 50% impervious, b) the amended soil landscape areas be modeled as `pasture' instead of `grass', and c) the coefficient associated with the `area of till soil covered with grass' in equation 6-13 used for wetpool sizing be reduced from 0.25 to 0.20. The applicant cites studies where extended use of amended soils has significantly reduced post -development runoff volumes. 12. South of the SE 124th Street entrance, two ad hoc parcels compose the southern 42 lots of the King County Shamrock development proposal. Adjacent immediately to the south, is another 11 lot development within the City of Renton also referred to as Shamrock. Both the southern portion of the King County Shamrock development and the contiguous City of Renton Shamrock development are to be served by conventional conveyance and detention in a shared facility along SE 128th Street referred to as the South Pond. This parcel is owned by the applicant and the proposed shared facility will be dedicated to the City of Renton. An existing pond along the eastern edge of where the South Pond will be constructed appears to be an abandoned pond which now passes existing flows from the City of Renton Shamrock site to SE 128th Street. This pond will be expanded within the limits of the City of Renton Shamrock parcel to accommodate the southern portion of the King County and Renton Shamrock subdivisions. The City of Renton has adopted the 1998 KCSWDM for its storm water drainage standards, simplifying the design of the South Pond. 13. The applicant has submitted to the City -of Renton a subdivision permit to develop the parcel and expand the current drainage facility. It is acknowledged that the City of Renton has review and approval jurisdiction over the South Pond drainage modifications. This shared facility plan approval by King County is to acknowledge the accommodation of a King County subdivision's runoff by a Renton stormwater facility and the design assumptions used for the facility's expansion. The assumed land cover for the design of the King County's portion of the pond is to be calculated based on maximum zoning impervious coverage. The developer of the King County Shamrock subdivision will expand the facility to its final configuration. Both the North and South Ponds would utilize the Level Two flow control and Basic water quality requirements of the 1998 KCSWDM since they both drain south to the Maplewood subbasin. Based on these findings, we hereby approve this adjustment to allow a) the diversion of runoff to two facilities ultimately draining to SE 1281h Avenue, b) modification of hydrologic Shamrock Subdivision/L04003 March 25, 2004 Page 4 of 5 modeling coefficients used in the wetpool and KCRTS facility sizing methodology for the North Pond whose tributary area utilizes low impact BMPs, and c) use of an off-site, shared facility in the City of Renton with the following conditions: 1. The release rates for the North Pond detention facility will be based on the tributary area being directed to the facility including the area of diversion. The release rates for the South Pond detention facility will be based on the tributary area being directed to the facility and the area within the City of Renton that the city deems appropriate. 2. The volume for both detention facilities will be based on all flows directed to the facilities at full development under current zoning. The allowed release rates will be reduced by any undetained flows that would bypass the proposed subdivision drainage facilities as specified in the 1998 KCSWDM. The detention volumes shall be sized using the Level Two flow control standard in the 1998 KCSWDM. A 10 to 20 percent volumetric factor of safety must be applied to all storm events requiring detention. The design Technical Information Report shall state the factor of safety selected and the basis of that determination. 3. Water quality facilities must be sized based on the entire proposed subdivision draining to the facilities including any required frontage improvements. 4. The North Pond drainage facility to be maintained by King County must be located in a public right-of-way, recreation space tract with easement or storm drainage tract dedicated to King County. The City of Renton will determine tract requirements for the South Pond. 5. Amended soils will be used throughout all non -impervious, developed area tributary to the North Pond. Gravel encased perforated pipes shall be a minimum of 25 feet long and be designed to meet Figure 5.1.3.A in the 1998 KCSWDM for all lots intending to use the 50% impervious/50% till grass credit. 6. All amended soil areas shall be located on private property and be privately maintained. 7. The attached "Guidelines & Resources" Manual 2002 shall be used as minimum standards for implementing amended soil depth and quality for the Low Impact Development portion of the King County Shamrock site. This manual was established to implement Washington State's Department of Ecology guidelines for soil quality to improve stormwater retention. 8. The accompanying "Field Guide" will be used to facilitate field inspection of the amended soil areas. 9. To document the impact of low impact development design, the North Pond's outflow stage/discharge shall be continuously monitored for three years starting at 75% buildout of that portion of the site. The data and interpreted results shall be presented Shamrock Subdivision/L04&03 March 25, 2004 Page 5 of 5 to King County WLRD Stormwater Services Section at the end of each full year of monitoring. 10. The developer of the South Pond facility is responsible for all costs associated with the implementation of the shared facility plan. Engineering plans for the King County Shamrock subdivision shall note this approved shared facility plan. 11. The South Pond shall be expanded/built to full facility size during development of the south portion of the Shamrock development. 12. Any proposed modification to the existing storm water facility adjacent to SE 128" Street will require approval of a valid land use permit from the City of Renton. A note on the engineering plans shall state that on-site construction south of SE 124'h Street shall not commence without an approved land use permit from the City of Renton. 13, The South Pond facility shall be inspected and receive approval for operation by the City of Renton prior to recording of the King County Shamrock subdivision. 14. Additional storm drainage requirements identified by SEPA or the plat hearing will apply to this project. Any additional storm drainage requirements identified by the City of Renton will apply to the South Pond. If you have any further questions regarding this KCSWDM adjustment or the design requirements, please contact Mark Bergam at (206) 296-7270. Sincerely, James Sanders, P.E. Development Engineer Engineering Review Section Land Use Services Division Jim Chan, P.E. Supervising Engineer Site Engineering and Planning Section Building Services Division cc: Curt Crawford, P.E., Managing Engineer, Stormwater Services Section, KCDNR Bruce Whittaker, Senior Engineer, Engineering Review Section, LUSD Kim Claussen, Project/Program Manager III, Current Planning Section, LUSD Mark Bergam, P.E., Senior Engineer, Engineering Review Section, LUSD Surface Water Design Manual King County Requirements I Standards Department of Development and Environmental Services 900 enton, ashingdale vcnite 98055-1219 Adjustment* Request Renton, Washington 98055-1219 Project Name: DDES Project File No.: DDES Engineer/Planner Name: Shack -;3 L03M 4 ��\/0 0 Project Address: Design Engineer: hone: 122B5 148th Ave SE/10233931742 Rebecca ;-TTHn 425--821– ApplicanUAgent: Phone:Date: CaALbst 425 -E25 -1955r/ al 7// � /' Signatu Date: — ngi eri ame. I Triad Associates Address: City, State, Zip ode: Address: City, State, Zip Code: 9720 kF 1201 Place Kirkland, UA 98034 111314 -115th Ave 1E Kirkland, lM 98034 INSTRUCTIONS TO APPLICANTIDESIGN ENGINEER: Please be sure to include all plans (T.I.R., if available), sketches, photos and maps that may assist in complete review and consideration of this adjustment request. Failure to provide all pertinent information may result in delayed processing or denial of your request. Please submit two complete copies of this reguest, application form and applicable fee to the DDES Intake Counter, at 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest, Renton, Washington 98055-1219. For additional information, phone Randall Parsons, P.E., at (206) 296-7207. REFER TO SECTION 1.4 IN CHAPTER 1 OF THE SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL FOR ADJUSTMENTS DESCRIPTION OF ADJUSTMENT REQUEST: IN Standard ❑ Complex 0 Experimental ❑ Blanket ❑ Pre -application 1. PraJide an offsite -shared facility 2. Lana corer assuTptims for loin ilrpact development conditions APPLICABLE VERSION KCSWDM: ❑ 1990 (11195) * EX 1098 (9198) ❑ * (Note: the term "variance" replaced by "adjustment") APPLICABLE SECTION(S) OF STANDARDS: Core Recpirermnt #3; Special Peq Iirarent #1 JUSTIFICATION PER KCSWDM SECTION 1.4.2 See attachments listed below. Preliminary Technical Information Report Prelir�4inary Plat lap Law TgTrt DevelcpTmt Project RepDrt AUTHORIZATION SIGNATURES: ERMINATION: 0 Approval ❑ DNRIWLRD Approval Signed: DDES Staff Recommendation Signed: Conditions of Approval: )(Conditional Approval (see below) J 1 11 / /1 Date: over Letter Date: 5 ❑ Denial & Blanket variances ❑ See attached Memo Dated: * DDES DIRE-CT0R1DF31GNFF- DDES, land Use Services Div., Engineering Review Supervisor: DDES, Bldg_ Serv. Div„ Site Engineering & Planning Supervisor: gned: Signed: ate: Date: Z , , ,nnnr�r'� FDslEBs,swots-.AD.; d— Fa6,E_5r5wD143- S dc_ [�tg[�u V/ L�g w JAN 2.2 2104 K.C. D.D.E.S. January 19, 2004 Mark Bergam King County DDES 900 Oakesdale Ave NIS 113 Renton, WA 98055-1219 RE: Shamrock KC Project # L02P0014 Triad Job No. 01-159 Dear Mark: TRLAD ASSOCIATES 11814 11 5r Avenue NE Kirkland, WA 98034-6923 42 5.629.8448 425.821.3481 fax 800 48H 0756 COIF Free www triadassoc Com This request is to approve the following adjustments to the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual. 1. Allow stormwater quantity and water quality treatment controls to be provided in an offsite facility (Adjustment to Core Requirement #3). And requesting permission to utilize the offsite facility as a shared facility within City of Renton jurisdiction (Special Requirement #1). 2. Allow modification to Land Cover assumptions used in modeling runoff for the Low Impact Development (L.I.D.) portion of the project. (Adjustment to Core Requirement #3). To assist in the review of the adjustment request, please see the enclosed project description, preliminary Technical Information Report, Preliminary Plat Map submittal and a Low Impact Development Demonstration Project Report. Project overview: The project proposes to create 118 single-family lots on an approximately 34.5 acre property. Approximately 30.5 acres will be developed, with the remainder left as protected wetlands and associated buffers_ The site is north of 128th St. SE, west of 148th Avenue SE in King County, Washington. The portion of the site between SE 124th Street and the northern boundary will incorporate Low Impact Development (L.I.D.) measures. The portion of the site between SE 124th Street and the southern boundary will be designed assuming standard development methods. Land Development C011SL11t8T1t5 Page 2 Mark Bergarn King County DDES January 19, 2004 Two detention/water quality facilities are proposed; one located centrally onsite (referred to as the North Pond), the other located within the City of Renton Jurisdiction at the southernmost property line (referred to as the South Pond). The North Pond receives runoff from those portions of the site designated as L.I.D. only, where the South Pond serves the remainder of the project which has been designed following tradition standards. Both ponds have been designed to a Level 2 flow control standard with Basic Water Quality. Adjustment Discussion: The first item requested for adjustment is to provide an offsite facility. In addition to the request for an offsite facility, permission is being requested to utilize the offsite facility as a shared facility. Core Requirement #3 states that all proposed projects must provide onsite flow control facilities to mitigate the impacts of increased storm and surface water runoff generated by the addition of new impervious surface and any related land cover conversion. Special Requirement #1 states that shared facility drainage plans shall be approved by King County to allow two or more projects to share drainage facilities required by this manual. This request is for the "South Pond" only. The location of the pond is at the natural discharge point for the entire area proposed to be developed utilizing "standard development methods" within the site (non L.I.D. portion). The parcel containing the proposed offsite facility lies within City of Renton jurisdiction. The developer has applied to the City for a subdivision permit for this parcel to be developed concurrently with the King County parcel. In the event that engineering plan approval within the City of Renton is delayed, a grading permit or equivalent will be obtained to construct the pond and conveyance lines. The City of Renton has adopted the 1998 King County Surface Water Drainage Manual with the same Level 2 detention standard and basic Water Quality standard for the site. The assumed land cover for the design of the pond has been calculated based on maximum zoning impervious coverage. An existing drainage pond is located at the south east corner of the south parcel. The area tributary to the existing pond has been accounted for in the new design. In addition to the designed volume, a conservative factor of safety has been applied. The flow control facility was analyzed and designed using KCRTS as approved by King County and the City of Renton. Water quality will be provided using a basic wetpond design. Benefits to the public are as follows: Page 3 Mark Bergam King County DDES January 19, 2004 + Maintenance costs for a single facility are lower than maintaining two facilities. • The existing detention pond in the south east corner will be incorporated into the design of the shared facility with upgraded detention standards. • In addition to savings in pond maintenance, the conveyance system maintenance will be streamlined since less pipe and appurtenances will be required. Also, a bypass system to a second pond is eliminated. The second item requested for adjustment is to utilize modified land cover assumptions for the Low Impact Development portion of the site. This request may be broken down into three subtopics. A. Effective impervious assumptions used in modeling roofs. B. Modeling of landscape as "pasture" in sizing detention volume (due to use of amended soil). C. Utilization of a modified land cover runoff coefficient in the water quality volume calculation (VO. A. The average proposed lot size within the portion of the site is 5,000 square feet. The maximum impervious coverage allowed per zoning is 55%, providing 2,750 square feet of impervious area per lot. Of this area, driveways and patios account for an estimated 500 square feet. Runoff from the remaining roof area (2,250 sfllot) is proposed to be modeled using modified land cover assumptions. The 1998 KCSWDM allows the use of "effective impervious area" in modeling existing rural residential development, or where dispersed flow paths exceed 50 feet in urban residential development. In addition, the manual cites use of projects utilizing roof downspout controls as a flow control BMPs. Standard subdivisions with this size lot typically include only a perforated stub averaging ten feet in length and are not able to utilize any flow control credit. This project's roof drains have been designed with perforated pipe having lengths of 25 to 40 feet_ The perforated pipe will be encased in an envelope of drain rock and amended soil, which will increase the soil/water contact area providing additional opportunity for infiltration. The majority of the perforated pipes will be directed to bioretention swales to increase the flow path significantly over traditional closed pipe conveyance systems prior to entering the detention facility. The lots that do not have their roof runoff directed to bioretention swales either discharge to a wetland providing Page 4 Mark Bergam King County DDES January 19, 2004 recharge with dispersion facilities located at the end of the perforated pipe, or are provided with additional length of perforated pipe to connect to the grassed swales conveying street drainage. Given the increased opportunities for infiltration and lengthened flow travel times resulting with this proposal, modeling the roofs as 50% till grass/ 50% impervious is an appropriate cover assumption. Benefits to the community are as follows: • Increased soil/water contact time to mimic the natural function of the pre -developed watershed. • Increased areas of open space between back yards with a more naturalistic appearance. • Increased time of concentration for the storm water to reach the detention facility, therefore reducing the peak flow and decreasing the size of the facility to be maintained. B. This project is requesting approval to model the required detention volume for the north pond using a modified developed land cover classification for pervious areas. The current cover of the site is a pasture condition. In the developed condition, pervious areas are typically modeled as "grass". This project proposes to utilize the King County Runoff Time Series to model the pervious areas as "pasture" due to extensive soil amendment. Amended soils promote runoff absorption, storage and infiltration. Soil amendment has been documented to decrease peak runoff rates and volumes by increasing the time of concentration, thus justifying a decrease of the curve number for a given hydrologic soil group when modeling runoff. Given the depth and degree of soil amendment proposed, the developed pervious condition of the site more closely simulates a pastured condition than that of a grassed condition. Amending soil to decrease runoff has been studied and documented not only in the Puget Sound Area, but throughout the nation. Hydrologic Response of Residential Scale Lawns on Till Containing Various Amounts of Compost Amendment, by Kosti, Burges, and Jensen, 1995 showed that beneficial effects on runoff response behavior was observed from test plots containing compost amended soils. The plots generated 53% and 70% of the runoff volume observed from un -amended control plots; thus showing a reduction of runoff from standard practices of residential lawn construction. Page 5 Mark Bergarn King County DDES January 19, 2004 Several Jurisdictions throughout the United States have adopted Low Impact Development Requirements. Island County, Maryland Surface Water Ordinance provides special performance requirements for mimicking pre -development runoff volume and peak runoff rates by using specific retention and/or detention BMPs (e.g., rain gardens, open drainage systems, and amended soils) throughout the site. These methods assist in providing equivalent runoff curve numbers (CN) and increasing the time of concentration to pre - developed lengths for reduced detention volumes and peak flows_ The EPA published Innovative Uses of Compost, October 1997 stating that soil amendments provides storm water quantity control with attenuation of peak flows and decreasing runoff; maintenance of base flows; increases groundwater recharge; increases soil structure and stability and increases infiltration capacity. The publication cites results from a Richmond, Washington, 1995 study showing that compost amended soils consistently had longer lag times to response, longer times to peak flow, higher base flows, higher storage and smaller total runoff than un -amended soils. Benefits to the Community are as follows: • A more naturalistic appearance to the backyard conveyance areas. • Providing a media that supports vigorous plant growth without added fertilizers. * Decreased irrigation costs due to the moisture retentive properties of composted soils. * Retaining the existing soil on site, reducing the amount of export thus reducing the amount of wear to surrounding infrastructure_ • Reducing the amount of surface area required for a "standard pond" thus reducing maintenance costs. C. The project proposes to utilize a modified land cover runoff coefficient in the water quality volume sizing calculation (V,). The project is providing basic water quality treatment per Core Requirement #8 utilizing a wetpond. Equation 6-13 in the 1998 KCSWDM provides a weighted coefficient specific to four soil cover types depending upon their generation of amounts of runoff. Impervious cover is the most heavily weighted area (09) where outwash grass or forest is the least weighted area (0.01). The two remaining coefficients between impervious cover and outwash forest are for till grass (0.25) or till forest (0.1). The Page 6 Mark Bergann King County DDES January 19, 2004 coefficient proposed to be used in sizing the water quality portion of the facility is 0.20. This coefficient is a hybrid between grass and forest, consistent with a pasture condition as described in Table 3.2. LA of the 1998 KCS%DM Runoff Coeffteients — -C - Values for the Rational Method. Many studies have shown that amending soils with compost decrease peak runoff rates and runoff volumes (see studies cited above). Additional studies show that compost has benefits in providing water quality as well as water quantity controls. Innovative Uses of Compost; EPA, October 1997 states that soil amendments break down potential pollutants; immobilize and degrade pollutants by holding them in place so that soil microbes can decompose them; increases soil stability, leading to less potential erosion; and reduces thermal pollution by maintaining runoff in the soil and on-site longer. The EPA also cited studies showing that composted soils had 10% less total Phosphorus, 58% less soluble reactive Phosphorous, and 7% less total nitrate. This citation was obtained from Harrison, R.B., M.A Grey, C.L., 1997: Field Test of compost Amendment to Reduce Nutrient Runoff. It should be noted that for these reasons, use of a hybrid coefficient to size the water quality treatment facility is appropriate. Although additional water quality enhancing L.I_D_ measures are proposed (bioretention swales, perforated pipe, rain gardens), additional facility sizing credits are not requested_ Taking credit for these measures would require redundant conveyance systems in order to separate "treated" storm water from the "untreated" road runoff. The project is providing the additional L.I.D. features, however, the water quality calculations have been conservatively provided in a single detention/water quality facility. Benefits to the public are: • A more naturalistic appearance to the conveyance features located in the rear yard areas more commonly landscaped with grass only. • Providing a media that supports vigorous plant growth without added fertilizers. • Decreased irrigation costs due to the moisture retentive properties of composted soils. • Retaining the existing soil on site, reducing the amount of export thus reducing the amount of wear to surrounding infrastructure. • Reducing the amount of surface area required for a "standard wet pond" thus reducing maintenance costs. Page 7 Mark Bergam King County DDES January 19, 2003 Please review the supporting material provided to assist you in your decision. Let me know if you require any ffirther information for your consideration of this request. Sincerely, TRIAD ASSOCIATES Rebecca . Cushman, P.E. NOIDNIFISVM AIN/700 !)NVJ 165iu N W N mpg )fOOHN 'HS 1181NX3 x SNO1110NO3 JNUS1X3 13 ae NOISIAib Uva -ax $ x N.i�lzs+is c vyc ti V C } I I 1 1 o v 4 ' 1 ` Doff C if r II to I i l I I• �I � _. _ 1 ��� � r � I �, i i - I : 1 1..-. h I O _ tL-_ wr LY W ♦'ter'~ 1 r I I� � tir\I 1 IilYlt i �; f S qq .. t 1 4 �, -. I - s 7 f C "a t -*ci• 7+4 " T r ling I I�i4y ♦ l IN m1 1al _ k �... , * ♦5 ♦, 'may I 1 I \� 11 I� � ` INL ELI is Z;i i i y♦\s \I 'I 1 °t i� +I yl 1 11 \ S 'I� f.,«L �• - .... . 3 rX •: 1 \ \ i 1 PRI d I:: !— 71 - J i i �` 1 1 i I I 4 I r `• .. ..... `1�,.'� + LU it ____ IJ ^l Il I I 1 'l 1 �'rf ��� A . --_ ��`111r 111�, �`�."-...... .1 1��{��{�y�Y' - 'll ��y,\`cI C l `III 11 I' 1%A - • �•' \ ' L•l\ ., t r!�� ! ���, Il,, r� t�`��ti��.�i l , \` r - ��i fi fA WI '6mP'03-17 65 X\i 73/137\S1rgryx3 6u1�aau16u3�sa1.+�`JM0�L5S'` s L�31D�ld�'3 s ooz `9(. uDur 5R31— NOIDNIHSVM :uNnoo DNI -V XDOHiOVVHS k Is2m)OVY0 4 F L IHIHX3 SNO1110N00 03dO73A3G as N0181UH Uyi TN ' I I I ' ! j �f 0 tqof C- A1*1 Qc NJ J-Aiq- too C -p �li, ti` ' O � Fes`. � � , `A A. Z jr Ld LO 0 q, z pa I I 6 z 0 49 nv 9 ♦f F I :0 u 3c U . . . . . d 1 5�Pk N, 00, N rf /0' r iih dl U 10OF IV, \0 7— 'N' L 'bmp'oC]-L-j 691LO\L -13A3-1\sl!q!qx3 6uija@uibu3\sDj!30Mo\p— d03PO8d\:3 WdL'<:g — �'C)OZ �—S 'uowi4sn�j_ • i March 22, 2002 MAR 2 4 2004 Kim Claussen, Planner King County Department of K.G. D.D.E.S. Development &. Environmental Services 900 Oakesdale Avenue SW Renton, WA 98055-1219 RE: Shamrock Property: L02P0014 Addition of tot — vesting question Dear Kim, This letter is in response to our recent conversation about the Shamrock property plat and our vesting. Specifically, we're proposing to add one additional lot to the plat for a total of 119 lots. The traffic concurrency certificate we submitted with the application back in 2002 allows for a maximum of 1.40 lots. You have advised us that if we want to add this additional lot, we will need to file a new application and re -vest the entire plat. The implication of re -vesting, aside from loss of time, is we will lose our traffic concurrency vesting. Since the submittal of the concurrency applications are no longer being approved in the vicinity of our plat because critical roadways are at capacity. Rebecca Campeau, King County DOT, has confirmed she will not re -issue a concurrency certificate for this project. When we spoke earlier you cited KCC code section 19.A.12.030 Revision of preliminary subdivisions as the basis for requiring re -vesting in this situation. In reviewing this section, it refers only to formally approved preliminary plats which have completed the public notice and hearing process. The first statement of this section reads: Application to revise subdivisions that have received preliminary approval shall comply with the following. That statement qualifies the following sections, including subsection A, where revisions to plats shall be treated as a new application and require a Type 3 land use decision. Although substantial revisions include creation of lots, this provision relates only to approved preliminary plats. This is consistent with the definition of "Revision" in KCC 19,A: 19A.04.270 Revisions. Revisions: a change prior to recording of a previously approved preliminary plat, preliminary short plat or binding site plan that includes, but is not limited to, the addition of new lots, tracts or parcels. (Ord. 13694 § 28, 1999). Therefore, based on these code sections and after running this by our land use attorney we do not believe KCC 19A.12.030 applies to our request for Shamrock based on the following: 1) This code section does not apply to our request as it seems to clearly address a process for approved preliminary plats seeking substantial modifications after the public process has been concluded and the plat approved. Ilene the stipulation of a Type 3 land use decision is logical to allow public input into the process. 2) Shamrock is not ar. approved preliminary plat. Since SEPA has not been issued nor has the plat hearing been held, we believe there is adequate public notice opportunities should anyone decide to comment on the added lot. 3) The traffic concurrency certificate supports the addition of one lot as it caps the max lot yield at 140 homes. 4) The density calculations support 119 lots. Thanks for your attention to this matter and we appreciate the flexibility with the SEPA issuance for the project. We hope once this is resolved to immediately proceed with submittal of all required information to you for the SEPA issuance. if you have any questions or need additional information for us, please call me at (425) 825-1955. Sincerely, Sara Slatten CamWest Development, Inc. enclosure 0 (King County 12-99) SUBDIVISIONS AND SHORT SUBDIVISIONS Chapter 19A.12 SUBDIVISIONS AND SHORT SUBDIVISIONS Sections: 19A.12.010 Purpose. 19A.12.020 Preliminary approval of subdivision. 19A.12.030 Revisions of preliminary subdivisions. 19A.12.040 Preliminary short subdivision -- approval time. 19A.12.050 Limitations for short subdivisions. 19A.12.060 Revisions of preliminary short subdivisions. 11 19A.12.010 – 19A.12.030 19A.12.010 Purpose. The purpose of this chapter is to specify requirements for the segregation of land into short subdivisions and subdivisions, in accordance with applicable Washington state and King County laws, rules and regulations, including permit processing procedures required by K.C.C. chapter 20.20. (Ord. 14788 § 3, 2003: Ord. 13694 § 55,1999). 19A.12.020 Preliminary approval of subdivision. A. Preliminary subdivision approval shall be effective for a period of sixty months. B. Preliminary subdivision approval shall be considered the basis upon which the applicant may proceed toward development of the subdivision and preparation of the final plat subject to all the conditions of the preliminary approval. C. If the final plat is being developed in divisions, and final plats for all of the divisions have not been recorded within the time limits provided in this section, preliminary subdivision approval for all unrecorded divisions shall become void. The preliminary subdivision for any unrecorded divisions must again be submitted to the department with a new application, subject to the fees and regulations applicable at the time of submittal. D. An urban planned development permit, fully contained community permit, or development agreement approved pursuant to K.C.C. chapter 21 A.39 may extend the preliminary approval period beyond sixty months for any preliminary subdivision approved simultaneous or subsequent to the urban planned development permit or fully contained community permit_ Such extensions may be made contingent upon satisfying conditions set forth in the urban planned development permit, fully contained community permit or development agreement. In no case shall the extended preliminary approval period exceed the expected buildout time period of the urban planned development or fully contained community as provided in the urban planned development permit, fully contained community permit or development agreement. This section shall apply to any approved urban planned development permit, fully contained community permit or development agreement in existence on January 1, 2000, or approved subsequent to January 1, 2000. E. For any plat with more than four hundred lots that is also part of the county's four to one program, the preliminary subdivision approval shall be effective for eighty-four months. This subsection applies to any preliminary plat approved by either the council or the hearing examiner, or both, on or after January 1, 1998, that relates to a four to one program with proposed plats containing more than four hundred lots. F. For any plat with more than fifty lots where fifty percent or more of those lots will constitute affordable housing which is housing for those that have incomes of less than eighty percent of median income for King County as periodically published by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, or its successor agency, and at least a portion of the funding for the project has been provided by federal, state or county housing funds, the preliminary subdivision shall be effective for seventy- two months. This subsection applies to any plat that has received preliminary approval on or after January 1, 1998. (Ord. 14747 § 2, 2003: Ord. 14113 § 2, 2001: Ord. 13694 § 56, 1999). > 19A.12.030 Revisions of preliminary subdivisions. Applications to revise subdivisions that have received preliminary approval shall comply with the following: A. Revisions that result in any substantial changes as determined by the department, shall be treated as a new application for purposes of vesting and shall be reviewed as Type 3 land use decision pursuant to K.C.C. 20.20.020. For the purpose of this section, substantial change includes the creation of additional lots, the elimination of open space or changes to conditions of approval on an approved preliminary subdivision. 19A-13 19A.12.030–19A.12.060 (King County 12-2003) LAND SEGREGATION B. Approval of the following modifications by the department shall not be considered revisions: 1. Engineering design, unless the proposed design alters or eliminates features specifically required as a condition of preliminary subdivision approval; 2. Changes in lot dimensions that are consistentwith K.G.C. Title 21A; 3_ A decrease in the number of lots to be created so long as the decrease allows for future compliance with the minimum density provisions of K.C.C. Title 21 A, if applicable. (Ord. 13694 § 57, 1999). 19A.12.040 Preliminary short subdivision - approval time. Preliminary approval of a short subdivision shall be effective for a period of sixty months, except the approval period shall be eighty-four months for any short plat or plats that were part of a development agreement or interlocal agreement entered into after January 1, 1996, that included at least four hundred acres of open space dedications and urban land designations at a four -to -one ratio. (Ord. 14788 § 4, 2003: Ord. 13694 § 58, 1999). 19A.12.050 Limitations for short subdivisions. A. Inside the Urban Growth Area, a maximum of nine lots may be created by a single application. Outside the Urban Growth Area, a maximum of four lots may be created by a single application. B. An application for further segregation may not be submitted within five years after recording, except through the filing of a subdivision application or unless the short plat contains fewer than nine lots inside the Urban Growth area or fewer than four lots outside the Urban Growth Area, in which case an alteration application may be submitted to create a cumulative total of up to nine lots inside the Urban Grwoth Area or up to four lots outside of the Urban Growth Area within the original short plat boundary. C. A maximum of eighteen lots inside the Urban Growth Area or eight lots outside the Urban Growth area may be created from two or more contiguous parcels with any common ownership interest. (Ord. 14788 § 5, 2003: Ord. 13694 § 59, 1999), 19A.12.060 Revisions of preliminary short subdivisions. Applications to revise short subdivisions that have received preliminary approval shall comply with the following: A. Revisions that result in any substantial changes as determined by the department, shall be treated as a new application for purposes of vesting and shall be reviewed as Type 2 land use decision pursuant to K.C.C. 20.20.020. For the purpose of this section, substantial change includes the creation of additional lots, the elimination of open space or changes to conditions of approval on an approved preliminary short subdivision. B. Approval of the following modifications by the department shall not be considered revisions: 1. Engineering design, unless the proposed design alters or eliminates features specifically required as a condition of preliminary short subdivision approval; 2. Changes in lot dimensions that are consistent with K.C.C. Title 21A; 3. A decrease in the number of lots to be created so long as the decrease allows for fixture compliance with the minimum density provisions of K.C.C. Title 21 A, if applicable. (Ord. 13694 § 60, 1999). 19f-14 0 17 am Claussen, Kimberly Z-0121 From: Lee, Jeff Sent: Monday, March 22, 2004 4:30 PM To: 'ssiatten@camwest.com;'haynie@tenw.com; Claussen, Kimberly Cc: Warren, Richard Subject: FW: Shamrock Property: Traffic Impact Fees Sara, We have looked into your request for a trip credit towards your MPS fee and agree that the development should receive a credit for the demolition of the previous existing uses. To remain consistent with prior applications, we re -calculated the credit for a Single -Family unit (ITE 21.0) based on its rate, rather than equation. This brings the total trip credit to 17 trips. Land Use Units Per Trips Single Family 5 D.U. 5 Nursery 25 Employees 12 Total 17 Since the ITE rate basically translates 1 SF unit to 1 P.M. peak hour trip, the Shamrock Property will receive a 17 Single -Family unit credit towards their MPS fee. If you have questions, please contact me at (206) 263-4759. Jeff -----Original Message ----- From: Sara Slatten [mailto:sslatten@camwest.com] Sent: Friday, March 19, 2004 11:04 AM To: richard.warren@metrokc.gcv Cc: haynie@tenw.com Subject: RE: Shamrock Property: Traffic Impact Fees Richard, Attached is the memo again which now includes the referenced attachment A. Thanks, Sara <<Shamrock Property Memo 3-18-04.pdf>> > -----Original Message----- > From: Sara Slatten > Sent: Friday, March 19, 2004 10:44 AM > To: 'richard.warren@metrokc.gov' > Cc: 'Jeff Haynie' > Subject: Shamrock Property: Traffic Impact Fees > > Richard, > CamWest is currently in preliminary plat review on the Shamrock > Property, located NW of 148th Ave SE & NE 4th Street on the East > Renton plateau. This plat is for 118 single-family lots and Kim > Claussen is planning to issue our SEPA determination late next week. > I met with Kim earlier this week and discussed our proposal to receive traffic impact fee credit as the site was previously used for a commercial nursery business and it contained five single-family homes. Attached is a memo from our traffic consultant Jeff Haynie, TENW, outlining our proposal. This proposal is similar to one you approved for our Sweetbriar Nursery project back in 2000. Kim asked that I forward this to you for review. I will mail a hard copy out to you in today's mail. If you have any questions about this could you please follow up with either Jeff or myself in the upcoming weeks. Thanks, Sara Slatten CamWest Development > (425) 825-1955; phone > (425) 825-1565; fax > 09, �xlilblt No. MAIN R! "� 'r` PY > www.camwest.com Item No �C:) -- Received King County Hearing Examiner '� J > << File: Shamrock Property Memo 3-18-04.pdf » King C4111114y Rn;td Services Division I)gxirlruU11t of Tr, asportation 201 SontStJac]csntzStreet Srvall Ile, WA 98104-3U56 Mareh 19, 2004 Camwest 9720 NE 1.20" Place, #100 Kirkland, WA 98034 RE: Road Variance L04VO004 — Shamrock — Related File L02POI14 Dear Sir/Madam: Thank you for submitting your application for a road variance from the King County Road Standards (KCRS)_ You requested a variance from Section 2.03 of the KCRS concerning the requirement for a crowned road cross-section. The Shamrock project is a demonstration project that King County Ordinance 14662 approved as a low -impact development. We have reviewed the one directional road cross -slope that is proposed for minor access and subaccess classification roads. The one direction cross slope on these local access streets will allow for an alternative drainage design with discharge to adjacent water duality swales. I approve a variance to allow the one -directional road cross slope on minor access and subaccess classification roads with the condition that slotted drains be utilized in the vertical curb to direct flows to the water quality swales. A copy of the staffs analysis, findings and conclusions is enclosed. If you have any questions, please call Craik; Comfort, Road Variance Engineer, Traffic Engineering Section, at 206-263-6109. Sincerely, Paulette Norman, P.E. County Road Engineer PN:CC:kc cc: James Sanders, P.E., Development Engineer, Land Use Services Division (LUSD), Department of Development and Environmental Services (DDES) Pete Dye, Y.E., Senior Engineer, LUSD, DDES Linda Dougherty, Director, Road. Services Division (RSD), Department of Transportation (DOT) Norton Posey, P.E., Acting County Traffic Engineer, Traffic Engineering Section, RSD, DOT Fatin Kara, P -E., Supervising Engineer, Traffic Engineering Section, RSD, DOT Kris Langley, Senior Engineer, Traffic Engineering Section, RSD, DOT Craigb.P.E., Roa Variance Engineer, Traffic Engineering Section, RSD, DOT Item No. Received lil4lAIN FILE COPY King County Hearing Examiner King County Road Services Division Department cf Transportabon Traffic Engineering Section 1t3S KSC-TR-0222 201 South Jack -Kin Street Seattle, WA 98104 March 19, 2004 TO: Variance File FM: Craig Comfort, P.E., Road Variance Engineer, Traffic Engineering Section RE: Road Variance 1,04V0004 — Shamrock - Related File L02POO14 Applicant's Presentation: Shamrock is a preliminary plat Low Impact Demonstration (LID) PrUject with 118 lots located on the west side of 148" Avenue SE at the 12400 block. The variance request is to apply a one directional cross slope for subaccess and minor access streets within the Low Impact Development portion of the project. The King County Road Standards requires a crowned road at 2% cross -slope. A variance is also requested for curb drops (notches) that convey surface water flow from the one directional cross slope pavement to the roadside grass -lined swales. 2. The design with one -directional road cross slope and notched curb, will allow for swales in lieu of closed pipe and provide increased contact of runoff with soils, facilitating opportunities for infiltration and water quality treatment and resulting in increased travel time and time of concentration. The natural function of the watershed is more closely mimicked resulting in reduced detention pond size and thus helping to minimize the impacts of development. The project will utilize vertical curb on the roads and the sidewalks will be on the upper side of the one -directional roads so that drainage will not run across the sidewalks. The grass -lined swales will be in privately maintained tracts. 3. The variance approval will not result increased County maintenance costs because the swales are in private tracts and fewer drainage appurtenances will be maintained by King County. Staffs Findings and Conclusions: 1. Concurrence with the applicant's presentation. 2. The one -direction cross -slope on these low classification roads (minor access and subaccess) would not compromise the traffic or maintenance functions of the roads_ The proposed notched curb should be replaced with slotted drains that extend through the vertical curb. Slotted drains will allow for a continuous top of vertical curb and no notching. � ! i Transportation Engineering NorthWest DATE: February 12, 2004 TO: Kim Claussen King County FROM: Jeff Haynie, P.E. Transportation Engineering Northwest Memorandum RE: Shamrock Property — MPS Fee Credits TENW Project No. 2328 This memorandum documents our assessment of the potential MPS fee credit associated with the existing uses on the Shamrock Property site located in King County. It is our understanding that the existing site contains 5 single-family homes and a wholesale nursery. Based on our discussions, the nursery operation had a total of approximately 100 employees, of which 25 worked on an average weekday. The p.m. peak hour trip generation estimate for the existing land uses was based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation manual, 7"' edition. Specifically, the equation for land use code (LUC) 210 Single -Family Detached Housing and the average rate for LUC 818 Wholesale Nursery were used. The existing uses on the Shamrock property site are estimated to generate a total of 19 p.m. peak hour trips. The trip generation for the existing uses is summarized in Attachment A. An additional trip generation calculation was conducted to determine the number of single-family homes that would be expected to generate 19 p.m. peak hour trips. Fifteen (15) single-family homes would be expected to generate 19 p.m. peak hour trips. The trip generation calculations are summarized in Attachment A. Summary The Shamrock Property should receive credit for 15 single-family homes towards King County MPS fees for the existing uses. If you have any questions regarding the information presented in this7jOW�' a�� me at (425) 485-4683. `% Fr a NSe1mart\o1TENW•EaslsidMctiveProjeelslKCLa1ecomerAssessmerd-825MShamrockProperlyMemo.dec Exhibit N Item No. Received Icing County Hearing Transportation Engineering/Operations ♦ Impact Studies ♦ Design Servltes • Transportation Planning/Forecasting D.E_S� ner 76625 Redmond Way, Suite M, PM8 323 • Redmond, INA 98052 • Office (4 25) 485-4663MAIWme py Shamrock Property Trip Generation Estimate DRAFT FOR CLIENT REVIEW ONLY ATTACHMENT A trip Generation Estimate for Existing Lana uses - NM IJeaK Flour Trip Generation Trips Land Use Units Units ITE LUC' Rate' Generated Existing Uses Single -Family Housing 5 DU' 210 Equation 7 Nursery 25 Employees 818 0.47 12 Total Existing PM Peak Hour Trips = 19 Notes: 1. Land Use Codes and trip generation rates from the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation, 71h edition, 2003. 2. Dwelling unit. Trip Generation Equivalent to Existing Lana uses - I'M NeaK hour Trip Generation Trips Rate' Generated Single -Family Housing 15 DU2 210 Equation 19 Total PM Peak Hour Trips = 19 Notes: 1. Land Use Codes and trip generation rates from the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation, 7th edition, 2003. 2. Dwelling unit. ALW Shamrock TGEN 2112/2004 0 January 22, 2004 Ms. Laura Casey Senior Ecologist King County Dept. of Development & Environmental Services ATTN: Ms. Kim Claussen, Senior Planner 900 Oaksdale Avenue Southwest Renton, WA 98055 Re: Proposed LID Modification to Wetland Regulations: Preliminary Plat Application ( LID) of Shamrock Property, King County LUSD No. L02P014. Dear Ms. Casey: Per our last meeting and comments received from staff (12/18/03), we are providing this letter to request a modification to wetland code requirements. This modification request is allowed under the LID Ordinance #14662 and is specifically necessary to locate an enhanced stormwater pond within a portion of wetland buffer for the Shamrock Property. The use of a wetland buffer for stormwater ponds is not allowed in the Sensitive Areas Ordinance (KCC 21A.24.330) and the current site plan design includes a vegetated cell of the detention pond within a Class 2 wetland 50 -foot buffer. As you are aware, the Shamrock proposal is one of King County's love impact development (LID) proposals. Last year, the County Council approved this pilot ordinance to allow for more innovative proposals that help maintain hydrologic conditions and also protect the aquatic environment. Consequently, it was acknowledged that potential modifications to existing King County code sections, including the Sensitive Areas Ordinance (KCC 21A.24), would be necessary for LID proposals. Specifically, the LID Ordinance reads: Section D.S. Environmentally sensitive areas: KCC Chapter 21A.24, if the modification results in a net improvement to the functions of the sensitive area. Section K.3 lists the criteria for receiving a modification to the Sensitive Areas Ordinance. I , FEB 13 K -C: D.DD, E., MAIN FILE COP'S ' • i Ms. Laura Casey, Shamrock LID Modification January 22, 2004 Page 2 Section K.3.b. Any individual request for a modification or waiver must meet two or more of the criteria (1) through (4) as follows: (1) uses the natural site characteristics to protect the natural system; (2) addresses storm water and drainage safety, function, appearance, environmental protection and maintainability based upon sound engineering judgment; (3) contributes to achievement of a two -star or a three -star rating for the project site under the Built Green "Green Communities" program recognized by the Master Builders Association of King and Snohomish Counties; or (4) where applicable, reduces housing costs for future project residents or tenants without decreasing environmental protection. The Shamrock plat is a Low Impact Development (LID) residential project incorporating site design techniques that store, infiltrate, evaporate, and detain urban stormwater runoff. The LID technology focuses on managing stormwater in ways that are similar to the pre - development or "natural" conditions. Utilizing vegetation uptake and soil infiltration opportunities throughout a site can promote water quality improvement and reduce the size of collection areas required for storage. In addition, wetland buffer enhancement and restoration of wetland area will be visible improvements to the environment. In order to accomplish the proposed LID features, modifications to the sensitive areas code are necessary. The following provides information on how the Shamrock LID proposal meets or exceeds two of the four criteria for the modification to sensitive area code. 0 Ms. Laura Casey, Shamrock LID Modification January 22, 2004 Page 3 0 (1) Uses the natural site characteristics to protect the natural system. The Shamrock site contains forested and shrub wetland habitat. Most of the wetland buffer areas have been cleared from previous development and use activities. A portion of Wetland B was cleared and filled which caused a disconnection of the wetland system. This LID project will restore wetland area and function by enhancing buffers with new trees and shrubs, will construct a "natural" stormwater pond facility, and will reconnect the wetland area that was filled. Low function wetland area will also be improved with the planned restoration. The proposed use of open, vegetated swales will provide a more natural return of surface water runoff into the on-site wetlands. The LID storm system will incorporate amended soils within associated drainage swales and this is expected to lead to higher water quality versus a traditional underground piped storm drainage system. The proposed wetland buffer averaging exceeds the area replacement standard and provides habitat by preserving more of the site's forest area. (2) Addresses storm water and drainage safety, function, appearance, environmental protection and maintainability based upon sound engineering judgment. Significant analysis has been conducted for the overall LID proposal especially with regards to the stormwater drainage components. Since the LID proposal is not specifically allowed by existing code, nor is there long-term performance results for these types of projects, the storm detention and water quality design utilizes existing code and standards. While some credit is given for the modified land cover element, the detention and water quality pond -sizing is fairly conservative considering factors of safety, and the long-term function and performance. The fill violation that occurred on the site several years ago, caused wetland drainage disturbance and interrupted natural flows. This wetland blockage and habitat degradation will be restored. The eastern portion of the fill area is intended for the construction of an enhanced stormwater pond. The stormwater pond will include design elements to 0 Ms. Laura Casey, Shamrock LID Modification January 22, 2004 Page 4 provide a "natural" feature over time. In addition to water quality treatment and storage functions, the pond may provide buffer functions of habitat and screening to protect the adjacent wetland areas. The detailed wetland restoration plan will include all specifications and typical standards of mitigation i.e. performance standards, maintenance program, monitoring, contingency plan, and performance security. In summary, the proposed Shamrock Property LID incorporates environmental quality in its design through wetland restoration and preservation, and the enhancements that included water quality improvement. The plat screening response letter addressed to Ms. Laura Casey (Shamrock LID October 6, 2003, Schulz) provides more detailed information that can be used to further support this modification request. Please feel free to contact me if there are any questions regarding this letter or the project. Sincerely, C. Gary chulz Wetland/Forest Ecologist 7700 S. Lakeridge Dr. Seattle, WA 98178 Telephone 206-772-6514 bear4ail@yahoo.com Cc: Ms. Sara Slatten, CamWest Development Mr. Jeff Cox, Triad Associates C AI\/I #WEST J 13, 2004 ussen, Planning unty Department of ment & Environmental Services :esdale Avenue SW WA 98055-1219 shamrock Property: L02P0014 'reliminary Plat Resummital 113� n, 1 is the Shamrock Property resubmittal to address the wetland modifications l and traffic impact fee credit proposal. Additionally, the plat has been revised t the buffer modifications which were proposed by Laura Casey at out last Specifically, lots 77-80 have been pulled back and are no longer shown in the buffer. )wing information is included in this submittal: Fwenty (25) copies of the revised preliminary plat. Fen (10) copies of the remaining Shamrock drawings including: • Sheet 2 of 8: Illustrative Low Impact Development Exhibit • Sbeet 3 of 8: Preliminary Grading & Storm Drainage Plan + Sheet 4 of 8: Detention Pond Sections — City of Renton Portion •Sheet 5 of 8: Preliminary Composite Utility Plan — KC Portion • Sheet 6 of 8: Preliminary Composite Utility Plan — Renton Portion • Sheet 7 of 8: LID Details • Sheet 8 of 8: Topographic Survey & Wetland Delineation Fen (10) copies of the modified wetland regulations proposal from Gary Schulz sated January 22, 2004 to Laura Casey. ren (10) copies of the proposed traffic credit memorandum from Jeff Haynie, rENW, dated February 12, 2004. you have any questions or need any additional information please call me at ?5-195.5. Thanks. MAIN FILE DEVELOPM:NT INC Februar! Kim Cla King Ca Develop 900 Oak Renton, RE: 1 Dear Ki Enclose proposa. to reflec meeting. wetland The foll( 1) - 2) 3) r s 4) r Should, (425) 8, 9720 NE 120th Pl. Suite Kirkland 00 425-825-1955 WA 98034 Fax 425-825-1565 J 13, 2004 ussen, Planning unty Department of ment & Environmental Services :esdale Avenue SW WA 98055-1219 shamrock Property: L02P0014 'reliminary Plat Resummital 113� n, 1 is the Shamrock Property resubmittal to address the wetland modifications l and traffic impact fee credit proposal. Additionally, the plat has been revised t the buffer modifications which were proposed by Laura Casey at out last Specifically, lots 77-80 have been pulled back and are no longer shown in the buffer. )wing information is included in this submittal: Fwenty (25) copies of the revised preliminary plat. Fen (10) copies of the remaining Shamrock drawings including: • Sheet 2 of 8: Illustrative Low Impact Development Exhibit • Sbeet 3 of 8: Preliminary Grading & Storm Drainage Plan + Sheet 4 of 8: Detention Pond Sections — City of Renton Portion •Sheet 5 of 8: Preliminary Composite Utility Plan — KC Portion • Sheet 6 of 8: Preliminary Composite Utility Plan — Renton Portion • Sheet 7 of 8: LID Details • Sheet 8 of 8: Topographic Survey & Wetland Delineation Fen (10) copies of the modified wetland regulations proposal from Gary Schulz sated January 22, 2004 to Laura Casey. ren (10) copies of the proposed traffic credit memorandum from Jeff Haynie, rENW, dated February 12, 2004. you have any questions or need any additional information please call me at ?5-195.5. Thanks. MAIN FILE CAMWEST D E V E L O P M E N T I N C 9720 NE 120th PI. Suite #100 Kirkland WA 98034 425-825-1955 Fax 425-825-1565 www.camwest.com King County Department of Development and Environmental Services Land Use Services Division 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Renton, Washington 98055-1219 (206) 296-6600 TTY (206) 296-7217 Alternative formats available upon request Drop -Off Cover Sheet for Land Use Services Division IMPORTANT *#**#*#*********!*******#***k PROJECT NUMBER AND NAME IS NECESSARY Date Received by LUSD FOR ALL DROP-OFFS Project No_: Project Name: `_ 3HM j n -, - t FROM: 7710 %� T�fI� L� '�.Ea z Company Name/ Co tact Person _ . Telephone No.: S—��i�e„l,a; ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REQUESTED BY KING COUNTY STAFF (please print) Short Plat / Plats Please eGify item(s) dropped -off _ Lot Line Adlustment Permit U Please specify item(s) dropped -off: Right of Way Permit Please specify item(s) dropped -off - Clearing / Gradin Permit Additional information requested-, please specify item(s) dropped -off: Other: PLEASE NOTE: All drop-off item(s) will be logged into the computer under the project number, therefore, it is important that the top portion of this form is completed properly before you drop-off anything. Assistance in finding a project number can be provided by speaking to a Land Use Services Division Person of the Day (POD) or the Zoning/Land Use Technician. Your cooperation is important. Thank you. I.USD Drop -Off Cover Sheet Ig-cvs-dropoff.pdf 05-30-2002 Page 1 of 1 i King County Department of Development and Environmental Services Land Use Services Division 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Renton, Washington 98055-1219 (206) 296-6600 TTY (206) 296-7217 Alternative formats available upon request Drop -Off Cover Sheet for Land Use Services Division *k#�#*x*x:xx*x*xtxftex*rrx�vi�# IIlAGflQ�hlT�tr#wk�'vr*#,r#x*x,r�*::xxxrr*#i�kk,t PROJECT 50NIMRAIND N, FORWIALL DRO Project No. Project Name: FROM: TO IS NSPESSARY I Date Received by LUSD Company Name A Contact Person Telephone No,: nG5 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REQUESTED BY KING COUNTY STAFF (please print) Short Plat/ Plats Please specify item(s) dropped -off: Lot Line Adiustment Permit Please specify item(s) dropped -off: 'tt;,, _ . Right of Way Permit K.G. D.D.E.S. Please specify item(s) dropped -off: Clearing / Grading Permit Additional information requested; please specify item(s) dropped -off: Other: PLEASE NOTE: All drop-off item(s) will be logged into the computer under the project number, therefore, it is important that the top portion of this form is completed properly before you drop-off anything. Assistance in finding a project number can be provided by speaking to a Land Use Services Division Person of the Day (POD) or the Zoning/Land Use Technician Your cooperation is important. Thank you. LUSD Drop -Off Cover Sheet Ig-cvs-dropoff.pdf 05-30-2002 MAIN FIDS COPY Page 1 of i I IN V r INELLYR—RT LOT Y F7TH AVE 5E JA 98059-4213 -4 Ct O 3 a G W QY U w r 'w • � 4 : �" C u' C CpJ • �7 � G � � � cps �j o:cngao �'p •^ a � oc n C A , s. O h` ro F3 w co m , U Y I- 20 20 m ... ,O a U cc V cd [... p v s�J�V ro ar cz «. 0-067 i■ij �o�o U 4 low�` C -4 AG • WEDNESDAY, Noviomt3ER 32, 2003 Whistle -blowers vuo Nf PAGE Al "Yes. it is an ongoing investiga- tion that is still open," Calderwood said. The Whistlehlower Protection Code is an avenue for county employees to report what they believe is improper governmental action and retaliation, The employees — Hossein Barahimi, Jim Ishimaru, Sean Wellander, Jim Davis and their supervisor, Ho -Chuan Chen — all work for the county's Travel Forecasting and Data Management group (TFDM) and helped develop the underlying model used to process concurren- cy applications They allege DOJ' has used "arbi- trary and inaccurate" data that favor development. The allega- tions are spelled out in e-mails between the employees, the Ombudsman's Office and the County Council. When contacted by The Press, ,,one, of the five employees wanted to be quoted for this story. A Icing County employee who spoke only on the condition of anonymity, however, said the TFDM group was formed several years ago specifically to address existing prob- lems within the concurrency pro- gram, which is supposed to work to ensure that roads and other trans- portation infrastructure keep pace with development. Dougherty disputed the reason the group was formed. "'Their lob is to develop and keep updating the underlying model," she said. "If they thought something was not done correctly, they could raise concerns to their manager, but they do not audit the program or have oversight responsibility." Complaint surfaces In Sammamish The complaint surfaced recently as possible new evidence in an appeal of the 132 -home Crossings at Pine Lake development in Sammamish. "The whistle -blowers' complaint fits closely with the information we would have liked to have had," said appellant Vic Heiler. "This could very well explain the anom- alies and a passing score for the test." His attorneysasked a Superior Court ju�o send the appeal back to a hearing examiner, in light of the employees' complaints. Heller said he never dreamed such a complaint would surface. "We were not pursuing an inves- tigation of the county," he said. ""Fe didn't assume they were doing the things alleged in the complaint. I expected to find people just didn't care or made a mistake. But it could be far beyond that, and that's very disturbing." If true, the employees' allega- tions could highlight why the area has so many traffic problems, Heller said. "I think this could be a major contribution," he said. "if there is a systemic problem with -actually having infrastructure in place in an appropriate time for development, that could be one of the main prob- lems facing this area." This isn't the first time the coun- ty's concurrency program has been questioned. Sammamish resident Scott Hamilton said that in the late 1990s, he appealed two develop- ments in Sammamish: the Greens and Bordeaux neighborhoods (part of the Beaver Crest subdivisions) and Cedar Cove. Both develop- ments ultimately were downsized. Following such appeals, the five employees say, the Icing County Auditor performed an audit of the concurrency model, and subse- quently made a series of recom- mendations that have not been implemented. Hamilton said he thinks the county is "pro -developer and pro -growth." THE ISSAQU of traffic on certain congested roads — whish is neither compli- ant with national standards or within American Planning Association Guidelines, "We don't know how widespread it is," the source said. In an e-mail sent to County Council members June 19, the employees say they've been work- ing to correct the problems from the bottom up for two years -- try- ing to convince their managers that the way in which the county processes transportation applica- tions would be vulnerable in court. They said they had hoped the Ombudsman's Office would investi- gate any "unethical, unprofession- al or potentially illegal actions." The complaint was forwarded to Executive Ron Sims' office before it was handed off to the DOT to man- age. Dougherty said the DOT asked the prosecutor's office to find someone to investigate the com- plaint. David Evans & Associates, a consulting firm, was hired to con- duct the investigation. County'pro-growth' "They like the permit fees, and theoretically the new tax base," Hamilton said. "And neither the state or the county will provide concurrent infrastructure, which is why we have the tragic problems like we do. It's now catching up." The cost to build one mile of road can be mind-boggling, Hamilton said. "So they take the easy way out," he added. "And what you get is gridlock." Doughertydisagreed. "We have absolutely no interest in trying to manipulate the outcome of traffic impacts from development," she said. "The county is the public, and we work for the taxpayers," But a county source said the county has made it a practice to randomly change its standar allow double or triple the am County has two models The county, a source said, has a transportation concurrency model thatoriginally was a copy of a countywide model used for other applications such as the Comprehensive Plan. The concur- rency model has since been altered with flawed information, and the county is slowly basing all future planning on that "corrupt" model, the source said. The employees first noticed inconsistencies between those two models two years ago. The upcoming update of the Comprehensive Plan, for example, will be based on the flawed model, the source said. And last year, when the County Council revised its concurrency rules, the DOT may have deliberately pro- vided false information to the council, and the council adopted ordinances that were created in part to act as a protection from challenges to the data used for Redmond Ridge East. the complaint says. The employees also claim that the county may have used those ordinances adopted based on false information to fight against citizens in hearing and appeal processes, and that they suspect that "crucial e-mails and documents have not been disclosed to citizens when asked for information and e-mails related to the Transportation AH PRESS 13Y GHJ;(: FA14UAlZ �TIDNIGHT BRIDGE REPAIR Llrook- USA engineers primp resin East Friday night under the Northwest Sammarnish Road Bridge, which settled and cracked during the 2001 earthquake, c.onc'urrE:r�c'V program. Heller said he tried to request more information concerning con- r,urreiicv tests. "And they said, 'This is all the infurmat.ion we have available,' " he said. "taut the whistle -blowers' complaint seems to indicate the cnnirary „ Dougherty confident In program Dougherty said she has strong con- fidence, in tfie concurrency program. "If anything, we tend to lean toward assuming a slightly higher traffic impact rather than erring on the wrong side," she said. "I just simply don't agree with their per- spective that somehow their model that they have been responsible for has been negatively manipulated For concurrency," The employees say that certain assumptions used by the concur- rency program to process Redmond Ridge East are so unusual that if they were to be applied to similar expected within King County or within the Puget Sound area. "This simply defies common sense," they wrote. When a concurrency certificate was issued for Redmond Ridge )vast, a county source said, the pro- posal was for about 1,500 homes. Develcpers might, however. only build 800 homes. The county source also said it's unclear how many developments could have been approved using the concurrency model that's altered by "flaws" including random roadway speed changes and the inclusion of several unfunded road projects, County Councilman David Irons Jr., R-Sammamish, said the council plans to refine the concurrency model again early next year. "And I will be looking into get- ting some feedback from the department sooner, not later, about this," he said. In their e-mail to the County Council, the employees expressed tively consider the questions we have raised." Dougherty said she doesn't believe the investigation raises a conflict of interest. "The world of transportation concurrency and traffic modeling is fairly small," sha said. "And peo- ple have to maintain a high level of integrity to maintain a professional reputation." The employees also have filed three retaliation complaints, a grievance with their union, a civil- rights complaint and a profession- al -engineer complaint. "On May 4, we filed a retaliation complaint because we believe our working conditions have been detrimentally impacted by our whistle -blowing actions. Our job responsibilities have been reas- signed," they wrote. They added that their supervi- sor, Ho -Chuan Chen, was given an "unwarranted written reprimand from our Division Manager." --,r •' —r -- -•• •••••••J __••vva aa., wauu Y1�V 11lY VJ 6f YUCLL1 that forecast models would shov�,as given to DQT to manage, and Stacy Goo contributed to this report. that there is no traffic congestioi appears unlikely that it will effec- October 6, 2003 Ms. Laura Casey Senior Ecologist King County Dept. of Development & Environmental Services ATTN: Ms. Kim Claussen, Senior Planner 900 Oaksdale Avenue Southwest Renton, WA 98055 Re: Notice of Request for Additional information: Preliminary Plat Application (LID) of Shamrock Property, King County LUSD No. L02P014. Dear Ms. Casey: The Shamrock Plat is a Low Impact Development (LID) residential project incorporating site design techniques that store, infiltrate, evaporate, and detain urban stormwater runoff. The LID technology focuses on managing stormwater in ways that are similar to the pre -development or "natural" conditions. Utilizing vegetation uptake and soil infiltration opportunities throughout a site can promote water quality improvement and reduce the size of collection areas required for storage. This letter is written to respond to King County's letter dated October 7, 2002 - Plat Screening Transmittal. The following responses to the technical review and information requests pertain specifically to wetland issues and red-tailed hawk use. The related comments are found on pages 3 and 4 of the Transmittal. I have conducted recent site visits and research to provide the following information. Wetland (s): The site has a pending grading permit (L93G0073) for a 1992 violation involving wetland fill (E92C 1531). The restoration of this area is proposed without the dedication of a new, street right-of-way in the area originally proposed for restoration. Additionally, the Shamrock L.I.D wetland restoration concept is not intended to exactly copy the previously approved plan for the old fill violation. However, the proposed plan will remove fill and restore a wetland connection and associated wetland buffer in areas that were impacted by the violation. A conceptual drawing of the wetland restoration is included in the re- submittal package on Sheet 8 of 8 (Shamrock L.I.D. Demonstration C Proposal, Triad Associates 9/26/03). Exhibit No. o_1 14V Item No. ' :A,W .RILEev Received Lb IR)o King County tearing Examiner Ms. Laura Casey, Shamrock LID October 6, 2003 Page 2 The following is a narrative description of the wetland restoration to be provided as a detailed plan after the current submittal information is reviewed: The conceptual restoration drawing represents approximately 19,161 square feet of wetland re -connection area. In addition, the adjacent stormwater pond will be enhanced with native plantings and provide a water quality improvement area that will have wetland and wetland buffer functions including wildlife habitat. A native seed source or seed bank is expected to be exposed when the wetland restoration area and stormwater / wetland pond areas are excavated. The western cell of the stormwater pond may also benefit from a seed bank remaining under the fill material. The previous wetland study concluded that the wetland area filled in 1992 was an emergent plant community. An emergent plant community should provide a significant seed source when exposed by careful excavation. Recent on-site investigation observed 1 to 2 feet of fill along the south boundary between existing forested wetland (Wetland A) and the old fill. The central areas appear to have a greater depth of fill to be excavated. Much of the "upland" area along the wetland boundary between existing wetland and fill at Wetland B was originally wetland. Based on the topographic survey, this area appears to have more than 2 feet of fill. The "upland" area next to Wetland B's south boundary would be restored to wetland. Also, a significant portion of this filled area is delineated as wetland but has low functions. The existing pioneer tree cover is unhealthy and dying. The understory lacks diversity and includes a dominant shrub cover of non-native blackberry. Excavation in this area would restore wetland functions without removing significant vegetation. The entire wetland restoration area will be excavated to original hydric soil to ensure the seed bank is exposed and wetland hydrology restored. On-site verification of excavation depths by the ecologist will be necessary during the restoration work. The wetland buffer area on the west side of the old fill has some young tree cover but will be fully planted to add diversity and buffer function. Several large western red cedar trees could be retained as habitat and to Ms. Laura Casey, Shamrock LID October 6, 2003 Page 3 provide shading for new plantings. The eastern fill area is intended for the construction of an enhanced stormwater pond. The stormwater pond would include design to appear as a natural feature over time. In addition to water quality treatment and storage functions, the pond may provide buffer functions of habitat and screening to protect the adjacent wetland areas. The detailed wetland restoration plan will include all specifications and typical standards of mitigation i.e. performance standards, maintenance program, monitoring, contingency plan, and performance security. There does not appear to have been any earthwork activity in the vicinity of wetlands and their buffers between 1993 and the present. The majority of the site was being used as a fully operational plant nursery at the time the wetland investigations started. This included planting beds located directly next to wetland boundaries. Additional grading and filling after the 1992 violation is not apparent. • r• t• •11 •'t ••ti • • r 11 l' rtlf The existing site conditions were used for this buffer averaging proposal. The plan drawing - Sheet 1 of 8 (Shamrock L.I.D. Demonstration Proposal, Triad Associates) shows the proposed buffer reductions and additions. Sheet 8 of 8 shows the proposed buffer enhancement areas. The majority of lots shown along the edge of Wetlands A & B are located in areas that were cleared for the Shamrock nursery operation. Lots 77, 78, 79, & 80 are located within existing, dense forest / shrub cover but are proposed for minor buffer reduction. Proposed Lots 67 through 76 are located in areas of limited vegetative cover and this area can greatly benefit from buffer enhancement plantings. Wetland B's buffer area, overall, would be improved with added native trees and shrubs. Wetland C has two areas proposed for buffer reduction. One is located in an area of Himalayan blackberry cover and old pasture. This reduced buffer would include an enhanced bioswale crossing. The bioswale would be planted with native trees and shrubs. The second reduction is for 144th Avenue S.E. culdesac. Most of the buffer replacement for Wetland C is located within the adjacent, forested areas. These added areas are Ms. Laura Casey, Shamrock LID October 6, 2003 Page 4 greater than the reduction and would provide a higher amount of buffer function. In addition, a small area of reduced buffer is proposed for Lot 41 and a new street, 144th Place S.E., at the southern part of Wetland A. Buffer effectiveness and the associated functions such as wildlife habitat for food and cover, shade, and sediment - pollutant removal etc. are not considered to be significant for most of the areas proposed for reduced buffers. Using the area calculations below, compensatory buffer area is being provided on the same wetland where the buffer averaging reduction is proposed. Wetland A / R RPstorPcl Reduced Buffer 4,634 sq. ft. Added Buffer 9,811 sq. ft. Wetland C: Reduced Buffer 3,869 sq. ft. Added Buffer 12,775 sq. ft. The intent of the proposed buffer averaging is to allow various site design features to occur and meet the code criteria. After site conditions are verified by the County, the buffer averaging can demonstrate that total area of buffer does not decrease, additional wetland protection can be provided, and wetland functions would be enhanced ( Public Rule 21 A-24- 016 A). As part of the analysis, the following criteria issues (Public Rule 21A-24-016 B) are being addressed: 1. Preserving the functions of the ,existing buffer on the parcel and adjoining parcels; 2. Not impacting the stability of a stream bank, if any; 3. Not creating a risk of hazardous trees as a result of development; Ms. Laura Casey, Shamrock LID October 6, 2003 Page 5 4. Providing the opportunity for additional protection or enhancement to the wetlands; 5. Not impacting the location of a floodway and 100 -year floodplain; 6. Not impacting the presence of any migrating river channel; 7. Preserving on-site natural resources (wetlands) and not impacting their functions and values; 8. Health Department requirements for on-site sewage disposal are not applicable to this proposal; 9. Will provide other information to be reasonably necessary to analyze the proposal. In addition, the buffer averaging would maintain the minimum buffer setback distance of 32.5 feet or 65 percent of the standard buffer width (50 feet). The additional buffer areas are contiguous to the standard buffer. The minimum building setback would be maintained between any structure and the reduced buffer ( Public Rule 21A-24-016 Q. As part of the low impact development, bioretention swales can be planted with native species to provide buffer enhancement. In summary, the buffer averaging as proposed would provide significantly more buffer area than required by code. Portions of increased buffer area would provide higher function due to existing habitat conditions. Other added buffer areas could provide opportunity for increased function over time or as the result of enhancement activities. Because this project includes wetland restoration, buffer areas would be enhanced and incorporated into the restoration plan (See Sheet 8 of 8). •r A previous study involving site visits combined with aerial photography interpretation was conducted on the entire wetland system between N.E. Sunset Blvd. (north side) in Renton to N.E. 4th (south side) in Renton (Wetland Determination For East Renton Property, Schulz 9/12/02). It was determined that with the presence of a forested wetland class, the Ms. Laura Casey, Shamrock LID October 6, 2003 Page 6 wetlands would be rated as Class 2. In addition, the wetland system exceeds one acre in size when off-site area is considered and off-site wetlands have present raptor nesting trees (KCC 21A.06.1415). No permanent open water was found in the system. Permanent, open water is a required habitat feature for Class 1 wetlands that are equal to or greater than ten acres in size. The subject wetland system may exceed ten acres in size but the two ponded areas observed were confirmed to have seasonal hydrology. No other ponded areas or potentially permanent open water habitats were found during the review. It does not appear that any of the other criteria for Class 1 wetlands are present in this system, i.e. federal or state listed species and rare plant associations. Even if the wetlands are connected as one system, the investigations indicate a Class 2 rating is appropriate. Red -Tailed Hawk: A survey of the site for red-tailed hawk nest(s) was conducted on 7/29/02. The request to review the site after the deciduous tree leaf -drop was performed on 12/14/02. This field investigation was similar to the first and used zoom binoculars to review individual trees. Both mature Douglas fir and black cottonwood were targeted for potential nests. The upland site and wetland areas were walked to get the best vantage of the tree crowns. No active nests or remnant nests were observed. Numerous site visits occurred on the property before and after these 2 dates. Some visits occurred within the timeframe for nesting and rearing but no related red-tailed hawk activity or behavior was observed. Please feel free to contact me if there are any questions regarding this letter or the project. Sincerely, C. , 4 aA 4 C. Gary Schulz Wetland/Forest Ecologist 7700 S. Lakeridge Dr. Seattle, WA 98178 Telephone 206-772-6514 bear4a11@yahoo.com Enclosed are: "These have been sent: ® Prints ® For Your Use ❑ Copies ❑ For Your Review /.4pprovul ❑ Reproducibles ❑ For Yoter Signature /Return ® Reports ❑ At Your Request ❑ Doctonents ® For- Yortr Records ❑ Specifications ❑ For Your Information ❑ Other ® Other submittal to KC TRILAD Date: October 8, 2003 s s_ o r I A r F s To. Sara Slatten CainWest Real Estate Development, Inc. I n I " II`rf%',f YN! 9720 NE 120th Place, Suite 100 Krk' rl w.a. ),K)11 rY,z1 Kirkland, `i'A 98034 42s.821.8448 47` 8 i 3 Al fa, Job No: 01-159 SO(i4fi8 �75L rol fres Project: Shamrock Enclosed are: "These have been sent: ® Prints ® For Your Use ❑ Copies ❑ For Your Review /.4pprovul ❑ Reproducibles ❑ For Yoter Signature /Return ® Reports ❑ At Your Request ❑ Doctonents ® For- Yortr Records ❑ Specifications ❑ For Your Information ❑ Other ® Other submittal to KC 1 10/7103 Preliminary Plat full size set 1 10/7/03 Preliminary Plat 112 size set 1 10/7103 Preliminary Technical Information Report 1 1017/03 Low Impact Development Report 25 1017/03 Preliminary Plat Sheets 1 and 8 8 10/7/03 Preliminary Plat full size sets 8 1017/03 Preliminary Technical Information Report 8 1017103 Low Impact Development Report Remarks: Sara, Enclosed are your copies as well as all copies for submittal to King County as discussed Sent 6y: ! Copies 7o file Rebecca eitshman MAIN FILE COPY GARRY STRUTHERS ASSOCIATES, INC. Memorandum 3150 Richards Road, Suite 100 Bellevue, WA 98005-4446 (425) 519-0300 (phone) (425) 519-0309 (fax) Date: January 6, Project Name: Shamrock Praperty To: Sara Slatten Project No.: 02001.03 P: T: CamWest Real Estate Develgpment. _ rp From: loan M Smelser, P.E Subject: Response to King County Comments -,' r I Purpose r . 0 E. This memorandum was prepared in response to the King County plat screening letter for Shamrock Property dated October 7, 2002. King County requested an addendum traffic study to address various issues. The issues are stated in italic with a response provided below. Supporting data and analysis is attached in the addendum Traffic Impact Analysis. All references pertain to the Shamrock Traffic Impact Analysis Addendum 1. Issues 1) Check the availability of updated (post -2000) accident information, and re-evaluate the accident data in Table 2 of the TLA. Please include the accident rate for the identified HAL at the intersection of 164rh Ave SE/SR-900. Please provide more specific information about "this type " (of intersection} as referenced in footnote 4, e.g., unsignalized with significant skew, etc. Updated accident data was obtained from WSDOT for the period between 1999 and 2001. The accident rates were re-evaluated with updated information and have been incorporated into the addendum TIA. The updated TIA provides a definition of the "type of intersection' and the accident rate at SR-900/164te Avenue SE (refer to Table 2). 2) Provide a supplemental analysis of the operation of the 14e Avenue SEISR-900 intersection CDE for the AM peak hour. l u An analysis of the AM peak hour level of service for SR -900/148` Avenue SE intersection is presented in Table 1 for 2002, Table 3 for 2006 without project, and Table 5 for 2006 with J, project. 10 ` 3) Confirm the lane configuration of the intersection of 148`x' Avenue SEISE 12e Street. o CD o } U The lane configuration for the SE 128th 8th Avenue SE intersection has been confirmed Street/14 x _� and the addendum TIA has been revised to reflect the correct lane configuration, e.g., `J :t=M Y eastbound/westbound exclusive left turn lane, exclusive through lane, and a shared through/right Q?4 lane and northbound/southbound exclusive left -turn lane and a shared through/right lane. Sinc(;ovs cAdocuments and settingslsslattenVocal settingsltemporary internet fileslolk151responsememoshamrock.doc 10!7!03 (ss) ' �� Memorandum 0 0 October 7, 2003 Page 2 a traffic signal has been installed at this intersection since the completion of the August 2002 TIA, the intersection was analyzed as a signalized intersection under all scenarios. 4) Reconcile the apparent difference in volumes southbound at the 148x* Avenue /SE 128`* Street vs. the southbound departure leg volumes from the intersection of SE 1241" Street/14e Avenue SE: 187 vs. 292 in the PM peak hour The southbound volumes at the 148th Avenue /SE 1281h Street were revised to match the southbound departure leg volumes from the intersection of SE 124`h Street/148`h Avenue SE (refer to Figures 3, 4, and 6). 5) SE 124'4 Street, the main plat access, is classified as a Neighborhood Collector. The KCRS stipulates that Neighborhood collectors intersecting arterials shall be 36 feet wide (curb to curb) for the first 154 feet—and although unspecified to be measured from the near -side of the intersection. This width provides for the opportunity to stripe the approach for either a shared left -through and right turn lane or a left -turn lane and a shared through -right. Since the eastbound approach of the SE 124th Street/148th Avenue SE intersection is estimated to operate at a high level of service (LOS B), additional capacity (e.g., exclusive turn lanes) is not needed. 6) Amend the TIA to add the 2406 "Without Project" turning movement volumes at the intersection of 14e/SE 120* Street (Figure 4). Addendum 1 includes the PM peak hour turning movement volumes and level of service analysis at the SE 120`h Street/148th Avenue SE intersection. For volumes, refer to Figure 3 (Existing), Figure 4 (2006 Without Project), and Figure 5 (2006 With Project). For level of service, refer to Table 1 (Existing), Table 3 (2006 Without Project), and Table 5 (2006 With Project). 7) Provide an evaluation for the AMpeak hour at the main plat entrance of SE 12,el]4? Avenue SE. Addendum 1 includes the AM peak hour turning movement volumes and level of service analysis at the SE 124th Street/148th Avenue SE intersection (see same figures and tables as stated in No. 6). 8) Provide a recommendation for lane geometry on the plat (west) side of the intersection. As stated in issue 5, the eastbound approach of the SE 124th Street/148th Avenue SE intersection is estimated to operate at a high level of service (LOS B) with a single left/through/right lane. Therefore, it is recommended that the plat entrance eastbound approach be two-lane road (one lane each direction). 9) Provide information upon which to assess the potential (future) short plat of proposed lot 118. Specifically, whether any recommendations in the TIA require revision based upon the resultant potential additional lots. cAdocuments and settings%ssiattenllocal settingsVemporary internet fileslolk151responsemernoshamrock.doc 10(7!03 (ss) Memorandum 9 9 October 7, 2003 Page 3 The potential future short plat of lot 118 is beyond the scope for the Shamrock property and, therefore, not part of the analysis for the Traffic Impact Analysis. ➢ SR -900/148 h Ave SE: The traffic study prepared for this project indicates that vehicles from the Shamrock proposal will travel north to the intersection of SR -900 and 148`' Avenue SE. The existing sight distance at this intersection appears to be substandard. To evaluate potential impacts at this intersection, prepare a sight distance evaluation, which includes an intersection plan showing sight line measurements. The intersection plan and measurements must be based upon field survey information and show design criteria such as right-of-way width, roadway locations, and restrictions to sight lines (i.e., vegetation, hillside embankments, fencing, etc.). Sight line measurements shall be based upon the Washington State Dept. of Transportation design standards. This drawing must be stamped by a civil engineer and land surveyor licensed in the State of Washington. The sight distance drawing illustrating the sight line measurements and field survey information is attached. ➢ SEPA SR -9001148`'` Ave SE: This Shamrock project, as proposed, may have a significant adverse impact (KCC 14.80) at the intersection of SR -900/148`" Avenue SE. This intersection is currently functioning at level of service F and sight distance at this intersection is deficient creating a safety problem for motorists and pedestrians. Installation of signalization and turn lanes have been identified to adequately solve the problem, however, no WSDOT funded projects currently exist which would assure the installation of the needed improvements. Although there are other proposals in the vicinity (Aster Park, East Renton, and preliminary plat of Stone Ridge), there are no assurances that this intersection improvement may be completed prior to the Shamrock proposal. Please indicate how the Shamrock project proposes to address this issue. To mitigate the deficient level of service and sight distance at the SR -900/148` Avenue SE intersection, it is proposed that a traffic signal and turn lanes be constructed by Shamrock and other proposed developments that would impact this intersection. It is proposed that a pro -rata share contribution be implemented to provide the needed improvements. Several developments will impact the SR -900/1481h Avenue SE intersection including Aster Park, Stone Ridge, and East Renton. Based on the number of PM peak hour project trips from each development passing through the SR -900/148`h Avenue SE intersection and the total PM peak hour trips entering the intersection, a pro -rata share percentage was calculated. The following table summarizes the volume of PM peak hour trips from each development proposal passing through the SR 900/1481' Avenue NE intersection. c:ldocuments and settingslsslatten%locai settingsltemporary internet fileslolki5lresponsememashamrock.doc 1017103 (ss) Memorandum October 7, 2003 Page 4 Table 1 Pro -Rate Share 1) Aster Park — Current proposal for Aster Park is 36 Lots per Mike Romano, Centurion uevetopment cervices. 2) Stone Ridge — Current proposal for Stone Ridge is 44 Lots per Curtis Schuster, KSS Partners 3) East Renton — Current proposal for East Renton is 66 Lots less credit for one existing single family residence for a net increase of 65 Lets per Sara Slatten of CamWest Development. 4) Shamrock — Current proposal for Shamrock is 118 Lots (King County) less credit for 5 existing single family residences for a net increase of 113 Lots. Trip generation for the 113 Lots was adjusted to reflect the previous Shamrock Nursery located on the site. Trip generation was reduced by 56 trips based on Land Use Code 818 Nursery (Wholesale) using employees as the independent variable. Shamrock Nursery had 120 employees on site. 120 employees x 0.47 PM peak trips per employee = 56 trips. As shown in Table 1, Shamrocks pro -rata share contribution is 23 percent. c:ldocumenta and settingslsslatteMocal settingsltemporary internet filesldk151responsememoshamrock.doc 10/7103 (ss) Lots No. of PM Peak Hour Trips (Net New) Total PM thru SR 9001148`h Avenue NE Pro- Rata Project Applicant 1215102 Peak Tris Intersection Share Aster Park' US Land 36 36 32 24% Stone Ridge KBS 44 44 32 24% East Renton3 CamWest 65 66 39 29% Shamrock¢ CamWest 113 114 30 23% TOTAL 258 260 133 100% 1) Aster Park — Current proposal for Aster Park is 36 Lots per Mike Romano, Centurion uevetopment cervices. 2) Stone Ridge — Current proposal for Stone Ridge is 44 Lots per Curtis Schuster, KSS Partners 3) East Renton — Current proposal for East Renton is 66 Lots less credit for one existing single family residence for a net increase of 65 Lets per Sara Slatten of CamWest Development. 4) Shamrock — Current proposal for Shamrock is 118 Lots (King County) less credit for 5 existing single family residences for a net increase of 113 Lots. Trip generation for the 113 Lots was adjusted to reflect the previous Shamrock Nursery located on the site. Trip generation was reduced by 56 trips based on Land Use Code 818 Nursery (Wholesale) using employees as the independent variable. Shamrock Nursery had 120 employees on site. 120 employees x 0.47 PM peak trips per employee = 56 trips. As shown in Table 1, Shamrocks pro -rata share contribution is 23 percent. c:ldocumenta and settingslsslatteMocal settingsltemporary internet filesldk151responsememoshamrock.doc 10/7103 (ss) GARRY STRUTHERS ASSOCIATES, INC. Date: February 6, 2003 To: Sara Slatten CamWest Real Estate Development. From: Joan M Smelser, P. Subject: Nursery Trip Generation Purpose 3150 Richards Road, Suite 100 Bellevue, WA 98005-4446 (425) 519-0300 (phone) (425) 519-0309 (fax) Project Name: Shamrock Property Project No.: 02001.03 P: T: This memorandum was prepared to provide supporting data to the issue of trip generation of the previous land use of the Shamrock Property. The following memorandum provides a summary of the process, findings, and recommendations of the trip generation analysis. Background Per Traffic Impact Analysis for Shamrock property, trip generation was adjusted to reflect trips associated with existing uses of the site. Trip generation for the 113 lots was adjusted to reflect the previous Shamrock Nursery located on the site. Trip generation was reduced by 56 trips based on Land Use Code 818 Nursery (Wholesale) using employees as the independent variable. Shamrock Nursery had 120 employees on site. 120 employees x 0.47 PM peak trips per employee = 56 trips. The Shamrock Nursery previously in operation at the proposed Shamrock property had both a nursery and office located on-site with approximately 125 employees. The operation has since moved to Kent, Washington, with the office located at 26205-65`h Avenue South and the nursery (Rainier Nursery) located at 7450 South 212[4 Street. Analysis To determine whether the trip generation rate provided in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) manual reflects actually trip generation for a wholesale nursery, a comparison of the ITE rate to an actual field study was conducted. The field study trip generation was determined by collecting traffic data from the Shamrock office building and the Rainier Nursery. Average daily traffic volumes were collected at the driveway entrances of both the office building and nursery to determine the number of PM peak hour trips generated by each operation. Table 1 summarizes the results of the traffic counts. c:ldocuments and settingslsslatteMocal settings%temporary internet fileslolk151tripgenmemoshamrock.doc 1017103 (ss) Memorandum 0 0 October 7, 2003 Page 2 Table 1 PM Peals Hour Traffic Volumes Location Total In out Shamrock Office Bldg 8 7 1 Rainier Nursery 11 9 2 Total 19 16 3 Revised Total' I9 IO 9 Revised ToWf 16 9 7 1 — revised using the directional distribution determined from the PM peak hour turning movement count. 2 — revised using the seasonal adjustment factor. As shown in Table 1, a total of 8 PM peak hour trips with 7 entering and 1 existing the Shamrock office building. The Rainer Nursery generated 11 PM peak hour trips with 9 entering and 2 exiting. Therefore, the total PM peak hour trips generated by both operations is 19 with 16 entering and 3 exiting. To verify the direction distribution of the PM peak hour trips, a turning movement count was conducted at the Shamrock office building. Results indicate that 55 percent of the trips entered the site and 45 percent exited the site. Therefore, this directional distribution was used, which results in 10 trips entering and 9 trips existing the site. This trip generation of 19 PM peak hour trips was used to determine an observed trip generation rate. Since there are currently approximately 125 employees at both the office building and nursery a PM peak hour trip generation rate of 0.152 (191125 = 0.152) was determined. Using this trip generation rate and the previous number of employees of 120, a trip generation of 18 (120 x 0.152 = 18) was determined for the previous Shamrock Landscaping operation. To account for the seasonal fluctuations in traffic throughout the year, a seasonal adjustment factor was determined. Monthly sales for 2002 were obtained for the Shamrock Office/Nursery to determine the average monthly sales of $745,604. This average monthly sales amount was then compared to the total sales in the month of January of $814,598. Therefore, the seasonal adjustment factor for January is 0.915 (745,604/814,598 = 0.915). Thus, the trip generation rate for Shamrock with the seasonal adjustment is 16 (18 x 0.915 = 16) PM peak hour trips, with 9 entering and 7 exiting. cAdocuments and settingslss]attenUoeal settingaVemporary internetfiles\olkl5%tripgenrremoshamrock,dac 1017103 (ss) t 0 �T I�� n I � 1 ��► ��fa �aaas�s+ �1 N �6 _ •�■ _J_ 0 �T 0 -RANSNATION r' 4 February 21, 2003 Triad Associates Attn: Bruce Knowlton 11814 115th Ave NE Kirkland, WA 98034 Re: Order No.: 300-10049351 Ll Title Officer: Chris Scurti Buyer/Borrower(s): Shamrock Highlands L.L.C. Subject Property: , , WA , King County WA , King County 12217 148th Avenue SE, Renton, WA 98059, King County 12227 148th Avenue SE, Renton, WA 98059, King County , , WA , King County 12265 148th Avenue SE, Renton, WA 98059, King County , , WA , King County 12409 148th Avenue SE, Renton, WA 98059, King County 12435 148th Avenue SE, Renton, WA 98059, King County 12205 148th Avenue SE, Renton, WA 98059, King County 12415 148th Avenue SE, Renton, WA 98059, King County Order Summary Thank you for placing this order with Transnation Title Insurance Company. If you need assistance on this file, please contact: Chris Scurti (425) 646-8585 cscurti@iandam.com Erin Crowder (425) 646-8584 ecrowder@landam.com Eric T. Bloomquist (425) 646-8583 ebloomquist@landam.com 1-800-441-7701 Fax: (425) 646-8576 Additional copies have been sent to: Camwest Development, Sara Slatten Transnation Title Insurance Company 14450 NE 29th Place, Suite 200, Mlevue, WA 980077k '�r ("OPV Phone: 800-441-7701 Fax 425-646-8576 � ' Cover Page WA.09.01.00 LzzfbCA a, TRANSNTS A.. . Triad Associates Attn: Bruce Knowlton 11814 115th Ave NE Kirkland, WA 98034 RE: Order No.: 300-10049351 Liability: Charge: Tax: Total: THIRD SUBDIVISION GUARANTEE $ 0.00 $ 200.00 $ 17.50 $ 217.60 Subject to the Exclusions from Coverage, the limits of liability and other provisions of the Conditions and Stipulations hereto annexed and made a part of this Guarantee, and subject to the further exclusion and limitation that no guarantee is given nor liability assumed with respect to the identity of any party named or referred to in Schedule A or with respect to the validity, legal effect or priority of any matter shown therein. TRANSNATION TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY a corporation herein called the Company, GUARANTEES the Assured named in Schedule A against actual monetary loss or damage not exceeding the liability amount stated herein which the Assured shall sustain by reason of any incorrectness in the assurances set forth in Schedule A. Dated: February 12, 2003 at 8:00 AM Authorized Signature Transoadon Tide Insurance Company 14450 NE 29th Place, Suite 200, Bellevue, WA 98007 Phone: 800-441-7701 F= 425-646-6576 Page 1 of 15 Subdivision Guarantee wr,.12_11.00 1. 2. 3. Order No.: 10049351 SCHEDULE A Name of Assured: Camwest Development and Shamrock Highlands L.L.C. Date of Guarantee: February 12, 2003 The assurances referred to on the face page hereof are: a. That according to those public records which, under the recording laws, impart constructive notice of matters affecting title to the following described land: See Exhibit A attached hereto. b. Title to the estate or interest in the land is vested in: Shamrock Highlands L.L.C., a Washington Limited Liability Company C. The estate or interest in the land which is covered by this Guarantee is: A fee simple estate Subject to the Exceptions shown below, which are not necessarily shown in order of their priority. EXCEPTIONS: 1. Taxes or assessments which are not shown as existing liens by the records of any taxing authority that levies or assessments on land or by the public records. 2. (a) Unpatented mining claims; (b) reservations or exceptions in Patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof, (c) Indian treaty or aboriginal rights, including, but not limited to, easements or equitable servitudes; or, (d) water rights, claims or title to water, whether or not the matters excepted under (a), (b), (c) or (d) are shown by the public records. 3. GENERAL PROPERTY TAXES and SERVICE CHARGES, as follows, together with interest, penalty and statutory foreclosure costs, if any, after delinquency: (1st half delinquent on May 1; 2nd half delinquent on November 1) Tax Account No.: 1023059040 Year Billed Paid Balance 2003 $1,897.69 $0.00 $1,897.69 (Covers Parcel A) 4. GENERAL PROPERTY TAXES and SERVICE CHARGES, as follows, together with interest, penalty and statutory foreclosure costs, if any, after delinquency: (1st half delinquent on May 1; 2nd half delinquent on November 1) Tax Account No.: 1023059304 Year Billed Paid Balance 2003 $ 888.43 $0.00 $888.43 (Covers Parcel B) Page 2 of 15 Subdivision Guarantee Order No.: 10049351 5. GENERAL PROPERTY TAXES and SERVICE CHARGES, as follows, together with interest, penalty and statutory foreclosure costs, if any, after delinquency: (1st half delinquent on May 1; 2nd half delinquent on November 1) Tax Account No.: 1023059319 Year Billed Paid Balance 2003 $3,692.48 $2,508.36 $1,184.12 (Covers Parcel C) 6. GENERAL PROPERTY TAXES and SERVICE CHARGES, as follows, together with interest, penalty and statutory foreclosure costs, if any, after delinquency: (1st half delinquent on May 1; 2nd half delinquent on November 1) Tax Account No.: 1023059022 Year Billed Paid Balance 2003 $4,277.16 $0.00 $4,277.16 (Covers Parcel D) 7. GENERAL PROPERTY TAXES and SERVICE CHARGES, as follows, together with interest, penalty and statutory foreclosure costs, if any, after delinquency: (1st half delinquent on May 1; 2nd half delinquent on November 1) Tax Account No.: 1023059415 Year Billed Paid Balance 2003 $2,267.42 $ 0.00 $2,267.42 (Covers Parcel E) 8. GENERAL PROPERTY TAXES and SERVICE CHARGES, as follows, together with interest, penalty and statutory foreclosure costs, if any, after delinquency: (1st half delinquent on May 1; 2nd half delinquent on November 1) Tax Account No.: 1023059174 Year Billed Paid Balance 2003 $3,881.09 $0.00 $3,881.09 (Covers Parcel F) 9. GENERAL PROPERTY TAXES and SERVICE CHARGES, as follows, together with interest, penalty and statutory foreclosure costs, if any, after delinquency: (1st half delinquent on May 1; 2nd half delinquent on November 1) Tax Account No.: 1023059031 Year Billed Paid Balance 2003 $1,653.01 $0.00 $1,653.01 (Covers Parcel G) Subdivision Guarantee Page 3 of 15 order No.: 10049351 10. GENERAL PROPERTY TAXES and SERVICE CHARGES, as follows, together with interest, penalty and statutory foreclosure costs, if any, after delinquency: (1st half delinquent on May 1; 2nd half delinquent on November 1) Tax Account No.: 1023059191 Year Billed Paid Balance 2003 $3,032.35 $0.00 $3,032.35 (Covers Parcel H) 11. GENERAL PROPERTY TAXES and SERVICE CHARGES, as follows, together with interest, penalty and statutory foreclosure costs, if any, after delinquency: (1st half delinquent on May 1; 2nd half delinquent on November 1) Tax Account No.: 1023059384 Year Billed Paid Balance 2003 $4,162.63 $0.00 $4,162.63 (Covers Parcel I) 12. GENERAL PROPERTY TAXES and SERVICE CHARGES, as follows, together with interest, penalty and statutory foreclosure costs, if any, after delinquency: (1st half delinquent on May 1; 2nd half delinquent on November 1) Tax Account No.: 1023059030 Year Billed Paid Balance 2003 $3,510.40 $0.00 $3,510.40 (Covers Parcel J and includes other property) 13. GENERAL PROPERTY TAXES and SERVICE CHARGES, as follows, together with interest, penalty and statutory foreclosure costs, if any, after delinquency: (1st half delinquent on May 1; 2nd half delinquent on November 1) Tax Account No.: 1023059042 Year Billed Paid Balance 2003 $4,420.88 $0.00 $4,420.88 (Covers Parcel K and includes other property) 14. Notice of tap or connection charges which have been or will be due in connection with development or re -development of the land as disclosed by recorded instrument. Inquiries regarding the specific amount of the charges should be made to the city/county/agency. CITY/COUNTY/AGENCY: CITY OF RENTON RECORDED: JUNE 21, 1996 RECORDING NO.: 9606210966 15. EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: GRANTEE: SNOQUALMIE FALLS AND WHITE RIVER POWER COMPANY, A CORPORATION Page 4 of 15 Subdivision Guarantee 0 9 Order No.- 10049351 PURPOSE: ELECTRIC TRANSMISSION LINE 10 FEET IN WIDTH AREA AFFECTED: THE DESCRIPTION CONTAINED THEREIN IS NOT SUFFICIENT TO DETERMINE ITS EXACT LOCATION ON THE PROPERTY HEREIN DESCRIBED RECORDING NO.: 305589 EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: PURPOSE: AREA AFFECTED: RECORDING NO.: (Covers Parcels A, B, G, H & I) POWER AND LIGHT POLES THE DESCRIPTION CONTAINED THEREIN IS NOT SUFFICIENT TO DETERMINE ITS EXACT LOCATION ON THE PROPERTY HEREIN DESCRIBED 2794410 17. EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: PURPOSE: ROADWAY AREA AFFECTED: NORTH 16 FEET OF PARCEL K AND OTHER PROPERTY DISCLOSED BY RECORDING NO. 2994768 and 2994769 18. EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: PURPOSE: INGRESS, EGRESS AND ROAD AREA AFFECTED: PARCEL K AND OTHER PROPERTY RECORDING NO. 5284273 19. Right to make necessary slopes for cuts or fills upon the land herein described as granted to King County by deed recorded under Recording Nos. 5755891 and 5755892. (Covers Parcels A & B) 20. EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: GRANTEE: KING COUNTY, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION PURPOSE: UTILITIES AREA AFFECTED: SOUTHERLY PORTION OF PARCELS A AND B AS DESCRIBED THEREIN RECORDING NO.: 5767638 21. EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: PURPOSE: AREA AFFECTED: RECORDING NO.: INGRESS, EGRESS AND UTILITIES NORTH 30 FEET 7208100354 Page 5 of 15 Subdivision Guarantee 22. 0 (Covers Parcel I) Order No.: 10049351 EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: GRANTEE: PUGET SOUND POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY, A WASHINGTON CORPORATION PURPOSE: ONE OR MORE ELECTRIC TRANSMISSION AND/OR DISTRIBUTION LINES AREA AFFECTED: SOUTH 30 FEET RECORDING NO.: 7808080327 (Covers Parcel C) 23. EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: PURPOSE: NOT DISCLOSED AREA AFFECTED: NORTH 16 FEET OF PARCEL K AND OTHER PROPERTY DISCLOSED BY RECORDING NO. 8706030864 24. EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: GRANTEE: KING COUNTY PURPOSE: UTILITIES AND DRAINAGE FACILITY AREA AFFECTED: SOUTH 5 FEET OF THE WEST 40 FEET RECORDING NO.: 8711300920 The Grantee's interest is now held by City of Renton under instruments recorded under King County Recording Nos. 20010116000508 and 20010426000238. (Covers Parcel B) 25. EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: GRANTEE: KING COUNTY PURPOSE: UTILITIES AND DRAINAGE FACILITY AREA AFFECTED: SOUTH 5 FEET RECORDING NO.: 8711300921 The Grantee's interest is now held by City of Renton under instruments recorded under King County Recording Nos. 20010116000506 and 20010426000236. (Covers Parcels A & B) 26. EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: GRANTEE: KING COUNTY PURPOSE: UTILITIES AND DRAINAGE FACILITY AREA AFFECTED: EAST 65 FEET OF THE SOUTH 200 FEET RECORDING NO.: 8711300922 The Grantee's interest is now held by City of Renton under instruments recorded under King County Recording Nos. 20010116000507 and 20010426000237. Page 6 of 15 Subdivision Guarantee • 0 Order No.: 1004935E (Covers Parcels A & B) 27. EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: GRANTEE. PUGET SOUND POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY, A WASHINGTON CORPORATION PURPOSE: ONE OR MORE ELECTRIC TRANSMISSION AND/OR DISTRIBUTION LINES AREA AFFECTED: SOUTH 10 FEET RECORDING NO.: 8807220452 Said instrument is a re-record of instrument recorded under King County Recording No. 8805310868. (Covers Parcel B) 28. EASEMENT AND. THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: GRANTEE: PUGET SOUND POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY, A WASHINGTON CORPORATION PURPOSE: ONE OR MORE ELECTRIC TRANSMISSION AND/OR DISTRIBUTION LINES AREA AFFECTED: SOUTH 10 FEET RECORDING NO.: 8807220453 Said instrument is a re-record of instrument recorded under King County Recording No. 8805310869. (Covers Parcel A) 29, EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: GRANTEE: KING COUNTY WATER DISTRICT NO. 90 PURPOSE: WATER MAINS SYSTEM(S) AREA AFFECTED: NORTH 10 FEET OF PARCEL K AND OTHER PROPERTY RECORDED: MAY 8, 2000 RECORDING NO.: 20000508000205 30. EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: GRANTEE: KING COUNTY WATER DISTRICT NO. 90, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION PURPOSE: WATER MAINS AND APPURTENANCES AREA AFFECTED: NORTH 10 FEET RECORDING NO.: 20000810000949 (Covers Parcel I) Page 7 of 15 Subdivision Guarantee 31. 33 Order No.; 10049351 EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: PURPOSE: TEMPORARY ACCESS AREA AFFECTED: AS DESCRIBED THEREIN RECORDING NO.: 20020228001893 The effect on the title and the description of the land due to the location of "148th Avenue S.E. (C.H. Bankson Road No. 72)" contained in the legal description in Schedule A. (Covers Parcels D, F, G, H, I & K ) MATTERS SET FORTH BY SURVEY: RECORDED: MAY 2, 1988 RECORDING NO.: 2 9004 DISCLOSES: FENCEENCROACHMENT OVER WESTERLY AND SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY LINES AS SHOWN THEREON (Covers Parcel E) 34. Terms and Conditions of unrecorded Lot Line Adjustment No. S90M0351, approved October 24, 1990. (Covers Parcels E & F) 35. Declaration of Covenant imposed by instrument recorded on December 29, 1992, under Recording No. 9212291639. 36. 37. (Covers Parcel C) AGREEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: RECORDED: RECORDING NO.: REGARDING: MAY 16, 1961 5284273 ROAD MAINTENANCE (Covers Parcel I) AGREEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: RECORDED: RECORDING NO.: REGARDING: AND AMENDMENTS THERETO: RECORDED: RECORDING NO.: (Covers Parcels A & B) APRIL 20, 2000 20000420000998 LATECOMERS AGREEMENT - SEE PARCELS 8 & 9, ON ATTACHED EXHIBIT A NOVEMBER 13, 2002 20021115001942 Page S of 15 Subdivision Guarantee Order No.,. 10049351 38. Lack of a recorded means of ingress and egress to a public road from the land. (Covers Parcel I) 39. TEMPORARY ACCESS EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF imposed by instrument recorded on February 28, 2002, under Recording No. 20020228001893. 40. AGREEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: RECORDED: OCTOBER 9, 2001 RECORDING NO.: 20011009002300 REGARDING: ASSIGNMENT, ASSUMPTION, CONSENT AND RELEASE AGREEMENT; PALANCHUK AGREEMENT AND AMENDMENTS THERETO: RECORDED: RECORDING NO.: OCTOBER 9, 2001 20011009002301 41. DEED OF TRUST AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: GRANTOR: TRUSTEE: BENEFICIARY: ADDRESS: LOAN NO.: ORIGINAL AMOUNT: DATED: RECORDED: RECORDING NO.: SHAMROCK HIGHLANDS, LLC, A WASHINGTON LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY RICHARD 1. POWERS, ATTORNEY AT LAW BASE CAPITAL, L.L.C., A WASHINGTON LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY 411 108TH AVE. N.E., *1970, BELLEVU E, WA 98004 NOT DISCLOSED $3,500,000.00 OCTOBER 1, 2001 OCTOBER 9, 2001 20011009002308 THE DEED OF TRUST WAS (MODIFIED -CORRECTED -AMENDED) BY INSTRUMENT. RECORDED: AUGUST 15, 2002 RECORDING NO.: 20020815000404 PROVIDING FOR: ADDITIONAL ADVANCE OF $500,000.00 THE DEED OF TRUST WAS (MODIFIED -CORRECTED -AMENDED) BY INSTRUMENT. RECORDED: DECEMBER 31, 2002 RECORDING NO.: 20021231002396 PROVIDING FOR: ADDITIONAL ADVANCE OF $1,000,000.00 AND AMENDING LEGAL TO INCLUDE ADDITIONAL PROPERTY 42. DEED OF TRUST AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: Subdivision Guarantee Page 9 of 15 Order No.: 10049351 GRANTOR: SHAMROCK HIGHLANDS, LLC., A WASHINGTON LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY TRUSTEE: TRANSNATION TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY BENEFICIARY: PATRICK HUNSAKER AND ANN MARIE HUNSAKER, HUSBAND AND WIFE, JAMES HUNSAKER AND DENISE HUNSAKER, HUSBAND AND WIFE, JOHN HUNSAKER AND NORMA JEAN HUNSAKER, HUSBAND AND WIFE, TIMOTHY HUNSAKER AND BONNIE HUNSAKER, HUSBAND AND WIFE BRIAN MORRISON AND CORA , MORRISON, HUSBAND AND WIFE, JOHN HOILAND AND BARBARA HOILAND, HUSBAND AND WIFE AND KENNETH TROSETH AND SHARON TROSETH, HUSBAND AND WIFE AND J.P. HUN LLC, A WASHINGTON LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY ADDRESS: 12409148 TH S.E., RENTON, WA 98059 LOAN NO.: NOT DISCLOSED ORIGINAL AMOUNT: $525,000.00 DATED: OCTOBER 5, 2001 RECORDED: OCTOBER 9, 2001 RECORDING NO.: 20011009002309 SUBORDINATION AGREEMENT which declares that the instrument recorded under Recording No. 20011009002309 is subordinate to the instrument recorded udder Recording No_ 20011009002308. SUBORDINATOR: LENDER: RECORDED: RECORDING NO.: Subdivision Guarantee PATRICK HUNSAKER AND ANNE MARIE HUNSAKER, HUSBAND AND WIFE; JAMES HUNSAKER AND DENISE HUNSAKER, HUSBAND AND WIFE; JOHN HUNSAKER AND NORMA JEAN HUNSAKER, HUSBAND AND WIFE; TIMOTHY HUNSAKER AND BONNIE HUNSAKER, HUSBAND AND WIFE; BRIAN MORRISON AND CORA MORRISON, HUSBAND AND WIFE; JOHN HOILAND AND BARBARA HOILAND, HUSBAND AND WIFE; KENNETH TROSETH AND SHARON TROSETH, HUSBAND AND WIFE; AND J.P. HUN LLC, A WASHINGTON LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY BASE CAPITAL, L.L.C., A WASHINGTON LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY OCTOBER 9, 2001 20011009002311 Page 10 of 15 43. M. Order No.: 10049351 ASSIGNMENT FOR SECURITY PURPOSES AND SECURITY AGREEMENT OF RENTS AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: ASSIGNOR: SHAMROCK HIGHLANDS LLC, A WASHINGTON LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY ASSIGNEE: J. P. HUN, LLC., A WASHINGTON LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, AND PATRICK HUNSAKER AND ANN MARIE HUNSAKER, HUSBAND AND WIFE, JAMES HUNSAKER AND DENISE HUNSAKER, HUSBAND AND WIFE, JOHN HUNSAKER AND NORMA JEAN HUNSAKER, HUSBAND AND WIFE, TIMOTHY HUNSAKER AND BONNIE HUNSAKER, HUSBAND AND WIFE, BRIAN MORRISON AND CORA MORRISON, HUSBAND AND WIFE, JOHN HOILAND AND BARBARA HOILAND, HUSBAND AND WIFE, AND KENNETH TROSETH AND SHARON TROSETH, HUSBAND AND WIFE DATED: OCTOBER 5, 2001 RECORDED: OCTOBER 9, 2001 RECORDING NO.: 20011009002310 FINANCING STATEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: SECURED PARTY: DEBTOR: COVERS: RECORDED: RECORDING NO.: 1. P. HUN LLC, ET AL, SECURED CREDITORS; PATRICK HUNSAKER AND ANN MARIE HUNSAKER, HUSBAND AND WIFE, JAMES HUNSAKER AND DENISE HUNSAKER, HUSBAND AND WIFE; JOHN HUNSAKER AND NORMA JEAN HUNSAKER, HUSBAND AND WIFE, TIMOTHY HUNSAKER AND BONNIE HUNSAKER, HUSBAND AND WIFE, BRIAN MORRISON AND CORA MORRISON, HUSBAND AND WIFE; JOHN HOILAND AND BARBARA HOILAND, HUSBAND AND WIFE, AND KENNETH TROSETH AND SHARON TROSETH, HUSBAND AND WIFE SHAMROCK HIGHLANDS LLC FIXTURES ("PERSONAL PROPERTY") OCTOBER 9, 2001 20011009002312 Page 11 of 1S Subdivision Guarantee Order No.: 10649351 45. ASSIGNMENT OF DEED OF TRUST GIVEN IN THE FORM OF A SECURITY DEVICE AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: ASSIGNOR: BASE CAPITAL, L.L.C., A WASHINGTON LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY ASSIGNEE: U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION RECORDED: OCTOBER 26, 2001 RECORDING NO.: 20011026001657 46. ASSIGNMENT OF CONTRACT RIGHTS GIVEN IN THE FORM OF A SECURITY DEVICE AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: ASSIGNOR: SHAMROCK HIGHLANDS, LLC, A WASHINGTON LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY ASSIGNEE: GEORGIY PALANCHUK AND NATALYA PALANCHUK, HUSBAND AND WIFE RECORDED: OCTOBER 16, 2001 RECORDING NO.: 20011016001118 (Covers Parcel ) and includes other property) BW:bw Subdivision Guarantee Page 12 of 15 EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION: PARCEL A: L�l Order No.: 14444351 THE EAST 'h OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST W.M.; EXCEPT THE EAST 100 FEET OF THE SOUTH 150 FEET THEREOF; AND EXCEPT THE SOUTH 42 FEET THEREOF AS CONVEYED TO KING COUNTY FOR S.E. 128TH STREET BY DEED RECORDED UNDER KING COUNTY RECORDING NOS. 5755891 AND 5755892; SITUATE IN THE CITY OF RENTON, COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. PARCEL B: THE EAST 100 FEET OF THE SOUTH 150 FEET OF THE EAST 1/2 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST W.M.; EXCEPT THE SOUTH 42 FEET THEREOF AS CONVEYED TO KING COUNTY FOR S.E. 128TH STREET BY DEED RECORDED UNDER KING COUNTY RECORDING NO. 5755891; SITUATE IN THE CITY OF RENTON, COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. PARS L C: THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE EAST'/2 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST W.M.; EXCEPT THE EAST 280 FEET THEREOF; TOGETHER WITH AN EASEMENT FOR INGRESS AND EGRESS OVER THE SOUTH 30 FEET OF SAID EAST 280 FEET; EXCEPT THAT PORTION THEREOF FOR 148TH AVENUE S.E. RIGHT OF WAY; SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. r PAROL D: `r THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE EAST 1/2 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST W.M.; EXCEPT COUNTY ROAD; Order No.; 10049351 EXHIBIT A (continued) SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON, PARCEL E: THE WEST 794 FEET OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST W.M.; SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON; ALSO KNOWN AS A PORTION OF LOT B OF S90M0351. PARCEL F: UNRECORDED LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST W.M.; AND EXCEPT THE WEST 794 FEET THEREOF; AND EXCEPT THE EAST 230 FEET OF THE NORTH 300 FEET THEREOF; SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. PARCEL G: THE N04 ,H OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST W.M.; EXCEPT THE NORTH 168.05 FEET OF THE EAST 302.15 FEET THEREOF; AND EXCEPT THAT PORTION THEREOF FOR 148TH AVENUE S.E. RIGHT OF WAY; SITUATE,IN THE COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. PAR H: f THE NORTH 168.05 FEET OF THE EAST 302.15 FEET OF THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST W.M.; EXCEPT THAT PORTION THEREOF FOR 148TH AVENUE S.E. RIGHT OF WAY; SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. PARCEL I: Order No.: 10049351 EXHIBIT A (continued) THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 25 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST W. M., DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SOUTH 1/2 ; THENCE NORTH 88020'44" WEST ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SOUTH 1/2, 50 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING NORTH 880 20'44" WEST, 216.94 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00015'25"WEST PARALLEL WITH THE EAST LINE OF SAID SOUTH 1/2, 329.36 FEET TO THE SOUTH LINE THEREOF; THENCE SOUTH 88020'52" EAST ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SOUTH 112, 266.94 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER THEREOF; THENCE NORTH 00015'25" EAST ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SOUTH 1/x, 313.35 FEET TO A POINT 16 FEET SOUTHERLY OF SAID NORTHEAST CORNER; THENCE NORTH 88020'44" WEST PARALLEL WITH THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SOUTH 1/2, 50 FEET; THENCE NORTH 00015'25" EAST PARALLEL WITH THE EAST LINE OF SAID SOUTH 1/2, 16 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. PARCELJ: THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W. M.; EXCEPT THE NORTH 132 FEET THEREOF; AND EXCEPT THE EAST 286 FEET THEREOF, SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. .�..lop PARCEL K: THE NORTH 16 FEET OF THE SOUTH Y2 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1A OF SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W. M.; EXCEPT THAT PORTION THEREOF FOR 148TH AVENUE S.E. RIGHT OF WAY; SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. October 8, 2003 Kira Claussen, Planning King County Department of Development & Environmental Services 900 Oakesdale Avenue SW Renton, WA 98055-1219 RE: Shamrock Propey:L2POO Preliminary Plat e 4 Dear Kim, Enclosed is the second resubmittal for the Shamrock Property Preliminary Plat proposal. As you are aware, the Shamrock proposal is now part of the Low Impact Development pilot program with King County. What we have done is to address the comments that staff had come up with and listed in your October 7, 2002 request for additional information. While most of the comments still relate to the new LID proposal, some of our responses have been modified to reflect the new proposal. We hope the revised plans, preliminary TIR, and project introduction in conjunction with our group meeting, clearly outline our new proposal and provides you and staff with enough detail. Below is the list of continents from your October 7, 2003 letter and our responses are noted below each one in bold. We look forward to everyone's feedback. Level 1 Analysis/ Conceptual Drainage Plan: 1. After field review, it appears that Wetland B flows to the north. Please evaluate the existing topography and provide detail of the existing flow pattern. A review of the flow pattern during a rain event would also be helpful. Response: Please refer to Section 6.2 of the preliminary TIR titled West Wetland Analysis. An analysis was performed on the wetland using additional topographic information, hydraulic modeling and observed flow patterns during rain events earlier this year. The results are available in the above-mentioned section of the TIR. 2. Please show all onsite sub -basins boundaries and offsite contributing area. Response: Please refer to section IV of the preliminary TIR report, titled Flow Control & Water Quality Facility Analysis Design for the location and analysis of the sub -basin boundaries. 3. Include a Level 1 Downstream Analysis for all sub -basins discharging from the site. Complaint investigation and analysis should be included for all 1 downstream drainage courses. It is understood that a diversion of the site drainage to the south is proposed. An analysis of the existing downstream is needed per Core Requirement 2 of the King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM). In general, provide more detail of the downstream drainage courses, including the newly constructed conveyance system for Sienna on and offsite. Response: A drainage diversion to convey everything exclusively to the south is no longer proposed. The current storm proposal conveys drainage to two detention ponds and to bypass a portion of lot drainage into adjacent wetlands for wetland recharge. One detention pond is located at the NW area of the site and the other at the previous location at the south end of the site. Please refer to the TIR and storm plans provided by Triad for the full storm drainage proposal. 4. A surface water adjustment is required to divert the existing site flows to the south. Submit an adjustment to accomplish the proposed diversion (Core Requirement 1). Also submit a letter of concurrence from the City of Renton, since the post developed flows will be directed to a new Renton detention facility. A letter of intent to grant -an easement or actual easement through the Bales property is also required. Response: No drainage basin diversions are proposed for Shamrock. Therefore, no surface water adjustments are proposed at this time. 5. Please include a narrative in the Level 1 Analysis explaining how the existing detention pond is to be addressed when the proposed pond is constructed. Response: Please refer to Section IV which explains how the existing pond, within the city of Renton property, will be incorporated into the south pond. 6. Provide an analysis of the drainage complaints found and how the complaints are mitigated per Core Requirement 2 of the KCSWDM. Example: A capacity problem appears to exist at the driveway culvert at 14415- SE 128"` St. The upstream cross pipe is much larger than the driveway culvert. Please include narratives in the Level 1 Analysis to show how specific mitigation address the downstream problems found. Response: Further analysis and information has been provided in response to the downstream drainage complaints. Please refer to the TIR, Section III, page 7. 7. Include calculations for the conceptual drainage plan to show approximate pond sizing to comply with Level 2 )~low Control. Please show how the water quality requirements are to be met.' Show more detail of the proposed 0 9 detention pond, including access road, outfall connection to the existing drainage structure. Provide two conceptual cross sections of the proposed pond. Response: Calculations for the conceptual drainage plan are included in Section IV of the TIR. Please refer to plan sheets 3-7 by Triad for additional information on the proposed detention ponds and storm details. 8.. The conceptual drainage plan should also show how the proposed frontage drainage improvements will be designed. Response: Please refer to sheet 3 for the plan view of the frontage improvements. The proposal is to install full frontage improvements including curb, gutter, & sidewalk from the north boundary of lot 117 south to lot 26. The two off-site parcels between SE 1215` and SE 1240` will receive full frontage improvements. The purpose of this proposal is to get a continual segment of curb & sidewalk in lieu of small segments along the Shamrock property frontages. Lot 118 is essentially outside of the proposal as the original owner "Palnachuk" will retain this lot. For lot 18 and the two parcels south of it, the proposal is to widen the pavement to the full 22 feet and provide a thickened asphalt edge. The proposed x - sections are shown on sheet 5 of 8. Once these properties develop in the future, full frontage improvements including curb & sidewalks can be installed. 9. Please provide details of how the post developed wetland hydrology will be maintained with the conceptual drainage plan. Response: Wetland recharge is addressed in detail in Section VI of the TIR report. The proposal is to bypass drainage from lots 71-80 and 100- 104 to wetlands B & C providing wetland recharge. Roads: 10. Evaluate the need for a road stub from proposed 148`h CT. SE north for eventual connection to 145'h Ave. SE in the proposed plat of East Renton. Response: Our assumption is this is referring to 146"' CT SE. Existing homes are located directly north where 146"' CT would extend through to the East Renton Property. It does not appear probable that these houses would be included with the development of the larger vacant parcel to the west of them, north of Shamrock. Therefore, we are not proposing a road extension through the two parcels which separate Shamrock from the East Renton proposal. 3 11. Provide a neighborhood circulation plan, which includes conceptual layouts for the adjacent parcels. Re-evaluate the road classification(s) as a result of this plan. This plan should also consider or evaluate the potential of shifting SE 1215E St. to the north to avoid potential intersection spacing problems with future development of parcel(s) to the east. Response: A neighborhood circulation plan by Triad is included in this submittal. 12. Provide a letter of intent from the affected property owner(s) for the future construction of 144`h Place (Morgan Place Plat, and property within the City of Renton to the south. Response: CamWest owns the parcel within the city of Renton limits, directly south of wetland A. Currently, a temporary cul-de-sac, benefiting the Morgan Place development, is located on our property just west of where NE 4th dead ends from Morgan Place. An agreement was reached between CamWest and the Morgan Place developer in order to relieve Morgan Place of providing a cul-de-sac within their development. Our plan is to incorporate a portion of this cul-de-sac into our NE 4th CT road extension. Please refer to the enclosed temporary cul-de-sac agreement which the City of Renton approved. We are not proposing to extend NE 4`h CT to connect to the neighborhood to the west. 13. Please provide a conceptual frontage improvement plan for 148'' Ave. SE. Evaluate the frontage improvements for any stopping sight distance or entering sight distance problems along the frontage. Although the Powers, Wegner, Bashary & Hodge parcels (adjacent to 148th Ave. SE) are not included within the boundaries of the Shamrock proposal, please consider and evaluate the extension of frontage improvements along those parcels to address drainage and pavement width transitions. Response: Please refer to sheet 1 of 8 which lists the entering and stopping sight distances at both entrance locations. Based on this analysis by Gary Norris, Garry Struthers Associates, no sight distance deficiencies exist at either entrance locations. 14. Identify the location of all private driveways within 50 feet (i.e. within the limits of the future curb returns, plus an additional 15 feet of the PCR upstream/downstream on 148th Avenue) of either side of the 'future' curb lines for the two -plat access streets. Please include any driveways on the east side of 148th Avenue SE, in the case of the north plat access. Response: Please refer to the preliminary plat drawing sheet 1 which depicts the driveways along the east side of 148`' Avenue SE. 4 0 0 15. The KCRS state that the spacing of intersections on a roadway classified as a Collector Arterial shall be a minimum of 300 feet from center -to -center. As previously indicated, the property to the immediate east of the north access roadway (at 12232 148th Avenue SE, Tax Parcel 1123059067) is developed with a single family residence, and, a parcel (Tax Parcel 1123059010) opposite the northern -most existing east -west "access" into former nursery is of sufficient area to be subdivided into 15 - 16 lots, therefore, of sufficient size to require a public street access. Please provide information on the probable resultant spacing of intersections along 148th Avenue SE that would result from the proposed plat street location Response: CamWest proposes to discuss this further at our October 8, 2003 meeting and will address this further at the next submittal. Traffic Study: Please provide an addendum study which includes the following: For items 16 to 24 below please refer to the January 6, 2003 memorandum by Joan Smelser, Garry Struthers Associates in response to each item. 16. Check the availability of updated (post -2000) accident information, and re- evaluate the accident data in Table 2 of the TIA. Please include the accident rate for the identified HAL at the intersection of 164thAve SE/SE 9900. Please provide more specific information about "this type" [of intersection) as referenced in foot note 4 e.g. unsignalized with significant skew, etc. 17. Provide a supplemental analysis of the operation of the 148th Avenue SE/ SR 900 intersection for the AM, peak hour. 18. Confirm the lane configuration of the intersection of 148th Avenue SE/ SE 128th Street. 19, Reconcile the apparent difference in volumes southbound at the 148th Avenue/ SE 128th Street vs. the southbound departure leg volumes from the intersection of SE 124th/ 148th Avenue: 187 vs. 292 in the PM peak hour 20. SE 124th Street, the main plat access, is classified as a Neighborhood Collector. The KCRS stipulates that Neighborhood Collectors intersecting arterials shall be 36 feet wide (curb to curb) for the first 150 feet -- and, although unspecified, to be. measured from the nearside of the intersection. This width provides for the opportunity to stripe the approach for either a shared left through and right turn lane, or, a left -turn lane and shared through right. 21. Amend the TIA to add the 2006 "Without Project" turning movement volumes at the intersection of 148th/ SE 120th. (spec. Figure 4) 22. Provide an -evaluation for the AM peak hour at the main plat entrance of SE 124th/ 148th Avenue SE. 5 - 0 0 23. Provide a recommendation for lane geometry on the plat (west) side of the intersection. 24. Provide information upon which to assess the potential (future) short plat of proposed Lot 118. Specifically, whether any recommendations in the TIA, require revision based upon the resultant potential additional lots. 25. SR 900/148th Ave. SE: The traffic study prepared for this project indicates that vehicles from the Shamrock proposal will travel north to the intersection of SR 900 and 148th Ave. SE. The existing sight distance at this intersection appears to be substandard. To evaluate potential impacts at this intersection, prepare a sight distance evaluation which includes an intersection plan showing sight line measurements. The intersection plan and measurements must be based upon field survey information, and show design criteria such as right-of-way widths, roadway locations and restrictions to sight lines (i.e. vegetation, hillside embankments, fencing, etc.). Sight line measurements shall be based upon the Washington State Dept. of Transportation design standards. This drawing must be stamped by a civil engineer and land surveyor licensed in the State of Washington. Response: This sight distance information at the intersection of SR 900 and 148a' has been submitted on behalf of CamWest, Centurion Development, and KBS Development as part of the channelization and signal review for this intersection. 26. SEPA-SR 900114e Ave. SE: This Shamrock project, as proposed, may have a significant, adverse, impact (KCC 14.80) at the intersection of SR 900/ 148th Avenue SE. This intersection is currently functioning at I..evel-of-Service F and sight distance at this intersection is deficient, creating a safety problem for motorists and pedestrians. Installation signalization and turn lanes have been identified to adequately solve the problem, however no WSDDT funded projects currently exist which would assure the installation of the needed improvements. Although there are other proposals in the vicinity (Aster Park, East Renton, and preliminary plat of Stoneridge), there are no assurances that this intersection improvement may be completed prior to the Shamrock proposal. Please indicate how the Shamrock project proposes to address this issue. Response: CamWest has entered into an agreement with the applicants of the Aster Park and Stone Ridge developments to design, permit, and construct these improvements at SR 900 and 148th SE. Currently, the channelization plans have been resubmitted to WADOT and once comments are received the civils will be submitted shortly after for review. CamWest agrees to have this requirement as a condition to the plat. :s� 0 0 27. Existing Easement(s): Clarify the existing easements along the northern boundary of proposed lots 35, 41 and 144`h Place SE and south boundary of proposed lot 42 and through proposed lots 74, 85-88, 99 and 111. Indicate if these easements will be relinquished/abandoned and provide letter(s) of intent or indicate how the easements will be incorporated into the design. Note, a portion of an easement area appears to have been removed from proposed lot 35, indicate if this is a drafting error, the result of a boundary line adjustment has been recorded or if this area is to be placed in a separate tract. In general, easements for ingress and egress should be placed in separate tract(s) and not included within the lot area. Response: Currently, there is an easement which spans from south of lot 26 west to lot 48." It is a compacted gravel road surface that contains a water line. This easements are now shown in separate tracts P & Q. CamWest's title has been updated to reflect the Shamrock Highland's interest in Tract P. The proposal at this time is to route utilities only through Tract Q in order to serve the lots 36-41 and the future Renton property with main line utilities. The Shamrock proposal will be platted around this easement. 28. Building Envelope: Provide a typical building envelope for the 'Y' lots which indicates how the building setbacks will be met. Response: A typical building footprint and lot envelope are included for your review. The structures are placed so that all required building setbacks are met. The proposal is to create a standard easement agreement and place a portion of lot A's driveway into lot B's property. 29. Recreation Space: Provide a conceptual recreation plan indicating the type of improvements (i.e. sport court, play structure, benches, landscaping, etc.) proposed within recreation tract(s). See KCC 21A.14.180 E2 for equipment requirements. Indicate how proposed lots 35-41 will gain access to the recreation space located in Tract B or if a separate tract will be provided. Response: CamWest intends to provide a conceptual recreation plan during the next submittal once we have received feedback on the currently proposed park area, rain garden, and adjacent enhanced storm swales. Our proposal is to provide the required amount of active recreation facilities once we have further direction on the overall proposal. 30. Tract A: Please indicate the purpose of this tract, as it not appropriate for recreation space and should not be included in the required recreation space calculations. In addition, this area should be included within the right-of-way for SE 121" St., to allow for future access by the adjacent parcel. 7 Response: Tract A is not intended for recreation space. Tract A is a landscape / open space tract which is intended to serve the property directly south as a future secondary access should it develop. 31. Tract F: Clarify/indicate the purpose of proposed Tract F, located south of SL 124' St. — Sensitive Area Tract (SEPI'), or open space, etc. Response: Tract F is an existing easement which benefits the property directly west of it. Please refer to the enclosed easement language which specifies this use. 32. Walkways: Provide an inventory map (i.e. existing conditions — widths, surface type, etc.) of the walking routes to the elementary, junior high/middle and high school and/or the appropriate bus stop location associated with each school. Identify any improvements necessary to provide safe walking conditions. Response: In talking to the Issaquah School district last year, we were told that kids would be bussed in this area to school and that a safe waiting area for the school bus stops would be required along 148"' Ave SE. CamWest will forward the current proposal showing the frontage improvement pian to the district to confirm what we have proposed will meet the intent of the safe waiting area. Wetland(s): 33. The site has a pending grading permit application (L9360073) for a 1992 violation involving wetland fill (E92C1531) in the vicinity of SE 124`h St., west of 144`h Ave. SE. The wetland boundary delineation beneath the fill was verified, and a restoration plan was previously approved by DDES for this area, however the permit was not picked up. The Shamrock project is proposing to dedicate right-of-way in the area originally proposed for restoration. Please submit a revised preliminary plat map showing the verified wetland boundary and wetland buffet s beneath the fill on "Parcel B". Also, please submit a revised wetland restoration plan, including compensatory mitigation, for the area of wetland fill that is proposed to remain in the proposed right-of-way. Response: A ROW extension is no longer proposed through the wetland fill violation area. The proposal is to reconnect adjacent wetland a to b where the fill was previously placed. Gary Schulz's memo dated October G, 2403 outlines the proposal in more detail and the illustrative low impact development exhibit, sheet 2 of 8, created by Triad shows the areas proposed for restoration and enhancement. Ezl 34. Please document any earthwork that occurred in the vicinity of the wetlands and their buffers between 1993 and the present. Any fill placed in the wetlands and their buffers during that timeframe must be removed as part of the above wetland restoration plan. Response: This item is addressed in Gary Schulz's October 6, 2003 memo. 35. Buffer averaging — provide written justification which demonstrates how the proposed buffer averaging complies with KKC 21A.24.320B, as clarified in the Administrative Rule 21A-24-016 (see attached). Note, compensatory buffer area must be provided on the same wetland where the buffer averaging reduction is proposed. Response: Please refer to Gary Schulz's memo dated October 6, 2003 and the revised preliminary plat, sheet 1 of 8, for more detail and calculations. 36. The entire north -south wetland system in this area appears to have surface hydrologic connections, potentially qualifying it as one wetland for regulatory purposes. Please re-evaluate the wetland, including off-site portions, to determine the classification per KCC 21A.06.1415 (i.e. show whether the wetland(s) meet the criteria for a Class 1 rating vs. a Class 2 rating). Response: The wetland has been re-evaluated in response to this comment. Please refer to Gary Schulz's memo dated October b, 2003. 37. Red —Tailed Hawk: Red-tailed hawks have been observed in the area. The King County Comprehensive Plan has identified the red-tailed hawk as a raptor of local significance. The wetland report contains a brief description of an evaluation that occurred on July 29, 2002, which is near the end of the nesting season. Please re -investigate the site for old nests, after deciduous tree leaf - drop. Alternatively, investigate the site after mid-February for active courtship and nest sites; a minimum of three site visits of six hours each are required. Response: No red-tailed hawks have been observed on site. Please refer to the memo by Gary Schulz dated October 6, 2003. Enclosed is the fallowing information: 1) Twenty (25) copies of the preliminary plat. 2) Ten (10) copies of the .remaining Shamrock drawings including: • Sheet 2 of S: Illustrative Low Impact Development Exhibit • Sheet 3 of 8: Preliminary Grading & Storm Drainage Plan • Sheet 4 of 8: Detention Pond Sections City of Renton Portion • Sheet 5 of 8: Preliminary Composite Utility Plan — KC Portion • Sheet 6 of 8: Preliminary Composite Utility Plan Renton Portion 0 Ll • • Sheet 7 of 8: LID Details • Sheet 8 of 8: Topographic Survey &'Wetland Delineation 3) Ten (10) copies of the revised TIR report by Triad & Associates 4) Ten (10) copies of the Shamrock LID proposal introduction summary 5) Ten (10) copies of Gary Schulz's October 6, 2003 memo 6) Ten (10) copies of Joan Smelser's memos dated January 6, 2003 and February 6, 2003. 7) Ten (10) copies of your October 7, 2002 letter requesting this additional information. 8) Ten (10) copies of this letter. 9) Three (3) copies of the typical `Z' lot configuration. 10) Three (3) copies of the updated title commitment and easement information relating to Tract F. Should you have any questions or need any additional information please call me at (425)825-1955. Sincerely, ��IIIVIA Sara Slatten " CamWest Development, Inc. enclosures 10 King County Department of Development and Environmental Services 900 Oakesdale Avenue SW Renton, WA 98055-1219 July 28, 2003 Sara Slatten Cam West Development, Inc. 9720 NE 120th Place, Suite 100 Kirkland, WA 98034 RE: Application for the Preliminary Plat of Shamrock Property DDES File No. L02POO14 Dear Ms. Slatten: Thank you for your July 28, 2003 e-mail request for an extension of the deadline for the submittal of the additional information required to process the preliminary plat application of Shamrock Property. The request for additional information stops all processing of the plat application until the required information is received. The time spent waiting for information to be submitted is not counted toward any time limit requirements of the plat application process. The previous letters established deadlines of January 6, 2003, February 24, 2003, May 10, 2003 and August 4, 2003. We are granting an extension to this deadline, as we understand that you are considering revisions as a result of the Proposed Low Impact Demonstration Ordinance. If the Land Use Services Division of DDES does not receive the necessary information requested to process your application by October 6, 2003, your application may be canceled or denied. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please call me at (206) 296-7167. Since ly, c Claussen, Program/Project Manager III Current Planning Section Cc: Triad Associates Bruce Whittaker, Senior Engineer, Engineering Review Section, LUSD Cynthia Moffit, Program/Project Manager III, Administrative Services Section, DDES Application File MAIN FILE COPY • 0 Claussen, Kimberly y From: Sara Slatten [sslatten@camwest.comj Sent: Monday, July 28, 2003 12:07 PM To: kimbedy.claussen@metrokc.gov Subject: Shamrock Resubmittal Hi Kim, Our preliminary plat deadline is approaching on Shamrock, Monday, August 4th. Triad and AHBL are making progress but it's been slower than expected. Would it be possible to get one more extension, as I think it will realistically be 2 more weeks before we resubmit? Thanks, Sara Slatten CamWest Development (425) 825-1955; phone (425) 825-1565; fax www.camwest.com 7/M/0,5 - - « q - � -7/2T� pt kC�z �C10/0� MAIN FILE COPY CJ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ,8 .9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 • Proposed Na 2003-0172.2 KING COUNTY Signature'Report June 2, 2003 Ordinance 94662 Ang County Courthouse L'04 4+ 516 Third Avenue 3eaule, WA 98104 Sponsors Hague and Constantine AN ORDINANCE relating to three development projects; adopting provisions for approval of three low -impact, development and Built Green demonstration projects, in accordance with K.C.C. 21A.55.010; amending Ordinance 2281, Section 5, as amended, and K.C.C. 9.04.050 and adding a new section to K.C.C. chapter.21A.55. PREAMBLE: The creation of livable communities and the availability of affordable housing is a regional vision sharedby the Growth Management Act, countywide planning policies, and the King County Comprehensive Plan. Concerns relative to creating safe, healthy and diverse communities include the desirability of sustainable growth, the affordability of housing at all income levels; and the efficiency of thp. development review process as it affects project affordability 1 Exhibit No. Item No. Recelved King County Fearing Examiner 1MAIN FILE COPY Ordinance 141 17 Comprehensive Plan Polices U-447, U-448 and U-449 support testing new 18 models by exploring alternative land development, flexible development 19 standards, and construction techniques; home ownership methods; and 20 development of projects with shared common areas, open space and 21 community facilities. Comprehensive Plan Policy U-407 also encourages 22 land uge and investment strategies that stimulate mixed-use and mixed - 23 income developments as a way to integrate neighborhoods and increase 24 housing. choices. The development of innovative, affordable 25 demonstration projects can encourage new housing and neighborhood 26 models that will meet the changing needs of individuals and families. 27 King County wishes to foster innovative design and development 28 techniques that will demonstrate that the impact of development can be 29 reduced while maintaining housing affordability and that changes to the 30 development regulations and building practices will Iead to an innovative 31 approach to land development, storm water management and increased 32 construction of affordable housing. The county also wishes to promote the 33 Use of recycled materials more efficient use of water resources, increased 34 energy savings and eco -friendly building techniques as outlined in the 35 Built Green program. 36 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF KING COUNTY- 31. OUNTY: 37 NEWS ON SECTION L ' There is hereby added to K.C.C. chapter 21A.55 38 a new section to read as follows: 39 Demonstration project overlay — low -impact development and Built Green 2 Ordinance 14662 0 0 40 A. The purpose of the low -impact development and Built Green demonstration 41 projects is to determine whether innovative permit processing, site development and 42 building construction techniques based on low -impact development and building 43 construction practices result in environmental benefits, affordable housing and lead to 44 administrative and development cost savings for project applicants and Ding County. 45 The demonstration projects will provide information on application of these techniques to 46 an urban infill mixed-use redevelopment project, an- urban single family residential 47 project and a Vashon Town housing project. The demonstration projects will also 48 provide information to assist in the development of King County Comprehensive Plan 49 policies to guide application and refinement of regulations such as zoning, subdivision, 5o roads and stormwater regulations. Expected benefits from the demonstration projects 51 include: improved conditions of habitat, ground and surface waters within a watershed; 52 reduced impervious surface areas for new site infrastructure in developed and 53 redeveloped projects; greater use of recycled -content building materials and more 54 efficient use of energy and natural resources; and the opportunity to identify and evaluate 55 potential substantive changes to land use development regulations that support and 56 improve natural functions of watersheds. The demonstration projects will also evaluate 57 whether consolidated administrative approval of modifications or waivers and any 58 subsequent hearings, if required, effectively speeds the development review process 59 while maintaining land use coordination and environmental protection, and whether that 60 leads to administrative costs savings for project applicants and King County. 61 B. The department shall implement the low impact development and Built Green 62 demonstration projects in all or a portion of each of the following: the White Center 3 63 64 65 66 67 68 Ordinance 146 neighborhood of the Park Lake Homes HOPE VI Project as described in Attachment A to this ordinance, the unincorporated Urban Area east of Renton at approximately 148th Avenge Southeast and Southeast 128th Street as described in Attachment B to this ordinance; and the Vashon Town as described in Attachment C to this ordinance. If the geographic boundaries of Park Lake Homes HOPE VI. Project are expanded, the provisions of this ordinance may apply provided the criteria in subsection K of this 69 section are met. 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 C. A request by the applicant to modify or waive development standards for the development proposals shall be evaluated by the department based on the criteria in subsection K of this section. A request shall first be either approved or denied administratively and may be further reviewed as described in subsection G.3 of this section. Approval or denial of the proposed modification or waiver shall not be construed as applying to any other development application either within the demonstration project area or elsewhere in the county. D. A modification or-waNer approved by the department in accordance with the low -impact development and Built Green demonstration projects shall be in addition to those modifications or waivers that are currently allowed by K.C.C.. Title 9. and this title. The range of proposed modifications or waivers to development regulations that may be considered pursuant to the low -impact development and Built Green demonstration projects shall include only the following King County code regulations and related public rules: 1. Drainage review requirements: K.C.C. chapter 9.04 and the Surface Water Design Manual; 4 Ordinance 14682 86 2. King County road standards: K.C.C. 14.42.010 and the county road standards, 87 1993 update; 88 3. Density and dimensions: ICC -.C. chapter 21A.12, if the base density is that of 89 the zone applied to the entire demonstration project and if the minimum density is not 90 less than the minimum residential density of the zone calculated for the portion of the site 91 to be used for residential purposes, in accordance with K.C.C, 21A.12.060. However, if a 92 demonstration project provides fifty-one .percent of the housing to households that, at the 93 time of initial occupancy, have incomes of eighty percent or less of median income for 94 King County as periodically published by the United States Department of Housing and 95 Urban Development, or its successor agency, then the director may approve less than the 96 minimum density; 97 4. Design requirements: K.C.C. chapter 21A.14; 98 5. Landscaping and water use: K.C.C. chapter 21A.16; 99 6. Parldng and circulation: K.C.C. chapter 21A.18; 100 7. Signs: K.C.C. chapter 21A.20; and 101 8. Environmentally sensitive areas: K.C.C. chapter 21A.24, if the modification 102 results in a net improvement to the functions of the sensitive area. 103 E. A demonstration project authorized by this section and located in the R-12 104 through R-48 zones may contain residential and limited nonresidential uses subject to the 105 following provisions: 106 1. The demonstration project may request a modification or waiver of any of the 107 development conditions contained in K.C.C. 21A.08.030, 21A.08.040, 21A.08.050, 108 21A.08.060, 21A.08.070, 21A.08,080 and 21A.08.100, subject to the review process �r�ir�w�rru�i� .rni�ur•�i1. r. 5 Ordinance 14662 109 described in subsection G of this flection and the criteria described in subsection K of this 110 section. 111 2. The demonstration project may include single family detached residential 112 dwelling units as a permitted use, subject to the review process described in subsection G- 113 of this section and the criteria described in subsection K of this section. 114 3. The demonstration project may include any nonresidential use allowed as a 115 permitted use in the NB zone, subject to any development conditions contained in K.C.C. 116 21A.08.040, 21A.08.050, 21A.08.060, 21A.08.070, 21A.08.080 and 21A.08.100, without 117 the need. to request a modification or waiver as described in subsection G of this section. 118 The applicant may request a modification or waiver of the development conditions 119 contained in K.C.C. 21A.08.030, 21A.08.040, 21A.08.050, 21A.08.060, 21A.08.070, 120 21A.08.080, and 21A.08.100, subject to the criteria in subsection K of this section. If a 121 nonresidential use is permitted in the R-12 through R48 zones, subject to development 122 conditions, and is permitted in the NB zone without development conditions, the use shall 123. be permitted in the demonstration project without development conditions and without 124 the need to request a modification or waiver. 125 4. If a nonresidential use is subject to a conditional use permit in the R-12 126 through R-48 zones and not subject to a conditional use permit in the NB zone, the use 127 - shall be permitted in the demonstration project without requiring a conditional use 128 permit. 129 5. If a use is subject to a conditional use permit in both the R-12 through R-48 130 zones and the NB zone or only in the NB zone, the use may be permitted in the .6 Ordinance 14662 131 demonstration project if the demonstration project applies for and obtains a conditional 132 use permit and satisfies the conditional use permit criteria. 133 6. Uses authorized by this subsection shall be allowed only as part of a 134 demonstration project. All such uses shall be subject to the development standards in 135 KCC 21A.12.030, except as may be modified or waived under subsection D of this 136 section and this subsection E. 137 F. This subsection authorizes -a msidential basics program for townhouse and 138 apartment building types if such housing are located in a demonstration project located in 139. the R-12 through R-48 zones, even if not. otherwise authorized by the department of 140 development and environmental services public rules chapter 16-04: residential basics 141 program. 142 G.1. Requests for a modification or waiver made in accordance with this section 143 may only be submitted in writing in relation to the following types of applications: .144 a. a site development permit; 145 b. !binding site plan; 146 c. a building permit; 147 d. a short subdivision; or 148 e. a subdivision. 149 2. Requests shall be submitted to the department in writing before or in 150 conjunction with an application for one or more of the permits listed in subsection G.1 of 151 this section, together with any supporting documentation. The supporting documentation 152 must illustrate how the proposed modification meets the criteria of subsection K of this 153 section. 7 Ordinance 1A 154 3. Except for an applicant's request for a modification or waiver submitted in 155 conjunction with an application for a subdivision, the notice of application, review and 156 approval of a proposed modification or waiver shall be treated as a Type 2 land use 157 decision in accordance with K.C.C. 20.20.020. The request for a modification or waiver 158 submitted in conjunction with an application for a subdivision shall be treated as a Type 3 159 Iand use decision in accordance with K.C.C. 20.20.020. 160 4. A preapplication meeting with the applicant and the department to determine 161 the need for and the likely scope of a proposed modification or waiver is required before 162 submittal of such a request. The department of natural resources and parks and the 163 department of transportation shall be invited to participate in the preapplication meeting, 164 if necessary. 165 5. If the applicant requests a modification or waiver of K.C.C. 9.04.050 or the 166 Surface Water Design Manual, the director shall consult with the department of natural 167 resources and parks before granting the modification or waiver. 168 6. If the applicant requests a variance from: the county road standards, the 169 director shall refer the request to the county road engineer for decision under KCC 170 14.42.060, with the right to appeal within the department of transportation as provided in 171 K.C.C. 14.42.062.- The purposes of this demonstration ordinance are intended as a factor 112 to be considered relative to the public interest requirement for road variances described in 173 K.C.C. 14.42.060. 174 7. Administrative appeals of modifications or waivers approved by the director 175 shall be combined with any appeal of the underlying permit decision, if the underlying 176 permit is subject to appeal. Ordinance 14662 177 H. The hearing examiner may consider an environmental impact statement 178 adequacy appeal in conjunction with a demonstration project plat appeal if the 179 environmental impact statement is prepared by a lead agency other than the department 180 and if its adequacy has not previously been adjudicated, even if not otherwise authorized 181 by K.C.C. 20.44.120. 182 L An approved development proposal for any of the applications listed in 183 subsection G.1 of this section, including site plan elements or conditions of approval, 184 may be amended or modified at the request of the applicant or the applicant's successor in 185 interest designated by the applicant in writing. The director may administratively 186 approve minor modifications to an approved development proposal. Modifications that 187 result in major changes as determined by the department or as defined by the approval 188 conditions, shall be treated as a new application for purposes of vesting and shall be 189 reviewed as applicable to the underlying application pursuant to K.C.C. 20.20.020. Any 190 increase in the total number of dwelling units above the maximum number set forth in the 191 development proposal permit or approval shall be deemed a major modification. The 192 county, through the applicable development. proposal permit or'approvai conditions, may 193 specify additional criteria for determining whether proposed modifications are major or. 194 minor. The modifications allowed under this section supercede other modification or 195 revision provisions of K.C.C. Title 16, Title 19A and this title, 196 - L For any subdivision with more than four hundred units that is also a part of a 197 demonstration project, the preliminary subdivision approval shall be effective for eighty- 198- four months, even if not otherwise authorized by K.C.C. 19A.12.O20. The director may 199 administratively grant a one-time extension, extending the approval an additional five IrrYYYYYYYY�I ■.., I I I�pIYYYYrIrliliYl�IrIIIYYr�1�Y�1 A� 9 Ordinance 1466f 200 years, only if the applicant has shown substantial progress towards development of the 201 demonstration project. Before granting the extension, the director will assess the 202 applicant's compliance with the demonstration project conditions and may modify or 203' impose new standards deemed necessary for the public health or safety. 204 K.1. To be eligible to utilize the provisions of the demonstration project, 205 development proposals must be located within the boundaries of the Park Lake Homes 206 HOPE VI Project as described in Attachment A to this ordinance, or as may be modified 707 as described in subsection B of this section; in the area east of Renton at approximately 208 148th Avenue Southeast and Southeast 128th Street as described in Attachment B to this 209 ordinance; and in the Vashon Town as described in Attachment C to this ordinance. 210 2. Proposals to modify or waive development regulationsfor a development - . . 211 application must be consistent with general health, safety and public welfare standards, 212 and must not violate state or federal law. 213 3.a. Applications must demonstrate how the proposed project, when considered 214 as a whole with the proposed modifications or waivers to the code, will meet all of the 215 criteria listed in this subsection, as compared to development without the modification or 216 waiver, and achieves higher quality urban development; enhances infill, redevelopment 217 and greenfield development; optimizes site utilization; stimulates neighborhood 218 redevelopment; and enhances pedestrian experiences and sense of place and community. 219 b. Any individual request for a modification or waiver must meet two or more 220 of criteria (1) through (4) as follows: 221 (1) uses the natural site characteristics to protect the natural systems; 10 Ordinance 14662 10 222 (2) addresses stormwater and drainage safety, function, appearance, 223 environmental protection and maintainability based upon sound engineering judgment; 224 (3) contributes to achievement of a two -star or a three -star rating for the 225 project site under the Built Green "Green Communities" program recognized by the 226 Master Builders Association of King and Snohomish Counties; or 227 (4) where applicable, reduces housing costs for future project residents or 228 tenants without decreasing environmental protection. 229 4. The criteria of subsection K of this section supervicede other variance, 230 modification or waiver criteria and provisions of K.G.C. Title 9 and Title 21A. 231 L. Regulatory modification and waiver applications, or both, authorized by this 232 section shall be filed with the department by December 31, 2006, or by such a later date 233 as may be specified in the conditions of any development approval for any type of 234 modification or waiver for which the opportunity for future application is expressly 235 granted in those conditions. Modifications or waivers contained within an approved 236 development proposal shall be valid as long as the underlying permit or development 237. application approval is valid. Modifications or waivers that are approved as separate 238 applications must be incorporated into a valid permit or development application that 239 must be filed by December 31, 2006. The director may extend the date for filing the 244 demonstration project permit and development applications for a maximum of twelve 241- months. The ability to establish the location and maximum size of uses. that are not. 242 otherwise permitted in the R-12 through R-48 zones as set forth in subsection E of this 243 section expires December 31, 2006. Any deadline set forth in this subsection shall be 244 adjusted to include the time for appeal of all or any portion of the project approval. 41 0 Ordinance 146 245 M.1. By December 31, 2006, the director shall prepare and submit to the council 246 a report on the pilot programs that: 247 a. describes and evaIuates the pertinent preliminary results from the ` 248 demonstration projects; and 249 b. recommends changes, based on the evaluation, which should be made to the 250 county processes and ordinances. 251 2. N only insufficient or inconclusive data are available when this report is due, 252 the director shall provide an interim status report and indicate the date a subsequent 253 report or reports will be transmitted to fully evaluate outcomes of the demonstration 254 projects, 255 SECTION 2. Ordinance 2281, Section 5, as amended, and K.C.C. 9.04.050 are 256 amended to read as follows: 257 Drainage review - requirements. 258 A. Core requirements. Every permit or approval application with drainage 259 review required by K.C.C. 9.04.030 must meet each of the following core requirements 260which are described in detail in the Surface Water Design Manual. 261 1. Core requirement #1: Discharge at the natural location. All surface and 262 storm water runoff from a project shall be discharged at the natural location so as not to 263 be diverted onto, or away from, downstream properties. The manner in which runoff is 264 discharged from the project site shall not create a significant adverse impact to downhill 265 properties or drainage systems as specified in the discharge requirements of the Surface 266 Water Design Manual. 12 Ordinance 94662 0 267 2. Core requirement #2: Offsite analysis. The initial application submittal for 268 proposed projects shall include an offsite analysis report that assesses potential offsite 269 drainage impacts associated with development of the proposed site and proposes 270 appropriate mitigations to those impacts. This initial submittal shall include, at 271 minimum, a Level One downstream analysis as described in the Surface Water Design 272 Manual. if impacts are identified, the proposed projects shall meet any applicable = 273 problem -specific requirements as specified in the Surface Water Design Manual. 274 3. Core Requirement #3: Flow control. Proposed projects shall provide flow 275 control facilities to mitigate the increased surface and storm water runoff generated by 276 the addition of five thousand square feet or more of new impervious surface and any 277 related land -cover conversion. These facilities shall meet the area -specific flow control 278 requirements and the flow control implementation requirements applicable to the project 279 site as specified in the Surface Water Design Manual. Projects subject to area -specific 280 flow control requirements shall meet one of the performance criteria listed below as 281 directed by the Surface Water Design Manual: 282 a. Level One: match the predeveloped site's peak discharge rates for the two - 283 year and ten-year return periods; 284 b. bevel Two: match the predeveloped site's discharge durations for the 285 predeveloped peak discharge rates between the fifty percent of the two-year peak flow 286 through the fifty-year peak flow; or 287 c. Level Three: meet Level Two criteria and also match the predeveloped 288 sitels peak discharge rate for the one hundred -year return period. 13 Ordinance 14662 289 4. Core requirement #4: Conveyance system. All engineered conveyance N 290 system elements for proposed projects shall be analyzed, designed and constructed to 291 provide the minimum level of protection against overtopping, flooding, erosion and 292 structural failure as specified by the conveyance requirements for new and existing . 293 systems and conveyance implementation requirements described in the Surface Water 294 Design Manual. 295 5. Core requirement #5: Erosion and sediment plan. All proposed projects that 296 will clear, grade, or otherwise disturb the site shall provide erosion and sediment control 297 (ESC) that prevents, to the maximum extent possible, the transport of sediment from the 298 site to drainage facilities, water resources and adjacent properties. Erosion and sediment 299 controls shall be applied in accordance with K.C.C. chapter 16.82 as specified by the 300 temporary ESC measures and performance criteria and implementation requirements in 301 1the King County erosion and sediment control standards. 302 6. Core requirement #6: Maintenance and operation. Maintenance of all 303 drainage facilities in compliance with King County maintenance standards is the 304 responsibility of the applicant/property owner as described in the Surface Water Design 305 Manual, except those facilities for which King County is granted an easement or 306 covenant and assumes maintenance and operation as described in the Surface Water 307 Design Manual. 308 7. Core requirement #7: Financial guarantees and liability. - All drainage 309 facilities constructed or modified for projects, except downspout infiltration and 310 dispersion systems for single family residential lots, must comply with the liability 14 Ordinance 14662 • 311 requirements of K.C.C. 9.04. 100 and the financial guarantee requirements of K.C.G. Title 312 27A. 313 8. Core requirement #8: Water quality. Proposed projects shall provide water 314 quality treatment facilities to treat polluted surface and storm water runoff' generated by 315 the addition and/or replacement of five thousand square feet or more of pollution - 316 generating impervious surface or one acre or more of pollutant -generating pervious 317 surface; however, pervious surfaces are specifically excluded if there is a good faith 318 agreement with the King Conservation District to implement a farm management plan for 319 agricultural uses, and pervious areas for other uses are specifically excluded if King 320 County department of development and environmental services approves a landscape 321 management plan that controls pesticides and fertilizers leaving the site. These facilities 322 shall meet the area -specific water quality treatment requirements and the water quality, 323 implementation requirements applicable to the project site as specified in the Surface 324 Water Design Manual. At a minimum, the facilities shall reduce pollutant loads by 325 meeting the applicable annual average performance goals listed below for ninety-five 326 percent of the annual average runoff volume: 327 a. basic water quality: remove eighty percent of the total suspended solids; 328 b. sensitive lake protection: remove fifty percent of the total phosphorus; 329 - c. resource stream protection: remove fify percent of the total zinc; 330 d sphagnum bog protection: remove fifty percent of the total phosphorus and 331 forty percent of the total nitrate plus nitrite. The discharge shall maintain a pH of less 332 than 6.5 and an alkalinity of less than ten milligrams per liter. 15 Ordinance 14662 333 B. Special Requirements. Every proposed project required by K.C.C. 9.04.030 to 334 have drainage review shall meet any of the following special requirements which apply to 335 the site and which are described in detail in the Surface Water Design Manual. The 336 department of development and environmental services shall verify if a proposed project 337 is subject to and meets any of the special requirements. 338 1. Special Requirement #i: Other adopted area -specific requirements. If a 339 proposed project is in a designated critical drainage area, or is in an area included in an 340 adopted master drainage plan, basin plan, lake management plan or shared facility plan, 341 then the proposed project shall meet the applicable drainage requirements of the critical 342 drainage area, master drainage plan, basin plan, lake management plan or shared facility 343 plan. 344 2. Special Requirement #2: Floodplain/floodway delineation. If a proposed 345 project contains or is adjacent to a stream, lake, wetland or closed depression, or if other 346 King County regulations require study of flood hazards, then the one hundred year 347 floodplain boundaries (and floodway if available or if improvements are proposed within 348 the one hundred year floodplain), based on an approved flood hazard study as described 349 in the Surface "Water Design Manual, shall be delineated on the site improvement plans 350 and profiles, and on any final subdivision maps prepared for the proposed project. 351 3. Special Requirement #3: Flood protection facilities. If a proposed project 352 contains or is adjacent to a Class 1 or 2 stream that has an existing flood protection 353 facility (such as levees, revetments and berms), or proposes to. construct a new, or modify 354 an existing, flood protection facility, then the flood protection facilities shall be analyzed 16 Ordinance 14662 355 and/or designed as specified in the Surface Water Design Manual to conform with the 356 Federal Emergency Management Administration regulations (44 C_F_R.). 357 4. Special Requirement #4: Source Control. If a proposed project requires a 358 commercial building or commercial site development permit, then water quality source. 359 controls shall be applied to prevent rainfall and runoff from coming into contact with 360 pollutants to the maximum extent possible. Water quality source controls shall be 361 applied'in accordance with K.C.C. chapter 9.12 and the King County stormwater 362 pollution control manual. All structural source controls shall be identified on the site 363 improvement plans and profiles or final maps prepared for the proposed project. 364 5. Special Requirement #5: Oil control. If a proposed project is a high -use site 365 or is a redevelopment project proposing $100,000 or more of improvements to an existing 366 high -use site, then oil control shall be applied to all runoff from the high -use portion of 367 the site as specified in the Surface Water Design Manual. 368 C. Adjustment. 369 1. An adjustment to the requirements contained in this section and/or other 370 requirements in the Surface Water Design Manual may be proposed provided that the 371 resulting development shall be subject to all of the remaining terms and conditions of this 372 chapter and provided that granting the variance shall: 373 a. produce a compensating or comparable result in the public interest, and 374 b. meet this chapter's objectives of safety, function, appearance, environmental 375 protection and maintainability based upon sound engineering judgment. 376 2. If meeting the provisions of K.C.C. 9.04.050C.1.a will deny reasonable use of 377 a property, the best practicable alternative shall be obtained as determined by the director 17 Ordinance 146 378 of the department of development and environmental services according to the 379 adjustment process defined in the Surface Water Design Manual. 380 3. Requests for adjustments which may be in conflict with the requirements of 381 any other King County division shall require review and concurrence with that division. 382 4. Requests for adjustments shall be processed in accordance with procedures 383 specified in the Surface Water Design Manual. (Note that the adjustment concept has 384 been termed "variance" in earlier editions of the Surface Water Design Manual). 385 5.- The county may require monitoring of experimental designs and technology 386 or untested applications proposed by the applicant in order to determine compliance with 387 K.C.C. 9.04.0500.1 and the approved plans and conditions. 388 6. The applicant may appeal an adjustment decision by following the appeal 389 procedures as specified in the Surface Water Design Manual. 390 D. The drainage re 'ew Muirements in this section and in the Surface Water Ordinance 14662 391 Desig& Manual ma be modified or waived under the pmeeduTes in section 1 of this 392 ordinance. 393 Ordinance 14662 was introduced on 4/1412003 and passed by the Metropolitan King County Council on 6/2!2003, by the following vote: Yes: 12 - Ms. Sullivan, Ms. Edmonds, Mx. von Reichbauer, Ms. Lambert, Mr. Phillips, Mr. Pe1z, Mr. McKenna, Mr. Constantine, Mr. Gossett, Ms. Hague, Mr. Irons and Ms. Patterson No: 0 Excused: 0 KING COUNTY COUNCIL KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON AT'T'EST: F� - Anne Noris, Clerk of the Council, APPROVED this J2-- day of �. '2003. Ron Sims, County Executive Attachments A. Park bake Homes HOPE VI Map, B. Shamrock Housing Development Nlap,,C. ;ss Sunflower Housing Development Map: - ,0 19 Park Lake Homes Hope VI Lara Impact Development and BLliit Green7`1 Demonstration Project � Nak"0111, �'+' moi` w w� �= -��� �.! ■ i� '.+Jlr �r� ■ Nool zi its i� �i ■. ��� U_ 22 613 �■ wt Ilii : - : a 1• mom i if. C ,E ME Mo �_� r.2_ M E wr NZ 0 OWN All "Mill OEM 11141i�� Now wills � � Nak"0111, w =i M 11 :moi .� Ire! � m-= T��� il■■� !!�. T7! J! Fi! �ME" iw ii a ■�I ni !� rw w■r ! r � r ww �o w_sa ■■w WON �■rr w: w w Uftwo `_ !! �iYTr�is !!fro a. �■ w Mi Pa.� 0� =5 si .. - 111 111 WM 1111110 : ■ ■w rr .ate � 'l�1♦w w 'i i f� w �^ Nool zi wt OWN wt "Mill OEM wills r � w■ o ■ _ c�-gar 2001 w =i M 11 :moi .� Ire! � m-= T��� il■■� !!�. T7! J! Fi! �ME" iw ii a ■�I ni !� rw w■r ! r � r ww �o w_sa ■■w WON �■rr w: w w Uftwo `_ !! �iYTr�is !!fro a. �■ w Mi Pa.� 0� =5 si .. - 111 111 WM 1111110 : ■ ■w rr .ate � 'l�1♦w w 'i i f� Shaftirock Housing Deveiopi,ant Low Impact Development and Built Green"' Demonstration Project r■ E sa m x Ounflower Housing DeVeEopment Lovi Impact Development and Built Green I'-' Demonstration Project w �r�ea1tisNI►�tPmt��hr-'� . d - PM p P81ki Y tr 900 to D 200 ODM 940 Im 9dwob !Yd �mw S 0 King County Department of Development and Environmental Services 900 Oakesdale Avenue SW Renton, WA 98055-1219 May 8, 2003 Sara Slatten Cam West Development, Inc. 9720 NE 12V' Place, Suite 100 Kirkland, WA 98034 RE: Application for the Preliminary Plat of Shamrock Prope DDES File No. L02P0014 Dear Ms. Slatten: Thank you for your May 7, 2003 e-mail request for an extension of the deadline for the submittal of the additional information required to process the preliminary plat application of Shamrock Property. The request for additional information stops all processing of the plat application until the required information is received. The time spent waiting for information to be submitted is not counted toward any time limit requirements of the plat application process. The previous letters established deadlines of January 6, 2003, February 24, 2003 and May 10, 2003. We are granting an extension to this deadline, as we understand that you are considering revisions as a result of the Proposed Low Impact Demonstration Ordinance. If the Land Use Services Division of DDES does not receive the necessary information requested to process your application by August 4, 2003, your application may be canceled or denied. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please call me at (206) 296-7167. Sincer ly, — cb'u� Ki Claussen, Program/Project Manager III Current Planning Section Cc: Triad Associates Bruce Whittaker, Senior Engineer, Engineering Review Section, LUSD Cynthia Moffit, Program/Project Manager III, Administrative Services Section, DDES Application File MAIN FILE COP'V L] Claussen, Kimberly From: Sara Slatten Isslatten@camwest.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 07, 2003 4:50 PM To: kimberly.claussen@metrokc.gov Subject: Shamrock Property Hi Kim, I hate to bother you again on this but I just wanted to make sure we can get an extension on shamrock as our deadline expires this Saturday the 10th. Would it be possible to get another 2 month extension to be on the safe side? Thanks, Sara Slatten CamWest Development (425) 825-1955; phone (425) 825-1565; fax www.camwest.com MAIN (FILE COPY �5 1 • Shamrock Properties — 203065.10 List of Assumptions 04/17/03 • The street section will be 24 feet from flow line to flow line with an additional 5.5 feet on each side for curb and sidewalk. The total impervious width is 35 feet. • The entire 60 foot right-of-way for SE 124`h Street was assumed to be impervious. • Driveways will be constructed of a permeable material (i.e. porous concrete, interlocking pavers, etc.) The King County Surface Water Design Manual allows pervious interlocking pavers to be modeled as grass. • The landscape/lawn areas will be provided with rehabilitated soils; therefore these areas have been modeled as pasture in the developed conditions. • The pre -developed conditions have been modeled as pasture with some existing gravel roads and buildings. This is the requirement per the King County manual but does not meet the new DOE requirements of modeling as pre -developed conditions as forested. • The site is predominately till soils. • The infiltration rate through the bio -retention areas has been assumed to be 0.25 inches per our with a design factor of safety of 2. This results in a design infiltration rate of 0.13 inches pet hour. Only the bottom surface area was considered for infiltration except for the bio -retention area adjacent to the active-recteation tract which has 10:1 sideslopes. • Wetland and wetland buffer areas will be preserved in dedicated tracts. Therefore, these areas were excluded from the basin area calculations. * The building footprint per lot was assumed to be 1750 square feet. • The driveway area per lot was assumed to be 500 square feet. • The site was separated into three main basins. Basin 1 is the northeast corner of the site and discharges to the smaller wetland along the northern property line. Basin 2 is most of the area north of the proposed SE 124`h Street. This basin has been separated into 3 sub -basins to model the flows into the separate bio -retention areas. The discharge location of Basin 2 is to the wetland located along the western property line. Basin 3 is the area south of SE 124`h Street and discharges to the proposed pond to the south. At this time, Basin 2 has been modeled and the results of this modeling are used to make assumptions regarding the other site basins. (see the attached basin map) Basin Areas (Basin 2) Pre -Developed Areas Total Area = 14.775 ac Exst. Gravel Road = 1.218 ac Exst. Buildings = 0.389 ac Exst. Pasture = 13.168 ac Developed Areas Basin B02(01) Total Area = 7.086 ac MAIN FILE COPY C Building Area (20 lots) = 0.803 ac Road/Sidewalk = 0.812 ac Grass Area = 0.230 ac Pasture Area = 5.153 ac F-xst. Buildings = 0.088 ac Basin B02(02) Total Area = 2.920 ac Building Area (18 lots) = 0.723 ac Road/Sidewalk = 0.635 ac Grass Area = 0.207 ac Pasture Area = 1.355 ac Basin B02(03) Total Area = 4.769 ac Building Area (28 lots) = 1.125 ac Road/ Sidewalk = 1.170 ac Grass Area = 0.321 ac Pasture Area = 2.153 ac Results There is a detention pond required for Basin 2 with a storage volume of 50,000 cubic feet. Costs Pipe Reduction 24001f -12" CPEP @ $19/1f = $45,600 5401f— 18" CPEP @ $29/lf = $15,660 25 —Type 1 CB's @ 800 EA = $20,000 5 -- Type 2 CB's @ 2500 EA = $12,500 Reduce Large Detention Pond by 225,000 CF 225,000 cf @ $5/cf = $1,125,000 Soil Amendment Costs 375,000 sf @ $0.65/sf = ($243,750) Additional Plantings (Bio -retention Areas) 30,000 sf @ $2/sf = ($60,000) Porous Driveways Interlocking Pagers 4200 sy @ $50/sy = $210,000 Concrete 4200 sy @ $30/sy = $126,000 Difference = ($84,000) Additional Pond 50,000 c£ @ $5/cf = ($250,000) Control Structure = ($3,500) Bio -retention control structures = r$6,OOQ� Total Cost Difference = $5711510 .1 �1 �1 11 L 11 r _ I � f I ❑ 7-1 I� dui � � � A ' • � L J I ; I Q I I I � 1'. I i I �1~ 0 I I 11 C� 1' I 01 01 I I v /./ k 41r V1 6') n r` 'a Ip lc f I I I I I I ' � I � I ~ r 7 I t_ -i II 1� I I f I J I < I F_ -i L_-i r-7 1 1 L—L T r5 f � rel I O � r 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 r1 1 1 1 1 +1 1 1 1 1 a 1 l 1 _ 3s 3n r w, n Nd1VNINSvm �.INOOO ONIN 1 I' 33 i I N33dO73r 3O 1 S3M PV V O NOIIdO 9-8 NOIN3d 30 AIfO J;IE NV7d 311S 7Vnl d3ONOa Islas Nnlslaa azro ae - .1 �1 �1 11 L 11 r _ I � f I ❑ 7-1 I� dui � � � A ' • � L J I ; I Q I I I � 1'. I i I �1~ 0 I I 11 C� 1' I 01 01 I I v /./ k 41r V1 6') n r` 'a Ip lc f I I I I I I ' � I � I ~ r 7 I t_ -i II 1� I I f I J I < I F_ -i L_-i r-7 1 1 L—L T r5 f � rel I O � r 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 r1 1 1 1 1 +1 1 1 1 1 a 1 l 1 _ 3s 3n r w, n I b+n-MbBI i40rde4CdoLUS r �[ -rode 1 I' I b+n-MbBI i40rde4CdoLUS r �[ -rode i - HBLProject No. ❑ Page of Subjct Phone Calculations A ❑ Fax With/To Fax ## ❑ Memorandum Address # Faxed Pages ❑ Meeting Minutes ❑ Telephone Memo Date:_ (a - 4oa r vac t 15 IS` By: rj r Copies to: 2215 N 34th Street Su4e 300 Tacoma, WA 98403 Old Town Historical District 2531383-2422 2531383-2572 FAX .3c,/.t zo2 l %Z 1 - IW LI 300 LF If this does not meet with your understanding, please contact us in writing within seven days. THANK YOU. WESTERN WASHINGTON HYDRIOGY MODEL V2 PROJECT REPORT "-o3ect Name: Shamrock to Address: City Renton Report Date 4/17/2003 Gage Seatac Data Start 1948 Data End 1998 Precip Scale: 1.17 PREDEVELOPED LAND USE Basin Pre-Dev Flows To outflow Groundwater: No Land Use Acres TILL PASTURE: 13.168 IMPERVIOUS: 1.607 DEVELOPED LAND USE Basin B02(01) 'owe To BR2 ::oundwater: No Land Use Acres TILL PASTURE: 5.153 TILL GRASS: 0.23 IMPERVIOUS: 1.703 Basin B02(02) Flows To BR3 Groundwater: No Land Use Acres TILL PASTURE: 1.355 TILL GRASS: 0.207 IMPERVIOUS: 1.358 Basin B02(03) Flows To BR4 Groundwater: No Land Use Acres TILL PASTURE: 2.153 TILL GRASS: 0.321 IMPERVIOUS: 2.295 RCHRES (POND) INFORMATION Pond Name: BR2 Pond Type: Trapezoidal Pond Pond Flows to : BR3 Dimensions Depth: 1.5ft. Bottom Length: 180ft. "nttom Width 60ft. de slope 1: 10 To 1 side slope 2: 10 To 1 Side slope 3: 10 To 1 Side slope 4: 10 To 1 Volume at Riser Head: 0.306 acre --ft. Discharge Structure Riser Height: 1 ft. Orifice 1 Diameter: 6 in. Elevation: 0.5 ft. road Name: BR3 Pond Type: Trapezoidal Pond Pond Flows to : BR4 Dimensions Depth: 1.5ft. Bottom Length: 300ft. Bottom Width : 18ft. Side slope 1: 4 To 1 Side slope 2: 4 To 1 Side slope 3: 4 To 1 Side slope 4: 4 To 1 Volume at Riser Head: 0.154 acre -ft. Discharge Structure Riser Height: 1 ft. orifice 1 Diameter: 4 in. Elevation: 0.5 ft. Pond Hydraulic Table Stage(ft) Area(acr) Volume(aer-ft) Dschr (cfs) Infilt(cfs) 0.000 Pond Hydraulic Table 0.000 Stage(ft) Area(acr) Volume(acr-ft) Dschrg(cfs) Infilt(cfs) 0.000 0.248 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.100 0.259 0.025 0.000 0.033 0.200 0.270 0.052 0.000 0.034 0.300 0.282 0.079 0.000 0.036 0.400 0.293 0.108 0.000 0.037 0.500 0.305 0.138 0.000 0.039 0.600 0.317 0.169 0.299 0.040 0.700 0.330 0.202 0.423 0.042 0.800 0.342 0.235 0.518 0.043 0.900 0.355 0.270 0.598 0.045 1.000 0.367 0.306 0.669 0.046 1.100 0.380 0.343 1.040 0.048 1.200 0.393 0.382 1.662 0.050 1.300 0.407 0.422 2.446 0.051 1.400 0.420 0.464 3.361 0.053 1.500 0.434 0.506 4.389 0.055 road Name: BR3 Pond Type: Trapezoidal Pond Pond Flows to : BR4 Dimensions Depth: 1.5ft. Bottom Length: 300ft. Bottom Width : 18ft. Side slope 1: 4 To 1 Side slope 2: 4 To 1 Side slope 3: 4 To 1 Side slope 4: 4 To 1 Volume at Riser Head: 0.154 acre -ft. Discharge Structure Riser Height: 1 ft. orifice 1 Diameter: 4 in. Elevation: 0.5 ft. Pond Hydraulic Table Stage(ft) Area(acr) Volume(aer-ft) Dschr (cfs) Infilt(cfs) 0.000 0.124 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.100 0.130 0.013 0.000 0.016 0.200 0.136 0.026 0.000 0.016 0.300 0.142 0.040 0.000 0.016 0.400 0.148 0.054 0.000 0.016 0.500 0.154 0.069 0.000 0.016 0.600 0.160 0.085 0.133 0.016 0.700 0.166 0.101 0.188 0.016 0.800 0.172 0.118 0.230 0.016 .900 0.178 0.136 0.266 0.016 x.000 0.184 0.154 0.297 0.016 1.100 0.190 0.172 0.633 0.016 1.200 0.196 0.192 1.223 0.016 1.300 0.202 0.212 1.976 0.016 1-400 0.209 0.232 2.862 0.016 1.500 0.215 0.253 3.863 0.016 Pond Name: BR4 Pond Type: Trapezoidal Pond Pond Flows to : Pond Dimensions ,3pth: 1.5ft. ttom Length: 700ft. Bottom Width 5ft. Side slope 1: 3 To 1 Side slope 2: 3 To 1 Side slope 3: 3 To 1 Side slope 4: 3 To 1 Volume at Riser Head: 0.129 acre -ft. Discharge Structure Riser Height: 1 ft. Orifice 1 Diameter: 4 in. Elevation: 0.5 ft. Pond Name: Pond Pond Type: Trapezoidal Pond Pond Flows to : Outflow Dimensions Depth: 5ft. Bottom Length: 160.12ft. Bottom Width 53.38ft. Side slope 1: 3 To 1 Side slope 2: 3 To 1 Side slope 3: 3 To 1 Side slope 4: 3 To 1 Volume at Riser Head: 1.038 acre -ft. Discharge Structure Riser Height: 4 ft. Orifice 1 Diameter: 4.13 in. Elevation: 0 ft. Orifice 2 Diameter: 6.3 in. Elevation: 3.068 ft. orifice 3 Diameter: 29.12 in. Elevation: 3.4 ft. Pond Hydraulic Table Table Stage(ft) Area(acr) Volume(acr-ft) Dschrg(cfs) Infilt(Cfa) 0.000 0.060 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.100 0.090 0.009 0.000 0.010 0.200 0.100 0.018 0.000 0.010 0.300 0.110 0.028 0.000 0.010 0.400 0.119 0.040 0.000 0.010 0.500 0.129 0.052 0.000 0.010 0.600 0.139 0.066 0.133 0.010 0.700 0.149 0.080 0.186 0.010 0.800 0.159 0.095 0.230 0.010 0.900 0.168 0.112 0.266 0.010 1.000 0.178 0.129 0.297 0.010 1.100 0.188 0.148 0.787 0.010 1.200 0.198 0.167 1.658 0.010 1.300 0.208 0.187 2.776 0.010 .400 0.218 0.208 4.094 0.010 500 0.228 0.231 5.585 0.010 Pond Name: Pond Pond Type: Trapezoidal Pond Pond Flows to : Outflow Dimensions Depth: 5ft. Bottom Length: 160.12ft. Bottom Width 53.38ft. Side slope 1: 3 To 1 Side slope 2: 3 To 1 Side slope 3: 3 To 1 Side slope 4: 3 To 1 Volume at Riser Head: 1.038 acre -ft. Discharge Structure Riser Height: 4 ft. Orifice 1 Diameter: 4.13 in. Elevation: 0 ft. Orifice 2 Diameter: 6.3 in. Elevation: 3.068 ft. orifice 3 Diameter: 29.12 in. Elevation: 3.4 ft. Pond Hydraulic Table Stage(ft) Area(acr) Volume(acr-ft) Dsehrg(cfs) Infilt(cfs) 0.000 0.196 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.056 0.198 0.011 0.106 0.000 0.111 0.199 0.022 0.149 0.000 0.167 0.201 0.033 0.183 0.000 0.222 0.203 0.044 0.211 0.000 .278 0.204 0.056 0.236 0.000 U.333 0.206 0.067 0.259 0.000 0.389 0.208 0.079 0.279 0.000 0.444 0.209 0.090 0.299 0.000 0.500 0.211 0.102 0.317 0.000 0.556 0.213 0.114 0.334 0.000 0.611 0.214 0.125 0.350 0.000 0.667 0.216 0.137 0.366 0.000 0.722 0.218 0.149 0.381 0.000 0.778 0.220 0.162 095 0.000 0.833 0.221 0.174 0.409 0.000 0.889 0.223 0.186 0.422 0.000 0.944 0.225 0.199 0.435 0.000 1.000 0.226 0.211 0.448 0.000 056 0.228 0.224 0.460 0.000 x.111 0.230 0.237 0.472 0.000 1.167 0.232 0.249 0.484 0.000 1.222 0.233 0.262 0.495 0.000 1.278 0.235 0.275 0.506 0.000 1.333 0.237 0.288 0.517 0.000 1.389 0.239 0.302 0.528 0.000 1.444 0.240 0.315 0.538 0.000 1.500 0.242 0.328 0.549 0.000 1.556 0.244 0.342 0.559 0.000 1.611 0.246 0.355 0.569 0.000 1.667 0.248 0.369 0.578 0.000 1.722 0.249 0.383 0.588 0.000 1.778 0.251 0.397 0.597 0.000 1.833 0.253 0.411 0.607 0.000 1.889 0.255 0.425 0.616 0.000 1.944 0.257 0.439 0.625 0.000 2.000 0.258 0.453 0.634 0.000 2.056 0.260 0.468 0.642 0.000 2.111 0.262 0.482 0.651 0.000 2.167 0.264 0.497 0.659 0.000 2.222 0.266 0.512 0.668 0.000 2.278 0.267 0.526 0.676 0.000 2.333 0.269 0.541 0.684 0.000 2.389 0.271 0.556 0.692 0.000 2.444 0.273 0.572 0.700 0.000 2.500 0.275 0.587 0.708 0.000 2.556 0.277 0.602 0.716 0.000 611 0.279 0.617 0.724 0.000 667 0.281 0.633 0.732 0.000 2.722 0.282 0.649 0.739 0.000 2.778 0.284 0.664 0.747 0.000 2.833 0.286 0.680 0.754 0.000 2.889 0.288 0.696 0.761 0.000 2.944 0.290 0.712 0.769 0.000 3.000 0.292 0.728 0.776 0.000 3.056 0.294 0.745 0.783 0.000 3.111 0.296 0.761 1.007 0.000 3.167 0.298 0.778 1.125 0.000 3.222 0.300 0.794 1.214 0.000 3.278 0.301 0.811 1.288 0.000 3.333 0.303 0.828 1.355 0.000 3.389 0.305 0.845 1.415 0.000 3.444 0.307 0.862 6.166 0.000 3.500 0.309 0.879 8.566 0.000 3.556 0.311 0.896 10.36 0.000 3.611 0.313 0.913 11.85 0.000 3.667 0.315 0.931 13.17 0.000 3.722 0.317 0.948 14.35 0.000 3.778 0.319 0.966 15.44 0.000 3.833 0.321 0.984 16.45 0.000 3.889 0.323 1.002 17.40 0.000 3.944 0.325 1.020 18.30 0.000 4.000 0.327 1.038 19.15 0.000 4.056 0.329 1.056 20.16 0.000 4.111 0.331 1.074 21.29 0.000 4.167 0.333 1.093 22.50 0.000 '.222 0.335 1.111 23.77 0.000 .278 0.337 1.130 25.08 0.000 4.333 0.339 1.149 26.43 0.000 4.389 0.341 1.168 27.83 0.000 4.444 0.343 1.187 29.26 0.000 4.500 0.345 1.206 30.72 0.000 4.556 0.347 1.225 32.22 0.000 4.611 0.349 1.244 33.75 0.000 4.667 0.351 1.264 35.30 0.000 A '777 n l5d 1 7R7 7F RQ n nnn 4.778 0.356 1.30350 40-15 0.000 is 4.833 0.358 1.323 25 year 0.000 4.889 0.360 1.343 41.82 0.000 4.944 0.362 1.363 43.51 0.000 5.000 0.364 1.383 45.23 0.000 ANALYSIS RESULTS Flow Frequency Return Periods for Predeveloped Return Period Flow(cfs) 2 year 0.976 5 year 1.375 10 year 1.652 25 year 2.014 50 year 2.293 100 year 2.579 Flow Frequency Return Periods for Developed Unmitigated Return Period Flow(cfs) 2 year 1.938 5 year 2.459 10 year 2.808 25 year 3.253 50 year 3.591 100 year 3.932 Flow Frequency Return Periods for Developed Mitigated Return Period Flow(cfs) 2 year 0.621 year 0.985 year 1.285 l5 year 1.74 50 year 2.14 100 year 2.597 Yearly Peaks for Pre and Post Developed Year Predevelo ed Developed 1949 1.123 0.579 1950 2.318 0.673 1951 1.465 1.606 1952 0.795 0.433 1953 0.652 0.424 1954 0.944 0.552 1955 1.138 0.742 1956 1.168 0.617 1957 1.237 0.636 1958 0.890 0.641. 1959 0.721 0.527 1960 1.313 1.361 1961 0.836 0.598 1962 0.592 0.349 1963 0.886 0.567 1954 0.946 0.534 1965 0.755 0.593 1966 0.870 0.438 1967 1.314 0.689 1968 0.874 0.515 969 0-862 0.598 970 0.885 0.499 1971 0.913 0.577 1972 1.607 0.964 1973 0.783 0.545 1974 0.863 0.488 1975 1.431 0.698 1976 0.891 0.545 1977 0.493 0.300 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 '83 .j84 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 Ranked Rank 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 -49 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 A 0 Yearly Peaks for Pre Predeveloped 2.3160 2.0791 1.9520 1.7258 1.6071 1.5052 1.4648 1.4310 1.4249 1.4075 1.3144 1.3131 1.2366 1.1929 1.1677 1.1384 1.1229 1.0917 0.9924 0.9463 0.9437 0.9125 0.9041 0.8957 0.8907 0.8897 0.8858 0.8845 0.8742 0.8704 0.8627 0.8620 0.8613 0.8495 0.8359 0.7947 0.7833 0.7550 0.7207 0.6682 0.6516 0.6434 0.6406 0.5923 0.5290 0.4931 0.4796 A 700-1 and Post Developed Developed 1.8335 1.7955 1.7591 1.6060 1.4723 1.4544 1.3731 1.3606 0.9640 0.7997 0.7423 0.6978 0.6889 0.6730 0.6524 0.6443 0.6414 0.6365 0.6168 0.5984 0.5981 0.5929 0.5786 0.5773 0.5667 0.5519 0.5454 0.5448 0.5344 0.5297 0.5269 0.5158 0.5156 0.5153 0.4992 0.4881 0.4774 0.4735 0.4695 0.4379 0.4325 0.4243 0.4204 0.3845 0.3492 0.3049 0.3004 n ri'11117 • 0.992 0.510 0.641 0.38 1.193 0.800 1.092 0.470 1.952 1.833 0.896 0.652 0.904 0.420 0.529 0.474 1.505 1.373 1.408 1.454 0.643 0.477 0.480 0.305 2.377 2.461 2.079 1.796 0.861 0.516 0.668 0.530 0.399 0.233 0.849 0.644 1.726 1.472 1.425 1.759 Yearly Peaks for Pre Predeveloped 2.3160 2.0791 1.9520 1.7258 1.6071 1.5052 1.4648 1.4310 1.4249 1.4075 1.3144 1.3131 1.2366 1.1929 1.1677 1.1384 1.1229 1.0917 0.9924 0.9463 0.9437 0.9125 0.9041 0.8957 0.8907 0.8897 0.8858 0.8845 0.8742 0.8704 0.8627 0.8620 0.8613 0.8495 0.8359 0.7947 0.7833 0.7550 0.7207 0.6682 0.6516 0.6434 0.6406 0.5923 0.5290 0.4931 0.4796 A 700-1 and Post Developed Developed 1.8335 1.7955 1.7591 1.6060 1.4723 1.4544 1.3731 1.3606 0.9640 0.7997 0.7423 0.6978 0.6889 0.6730 0.6524 0.6443 0.6414 0.6365 0.6168 0.5984 0.5981 0.5929 0.5786 0.5773 0.5667 0.5519 0.5454 0.5448 0.5344 0.5297 0.5269 0.5158 0.5156 0.5153 0.4992 0.4881 0.4774 0.4735 0.4695 0.4379 0.4325 0.4243 0.4204 0.3845 0.3492 0.3049 0.3004 n ri'11117 • 0 1/2 2 year to 50 year Flow(CFS) Predev Final Percentage Pass/Fail A.4880 1672 1670 99.0 Pass 5062 1512 1478 97.0 Pass .,.5245 1377 1287 93.0 Pass 0.5427 1236 1144 92.0 Pass 0.5609 1127 1012 89.0 Pass 0.5792 1026 906 88.0 Pass 0.5974 941 809 85.0 Pass 0.6156 860 720 83.0 Pass 0.6339 785 635 80.0 Pass 0.6521 730 552 75.0 Pass 0.6703 667 487 73.0 Pass 0.6886 619 434 70.0 Pass 0.7068 564 376 66.0 Pass 0.7250 508 323 63.0 Pass 0.7433 468 266 56.0 Pass 0.7615 438 224 51.0 Pass 0.7797 409 172 42.0 Pass 0.7979 380 154 40.0 Pass 0.8162 349 147 42.0 Pass 0.8344 330 141 42.0 Pass 0.8526 302 136 45.0 Pass 0.8709 272 130 47.0 Pass 0.8891 242 130 53.0 Pass 0.9073 230 128 55.0 Pass 0.9256 212 121 57.0 Pass 0.9438 194 118 60.0 Pass 0.9620 176 114 64.0 Pass 0.9803 168 110 65.0 Fail 0.9985 153 109 71.0 Fail 0167 145 103 71.0 Fail -- 0350 130 103 79.0 Fail 1.0532 117 100 85.0 Fail 1.0714 114 97 85.0 Fail 1.0897 106 90 84.0 Fail 1.1079 95 87 91.0 Fail 1.1261 90 86 95.0 Fail 1.1444 82 79 96.0 Fail 1.1626 77 76 98.0 Fail 1.1808 69 72 104.0 Fail 1.1991 65 69 106.0 Fail 1.2173 60 63 104.0 Fail 1.2355 59 60 101.0 Fail 1.2538 54 56 103.0 Fail 1.2720 48 52 108.0 Fail 1.2902 46 49 106.0 Fail 1.3085 42 40 95.0 Fail 1.3267 39 36 92.0 Fail 1.3449 37 32 86.0 Fail 1.3632 33 28 84.0 Fail 1.3814 32 25 78.0 Fail 1.3996 28 23 82.0 Fail 1.4178 27 20 74.0 Fail 1.4361 23 20 86.0 Fail 1.4543 22 18 81.0 Fail 1.4725 18 17 94.0 Fail 1.4908 17 16 94.0 Fail 1.5090 16 16 100.0 Fail 1.5272 15 16 106.0 Fail 1.5455 15 13 86.0 Fail .5637 14 13 92.0 Fail 1.5819 14 13 92.0 Fail 1.6002 12 12 100.0 Fail 1.6184 10 9 90.0 Fail 1.6366 10 8 80.0 Fail 1.6549 9 7 77.0 Fail 1.6731 9 6 66.0 Fail 1.6913 9 6 66.0 Fail 1 '7n❑G ❑ C GG n �-,; 1 1.7278 B 6 75.0 Fail 1.7460 8 6 75.0 Fail 1.7643 8 4 50.0 Fail 1.7825 8 4 50.0 Fail 1.8007 7 3 42.0 Fail 8190 7 3 42.0 Fail _.8372 7 2 28.0 Fail 1.8554 7 2 28.0 Fail 1.8737 7 2 28.0 Fail 1.8919 7 2 28.0 Fail 1.9101 7 2 28.0 Fail 1.9284 7 2 28.0 Fail 1.9466 7 2 28.0 Fail 1.9648 6 2 33.0 Fail 1.9831 6 2 33.0 Fail 2.0013 6 2 33.0 Fail 2.0195 6 2 33.0 Fail 2.0377 6 1 16.0 Fail 2.0560 6 1 16.0 Fail 2.0742 6 1 16.0 Fail 2.0924 4 1 25.0 Fail 2.1107 4 1 25.0 Fail 2.1289 4 1 25.0 Fail 2.1471 4 1 25.0 Fail 2.1654 4 1 25.0 Fail 2.1836 3 1 33.0 Fail 2.2018 2 1 50.0 Fail 2.2201 2 1 50.0 Fail 2.2383 2 1 50.0 Fail 2.2565 2 1 50.0 Fail 2.2748 2 1 50.0 Fail 2.2930 2 1 50.0 Fail The development has an increase in flow durations `rom 1/2 predeveloped 2 year flow to the 2 year flow more than a 10% increase from the 2 year to the 50 Aar flow. Water Quality BMP Flow and Volume. On-line facility volume: 0 acre-feet On-line facility target flow: 0 c€s. Adjusted for 15 min: 0 cfa. Off-line facility volume: 0 acre-feet On-line facility target flow: 0 cfs. Adjusted for 15 min: 0 cis. ! qp \� .\�\�■� ,E ... \ ! qp \� .\�\�■� \ ! qp f Ms. Kim Claussen, Planner King County DDES Land Use Division 900 Oakesdale Avenue SW Renton, WA 98055 f 10415 — 147' Avenue SE Renton, WA 98059 March 10, 2003 RE: L02P0014 — Shamrock Property Dear Ms. Claussen: I would like to have the following comments submitted for the above reference Land -Use Application. In the Notice of Application, it states "Development regulations to be used for project mitigation, including sensitive area regulations, 1993 King County Road Standards, etc." This is 2003. I believe that the KC Road Standards have been upgraded since1993. As such, the use of the most current Road Standards should be used for determining mitigation for this proposed development. Also, noted in the Notice of Application is the Date Application Filed: August 1, 2002; Date Determined Complete: October 29, 2002. On June 11, 2002, the King County Council adopted new traffic currency standards for King County Roads. This proposed development is now located with the "Concurrency red" zone, which means no new development can occur until the County bring the Roads up to code. Several issues need to be address with this plat. One is traffic. Already on 148' Avenue SE are plans for this development, which will add 1180 new daily round trips, East Renton Development —just down the road from Shamrock -- which will add 660 new daily round trips. At the intersection of SR 900 and 148" Avenue is the proposed plat of Aster Park -- which will add 330 new daily round trips. Will the Shamrock development have to participate in the new stop light at the intersection of SR 900 and 148`h Avenue SE? Thank you for allowing me to make comments on this proposed development. I look forward to reviewing this file in the future. Sincerely, Ma Claudia Donnelly 11N IPQ�s olopv o King AMY Department of Development and Environmental Services 900 Oakesdale Avenue SW Renton, WA 98055-1219 February 20, 2003 Sara Slatten Cam West Development, Inc. 9720 NE 120'h Place, Suite 100 Kirkland, WA 98034 ��� - •1 • 1' � it l-■ • 1 -.Il e . •r—lei Dear Ms. Slatten: Thank you for your February 12, 2003 e-mail request for an extension of the deadline for the submittal of the additional information required to process the preliminary plat application of Shamrock. The request for additional information stops all processing of the plat application until the required information is received. The time spent waiting for information to be submitted is not counted toward any time limit requirements of the plat application process. The previous letters established deadlines of January 6, 2003 and February 24, 2003. We are granting a final extension to this deadline, as we understand that you are considering potential low impact revisions. If the Land Use Services Division of DDES does not receive the necessary information requested to process your application by May 10, 2003, your application may be canceled or denied. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please call me at (206) 296-7167. Sincer ly, Im Claussen, Program/Project Manager III Current Planning Section Cc: Triad Associates Bruce Whittaker, Senior Engineer, Engineering Review Section, LUSD Cynthia Moffit, Program/Project Manager III, Administrative Services Section, DDES Application File MAIN FILE COPS' 6a �(� 02- Glaussen, Kimberly From: Sara Slatten [sslatten@camwest.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2003 9:52 AM To: kimberly.claussen@metrokc.gov Subject: Shamrock Plat extension Hi Kim, It looks like we'll definitely need to request another plat submittal extension for Shamrock? I believe our deadline is 2/24. Is it possible to get another 2 month extension? We've got an upcoming meeting w/ 20/20 engineering out of Bellingham to discuss low impact alternatives and from there plan to proceed with presenting some options over the upcoming month. Regarding the vesting issue that you raised, I did discuss this with Cynthia Moffit last week and she said she would follow up with Stephanie on this. I imagine they will be discussing this further with you - but if I hear something first I'll let you know. Thanks, Sara Slatten CamWest Development, Inc. (425) 625-1955 www.camwest.com � t' M� c� wee ��Cjl D MAIN! Fly E C]►" 0 King County Department of Development and Environmental Services 900 Oakesdale Avenue SW Renton, WA 98055-1219 December 19, 2002 w Sara Slatten Cam Vilest Development, Inc. 9720 NE 120'hPlace, Suite 100 Kirkland, WA 98034 ` 'fir •l • :1 m In. &I left . N 151.-� Dear Ms. Slatten: 0 Thank you for your December 19, 2002 e-mail request for an extension of the deadline for the submittal of the additional information required to process the preliminary plat application of Shamrock. The request for additional information stops all processing of the plat application until the required information is received. The time spent waiting for information to be submitted is not counted toward any time limit requirements of the plat application process. The October 7, 2002 letter established an initial deadline of January 6, 2003. We are granting a final extension to this deadline. If the Land Use Services Division of DDES does not receive the necessary information requested to process your application by February 24, 2003, your application may be canceled or denied. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please call me at (206) 296-7167. Sinely, im Claussen, Planner III Current Planning Section Cc: Triad Associates Bruce Whittaker, Senior Engineer, Engineering Review Section, LUSD Application File MAT FILE COPY Claussen, Kimberly From: Sara Slatten [sslatten@camwest,com] Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 9:46 AM To: Kim Claussen Cc: Bruce Whittaker; Bruce Knowlton Subject: Shamrock Property Update Kim, Yesterday afternoon, Bruce Whittaker, Beth Cheshier, Triad, and I all met at the Shamrock Property. One issue that was raised in our tech screening letter was to determine the direction of the drainage flows at the north portion of the site. Triad recently took additional topo shots in attempts to determine this and it proved to be inconclusive. Given all of the recent rainfall we visited the site in hopes of determining the direction by observing the drainage patterns. Unfortunately, we were not able to. It appears once we get one or two more heavy rain fall sessions we will have a better indicator of the drainage flows. The plan is to visit the site again over the upcoming week once it rains. Currently, we have a Jan 6th deadline for resubmittal which I do not believe we'll make. Would it be possible to get an extension to Tan 31, 03? I hope to have comments in before hand but would like to allow us some additional time if needed. Thanks, Sara Slatten CamWest Development, Inc. (425) 825-1955 www.camwest.com 'MAIN FILF- Copy „ CITY O*RENTON ..tiPlanning/Building/PublicWorks Department 1 Tanner, Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P,E., Administrator November 27, 2002 Ms. Kine Claussen King County Department of Development and Environmental Services - Land Use Services Division 900 Dakesdale Avenue SW Renton, WA 98055-1219 SUBJECT: FILE #L02P0014, SHAMROCK PROPERTY Dear P01s. Claussen: Thank you for providing us with the opportunity to review and comment on the Shamrock Property proposal. The Renton Planning/Building/Public Works Department has the following comments. 1) A certificate of water availability from Water District 90 will be required to be submitted to King County. 2) The project has received City of Renton sewer availability certificate. 3) The proposed surface water detention and water quality facility will be in the Renton portion of the project. Unlike King County, Renton does not maintain facilities associated with private development projects, but rather requires an instrument to be recorded (note on face of plat and recording of Homeowner's Association restrictive covenants) that places responsibility for operation and maintenance of these facilities on the Homeowners Association (or even better, directly upon the owners of the lots). A drainage easement is included allowing Renton staff to access these facilities, and a provision of the recorded instrument allows Renton to maintain the facilities if the Homeowner's Association fails in this responsibility, and to back bill either the Homeowner's Association of the owners of the individual lots for costs. We request that this approach be used on this project as well, since the drainage facilities are located within Renton. 4) Level 2 flow control at a minimum is required. Review and approval of the surface water facilities and drainage report by the City of Renton is required. King County should also review the detention, water quality and conveyance system design and sizing for the total E project for compliance with the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual (both LE within unincorporated King County and Renton) since it is all part of the same system. Approval of the storm drainage system by both jurisdictions should be required before any 4 permits are issued. 5) The northern portion of the project may flow to the May Creek Basin. It needs to be verified o that the diversion of flow from the May Creek Basin to the Cedar River Basin is not Ci v occurring because of the site's development and storm system design, LU 2 6) The proposed development is located within Renton's potential annexation area. Therefore we request that any improvements to existing streets abutting the development site, and any new streets within the development site, be construction in accordance with City of B&=Q 1055 South Grad WaY Renton Washin ton 98055 N T O AHEAD OF THE CURVE This paper c;nntains SO % reuycied material. 30% past consumer November 27, 2002 Page 2 standards. The City of Renton has been working with King County and the developer to extend SE 124'h Street (NE 6'h Place in Renton) to the westernmost property line. We request that this street also be constructed in accordance with City of Renton standards. Thank you. Sincerely, AV4/MA6; - Gregg 2 im erman, Administrator Planning/Building/Public Works Dept. cc: Jennifer Henning Lys Hornsby Jack Crumley Sandra Meyer Kayren Kittrick Neil Watts Documen0cor Uri �v"D L-A x (D a p) w Lo o �:s �:5 0A 0 o N �;sl U)0 L::5 F__ �PiU)frw 0 thC 0 F_�_l .p (D c a m co /Y• }((D� (D C) > \1 V Ui C (D ff Un LTJ m r�mv° Nj F_110 (D c a c t1 Vmmi ' ryry�' 1m1 1V ul D v Q m U) U) m C C'1 m m m 0 C m N m 0 V i� • • Department of Development and Environmental Services Land Use Strvlces Dtvlalon 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Renton. Washington 98055-1219 Applicant: Cam -West 9720 NE 120" Pl, Suite 100 Kirkland, WA 98034 (425)825-1955 NoRice of Application File#: L02P0014— Shamrock Property DDES Planner: Kim Claussen Planner Telephone No.: (206) 296-7167 Date Application Filed: August 1, 2002 Date Determined Complete: October 29, 2002 (Type 3) Project Location: The site is located between NE 4' Ct. and SE 120', Street on the westside of 148' Ave SE Project Description: This is a request to subdivide 29.6 acres into 118 lots for detached single-family dwellings and tracts for recreation and sensitive areas. The proposed drainage facilities for this project are currently proposed to the south, within the City of Renton. Permits requested in this application: Formal Plat Relevant environmental documents are available at the address below: Environmental Checklist, drainage study, traffic study, wetland/stream study, geotechnical study. Development regulations to be used for project mitigation, known at this time: King County Code 21 A, including sensitive area regulations, 1993 King County Road Standards, 1998 Surface Water Design Manual Consistency with applicable County plans and regulations: This proposal will be reviewed for compliance with all applicable King County Codes, including those noted above. Other permits not included in this application, known at this time: Applicable permits from City of Renton for construction of drainage facilities. A public hearing before the King County Hearing Examiner is required for this application. Notification of the public hearing date will occur approximately 30 days prior to the scheduled hearing date. The Department of Development and Environmental Services (DDES) will issue a report and recommendation to the Hearing Examiner two (2) weeks prior to the scheduled public hearing. Following the close of the public hearing, the Hearing Examiner will issue a written decision which may be appealed to the Metropolitan -King County Council. Details of the appeal process will be included in the notice of recommendation. Any person wishing additional information on this proposed project should contact DDES at the address and/or telephone number listed below. Written comments may also be submitted to DDES. You may review the application and arty environmental documents or studies in our Renton office. NOTE: If you require this material in braille, audio cassette, or large print, please call (206) 296-6600 (voice) or (206) 296-7217 (TTY). Department of Development and Environmental Services Land Use Services Division 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Renton, Washington 98055-1219 206-296-6600 Mailing! Date: November 20, 200.2 OEVELOpMENT p REI(7'ONNINC: Please send me notification of he public hearing and other official notices concerning this application. File No- L02P0014 — Shamrock Property ( Please prinr ) Name: Address: F9G\rprsN ype-l.noa 1/30/91 cle Telephone No.: RECSV,D October 29, 2002 Kim Claussen King County Department of Development & Environmental Services 900 Oakesdale Avenue SW Renton, WA 98055-1219 RE: Shamrock Property: L02POO14 Transfer of Applicant - M --- Dear Ms. Claussen, Enclosed is the original transfer of applicant status form, signed by Georgiy Palanchuk, for the Shamrock Property plat application. It is my understanding that this is the only remaining item required for the issuance of the notice of complete application. The Shamrock Highlands LLC which Eric Campbell, CamWest, is affiliated with is the property owner for the remaining parcels. If there is any additional information that you need prior to issuing the notice of complete application, please contact me at (425) 825-1955. Sincerely, Sara Slatten CamWest Development, Inc. enclosure J Fina County DDES LAND USE SERVICES DNFSiON 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Rentor, WA 9$053 DR QP -OFF FOR L USD QNL Y Cover Sheep •"""'"'"'•'•*R"""*`IMPORTANT*„R RRFRRR**'*'*R RR PROTECT N .NGER. AND Y tirE IS tMECESSARY FOR ALL DROP-OFF Project No Project Jame • Telephone No- • ,tel �■ Date Received by LUSD �r II - OCT 2 9 2002 ADDMO,V.AL TIVF0R.7Yf4T701V REQUESTED SYR'CS'TAFF'(piease print) Short Plat / Plats Please snecifv item(e) Bron—nfP Pease specify itern(s) drop-off Fight of Way Permit Please specify item(s) drap-off Gradin °/C7eari n g Permit Additional Inf. requested, please specify items) drop-off Other. RR RRR1 Rfl II�RR*1R 11 RR4RRlR SRRRe*11 i[R•1�Q'-rhe �t R*R*RReea RRilrt�tfatl;t e*RR}f R,t i**t R 1p6/0/98 All drop-off item(s) will be logged into the computerunder the project number, therefore, its important that the top partioa of thi9 form is campi Oct -16-02 09:32A [ V�]� P 01 � CC - 1 ♦W spr1 Real Estate Development, Inc. Date 10/16/2002 -� fax Number of pages including cover sheer To: King County DDES Attn: Kim Claussen Phone Fax (206) 294-7451 Subject Shamrock Property FROM: Cam West Development 9720 NE 120"' PL, suite 100 Kirkland, WA 98034 Sara Slatten Phone 425-925-1955 email sslatten@camwest.com Fax Phone 425-825-1565 Kim, Attached is the transfer of applicant status, signed by George Palanchuk, that was outstanding for the Shamrock Property. I will submit the original copy to you by the end of the week. Please call me with any questions. Sincerely, Sara Slatten AN RLIE COPS' Oct -lb -02 09:32A 0 King Country Department of Developmeni and Environmental Services 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwosl Renton, Washington 99055-1219 (206) 296-6600 TTY (206)296-7217 1101 Certification & Transfer of Applicant Status Alternative formats mailable upon request Permit Number: L02 Poo ILI P.02 FOR CURRENT OWNE (print name) hereby certify that I am an/the owner of th rop rty hich is the subject of this application for permit or approval. If I am not the sole owner of the propert , I cdtify that I am authorized by any and all other owners of the property to make this certification and transfer any an all rights Itwe have to apply for this permit or approval to The person listed below, 1, therefore certify that �, -fr (print name) is the "applicant" for this permit or approval and shall remain 1he "applicant" forheedd�uration of this permit or approval unless "applicant" status is transferred in writing on a form provided by this department, By being the "applicant." that individual assumes financial responsibility for all fees and will receive any refunds paid. certify under penally 'ury under the laws of the State of Washington that the foregoing is true and correct. VSiignaturehf Owner Date Signed t, "applicant" for this p it or approval unless "applicant" status ansferre res onsiblil for all fees ass - to address is: , (print name) hereby certify that I am the I shall remain the "applicant" for the duration of this permit or approval in writing on a form provided by this department. I accept financial with this permit or approval and will receive any refunds. My mailing I certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the glate of Washington that the foregoing is true and correct. Signature of Applicant agent of OR Date Signed hereby certify that I am an authorized a Corporation of other business association authorized i the State of Washington and that this business association is the "applicant" for this permit or approval and is-ftanclally responsible for all fees and will receive any refunds paid. This association shall remain theplicant" for the duration of this permit or approval unless "applicant" status is transferred in writing on a form vided by this department. The mailing address of this business association is I certify under penalty of perjury under the la'N of the State of Washington that the foregoing is true and correct. ignature of Applicant Cenlflcation & Tr9nsfer of Apphcanl Swur lc-cer-irapsiat 08127102 Date Signed F'aRe i of 2 Oct --16—o2 09:32A r r NOTICE TO APPLICANTS: By law, this department returns all engineering and other plans to the applicant. 11, however, you wish to authorize the department to return engineering and other plans directly to the engineer, architect, or other consultant for the limited purpose of making rrectlons, please designate bellow: D I authorize this department to return plans directly to my consultant(s) for the limited purpose of making corrections, as designated on this form CONSULTANTS: P.03 Cartrfcalion A Transfer of Applicant Stalus ic-cer-trep5Sa1 0W27f02 Page 2 of 2 0 0 September 27, 2002 Kim Claussen, Planning King County Department of Development & Environmental Services 900 Oakesdale Avenue SW Renton, WA 98055-1219 Shamrock Property: L02P0014 -` Preliminary Plat Resubmittal #1 Dear Ms. Claussen, We received your August 28, 2002 letter requesting additional for our recent Shamrock Property plat application. Per your request, enclosed the following information for your review: Eight (8) copies of the revised topographical survey from Triad which now includes complete survey data for the entire site. The preliminary plat is attached to the survey as well. George and Natalia Palnachuk are owners of the only parcel not owned by the Shamrock Highland LLC. The transfer of applicant status form will be submitted next week. With respect to the remaining parcels, CamWest is affiliated with the Shamrock Highlands LLC and owns all of the parcels, excluding the Palnachuk property. One (1) copy of your August 28, 2002 letter. Should you have any questions or need any additional information, please call me at (425)825-1955. k� Sara Slatten CamWest Development, Inc. i -F' 2 2002 .C. D.D.E.5. CAIN FILE CO 0* King County Department of Development and Environmental Services 900 Oakesdale Avenue SW Renton, WA 98055-1219 August 28, 2002 Sara Slatten CamWest Development, Inc. 9720 NE 1201h Place, Suite 100 Kirkland, WA 98034 RE: Notice of Incomplete Application DDPS Pile No. L02P0014 — Shamrock Property Dear Ms. 'Slatten: The purpose of this letter is to notify you that on August 28, 2002 the Land Use Services Division determined that the above -referenced application is incomplete under the current requirements for a complete application as specified in King County Code 20.20 and 19A.08. This initial determination is intended to be used only for the purposes of applying the time period established in the King County Code. The following information is needed for this application to be considered complete. ❑ Applicant Designation — Please submit the enclosed Certification and/or Transfer of Applicant status form, which contains the name and signature of the property owners as well as the applicant for this proposal. Note, the title report and assessors records indicate multiple owners of the parcels. ❑ Field Topography — The topographic survey map (sheet 2 of 2) indicates that a portion of the site (southeast corner, south of SE 124th St.) has not been included in the survey. Please submit 8 copies of a revised field topographic base map, stamped by a licensed surveyor, for the entire site. Land Use Services Division will keep your application "on hold" pending receipt of the above information, during which time no further review will take place. Pursuant to King County King Code 20., if the requested information is not received within 90 days from the date of this letter (November 25, 2002), your application will be canceled. No time extensions will be granted. Should the application be canceled, you will be required to submit a new application. If you have any questions about the information requested, please contact me at (206) 296- 7167. FSinc rely, im Claussen, Planner Current Planning Section, Land Use Services Division cc: Triad Associates Greg Borba, Supervisor, Current Planning Section, Land Use Services Division Bruce Whittaker, Senior Engineer, Engineering Review Section, LUSD Application file 9 ya King County Department of Development and Environmental Services Land Use Services Division 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Renton, Washington 98055-1219 (246) 296-6600 TTY (206) 296-7217 Alternative formats available upon request Drop -Off Cover Sheet for Land Use Services Division IMPORTANT ******************YY *Y*Y*Y*** PROJECT NUMBER AND NAME IS NECESSARY FOR ALL DROP-OFFS Project No.: L 0_�;), f 0 O Project Name: _ ' ci,��. _0 C �C_ FROM: -S,-A,- CO3 �` -e,rj, t .!„rev1 Company Name / Contact son Telephone No_:S S Date Received b D_ D K -G, 'D.D_E.5. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REQUESTED BY KING COUNTY STAFF (please print) Short Plat I Plats Please specify item(s) dropped -off: Lot Line Adjustment Permit Please specify item(s) dropped -off: Right of Way Permit Please specify item(s) dropped -off - Clearing I Gradin_q Permit Additional information requested; please specify item(s) dro5rcif G �7 r[Q� Other: PLEASE NOTE: All drop-off item(s) will be logged into the computer under the project number, therefore, it is important that the top portion of this form is completed properly before you drop-off anything. Assistance in finding a project number can be provided by speaking to a Land Use Services Division Person of the Day (POD) or the Zoning/Land Use Technician. Your cooperation is important. Thank you. LUSD Drop -Off Cover Sheet Ig-cvs-dfopoff.pdf 05-30-2002 MAIN FILE CO'Pv Page 1 of I @) 0 0 King County Department of Development and Environmental Services 900 Oakesdale Avenue SW Menton, WA 98055-1219 November 6, 2002 Sara Slatten CamWest Development 9720 NE 120" Place, Suite 100 Kirkland, WA 98032 RE: Notice of Complete Application for Application Time Periods Application No. L02P0014 — Shamrock Property Date Filed: August 13, 2002 Dear Ms. Slatten: The purpose of this letter is to notify you that on October 29, 2002, the Land Use Services Division determined that the above -referenced application is complete under current requirements for a complete application, as a result of the additional information submitted October 29, 2002. This initial determination is intended only for the purpose of applying the time periods for permit processing specified in King County Code. Supplemental information may be requested by the Division, as necessary, for the continued review of your application. Please refer to October 7, 2002 request for additional information. Our goal is to process your application within 120 days. However, the complexity and level of analysis required to review your project and available staff resources will affect the actual review time. The timeline can also be impacted by one or more of the following: • any request made by the Division for additional information • changes or revisions requested by the applicant • mutually -agreed-upon requests to stop the time clock • preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement • failure to post the property • resolution of land use decisions appeals If you have any questions about your application or the posting requirements, please contact me at (206) 296-7167. Since y, Ourrecnl�eit ussen, Planner III Planning Section cc: Triad Associates Bruce Whittaker, Sr. Engineer, Engineering Review Section, LUSD Application File MAIN FILE COPY King County Department of Development and Environmental Services 900 Oakesdale Avenue SW Renton, WA 98055-1219 October 7, 2002 Sara Slatten CamWest Development, Inc. 9720 NE 120'' Place, Suite 100 Kirkland, WA 98034 RE: Notice f Request f Studies Application No. L02P0014 -- Shamrock Property Date Filed: August 1, 2002 Date of Incomplete Application: August 28, 2002 Dear Ms. Slatten: The purpose of this letter is to notify you pursuant to Ordinance 12196/King County Code Title 20, that the Land Use Services Division is requesting additional information and/or studies to complete the review of your project. The information is described on the enclosed plat screening transmittal. Note, this is in addition to the information requested for complete application per the August 28, 2002 letter. When submitting the requested information, include a copy of the plat screening transmittal and retain a copy for your records. Provide a cover letter, which lists how each item, was addressed. Any clarification or explanation of the submittal can also be included in the cover letter. Please submit the information to: King County Dept, of Development and Environmental Services Land Use Services Division ATTN.: Kim Claussen, Senior Planner, Current Planning Section 900 Oaksdale Avenue Southwest Renton, WA 98055-1219 If the submittal is hand delivered, submit at the address above. Your application is on "hold" from the date of this notice, until the date you are advised that the additional information satisfies this request or 14 days after the date the information has been provided. You will be notified if the Division determines that the information is insufficient. Please note that the supplemental information required after vesting of a complete application shall not affect the validity of such application. nnAita FrLe caPx ,/ 0 The deadline for the submittal of the necessary information is January 6, 2003. In the event you feel extenuating circumstances exist, which may justify an extension of this date, you may submit such request, in writing, for consideration by this Department. Failure to meet the deadline shall be cause for the Department to cancel or deny the application. If possible, please submit all of the information in one package. If you have any questions, regarding the additional information or the submittal deadline, please call me at (206) 296- 7167. Sinrely, im Claussen, Senior Planner Current Planning Section Cc Triad Associates Bruce Whittaker, Senior Engineer, Engineering Review Section, LUSD wlenc Laura Casey, Senior Ecologist, Site Development Services, LUSD, w/enc Kris Langley, Senior Engineer, Traffic Engineering Section, KCDQT, w/enc Application File w/enc King County Department of Development and Environmental Services Land Use Services Division 9€H} Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Renton, Washington 98055-1219 Please provide ten (10) copies of the following, unless otherwise noted. Level 1 Analysis/ Conceptual Drainage Plan: After field review, It appears that Wetland B flows to the north. Please evaluate the existing topography and provide detail of the existing flow pattern. A review of the flow pattern during a rain event would also be helpful. • Please show all onsite subbasins boundaries and offsite contributing area. Include a Level 1 Downstream Analysis for all subbasins discharging from the site. Complaint investigation and analysis should be included for all downstream drainage courses. It is understood that a diversion of the site drainage to the south is proposed. An analysis of the existing downstream is needed per Core Requirement 2 of the King County Surface Water Design Manual(KCSWDM). In general, provide more detail of the downstream drainage courses, including the newly constructed conveyance system for Sienna on and offsite. • A surface water adjustment is required to divert the existing site flows to the south. Submit an adjustment to accomplish the proposed diversion (Core Requirement 1). Also submit a letter of concurrence from the City of Renton, since the post developed flows will be directed to a new Renton detention facility. A letter of intent to grant an easement or actual easement through the Bales property is also required. • Please include a narrative in the Level 1 Analysis explaining how the existing detention pond is to be addressed when the proposed pond is constructed. • Provide an analysis of the drainage complaints found and how the complaints are mitigated per Core Requirement 2 of the KCSWDM. Example: A capacity problem appears to exist at the driveway culvert at 14415- SE 128"' St. The upstream cross pipe is much larger than the driveway culvert. Please include narratives in the Level 1 Analysis to show how specific mitigation address the downstream problems found. • Include calculations for the conceptual drainage plan to show approximate pond sizing to comply with Level 2 Flow Control. Please show how the water quality requirements are to be met. Show more detail of the proposed detention pond, including access road, outfall connection to the existing drainage structure. Provide two conceptual cross sections of the proposed pond. • The conceptual drainage plan should also show how the proposed frontage drainage improvements will be designed. • Please provide details of how the post developed wetland hydrology will be maintained with the conceptual drainage plan. 1 Roads: 0 0 • Evaluate the need for a road stub from proposed 148' CT. SE north for eventual connection to 1451h Ave. SE in the proposed plat of East Renton. • Provide a neighborhood circulation plan, which includes conceptual layouts for the adjacent parcels. Re- evaluate the road classification(s) as a result of this plan. This plan should also consider or evaluate the potential of shifting SE 121' St. to the north to avoid potential intersection spacing problems with future development of parcel(s) to the east. • Provide a letter of intent from the affected property owner(s) for the future construction of 144'" Place (Morgan Place Plat, and property within the City of Renton to the south. • Please provide a conceptual frontage improvement plan for 148'h Ave. SE. Evaluate the frontage improvements for any stopping sight distance or entering sight distance problems along the frontage. Although the Powers, Wegner, Bashary & Hodge parcels (adjacent to 148t` Ave. SE) are not included within the boundaries of the Shamrock proposal, please consider and evaluate the extension of frontage improvements along those parcels to address drainage and pavement width transitions. • Identify the location of all private driveways within 50 feet (i.e. within the limits of the future curia returns, plus an additional 15 feet of the PCR upstream/downstream on 148th Avenue) of either side of the 'future' curb lines for the two plat access streets. Please include any driveways on the east side of 148th Avenue SE, in the case of the north plat access. • The KCRS state that the spacing of intersections on a roadway classified as a Collector Arterial shall be a minimum of 300 feet from center -to -center. As previously indicated, the property to the immediate east of the north access roadway (at 12232 148th Avenue SE, Tax Parcel 1123059067) is developed with a single family residence, and, a parcel (Tax Parcel 1123059010) opposite the northern -most existing east -west "access" into former nursery is of sufficient area to be subdivided into 15 - 16 lots, therefore, of sufficient size to require a public street access. Please provide information on the probable resultant spacing of intersections along 148th Avenue SE that would result from the proposed plat street location Traffic Study: Please provide an addendum study which includes the following - • Check the availability of updated (past -2000) accident information, and re-evaluate the accident data in Table 2 of the TIA. Please include the accident rate for the identified HAL at the intersection of 164thAve SEISE 9900. Please provide more specific information about "this type" [of intersection) as referenced in foot note 4 e.g. unsignalized with significant skew, etc. • Provide a supplemental analysis of the operation of the 148th Avenue SE/ SR 900 intersection for the AM peak hour. • Confirm the lane configuration of the intersection of 148th Avenue SEI SE 128th Street. • Reconcile the apparent difference in volumes southbound at the 148th Avenue/ SE 128th Street vs. the southbound departure leg volumes from the intersection of SE 124th! 148th Avenue: 187 vs. 292 in the PM peak hour • SE 124th Street, the main plat access, is classified as a Neighborhood Collector. The KCRS stipulates that Neighborhood Collectors intersecting arterials shall be 36 feet wide (curb to curb) for the first 150 feet -- and, although unspecified, to be measured from the near -side of the intersection. This width provides for the opportunity to stripe the approach for either a shared left -through and right turn lane, or, a left -turn lane and shared through -right. • Amend the TIA to add the 2006 "Without Project" turning movement volumes at the intersection of 148th1 SE 120th. (spec. Figure 4) • Provide an evaluation for the AM peak hour at the main plat entrance of SE 124th! 148th Avenue SE. • Provide a recommendation for lane geometry on the plat (west) side of the intersection. 2 • Provide information upon which to Bess the potential (future) short plat of roposed Lot 118. Specifically, whether any recommendations in T1A require revision based upon the Itant potential additional lots. SR 9001148th Ave. SE: The traffic study prepared for this project indicates that vehicles from the Shamrock proposal will travel north to the intersection of SR 900 and 148" Ave. SE. The existing sight distance at this intersection appears to be substandard. To evaluate potential impacts at this intersection, prepare a sight distance evaluation which includes an intersection plan showing sight line measurements. The intersection plan and measurements must be based upon field survey information, and show design criteria such as right- of-way widths, roadway locations and restrictions to sight lines (i.e. vegetation, hillside embankments, fencing, etc.). Sight line measurements shall be based upon the Washington State Dept. of Transportation design standards. This drawing must be stamped by a civil engineer and land surveyor licensed in the State of Washington. SEPA-SR 90011481h Ave. SE: This Shamrock project, as proposed, may have a significant, adverse, impact (KCC 14.80) at the intersection of SR 9001 148th Avenue SE. This intersection is currently functioning at Level -of -Service F and sight distance at this intersection is deficient, creating a safety problem for motorists and pedestrians. Installation signalization and turn lanes have been identified to adequately solve the problem, however no WSDOT funded projects currently exist which would assure the installation of the needed improvements. Although there are other proposals in the vicinity (Aster Park, East Renton, and preliminary plat of Stoneridge), there are no assurances that this intersection improvement may be completed prior to the Shamrock proposal. Please indicate how the Shamrock project proposes to address this issue. Existing Easement(s): Clarify the existing easements along the northern boundary of proposed lots 35, 41 and 1441" Place SE and south boundary of proposed lot 42 and through proposed lots 74, 85-88, 99 and 111. Indicate if these easements will be relinquished/abandoned and provide letter(s) of intent or indicate how the easements will be incorporated into the design. Note, a portion of an easement area appears to have been removed from proposed lot 35, indicate if this is a drafting error, the result of a boundary line adjustment has been recorded or if this area is to be placed in a separate tract. In general, easements for ingress and egress should be placed in separate tract(s) and not included within the lot area. Building Envelope: Provide a typical building envelope for the "z" lots which indicates how the building setbacks will be met. Recreation Space: Provide a conceptual recreation plan indicating the type of improvements (i.e. sport court, play structure, benches, landscaping, etc.) proposed within recreation tract(s). See KCC 21A.14.180 E2 for equipment requirements. Indicate how proposed lots 35-41 will gain access to the recreation space located in Tract B or if a separate tract will be provided. Tract A: Please indicate the purpose of this tract, as it not appropriate for recreation space and should not be included in the required recreation space calculations. In addition, this area should be included within the right-of-way for SE 121' St., to allow for future access by the adjacent parcel. Tract F: Clarify/indicate the purpose of proposed Tract F, located south of SE 1241' St. — Sensitive Area Tract (SAT), or open space, etc. Walkways: Provide an inventory map (i.e. existing conditions — widths, surface type, etc.) of the walking routes to the elementary, junior high/middle and high school and/or the appropriate bus stop location associated with each school. Identify any improvements necessary to provide safe walking conditions. Wetland(s): • The site has a pending grading permit application (L93G0073) for a 1992 violation involving wetland fill (E92C1531) in the vicinity of SE 1241h St., west of 144" Ave. SE. The wetland boundary delineation beneath the fill was verified, and a restoration plan was previously approved by DDES for this area, 3 however the permit was nolgicked up. The Shamrock project is PINsing to dedicate right-of-way in the area originally proposed foWstoration. Please submit a revised pinary plat map showing the verified wetland boundary and wetland buffers beneath the fill on "Parcel B". Also, please submit a revised wetland restoration plan, including compensatory mitigation, for the area of wetland fill that is proposed to remain in the proposed right-of-way. • Please document any earthwork that occurred in the vicinity of the wetlands and their buffers between 1993 and the present. Any fill placed in the wetlands and their buffers during that timeframe must be removed as part of the above wetland restoration plan. • Buffer averaging — provide written justification which demonstrates how the proposed buffer averaging complies with KKC 21A.24.320B, as clarified in the Administrative Rule 21A-24-016 (see attached). Note, compensatory buffer area must be provided on the same wetland where the buffer averaging reduction is proposed. • The entire north -south wetland system in this area appears to have surface hydrologic connections, potentially qualifying it as one wetland for regulatory purposes. Please re-evaluate the wetland, including off-site portions, to determine the classification per KCC 21A.06.1415 (i.e. show whether the wetland(s) meet the criteria for a Class 1 rating vs. a Class 2 rating). Red —Tailed Hawk: Red-tailed hawks have been observed in the area. The King County Comprehensive Plan has identified the red-tailed hawk as a raptor of local significance. The wetland report contains a brief description of an evaluation that occurred on July 29, 2002, which is near the end of the nesting season. Please re -investigate the site for old nests, after deciduous tree leaf -drop. Alternatively, investigate the site after mid-February for active courtship and nest sites; a minimum of three site visits of six hours each are required. Revised Preliminary Plat: Provide 25 copies of a revised preliminary plat, as necessary, as a result of above - referenced requests for additional information. As a result of the review of the information, additional information (studies, revisions, etc.) may be requested at a later date. Further evaluation of these issues may result in the reconfiguration and/or loss of lots. 4 0 0 KING COUNTY PUBLIC RULES DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES sensitive Areas Code: Presumption of Salmonids, Sensitive Area and Huffer Modifications, and Mitigation Requirements Effective Date: May 4, 2000 Amended: July 19, 2002 before approving the sampling protocol. Sampling shall not be conducted when the stream or other water body is essentially dry or if flows are intragravel. The department may require additional sampling if it determines that conditions, such as flooding, drought, low water flows or other -circumstances, impaired the accuracy of the sampling used in the surveys. D. If sampling includes electrofishing the stream or other water body or using other capture methods, the sampling shall be conducted in compliance with the conditions of a Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife Scientific Collector's Permit and any other required state or federal permit, including any permit required under Section 10 of the federal endangered species act. Unless a change in the survey window is approved by the department on a case by case basis because local stream conditions require a change, sampling conducted by electrofishing shall be conducted during the following periods: 1. For a stream or other water body with anadromous access, the sampling shall only be conducted between March 1 and July 15. The department may approve sampling for over -wintering salmonids between January 1 and March 1 after consultation with the Washington department of fish and wildlife and affected tribes; and 2. For a stream or other water body with no anadromous access, the sampling shall only be conducted between May 1 and July 15. E. Fish presence surveys using visual detection methods, trapping, rod and line surveys, or netting may be used to demonstrate fish presence at any time of year, subject to conditions of a Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife Scientific Collector's Permit and any other required state or federal permit, including any permit required under Section 10 of the federal endangered species act. 21A-24-016 Buffer width averaging for stream and wetland buffers. A. Under K.C.C. 21A.24.320B and 21A.24.360B, the department may approve a proposal for buffer width averaging if the applicant demonstrates that the total area contained in the buffer on the site does not decrease and that the proposal will either provide additional protection to the wetland or stream, or enhance the functions of the wetland. B. The applicant for buffer width averaging shall provide the department with an analysis acceptable to the department of existing buffer functions that addresses the following issues: Page 4 of 17 0 0 RING COUNTY PUBLIC RULES DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIROMIENTAL SERVICES Sensitive Areas Code: Presumption of Salmonids, Sensitive Area and Buffer Modifications, and Mitigation Requirements Effective Date: May 4, 2000 Amended: July 19, 2002 1. The functions of the existing buffer on the parcel and adjoining parcels to the extent those parcels are accessible; 2. The stability of the stream bank, if any; 3. The risk of creating trees likely to be designated as hazardous as a result of the development; 4. The opportunity for additional protection to the stream or wetland or enhancement to the wetland; 5. The location of the floodway and the 100 -year floodplain; 6. The presence of any migrating river channel; 7. The impact on functions and values of natural resources that will result from the proposal; 8. Health Department requirements for on-site sewage disposal systems; and 9. Any other information determined by the department to be reasonably necessary to analyze the proposal. C. The department shall approve an application for buffer width averaging only if the applicant demonstrates to the department that the proposal for buffer width averaging meets the requirements of K.C.C. 21A.24.320B or 21A.24.360B. The department shall apply the following minimum standards to the proposal: 1. The minimum buffer width shall not be less than sixty-- five percent of the standard buffer width, unless the applicant demonstrates that a proposal that reduces the buffer to less than sixty-five percent of the standard buffer width will result in substantial enhancement to the buffer's overall function. The buffer shall be monitored by the applicant pursuant to 21A-24- 037; 2. The additional buffer shall be contiguous with the standard buffer; 3. Unless a building setback variance has been issued, the yard area between any structure and the reduced buffer shall meet minimum building setback requirements. If the buffer width averaging allows a structure or associated yard to intrude into the normal buffer area, the resulting yard shall extend no more than 15 feet from the edge of the structure's footprint toward the reduced buffer; and 4. In order to demarcate the buffer edge, permanent signs identifying the presence of a sensitive area shall be required between the edge of the yard and the buffer. Page 5 of 17 te i King County Department of'Development and Environmental Services fano C ,1kcs:dalc Avcnur Solahwesf 1(vi lon. VVA 9W55 -121J September 11, 2002 ,7 TO: Kim Claussen, Planner III, Current Planning FM: Laura Casey, Environmental Scientist (Ecologist) RE: L02P0014, Plat of Shamrock I have reviewed the following documents submitted with the preliminary plat of Shamrock: Preliminary Plat Map, dated 811102, Preliminary Storm Drainage Plan dated 819102, and Level 1 Downstream Analysis, dated July 29, 2002, all by Triad Associates; Wetland Determination for Shamrock Property, dated July 28, 2002, by C. Gary Schulz; and Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazards, and Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report, dated September 7, 2001, by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. I expect to get to the site in the next couple of weeks to field verify the wetland boundaries and classifications and observe the areas of proposed wetland buffer averaging reductions. The following are my comments and requests for additional information at this time: This site has a pending grading permit application L93G0073 for a 1992 code violation involving wetland fill (E92C1531). A restoration plan was approved in 1994 by Jon Hansen, wetland specialist previously with DDES. The applicant was notified then, and again in 2000, that the permit was ready for issuance. The applicant never picked up the permit. The current subdivision proposal would dedicate (but not construct) road right-of-way in the location of the unpermitted fill. There is no logical reason to implement the previously approved wetland restoration in the area that will become a paved road in the future. The applicant should be required to submit a revised wetland restoration plan, including compensatory mitigation for the area of wetland fill that will remain in the road right-of-way. 2. Proposed buffer averaging would reduce the wetland buffer adjacent to lots 41, 52, 70-71, 73, 74, 78-80. 85-86 and 144th PI SE. The applicant must provide written justification showing that the proposal meets the requirements of KCC 21A.24.320.B, as clarified in Administrative Rule 21A-24-016. The justification in the Wetland Determination for Shamrock Property does not show that the proposal meets this criteria. The Administrative Rule specifies the necessary analysis required of the applicant, and the criteria to be used MAIN FILE COPY TO: Kim Claussen 0 0 RE: Shamrock, L02PO014 September 11, 2002 Page 2 by the County in evaluating the proposal. Note that it states that any compensatory buffer area must be provided on the same wetland where the buffer averaging reduction is proposed. 3. As requested for the plat of East Renton to the north (1_02P0005), the entire north -south wetland system in this area appears to have surface hydrologic connections, making it one wetland for regulatory purposes. The applicant must re-evaluate the wetland, including off-site portions, to show which classification it meets, as defined in KCC 21A.05.1415. Note that I have not received any additional information on this topic for the plat of East Renton. 4. The applicant was informed during pre -application meetings that the presence of nesting red-tailed hawks on the property could be a concern. Red-tailed hawks are specified in the King County Comprehensive Plan as a raptor of local significance. The Wetland Determination report contains a brief description of a site evaluation for red-tailed hawks that occurred on 7129/02. This is within the last 2 possible days of the nesting season. Nest monitoring guidelines previously approved (Plat of Jerry's Place) require continuous nest observation for six hours each visit, for three site visits. We should require at least that much observation time on site while attempting to locate a hawk nest. The hawk breeding and nesting period is over for this year. The applicant could either check the site for old nests after leaf -drop, or wait until mid-February to see whether there are hawks beginning to use the site for nesting. 5. As requested by Bruce Whittaker, the applicant must evaluate and address the potential hydrologic impacts to the wetlands on this site. A drainage report and conceptual drainage plan must be submitted that identifies the methods proposed to be used to maintain hydrology to these wetlands. If you or the applicant have any questions, I can be reached at (206) 295-7291 or laura.casey((a�metrokc.gov. Cc: Kris Langley, Development Review Supervisor, Road Services Bruce Whittaker, Senior Engineer, Engineering Review Steve Bottheim, Supervising Engineer, Critical Areas Attn: Larry West, Environmental Scientist (Geologist) King County Department of Development and Environmental Services 900 Oakesdale Avenue SW Renton, WA 98055-1219 August 28, 2002 Sara Slatten CamWest Development, Inc. 9720 NE 120"' Place, Suite 100 Kirkland, WA 98034 RE: Notice of Incomplete Appliraftirt DDES File No. L02P0014 -- Shamrock Property Dear Ms. Slatten: The purpose of this letter is to notify you that on August 28, 2002 the Land Use Services Division determined that the above -referenced application is incomplete under the current requirements for a complete application as specked in King County Code 20.20 and 19A.08. This initial determination is intended to be used only for the purposes of applying the time period established in the King County Code. The following information is needed for this application to be considered complete. ❑ Applicant Designation — Please submit the enclosed Certification and/or Transfer of Applicant status form, which contains the name and signature of the property owners as well as the applicant for this proposal. !Vote, the title report and assessors records indicate multiple owners of the parcels. ❑ Field Topography — The topographic survey map (sheet 2 of 2) indicates that a portion of the site (southeast corner, south of SE 124"' St.) has not been included in the survey. Please submit 8 copies of a revised field topographic base map, stamped by a licensed surveyor, for the entire site. Land Use Services Division will keep your application "on hold" pending receipt of the above information, during which time no further review will take place. Pursuant to King County King Code 20., if the requested information is not received within 90 days from the date of this letter (November 25, 2002), your application will be canceled. No time extensions will be granted. Should the application be canceled, you will be required to submit a new application. MAIN FILM COPY If you have any questions about the information requested, please contact me at (206) 296- 7167. Sinc rely, uaavaeU im Claussen, Planner Current Planning Section, Land Use Services Division cc: Triad Associates Greg Borba, Supervisor, Current Planning Section, Land Use Services Division Bruce Whittaker, Senior Engineer, Engineering Review Section, LUSD Application file 0 King County DDES LAND USE SERVICES DIVISION 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Renton, SVA 98055 UJ DROP-OFF FOR LUSD ONLY Cover Sheet . *******************IMPORTANT****************** Portion Below MUST BE complete Lar all drop-off to KC LUSD Staff Project No_ Project Name i_Y I --,— FROM: Company Name};�Zs_ tactPerson r Telephone No. r _ X gf TO: i 14-41 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REQUESTED BY KC STAFF Short Plat/ Plats Please specify item(s) drop-otf Z.0J%1Ajqm^AAJ 5_�``- TWlai1 1lA.e eG' -e . �l Lot Line Ad justment Permit Please specify item(s) drop-off Right of Way Permit Please specify item(s) drop-off I GradinglGearing Permit Additional Inf. requested, please specify item(s) drop-off L / Other: ****NOTE****** If what you are dropping off is not given on this cover sheet, then please check with a Land Use Technician or our POD. He/She can assist you in determining whom the drop-off should go to, within Land Use Services Division. MAIN FIL� COPY Date: August 9, 2002 .,`TRLAD To: Kimberly Claussen King County DDES 900 Oakesdale Avenue SW Renton, WA 98055 425.821.6446 Job No: 01-159 Project: Shamrock Property Enclosed arc: These have been sent: M Prints E For Your Use F-1 Copies E For Your Review /Approval F-1 Reproducibles ❑ For Your Signature /Return ❑ Reports ❑ At Your Request ❑ Documents ❑ Far Your Records El Specifications El For Your Information F1 Other El Other I III! 8 ea 8/9/02 Conceptual drainage plan Remarks: Kim, Sara Slatten with CamWest asked that we forward the enclosed Drainage plan to you for your review. If you have any questions, please call Bruce Knowlton at 425-821-8448. Thank You Sent By: Copies To., Sara Slatten-CamWest KiaR Wilson Project Administrator King County Dept. of Development and Environmental Services Land Use Services Division 960 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Renton, WA 98055-1219 DATE: August 1, 2002 C..- ele Lal , ?Lf r'S4"'t S/CC'h C :2 L.. TO: Iss,agmah School District, ATTN: K 7' L/ All ! S66 FM: Kim Clau sen. Planner III -11 23_ RE: Proposed Plat of Shamrock (DDES File No. L02P0014) The Land Use Services Division (LUSD) has received an application for a subdivision in your District. Enclosed is a copy of the plat map received by the Land Use Services Division on August 1, 2002. In order for us to adequately evaluate this proposal, provide the most accurate information to the public, and for LUSD to serve the School District better, please provide us with the following information: which schools do you anticipate the students living in this subdivision would attend? Elementary () PL lL Jr. High/Middle ►"�j ���tc�d [ `L,L�j� Sr. High Will the students walk or be Elementary sed to these schools? Jr. High/Middle Sr. High j_ ';c. FCA If the students will be bussed, where do you anticipate the bus stops will be located? If that information is not available at this time, currently, where are the closest bus stops located to this site? Elementary Lt ; Jr. High/Middle Sr. Highxa���c Other Comments: _'ef- C' a/A 'fes C -0'-G? Please complete this form and return it by September 5, 2002 to the address below. If you have questions regarding this proposal, please call me at (206) 296-7167. Thank you. � f%rtlV)y King County Department of Development and Environmental Services Land Use Services Division ATTN: Kim Claussen, Planner III 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Renton, WA 98055-1219 MAIN Fjj cF7).. . f*#,. Form96/SPECS/RegScho1.Inf c1c 1/6/2000 .C.D.D.'- C—D « � C PRELIMINARY PLAT OF SHAMROCK Permit Approval Conditions Document Fire System Review Tracking Number: L02P0014 The following conditions apply to the Fire Engineering approval of the above referenced preliminary plat: AA02 MUDD Any questions regarding the fire review of this plan should be directed to: Bill Mudd, Fire Engineer Telephone: (206) 296-6785. SPECIAL CONDITION: The temporary turn -around (minimum 80 -feet in diameter) has to be provided at the north terminus of 144"' Place SE; or any future residences constructed on lots 36 through 41 will have to be sprinklered NFPA 13D. FH01 FIRE HYDRANT WATERMAIN PERMITS A separate permit is required for the installation of water mains and/or fire hydrants. Submit three (3) copies of drawings and specifications to DDES Building Services Division Permit Service Center for a permit application. Review and approval by Fire Engineering Section is required prior to installation. Plans shall include, but are not limited to; pipe sizes, pipe type, valves/fittings, thrust blocks and/or rodding and material listings. Fire hydrants shall be installed per K.C.C. Title 17 Watermains shall be installed and tested per AWWA standards and/or NFPA#24 (STANDARDS FOR PRIVATE FIRE HYDRANTS AND WATERMAINS); as applicable. Ref. 1001.4 UFC NOTE: UNLESS SPECIFICALLY NOTED, ANY WATERMAIN OR FIRE HYDRANT DETAILS ON BUILDING PLANS/DRAWINGS HAVE NOT BEEN REVIEWED OR APPROVED. FH74 PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL Preliminary Fire Engineering approval has been granted based upon the following information provided. To obtain final Fire Engineering approval, the following item(s) must be submitted, reviewed and approved: I. Certificate of Water Availability. (Provided by appropriate water purveyor). Valid one year from date of signature. Minimum acceptance flow shall be 1000 gallons per minute at 20 pounds per square inch residual pressure. II. Three copies of plans indicating: A. Fire hydrant(s) location - measured by vehicular travel distance. (K.C.C. Title 17) Residential Fire Systems Review Approval Conditions L02P0008.doc Page 1 of 2 MAIN FILE Copy 1. 700 ft. maximum spacing. 2. Not more than 350 ft. from each lot. B. Watermain placement (K.C.C. Title 17) 1. Source (i.e.) supply connection. 2. Main sizes identified. C. Fire access roads Ref. UFC 902.2 1. Minimum 20 ft. wide unobstructed - 13'6" vertical clearance, unobstructed. All-weather surface, able to withstand 25 tons. 2. Fire access roads in excess of 150 feet (dead -ends), must have a turn -around area. Required turn -grounds must be a minimum 80 -foot diameter. 3. Fire access roads must provide 20 -foot minimum inside turning radius and 40 outside turning radius when said roads change direction. 4. Fire access roads shall not exceed 15% grade. 5. The required width of any fire apparatus access road shall not be obstructed in any manner, including parking of vehicles. Minimum required widths and clearances established under this section shall be maintained at all times. D. Marking when required, approved signs or other approved notices shall be provided and maintained for fire apparatus access roads to identify such roads and prohibit the obstruction thereof or both. Ref. UFC 902.2 FH77 FINAL PLAT APPROVAL Final plat approval requires an inspection and approval of the fire hydrant and watermain installation by a King County Fire Inspector, prior to recording. Call (206)296-6675; after a permit to install has been obtained from DDES; Fire Protection Engineering. Fire Systems Review Approval Conditions L02ta0008.doc Page 2 of 2 King County Dept. of Development and Environmental Services Land Use Services Division 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Renton, WA 98055-1219 DATE: August 1. 2002 TO: issagusih School District, ATTN: FM: Kim Claussen. Plan or III V-111 — The Land Use Services Division (LUSD) has received an application for a subdivision in your District. Enclosed is a copy of the plat map received by the Land Use Services Division on August 1, 2002. In order for us to adequately evaluate this proposal, provide the most accurate information to the public, and for LUSD to serve the School District better, please provide us with the following information: which schools do you anticipate the students living in this subdivision would attend? Elementary Jr. High/Middle sr. High Will the students walk or be bussed to these schools? Elementary Jr. High/Middle Sr. High If the students will be bussed, where do you anticipate the bus stops will be located? If that information is not available at this time, currently, where are the closest bus stops located to this site? Elementary Jr. High/Middle Sr. High Other Comments: Please complete this form and return it by September 5, 2002 to the address below. If you have questions regarding this proposal, please call me at (206) 296-7167. Thank you. King County Department of Development and Environmental Services Land Use Services Division ATTN: Kim Claussen, Planner III 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Renton, WA 98055-1219 MAIN FILE COPY Form96/SPRS/RegScho1.Inf C1C 1/6/2000 Laureen M. Nicolay From: Laureen M. Nicolay Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2009 11:46 AM To: Kayren K. Kittrick; Stacy Tucker; Jennifer T. Henning Cc: Rocale Timmons Subject: Shamrock Heights 1 Plat (aka Shamrock), LUA09-125--Transferred after recording, but still needs a planner assigned for wetland/wet pond mitigation follow up Stacy, here's two more boxes ready to send to the Clerk's Office. This one is recorded, but needs wetland mitigation monitoring for a minimum of 5 years. It probably only needs to be assigned to a planner for wetlands issues. According to the file, there is probably a bond for this somewhere, but I did not come across it. Kayren says there are few if any remaining public works issues at this plat. Rocale has nothing in her wetland file system for this plat's wetland mitigation. 118 -LOT PLAT TRANSFERRED ON 9-21-09 AFTER APPROVAL AND RECORDING IN KING COUNTY (RECORDING NO. 20051122000044). PLAT WAS A DEMONSTRATION PROJECT OF LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT (LID) PROPOSING REDUCED DRAINAGE IMPACTS IN ORDER TO HAVE A SMALLER R/D FACILITY. A ROAD VARIANCE FOR THIS PROJECT WAS ALSO APPROVED BY THE COUNTY. WETLANDS ON SITE WERE MODIFIED BY AVERAGING AND REDUCTIONS AND THIS PROJECT WILL REQUIRE A MINIMUM OF 5 -YEARS OF MONITORING AND MAINTENANCE FOR CONDITION #15 OF PLAT APPROVAL. ADDITIONALLY, MONITORING OF THE TOXICITY AND WATER LEVELS IN THE WET POND IN TRACT H IS REQUIRED SINCE THIS WAS PART OF THE WETLAND IMPACT MITIGATION. Laureen Nicolay, Senior Planner City of Renton Development Planning 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 (425) 430-7294 phone (425) 430-7231 fax Inicolay@ rentonwa.go�+ Shamrock — L02P0014 90 d FRONTAGE: The site's property frontages along 148th avenue SE (west side) shall be improved to the urban collector arterial standard with sidewalk. The property frontages (tax lots 9021, 9026, 9170 and 9259) along 148th Ave SE shall be addressed at engineering plan submittal, to either provide for a paved shoulder or thickened edge section. Off-site property owners shall be contacted for design and construction coordination. The final frontage proposal shall be reviewed and approved by DDES at engineering design review. The frontage improvements shall be evaluated at engineering plan submittal for safe walking conditions per the KCRS. 5!6/04 Exhibit No. -22% Item NoZ Received King County Hearing Examiner Denis Law City of o Mayor 8 r + October 26, 2009 Department of Community and Economic Development Alex Pietsch, Administrator Attn: Contract Surety Developers Surety and Indemnity Company Indemnity Company of California P.O. Box 19725 Irvine, CA 92623 Subject: Release of Surety Bond Shamrock Height LID, (Project Number 11.021130014) Bond # 576110S To Whom It May Concern: This letter will serve as authority to release the above-mentioned bond in the amount of $26,281.00. This Surety Bond was originally issued for the amount of $87,602. This amount was reduced on February 25, 2008 }ger coverage rider received by King County. This bond was posted with King County successor the City of Renton) on behalf of 5B1 Developing, LLC on August 14, 2009. The original security device is enclosed for your files. If you have any questions, please contact Rocale Timmons at (425) 430-7219. Sincerely, QaA)�) J Jennifer Henning Planning Manager CED/Planning Cc: E:aureen-Nicolay,5eniarPa — Rocale Timmons, Associate Planner Carrie Olson, Engineering Specialist Linda Weldon, Accounting Assistant File C,UA Jq - /Zg Renton City Hall 0 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057. • rentonwa.gov February 21, 2003 Kim Claussen Department of Development and Environmental Services Land Use Services Division 900 Oakesdale Ave S Renton WA 98055-1219 Dear Ms. Claussen: I am writing to request that I be made a Party of Record on King County File Number L02P0014, known as Shamrock Subdivision. Thank you. Sincerely, LOZIER HOMFS CORP TION Jahn Gr�ves 'Land Apfjuisitions Manager cc: file LO21ER HOMES CORPORATION 1203 114TH AVENUE SOUTHEAST BELLEVUE.WA 98004 425-5548690 LO71EHC3[5M1.1 FAX 425.656,8695 Please send the notification of the public hearing and other- official notices concerning this application. File No. L02P0014 -- Shamrock Property { Please printl---9 9 Name: ti Address. \C\ ` Telephone No.: q7-5 F96\epre\lype-3.noa 1/30/98 C1C �0� ,r y , poi Iv I I � j FA ki I� L I all cc IN 19 1 .0 if Please send ane notification oT the public hearing and other official notices concerning this application, File No. L02P0014 — Shamrock Property ( Please print ) Name: Address: cyfl[ ' 0 10 Ss 5, 6 Telephone No.: F96\sprs\Type-3.noa 1174198 cic � uD3s .011. ,rm . .s: I I 1 9 LJ � T A qq Mailina Date: November 20, 2002 Please send me notification of thc: 13ublic hcaring and other official notices concerning this application. File No. L02POO14 — Shamrock Prol)erty ( Please print Y� ct y CEJ ^ m Name: 4 b Address:�a , Re L,, Toy\� w — 5:roc—o S 1 Telephone No.: + Z l 2 r71— 3,6 76 F96\sprs\Type-3.noa 1/30/98 cic ....../)}„ \uu/z2/« � ' Ll« L -j R| 1 j [-�--- � 4 \! $� , |■ I k `� �|�� I------/-------] 1 |\ /--- | 089L -0£Z (90Z) :ouo�d3pj, L0086 VM ianA31138 os t, alms `as 'id 4,9bi 0$££ :Ssajppv aluisa luau poaS •-I uuor :Xweduro'D iUpsx!3 an31S ;oUTex •uor}earidde STLIJ fu[uao3uo3 saaiJou iUraIJJo aoTi10 pue OuiIL1o1i oricind o�j jo uoiW31 lou '�uipniaui �tpaoaall jo �.z�d„ su auz RE oseaid 6 i Z i -S 5086 VAk1 `uoauaZi FJS 'and 31Ppso�100 006 uotSiniQ saainzaS osn pue-i Saoin13S iUJuau.Iu011nuR W JuourdoionaQ Jo juourarudoQ w 10 LU �t Ln w cz 6 z � _ 3 � Q E o E@ .k 3 o E m C'4 a ¢ § k C) m .g C> § 2 $ (13% m = ® $ § < c o Ek a2 ®� o -o E / % R § 2dUJI -j0)ry (A 0 ■ � M * ■ , 0 a , 9 i� C j"m INi [ L Er" 7 Him rsnw ra www --r [lr usr13 ar�,11 [t 1 u Lreu as !test f { [ mm S jj= is Kurt 1 � 1 [ 1 Lr 7 rtxeurl r r Ar1fi [ �; am= ra ALzmv I 1 s Aar mm►r "mf l 39 rriosl it m"r 1 [aeoi u 5+a+smr � � V [ lr ![Alar $ a" -*r 1 1 '1rm7N T lzm 1 - `Y1ar sau w a W Am merles& 7sr OW WOerr rri.�.w . aulrc Aw x>� a1 +rmvwxsar o v3w SNL M dlwwporn. ra�rae SLAG43WL W ALrLn a0 OM Or 7rL7R71rWW�A3V1r11MIW'aQYzWKW7a LI 147% 1S1tArlt A SYA mPlr SZJ avromr r Lrfdt r a a suLar - r�rr 4 r-1 L_J i- -- _ . 5 4 JI -8 ON yv mese �r 9AVC • LlgOtrY C 1mTJ r .wwr u 2num 9i ser mlilr Affil amorrLw r LxairAa Dgm rA srr.s As Asea ear ■ovaa Arnim r 7mr svxmU �ecirLnq an C r L C a Poo 1 Lf - 441 �Vn , to k- gscs� • r F CEaussen, Kimberly From: Claussen, Kimberly Sent: Monday, May 23, 2005 8:17 AM To: 'Sara Slatten' Cc: Dye, Pete; Townsend, Steve Subject: RE: Park changes for Shamrock The substitution of the play equipment is acceptable provided 1. The equipment (structures, benches, picnic table, etc.) shall meet at a minimum, Consumer Product Safety Standards and be appropriately anchored. Thanks -----Original Message ----- From: Sara Slatten (mailto:sslatten@camwest.com] Sent: Friday, May 20, 2005 6:39 PM To: kimberly.claussen@metrokc.gov Subject: Park changes for Shamrock Kim, Attached are specs and insets of the small play areas at Shamrock. Essentially, we've added more features and modify slightly. 1) Area 1: will have climbers (6 curved ones total w/ diff heights and one u shaped one in the middle). Also, there will be a balance beam. All of this stuff is for kids 5-12 age group. This is replacing the previous proposal for small individual play toys. T made the change give the lack of select and attractiveness on the latter. 2) Area 2: This is for the small kids (2-5 age group). There will be 2 small digger toys and a seesaw toy. Hope these changes are acceptable to you. I'm in the process of getting the large play toy speed out and will fwd that to you the week of the 31st once I'm back in the office. Thanks, Sara -----priginal Message ----- From: Sara Slatten [mailto:sslatteni�)camwest.com] Sent: Saturday, May 21, 2005 3:22 PM To: Sara Slatten Subject: This E-mail includes attached file(s) sent from "RNP7DDE58" (Aficio 2035). Scan Date: 05.21.2005 17:21:36 (-0500) 1 f s An m r lump Y a acia +� w s �w P w � 9L w . ti _ w w _ • a ~ w • k10 nL a ce _j .__ a • w US '' VV R . . 0-0 a • ~ T -cu w w . � a a Co FL a w � w w g O co L m 46 Qi moi• aao Astro Modular add -a -bay design allows multiple Cliff Climbers to be linked together to form a wall • Colorful, PVC -coated die-cast aluminum grips • At] designs measure 7 ft, in height • Three unique routed -in designs; Cliff, Fossil & ice (custom clns ale) ailik— Fossil .7777777 Wn-, NClimbers FOR 2005 1/1/-, Uec.e R For A 3 542 PC 2270 50" x 40" 16'/z' x 15'12.' Cliff Climber $1,624.00 (1,3m x 1.0m) (6,0m x'4.7m) PC 2270 -AB 50' x 38" 161W x 1511i Add -A -Bay Unit $1,526.00 (1.3m x I.om) (5.0m x 4.7m) e Climber' • Straight up climbing strengthens arms and legs FORK" • Can be used Independently or to access a deck A .FS2 • Multiple pipe climbers can be configured in many ways 5 -1_ Modal Height .-Dirridnslons I Price PC 2240 4'- 0' 28" x 16" (0.7m x 0.4m) $299.00 k PC 2260 6'-0' 28" x 16' (0.7m, x 0.4m) $389.00 d% %VShown 0 N 01" • Afun and challenging slope climbing activity • Includes two side climbers and a snake climber Fo "�K • Powder -coated, all steel constructionES at colors 5-12 • Seepage 115 for available powder- 9 Size: 18'x 7' (5-6m x 2.1 m) use zone: 30' x 19' (9.1 m x 5,13m) PC 2990-133.5 Price: $1,995-00 59 Inde ra'd!�:1t% CM;74 FEE f S 1 � • Fun and challenging arch design` • Climb up, one side and down the other K AGES" Powder -coated, all -steel construction LLi2 Size: 5'x 3' (1.5m x 0.9m) Height: 7' (2.1 m) PC 2280 Use Zone: 17'x 15' (5.2m x 4.9m) Price: $725.00 Spicer CIIml3er r • Climbing and sliding fun! • Powder -coated all -steel ACEs oonstruction 15-12, Slze:7'x7'(2.1mx2.im) Hsi ght: 7' (2,1 m) Use Zone: 19'x 19' (5.8m x 5,8m) PC 2250 Price: $739.00 r i 1WRMMIG: M Yrgrtl aaerR'N+�f •ulb f• ,q,Fna vAa nY veaiE •1 PbYP^utb Nom•. DOI ltbek M • Double the fun of the standard Up & Over Climbed • Unique design fosters coordination and dexterity oR�os AGES • Powder -coated, all steel construction 5-12 Size: 12'x 3' (3.7m x 0.9m) Height: 7'(2.1m) PC 2290 Use Zone: 24'x 15'(7-3m x 4.6m) Price: $1,429.00 A,N E1N. Fore zuos� b Cumber _ d§ff p -2970 • Arachnid inspired climber • Powder -coated steel frame with 11-1 97 PVC-coated chains 5-12 Size: Tx 1' (2.1m x 0.3m) Height: 6%'(2.0m) Use Zone: 19'x 13'(5.8m x 4.0m) PC 2970 Price: $1,398.00 F umbers. � . IM • A popular classic design • Powder -coated al[ -steel FAGES construction 5-12 Size: 9'x 9'(2.7m x 2.7m) Height: 7' (2.1 m) Use Zone: 21'x 21'(6.4m x 6.4m) PC 2980 Price: $1,098.00 A,N E1N. Fore zuos� b Cumber _ d§ff p -2970 • Arachnid inspired climber • Powder -coated steel frame with 11-1 97 PVC-coated chains 5-12 Size: Tx 1' (2.1m x 0.3m) Height: 6%'(2.0m) Use Zone: 19'x 13'(5.8m x 4.0m) PC 2970 Price: $1,398.00 F r 41 S - s . s . 1 CCLee 0 0� m 22 4c M X UL 1�L ca 4A aO ria - r � '� • � � r w ww r w • w_ • o w • w ~ • a � w w � w a 16 L a - r a w w ti • s r w- a a a � . fa 1 CCLee 0 0� m 22 4c M X UL 1�L ca G c J Y "iY �Y j� O '+l^ �Y •~ ! i A :.': �2� L�FllIAIZYHIS Ulu err n� °'l:a r�J"`: : +y _.•. `� ` 6 sk r :..d - 21R:3- +i1 -useo Oil "Ai V r r E 3 Y b V r r E Motion Attiuities 9.11.V, ryl -wet Hu"Z4UV 'A • Log rolling tun! IAN • A great activity for building balance and coordination, skills 5-12 Size- 6'x 2'(1 -Brn X 0.6M) PC 2480-R5 Use Zone: 18'x 14'L5_rxa._Y 4�i) Price: $998.00 -M PC NEIN FOR2005 Mo PC PC I L n ner� Spring Seesaw "'PO 661 C245 ..2475 Js. M. ... .. �odej.'p spinning fun. J� Gre • Ride the seesaw with your friends or go solo ing fun for Gr at bouncing Turning and Powder-coatedsteel moint.. • Motion ArEs Smooth and springy up and down Motion abilities ki of all abilit ZTS"' Sl -resistant, textured -8 and handles In durable . • HOPE seats, grips and foot restsnever too 2.12p 5.12 textured HDP base 62 sjiG surface hot or too cold U e Zone: Wx 14' 1 Use Zone: 14'x 14' Size: 11'x 2' (3,4m x 0.6m) P0 1920 .3nn x 4.3m) PC 2456 12455 (4.3m x 4.3m) PC 24-75 $849, Use Zone: 2TY 14' (7.0m x 4.3m) Price: $1,945 Price: $2351$114 Price: �oaPo6r4 GARRY STRUTHERs AssocIATES, I NC. Fxllioit N." !,tom NG, Kirig Couin Hoari[ig �x�,,pjjr F.,. ..... ...... . �oaPo6r4 GARRY STRUTHERs AssocIATES, I NC. Fxllioit N." !,tom NG, Kirig Couin Hoari[ig �x�,,pjjr F.,. TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS FOR SHAMROCK PROPERTY lE) August 1, 2002 CamWest Real Estate Development 9720 NE 120th Place, Suite 100 Kirkland, WA 98034 Traffic ImpactAnal),sis TABLE OF CONTENTS Shamrock Properry INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................................................... 1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION............................................................................................................................ 1 EXISTING CONDITIONS............................................................................................................................ 1 Roadways.... ................................................................................................................................................ 4 148thAvenue SE....................................................................................................................................4 SE4th Court.................................................................. ...............4 LyonsAvenue SE....................................................................................................................................4 SE128th Street_ ........................ ................ ........................ ......................4 SR -900 ........................... I........................................................................................................................ 4 Transit/Non-Motorized Facilities.............................................................................................................. 5 Transit..................................................................................................................................................... 5 Non -Motorized Facilities........................................................................................................................5 TrafficVolumes..........................................................................................................................................5 Levelof Service..........................................................................................................................................5 Accidents.................................................................................................................................................... 7 Planned and Programmed Improvements...................................................................................................9 FUTURE CONDITIONS WITHOUT PROJECT........................................................................................ 10 Background Traffic Volumes.................................................................................................................... 10 PipelineProjects................................................................................................................................... I I Levelof Service.. ................. _ ................. ................................................................................................ 13 FUTURE CONDITIONS WITH PROJECT................................................................................................ 13 TrafficVolumes........................................................................................................................................ 14 ProjectTrip Generation........................................................................................................................ 14 Trip Distribution/Traffic Assignment....................................................................................................... 14 Levelof Service........................................................................................................................................ 15 SightDistance Analysis............................................................................................................................ 18 Turn Lane Warrant Analysis..................................................................................................................... 18 StreetConnectivity.................................................................................................................. CONCLUSIONS.......................................................................................................................................... 19 TRAFFIC IMPACT MITIGATION............................................................................................................. 20 Garn- .Struthers Associates, Inc- cr Analysis I� �►��T1IfI��cri� Shamrock The following traffic impact analysis was prepared to address both the requirements of the King County Integrated Transportation Program (ITP) and the City of Renton since the preliminary plat of Shamrock Property is located in both jurisdictions. A vicinity map is presented in Figure 1. As specified in the King County Integrated Transportation Program (ITP), intersections impacted by 30 or more peak hour project trips and at least 20 percent of the total peak hour project traffic were selected for evaluation. Based on the turning movement counts, it was determined that the proposed project would impact two intersections 1) SR -9001148th Avenue SE and 2) SE 116th Street/148th Avenue SE. Renton City staff requested the traffic impact analysis include level of service analysis of two intersections: 1) SE 4th Street/148th Avenue SE (Nile Avenue); and 2) SE 4th Street/Lyons Avenue. In addition, the City requested the analysis address potential future connections for stub roads identified in the preliminary plat. This report summarizes the process, findings, conclusions and recommendations of the traffic analysis. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Shamrock Property is a proposed plat consisting of 126 single -Family dwelling units. The property is situated such that 117 new units plus one existing residence are in King County and 8 new units in the City of Renton. The parcel within King County is zoned R-4, which allows 4 dwelling units per acre and the parcel within the City of Renton is zoned R-5, which allows 5 dwelling units per acre. The plat is expected to be fully occupied by 2006, which for the purposes of this analysis is assumed to be the horizon year. A preliminary site plan is presented in Figure 2. As shown on the site plan, lots 40 to 54 will have a single point of access to SE 128th Street via SE 4th Court and Lyons Avenue SE. The remaining lots ( 1 -39 and 55-118) will have two points of access to 148th Avenue SE. In addition to providing access to the proposed lots, the internal road system will provide road stubs to adjacent properties to the south. EXISTING CONDITIONS The Existing Conditions analysis provides a statement of the traffic -related conditions within the study area at the time of the writing of this report. The statement includes a discussion of the existing roadway, transit, pedestrian and bicycle facilities serving the site; identification of existing peak hour traffic volumes and accident history at the analysis intersections; and identification of proposed transportation improvements in the area. Garr}- Struthers Associates, Inc. Page 1 �q TO 900 Ly s n� [`I 1 T �S .J 5E 116th ST I1 AD ( SE 117th ST I 900 ti SE 120th 3• � Q ry 5r L s sE 124th COAtf't'!LD jp�� PARK P J j Q K PARK + TO Y-415 NE 14th ST �rC` SE 7.32nd ST S< 133rd C F C .r jj l NOT TO SCALE G/,RRY $TRUTMEiiS ASSOCIATES. INC 1150 Ap,WAod, SWy !0 0 ���,s� SHAMROCK �PROJECT VICINITY FS)Sf93CM PROPERTY Mme: rhw�r, paµ�xwic. mm FIGURE T I " k� NCt Co u (! pUC ITT Wufowy 11 UTY OF ,,Ir. 48� y� ! � 94 E- 61TH UuitT ,._. l s s Ir9 r}s Ir! rrs rrr rro rI-- ' s I x rowlogas er sa es sr , FO! rp! i I Ss raj rQ7 ;..• 25 Ica so .., rt �. I 17 x ray , 71F 11 j 27 too 78 28 r7777 1��j1 1y s4 � m n n 71 7i s9 _.... J ss 97 I 1 37 57 ,79 s7 4w n so sr ss a7 se I " k� NCt Co u (! pUC ITT Wufowy 11 UTY OF ,,Ir. 48� y� ! � 94 E- 61TH UuitT ,._. l X 12 -STH ST r\) rii To 5CA LE GARRY STRUTHERS ASSOCIATES, INC. 31 So RlC — Ra, Sv,te 100 B.11.—.:WAh_. 48005-+446 Php�ef425) 5:4-0.300 F— (425) 519-0309 E_W l- pns�peeaeac-iec.com hlgJlwxnr-p em�ee��w-oom SITE PLAN FIGURE 2 SHAMROCK PROPERTY Traffic btipact Aewlvsis Shaturock Propernv Roadways The roadways impacted by the proposed development include 148th Avenue SE. SE 128th Street, Lyons Avenue, and SR -900. These roadways are discussed in the following sections. 1481h Avenue SE 148th Avenue SE is a two-lane collector arterial that runs north -south. The paved roadway width is approximately 28 feet and includes two 11 -foot travel lanes, a 5 -foot shoulder on the west side of the road and a 2 -foot shoulder on the east side. Traffic control includes stop signs at the SR - 900 and on the minor intersecting streets. Currently, there is a stop sign on 148th Avenue SE at SE 128th Street, however, a traffic signal has been installed at this location but is not yet in operation. The posted speed limit on 148th Avenue SE is 35 miles per hour (mph). SE 4th Court SE 4th Court is a 2 -lane local access road constructed as part of the Morgan Place development, The road dead -ends to the east and will connect to the Shamrock Property on the west_ There are curb. gutter and sidewalks on both sides of the street. Lvon.s Avenue SE Lyons Avenue SE is a 2 -lane local access road that was constructed as part of the Morgan Place development. Lyons Avenue SE runs north to SE 4th Court and south to SE 128th Street with curb, gutter and sidewalks on both sides of the street. SE 128th Street SE 128th Street is a 4 -lane principal arterial with a two-way left turn lane at Lyons Avenue and designated left -turn lanes at the intersection of 148th Avenue SE. The roadway width is approximately 60 feet. There are asphalt -paved shoulders at the intersection with 148th Avenue SE. Traffic control includes a stop sign at 148th Avenue SE and a signal at 156th Avenue SE. The posted speed limit is 45 mph. SR -900 SR -900 is a two to five -lane principal arterial that runs east -west. In the vicinity of 148th Avenue SE, the pavement width is approximately 32 feet with two 1 I -foot travel lanes and 5 -foot shoulders. Traffic control includes signals at 138th Avenue SE and 164th Avenue SE and stop signs on the side streets. The posted speed limit is 35 mph west of 148th Avenue SE and 40 mph east of 148th Avenue SE. Garn, Stnethers Associates, Inc. Page 4 Traffic Impact Analysis Shamrock Propern- Transit/Non-Motorized Facilities Transit King County Metro provides transit service in the vicinity of the site. Route 11 I provides weekday service between the Renton Highlands and downtown Seattle via SE 128th Street and Coal Creek Parkway SE. Weekday service for Route 1 1 1 operates with approximate 30 -minute headways during the PM peak commute hours_ Route 240 provides weekday and weekend service between downtown Renton and Bellevue via 138th Avenue SE and Coal Creek Parkway SE. This route operates with 30- to 60 -minute headways during the weekdays and 60 -minute headways on the weekend. Transit service is also available at the Renton Highlands Park & Ride located approximately three miles from the project site. The Park & Ride serves Metro Routes 105, I 1 1, and 909. Routes 105 and 909 provide weekday and weekend service to the Renton Transit Center. Non -Motorized Facilities There are no sidewalks along either side of 148th Avenue SE in the vicinity of the proposed site. There are sidewalks along both sides of SE 4th Court and Lyons Avenue SE. According to staff at Apollo Elementary, 15025 SE 1 17th Street, all students are bused to the school since there are no facilities, that provide safe pedestrian access. Maywood Middle School, 14490 168th Avenue SE, buses all students except those who live within a mile radius. Bus transportation is also provided for Hazen High School located at 1 101 Hoquiam NE. Traffic Volumes Existing PM peak hour traffic volumes at the SE 128th Street/148th Avenue SE and SE 128th Street/Lyons Avenue SE intersections were determined from July 2002 turning movement counts. Existing PM peak hour traffic volumes at the SR-900/148th Avenue SE and SE 1 16th Street/148th Avenue SE intersections were determined from September 2001 turning movement counts factored to 2002. The existing PM peak hour volumes are presented in Figure 3. Level of Service Level of service (LOS) is used to qualify the degree of traffic congestion and driver comfort on streets or at intersections. The Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) describes the methodologies for calculating LOS on street segments and at signalized and unsignalized intersections. According to the HCM (TRB Special Report #209), there are six levels of service, which describe the operational performance of the roadway system. The levels range from LOS A, which indicates a relatively free-flowing condition, to LOS F which indicates operational breakdown. The level of service for a two-way stop controlled (TWSC) intersection is determined by the computed or measured control delay and is defined for each minor movement. Level of service is not defined for the intersection as a whole. Average control delay less than or equal to 10 seconds per vehicle is defined as LOS A. For LOS F, the average control delay is greater than 50 seconds per vehicle. Garry Struthers Associates, [tic. Page 5 NOT T GARRY STRUTHERS ASSOCIATES, INC. 3150 Rid .a . Ro . S.IW 100 B.M.—a, WA 98005 e Phone'. f425) 519-0300 . Faa: 125)559-0309 E-- '11: eo®v.s.,00-n,�.�., t,Z/A-9.asaaciM— EXSTNG TRAFFIC VOLUMES FIGURE 3 SHAMROCK PROPERTY Traffic Impact Analysis Shamrock Propern, The LOS for signalized intersections is defined in terms of average control delay per vehicle for the entire intersection. The criterion for LOS A is an average control delay of less than or equal to 10 seconds per vehicle. The criterion for LOS F is an average control delay of greater than 80 seconds. King County has adopted level of service E as the county road standard. According to the King County Integrated Transportation Program (ITP), any development that impacts an intersection with 20 percent of the peak hour project generated trips and 30 project generated peak hour trips must insure LOS E with full development of the project. City of Renton 'transportation level of service standard is based on an index value, which is a weighted sum of the PM peak travel distances from the city, averaged in all direction, in thirty minutes as determined by the City. Level of service for the analysis intersections was calculated using SynchroTN1 5.0, computer software program based on the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual. As stated previously, the four analysis intersections are SR-900/148th Avenue SE, SE 116th Street/148th Avenue SE, SE 128th Street/148th Avenue SE, and SE 128th Street/Lyons Avenue SE. The results of the existing condition level of service analysis are shown in Table 1. Table 1 2002 Level of Service Intersection 2002 Existing LOS Standard SR-900/148th Ave SE NBLT' F 09.0)' E SE 1 16th St/148th Ave SE EBLT' B (M2) E SE 128th St/ 148th Ave SE NB LT 1 F (1 11.0) -2 SE 128th St/Lyons Ave SE SBLT' C (15.4) -2 (xx) - seconds of delay per vehicle 1 -- level of service for the two-way stop controlled intersection represents the movement with the highest delay. The remaining movements operate at an acceptable level of service. 2 — City of Renton transportation LOS standard is based on an index value that is the weighted sum of the PM peak travel distances from the City, averai=ed in all direction, in thirty minutes as determined by the City. As shown in Table 1, the SR-900/148th Avenue SE and the SE 128th Street/148th Avenue SE intersections currently operate at LOS F. The SE 116th Street/148th Avenue SE intersection operates at LOS B and the SE 128th Street/Lyons Avenue SE intersection at LOS C. Accidents The most current accident data for the analysis intersections was obtained from WSDOT and King County. City of Renton did not request accident analysis. The WSDOT accident data includes the Gan}, Struthers Associates, Inc. Page 7 Traffic Impact Analysis Shamrock PropertY three-year period from January 1998 to December 2000. In addition to the analysis intersections, accident data for the SR -9001164th Avenue SE intersection is included since it is considered a high accident location (HAL). According to WSDOT, accident data for 1999 and 2000 have been entered into the system, however, some data fields are still missing. Although some of the data fields are missing, the total number of accidents has been recorded. However, only 64 percent of the 1998 data has been entered, The available three-year accident history is summarized in Table 2. Table 2 Three -Year Accident History No. of Reported Accidents 1998 1999 2000 Ace. Avg. Collision Type In'.t PDO' In'. PDO In'. PDO Total Rate3 Rate + WSDOT Accident Data SR -9041148th Ave SE Rear -end 1 1 Enter at angle 1 2 t 2 6 Front enol (not head-on) I' 1 Intersection Total 1 1 2 1 1 2 8 0.57 1.30 SR-900/164th Ave SE Rear -end 1 2 2 2 1 8 Enter at angle 1 l 2 1 5 Front end (not head-on) 1 1 2 1 5 Pedestrian 1 1 Head-on 1 1 Object 1 1 Intersection Total 2 4 4 4 4 3 21 King County Data SE 116th St/148th Ave SE Bicycle 1 Intersection Total 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0.34 1.30 1) — Injury accidents 2) — Property damage only accidents 3) — Accident rate per million entering vehicles 4) — Average accident rate state-wide for this type of intersection per WSDOT 5) — Listed as a "enter at angle", however, it is coded as a front end (not head-on), with one of the vehicles crossing over the centerline or through median. As shown in Table 2, a total of 8 accidents have occurred during the latest three-year period at the SR -9001148th Avenue SE intersection. Of the 8, there were 6 enter at angle, 1 rear -end and front end. The accident rate at the SR -9001148th Avenue SE intersection, however, is well below the statewide average for similar intersections_ At the SE 116th Street/148th Avenue SE intersection, one bicycle collision occurred during the latest three-year period. There were a total of 21 collisions at the SR-900/164th Avenue SE intersection between 1998 and 2000. Of the 21, there 8 were rear -ends; 5 enter at angles; 5 front ends; l pedestrian; I head- on; and 1 fixed object. Gam Struthers Associates, [tic. Page 8 Traffic Impact AnalYsrs Shamrock Propern, It is assumed the accident rate for each of the intersections will remain the same in the future. As such, with increased traffic. it is likely there will be a corresponding increase in accidents. However, it does not appear that the relatively small increase in traffic would create an identifiable safety hazard. Planned and Programmed Improvements A review of King County's Planned and Programmed Transportation Improvements and the City of Renton's Six -Year Transportation Improvement Program indicate the following transportation improvement projects planned in the study area. King County's 1999 Transportation Needs Report (TNR) SE May Valley Road (Coal Creek Parkway to SR -900), NC -42. This project includes widening travel lanes and paving shoulders. In addition, this project would also include the construction of equestrian facilities. Both King County and the City of Newcastle would fund this low priority project. Coal Creek Parkway at SE May Valley Road, NC -101. This project includes widening the north and south legs of this intersection to provide additional channelization. King County would fund this high priority project. King County's Pipeline Project(s) Improvements SE 128th Street/148th Avenue SE. A traffic signal is to be installed as part of the mitigation requirements for the Maplewood development located south of SE 128th Street between 148th Avenue SE and 152nd Avenue SE_ In addition, left -turn lanes for the cast and west approaches will be constructed at the intersection_ The south approach will be constructed with an exclusive right turn lane and a shared left/through lane. SR -9001148th Avenue SE. A traffic signal is proposed at this intersection to mitigate the deficient level of service by several proposed developments. The King County Examiner has required a signal and other improvements at SR -9001148th Avenue SE intersection as mitigation of the traffic impacts generated by the plat of Stone Ridge. Stone Ridge is located on the west side of 148th Avenue SE, approximately between NE 16th Street and NE 18th Court. Stone Ridge is required to provide the following traffic - related improvements for final approval: o Construct eastbound and westbound left turn lanes on SR -900, at the SR 9001148th Avenue SE intersection. o Modify the east leg of the SR -9001148th Avenue intersection as necessary, to meet WSDOT stopping sight distance requirements. (Note that per the applicant's engineer, this can be achieved by the clearing of vegetation along SR -900.) In addition, the applicant shall clear vegetation within the right-of-way along SR -900, east of 148th o Avenue, to maximize the entering sight distance for the north and south legs of the intersection. Garr, Struthers Associates, Inc. Page 9 Traffic Impact Analysis Shamrock Propern• o Construct a traffic signal at the SR -9001148th Avenue SE intersection. This work shall be completed either individually, or in conjunction with other developments in the area. In addition to Stone Ridge, other proposed developments would likely have to participate in the cost of the installation of a traffic signal at this intersection. If Stone Ridge and the other developments provide a new traffic signal at the SR -9001148th Avenue SE intersection, the existing and horizon year level of service deficiency will be mitigated. In 2006 with Shamrock Property, the level of service would improve to an acceptable level (LOS C) with the proposed traffic signal. Therefore, no additional level of service mitigation would be required for the Shamrock Property. The required improvements are currently under design by Stone Ridge. City of Renton's Trans ortation Im rovemen€ Program Duvall Avenue NE (Coal Creek Parkway NE). This project includes widening roadway to lanes from SR -900 to north city limits. NE 3rd Steet/4th Street Corridor Improvements. This project involves a series of key improvements in this corridor to improve traffic operations such as rechannelization and traffic signal modifications, possible construction of an eastbound hill -climbing lane from Monterey Avenue to east of Edmonds Avenue, possible transit priority signal treatments and possibly queue jumps. This project will seek to meet pedestrian, transit, and bicycle needs. NE 4th Street/Hoquiam Avenue NE. This project will install a new fully actuated traffic signal, including poles, signal and pedestrian displays, detection loops, emergency pre- emption, a new signal controller, interconnect to master computer and associated channelization. FUTURE CONDITIONS WITHOUT PROJECT The Future Conditions Without Project analysis provides a discussion of the traffic -related conditions in the horizon year without the proposed project. This section includes a discussion of background traffic volumes and level of service at the analysis intersections. Shamrock Property is expected to be fully occupied by 2006, market permitting. Therefore, 2006 for the purposes of this analysis is considered to be the horizon year. Background Traffic volumes Background traffic volumes for the 2006 without project condition include the 2002 existing PM peak hour traffic volumes, plus known pipeline projects in the vicinity of the site, plus area -wide traffic growth. A growth factor of 2.57 percent per year was used based on the area -wide historical growth in traffic provided by WSDOT. Garry Struthers Associates. Inc. Page 10 Traffic Impact AnaNsis Shamrock Propern Pipeline Projects A pipeline project is defined as a proposed development, which submitted a complete application in advance of Shamrock Property, and is expected to be fully developed and impact the transportation system within the horizon year of Shamrock Property. According to King County, there are several pipeline projects in the general vicinity of Shamrock Property. Trip generation for the proposed projects is presented in Table 3 Table 3 Pipeline Projects Location King County 10601 148th Ave SE (Stoneridge) NE 12th & Anacortes 142nd Ave SE between 1 1400 & 11600 SR -9001148th Ave SE (Aster Park) 14429 SF., l 16th St 13715 SE 116th St 11813 148th Ave SE (Northward) 12013 148th Avc SE (East Renton) SE 124th St/149th Ave SE (Fdenwood) SE 128th St bet 150th Ave & 155th Ave SE 13825 156th Ave SE 12048 160th Ave SE 131st Jericho Ave NE (Sienna) SE 128th St & 146th Ave SE City of Renton 5001 SE 128th Street (Lauri's Meadow) N. & S. side of SE 128th St (Morgan Place) 14606 SE 136th St (Parkside Court) 5715 SE 128th St (Morgan Court 1) 5710 SE 128th St (Morgan Court 1I) 5800 SE 128th St (Madison Landing) SE 128th SLINile Ave NE (Maplewood Estates) 618 SE 128th St (Maureen Heights) PM Peak Hour Trips Land Use Total In Out 53 sfdu's 54 _ 34 20 6 sfdu's 6 4 2 4 mfdu's 2 1 1 2 sfdu's 2 1 1 37 sfdu's 37 24 13 20 sfdu's 20 13 7 3 sfdu's. 3 2 78 53 sfdu's 61 39 22 60 sfdu's 61 39 22 14 sfdu's 14 9 5 123 sfdu's 124 80 44 1 sfdu 1 1 0 I sfdu I 1 0 62 sfdu's 63 40 23 140 sfdu's. 141 90 51 8 sfdu's 8 5 3 45 sfdu's 45 29 16 21 sfdu's 21 13 8 7 sfdu's 7 4 3 7 sfdu's 7 • 4 3 8 sfdu's 8 5 3 218 sfdu's 218 140 78 124 sfdu's 125 80 45 As shown in Table 3, there are fourteen pipeline projects identified by King County and eight identified by the City of Renton in the vicinity of the project site. Trip distribution/traffic assignments for the pipeline projects were determined based upon the Transportation Concurrency run for Shamrock Property provided by King County. A summary of the background traffic volumes is presented in Figure 4. Garry Struthers Associates, Inc. Page 11 NOT T E'_ GARRY STRUTHERSASSOCIATES, INC- 3150 R1Giards ftoad, Sake S90 Bellew.,WA 98003-4446 Phone: 1251519-0300 # fax'.{4251514-0309 E- 4. 9ea4zpeuaoc�nc.wm hlm:llYvwrr.9saasx-I nC, COm 2006 WITHOUT PROJECT TRAFFI C VOLUMES FIGURE 4 SHAMROCK PROPERTY Trgffic Impacr Awdvsis Level of Service Shamrock P The results of the 2006 background without project PM peak hour level of service analysis are shown in Table 4. The existing level of service is shown for comparison purposes. Table 4 2406 Without Project Level of Service Intersection 2002 Existing i 2446 Without Project LOS Standard SR -9001148th Ave SE NBLT F (59.0)` F M E SBLT F (215)' With Signal3 A (8.7) SE 116th St/148th Ave SE EBLT' S (10.2) B (11.7) E SE 128th St/148th Ave SE NBLT' F (1 11.0 With Signal'' A (8.8) SE 128th St/Lyons Ave SE SBLT' C (15.4) NBLT D (27.2) (xx)seconds of delay per vehicle 1 — level of service for the two-way stop controlled intersection represents the movement with the highest delay. The remaining movements operate at an acceptable level. 2 — movement will also operate below an acceptable level. 3 — a traffic signal is proposed at this intersection to mitigate the deficient LOS by several by proposed developments 4 — traffic signal to be in operation in 2006 4 5 — City of Renton transportation LOS standard is based on an index value that based on weighted stem of the PM peak travel distances from the City, averaged in all direction. in thirty minutes as determined by the City. * - delay is greater than 1,000 Seconds As shown in Table 4, both the northbound and southbound left -turn movements at the SR - 9001148th Avenue SE intersection will operate below the level of service standard in the 2006 without project condition. However, with the proposed traffic signal, the intersection is estimated to operate at a LOS A in 2006 without the project. The SE 116th Street/ 148th Avenue SE intersection is estimated to operate at an acceptable level of service (LOS B) in 2006 without the project. The SE 128th Street/ 148th Avenue SE intersection will operate at a LOS A in 2006 with the proposed traffic signal. The northbound left -turn movement at the SE 128th Street/Lyons Avenue SE intersection is estimated to operate at LOS D in 2006 without the project_ FUTURE CONDITIONS WITH PROJECT The Future Condition With Project analysis provides a statement of what traffic related conditions will be like in the horizon year with the project. The analysis simply adds anticipated project impacts to the horizon year background conditions. The analysis defines anticipated project trip generation and evaluates impact through a level of service analysis at the analysis intersections. Garn- Str«thers Associates, Inc. Page 13 Tr-rrf fic Impact Analysis Shamrock Propern, Traffic Volumes Traffic volumes for 2006 with project condition include 2006 without project PM peak hour volumes discussed above plus expected PM peak hour traffic to be generated by Shamrock Property. Project Trip Generation Trip generation For Shamrock Property was calculated using the trip generation rates for Single - Family Dwelling Units, Land Use Code 210 presented in the Sixth Edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Report, 1997. A summary of the anticipated trip generation for Shamrock Property is presented in Table 5. Table 5 Trip Generation Land Use AWDT Total AM Peak In Out Total P\I Peak In O Proposed Shamrock Property Kin,(* Co. 118 sfdu's (Proposed) 1,129 89 22 67 119 77 42 5 sfdu's (Existing) 48 4 1 3 5 3 King Co. Net Total 1.081 85 21 64 114 74 40 Citv of Renton 8 sfdu's (Proposed) 77 ....... ....... . 6 2 4 8 5 3 Shamrock Total 1158 91 23 68.... 122 79 43 As shown in Table 5, the King County portion of the Shamrock Property is estimated to generate 1,129 daily, 89 AM peak hour and 119 PM peak hour trips in the 2006 horizon year. The net traffic impact of the King County portion was determined by deducting the existing site trip generation from trip generation expected with the proposed development. Therefore the net trips for the King County portion of Shamrock is 1,081 daily, 85 AM peak hour, and 114 PM peak hour. The City of Renton portion of the traffic impact is 77 daily vehicle trips, 6 AM peak and 8 PM peak hour trips. Therefore, the total traffic impact of Shamrock Property is 1,158 daily, 91 AM peak and 122 PM peak hour trips. Trip Distribution/Traffic Assignment Trip distribution percentages for Shamrock Property were based on the traffic assignment provided by King County Transportation Planning as part of the Transportation Concurrency Analysis for the proposed Aster Park development located at the SR -9001148th Avenue SE intersection adjusted to account for location as well as the current turning movement counts in the vicinity of the site. The trip distribution percentages, however, were adjusted for the location of Shamrock Property compared to Aster Park Since Shamrock Property is located closer to the principal arterial, SE 128th Street, the percentage of trips to/from SE 128th Street increased by 8 percent and the trips to/from 148th Avenue SE were decreased by 8 percent. The pipeline project distribution was derived in the same manner as the Shamrock Property. Garn, Struthers Associates, Inc. Page I4 Traffic InipacrAnal�sis Shanirock Properry The results of the trip distribution/traffic assignment process for project -generated trips are presented in Figure 5. A summary of the 2006 with project PM peak hour volumes are presented in Figure 6. Level of Service The 2006 with project PM peak hour level of service at the analysis and site access intersections are provided in Table 6. The existing condition and 2006 without project PM peak hour level of service are provided For comparison. Table 6 2006 With Project Level of Service 2006 Without 2006 With Intersection 2002 Existing Project Project LOS Standard North Site Access/148th Ave SE WBLT' B (10.6) E South Site Access/148th Ave SE WBLT' C (16.3) E SR-900/148th Ave SE NBLT' F (59.0)' F O F(*) E SBLT' F (215)' F (315.5)2 With Signal' A (8.7) C ('-M) SE 1 16th St/149th Ave SE SBLT' B r10.2) B (11.7) B (t 1.6) E SE 128th St/148th Ave SE NBLT' F ( 111.0) With Signat4 A (8.8) A (9.0) SE 128th St/Lyons Ave SE SBLT' C (15.4) -5 NBLT' D (27.2} D (28.6) (xx) - seconds of delay per vehicle * delay is greater than 1,000 seconds I — level of service for the two-way stop controlled intersection represents the movement with the highest delay. The remaining movements operate at an acceptable levet. 2 — movement will also operate below an acceptable level 3 — a traffic signal is proposed at this intersection to mitigate the deficient LOS by several by proposed developments 4 — traffic signal to be in operation in 2006 5 — City of Renton transportation LOS standard is based on an index value that based on weighted sum of the PM peak travel distances from the City, averaged in all direction, in thirty minutes as determined by the City. As shown in Table 6, the site access/148th Avenue SE intersection will operate at an acceptable level of service in 2006 with the project. The SR -9001148th Avenue SE intersection will operate below the Ievel of service standard in 2006 with the project- However, with the proposed traffic signal, the intersection is estimated to operate at a LOS C. The SE 116th Street/ 148th Avenue SE intersection will continue to operate at a LOS B in 2006 with the project. The SE 128th Street/ 148th Avenue SE intersection is estimated to operate at a LOS A in 2006 with the project. Garn' Struthers Associates, Inc. Page 15 NOT R GARRY STRUTHERS ASSOCIATES. INC- ` ai 59 FOOwldr R.", SW. 1 PO- B.Ilawe, WA 98W_5 6 Phw (425} 519-0300 . Fu: (425) 5190309 E-mail: 4s. ®9....x-1 - �(lp:7hMN Qsa W -IR .Wm PROJECT -GENERATED TRAFFIC VOLUMES FIGURE 5 SHAMROCK PROPERTY GARRY STRUTHERSASSOGIATES, INC ` 3150 RIC .ld. Reed. SUI. 100 B.11._.. 4-03003DD e. WA 9BOO Phone: (425) 51 ` Fa%; (4251 5140309 E-mail; ya�gasaaxancod„ hhp Jlwww.gssasec iris cartti 2006 WITH PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUMES FIGURE 6 SHAMROCK PROPERTY c Impact Analysis Shamrock Pronern In 2006 with the project, the northbound left -turn movement at the SE 128th Street/Lyons Avenue SE intersection is estimated to operate a LOS D. Sight Distance Analysis A field study of stopping and entering sight distance was conducted during July 2002. There are two proposed plat entrance roads, which are 360 feet apart, that provide direct access to/from 148th Avenue SE for lots 1-39 and 47-11 S. Access to/from SE 128th Street for lots 40-54, will be provided via SE 4th Court and Lyons Avenue SE. The posted speed limit on 148th Avenue SE is 35 mph. King County has administratively chosen to use the posted speed plus 10 mph for design speed. Based upon a 45 mph design speed (posted speed of 35 + 10 mph), SSD of 400 feet is required from the north and South under the KCRS. In addition, based on a design speed of 45 mph, an entering sight distance of 620 feet is required looking to the north and south. Field measurements of the south access road indicate the SSD from the north is 796 feet and 1,305 feet from the south. The SSD for the north access road is 436 feet from the north and 945 feet from the south. The ESD for the south access looking to the north is 918 feet and 1,305 feet looking to the south. The ESD for the north access looking to the north is 655 feet and 1,665 feet looking to the south. Based on the field measurements, both the SSD and ESD meet KCRS as shown in Table 7. Table 7 Sight Distance Entering Sight Distance Measured Entering Sight Distance Required Entering Sighi Intersection Looking North Looking South Distance North access/148th Ave SE 655` 1,665' 620' South access/148th Ave SE 918' 1,305' 620' Stopping Sight Distance Measured Stopping Sight Distance Required Stopping Sight Intersection From North From South Distance North access/148th Ave SF, 436' 945' 400' South access/148th Ave SE 796' 1,305' 400' Turn Lane Warrant Analysis A left -turn lane warrant analysis at the site accesses on 148th Avenue SE was conducted. The results of the analysis indicate a left -turn lane is not warranted at either access. Garr), Struthers Associates, Inc_ Page 18 Traffic Irripaet AiiaAsis Shamrock Properrt Street Connectivity There are several stub roads currently included in the plat design. For the King County portion of the plat there are stubs west and south. A right-of-way will be provided for a future road to the west property line along the alignment of NE 6th Street. Currently, NE 6th Street does not exist west of the Shamrock property to approximately 200 feet east of Duvall Avenue NE. There are several issues, which would preclude the future extension of NE 6th Street west of Shamrock. Construction of the roadway along the NE 6th Street alignment would require: 1) relocation of several homes and 2) extension through a gated community east of Duvall Avenue. The stub road to the south between lots 39 and 47 would serve as access to the four -acre parcel to the south. The parcel has a potential for 20 — 24 lots. A secondary access to this parcel would have to be provided as the current stub would exceed the maximum length of a cul-de-sac unless a variance was granted. Currently, there is a privately owned (Phung) residence between lots 29 and 46. The stub road to the north between lots 29 and 46 will provide access to a 5 -acre parcel. This stub could potentially serve the developable portion of this parcel continuing through lot 29 to the east -west plat road. For the portion in the City of Renton, NE 4th Court will be extended to the west property line for potential future connection to the plat to the west. CONCLUSIONS The plat of Shamrock Property will not create any significant adverse conditions on the surrounding transportation network. The plat will generate a net impact of 1,158 daily vehicle trips, 91 AM peak and 122 PM peak hour trips to the transportation network. The SR -9001148th Avenue SE intersection was determined to operate at an unacceptable level of service in the 2002 existing condition and in 2006 with and without the project. With the installation of a signal constructed by pipeline development, the level of service will improve to LOS C in 2006 with the project. The SE 1 16th Street/ 148th Avenue SE intersection was estimated to operate at an acceptable level of service for the existing, 2006 with and without project conditions. The SE 128th Street/148th Avenue SE intersection is estimated to operate at a LOS A in 2006 with the project. In 2006 with the project, the northbound movement at the SE 128th Street/Lyons Avenue SE intersection is estimated to operate a LOS D. It should be noted that the addition of the project traffic would not change the qualitative level of service at either analysis intersection. It is assumed the accident rate for each of the intersections will remain the same in the future. As such, with increased traffic, it is likely there will be a corresponding increase in accidents. However, it does not appear that the relatively small increase in traffic would create an identifiable safety hazard. The right-of-way to the west provides potential for future connectivity of NE 6th Street. The stub road between lots 29 and 46 is currently limited by the existing residence with the potential Garry Struthers Associates, Inc. Page 19 Traffic Imvact Anahsis Shamrock Property for future connection through lot 29. The stubbed road to the south between lots 39 and 47 would potentially provide access to the parcel to the south if a variance was granted_ It is anticipated that the proposed project would not impact Metro's transit operations in the surrounding area. TRAFFIC IMPACT MITIGATION Shamrock Property is required to pay the King County Mitigation Payment System (MPS) fee of $2,913 per unit (1 13 net new units) for concurrency zone 442. In addition, credit should be applied for the existing previous land use of the property as a nursery. The City of Renton's Transportation Mitigation fee is based on S75 per each new average daily trip attributable to the project. It is estimated that a total of 77 daily trips will be generated by the Shamrock Property within the City of Renton. Therefore, the Transportation Mitigation fee for the City of Renton is $5,775. No other mitigation is required. Garn, Struthers Associates, Inc. Page 20 Traffic ImpacrAnalssis Shamrock Prrrperts' TECHNICAL APPENDIX for SHAMROCK PROPERTY Garn• Struthers Associates. Inc. Shamrock Property 148th Avenue SEISR-900 PM PEAK HOUR Revised with 2.57 annual growth rate per WSQOT and Sept. 2001 TMC 71311024:13 PM C1 2 2 U q� L IL 2 T O C 2 I)., ED a U 47 01 C (3 Q.IL C _ O O IL {p LLC Y C IL W 2 O C 2 O = c Cu CM0M C_ C4 CO CD Y Co CS N Co M 4 Y q} Ir N U) N IL IL EBLT 36 19 0 59 0 59 403 43 0 0 446 0 446 EBT 0.96 66 7 29 2 104 16 120 EBRT WELT 4 0 7 0 11 7 18 0.87 522 56 0 0 578 0 578 WBT 12 1 2 0 15 0 15 WBRT NBLT 39 4 15 0 58 9 67 32 3 19 1 55 11 66 0.84 NBT 26 3 4 0 33 3 36 NBRT SBLT 14 1 3 0 18 0 18 fi5 7 37 0 109 16 125 0.78 SBT 28 3 8 0 39 0 39 SBRT 1247 132 143 3 1525 62 1587 71311024:13 PM Shamrock Property SE 116th Street/148th Avenue SE PM PEAK HOUR Collected Sept. 26, 2041 EBLT 5 EBT 1 EBRT 2 WELT13 WBT 0 WBRT 10 NBLT 6 NBT 73 NBRT 15 EBLT15 SBT 125 SBRT 6 271 71311023:57 PM U a5 " = 2 a w 2 m T a� N Oam C CL 0 N U O m C7 v c 4 0 o m a CL m CL ' a a "- E 7 O C C O Y C CD U M Y Cr N Gl N d Q 0 1 0 0 6 ❑ 6 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0.47 0 0 2 0 2 0.77 1 0 0 14 0 14 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 ❑ 0 11 0 11 1 0 0 7 0 7 8 33 1 115 23 138 0.86 0 2 0 0 17 0 17 2 0 0 17 0 17 13 25 2 165 39 204 0.86 0.0 1 0 4 7 0 7 30 58 3 362 62 424 Shamrock Property North Site Access/148th Avenue SE PM PEAK HOUR EBLT 0 EBT 0 EBRT 0 WELT 0 WBT 0 WBRT 0 NBLT 0 NBT 94 NBRT 0 SBLT 0 SBT 146 SBRT 0 240 7131/023:57 PM 74 U m 0 a_ L a 0 N 5 ❑ 4 ❑ 0 0 8 160 0 0 226 8 411 U N 0 '- c n a 0 o p c o 0 Ca c_ O o M Y Cl N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ❑ 0 0 0 4 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ❑ 0 0 0 4 0 10 37 1 142 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 31 195 0 0 E2 0 3 0 26 68 337 74 U m 0 a_ L a 0 N 5 ❑ 4 ❑ 0 0 8 160 0 0 226 8 411 Shamrock Property Site Access (SE 124th Street}l148th Avenue SE PM PEAK HOUR EBLT 0 EBT 0 EBRT 0 WELT 23 WBT 0 WBRT 20 NBLT 0 NBT 94 NBRT 30 SBLT 30 SBT [EO SBRT 343 71311023:57 PM N U Y � U 2 t d m a 7 o c 2 C7 m a 2 a a d a c J d L U t Y' m cn E m cc 0 07 Y N [n N 0 0 a a 15 15 0 0 0 0 0 a a 0 0 0 15 15 2 54 0 79 0 79 0 0 0 0 32 0 0 2 10 0 0 32 0 0 37 0 0 27 27 10 1 142 11 153 3 63 0 96 0 96 3 18 0 51 0 51 16 31 2 195 9 204 4 0 Q 0 26 103 26 36 213 3 595 698 Shamrock Property SE 4th Street/148th Avenue SE (Nile Ave SE) PM Peak Peak Hour: 4:45 - 5:45 EBLT EBT EBRT WBLT WBT WBRT NBLT NBT NBRT SBLT SBT SBRT M U Q7 U a 2 v T Q7 O c 0- 3 _ V CD D CO -�a N a. a. LL U .N a a_ o U 0 2 c W Cj o 2 = c a� m a ro B N Cd Y w C N U) a_ a_ 90 10 29 9 138 34 172 0.017 1029 110 133 71 1343 0 1343 0.95 0.93 9 1 0 159 169 0 169 2 0 0 21 23 0 23 578 62 73 1 714 0 714 0.015 21 2 8 2 33 4 37 21 2 0 88 111 0 111 2 0 0 12 14 0 14 0.48 0.030 10 1 1 13 25 0 25 0.051 36 4 15 2 57 2 59 2 3 2 7 0 7 0.86 60 [A6 27 6 99 r 22 r 121 1860 198 289 386 2733 62 2795 Shamrock Property SE 128th Street/Lyons Avenue SE PM Peak Peak flour: 4:00 - 5:00 EBLT EBT EBRT WELT WBT WBRT NBLT NBT NBRT SBLT SBT SBRT U � � V O � � � N (j C {}_ a O O tp U .� Q IL Q3 i1. U- = V L1J 01 Li C }� 7 O = C cv �c C x0 E co Y CO m 3c cdv Cnn C- a_ 4 0 0 0 4 S 9 1119 120 162 174 1575 31 1606 0.93 0.023 2 0 0 0 2 0 2 0.85 0.028 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 657 70 0 92 59 878 1 17 895 1 0 0 0 5 6 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0.89 0.043 6 1 0 0 7 0 7 3 0 0 0 3 3 6 D b 0 0 0 0 0 0.68 0.057 1 0 0 �] 0 1 2 3 1796 191 254 233 2474 63 2537 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis SHAMROCK PROPERTY 2: SR -900 & 148th Ave SE (2002 EXISTING) 7/31/2002 --* 4--- 4-- t i M"61,6,60- IEILR-ft W w M Lane Configurations +T, +T+ «T Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 36 403 66 4 522 12 39 32 26 14 65 28 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (veh/h) 39 438 72 4 567 13 42 35 28 15 71 30 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type - None None Median storage veh) vC, conflicting volume 580 .510 1201 1141 474 1180 1171 574 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4,0 3.3 p0 queue free % 96 100 59 . 82 95 89 62 94 cM capacity (veh/h) 994 1055 104 192 590 132 184 518 Volume Total 549 585 105 116 Volume Left 39 4 42 15 Volume Right 72 13 28 30 cSH 994 1055 165 209 Volume to Capacity 0.04 0.00 0.64 0.56 Queue Length .(ft) 3 0 90 75 Control Delay (s) 1.1 0.1 59.0 42.0 Lane LOS A A F E Approach Delay (s) 1.1 0.1 59,0 42.0 Approach LOS F . E rot�':.��+ y{.�`.�.M(,r�•.�+;: u.N p ���,5�,,�y �.. Y;. �,s ', < " 'i � '�s� a' r 3t ,�Wi%l . w ......&. .. .. _.v :-.4 Average Delay 8.7 Intersection Capacity Utilization 82.6% ICU Level of Service D Baseline Synchro 5 Report Page 1 Garrysbell-st51 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis SHAMROCK PROPERTY 12; SE 116TH ST & 148TH AVE SE (2002 EXISTING) 7/31/2002 Average Delay 1.8 Intersection Capacity Utilization 20.4% ICU Level of Service A Baseline Synchro 5 Report Page 1 Garrysbell-st51 _-A 4\ t f, Lane Configurations,, Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 5 1 2 13 0 10 6 73 15 15 125 6 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (veh/h) 5 1 2 14 0 11 7 79 16 16 136 7 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) vC, conflicting volume ' 283 280 139 275 276 88 142 96 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol tC, single (s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) t (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 pO queue free % 99 100 100 98. .100 99 100 99 cM capacity (veh/h) 654 618 909 667 622 971 1440 1498 .'..,., ,•. F£x`;":. ...;�� "I..kkk' �.- .,.si�. i..�T .. d' S � ....a=.. .., s��..� .. i!'Y t.:t.�-�"G^.' <F.t§fir �` Volume Total 9 25 102 159 Volume Left 5 14 7 16 Volume Right 2 11 16 7 cSH 698 772 1440 1498 Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.03 DAO 0.01 Queue Length (ft) 1 3 0 1 Control Delay (s) 10.2 9.8 0.5 0.8 Lane LOS B A A A Approach Delay (s) 10.2 9.8 0.5 0.8 Approach LOS B A Average Delay 1.8 Intersection Capacity Utilization 20.4% ICU Level of Service A Baseline Synchro 5 Report Page 1 Garrysbell-st51 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis SHAMROCK PROPERTY 9: SE 128TH ST & LYONS AVE SE (2002 EXISTING) 7/31/2002 Lane Configurations *TT* *'T:, 4 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 4 1119 2 1 657 1 1 1 6 3 .0 1 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (veh/h) 4 1216 2 1 714 1 1 1 7 3 0 1 Pedestrians Lane Width (fit) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veli) Median type None None Median storage veh) vC, conflicting. volume 715 1218 1586 1943 609 1341 1944 358 vC1, stage 1 cont vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % 1.00 100 98 98 99 97 100 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 881 568 72 64 438 107 64 639 Volume Total 612 610 358 358 9 4 Volume Left 4 0 1 0 1 3 Volume Right 0 2 0 1 7 1 cSH 881 1700 568 1700 185 135 Volume to Capacity 0.04 0.36 0.00 0.21 0.05 0.03 Queue Length (ft) 0 0 0 0 4 2 Control Delay (s) 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 25.4 32.5 Lane LOS A A D D Approach Delay (s) 0.1 0.0 25.4 32.5 Approach LOS D D Average Delay 0.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 45.0% ICU Level of Service A Baseline Synchro 5 Report Page 1 Garrysbell-st51 1,91s-Ilags(uaeE) L abed uoda�j 9 oJ4ouAS au!laseS lb� f t ZOOEILE/L ONUSIX3 3006 3S 3Ad SNOAT2 -LS HiK L 3S:6 ,kiH3dOad A:DOUAVHS sisAIuub AlpedeC) uolioasiam paz,ieu61sun WOH y aaiAJaS }o lanai not %0'0£ uo!aezinn �4!aede(] uo!pasielul E•0 �telar� a6eJany ° °� a� :S.w.;csa� �`�'�.;a_:?§i&;;sou, • ra '� _ _ - - - - - _ - -.- _. _ _ _ - - - xu.� .. ' e SO -T 4d'eoAde "S1, 9'6 0"0 1'9 (s) Aelan 4aeoJddy 0 v V b SOS aue-1 V9 L 9'6 0"0 0-0 0"0 L-6 (s) ,tela(] loJtuo(] L ` 0 0 0 0 (4) 4t6ua-1 anent 1,0'0 1,0'0 [Z'0 00'0 00'0 00,0 Aipudeo of aWnlon LSE E91. OOLL 6L9L OOLL Lbs HS3 L L i 0 Z 0 1461} awnIOA £ L 0 L 0 ti `.. 1}a-1 awnloA b 6 ESE 85E Z t, 1e1o1 awnlan 609 LSE 90£ £801, Lb£ 899 61,9L 1,88 (4/4aA) A pedeo no 00 L 00 L 66 66 00 L OM 00 L ON , % eaJ� enanb Od E'E 0'17 5'E £'E 0't, S'£ Z'Z Z'Z (S) -=it 6'9 9'9 TZ 6'9 5'9 5'L L'b 1,'1' (s) albu!s '(]t JoA;uoo Z a6els Ion tuoo I, abets ' 1,(]A 89E 9ZL EEL L /.ZL oa Z 9LL euan{DA 6uip!l lioo `OA (w a6eJots ue1p8n auoN auON adAj ue!paW (49A) aJel3 uJnl 1461H 96eNa018 Iu90Jad (s/4) peads 6u!>{IeM (4) qW!M auej sueu1sapad L 0 E L L L L ti LL L Z 0 117 ((V49n) ejej moll AjjnOH Z6'0 Z6"0 Z6'0 Z6"0 Z6'0 36'0 Z6'0 Z6"0 Z6'0 Z6-0 Z6"0 36'0 aojoej JnOH plead L 0 E 9 tl L L99 L Z 0 t: {W4aA) own]OA %0 %0 %0 %0 a PeJ J dojS dots eai j loijuoc) u61S +1„1+ suopainbi}uoO auu-j lb� f t ZOOEILE/L ONUSIX3 3006 3S 3Ad SNOAT2 -LS HiK L 3S:6 ,kiH3dOad A:DOUAVHS sisAIuub AlpedeC) uolioasiam paz,ieu61sun WOH HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis SHAMROCK PROPERTY 6: SE 128TH ST & 148th Ave SE 2002 EXISTING 7/31/2002 Lane Configurations tT4 #TT 4 +T r Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 90 1029 9 2 578 21 21 2 10 36 2 60 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (veh/h) 98 1118 10 2 628 23 23 2 11 39 2 65 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) vC, conflicting volume 651 1128 1704 1974 564 1411 1968 326 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % 89 100 52 96 98 54 96 90 cM capacity (veh/h) 931 615 48 55 469 85 55 670 {✓� fF� ',`r €j�§aa�� 6. �x�17 ��. :. Fss�� c,@-'i�I�v4�e�� "� „" .. „YS.d. ,.'�'... .Y .:. ,.. . .. .�r,t., z Volume Total 98 746 383 316 337 36 41 65 Volume Left 98 0 0 2 0 23 39 0 Volume bight 0 0 10 0 23 11 0 65 cSH 931 1700 1700 615 1700 66 83 670 Volume to Capacity 0.11 0.44 0.23 0.00 0.20 0.54 0.50 0.10 Queue Length (ft) 9 0 0 0 0 56 53 8 Control Delay (s) 9.3 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 111.0 85.3 11.0 Lane LOS A A F F 8 Approach Delay (s) 0.7 0.1 111.0 39.8 Approach LOS; F E �T y E" "FMEA2- x yry k ...w: F;!�'..+.1. Average Delay ,. 4.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 62.7% ICU Level of Service B Baseline Synchro 5 Report Page 1 Garrysbell-st51 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis SHAMROCK PROPERTY 2: SR -900 & 148th Ave SE 2006 WITHOUT PROJECT 7/31/2002 Baseline Synchro 5 Report Page 1 Garrysbell-st51 Lane Configurations Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 59 446 104 11. 578 15 58 55 33 18 109 39 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (veh/h) 64 485 113 12 628 16 63 60 36 20 118 42 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type . None None Median storage veh) vC, conflicting volume 645 598 1423 1338 541 1339 1386 636 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % 93 99 0 58 93 74 10 91 cM capacity (veh/h) 941 979 22 141 541 76 132 478 { Volume Total 64 598 12 645 159 180 Volume Left 64 0 12 0 63 20 Volume Right 0 113 0 16 36 42 cSIH 941 1700 979 1700 47 145 Volume to Capacity 0.07 0.35 0.01 0.38 3.37 1.24 Queue Length (ft) 5 0 1 0 Err 268 Control Delay (s) 9.1 0.0 8.7 0.0 Err 215.1 Lane LOS A A F F Approach Delay (s) 0.9 0.2 Err 215.1 Approach LOS F F e Average Delay 981.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 69.7% ICU Level of Service B Baseline Synchro 5 Report Page 1 Garrysbell-st51 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis SHAMROCK PROPERTY 2. SR -900 & 148th Ave SE (2006 WITHOUT PROJECT) 7/31/2002 Lane Configurations 1 1� *T# +14 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1.900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util, Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.97 0.97 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.98 0.99 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1810 1770 1856 1771 1794 Flt Permitted 0.35 1.00 0.38 '1.00 0.79 0.96 Satd. Flow (perm) 646 1810 700 1856 1423 1737 Volume (vph) 59 446 104 11. 578 15 58 55 33 18 109 39 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 64 485 11.3 12 628 16 f3 60 36 20 118 42 Lane Group Flow (vph) 64 598 0 12 644 0 0 159 0 0 180 0 Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 4 8 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 32.6 32.6 32.6 32.6 9.4 9.4 Effective Green, g (s) 32.6 32.6 32.6 32.6 9.4 9.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.19 0.19 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 421 1180 456 1210 268 327 v/s Ratio Prot 0.33 c0.35 v/s Ratio Perm 0.10 0.02 c0.11 0.10 . v/c Ratio 0.15 0.51 0.03 0.53 0.59 0.55 Uniform Delay, dl 3.4 4.5 3.1 4.6 18.6 18.4 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.8 1.6 0.1 1.7 3.5 2.0 Delay (s) 4.1 6.1 3.2 6.3 22.1 20.4 Level of Service A A A A C C Approach Delay (s) 5.9 6.3 22.1 20.4 Approach LOS A A C C HCM Average Control Delay 9.2 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.55 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 50.0. Sum of lost time (s) 8.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 69.7% ICU Level of Service B c Critical Lane Group Baseline Synchro 5 Report Page 1 Garrysbell-st51 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis SHAMROCK PROPERTY 12: SE 116TH ST & 148TH AVE SE (2006 WITHOUT PROJECT) 17/31/2002 Lane Configurations 4T+ Sign Control., Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 6 1 2 14 0 11 7 115 17 17 165 7 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (veh/h) 7 1 2 15 0 12 8 125 18 18 179 8 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage: Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Nome Median storage veh) vC, conflicting volume 382 379 183 372 373 134 187 143 vC1, stage 1 cont vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol tC, single (s) 7.1 6.5 62 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 99 100 100 97. 100 99 99 99 cM capacity (veh/h) 561 543 859 574 547 915 1387 1439 Volume Total 10 27 151 205 Volume Left 7 15 8 18 Volume Right 2 12 18 8 cSH 605 687 1387 1439 Volume to Capacity 0.02 0.04 0.01 0.01 Queue Length (ft) 1 3 0 1 Control Delay (s) 11.0 10.5 0.4 0.8 Lane LOS B B A A Approach Delay (s) 11.0 10.5 0.4 0,8 Approach LOS B B ..�,.. �-e., ,o.,.... ,a. -. , ge`�a.x'�;r' ::.. .. `�° • . ". r...i@ R'3k,���..s tF ��.s�».":^_,. Average Delay 1.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 24.3% ICU Level of Service A Baseline Synchro 5 Report Page 1 Garrysbell-st51 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis SHAMROCK PROPERTY 6: SE 128TH ST & 148th Ave SE (2006 WITHOUT PROJECT} 7/31/2002 - f' *-- 4\ Lane Configurations 0.98 t'+ *TT *T* +T 1.00 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4,0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.98 0.99 0.98 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.96 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 3480 3511 1756 1784 1583 Flt Permitted 0.32 1.00 0.88 0.74 0.72 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 593 3480 3092 1341 1348 1583 Volume (vph) 138 1343 169 23 714 33 111 14 25 57 7 99 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 150 1460 184 25 776 36 1.21 15 27 62 8 108 Lane Group Flow (vph) 150 1644 0 0 837 0 0 163 0 0 70 108 Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 4 8 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 40.7 40.7 40.7 11.3 11.3 11.3 Effective Green, g (s) 40.7 40.7 40.7 11.3 11.3 11.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.19 0.19 0.19 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 402 2361 2097 253 254 298 v/s Ratio Prot c0,47 v/s Ratio Perm 0.25 0.27 c0.12 0.05 0.07 v/c Ratio 0.37 0.70 0.40 0.64 0.28 0,36 Uniform Delay, d1 4.2 5.9 4.3 22.5 20.8 21.2 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 2.6 1.7 0.6 5.5 0.6 0.8 Delay (s) 6.8 7.6 4.8 28.0 21.4 22.0 Level of Service A A A C C C Approach Delay (s) 7.5 4.8 28.0 21.8 Approach LOS A A C C HCM Average Control Delay 8.8 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.69 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 60.0 Sum of lost time (s) 8.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 95.3% ICU Level of Service E c Critical Lane Group Baseline Synchro 5 Report Page 1 Garrysbell-st51 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis SHAMROCK PROPERTY 9: SE 128TH ST & LYONS AVE SE (2006 WITHOUT PROJECT) 7/31/2002 Lane Configurations OT"T4 +TT *T Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 4 0 2 1 878 1 1 1 7 3 0 1 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (veh/h) 4 0 2 1 954 1 1 1 8 3 0 1 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) vC, conflicting volume 955 2 490 967 1 974 968 478 vC1, stage 1 cont vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.5 6.5 6.9 7,5 6.5 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % 99 100 100 100 99 98 100 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 715 1619 458 251 1083 203 251 534 Volume Total 4 2 478 478 10 4 Volume Left 4 0 1 0 1 3 Volume Right 0 2 0 1 8 1 cSH 715 1700 1619 1700 712 240 Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.28 0.01 0.02 Queue Length (ft) 0 0 0 0 1 1 Control Delay (s) 10.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.1 24.3 Lane LOS B A B C Approach Delay (s) 6.7 0.0 10.1 20.3 Approach LOS B C Average Delay 0.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 36.7% ICU Level of Service A Baseline Synchro 5 Report Page 1 Garrysbell-st51 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis SHAMROCK PROPERTY 9: SE 128TH ST & LYONS AVE SE (2006 WITHOUT PROJECT) 7/31/2002 x Lane Configurations 860 f"T, 1 +TT+ 10 +T+ Volume Left 4 +14 1 Sign Control 1 Free Volume Right Free 2 Stop 1 8 Stop cSH Grade 1700 0% 1700 0% 291 00/0 0.00 0.50 0% 0.00 Volume (veh/h) 4 1575 2 1 0 1 1 1 7 3 0 1 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (veh/h) 4 1712 2 1 0 1 1 1 8 3 0 1 Pedestrians D G Lane Width (ft) Average Delay 0.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization Walking Speed (ft/s) 59.2% ICU Level of Service A Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) vC, conflicting volume 1 1714 1725 1725 857 876 1726 1 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 cant vol tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % 100 100 98 99 97 99 100 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 1620 366 57 87 301 234 87 1083 Volume Total 860 858 1 1 10 4 Volume Left 4 0 1 0 1 3 Volume Right 0 2 0 1 8 1 cSH 1620 1700 366 1700 172 291 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.01 Queue Length (ft) 0 0 0 0 4 1 Control Delay (s) 0.1 0.0 14.9 0.0 27.2 17.6 Lane LOS" A B D C Approach Delay (s) 0.0 7.4 27.2 17.6 Approach LOS D G Average Delay 0.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 59.2% ICU Level of Service A Baseline Synchro 5 Report Page 1 Garrysbell-st51 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis SHAMROCK PROPERTY 2. SR -900 & 148TH AVE SE (2006 WITH PROJECT) } 17/31/2002 Lane Configurations 64 T, 20 T 184 198 Volume Left 64 0 20 Sign Control 73 Free Volume Right Free 130 Stop 16 39 Stop cSH Grade 1700 0% 1700 0% 133 0% 0.07 0.36 0% 0.38 Volume (veh/h) 59 446 120 18 578 15 67 66 36 18 125 39 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (veh/h) 64 485 130 20 628 16 73 72 39 20 136 42 Pedestrians F F j:.; ^Mw;, at" R •` � Y,nii ��FF £ %�`''ti' � ITF .X��'''�' • h..:S...........:,wt � Lane Width (ft) Average Delay Err Intersection Capacity Utilization 71.9% Walking Speed (ft/s) of Service C Percent Blockage . Right turn flare (veh) Median type . None None Median storage veh) vC, conflicting volume 645 615 1456 1362 550 1364 1419 636 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % 93 98 0 47 93 69 0 91 cM capacity (veh/h) 941 964 0 135 535 63 125 478 Volume Total 64 615 20 645 184 198 Volume Left 64 0 20 0 73 20 Volume Right 0 130 0 16 39 42 cSH 941 1700 964 1700 0 133 Volume to Capacity 0.07 0.36 0.02 0.38 Err 1.49 Queue Length (ft) 5 D 2 0 Err 339 Control Delay (s) 9.1 0.0 8.8 0.0 Err 315.5 Lane LOS A A F F Approach Delay (s) 0.9 0.3 Err 315.5 Approach LOS F F j:.; ^Mw;, at" R •` � Y,nii ��FF £ %�`''ti' � ITF .X��'''�' • h..:S...........:,wt � Average Delay Err Intersection Capacity Utilization 71.9% ICU Level of Service C Baseline Synchro 5 Report Page 1 Garrysbell-st51 HCM Signalized intersection Capacity Analysis SHAMROCK PROPERTY 2. SR -900 &_148TH AVE SE (2066 WITH PROJECT) ,., 7/31/2002 ,rte. _ -s.. ,, <. �" ... , a " .:, �......._. n S t Lane Configurations 111� c0.13 T v/c Ratio 0.16 4 0.05 0.55 0.65 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900. 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 1.8 4.0 4.0 4.0 Delay (s) 4,5 4.0 3.6 6.9 Lane Utii. Factor 1.00 1.00 Level of Service A 1.00 1.00 G 1.00 B 1.00 6.6 Frt 1.00 0.97 19.8 1.00 1.00 A 0.97 0.97 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 HCM Average Control Delay 0.95 1.00 0.98 0.99 0.57 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1804 1770 1856 Sum of lost time (s) 1774 8.0 1800 Intersection Capacity Utilization Fit Permitted 0.34 1.00 C 0.36 1.00 0.77 0.97 Satd. Flow (perm) 632 1804 666 1856 1388 1747 Volume (vph) . 59 446 120 18 578 15 67 66 36 18 125 39 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 64 48.5 130 20 628 16 -73 72 39 20 136 42 Lane Group Flow (vph) 64 615 0 20 644 0 0 184 0 0 198 0 Tum Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 4 8 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 31.8 31.8 31.8 31.8 10.2 10.2 Effective Green, g (s) 31.8 31.8 31.8 31.8 10.2 10.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.64 0.64 0.64 0.64 0.20 0.20 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Gap (vph) 402 1147 424 1180 283 356 v/s Ratio Prot 0.34 c0.35 v/s Ratio Perm 0,10 0.03 c0.13 0.11 v/c Ratio 0.16 0.54 0.05 0.55 0.65 0.56 Uniform Delay, d1 3.7 5.0 3.4 5.1 18.3 17.9 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incrementa€Delay, d2 0.8 1.8 0.2 1.8 5.3 1.9 Delay (s) 4,5 6.8 3.6 6.9 23.5 19.8 Level of Service A A A A G B Approach Delay (s) 6.6 6.8 23.5 19.8 Approach LOS A A C B HCM Average Control Delay 10.0` HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.57 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 50.0 Sum of lost time (s) 8.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 71.9% ICU Level of Service C c Critical Lane Group Baseline Synchro 5 Report Page 1 Garrysbell-st51 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis SHAMROCK PROPERTY 12: SE 116TH ST & 148TH AVE SE 2006 WITH PROJECT) 7/31/2002 Baseline Synchro 5 Report Page 1 Garrysbell-st51 Lane Configurations , , 41, Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 6 1 2 14 0 11 7 138 17 17 204 7 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (veh/h) 7 1 2 15 0 12 8 150 18 18 222 8 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type. None None Median storage veh) vC, conflicting volume 449 446 226 440 441 159 229 168 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol tC, single (s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 22 p0 queue free % 99 100 100 97 100 99 99 99 cM capacity (veh/h) 506 497 814 518 501 886 1339 1409 ",': Volume Total 10 27 176 248 Volume Left 7 15 8 18 Volume Right 2 12 18 S c S H 551 634 1339 1409 Volume to Capacity 0.02 0.04 0.01 0.01 Queue Length (ft) 1 3 0 1 Control belay (s) 11.6 10.9 0.4 0.7 Lane LOS B B A A Approach Delay (s) 11.6 10.9 0.4 0.7 Approach LOS B B �es ,, .,r• _Fa..l_.. , t .. ..-.. ix' [s�u..". `..-�-'S.`i�'m?e„^SS#�i'v�'Yb;EE:�a. t3HF.3E x `P4�:_RciF�' "�.%r.,Fa.!§SFi�fH'sE i✓ 4h"r;'^..;'�5.�4��`�-,.�."S�K"*'= Average Delay 1.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 27.5% ICU Level of Service A Baseline Synchro 5 Report Page 1 Garrysbell-st51 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis SHAMROCK PROPERTY 18: NORTH SITE ACCESS & 148th Ave SE (2006 WITH PROJECT) 7/31/2002 --* t l 41 Q .= Lane Configurations y +T Sign Control Stop Free Free G rade 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 5 4 8 156 220 8 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (veh/h) 5 4 9 170 239 9 Pedestrians Lane Width (#t) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) VC, conflicting volume 430 243 248 vC1, stage 1 cont vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 99 99 99 cM capacity (veh/h) 578 795 1318 Volume Total 10 178 248 Volume Left 5 9 0 Volume Right 4: 0 9 cSH 658 1318 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.01. 0.01 0.15 Queue Length (ft) 1 0 0 Control Delay (s) 10.6 , 0.4 0.0 Lane LOS B A Approach. Delay (s) 10.6 0.4 0.0 Approach LOS B Average Delay 0.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 23.1% ICU Level of Service A Baseline Synchro 5 Report Page 1 Garrysbell-st51 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis SHAMROCK PROPERTY 15: SE 124TH ST SITE ACCESS & 148th Ave SE 2006 WITH PROJECT 7/31/2002 ,A 4--- A, -*�, I i Lane Configurations +T, 33 121 Sign Control 299 Stop 16 86 Stop 55 Volume Right Free 35 Free Grade cSH 0% 438 1323 0% Volume to Capacity 0.07 00/0 0.02 0% Volume (veh/h) 15 0 15 79 0 32 27 149 96 51 198 26 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (veh/h) 16 0 16 86 0 35 29 162 104 55 215 28 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None - Median storage veh) VC, conflicting volume 648 665 229 629 627 214 243 266 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol tC, single (s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 4.4 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 95 100 98 77 100 96 98 96 cM capacity (veh/h) 349 356 810 368 374 826 1323 1298 Average Delay 4.3 Intersection Capacity UtUization 56.2% ICU Level of Service A Baseline Synchro 5 Report Page 1 Garrysbell-st51 Volume Total 33 121 296 299 Volume Left 16 86 29 55 Volume Right 16 35 104 28 cSH 488 438 1323 1298 Volume to Capacity 0.07 0.28 0.02 0.04 Queue Length (ft) 5 28 2 3 Control Delay (s) 12.9 16.3 1.0 1.8 Lane LOS B C A A Approach Delay (s) 12.9 16.3. 1.0 1.8 Approach LOS B C Average Delay 4.3 Intersection Capacity UtUization 56.2% ICU Level of Service A Baseline Synchro 5 Report Page 1 Garrysbell-st51 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis SHAMROCK PROPERTY 6: SE 128TH ST & 148th Ave SE (2006 WITH PROJECT) 7/31/2002 * /.No. 4/ Lane Configurations t14 4T+ +T+ Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.98 0.99 0.98 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.96 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 3480 3509 1756 1783 1563 Flt Permitted 0.32 1.00 0.88 0.74 0.72 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 590 3480 3090 1339 1342 1583 Volume (vph) 172 1343 169 23 714 37 .111 14 25 59 7 121 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 187 1460 184 25 776 40 1.21 15 27 64 8 132 Lane Group How (vph) 187 1644 0 0 841 0 0 163 0 0 72 132 Tum Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 4 8 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 40.7 40.7 40.7 11.3 11.3 11.3 Effective Green, g (s) 40.7 40.7 40.7 11.3 11.3 11.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.19 0.19 0.19 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 400 2361 2096 252 253 298 v/s Ratio Prot c0.47 v/s Ratio Perm 0.32 0.27 c0.12 0.05 0.08 v/c Ratio 0.47 0.70 0.40 0.65 0.28 0.44 Uniform Delay, di .4.5 5.9 4.3 22.5 20.9 21.6 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 3.9 1.7 0.6 5.6 0.6 1.1 Delay (s) 8.4 7.6 4.8 28.1 21.5 22.6 Level of Service A A A C C C Approach Delay (s) 7.7 4.8 28.1 22.2 Approach LOS A A C C HCM Average Control Delay 9.0 NCM Level at Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.69 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 60.0 Sum of lost time (s) 8.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 95.5% ICU Level of Service E c Critical Lane Group Baseline. Synchro 5 Report Page 1 Garrysbell-st51 HCM Unsignalized intersection Capacity Analysis SHAMROCK PROPERTY 9- SE 128TH ST & LYONS AVE SE (2006 WITH PROJECT _. .. „ 7/31/2002 Lane Configurations►.► Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 9 0 2 1 895 6. 1 1 7 6 0 3 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (veh/h) 10 0 2 1 973 7. 1 1 8 7 0 3 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) vC, conflicting volume 979 2 512 1002 1 1006 1000 490 vC1, stage 1 cont vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % 99 100 100 100 99 97 100 99 cM capacity (veh/h) 700 1619 437 237 1083 191 238 524 Volume Total 10 2 488 493 10 10 Volume Left 10 0 1 0 1 7 Volume Right 0 2 0 7 8 3 cSH 700 1700 1619 1700 694 243 Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.29 0.01 0.04 Queue Length (ft) 1 0 0 0 1 3 Control Delay (s) 10.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.3 20.5 Lane LOS B A B C Approach Delay (s) 8.4 OA 10.3 20.5 Approach LOS B. C OWN..�... _.:..,.... ... 1 ...m"?.: .mac. xr,...a :.�- nc.,.._ Average Delay 0.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 37.3% ICU Level of Service A Baseline Synchro 5 Report Page 1 Garrysbell-st51 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis SHAMROCK PROPERTY 9: SE 128TH ST & LYONS AVE SE 2006 WITH PROJECT 7/31/2002 Baseline Garrysbell-st51 Synchro 5 Report Page 1 -►i *-- 4\ t i Lane Configurations *"Tr 44� Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Volume (vehlh) 9 1606 2 1 .0 6 1 1 7 6 0 3 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (veh/h) 10 1746 2 1 0 7 1 1 8 7 0 3 Pedestrians Lane.Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) vC, conflicting volume 7 1748 1772 1775. 874 906 1773 3 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % 99 900. 98 99 97 97 100 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 1613 355 52 81 293 221 81 1079 z Volume Total 883 875 1 7 10 10 Volume Left 10 0 1 0 1 7 Volume Right 0 2 0 7 8 3 cSH 1613 1700 355 1700 162 .301 Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.51 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.03 Queue Length (ft) 0 0 0 0 5 3 Control Delay (s) 0.2 0.0 15.2 0.0 28.6 17.4 Lane LOS A C D C Approach Delay (s) 0.1 2.2 28.6 17.4 Approach LOS D C �p Average Delay 0.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 61.9% ICU Level of Service B Baseline Garrysbell-st51 Synchro 5 Report Page 1 Washington State Department of Transportation Douglas B. MacDonald Secretary of Transportation July 5, 2002 Ms. Joan Smelser Garry Struthers Associates 3150 Richards Road, Suite 100 Bellevue, WA 98005-4446 SR 900 CS 1713 1481h Ave SE Vic MP 15.01-15.09 164Th Ave SE Vic MP 16.14-16.22 Dear Ms. Smelser: ECEIVEMI JUL 1 12002 Garry Struthers Assoc., lrc. Northwest Region 15700 Daytcn Avenue Noah P.O. Box 330310 Seattle. WA 98133-9710 206-440-4000 TTY: 1-800-833-6388 www.wsdot.wa.gov Enclosed are copies of the accident listings for the subject sections of SR 900 in accordance with your request of July 9, 2002. These listings cover the period from January 1, 1998, through December 31, 2001. About 35% of the records for 1998 are missing, and data fields are missing for those 1998 records that are in the data base. Only about 25% of 2001 records have been entered into4he system to date. The intersection of SE 116'x' Street and 148"' Avenue SE is not on the state highway system. Please contact King County for accident data at that location. Sincerely, Patricia A. Foley, P.E. Accident Analysis Engineer PAF cc: CS File N u w >- U W w ww W 'n LU 7 0> J J J J J m m 1 m COM 1 F W Z Z �--• •--� Z •-� •--• Z Z Z Z •-� Z CG H .-� N N .-. N N ... r ..• .... U] r o w N m 0 000000000000 Z CL D. z D. dZZZz CLZ H U S/1 UOqq 4wv C34U W !2 -C nMM4 m4 mmQ K r CO CO cy J Q n o n 0 n n n n O U V m-L7UUmU O d 0 * rL w Md� h C. W W w W w w W W w > F- J 0EDw J J J J J J J C792 z Z 0 = Z = Z = Z =Zr Z Z Z O d d d d d d d dEl r r r rsr r r n ¢ ¢¢ a a d¢ a in J d%uj x Lu nC OG OG d' OC W J W W W W W W W W K Li z x z z x z x z W LU wwwwLLP wwac U7 m a a >E f r J J 0 S 2 S O x S Q x S c7 L7 t7 x G7 i.7 x i7 u J J J Y J J Y J J a QaQQQaQa v ooa00000 r r r 0 C3 c 0 o o� W J J J J H H \ \ \ 11 Q of w a w zdzaQzwx •-• W •-• w w •-• W J Q J d J J d> Q u ccUCUU�oac � W i� au acr 6 7 > OC rrrr>rrr W oC x W W W OG V7 O 3341CZC33 Q x d O —x r u7 u z W O .-. F F r F H F H N r w CC w d r J xw r rrrr�r�r ,noou4oO10 C3.Lnoo LU NOMO.t .t OM In 12 z .D Ol ru O. w 10 ►- pQ�oQQ�Qp�Qpo��.���n--- U o 0 0 o 0 0 0 U P U U W N N N I V[ V N N d O W CDN DA �� OHO N11�Ii5M N O N N O N T O r NLn Q•••"�O f,-fV rM10 f� --moa—ooe-0000 N 4L J O 0 � Q N i Q f- �Y uY uz ul to u1 ul u1 W um 4n u1 N 000000000000 d Ul in uz u1 uti u1 Ln Ln in ui to in Y r r r r —r -- r!--- Ln in Ln Ln vi to in Ln to u1 en in 6 G CG CO G40C3OGG w tp (n J d vvvovvvvavvC. �- w v a o O v v v v a v v o 6 an alo.ao.o�aaaaolao+ r - r r N � Q 0 0 ch cn :KEn 7 H 0 > O m G a W 0 J W f ¢ O. 4 W M K Q d g� Q CC c d In cn w z �a t- oa><c� v dx Z K = r O w 3 U U Lu VJ Z v in�00 I-- w xc.lr v w z m 6 w N S LU x� r W - W d m m cz d m 0 a z r n x OC 0 LU z r In ? U 4 ;z 4 w Lu x M Q u t N p 2 w � uj N O M = � ? Z F- W d 7 C7 [/J d d x z z z z w >- a: 0: W w ww W 'n LU 7 0> J J J J J m m 1 m COM 1 F W Z Z �--• •--� Z •-� •--• Z Z Z Z •-� Z 41 .-. .-� N N .-. N N ... r ..• .... U] r o w N m 0 000000000000 Z CL D. z D. dZZZz CLZ ae d f a 1 S/1 UOqq 4wv C34U z�2 !2 -C nMM4 m4 mmQ K r N N N LnmN I� N N N 1 m 10 cy J Q n o n 0 n n n n a-K��uumuQQQQa� .=d U V m-L7UUmU O d 0 Mr�1l NNr NQNv Md� HOG MSO V1 OC W •-+0 m to NJ M N N V1�N D• Ja f �oOdUv JW 7 OOC2 U f- �Y uY uz ul to u1 ul u1 W um 4n u1 N 000000000000 d Ul in uz u1 uti u1 Ln Ln in ui to in Y r r r r —r -- r!--- Ln in Ln Ln vi to in Ln to u1 en in 6 G CG CO G40C3OGG w tp (n J d vvvovvvvavvC. �- w v a o O v v v v a v v o 6 an alo.ao.o�aaaaolao+ r - r r N � Q 0 0 ch cn :KEn 7 H 0 > O m G a W 0 J W f ¢ O. 4 W M K Q d g� Q CC c d In cn w z �a t- oa><c� v dx Z K = r O w 3 U U Lu VJ Z v in�00 I-- w xc.lr v w z m 6 w N S LU x� r W - W d m m cz d m 0 a z r n x OC 0 LU z r In ? U 4 ;z 4 w Lu x M Q u t N p 2 w � uj N O M = � ? Z F- W d 7 C7 [/J d d # U O r1' r m F- U W 03 m 0 J as aQ a L r ua c.7 nc z w F- r- r- r- C,F- = w rr Z F-• F- F+ r!7 (n 0 w W N w 1-- F- F-- 3 Q rn V] ca J 0 V7 U m F- Vl 7^ r 0 m� LUQ <L O � d r r nz r rnnwnn tx rn c� oco N •.• r N 7 O # x D WN F- OM 2 r w 1 WF- O O W M Q_ W O } } \ W N 4 N J w H LU E F-- J r D z w 10 4 D m W W W S w W w W Z S x m m m J 7= ^] ¢l m m m r� 2 2 !] 0 Q W S 0 W E 00\� h- oaro as P O+o rh QQ \ W K r YT to tiO W F- F- J J s M J J J J J J r J J J V7 N U U U W U U U U U U W U U U a 4 4 \ \ \ ¢ \ \ \ \ \ 6 \ \ \ Q as aQ a r N r N M r r c.7 nc z w F- r- r- r- C,F- = w rr Z F-• F- F+ r!7 (n 0 w W N w 1-- F- F-- rn V] ca J 0 V7 U m F- Vl 7^ r 0 m� S H m OG d r r nz r rnnwnn W x ca nca oco nO wuFaU)Q) nU'n 0 a UJx r nnF-an4 0 0m 0m x x x z x .. x z S= z x z z W DC K OC w W T W W d" a' W a rY w Q 2 z W O CE tr r r w W W W w Z W F F- W w F- Q JJJK[Y�arx WJtrJJ CK -i W W ad' Z Z O O U H a a W W W S w W w W Z S x m m m J 7= ^] ¢l m m m d S Z T Z 2 S S S S S S S = 2 2 J [.i C7 I.7 C7 Cs CO C7 C7 J V V V c7 c7 J J J m m tY YYYYYYr}ara-Nr<= rr 44aaa4a¢a¢¢¢¢O a :) as a ncoocccoaoQQQQno QQ rrs• rrrrr> rar YT COM 001=9200 -j -j -A -i zxww=azzaaaxzwzaazazzazz= F- F- J J s M J J J J J J r J J J V7 N U U U W U U U U U U W U U U J J L) U 4 4 \ \ \ ¢ \ \ \ \ \ 6 \ \ \ \ \ ct u ac auam aa at m= a¢ aoc¢¢¢ w LULU W w- W W W W W W ww, wW wW ww wW wW w W } }¢ J J J} J J J J J J J J J W W J J Q Q K U U U O D U U U U U o O U u U U U Y F-�aarrrrwa-rNYkYr >->~ d' W W CC DC S 1• T 1• U K K a s �' O[ aY d' d' Q 3 3 0 0 0 Q n Q •- n n n n n a n G C J W OC F- O x H rrrrrrzrrr-F-F-r rF-I-- 4 a a a z LU a LU d d a a a a a s *O 01 Lm 0 0 N M rn 0 Ln a rn 0 rn h rn 0 0 0 0 0 Ln rn O Ln N ON10 MFnN ON Ln 7: rV MNN OMrA 9 L ON I•I 171t o - .t h h 0• �r h �a N h h •Q OF Ln M h '7 +O rn r- P rn ru o *- N r r r O 0 r r +- r r O r r r r r r r r w 01w moo PP PP PP 0.O nO00O.- P P P P P P P P P P P P 0 cD 0 0 0 0 0 O O o P P o P P P_ 4• _P P_ P_ P_ P_ P_ P_ P o 4 0 0 0 O O O O0 P P o r N N N N N N N N N N r r N h Prn NN mrn N+8 rD M NN .O orr,Orh CO N NC]rN n 0rNfOONrOons-Mr rONr \ 0 n \ W P c0 rn 0D=r N+t cD S No oo0 or r It nn oon o 0 0 0 4 Q O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r r 0 0 0 0 0 0 F- F - w O O in SR} W 7t F� N O m m 0 - LU W Q J W >E d Q a w a a Q_ c x a rr c� d in V7 W x C7 4 Pacat- oOSc7 � 6 = r o — = K 2 0�aa W O w 3 UU Ld N (n O O n -- F- W 2 U F- W d d n F- O nV) U Lu Z N Q W sn D x W = H H W W m J O rn n W Z 1- in d m U 4 3 M d 4 W uj M a U H N n x W F- LLI OGy4y 0 =- . x O = x H W 4 7 V rn a 4 N 7 P w a a # r N r N M r r N x O 'ate Z xx•-+ � x= _ _ M w ce (Il Q 7 W W W S w W w W Z S x m m m J 7= ^] ¢l m m m w z S= W w 2 •-+ x x -- -• m= S W= •-• _ •+ .Z Z •-• Z Z Z (/) Q D .-. (i .-. .•. {!) N 4 "- D f!1 Vl .•. Vl �. r Vl r r •.. 0 N rn N rn w N V] O O>> O o 0 0 a D -- 0 0} 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 zxww=azzaaaxzwzaazazzazz= �rrrrrrrrrrrrrrfrrr�-•r.•-rrr a c c c c o¢ m Q w n Q Q m n n m a N g as <M M<aoo a aLUmc� a¢m mm¢a ¢mmm¢omppcm mdmmr.�dcaw0u r -hr R N a N MMhhNa} �!00"N4 comw00(V =rljM r- O rC, MP-r,'a r O�6 Nh •OM M•Q+D hN h+D•Q m U Q J d : O r O O r 0 0 0 0 0 h O a 0 0 0 r r O r O O N 0 0 \ d d F- •- x -r U U U U U a U U d d d d d d U Q U U a m 4 gq aa¢ m QU m m m m d d m d a mpp d mm m4 m U ca UL) r M n d n Vlrhhh hW7rn It 000 OItm W w Qi%jw17nrVM rn t x xN or O ti K _ cO 0t 00 N 10 N h r to O 0a 0. O. O•OMhrel ca mm O•h ••- W rn elf U? K w �Om UM.f �t N+D 00 rn �Y h M r00 .QrrMr Phh Nh NM J-. mJh J tLZ J W O •Qh Nrn rt1l to rn Mr -x 01 J O\ O a z + U r U 4 .T h47 W a0 WmcO SO W CO 4l 4O mCD tQ fb m'fb CO fb DODUP rn } m r 4O r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r e- r r r r-• r r r. N Y Q •Q`d O`C •OOO•Q`Q •D LL, m r/WW -rrrrr---r-----------rrr- :t f W w W i+ LLI M Ln ic% Ln rf5 Ln fn Ln Ln Ln cn Ln Ln u% Ln Ln In rn rn Ln rn rn rn rn rn to N W rz W O O O O O O O O0 O O O O O O n 0 n 0 0 0 C. 0 4 0 Z f N (nJ N 2 H Of O O O 1:01O O O O O 102,O o O n 0 0 10:10 0 0 n O 'COP, O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Q p O O O O O O O 4 1():, O F w d U N POS CollO•D•P Q•PPPPD•O•PPPPPPPUO+PPP t- no U o LL7 2 O L}r V' U) Z D O U z 0 D a J Q U W O LU i .i J 33 Q 3- 3_ 4 Li Y CC rn rn r J }-- - W S •- U J W N- Z 0 J w > ill x- U J w N _ c i C (Y 7 C Lu ZE E s m r N p O c m w 3O J Q U C W > D� L rn '0.-r ,t. ti J m G G r O L b> o o c m ~ O o Z$ f- d a y 1C s o p c O Ln O Y O N ¢ .� O a u! Y 'C C U TL 4 j U rn G E En Y a cnU 'N m D1 •Q7 y 0, Z_ U W a¢ a U) d J d 4f j >..Q ❑ J L V U iU y r Q1 `y c ro 1E E H N U N❑ til Q J J O p j6 a> N y U �~� �a a w � -A a a to a�Z �- df a� N U s p Q¢ in [� . o� Z> y m m .2~ m > U v QLU U >` J y as CL y 2 U� y d, rr W y f0 N U lJ N S U y a a> U tJ h a r 4+ C y -- m .�. = � L a) O a a} m Z ' o °' °' S >? E d W H O Z 2 U uIL(7Cr-?. �u v U m a+ N C E rn .: E w ❑ V i U •G a L dl y �' G1 T -0 w •O a p>, y' A .6 O V p. x O S w m U Z U W z 3G ( ❑ L!J m ~ a t6 7 rn °� U i> L a U r '• b m30: v .0 a >� C- a rn -p -a O p y LU a. }2 O d s s n a o � u a� a �c m rn v d -5L �. a s� p �Zr��~ Q� O cy m N F,'- Z crLL>-¢y m N 'tV o o ? y d Lu s } a 7 c m > y v p �'rL y c w F- Z ? oI LL01 -0 O 7 N V) in L L W U W O to Q 0 m .0 ¢ J DJ G V N '{•1 � U L O O «1 ❑ C7 t �"� LL,r W p m N 5, Wj 0.'in qq CX i- .� ar'J 'a X .�. Y •G} T LO O a� J a i LU p r y y J Cr CC T > Z �•' II �- x U .SC ,( o U c: W w C w w s -2 117 ?C e j Q J L b J fr _ O a., F- i p C� Z Y Y }- Q" Q r a 2 C Y •C m U () _ A _N y V LU J Q () Q L y f- i- y it y Q' Q z Y LL W (.7 O Q c W V 2 U ` J Q 97 N Y AA a X 'gyp N :N m. N U •C 4 Z s G Q c¢ Z ee a U yp„ 2 14 (,7 Z y 81 .X ll LLl Z (7 Q7 _Q a _Q y Q7 W U 2 J C a W d •Y u H z 41 N H 61 2r ', CI} 5 m N 3 Y •� y t� a .� 5 f: _ -. • C ld C N LTC Q7 •p a G} d lO U a 0 0 N •O U u .Cfr ? t!) C in N # y �C c O N p Y p p u y }r y y 2 N- Q fO 3 U L o `o fn „i, _ IL' fi Lu p� ii a rL Q. ,. a. �. � ��� 2 y- m.5 `5 4e i 7 a o m LL ur w y y? Y y n¢ Vj a Q : 4 -c C of Z � W J O Qco Q LO LO 47 tO (¢ co Q7 U .i J 33 Q 3- 3_ 4 Li Y CC rn rn r N _ c C (Y 7 C Lu ZE E s m r N p O c m w 3O J U C W > D� L rn '0.-r ,t. ti J m G G r O L b> o o c m ~ O o Z$ f- d a y 1C s o p c O Ln Y O N ¢ .� O G u! Y 'C C U TL 4 j U rn G E En Y a cnU 'N m D1 •Q7 y 0, Z_ U W a¢ a U) d J d j j >..Q p J 7 7 7 iU y N `y c ro 1E E H N U N❑ til Q J J O p j6 a> U �~� �a a w � -A a a to a�Z �- df > J N U s p Q¢ in [� . o� m N L y •.• rnnLUo °! o 'm v QLU U >` J y m y 2 U� y d, rr 4 V U U h � Z 0 w U.* U uIL(7Cr-?. x z... a[7 U LD N to y C m m U o m "O m30: v .0 p QJ O N a rn -p -a O LU O M iR� J cM o, O c 0 0 0 U N ❑ p W- 0)W-.0t.0i 3'vim 3 m= o m IZU r~ O cy m N rn p rn m N 'tV o o ? y CZ, u c c a G a > >❑ � C) O C7 a �- x I w` w W w w Q I z •c p wQ C(7 W U y z z ? � �6< a z W Q p¢ m cJ Q e`il U w w 2 0 LL d LU t DJ U 0 z 0 a JC J a a zt aZZLuLUU)� c: W r ❑ Q 0z ? U L ¢ CL �i LLI L r Q m (A () Q L z U7 C ❑ b L .i J 33 Q 3- 3_ 4 Li Y CC rn rn r r A cc Im w C x - w w vi U w VA Q VA Sp r N ur x G u u r a u bo w a w r -I h � z v -n a V � r q M cn o a v Y a\ r W �1 u u w >. IL V Wo mvr P4 ry z t Qj •�r+a'JQ h O` Qf F NO02 LA 3 n 4 s { „y J 4j O C r4 Q O v O 4 Up v u rn •r o w w -i Q L a v Q A cc Im w C x - w U VA VA Sp r G u a u w a h � v -n V � O q M O O In a\ F W �1 0a'. y r,4 r4 uU Wo mvr P4 ry �aulw �� •�r+a'JQ h O` cO F NO02 A n 4 4j O C r4 Q O v L. u rn •r o w w -i u -.co Q GARRY STRUTHERS ASSOCIATES, INC. Dedicated to Excellence www.gsassoc-inc.com Cynthia Moya From: Laureen M. Nicolay Sent: Friday, November 20, 2009 2:19 PM To: Cynthia Moya Subject: Shamrock 118 -LOT PLAT TRANSFERRED ON 9-21-09 AFTER APPROVAL AND RECORDING IN KING COUNTY (RECORDING NO. 20051122000044). PLAT WAS A DEMONSTRATION PROJECT OF LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT (LID) PROPOSING REDUCED DRAINAGE IMPACTS IN ORDER TO HAVE A SMALLER R/D FACILITY. A ROAD VARIANCE FOR THIS PROJECT WAS ALSO APPROVED BY THE COUNTY. WETLANDS ON SITE WERE MODIFIED BY AVERAGING AND REDUCTIONS AND THIS PROJECT WILL REQUIRE A MINIMUM OF 5 -YEARS OF MONITORING AND MAINTENANCE FOR CONDITION #15 OF PLAT APPROVAL. ADDITIONALLY, MONITORING OF THE TOXICITY AND WATER LEVELS IN THE WET POND IN TRACT H IS REQUIRED SINCE THIS WAS PART OF THE WETLAND IMPACT MITIGATION. L a.ureew►. N i`,c�, Se+t ar i ianvw-#- City of Renton Planning Division 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 (425) 430-7294 phone (425) 430-7231 fax lnicolav(@rentonwa.gov o King County Department of Development and Environmental Services Land Use Services Division 900 Oakesdale Ave 5W Renton, WA 98055-1219 November 6, 2002 Notice Board & Posting Procedures Instruction Package Notice of Application In accordance with King County Code Section 20.20.060, enclosed you will find instructions, specifications, and materials in order to meet the notice of application posting requirements of the County. Please read these instructions carefully and take action quickly to order your notice board sign. Your notice board sign can be ordered through a sign painter, using the information supplied on page 2 of the enclosed "Notice Board Requirements." The cost of the sign is the responsibility of the applicant. Further processing of your application is dependent upon fulfilling the notice of application posting requirement. When your sign is in place, attach the colored laminated notice of application along with the plastic envelope (containing extra copies of the notice of application) to the notice board as depicted on page 1 of the instructions. Maintain a supply of notices within the plastic envelope throughout the comment period. The posting sign/notice board must remain in place throughout the duration of your application. Immediately upon com letion of the above instructions complete the enclosed affidavit of posting and return to the Department of Development and Environmental Services Land Use Division, Current Planning Section, at the address shown above (envelope enclosed). Failure to comply with Postingrequirements may be cause for a delay in the processing of your application. If you have any questions, please call the Land Use Services Division at (206) 296-6600. Enclosures: Notice Board Requirements -Application Laminated Notice of Application Waterproof Vinyl Envelope containing copies of the Notice of Application Affidavit of Notice of Application Posting form/LUSD return envelope Notice Board & Posting Procedures Instruction Pkg.-NOA 818101 MAIM FILE COPY 04� King County Department of Development and Environmental Services Land Use Services Division 900 Oakesdale Ave SW Renton, WA 98055-1219 L02P0014 — Shamrock Property Subdivision DDES Project Number I, (print name) X Notice of Permit Application Other AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING hereby affirm that I have posted the following: on the day of , 2002, in accordance with the Department of Development and Environmental Services' requirements. I further affirm that the notice will remain in place and visible during the full required notice period. Notice was provided at the following location(s): 1) 2) 3) I hereby affirm that the above is a true and correct statement. Signature This affidavit must be completed and returned to the Land Use Services Division within 7 days of posting. Improper posting or failure to return the affidavit within 7 days shall be cause for the final decision regarding your permit to be postponed. CPSFORMS/AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING.DOC 7127/99 NOTICE BOARAREQUIREMENTS NOTICE OF APPLICATION King County Dept. of Development and Environmental Services Land Use Services Invision 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Renton, Washington 98055-1212 Per King County Code Section 20.20.060, a notice board must be prepared and posted for your land use application. Please prepare and post in the following manner: Notice Board Size and Text Specifications The notice board shall be constructed to the specifications described below. The notice board shall display the information shown in the figure. Board Construction: The notice board shall be constructed with 4'x 4' plywood. Professionally prepared plastic notice board overlays, permanently affixed to the board are permissible. Notice boards may be reused but they must be clean and show no evidence of former wording. 1. Lettering style: Helvetica or similar standard typeface 2. Lettering size: Title should be 3" capital letters (NOTICE OF PROPOSED LAND USE ACTION). Other letters should be 2" letters except on the 81/2' x 14" laminated paper providing the details of the proposal. See illustration below for use of capital and lower case letters, and placement of laminated paper and vinyl jacket. 3. Lettering: Black (permanent ink or silk-screen) 4. Background Color: White 5. Logo: King County emblem, in black 6. Laminated Notice of Application on a legal size sheet which provides information regarding the proposed land use application. TO BE SUPPLIED BY Land Use Services Division (LUSD) (see enclosed). 7. Legal size waterproof vinyl jackets with a fold flap, and wrap string. TO BE SUPPLIED BY LUSD (see enclosed). The applicant must make copies of the Notice, place them in the vinyl jacket, and maintain a supply of copies throughout the posting period. 4 FT O NOTICE OF PROPOSED LAND USE ACTION King County Department of Development and Environmental Services Land Use Services Division 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Renton, Washington 98055-1219 Call (206) 296-6600 Type of Action: Proposal: File No.: NOTICE OF APPLICATION 8.5" X 14" LAMINATED 4 FT EXAMPLE COPIES OF NOTICE OF APPLICATION IN VINYL JACKET Notice Board Requirements -NBA 8/8/01 Pg 1 AML Standards for Locating and Installing Notice Board The notice board shall be located and installed to the specifications described below. Number of Notice Boards required for this application: ONE Special Instructions: Notice board shall be located: ** Placed along 1481H Ave SE ** • Midpoint on the site street frontage or as otherwise directed by LUSD staff to maximize visibility. • At a location 5 feet inside from the street property line; a notice board structurally attached to an existing building shall be exempt from the setback provisions, provided that no notice board is located not more than 5 feet from the property line without approval from LUSD staff. • So that the top of the notice board is between 7 to 9 feet above grade. • So that it is easily accessible and totally visible to pedestrians. The applicant shall erect the notice board by solidly setting the post 12 to 18 inches into the ground; or structurally attached it to an existing building. Two 4" x 4" 8 -foot -long (minimum) posts and four washers, bolts and nuts (3/8 -inch diameter and bolts are 5 -inches long) shall be used to install the notice board. Installation Certification The notice board(s) must be installed within 14 days after Land Use Services Division has determined that the application is complete. The enclosed "Affidavit of Posting" must be signed, and returned to the Land Use Services Division within 7 days following the date of posting. Maintenance and Removal of the Notice Board The applicant shall maintain the notice board in good condition throughout the application review period, which shall extend through the time of the final county decision on the proposal and the expiration of any applicable appeal periods. If the notice board is removed, LUSD review of the land use application may be discontinued until the notice board is replaced and has remained in place for the required period of time. TO BE FILLED OUT BY LUSD STAFF NOTICE BOARD TEXT INFORMATION (To Be Given to the Sign Painter) Type of Action: Formal Subdivision Proposal: Subdivide 29.6 acres into 118 lots for single-family dwellings. File No.: L02P0014 — Shamrock Property Subdivision NOTE: If you require this material in braille, audio cassette, or large print, please call 206-296-6600 (voice) or for hearing impaired 206-296-7217. Notice Board Requirements-NOA 8/8/01 Pg 2 0 0 Rogers, Carol From: Claussen, Kimberly Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 9:45 AM To: Rogers, Carol Subject: L02P0014 - Shamrock Attached is the notice of application, 1 posting board - 148th Ave SE. Please let me know if you have any Ts or need addtl. info. Thanks. IO2p0015noa.doc D King County Department of Development and Environmental Services Land Use Services Division 900 Oakesdale Ave SW Renton, WA 98055-1219 L02P0014 - Shamrock Property Subdivision DDES Project Number AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING I, �5 tS(M 7TEPJ , hereby affirm that I have posted the following: (print name) X Notice of Permit Application ❑ Other on the Iday of AlaliIV 66W , 2002, in accordance with the Department of Development and Environmental Services' requirements. I further affirm that the notice will remain in place and visible during the full required notice period. Notice was provided at the following location(s): 2) 3), 1 I hereby affirm that the above is a true and correct statement. Si a ure Thi affidavit must be completed and returned to the Land Use Services Division within 7 days of posting. Improper posting or failure to return the affidavit within 7 days shall be cause for the final decision regarding your permit to be postponed. Exhibit No. L Item No, L�o N Received ` King County HearMAK AME COPY CPSFORMS/AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING -DOC 7/27199 Mncr County DDES DROP-OFF POR LUSD ONLY LAND USE SERVICES DIVISION Cover Sheep 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Reatoa, WA 48055 R.. * r. R.* *.****! *!*IiWOR—f A1'T \T*.... Rfe R*R#�trRRR♦ PROJECT NUMBER. A.ND NAME 15 ANECESSARY FOR ALL DROP -OFT' Project No. P Project Name FROM: 8ACqfY1 Company Nzic/Conta Person Telephone Nar—�- s� TO: 1LImSs tJ P ! NG Date Received by LUST] NOV 18 2002 K•C, D.D.E.S. ADDITIONAL LVF0P,?�fA 770:V RE UE'STED EY KC STA FF (p lease print) ,Short Plat /Plats Please specify item(s) drop-off Lot Line Adjustment Permit Please specify itern(s) drop-off Fi4ht of Kray ,hermit Pica.se specify itern(s) drop-off GradinzlGeariria Permit Additional rnf. requested, please specify item(s) drop-off Other_ :OTL�.r*RZ. X. r.. t* RR**R** r##eRRI\a 1fiJ/t10 AB drop-off items) will be logged into the computer under the project number, therefore, i . ill TO important that the top portion of thi3 form is completed properly before you drop --a f? an3ttLn; assistance in finding a project number can be provided by ipealUng to a Land Use Sery cu Division Permn of the Day (POD), or the ZoningiLand Use Technician- Your cooperation is important, thank you. 0 ro [B b O b C la C c0 O b O. O E cl.@ro�CJa� q m N "M O M. UJ CO)10 L c o a ro oma- c c E2 ❑' -L -60 E 5S :o:' O C O O .0 Cn 0 E al O ¢��'��s }-� to -- i -c O7 7 w0 -0 O m N y y e' (DEs.�`� 10 in o. Q > rn C N v � a U c E�mv_,Z'C) 0 LroD o w.. �� Q}aLr= �DC b b 7 ro a� [D C C (/) � � U O 'S m ro @� C u L a Cp 0 U N � b C CD Ln Ol ' "' E C Q COC U (D �iopy(D CL L) CD c tv m E o 3ac`,wP N 0-OQ � = O C :. ro N d C b � — C ro c 3ro . m �a) :30)M oro Ca 0) a C W C un M O D a N O J W O E O w L c 0 ro U 3 4 OY C O a a 0 b d ro U Q7 10 N 00 rn 00 E 0 @ O 3 z t U F-" Q 0 U Q N L w0 tp Y c [7 m N N Q W o �p N �� m O m ca O N N [6 ai WVi 140,ID 7 U 1-: .a N vi w 103 o m m E LU OyZj�QWaus L a vi W 570 U cON 3 � � 1•'��� a W p l.1—Z D -jmw "�� m cc3� m N .'y m f O U N a y C C 7 cO y N Z LLI C7oM`r0.0.. QZ���n n mn1,ff:L, J ZLLZW O m32 W 0 LU 9) m cc ILL L CA a 3 CU Ic .. Q. N li ro [B b O b C la C c0 O b O. O E cl.@ro�CJa� q m N "M O M. UJ CO)10 L c o a ro oma- c c E2 ❑' -L -60 E 5S :o:' O C O O .0 Cn 0 E al O ¢��'��s }-� to -- i -c O7 7 w0 -0 O m N y y e' (DEs.�`� 10 in o. Q > rn C N v � a U c E�mv_,Z'C) 0 LroD o w.. �� Q}aLr= �DC b b 7 ro a� [D C C (/) � � U O 'S m ro @� C u L a Cp 0 U N � b C CD Ln Ol ' "' E C Q COC U (D �iopy(D CL L) CD c tv m E o 3ac`,wP N 0-OQ � = O C :. ro N d C b � — C ro c 3ro . m �a) :30)M oro Ca 0) a C W C un M O D a N O J W O E O w L c 0 ro U 3 4 OY C O a a 0 b d ro U Q7 10 N 00 rn 00 E 0 @ O 3 z t U F-" Q 0 U Q C T O c cv W o �p N �� y 111 m m ca O N N [6 ai WVi 140,ID rq c C C� (Dm 7 cE O C 6-50 N 08 L '0" CD m V >O �❑ d N ID CD m v �co v Y w W - _ ID 4D A m O Z O 41Q V�1 O al (O cmc m@ H E N V) v a m m E � oo �-1 c a � n 0m CO)C(0m O O O 0) N m cn J- a L C caC N 0 co U 0 Y V Q 3 CL 0 z t U 3 AIN FILE A,X)PY 0 AIN FILE A,X)PY 0 Affidavit of Publication 1744668/2 State of Washington, Counties of King and Snohomish, r-1 L—J Daniel S. O'Neal being duly sworn, says that he/she is the Authorized Agent of Seattle Times Company, publisher of The Seattle Times and representing the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, ' ?.'Lr c separate newspapers published daily in King and Snohomish Counties, State of Washington: that they are newspapers of general circulation in said Counties and State; that they have beer),:.., �-it"� approved as legal newspapers by orders of the Superior Court of King and Snohomish Counties; that the annexed, being a classified advertisement, was published in: Nbwspaper Iia The Seattle Times 11/12/02 And not in a supplement thereof, and is a true copy of the notice as it was printed and/or distributed in the regular and entire issue of said paper or papers during all of said period, and,9�s that said newspaper or newspapers were re regularly distributed to its subscribers during all of aoe g Y g said period. ,teme � s can Po Phofile V1�34R►htisuaorvtsidN File Name:gl ke F_stotes Div 2 Subdivis ' •' ' 7CPPIIC11Z :G WC Inv-;," Terry I fbdr -- ss°`atrt sti ; perky a nvd so a $.Milrtor{y�tl.. . T S OF E L ...: P6 5'�V F rFis�,�'!tt7fis vbrptf�Inar#rlaf CrdrneF TforihWmt ocoted 04,jam,22nd u Soba lde 6.42 acres i-Ihe"R&MAe.:. . pnner: TWA, Slade, -� �pRQfE�DI}RfS: sstiE tt4ecisiart 6n this faNOWinp a 2t -day eriad �eixiimq on Pe - Written cola' �ddilfoA ]I Mformation lamed W cohtacti" d W ¢d 6ohove or by 296 Gda00 Subscribed and sworn to before me this 20`h day of November, 2002 Notary Public i nd for the State of Washington residing at Seattle Prnipct P-Yi�p� ftaossen, .(206 R duesr• ` �., ::. —MAL > UROIVIS141`4-�� F�ai��ko�611014c. lCdi45f�if Sf PCditErtV L.acotldn� � �j Ydt5lre'eri nE or* thV iU?`Lyb6Gtl{I� . _. aiaove�rth�OG2�h day of r , King County Department of Development and Environmental Services Land Use Services Division 900 Oakesdale Ave SW Renton, WA 98055-1219 DA'L'E: November 6, 2002 TIME: leg" 0? /4A - FAX TO: SOUTH COUNTY JOURNAL ATTN: KATHY FEHLINGS / Legal Ads FAX #: 253-854-1006 NOTE: NO HARD COPY WILL BE SENT # OF PAGES (INCLUDING THIS PAGE): 2 SENDERS NAME: Carol Rogers Current Planning Section, Land Use Services Division SENDERS PHONE: 206-296-7116; (Fax: 206-296-7051) Please publish the accompanying, legal notice in your newspaper on TUESDAY, November 12, 2002, which will meet our minimum legal notice requirement. Should this not be possible, please call or fax me immediately. Submit your invoice and 3 copies of the affidavit of publication to Accounts Payable as soon after publication as possible, in order for us to enter legal proof of publication in our file records, and so that we may process same for payment. Attachment: Legal Notice cc: Accounts Payable, Administrative Services Division, DDES Application File(s): L02P0013; Northlake Estates Div. 2 application notice L02P0014; Shamrock Property application notice MAIN FILE COPY C'✓ KING COUNTY DEPT. OF DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES (DDES) 900 Oakesdale Ave SW, Renton, WA 98055-1219 NOTICE OF LAND USE PERMIT APPLICATIONS REQUEST: FORMAL SUBDIVISION File: L02P0013 File Name: Northlake Estates Div 2 Subdivision Applicant: GWC Inc, Terry Defoor Location: Located south of S. 328th St., between 42"d Ave So & S.Military Rd. Proposal: To subdivide 10.49 acres into 53 lots for single-family residences. Project Planner: Kim Claussen, (206) 296-7167 File: L02P0014 File Name: Shamrock Property Subdivision Applicant: Cam -West Inc. Location: Located between NE 4�h Ct. and SE 120th St. on the west side of 148th Ave SE. Proposal: To subdivide 29.6 acres into 118 lots for detached single-family Dwellings. Project Planner: Kim Claussen, (206) 296-7167 COMMENT PROCEDURES: Comments on the above files are now being accepted by King County DDES, Land Use Services Division, at the address listed above. Phone: 206-296-6600. Published this 12th day of November, 2002. Rogers, Carol From: Rogers, Carol Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 9:58 AM To: Iggreen@seattletimes.com' Subject: Combined Legal ad for publ. on Tuesday, 11/12 Please confirm receinf. Please publish the accompanying, legal notice in your newspaper on TUESDAY. Novembar 12, 2002, which will meet our minimum legal notice requirement. Should this not be possible, please call or fax me immediately. Submit your invoice and 3 copies of the affidavit of publication to Accounts Payable, as soon after publication as possible, in order for us to enter legal proof of publication in our file records, and so that we may process same for payment_ Attachment: Legal Notice KING COUNTY DEPT. OF DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES (DDES) 900 Oakesdale Ave SW, Renton, WA 98055-1219 NOTICE OF LAND USE PERMIT APPLICATIONS REQUEST. SHORT SUBDIVISION File: L02SO027 File Name: Van Phan Short Plat Applicant: Cramer Northwest Inc Location: Located at 10722 22nd Ave SW, Seattle. Proposal: To subdivide 0.42 acres into 3 lots in the R6 zone. Project Planner. Tom Slade, (206) 296-7059 COMMENT PROCEDURES: DDES will issue a decision on this application following a 21 -day comment period ending on December 16, 2002 Written comments and additional information can be obtained by contacting DDES at the address above or by phoning 206-296-6600. REQUEST: FORMAL SUBDIVISION File: L02P0013 File Name: Northlake Estates Div 2 Subdivision Applicant: GWC Inc, Terry Defoor Location: Located south of S. 3281h St,, between 42"d Ave So & S.Military Rd. Proposal: To subdivide 10.49 acres into 53 lots for single-family residences. Project Planner: Kim Claussen, (206) 296-7167 REQUEST: FORMAL SUBDIVISION File. L02P0014 File Name: Shamrock Property Subdivision Applicant: Cam -West Inc. Location: Located between NE 411 Ct. and SE 12011 St. on the west side of 148th Ave SE. Proposal: To subdivide 29.6 acres into 118 lots for detached single-family dwellings. Project Planner: Kim Claussen, (206) 296-7167 COMMENT PROCEDURES: Comments on the above formal subdivision files are now being accepted by King County DDES, Land Use Services Division, at the address listed above. Phone: 206-296-6600. Published this 12th day of November, 2002. cc: Accounts Payable, Administrative Services Division, DDES Application File(s): L02S0027; Van Phan sip applciation notice. L02P0013: Northlake Estates Div. 2 application notice L02P0014; Shamrock Property application notice. VAIN !BILE COPY Combined Legal ad for publ. on Tuesday, 11/ 12 12 Page 1 of 2 Rogers, Carol From: Grace Green [ggreen@seattletimes.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 10:11 AM To: Rogers, Carol Subject: RE: Combined Legal ad for publ. on Tuesday, 11/12 Okay -----Original Message ----- From: Rogers, Carol [ma ilto:Carol. Rogers@MEiROKC.GOV] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 9:58 AM To: Grace Green Subject: Combined Legal ad for publ. on Tuesday, 11/12 Please confirm receipt. Please publish the accompanying, legal notice in your newspaper on TUESDAY. November 12, 2002, which will meet our minimum legal notice requirement. Should this not be possible, please call or fax me immediately. Submit your invoice and 3 copies of the affidavit of publication to Accounts Payable, as soon after publication as possible, in order for us to enter legal proof of publication in our file records, and so that we may process same for payment. Attachment: Legal Notice KING COUNTY DEPT. OF DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES (DDES) 900 Oakesdale Ave SW, Renton, WA 98055-1219 NOTICE OF LAND USE PERMIT APPLICATIONS REQUEST: SHORT SUBDIVISION File: L02SO027 File Name: Van Phan Short Plat Applicant: Cramer Northwest Inc. Location: Located at 10722 22nd Ave SW, Seattle. Proposal: To subdivide 0.42 acres into 3 lots in the R6 zone. Project Planner: Tom Slade, (206) 296-7059 COMMENT PROCEDURES: DDES will issue a decision on this application following a 21 -day comment period ending on December 16, 2002 Written comments and additional information can be obtained by contacting DDES at the address above or by phoning 206-296-6600. REQUEST: FORMAL SUBDIVISION File: L02P0013 File Name: Northlake Estates Div 2 Subdivision Applicant: GWC Inc, Terry Defoor Location: Located south of S. 328th St., between 42nd Ave So & S.Military Rd. Proposal: To subdivide 10.49 acres into 53 lots for single-family residences. Project Planner: Kim Claussen, (206) 296-7167 REQUEST: FORMAL SUBDIVISION File: L02P0014 11/06/2002 Combined Legal ad for publ. on Tuesday, 11/ 12 File Name: Shamrock Property Subdivision Applicant: Cam -West Inc. Location: Located between NE 411 Ct. and SE 1201h St. on the west side of 148th Ave SE. Proposal: To subdivide 29.6 acres into 118 lots for detached single-family dwellings. Project Planner: Kim Claussen, (206) 296-7167 COMMENT PROCEDURES: Comments on the above formal subdivision files are now being accepted by King County DDES, Land Use Services Division, at the address listed above. Phone: 206-296-6600. Published this 12th day of November, 2002. cc: Accounts Payable, Administrative Services Division, DDES Application File(s): L02S0027; Van Phan s/p applciation notice. L02P0013; Northlake Estates Div. 2 application notice L02P0014; Shamrock Property application notice. 11/06/2002 Page 2 of 2 r � Notite of Department of Development and Fnvironmenial Servicest Land Use Services Division p ion 906 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Renton, Washington 98655-1219 Applicant: Cam -West 9720 NE 120`l' P1, Suite 100 Kirkland, WA 98034 (425) 825-1955 File 9: L02P0414 — Shamrock Property DDES Planner: Kim Claussen Planner Telephone No.: (206) 296-7167 Date Application Filed: August 1, 2002 Date Determined Complete: October 29, 2002 (Type 3) Project Location: The site is located between NE 4" Ct. and SE 120"' Street on the westside of 148`h Ave SE Project Description: This is a request to subdivide 29.6 acres into 118 lots for detached single-family dwellings and tracts for recreation and sensitive areas. The proposed drainage facilities for this project are currently proposed to the south, within the City of Renton. Permits requested in this application: Formal Plat Relevant environmental documents are available at the address below: Environmental Checklist, drainage study, traffic study, wetland/stream study, geotechnical study. Development regulations to be used for project mitigation, known at this time: King County Code 21A, including sensitive area regulations, 1993 King County Road Standards, 1998 Surface Water Design Manual. Consistency with applicable County plans and regulations: This proposal will be reviewed for compliance with all applicable King County Codes, including those noted above. Other permits not included in this application, known at this time: Applicable permits from City of Renton for construction of drainage facilities. A public hearing before the King County Hearing Examiner is required for this application. Notification of the public hearing date will occur approximately 30 days prior to the scheduled hearing date. The Department of Development and Environmental Services (DDES) will issue a report and recommendation to the Hearing Examiner two (2) weeks prior to the scheduled public hearing. Following the close of the public hearing, the Hearing Examiner will issue a written decision which may be appealed to the Metropolitan -King County Council. Details of the appeal process will be included in the notice of recommendation. Any person wishing additional information on this proposed project should contact DDES at the address and/or telephone number listed below. Written comments may also be submitted to DDES. You may review the application and any environmental documents or studies in our Renton office. NOTE: If you require this material in braille, audio cassette, or large print, please call (206) 296-6600 (voice) or (206) 296-7217 (TTY). Department of Development and Environmental Services Land Use Services Division 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Renton, Washington 98055-1219 206-296-6600 Mailing Date: November 20 2002 Please send nne notification of the public hearing and other official notices concerning this apptication. File No- L02P0014 — Shamrock Property ( Please print ) Name: Address: Telephone No.: P96\sprB\Type-3.n0a 1/30/96 c]c MAIN w s 1 -I � 1 7 all � I I I 1 �� � I �� I !1 I�■ I I� � 1 � I� l 114..'!; 1 I PIII M I I a Ir I a 7- t ,44 �_.:. _ Lal S f p I - - � 41 ► '�. YfI Cr'• IP 'OF. ~�y I �y I Fir � �� Li I Ag_.•R a __.� t I , n.• ,.Oc w� b 39 --VFr ifrr• - J ��� o� _ .. ���h _ �- � db fir- -�T" -G •w 7 e. k ''IQICf`�" i ..•r hi—� r �8rhlllr _ _"._ 1 en ' �. Ad I I I e"s• rof '�'� ; $ S SK >< 1rra : r h' i �r '' a_ I ���;•,, I g '.y � f i .Y� I w ~ Y rr �'. � � .\ � ,� � " � v` $ I- '; ,�Y I ! I � F. Y Y' '•' I jI I 1 LJ �J� I 1 C i E■ i is ��s•: i Ile `- 1 i I ,� tiQ� ------ -------k IF Department of Development and Environmental Services Land Use Services Division 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Renton, Washington 98055-1219 Applicant: Cam -West 9720 NE 120" PI, Suite 100 Kirkland, WA 98034 (425) 825-1955 Notiee of Application File #: L02POO14 — Shamrock Property DDES Planner: Kim Claussen Planner Telephone No.: (206) 296-7167 Date Application Filed: August 1, 2002 Date Determined Complete: October 29, 2002 (Type 3) Project Location: The site is located between NE 4"' Ct. and SE 120"' Street on the westside of 148" Ave SE Project Description- This is a request to subdivide 29.6 acres into 118 lots for detached single-family dwellings and tracts for recreation and sensitive areas. The proposed drainage facilities for this project are currently proposed to the south, within the City of Renton. Permits requested in this application: Formal Plat Relevant environmental documents are available at the address below: Environmental Checklist, drainage study, traffic study, wetland/stream study, geotechnical study. Development regulations to be used for project mitigation, known at this time: King County Code 21A, including sensitive area regulations, 1993 King County Road Standards, 1998 Surface Water Design Manual. Consistency with applicable County plans and regulations: This proposal will be reviewed for compliance with all applicable King County Codes, including those noted above. Other permits not included in this application, known at this time: Applicable permits from City of Renton for construction of drainage facilities - A public hearing before the King County Hearing Examiner is required for this application. Notification of the public hearing date will occur approximately 30 days prior to the scheduled hearing date. The Department of Development and Environmental Services (DDES) will issue a report and recommendation to the Hearing Examiner two (2) weeks prior to the scheduled public hearing. Following the close of the public hearing, the Hearing Examiner will issue a written decision which may be appealed to the Metropolitan -King County Council. Details of the appeal process will be included in the notice of recommendation. Any person wishing additional information on this proposed project should contact DDES at the address and/or telephone number listed below. Written comments may also be submitted to DDES. You may review the application and any environmental documents or studies in our Renton office. NOTE: If you require this material in braille, audio cassette, or large print, please call (206) 296-6600 (voice) or (206) 296-7217 (TTY). Department of Development and Environmental Services Land Use Services Division 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Renton, Washington 98055-1219 206-296-6600 Mailing Date: 'November 20, 2002 Please send me notification of the public hearing and other ofticial notices concerning this application. File No. 1..02P0014 — Shamrock Property ( Please print ) Name: Address: Telephone No.: F4a\sprs\zype-3.nea 1/3o/e6 c1c _ I jig oil Ell I I I g� ! a� ! I Igp ��� ,�,r• J I + Atli NAM 17 too } X--' R y ! e ee •rr.. Ss Y .,�J• 3fq� I ""— as q• W , may-• ___ - ! I ---� r•--� I, ��° ., � - - ,weep_ _ :.:::I..�.:. 4. `: �, I Y�: •• - � � 20 15 All T, H• .`, T�._A YY -. i _-mow' '� 4'� � -1 $ II 17 r Rig yQ�a �blf�1y . Ir .� I��• �' r"`� .77 Tr - T I I$ ! I I I Ir I Iry I I I I I {r I . ! I�� I� IL, ILS I I 1 � �, �+ I � I � I� � t1�► I � Iry { � � � �w- � I � { �� I I !w � I a ET 149TH AVE 8F I �" I I •� �_ �__ .4 ?lk r� f� f I pati C4 IR g Nil MIiqlq SIRq4 al S! P is a 4 p P,fi 11 gpdr f4g� I � 4 � 2, i I 1 9 9' �p �y+ w 1 i 11 P1 y■ On � � MMM 5 t q A PO i k ; f5 CLAUSSEN, KIM L02P0014 REVIEW PLANNER DDESlLUSD MS: OAK- DL - 0100 CONDREY. WILLIAM L02POO14 TRIAD ASSOCIATES 11814 115TH AVE NE KIRKLAND. WA 98034 F1KSD.AL, STEVE L02POO14 JOHN L.SCOTT REAL ESTATE 3380 146TH PL SE, 4450 BELLEVUE, WA 98007 LANGLEY, KRISTEN L02P0014 LAND USE TRAFFIC REVIEW DDES / LUSD MS: OAK -DE-0100 OBERG, TODD L02P0014 TRIAD ASSOCIATES / S 11814 115Th AVE NF KIRKLAND, WA 98034 D BORBA, GREG L02P0014 ROGERS, CAROL L02POO14 CURRENT PLANNING SUPERVISOR CURRENT PLANNING SECTION DDES/LUSD DDES?LUSD MS: OAK -DE-WOO MS OAK -DE -0100 CAMPBELL, ERIC 1,02P0014 WEST, LARRY 11021300 14 SHAMROCK HIGHLANDS LLC GEO REVIEW 9720 NE 120TH PL 4100 DDES ? LUSD KIRKLAND, WA 98034 MS: OAK- DE - 0100 CAMWEST REAL ESTATE DEV. L02POO14 WHITTAKER, BRUCE L02P0014 SARA SLATTEN PRELIMINARY REVIEW ENGINEER 9720 NE 120T1 -I PL, #100 DDES / LUSD KIRKLAND, WA 98034 MS: OAK -DF-0100 CASEY, LAURA L02P0014 WETLAND REVIEW DDES/LUSD MS: OAK -DE- 0100 CLAUSSEN, KIM L02P0014 REVIEW PLANNER DDESlLUSD MS: OAK- DL - 0100 CONDREY. WILLIAM L02POO14 TRIAD ASSOCIATES 11814 115TH AVE NE KIRKLAND. WA 98034 F1KSD.AL, STEVE L02POO14 JOHN L.SCOTT REAL ESTATE 3380 146TH PL SE, 4450 BELLEVUE, WA 98007 LANGLEY, KRISTEN L02P0014 LAND USE TRAFFIC REVIEW DDES / LUSD MS: OAK -DE-0100 OBERG, TODD L02P0014 TRIAD ASSOCIATES / S 11814 115Th AVE NF KIRKLAND, WA 98034 D 5637200300/1-02P0014 5637200390/L02P0014 5637200380/L02P0014 5637200370/1-02P0014 5637200360/L02P0014 5637200350/1-02P0014 5637200340/L02P0014 5637200330/L02P0014 5637200400/L02P0014 5637200310/1-021`0014 5637200410/1.02P0014 5637200290/L02P0014 5637200430/1,02P0014 5637200440/1,02P0014 5637200420/1,021`0014 9477947777/1-02P0014 5637200320/1-021`0014 5637200280/1,02P0014 II23059065/L02P0014 1023059026/1,02P0014 5637207777/1-02P0014 ANDERSON ROBERT BASHARY SHAY PO BOX 353 10025 SE 260TH ST MAPLE VALLEY WA 98027 KENT WA 98031 0638100210/L02P0014 1023059306/L02P0014 1023059350/L02P0014 BEHAN TERRA C BENNER CLAY S+PATRICIA L BERG BRIAN D 11920 148TH AV SE 5218 NE 5TH PL 12035 148TH AV SE RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98059 2739200080/1-02P0014 2739200090/L02P0014 1023059145/L02P0014 BIELKA RONALD G BIELKA RONALD G BIGELOW CAROLYN 18419 SE 122ND 18419 SE 122ND 6929 37TH SW ISSAQUAH WA 98027 ISSAQUAH WA 98027 SEATTLE WA 98126 1023059308/1.02P0014 2739200010/1-02P0014 2739200020/1,021`0014 BLESSING EMERY A BOWEN JR RALPH P+BRENDA M BOWEN JR RALPH P+BRENDA M 14330 SE 125TH ST 12415 149TH AV SE 12415 149TH AV SE RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98059 2739200130/L02POO 14 W9142/1-021`0014 059084/1-02P0014 BOWEN RALPH P JR BYERSDORFER DEBORAH PHELPS CAMPBELL DON R 12415 149TH AV SE BYERSDORFER GREGORY A 12022 148TH AV SE RENTON WA 98055 22651 SE 56TH ST RENTON WA 98059 ISSAQUAH WA 98029 1123059038/1-021`0014 PL33/LO2POO14 PL50/L02PO014 CHILDS RITA KRISTINE CITY OF RENTON CITY OF RENTON 12004 148TH AV SE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DIVISION DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION RENTON WA 98059 1055 SOUTH GRADY WAY 1055 SOUTH GRADY WAY RENTON WA 98055 RENTON WA 98055 1023059346/1-02P0014 1023059345/LO2P0014 1123059032/LO2P0014 DAUGHERTY GREG DAUGHERTY GREGORY WAYNE DAVISON MATHEW J+KIMMI R 12201 148TH AV SE 12201 148TH AV SE 14831 SE 120TH ST RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98056 1123059092/1-02PO014 102305931.6/L02POO14 1123059091AL02P0014 DUBOSKI DARRYL EBBERT DAVID M ELLIS STANLEY E & OLWYN M 12204 148TH AV SE 459 NILE AV NE 1555 RIDGEVIEW DR #235 RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98055 RENO NV 89509 1123059075IL02POO 14 1023059033/1,02P0014 2739200120/LO2POO14 ENGH DALE+ENGH MARY E FIFER RUTH L LVNG TRST FLATTUM PATRICIA LEE ROBINSON- 5219 NE 5TH PL 1242.2 148TH AV SE 12250 148TH AV SE RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98059 2739200050/L02POO14 1023059035/L02PO014 UAC-FC/L02POO14 FLATTUM PATRICIA LEE POSTER THOMAS C FOUR CREEKS UNINCORPORATED 12422 148TH AV SE 20840 SE 118TH ST AREA COUNCIL RENTON WA 98059 ISSAQUAH WA 98188 PO BOX 3501 RENTON WA 98056 1023059368/L02P0014 102305934t/L02POO14 102305915l/L02PO0I4 GACEK THERESA HELEN ETAL GILBERT KEITH C+CATHERINE C GUSTIN WILLIAM+TIFFANY 2823 16TH AV S 12609 148TH AV SE 12204 142ND AV SE SEATTLE WA 98144 RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98059 2739200190/L02POO14 2739200170/L02PO014 1023059013/L62P0014 HALFHILL DAVID K & SUSAN L HAMMOND JAMES C+ERIKA L HAND SCOTT E 12428 149TH AV SE 12414 149TH AV SE 5107 NE 5TH PL RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98059 1023059179/1-021`0014 1123059066/L02POO14 1023059170IL02P0014 HAWORTH CASEY D HILLS WALTER W HODGE HAROLD D 4108 NE 9TH PL 28300 35TH AV NE 19210 121 ST PL SE RENTON WA 98059 ARLINGTON WA 98223 RENTON WA 98055 2739200071/1-02POO14 1123059087/L02POO14 1123059053IL02POO14 HOHLBEIN ERIK F+MICHELLE L HOLMQUIST ALAN HOOVER RODDIE 12438 148TH AV SE 12050 148TH AV SE 12012 148TH AV SE RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98055 RENTON WA 98059 1023059017/L02P0014 1 05901O/LO2POO14 059I58/L02PO014 INTLEKOFER MICHAEL J JARVIS JERRY D JOHNSON WALTER M+KATHRYN M 4472 119TH AV SE 12204 148TH SE 12006 142ND AV SE BELLEVUE WA 98006 RENTON WA 98055 RENTON WA 98059 1023059257/1-021`0014 JOHNSON WALTER M/KATHRYN M 12006 142ND AV SE RENTON WA 98059 1023059391/LO2POO14 KING COUNTY 500 KC ADMIN BLDG 500A SEATTLE WA 98104 273920015OiLO2POO14 KRISTOFERSON RICHARD 15807 60TH DR SE SNOHOMISH WA 98296 2739200060/LO2P0014 LARSON JAMES M+GLORIA E 12430 148TH AV SE RENTON WA 98059 I123059093/L02POO 14 LUNDBERG MARK H+MONICA A 19025 92ND AV W EDMONDS WA 98020-2387 1023059221/LO2POO14 MARX ROBERT P & LYNN J 12248 142ND SE RENTON WA 98056 1023059222/1-02POO14 MOORE MONTE D+KAREN L 12226 142ND AV SE RENTON WA 98059 2739200040/1.02 PO014 MUNRO RICHARD G 12414 148TH AV SE RENTON WA 98055 t023059355/LO2POO14 KELLY BRYANT K S 12601 148TH AV SE RENTON WA 98059 2739200160/LO2POO14 KINGSTON CHARLIE & STACY 12406 149TH AV SE RENTON WA 98059 1123059086/LO2P0014 KUBISKY JOHN A 14825 SE 120TH ST RENTON WA 98055 1123059039/1-02POO14 LEMMA JAMES P 14841 E 120TH ST RENTON WA 98055 1023059196/1-02POO14 MARQUART ANNA13ELL 12254 142ND AVE S E RENTON WA 98059 1023059230/LO2P0014 MEAD HANK & LAVERNE 552 HOQUTAM AV NE RENTON WA 98059 1023059049/1,02P0014 MOORE MONTE D+KAREN L 12226 142ND AV SE RENTON WA 98059 2739200030/LO2POO14 MUNRO RICHARD G+BARBARA C 12414 148TH AV SE RENTON WA 98059 1023O59344/LO2PO0t4 KIGER KENNETH E & TINA M 11826 142ND AV SE RENTON WA 98059 1023059038/1,02PO014 KOCH JOHN E+PATRICIA D 12605 148TH AV SE RENTON WA 98056 1023059069/LO2P0014 LAI MAN -LING 12841 LUNADA PL SAN DIEGO CA 92128 1123059061/LO2P0014 LEMMA JAMES P 14841 SE 120TH RENTON WA 98055 1023059383/1_02P6014 MARTIN KENNETH A 12439 148TH AV SE RENTON WA 98059 1123059070/LO2POO14 METCALF WILLIAM+BERNICE 12260 148TH AV SE RENTON WA 98059 1123059021AL02POO14 MULLENBERG DEAN J+CAROLYN L 5816 NE 4TH PL RENTON WA 98059 1123059067/LO2POO14 NUGYEN NGOC 12232 148TH SE RENTON WA 98059 It23059017/LO2POO14 1023059030/1-02POO14 1023059190/LO2POO14 OLDING TERRY L PALANCHUK GEORGIY+NATALYA PETERS CAROLE J 466 NILE AV NE 12205 148TH AV SE 26815 166TH PL SE RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98059 COVINGTON WA 98042 1023059042/L02P0014 #59231/1-021`0014 1* 059025/1-02P0014 PHUNG AN T PIELE LEONARD+BRENDA PIELE LES 9333 57TH AV W 5212 NE 5TH PL PO BOX 752 MUKILTEO WA 98275 RENTON WA 98059 RAVENSDALE WA 98051 1023059259/L02P0014 1023059113/L02P0014 SD 13/1-021`0014 POWERS JACK M+DENISE T PRUMMER FRANCIS J R. STRACKE, FACILITIES & PLANNING 12207 148TH AV SE 12227 142ND AV SE RENTON SCHOOL DISTRICT #403 RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98056 1220 N 4TH ST RENTON WA 98055 1023059320/1-02P0014 1023059041/1-02P0014 2739200180/1-02P0014 REED LAWRENCE A REID BENNIE J+BARBARA J REPENN ROGER L 465 NILE AV NE 5318 NE 4TH ST 12422 149TH AV SE RENTON WA 98055 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98055 1023059023/L02P0014 1123059031/L02P0014 1023059384/L02P0014 SCHIRMAN MICHAEL+WOLF CYNTH SCOTT SHARON ELIZABETH SHAMROCK HIGHLANDS LLC 12013 148H AV SE 12610 148TH AV SE 9720 NE 120TH PL #100 RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98059 KIRKLAND WA 98034 t023059040/LO2P0014 1023059174/L02P0014 1023059031/L02P0014 SHAMROCK HIGHLANDS LLC SHAMROCK HIGHLANDS LLC SHAMROCK HIGHLANDS LLC 9720 NE 120TH PL #100 9720 NE 120TH PL #100 9720 NE 120TH PL #100 KIRKLAND WA 98034 KIRKLAND WA 98034 KIRKLAND WA 98034 1023059415/1-02P0014 1023059022AL02P0014 1023059319/L02P0014 SHAMROCK HIGHLANDS LLC SHAMROCK HIGHLANDS LLC SHAMROCK HIGHLANDS LLC 9720 NE 120TH PL 4100 9720 NE 120TH PL #100 9720 NE 120TH PL #100 KIRKLAND WA 98034 KIRKLAND WA 98034 KIRKLAND WA 98034 1023059191/L02P0014 2739200210/L02P0014 2739200200/L02P0014 SHAMROCK HIGHLANDS LLC SHARKEY DOUGLAS V SHARKEY DOUGLAS V 9720 NE 120TH PL #100 12436 149TH AV SE 12.436 149TH AV SE KIRKLAND WA 98034 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98059 1123059002/1-021`0014 2739200110/L02P0014 2739200100/L02P0014 SHENK DAVID SIKES DONALD K JR SIKES DONALD K JR+CINDY I P 12206 148TH AV SE 12435 149TH AV SE 12435 149TH AV SE RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98059 S D 8/L02P0014 1023059184/1-02P0014 CG2/L02P0014 STEVE CRAWFORD, NEW SUDDUTH JONET M SUSAN SULLIVAN CONSTRUCTION 12260 142ND SE 24311 SE 47TH ST ISSAQUAH SCHOOL DISTRICT #411 RENTON WA 98065 ISSAQUAH WA 98029 565 NW HOLLY ST ISSAQUAH WA 98027 1123059078/1-021`00W 112305907I/L02P0014 1023059189AL02P0014 TOMLINSON ERIC D+AUTUMN WAIDMANN GUSTAV H WALTOSZ JAMES H 12240 148TH AV SE 720 N ELL ST 12021 148TH AV SE RENTON WA 98056 CAMANO ISLAND WA 98292 RENTON WA 98059 1023059021/L02P0014 1059371/L02P0014 Is WEGNER BRETT+MARY K ZERBY JAMES L+DINA L 12211 148TH AV SE 12208 142ND AV SE RENTON WA 98059 RENTON WA 98059 (E Renton) FD25 (Spring Glen) FD40 Fire Protection Dist #25 Fire Protection Dist #40 P_O_ Box 2925 10828 SE 176th St Renton WA 98056-0925 Renton WA 98055 MS: KSC-NR-0600 MS: KSC-TR-0431 KC27 Water & Land Res. Div Gary Kriedt King County Dept. of Natural Res. KC Metro Envirn. Planning Steve Foley LI15 LI20 Fair -wood Library Highlands Library 17009 - 140th Av SE 2902 NE 12th St Renton WA 98058 Renton WA 98056 L123 Documents Dept. Librarian L124 Kent Regional Library King County Library System 212 - - 2nd Av N 960 Newport Way NW Kent WA 98032-4482 Issaquah, WA 98027 L136 ATTN: Edward White PL18 Renton Library Kent Engineering Dept 100 Mill Av S 220 - 4th Av S Renton WA 98055 Kent WA 98032 PL19 City of Renton PL33 Kent Planning Dept Economic Development Dept. 220 - 4th Av S 1055 S. Grady Way Kent WA 98032 Renton WA 98055 Steve Crawford, New Construction SD8 Clinton G. Marsh, Director Fac. & Const. Dept SD9 Issaquah School District # 411 Kent School District # 415 565 NW Holly St. 12033 SE 256th St. Bldg B Issaquah WA 98027-2899 Kent WA 98031-6643 R. Stracke, Facilities & Ping SD13 Administrator SE5 Renton School Dist # 403 Kent Sewer Utility 1220 N 4th St 220 - 4th Av S Renton WA 98055 Kent WA 98032 Environmental Review Section ST2 Habitat Biologist, Rod Malcom TRI WA State Dept of Ecology Muckleshoot Indian Tribe PO Box 47703 39015 - 172nd Av SE Olympia WA 98504-7703 Auburn WA 98002 Russ Ladley, Fisheries Biologist TR2 TR3 Puyallup Tribe Snoqualmie Tribe 6824 Pioneer Wy E PO Box 280 Puyallup WA 98371 Carnation WA 98014-0280 Fisheries Habitat/Environment TR5 Richard Young Suquamish Indian Tribe Tulalip Tribe PO Box 498 7615 Totem Beach Rd Suquamish WA 98392 Marysville WA 98271 WD12 Public Works Dtr Cedar River Water/Sewer Dist Kent Water Dist 18300 SE Lk Youngs Rd 220 - 4th Av S Renton WA 8058-9799 Kent WA 98032 City of Renton, Public Works Dept. WD32 Development Services Div. Soos Creek Water/Sewer Dist 1055 South Grady Way PO Box 58039 Renton WA 98055 Renton WA 98058-1039 WA State Dept. of Wildlife Habitat Mgmt. Division P.O. Box 43155 Olympia, WA 98504-3155 WA St.DOT MS 230 15700 Dayton Ave. No PO Box 330310 Seattle, WA 98133-9710 WA St.DOT MS 250 15700 Dayton Ave. No. PO Box 330310 Seattle, WA 98133-9710 Roger Dorstad PO Box 375 Redmond, WA 98073 WA State Dept. of Ecology NW Regional Office 3190 - 160th Ave SE Bellevue, WA 98008-5452 WA St DOT MS 240 15700 Dayton Ave No. PO Box 330310 Seattle, WA 98133-9710 WA St. Ecology Dept/WQSW Unit Linda Matlock PO Box 47696 Olympia, WA 98504-7696 Eleanor Moon KC Executive Horse Council 12230 NE 61 st Kirkland, WA 98033 TR4 WD23 WD41 WD57 WD55 Water Dist #90 Coal Creek Utility District 15606 SE 128th St 6801 132nd Place SE Renton WA 98059-8522 Newcastle, WA 98059 WD58 WA State Dept. of Wildlife Water Dist #111 16018 Mill Creek Blvd. 27224 - 144th Av SE Mill Creek, WA 98012 Kent WA 98042-9058 WA State Dept. of Wildlife Habitat Mgmt. Division P.O. Box 43155 Olympia, WA 98504-3155 WA St.DOT MS 230 15700 Dayton Ave. No PO Box 330310 Seattle, WA 98133-9710 WA St.DOT MS 250 15700 Dayton Ave. No. PO Box 330310 Seattle, WA 98133-9710 Roger Dorstad PO Box 375 Redmond, WA 98073 WA State Dept. of Ecology NW Regional Office 3190 - 160th Ave SE Bellevue, WA 98008-5452 WA St DOT MS 240 15700 Dayton Ave No. PO Box 330310 Seattle, WA 98133-9710 WA St. Ecology Dept/WQSW Unit Linda Matlock PO Box 47696 Olympia, WA 98504-7696 Eleanor Moon KC Executive Horse Council 12230 NE 61 st Kirkland, WA 98033 TR4 WD23 WD41 WD57 �^°D. ��o C7AP4 o a :� .,, t-a w W3 z o +s�32iqy d� aa`" C1 p c°ro mac° ay ��k a UCf� m o-Oay C� �V] qqpp���� e°Qq� fri IFA 0 O a7 �-7 !, e 4h'_ •• r / �-ri / 0 _ � Ll bU C Y x CL 18.1 r1� G end Cc% s Z y r bl) cb a f1T c .`? o .d U aS O 3 y q B tia a ow � �- 00 N cl cl z o do C13 0 �d -cs ❑ o _ ❑ 3 F 3 3 U � pu -0. ~ x fl. G °� 4 5 L w :a a C cd w h u p ou 3- ao QQ+ O°'o m" 0U°zi o c� Cts �tia�r .> E : ° Z o ro u L FO U C y cd O j, > y �4 a a C% Z icdp C N C W U O w z U Q �� z tA 4 44 C4 m o °Vv�F:tro G 3 F a.° �,�va i Eq- ZQU MAIN FILE COPY Affidavit of Publication 2559868/2 State of Washington, Counties of King and Snohomish, Daniel S. O'Neal being duly sworn, says that he/she is the Authorized Agent of Seattle Times Company, publisher of The Seattle Times and representing the Seattle Past-Intelligencer, separate newspapers published daily in King and Snohomish Counties, State of Washington: that they are newspapers of general circulation in said Counties and State; that they have been approved as legal newspapers by orders of the Superior Court of King and Snohomish Counties; that the annexed, being a classified advertisement, was published in: Newspaper: publication bate The Seattle Times 04/09/04 The Seattle Post-Intelli encer 04/09/04 And not in a supplement thereof, and is a true copy of the notice as it was printed and/or distributed in the regular and entire issue of said paper or papers during all of said period, and that said newspaper or newspapers were regularly distributed to its subscribers during ail of said period. 44 Q. Subscribed and sworn to before me this 9'h day of April, 2004 1�. Chl !! ♦ �g510Nrr!' to Ai i A(1130 0 rllltulla•••••� flili�oF WAs%% 'e ev, Public in and for the State of Washington residing at Seattle CPO p' eCOIViMEK)NAT1SH LAND VSE SERVICES. DIVISION Request:. Formal,(Subdiv191on) FIIe0814ame:L02P0014 - ShamroekSubdivisipp - Applicant: Cam -West Location: Located between NE Rh Ct. & SE 120th 5t, on the west side of 1481h Ave SE Protect Mohagee: Kim Clausen, 1206) 29d -71d7 - HearingDat! and Time; May b, 2b6<u19:3D a.m.- Loccition - of Public DDES, Hearing Room 906 dale AVe SW Renton, WPiy 1219 ..-. / Dept: RkOmmendatloii i ,i _ Ing Examinert App[6Yt€ASublect to condlt€on8: 1KKhh�" Comment -, Procedures: �Com- "I this 9th day'of rih 0 Rogers, Carol From: Rogers, Carol Sent: Friday, April 02, 2004 1:19 PM To:'legals.bel Ievue@kingcountyjournal,corn'; 'Legals' Subject: Legal ad for publ. on Friday, 419 Please confirm receipt Please publish the accompanying, legal notice in your newspaper on FRIDAY, April 9, 2004, which will meet our minimum legal notice requirement. Should this not be possible, please call or fax me immediately. Submit your invoice and 3 copies of the affidavit of publication to Accounts Payable, as soon after publication as possible, in order for us to enter legal proof of publication in our file records, and so that we may process same for payment. Attachment: Legal Notice KING COUNTY DEPT. OF DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES (DDES) 990 Oakesdale Ave SW, Renton, WA 98055-1219 NOTICE OF PERMIT HEARING & RECOMMENDATION WIN 1111-14.9=IAVA101="t]►V/6't[0l: Request: Formal (Subdivision) File # & Name: L02P0014 Shamrock Subdivision Applicant: Cam -West Location: Located between NE 41h Ct. & SE 1201h St. on the west side of 14P Ave SE Proposal: Subdivide 29.8 acres into 118'h lots for detached single-family dwellings Project Manager: Kim Claussen, (206) 296-7167 Hearing Date and Time: May 6, 2004 at 9:30 a.m. Location of Public Hearing: DDES, Hearing Room 900 Oakesdale Ave SW Renton, WA 98055-1219 Dept. Recommendation to Hearing Examiner: Approve subject to conditions. Comment Procedures: Comments on the above file are now being accepted by King County DDES, Land Use Services Division, at the address listed above. Published this 9th day of April, 2004. cc: Accounts Payable, Administrative Services Division, DDES Application File(s): L02P0014; Shamrock Property hearing notice. • MAIN FILE COW tae c cLe i■ 0 Q? s U S6 CIO w --70 C13 S E =7 41 /0� L CI ar � [6 0 c O N z y 0 c O M LJ 1- 2 C-4 2N a N MCDv MQ v E o p aU N C �F —1�f{ .�..y, ?i Z ~l a► Ou CA wi Cod iS LEI`. o G�3 LL Fci l L cLe i■ 0 Q? s U S6 CIO w --70 C13 S E =7 41 /0� L CI ar � [6 0 c O N z y 0 c O M LJ 1- 2 C-4 2N a N MCDv MQ v E o p aU N SSC � � Page 1 of 2 Rogers, Carol From: Legals [legals@seattletimes.com] Sent: Friday, April 02, 2004 1:57 PM To: Rogers, Carol Subject: RE: Legal ad for publ. on Friday, 419 Thanks -----Original Message ----- From: Rogers, Carol[mai lto:Carol.Rogers@METROKC.GOV] Sent: Friday, April 02, 2004 1:19 PM To. 'legals.bellevue@kingcountyjournal,com'; Legals Subject, Legal ad for publ. on Friday, 4/9 Please confirm receipt. Please publish the accompanying, legal notice in your newspaper on FRIDAY. Ap01.9, 2004, which will meet our minimum legal notice requirement. Should this not be possible, please call or fax me immediately. Submit your invoice and 3 copies of the affidavit of publication to Accounts Payable, as soon after publication as possible, in order for us to enter legal proof of publication in our file records, and so that we may process same for payment. Attachment: Legal Notice KING COUNTY DEPT. OF DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES (DDES) 900 Oakesdale Ave SW, Renton, WA 98055-1219 NOTICE OF PERMIT HEARING & RECOMMENDATION LAND USE SERVICES DIVISION Request: Formal (Subdivision) File # & Name: L02P0014 Shamrock Subdivision Applicant: Cam -West Location: Located between NE 411 Ct. & SE 1201h St. on the west side of 1481h Ave SE Proposal: Subdivide 29,8 acres into 118th lots for detached single-family dwellings Project Manager: Kim Claussen, (206) 296-7167 Hearing Date and Time: May 6, 2004 at 9:30 a.m. Location of Public Hearing: DDES, Hearing Room 900 Oakesdale Ave SW Renton, WA 98055-1219 Dept. Recommendation to Hearing Examiner: Approve subject to conditions. Comment Procedures: Comments on the above file are now being accepted by King County DDES, Land Use Services Division, at the address listed above. Published this 9tt, day of April, 2004. 04/02/2004 (i) King County Department of Development and Environmental Services Land Use Services Ur"sion 900 Oakesdalc Avenue Souihwcst Renton, Washington 98055-1219 (206) 296-6600 TTY (206) 296-7217 10 - Application for Land Use Permits Alternative formats available upon request I i - being duly sworn, state that I am the owner or (print name) officer of the corporation owning property described in the legal description filed with this application and that I have reviewed the rules and regulations of the Department of Development and Environmental Services (DDES) regarding the preparation and filing of this application and that all statements, answers and information submitted with this application are in all respects true, accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief. During the review of this application, it may be necessary for DDES staff to make one or more site visits. By signing this application form, you are giving permission for these visits. If it is rental property, the owner hereby agrees to notify tenants of possible site visits. FPC i?;,F'2�i� T printed name NE - mailing address 21. Y --11Z k- eAl\)D IATA �i -/ city state zip corporation or company name telephone If applicable, state below, the name, address and telephone number of the authorized applicant for this application as shown on the Certification and Transfer of Application St tos forIled with this application.?(fllblt�0. Item No. name R0taddress King County Hearing Examiner telephone city state zip r MAIN FILE P Qlf Application for Land Use Permit(s) lc-app-luper 20102 Page 1 of 2 DO NOT WRITE ABOVE THIS DIVIDER I (We) request the following permit(s) or approval(s): ❑ Building Permit _] Shoreline Substantial Development Permit ❑ Clearing & Grading Permit ❑ Shoreline Conditional Use Permit ❑ Temporary Use Permit ..] Shoreline Variance ❑ Binding Site Plan 7 Shoreline Redesignation ❑ Site Development Permit ❑ Zoning Variance ❑ Boundary Line Adjustment ❑ Conditional Use Permit -1V ShortSubdivision ❑ Reuse of Public Schools Formal Subdivision ❑ Special Use Permit ❑ Urban Planned Development ❑ Zone Reclassification ❑ Plat Alteration ❑ Site Specific Comprehensive Plan Amendment ❑ Plat Vacation ❑ P -Suffix Amendment ❑ Road Variance ❑ Special District Overlay Removal ❑ Drainage Variance or Adjustment ❑ Reasonable Use Exception ❑ Right -of -Way Use Permit ❑ Public Agency & Utility Exception J Shoreline Exemption ❑ Period Review for Mining Sites I i - being duly sworn, state that I am the owner or (print name) officer of the corporation owning property described in the legal description filed with this application and that I have reviewed the rules and regulations of the Department of Development and Environmental Services (DDES) regarding the preparation and filing of this application and that all statements, answers and information submitted with this application are in all respects true, accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief. During the review of this application, it may be necessary for DDES staff to make one or more site visits. By signing this application form, you are giving permission for these visits. If it is rental property, the owner hereby agrees to notify tenants of possible site visits. FPC i?;,F'2�i� T printed name NE - mailing address 21. Y --11Z k- eAl\)D IATA �i -/ city state zip corporation or company name telephone If applicable, state below, the name, address and telephone number of the authorized applicant for this application as shown on the Certification and Transfer of Application St tos forIled with this application.?(fllblt�0. Item No. name R0taddress King County Hearing Examiner telephone city state zip r MAIN FILE P Qlf Application for Land Use Permit(s) lc-app-luper 20102 Page 1 of 2 11 For Formal Subdivisions only: Name of Subdivision C d C� Registered Land Surveyor • ,rTz1PkIz;> k rl:�S- Name M)(4- (12-NyE, M�G� Address and Zip kmsZ,1L (- t S„AHD Telephone Number Inc d+oere. 4 r •• .4uVzk;. Engi eer Name Address and Zip _ SAJQ A SWr6LJ . &2 F Developer i Name '� —T Land Surveyor's Certification I hereby certify that the accompanying plat has been inspected by me and conforms to all rules and regulations of the platting resolution and standards for King County, Washington Date - Note: . - �'A /0F Address anal Zip Telephone Number Land Surveyor Seal Note: Application forms and submittal requirements are subject to revision without notice. Application for Land Use Permit(s) lc-app-luper 2113102 Page 2 of 2 0 August 1, 2002 Kim Claussen King County Department of Development & Environmental Services 900 Oakesdale Avenue SW Renton, WA 98055-121.9 RE: Shamrock Property Preliminary Plat Application Dear Ms. Claussen, 0 CamWest Development, Inc. is pleased to submit a preliminary plat application for the Shamrock Property, located at 12409 148`h Avenue SE. The proposal is to develop 29.6 acres, zoned R-4, into a 118 lot single-family home community. The property was previously occupied by a commercial nursery business, Shamrock Nursery. As you are aware, we recently met in April to discuss this proposal at a pre - application conference. Since the property located adjacent to two parcels, located within the city of Renton's city limits, Jason Jordan and Juliana Sitthidet, met at the pre -app as well. The proposal remains conceptually the same as what was presented at the pre -app a few items to note: One centrally located park is proposed totaling 46,120 square feet. The storm detention facility is proposed within the adjacent parcels located within the city of Renton's jurisdiction. As discussed at the pre -app, both King County and the City of Renton will review this proposal as the application process continues. The lot and street layout has been revised to substantially reduce wetland buffer encroachments. All wetland and buffer related calculations are depicted on the face of the preliminary plat. We believe the Shamrock Proposal meets many of the objective set forth in the King County Comprehensive Plan. A few are noted as follows: U-203: King County should encourage most population and employment growth to locate in the contiguous Urban Growth Area in western King County, especially in cities and their Potential Annexation Areas. MAINS m, 1 0 0 U-522; All residential development should provide park sites or contribute a fair share toward meeting local -level park and outdoor recreation needs. U-515: Urban residential neighborhood design should preserve historic and natural characteristics and neighborhood uniqueness, while providing for privacy, community space, pedestrian safety and mobility, and reducing the impact of motorized transportation. PR -104: Local parks, trails and open spaces should be provided in each community, in both urban and rural areas, to enhance environmental and visual quality and meet local recreation needs. Local means smaller sites and facilities to serve close -to -home, day-to-day needs of the community. Enclosed are the following documents as outlined in King County's instruction for subdivision applications: 1. One (1) copy of the subdivisions checklist. 2. Three (3) copies of the application form. 3. One (1) copy of the current assessor's map. The Shamrock properties are outlined in red and the surrounding properties located within 500 feet are highlighted in yellow. 4. Three (3) copies of the legal descriptions are included in the title report. 5. Three (3) copies of the legal lot status documentation. 6. Twenty (20) copies of the environmental checklist. 7. Three (3) copies of the certificate of water availability form issued by King County water district 90. 8. Three (3) copies of the certificate of sewer availability form issued by the city of Renton. 9. Thirty five (35) copies of the proposed preliminary plat created by Triad & Associates dated July 2002. 10. One (1) copy of the reduced plat map: &1/2" x 14" created by Tri ad & Associates dated July 2002. 11. Three (3) copies of the Fire District Receipt issued by Fire District 10. 12. Eight (8) copies of the level -one drainage analysis created by Triad & Associates dated July 2002. 13. Three (3) copies of the transportation certificate -of concurrency. 14. Three (3) copies of the density and dimensions calculation worksheet. 15. Three (3) copies of the certificate/affidavit of sensitive areas compliance form. 16. Three (3) copies of the applicant status form. 17. Three (3) copies of the title report for all parcels. 18. Eight (8) copies of the traffic analysis report prepared by Garry Struthers & Associates dated August 1, 2002. 19. Eight (8) copies of the geotechnical report prepared by Associated Earth Sciences, dated September 7, 2401. 24. Eight (8) copies of the wetland report by Gary Schulz, dated July 28, 2042. CamWest will forward this proposal to the city of Renton concurrently with our short plat application and will help facilitate review coordination. If at any point you would like to meet with the city of Renton to conduct a joint review and/or discussion, let me know and I can help facilitate. We look forward to working with you on this proposal. Should you have any questions or need any additional information, please contact me at (425) 825-1955 or sslatten@camwest.com. Sincerely, Sara Slatten CamWest Development, Inc. enclosures S 0 r1_1 DDES King County Department of Development and Environmental Services 900 Oakesdale Ave SW Renton, Washington 98055-1219 August 1, 2002 5ummary of Uhar2es and Yavments Page 1 of 1 Applicant: CAMWEST DEVELOPMENT, INC. Activity Number: 9720 NE 120TH PLACE, SUITE 100 Project Number: L02P0014 KIRKLAND, WA 98034 Development Number: Permit Type: PRE -PLAT 425-825-1955 Status: APPLIED Charges Description Amount Bldg FireFlow Review $192.50 Counter Service Fees $440.00 Deposit Based on Est Hrs 515,840.00 SUB TOTAL CHARGES: $16,472.50 Payment's Description Check # Checklogid Payee Date Entered Amount SUB TOTAL PAYMENTS: $0.00 BALANCE: $16,472.50 The fees shown above represent current charges as of this date and are an estimate based on the information provided to DDES at the time of application. For services that are rendered on an hourly basis, the cost of those services will be based on the actual hours worked. Hourly fees are charged at the rate in effect at the time of service, and will be billed monthly, along with any other outstanding fees. Fees that have been posted prior to permit issuance will be collected at that time. Fees subsequently posted will be billed to the applicant. All fees must be paid in full before DDES issues Final Approval, T.C.O. or C.O. MAIN FILE COPY o King County Department of Development and Environmental Services 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Renton, Washington 98055-1219 (206) 296-6600 TTY (206) 296-7217 Certification & Transfer of Applicant Status Alternative formats available upon request Permit Number: G02— POO //� (print name) hereby certify that I am an/the owner of Viriity hich is the subject of this application for permit or approval. If I am not the sole owner of the propey thatI am authorized by any and all other owners of the property to make this certification and transfer any an all rights I/we have to apply for this permit or approval to the person listed below. I, therefore certify that S. ___ SLA -7- 41AVIV'SZ _ (print name) is the "applicant" for this permit or approval and shall remain 1he "applicant" for fhe duration of this permit or approval unless "applicant" status is transferred in writing on a form provided by this department. By being the "applicant," that individual assumes financial responsibility for all fees and will receive any refunds paid. certify under penalt ury under the laws of the State of Washington that the foregoing is true and correct. VSI'gnatureo6f Owner Date Signed "applicant" for this p it or approval unless "applicant" status I ansferre responsibility for all fees ass ate address is: , (print name) hereby certify that I am the I shall remain the "applicant" for the duration of this permit or approval in writing on a form provided by this department. I accept financial with this permit or approval and will receive any refunds. My mailing certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the Se of Washington that the foregoing is true and correct. Signature of Applicant 061-0 Date Signed I, , hereby certify that I am an authorized agent of , a corporation of other business association authorized i the State of Washington and that this business association is the "applicant" for this permit or approval and is ftnancially responsible for all fees and will receive any refunds paid. This association shall remain the' plicant" for the duration of this permit or approval unless "applicant" status is transferred in writing on a form vided by this department. The mailing address of this business association is: I certify under penalty of perjury under the laW\s of the State of Washington that the foregoing is true and correct. Signature of Applicant Certification 8 Transfer of Applicant Status le-cer-trapstat Date Signed 08127102 MAIN FILe 1 of 2 1�1 E NOTICE TO APPLICANTS: By law, this department returns all engineering and other plans to the applicant, If, however, you wish to authorize the department to return engineering and other plans directly to the engineer, architect, or other consultant for the limited purpose of making corrections, please designate below: ❑ 1 authorize this department to return plans directly to my consultant(s) for the limited purpose of making corrections, as designated on this form. CONSULTANTS. Certification & Transfer of Applicant Status lc-cer-trapstat 08/27/02 Page 2 of 2 o' 0 King County Department of Development and Environmental Services Land Use Services Division 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Renton, Washington 98055-1219 (206) 296-6600 TTY (206) 296-7217 FOR CURRENT OWNER: Certification & Transfer of Applicant Sols ;LL Alternative formats available- upon request a -____ __-____, (print name) hereby certify that I am an/the owner of the property which is the subject of this application for permit or approval. If I am not the sole owner of the property, I certify that I am authorized by any and all other owners of the property to make this certification and transfer any an all rights I/we have to apply for this permit or approval to the person listed below. I, therefore certify that ------------------------------------------------ (print name) is the "applicant" for this permit or approval and shall remain the "applicant" for the duration of this permit or approval unless "applicant" status is transferred in writing on a form provided by this department. By being the "applicant," that individual assumes financial responsibility for all fees and will receive any refunds paid. I certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that the foregoing is true and correct Signature of Owner Date Signed FOR INDIVIDUALS: 1. _ __-___________________ ___-, (print name) hereby certify that I am the "applicant" for this permit or approval- I shall remain the "applicant" for the duration of this permit or approval unless "applicant' status is transferred in writing on a form provided by this department. I accept financial responsibility for all fees associated with this permit or approval and will receive any refunds. My mailing address is: I certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that the foregoing is true and correct. Signature of Applicant Date Signed ��I6 FOR CORPORATIONSIBUSINESS ASSOCIATIONS: I. ____ 1._ ------, hereby certify that I am an authorized agent of 4,# _, _ � _______ _ _, a corporation of other business association authorized in the State of Washington and that this business association is the "applicant' for this permit or approval and is financially responsible for all fees and will receive any refunds paid. This association shall remain the "applicant' for the duration of this permit or approval unless "applicant' status is transferred in writ, an a form provided by this department. The mailing address of this business association is: C 7 3L) IJO+Il Ot t I:V- IC)"_) I certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washinaton that the foreaoina is true and correct_ Certification & Transfer of Applicant Status Ic-cer-trapstat --- -'?1-° �--------------- Date Signed INj 01 , 115/02 Page 1 of 2 f?� Lb2oftC*4 n NOTICE TO APPLICANTS: By law, this department returns all engineering and other plans to the applicant. If, however, you wish to authorize the department to return engineering and other plans directly to the engineer, architect, or other consultant for the limited purpose of making corrections, please designate below: 7 I authorize this department to return plans directly to my consultant(s) for the limited purpose of making corrections, as designated on this form_ CONSULTANTS: Certification & Transfer of Applicant Status Ic-cer-trapstat 1115102 Page 2 of 2 07/31/2002 13:57 FAX 425 646 857 LXTRANSNAnON July 31, 2002 Camwest Development Attn: Sara Slatten 9720 NB 20th PI. Kirkland, WA 98084 TRANSNATION DREW UNIT 3 CST 0001/035 Re. Order No.: 300-10049351 Title Offiicer: Harry Drew Buyer/Borrower(s). Shamrock Highlands L.L.C. Subject Property; , , WA , King County WA , King County 12217 148th Avenue SE, Renton, WA 98059, King County 12227 148th Avenue SE, Renton, WA 98059, King County , , WA , King County 12255 148th Avenue SE, Renton, WA 98059, King County , , WA , King County 12409 148th Avenue SE, Renton, WA 98059, King County 12435 148th Avenue SE, Renton, WA 98059, King County 12205 148th Avenue SE, Renton, WA 98059, Icing County Girder Summary Thank you for placing this order with Transnatlon Title insurance Company. If You need assistance on this file, please contact; Harry 0. Drew (423) 646-8583 hdrew@iandam.cora Chris Scurti (425) 646-8585 cscurti@landam.com Erin Crowder (425) 646-8584 etTowder@landam.com 1-800--441-gyral Fax: (425) 64"576 Additional copies nave been Sent to: Triad Associates, Bruce Knovilton Trwanation Tide Laurance Com any 14450 NE 291h Place, Suite 200, Betlecue, WA 9=7 Phcnc: 800-941-TIOI F= 425-646-8576 coverpage MA11V FILE Copy vl �.la�•E�o �� 07/31/2002 13_57 FU 425 646 857 L% ,,�'UMSNA LAX1DjA4 TRIAD ASSOCIATES Attu; Bruce Knowlton 11814 115th Ave NE Kirkland, WA 98034 RE: order No.: 300-10049351 TRANSNATION DREW UNIT Liability: Charge: SECOND SUBDIVISION GUARANTEE i CANWEST $ 200.00 $ 200.00 $ 217.60 Q002/035 Subject to the Exclusions from Coverage, the limits of liability and other provisions of the Conditions and Stipulations hereto annexed and made a part of this Guarantee, and subject to the further exclusion and limitation that no guarantee is given nor liability assumed with respect to the identity of any party named or referred to in Schedule A or with respect to the validity, legal effect or priority of any matter shown therein. TRANSNATION TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY a corporation herein called the Company, GUARANTEES the Assured named in Schedule A against actual monetary loss or damage not exceeding the liability amount stated herein which the Assured shall sustain by reason of any incorrectness in the assurances set forth in Schedule A. Dated; July 19, 2002 Authorized Skmature Timm nadm Mde lnmunce Company 14454 NE 29dL Placr, Site 200, Hellmut, WA 95007 rbone• $00441-7701 Fax 425-641r9576 Subdrvrslon Guarantee Pace 1 of 3.9 wbi2_u_Oo 07/31/2002 13:57 FAX 425 038 857 3RANSNATION DREW UNIT SCHEDULE A 1. Name of Assured: Camwest Development and Shamrock Highlands L.L.C. 2. onto of Guarantee: July 19, 2002- 3. 0023. The assurances referred to on the face page hereof are: -� GEST 10005/035 Order No.: 10049351 a. That according to those public records which, under the recording laws, impart constructive notice of matters affecting title to the following described land: See Exhibit A attached hereto. b. Title to the estate or interest in the land is vested in: GEDRGIY PALANCHUK AND NATALYA PALANCHUK, HUSBAND AND WIFE, AS TO PARCEL_ 1; AND shamrock Highlands L.L.C., a Washington Limited Liability Company, AS TO THE REMAINDER C. The estate or interest in the land which is covered by this Guarantee is: A fee simple estate Subject to the Exceptions shown below, which are not necessarily shown in order of their priority. EXCEPTIONS: I. Taxes or assessments which are not shown as existing liens by the records of any taxing authority that levies or assessments on land or by the public records. 2. (a) Unpatented mining claims; (b) reservations or exceptions in Patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof; (c) Indian treaty or aboriginal rights, including, but not limited to, easements or equitable servitudes; or, (d) water rights, claims or title to water, whether or not the matters excepted under (a), (b), (c) or (d) are shown by the public records. 3. GENERAL PROPERTY TAXES and SERVICE CHARGES, as follows, together with interest, penalty and statutory foreclosure costs, if any, after delinquency: (1st half delinquent on May 1; 2nd half delinquent on November 1) Tax Account No.: 1023059M Year Billed 2002 $1,808.01 (Covers Parcel A) Paid Balance $904.01 $904.00 suidivirion Guarartwe Page 2 of 18 07/31/2002 13:57 FAX 425 648 857 TRANSNATION DREW UNIT A ST 1?1004/035 order Na.: 10049251 4, GENERAL PROPERTY TAXES and SERVICE CHARGES, as follows, together with interest, penalty and statutory foreclosure costs, if any, after delinquency: (1st half delinquent on May 1; 2nd half delinquent on November 1) Tax Account No.: 1023059304 Year Billed Paid Balance 2002 $ 859.94 $429.97 $429.97 (Covers Parcel B) 5. GENERAL PROPERTY TAXES and SERVICE CHARGES, as follows, together with interest, penalty and statutory foreclosure costs, if any, atter delinquency: (1st half delinquent on May 1; 2nd half delinquent on November 1) Tax Account No.: 1023059319 Year Billed Paid Balance 2002 $2,368.24 $1,184.12 $1,184.12 (Covers Parcel C) 6. GENERAL PROPERTY TAXES and SERVICE CHARGES, as follows, together with interest, }penalty and statutory foreclosure costs, if any, .after delinquency: (1st half delinquent: on May 1; 2nd half delinquent on November 1) Tex Account No.; 1023059022 Year Billed Paid Balance 2002 $3,825.21 $1,912.61 $1,912.60 (Covers Parcal a) 7. GENERAL PROPERTY TAXES and SERVICE CHARGES, as fellows, together with interest, penalty and statutory foreclosure Costs, if any, after delinquency: (1st half delinquent on May 1; 2nd half delinquerrt on November 1) Tax Account No.: 1023059415 Year Billed paid Balance 2002 $2,139.87 $1,069.94 $1,069.93 (Covers Parcel E) 8. GENERAL PROPERTY TAXES and SERVICE CHARGES, as follows, together with Interest, penalty and statutory foreclosure costs, if any, after delinquency: (1st half delinquent on May 1; 2nd half delinquent on November 1) Tax Account No.; 1023059174 Year Billed 2002 $3,565.66 (Covers Parcel F) Paid Balance $1,782.$3 $1,782.83 Subdivision Guarantee Page 3 of Ya 07/31/2002 13:57 FA% 425 648 85" TRANSNATION DREW CTNIT i jfST IJ0051035 Order NQ.: 10049351 9. GENERAL PROPERTY TAXES and SERVICE CHARGES, as follows, together with interest, penalty and statutory foreclosure costs, if any, after delinquency: (1st half delinquent on May 1; 2nd half delinquent on November 1) Tax Account No.: 1023059031 Year Billed Paid Balance 2002 $1,563.58 $781.79 $781.79 (Covers Parcel G) 10. GENERAL PROPERTY TAXES and SERVICE CHARGES, as follows, together with interest, penalty and statutory foreclosure Costs, if any, after delinquency: (1St half delinquent on May 1; 2nd half delinquent on November 1) Tax Amount No.: 1023059191 Year Billed Paid Balance 2002 $2,542.05 $1,421.03 $1,421..02 (Covers Parcel H) 11. GENERAL PROPERTY TAXES and SERVICE. CHARGES, as follows, together with interest, penalty and statutory foreclosure costs, if any, after delinquency: (1st half delinquent on May 1; 2nd half delinquent on November 1) Tax Account No.: 1023059384 Year Billed Paid Ba I a nce 2002 $3,822.75 $1,911.38 $1,911.37 (Covers Parol I) 12. GENERAL PROPERTY TAMES and SERVICE CHARGES, as follows, together with interest, penalty and statutory foreclosure costs, If any, after delinquency: (1st half delinquent on May 1; 2nd half delinquent on November 1) Tax Account No.: IM059030 Year Billed Paid Balance 2002 $3,146.25 $1,573.13 $1,573.12 (Covers Parcel 3) 13. Notice of tap or connection charges which have been or will be due in connection with development or re -development of the land as disclosed by recorded instrument. Inquiries regarding the specific amount of the charges should be made to the city/county/agency. CITY/COUNTY/AGENCY: RECORDED; RECORDING NO.: CITY OF RENTON JUNE 21, 1996 96062.10965 Subdivision Guarantee Page 4 of i8 0713112002 13:57 F.AX 425 646_8TRANSNATIQN DREG' UNIT C ST 9006i035 Osler No.: 10049351 14. EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: GRANTEE: SNOQUAL_MIE FALLS AND WHITE RIVER POWER COMPANY, A CORPORATION PURPOSE": ELECIRIC TRANSMISSION LINE 10 FEET IN WIDTH AREA AFFECTED: THE DESCRIPTION CONTAINED THEREIN 15 NOT SUFFICIENT TO DETERMINE ITS EXACT LOCATION ON THE PROPERTY HEREIN DESCRIBED RECORDING NO.: 305589 15. EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: PURPOSE: POWER AND LIGHT POLES AREA AFFECTED: THE DESCRIPTION CONTAINED THEREIN IS NOT SUFFICIENT TO DETERMINE ITS EXACT LOCATION ON THE PROPERTY HEREIN DESCRIBED RECORDING NO.: 2794410 (Overs Parcels A, B, G, H & I) 16. Right to make necessary slopes for cuts or hills upon the land herein described as granted to King County by deed recorded under Recording Nos. 5755891 and 5755892. (Covers Parcels A & B) 17. EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: GRANTEE: KING COUNTY, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION PURPOSE: UTILMES AREA AFFECTED: SOUTHERLY PORTION OF PARCELS A AND B AS DESCRIBED THEREIN RECORDING NO.: 5767638 18. EASEMENT AND THE TERMS ANIS CONDITIONS THEREOF: PURPOSE: AREA AFFEC k D: RECORDING NO.: (covers Parcel I) INGRESS, EGRESS AND UTILITIES NORTH 80 FEET 7208100354 Subdivision Guarantee Page 5 of IS 07/31/2002 13:57 FAX 425 646 8579M 171kNSNATION DREW UNIT 19. EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: - WST 0007/035 Order No.: 10049351 GRANTEE: PUGET SOUND POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY, A WASHINGTON CORPORATION PURPOSE: ONE OR MORE ELECTRIC TRANSMISSION AND/OR DISTRIBUTION LINES AREA AFFECTED: SOUTH 30 FEET RECORDING NO.: 7808080327 (Covers Parcel C) 20. EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: GRANTEE: KING COUNTY PURPOSE: imLXTIES AND DRAINAGE FACILrN AREA AFFECTED: SOUTH 5 Fi=E#' OF THE WEST 40 FEET RECORDING NO.: 8711300920 The Grantee's interest is now held by City of Renton under instruments recorded under icing County Recording Nos. 20010116000508 and 20010426000238, (Covers Parcel B) 21. EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: GRANTEE: KING COUNTY PURPOSE: UTILITIES AND DRAINAGE FACILITY AREA AFFECTED: SOUTH 5 FEET RECORDING NO.: 8711300921 The Grantee's interest is now held by City of Renton under Instruments recorded under King County Recording Nos. 20010116000505 and 20010426000236. (Covers Parcels A & B) 22. EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: GRANTEE: KING COUNTY PURPOSE: UTILITIES AND DRAINAGE FACILITY AREA AFFECTED: EAST 65 FEET OF THE SOUTH 200 FEET RECORDING NO,: 8711300922 The Grantee's interest is now held by City of Renton under instruments recorded under King County Recording Nos. 20010116400507 and 20010426000237. (Covers Parcels A & B) Subdivision Guarantee Page 6 of 18 07/31112002 13:58 F.AX 425 646 857ft TRANSNATIQN DREW UNIT } GEST Z008/035 Order No.: 101351 23. EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: GRANTEE: PUGET SOUND POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY, A WASHINGTON CORPORATION PURPOSE: ONE OR MORE ELECTRIC TRANSMISSION AND/OR DISTRIBUTION LINES AREA AFFECTED: SOUTH 10 FEET RECORDING NO.: 8807220452 Said instrument is a re-record of instrument recorded under King County Recording No. 8805310868. (Covers Parcel 5) 24. EASEMENT AND SHE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: GRANTEE; PUGEI' SOUND POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY, A WASHINGTON CORPORATION PURPOSE= ONE OR MORE ELECTRIC TRANSMISSION AND/OR DISTRIBUTION LINES AREA AFFECTED: SOUTH 10 FEET RECORDING NO.; 8807220453 Said instrument Is a re-record of irrstrumert recorded under King County Recording No. 8805314859. (Covers Parcel A) 25. EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: GRANTEE=: KING COUNTY WATER DISTRICT NO. 90, A MUNICIPAL, CORPORATION PURPOSE: WATER MAINS AND APPURTENANCES AREA AFFECTED: NORTH 10 FEET RECORDING NO., 20000810004949 (Covers Parcel I) 26. EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF; PURPOSE: TEMPORARY ACCESS AREA AFFECTED: AS DESCRIBED THEREIN RECORDING NO.: 20020228001893 27. The effect on the title and the description of the land due to the location of "348th Avenue S.E. (C.H. Bankson Road'No. 72)" contained in the legal description in Schedule A. (Covers Parcels D, F, G, H& 3 } 28. MATTERS SET FORTH BY SURVEY: RECORDED! MAY 2, 1988 RECORDING NO.: 8805029004 DISCLOSES: FENCE ENCROACHMENT OVER SubdtvWon Guarantee Page 7 of 18 07/31/2002 13:58 FAX 425 618 857 TM*NATION DREW UNIT (WST 0009/035 Order No.: 10049351 WESTERLY AND SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY LINES AS SHOWN THEREON (Covers Parcel E) 29, Terms and Conditions of unrecorded Lot Line Adjustment No. 590M0351, approved October 2.4, 1990. (Covers Parcels E & F) 30. Declaration of Covenant unposed by instrument recorded on December 29, 1992, under Recording No. 9212291639. (Covers Parcel C) 31. AGREEMENT ANIS THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: RECORDED: MAY 16, 1961 RECORDING NO.: 5284273 REGARDING: ROAD MAINTENANCE (Covers Parcel I) 32. AGREEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: RECORDED: APRIL 20, 2000 RECORDING NO.: 20000420000998 REGARDING: LATECOMERS AGREEMENT (Covers Parcels A & B) 33. NOTICE OF HOUSING CODE VIOLATION: FILE NO.: E92C1531 RECORDED: NOVEMBER 18, 1992 RECORDING NO.: 9211180392 (Covers Parcels G & H) 34. NOTICE OF HOUSING CODE VIOLATION-, FILE NO., E92.C1531 RECORDED: JANUARY 9, 2001 RECORDING NO.: 20010109001089 (Corers Parcel E) 35. Lack of a recorded )'Weans of ingress and egress to a public road from the land. (Covers Marcel 1) 36. TEMPORARY ACCESS EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF unposed by instrument recorded on February 28, 2002, under Recording No. 20020228001$93. Subdivis on Guarantee Page a of 1.8 07/31/2002 13:58 FAX 425 646 851 TRANSNATION DREW UNIT GEST 37, AGREEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: [a 010/035 Order No.: 1000351 RECORDED; OCTOBER 9, 2001 RECORDING NO.: 2UD11009002300 REGARDING: ASSIGNMENT, ASSUMPTION, CONSENT AND RELEASE AGREEMENT; I PALANC:HUK AGREEMENT AND AMENDMENTS THERETO: RECORDED: RECORDING NO.: OCTOBER 9, 2001 20011009002301 38. DEED OF TRUST AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: GRANTOR: TRUSTEE: BENEFICIARY: ADDRESS: LOAN NO.: ORIGINAL AMOUNT: DATED: RECORDED: RECORDING NO.; ASSIGNMENT OF THE DEED OF TRUST: ASSIGNEE: ADDRESS RECORDED; RECORDING NO.: ]AMES AND DENISE HUNSAKER, HUSBAND AND WIFE, PATRICK HUNSAKER AND ANN MARIE HUNSAKER, HUSBAND AND WIFE, JOHN HUNSAKER AND JEAN HUNSAKER, HUSBAND AND WIFE, TIMOTHY HUNSAKER AND BONNIE HUNSAKER, HUSBAND AND WIFE, BRIAN MORRISON AND CORA MORRISON, HUSBAND AND WIFE, JOHN HOLLAND AND BARBARA HQILAND, HUSBAND AND WIFE AND KENNETH TROSE H AND SHARON TROSETH, HUSBAND AND WIFE CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY CHARLES AND NORMA HURLOCKER 12237 148TH AVENUE SE., RENTON, WA 98059 $355,000.00 DECEMBER 28, 2000 JANUARY 9, 2001 20010109000191 APRIL SHOWERS FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP 12217 148TH AVENUE S.E., RENTON, WA 98059-4602 JANUARY 11, 2001 20010111000053 ASSUMPTION AGREEMENTAND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: ASSUMED BY, RECORDED. RECORDING NO.: CAMWEST DEVELOPMENT, INC., A WASHINGTON CORPORATION OCTOBER 9, 2001 2001.1009002304 Subdivistan Guarallt%Q Page 9 of 18 07/31/2002 13:58 FAX 125 646 8571mb, TRANSNATION DREW UNIT AN D AM EN DMENTS TH EREfD: RECORDED; RECORDING NO.: OCTOBER 9, 2001 20011009002305 i GEST (� 011/035 Order No.; IO 49351 (Cavern Parcel Q 39. DEED OF TRUST AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: GRANTOR: PATRICK HUNSAKER AND ANN MARIE HUNSAKER, HUSBAND AND WIFE, AS TO AN UNDIVIDED 33.485% INTEREST, JAMES HUNSAKER AND DENISE HUNSAKER, HUSBAND AND WIFE, AS TO AN UNDIVIDED 33.435% INTEREST, JOHN HUNSAKER AND JEAN HUNSAKER, HUSBAND AND WIFE, AS TO AN UNDIVIDED 9.303% INTEREST, TIMOTHY HUNSAKER AND BONNIE HUNSAKER, HUSBAND AND WIFE, AS TO AN UNDIVIDED 9.303% INTEREST, BRIAN MORRISON AND CORA MORRISON, HUSBAND AND WIFE, AS TO AN UNDIVIDED 6.606% INTEREST, JOHN HOILAND AND BARBARA HOILAND, HUSBAND AND WIFE, AS TO AN UNDIVIDED 3.509% INTEREST AND KENNETH TROSETH AND SHARON TROSETH, HUSBAND AND WIFE, AS TO AN UNDIVIDED 3,909% INTEREST TRUSTEE: CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY BENEFICIARY: ROY R. SMM ARID RUBY P. SMITH, HUSBAND AND WIFE ADDRESS: 12265 148TH STREET SE., RENTON, WA 98056 LOAD NO.: --- ORIGINAL AMOUNT: $220,0100.00 DATED: JANUARY 17, 2001 RECORDED: JANUARY 19, 2001 RECORDING NO.: 200101190001337 ASSUMPnON AGREEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: ASSUMED BY: CAMWEST DEVELOPMENT, INC., A WASHINGTON CORPORATION RECORDED: OCTOBER 9, 2001 RECORDING NO.: 20011009002306 5Ubdivfslnn Guarantee Page 10 of 16 07/31/2002 13:58 FIX 125 646 857 TRAIN 4TION DRIEW UNIT -* CWST Q012/035 Order No.: 10049351 AND AMENDMENTS THERETO: RE -CORDED! RECORDING NO.. OCTOBER 9, 2001 20011009002307 (Covers Parcel F) 44. DEED OF TRUST AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: GRANTOR: J.P. HUN L.L.C., A WASHINGTON LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY TRUSTEE, COMMONWEALTH LAND TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, A CORPORATION BLENEFICIARY: BALES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, A LIMITED PARTNERSHIP FORMED WITH THE STATE OF WASHINGTON ON AUGUST 1, 1936, WITH SALES MANAGEMENT TRUST, ESTABLISHED UNDER AGREEMENT DATED JULY 18, 1995, GEORGE H, BALES, OR HIS SUCCESSORS, TRUSTEE, AS GENERAL PARTNER. ADDRESS. P.O. BOX 3015, RENTON, WA 98056 LOAN NO.: --- ORIGINAL AMOUNT: $400,000.00 DATED: APRIL 16, 2001 RECORDED., APRIL 20, 2001 RECORDING NO.: 20010420000751 ASSUMPTION AGREEMENT AND THE TERMS ANIS CONDITIONS THEREOF: ASSUMED BY: CAMWEST DEVELOPMENT, INC., A WASHINGTON CORPORATION RECORDED: OCTOBER 9, 2001 RECORDING NO.: 20011009002302 0 SuWIv[lslon Guarantee Page l2 or is 07/31/2002 13:58 RAX 425 846 85* TWSNATION DREW UNIT AND AMENDMENTS THERETO* RECORDED; RECORDING NO.; OCTOBER 9, 2001 20011009002303 (Covers parcels A & B) 41. DEED OF TRUST AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF; CST X013/035 Order tin.: 10049351 GRANTOR; SHAMROCK HIGHLANDS, LLC, A WASHINGTON LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY TRUSTEE: RICHARD 3. PQWERS, ATTORNEY AT LAW BENEFICIARY: BASE CAPITAL, L.L.C., A WASHINGTON BENEFICIARY: LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY ADDRESS: 411 1087 AVE. N.E., #1970, BELLEVUE, INA 98004 LOAN NO.: NOT DISCLOSED ORIGINAL AMOUNT: $3,500,000.00 DATED: OCTOBER 1, 2001 RECORDED: OCTOBER 9, 2001 RECORDING NO.: 20011009002308 42. DEED OF TRUST AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: GRANTOR: SHAMROCK HIGHLANDS, LLC., A WASHINGTON LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY TRUSTEE: TRANSNATION TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY BENEFICIARY: PATRICK HUNSAKER AND ANN MARIE HUNSAKER, HUSBAND AND WIFE, JAMES HUNSAKER AND DENISE HUNSAKER, HUSBAND AND WIFE, JOHN HUNSAKER AND NORMA JEAN HUNSAKER, HUSBAND AND WIFE, TIMOTHY HUNSAKER AND BONNIE HUNSAKER, HUSBAND AND WIFE , BRIAN MORRISON AND CORA MORRISON, HUSBAND AND WIFE, JOHN HOILAND AND BARBARA HOILAND, HUSBAND AND WIFE AND KENNETH TROSE-H AND SHARON TROSEfH, HUSBAND AND WIFE AND J.P. HUN LLC, A WASHINGTON LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY ADDRESS: 12409 148TH S.E., RENTON, WA 98059 LOAN NO.; NOT DISCLOSED ORIGINAL AMOUNT: $525,800.00 DATED: OCTOBER 5, 2001 RECORDED: OCTOBER 9, 2001 RECORDING NO.: 20011049002309 SubdMsion Guarantee. Page 12 of 18 07/31/2002 13:58 F_AT 425 646 857 ..___ TRANSNATI©N DREW UNIT y WST 11014/035 Order No.: 10049351 43. SUBORDINATION AGREEMENT whim declares that the instrument recorded under Recording No. 20011049002309 is subordinate to the instrument recorded under Retarding No. 20011,009002308. SUBORDINATOR: PATRICK HUNSAKER AND ANNE MARIE HUNSAKER, HUSBAND AND WIFE; TAMES HUNSAKER AND DENISE HUNSAKER, HUSBAND AND WIFE; JOHN HUNSAKER AND NORMA JEAN HUNSAKER, HUSBAND AND WIFE; TIMOTHY HUNSAKER AND BONNIE HUNSAKER, HUSBAND AND WIFE; BRIAN MORRISON AND CORA MORRISON, HUSBAND AND WIFE; JOHN HOILAND AND BARBARA HOILAND, HUSBAND AND WIFE; KENNETH TROSETH AND SHARON TROSETH, HUSBAND AND WIFE; AND J.P. HUN LLC, A WASHINGTON LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY LENDER: BASE CAPITAL, L.L.C., A WASHINGTON LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY RECORDED; OCTOBER 9, 2001 RECORDING NO, 20011009002311 44. ASSIGNMENT FOR SECURITY PURPOSES AND SimCURTTY AGREEMENT OF RENTS AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF; ASSIGNOR: SHAMROCK HIGHLANDS LLC, A WASHINGTON LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY ASSIGNEE: J. P. HUN, LLC., A WASHINGTON LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, AND PATRICK HUNSAKER AND ANN MARIE HUNSAKER, HUSBAND AND WIFE, JAMES HUNSAKER AND DE=NISE HUNSAKER, HUSBAND AND WIFE, JOHN HUNSAKER AND NORMA JEAN HUNSAKER, HUSBAND AND WIFE, -aMOTHY HUNSAKER AND BONNIE HUNSAKER, HUSaAND AND WIFE, BRIAN MORRISON AND CORA MORRISON, HUSBAND AND WIFE, JOHN! HOILAND AND BARBARA HOILAND, HUSBAND AND WIFE-, AND KENNETH TROSETH AND SHARON TROSETH, HUSBAND AND WIFE DATED: OCTOBER 5, 2001 RECORDED: OCTOBER 9, 2001 RECORDING NO.: 20011009002310 Subdivision Guarantee Page 13 of 13 07/31/2002 13:58 FSS 425 646 85 TRANSNATION DREW UNIT �ST 45. FINANCING STATEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDMONS THEREOF, [a 015/035 order Na.: 10040351 SECURED PARTY: J. P. HUN LLC, Ef AL, SECURED CREDrMR.S; PATRICK HUNSAKER AND ANN MARIE HUNSAKER, HUSBAND AND WIFE, JAMES HUNSAKER AND DENISE HUNSAKER, HUSBAND AND WIFE; JOHN HUNSAKER AND NORMA JEAN HUNSAKER, HUSBAND AND WIFE, TIMOTHY HUNSAKER AND BONNIE HUNSAKER, HUSBAND AND WIFE, BRIAN MORRISON AND CORA MORRISON, HUSBAND AND WIFE; JOHN HOTLAND AND BARBARA HOILAND, HUSBAND AND WIFE, AND KENNETH TROSETH AND SHARON TROSETH, HUSBAND AND WIFE DEBTOR: SHAMROCK HIGHLANDS LI -C COVERS. FIXTURES ("PERSONAL PROPERTY-) RECORDED: OCTOBER 9, 2001 RECORDING NO.: 20011009002312 46. ASSIGNMENT OF DEED OF TRUST GIVEN IN THE FORM OF A SFCURITi' DEVICE AND THE TERMS AND CONDMONS THEREOF: ASSIGNOR: ASSIGNEE: RECORDED: RECORDING NO.: BASE CAPITAL, L.L.C., A WASHINGTON LIMITED LIABILITY -COMPANY U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OCTOBER 26, 2001 20011026001657 SubdivWOM Guarantee Page 14 of 18 07/31/2002 13:5$ FAX 425 64$$57 TRANSNATION DREW --NIT 1wST 47, DEED OF TRUST AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: GRANTOR: TRUSTEE: BENEFICIARY' ADDRESS: LOAN NO.: ORIGINAL AMOUNT: DATED: RECORDED: RECORDING NO.: Q016/035 Order No.. 10049351 GEORGIY PALANCHUK AND NATALYA PALANCHUK, HUSBAND AND WIFE CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY FT MORTGAGE COMPANIES D/B/A EMERALD MORTGAGE COMPANY, A KANSAS CORPORATION 2974 LB] FREEWAY, SUITE 200 DALLAS TK 76234 0012928339 $138,750.00 AUGUST 14, 1998 AUGUST 13, 1998 9808131803 ASSIGNMENT OF THE DEED OF TRUST: ASSIGNEE: CHASE MORTGAGE COMPANY, AN OHIO CORPORATION RECORDED: AUGUST 22, 2400 RECORDING NO-: 201:100822000292 (Covers Parcel J) 48. ASSIGNMENT OF CONTRACT RIGHTS GIVEN IN THE FORM OF A SE-CURITY DEVICE AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: ASSIGNOR: SHAMROCK HIGHLANDS, LLC, A WASHINGTON LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY ASSIGNEE: GEORGIY PALANCHUK AND NATALYA PALANCHUK, HUSBAND AND WIFE RECORDED: OCTOBER 16, 2001 RECORDING NO.: 20011016001118 (Covers Parcel ]) 49. UNRECORDED VACANT LAND PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT, DATED MAY 2, 2001 , BETWEEN GEORGIY PALANCHUK AND NATALYA PALANCHUK, HUSBAND AND WIFE, as seller and SHAMROCK HIGHLANDS, LLC, A WASHINGTON LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, AS PURCHASER, DISCLOSED by instrument recorded on October 16, 2001, under Recording No. 20011016001118. (Covers Parcel J) BIN: bw/CSS/ec/6LN: bw enc. Vesting Deed No. 9808131802 (Pd ]) Paragraph Nos. 46 & 47 Subdivision Guarantee Page 15 of 1$ 07/31.'2002 13:59 FAI 425 646 85 TRAN,SNAT'ION DREW UNIT WST 017/035 EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION: PARCEL A: Order No.: 10049351 THE EAST i/z OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST W.M.; EXCEPT THE EAST 100 FEET" OF THE SOUTH 150 FEET THEREOF; AND EXCEPT THE SOUTH 42 FEE!' THEREOF AS CONVEYED TO KING COUNTY FOR S.E. 128'x' STREET BY DEED RECORDED UNDER KING COUNTY RECORDING NOS. 5755891 AND 5755892; SITUATE IN THE CITY OF RENTON, COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON, PARCEL B.- THE :THE EAST 100 FEET OF THE SOUTH 150 FEET OF THE EAST 1h OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 1Q, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST W.M.; EXCEPT THE SOUTH 42 FEET THEREOF AS CONVEYED TO IQNG COUNTY FOR S.E. 128'x' STREET BY TEED RECORDED UNDER KING COUNTY RECORDING NO, 5755891; SITUATE IN THE CrTY OF RENTON, COUNTY OF iQNG, STATE Of! WASHINGTON. PARCEL Q THE NORTH 'h OF THE NORTH '/z OF THE SOUTH % OF THE NORTH lb OF THE EAST 1/2 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 23 (NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST W.M.; EXCEPT THE EAST 280 FEET THEREOF, TOGETHER WITH AN EASEMENT FOR INGRESS AND EGRESS OVER THE SOUTH 30 FEET OF SAID EAST 280 FEET; EXCEPT THAT PORTION THEREOF FOR 148TH AVENUE S.E. RIGHT OF WAY; SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. PARCEL D: THE SOUTH 112 OF THE NORTH 'h OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE NORTH 'h OF THE EAST '12 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 23 }NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST W.M., EXCEPT COUNTY ROAD; 07/31/2002 13:59 FAX 425 648 857' TRANSNATI4N DREW tNIT WEST Q018/035 ' r Order NO.: 10049351 EXHIBIT A (continued) SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. PARCEL E: THE WEST 794 FEET OF THE SOUTH '/i OF THE SOUTH 1A OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST W.M.; SrMATE IN THE COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON; ALSO KNOWN AS A PORTION OF LOT B OF UNRECORDED LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. S90M0351. PARCEL >F: THE SOUTH 112 OF THE SOUTH 14 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF TIME SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 23 FORTH, RANGE 5 EAST W.M.; AND EXCEPT THE WEST 794 FEET THEREOF; AND EXCEPT THE EAST 230 FEET OF THE NORTH 300 FEET THEREOF; SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. PARCEL Cs: THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 LAST W.M.; EXCEPT THE NORTH 168,0.5 FEET OF THE EAST 302.15 FEET THEREOF; AND EXCEPT THAT PORTION THEREOF FOR 14e AVENUE S.E. RIGHT OF WAY; SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF KINGY STATE OF WASHINGTON, PARCEL. H; THE NORTH 158.45 FEET OF THE EAST 342.15 FEET OF THE NORTH Y2 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 FAST W.M.; EXCEPT THAT PORTION THEREOF FOR 1487' AVENUE S.E. RIGHT OF WAY; SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. PARCEL 1: 07/31/2002 13:58 FAX 425,646 857 TRANSNATIQN DREW UNIT 3 CWST 0019/035 Order No.: 100¢9351 EXHIBIT A (continued) THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTH V/z OF THE NORTHWEST 114 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/q OF SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 25 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST W. M., DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SOUTH W ; THENCE NORTH 8820'44" WEST ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SOUTH '/z, 50 FEET T�yOHE� THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING NORTH 886 20' 44" WEST, 216.94 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00015'25"WEST PARALLEL WITH THE EAST LINE OF SAID SOUTH 1/2, 329.36 FEET TO THE SOUTH LINE THEREOF; THENCE SOUTH 88020'52" FAST ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SOUTH '/?-, 266.94 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER. THEREOF; THENCE NORTH 00415'25" EAST ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SOUTH 1/2, 313.35 FEET TO A POINT 16 FEET SOUTHERLY OF SAID NORTHEAST CORNER; THENCE NORTH 88020'+44" WEST PARALLEL WITH THE NORTH TINE OF SAID SOUTH 1/Z, 50 FEET; THENCE NORTH 00415'25" FAST PARALLEL WITH THE EAST LINE OF SAID SOUTH 1/2, 16 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BECINNTNG; SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF ICING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. PARCELJ: THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE NORTH 1/t OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W. M.; EXCEPT THE NORTH 132 FEET THEREOF; AND EXCEPT THE SOUTH 90 FEET OF THE EAST 174 FEET THEREOF; AND EXCEPT THE EAST 30 FEET OF THE REMAINDER, FOR 148TH AVENUE S.E.; SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. This sketch is provided, without charge, for your information. It is not intended to show all matters related to the property including, but not limited to, area, dimensions, easements, en. croachmenrs, or location of boundaries. It is not a part of, nor does it modify, the commitment or poiicy to which it is attached. The Company assumes NO LIABILITY for any matter relarf-d rn rh;e sketch_ ReferPnrPc vi,.,,,I.a l,o .,.._-j- -- Icing County DUES DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Renton, Wa 98055-1219 This certifica,v Wides the Seattle King County Department of Public Health and the Department of Development and Environmental Services with information necessary to evaluate development proposals. King County Certificate of Water Availability Do not write in this box number ® Building Permit ❑ Preliminary Plat or PUD ❑ Short Subdivision ❑ Rezone or other Applicant's name: CamWest Development, Sara Slatten Proposed use: Single Family Residences -- 140 lots Location: 12409 148`" Ave. SE & 12205 148th Ave. SE Renton #102305-9040,9304,9319,9174,9384,9415,9030,9022,9191,9031 (attach map and legal description if necessary) 1. a. Water will be provided by service connection only to an existing 8" (size) water main that is fronting the site. OR ® b. Water service will require an improvement to the water system of: ❑ (1) feet of water main to reach the site; and/or ❑ (2) The construction of a distribution system on the site; and/or N (3) Other (describe): Developer Extension Re uired 2. ® a. The water system is in conformance with a County approved water comprehensive plan. OR ❑ b. The water system improvement is not in conformance with a County approved water comprehensive plan and will require a water comprehensive plan amendment. (This may cause a delay in issuance of a permit or approval). 3. a. The proposed project is within the corporate limits of the district, or has been granted Boundary Review Board approval for extension of service outside the district or city, or is within the County approved service area of a private water purveyor. OR ❑ b. Annexation or Boundary Review Board (BRB) approval will be necessary to provide service. 4. ® a. Water is or will be available at the rate of flow and duration indicated below at no less than 20 psi measured at the nearest fire hydrant 350 feet from the build!ng/property (or as marked on the attached map): Rate of flow at Peak Demand Duration ❑ less than 500 gpm (approx. gpm) ❑ less than 1 hour ❑ 500 to 999 gpm ❑ 1 hour to 2 hours N 1000 gpm or more N 2 hours or more ❑ flow test of gpm ❑ ❑ calculation of gpm other (Note: Commercial building permits which includes multifamily structures require flow test or calculation.) OR ❑ b. Water system is not capable of providing fire flow. 5. ® a, Water system has certificates of water right or water right claims sufficient to provide service, OR ❑ b. Water system does not currently have necessary water rights or water right claims. Comments/conditions: Easements required, Need to schedule pre -design meeting with the District prior -to OP I certify that the above water purveyor information is true, This certification shall be valid for 1 year from date of signature. KING COUNTY WATER DISTRICT #90 LESTER PIELE RENEWAL FEES: WIN 1 year $50.00 Agency name Signatory name AFTER 1 year $125.00 SUPERINTENDENT 3/21/02 Title Signature , Date C:`My Documents Kris\Water Availability\CamWest-Shamrock.doc L0 CITY *I" RENTON ,.� Planning/Building/PublicWorks Department yesse Tanner, Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E., Administrator May 14, 2002 D Sara Slatten CamWest Development ' 9712 N.E. 120'h Place, Suite 100 Kirkland, WA 98034 SUBJECT: SANITARY SEWER AVAILABILITY -12409148M AVE, S.E. KCPID NO 102305-9040,99304,9319,9174,9384,9415,9030,9022,9191, AND 9031,140 -LOT SHAMROCK PLAT Dear Ms. Slatten: This letter shall serve as a supplement to the sewer availability prepared for this proposed development dated May 14, 2002. Sanitary sewer service from the City is available to serve this proposed development. Sewer is not currently directly available for service. The development will be responsible for bringing sewer to the proposed plat and to provide all sewer extensions to adjacent rights-of-way and within the actual development_ Initial review indicates that this development will serve into the City's existing system in N. E. 4ffi Street through currently developing plats in the City. The actual routing of service will be determined upon your formal application for permitting of sewer. This sewer availability is also conditioned upon the requirement that a covenant to annex document be executed prior to the issuance of any City permits for the installation of sewer to serve this plat. The format of this document is currently being developed by the City and will be forwarded to you upon its completion. Fees for this plat will include System Development Charges of $760.00 per lot, Special Assessment District charges for the East Renton System, $60 per lot side sewer permit fees, right- of-way fee and bond to be determined upon submittal, inspection and plan review fee of 5% of estimated construction cost, and a King County permit fee equal to 100% of costs billed by the County to the City. If you have any questions regarding this availability, please contact me at (425) 430-7212. Wastewater P—tility Supervisor MAIN 71L.F- #,-,fJPV n Lj>2,,,fcs=sA avec ewer vat a eser. oc w 1055 South Grady Way - Renton, Washington 9855 0 This paper contains 50% recycled material, 30'Y post consumer RENTON AHEAD OF THE CURVE SANITARY SEWER AVAIALITY FOR SINGLE FAMILY REST IAL BUILDING CITY OF RENTON 1055 5 Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055 Phone: (425) 430-7200 Fax: (425)430-7300 TO BE FILLED OUT BY APPLICANT: Date of Request Z(� Applicant's Name: clik j/1042fNj ('94hone No. A�; Mailing Address: �% j NE- IZ't �� S V I 10C) City State �-_ Zip Code �.'K Check one: Proposed Single Family Home Existing Single Family Home On Septic Other (Specify) { f Sl na--t, 40 (7 Location/Address: 1`4`h S _ King County Tax Account No. i b Z-6 0 S 9 b4t2 . [ 02-3 bSq 3 Q!J Legally Described as: IoZ�4s�31 �OZ3oS�l7� to2334, ZoZ3pS�3� THIS APPLICATION SHALT. INCLUDE A COPY OF THE PROPOSED SITE/PLOT PLAN. INFORMATION PROVIDED BY CITY: ❑ Sanitary Sewer Service will be provided by side sewer connection only to an existing size sewer main located within City records show a side sewer stub to the property ❑ Y ❑ N or ❑ Sanitary sewer service will require an extension of approximately of size sewer main located within or ❑ El 2_ ❑ The proposed development lies within applicant shall contact The District/Agency at See attached letter dated Payment of all applicable system development fees: (Fees are subject to change without notice) - System Development Charge: S 760 - Residential building sewer permit: S 60 - Latecomers, special assessment fees: $ -Right of Way Fee $ - Right of Way Bond (Refundable) $ service area; therefore, the (phone) for sewer availability. per single family residence per single family residence MAIN 9IL COPY (over) Shamrock Property Parcel and Ownership Last July 26, 2001 Parcel No. Property Owner 102305-9040 Patrick & Ann Marie Hunsaker 102305-9304 Patrick & Ann Marie Hunsaker 102305-9319 Patrick & Ann Marie Hunsal{er 102305-9174 Patrick & Ann Marie Hunsaker 102305-9384 Jim Hunsaker & John Hoiiand 102305-9415 Jim & Denise Hunsaker 102305-9030 Gregory Palanchuk 102305-9022 Jim & Denise Hunsaker 102305-9191 James Hunsaker 102305-9031 James Hunsaker King County Department of Developinerit and Environmental Services 900 Oakesdale Avenue Renton, WA 98055-12 tq Name of Project / Proposal Fire District Receipt S ham rock Pibe -tn Fire District # 10 Location of Project / Proposal S W ',i t" t'`'mp/i a� 14 S 4Ye- NE aA4 5F- 12 S rA 5f' (Address, parcel number, tax account number, legal description)* *One of these required for processing of application Pa,"wl':'s 102.105 -'10140.4 !02505 - 130q, 102-30-T- t3Iq , 107-3OS- qJ7LJ ta2-305- 43gq 107-305— aLi 15, !02.30 S " 1036 , 102 305 - U27-1 102305 - gl it . 102.205 - 103 i SEC 10 Name of Applicant Address of Applicant Telephone Number TWN 2.3 M +cine [ V, V"'Ier RNG. Gamin Lvesl'- S .De rGfq0 men Q72o AtE rZd *" P1 Smirk. 100 N2-5- 92-5- M s 5 KROLL PAGE �" , l an C,. Description: Type of Project / Proposal Check appropriate box(es) ❑ Apartment / Multifamily ❑ Commercial / Industrial ❑ Retail ❑ Residential: Single Family Residence ❑ Other (describe) ❑ Storz couplings required on Fire Hydrants ❑ Duplex WSubdivision ❑ Short Subdivision / Short Plat ❑ Rezone g803 q ❑ Conditional Use ❑ Unconditional Use ❑ Planned Unit Development ❑ School / Classroom Issuance of this receipt does not imply an approval, disapproval nor review of referenced project / proposal. This receipt shall be valid for 30 days from date of signature. h19' Agency Name Signatory Name r C e fives sr� 7 L U, Title Signature Date Distribution: White: Applicant (see below) Yellow: King County Building Services Division Pink: Fire District Note Applicant. at the time of application to DDES the white copy must be presented with project / proposal submittal. 0178 (Rev. 9197) Fire District: mail yellow copy to: King County _ Building Services Divi i�gr j ` i j , c Lam, 900 Oakesdale Avenue Renton, WA 98055-121 � Attn: Fire Engineering �C�- ��� 11 King County Department of Development and Environmental Services Land Use Services Division 900 Oakesdale Avenuc Southwest Renton, Washington 98055-1219 (206) 296-6600 TTY (206) 296-7217 Date: From: Name: Address City, Ste 0 Determination of Legal Status of a Lot Alternative formats available upon request RE: Lot Status Recognition of King County Tax Lot Nosy -SC-E ,q_ITC.fl ]p Per K.C.C. 19A.08.070 Determining and Maintaining Legal Status of a Lot Department of Development and Environmental Services Engineering Review Section, Land Use Services Division 900 Dakesdale Avenue Southwest Renton, Washington 98055-1219 Dear DDES: Enclosed find �;_ separate legal descriptions and the supporting documentation for the above-mentioned tax lot(s). I respectfully request that you review the enclosed information and recognize/segregate the parcel(s) into ( ( ) lots to meet the definition of a lot per K.C.C. 19A.04.210. Your submittal should include the deed history and tax history of the property and title report if the property was recently purchased. All reviews are subject to the current deposit and Hourly review fees. If you hav any questions or comments, you can reach me at (daytime phone number) or contact my agent at -e tYo &_JP_r s u,TTF F-� Signature of Own6f npy Determination of Legal Status of a Lot le-det-leglot.pdf 03/06/02 Page 1 of 1 Lo02w =%A This sketch is provided, without charge, for your information. It is not intended to show all matters related to the property including, but not limited to, area, dimensions, easements, en- croachments, or location of boundaries. It is not a part of, nor does it modify, the commitment or policy to which it is attached. The Company assumes NO LIABILITY for any matter related rn this sketch. References k• ,r.,aa M -- - -- t This sketch is provided, without charge, for your information. It is not intended to show all matters related to the property including, but not limited to, area, dimensions, easements, en- croachments, or location of boundaries. It is not a part of, nor does it modify, the commitment or policy to which it is attached. The Company assumes NO LIABILITY for any matter related rn this sketch. References k• ,r.,aa M -- - -- 07/31/2002 13:59 FAX 425 646 8576 TRANSNATIUN DREW UNTF CANWEST 0017/035 Order No.: 10049351 EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION: PARCEL, A: THE EAST 1/2 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST W.M.; EXCEPT THE EAST 100 FEET OF THE SOUTH 150 FEET THEREOF; AND EXCEPT THE SOUTH 42 FEET THEREOF AS CONVEYED TO KING COUNTY FOR S.E. 12e STREET BY DEED RECORDED UNDER KING COUNTY RECORDING NO$. 5755891 AND 5755892; SITUATE IN THE CITY OF RENTON, COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. PARCEL B: THE EAST 100 FEET OF THE SOUTH 150 FEET OF THE EAST 1g OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST W,K; EXCEPT THE SOUTH 42 FEET THEREOF AS CONVEYED TO KING COUNTY FOR S.E. 128TI, STREET BY DEED RECORDED UNDER KING COUNTY RECORDING NO. 5755891; SITUATE IN THE CITY OF RENTON, COUNTY OF ICING, STATE OF WASHINGTON, PARCEL C: THE NORTH 1//2 OF THE NORTH 1/z OF THE SOUTH lh OF THE NORTH lh OF THE EAST 1/2 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST W.M.; EXCEPT THE EAST 280 FEET THEREOF; TOGETHER WITH AN EASEMENT FOR INGRESS AND EGRESS OVER THE SOUTH 30 FEET OF SAID EAST 280 FEET; EXCEPT THAT PORTION THEREOF FOR 1487 AVENUE S.E. RIGHT OF WAY; SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF }GING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. PARCEL. D: THE SOUTH lh OF THE NORTH 112 OF THE SOUTH 1/8 OF THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE EAST/2 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST W.M.; EXCEPT COUNTY ROAD; 07/31/2002 13:59 FAY, 425 646 8576 TRANSNATION DREW UNIT > M ST 0]018/035 Ord6r N4.: 10049351 EXHIBIT A (continued) SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. PARCEL E: THE WEST 794 FEET OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTH '/z OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEA57114 OF SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST W.M.; SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON; ALSO KNOWN AS A PORTION OF LOT B OF UNRECORDED LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. S90M0351. PARCEL Pe THE SOUTH '/z OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 114 OF SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST W.M.; AND E (CEPT THE WEST 794 FEET THEREOF; AND EXCEPT THE EAST 230 FEET OF THE NORTH 300 FEET THEREOF; SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF DING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. PARCEL G: THE NORTH 1/h OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST W.M.; EXCEPT THE NORTH 168,05 FEET OF THE EAST 302.15 FEET THEREOF; AND EXCEPT THAT PORTION THEREOF FOR 24e AVENUE S.E. RIGHT OF WAY; SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. PARCEL H: THE NORTH 168.05 FEET OF THE EAST 302.15 FEET OF THE NORTH 1/7 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST W.M.; EXCEPT THAT PORTION THEREOF FOR 1487" AVENUE S.E. RIGHT OF WAY; SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. PARCEL I: 07/31/2002 13:58 FAI 425 646 8576 TRAN,SNATION DREW ITVIT CAMiYEST f 4191035 Order Nd.: 10049351 EXHIBIT A (Continued) THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTH '/z OF THE NORTHWEST 1A OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SEMON 10, 'TOWNSHIP 25 NORTH, RANGE 5 FAST W. M., DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SOUTH i/z ; THENCE NORTH 88020'44" WEST ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SOUTH 'h, 50 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING NORTH 88" 20' 44" WEST, 215.94 FEFT; THENCE SOUTH 00015'25"WEST PARALLEL WITH THE EAST LINE OF SAID SOUTH 1/z, 329.36 FEET TO THE SOUTH LINE THEREOF; THENCE SOUTH 88°20'52" EAST ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SOUTH ih, 265.94 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER THEREOF; THENCE NORTH 00°15'25" EAST ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SOUTH lb, 313.35 FEET TO A POINT 16 FEET SOUTHERLY OF SAID NORTHEAST CORNER; THENCE NORTH 88020'44" WEST PARALLEL WITH THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SOUTH lh, 50 FEET; THENCE NORTH 00015'25" EAST PARALLEL WITH THE EAST LINE OF SAID SOUTH 1/2, 16 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. PARCEL 3: THE SOUTH 1h OF THE NORTH lb OF THE NORTHEAST Y4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W. M.; EXCEPT THE NORTH 132 FEET THEREOF; AND EXCEPT THE SOUTH 90 FEET 4F THE EAST 174 FEET THEREOF; AND EXCEPT THE EAST 30 FEET OF THE REMAINDER, FOR 148'x' AVENUE S.E.; SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF ICING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. 07/31/2002 13:57 FAX 425 646 8576 TRANSNATION DREW 17IIT CAMST 1004/035 order No.: 10045351 4. GENERAL PROPERTY TAXES and SERVICE CHARGES, as follows, together with interest, penalty and statutory foreclosure costs, if any, after delinquency; tilt half delinquent on May 1; 2nd half delinquent on November x) Tax Account No.: 10230593014 Year Billed Fait! Balance 2002 $ 859.94 $429.97 $429.97 (Covers Parcel B) 5. GENERAL. PROPERTY TAXES and SERVICE CHARGES, as follows, together with interest, penalty and statutory foreclosure costs, if any, after delinquency: (1st half delinquent on May 1; 2nd half delinquent on November 1) Tax Account Nv.. 1023059319 Year Billed Paid Balance 2002 $2,368.24 $1,184.12 $1,184.12 (Covers Parcel Q 6. GENERAL. PROPERTY TAXES and SERVICE CHARGES, as follows, together with interest, penalty and statutory foreclosure costs, if any, after delinquency: (1st half delinquent on May 1; 2nd half delinquent on November 1) Tax Account No.: 1023059022 Year Billed Paid Balance 2002 $3,825.21 $1,912.61 $1,912.60 (Corers Parcel D) 7. GENERAL PROPERTY TAXES and SERVICE CHARGES, as follows, together with interest, penalty and statutory foreclosure costs, if any, after delinquency: (1st half delinquent on May r, 2nd half delinquent an November 1) Tax Account No.; 1023059415 Year Billed Paid Balance 2002 $2,13987 $1,069.94 $1.,069.93 (Covers Pard E) 8. GENERAL PROPERTY TAXES and SERVICE CHARGES, as follows, together with Interest, penalty and statutory foreclosure costs, if any, after delinquency: (1st half delinquent on May 1; 2nd half delinquent on November 1) Tax Account No.., 1023059174 Year Billed 2002 $ 3,565.66 (Covers Parcel F) Paid Balance $1,782.$3 $1,782.83 Subdivision Guarantee Page 3 of IS 07/31.12002 13:57 FAX 425 646 8676 TRANSNATION DREW UNIT y CAMWEST 005/035 order NQ.: 10049351 9. GENERAL PROPERTY TAXES and SERVICE CHARGES, as follows, together with interest, penalty and statutory foreclosure costs, if any, after delinquency: (1st half delinquent on May 1; 2nd half delinquent on November 1) Tax Account No.: 10230590.31 Year Billed Paid Balance 2002 $1,563.58 $ 781.79 $781.79 (Covers Parcel G) 10. GENERAL PROPERTY TAXES and SERVICE CHARGES, as follows, together with interest, penalty and statutory foreclosure costs, if any, after delinquency,. (1st halt delinquent on May 1; 2nd half delinquent on November 1) Tax Account No.. 1023054193 Year Billed Paid Balance 2002 $2,842.05 $1,421.03 $1,421..02 (Covers Parcel H) 11. GENERAL PROPERTY TAXES and SERVICE CHARGES, as follows, together with interest, penalty and statutory foreclosure casts, if any, after delinquency: (1st half delinquent on May 1; 2nd half delinquent on November 1) Tax Account No.. 1023059384 Year Billed Paid Balance 2002 $3,822.75 $1,911.38 $1,911.37 (Covers Parcel I) 12. GENERAL PROPERTY TAXES and SERVICE CHARGES, as follows, together with interest, penalty and statutory foreclosure Casts, If any, after delinquency: (1st half: delinquent on May 1; 2nd Ralf delinquent on November 1) Tax Account No.: 1023059030 Year Billed Paid Balance 2002 $3,146.25 $1,573.13 $1,573.12 (Covers Parcael ]) 13. Notice of tap or connection charges which have been or will be due in connection with development or re -development of the land as disclosed by marded instrument. Inquiries regarding the specific amount of the charges should be made to the city/county/agency. CITY/COUNTY/AGENCY: RECORDED: RECORDING NO.: CITY OF RENTON JUNE 21, 1996 9605210966 Subdivision Guarantee Page 4 of 18 0 0 King County Department of Development and Environmental Services Land Use Services Division 900 Oakesdale Avenue SW Renton, WA 98055-1219 (206) 296-6600 TTY (206) 296-7217 STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) SS COUNTY OF KING ) File Number: mo Application N Affidavit Concerning Sensitive Areas Cornplliance Alternative formats available upon request Project Location: [__---� r_ NE /44t --i, `C T The undersigned, being first duly sworn on oath deposes and says: 1. That the affiant is competent to be a witness herein, 2. That the affiant is the applicant for the above project; 3. That to the best of the afFant`s knowledge the sensitive areas on the _ development roposai site have not been 'Ileggally altered; and i~-�� 1 / A!�'� (JN 71 tTLrN DSl 0G L"T7 ill moi' / K. C 4. That the affiant has not previously been found to be in violation of sensitive areas regulations for any property in King County, or alternatively, that if there have been any violations, such violations have been/are being cured to the satisfaction of King County. IA- Qt �yr-' Appii t Sign re date and Place (City and State) I certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington khat the foregoing is true and correct. AFFIDAVrf CONCERNING SENSITIVE AREAS COMPLIANCE lc-aff-sacomp 11/02/01 Page 1 of 1 / L Lmpmlol 4 King County SEPA Checklist A. BACKGROUND Name of proposed project, if applicable: 4 Shamrock Property 2. Name of applicant: CamWest Development, Inc. 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: CamWest Development, Inc. 9720 NE 120th PL, Suite 1.00 Kirkland, WA 98034 Contact: Sara Slatten, Cam West Development, Inc. 4. Date checklist prepared: July 31, 2002 S. Agency requesting checklist: King County DDES 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if'applicable): Infrastructure Construction: Fall 2003 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or.further activity related to or connected with this proposal? (Ifyes, explain.) The two southern parcels containing the proposed detention pond are located within the city of Renton and will be processed through the city of Renton. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. Please refer to the wetland delineation by C. Gary Schulz dated 7/28102, Traffic Report by Garry Struthers Associates dated 7/02, and Soils Report by Associated Earth Sciences dated 9/7/01. 9.Do you know whether applications are pending far governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? Ifyes, explain. None known. 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed,for your proposal, if known. Required Approvals: Preliminary Plat, Site Development Permit, Final Plat Approval, N Individual Building Permit Approvals. �. 11. Give a brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need t repeat those answers on this page. Exhibit No. Item Na. Received Icing County Hearing Examiner SEPA CHECKLIST PAGE 1of 9 7 31/2002 LouoboA 0 0 The Shamrock property consists of 8 separate parcels totaling 29.6 acres. CamWest proposes to subdivide into 117 new single-family lots. 118 single-family lots are depicted to include an existing home on the northeast section of the site which will be retained. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if'known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. The Shamrock Property is located at 12409 148th Avenue SE. A site map, topography map, legal descriptions, and parcel I.D. numbers are included in the enclosed submittal. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. EARTH A. General description of the site (circle one): flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other The site ranges from flat to gently rolling and slopes from east to west and north to south. B. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? Describe location and areas of different topography. The steepest slope on site is approximately less than 20% in areas. C. What general opes of'soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, and mulch)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. Please refer to the enclosed soils logs from Associated Earth Sciences, dated 917/01, for soil type information and classification. D. Are there surface indications or histot), of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. None Known. E. Describe the purpose, type, location and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. The site will be graded to provide appropriate provisions for: roads, driveways, building pads, and yards. Outside fill will need to be brought onto the site. F. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. Erosion can take place on site. However, the King County Surface Water Control manual will be followed in order to minimize the amount of actual erosion. As necessary, filter fence and mulching of exposed soils will be implemented on the site to control potential erosion problems. G. About what percentage of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? Approximately 50% H. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any. SEPA CHECKLIST PAGE 2of 9 7/31/2002 0 • Filter fence, temporary ponds, hydroseed, straw bales, and other temporary erosion control measures will be utilized in accordance with Ding County development standards. 2. AIR A. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e. dust, automobile, odors, and industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed: If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. Dust, diesel and gasoline emissions during construction. Natural gas emissions from fireplaces will increase after home construction due to this proposal. B. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. None known C. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: Construction vehicles will be in proper working order to minimize emissions. 3. WATER A. Surface Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type, location and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. Wetlands are present on site. Please refer the attached wetland determination, dated 7/28/02, prepared by C. Gary Schulz. 2. Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200.feet) the described waters: If yes, please describe and attach available plans. Single-family house construction will take place near the on-site wetlands. Please refer to the attached preliminary plat drawing by Triad for detailed information. N/A N/A No No 3. Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source offill material. 4. Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. 5. Does the proposal lie within a .100 year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. 6. Does the proposal involve any discharge of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of 'waste and anticipated volume of discharge. B. Ground SEPA CHECKLIST PAGE Sof 9 7/31/2002 No NIA I . Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. 2. Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if'any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals ... ; agricultural; etc.) Describe the general size of the system, the number of'such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. C. Water Runoff (including storm water): Describe the source(v) of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection, transport/conveyance, and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. The surface run-off from the site will be routed to an on-site storm detention pond, located within the two southern parcels within the city of Renton limits. The water will be collected, stored, and then discharged. The storm water detention facility will be designed and constructed to meet King County codes, regulations, and guidelines. Please refer to our Level 1 Analysis prepared by Triad Associates, dated 7/02, and the Preliminary Plat by Triad for additional storm information. 2. Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. Oil from automobiles could enter the storm system. D. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts if any: A storm water detention vault will be designed for the proposed development that will meet or exceed the requirements, codes, and guidelines set forth by King County's Development Standards. 4. PLANTS A. Check or circle types of'vegetation found on the site: deciduous tree: alder, cottonwood, maple, aspen, other. evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other: shrubs: grass: crop or grain wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bulrush, skunk cabbage, other water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other other types of vegetation (Please list) Red Alder, Red Osier Dogwood, Pacific Willow, Hemlock, Vine Maple, Himalayan blackberry, and lady fern. Please refer to the wetland report by Gary Schulz for a detailed list of plants and trees present on site. B. What kind and amount o, f vegetation will be removed or altered? Trees and shrubs will be removed for development of streets, utilities and building sites. C. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None known. D. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: SEPA CHECKLIST PAGE 4of 9 7/31/2002 1�1 Street trees will be installed along the internal roads within the property and landscaping will be installed on all lots. 5. ANIMALS A. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other: mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: fish salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: B. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None known. D. Is the site part of'a migration route: If so, explain. Not known. E. Proposed measure to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: On-site wetlands to be preserved to provide habitat for wildlife. 6. ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES A. What kinds of'energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs: Describe whether it will be used fbr heating, manufacturing, etc. Electricity for lighting and natural gas for heating. B. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. Not aware of any affects. C. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: Construction will meet all codes, requirements, and guidelines that pertain to site development and single-family home construction per King County Standards. 7. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH A. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk or fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of'this proposal? If so, describe. The potential for a house fire is always a possibility. 1. Describe special emergency services that might be required. Normal fire, medical, and police emergency services. 2. Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: SEPA CHECKLIST PAGE 5of 9 7/31/2002 • All construction and development to meet or exceed local codes, requirements, and guidelines. B. Noise 1. What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic equipment, operation, other)? Traffic noise from adjacent roadways may affect the project. 2. What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. Short-term noise may be created by construction equipment and automobiles. Long-term noise may be created by automobiles. 3. Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: Short-term measures include keeping all machinery in proper working order and on site work is to occur only within approved operating hours as determined by King County. S. LAND AND SHORELINE USE A. What is the current use of 'the site and adjacent properties? The property is currently and abandoned nursery site. Single-family residences border the north and west property lines. 148" Avenue SE is adjacent to the eastern property line. B. Has the site been used for agriculture? If'so, describe. Not known. C. Describe any structures on the site. Abandoned single-family residences and outbuildings used for a commercial nursery business are present on site. D. Will any structures be demolished? Ifso, what? All abandoned nursery buildings will be demolished. R-4 F. What is the current zoning classification of the site? F. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? Urban Medium NIA G. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? H. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. (If unsure check with City) Yes, portions of the site have been designated as wetlands. Please refer to the wetland report by Gary Schulz for analysis and additional information. I. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project. Approximately 293 people would reside at the Shamrock Property based on 2.5 residents per unit and 1.17 new single family residences. SEPA CHECKLIST PAGE 6of 9 7/31/2002 N/A J. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: K. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: The site will be developed to meet King County's zoning, comprehensive plan designation, and building code to ensure compliance with the surrounding community. 9. HOUSING A. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. 117 new middle income residences. None. B. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? .Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. C. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if'any: Conform to King County's guidelines. 10. AESTHETICS A. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building materials) proposed? Approximately 30 feet tall structures with wood siding with brick or stone accents. B. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? No obstructions known. C. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: Architectural continuity with the new homes. The homes will feature classic architectural elements such as front porches, pitched roofs, and craftsman elevations. 11. LIGHT AND GLARE A. What type of'light or glare will the proposal produce: What time of day or night would it mainly occur: Street lighting and house lighting will be constructed per King County standards. B. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views: Not aware of any potential interference or hazard. C. What existing off -'site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? None known. D. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: SEPA CHECKLIST PAGE 7of 9 7/31/2002 Street lighting and house lighting will be constructed per Icing County standards. 12, RECREATION A. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? May Valley County Park is within close proximity to the project. No B. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. C. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: Over one acre of recreational area will be provided on-site as part of this proposal. 13. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION A. Are there any places or objects listed on, or, proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. None known B. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, .scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. None known C. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: NIA 14. TRANSPORTATION A. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if 'any. 148'' Ave SE is the entrance is proposed for the development. Please refer to the traffic study from Garry Struthers Associates, dated 7102. B. Is the site currently served by public transit? If ' not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop. Yes. Transit stops are located adjacent to the site along 148" Avenue SE. C How many parking spaces would the completed project have: How many would the project eliminate? Each residence will have parking available with their driveway and attached garage. No parking spaces will be eliminated. D. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? Is so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private) Additional streets will need to he constructed within the proposed plat. Please refer to the attached site plan for proposed locations. E. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? IF so, generally describe: SEPA CHECKLIST PAGE $of 9 7/31/2002 No F. How many weekday vehicular trips (one way) per day would be generated by the completed project? Please refer to the traffic study from Garry Struthers Associates, dated 7102, for information regarding anticipated vehicular trips. G. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: Payment of traffic impact fees in accordance with King County ordinances. 15. PUBLIC SERVICES A. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, healthcare, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. Police, Fire, Ambulance B. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. Impact fees may be imposed on the project as required by King County. 16. UTILITIES A. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other. B. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. Water provided by King County District 90, sewer provided by the City of Renton, telephone provided by Verizon. Electricity and gas provided by Puget Sound Energy. C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. Signature: Date Submitted:/ f /01-21 • Relationship to signer to project: SEPA CHECKLIST PAGE 9ot 9 7/31/2002 King County .Road Services Division Department of Transportation 20i South Jackson Street Seattle, WA 98; 04-3856 TYPE OF CERTIFICATE August 16, 2001 ® ORIGINAL Certificate 9 01325 ❑ CONDITIONAL File Number: 01-07-03-01 Expires: August 16, 2002 CERTIFICATE OF TRANSPORTATION CONCURRENCY ❑ Specific conditions are described on the reverse side of this certificate. Pursuant to King County Code, Chapter 14.70 as amended, this certificate confirms that the level of service standard used in the Transportation Concurrency Management program has been satisfied and sufficient road capacity is reserved for the development project described below. IMPORTANT: This certificate does not guarantee a development permit. Other transportation improvements and mitigation will be required to comply with Intersection Standards, Mitigation Payment System, King County road standards, and/or safety needs. 1. Applicant Name and Address: Sara 5latten, Camwest Development 9720 NE 120th Place, Suite 100, Kirkland, WA 98034 2_ Property Location: a. Property Address: SE 128th Street & 146th Avenue SE b. Development Name: c. Parcel Number: 1023059040,9304, 9415,9031,9319,9174,9384,9030,9022,9191 3. Type of Development Permit To Be Requested: Formai Plat 4. Proposed Land Use. Single Family Residential 5. Zone Location and Reserved Units: a. Concurrency Zone: 442 Community Planning Area: Newcastle , i. Commercial Project -Total Square Feet: 0 ii. Multi -family - Number of Units: 0 iii. Single family - Number of Units: 140 6. This Certificate is subject to the following general conditions: a. This Certificate of Concurrency runs with the land and is transferable only to subsequent owners of the same property for the stated development, subject to the terms, conditions and expiration date listed herein_ This Certificate of Concurrency is not transferable to any other property and has no commercial value. This Certificate Expires: August 16, 2002 unless you apply for the development permit described above, prior to that date. If this requirement is not met the King County Department of Transportation reserves the option to cancel your certificate and capacity reservation. When you apply for a development permit with King County's Department of Development and Environmental Services (DDES), bring this Certificate of Transportation Concurrency as part of the development application package. If you have any questions, please tail (206) 263.4722. _Iz F Linda Dougherty, Acting Manager, Road Servic on Department of Transportation. King County, Washington I Exhibit No. l Item No. �--- 4 Aeceivetl King County Tearing Examiner Subdivision Density and KingCaunty. Dimension Calculations Departntcnt of Dcvclopn)cnf and Fa wrvnewatal Serviecs -La'rt9 qsL_ Services Mvisiun' .. , 9[rD0lSsdale.nv�riue5out1;4cst_. -' Alternative formats available I%entQn. Washirsgton 98055-1 2 1 9 j_j (zOki);296-bfi00 7-rY 206) 217 upon upon request File Number (To be filled in by DDES) Several development regulations play a role in the creation of a subdivision within King County. Determining the allowable density, minimum density, and a lot width on a piece of property can be confusing. This worksheet will assist you in correctly applying specific portions of the code and will be used to determine if a proposed subdivision or short subdivision meets the density and dimensions provisions of the King County Zoning Code (Title 21A). This worksheet is designed to assist applicants and does not replace compliance with adopted local, state and federal laws. Pre -application conferences are required prior to submittal of a subdivision or short subdivision. These conferences help to clarify issues and answer questions. They may save you both time and money by eliminating delays resulting from requests for additional information and revisions. You may call (206) 296-6600 to find out how to arrange for a pre -application conference. Worksheet Prepared By: S,41 A SLA--iTF-t� Date: —7—D $— O��'L (Print Name) Subdivision Name: 84AM Y, EtL�, LLLC Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation: J J TZ-I_AAi MEDIV Zoning: If more than one Comprehensive Plan Land Use designation or zone classification exists for the property, show the boundary between the land uses or zones and the area within each on the preliminary plat map. If a single lot is divided by a zone boundary, transferring density across zones on that lot may be permitted subject to the provisions of K.C.C. 21A.12.200. Please complete only the aoolicable Portions of this form I. Site Area K.C.C. 21A.06.11721 also see MC.C. 21A.12.0801: Site area (in square feet) is the gross horizontal area of the project site, less submerged lands as defined by K.C.C. 21A.06.1265, and less areas which are required to be dedicated on the perimeter of a project site for the public rights-of-way. square feet in submerged land (any land below the ordinary high n - water mark — see K.C.C. 21A.06.825) +_-— square feet in perimeter rights-of-way which will be required to be Tota I dedicated (area 30 feet from center line of road) — � /1 �1 Flr�, m S s� . Subdivision Density and Dimension Calculations Ircal-saGden 11130/01 Calculation: j12.!9)'7376 Gross horizontal area of the project site - -0- Total submerged lands and rights-of-way Site area in square feet NOTE: To continue calculations, convert site area in square feet -to acres by dividing by 43,560 Site area in acres NOTE: When calculating the site area for parcels in the RA Zone, if the site area should result in a fraction of an acre, the following shall apply: Fractions of .50 or above shall be rounded up to the next whole number and fractions below .50 shall be rounded down. Example: If the site area in acres is 19.5 acres (less the submerged land and less the area that is required to be dedicated on the perimeter of a project site for public right-of-way) the site area can be rounded up to 20 acres. No further rounding is allowed. (See K.C.C. 21A.12.080) II. Base Density (K.C.C. 21A.12.030 - .040 tables): The base density is determined by the zone designations(s) for the lot. du/acre III. Allowable Dwelling Units and Rounding (K.C.C. 21A.12.070): The base number of dwelling units is calculated by multiplying the site area by the base density in dwelling units per acre (from K.C.C. 21A.12.030 - .040 tables). '�J, ( site area in acres (see Section 1.) X . base density (see Section II) _ -- allowable dwelling units Except as noted below, when calculations result in a fraction, the fraction is rounded to the nearest whole number as follows: A. Fractions of .50 or above shall be rounded up; and B. Fractions below .50 shall be rounded down. NOTE: For parcels in the RA Zone, no rounding is allowed when calculating the allowable number of dwelling units. For example, if the calculation of the number of dwelling units equaled 2.75, the result would be 2 dwelling units. Rounding up to 3 is not allowed. (See K.C.C. 21A.12.070(E)). IV. Required On-site Recreation Space (K.C.C. 21A.14.180): This section must be completed only if the proposal is a residential development if more than four dwelling units in the UR and R zones, stand-alone townhouses in the NB zone on Subdivision Density and Dimension Calcutatlons Ic-cal-subden 11J30/D1 Page 2 of 6 property designated Commercial Outside of Center if more than four units, or any mixed use development if more than four units. Recreation space must be computed by multiplying the recreation space requirement per unit type by the proposed number of such dwelling units (K.C.C. 21A.14.180). Note: King County has the discretion to accept a fee in lieu of all or a portion of the required recreation space per K.C.C. 21A.14.185. Apartments and town houses developed at a density greater than eight units per acre, and mixed use must provide recreational space as follows: 90 square feet X proposed number of studio and one bedroom units 170 square feet X proposed number of two bedroom units + 170 square feet X proposed number of three or more bedroom units + Recreation space requirement Residential subdivisions, townhouses and apartments developed at a density of eight units or less per acre must provide recreational space as follows: 390 square feet X Jam_ proposed number of units - Mobile home parks shall provide recreational space as follows: 260 square feet X proposed number of units = V. Net Buildable Area W-C.C. 21A.06.79 This section is used for computing minimum density and must be completed only if the site is located in the R-4 through R-48 zones and designated Urban by the King County Comprehensive Plan. The net buildable area is the site area (see Section I) less the following areas: areas within a project site which are required to be dedicated for public rights-of-way in excess of sixty (60') of width +T sensitive areas and their buffers, to the extent they are required by King County to remain undeveloped hPlf f-04. + _ areas required for above ground stormwater control facilities including, but not limited to, retention/detention ponds, biofiltration swales and setbacks from such ponds and swales Off -S14 + areas required by King County to be dedicated or reserved as on-site recreation areas. on � -{on Deduct area within stormwater control facility if requesting recreation space credit as laarce- S allowed by K.C.C. 21A.14.180 (see Section IV) + regional utility corridorsr and + A977 other areas, excluding setbacksr required by King County to remain undeveloped _ Notal reductions Affr 11 Calculation: `t2. 9.37 site area in square feet (see Sectionl) Total reductions 1_$_._ 1 Net buildable area in square feet NOTE: convert site area is square feet to acres by dividing by 93,560 _ �� Net buildable area in acres Subdivision Density and Dimension Calculations Iccal-subden 11/30/01 Page 3 orb VI. Minimum Urban Residential Density (K.C.C. 21A.12.060): The minimum density requirement applies gnly to the R-4 through R-48 zones. Minimum density is determined by multiplying the base density in dwelling units per acre (see Section II) by the net buildable area of the site in acres (see Section V) and then multiplying the resulting product by the minimum density percentage from the K.C.C. 21A.12.030 table. The minimum density requirements may be phased or waived by King County in certain cases. (See K.C.C. 21A.12.060.) Also, the minimum density requirement does not apply to properties zoned R-4 located within the rural town of Fall City. (See K.C.C. 21A.12.030(8)12.) Calculation: 4 base density in du/ac (see Section II) Xlooj 6 Net buildable area in acres (see Section V) _ -& X minimum density % set forth in K.C.C. 21A.12.0313 or as adjusted in Section VII 7.q minimum dwelling units required VII. Minimum Density Adjustments for Moderate SloM (K.C.C. 21A.12.087): Residential developments in the R-4, R-6 and R-8 zones may modify the minimum density factor in K.C.C. 21A.12.030 based on the weighted average slope of the net buildable area of the site (see Section V). To determine the weighted average slope, a topographic survey is required to calculate the net buildable area(s) within each of the following slope increments and then multiplying the number of square feet in each slope increment by the median slope value of each slope increment as follows: sq. ft 0-5% slope increment X 2.5% median slope value sq. ft 5-10% slope increment X 7.5% median slope value = + sq. ft 10-15% slope increment X 12.5% median slope value = + sq. ft 15-20% slope increment X 17.5% median slope value = + sq. ft 20-25% slope increment X 22.5% median slope value = + sq. ft 25-30% slope increment X 27.5% median slope value = + sq. ft 30-35% slope increment X 32.5% median slope value = + sq. ft 35-40% slope increment X 37.5% median slope value = + Total square feet Total square feet in net buildable area adjusted for slope Calculation: total square feet adjusted for slope divided by total square feet in net buildable area weighted average slope of net buildable area °/a (Note: multiply by 100 to convert to percent — round up to nearest whole percent) Use the table below to determine the minimum density factor. This density is substituted for the minimum density factor in K.C.C. 21A.12.030 table when calculating the minimum density as shown in Section VI of this worksheet. Weighted Average Slope of Net Minimum Density Factor Buildable Areas of Site: 0% - less than 5% 85% 5% -- less than 15% 83%, less 1.5% each 1% of average sloe in excess of 5% 15% -- less than 40% 66%, less 2.0% for each 1% of average sloe in excess of 15% Subdinsion Density and Dimension Calculations Ic-cal-subden I1/30/01 Page 4 of6 EXAMPLE CALCULATION FOR MINIMUM DENSITY ADJUSTMENTS FOR MODERATE SLOPES: 3,250 Total square feet adjusted for slope divided by 30,000 Total square feet in net buildable area = 108333 Weighted average slope of net buildable area - 11% (Note: multiply by 100 to convert to percent — round up to nearest whale percent) Using the table above, an 11% weighted average slope of net buildable area falls within the 5% -- less than 15% range which has a minimum density factor of 830/0, less 1.5% for each 1% of average slope in excess of 5%. Since 11% is 6% above 5%, multiply 6 times 1.5 which would equal 9%. Subtract 9% from 839/b for an adjusted minimum density factor of 74%. This replaces the minimum density factor in K.C.C. 21A.12.030 table. VIII. Maximum Dwelling Units Allowed (K.C.C. 21A.12.030 -.040): This section should be completed only if the proposal includes application of residential density incentives (K.C.C. 21A.34) or transfer of density rights (K.C.C. 21A.37). Maximum density is calculated by adding the bonus or transfer units authorized to the base units calculated in Section III of this worksheet: The maximum density permitted through residential density incentives is 150 percent of the base density (see Section II) of the underlying zoning of the development or 200 percent of the base density for proposals with 100 percent affordable units. The maximum density permitted through transfer of density rights is 150 percent of the base density (see Section II) of the underlying zoning of the development. base density in dwelling units per acre see (Section II) X 150% = maximum density maximum density in dwelling units per acre X site area in acres = maximum dwelling units allowed utilizing density incentives (K.C.C. 21A.34) base density in dwelling units per acre (see Section II) X 200% = maximum density maximum density in dwelling units per acre X site area in acres = maximum dwelling units allowed utilizing density incentives with 100 percent affordable units (K.C.C. 21A.34) base density in dwelling units per acre (see Section II) X 150% = maximum density maximum density in dwelling units per acre X site area in acres = maximum dwelling units allowed utilizing density transfers (K.C.C. 21A.37) Calculation: base allowable dwelling units calculated in Section III + bonus units authorized by K.C.C. 21A.34 + transfer units authorized by K.C.C. 21A.37 total dwelling units (cannot exceed maximum calculated above) IX. Minimum Lot Area For Construction (K.C.0 21A.12.1001: Except as provided for nonconformances in K.C.C. 21A.32: SubdMsion Density and Dimension calculations Ic-cal-subden 11/30/01 Page 5 of 6 sq. ft 0-50/a slope increment X 2.5% median slope value = _ + 10,000 sq. ft 5-10% slope increment X 7.5% median slope value = 750 + + 20,000 sq. ft 10-15% slope increment X 12.5% median slope value = 2,500 + + sq. ft 15-20% slope increment X 17.5% median slope value = + + sq. ft 20-25% slope increment X 22.5% median slope value = + + sq. ft 25-30% slope increment X 27.5% median slope value = + + sq. ft 30-35% slope increment X 32.5% median slope value = + + sq. ft. 35-40% slope increment X 37.5 % median slope value = + 30,000 Total square feet 3,250 Total square feet in net buildable area adjusted for slope 3,250 Total square feet adjusted for slope divided by 30,000 Total square feet in net buildable area = 108333 Weighted average slope of net buildable area - 11% (Note: multiply by 100 to convert to percent — round up to nearest whale percent) Using the table above, an 11% weighted average slope of net buildable area falls within the 5% -- less than 15% range which has a minimum density factor of 830/0, less 1.5% for each 1% of average slope in excess of 5%. Since 11% is 6% above 5%, multiply 6 times 1.5 which would equal 9%. Subtract 9% from 839/b for an adjusted minimum density factor of 74%. This replaces the minimum density factor in K.C.C. 21A.12.030 table. VIII. Maximum Dwelling Units Allowed (K.C.C. 21A.12.030 -.040): This section should be completed only if the proposal includes application of residential density incentives (K.C.C. 21A.34) or transfer of density rights (K.C.C. 21A.37). Maximum density is calculated by adding the bonus or transfer units authorized to the base units calculated in Section III of this worksheet: The maximum density permitted through residential density incentives is 150 percent of the base density (see Section II) of the underlying zoning of the development or 200 percent of the base density for proposals with 100 percent affordable units. The maximum density permitted through transfer of density rights is 150 percent of the base density (see Section II) of the underlying zoning of the development. base density in dwelling units per acre see (Section II) X 150% = maximum density maximum density in dwelling units per acre X site area in acres = maximum dwelling units allowed utilizing density incentives (K.C.C. 21A.34) base density in dwelling units per acre (see Section II) X 200% = maximum density maximum density in dwelling units per acre X site area in acres = maximum dwelling units allowed utilizing density incentives with 100 percent affordable units (K.C.C. 21A.34) base density in dwelling units per acre (see Section II) X 150% = maximum density maximum density in dwelling units per acre X site area in acres = maximum dwelling units allowed utilizing density transfers (K.C.C. 21A.37) Calculation: base allowable dwelling units calculated in Section III + bonus units authorized by K.C.C. 21A.34 + transfer units authorized by K.C.C. 21A.37 total dwelling units (cannot exceed maximum calculated above) IX. Minimum Lot Area For Construction (K.C.0 21A.12.1001: Except as provided for nonconformances in K.C.C. 21A.32: SubdMsion Density and Dimension calculations Ic-cal-subden 11/30/01 Page 5 of 6 A. In the UR and R zones, no construction shall be permitted on a lot that contains an area of less than 2,500 square feet or that does not comply with the applicable minimum lot width, except for townhouse developments, zero - lot -line subdivisions, or lots created prior to February 2, 1995, in a recorded subdivision or short subdivision which complied with applicable laws, and; B. In the A, F, or RA Zones: 1. Construction shall not be permitted on a lot containing less than 5,000 square feet; and 2. Construction shall be limited to one dwelling unit and residential accessory uses for lots containing greater than 5,000 square feet, but less than 12,500 square feet. (K.C.C. 21A.12.100) X. Lot Width MC.C. 21A.12.D50(B)): Lot widths shall be measured by scaling a circle of the applicable diameter within the boundaries of the lot as shown below, provided than an access easement shall not be included within the circle. (See K.C.C. 21A.12.050). Lot Width Measurement Subdivision Density and Dimension Galcuiabons Ic-cal-subden 11/30/01 Page 6 of 6 King County Department of Development and Environmental Services 900 4akesdale Avenue SW Renton, WA 98055-1219 June 6, 2002 . 1J Jason Jordan, Planner City of Renton p `� Renton City Hall;- ' 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 RE: Shamrock Property PreapplicationMeetina DDES Activity No. A02P0138 Dear Mr. Jordan: As per our June 5, 2002 phone conversation, enclosed is a copy of the preappiication request for the Shamrock Property by Cam -West Development, Inc. This proposal is located within the City of Renton and Unincorporated King County. The layout submitted to the Dept. of Development and Environmental Services Division (DDES) consists of 118 lots, ranging from approximately 4,000 to 7,700 square feet in size and tracts for drainage, sensitive areas and recreation. Your are invited to the preapplication meeting with the applicant and DDES staff to be held June 19, 2002 at 1:30 p.m. at DDES. Written comments are welcome if you are unable to attend. If you have any question, please call me at (206) 296-7167. Thank you. 5incer I Ki' Claussen, Planner III Current Planning Section Land Use Services Division, DDES Cc: Sara Slatten, Cam -West Development Inc. Bruce Whittaker, Senior Engineer, Engineering Review Section, LUSD Cool, I.D20FtNt1O14 Oe SHAMROCK Kirin Cotr iw, [Fas h1'1rgtr»t Preliminary Technical Information Report Revise: 1018103 Cl `a Job # 01-159 Lew* Pao 11 MAIN FILE COPY f Exhibit No. s Item No., Ln Receive King County Hearing Examiner • SHAMROCK King Counh), Washingto,l Preliminary Technical Information Report Revise: 1018103 Job # 01-159 40 Revision Date(s) Prepared By: Ben Rutkowski Schwin Chaosilapakul Reviewed By: Rebecca Cushman, PE • mAm na- COP'S • Prepared For: CaTnWest Real Estate Development, Inc. Prepared By: Ben Rutkowski schwin Chaosilapakul Reviewed By: Rebecca Cushman, P1~ 0 Issued October 8, 2003 EXPIRES 111151 • • I-eclulical Information Report TABLE OF CONTENTS I PROJECT OVERVIE'vV............................................................................. I-1 1.1 Low IMPACI Dl:vLt.orntr;N 1 y9I I1101)01 06Y (Nc3R 1I i Pc1r1t:).... ............ ..... ............_ ................ 12 2 CONDITIONS AND REQUIRENIENTS SLIM IARI'...................................... ................................. 2-1 2.1 CORE REQUIREMENTS-- ............ ......... .................................. ........... ................ 2-1 3 OFFSITE ANALYSIS............................................................................................................................3-1 4 FLOW CONTROL AND WATER QUALITY DESIGN....................................................................4-1 4.1 DRAINAGE CONCEPT ......... ...... ............... .................. .................... ......... -- ............. .................. 4-I 4.2 FACILITY DESIGN ............................ ..................................... ............... ..................................... 4-2 5 CONVEYANCE SYSTEM ANALYSIS & DESIGN...........................................................................5-1 6 SPECIAL REPORTS AND STUDIES ........... .......................... ............................................................. 6-1 6.1 WF;TLANDRECHARGE.............................. .................. ....... .............. ..--- ......... ......... ........ .............. 6-1 6.2 WEST WETLAND ANALYSIS ........... ........ ............. --- ........... ..... ............................ ...... .................. 6-3 7 OTHER PERI'`IITS.................................................................................................................................7-1 8 TESC ANALYSIS AND DESIGN.........................................................................................................8-1 9 BOND QUANTITIES, FACILITY SUMMARIES, AND DECLARATION OF COVENANT ...... 9-1 9.1 BOND QUANTITIES ...........................................................................................................................9-1 9.2 FACILI7 Y SUMMARIES...................................................................................................................... 9-1 9.3 Dk.('LARATION OF COVENANT ..................... .............. --- .......... ......... ....................................... ...... 9-1 10 OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE ................... .......................................................................... 10-1 ;';.10/7?2003 Joh *:a1-,59TRIAD • Technical lrxformation Report LIST OF SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION Vote: Where applicable. supplemcn%il infor111tition is 10CMCd at the cnd of each section. Section 1: TIR Worksheet* Section I1: King County Community Planning Areas Section III: Level 1 Downstream Analysis, Triad Associates, August 4", 2003 Existing Conditions Exhibit Developed Conditions Exhibit Soils Survey Soils Legend Section IV: Existing Drainage Basins Exhibit Developed Drainage Basins Exhibit Figure 3.2.2A Rainfall Regions and Regional Scale Factors Figure 6AAA Precipitation for Mean Annual Storm KCRTS Output Section V: KCRTS 15 -Minute Conveyance Flow Output* KCBW Output* Detention%Water Quality Facility Conveyance Tributary Exhibit* Section VI: Wetland Analysis Section IX: Stormwater Facility Summary Sheet* Pond Details* *To be provided at Final Engineering Submittal ", M7i2003 Joh 401-159 /TRIAD Fcchiiical lnfnimation Report 0 1 PROJECT OVERVIEW The project proposes to create 1 tai single-family lots on an approximately 34.5 acre property. Approximately 30.5 acres will be developed, with the remainder left as protected wetlands and associated buffers. The site is north of 128'x' Steet SE, %vest of 148`x' Avcnue SE. The property is within Section 10, Township 2.3 North, Range 5 Fast, W.M., King County, Washington. Please see the Vicinity Map below. - - -- —F ..� - V J�fl. `I f 1 ? - 5E 132,e s L'-- - - VICINITY MAP Not to Scale • X1017?2003 Jobfl1-159 TRIAD Page 1- l t'echnit at InfoFcuation Report Site visits were perfori-ned on July 2, 2001, .luly 15, 2002 and July 14, 2003. Refcr to the Lcti cl I Downstream Analysis in Section 3 for description of the silt udder I}redeveloped conditions. The portion of the site between SE 124`x' Street and the northern boundary will incorporate Low Impact Development (LID) measures. These measures include: use of amended soils throughout the project; use of open channel conveyance elements (vegetated swales) in lieu of pipe systems where feasible; use of flow dispersion trenches and perforated stub -outs to manage roof and footing drainage from individual lots; and the incorporation of a rain garden. The portion of the site between SF 124`x' Street and the southern boundary will be designed assuming standard development methods. 1.1 Low Impact Development Methodology (Areas Tributary to the North Pond) 0 Low Impact Development practices help to reduce developed site runoff using distributed source control and treatment practices. Native vegetation, landscaping, and small-scale stormwater controls capture, treat, infiltrate, evaporate, and transpire rainfall at the parcel or subdivision level. This section will highlight the specific designs used to achieve this goal. Amended Soils Amended soil is the result of tilling compost in with the natural soil. By doing so, the amended soil has more capacity to treat, store and infiltrate water. This is turn will reduce runoff, promote plant health and decrease the need for landscape watering and fertilization. This project will incorporate 5-10 inches of amended soil on top of 4 inches of scarified soil. Open 5w•ales Open swales lined with vegetated, amended soils, are used wherever possible as a means of surface water- conveyance- This maximizes the opportunity for water duality treatment and infiltration. The open swales are designed as wide as possible and as shallow as feasible to 0 ' 101712003 Page 1-2 Job 401 -1 59 TR7 nD I'echnicil Inii>rmation Report provide a natural appearance, while still providing adequate conveyance capacity. Slopes are desicnned to be less than ��',%,, with flatter areas and shallow berms provided to elicourage ponding. Sonle swales will fie designed as Moretention areas with additional depth of amended soils. These areas will provide additional runoff storage capacity and further help to attenuate flow rates. Underdrains will be incorporated to prevent ponding for an excessive period of time. Where feasible, swales are provided to convey runoff from the access roadways. Runoff is introduced to these swales either by using a series of narrow curb drops, or by using shallow curb inlets and connecting pipe. The open swales will be located in private tracts and will be maintained by a home owners association. Lot Draina-2e Lot drainage will be addressed in three different ways throughout the site_ Runoff from sonic lots will bypass the proposed detention pond and provide recharge to the wetland areas. This will be accomplished by connecting the roof- and footing drains to a backyard dispersion trench designed to discharge overflow runoff to the wetland in sheet fashion evenly back into the wetland, Other lots will discharge roof and footing drainage to an open Swale via a gravel -encased perforated pipe. This "perforated stub -out" will provide increased opportunity for infiltration_ These lots will be graded to promote sheet flow across the yard and toward the open Swale. All yards will contain amended soils to increase attenuation. The lots where an open swale is not accessible will discharge into the street conveyance system via perforated stub -outs and perforated connecting pipe. The driveways will be sloped towards the access roadway. Rain Carden Rain gardens are small depressions constructed near stormwater flow sources. They consist of different layers of gravel, amended soils and mulch beneath a vegetation cover. Rain gardens collect and soak up rainwater, capture pollutants, and detain or infiltrate standing water: This project will incorporate a rain garden located in the open space near the northeast intersection of 145`x' Avenue SE and SE 124`t' Street. The grading in the north east portion of the site will direct most of the runoff to this feature via open swales. The rain garden will be planted with native species that are wet and dry tolerant and will add to the biodiversity of -the area. 1017;2003 Page 1-3 Job #01-159 /TRIAD Technical Infonnatiori Rl:pon • 2 CONDITIONS AND REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY • 2.1 CORE REQUIREMENTS 2.1.1 Core Requirement #1: Discharge at the Natural Location Runoff from the existing site naturally discharges to three different places. Please refer to the Level 1 Downstream Analysis in Section 3 for a description of each sub -basin. In the developed condition, a portion of the flow will be routed to two onsite ponds and a portion will be allowed to bypass the detention facility as wetland recharge. The northern pond releases to the adjacent wetland. The southern pond releases to the existing conveyance system located along S.E. 128'x' Street. 2.1.2 Core Requirement #2: Offsite Analysis Please see Section 3. 2.1.3 Core Requirement #3: Flow Control See Section 4. A level 2 detention standard has been applied. 2.1.4 Core Requirement #4:. Conveyance System See Section b Conveyance System Analysis and Design - 2.1.5 Core Requirement #5: Erosion and Sediment Control See Section 9 Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Analysis and Design. 2.1.6 Core Requirement #6: Operations and Maintenance This is a publicly maintained system. 2.1.7 Core Requirement #7: Bonds and Liability See Section 9 — Bond Quantity Work Shect, Retention/Detention Facility Summary, and Declaration of Covenant. ,,Z,10!712003 Page 2-1 Job #01-1 59 /TRIAD 0 • Technical hif-)nnat on Report 2.1.8 Core Requirement #8: Water Quality See Section 4- This project Eklll use the Basic Water Quality iMcnli and wiH utilize the "Dead Storage- nlethod. 2.1.9 Special Requirement #1: Other Adopted Area -Specific Requirements 2.1.9.1 Critical Drainage Areas Not applicable. 2.1.9.2 Master Drainage Plan Not applicable. 2.1.9.3 Adopted Basins or Community Plans According to the King County Basin Reconnaissance Program, the site is located within the East Lake Washington sub -basin of the Cedar Drainage Basin, 2.19.4 Lake Management Plans Not applicable. 2.1.9.5 Shared Facility Drainage Plans Not applicable. 2.1.10 Special Requirement #2: Floodplain/Floodway Delineation The limits of this project do not Iie in a ! 00 -year noodplain. 2.1.11 Special Requirement #3: Flood Protection Facilities This special requirement is required for projects with a Class 1 or 2 streams with an existing flood protection facility. The site does not contain the above-mentioned itelns. c�' 10/712003 Job #01-159 TRIAD Page 2-2 0 • Tectu7ical Inforntition Report 2.1.12 Special Requirement #4: Source Controls Not applicable. This project is not a comrnei-cial. industnal_ multifamily or a redcvclopment ol'a commercial, industrial or multi family project. 2.1.13 Special Requirement #5: Oil Control Not applicable. This project is not proposing to develop or redevelop a high -use site. 10/7/2003 Page 2_3 Job #01-159 ,TRIAD IechnicLfl Information Report 40 3 OFFSITE ANALYSIS Please refer to Level l Downstream .analysis prepared by Triad Associates, hilt' 29, 2002 • and revised September 12, 2003 enclosed. T`101712003 Page -3-1 Job #01-159TRIAD • Prepared For: CamWest Real Estate Development, Inc. Prepared By: Schwin Chaosilapakul Ben Rutkowski Reviewed By: Rebecca Cushman, PE Issued July 29, 2002 Revised September 12, 2003 0 7359 NAL EXPIRES 11/15/. ` Sh.awrock l_.evel 1 Dovviistream .Analysis Table of Contents 0 1 INTRODUCTION 3 2 SITE................................................................... 3 UPSTREAM DRAINAGE ANALYSIS.................................................................4 3.1 Upstream Basin------------------------------•-........---•--..--........................... ............ 4 4 DOWNSTREAM DRAINAGE ANALYSIS...........................................................5 4.1 Onsite Runoff....................................................................................................... 4.2 Offsite Runoff................................................................------........................ 6 4.3 Downstream Drainage Problems............................................................ ....... 7 5 RESOURCES USED FOR ANALYSIS...............................................................8 5.1 Sensitive Areas Folio --.......• ..................•-• •---......................... 8 5.2 King County Basin Reconnaissance Program................................................................ 8 5.3 Soils Survey for the King County Area............................................................................ 8 5.4 King County Community Planning Area.......................................................................... 8 6 DRAINAGE CONCEPT.......................................................................................9 Appendix. .... ......................................................................................... L)evelrJpe(C orrditiorls Exhibit E.xistin,; Conditions Erhibil D011�71.slrccnn lVai nage F.yhibit L,�)stream TKibutai y Arens Exhibit (onsite, for downstream analysis) Soils Map and Legend, I Iydrologic Soils Group Table Sensitive .areas I{olio King County Basin Reconnaissance Program King County Community Planning A-rea Complaints • fl�luc ., • 0 C Shamrock level 1 UoVVTIStrea111 AlKilvsis 1 INTRODUCTION The project proposes to create l 1S single-family lots on an approximately 29.6 acre property. Approxirmately 22.1 acres will be included in the development site, and the remainder left as protected wetlands and associated buffers. The site is located north of 128'1' St. SE and west of 148"' /Avenue SE. The property is within Section 10, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., King County, Washington. Please see the Vicinity, Map below. VICINITY 'MAP Alm to Scale Site visits .ere performed on July 2, 2001 and July 15, 2002 and July 14, 2003 to observe the upstream and dovmstream dralmwe conditions. The folloxving analysis is based on these site visits and related research oFavailable records. Pa\?e :", \ G 40 I I IIIVT `la TE :I7 I VICINITY 'MAP Alm to Scale Site visits .ere performed on July 2, 2001 and July 15, 2002 and July 14, 2003 to observe the upstream and dovmstream dralmwe conditions. The folloxving analysis is based on these site visits and related research oFavailable records. Pa\?e :", • Shernrock J. -eve.] 1 T}ownstrcam Arndysis 2 SITE The existing site is a wholesale nursery. -ith two residences and suvural outbuildings that will be dtmolishcd (see F._xistinc,1:1Conditions Exhibit, in Appendix). The site generally slopes fi-orn the east to west. An onsite wetland exists on the northwestern portion of the site. Slopes range from 2-12 % with pasture ground cover. The site exists within two basins - 3 UPSTREAM DRAINAGE ANALYSIS 3.1 Upstream Basin There are two upstream areas that are Iribrrtary to the site_ Upstream from the southeast section of the site is a development called Morgan Place which contributes 3.1 acres. The slopes in that area range fi-om 3--10% in a westerly direction. Bordering the western side of the site is a S acre area with varying slopes of 2-10% consisting primarily of pasture, some light forest, wetland and two existing houses_ This area flows to the onsite wet}and and then to the north. Refer to the Trihutaii, .areas Fxhihit in the Appendix. Pa2e 4 Shamrock Leve] 1 Downstream Am'dNsis 4 DOWNSTREAM DRAINAGE ANALYSIS Refer to the Doiwnstr-e(un Drainauc E.xhiblt in the Appendix. 11 4.9 Onsite Runoff North ,Approximately 17.0 acres of the northern portion of the site slope from east to west. Slopes range lrom 2-12 %. This northern portion of the site is tributary to an onsite wetland located in the northwestern portion of the site. 'The wetland covers approximately 5.5 acres and discharges offsite to the north. Sojiih The remainder of t.lae site drains in a southwest to south direction over gentle slopes. Runoff is collected in an existing detention pond located north of the intersection of SE 12 81h Street and 146'h Ave. SE. Runoff from the pond discharges south offsite beneath SE 128'}' Street throngh a 42" pipe. • • par zt 5 ShLtinrock Level 1 Dmvijslicarn Analv,,IS 4.2 Offsite Runoff North Discharge from the onsite wetland 11ONvs offsitc to the 1-101-117 through a 12" CMP and a 6" concrete culvert and into a pond in the adjacent property. The pond discharges north into a wetland, then to 11oney Dew (Honey) Creek which, according to the December 1990 King County Sensitive Areas Map Folio, is an unclassified stream in the ]Vlay Creek Sub -Basin, Honey Dery Creek combines with May Creek over two miles downstream (north) of the site. May Creek is in the Cedar River Drainage basin and ultimately discharges into Lake \Vashington. South ttunoff to the south flows ilirottgh a 12" pipe then into a ditch behind a resilience at 14415 SF 128th St. The ditch ranges front 2 to 3 feet deep and: then travels under a drivctivay via an 18" culvert. The storm water enters the north property line of a new development (,Sienna). The t1otiN- is then picked up by the 36" pipe within the Sienna developi-r►ent and continues in a southerly direction until passing the quarter -mile downstream point at its intersection with SF 132``1 Street. From there, the flow travels in the 36" pipe approximately 200 feet -vest on SL 132nd Street before changing course to the south on 140' Avenue SE. N L, C 6 Shamrock Leve! l ArialVSiS 4.3 Downstream Drainage Problems North According to King County Water X, Land Resources Division, there have been no recent problems downstream of' this project. The complaints that have been documented are associated w ih downstream properties near the East Renton project. These complaints are over 12 years old. King County suggests not following up on any complaints before 1990 due to their age. development that has occurred, etc. Additionally, no complaints have been documented at those addresses for 12 years, so the problem most likely has been corrected. The complaints are linked to a private home drainage system and a private road washout due to na drainage system rather than flooding, or erosion of the large drainage course that aur site .vill discharge to. Since no complaints have been documented at this location in the last 12 years, it is assumed that corrections have been made as a result of subsequent development. c—iu According to complaints compiled by the King County Water .and Land Resowces Division, several instances of flooding have been reported in areas near the downstream drainage path of the site. Problems of flooding and drainage in these areas seem to have been alleviated with the recent installation of a 36" pipe system shown in the Downstremn Di-ainage Erhlbit. Details of complaints are included in the Drainage Complaints exhibit located in the Appcndix. LJ Pa e Shamrock Lcvcl 1 Anal-_ sis 5 RESOURCES USED FOR ANALYSIS Refer to the appendix for a copy of the following maps and figures. 5.1 Sensitive Areas Folio Mips from the Kin County Sensitive Areas Folio, dated December 1990, show that the site is not in a sensitive area with regards to seismic hazards, coal mines, landslide hazard, erosion hazard, streams or wetlands. 5.2 King County Basin Reconnaissance Program According to the King County Basin Reconnaissance Program, the site is located within the Lower Cedar River sub -basin of the Cedar River Drainage Basin. 5.3 Soils Survey for the King County Area The site is underlain wilh AldciA�ood gravelly sanely loam according the Soils Survey for the 0 King County Arca. 5.4 King County Community Planning Area The site is located within the Newcastle Community Planning Area. 1-7 LJ N'_' 0 S Shamrock Lcvr :l 1 L)o���nstream rin�ilvsis 6 DRAINAGE CONCEPT The proposed (mina -e system will consist of' road and ditch section to convey the street runoff. Roof- and footing drains serving individual lots will be directed to swale systems which will increase travel times, convey runoff, as well as provide water quality treatment. All conveyance, detention, and water quality systems will be designed per the 1999 King County Surface Water Drainage Manual. It is anticipated that there will be two detention facilities. One facility twill be near The western border of the site at the end of SE 124`" St. The second facility will be located south of the site on the Rales Property. A public storm drainage easement will be required to convey site runoff across the Bales Properly to the detention facility. This facility will be sized to accommodate both the Shamrock flat and the Bales Plat. The portion of the site between SE 124"' Street and the northern boundary will incorporate Low impact Development (HD) concepts. The LID concepts utilized are amended soils for increases infiltration, open Swales used for the conveyance system to aiterivate flow rates and . roadwways slopes in one direction to decrease the need for cross culverts. Roof and footing • drains will drain to open stvales or dispersion trenches via a perforated drain pipe_ This will increase the time of concentration to the proposed pond_ Additionally, the public right-of- way has been narrowed and private drainage tracts have been created to reduce the need for public maintenance. The portion of the site between SI 124" Street and the southern boundary will be designed using standard development methods, p-,lue 9 Shamrock t,e%d 1 Downstream Analysis Appendix • ;7 Paye :A NOl`JlV1HSttM :11N oD DNix � N m s o 1I91HX3 SNOLLIONOO DNUSIX3 ra Ae N013M acro '01 °1334.4 39 \ .. U Ln Ia CS of I Y I I a cti I " i Itif 1, qs i � q � �E - y _ � � tea..^ ` •�,� ; j '' QQUa \ co Q LU cc C7 ` ii rmm 1 �, vt " t l N I y , .t , 1 , f ~ U ... . .. L'"��` �'L--•1 �!` _ .. ���. I U li 1 I l r r l I V `♦ �\ ` �`` Ny�\\ I .l ��`,� lJ f'�`1 t :� F\n :I II i � yl � � " � ` � �� V .. -•-e.� AV � I 1 �I, :1_'� I \': � �' 1 o R t + Y I ` 1 I I p �y i 1 , �- , ' � I•. � y � . �, � , ' � � � y ,y V t I � I r � - '• I d • ,. \ t -.��- V..; � 1� y\1� � ' t �V A � A ��y tt tl � t tt �V V ��� � � v I �� v � I� -� I� � � : � � . .. _ '�'I� � v , , `yam: � .1 �,-,.m� �� �% • � �i , v' ' t��\ ' ` I , � � ' � � ' LLJ LO LU .I l } l \ \ ` )fir 1 { i t �1—+ I i + f • i . 1 1 + ,. ,.,.�, "�; :'� �� „, \\ W1 I I \\ I I yt 1 t ',"y., � i+ ' yl I � •/f . • ' � �1 11�. _ _ _ 1i � _,�,�\ \\ \\ �II'II A �%� 1 1t l y t � � � ,� � • � i � /� j I V � L � A• .. .. ., . ,. . C\III t, 1 T T , v 1 t �,�• t 1 t 1� \ 7 11 ' � ���� � A �• �1� y `�5, IN �] ,\ 11 \ \ I 'y 5 t 1 i I i+i 1, m ,C i��. L _ 1 — I `• r �' ' ` ' - - 1 ` �. \ i, .. J ��, , 4 � 1 1 t t � F, 1 � ,, •'' I � �I 1 � L 1 ' � r I •I � '^ ^.4 \ \\4.•'• \� l � l 14 t yp 8 h 1' 1 't , 1 s p I ` � ., � J � f + + I * _ - - _ ,. a cz, w: 'k �Mp —l7 5S1I0''y! ,JYLJ`,,s�rgryxJ bur�aaurbu�" saff��MG15 IJ r^Ctd� 3 79dZfS NQIJNINSVM : n o -z3 N01DNIHSVM AUNnoo Jgma El )iooynvHs F 30tr'NI tifl3 W t/3,V1 SNM 00 Ila Aul NoIsusaI Ma 1,ON w ti 3 a l— — — — — — — — — — — — Ili i i �lI,lll S a Q3 O ------ uq Ln III v ,I I I III u Q L, w I'I W a I I II i -------a II III iIi � -----------------� ! I Ili --------�� I I f "---I -----------� r—r— i -------- 1 - �_-_---L--------w_J_J J_J_-_- -__ _—.-------- r—�---�--(---('—��—r= _ � ------------.. -- ---- __I I __ r L--------- � -------� L----- - — - M IIS----- I I I l r------ 1 I i I I 11 F------�-� I I I i I I 1 11 I I L --------- 1 I I `v_ t _-------- ----------- r_J L__ iii I I T I TT — L l 1_L_I___I I er 1 1 I i TI�--------r------ I , i �_ I I `• ! y I�l I I I I Ik. I I I I I II II 17 1 I I I i_ _--------- IF ----- N�\ J �--- 1 II�-- r 1 I F -- I I ! I N�\ J F- LU LU 40 LLA a z a cc i cc 0 z 111 t� 2 2 3 0 0 r z 0 Q W N NOIJNJNSV AiNf1OO !wx Q� � A R 1SIM wao Y 1191HX3 S a3HV A d vi n91t1.[ W a3y1 Shcl IN) A8 NOISIAAB &LVO 'ON i l �rA _ U) w a o vi Ln_ --- -r- - -- - - - �� i 111 of �-- --- 7 -T-- 7- -f--- T ---- -FT T T --- � iii laPoW OgIH_i 31l53_�0 68110\! 73A33\E q!gx36urJaaui6u�`sal.1�OM�`6 L01O3I'O�ld\ .3 wot- '!l — F'OOz '/0 'isls�osl�naq .1 ; 1DIXT NO 11 KING COUNTY AREA, WASIIINGTON (RENTON QUADRANGLE) r_,�000c FEET 122°?7`-30" AfC I 413 A,C ffra 915 3 42-T u isoo SITE oo FEET AgU 1 I 14 5 cj AkE 11 Py. p - ` - I - �'• Pc '4 :. • •� l o Aq a (S _� � j/.• .1 ; r 111V� '�+-� � . -� rc Eflot n .II I Ur AkF ' I Akf ` Palk Ng AE E ASC 1�1 H - ARD AkF 27'x()., rr l� 11 I A cc ARL}. AgEj _ — rFCcrnE` AF` 27- ur -PART MFNF CF ACRtCUI TUF,..'E )NSFHVATlON Sll,VlCF • SOIL LEGEND Thr r.r,:ao. rol le e ra rhe i•+,Irol wr of rr _ he sr•;1 _ h s -4 cnpissrl IfI n, CD E, F -4- 1- Il,e Bloss of slope. S'Y^bols �+;IF �N n slo pr lel rer c,re ri,use uI r,_owly le..ef scr ls. Slmr)ot NAME AyB A13e,wex,d 9--ily Bondy 0 so 6 vcrcenr slaves A�[ NEde•+�oud gro-elly Bondy Icro.r•, 6 ro 15 Pe,c slopes AoD G{der,.cod rgroye lly Bondy lcorn, 151.30 pert ens slopes ALF Alder:. ood and K"-11 sorts, -ly ..-P A -B A e=,rs, Alden.•ood r.o rrrei 01. 6 Perernr slopes pmC Trrrnrs, A1drr++e nd rr+orer;o1. 61n 15 Ferr enr slopcs �., t,•e.,r �. E„ererr o e rai • NeC 8— 6- via. rl ly sorx}y 100.x,, 6 ro 15 P-"'] slopes FSrD 8ftics;fe 9--ily s ,Iu 1—, 15 >o JO pert e.,r s lows «F f;an„srr r�ro rlly sordy Loo , AC}+a 'S prrc.nl •,Ivves B, gr rsc or sr11 I«m 0� g,,c LIeY srh loom Cb C,�,;rol E7evc hes ti-, Fcr l,.,cnr s,lr Irn r+ Ed F. ,Jge r<k h, •d r rr,u r f+FS F•. a1 eltyo_.,rdr 1c0 Oso4a•_•r.cr•,+sloven F =f F---rr"'OT, _o„ dr 1--, 5 ro 15 _enr ,iepes E.. FI E-r-r•r -p-, ;1, _ rrdy Ion , 151. JU F.yrr. slopes lrlr�.-�c�J,,,.o�efly.'sor v�loa•++s, hIn I`, I,- r n„I<:[•e, L, r. Ir,d o�olu Icr, •.ry Irr,r ;�.,d, 0 rn n c�•.rn sloven J. 415 p=,ce,+1 'I"-,ir.D i-,inr.,,lo Imm� rn� ,o�,i. 15r10 fU re'r rrr alnpes e8: K rC Kri.. r•p sr}r !m '-? e� IS f,c,c er+r �InPes KrD Y_rrSnC ;rr I.>om, E') ,� '.f(1 core e•+r :lopes r;C Fr l;, �.; � �liy kr-�:.-: send, h In 1S parr am slopes "IrC It�,lr�r v- Py Ir,c :nod, c 15 pr.cr Icpr Nq rlr�brq r Icer„ 7ik ilco4s�cL 5,11 I�nr-+ ( Lacus Pro+ (;: v7r rd ry srll IMm f_>•.[ G:ofl r�rovr lly loc m. 0 ro 15 [.rr,rni slopcs O:D O.,�tf �•c�elfy Ica m, 15 rc 25 per<enr stoves CV Cy�all jro�c llY lr,v .�, dQ xo 75 yercenr slopes Pc P;IcS,vc4 lsrur.,y I',rre sorra Pk P'Ifhvfk bene -d' In Pr, Payr' orky cloy I— Py P,yal{rp Erne sandy ;-- oomPaC P, C Roq•,c, lire r.o-d, roar,, 6 ra 15 prrc er+ slopes Roo Rryrnr firs Bondy loom. 15 ro 25 Pe,cens slopcs PdC Ragrgr.lnd ronUl(r n[5n<•OI>pn, 'IOpi-1 i2dE Rngrrn-h,d rnrolo o_sr,c ra r rnoderelrfy weep Pe Rr•rrcr„ s=EI loom So S.,lul s,ll loom ,h 5c mrr,orr.i sl, Bele long f k Seam le m:re k '_hokor r r_L _ 1.. s,lr Innm .,•nhc•., •.h <,ll Inlrn _u 5nchn•rr.s 1, ,rEr 1,-,.�, Ih,. 4 nor f:,:r v.,f c n1 Sv Sv!oo„ s, h ixn+ T_ T,k a r..rk lJ• I_!ry,n lora{ Y,'c �i�nv:l le Brie I:-w�-r • The vr„pc.s;r rn of t?,e se +m,ir- i, more >-. :oble IF,a •, rl,a, of rhe o,l+ers rr rh. �r a<r, 4r1 it h,rs ty. e � e'1 i..r}'..r fl enc��jl, ro inlrr Cr�r IUr ,4r K� N(, COUN TY ARFA, WASHINCT( FScundar y, •>nl�cY,al Scare ... ............ C ovnl y, Pnr-sh, C •YiS ro+•.rs hin, I I.+c wpw aced f i,Y Peser.or; Smo!! pork -r.+e ref 1;o•, h -,r, �h ,1.c . rf Icer Irre_ am c. Yo rshrp Irr, o f?o�•,dr, ons r r B rn.fdr s {ban, +-n• l eleLl„,o I..+ sFrrm ells ",h.r rhp•.,.,�t,r- 'r „•.L s: o. 1, ..-,•.•. . l.xorrS w lo•�sJ-ork lior;z '-1 -d "r,rc Tubkr, Boer it 1e �r [ hhr• ref nv r.oblr . Flor,z onrotcv r+or ser Jany •es ,�eroblr ••,. V nr Inc UI fMrrar srari (fir he ecce e oble Clef 4-d sro, ek.orr. Flrr Fer ked sp0r rle-< r >i • - 't't13LE �3 � ?.i3t.rQXlIYr�LE�rCF �31�I�i11'�i1i �E_S SUILLY}')�� fiN� 15.CFi �S �Q[�:.1; k'I'L;S ' SCS Soil Type SCS KCRTS Soil Notes Hydrologic Group Soil Group Alder -wood (AqB, AgG, AgD) C' —Till -- - Nents, Aklerwood Material (AmB, AMC) C fill Arents, Evr�rett Material (An) B Outwash 1 Beausile(BeG, BeD, BeF) C Till 2 C3ellinyhar-n (Bh) D Till_ 3 Briscot (Br) D Till 3 Buckley (Bu) D Till 4 EarlrTlont (Ea) D Till 3 Fdgewick (Ed) C Till �Out�.vash 3 Everett (FvB, EvC, EvD, EwQ AIB 1 Indianola (InC, inA, 1nD) A Outwash 1 Kilsap (KpB, KpC, KPD) C - Till --- Klaus (KsC;) Klaus Neilton j eC) - C% Outwash t - A Oulwash 1 Newheig (Ng) B -fail 3 flook�.ack (Nk) -- Noun=: Orcas. (Or} _ 0 C Till 3 D l TII ^ 3 D D11 WOland -- 3 Ovall (OvC. OvD, OvF) -- C I ill 2 Pilcht)r:k (F'c) Ragnar (R< -j ,, Ra D, RaC, Rain) Rer�lcn Scalal (Sa) -SarurnamT�.1) (Sh) Shalcar (Sin) - - - - 3 ---r'I 0uv d S h B - t-- — T II 3 - C 3 D fill — Till 3 - 3 3 D - Till Till -- - SnohorTTi!-.ts (5o, Sr) D 3— Sultan (Su) G Till 3 - Tukwila (Tu) _ D {� D fill Till 3 _ WoodinviIle ON 0) 3 Nolei: I. Vvhere oulwash soils are saturated or underlain at shaflow depth (<_5 feet) by glacial tilt, they should hr' trealed as till soils. 2. TtTese are bedrock soils, but calibration of HSPF by King County DNR shows bedrock soils to have similar hydrologic response to tilt soils. 3 These are alluvial soils, some of which are underlain by glacial till or have a seasonally high water lab1c In the absence of detailed study, these soils should be lreated Js lilt sails. 4. Fuck€uv soils are formed on the low -permeability Osceola mudilow. Hydrelogic response is �. uwed to h- similar to that of till soils. ]998 Surtjcc -ti',aa,r 9'1,98 sly voids ly �� ��{ i:sl 1 L - `J*y � � E�� 'F l-G�r iS;'a[3ifi'' S: t �� • � � � q I '' � 4 - � , - "5 li� � � : hY � - �J� � of ��• C ��� ^ ' ��r`�' i., } �i r} � 4 ' zai'd .�`2k- :•" ��F IT tt_ �+,7 ;Y4 4.,% 1 r. t - `9�9���Z � ��� %r/` . 5� ! ..� � -1 1 L l 4 �,': /c { y �} 4:. • _ � I.. I .;� y r � }1j '.' . � � � � � � z�5. k} l� {} ..J �:4-s z 6 -ti ,fit;. . )', •I tel. ` _VI,_` ':4• • Yt _`` � I q�� �ti:>� �, ��_� lel � �{� ;. g� i 1.'� L� �� `�� `�� rFJJI 14 no 7i 2 - � 0 -ITE' ! I�'l , _ rr- .}Y�;I � - �`' •„r )"ys��I. ) _ } `a` 1 i i���i•'� �}-.� � � -� h-'��' �';' ��-i I •�3 ; i2Sb' 1 (till f -.I ' I, [ E 24 1. ,\` _ `� �_ '• �. - / _ J3 �I 221-- >, _ . �a ;..f; � _ � �• - ��� I�r�, � . , yam; _�.r � ' .y � I L, k S � - �� k #St'. t Id '� i 3 A / �(. * - •` �..� r _ .. � � S° a; :1 �-E"Z } I s � 1�.� l � �`'(. Oil all 7 `�� `� rle - b.,. z ,:e, �.y'-- MOM Open Water - - � �`— -----. r: MW WSW Boundaries o , r, Sub brasin Boundarties V i I{ d'71 k 4�' ~ G y�`s'. it ✓ �-y { 4 . y _ _ V _ Y - - meq- - <.. - _ I t � _ ✓// i- i�,F } jj t � _ `CIES' 7 11 �< # i.. __ - _.._-� __1' 1i C �� yN �• '� , t 7 -~� � �ltt .-i y- � _ qi. +.: � 1,}i1 \i1f�'. - - 1 rt-.._ . \ - -' "44 i I -. 1 `{_ I .2 { r 1 p �'!{!{•• J. I� ��" F - .i I I 1 A 4 �• � - � '' jTT _ - - !! - :- �,1� �. .� � � x--11 _,�� F qty �� t ?C��f" y 7S�a v f ' '-� f r f �'i�� I ��� t:, i� 1- - _ I •1 J � -�`:��;r � ( S - ._ -- — ",rlr:lat Streams _. F "o 1„ fli1L _ ` � r -• re Cias-s 2 (with s3lrronids) crow .he Class 2 (perennial: salrnenid z • 3 ,, �, ,,. Year Floc) pias -- e -d) use undetercirn - e • • a s Class 3 1 F ,; '�'I-,,.,:-? -�, , -I�A s _gq j� >.� i v`,y .. _�� of Y SITIL ,. #`Y', �1 - j Ong.'_ - �- U � f r r _ _�•5 t � � ;"r. -.%M1 4 � ��. 5�._: _ i � _ .-�� -.� -. 1. � c'S ., , ���="�-� — - �'', _- �. _ S� S � f f, J J��" r ,_i Y�',5 L yx "� � r -�� � 1.7 � jjj��� y -I Z_(,� +L: �. �y. {'�`[ •� MJ i lza'.'' ti 'Awn i - Y o,51on Herd [Zti"k:cmish LIZ t to � f � � -I'.. � 4 ? � •� L p )�11 �.�r �l l: { 1, ,� ��� 1 � � }� �t ` � - Fiv � irk 4 �-1 SITE IL �l` �a� r1 ~ G ��- ir�-_� �•-r �1 � 'YS if'-SK3 'V G' ��-- -... -_ E_ -T tr 1' � f {' s � t, `c '�- � ` e �� f' 1 j� � ♦ 8"i��C'g'a2�•�- �` c. ��:�"=.e L {T�"L - F 3 Lr - �' 'l� Landslide Hazard 1U�-m.3mish Areas _.7 7. �- s rl �r'e ha<.)r j 'C+ ' a n ire?s. Seisr e Nazar Ir+d:r liih=�r .,e rS rrF Areas G. 3 fvPS 4 I ed ori a! min - `O t off Na;ural fir- (C,1j Mine ,fib hied will- Coal e Hazard r7; thaj( OC Curs Areas u!' stet eded su 6 u.7nefs Ut�w,3rrlisfi �� .I_L�'__j _____ DRAINAG King C 19E Nalwalm Major Bas Sub -Basin Source- King Co' ReconnaiZance t, r' i } 0 3 2 3 S.- 300,000 h r ((ff t l a DRAINAG King C 19E Nalwalm Major Bas Sub -Basin Source- King Co' ReconnaiZance t, r' i } 0 3 2 3 S.- 300,000 • 0 Ll Figure I KING COUNTY 4-r%PkA A A U L I IS-" PLANNING AREAS v Vv I �q I Is King CjnuntY 1985 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a W&S Klau County Water and land Hesourcas Division - &tormwater servim Saetfem Complaint Search Printed, 7l18120D2 4'1g:45 PM m9WRI �Type Typo nT PPDbWm AdMw of PruM mtmr Code Comments Tiros Pape 1993-0224 C PONDING 12217 146TH AV SE POSSIBLE SAO VIOLATIONJI)ITCH ENCRO 658-11 1995-0788 C DISCHARG 14328 SE 128TH ST COMPLAINT REQU NO INV( THIS TIME 656.11 1995-0991 WOC DUMPING 12516 142ND AVE SE APPARENT PROPERTY DISPUTE 656J1 1996-0880 WQC EROSION 14328 -SE 128TH ST 656,11 1996-1401 C FLDG --SE 128TH & 142ND A SE MAINTENANCE OF EXISTING CHANNNEL 656J1 1997-1625 AA QA BMP'S 14413 SE 128TH ST 655J1 �J Page 1 of t Slnp County Water and land Hammes PIklsltm - Stvrownter Sery1m. Section rnmplalnt $Barulr Printed ; 7!2212002 2:14:22 PM WWlahl Type Tyoe or Prot ain Address of Probbm cpIMlflm ber Carie ibrrm Pop 1975-0135 C FLDG 13921 SE 136TH PL SWAMP/SE 135TH PLfHIDEWAY HTS 656J2 1981-0197 C DRNG 13832 SE 131 ST ST BLKFD 656,12 1982-0341 C FLDG 14005 SE 133RD ST 656J2 1982-0386 C DRNG 12808 13BTH AVE SE & FLDG 656J2 1982-0491 C FLDG 14009 SE 128TH ST MAPLEWOOD HTS 656J2 1982-0525 C DVR 16935 116TH AVE SE @ SE 132ND1144TH AVE SE 656J2 1983-0353 C FLDG 13224 144TH AVE SE 656J2 1984-0221 C DVR 140XX 5E 132ND ST FLDG 656,12 1985-1010 C DRNG 14100 SE 132ND ST SEE 84-1005fTO ROADS 659J2 1956-01D9 C DRNG 14011 SE 132ND ST SURFACE WATER 656J2 1986-0256 C 65632 1986-0255 F 656J2 1986-0256 Si COMMIT TED DATE:1 ST OTR 1989. 556J2 1966-03A4 C DRNG 138-T H AVE SE SYSTEM SILTED 656J2 1986-03A4 E PROS CR -TD, 656J2 1988-0739 C FLDG 13323 146TH AVE SE WATER FROM SCHOOL 6561!2 1987-0255 C FLDG 14639 SE 132ND ST STANDING WATER & MUD 658!2 10»7-0328 C DRNG 13323 14 STH AVE SE CO DIVER-] F -D DRNG ONTO PROPERTY 656J2 '-0405 C FLDG 13025 138TH AVF SE SEE 87-0463 OVER STREET 656J2 90445 C FLDG 13637 SE 128TH ST FILLING OF LOT 656J2 7'. 0445 F -R FLDG 13837 SE 728TH ST SEE 86-03A4 PENTON_ 87-0707 656,12 1937-0463 X FLr7G 13025 138TH AVE SE ON 138TH AVE SF 656J2 1988-0280 C DRNG 14106 SE 135TH ST STRORM DRAIN FAILURE 656J2 1983-0036 C DEBRIS 14003 SE 132ND S7 DEBRI ON RD TO DET POND 65FJ2 1989-0113 C DRNG 13852 SE 128TH AVE DRAINAGE OF NFIGH30RS FILLIROAD CO 656J2 1989.0200 C SETTLING 13120 138TH AVE SE SINK HOLE IN YARD 656J2 1989-0461 S2 FLDG/DVR 14011 SE 132ND ST SEE:86-0256 YAHN PH I 656J2 1989-0472 X INQUIRY 14105 SE 133RD ST STATUS OF STUDY(YAHN STUDY) 656J2 1989-0636 X DRNG 14103 SE 132ND ST YAHN STUDY COMPLAINTS 666JZ 1990-0209 C FLDG 14639 SE 132ND ST DITCH OVERFLOW/STORM EVENT 656-12 1990-0388 C DRNG 14105 SE 133RD ST FLOODING IN NBRHD 656J2 1990-0512 C DRNG 13600 138 T H AVE SE CROSS PIPE ERODING RAVINE 656J2 1990-0556 C DRNG 13323 148TH AVE SE DITCH 1 ND`JOIVERTED WATER 65C_J2 1990-0556 ER DRNG 13323 146TH AVE SE XP1PE AND POND/DITCH ENDS 656J2 1990-0804 X FLDG 14105 SE 133RD ST COMPLETION OF STUDY 655J2 1990-1511 X FLDG 14105 SE 133RD ST CAPACITY OF PLAT DRNG 65632 1991-0081 SR DRNG 141 C5 S 133RD ST PUGET COLONY HOMES 656J2 Page 1 of 3 0aIttv t No-uE Code TYPO of Prows'tm Addroaa of PrfibW Gfm�ts gyrus P am )1-0081 X DRNG 14105 S 133RD ST CCF#191-32/YA.I IN STUDY;FLOODED YAR G56J2 1-0093 SR DRNG 14105 SE 133RD ST CCF#SWM0124 PUGET COLONY HOMES 656,12 1991-0098 X DRNG 14105 SE 133RD ST CCF#SWM0124/1)EVELOPEMENT 656,32 1991-0246 C DRNG 14013 SE 133RD ST PLUGGED 656-12 1991-0246 SR DRNG 14013 SE 133RD ST PLUGGED PUGET COLONY HOMES 656J2 1991-0315 C FLOG 14011 SF 132ND DIVERSION/CULVERT OVERFLOW 656,32 1991.0619 NDA DRAINAGE 10403 147TH AVE SE STORM EVENT - ONV FLOODING 656J2 1991-0636 NDA FLDG 14105 SE 133RD ST CCF#491-32 NOT NDA PUGET COLONY H 656J2 1991-0635 X FLOG 14105 SE 133RD ST CCF#491-32JPLAT DRAINAGE 656,12 1991-0650 NDA DRNG 14105 SE 133RD ST CCF#591-2 NOT NDA PUGET COLONY HO 65632 1991-0650 X DRNG 14105 SE 133RD ST CCF-4591-2 SAME OLD PROS 656_12 1991-0682 CL FLDG 14105 SE 133RD ST CCF# 591-2 DUE JULY 656J2 1991-0712 NDA DRNG 14103 SE 132ND ST CCF# SWM 0520 NOT NDA PUGET COLON 656J2 1991-0712 X DRNG 14103 SE 132ND ST CCF# SvVM 0520 MANY COMP 656,12 1991-0715 C DRAINAGE 14105 SE 133RD ST NEIGHBORHOOD FLOODING 656J2 1991-0715 SR DRAINAGE 14105 SE 133RD ST PUGET COLONY HOrAES 656.12 1991-0723 5R DRAINAGE 14105 SE 133RD ST CCF# 591.37 PUGET COLONY HOMES 656.12 1991-0723 X 13R4fNAGE 14105 SE 133RD ST CCF## 591 37 G56J2 1891-0732 C DRAINAGE 14024 SE 133RD ST /LA Iv'B (CLAIM) 656J2 1991-0732 SR CRAINAGE 14024 SE 133RD ST /LAMB (CLAIM) NOI NDAP 658.12 1991-0739 SR DRNG LD 14103 SE 132ND ST CCF# 5WM-0610 NOT NDAP c56,12 I-0777 NDA FLOODING 14103 SE 132ND ST CCF# 591-39 NOT NDA PUGET COLONY 656J2 00777 X FLOODING 14103 SE 132ND ST CCL# 591-39 G56J2 1991-0812 C DRAINAGF 14639 SE 132ND ST 656,12 1991-0868 SR DRAINAGE 14010 SE 134TH ST CCF# SWM0279 NOT NDAP 656,12 1991-0868 X DRAINAGE 14010 SE 134TH ST CCF# SWN1C279/PU'GET COLONY 656J2 1991-0885 X FLOODING 13405 142ND AVE SE CCF# SVVM-0854/DRAINAGE IMPROVEME 656.12 1991.0868 SR FLOODING 13600 SE 128TH ST CCF#SWM-0852-NOT NDA-PUGET COLON 656-12 1991-0888 X FLOODING 13800 SE 128TH ST CCF# SWM-0852\NETLAND PROBLEMS 656J2 1991-0946 X DRAINAGE 14105 SE 133RD ST CCF#.- 91-08221GRANTING EASEMENTS 656,12 1991-1214 X DRAINAGE 14105 SE 133RD CCF# SWM 1217/PROJECT SCHEDULE 656-12 1993-0179 C DIVERSON 137XX 144TH AVE SE POSS CLEARING VIOLATION 656,12 1993-1064 C FLDG 14400 SE 136TH 5T GROUND WATER UNDER ROADWAY G56J2 1993-1085 E DRNG 14600 SE 132ND ST CHKSTATBYCMDT 656.12 1493-1085 ER DRNG 14600 SE 132ND ST 656J2 1997-0055 C FLDG 14105 SE 133RD ST PUGET COLONY HOMES 656-12 1997-0055 NDA FLDG 14105 SE 133RD ST PUGET COLONY HOMES 656.12 1997-0055 R FLDG 14105 SE 133RD ST PUGET COLONY HOh1F5 656J2 1998-0350 C DRAINAGE 14454 SE 132ND ST APPEARS FRE GRADING ACTIVITY NO PE 656.:'2 1998-0534 `NOC 'JWASH'NAT 13224 144TH AVE SE APPARENT GREY LNATER DISCHARGE 65612 Pace 2 o;• 3 Eompfelnt Type � Humber Code Type of "lam Addr8ss of Problem Comments ibma Pap "8-0534 `NOR WOI 13224 144TH AVE SE APPARENT CREY WAl-ER DISCHARGE 656J2 189-0609 C CONSTRUC 14606 SE: 136TH ST CONCERNS FSE NEW DEVEELP CITY OF RE 656,12 9-0625 C STND f"20 13741 148TH PL SE SOGGY BACKYARD SOURCE OF WATER 656.12 2001-0697 C Dcm 13309 146TH AVL= S`1 i 65612 • Page 3 of 3 i It:N I UJ - YULILIL; YyVHK�5 v� SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT DMSIGN r COMPLAINT INVESTIGATION REPORT ) Dole Fac a; F OF COMPLAINT: SEG L-5: Twp 2 3 RGI; LOCATION: `KFIDLL PG. C0MPLAiNANT: �t�tI�J?�`- ---- — COUNCIL DIST. ' Y}iCNQ Np_ Address�_Ll_3. Z3 — t�£' S ►_ Ofjy State Z!p — WORK �r �-4 s DETAILS OF COMPLAINT: J ~F v *r 18 ': c a r r 2 �� <� �•-�- r -�a- --�— ,,, �•--L, i- 1, �-.._ . 1`-( 2 L S � i ,�. y-,� i �i.� fr TM -. C✓ Lc',�/O `-?' `^�' l 'f'-*� 2 [ J ,�. i , `� i i�} a�...� rJ-� 1-`l� -4 ```#- �'+- [t- y �. [ 1•A ---(?-t— COMPLAINT RECEIVED BY: C LS 01= IhiVE571GATlON: Sketch on r verse side: Yes E2` No [ Photos: Yes _7;a'_(�No I-) - _ Duan Illy i site 3-5-90. OChad been raining earlier in the day and therq was considerable run off at the time_ Topo- graphic maps for this area indicates run off should flow towards the 1Iofford property, and ditches direct the flow in this direction. Woffolrd has approx 30 loads of fill in the north east corner of his lot. The lot to the north has'a ponded area adjacent to the fill. Part of that pond drains to the west and part over tops )the drive to Woffords house and drains to the east into the newly cleared area (photo 4). 1 was told by Wofford that fill had been brought into the back portion of the cleared lotand the owner ditched run off to the south (photo 5 & 6), diverting it from the original drainage direction, southeasterly. This im- pacts Wofford's 5 acre parcel to the south of the newly cleared area, and to other parcels in that area. Photo 1) Looks south on 146th from SE 132nd. 2) Shows fill at the northeast corner of Wofforts lot - 3) Shows culvert outlet on east side of 145th at cleared lot_ 4) Cleared lot. Area beyond gravel is saidito have been a 3'pond before fill with out- let in swaled background. 5) Said to be diverted drainage flow. 5) Diverted flow into Wofford's acreage. '.QMPLAIIVT iNVESTIGATBb BY'�JG�-�— DATE:__` 1C ON TAKEN: :oObinant advised of action possible or taker by. Phene ❑ LBttBr 0 Personal Contact d - ID ornpIaintAttfonHandle4K' dBy closed: p-�' / "L � Name D��■ Inlffalf 0 sr C] ----- $ ic- KING COUNTY SLJRFACE WATER MANAGEMENT DIVI� DRE DRAINAGE INVESTIGATION REPO ULE N = UEST Pave r 1NESN AND F�_D TYPE /1-:0MPROBLEM /1—}f�/f/�l�_ q . F V ad by Date: /�I 'l OK -d by: dile No. � 3 � L O;ve?,d from: {Fs..v pnnr pWnly for sr_a inp). {may) 1��1 —PHONE 11120WEVY. ADD -KESS: //rr%�t�T _ _ Ciry Wale ?gip Location of pro5lem, H Werent: ]�G� 1� .�� �.¢S�j, fyCHARGE r Derails of _15/ 3 ' 120-5'aJ Lam? l WA Other agencies involved: (Give details) Fr'por;ad 1rnpects_ 0 Propprties. Home Access road Septic system _ Outbuildings, garage _ Yard/landscaping Other property Stream, lake, vetland Co: zm Gn fs Dates/lrecuE.ncy of O ,5-j "J occurrences= l _oca icnTraclring /rrfo_ 114 S /_5 T.2�LRParcel No. 0547ZO —CJype Eesin Council D'j St j DIP, Rei/Chg No, Field invesTsC2'6on needed? P12t ,am e: 61-. J -CK— t. 0,a-r-�. Fev c - r4 -t- P-` TF`: t�ke,�: Assigned 10: i uu ed to--- on/ - I T S EROS NEW / � �Z DATE CLOSED.- OLD: LOSED_OLD: 5'sock No; lnf is s: OK'd. Lo{ No: KROLL DRAINAGE INVESTIGATION REPORT) v, Pale l : I?�vEs"FIG.�,"LION KEC,��.'EST Type C-- PROBL.EAI: ` � ri(rt- c-F�t,E No.I�'CrL 2ECF_iN"ED BY: mate: 2• �- OKd by; Received from: (Day)�� � � (Ev-) NAME: �C t Q� L �� PHONE Zai r 1;L1 Ex7 �9, �.` �, --� ��r ADDRESS: i[�}f?` = =�T City State Zips f Location cfproblern, if different: Reporfed Problem: CALL, FIRST lE) (Would Like To Be Nlesent) [ 0 4 f�.1.5 pc t' � fi- i ! i r t �'�} , 1/U h i C1i � l 5 MW o.. .TVI I (,�r'l?G ! E ►� - �� 1^J��r r' 7 el! CG �77I;1 d c� r�1�1 G?-bV6� fr if )at Othcr agencies involved: 1.23 CLL. 1/4 T Lot No: '1 Block No: No field investigation required (initials) TO BE CON PLETED BY COMPLAINT PROGRAM STAFF R Parcel No. Ue 4 "4 10 -OU G�� Kroll 210 e Th -Bros: New U-Qx TI-, Old , `5 Basin-L_C Council District L Charge No. RF_SPONSE: Citizen notified on Z 1- by: phone letter in person { S Dv�n d t J f `q va , y �.J6y- SCJ pc�SS Ja1` wt�a �� M1 POS1TIUN' Turned to on f f by OR: No further action recommended because: Lead agency has been noti#ieri; -;---�- ___ Problem has been carrected. No problem has been identified_ Prior investigation addresses problem: SuFjug Private problem - NDAP will not consider because: )Water originates onsite and/or on neighboring parce). Location is outside WIRD Sergi P Other (Specify): DATF CLOSED: Complaint 9$-0364 Meyer investigatr_d by Robert :Manns on 5-27-9?, I found tbat a large area had been cleared, aPproxima,�Jy 112 acre. An cxisting depression with water is located at the south side of 'Fax parcel 08471¢-0045, next to Mcyer's property. Some dirt and debris has been pushed into the water from the gr�dmg work being done on parcel --0045- I checked Sierra and found no permits for the grading work- Clarence Weyer is the property owner of this parcel- His house is on the adjoining parcel; house ff 14602. Nieyer`s property is not impacted by the Work, berailse of the higher elevation above the grading. AGS: TNVESTTGATION RFI>OTZT Page I' I; VF_'57GATION REQUEST Type PROBLEM,' FrrtEVED BY. + Lr3iOKd by 1' TLE 1NT0, a eccit,ed from_ NAME:..— Ai7DIZESS:. _ IC `" J ty / 5tateL Zip Location of problem, if different; Reported Problem: CALL FIRST E] (Would Likc To Be Present) tee7fe 47 yrs< -C Q mow- hazes Wz f --1 w w VOL dx r . c `�xL171 �4Fft C 0 1 p`, � Lot No: Block No. aye n s in ok-cd_ r No field lnti4+stigation required I O BE CO�fYLETED BY CO?viPLA-INi PROGR4hi STAFF '�4 S T R Parcel No. I WOO ', - Kroll E Th.B; os: Ncw 61151�� O Old?5 Basin Z -C -If Council District Charge No. RFspoivm Citizen notified on DISPOSITION: Turned to on I I by: photic letter in-person by OR: No further action reco=, ended because: Lead agency has been notified,_ — Problem has becn.corrcocd. No problem has been identified Private problem - NDAP will not consider because: - Water originates onsite and/or on neighboring parcel_ Location is outside ,NTRD Survicc Area. A CLOSED: I I By- Prior investigation -addresses problem: ELF Fit..-. # Other (Specify): I ethnical Inforrua€ion Report • 4 FLOW CONTROL AND WATER QUALITY DESIGN 4.1 DRAINAGE CONCEPT The detention facilities were sized Using King County's computer program KCRTS. The site will release water at the stream protection standard (KCRTS Level 2) with a 15% factor of safety applied to the calculated live storage volume_ The 1998 KCSWDM does not require the use of a factor of safety. A 15% factor of safety was chosen to account for inaccuracies during pond construction. A combined detention -;'vet pond will be used for water quality treatment. The facility will be designed using sizing criteria from the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM). The King County Runoff Time Series (KCRTS), program was developed as a hydrologic modeling tool for western King Co€€nty. The runoff files have been pre -simulated for a range of land cover conditions and soil types for different regions of King County using the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's HSPF10 model. The HSPF10 model was calibrated with 11 summing, lagging, and level -pool routing of runoff files. The KCRTS program includes a group of analytical tools to provide statistical data on the generated time series files The KCRTS Level 2 standard requires the project to maintain the developed peak release rates at their pre -developed peak runoff rates for the 2 -year and 10 -year storm events. In addition to matching peak runoff rates, durations to pre -developed durations for the range of predeveloped discharge rates from 50% of the 2 -year peak flotiv up to the full 50 -year peak flows will be matched. The KCRTS modeling is summarized in the following sections. The scale factor for the site is SeaTac I.0 (See KCSWDM Figure 2.2.2.A Rainfall Regions and Regional Scale Factors at the end of this Section). ia?�rzous Page 4-I Baa "i01-154 TRIAD regional parameters developed by the U -S_ Geologic Survey and King County Basin Maiming. The KCRTS program simulates the project hydrology through the scaling, 11 summing, lagging, and level -pool routing of runoff files. The KCRTS program includes a group of analytical tools to provide statistical data on the generated time series files The KCRTS Level 2 standard requires the project to maintain the developed peak release rates at their pre -developed peak runoff rates for the 2 -year and 10 -year storm events. In addition to matching peak runoff rates, durations to pre -developed durations for the range of predeveloped discharge rates from 50% of the 2 -year peak flotiv up to the full 50 -year peak flows will be matched. The KCRTS modeling is summarized in the following sections. The scale factor for the site is SeaTac I.0 (See KCSWDM Figure 2.2.2.A Rainfall Regions and Regional Scale Factors at the end of this Section). ia?�rzous Page 4-I Baa "i01-154 TRIAD • • tcclmical hifcn-mation Report 4.2 FACILITY DESIGN There will be two separate onsite detentioniwater quality facilities. The detention facilities are designed per Section 5.3.1 Detention Ponds, of the KCSWDNI- The onsite convcvance systems will be tributary to the pond_ The proposed detention facilities will also contain basic water quality treatment with the use of a wetpond. The wetpond is designed per Sections 6.4.1 anrd 6.4.4 — PVetponds Basic and Combined Detention and Wefpool Facilities. 4.2.1 North Pond The North Pond receives runoff from the portions of the site depicted oil the Developed Drainage Basins Exhibit, located at the end of this section, This includes the out parcels located on the west side of 148`x' Avenue SE. In the developed state, there are two areas that are allocated to provide wetland recharge. These areas are labeled as Bypass N1 and Bypass N2 on the exhibit. Bypass N1 includes the entire area of lots 101-I04. Bypass N2 includes lots 73-80 and will also direct runoff to the wetlands to the west, with the exception of the driveways, which will drain toward 144`'' Avenue SE, then to the detention pond via the conveyance system. in both cases roof and footing drains will collect runoff and convey it to a backyard dispersion trench. The runoff directed to the wetland areas will be used as wetland recharge and will be considered as Bypass for modeling purposes, The mathematical representation of this is: [Pretleveloped Hydrograph] — [Bjpass Hydrograph] [Developed Hydrograph] -,:.101712003 Job 4C1-159 t `TRIAD Page 4-2 C • • Technical Informatloii Rej)()it Predeveloped Basin The predcveloped condition has been modeled based an the existing conditions of the site. The onsite existing ;round cover is Till Pasture. The portion of 148'x' Avenue SL that will be improved has been modeled as impervious in the predeveloped condition. The land cover associated with the out parcels has been calculated based on zoning regulations for maximum impervious coverage. The existing ground cover characteristics and resulting flow is listed in the following table. Existing Impervious Pavement (148t" Ave SE) Fxisting Structures Till Pasture Total The following is the KCRTS Output Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:predev.tsf Project LocaLion:Sea-Tac ---Annual Peak Flow Rates --- Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak (CFS) (CFS) Period 1.46 2 2/09/01 18:00 0.609 7 1/05/02 16:00 1.38 3 2/28/03 3:00 0.192 8 8/26/04 2:00 0.775 6 1/05/05 8:00 1.29 4 1/18/06 16:00 1.24 5 11/24/06 4:00 2.59 1 1/09/08 6:40 Computed Peaks 2-21 ,�' 1017/2003 Job #01-159 0.19 acres 0.23 acres 19.76 acres 20.18 acres -----Flow Frequency Analysis ------- - - Peaks - - Rank Return Prob (CFS) Period 2.59 1 100-00 0-99c 1.46 2 25.00 0.960 1.38 3 10.00 0.900 1-29 4 5.00 0.800 1-24 5 3.00 0.667 0.775 6 2.00 0.500 0.609 7 1-30 0.231 0.192 8 1.10 0.091 2-21 5n nn n ARn Allowable Release Rate Qio = 1.38 efs QZ — 0.775 cfs TRIAD Page 4-3 • .fechnicat l,oformarion Report Developed Basin LID methods have be incorporatcd in the developed condition of the area tributary to the north pond. The soils will be amended and plantings will be used to decrease compaction. In addition to the soil arnendment, bioretention swales and open channel conveyance systems will attenuate the drainage to the pond. This will result in an absorption time similar to that of the predeveloped condition, which is Till Pasture. The around cover conditions for the lots in the developed condition have been calculated based on an average lot size of 5,000 square feet. The maximum impervious coverage allowed is 55%, which is 2,750 square feet for the average lot. Since the roof drains will be routed through perforated pipe, the actual time of concentration will increase. As a result, the roofs have been modeled as 50% impervious and 50% lawn. The driveways were modeled as impervious with an assumed size of 500 square feet. The following table shows the breakdown of ground cover associated with each lot. Impervious (Driveway) 500 sf Impervious (Roof) 1,125 sf Till Grass (Roof) 1,125 sf Till Pasture 2,250 sf Total 5,000 sf This information has been used to calculate the ground cover for the entire developed basin, minus the bypass areas. The following table shows this breakdown. Impervious 6.04 acres Lots 2.47 acres Roads and Sidewalks 2.73 acres Poaid Stnface 0.6! acres Exisling Structures 0.23 acres Till Grass 1.65 acres Till Pasture 10.78 acres Total 18.47 acres 10/7/2003 Job 401-159 /TRIAD Page 4-4 C] • • ['cchmcal I11 orzuatiall Report The following is the KCRTS Output FIL1W FT-ecluenc'y Ana.l'ysis Time Series File:dcv.tsf Project Location:Sea-Tac Annual Peak Flow Rates--- FIow Rate Rank Time of Peak (CFS) (CFS) 1 Period 2.19 5 2/09/01 2:00 1.65 7 1/05/02 16:00 2.56 2 2/27/03 7:00 1.56 8 8/26/04 2:00 1.92 6 10/28/04 16:00 2.36 3 1/18/06 16:00 2.27 4 10/26/06 0:00 4.50 1 1/09/08 6:00 Computed Peaks 3.86 Bypass -----Flotr Frequency Analysis - Flow Rate - - Peaks - Rank Return Prob (CFS) 1 Period 0.188 4.50 1 100.00 0.990 2.58 2 25.00 0.960 2.36 3 10.00 0.900 2.27 4 5.00 0.800 2.19 5 3.00 0.667 1.92 6 2.00 0.500 1.65 7 1.30 0.231 1.58 8 1.10 0.091 3.86 50.00 0.980 The flows associated with the bypass area have been calculated using the same ground cover characteristics per lot as previously described in the developed conditions_ The following table shows the breakdown of the total bypass area and the resulting peak flows. Impervious 0.44 acres Till Grass 0.36 acres Till Pasture 0.91 acres Total 1.71 acres KCRTS Output Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:by-pass.tsf Project Location:Sea-Tac ---Annual Peak Flow Rates --- Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak (CFS) 0.394 1 100.00 0.188 5 2/09/01 2:00 0.134 7 1/05/02 16:00 0.223 2 2/27/03 7:00 0.120 8 8/26/04 2:00 0.148 6 10/28/04 16:00 0.202 3 1/18/06 16:00 0.190 4 11/24/06 3:00 0.394 1 1/09/08 6:00 Computed Peaks 1017,2003 Job #01-159 Flow Frequency Ana.Iysis - Peaks - - Rank Return Prob (CFS) Period 0.394 1 100.00 0.990 0.223 2 25.00 0.960 0.202 3 10.00 0.900 0.190 4 5.00 O.B00 0.188 5 3.00 0.667 0.148 6 2.00 0.500 0.134 7 1.30 0.231 0.120 8 1.10 0.091 0.337 50.00 0.980 TRIAD Page 4-5 Tec: uwicat Inforniatinn Rcpon 0 Facility Output The resulting facility sunnnar_v is shown below. Pleasc refer to the end oFthis section for the complete KCRTS Output. Retention/Detention Facility Type of Facility: Detention Pond Side Slope: 3.00 H:1V Pond Bottom Length: 189.00 ft Pond Bottom width: 96.00 ft Pond Bottom Area: 18144. sq. ft Top Area at 1 ft. FB: 27594. sq. ft 1.02 0.633 acres Effective Storage Depth: 4.00 ft Stage 0 Elevation: 0-00 ft Storage Volume: 87024. cu. ft 0.67 1.998 ac -ft Riser Head: 4.00 ft Riser Diameter: 12.00 inches Number of orifices: 2 Full Head Pipe Orifice # Height Diameter Discharge Diameter (ft) (in) (CFS) (in) 1 0.00 3.06 0.508 2 2.05 4-13 0.646 8.0 Top Notch Weir: Rectangular Length: 4.20 in Weir Height: 3.60 ft Outflow Rating Curve: None Hyd R/D Facility Tributary Reservoir 3-25 Outflow Inflow Inflow 1 3-08 0.39 ******** 2 1.36 0.19 ******** 3 1.02 0.19 ******** 4 0.97 0-20 ******** 5 0.90 0.22 ******** 6 0.67 0-12 ******** 7 0-34 0.13 ******** 8 0.26 0.12 ******** POC Outflow Target Calc ******* 3-25 ******* 1.49 1.38 1.13' ******* 1.08 ******* 1.00 0.77 0.73 0.39 0.31 Note that the post -developed peak runoff rates (0.73 cfs For the 2 -year and 1.13 cis for the 10 -year) are less than the predeveloped runoff rates (0.77 for the 2 -year and 1.38 for the 10 - year). The proposed facility therefore also satisfies the KCRTS Level 1 peak flow requirements. 1Dl712003 Page 4-6 Job 401-159 ,/TRIAD • L_J • l eclfni�:al Inlbrrnation Rcpoi 1 The recluircd detention volume for live storage is 87,024 orbic fcct. The provided detention volume wIII be a mininiurn of 100,000 orbic feet, tivhich includes a 15°* factor of siifcty. Due to limitations of running the KCRTS program with reduced runoff record files. information for the 50 -year duration curves is Trot available. Because of this, the upper limit of the target duration curve is based on the 25 -year existing design storm event. Based on discussions v�-ith King County personnel responsible for creating the KCRTS program, the difference in volume of a detention facility sized using the 25 -year duration curve versus a facility sized using the 50 -year duration curve is negligible_ Through several iterations, both the detention facility size and flow restrictor configuration were adjusted until the required flora= duration and peak outflow criteria were met for the facility. Duration Comparison Anaylsis Base File: vredev.tsf New File: poc.tsf Cutoff Units: Discharge in CFS Maximum positive excursion = 0.065 cfs ( 7.8%) occurring at 0.832 cfs on the Ease Data:predev.tsf and at 0.897 cfs on the New Data:poc.tsf Maximum negative excursion = 0.080 cfs 15.0x} occurring at 0.536 cfs on the Base Data:predev.tsf and at 6.955 cfs on the New Data:po::Asf Note: Since the proposed North Pond will discharge into the wetland located on the west portion of the property (to maintain a natural drainage path), the bottom of live storage (live/dead interface elevation) will be set at the 100 -year water surface elevation of -the west wetland. This elevation is 445.00'. Refer to Section 6.1 for complete wetland analysis. 1)10/7 2003 Job #01-159 1TRJAD Page 4-7 -----Fraction of Time ----- ---------Check of Tolerance ------- Cutoff Base New °%Change Probability Base New %Change 0.389 0.82E-02 0.75E-02 -7.8 0.82E-02 0.389 0.383 -1.6 0.471 0.58E-02 0.47E-02 -19.9 0.58E-02 0.477. 0.416 -11.7 0.554 0.46E-02 0.39E-02 -14.8 0.46E-02 0.554 0.474 -14.4 0.636 0.35E-02 0.35E-02 0.9 I 0.35E-02 0.636 0.640 0.7 0.718 0.26E-02 0.29E-02 9.3 0.26E-02 0.718 0.736 2.5 0.801 0.19E-02 0.22E-02 13.8 I 0.19E-02 0.801 0.854 6.6 0.883 I 0.14E-02 0.17E-02 26.5 I 0.14E-02 0.883 0.932 5.5 0.966 I 0.10E-02 0.11E-02 8.1 I 0.10E-02 0.966 0.978 1.3 1.05 0.72E-03 0.60E-03 -15.9 0.72E-03 1.05 1.02 -2.8 1.13 0.47E-03 0.29E-03 37.9 I 0.47E-03 1.13 1.08 4.8 1.21. I 0.26E-03 0.20E--03 -25.0 0.26E-03 1.21 1.13 -6.7 1.30 I 0.15E-03 0.13E-03 -11.1 I 0.15E-03 1.30 1.29 -0.2 1.38 0.65E-04 0.82E-04 25.0 0.65E-04 1.38 1.42 3.0 Maximum positive excursion = 0.065 cfs ( 7.8%) occurring at 0.832 cfs on the Ease Data:predev.tsf and at 0.897 cfs on the New Data:poc.tsf Maximum negative excursion = 0.080 cfs 15.0x} occurring at 0.536 cfs on the Base Data:predev.tsf and at 6.955 cfs on the New Data:po::Asf Note: Since the proposed North Pond will discharge into the wetland located on the west portion of the property (to maintain a natural drainage path), the bottom of live storage (live/dead interface elevation) will be set at the 100 -year water surface elevation of -the west wetland. This elevation is 445.00'. Refer to Section 6.1 for complete wetland analysis. 1)10/7 2003 Job #01-159 1TRJAD Page 4-7 l eclum'cal li)f( nation Rr!port WATER QUALITY DESIGN The Proposcd Ovate;' quality facilities were (lc -signed to comply � ith the KCSWDM's Basic 1T7C11 f- OH(dil17 1l CHU rerluirenlcnts This €nenu pi -w ides several options for water quality facilities, which are designed to remove 80% total suspended solids for flows or volumes tip to and including the WQ desi,.,n floe- or volume. The "combined detention and wetpool facilities" option was selected for the project's facility, and was designed per sections 1.2.8, 6.4.1, and 6.4.4 of the 1998 KCSWDM, as applicable to the combination detention and wetpond facility. Water Qualitv Facilities Sizing Calculations (North Pond) A summary of the water quality facility sizing calculations is provided below. Section 6.4.1.1 of the KCSWDM specifies that the following equation be used when sizing wetpond facilities. Vil —J V,. where- f = Volume Factor (3.0 for "basic" wetponds) V, Volume of runoff from mean annual storm (cf) 40 Vr—(0.9A;+0.25A,g+0.10A,f+O.OlA„)xR where: A! = Area of impervious surface (sf) A,Q � Area of till soil covered with grass (so A,f = Area of till soil covered with forest (sf) R = Rainfall from mean annual storm, (inches) (0.{141' for all facilities see Figure 6.4.1.A in the Appendix) Total Area = 20.18 acres (site plus bypass) Ai 6.48 Ac Arg = 2.01 Ac V,.= 11,313 cf Vb = 33,940 of The actual volume of the wetpool is 45, 734 cultic feet. Overflow Spillway Calculation L = Q1Oc-2.4x H , or min. of 6 feet, min- H=0.3' 3.21 x H3 '- Q€oo= 4.5 cfs, 11=0.3' 50 4. L = — 2.4 x 0.3 7.8'— Actual length will be 8' 3.21 x 0.33,' 101712003 Page 4-8 Job #01-159 , TR1 A D • ON .technical lii1in-n7atio❑ Repon 4.2.2 South Pond The South Pond receives runoff 1-1-0111 the portions (If'tilesite depicted on the Pond Tr-ilmlary ;frees E_lhibir, located at the end of this section. ,An existing stormwater pond is located in the south east corner of the parcel. Upon review of the Morgan Place Technical Information report by Peterson Consulting Engineers (new subdivision located on eastern property line), it was determined that the same tributary areas to the existing pond are included in the model for the new pond. Therefore, the volume of the existing pond is included in the proposed pond. Predeveloped Basin The predeveloped basin has been modeled based on the existing conditions of the site. The resulting predeveloped flours will be the maximum discharge rate in the developed condition. The existing ground cover characteristics and resulting flow are listed below - Impervious Impervious (NE 5'1' St, Jlorga,r Place, 148",4ve .SF.) 0.10 acres Till Pasture 14.48 acres Upstream parcel 3.15 acres Remainder- of .site 11.33 acres Till Grass (back half lots 40-4G, Mw -X n Place) 0.56 acres Total 15.14 acres l he totlowing is the Kux 1 s Uutput Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:pre.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 1.08 2 2/09/01 18:00 1.91 1 200.00 0.990 0.428 7 1/05/02 16:00 1-08 2 25.00 0.960 1.02 3 2/28/03 3:00 1.02 3 14.00 0.900 0.123 8 3/24/04 19:00 0.946 4 5.00 0.800 0.563 6 1/05/05 8:00 0.907 5 3.00 0.667 0.946 4 1/18/06 16:00 0.563 6 2.00 0-500 0.907 5 11/24/06 4:00 0.428 7 1.30 0.231 1.91 1 1/09/08 6:00 0.123 8 1.10 0.091 Computed Peaks 1.64 50-00 0.980 Allowable Release Rates Q10 = 1.02 efs Qz — 0.563 efs �n 017/2003 Page 4-9 Jab #01-159 /rR rAD A 0 Tcdlllical Intiorn�ation Report Developed Basin The following has been used to determine the peak developed flows for the south basin. Impervious coverage has hecn calculated base on the maxirnum zoning, which is 55°% impervious_ (Non -LID assumptions_) The 3.15 acre upstream parcel was assumed to remain undeveloped or will provide its own detention pond For future development. Impervious 6.46 acres Lois 3.30 acres (ronfs cowidered impen-iowq Roads and Sidewalks (irrciuding rl4organ Place) 2.66 aeres Pard Surface 0 j acres Till Pasture (,,pm-eanr P(27-ccl) 3.15 acres Till Grass (including hack half hors 40-46. Mor•.�,an Place) 5.53 acres Total 15.14 acres i ne jonowing is the output Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series Pile:dev.tsf Project Location:Sea-Tac Annual Peak Flow Rates Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak (CFS) (CFS) Period 2.25 5 2/09/01 2:00 1.74 8 1/05/02 16:00 2.70 2 2/27/03 7:00 1.76 7 8/26/04 2:00 2.14 6 10/28/04 16:00 2.39 4 1/18/06 16:00 2.54 3 10/26/06 0:00 4.64 1 1/09/08 6:00 Computed Peaks 3.99 s1017/2003 Job #01-159 Flow Frequency Analysis ------- - - Peaks - Rank Return Prob (CFS) Period 4.64 1 100.00 0.990 2.70 2 25.00 0.960 2.54 3 10.00 0.900 2.39 4 5.00 0.800 2.25 5 3.00 0.667 2.14 6 2.00 0.500 1.76 7 1.30 0.231 1.74 8 1.10 0.091 3.99 50.00 0.980 TRIAD Page 4-10 r0 u 40 'rechnkal lnRi nzahon Repw Facility Output "i'he resulting Facility summary is .show helow. Please refer to the end of this Section for the complete KCRTS Output. Retention/Detention Facility Type of Facility: Detention Pond Side Slope: 3.00 3:0,, Pond Bottom Length: 360.00 ft Pond Bottom width: 100.00 ft Pond Bottom Area: 36000. sq, ft Top Area at 1 ft_ FS Effective Storage Depth: Stage 0 Elevation: Storaae Volume: Riser Head Riser Diameter Number of orifices 46101. sq. ft 1.058 acres 2.50 ft 0.00 ft 98813. cu. ft 2.268 ac -ft 2.50 ft 12.00 inches 3 Full Head Pipe Orifice # Height Diameter Discharge Diameter (ft) (in) MPS) (in) 1 0.00 2.B8 0.356 2 1.20 3.44 0.366 6.0 3 1.60 2.19 0.123 6.0 Top Notch weir_ Rectangular Length: 2.25 in Weir Height: 2.00 ft Outflow Rating Curve: None Hyd Tnflow Outflow Peak Storage Target Calc Stage Elev (Cu -Pt) (Ac -Ft) 1 4.62 ******* 2.70 2.81 2.81 112107. 2.574 2 2.24 ******* 1.27 2.59 2.59 102625. 2.356 3 2.25 1.02 0.85 2.29 2.29 89622. 2.057 4 2.38 ******* 0.73 2.08 2.08 81059. 1.861 5 2.69 ******* 0.69 2.00 2.00 77552. 1.780 6 1..40 0.56 0.48 1.58 1.58 60556. 1.390 7 1.72 ******* 0.28 1.31 1.31 49385. 1.134 8 1.74 ******* 0.21 0.83 0.83 30976. 0.711 Note that the post -developed peak rates of runoff (0.45 cfs for the 2 -year and 0.85 cfs for the 10 -year) are less than the predeveloped peak rates of runoff {0.56 cfs for the 2 -year and 1.02 �:10»i�r�as Joh X01-154 TREAD Page 4-11 ri cdwical 111co milion RZ:Pori c.fs for the 10 -year). The proposed facility therefore also salisfies the KCRTS Lc\,cl 1 peak ]lo%� 1-equire:nlents. Due to limitations of running the KCRTS program with reducer] runoff record files, information for the 50 -year duration curves is not available. Because of this, the upper limit of the target duration curve is based on the 25 -year existing design storm event. Based on discussions with King County personnel responsible for creating the KCRTS program, the difference in volume of a detention facility Sized using the 25 -year duration curve versus a facility sized using the 50 -year duration curve is negligible. Through several iterations, both the detention facility size and flow restrictor configuration were adjusted until the required flow duration and peak outflow criteria were met for the facility. Duration Comparison Anaylsis Base File: pre_tsf New File: spond.tsf Cutoff Units: Discharge in CFS i Maximum positive excursion = 0.098 cfs ( 9.2%) occurring at 1.07 cfs on the Base Data:pre.tsf and at 1.17 cfs on the New Data:spond.tsf Maximum negative excursion = 0.033 cfs ( -8.5%) occurring at 0,386 cfs on the Base Data:pre.tsf and at 0.353 cfs on the New Data:spond.tsf The required detention volume for live storage is 98,813 cubic Feet- The provided detention volume Nvill be a minimum of 113,635 cubic feet, which includes a 15% factor of safety. -1017;2003 Page 4-12 Job #01-159 /TRIAD ----- Fraction of Time ---- ---------Check of Tolerance ------- Cutoff Base New %Change Probability Base New %Change 0.280 0.88E-02 0.83E-02 -5.6 0.88E-02 0.280 0.272 -2.8 0.342 0.62E-02 0.56E-02 -9.8 0.62E-02 0.342 0.322 -5.6 0.403 I 0.48E-02 0.45E-02 -6.8 0.48E-02 0.403 0.375 -7-0 0.465 I 0.36E-02 0.41E-02 13.2 0.36E-02 0.465 0.485 4.3 0.527 I 0.2BE--02 0.27E-02 -3.5 0.28E-02 0.527 0.518 -1.7 0.589 I 0.21E-02 0.21E-02 4.0 0.21E-02 0.589 0.614 4.3 0.650 0.15E-02 0.18E-02 24.4 0.15E-02 0.650 0.683 5.0 0.712 I 0.10E-02 0.11E-02 9.4 0.10E-02 0.712 0.724 1.6 0.774 I 0.77E-03 0.65E-03 --14.9 0.77E-03 0.774 0.766 -1.0 0.836 I 0-44E-03 0.41E-03 -7-4 I 0,44E-03 0.836 0.830 -0.7 0.897 0.26E-03 0.23E-03 -12.5 I 0.26E-03 0.897 0.886 -1.3 0.959 0.16E-03 0.16E-03 0.0 0.16E-03 0-959 0.963 0.4 1-02 0.65E-04 0.49E-04 -25.0 I 0.65E-04 1.02 1.01 -1.2 1-08 0.16E-04 0.49E-04 200.0 0.16E-04 1.08 1.17 7.8 Maximum positive excursion = 0.098 cfs ( 9.2%) occurring at 1.07 cfs on the Base Data:pre.tsf and at 1.17 cfs on the New Data:spond.tsf Maximum negative excursion = 0.033 cfs ( -8.5%) occurring at 0,386 cfs on the Base Data:pre.tsf and at 0.353 cfs on the New Data:spond.tsf The required detention volume for live storage is 98,813 cubic Feet- The provided detention volume Nvill be a minimum of 113,635 cubic feet, which includes a 15% factor of safety. -1017;2003 Page 4-12 Job #01-159 /TRIAD • Technical ]ntbrmation Report Water Quality Facilities Sizing Calculations (South Pond) A summary cif- the water quality facility sizin« Calculations i5 provided helow, Section 6.4.1.1 of the KCSWDNl specifies that the followinLr equation be it -sed when sizin�o wetpond facilities. P'h f l�l where: f Volume Factor (3.0 for "basic" wetponds) V,. = Volume of runoff from mean annual storm (cf) Vr=(0.9,4,+0.25A,.�+0.10Ay=0.01A„)xR where: A, Area of impervious surface (sf) Arg Area of till soil covered with grass (so A,f = Area of till soil covered with forest (st) R Rainfall from mean annual storm, (inches) (0.041' for al] facilities see Figure 6.4.I.A in the Appendix} Total Area = 14.51Ac (site plus bypass) Ai 6.49 Ac A,? — 5.53 Ac V,. = 12,900 cf Vb = 38,703 cf 0 The actual volume of the wetpool is greater than 40,000. • ''-10/712003 Page 4-13 Joe #01-159 =TRIAD NO1DNIHSVM iS1Nf10O gmtx XDObIW V'HS IR i R R� �" 1S3MWb7 0 00 `sem o IISIHX3 SNISVS 4 I y 39 VNIV Ha `J" NII SIX3 U III ui 1 V) �T Y Q J a Q CY C) , t t+ L 1 , r 4 s • i 1 u� j'v • c: y� q `I V t "s:(.Ek•'� , { \ \ t , �* I' .�._ !f I �� 1 f f4 E„`f j�'� f S kt Y 9'a.•$.x.`C�¢,6�i� hl' {� , 11.. +\ + . m m \ ...� vd :L - t ju1-4 14 g, g a L # o � -IPI'Vllr � a s } I _ ” r-- 1 I IJI'=}�:,\�I\, � \� .14 1'�'y, `I` \•�\I I /i�' � �'� � � � _- `. �f�!#�u�tll!�It��l.- �� r ' I: I ' i' � � I I l � , ` �k ; , � 1 J' + , � � l '• '\. !1 it Ir � 7 i \ ._._�r-' :1 i . ,, \ t + 4 r w/ iJ yy J �r yy r• �w,,, v v �• r \ sit� —�� + I;�,I+1' '\ ti \ � �I�ly _ � i 4 � 1 � II,.. .rl .�" 3, 1� 1 �� � I II� �I ��� I ] y, i 1■ A r -� �.� � 1 � 1 , , \ � 1 t 1 1 1 1 1 +, y y '� I I ���• �I r I I \ — _„ - ` _ " .. _ :� J( 1 , J 1 1 VI t 1 1 i y I J �I 'I� � 1 i/ /7 / J 1 I I r �•1 �\`` ,. . m " .. " . t _ 1 F \ r y / ........ �3n-alo � rl r � ,r a I�" ` `1 l �1 * r\ R- J l V I i 1_ w•�3x, aamr�a��i�ese�or`.Isc,l 1 y �'.� 4 Ji' � il1 ' A � \� / 1 �I + ,. I � � y � l � Y V�\ ,y 1 \♦ C 1 11 i 1 I ++ I, *'+ � J { 1` i 1, \ �} •1 I \ 11`�il { r 1 I I / / I —I ! " " " .. + . + _ + . _ I . 1- 1.\........... - E � � � A v �v .�IIlI �: �,-t-�•' ,+,+ yy1',. l 1"'1 y1 _. y 11 i 4 = �I 4 . m � � I \� ��� 1 ,Ir�\X Raw I 1 1r� � � yl t y:.�r•"1 �S. 1 � r '1 ��1 t �.� ! � � I`I _a + �if -� I —, h ' "+ " " " _ • l w _ —.— ST 1.0/ ST 1.0 LA 0.8 LA 0.9 LA 1.0 LA 1.2 ST1,1 3[\ , lAvr BOi it TNUoo y1 — —� .--- 540110 MIS H_= lrilY KIrvC. �r�l1 uT Y RE Otis' - �I NAT 4 Y G- Erly '4i11 II F/7 VY' rATTE E- V BELLEVVE sayy BEINE .T- ! ��E IJ jh I sf * rdEd , C SU 11 FIr- t K / a^ Ir-ATA, a.nKo TAC LANDSBURG ' Fuc„ , ESNUHG fl ST 1.1 v1E R4E [OUr+xr � �� ST 1.0 ` ST 1.01 �._ f... Rainfall Regions and LA 0.8 Regional Scale Factors LA 0.9 Incorporated Area LA 1.0 \- River/Lake — Major Road • 6.1-1 %VE11T)NDS - BASICANDLARG - ,t7F7iIC1I1 C?F.9:',1 }';IS FIGURE 6.4.1.;1 PREC'IPITA'TION FOA IMEAN ANNUAL STORM LN INCIIES fFEE TI 0.59" {0.045') ST 1- 0 LA I. Cl T-.rA 1. 2 8 L- 0.9 _ Incorporated Area / RiveriLakP 4 . 47 ' Lr - Major Ruad (0.039') C� 52" (0.' i - NOTE: Areas east of She eastemmost isopluvial should use 0 55 L'43 , p ,; md,es unless rainfall data is available for the location of interest t 347 ` Tn0 moat annual Mom) is a mnceplual s?onn Iwnd Gy (J-d,n0 The annual pra6p,1aiion Sy the total number of 51crm events pet year result_ generates larue arrrounts of runoff. For this application. till so]; types include Buckley and bedrock soils. and alluvial and oulrvash soils that have a scasona]ly high water table or a.e underlain at a shallop' depth (less than 5 feet) by glacial till. U.S. Soil Conservation SCI'ice (SCS) h�dFolo�-,ic soii groups that are classified as till soils incltacie a ft%V B. most C. anti all D soils. See Chapter for classification of peuific SCS soil types Surlacc Wart r Desl2n Manual 6-69 • • r -IL North Pond KCRTS Qutput Retent1.c::n/L'etenticri F'-rc_1iLV TVn(� of Faciiit�lz: Deter3Lion Pond Side Slope_ 3.00 HTV Vend Bottom L(-,ngrlj: 1F39.00 ft Fond BGttOIII Width: 96.00 ft Ponca Battom Area: 1814.9 . sc3. ft 'Fop Area at 1 ft. FB Effective Storage Depth Stage 0 Elevation Storage Volume Riser Head Riser DiaTr; eter Number of orifices 27594. sq_ ft 0.633 acres 4.00 ft 0.00 fL 87024- cu_ ft 1.998 ac -ft 4.00 ft 12.00 inches 2 Full Head Pipe Orifice 4 Height Diameter Discharge diameter f f t ) (in} (CFS) (in) 1 0.00 3.06 0-508 2 2.05 4.13 0.6=16 8.0 Top Notch We i. : Rect-angular L(c rigtb : 4-20 i n WCir Height: 3,60 ft out f tow Yat inq Curve - 1loile .:;t acre F.] ev at i on Storage Discharge Percol a t i c)n Surf Area lft) (ft") (Cu. ft) (ac -ft) fcfs) Ecfs) E q. ft) 0.00 0.00 0_ 0.000 0.000 {).p0 18144. 0.03 0.03 545. 0.013 0.045 0.00 18195. 0.06 0-06 1092. Q. 025 0.064 0.00 18247. 0.10 0.10 1823. 0.042 0.079 0.00 18315. 0-13 0.13 2373. 0.054 0.091 0.00 1.8367. 0.16 0.16 2925. 0.067 0.101 0.00 18419. 0.19 0.19 3478_ 0.080 0.111 0.00 18470. 0.22 0.22 4033. 0.093 0.120 0.00 18522. 0-26 0.26 4775. 0.1.10 0.128 0.00 18591, 0-36 9.36 6643. 0.153 0.151 0.00 18764 0..16 0.46 852Q. 0.136 0.171 0.00 18938. 0.56 0.56 10431. 0.239 0.189 0.04 191-13. 0.66 0.66 12353. 0-284 0-206 0.00 19288. Ci.75 0.76 14289. 0.328 0.221 0.00 19464. 0.86 0.86 16244. 0.373 0.235 0.00 19641_ 0.96 0-96 18217. 0.418 0.248 0.00 19819. 1.06 1.06 20208. 0.464 07.261 0.00 19997- 1.16 1.-1 222.16_ 0.510 0.273 0.00 20176. 1.26 1.21 24243. 0.557 0.285 0.00 20356 1.36 1.36 26287. 0.603 0.296 0.00 20536. 1.46 1-46 28350. 0.651 0.306 Q.O0 20%17 1.56 1 56 30431. 0-699 0.317 0.00 207899. 1-66 i.rl6 x2534. 0.747 0.327 0.00 x.1082 1.96 1.96 38937_ 0.894 0.355 0.00 21634. 2.05 40892. 0-039 0.361 0.00 21801. 2 09 2 09 11765. 0-959 0.30 0-n0 21075. 4 2.14 42861. 0.984 0.391 0 OD 21068 2.18 2.18 43742. 1..004 0.420 B. Q) 2.2043. 2.22 2.22 44625. 1.024 0.457 0.00 221M. 2.27 2.27 157_i_3_ 1.050 0.503 0.00 222.11- 2-31 2-31 46623. 1.070 0-558 0.00 22286. 2.35 2.35 47516. 1.091 6.61.9 0.00 22361. 2.39 2.39 48412- 1.11.1 0.664 0.00 22437. 2.44 2.44 49536_ 1.137 0.684 0.00 22531_ 2.54 2.54 51799. 1.189 0.727 0.00 22720- 2.64 2.64 54080_ 1.242 0.767 0.00 22909- 2.74 2.74 56380. 1.291 0.804 0.00 23100. 2.84 2.84 58700. 1 348 0.838 0.100 23291. 2.94 2.94 61039. 1-101 0.871 Q-00 23483. 3.04 3.04 63396- 1..445 0.902 0.00 23675. 3.1.1 3.14 65779, 1.510 0.932 0.00 23868. 3.24 3-24 68170_ 1.565 0.961 0.00 29062. 3.34 3.34 70586. 1.620 0.989 0.00 1'.425'1. 3.94 3.44 73022_ 1.676 1.02.0 0 00 24452- 4452.3.54 3 54 3.54 75477. 1.733 1.040 0.05 21649. 3.60 3.60 76959. 1.767 1.060 0.0{) nQ767. 65 3.65 78200. 1.795 1-040 0.00 2486`__x. 3.70 3.70 79446. 1.82] 1.120 0.00 24964. 3 - 75 3 . 75 80696 1 . Hsi 1 . 160 0 . 00 25063 - 3.80 3..80 81952. 1.881 1.200 0. C)0 75162. 3.85 7 85 Ri212.. 1.910 1.240 0.00 MA61. .90 3.90 31473. 1.939 1-290 0.00 25361. 3-95 4.00 3.95 4.00 65749. 87024 1-969 1.998 1.330 1.380 0.00 0.00 .;.5460. z5560. 4.10 4.1.0 89590. 2.057 1.710 0.00 25760. 4.20 9.20 92176. 2.116 2.300 0-00 2.5961. 4.10 A.30 94782 2..176 3.050 0.00 26163. 4.40 4,40 57409. P.236 3.850 0.06 26365- 4-50 1-50 100055. 2.297 4.150 0.00 26568. -1.60 4.60 102722. 2-358 1.140 0.00 26772- 4.70 4.10 105410. 2.-420 4.690 0.00 269V6. 4.80 4.80 10817.8_ 2.482 4.930 0.00 27181 4.90 -1-90 110846. 2.545 5-160 0.00 27387- 5.04 5.00 113595. 2.608 5.370 0.00 27594. .1O 5.10 116365. 2.671 5.570 0.00 27H01. x.20 5.20 119155. 2.735 5.V70 0-00 28009. 5.30 5.30 121967. 2.800 5.960 0.00 282.18. 5.40 5.40 224799. 2.865 6.140 0.00 28428. 5.50 5 50 117652.. 2.930 6.310 0.00 28638. :�.5r, 11.60 13052%. 2.996 6-480 0.00 28849- 5.70 5-70 133922. 3.063 6.650 0.00 29061- 5.80 5.90 1.36339- 3.130 6.810 0.00 29273. 5-90 .90 139277. 3.197 6.950 0.00 29486. (I CO s:-.00 112236. 3.265 7.120 0.00 29700- H d inflow Outflow Peak skorage ptage Flev Wu - Pt) 1ax-Ft1 1 4 50 3.08 4.30 4.30 94884_ 2.178 7, 2.19 1.36 ?.°8 3,08 86552.. 1.987 3 2.15 1 02 3.45 1-45 73195. 1-680 L J 40 Route Time Series through Facility Inflow Time Series File-dev.tsf C)uMOW Time Series Fije:pond POC Time Serips File:poc Inflow/Outflow Analysis Peak Inflow Dis_haryc: 4.51 CFS at Peak Cut:flow Discharge: 3.06 CFS at Peak Rpser•;oii Stage 1.30 Ft Peak keservoi r Elev 4.30 Ft Peak Resevvuir Slnragc: 94884. CU -Ft 2.178 Ac -Ft Adci `Lime series-bypass.tsf 6:00 on Jan 9 in Year 8 10:00 on Mari 9 in Year 3 Peak -Summed Discharge: 3.25 CFS at 10:00 on Jan 9 1n /'ear n Paint of Compliance File:poc_tSf Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:onCl.t:=1 Project Lona; i.nn:Sen-Tac ---Annual Peal; Flow Rates --- 4 2 36 (CFS) 0.97 3 .26 3.26 1.36 6B621. 20:00 0.144 1 . 51L) 18:00 5 2.58 7:00 0.256 0.?0 3 OS 3.05 0.672 63524. 14:00 0.966 1.4513 23:00 6 1,41 7:00 3.08 0-67 2.41 2.41 Computed 48938- 0.904 3.05 1-121 3.00 7 1.65 2.41 Project 0. 31 l .84 1 84 35 340. 7 1.30 0 831 0.2.56 8 a .'.)8 0.091 0.20 1 .02 1 . 02 1.9436. 0.951) 1 _:1116 Hyd R/D Fauility Tributary Reservoir POC Dutflo,., outflow inflow Tnflow Target Calc 1 3.08 0.39 3.25 2 1.36 0.19 **k*}k# k#*,*.* 1.49 3 1.42 0.19 k+#r*x** 1.38 1.13 4 0.97 0.20 ****W*x* ******* 1.08 5 0.90 0.22 1.00 6 0.67 0-12 0.77 0.73 7 0.34 0.13 0.39 S 0-26 0.12 *}k##}fig ******* 0.31 L J 40 Route Time Series through Facility Inflow Time Series File-dev.tsf C)uMOW Time Series Fije:pond POC Time Serips File:poc Inflow/Outflow Analysis Peak Inflow Dis_haryc: 4.51 CFS at Peak Cut:flow Discharge: 3.06 CFS at Peak Rpser•;oii Stage 1.30 Ft Peak keservoi r Elev 4.30 Ft Peak Resevvuir Slnragc: 94884. CU -Ft 2.178 Ac -Ft Adci `Lime series-bypass.tsf 6:00 on Jan 9 in Year 8 10:00 on Mari 9 in Year 3 Peak -Summed Discharge: 3.25 CFS at 10:00 on Jan 9 1n /'ear n Paint of Compliance File:poc_tSf Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:onCl.t:=1 Project Lona; i.nn:Sen-Tac ---Annual Peal; Flow Rates --- Flow Rate Pank Time of Peak (CFS) Rank Return 1.36 2/09/01 20:00 0.144 1 12/28/01 18:00 0.904 5 2/28/03 7:00 0.256 3 2/24!04 0:00 0.672 6 I.I0705 14:00 0.966 i 1/28/06 23:00 1.02 3 11/21/06 7:00 3.08 1 I./09/OS 10:00 Computed Peaks 0.904 3.05 Flo,. Frequency Analysis 3.00 Time Series mile poc._sf 2.41 Project Locatit:n:Sea-Tar_- 0.500 ---Annual Peat FIC, fates -- Flow Rate Park Time of Peak WK) ---Flow Frequency Analysis --- - - Peaks - - Rank Return Prob (CFS) (ft) Period 3.08 9.30 1 100.00 0-990 1-36 3.98 2 25.00 0.950 1.02 3.46 3 10.00 0.900 0.966 3.2.6 9 5.00 0.800 0.904 3.05 5 3.00 0.667 0.672 2.41 6 2.00 0.500 0.3.14 1.84 7 1.30 0.211 0.2.56 1.02 8 1.10 0.091 2.51 4.23 50.00 0.951) -Flow Frequency Analysis ------- Peaks - rank Return Prcb ICFS) Period IAB 2 2/09/01. 19:00 3.25 1 100.00 0 990 0.392 7 7.2/25;01 15:00 1.48 2 25 00 0.960 0 996 5 2/25/03 6 00 1. 1.3 3 10-00 0.:)00 0.306 8 8/26/04 2:00 1 Oz3 4 5.00 0.800 0.734 6 1/05/05 13:00 0.996 5 3.00 0.667 1.08 4 1/18/06 21:00 0.134 6 2.00 0.500 1-13 3 11/24/06 6:00 0.392 7 1.30 0.231 3.25 1 1/09/09 10:00 0.306 8 1 10 0.091 Computed Peaks 2.66 50.00 0.980 Flow Duration from U me Series File:pond.tsf Cutoff Count Frequency CDF Exceedence Probability CFS 4 a 9 0.019 43835 71.486 71.48E 22.514 0.285E+00 0.057 77.80 6.817 78.302 21.698 0.217E+00 0.096 3955 6,450 64.752 15.248 0.152F,+00 0-13=1 3035 4.049 59-702 10.298 0.103E+00 0.172 2091 3.410 93.112 6.488 0.689E-01 0.210 1422 7..319 95,43a 4-509 0. 457E-01 0.243 979 1.597 97.02? '1..973 0.297E-01 0.286 620 1.011 .8.038 1.962 0 196E-01 0.321 462 0.753 95.792 1.208 0.121E 01 0.362 355 0.479 99.371 0.629 0.629E -D2 0.400 86 0.140 99.511 0.459 0.439E-02 0.439 27 0.044 99.545 0.415 0.445E-02 0.977 21 0.034 99.559 0_111 0.711E-02 0.515 16 0.026 99.615 0-385 0.355E-02 0.553 11 0.018 99.633 0.30'7 0.367E-02 0 591 1st 0 029 59.562 0.333 0.338E-02 0.629 17 0 028 P9.690 0.310 0.310E-02 0.661 11 0.0:'.3 99.71i 0.287 0.287E-02. 0.705 33 0.054 99-767 0.233 0.233E-02 0.713 13 0.021 99.788 0.212 0.212E-02 0.782 i3 0-O21 99.809 0.191 0.191E-02 0.820 19 OnAl 99.040 0 160 0.160E 02. 0.858 16 0.026 99-066 0.134 0.134E-02 0.896 19 Q 031 99.897 0.103 0.103E-02 0.934 18 0.029 99.927 0.073 0.731E-03 0.972 1.5 0.029 99.951 0.049 0.489E-03 1.01 8 Q.013 99.964 0.036 0.359E-03 1.05 0,011 99.976 0.024 0.245E-03 1.09 3 0-005 99.980 0.020 0.196E-03 1.12 2 0-003 99.9P4 0.016 0.163E-03 1.16 1 0_D02 99.9F35 0 015 0.147E-03 1.20 1 0.0an 99.907 0.013 0.130E-03 1.24 .. 0.003 99.p90 0.010 0.978E-04 1.2S 1 0 002 09.4:'= 0.008 0.815E-04 1.32 2 '.003 99.995 0.005 0.489E-09 1.35 2 0.003 99.998 9902 0.163E-04 Flow Wration from Time Series File:por .tsf Cutoff Ccunt Fryc3uv" y UDF Exceedence Probability. CFS s 0..0:21 43878 ._ I .55F_ -_1.55& 28-414 0.284E+00 0.062 4 19 6-444 . 4 00 21.600 D . 216E+00 0.101 4057 0_SIG 55.015 14.934 0.150;;+00 40 11 .145 2915 4 --5. 90, 10. 110 0. 102E+DO C; 93.221 0.186 6.79 2116 3.451 Base i)_228 1370 2.234 0.4535 ().269 9j.032 967 1-577 0.383 0.310 0-58E-02 590 R_962 2-006 0. 352 453 0 . V39 0.46E 02 0.393 0.474 393 0.559 99.292. 0.435 0.708 109 0.178 0.9 0.475 0-718 42 0.068 0.5300 0.517 99.538 22 0.035 0.854 0.559 0.22E-02 23 0.038 0.426 0.600 0.426E-02 13 0.021 0.966 D.641 0.978 15 4.024 99.633 D.653 0.367 15 0.024 1.05 0.724 0.72E-03 24 0.039 0.342E-02 0.765 99.652 28 0.046 0.29E-03 0.8D7 -37-9 I1 0.023 0.279 0.848 0-279E-02 11 0.018 0.889 1.42 15 0-024 99.790 0.931. 0.210 20 0.033 0.65F 04 0.972 18 0.029 0.192E-02 1.01 99.832 19 0.031 1.05 13 0.021 0-135 1.10 0.1.35E-02 9 U-015 1- 1 A 9 01 4 1.18 3 0.OD5 {)9.945 1.22 0.054 1 002 1 .26 2 0 003 0 1.30 99. 1 0.002 02'1 1.34 £E-03 . 24 F 03 2 0.003 0.020 1-39 0.196E-03 1 0-002 1.43 2 0.003 99.985 1.47 0.015 2 0.003 Duration Comparison Anaylsis 0.130E Base `?9__ File: predev-tsf. 0.010 New File: poc-tsf. C; 93.221 6.79 - 0.678E-01 Base 95.144 4.545 0.389 0.4535 01 9j.032 0.389 2.968 0.383 0.2,97X-01 0-58E-02 9_7.994 V 2-006 -19.9 0.201E-01 0.554 98.733 0.46E 02 1.267 0.474 0.127E-01 0.35E-02 99.292. € 0.708 0.35E--02 0.708E-02 0.9 99.470 0-718 0.530 0.26E-02 0.5300 02 99.538 0.801 0.462 0.854 0.462E-02 0.22E-02 99.574 13.8 0.426 0.683 0.426E-02 0.14E-02 99.612 0.966 0.388 0.978 0.388E-02 I 99.633 0.11E-02 0.367 8.1 0.367E-02 1.05 99.608 0.72E-03 0.342 1.08 0.342E-02 0.26E-03 99.652 I 0.318 0.29E-03 0.318E-02 -37-9 99.721 1.21 0.279 0.26E-03 0-279E-02 0_65E-04 99.767 0.233 1.42 0.233H 02 99.790 17.1 0.210 1.3B 0.210E-02 0.65F 04 99.608 0.192 0.192E-02 99.832 0.168 0-168E-02 99.865 0-135 0.1.35E-02 99.894 0.106 0.106E-02 99.925 0.075 0.750E-03 {)9.945 0.054 0.538E-03 99.961 0.0391 0 2511 99. 9?6 4- 02'1 Q £E-03 . 24 F 03 g9.980 0.020 0.196E-03 99-982 0.018 0.179E-03 99.985 0.015 0.197E-03 99.981 0-013 0.130E 03 `?9__ 90 0.010 0.978E-04 99.992 0.008 0 815E-04 99.995 0.005 0.4895-04 99.998 0.002 0.163E-04 Cutoff Units- Discharge in CFE ---------Check of - Cutoff Base New VChange 0.389 I 0.82E-02 0.75E-02 0.389 -7.8 0.383 0.971 0-58E-02 0.58E-02 V 17E..-02 -19.9 11.7 0.554 AM- 02 0.46E 02 0.39E-02 0.474 -14.8 0.35E-02 0.636 € 0.35E-02 0.35E--02 0-7 0.9 0-718 0.26E-02 0.29E-02 0.19E-02 9-3 0.801 0-e01 0.854 0.79E-02 0.22E-02 13.8 0.683 I 0.14E-02 0.17E-02 0.966 26-5 0.978 0.966 I 0-10E-02 0.11E-02 1.05 8.1 -2.8 1.05 0.72E-03 0.60E-03 1.08 -15.9 0.26E-03 1.13 I 0.47E-03 0.29E-03 -6.7 -37-9 1.21 1-30 0.26E-03 0.20E-03 0_65E-04 -25-0 1.3D 1.42 0.15E-03 0-13E-03 17.1 1.3B ' 0.65F 04 0.82E-04 25.0 ---------Check of Tolezance ------- Erobabi.iity Baso New Change 0.82E-02 0.389 0.383 -1.6 0-58E-02 0-471 0.416 11.7 0 AM- 02 0-554 0.474 -14.4 0.35E-02 0.636 0.640 0-7 0.26E-02 0.718 0.736 2-5 0.19E-02 0.801 0.854 6-6 0.14E-02 0-853 0.932 5-5 0.10E-02 0.966 0.978 1.3 0.72E-03 1.05 1.02 -2.8 0.47E-03 1.13 1.08 AA 0.26E-03 1.2.1 1.13 -6.7 0.15E-43 1-30 1.29 -0.2 0_65E-04 1.38 1.42 3-0 maximum positive excursion - 0 065 cfs { 7.90 occurring at 0.832 cfs on the Rasa Data p iedev.tsf and at 0.897 As on the New Uavn :nc,c. tsf lcl,Xirrium ne ati_e exc-.irsicn - D.()84 cfs ��ccurrirq aL t).,36 cfs ori thc- Base Data:piedev_t f riled of a .155 fs o.3 Lhe W( -",r Uata7p(-)c-.t.,E • 0 South Pond KCRTS Output Retention/Detention Facility Type of Facicity Side Slope: Pond Bottom Length: Pond Bottom Width: Pond Bottom Area: Top Area at 1 ft- FB: Effective Storage Depth Stage 0 Elevation Storage Volume Riser Head: Riser Diameter: Number of orifices: Or:if ir_e # Height (f t) 1 0.00 7..20 3 1.60 Top Notch Weir: Length: Weir Height: Outflow Rating Cur%re: Detention Pond 3.00 H:7V 360.00 ft 100.00 ft 36000. sq. ft 46101. sq. ft 1.058 acres 2.50 ft 0.00 ft 98813- cu. ft 2-268 ac -ft 2._50 ft 12.00 inches 3 Full Head Pipe Diameter Discharge Diameter (in) (CFS) (in) 2.88 0.356 3.44 0.366 5.0 2.19 0.123 6.0 Rectangular 2.25 in 2.00 ft None 40 Stage Elevation Storage Discharge Percolation Surf Area (ft) !ft) (eta. ft) (ac -ft) (cfs) (Cfs) Isq_ ft) 0-00 0.00 0. 0.000 0.000 0.00 36000. 0.03 0.03 1081. 0.025 0.039 0.00 36083. 0.06 0.06 2165, 0-050 0.055 0.00 36166. 0.09 0.09 3251_ 0.075 0.067 0.00 35249. 0.12 0.72 4340. 0.100 0.078 0.00 36332 0.15 0.15 5431. 0.125 0.087 0.00 36415- 0.18 0-18 6525. 0.150 0.095 0.00 36492- 0,21 0-21 7621. 0.175 0.103 0-00 36581. 0.24 0.24 £3720. 0.200 0.110 0.00 36664 0.34 0.34 12400. 0.285 0.131 0.00 36943 0.44 0.44 16108. 0.370 0.149 0.00 37221- 0.54 0.54 19841. 0-456 0.165 0.00 37501 4.64 0.64 23608. 0 - 542 0.180 0.00 37781 0.74 0.74 27401. 0.629 0.194 0.00 38062 0-84 0.84 31221. 0.717 0.206 0.00 38344. 0.94 0.94 35069. 0.805 0-218 0.00 38626- 1.04 1.04 38946. 0.894 0.229 00 38909_ 1-14 1.74 42851. 0.984 0.240 0.00 39193- 7."2.0 1.20 45208 1.036 0.246 0.00 39364 ..24 1.24 46785. 1.074 0.253 0.00 39478 1.27 1.2? 97970. 1.101 0.266 p.On 39563 1.31 1-31 49555. 1.138 0.284 '.GO 39677. 1.31 1. .34 50747. 1.155 +x.308 00 39763 1.38 1.38 52340. 1.202 0-337 0.00 39877 40 1.42 1 4 53937. 1.238 0.361% 0ID0 39992- 1.45 1.:11) 55138. 1. 266 0.412 O.O() 90078. l.49 1.49 567A3. 1.303 0.446 00 10192- 1.59 1.59 60"r"1-7. 1.395 4-483 0.00 4 )4"79_ 1.60 1.60 61182. 1.405 0.488 0.00 40508_ 1.62 1.62 X1993. 1"4 3 0.496 0"QO 4D566- 1.65 L6 5 63211. 1.451 0.508 0.00 1D652. 1.67 1.57 64025. 1.470 0.521 0.00 40710 1"69 1.69 04839. 1.489 0.537 0.00 40767. 1.71 1.71 65655. 1.507 0.555 0.00 40825_ 1.'74 1"74 66881. 1.535 0.574 0"00 40911. 1.7F; 1"76 67700. 1.554 0"591 0.D0 40969. 1.78 1.78 68520. 1.573 0"601 0.00 11027. 1.81 1.8I 69752. 1.601 0.611 0.00 51114" 1.91 1.91 73878. -1..696 0.652 0.00 91.103 2.00 2.00 7-1616. 1.782 0.688 0.00 4-564. 2.06 2"06 80121. 1.839 0"719 0.00 41838. 2.13 2.13 83057. 1.907 0.";55 0.00 42042. 2.19 2.19 85585. 1.965 0.792 D.00 �;2277. 2.25 2.25 88123" 2.023 0.828 D.00 42392. 2.31 2.31 90672. 2.082 0.863 0.00 42568. 2.38 2.38 93659. 2.150 0.896 0.00 -52773. 2.44 2.44 96230. 2.209 0.937 C).D0 -12949- 2 50 2.50 98813_ 2.268 0.979 X3.00 43125. 2.60 2.G0 103140_ 2.368 1.310 0.CC) 43419_ 2.70 2.70 107496_ 2.468 1"900 0.00 43714. 2.80 2.80 111883. 2 568 2.660 0.00 9.1010" 2.`30 2.90 116298. 2.670 1.480 0"00 A4307. 3.00 3.00 1'.0744_ 2.772 3.780 0.00 44604- 3.10 3.10 12,219. 2.875 4.060 0.00 14902" 3-20 3.20 129724. 2.978 4.320 0.00 45201. 1.30 3.30 134259. 3.082 4.560 0.00 45500" 3.40 3-40 1.38824. 3.187 4.790 0.00 ]5800. 3.50 3"50 143420. 3.292 5.000 0.D0 46101. 3.60 3.60 148045. 3-399 5"210 0.00 46403. 3.70 3.70 152700. 3.506 5.410 0.00 46705. 3.90 3.80 15'7386. 3.613 5.600 0.00 }7008. 3.90 3.90 7.62102_ 3.721 5.780 0.00 1731.2. .1 .(DO 4.00 166648. 3.830 5"950 0"00 47616 .1 .10 4.10 171625, 3.940 6.130 0.00 47921 4.20 4.2D 176432" 4.050 5.290 0.00 48227. 4.30 -1.30 181270. 4.161 6.450 0-00 A 8534. 4.40 4.40 186139. 4.273 6.610 0"00 18841 4"50 4.50 191039. 9"386 6.760 0.00 49149 H d Inflow Outflow Peak Storage Target Calc Stage Eley (Cu - Ft) (T,c:-Ft) 1 4-62 ******* 2-70 2.81 2-81 112107. 2.574 2 2.24 ******* 1.27 2.59 "2"59 -102625. 2.356 3 2.25 1.02 0.85 2.29 2.2.9 89622. 2.05? 4 2.3© *#****, 0.73 2.08 2.08 81059. 1.861 5 2-69 ****"** D.69 2.D0 2.00 77552. 1.780 6 1-40 D.56 D . 4 B 1.58 1.58 60556. 1.390 -7 7.'72 ******* 4.c8 I.31 1-31 49385. 1._139 B 1%4 ******* 0.21 D.83 0.83 30976. 0.111 ------------ -- Route Time Series ti-rroi.rgh Facility Inflow Time Series r' le:dev-W Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series 170c : sponcl. tsf Project Location:Sea-Tac Annual Peak Flow Rates --- Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak {CFS? 1.27 2 U.2fi2 r 0.68'r 5 0 20 8 0.481 6 0.899 3 2. 0 1 Computed Peaks Outflow Time Series Ki le:spord Analysis------- Cutoff Count Inflow/Outflow Analysis CFS Rank Return Peak Inflow Discharge: 4.62 CFS at 0.059 Peak Outflow Discharge: 2.70 CPS at 5022 Peak Reservoir Stage: 2.81 Ft 100.00 Peak Reservoir Elev: 2.81 Ft 0.195 Peak Reservoir Storage: 112107. Cu -Ft 1052 0.849 2.574 Ac -Ft Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series 170c : sponcl. tsf Project Location:Sea-Tac Annual Peak Flow Rates --- Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak {CFS? 1.27 2 U.2fi2 r 0.68'r 5 0 20 8 0.481 6 0.899 3 2. 0 1 Computed Peaks r� u 2109/01 19:00 7.2/28/01 18:00 2/28/03 7:00 0/26/04 6:00 1/05/05 15:00 1/1006 23:00 11/24/06 8:00 1/09/08 10:00 6:00 on Jan 9 in Year 8 10:00 on Jan 9 in Year 8 -----Flow Flow Gu r a t i o n Analysis------- Cutoff Count - - Peaks CFS Rank Return 0.018 40677 (CFS) 0.059 5305 Period 0.089 5022 2.70 0.124 4056 100.00 0.160 2557 1.27 0.195 1581 25.00 0.231 1052 0.849 0.266 485 10.00 0.302 118 0.730 0.337 76 5.00 0.373 69 0.687 0.408 16 3.00 0.449 38 0.481 0.4?9 73 2.00 0.515 28 0.262 0.550 12 1.30 0.S86 14 0.20; 0.621 24 1.10 0.657 28 2.22 0..592 25 SO . 00 0.?28 16 0.023 0.763 12 0.227E-02 0.,99 6 0.188 0.834 0.046 99.858 0.870 - r� u 2109/01 19:00 7.2/28/01 18:00 2/28/03 7:00 0/26/04 6:00 1/05/05 15:00 1/1006 23:00 11/24/06 8:00 1/09/08 10:00 6:00 on Jan 9 in Year 8 10:00 on Jan 9 in Year 8 -----Flow Frequency Analysis------- Frequency CDP - - Peaks - - Rank Return Prob 0.337E+00 (CFS) (ft) 25.013 Period 8.190 83.177 2.70 2.80 1 100.00 0.990 0.102E+00 1.27 2.59 2 25.00 0.960 96.539 0.849 2.29 3 10.00 0.900 0.174E-01 0.730 2.08 4 5.00 0.800 99.238 0.687 2.00 5 3.00 O.h67 0.638E-02 0.481 1.S8 6 2.00 0.500 99.504 0.262 1.31 0.062 1.30 0.231 0.434E-02 0.20; 0.83 8 1.10 0-091 99.731 2.22 2.74 SO . 00 V980 `780 from Time Series File:spond.tsf Frequency CDP Exceedence Probability 66.336 66.336 33.664 0.337E+00 8.551 74.987 25.013 0.250E+00 8.190 83.177 16.823 0.168E+00 6.614 89.791. 10.209 0.102E+00 4.170 93.961 6.039 0.604E-01 2.578 96.539 3.461 0.346E 01 1.716 98.255 1.745 0.174E-01 0.791 99.046 0.954 0.954E-02 0.192 99.238 0.762 0.762E-02 0.124 99.362 0.638 0.638E-02 0.113 99.475 0.525 0.525E-02 0.029 99.504 0.496 0.495E-02 0.062 99.566 0.434 0.434E-02 D.119 99.685 0.315 0.335E-02 0.046 99.731 0.269 0.269E-02 0.020 99.750 0.250 0.250E.-02 0.023 99.773 0.227 0.227E-02 0.039 99.812 0.188 0-188E-02 0.046 99.858 0.142 0.192E-02 0.011 99.899 0.101 0.101E 02 0.026 95.925 0.075 0.750E-03 0,020 99.945 0.055 0.554E-03 0.010 99.959 0.096 0.457E-03 C-010 99.964 0.036 0.359E-03 0.011 99-976 0.024 0.245}'-03 0.905 3 0.005 99.900 0.020 0.196E-03 0.341 3 0-005 90.985 0.015 0.197E-03 0.970 2 0.003 99-989 0.011 0.114E-03 1.01 1 0.00:? 99.990 0.010 0.978E-04 1.05 0 0.000 99.990 0.010 0.978E-04 1.08 "1. 0.003 99.993 0.007 0.652E-04 1.12 0 0.000 99.993 0.007 0.652E-04 1.15 0 0.000 99.993 0.007 0.652E-04 1.19 2. 0.003 99.997 0.003 0.326E-04 1.22 0 0.000 99.997 0.003 0.326E--04 1.26 0 0.000 99.997 0.003 0.326E-04 • • t2clmiwl Information Report 5 CONVEYANCE SYSTEM ANALYSIS &DESIGN All conveyance systems tii ill be designed in accordance with the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KC'SWDM). All systems will be analyzed during the 1 00 -year design storm event and show that no catch basin or sw ale systern overflows or floods at any point. Actual conveyance analysis will be provided during final engineering submittal. 10/7?2003 Page 5-1 Job 401-159 /TRIAD J cchnical liifin nation Report is 6 SPECIAL REPORTS AND STUDIES • 6.1 Wetland Recharge North Central Wetland In the existing condition, 2.73 acres of the site is tributary to the wetland located near the north property line approximately 600 feet west of 148th Ave SF_ The land cover is as follows: 0.07 Acres Impery-ions (driveways and roofs with 50% effective impervious multiplier) and 2.66 acre till pasture. The 1.1 year event produces 0.029 cfs of flow. Please see the KCRTS time series provided below. Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:eastpre.tsf Project Location:5ea-Tac -Annual Peak Flow Rates --- Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak (CFS) (CFS) Period 0.198 2 2/09/01 18:00 0.085 7 1/05/02 16:00 0.188 3 2/28/03 3;00 0.029 8 8/26/04 2:00 0.107 6 1/05/05 8:00 0.178 4 1/18/06 16:00 0.171 5 11/24/06 4:00 0.354 1 1/09/08 6:00 Computed Peaks 0.302 -----Flow Frequency Analysis- --- Peaks - - Rank Return Prob (CFS) Period 0.354 1 100.00 0.990 0.198 2 25.00 0.960 0.188 3 10.00 0.900 0.178 4 5.00 0.800 0.171 5 3.00 0.667 0.107 6 2.00 0.500 0.085 7 1.30 0.231 0.029 8 1.10 0.091 0.302 50.00 0.980 To maintain the hydrology of the wetland, runoff from lots 101-104 and the back yard of lot 100 (0.6 acres in total) will be allowed to bypass the detention pond and drain directly into the wetland to provide recharge. The land cover is as follows: 0.08 acre impervious, 0.17 acre till grass and 0.35 acre till pasture producing 0.025 cfs of flow. Please see the KCRTS time series provided below. ; 10!71200,1 jot) 1:01-159 TRIAD Page 6-1 • • Technical f iforrnalicnl Rcj-colt Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File; recharge.'Ls£ s'rajcCt kucatior:Sea Tac - Ail rua l Peak PILow Rates - - - - Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak (CFS) Period 0.054 4 2/09/01 2:00 0.034 6 1/05/02 16:00 0.064 2 2/27/03 7:00 0.025 8 8/26/04 2:00 0.033 7 1/05/05 8:00 0.057 3 1/18/06 16:00 0.053 5 11/24/06 3:00 0.116 1 1/09/08 6:00 Computed Peaks 50.00 Results: - F1.ow Frequency Analysis - - - - Peaks - Rank Return Prob {CFS} Period 0.116 1 100.00 0.990 0.064 2 25.00 0.950 0.057 3 10.00 0.900 0.054 4 5.00 0.800 0.053 5 3.00 0.667 0.034 6 2.00 0.500 0.033 7 1.30 0.231 0.025 8 1.10 0.091 0-098 50.00 0.980 In the developed state, the runoff produced by the eastern buffer plus the above stated lot runoff, the difference of flow between the predeveloped and recharge amount for the 1.1 year return period is minimal (0.004 cfs). s 10/712003 Job 401-159 ����❑ Page 6-2 TeJJFIIC i Information Replant 0 6.2 West Wetland Analysis The West Wttland is proposed to receive discharge from the North Pond. The 100 -year water surface elevation of the wetland was selected as the critical live storage elevation of the North Pond (live/dead interface elevation). Exisling Conditions: Approximately 28.3 acres of land in the existing condition is tributary to the subject wetland. The wetland itself covers approximately 3.0 acres and within it, are topographically two separate sub -wetlands, a north and a south ,vetland. These sub -wetlands are connected by an inter -wetland ditch. Primary discharge for the entire wetland system flows north through a 12" CMP and a 6" concrete pipe into a pond located in the adjacent property to the north. The secondary discharge for the wetland Bows south through a V -ditch offsite into another wetland. Approach: Since the primary discharge for the entire wetland drains to the north, tail water elevations are established by ponding conditions in the downstream pond to the north. Currently the pond to the north discharges through a 12" CMP (443.48} at an elevation higher than that of the discharge point of the subject wetland (443.4'). Therefore, the starting tail water elevation for the analysis is governed by the discharge point of the downstream pond. To be conservative the maximum tail water surface has been set at the overflow elevation of this pond (top of berrn, approximately 444.5'). Considering the elevation for the inter -wetland ditch connecting the north and south wetland is 444.45' (slightly below that of the assumed tail water elevation), it is assumed that there will be no contributing storage volume from the north wetland below elevation 444,5'. Given these assumptions, the south wetland will be analyzed with the primary outlet as the inter -wetland ditch discharging north from the subject wetland. Tributary flows and volumes for the south wetland are presented below. ;10172003 Page 6-3 Jab X01-159 /TRI" • • Technical InfomZation Repoi t Analysis: Hie Kine COLInty Runoff 1"inic Series (KCRTS) program was used to calculate nmvs and surface water elevations Ior the south wetland- Peak runoff calcUlations v, -ere determined using Sea -Tac scale factor of- 1.0 and Till soils. Areas tributary to the south wetland are given below. Refcr to the I'Vetlan(I Basins Frhihrt attached for basin delineation. Impervious (roof'cand roa(1s) 1.78 acres Till Pasture 12.79 acres Till Forest 0.81 acres Wetland 1.23 acres Total 16.61 acres Inflow: The fallowing table shows the peak flow tributary to the south wetland in existing conditions. Flow Frequency Analysis 'rime Series File:exst-sw.tsf Project Location:5ea-Tac ---Annual Peak Flow Rates --- Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak (CFS) (CFS) Period 1.42 3 2/09/01 15:00 0.751 7 1/05/02 16:00 1.50 2 2/27/03 7:00 0.500 B 2/26/04 2:00 0.773 6 1/05/05 B:00 1.27 4 1/18/06 16:00 1.20 5 11/24/06 3:00 2.53 1 1/09/08 6:00 Computed Peaks 2.19 l 0!712003 Job #01-159 -----Flow Frequency Analysis ------- - - Peaks - - Rank Return Prob (CFS) Period 2.53 1 100.00 0.990 1.50 2 25.00 0.960 1.42 3 10.00 0.900 1.27 4 5-00 0.800 1.20 5 3.00 0.667 0.773 6 2.00 0.500 0.751 7 1.30 0.231 0.500 8 1.10 0.091 2.19 50-00 0.980 TR,TAD Page 6-d • • J Mini CaI II]fol ta6on Report Reservoir: Mlle following table slimv5 t}hc 2 -outlet reser,-oir ]-le. Discharge A is the flow rate for the inter-wctlaiid ditch to the north. Dischargc B is the flow rate for the V -ditch to the sotitll. Rder to Ditch Flow Calculations in the end of this Section for ditch cross sections and calculations. South Wetland 2 -Outlet Reservoir Data Two Outlet Reservoir Routing File Stage Discharge Flow Rates--- Storage Perm -Area (Ft) (CFS) Flow Rate (Cu -Ft) (Sq -Ft) Peak A B Rank Return 0.00 0.000 0.000 0. 0. 0.10 0.110 0.000 1704. 0 0.15 0.210 0.000 3462. 0. 0.20 0.350 0.000 5329. 0. 0.30 0.730 0.040 9393_ 0- 0.40 1.230 0.140 13907_ 0. 0.50 1.930 0.340 18881. 0. 0.60 2.770 0.650 24324, 0. 0.70 3.800 1.100 30248, 0. 0.80 5.030 1.710 36661. 0- 0.90 6.460 2.490 43572. 0. 1.00 8.120 3.460 50991. 0. 444.50 Ft : Base Reservoir Elevation 0.0 Minutes/Inch: Average Perm -Rate Outflow North: The following table shows the discharge from the inter -wetland ditch to the north. Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:n-d.itch.tsf 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 1.16 2 2/09/01 19:00 1.90 0.50 1 100.00 0.990 0.388 7 1/05/02 18:00 1.16 0.39 2 25.00 0.960 0.972 3 2/27/03 9:00 0.972 0.35 3 10.00 0.900 0.184 8 8/23/04 20:00 0.970 0.35 4 5.00 0.800 0.593 6 1/05/05 9:00 0.952 0.34 5 3.00 0.667 0.952 5 1/18/06 21:00 0.593 0.26 6 2.00 0.500 0.970 4 11/24/06 5:00 0.388 0.21 7 1.30 0.231 1.90 1 1/09/08 10:00 0.184 0.14 8 1.10 0.091 Computed Peaks 1.65 0.46 50.00 0.980 ,�-1017i2003 Joh 401-159 /TRIAD Page 6-S • • FOChnfril Infoinlatioii Retort Outflow ,south: The fc)lloyv frig table ShMys thU ChSCIKLI-le f-0111 the V -Aitch to 1114 south. FT o,,.; Frequency Analysis Time series Fiie:s-ditch.tsf Project Locatiori:Sea-Tac Annual Peak Flow Rates Floe Rate Rank Time of, Peak ((-FS} 0.330 0.54 1 0.126 2 2/09/01 19:00 ).004 7 1/05/02 18:00 0.088 3 2/27/03 9:00 0.000 8 8/23/04 20:00 0.026 6 1/05/05 9:00 0.084 5 1/18/06 21:00 O.OBB 4 11/24/06 5:00 0.330 1 1/09/08 10:00 Computed Peaks Resents: Flow Frequency Analysis Peaks - - Rank Return (CFS) (ft) Period 0.330 0.54 1 100.00 0.126 0.39 2 25.00 0.088 0.35 3 10.00 0.088 0.35 4 5.00 0.084 0.34 5 3.00 0.026 0.26 6 2.00 0.004 0.21 7 1.30 0.000 0.14 8 1.10 0.262 0.46 50.00 Prob 0.990 0.960 0.900 0.800 0.667 0.500 0.231 0.091 0.980 The tail water elevation for the above out -going flow rates is 444.50'. The surveyed elevation of 444.45' of the inter -wetland ditch was assumed as the primary outlet of the south wetland. The water surface elevation for the south wetland for the 2, 10, and 100 -yr storm are as follows: 2 -yr: 444.76' 10 -yr= 444.85' 100 -yr: 445.00' The water surface elevation for all three storm events is above both discharge elevations of the south wetland (444.45' for inter -wetland ditch and 444.64' for the V -ditch to the south). Therefore water travels in both directions in all storm events except for the 1.1 -year event which flows only to the north. The predicted storm event water surfaces are conservative. :� 10/7f2003 Job #01-159 ,'TRIAD Page 6-6 • • .r Cchnic81 111fulmation Report Carac•lrrsiou: The 100 -yr water stirface elevation liar the onsite wetland was (Ictermilled to establish the bottom of live storage elcvation (l)"ve./dead interface) for the proposed detention bond. Only the Sottth Wetland was considered for the analysis since the tail water elevation (conservatively determined from downstream conditions) is higher than both discharge points for the North Wetland. From the KCRTS reservoir modeling the 100 --yr water surface elevation of the wetland was determined to be 445.00', therefore the bottom of live storage elevation has been designed at 445.00. c 101P2003 Page 6-7 Job 401-159 /TRIAD T W 0 z m C9 N Z 3 Q r U LU U) NOIJNIHSVM :UWOO ONIN 2. rn w g c o V) d Q rY F -- N1 O d N — � o � Q rY F -- N1 O d N — 171 • 0 DITCH FLOW CALCULATIONS Pd#annings Equation C?=(If 49AR,"S1')ln Kra = 1%JP,H Pilch - N Trapezoid IL- (tt) _ 144 50 1 rape7oid ditch equations SSa,,e = 0.91 H A = wb+y H -- Sl„tcn (ft/ft) - 0.135 P, wt, = 0 50 n = 0 Of)) ;iver3ge rnanninq; Contour (n) Y ltt) Area (sf) I P,v (11) 1 R„ (11) Q (cfs) 444.50 444.60 0.00 01.00 fl_50 000 0.08 0.00 0.11 0.10 i) 06 0.10 0.77 - 0.91 444 65 0.1 `, 0 11 0 21 444.70 020 0.14 0.23 1.04 1.31 0.13 0.3P) 0 73 1,1,1.80 {)_30 0.40 0.18 444.9U 035 1 t)8 -- 1 .55 0.22 Q26 1 It) 193 .._.._ 4,15.00 0 50 -- 0.60 0.48-- 0 53 445.10 2- 12 2.39 0.30 0.33 2 77 3.80 445.20 445.30 [}_70 G 80 0.9U 080 0 98 19 266 2 93 0,37 03 6 46 44'1,40 0.10 445.50 }.00 1.41 3.20 0.44 - 8 '12 Ditch - S V IP (fi) = 444-64 R, M) 4.36 Sd, o, (tuft) 0-005 n = 00,55 V ditch equations _ fIV A=y'H averaye marminys Contour (H) y {tt) Area (sf) P- {") R, M) 444.70 0.06 0.02 0.54 0.03 0.00 444 80 0 16 0 11 1 43 008 0 04 T444.90 0.261 0.29 2.33 0.13 0.14 445.00 0.36 0.57 3.22 0.18 0.34 445.10 0.46 0.92 4.12 0.22 0.65 44520 0-56 1 37 5-01 027 .1 10 -- 44530 0.66 1.90 5.90 032 1.71 445.40 0.76 2.52 6 80 0.37 2.49 445.50 0.86 3.22 7 F,9 0.42 3.4Ei • to Cj) co I— tD LO Lo LO -j- (1j) LJOIJeA@JA to 7- T-- tf) C) CV • to Cj) co I— tD LO Lo LO -j- (1j) LJOIJeA@JA to 7- T-- tf) C) U U-) Ln CD �t �r Lf) 0) LO co Lf) rl- Ln co U-) Ln CD �t �r Lf) 0) LO co Lf) rl- 0) co J �t It � LO A- f _ N LO J �t LO f _ N Ln I� i � 1 � LO ol I E I o- cO 2 1 f> Chapter ;} r f 104v in Open __-_ -- -- ('orrecttun factor p lalale 4-15 - - i u0 t_DrreCt!on Faclor`• for 5traig,ht i_ltannels 0 ,t0 ("vee r,f Sinuqusne;s Sligklt}y :.,mous dtannels 0.75 Aloderalely stnvous channels 0,60 VUY sinuous Sours efLa ne. ��'. "pecign o! Stable Channels:' "Transactions of the A SLE can So' ie tY Of G'—I t-n¢inU"'v i24, tt l'i1—"19. Coprt:vhi f19`,S bs ASCE Repnnledbyperml>stort�...-- ,,.hist} states that f rt -- 0.031 rf uherr d i; the characteristic ,article diameter on the boundary {I feelI iJsin2 Ole `> l}erc.erttile diameter, d for ci vie4ds rl 0.Q31(d,s1 = 0.031(0 r>? x 3.281}F 0 020 }his compares F,a�or bl) with ft Il f)2; C�tim:ated from TabIC 4.16, anti the a ,ccl tfte ileoig more conser�''3ti•:e \.due c,f 0.0'"I : t11 hf itt Stef> Z� The angle of I cf,ase of the channel I tjatel ial it, esttntt+ted fro0 nt Fi�,ure d.., - ., u I 1 0 8 In } hr:lefore_ thc' angle of repose,<Y, is cflual tr> Ihate<� on nr�dcralcl rnnn.le:i ntntcliali. NjiniMorit rt Normal rt Plaxim"Inr �Tite Chararterislics --. n til5 of fable 4.16 Koughnes5 Coe(flCtenls In.,rrsh, .Irai lett, clean, retentl,; relTf} feted I)IE p ll}y 0-021' FxCd1'c tC'd Q11Fn (.hartnals and t.111401111 i}earl, ahf.r ,:'('•alit..^rlRg ., dc" Q ('i5 I} X7;1 untfunn section. ti -.'ith short �,raE Y, fe'•� \l eels U-07.3 0.023 I11]7`1 Earth,w'inding, nc) , P 'ef ai lOn __��_. n.0<`.� C`� 6 = p 933 artd sltl£g,i •h n i rash some wee ac}uatic pt tats 0 p3D it 035 0r)40 dense •fees or in deep channels p.0 8 0.030 0-035 ealti bottom and rubble s' des 0.035 0 ,040 .- stony };elte'rid weed) tanks m 0 0} 0.030 01,040 0.050:_2 cobktle ttottum and clean sides 0.02 5 0-028 Op33 0.00" Dragline exea� ate no E'egetation brush On banks 0 t)35 p 050 q 440'- or dredged li# ht and uniF�rlja 0 (�2_ 0,Q35 Q 040 p 0 . Reck ruts sM,mli jagged and irregular 0 413-' O80 0.12 ense eds h)gh as f1e" c}ept� ,'e 41.050 Channels not - b<titorn, rus�nn sties 0 Oto p.il. maintained, clean san,e,highcst stage of flow (1.0:15 O.i00 �':ecds and dense brush, high srtge Q.t180 -- brush uncut , -- - 1 11 tL- !4f G \; .LC Courcy Chole' 11?-9;.� .<_F�nt, f 395u1 iccOl"mrn��c3 tc�r use '; 1 I • 7 OTHER PERMITS • • Technical fntormation Report 10/7/2003 7-1 Job #01-159 'TRI -1D Technical lnformatioai Report • 8 TESC ANALYSIS AND DESIGN • • To be provided t►t en1inccr ing subtllittal_ 17. 10/7/2003 8-1 Job <11-159 • • Fcchnical Information Report 9 BOND QUANTITIES, FACILITY SUMMARIES, AND DECLARATION OF COVENANT 9.1 Bond Quantities A Site Improvement Bond Quantity Worksheet will be provided at the end of the engineering review process. 9.2 Facility Summaries To be provided at engineering submittal, 9.3 Declaration of Covenant Not applicable. 1017120'03 Joh 901-159 9-1 Teci7nical tnfoenlation I gloat io 10 OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE The ponds will he publicly maintained systems, whereas the swales and rain �-,at-detis will be • • privately maintained. The documentation xvill be provided during en-ineering submittal. ,�-101712003 Job #Q1-159 II TRIAD 10-1 r �T y { FAI � 4Lr1, +1W..'tia, Y' 1 t4i'T '�e _ v. i. 4°';� <�S 4' �M17 i �j ti. 4 K y� rYt, qJ � Y.- .i. P F a. A I •-. F. S A 1 f 5.. 1.y t ;k m sk ir. Prepared For: Cam West Real Estate Development, Inc. Issued October 7, 2003 Prepared By: Ben Rutkowski Reviewed By: Rcbecca Cushman, PE Loci- Impact 1](,velopmcm LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT METHODOLOGY Low Impact Developnierlt (LID) is a comprehensive technology-based approach to nianagi.ng ' urban stormwater. This approach combines a hydrologically functional site design with pollution prevention measures to compensate for land development impacts on hydrology ' and water quality. Storinwater is managed in small, cost-effective landscape features located on each lot rather than rely solely on large pond facilities located at the bottom of drainage ' areas. This localized source control concept is quite different from conventional end of pipe treatment or conservation techniques. The primary goal of LID is to mimic the ' predevelopment site hydrology by using site design techniques that store, infiltrate, evaporate, and detain runoff. Use of these techniques helps to reduce off-site runoff and ' ensure adequate groundwater recharge. )1017'2003 Page 1 Job X01-15 - TRIAD r_ Loan fnipact Development SHAMROCK PROJECT OVERVIEW The projcc-t proposes to create 118 single-fa111ily lots on all approximately 34.5 acre property. Approximately 30.5 acres will be developed, with the remainder left as protected wetlands and associated buffers. The site is north of 128`" St. SF, tivest of 148`x' Avenue SE. in King County, Washington. Please see the enclosed Viciait}y Map. The portion of the site between SE 124"' Street and the northern boundary will incorporate Low Impact Development (LID) measures. These measures include_ use of amended soils throughout the project; use of open channel conveyance elements (vegetated swales) in lieu of pipe systems where feasible; use of flow dispersion trenches and perforated stub -outs to convey roof and footing drainage from individual lots; and incorporation of a rain garden; The portion of the site between SE 124t' Street and the southern boundary will be designed assuming standard development methods. Job #01-159 1 TRIAD Page 2 1 ' V F -vr lath s Y � I I VICINITY MAP Not to Scale The portion of the site between SE 124"' Street and the northern boundary will incorporate Low Impact Development (LID) measures. These measures include_ use of amended soils throughout the project; use of open channel conveyance elements (vegetated swales) in lieu of pipe systems where feasible; use of flow dispersion trenches and perforated stub -outs to convey roof and footing drainage from individual lots; and incorporation of a rain garden; The portion of the site between SE 124t' Street and the southern boundary will be designed assuming standard development methods. Job #01-159 1 TRIAD Page 2 tow 111 pic1 t)evelopmea�t Please refer to the illustrative Low impact Development Exhibit located in the back of the document to clarify the details mentioned below. Amended Soils A soil amendment is any lnaterial added to a soil to improve its physical properties, such as water retention, permeability, water infiltration, drainage, aeration and structure. The goal is to provide a better environment for roots_ Amending a soil with organic compost increases the soil's permeability and water holding capacity, thereby delaying and often reducing the peak stormwater run-off flow rate, and decreasing irrigation water requirements. Amending soils will also enhance the plant's long-term aesthetics while reducing fertilizer and pesticide requirements. Amended soil is the result of tilling compost in with the natural soil. This project will incorporate 8-10 inches of amended soil on top of 4 inches of scarified soil. Open swales Open swales lined with vegetated, amended soils, will be used wherever possible as a means of surface water conveyance. This maximizes the opportunity for water quality treatment and infiltration. The open swales are designed as wide as possible and as shallow as feasible to provide a natural appearance, while still providing adequate conveyance capacity. Slopes are designed to be less than 5%, with flatter areas and shallow berms provided to encourage ponding. Some swales will be designed as bioretention areas with additional depth of amended soils. These areas will provide additional runoff storage capacity and further help to attenuate flow rates_ Underdrains will be incorporated to prevent ponding for an excessive period of time. Where feasible, swales are provided to convey runoff from the access roadways. Runoff is introduced to these swales either by using a series of narrow curb drops, or by using shallow curb inlets and connecting pipe. The open swales will be located in private tracts and will be maintained by a home owners association_ ' tT 10l7i2003 Joh ft01-159 ITRIAD Page 3 1 Lo -,ti hiipct t:)e�elopment Lot i}rainage Lot drainage will be addressed in three di fferent ways throughout the site. Runoff fi-0111 some lots will bypass the proposed detention pond and provide rccllarge to the wetland areas. The ' recharge to the wetland will be accomplished by connecting the roof and footing drains to a backyard dispersion system- The design mimics surface flow in an un -concentrated manner evenly back into the wetland. Other lots will discharge roof and fboting drainage to an open swale via a gravel -encased perforated pipe. The "perforated stub -out" will provide an ' increased opportunity for infiltration. These lots will be graded to promote sheet flow across the yard and toward the open swale. All yards will contain amended soils to increase the ' length of time that the storm water takes to travel into the storm conveyance system. The lots where an open swale is not accessible will discharge into the street conveyance system via ' perforated stub -outs and perforated connecting pipe. The driveways to the homes will be sloped towards the access roadway to convey the drainage into the street system. ' Rain Garden ' Rain gardens are small depressions constructed near stormwater flow sources. They consist of different layers of gravel, amended soils and mulch beneath a vegetative cover. Rain ' gardens collect and soak up rainwater, capture pollutants, and detain or infiltrate standing water. This project will incorporate a rain garden located in the open space near the ' northeast intersection of 145"' Avenue SE and SE 124`f' Street. The grading in the north east portion of the site will direct most of the runoff to this feature via open swales. The rain ' garden will be planted with native species that are wet and dry tolerant and will add to the biodiversity of the area. ' Benefits Relating to Facility Sizing A drainage pond is still necessary to meet current detention and water quality standards. However, the size of the facility is reduced due to the proposed LID methods incorporated in the developed area tributary to the pond. The above mentioned practices slow the water down and increases the time it takes for the storm water to reach the pond and provides a greater opportunity to infiltrate back into the soil, thus reducing the arnount of runoff that 1 01712 0 03 Job 401-159 /TRIAD Page 4 o� ,vol DN1NSYM :f1N(?00 7N1N a r N XDOUNVHS a 7F =g! 9 A y 4 MO -7 1181mx.g 1N3WdO7.9A30 JOVdW! -7mi usn771 v�4 e � A y o� 1 1 1 1 1 Lww Impic'i Dcvdopnnent will rcach the pond. The decreased velocity, increased time of travel and redue6013 of volume mimics the conditions of"the land to that of -a predeveloped state. Water duality is also improved utilizing LID techniques. BY SIOWing down the velocity of the storm water, sediments and other impurities are less likely to be picked tip and transported. However, if' sediments are transported, an increased flow time will allow sediments to settle to the bottom of the swales and/or be absorbed by plants. 1017/2003 Job tt01-159 TREAD r Page 5 DEl/CfT OF ,,NNN1N. OC T I u 2005 RECEIVED PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL REPORT Highlands Park 13400 Block of 156th Avenue SE Renton, Washington Project No. T-5668-1 Terra Associates, Inc. Prepared for: Burnstead Construction Company Bellevue, Washington October 10, 2005 t 1-1 t TERRA ASSOCIATES, Inc. Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering, Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences October 10, 2005 Project No. T-5668-1 Mr. Ron Hughes Burnstead Construction Company 1215 —120th Avenue NE, Suite 201 Bellevue, Washington 98005-2135 Subject: Preliminary Geotechnical Report Highlands Park 13400 Block of 156th Avenue SE Renton, Washington Dear Mr. Hughes: 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. Our field exploration indicates the site is predominantly underlain by glacial till consisting of dense to very dense silty sand to sandy silt with varying amounts of gravel. We observed what appears to be an isolated area of recessional outwash sand and gravel extending to depths of 5 to 20 feet near the southwestern corner of the site. Existing fill soils containing organics and construction debris were found to a depth of 10.5 feet in the northeastern portion of the site. We observed groundwater seepage in 10 of the 37 test pits. The observed seepage is generally light and perched on top of the dense to very dense glacial till. In our opinion, the soil and groundwater conditions are suitable for the planned development. Undisturbed inorganic native soil subgrade or compacted structural fill placed above competent native soil will provide suitable bearing for standard spread footing foundations, floor slabs, and pavements. 12525 Willows Road, Suite 101, Kirkland, Washington 98034 Phone (425) 821-7777 • Fax (425) 821-4334 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Mr. Ron Hughes October 10, 2005 Detailed recommendations addressing these issues, as well as other geotechnical design considerations, are presented in the attached report. 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. jb-1 v-a'r Project No. T-5668-1 Page No. ii 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Pap_e No. 1.0 Project Description.........................................................................................................1 2.0 Scope of Work................................................................................................................1 3.0 Site Conditions................................................................................................................2 3.1 Surface............................................................................................................... 2 3.2 Soils...................................................................................................................2 3.3 Groundwater...................................................................................................... 3 4.0 Geologic Hazards............................................................................................................ 3 4.1 Steep Slopes.......................................................................................................3 4.2 Landslide Hazard............................................................................................... 3 4.3 Erosion Hazard.................................................................................................. 4 4.4 Seismic Hazard.................................................................................................. 4 5.0 Discussion and Preliminary Recommendations.............................................................. 4 5.1 General............................................................................................................4 5.2 Site Preparation and Grading............................................................................. 5 5.3 Excavations........................................................................................................ 6 5.4 Foundations........................................................................................................6 5.5 Basement and Site Retaining Walls................................................................... 7 5.6 Slab -on -Grade Floors......................................................................................... 7 5.7 Stormwater Pond................................................................................................ 8 5.8 Drainage.............................................................................................................8 5.9 Utilities.............................................................................................................. 9 5.10 Pavements.......................................................................................................... 9 6.0 Additional Services.......................................................................................................10 7.0 Limitations......................................................................................... 10 Fieures VicinityMap........................................................................................................................Figure 1 Exploration Location Plan..................................................................... .......Figure 2 ....................... Typical Wall Drainage Detail..............................................................................................Figure 3 Appendix Field Exploration and Laboratory Testing................................................................... Appendix A Preliminary Geotechnical Report Highlands Park 13400 Block of 156th Avenue SE Renton, Washington i 1 1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1 1 n The proposed project is a residential development. We were provided with a Preliminary Plat site plan by Core Design, dated July 2005 that indicates the site will be developed with 73 residential building lots. Site access will be from 152nd Avenue along the west property line and from SE 133rd Street along the north property line. The plan indicates site stormwater will be collected and routed to a stormwater facility in the southwestern corner of the site. Site grading, building, and stormwater management plans are currently not available. With the rolling topography, we expect site grading will consist of minor to moderate cuts and fills necessary to establish desired building pad and roadway elevations. We expect the residential structures will be one- to two-story, wood - framed buildings with main floor levels either framed over crawl spaces or constructed as slab -on -grade. Foundation loads should be light, in the range of 1 to 2 kips per foot for bearing walls and 10 to 25 kips for isolated columns. The recommendations contained in the following sections of this report are based on our understanding of these design features. if actual features vary or changes are made, we should review them in order to modify our recommendations, as required. We should review final design drawings and specifications to verify that our recommendations have been properly interpreted and incorporated into project design. 2.0 SCOPE OF WORK Site exploration work completed for this study included excavating test pits on three separate occasions. Test pits were excavated on February 7, 2005, July 27, 2005, and on October 5, 2005. Using the information obtained from the subsurface exploration, we performed analyses to develop geotechnical recommendations for project design and construction. Specifically, this report addresses the following: • Soil and groundwater conditions • Geologic hazards • Site preparation and grading • Excavations • Foundations October 10, 2005 Project No. T-5668-1 • Retaining walls • Slab -on -grade floors ' • Stonnwater pond • Drainage • Utilities 1 • Pavements It should be noted that the 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) are beyond Terra Associates' purview. A building envelope specialist or contractor should be consulted to address these issues, as needed. 3.0 SITE CONDITIONS 3.1 Surface I The site is an undeveloped, approximately 20 -acre assemblage of 3 parcels located between 152nd Avenue SE (also known as Rosario Avenue SE) and 156th Avenue SE, just north of SE 136th Street (also known as SE 2nd Place) in Renton, Washington. The approximate location of the site is shown on Figure 1. it 1 The eastern end of the north parcel is currently occupied by a single-family residence with several outbuildings. The site is generally forested with mature coniferous and deciduous trees. Site topography is relatively flat to rolling with a gentle grade down to the southwest. Topographic information provided to us indicates surface grades generally range between about 8 and 13 percent; however, localized slope areas may be slightly steeper. Overall relief" across the site is approximately 84 feet. 3.2 Soils The soils we observed in the test pits generally consist of 3 to 18 inches of topsoil and forest duff overlying moist, silty sand with gravel consistent with glacial till. We observed dry to moist, outwash gravels and sands overlying the glacial till in five of the test pits and moist fill soils overlying the glacial till in nine of the test pits. The till was generally medium dense and weathered in the upper portions. The dense, unweathered glacial till was observed at depths ranging from 1.0 to 10.5 feet below existing surface grades. In Test Pits TP -1, TP -2, TP - 12, TP -101, and TP -103 we observed medium dense gravel with sand and sand with gravel consistent with recessional outwash to depths ranging from 5.5 to 20.0 feet below existing surface grades. These test pits are located in and around the stormwater detention tract in the southwestern corner of the site. Test Pits TP -1, TP -2, TP -12, and TP -101 were terminated in the outwash gravels and sands. We observed the glacial till underlying the outwash in Test Pit TP -103 at a depth of 5.5 feet. IPage No. 2 1 u October 10, 2005 Project No. T-5668-1 We observed moist fill to depths ranging from 1.5 to 10.5 feet below existing surface grades in Test Pit S-3, S4, S- 7, S- 9, S-10, S-13, S-14, TE -1, and TP -105. The fill was generally loose to medium dense and consisted of silty sand with gravel, organics, and occasional trash debris. These test pits are located around the existing residence located in the northeastern portion of the site. The Geologic Map of the Renton Quadrangle, King County, Washington, by D.R. Mullineaux (1965), shows soils in the vicinity of the site mapped as ground moraine deposits consisting of ablation till over lodgment till. These soils are described as a mixture of silt and sand with varying amounts of gravel. The soils observed in our test pits are generally consistent with this description; however, the granular soils observed in the southwestern portion of the site appear to be recessional outwash deposits, which stratigraphically overly glacial till. 3.3 Groundwater We observed groundwater seepage in 10 of the 37 test pits. The observed seepage was light and generally ' perched on top of the dense to very dense glacial till. However, we observed moderate to heavy groundwater seepage between depths of approximately one to six feet below the existing ground surface in Test Pit TP -5. I u n 1 11 The groundwater conditions observed are typical for a glacial till site. In general, surface water that infiltrates through the upper weathered soil zone becomes perched on the underlying, dense cemented till. The cemented till has a relatively low permeability that impedes the downward migration of the infiltrated surface water. As a result, groundwater seepage will develop and tend to flow laterally along the till contact. Locally, such seepage is referred to as interflow. Perched groundwater levels and flow rates will fluctuate seasonally and typically reach their highest levels during and shortly following the wet winter months (October through May). 4.0 GEOLOGIC HAZARDS 4.1 Steen Slopes Section 4-3-050B4b (Steep Slopes) of the Renton Municipal Code (RMC) describes steep slopes as either sensitive slopes or protected slopes. These designations require slope grades of either 25 percent and greater or 40 percent and greater, respectively. Based on our observations and site topography provided to us, slope gradients at the site are less than 25 percent. Therefore, steep slope areas as defined by the RMC do not exist on- site. 4.2 Landslide Hazard As discussed earlier, site grades typically slope at gradients of less than 15 percent. Therefore, according to RMC Section 4-3-050B4c (Landslide Hazards), a Low Landslide Hazard (areas with slopes less than 15 percent) exists on-site. Page No. 3 October 10, 2005 Project No. T-5668-1 4.3 Erosion Hazard The Soil Conservation Service (SCS) has mapped the site soils as Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes (AgQ. These soils are described as having a moderate erosion potential. As defined in RMC Section 4-3-050B4d (Erosion Hazards), the site has a low erosion hazard. Regardless of the site classification, the site soils will be susceptible to erosion when exposed during construction. In our opinion, properly applied and maintained Best Management Practices (BMPs) for erosion prevention and sediment containment will adequately mitigate the potential for on-site erosion and sediment itransport. All BMPs should conform to City of Renton requirements. 4.4 Seismic Hazard ' The site is underlain by dense to very dense glacial till. Therefore, according to RMC Section 4-3-050B4e ' (Seismic Hazards), the seismic hazard at the site is low. Seismic Site Class Based on the soil conditions encountered and the Iocal geology, per Chapter 16 of the 2003 International Building Code (IBC), Site Class "C" should be used in the project's structural design. i 1 5.0 DISCUSSION AND PRELIMINARY RECOMMENDATIONS 5.1 General Based on our study, in our opinion, there are no geotechnical constraints that would preclude development, as 1 planned. The structures can be supported on conventional spread footings bearing on competent native soils or on structural fill placed above these native soils. Localized fill soils observed in the vicinity of the existing residence in the northeastern portion of the site will not be suitable for support of new construction. Removal and replacement of all or a portion of this fill with structural fill should be planned for support of new construction. The predominant glacial till soils and existing fill observed at the site contain a sufficient percentage of fines (silt- and clay -sized particles) that will make them difficult to compact as structural fill when too wet. Accordingly, the ability to use the soils from site excavations as structural fill will depend on their moisture content and the prevailing weather conditions at the time of construction. Reuse of existing fill will also be dependent on the amount of organics and deleterious debris it contains. Detailed recommendations regarding these issues and other geotechnical design considerations are provided in the following sections of this report. These recommendations should be incorporated into the final design 1 drawings and construction specifications. IPage No. 4 1 11 October 10, 2005 Project No. T-5668-1 5.2 Site Preparation and Grading To prepare the site for construction, all vegetation, organic surface soils, and other deleterious materials should be stripped and removed from the site. Surface stripping depths of about 3 to 18 inches should be expected to remove the organic topsoil and forest duff. The organic topsoil currently stockpiled in the eastern portion of the site will not be suitable for use as structural fill, and should also be stripped and removed in preparation for mass grading. The existing uncontrolled fill observed around the existing residence in the northeastern portion of the site, should also be excavated and replaced with structural fill. Based on our observations, it appears that the majority of the existing fill contains enough organics and construction debris that will make it unsuitable for reuse as structural fill. Existing fill that contains a minimal amount of organics and construction debris could be reused as structural fill provided its moisture content allows for proper compaction when placed. Once clearing and stripping operations are complete, cut and fill operations can be initiated to establish desired roadway and lot grades. Prior to placing fill, all exposed surfaces should be proofrolled to determine if any isolated soft and yielding areas are present. Proofrolling should also be performed in cut areas that will provide direct support for new construction. If excessively yielding areas are observed and they cannot be stabilized in place by 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 unstable soils is excessive, use of a geotextile reinforcing/separation fabric, such as Mirafi 500X or equivalent, can be considered in conjunction with structural fill. Our experience has shown that, in general, a minimum of 18 inches of a clean (no soil fines), granular structural fill over the geotextile fabric should establish a stable bearing surface. The vast majority of soils observed on-site contain a significant amount of fines, and will be difficult to compact ' as structural fill when too wet. Accordingly, the ability to use native soils from site excavations as structural fill will depend on their moisture content and the prevailing weather conditions when site grading activities take place. Native soils that are too wet to properly compact could be dried by aeration during dry weather conditions or mixed with an additive such as cement, cement kiln dust (CKD), or lime to stabilize the soil and facilitate compaction. If an additive is used, additional BMPs for its use will need to be incorporated into the Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control plan (TESL) for the project. Compaction of the fine-grained native soils may be accomplished using a self-propelled, vibrating sheep's -foot roller. n Outwash sand and gravel observed at Test Pits TP -1, TP -2, TP -12, TP -101, and TP -103 in the southwestern portion of the site should be suitable for use as structural fill during most weather conditions. If grading activities are planned during the wet winter months, or if they are initiated during the summer and extend into fall and winter, the owner should prepare to import wet weather structural fill. For this purpose, 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 maximum* *Based on the 314 -inch fraction Page No. 5 October 10, 2005 Project No. T-5668-1 Prior to use, Terra Associates, Inc., should examine and test all materials 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 of 95 percent of the soil's maximum dry density, as determined by the 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. 1 5.3 Excavations All excavations at the site associated with confined spaces, such as utility trenches and retaining walls, must be completed in accordance with local, state, or federal requirements. Based on the Washington State Department of Labor and Industries current occupational safety and health regulations, the existing fill, upper weathered till horizon, and the medium dense to dense granular soils observed in the southwestern portion of the site would be 1 classified as Type C soils. The unweathered, dense to very dense glacial till soils would be classified as Type A soils. Accordingly, for temporary excavations of more than 4 feet and less than 20 feet in depth, the side slopes in Type C soils should be laid back at a minimum slope inclination of 1.5:1 (Horizontal:Vertical). Excavations in Type A ' soils should be laid back at a minimum slope inclination of 0.75:1. If there is insufficient room to slope the excavations in this manner, the contractor will need to use temporary shoring to support the excavations. We expect that site excavations will encounter light seepage of perched groundwater, particularly in the winter and early spring months. However, we do not expect that the light seepage flows will adversely impact the stability of temporary excavation sidewalls that are properly sloped, as described earlier. We expect the rate and 1 volumes of the seepage will be low, and that conventional sump pumping procedures and a system of collection trenches, if necessary, should be capable of maintaining relatively dry excavations for construction purposes. This information is provided solely for the benefit of the owner and other design consultants, and should not be construed to imply that Terra Associates, Inc., assumes responsibility for job site safety. It is understood that job site safety is the sole responsibility of the project contractor. 5.4 Foundations Residential structures may be supported on conventional spread footing foundations bearing on competent inorganic native soils or on structural fills placed above competent native soils. Perimeter foundations exposed to the weather should bear at a minimum depth of 1.5 feet below final exterior grades for frost protection. Interior foundations can be constructed at any convenient depth below the floor slab. We recommend designing foundations for a net allowable bearing capacity of 2,500 pounds per square foot (psf). For short-term loads, such as wind and seismic, a one-third increase in this allowable capacity can be used. With the anticipated residential loads and this bearing stress applied, building settlements should be less than one-half inch total and one-fourth inch differential. Page No. 6 October 10, 2005 Project No. T-5668-1 For designing 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 350 pounds per cubic foot (pcf). We recommend not 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 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 Basement and Site Retaining Walls The magnitude of earth pressure development on below -grade walls, such as basement or retaining walls, will partly depend on the quality of the wall backfill. We recommend placing and compacting wall backfill as 1 structural fill. To guard against hydrostatic pressure development, drainage must be installed behind the wall. A typical wall 1 drainage detail is shown on Figure 3. With wall backfill placed and compacted, as recommended and drainage properly installed, unrestrained walls can be designed for an active earth pressure equivalent to a fluid weighing 35 pcf. For restrained walls, an additional uniform lateral pressure of 100 psf should be included. These values assume a horizontal backfill condition and that no other surcharge loading, such as traffic, sloping embankments, or adjacent buildings, will 1 act on the wall. If such conditions exist, then the imposed loading must be included in the wall design. Friction at the base of the wall foundation and passive earth pressure will provide resistance to these lateral loads. Values for these parameters are provided in Section 5.4 of this report. 5.6 SIab-on-Grade Floors 1 Slab -on -grade floors may be supported on subgrades, as recommended in Section 5.2 of this report. Immediately below the floor slabs, we recommend placing a four -inch thick capillary break layer of clean, free -draining, coarse sand or fine gravel that has less than three percent by weight of material 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 slabs. 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 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 be effectively drained. IPage No. 7 October 10, 2005 Project No. T-5668-1 Other methods are available for preventing or reducing water vapor transmission through the slab. We recommend consulting with a building envelope specialist or contractor for additional assistance regarding this issue. 1 5.7 Stormwater Pond Soils observed in the location of the stormwater pond varied from relatively impervious glacial till in the ponds northeastern area transitioning to outwash sand and gravel to the southwest. The permeability of the outwash deposits will allow stormwater directed to the pond to infiltrate. However, the on- and off-site lateral extent of 1 the deposit appears limited and; therefore, the capacity of the formation to accept infiltrated water will be limited by its volume. Further exploration and study would be necessary to define the limits of the formation and this volume. However, based on experience, it is likely that the volume will not be sufficient to rely on infiltration discharge of multiple storm events. Therefore, in our opinion, design of the stormwater system should be based on detention and controlled release. iWhile the ability to infiltrate stormwater will be limited by the storage voIume of the outwash formation, this available storage will be sufficient to impact water quality dead storage in the pond. If the pond system is designed with dead storage for water quality purposes, the water quality pond cell should be located on the upper northeastern portion of the pond site. If located in the western outwash portion, or if outwash soils are exposed in the water quality pond cell, the pond should be lined to prevent loss of dead storage. Lining can consist of a ' soil liner constructed using the on-site glacial till soils. The glacial till soil liner should have a minimum thickness of 2 feet and be constructed with till soils that have a minimum fines content of 20 percent. Cobbles or rock size of three inches and greater should be removed from the soil liner. The soil liner should be placed in 12 - inch loose soil lifts and compacted as structural fill. Soil moisture should be within minus one to plus three percent of optimum soil moisture when compacted. Fill material placed for construction of perimeter containment berms should meet the requirements for pond liner as discussed. Berm fill should be placed and compacted structurally. Preparation of the fill subgrade should include removal of topsoil and forest duff, exposing competent native inorganic glacial soil. Interior pond slopes below the design maximum water surface should be graded to a minimum slope inclination of 3:1. Exterior slopes can be graded to 2:1. All slope faces should be compacted and track -walked followed by ' cover planting, such as hydro -seeding to reduce the erosion potential. 1 5.8 Drainage 1 Surface Final exterior grades should promote free and positive drainage away from the building areas. We recommend providing a gradient of at least three percent for a minimum distance of ten feet from the building perimeter, except in paved locations. In paved locations, a minimum gradient of two percent should be provided, unless provisions are included for collection and disposal of surface water adjacent to the structure. IPage No. 8 ' October 10, 2005 Project No. T-5668-1 Subsurface We recommend installing continuous drains along the outside lower edge of the perimeter building foundations. The foundation drains should be tightlined to an approved point of controlled discharge independent of the roof drain system. Subsurface drains must be laid with a gradient sufficient to promote positive flow to the point of discharge. All drains should be provided with cleanouts at easily accessible locations. These cleanouts should be serviced at least once every year. 5.9 Utilities Utility pipes should be bedded and backfilled in accordance with American Public Works Association (APWA) ' 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, successful use of on-site soils as fill will require close moisture control. When moisture cannot be controlled to facilitate proper compaction, minimum trench backfill should consist of 1 an imported granular soil that meets the gradation requirements presented in Section 5.2 of this report. 1 5.10 Pavements Roadway pavement within the project site should be constructed on subgrades, as described in Section 5.2 of this 1 report. Regardless of the relative compaction achieved, the subgrade must be firm and relatively unyielding before paving. Proofrolling the subgrade with heavy construction equipment should be completed to verify this condition. The thickness of the various components of the pavement depends on the subgrade soils and the traffic conditions to which the pavement will be subjected. We expect traffic to mainly consist of light passenger vehicles, with only occasional heavy service vehicles. Based on this information, and assuming a properly prepared and stable subgrade, we recommend the following pavement sections: • Two inches of asphalt concrete (AC) over four inches of crushed rock base (CRB) , • Two inches of AC over three inches of asphalt -treated base (ATB) All paving materials should conform to the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) specifications for Class B asphalt concrete and CRB surfacing. Long-term 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. To improve performance, we recommend surface drainage gradients of at least two percent. Some longitudinal and transverse cracking of the pavement surface should be expected over time. Regular maintenance should be planned to seal cracks when they occur. IPage No. 9 October 10, 2005 Project No. T-5668-1 6.o ADDITIONAL SERVICES Terra Associates, Inc., should review the final project designs and specifications in order to verify that earthwork and foundation recommendations have been properly interpreted and incorporated into project design. We ' should also provide geotechnical services during construction to observe compliance with our design concepts, specifications, and recommendations. This will allow for expedient design changes if subsurface conditions differ from those anticipated prior to the start of construction. 1 7.0 LIMITATIONS 1 v i We prepared this report in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. This report is the property of Terra Associates, Inc., and is intended for specific application to the Highlands Park project in Renton, Washington. This report is for the exclusive use of Burnstead Construction Company and its authorized representatives. The analyses and preliminary recommendations presented in this report are based on data obtained from the on- site test pits. 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 proceeding with construction. 1 Page No. 10 R 5E 121 t ST LU SE 120Th 51; rC 227 , ' » ` XWFIELO b PAW c ,` i•'.1CLIIhY'i 1!t F" 657 6 et 5C 124tH •'�: SE 124114 C SMC. 111 r PL fl! :T d! r a i ; QST t ! Lr. SE 4-1h '.q '_, y7d1A •it'P LLJ ---------------- ---- �� 12 ,�� � � � '` � � f � A! �EapC�"" ,i � 1� spa � � �'r. 4 atj.! •ct: 4PAIK ST � �Vr SE 131S' ST SE 152ND ST µ K SND Ss +Y z .c 13Eill SE 132W ¢3x� u� ►' <E'( SE a a a 1%4y h ' i 51 Q4TH �" ST d �• � A !1µi E s " 3 a lam 5E SE 199TH~ ST '' 3s: iK°" , z� 3�:: �` � 3811'1 5T � � � SE ,� 1 2 'park r ,4 - s•thT - - -�,r i - �— z Liu DISE 138TH ie 11em r� sr =T1! i ? va s[ 1�eTe rt LPAfR%i ST •gib �. St 1397H ►i 4 y ry�i PL?I I ., �� a ;. / SE 19911 y ash C PL SE 139TH Pl. "� SE St lLrrn St 1 k54 H SL 1415 ��¢n wt+ r W r t Lo SE 141ST - ST 142ND 5T w' si- a 142M1 ST '� n� @moi SE 142M 5€ Id St 14?HU ,� :3 yy ::� = SE 142RU ST ST 142W N 9 .Y 5E A 14 ST - ' s r i•TC t-1 ` 1441H Yl ST n p 5E 1441N rr .P. x • i!� $? ws S �, JY _ �t tVI M i�srTu z., +4 * - y'0' � �� le PLfn� �XIO PL MCI (Y 02003 Th, REFERENCE: THOMAS GUIDE, CD-ROM, KING/PIERCEISNOHOMISH COUNTIES, 2004 NOT TO SCALE Terra VICINITY MAP HIGHLANDS PARK • ••• Associates) Inc. RENTON, WASHINGTON • Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering Geology and pro No. T-5668-1 Date OCT 2005 Figure 1 Environmental Earth Sciences �' w ;:.,TED;'= 40-333$ ; �-- CITY OF f1iGFILANDS P.9RK RENTON �' — `• •ms's _„w„ ""�/'�'+°1K+v"� •"'� "1°'. ROAD & GRAOfNG PLAN 1 I - f _ � pp LkH k ij r' E z 5 ZLL # A O Z j # 11 -L IS LZ p C~'] _ — H QZ o Q a= N R-- -; — (_) z a o Pm z<� -"• o o = o N lii V A r' V i ❑ =Z r ~r n. LL W o +� � - UD ■ '� F- X o ■ ■i ■ ■ W Z r w a� N ti d)■ z AP s ■ Y- - - W COD U Flu a 00 � .0" o �cb cmq (P 0-1 m IN C�'l F— Co CL Q i. > ■ CO) ti I AV3 go A LLk Mr C0a t N Cl?w �� Lul 6 •- N � • r � � 4 1 6b n cb .° W $ N Ldp O C cr d) la $ .t i N ll u J Q / a J Zco CD [ O J J N ri3 7 LL] co)Q z0 m Z Z v r(l �`' ,mo _ LLI O O wy ao o a to Co Lu F- m U -0 0U. 0 0 00 o v Z Z Z Z ~ 0-10 O O O toto a- a a ry CLCL � I X X x X a I Q � � x Q a- d CD .gym LU Hch H P E'D i'• ■ , C) �" r ' o Nr L Lou� CL CDr- z ❑ a. QCL rD z _ (j�W� C) LA m � C7 a = W ■ <—oz a CL °� ' omu) 2 H LTLI Q} r p W J t 7=z � Z 0 3 r .� -'3-5 '3AV N151- g U W x fi azO x U wozo Z z - 1 551" z U, 5izwC9 W 0. w � � W Ill W 2 — W W IL F - ratan LU u) 0 m m m m m m m= m om= m m m = m r= 1 1 1 1 12" MINIMUM 314" -------- ' MINUS WASHED 3" BELOW PIPE 4" DIAMETER PERFORATED PVC PIPE 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 TYPICAL WALL DRAINAGE DETAIL HIGHLANDS PARK ~� RENTON, WASHINGTON .•• • • Associates Inc. • Consuttants in Geotechnical Engineering Geology and Pro No. T -5668-1I j Date OCT 2005 Figure 3 Environmental Earth Sciences j. g APPENDIX A FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING Highlands Park Renton, Washington Site exploration work was completed on three separate occasions. Initially, on February 7, 2005, we excavated ' 12 test pits to a maximum depth of 20 feet below existing surface grades. On July 27, 2005, we excavated 14 additional test pits to a maximum depth of 9 feet below existing surface grades and 5 test holes to a maximum depth of 12.5 feet below existing surface grades. On October 5, 2005, six more test pits were excavated on ' property that was added onto the development site. The test pits were excavated using either a rubber -tired backhoe, or a track -mounted hoe. The approximate ' Iocations of the test pits are shown on Figure 2. Test pits locations are approximate and were determined by pacing and belt chain measurements from existing site features. The test pit logs are presented on Figures A-2 through A-20. Test pit elevations shown on the logs are approximate and were determined by interpolation of the contour lines shown on the boundary and topographic survey prepared by CORE Design. ' A geological engineer or geotechnical engineer from our office conducted the field exploration, maintained a log of each test pit, classified the soils encountered, collected 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 pits were placed in sealed 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 11 of the samples, the results of which are shown on Figures A-21 through A-26. IProject No. T-5668-1 1 t Fi MAJOR DIVISIONS LETTER SYMBOL TYPICAL DESCRIPTION Clean GW Well -graded gravels, gravel -sand mixtures, little or no GRAVELS Gravels fines. GP Poorly -graded gravels, gravel -sand mixtures, little or J(less than r_`o N More than 5% fines) no fines. C' M Silty gravels, gravel -sand -sift mixtures, non -plastic 'io- 50% of coarse fraction is a W m � M larger than No. Gravels with fines fines. . � 4 sieve GC Clayey gravels, gravel -sand -clay mixtures, plastic fines. C) 0 o C) N Clean SW Well -graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fines. SANDS Sands SP Poorly -graded sands or gravelly sands, little or no W r- Z (less than < .c c More than 5% fines) fines. 2 t4 50% of coarse o fraction is SM Silty sands, sand -silt mixtures, non -plastic fines. U g° smaller than Sands SC Clayey sands, sand -clay mixtures, plastic fines. No. 4 sieve with fines _ ML Inorganic silts, rock flour, clayey silts with slight .2 o SILTS AND CLAYS plasticity. CL Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity, {lean clay). � N E o Liquid limit is less than 50% OL Organic silts and organic clays of low plasticity. Wa Z N Z U-) M y MH Inorganic silts, elastic. C7 E5 SILTS AND CLAYS WCH Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays. Z 0 W Liquid limit is greater than 50% IL OH Organic clays of high plasticity. HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT Peat. DEFINITION OF TERMS AND SYMBOLS V] co Standard Penetration Density Resistance in Blows/Foot 2" OUTSIDE DIAMETER SPLIT I SPOON SAMPLER 0 Very loose 0-4 2.4" INSIDE DIAMETER RING SAMPLER FT Loose 4-10 OR SHELBY TUBE SAMPLER W = Medium dense 10-30 Dense 30-50 S WATER LEVEL (DATE) SVery dense X50 Tr TORVANE READINGS, tsf Pp PENETROMETER READING, tsf Standard Penetration W Consistency Resistance in Blows/Foot DD DRY DENSITY, pounds per cubic foot Very soft 0-2 LL LIQUID LIMIT, percent u(nj Soft 2-4 = Medium stiff 4-8 PI PLASTIC INDEX Stiff 8-15 Very stiff 16-32 N STANDARD PENETRATION, blows per foot Hard X32 Terra UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM ' Associates, Inc.HIGHLANDS PARK RENTON, WASHINGTON Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering Proj. No. T-5668-1 Date OCT 2005 Figure A-1 Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Logged by: JV Date: 2/7/05 Depth (Oft. ) 5— 10— 15— 20— Test Pit No. TP -1 Soil Description Approximate Elev. 422 Moisture Content M (8 inches TOPSOIL and FOREST DUFF with fine roots) 14.9 17.2 Reddish -tan SILT with sand and small roots, fine grained, medium dense, Gray, fine- to medium -grained sandy GRAVEL, medium dense to dense, moist. (ML) With fine roots. Gray, fine- to coarse-grained SAND to SAND with slit, medium dense, 7.6 moist. (SP/SW-SM) 6.2 Gray, fine- to medium -grained sandy GRAVEL, medium dense, moist. (GP) 6.9 3.1 Light perched groundwater seepage encountered at 8.5 feet. 7.4 Gray, weakly cemented, fine-grained SAND with silt, dense, moist. (SP -SM) 19.4 Test pit terminated at 20 feet. Light groundwater seepage encountered at 18.5 feet. Logged by: JV Date: 2/7/05 Depth (ft-) O 10 15 20 Test Pit No. TP -2 Approximate Elev. 422 Moisture Soil Description ContentM Terra TEST PIT LOGS Associates Inc. HIGHLANDS PARKNTON, WASHINGTON RE • � • • • Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences Proj. No. T-5668-1 Date OCT 2005 Figure A-2 (6 inches TOPSOIL and FOREST DUFF with fine roots) Reddish -tan, fine-grained silty SAND to sandy SILT, medium dense, moist. (SMIML) With fine roots. 17.2 Gray, fine- to medium -grained sandy GRAVEL, medium dense to dense, 6.7 moist. (GP) 7.1 8.2 Test pit terminated at 16 feet. Light perched groundwater seepage encountered at 8.5 feet. Terra TEST PIT LOGS Associates Inc. HIGHLANDS PARKNTON, WASHINGTON RE • � • • • Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences Proj. No. T-5668-1 Date OCT 2005 Figure A-2 Test Pit No. TP -3 Logged by: JV Approximate Elev. 428 Date: 2/7/05 Depth Moisture (it.) Soil Description Content 0 1 rq in, -hes TOPSOIL end FOREST DUFI=) sh-tan, fine-grained silty SAND with gravel, loose to medium dense, moist. 10.9 With fine roots. J 9.3 Gray, fine grained, weakly cemented silty SAND with gravel to sandy SILT with gravel, dense, moist. (SMIML) (Glacial Till) 1 � 11.3 7.1 15 20 A Test pit terminated at 19 feet. No groundwater seepage encountered. Logged by: JV Date: 2/7/05 Depth (ft.) O 5 10 15 20 14.6 Test Pit No. TP -4 Approximate Elev. 439 Moisture Content Soil Description M Terra TEST PIT LOGS Associates Inc.HIGHLANDS PARK Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering RENTON, WASHINGTON Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences Proj. No. T-5668-1 Date OCT 2005 f=igure A-3 .1 inc es TOPSOIL and FOREST DUFF) Reddish -tan, fin"rained silty SAND to sandy SILT, medium dense, moist. 18.5 (SMIML) Gray, fine-grained silty SAND to sandy SILT, mottled, medium dense, moist. (SMIML) (Weathered Glacial Till) 9,6 Gray, fine grained, moderately cemented silty SAND with gravel to sandy SILT with gravel, dense to very dense, moist. (SMIML) (Glacial Till) 7.0 9.2 Test pit terminated at 12 feet. No groundwater seepage encountered. Terra TEST PIT LOGS Associates Inc.HIGHLANDS PARK Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering RENTON, WASHINGTON Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences Proj. No. T-5668-1 Date OCT 2005 f=igure A-3 .1 Logged by: JV Date: 2/7/05 Depth (ft.) a y 10 15 Test Pit No. TP -5 Soil Description Approximate Elev. 437 Moisture Content Logged by: JV Date: 2/71x5 Depth (ft.) a 5 10 15 Test Pit No. TP -6 Soil Description Approximate Elev. 448 Moisture Content (%1 (TOPSOIL and FOREST DUFF mixed with reddish -tan sandy SILT) With fine roots. 22.4 1 Mottled gray, fine-grained silty SAND with gravel and cobbles, medium 28.0 V dense, wet. (SM) Gray, fine-grained silty SAND with gravel to sandy SILT with gravel, 8.6 medium dense, moist. (SMIML) (Weathered Glacial Till) T6 Gray, fine grained, moderately cemented silty SAND with gravel to sandy SILT with gravel, dense, moist. (SM/ML) (Glacial Till) dense, moist. (SM) (Glacial Till) 8.4 Test pit terminated at 12 feet. 11.5 Moderate to heavy groundwater seepage between 1 and 6 feet. Logged by: JV Date: 2/71x5 Depth (ft.) a 5 10 15 Test Pit No. TP -6 Soil Description Approximate Elev. 448 Moisture Content (%1 Terra Associates, Inc. Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences TEST PIT LOGS HIGHLANDS PARK RENTON, WASHINGTON Proj. No. T-5668-1 I Date OCT 2005 I Figure A-4 I (TOP5OIL and FOREST DUFF) Tan, fine-grained silty SAND, medium dense, wet. (SM) 28.0 V Gray, fine-grained silty SAND with gravel to sandy SILT with gravel, medium dense, moist. (SMIML) (Weathered Glacial Till) 11.6 Gray, fine grained, moderately cemented silty SAND with gravel, very dense, moist. (SM) (Glacial Till) 11.5 Test pit terminated at 10 feet. A Light perched groundwater seepage encountered at 3 feet. __ Terra Associates, Inc. Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences TEST PIT LOGS HIGHLANDS PARK RENTON, WASHINGTON Proj. No. T-5668-1 I Date OCT 2005 I Figure A-4 I Logged by: JV Date: 2/7/05 Depth (ft.) 0 5 10 15 Test Pit No. TP -7 Soil Description Approximate Elev. 462 Moisture Content M Logged by: JV Date: 2/7/05 Depth (ft.) 0 6 10 15 Test Pit No. TP -8 Soil Description Approximate Elev. 459 Moisture Content (4 inches TOPSOIL and FOREST DUFF) Tan, tine -grained silty SAND with gravel to sandy SILT with gravel, loose to medium dense, moist. SMIML 14.7 Gray, fine grained, moderately cemented silty SAND with gravel, dense, $ 3 moist. (SM) (Glacial Till) Gray, fine-grained silty SAND with gravel, medium dense, moist. 13.8 (SM) (Weathered Glacial Till) 12.4 1 Test pit terminated at 12 feet. 9.2 Light perched groundwater seepage encountered at 2.5 and 11.0 feet. Logged by: JV Date: 2/7/05 Depth (ft.) 0 6 10 15 Test Pit No. TP -8 Soil Description Approximate Elev. 459 Moisture Content Terra Associates, Inc. Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences TEST PIT LOGS HIGHLANDS PARK RENTON, WASHINGTON Proj. No. T-5668-1 I Date OCT 2005 I Figure A-5 I (TOPSOIL and FOREST DUFF) 32.5 Tan, fine-grained sandy SILT, medium dense, wet. (ML) With fine roots. Gray, fine-grained silty SAND with gravel, medium dense, moist. 12.1 (SM) (Weathered Glacial Till) Gray, fine grained, moderately cemented silty SAND with gravel to sandy 9.2 SILT with gravel, dense to very dense, moist. (SMIML) (Glacial Till) 5.8 Test pit terminated at 10 feet. Light perched groundwater seepage encountered at 2.5 feet. Terra Associates, Inc. Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences TEST PIT LOGS HIGHLANDS PARK RENTON, WASHINGTON Proj. No. T-5668-1 I Date OCT 2005 I Figure A-5 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Logged by: JV Date: 217105 Depth M) 0 5 10 15 Test Pit No. TP -9 Soil Description Approximate Elev. 470 Moisture Content Logged by: JV Date: 217105 Depth (ft.) 0 5 10 15 Test Pit No. TP -10 Soli Description Approximate Elev. 482 Moisture Content (TOPSOIL and FOREST DUFF) 19.1 Gray, fine grained, moderately cemented silty SAND with gravel to sandy 19.4 Mottled gray to tan, fine-grained silty SAND to sandy SILT, medium dense, moist. (SMIML) (Weathered Glacial Till) 12.1 Test pit terminated at 12 feet. No groundwater seepage encountered. Gray, fine grained, moderately cemented silty SAND with gravel to sandy SILT with gravel, dense to very dense, moist. (SM/ML) (Glacial Till) 11.2 7.7 Test pit terminated at 12 feet. Light perched groundwater seepage encountered at 4 feet. Logged by: JV Date: 217105 Depth (ft.) 0 5 10 15 Test Pit No. TP -10 Soli Description Approximate Elev. 482 Moisture Content Terra Associates, Inc. Consultants In Geotechnical Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences TEST PIT LOGS HIGHLANDS PARK RENTON, WASHINGTON Proj. No. T-5568-1 � Date OCT 20051 Figure A-6 (4 inches TOPSOIL and FOREST DUFF) Mottled gray to tan, fine-grained silty SAND to sandy SILT, medium dense, moist. (SM/ML) (Weathered Glacial Till) 19.1 Gray, fine grained, moderately cemented silty SAND with gravel to sandy 13.7 11.9 SILT with gravel, dense to very dense, moist. (SM/ML) (Glacial Till) 1'1.5 Test pit terminated at 12 feet. No groundwater seepage encountered. Terra Associates, Inc. Consultants In Geotechnical Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences TEST PIT LOGS HIGHLANDS PARK RENTON, WASHINGTON Proj. No. T-5568-1 � Date OCT 20051 Figure A-6 Logged by: JV Date: 217!06 Depth (ft.) 0 5 10 15 Test Pit No. TP -11 Soil Description Approximate Elev. 436 Moisture Content M Logged by: JV Date: 2!7105 Depth (ft.) 0 5 10 15 Test Pit No. TP -12 Approximate Elev. 427 Content Moisture Soil Description M (8 inches TOPSOIL and FOREST DUFF) ! Reddish -tan, fine-grained sandy SILT with gravel, medium dense, moist. 19.5 ML With fine roots. Gray, fine-grained silty SAND with gravel to sandy SILT with gravel, 3.4 medium dense, moist. (SM/ML) (Weathered Glacial Tili) 9.6 8.0 Gray, fine grained, moderately cemented silty SAND with gravel, dense to very dense, moist. (SM) (Glacial Till) Test pit terminated at 10 feet. Light perched groundwater seepage encountered at 1.5 feet. 6.4 Test pit terminated at 13 feet. Light perched groundwater seepage encountered at 2.5 feet. Logged by: JV Date: 2!7105 Depth (ft.) 0 5 10 15 Test Pit No. TP -12 Approximate Elev. 427 Content Moisture Soil Description M Terra Associates, Inc. Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences TEST PIT LOGS HIGHLANDS PARK RENTON, WASHINGTON Proj. No. T 5668-1 Date OCT 2005 Figure A-7 6 inches TOP9511 an d FOREST DUFF) an, fine-grained sandy SILT, medium dense, moist. (ML) With fine roots. ! Gray, fine grained, weakly cemented silty SAND with gravel, dense, 11.3 moist. (SM) 3.4 Gray, fine- to coarse-grained GRAVEL with sand, medium dense, moist. (GP) Test pit terminated at 10 feet. Light perched groundwater seepage encountered at 1.5 feet. Terra Associates, Inc. Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences TEST PIT LOGS HIGHLANDS PARK RENTON, WASHINGTON Proj. No. T 5668-1 Date OCT 2005 Figure A-7 Logged by: EH Date: 7127100 Depth (ft.) 0 ---r-- Test Pit No. S-1 Soil Description Brown silty SAND with gravel, loose, moist. (SM) Gray silty SAND with gravel, very dense, moist. (SM) (Glacial Till) 5 � Test pit terminated at 4 feet. No groundwater seepage encountered. 10 Logged by: EH Date: 7/27/05 Depth (ft.) 0 —r— 10 Test Pit No. S-2 Soil Description Brown silty SAND with gravel, loose, moist. (SM) Gray silty SAND with gravel, very dense, rnoist. (SM) (Glacial Till) Test pit terminated at 4 feet. No groundwater seepage encountered. Moisture Content (°Io} Moisture Content Terra TEST PIT LOGS Associates Inc. HIGHLANDS PARK RENTON, WASHINGTON Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences Prof. No. T-5668-1 I Date OCT 20051 Figure A-8 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 t 1 Logged by: EH Date: 7127/05 Depth (ft.) 0 -7 -- 10 Test Pit No. S-3 Soil Description FILL: brown silty sand with gravel and organics, loose, moist. (SM) Gray silty SAND with gravel, very dense, moist. (SM) (Glacial Till) Test pit terminated at 4 feet. No groundwater seepage encountered. Logged by: EH Date: 7127/05 Depth (ft.) 0 --r — 10 Test Pit No. S-4 Soil Description FILL: brown silty sand with gravel and organics and wood debris, loose, moist. (SM) Gray silty SAND with gravel, very dense, moist. (SM) (Glacial Till) Test pit terminated at 4.5 feet. No groundwater seepage encountered. Moisture Content Moisture Content Terra TEST PIT LOGS RioAssociates Inc. HIGHLANDS PARK Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering RENTON, WASHINGTON Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences Proj. No. T-5668-1 Date OCT 2005 Figure A-9 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Test Pit No. S-5 Logged by: EH Date: 7/27/05 Depth (ft.) Soil Description Brown silty SAND with gravel, loose, moist. (SM) Gray silty SANT] with gravel, very dense, moist. (SM) (Glacial Till) J Test pit terminated at 4 feet. I No groundwater seepage encountered. 10 Logged by: EH Date: 7127/05 Depth (ft.) 0—r-- 10 Test Pit No. S-6 Soil Description Brown silty SAND with gravel, loose, moist. (SM) Gray silty SAND with gravel, very dense, moist. (SM) (Glacial Till) Test pit terminated at 4 feet. No groundwater seepage encountered. Moisture Content Moisture Content Terra TEST PIT LOGS Associates Inc.HIGHLANDS PARK Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering RENTON, WASHINGTON Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences Proj. No. T-5668-1 Date OCT 2005 Figure A-10 Logged by: EH Date: 7/27105 Depth (ft.) 0 10 Test Pit No. S-7 Moisture Content Soil Description (%) Test Pit No. S-8 Logged by: EH Date: 7/27/05 Depth Moisture (ft.) Soil Description Content o M Brown silty SAND with gravel, loose, moist. (SM) Gray silty SAND with gravel, very dense, moist. (SM) (Glacial Till) Test pit terminated at 4 feet. 5 No groundwater seepage encountered. 10 Terra TEST PlT LOGS Associates Inc.HIGHLANDS PARK Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering RENTON, WASHINGTON Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences Proj. No. T-5668-1 Date OCT 2005 Figure A-11 FILL: brown silty sand with gravel and organics, loose, moist. (SM) Gray silty SAND with gravel, very dense, moist. (SM) (Glacial Till) Test pit terminated at 6 feet. No groundwater seepage encountered. Test Pit No. S-8 Logged by: EH Date: 7/27/05 Depth Moisture (ft.) Soil Description Content o M Brown silty SAND with gravel, loose, moist. (SM) Gray silty SAND with gravel, very dense, moist. (SM) (Glacial Till) Test pit terminated at 4 feet. 5 No groundwater seepage encountered. 10 Terra TEST PlT LOGS Associates Inc.HIGHLANDS PARK Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering RENTON, WASHINGTON Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences Proj. No. T-5668-1 Date OCT 2005 Figure A-11 Logged by: EH Date: 7127105 Depth (ft.) 0 5 10 Test Pit No. S-9 3k-( "� (� Moisture Content Soil Description (%) Logged by: EH Date: 7127105 Depth (ft.) 0 5 10 Test Pit No. S-10 Moisture Soil Description Content[%l FILL: brown silty SAND with gravel and organics, loose, moist. (SM) Brown silty SAND with gravel, loose, moist. (SM) Gray silty SAND with gravel, very dense, moist. (SM) (Glacial Till) Test pit terminated at 7 feet. No groundwater seepage encountered. Logged by: EH Date: 7127105 Depth (ft.) 0 5 10 Test Pit No. S-10 Moisture Soil Description Content[%l EgoTerra Associates, Inc. Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences TEST PIT LOGS HIGHLANDS PARK RENTON, WASHINGTON Proj. No. T-5668-1 I Date OCT 2005 IFigure A-12 FILL: brown silty sandy gravel with rubbish, engine parts, and hydraulic hoses, loose, moist to wet. (SM) Gray silty SAND with gravel, very dense, moist. (SM) (Glacial Till) Test pit terminated at 9 feet. No groundwater seepage encountered. EgoTerra Associates, Inc. Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences TEST PIT LOGS HIGHLANDS PARK RENTON, WASHINGTON Proj. No. T-5668-1 I Date OCT 2005 IFigure A-12 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Logged by: EH Date: 7/27105 Depth (ft.) 0 �- Test Pit No. S-11 Soil Description Brown silty SAND with gravel, loose, moist. (SM) Gray silty SAND with gravel, very dense, moist. (SM) (Glacial Till) 5 Test pit terminated at 5 feet. No groundwater seepage encountered. 10 Logged by: EH Date: 7127105 Depth (ft.) 0-T-- Test Pit No. S-12 Soil Description Brown silty SAND with gravel, loose, moist. (SM) Gray silty SAND with gravel, very dense, moist. (SM) (Glacial Till) 5—i Test pit terminated at 4 feet. No groundwater seepage encountered. 10 Moisture Content M Moisture Content Terra TEST PIT LOGS E� • • • Associates Inc. HIGHLANDS PARK NTON, WASHINGTON RE Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences Pro}. No. T-5668-1 Date OCT 2005 Figure A-13 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Logged by: EH Date: 7127105 Depth (ft.) 0 5 IIS Test Pit No. S-13 Moisture Content Soil Description M Logged by: EH Date: 7/27105 Depth (ft.) 0 5 10 Test Pit No. S-14 Moisture Soil Description Content M FILL: brown silty sand with gravel and organics, loose, moist. (SM) Gray silty SAND with gravel, very dense, moist. (SM) (Glacial Till) Test pit terminated at 8 feet. No groundwater seepage encountered. Logged by: EH Date: 7/27105 Depth (ft.) 0 5 10 Test Pit No. S-14 Moisture Soil Description Content M VigoTerra TEST PIT LOGS Associates, Inc. HIGHLANDS PARK Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering RENTON, WASHINGTON Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences Proj. No. T-5668-1 Date OCT 2005 Figure A-14 FILL: brown silty sand with gravel and organics, loose, moist. (SM) Brown silty SAND with gravel, loose, moist. (SM) Gray silty SAND with gravel, very dense, moist. (SM) (Glacial Till) Test pit terminated at 8 feet. No groundwater seepage encountered. VigoTerra TEST PIT LOGS Associates, Inc. HIGHLANDS PARK Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering RENTON, WASHINGTON Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences Proj. No. T-5668-1 Date OCT 2005 Figure A-14 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Logged by: EH Date: 7127/05 Depth (ft.) 0 Test Pit No. TE -1 Soil Description 5 —j �i FILL: gray silty SAND with gravel, loose, moist. 14 Gray silty SAND with gravel, very dense. (SM) (Glacial Till) Test pit terminated at 12.5 feet. 15 Groundwater seepage encountered at 11.5 feet. Logged by: EH Date: 7127105 Depth (ft.) 0 10 15 Test Pit No. TE -2 Soil Description Moisture Content Moisture Content M U Terra Associates, Inc. Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences TEST PIT LOGS HIGHLANDS PARK RENTON, WASHINGTON Proj. No. T-5668-1 I Date OCT 2005 1 Figure A-15 I Brown silty SAND with gravel, loose. (SM) Gray silty SAND with gravel, very dense. (SM) (Glacial Till) Test pit terminated at 5 feet. No groundwater seepage encountered. Terra Associates, Inc. Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences TEST PIT LOGS HIGHLANDS PARK RENTON, WASHINGTON Proj. No. T-5668-1 I Date OCT 2005 1 Figure A-15 I Test Pit No. TE -3 Logged by: EH Date: 7/27/05 Depth (ft.) Sail Description Brown silty SAND with gravel, loose. (SM) 5 10 Gray silty SAND with gravel, very dense. (SM) (Glacial Till) Test pit terminated at 5 feet. No groundwater seepage encountered. Test Pit No. TE -4 Logged by: EH Date: 7127105 Depth (ft) Soil Description 0 Brown silty SAND with gravel, loose. (SM) 5 10 Gray silty SAND with gravel, very dense. (SM) (Glacial Till) Test pit terminated at 7.5 feet. No groundwater seepage encountered. Moisture Content (a/a) Moisture Content Terra TEST PIT LOGS Associates, Inc.HIGHLANDS PARK Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering 1 RENTON, WASHINGTON Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences Proj. No. T-5668-1 Date OCT 2005 Figure A-16 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Logged by: EH Date: 7/27105 Depth (ft.) 0 --r- 5 10 Test Pit No. TE -5 Moisture nt Soil Description C [ o) nt FILL: brown silty SAND with gravel, loose. Test pit terminated at 6.5 feet. No groundwater seepage encountered. Terra TEST PIT LOGS '+ Associates Inc.HIGHLANDS PARK Consultants In Geotechnical Engineering RENTON, WASHINGTON Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences Proj. No. T-5668-1 Date OCT 2005 Figure A-17 Logged by: BPK Date: 10/5/05 Depth (ft.) 0 5- 10— Test Pit No. TP -141 Soil Description Approximate Elev. 414 Moisture Content f%1 (6 inches TOPSOIL) (6 inches TOPSOIL) Reddish -brown to tan silty SAND with gravel, cobbles to 6 inches, medium 6.5 Reddish -brown to tan silty SAND with gravel, cobbles to 12 inches, dense, dry. (SM) Gray GRAVEL with sand, trace silt, cobbles to 6 inches, medium dense, 3.3 dry. (GP) (Outwash) Slightly cemented below 2 feet. Moist below 6 feet. Gray, mottled yellow silty SAND with gravel, moderately cemented, Dense below 6.5 feet. Brown SAND with gravel, trace silt, cobbles to 4 inches, dense, moist. 6.0 (SP) (Outwash) Gray silty wi rave , moderately cemented, 6bbbles to 4 inches, 6.1 Wet below 9 feet. 4.7 dense, moist. SM(Glacial Till Test pit terminated at 9.5 feet. No groundwater seepage encountered. Logged by: BPK Date: 10/5/05 Depth /(ft•) V 5 10 Test Pit No. TP -102 Soil Description Approximate Elev. 430 Moisture Content Terra TEST PIT LOGS ` Associates, Inc. HIGHLANDS PARK • • Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering RENTON, WASHINGTON Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences Proj. No. T-5668-1 Date OCT 2005 Figure A-18 (6 inches TOPSOIL) Reddish -brown to tan silty SAND with gravel, cobbles to 12 inches, medium dense, dry. (SM) 5.6 Slightly cemented below 2 feet. Gray, mottled yellow silty SAND with gravel, moderately cemented, 6.3 cobbles to 4 inches, medium dense, moist. (SM) (Weathered Glacial Till) Gray silty wi rave , moderately cemented, 6bbbles to 4 inches, 6.1 dense, moist. SM(Glacial Till Test pit terminated at 6 feet. No groundwater seepage encountered. Terra TEST PIT LOGS ` Associates, Inc. HIGHLANDS PARK • • Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering RENTON, WASHINGTON Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences Proj. No. T-5668-1 Date OCT 2005 Figure A-18 t 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Test Pit No. TP -103 Logged by: BPK Approximate Elegy. 418 Date: 10/5/05 Depth Moisture (ft.) Content Sail Description a {8 inches TOPSOIL) dense, moist. (SM) 7.2 Reddish -brown to tan silty SAND, slightly gravelly, medium dense, dry. 8.7 (SM) Slightly cemented below 2 feet. 5.7 Light gray mottled orange silty SAND with gravel, moderately cemented, Cobbles to 4 inches below 2.5 feet. cobbles to 4 inches, medium dense, moist. (SM) (Weathered Glacial Till) Gray GRAVEL with sand, trace silt, slightly cemented, medium dense, dry. 1,9 ra sity with gravel, moderately cemen a o dense, moist. (VM (Glacial Till) 8.9 (GP) (Outwash) Test pit terminated at 7 feet. 5 Becomes brown and sandy below 5 feet. Gray silty SAND with avel, moderately cemented, co es to inches, dense, moist. SM facial Till 9.8 Test pit terminated at 6.5 feet. No groundwater seepage encountered. 10 Logged by: BPK Date: 10/5/05 Depth eft. } 0- 5 10 Test Pit No. TP -104 Soil Description Approximate Eley. 444 Moisture Content t%t Terra TEST PIT LOGS ASSOC12lteS, Inc.HIGHLANDS PARK • • RENTON, WASHINGTON Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Scienoes Proj. No. T-5668-1 Date OCT 2005 Figure A-19 (10 inches TOPSOIL) Reddish -brown to tan silty SAND with gravel, cobbles to 4 inches, medium dense, moist. (SM) 7.2 8.7 Light gray mottled orange silty SAND with gravel, moderately cemented, cobbles to 4 inches, medium dense, moist. (SM) (Weathered Glacial Till) ra sity with gravel, moderately cemen a o dense, moist. (VM (Glacial Till) 8.9 Test pit terminated at 7 feet. No groundwater seepage encountered. Terra TEST PIT LOGS ASSOC12lteS, Inc.HIGHLANDS PARK • • RENTON, WASHINGTON Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Scienoes Proj. No. T-5668-1 Date OCT 2005 Figure A-19 Test Pit No. TP -145 Logged by: BPK Approximate Elev. 459 Date: 10!5105 Depth Moisture (ft') Soil Description Content FILL: dark brown sandy silt with gravel and organics, disturbed texture, loose, moist. Tan orange silty SAND, slightly gravelly, medium dense, moist. (SM) Gray, mottled orange silty SAND with gravel, moderately cemented, 7.7 cobbles to 6 inches, medium dense, moist. (SM) (Weathered Glacial Till) Gray silty SAN D with gravel, era e y cemented,dense, moist. 12.7 5 Test pit terminated at 5 feet. No groundwater seepage encountered. 10 Logged by: BPK Date: 1015!05 Depth (ft.) 0 --r Test Pit No. TP -146 Soil Description Approximate Elev. 453 Moisture Content (8 inches TOPSOIL) Reddish -brown to tan silty SAND with gravel, medium dense, moist. (SM) 7.6 Gray, mottled orange silty SAND with gravel, moderately cemented, 7 8 cobbles to 6 inches, medium dense, moist. (SM) (Weathered Glacial Till) 5rayy si ty A with gravel, moderately cemented, dense, moist. 11.3 (SY) (Glacial Till) 10 Test pit terminated at 5.5 feet. No groundwater seepage encountered. Terra TEST PIT LOGS • Associates Inc.HIGHLANDS PARK Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering RENTON, WASHINGTON Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences Proj. N0. T-5668-1 Date OCT 2005 Figure A-20 IE GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS HIGHLANDS PARK RENTON, WASHINGTON Proj. No. T-5668-1 Date OCT 2005 Figure A-25 GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS HIGHLANDS PARK RENTON, WASHINGTON Proj. No. T-5668-1 Date 0CT 2005 Figure A-26 WETLAND DETERMINATION FOR SHAMROCK PROPERTY King County Washington Prepared for: Ms. Sara Slatten CamWest Development, Inc. 9720 NE 120th Pl. Suite #100 Kirkland, Washington 98034 425-825-1955 Prepared by: C. Gary Schulz Wetland/Forest Ecologist i 7700 S. Lakeridge Dr. Seattle, Washington 98178 206-772-6514 `�" U ,July 28, 2002 Item No. Received '" King County Flearina Fxn4ner MAIN FILE V" \ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 r i i FABLE OF CONTENTS Page Introduction 1 Project/Site Description 1 Purpose 2 Methodology 3 Wetland Determination 4 Soils 4 Hydrology 5 Wetland Description 5 Wetland Restoration 7 Wetland Buffer Averaging 8 Wildlife Habitat 10 References 11 Appendix A Data Plot Forms t INTRODUCTION r Project/Site Description The majority of the Shamrock Property is a nursery business site that will be abandoned for a single-family residential subdivision development. The project site is comprised of several land parcels that also includes parcels that were not part of the Shamrock nursery business. These land parcels exist directly north, and to the south (Bales Property). All land parcels, except for the Bales property, are located in unincorporated Icing County. The Bales property is located in the City of Renton and will not be included in the subdivision plat application with King County (Shamrock Property). The total size of the project site (Shamrock Property) is approximately 29.6 acres situated east of Renton in unincorporated King County. The property is located on the west side of 148th Avenue S.E. near S.E. 124th Street, King County (Section 10, Township 23 N., Range S E., WM). The subject property is situated in an area that is zoned for single-family development. The southern parcels were developed as a landscape / nursery business and includes house buildings, sheds, and garage structures. The north parcels were partly developed for single-family residential use. These parcels include pasture and forest areas with a mobile home and small outbuildings located on the upper, northeastern portion of the Shamrock Property project site. The project site design includes a total of 118 single-family lots clustered on the upland portion of the property. The project roadways are proposed with access from 148th Avenue S.E. Surface water runoff from new development would be conveyed to an enhanced, open detention and water quality facility to be located south of the development (Bales property). Please refer to the attached site plan map (Shamrock Preliminary Plat - 7/02 Triad Associates, Inc.) A wetland drainage system exists along the lower, western side of the site, however, most of the central and eastern portions are proposed for new, single-family development. This area has flat to moderate sloping topography. Slopes are generally oriented east to west across the site with a topographic relief change of up to approximately 50 feet. The natural drainage system, present within this basin, appears to flow north to south through the property. Page 1 Ll 1 s comprised The majority of the protect site i m rised of cleared and modified land associated with the previous use of the Shamrock nursery. Very little of the upland area would be considered as a natural condition. Drainage alterations combined with past grading and filling activities are evident throughout this area. A prior wetland fill violation is present in the western area between Wetlands A and B. The northern, upland portion of the site includes two parcels that were not part of the nursery. Most of the north parcel is forested with both mature conifer and deciduous trees. Native bigleaf maple (Acer macrophyllum), Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), and red alder (Alnus rubra) trees are present. The shrub cover includes Himalayan blackberry (Rebus discolor), salmonberry(Rubus spectabilis), and Indian plum (Demleria cerasiformis). The southern parcel includes pasture land that has not been recently maintained or used. The herbaceous groundcover associated with pasture area includes bracken fern (Pteridium aquilinum), common velvetgrass (Holcus lanatus), false dandelion (Agoseris sp.), colonial bentgrass (Agrostis tenuis), and red clover (Trifolium pratense). Much of the lower, western portion of the property is influenced by runoff and groundwater seepage. This is a basin area with native vegetation in wetland and buffer areas. A more detailed description is found in the Wetland Determination section. Purpose The purpose of this report is to provide the applicant a wetland determination study to submit for County comment, verification, and regulatory compliance. A pre - application meeting was conducted with King County staff on June 19, 2002. Based on staff comments provided at the pre -application meeting, a wetland study would be considered adequate for the preliminary submittal and to use for determining application "completeness". Additional natural resource planning may be requested by the County for wetland restoration related to a prior sensitive area violation on the Shamrock nursery site. Professional observations are included to assist with determining natural resource classifications and functions. A preliminary, residential site design is submitted for the subdivision permit process. Site plan layout has avoided significant impacts in order to preserve existing wetland areas and the associated functions. Per County staff comments, a brief discussion of on-site observations related to red-tailed hawk use is found under a wildlife habitat section. Buffer reduction and the related analysis for allowing wetland buffer averaging is also included in this study. Page 2 f Methodology Typically defined, wetlands are ... "those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration to support-, and Haat under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas". Through the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) and the Growth Management Act (GMA), the County reviews proposals which may potentially impact wetland and other sensitive areas. Because of observed site conditions, combined with jurisdictional wetland regulations, wetland presence and extent must be determined for the permitting process. The methodology used for wetland determination was based on the presence of dominant hydrophytic vegetation (i.e.. plant species adapted to, or tolerant of, growing in saturated soil conditions), hydric soils, and observed wetland hydrology as described in the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987). The Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual (Dept. of Ecology Pub. #96-94, 1997) was used, for consistent regional wetland determinations. The State manual was developed to address regional conditions and is consistent with the 1987 Corps Manual methodology. The three technical criteria for vegetation, soils, and hydrology are mandatory under normal conditions and must all be met for an area to be identified as wetland. Because the site has had significant development and the wetland plant communities are distinct, the Routine On-site Determination Method was used in this investigation. Wetland data plots (8), approximately 0.01 acres in size, were installed within wetland and upland areas as a relative sampling of the property's existing conditions. The associated data plot forms are included in Appendix A. King County's Sensitive Areas Map Folio (1990) was used to review local area wetlands and streams. The Soil Conservation Service (SCS) (USDA 1973), King County Area Soil Survey, was used to reference soil mapping and classification. Determination of wetland area was based on observed plant species, topographic relief, soil profiles, and hydrology. Pink and orange plastic flags were used to mark the site's wetland boundaries and data plot locations. This delineation of wetland areas updates previous wetland flagging by others and much of the older wetland flagging (pink) is still present on the site. The previous and current wetland boundaries were professionally land surveyed by Triad Associates, Inc. and mapped onto a base topographic map (Shamrock Topographic Survey / Wetland Delineation, 7/02). Page 3 J WETLAND DETERMINATION Altmann Oliver Associates, LLC conducted a wetland delineation on the Shamrock Property. This delineation work included the entire project site and Triad Associates, Inc. surveyed the wetland boundaries. Gary Schulz, Wetland Ecologist conducted a separate field investigation to verify the previous wetland delineation and provide revisions or recommendations. Minor wetland boundary revisions were mapped for the project submittal. Field investigations for this wetland study were conducted during July and August of 2002 to delineate the portions of wetland areas existing on the Shamrock Property (See Attached Maps). Two wetlands (A & B) are identified along the west side of the property and are within the natural drainage corridor that runs from south to north through the property. A third wetland (C) is located on the north boundary as an isolated depression. The older wetland flagging (Altmann Oliver Associates) was verified during the field work and left in place. In general, the previous wetland delineation was found to be accurate and is incorporated into this updated determination and survey. Most of these boundary revisions are minor and located around Wetland C (Flagged in the field as "D"). To supplement this study, eight wetland data plots were installed and this information is found in Appendix A. i Soils The SCS (USDA 1973) Soil Survey - King County Area has mapped two soil series on the subject property. The soil map units are Alderwood gravelly sandy loam - 0 to 6 percent slopes (AgB) and Alderwood gravelly sandy loam - 6 to 15 percent slopes (AgQ. The Alderwood series is comprised of moderately, well -drained soils associated with a glacial till at depths of 20 to 40 inches. These soils are on uplands but have inclusions of other soils that are not large enough to map. Some included soils are Norma, Bellingham, Seattle, Tukwila, and Shalcar series. Investigation of portions of the site's upland area confirmed soil that closely resembles the Alderwood series. Page 4 L� The soil inclusions mentioned above are poorly drained and found in depression areas and drainage ways on till and outwash plains. These soil map units are listed in the Hydric Soils of Washington (1985). Hydric soils are generally associated with wetland habitats. Hydric mineral soils observed in soil pits excavated within the wetland areas appeared to be the Norma series. Organic soils present in ponded areas could be the Seattle, Tukwila, or Shalcar series. 11 Hydrology 1 1 1 King County's Map Folio identifies one wetland on the Shamrock Property. This wetland is identified as May Creek #24b. The letter "b" indicates the wetland was mapped in the US Fish & Wildlife Service National Wetlands Inventory but is not included in the King County Wetlands Inventory (1983). This wetland is mapped as crossing the basin boundary for May Creek to the north, and Lower Cedar River to the south. It appears that the wetland drainage for the Shamrock Property site drains south towards an off-site "Unclassified" stream known as Maplewood Creek. Observed hydrology on the site appears directly influenced by local, shallow groundwater that is moving through the area from north to south. Because the site's location is along a basin boundary, much of the water may originate on the site. Off-site wetland drainage on the north side of the site is not confirmed but appears evident as a narrow, seasonal swale. Wetland Description WWands A & B Wetlands A-& B are described together as part of a headwaters wetland system due to their close proximity and similar habitats. The wetland drainage appears linear and oriented north to south. These on-site wetlands have been separated by fill material reportedly placed by the Shamrock nursery operation. Wetlands A & B are no longer connected by wetland (hydric) soils but are likely supported by the same groundwater hydrology and could be connected depending on subsurface soil conditions under the fill material. No surface water connections were observed. The wetland system also receives surface water runoff from adjacent upland. At the time of this investigation, the nursery was still operating and those adjacent upland areas were planted with non-native trees and shrubs. Much of the vegetation cover in uplands surrounding Wetlands A & B has been: cleared from land use. The off-site area directly north of the on-site -wetlands has been cleared and converted to a maintained lawn condition along most of the project site's boundary. Page 5 t Overall, the wetlands are characterized as deciduous forest dominated by red alder (Alnus rubra) with Pacific willow(Salix lasiandra) and black cottonwood(Populus balsamifera) trees observed throughout. Western red cedar(Thuja plicatat) trees are present as scattered individuals or small groves. Douglas fir and western hemlock individuals are scattered throughout the basin area and appear to be present within upland islands. The shrub cover in forested wetland areas is dominated by salmonberry (Rubes spectabilis) and with significant presence of Himalayan blackberry. Vine maple (Acer circinatum), red osier dogwood(Cornus stolonifera), and black twinberry (Lonices`a involucrata) are also present. Openings in the canopy have shrub cover of Douglas' spirea (Spiraea douglasii) and Himalayan blackberry. The wetland has diverse emergent vegetation dominated by lady fern (Athyrium felix-femina) and includes cover of slough sedge(Carex obnupta), creeping buttercup (Ranunculus repens), mannagrass (Glyceria sp.), water parsley (Oenanthe sarmen Cosa), and skunk cabbage (Lysichi fon american um). Cattail (Typha sp.), wool -grass (Scirpus cyperinus), smartweed (Polygonum sp.), and plantain (Plantago sp.) were observed growing in a distinct depression area within Wetland B. Using the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) classification system (Cowardin et al. 1979), this wetland is classified as palustrine, forested, scrub/shrub, persistent and non-persistent emergent, and is influenced by seasonally flooded conditions. With the presence of a forested wetland class, the wetlands are likely rated as Class 2. In addition, the wetland system probably exceeds one acre in size when offsite area is considered. No areas of permanent open water were observed. The standard buffer setback distance for Class 2 wetlands is 50 feet. This area is considered a "headwaters" wetland system mostly supported by groundwater discharge. W�u C Wetland C is also a forest area having a fairly open canopy cover comprised of red alder trees with a few mature black cottonwood trees. Red alder tree canopies are sparse in this wetland and a few snags are present. Due to the open canopy, shrub cover is dominated by Himalayan blackberry. A significant cover of salmonberry is also present with red osier dogwood, red elderberry, and Douglas' spirea occurring infrequently. The wetland includes upland hummocks that support sword fern (Polystichum munitum) and Indian plum. Wetland hydrology indicators of seasonal ponding and low chroma values in the upper soil layer (Data Plots #2 & #4) are present. Wetland emergent groundc over observed in low areas includes lady fern and creeping buttercup. Page 6 r I The adjacent upland to the east and west is forested. Tree cover includes Douglas fir, J P g 1 1 western red cedar, big leaf maple, and bittercherry (Prunus emarginata). The dense shrub cover is also comprised of Himalayan blackberry but includes Indian plum (Oemleria cerasiformis), vine maple, and western hazelnut (Corylus cornuta) shrubs. Associated upland groundcover is comprised of sword fern and Pacific blackberry (Rebus ursinus). Using the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) classification system (Cowardin et al. 1979), this wetland is classified as palustrine, forested, scrub/shrub, persistent and non-persistent emergent, and is influenced by seasonally flooded conditions. With the presence of a forested wetland class, the wetland is likely rated as Class 2. No areas of permanent open water were observed. The standard buffer setback distance for Class 2 wetlands is 50 feet. This area is isolated from the Wetland A and B drainage. Wetland Restoration Per meetings with King County and City of Renton staff, a previous wetland fill will be restored as part of the Shamrock Property subdivision. The illegal fill is a sensitive area violation in King County and occurred on the Shamrock nursery site. An undetermined amount (depth and area) of fill material was placed in wetland along the west and south boundaries of the site. This effectively has separated Wetlands A & B. Surrounding tree cover combined with soil excavations would be used to determine the area of the fill violation. The goal of the restoration is to re- connect the wetland areas (A & B) by excavating fill and planting the area with native species. The City of Renton has requested right-of-way dedication for a future roadway extending from the Shamrock development site to the west. This right-of-way alignment (SE 6th Street or SE 124th Street) is located in the area of the wetland fill. The applicant / owner would provide the right-of-way but proposes to restore wetland and correct the fill violation as part of the subdivision permit process in King County. At the time that future development west of the site allows an opportunity for the roadway to be constructed, the City of Renton may elect to proceed with a roadway connection and the associated wetland permitting. i Page 7 1 [l r WETLAND BUFFER AVERAGING The Preliminary Plat site plan proposes a limited amount of buffer reduction along the edge of Wetlands A & B. Per the County's sensitive area standards (KCC 21A.24.320B & Public Rules 21A-24-016), buffer averaging is being proposed in several locations on the project site (See Attached Maps). The buffer area chart and written analysis to support the buffer averaging are presented as follows. The existing site conditions were used for this buffer averaging proposal. The Preliminary Plat Map (Attached) shows the proposed buffer reductions and additions. The majority of lots shown along the edge of Wetlands A & B are located in areas that were cleared for the Shamrock nursery operation. Lots 41, 52, 70, 71, 73, 74, 85, & 86 are located in areas of limited vegetative cover and are proposed for buffer reduction. Lots 78, 79, & 80 are located within existing, dense forest / shrub cover and also are proposed for buffer reduction. In addition, a small area of reduced buffer is proposed for a new street, 144th Place S.E., at the southern part of Wetland A. Buffer effectiveness and the associated functions such as wildlife habitat for food and cover, shade, sediment - pollutant removal etc. are not considered to be significant for most of the areas proposed for reduced buffers. Much of the buffer replacement is located within forested areas adjacent to Wetland C. These added areas provide a higher amount of buffer function. Using the area calculations below, the overall area for the 50 -foot wetland buffer zones is being increased from 138,027 square feet to 167,798 square feet. The buffer averaging, for 7,820 square feet of reduction, would provide an increase to 29,771 square feet of buffer area at a ratio that exceeds 3.5 : 1. WETLAND BUFFER AREA EQUIVALENCY Total Required Buffer 138,027 sq. ft. Total Proposed Buffer 167,798 sq. ft. Total Buffer Encroachment 7,820 sq. ft. Total Buffer Added 29,771 sq. ft. The intent of the proposed buffer averaging is to allow various site design features to occur and meet the code criteria. After site conditions are verified by the County, the buffer averaging can demonstrate that total area of buffer does not decrease, additional wetland protection can be provided, and wetland functions would be enhanced (Public Rule 21A-24-016 A). Page 8 As art of the analysis, the following criteria issues Public Rule 21A-24-016 S are P y a g ( ) being addressed: 1. Preserving the functions of the existing buffer on the parcel and adjoining parcels; 2. Not impacting the stability of a stream bank, if any; 3. Not creating a risk of hazardous trees as a result of development; 4. Providing the opportunity for additional protection or enhancement to wetlands; 5. Not impacting the location of a floodway and 100 -year floodplain; 6. Not impacting the presence of any migrating river channel; 7. Preserving on-site natural resources (wetlands) and not impacting their functions and values; 8. Health Department requirements for on-site sewage disposal are not applicable to this proposal; 9. Will provide other information to be reasonably necessary to analyze the proposal. In addition, the buffer averaging would maintain the minimum buffer setback distance of 32.5 feet or 65 percent of the standard buffer width (50 feet). The additional buffer areas are contiguous to the standard buffer. The minimum building setback would be maintained between any structure and the reduced buffer (Public Rule 21A-24-016 Q. In summary, the buffer averaging as proposed would provide significantly more buffer area than required by code. Portions of increased buffer area would provide higher function due to existing habitat conditions. Other added buffer areas could provide opportunity for increased function over time or as the result of enhancement activities. Because this project includes wetland restoration, it is anticipated that buffer areas may be enhanced or incorporated into a required restoration plan. Page 9 a ,�J 1 1 fl [-I 1 WILDLIFE HABITAT Land development projects that are at least 10 acres in size have been required by King County to perform a wildlife study. Per comments received from County staff, a preliminary assessment for red-tailed hawk (Bureo jamaicensis) use on the Property is included in this study. No cited literature was used for the survey methodology; however, professional experience and familiarity with the site should be considered. Many site visits were conducted during the summer of 2001 when wetland areas were investigated. Familiarity with red-tailed hawk use and habitat includes sites that are situated directly north of the Shamrock Property. The site was re -visited on 7/29/02 to purposely investigate the presence of a red- tailed hawk nest. Red-tailed hawks have been observed in the area and use the Shamrock project site for hunting. Property residents living on the north portion of the site reported no known nests exist except an off-site nest to the north. The site is very open throughout most of the central and eastern areas. This vantage from the east provides good visibility into the treed areas using binoculars. Large black cottonwood and Douglas fir trees were targeted as potential nesting sites. Mature, black cottonwood trees are scattered throughout the western wetland areas. Two large Douglas fir groves are present on or adjacent to the site. However, these groves of trees are within 100 feet of existing homes. In summary, targeted trees, primarily on the site, were closely observed using zoom binoculars. Red-tailed hawk nests were not observed during this investigation or others that occurred related to this project. �Page a 1 11 REFERENCES Cowardin, L., V. Carter, F. Golet, and E. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. Office of Biological Services, Fish and Wildlife Service, United states Department of the Interior, FWS/OBS-79-31. Environmental Laboratory. 1987. "Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual," Technical Report Y-87-1, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Miss. Hitchcock, C.L., A. Cronquist, M. Ownbey, and J.W. Thompson. 1977. Vascular Plants of the Pacific Northwest. University Press, Seattle, Washington. King County. 1990. Sensitive Areas Map Folio. King County. 2000. King County Code - Chapter 21A.24 Environmentally Sensitive Areas. United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1973. King County Area Soil Survey, Washington. Prepared in cooperation with the Soil Conservation Service, King County, and the Washington Agricultural Experiment Station. United States Department of Interior, Fish, and Wildlife Service. 1988. National Wetland Inventory. Prepared for the Office of Biological Services. Washington State, Department of Ecology. 1997. Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual. Ecology Publication #96-94. Page 11 f u DATA PLOTS t �l 1 J APPENDIX A 1 DATA FORM O NE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHODi Field Investigator(s) 1 Date: r Projed/Site: State: County: , Appl'icantlOwner: Plant Community #/Name: (Vote: K a more detailed site description is necessary, use the back of data form or a field notebook.'' ----------------------------------- Do norma nvrronmental conditions exist at the plant community?V j W/%r,c L Yea / No no, explain on back) Has the .veget c n iis, an&or hydrology been significantly disturbed? Yes No (If yes, explain on back) -------------------------------------------------- 1 � Ada � a�8 ' rs 5& n 1 B-2 VEGETATION Indicator Indicator Dominant Plant s Status Str tum Domin nt Plant Species- Status Stratu qq 12. qq 4.-7T— 14. A 5. 15. 6. 16. ,(! 7. 17. 8. 18. 9. 19. 10. 20. Percent of dominant species that are OBL. FACW. and/g.f!_AC Is the hydrophytic vegetation.criterion met? Yes • No Rationale: SOILS Series/phase: Subgroup:2 Is the soil on the hydric soils fist? Yes No Undetermined Is the soil a Histosol? Yes No tic epipedon present? Yes a Is the soil: Monied? Y No Gleyed? Yes No Matrix Color: Mottle Colors: Other hydric soil i ators: Is the hydric soil crtWionpqt,? Yes, _ _Nq f HYDROL GY Is the ground surface inundated? . Yes No Surface water depth: Is the sail saturated? Yes No� ,r % Depth to free-standing watw in pit/soil probe hole: /Ll List other held evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation. Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? Yes No Rationale- _-- -- JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION- AND RATIONALE is the plant community a wetland? Yes No Rationalefor-jurisdictionaldecision: 1 This -data form can be used for the Hydric Soil Assessment Procedure and the Plant Community Assessment Procedure. r 2 Classification accordtng to. "Sod Taxonomy.' �-j 7 1 1 C 11 DATA FORM M INE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHODi Field Investigator(s): Date: Pr6joct ite: State. County: ApplicantK caner: *9- Plant Community Mame: We: If a more detailed site description is necessary, use the back of data form or a field notebooks — — r — , _ Do normalvironmental conditions exist at the plant community? Yes 4" No (If o, explain on back) Has thevegetation, andlor hydrology been significantly disturbed? Yes No.. (N yes, explain on bads) --------------------------------------------------- VEGETATION Indicator indicator Domina t Plant Spe ies Status Stratum Domi nt PlaM Species St tus ra m 14s p 5 15. r9 l f �' 51 6. 16. ..� 7. t.tc 17. 1 9. 8. ' S . l� N 19.0 1 Q. 20. Percent of dominant species that are OBL. FACW, and/or AC Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes No B -2 Series/phase: ,eXLLS' v6" Is the soil on the hydric soils list? Is the soil a Histosol? Yes Is the soil: Mottled? Ye Matrix Color: S' Other hydric soil indic ors: Is the hydric soil criterion Meta 4t- 4'[-Y'l0' ( Subgroup:' Yes No Undetermined No Histic epipedon present? Yes No N Gieyed? Yes No 1 Mottle Colors: Is the ground surface inundated? . YesNo �_ Sur Is the sar7 saturated? Yes No Depth to free -staring water in pt'soil prone hole: _ T List other field evidence of surface inundation or sol saturation. Is the wetland hydrotooy criterion met? Yes _A::� No Rationale: ' ✓ JURISDICTIONAL ERMINATION AND RATIONALE Is the plant community a wetland? Yes No Rationale for jurisdictional decision: t This data form can be used for the Hydric Soil Assessment Procedure and the Plant Community Assessment Procedur6. 'Classification according to "Sod Taxonomy. - LJ DATA FORM ROUTINE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHOD' S . FWId invest;gator(s): I z Date: I Project/S- C--& State: County' ApplicantAOwner: Plant Commmunity Wwame: Note_ If a more detailed site description is necessary, use the bads of data form or a field notebook_ - - - - - Do norm Wronmental conditions exist at the plant community? - r 00 Yes No Qf no, explain on back) Has the. vegetation, , and/or hydrokrgy been significantly disturbed? rJ T Yes No yes, explain on back) - of ---.-------------------------------�—YY—-------- -- VEGETATION Indicator Indicator Domin flant Species Status ° � Stratum Domi t nt . Status Stralym I�KgJt 4-A Ja 3. 9, E 12 W 13. 1 ,4- , �4. 16. S- ' "17. 7. g 19. g, 19. 10. 20. q Percent of dominant species that are OBL. FACK andlor FAC Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes No Rationale: 1 1 1 1 1 1 B-2 SOIL Series/phase: Subgroup -.2 Is the soil on the hydric soils list? Yes o Undetermined Is the soil a Histosol? Yes No istic epipedon present? Yes No Is the soil: Mottleg? YNo Gleyed? Yes No - t� Matrix Color: /� Mottle Colors: Is the soil saturated? Yes No Depth to free-standing water in pit/soif probe hole: List other field evidence of surface inundation or sol saturation. Is the wetland hydrokoy criterion met? Yes No Rationale: JURISDICTIONAL. DETERMI ON AND RATIONALE Is theplaM community a wetland? Yes No Rationale for'jurisdictional decision: t This data form can be used for the Hydric Sol Assessment Procedure and the Plant Community Assessment Procedur6. r 2 Classification according to..'S d Taxonomy.' DATA FORM FOUTINE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHOD' Field Investigator(s): A !�G %' Date: g / 0 Project/Srt e: State: Coun Applicant/Owner: —Plant Cominunity #/Name: ty: ' Note_ I a more detailed site description is necessary, use the back of data form or a field notebook-------------------------------------------------- r - r - - - Do normal ronmental conditions exist at the plant community? /1 ' Yes No (if no, explain on bads) Has the vegetatio�ny� ifs, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? r Yes No 1/ (if yes, explain on back),¢�.fr% (Y ---------------- ------------------------------------t`- 1 t VEGETATION indicator Indicator Dominant Plant Specisay Status Stratum Dominant Plant Species Status Stratum 70� 1. jT�_ 11. _ 3, 12. g 13. 4. 14. Ott is. A 16. 7. 17. 8. 18. 9. 19. 10. 20. Percent of dominant species that are OBL. FACK and/AC No Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes Rationale: V . p SOI S / Series/ base: KW1 Subgroup:z Is the soil on the hydric soils list? Yes No Undetermined Is the soil a Histosol? Yes No .Histic epipedon present? Yes Na Is the soil: Mottled? Ye No �Gleyed? Yes No Matrix Color: Mottle Colors: Other hydric soil int' .tars: Is the hydric soil * ion met? Yes No _ l - n-•c"...�e. /l1 19// �J.�V_ A �.!/ ! n n/1%OU1% �i11 ® }— / / 1� !Q // /r`7 1 /AI, LL: /--3 /_ ' / N / to / HYDRO Is the ground surface Inundated? Yes Surface ater depth: Is the soil saturated? Yes No v M, Depth to free-standing water io pWsoil probe hole: List other field evidence of surface Inundation or sol saturation. Is She wetland hydro4o' criterion met? Yes 4--, No Rationale- JURISDICTIONAL ERMINATION AND RATIONALE Is thep lant community -a wetland? Yes No Rationale forJurisdictional decision: 1 This data form can be used for the Hydric Soil Assessment Procedure. and the Plant Community Assessment Procedure. 2 Classification according to "Soil Taxonomy.' ' B-2 1 _ 1 DATA FORM O NE ONSITE DETERMINATION METifOD1 Field Investigator(Date: r s Projed/Site: State: County. Appticant/Owner: Plant Community a/Name: Not --------------------------------------------------- DoN a more detailed site description is necessary, use the bads of data form or a field notebook. r _ _ _ T Do nor al mental conditions exist at the plant community Yes No (If no, explain on back) ��QI'"""JJ�I G ` V ► ID Has the vegetation, Sails. and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? Yes No (H yes, explain on bads) --------------------------------------------- VEGETATION Indicator Indicator Domi t lant Spqcies Status strptumj Dominant Plant Species Status Stratum 1.i1. 2. 4 3. 12.. 13. 4. 14. 6. 16. 7. 17. 9. 19. 10. 20. Percent of dominant species that are OBL. FACK and/or FAC Is the hydrophytic vegetation critedYes No Rationale: 146e 2met?% f XIC66 SOILS (/ Series/phase: ct Subgrou :2 P Subgroup :2 the soil on the hydric soils list? Yes No Undetermined Is the sail a Histosol? Yes No tic epipedon present? Yes No Is the soil: Mottled? o Gleyed? Yes No _ Matrix Color: O Mottle Colors: Other hydric soil indi tors: Is the hydric soil c 'tenon Met? e No St4iZ �4 Rationale: Q fi .Is the ground surface inundated? YesN0 �S709 water depth: Is the soil saturated? Yes No !/ Depth to free-standing water -in pit/soil probe hole: List other field evidence of surface Inundation or soil saturation. Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? Yes No Rationale: JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE Is the plant community a wetland! Yes No C Rationale for jurisdictional decision: - .1 This data form can be used for the Hydric Sod Assessment Procedure and the Plant Community ' Assessment Procedure. 2 Cfassifioation according to 'Sol Taxonomy.` � a= 1 1 1 fl t DATA FORM RO"NE ONSITE DETERMINATION METNODi Field lnvestigator(s): Date: • Project/Site: State: County' ApplicanVOwner: Plant Community s/Name: Note--------------------------------------------------- I! a more detailed site description is necessary, use the back of data form or a field notebook�yry Do normalviranmental conditions exist at the plant community?usf1- Yes No 0, explain on back) Has the vegetati�>((Eyejs, nd/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? Yes No explain on back) �� e B-2 SOILS Series/phase: Subgroup:2 Is the soil on the hydric soils list? YesNo _ Undetermined Is the soil a Histosol? Yes No istic epipedon present? Yes No Is the soil: Mottled? s �Gleyed? Yes Na Matrix Color: No + Monle Calors: Other hydric soil tors: Is the hydric soil triter/ met? Yes No % �✓ /�YJ {' t /I � HYDROi.Y Is the ground surface inundated? YesNo/ Surface water depth: Is the soil saturated? Yes No� ham. Depth to free-standing water in pitlsoil prone hole: _ //.* - List other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation. Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? Yes No Rationale: JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINON AND RATIONALE Is the plant community a wetland? Yes No Rationale for'juriscictional decision: 1 This data form can be used for the Hydric Soil Assessment Procedure and the Plant Community Assessment Procedure. 2 Classification according to "Soil Taxonomy." VEGETATION Indicator indicator Dominant cant Specos Stratum Dominant Dominant Plant Species Status Stratum 71 1. �Stat�us -- f' r � 12. 13. �3. > 14. 1 �a 15. ..d5' B. l 7. 17, f g 9. 101 19. 16. ' 19. � 2Q. Percent dominant species that are OSL. FACW, and/or FAC Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes No Rationale: B-2 SOILS Series/phase: Subgroup:2 Is the soil on the hydric soils list? YesNo _ Undetermined Is the soil a Histosol? Yes No istic epipedon present? Yes No Is the soil: Mottled? s �Gleyed? Yes Na Matrix Color: No + Monle Calors: Other hydric soil tors: Is the hydric soil triter/ met? Yes No % �✓ /�YJ {' t /I � HYDROi.Y Is the ground surface inundated? YesNo/ Surface water depth: Is the soil saturated? Yes No� ham. Depth to free-standing water in pitlsoil prone hole: _ //.* - List other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation. Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? Yes No Rationale: JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINON AND RATIONALE Is the plant community a wetland? Yes No Rationale for'juriscictional decision: 1 This data form can be used for the Hydric Soil Assessment Procedure and the Plant Community Assessment Procedure. 2 Classification according to "Soil Taxonomy." 1 1 11 1 1 1 i 1 1 B-2 DATA FORM O NE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHOD' Field Investotor(s}: Dale: Project/Site: State: County: Appliicant/Ownef: Plant Community $/Name: Note--------------------------------------------------- If a more detailed site description is necessary, use the back of data form of a field noteboo Do norma ironmenlal conditions exist at the plant community? Yes No (tf no, explain on back) v .� Has the vegetation, iis, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? �� A�� �./o Yes No (If yes, explain on back) % ----------------------------------- V1 *1 :2 cy I w g Indic-ator Domina.gt Plant Species, A i<�•a►�� i1.1t �1 F 4. VSs:len, A w �rt�a J► i s ..A._ � /� .Dominant J�Y��. _ . ter. • /%ITT rd :if.0 a 14. 16 17, 18 10, - 20. Percent of dominant species that are QBL, FACW Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes Rationale: and/ AC No SOILS Series/phase: Subgraup:2 Is the soil on the hydric soils list? Yes -,-No Undetermined Is the soil a Histosol? Yes No stic epipedon present? Yes No Is the soil: Mottled �/j'/ No 1_�4eyed? Yes No List other field evidence of surface inundaiion or soil saturation. Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? Yes No Rationale: JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINA . ON AND RATIONALE Is the plant community a wetland? Yes No ; % sl Rationale for'jurisdictional decision: %tr'X%�! ISif 1 This data form can be used for the Hydric Soil Assessment Procedure and the Plant Community Assessment Procedure. 2 Classification according to 'Soil Taxonomy.' a 1 1 1 1 DATA FORM ROPNE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHODi Fiekf Investigator(s): Y Date: Projed/Site: State: County: ApplicantlOwner: Plant Community if/Name: Note: ft a more detailed site description is necessary, use the bads of data form or a field notebook. __ _____________.._.__ e Do norm nvironmental conditions exist at the plant community? Yes No (ff no. explain on back) Has the vegetation, s . andlor hydrology been significantly disturbed? pL� Qid''-&d— Yes No yes, explain on back) !� S tF VEGETATION 1 Indicator Dom' t Plant ies Status Stqturry Dominant Plant Species 1� 11. 2. r _ 12. 3 13. 4, 14. 5Ao'. 15. 16. 7 -T1 17. 8. 18. 9. 19, `10. 20. Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACK an&or AC Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes o Rationale: i� CEJ d,SOILS Seriestphase:11410610Subgroup:2 Is the soil on the hydric soils list? Yes No Undetermined Is the soil a Histosol? Yes No (/ Hystic epipedon present? Yee No = Is the soil: Mott No isyed? Yes No Matrix Color: Y Mottle Colors: Other hydric soilt�'met? rs: Is the hydric soil es %o - 15t` If Indicator Status Stratum ti ♦ h ff y1 - HYDFt, OL�CY Is the ground surface inundated? . YesSurf ce water depth: Is the soil saturated? Yes No _— Depth to free-standing water 1n p!Vsoil probe hole: (z Y-0 List other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation. Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? Yes No Rationale: JURISDICTIONAL.DETERMINA AND RATIONALE Is the plant community a wetland! Yes No Rationale for'jurisdidionaf decision: LLldl 1 This data form can be used for the Hydric Sod Assessment Procedure and ttte Plant Community. Assess-rnent Procsdure. 2 Classification according to 'Soil Taxonomy.' NOIONIHS" :UIMOO DNUf >y NOOLOWHS INN fit � a 1!9lNX3 s SNOIIIONOO 03dO URIC nj Ali Nouurre u'fa 'ON 31 Q WP 3N.. _. I 11 ifi 4 I f •V Amu I rt I v \, i I LU Ui- G. iII 5 i 1� p771IK 1 r� '. 1 11\111'5 \.fir I rt lr 11 r 4 + - � Ulfr f ` I ii yl \ —----- — �f L LU 1! '� 1't �, �. ,; + ,,• M1 � w I `1.4,1 u - y ` ., � I ti �; � « . �-,,, � �,\I n? �. I!k,1 r H ;1`s 5\ \` ``IIIA'` I y' S � _ ,�•, 1 7ItI�(�� kl111° •�''. y ��, tiY ! �. tiy,^ ' \•'.:, 'i. ! 1 ! I I r � ��:,,. � � 'iC �I • i i r �15Y 1 � ��' " ��"��/ i 4 ;t-li.sa. ' ` 't 'i ��'�:,' 'ar ' �.r`�r rJJI`u � � � � f ; i rrr�� � ; _ «. « • `�� I^, �j 1 xC•1 .� ✓< .r T' �`; 1 I` a ti � 'ti, ',111111;' ''I� �, I 1 r � , s i '�\. <. ! Itl' � I ^ t.._00,•\ `� "y 4 ''117' _ , , . 71 * .°�} . 1 + i �, ik i `rr + `•,k `� \1 '� 5 ``� �I yli17p1 IC .' ` ` � ~'` , I! ` � 'I�` w _ " ' " + ' • , • - , f I!�; ! I ! �I 'S I1L1 � i ri, ` � ...r,1 ` J �',� 1 / 4 ..-�. � I I f r 1 + 1 f f I ! 1 i f � ' • , « - T , _ .. , tlg` t\ .4F ,t .; `14 �5� �\�\� \�\ � _� 0,00 !1 {11111 I Irt « . ., • - �� I', `• f�_ ;> �•� _� 141 ,.` _ _ ,. - _ - S\\\\k 1% i5\ �'.' lit '` ° }.; ^ h - !!' • - . * ± , # - �>� I N 'E)mP'aO--l1 55IOV 13A3.1\sl!q!4x3 buuaau!Du3\sa1!J0M D3fOYd\:. ND1.DN1NSM AIM1700 DNlN I T I191HX-4 SNOUIGNd D DMI S1X.3 HOWIAlY ura •ml w I i - I i I / KFS �\ ,r t, •``s, � vii i : I .... .14 L.. i ... _4i. W- �..-Q�.� I `` — r —�. ` ten•.__:. ` �, �� _ I QQa� I fQ+ ew 14 t IIs Ld LLL '`��i 1{ X111 l X::♦ r) �� _ ti. i *. �- —7 CLI WI � I 01 � r IEII�' t I i •� � `� O � � 1 1 { � \ � 71,1, 1 t � \ i I l '} I I �—•'- —rte �� ,�_ �.�, Y r � .--•�.`•'yC' 7 . r "I I I I r I 1 , ........ �`� �' • � W 1 I '`� I 1, �. �� }•.� I � 14�,'�, � � '�1'' IIS I I t } � 1 F! { :. � I I �„ ♦ �' �� __—� I I ,4 i:� \ �t } ! y 5 1 +�'..`...'�� � f —_fes ♦1: —, // F/ .r. fes` ��1, �� I I it � 1 I 1 � l 1 "'1" l !� �_= �' _ _.�.- J a • � y � t o F ,1 \ Y � 1 t � � }r Ir Ir }, � `, * � . * ~ � ~ t � r' I ._ ^"� `�, \ •' til — � 1, Iti�\ N: .1 l kl I}r 1 $ I , 4 , I U �' • ' II ` � y 4 I , 1 1 \ 1 1 t \ \ r a ?: \ \ 4 r I • '+ !✓ ,. ,. i omit l 11 : i _ fp ..r� • t 4 \, \ ) \ 1 1 1 , 1 1 1 4 ! , l 1 k � � � r � � ! �` • \ •/ �'. � �. — I�:— ;.1)),)11,11+1, }� \�11\ � II . r: ❑ � I t 1\ } \ }\ � \r\_ 'I � '', `\ �� ' Ir i r ; l } .. �,.��! I « • ..�. Il kl•..`..l i 11 1\\ ) t� \\ ' E7 Il IlY Ir171 , , , ��. FJ� . r! /1 / k , I i� , — i �'., , Y V 1�'�� w + } `y+111111, 7 1 ,� j' � � � �! � , V � t •�., `_".,". I laE r.: + I}'v •)\� ,, i l � 11�s 7 1 ; z Y ,'1 1 I` , �'�. � . , \ '• L ,� � _ J� � 1. , �_ _ _ � � i , 1 } t � 1 � �i l � L 1, 1 ', 1 >; 1 1 1 � +' i •� � � �� i ! \� 9y 1 .--i �'n ` ) �' ` } •��� , � 1 } 411 1 R } 1 4 1 � V. � ,7 1. 1 V f + �« . . „1� \'':., \ } ) 1 , , 1 l Y 1 � � 7 , , , l l I L 17 �� � ;. r ,Ii�iR� �%.• ! �, « ,. « -- 85'110`! 72A21\sPgryx3 bu.1 &ur6u3`Sa1.r310 JM0` 3roddl wdzf ; - Foos , uAu.ysn; • • • g�� a ^cs n a a m m s d m e w � O -•� O N rL FD —_ O C Q .a H •e � w n da F c �, a ae a N �, m dpo u - tm C /p m y N --H, { 4' r p fD 3 n ••, o o ti v+ � 0 ao 4 a LA w a 3 m �, � -�+ a n e �• �► A 3 .Y.n m» er Er H 5• a nom_ o � � n G. C ^ °O re a a 3 rr n O7 Q_ O — O N rL FD —_ O C Q N f—➢ d dpo - tm C /p m y N --H, { 4' r p fD 3 C • • 7' �^ C h fr) b 7 n o c O • a • "`� yy V n � ? q a m � n M¢ 3 v o 3 A y 3 n �• n { n p � F .-i 5• o G m A q� 0 � 4 a 7• p S. .v'i m 11 '.7 i7 O � � O [a. C �w 6r a o � G n � - w •Q LA .... d A a O h ro N O O E 7 .D i-. rb �. w �. n 6 wC p a q .� pn » n N e '••C � _ 7 S u {f� 7ppt a ^ �_ n C � t a obi _4. � r�•F � n � m b C S m� m d 0. m w w oc a A 1=1 95 sr cr c 7 p n � - �• � O n �' t � n N n M EM 6. e r• Q y S p T ^• : n 0. co ^a A n n ^ �' =- p n G O ^Ow •a Y A cr 9 o N � d = - Cl. d n C b 0 _ ry Rrr rn S p n rq T q q 7 fi p1 y 4A 3 �' •v ro "' •� d S `,d • 7' �^ C h 7 n o c O S E. 7 O y A � � .n 0• '� d u � C: � Q m s O � p d a A � i1 y. '� { n p � F .-i 5• o G m A q� 0 � 4 a 7• p S. .v'i 3 A a O h O O O O •i G � H .D i-. S ^ p n rE 5 I - n D. o' ro d 0. A a ,• ��� .A b C S m� m d 0. m w w 95 sr cr n Q y S p T ^• : co ^a A n n ^ �' =- p n G O ^Ow •a Y A cr 9 o - Cl. d n b 0 rn OY •� d S `,d � O G C `' �j• 6. p O VI C� •^ � d .r7T. 1 W �s 3 3 9 � �i O .• H rT O O " 3 bp o c y � L • fill MANUAL 2002 9 d FOR IMPLEMENTING ,f SOIL DEPTH Et QUALITY BM P T.S.13 1 N WDOE -¢ WESTERN WASHINGTON STORMWATER • This publication is provided to help professionals in the land development and landscape industries understand and implement new Washington State guidelines for soil quality designed to improve stormwater retention and quality. The specifications, procedures and forms contained in this manual were developed by a team of landscape professionals, municipal. inspectors, soil scientists and public agency staff. They are provided as examples of the tools needed to implement the guidelines. However they are not officially sanctioned methods to meet the guidelines. • CONTENTS SECTION ONE Healthy Soil and Stormwater Management SECTION TWO BMP T5.13 Soil Quality and Depth SECTION THREE Summary of Steps for Implementing BMP T5.13 SECTION FOUR Outline of Amendment Options SECTION FIVE Developing A Soil Management Plan "Soil Management Plan" form (for permit applications) SECTION SIX field Guide to Verifying Soil Depth and Quality "Field Inspection Form" SECTION SEVEN Resources Permitted Composting Facilities in Puget Sound Basin Soil and Compost Analytical labs Serving Western Washington Amendment Rate Calculation Spreadsheet Additional Resources on Compost Quality, and The Rale of Soil Quality in Stormwatcr Management Model Soil Amendment Specifications: APWA and ICS Formats CREDITS FUNDING: Snohomish County Public Works Department PROJECT MANAGER: Sego Jackson, Snohomish County Public Works Department MANUAL AUTHOR: Howard Stenn, Stenn Design. Vashon, WA. TLCHNICAL ASSISTANCE - AMENDMENT CALCULATIONS: Dr, Craig Cogger, Washington State University -Puyallup TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE - SPECINCATIONS: Jeff Girvin: The Berger Partnership, Seattle, WA. GRAPHIC PRODUCTION: Partners In Design, Seattle, WA ADDITIONAL GRAPHICS: Courtesy of King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks THE ROLE OF SOIL QUALITY IN STORMWATER MANAGEMENT The Benefits of Healthy Soil Healthy soil provides important stormwater management functions including efficient water infiltration and storage, adsorption of excess nutrients, filtration of sediments, biological decomposition of pollutants, and moderation of peak stream flows and temperatures. In addition, healthy soils support vigorous plant growth that intercepts rainfall, returning much of it to the sky through evaporation and transpiration. Native Soil CA Rapid urbanization of forest and farmland in the Puget Sound basin has severely degraded soil capacity to absorb, filter and store rainwater; and support vigorous plant growth_ Common development practices include removal of topsoil during grading and clearing, compaction of remaining soil, and planting into unimproved soil or shallow depths of poor quality imported topsoil. These conditions typically produce unhealthy plants that require excessive fertilizers and pesticides, further contaminating runoff. Disturbed Soil awr.r � • • • H,althy SCi[ and Stocmwater M2,)39ement r These changes, plus the listing of some Puget Sound salmon runs as "threatened" under the Endangered Species Act, has stimulated examination of alternative practices to preserve and restore the soil's stormwater and water quality functions. Best development practices that improve on-site management of storm water runoff include minimizing impervious surfaces, preserving native soil and vegetation, and establishing minimum soil quality and depth standards in landscaped areas. Amending soils with compost or other organic materials can restore soil functions. Utilization of Best Management Practices for Soilssoil wattrinfiltration erosionstorage capacities. Pemasessuirface.watef runoff, and -Traps sed�rner ts, heavy rinea Is and excess and biodegrades flebuilds benefit lal soil life that fights pests and, ,pplants .nutrients and viater Aids deep plant root grawth and vigomus The Regional Impact of Urbanization on Stormwater Flows ao --- - ---- - 20''4, — -- — -- (Y - gest Pasture Suburban City EVAPOTRANSPIRATION no INTERFLOW GROUNDWATER ® SURFACE RUNOFF water that travels just below the surface Illustrations for this section were created by the King County Department of Naturof Resources and Porh 3 • • BMPT5.13 POST -CONSTRUCTION SOIL QUALITY AND DEPTH Excerpted €turn the Washington Stott Department of Ecology's Storm water Management Mon uol for Western Washington, Vol. V Runoff Treotment BMPs, August 2001, pp. 5-1Z 5-13. This volume can be found online of www.evc.wo.00v/pubsl991 S.Pddf. BMP €5.13 is on pages )OF- ;02 of that pdf fife. Purpose and Definition Naturally occurring (undisturbed) soil and vegetation provide important stormwater functions including: water infiltration; nutrient, sediment, and pollutant adsorption; sediment and pollutant biofiltration; water interllow, storage and trans- mission; and pollutant decomposition. These functions are largely lost when development strips away native soil and vegetation and replaces it with minimal topsoil and sod. Not only are these important stormwater functions lost, but such landscapes themselves become pollution- generating pervious surfaces due to increased use of pesticides, fertilizers and other landscaping and household/industrial chemicals, the concentration of pet wastes, and pollutants that accompany roadside litter. Establishing soil quality and depth regains greater stormwater functions in the post development landscape, provides increased treatment of pollutants and sediments that result from development and habitation, and minimizes the need for some landscaping chemicals, thus reducing pollution through prevention. Applications and Limitations Establishing a minimum sod quality and depth is not the same as preservation of naturally occurring soil and vegetation. It also does not maximize the stormwater functions that could be attained through greater soil depth and more specialized 4 formulations as presented in SMP T5.35, Engineered Soil/Landscape Systems. However, establishing a minimum soil quality and depth will provide improved on-site management of stormwater flow and water quality. Soil organic matter can be attained through numerous materials such as compost, composted woody material, biosolids, and forest product residuals. It is important that the materials used to meet the soil quality and depth BMP be appropriate and beneficial to the plant cover to be established. Likewise, it is important that imported topsoils improve soil conditions and do not have an excessive percent of clay fines. Design Guidelines 1. Soil retention. The duff layer and native topsoil should be retained in an undisturbed state to the maximum extent practicable. In any areas requiring grading, remove and stockpile the duff layer and topsoil on site in a designated controlled area not adjacent to public resources and critical areas, to be reapplied to other portions of the site where feasible. 2. Soil quality. All areas subject to clearing and grading that have not been covered by impervious surface, incorporated into a drainage facility or engineered as structural fill or slope shall, at project completion, demonstrate the following: • Retention or enhancement of the moisture infiltration rate and soil moisture holding capacity of the original • • 0 undisturbed soil native to the site. Areas which have been compacted or have removed some or all of the duff layer or underlying top soil shall be amended to mitigate for lost moisture infiltration and moisture holding capacity; and • A topsoil layer with a minimum organic matter content often percent dry weight and a pl I from 6.0 to 8.0 or matching the pH of the original undisturbed soil. The topsoil layer shall have a minimum depth of eight inches except where tree roots limit the depth of incorporation of amendments needed to meet the criteria. Subsoils below the topsoil layer should be scarified at least 4 inchei with some incorporation of the upper material to avoid stratified layers, where feasible. • These criteria can be met by usingon-site native topsoil, incorporating amendments into on-site soil, or importing blended topsoil. If blended topsoil is imported, then fines should be limited to twenty-five percent passing through a 200 sieve. • The resulting soil should be conducive to the type of vegetation to be established. Maintenance 1. Soil quality and depth should he established toward the end of construction and once established, should be protected from compaction, such as from large machinery use, and from erosion. 2. Soil should be planted and mulched after installation. 3. Plant debris or its equivalent should be left on the soil surface to replenish organic matter. 4. It should be possible to reduce use of irrigation, fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides. These activities should be adjusted where possible, rather than continuing to implement formerly established practices. EMP T5. 13 Soil CluaEity and Dtpth E= • • SUMMARY OF PROPOSED SPECIFICATION PERMiTT1NGAND INSPECTION TO. IMPLEMENT BMP T5.13 POST -CONSTRUCTION SOIL QUALITY AND DEPTH The following approach to implementation of BMP T5.13 in the Department of Ecology's Stormwater Manual has been developed with expert input and review. It is proposed as a practical methodology to implement the State's BMP guidelines. Proposed Soil Specifications • These specifications are designed to achieve an 8 inch depth of soil with 10% organic content in.planting beds, and 5% organic content in turf areas. Detailed amendment rates and procedures are described in Section 1V and in the specifications included in section seven. • Developers may select from the following methods to meet the requirements. Option 1. Leare undisturbed nazi+re vegetation and soil, and protect From ccmipacrion durirnl; ronstructicm_ Option 2. Amend existing site topsoil or subsoil either at def;tult `pre - approved" rates, or at custom calculated rates based an specifiers tests of the soil and amenclMent. Option 3. Stockpile esisiin,, to>psnif durin<i railin„ and replace it prior to planting_ tiIockpiled topsoil must also be amended il'needed to meet the or;cmuk matter or dept h requirements, rirher at a default "pre-npproved- rate or ar a custom calcuiaied rate. Option 4. Import tr,psnil rnix of sul3icient organic content and dei7th to meet the requirements. 0 Mort than one treatment may be used on different portions of the same site. Soil that already meets the depth and organic matter quality standards, and is not compacted, does not need to be amended. • Compacted subsoils must be scarified at least 4 inches below the 8 inch deep amended layer (for a finished uncompacted depth of 12 inches). Planting beds must be mulched with 2 inches of organic material. • Quality of compost and other materials used to meet organic content. 1. The organic content for the "pre -approved" amendment rates can be met only using Grade A Compost as defined by WDOE Interim Compost Quality Guidelines (or the definition for "composted materials" in WAC 173-354). • The compost must also have an organic matter content of 35% to 65%, and a carbon to nitrogen ratio below 25:1. The carbon to nitrogen ratio may be as high as 35:1 for plantings composed entirely of plants native to the Puget Sound Lowlands region. 2. Calculated amendment rates may be met through use of composted materials as defined above; or other organic materials amended to meet the carbon to nitrogen ratio requirements, and meeting the contaminant standards of Grade A Compost. Planning and Permitting A site specific Soil Management Plan [SMP) must be approved as part of the clearing and grading or construction permit application. The SMP includes: • A scale -drawing (11" X 17" or larger) identifying area where native soil and vegetation will be retained undisturbed; 0 • and which soil treatments will applied in landscape areas. • A completed SMP form identifying treaments and products to be used to meet the soil depth and organic content requirements for each area. • Computations of compost or topsoil volumes to be imported (and/or site soil to be stockpiled) to meet "pre - approved' amendment rates; or calculations by a qualified professional to meet organic content requirements if using custom calculated rates. Qualified professionals include certified Agronomists, Soil Scientists or Crop Advisors; and licenced Landscape Architects, Civil Engineers or Geologists_ • Copies of laboratory analyses for compost and topsoil products to be used, with organic matter contents and carbon to nitrogen ratios documented. Inspection and Verification Procedures Inspection and verification should be performed by appropriate jurisdiction inspectors. Some verification may be made by supervising Landscape Architects or Civil Engineers, who submit signed certification that the approved SMP had been implemented. Thtfdowing is an outline of a pieferred inspection schedule and tasks. Depending on local resources and procedures, the inspection tasks may be consolidated into fewer visits. Pre -Grading Inspection. • Verify delineation and fencing off of native soils and vegetation to be left undisturbed, per the SMP. • Review the SMP with the general contractor to ensure that topsoil stockpiling and other specified measures are incorporated into the work plan. Grading Progress Inspection. - Verify that proper erosion control methods are being implemented. • Verify that excavation and stockpiling of native soils follows the SMP. • Verify that subgrades are consistent with the SMP, Post-Construction Inspection. Preferably prior to planting, so omissions can easily be corrected. • Verify that compost, mulch, topsoil and amendment delivery tickets match volumes, types and sources approved in the SMP. If materials other than those approved in the SMP 7 5umm„ary 0; 5;eps for ImplemerliFq ENT TM3 were delivered, submissions by the supplier should verify that they are equivalent to approved products, • Check soil for compaction, scarification and amendment incorporation by digging at least one 12 inch deep test hole per acre for turf and at least one per acre for planting beds. Test holes must be excavated using only a garden spade driven solely by inspector's weight. • Test 10 locations per landscaped acre (10 locations minimum) for compaction, using a simple "rod penetrometer" (a 4 foot long 3/81h inch diameter stainless steel rod, with and a 30 degree bevel cut into the side at that goes in 1/8 inch at the tip). Rod must penetrate to 12" depth driven solely by inspector's weight_ Mulch Verification. • Verify placement of two inches of organic mulch material on all planting beds. Secondary Verification For Failing Sites. If inspector believes the installation does not meet the approved permit conditions, additional testing may be ordered to determine whetber remediation steps are required prior to final occupancy and payment_ An independent consultant (Certified Soil Scientist, Crop Advisor or Agronomist; or Licensed Landscape Architect, Civil Engineer or Geologist) should conduct additional sampling and analysis: - Organic matter content should be verified by an independent soil testing service, using the Loss On Ignition method- - If necessary, the percentage of fine particles (less than #200 mesh) should be confirmed by a certified Soil Laboratory using a wet sieve test. • At present, an analytical method for verifying scarification has not been identified- Verification may be a matter of professional opinion- Post-Construction pinion • • • AMENDMENT OPTIONS Select the soil preparation options that best suit specific areas of the project site. Choose either a "default" pre -approved amendment rate, or a qualified professional may calculate a custom rate based on soil and amendment tests described in the specifications (included in the Resources Section VII). OPTION 1: Amend Existing Soil In -Place Scarification: Scarify or till subgrade to 8 inches depth (or to depth needed to achieve a total depth of 12 inches of uncompacted soil after calculated amount of amendment is added). Entire surface should be disturbed by scarification. Do not scarify within drip line of existing trees to be retained. A. Planting Beds i. PRE -APPROVED RATE: Place and rototill 3 inches of composted material into 5 inches of soil (a total amended depth of about 9.5 inches, for a settled depth of 8 inches); ii. CALCULATED RATE: Place and rototill calculated amount of composted material or approved organic material into depth of soil needed to achieve 8 inches of settle soil at 10% organic content Rake beds to smooth and remove surface rocks larger than 2 inches diameter. --- Mulch planting beds with 2 inches of organic mulch_ ::� B. Turf Areas i. PRE -APPROVED RATE: Place and rototill 1.75 inches of composted material into 6.25 inches of soil (a total amended depth of about 9.5 inches, for a settled depth of 8 inches); ii. CALCULATED RATE: Place and rototill calculated amount of composted material or approved organic material into depth of soil needed to achieve 8 inches of settled soil at 5% organic content. Water or roll to compact soil to 85% of maximum. Rake to level, and remove surface woody debris and rocks larger than 1 inches diameter • • GutlirP of Amendment Opt m f 1 OPTION 2: Stockpile site topsoils prior to grading for reapplication. Amend with organic matter or add topsoil if necessary to achieve required organic content to 8 inches depth - Scarification: If placed topsoil plus compost or other organic material will amount to less than 12 inches: Scarify or till subgrade to depth needed to achieve 12 inches of loosened soil after topsoil and amendment are placed. Entire surface should be disturbed by scarification. Do not scarify within drip line of existing trees to be retained. Stockpile and cover soil with weed barrier material that sheds moisture yet allows air transmission, in approved location, prior to grading - Replace stockpiled topsoil prior to planting. A. Planting Beds B. Turf Areas i. PRE -APPROVED RATE: Place and rototill 3 inches of i. PRE -APPROVED RATE: Place and rototill 1.75 inches of composted material into 5 inches of replaced soil (a total composted material or into 6-25 inches of replaced soil (a total amended depth of about 9.5 inches, for a settled depth of 8 amended depth of about 9.5 inches, for a settled depth of 8 inches); inches); ii- CALCULATED RATE: Place and rototill calculated amount ii. CALCULATED RATE: Place and rototill calculated amount of composted material or approved organic material into depth of composted material or approved organic material into depth of replaced soil needed to achieve 8 inches of settled soil at of replaced soil needed to achieve 8 inches of settled soil at 5% 10% organic content organic content. Rake beds to smooth and remove surface rocks larger than 2 Water or roll to compact soil to 85% of maximum inches diameter. Mulch planting beds with 2 inches of organic mulch or Rake to level, and remove surface rocks larger than 1 inches stockpiled duff. diameter - OPTION 3: Import topsoil meeting organic matter content standards. Scarify or till subgrade in two directions to 6 inches depth. Entire surface should be disturbed by scarification. Do not scarify within drip line of existing trees to be retained. A. Planting Beds B. Turf Areas Use imported topsoil mix containing 10% organic matter Use imported topsoil mix containing 5% organic matter (typically around 40% compost). Soil portion must be sand or (typically around 25% compost). Soil portion must be sand or sandy loam as defined by the USDA. sandy loam as defined by the USDA. Place 3 inches of imported topsoil mix on surface and till into Place 3 inches of imported topsoil mix on surface and till into 2 inches of soil. 2 inches of soil. Place 3 inches topsoil mix on surface. Place 3 inches topsoil mix on surface. Rake beds to smooth, and remove surface rocks over 2 inches Water or roll to compact soil to 85% of maximum. diameter. Mulch planting beds with 2 inches of organic mulch. Rake to level, and remove surface rocks larger than 1 inches diameter. C • • GUIDE TO DEVELOPING A SOIL MANAGEMENT PLAN This section outlines steps for professional specifiers to prepare a Soil Management Plan (SMP) to meet the provisions of BMP T5.13 Soil Quality and Depth in the Department of Ecology's Stormwater Manual for Western Washington_ The main steps to creating the SMP are: Step 1: Review Site Landscape Plans and Grading Plans. Examine all areas that will not be covered by structures, impervious surfaces, or stormwater detention J infiltration structures; to assess how grading will impact soil conditions and determine areas where different soil treatments may be applied. Those allowed soil treatment options are: Option 1. Areas where native soil and/or vegetation will be retained in place, AREAS Native vegetation f undisturbed soil to be preserved. Topsoil not requiring grading, but cleared of native vegetation. ASSESS CONDITIONS • Establish native plants. • Undisturbed topsoil and dufflayer. Option 1. Areas where topsoil or subsoil will be amended in place, Option 3. Areas where topsoil will be stripped and stockpiled prior to grading for reapplication, and Option 4. Areas where imported topsoil will be applied. Step 2: Visit Site to Determine Soil Conditions. Working with plans, check the soil in each area to identify information outlined in the chart below. Identify compaction of subgrade in each area by digging down to a level that will be 12' below finished grade. Use a shovel or 'rod penetrometer" driven solely by the your weight, as described in the Specification and "Field Guide to Verifying Soil depth and Quality." INCLUDE INFORMATION ON SM? • Areas to be left undisturbed and fenced during construction. • Depth ofcompacted layers less thari I2 inches deep_ • Will scarification be needed. What depth scarification • Presence of organic matter that may make required to allow compost' incorporation and achieve 12 inches amendment unnecessary or allow calculation of uncompacted depth. reduced amendment rate. • Will area be amended with compost or topsoil at 'pre- * If planning to use calculated amendment rate, approved" rate, or at custom calculated rate. sample and test soil as described in Step 4_ • Can areas be protected from compaction during construction. Areasto be cut during - Quantity oftopsoil that can be stockpiled and grading reapplied. , • Depth of any compacted layer less than 12 inches below ultimate finished grade. • Presence of organic matter at subgrade that may make amendment unnecessary, or allow calculation of reduced amendment rate. • If planning to use calculated amendment rate, sample and test soil as describe in Step 4 Areas to be filled Estimate what subgrade conditions will be when during grading fill is in place. • Depth of any compacted layer less than 12 inches below ultimate finished grade. • Presence of organic matter in fill soil that may make amendment unnecessary, or allow calculation ofreduced amendment rate. • If planning to use calculated amendment rate, sample and test soil as in Step 4. 10 • Will scarification be needed. -What depth scarificat" required to allow compost incorporation and achieve 12 incbes uncompacted depth. • Will topsoil be stockpiled during grading and reapplied. Will it require supplemental topsoil or compost to achieve 8 inches at specified organic content. • Will area be amended with compost or topsoil at "pre - approved" rate, or at custom calculated rate. • Will scarification be needed. What depth scarification required to allow compost incorporation and achieve 12" uncompacted depth. • Will area be amended with compost or topsoil at -pre- approved" rate, or at custom calculated rate. • is Step 3: Select Amendment Options The most convenient and economic methods for achieving the Soil Quality and Depth guidelines depends on site soil conditions, grading and resulting subgrade compaction, practicality of stockpiling topsoil during grading, and site access issues. Use of Pre -Approved amendment rates may simplify planning, however custom calculated rates can save substantial effort and expense—easily repaying the expense of testing and calculations. Often existing pasture or woodland soils have adequate organic matter if existing organic layers PC preserved. Also, compost products will frequently provide the desired soil organic matter content at lower applications than "Supplies the Pre -Approved rates (which are based on 'average" conditions) • Identify the areas where each amendment option will be applied by outlining each on site plan with a dark, thick -line pen. • Assign each area an identifying number or letter (A, S, C ... ) on the plan and on the Soil Management Plan form. Step 4. Identify Compost, Topsoils and Other Organic Materials for Amendment and Mulch • Amendments for Pre -Approved rates must be Class A compost per WDOE Interim Compost Quality Guidelines ("composted materials" defined in WAC Chapter 173-350 Section 220) or topsail manufactured from these composts plus sand or sandy sod Products must be identified on the Soil Management Plan form, and recent product test sheets provided showing that they meet additional requirements for organic matter content and carbon to nitrogen ratio. See specifications. • For custom calculated amendment rates, organic matter may be provided by Grade A Compost or other organic materials with a carbon.to nitrogen ratio under 25:1(35.1 for native plantings), and contaminant levels equivalent to Grade A Compost- These products must be identified on the Soil Management Plan Form, and recent test results provided showing that they meet these requirements. pcYcloping a Soil Management Plan a Sampling and Testing for Custom Calculated Rates Soil and amendments submitted for testing should be a composite of samples taken from several spots on a site or in a pile of amendment. Soil: Gather samples from soil that will be the subgrade after all grading operations are completed, before placement of imported topsoil or amendments. Take samples from 14-12 spots in each area. Imagine a line dividing the area in half lengthwise, then divide each half into five near equal sized widths. Take samples near the middle of each subsection. • At each sampling spot dig a spades -width hole at least 8 inches deep, then use shovel to shave a 1 inch thick soil slice from the side of the hole to use in composite. Thoroughly mix the 14-12 samples from each turf or planting area together in a clean plastic bucket or bowl. Place 2 cups of the mix into a sealable plastic bag for testing (some tests may require more soil, ask laboratories). ■ Label the bag with the site information, area of sample; plus your name, address and phone number. Amendment: Producers of composts and manufactured topsoils can usually provide test results for their products. If tests are nonexistent or incomplete, conduct necessary tests on each proposed amendment. • Take samples from 10-12 spots in pile of material. Imagine a line dividing the pile in half lengthwise, then gather samples from five spots equally spaced along the length of each side of the pile. • At each sampling spot, dig a spades -width hole at least 8 inches deep. Use a clean cup or trowel to collect a cup of amendment from the bottom of each hole. • Thoroughly mix the 10-12 samples from each pile together in a clean plastic bucket or bowl- Place 2 cups of the mix into a sealable plastic bag for testing (some tests may require more compost, ask laboratories), • Label the bag with the product and supplier information; plus your name, address and phone number. (see table on next page) • • • ticvcloping a Soil Management Plan TESTS TO -CONDUCT FOR CUSTOM CALCULATED AMENDMENT RATES. Soil Bulk density Percent organic matter (loss on Ignition method) Step 5. Compost Bulk density Percent organic matter (Loss on Ignition method) Moisture content as is Carbon to nitrogen ratio Heavy metals analysis per WAC 173-350 Section 220 Calculate Amendment, Topsoil and Mulch Volumes on SMP Form • For Pre -Approved amendment rates, figure the square footage of each area and complete the simple calculation to convert inches of amendment into cubic yards. • To compute custom calculated amendment rates, use soil and amendment test results and the Model Amendment Rate Calculator Spreadsheet and/or the Equation far Calculating Compost Application Rates to achieve a target soil organic matter content. 12 • • Developing a Soil Management Plan t MODEL "SOIL MANAGEMENT PLANT FOR BMP T5.13 MODEL -SOIL MANAGEM NT PIAN- VIDR BMT TA -13 PROJECT INFORNUTION pry* tt � �,� � Pori i'OMOVte an Wormatiaa vs part t, urdr wile address and prrwit number •■ adkbtians) pasts. Slit ,Address 1 Lot Ne.. Permit Tv e: A Prrrnii Nowsber, Permit Holder- older _ inch w-wification acodtd to $clucve finishod IoW 12' loosened depth. Mailing Addrew. Mailing ❑ Contact Person: one. Platy Prepared By: ATTACMIL TS REQUIRED (Check off items anached mec4ins regninctneots} Site plan she►. ing, to ►colt: _ Arras of ondiarurbed native velctWivq (no amendment rcgaimd) Sim placating beds and tuff area (anwodmenl required) _ Type of sail urWovcment proposed for cad sept Snil urvg0t; ImuiliTed if proposinle cuslom atsitndmtpf rafts Prudect test rt3alts for propostd autrudartati ARWA A PLAIN ]INN TYP1r Turf � Vu4t turbcd aahve vegd7rtion PI$atiott Sods Qtlrcr: SQUARE FOOTACS- SCARIFICATION _ inch w-wification acodtd to $clucve finishod IoW 12' loosened depth. Subwa Will be xMifsod ❑ PJILL- ITROV" I anchcs compact w Impound topsail] PRODUCT.- Ah1ENDNMYr j ❑ 0"amy: TapWil import - CO. ym4a I I.Wo N. it, QUANT- CU. YDS. Atucud with ►impost X,.__,000 sq.fl U Stockpile and tawcod - habit yatrds tunaodtnem ra. >4s, Yd3. 34ock Teal Rtisalb; % ort•ame Man" CN ratio -2$r:1 (-;_35:1 fiat Mbvr lent) "IS -TOM ANIS OMENI• Amreb teat results turd calcula4{vms, PRODUCT: _ Topsoil import I inches oto, rna#ter or mail impart) _ Topsoil & compost lift X3A QUANT: CU. YDS. — Amend = cv- yards 11,000 sq. I _ Stockpile tmd amend XL_,000 say$ (____y& c"bit sage Amemdroe w MULCH ,000 sift. PRODUCT - RODUCT-cubic,-N& cubic %-N&Undch QUANT: CU. YDS_ TOTAL A'1 YNDMENTMOPS4?11.J1111111117 MR At.1. AREAS f intni oil xro ; unpoLel o n1ky:. er. Ydr. ❑ Test Rooth: % Grzanic sat" r C.N ratio -M., r35, t for native baht -- `•r U Pre&jct tel: _ -_- ❑ 0"amy: M safe. U Test Remlhe % o Ma f • � S j..ftjM6YC lauds `arbderat w is "t•try nobw U h duel eel. a Quaff: ra. >4s, t3 Teal Rtisalb; % ort•ame Man" CN ratio -2$r:1 (-;_35:1 fiat Mbvr lent) -wMkT t ^ to I'vtry sisble^ Dries; linpcto. AApprroorvYe•dd:s RRrevrilsli tas Required. Dow. red: Dae 1n 13 i FIELD GUIDE TO VERIFYING SOIL DEPTH AND QUALITY IN NEW LANDSCAPES • • This guide is provided to help professional inspectors verify implementation of soil improvements to fulfill BMP T5.13 Soil Quality and Depth in the Western Washington Stormwater Manual. The main conditions to be confirmed are: 1. Provision of eight inches of topsoil containing 10% organic matter in planting beds, or 5% in turf areas. 2. Scarification of compacted subsoil four inches below the topsoil layer (for a total uncompacted depth of 12 inches). 3. Placement of two inches of mulch on all planting beds. Site Inspection Supplies • A copy of the approved Soil Management Plan (SMP) for the site, with site drawing. • A sturdy shovel • Tape measure or 12" ruler • 3/8 inch diameter 3-4 foot stainless steel "rod penetrometer" with a 1/8" bevel cut into the tip at 30 degrees from the side, and a 90 degree bend at top to form a handle. • Field Verification Form to record results The following steps may be completed at multiple visits as a project progresses or in one final project approval inspection, depending on local practices. • Site location and permit holder, • Turf and planting areas match approved drawings. • Areas to remain as undisturbed native soil and vegetation have been fenced off during construction to prevent soil compaction or damage to plants. Inspect deTlvery ticicts for3eomp6s r ';• r �. fopsail and mulches: Permitee must provide original delivery tickets for all soil and mulch products. Compare delivery tickets with the SMP to match the following information: • Delivery location. • Total quantities for each soil product and mulch. • Product descriptions and sources. If materials other than those listed in the SMP were delivered, laboratory test results must be provided to confirm that they are equivalent to approved products. MULCH LOOSE SOIL wish volhlr L61k tKL'�itlir �Ilsllt'•T LOOSE OR FRACTURED compare site conAltlft withapproved Soil Management Plan (SMP). SUBSOIL The SNIP approved with the site permit describes soil treatments approved for each area. Make sure site conditions match these details in the SMP: 14 Tett kern %V,*LJ to s>s = decs —rt[r finl x 1F m 0 • Verify Depth of Amended Soil and Scarification Use a shovel to dig at least one test hole per acre for turf and one per acre for planting beds to verify eight inch topsoil depth (below mulch layer), incorporation of amendments, and four inches of uncompacted subsoil. Eight Inch Depth of Amended Soil. The top eight inches of soil should be easy to dig using a garden spade driven solely by your weight- The soil should be darker than unamended soil below and particles of added organic matter are likely to be visible. Clay soil that has been saturated and then dried may require jumping on the shovel step to penetrate, but the soil should yield easily when moist. Soil that requires vigorous chipping with a shovel to penetrate probably does not meet the specification. Four Inch Depth of Scarified Subsoil. The next four -inch depth of soil should be loose enough to penetrate with a shovel. It may be rocky, and the loosened depth may vary due to the pattern of scarifying equipment—but some sections of subsoil in a one foot square hole should be loose four inches deep - Check Soil Depot In Sevel'al Spats Use a simple "rod penetrometer" (illustration) to confirm that the soil is uncompacted twelve inches deep at ten locations per acre—with a minimum of ten on smaller sites. To locate test spots, imagine a line dividing the site (or each acre) in half lengthwise, then divide each half into five nearly equal sections. Conduct tests near the middle of each section. • Rod penetrometer should enter the soil twelve inches deep, driven solely by the inspector's weight- Irregular scarification or rocks in the lower layer may require probing a few spots at each location to reach the full depth. Check Mulch Depth Use a shovel to scrape away and reveal surface mulch thickness. A two inch deep layer of organic material such as composted sawdust, wood chips, or ground bark should be distinguished from the underlying soil on all planting beds. 15 Vtrifying Soil Depth and Quality ERRM MULCH .... V1. LOOSE -SO-11- ", OIL", i:rl ti ;i% -iari- 1rrrtIFPI' 11. iA ItY LOOSE OR FRACTURED SUBSOIL jhwtr!tr il]irkii N] t}-Irr 7.,'r3 lir! n -n Irr" Ir. Im t2 r1ikr 3 t,RJr nr 1' fi ljer tr- hex! lis %it wn !t 3.#rt !trt v>t 6hir it lmt m. What should be attached to the Soil Management Plan? • Scale drawings showing layout of turf and planting beds, and identifying where soil treatments described in the SMP will be applied- * Copies of compost and topsoil test results demonstrating that products contain adequate organic matter, and meet carbon to nitrogen ratio and stability standards. • Where custom calculated amendment rates are used, include laboratory analyses of the soil and organic matter sources plus calculations by a qualified professional showing that the organic matter requirement will be achieved. What If A Site Does Not Meet the SMP Requirements? If inspection indicates that an installation does not fulfill the approved SMP, the permit holder or their agent should be notified ofwbat steps are needed to comply. When results are unclear or disputed, an independent consultant should conduct sampling for analytical of testing organic matter as described in the project specifications- Qualified consultants include Certified Soil Scientists, Crop Advisors or Agronomists, or Licensed Landscape Architects, Civil Engineers or Geologists). Is • 0 1 Verifying Soil Depth and Quality MODEL "FIELD VERIFICATION FORM" FOR BMP T5.13 MODEL-VWL.D VrRIFW-k-nON FORM- FOR BRAT T3-13 PROJECT WFORA1AT1ON lige at of —}taus Camspicit all imforrsalim oe pase 1. soly site addrm mad permit somber on sdditiaaal poem Site Addreal: PC -14 T eek Nrwber. rerystH llalder Maw AA&ess- cussomer Alchase Pl.a arrd VlRtrr IZ wIrinan Dow lagwcl.r: brow Approved; w Fcocbg W1 aedlNurbed areae � Soil prspank" Und6ko%W veywtiea Number Test lHohn Rsgsirs+d; Md DO= hupeHor: htm Approved: _ 1'e*e6t off tmdnrtarbW suss _ Sssi preparodIo■ NW&Y"sely, so "Wwy stabil' X23% hose -cwm Ll M akh Otbew DOW bnpcow-- Items Apprvrod: w Feariss off tmdtst otw threat , SaA prop"We 0 Product At Mrlri DVLiVURY TICKGTS FOR COMPOST. TOPSOIL t MULCH. Check if ikkets Soa mgmt pbm ❑ Produd ilx Red Tat Und6ko%W veywtiea Number Test lHohn Rsgsirs+d; ❑ Test R awl= % aromir manrr CIN ratio 43--1 NW&Y"sely, so "Wwy stabil' X23% hose -cwm Ll Quamtky. M ydB. 35.1 Iter waives. Not to E!th 0 Product At Sro I] AltteadMON YAbk ? ❑ Test Resol % argasir mouse _C:N rotie 4*5:1 -mederasely" to -vwy stable" _43% uses -4303 ❑ Qwoi2ft. ra yam. 5:1 £or natives, Not to i:addr L) prodlo t R!: ❑ Tat Resdtaz _ % wrath a rw _C:N rwo 43:1 llw deraw w -Vtry Aabww ,�1257i fis" cum ❑ Oa■wtwVt ccs. Yds. (35;1 for tr dvct. Not KnAv to tnicltl ■&VA s 1PL4hTwG TYM Tal Boles Red Tat Und6ko%W veywtiea Number Test lHohn Rsgsirs+d; N Rad Tato d-. _ _ T1td (anhimu h 1 We ha*) {kirks 10 casts lercas) — Pbnd8 Bede Sell Anwaded 0 lscbm D"*? Y ! N Rad pewebwrea 12 is 1 es dlrsgr im s! :resat Ulltor Asesdoemi ME" $a 3 XmL Sun? Y I N Y I N Q TOPKA Sro I] AltteadMON YAbk ? $abs L. Iliad ll I • ! Mtrkb! Meld two beth detpf V ! N Commea6t ARRA AV r1ANTM TM Tad licks Rad rest _ Urrdnavbed wSetstiao Bossier Test Asks Rgrired: Nam bbd Two sd: _ Twf (m6irnwa 1 is k fwot) (ao,ipaapt 10 teaks lww) _PIMAiFig BOLI 8" AAsuded 0 hcbn Deep? Y 1 N Ibd peuetraerl 12' [11 1 dear i AN area? Qchw aLmrsdoest moth Seth him rias? Y! H Y !Tri D TopKa Pro&xl ? Squaref D Mtcadowmt Yml& ? Sabsos'1 Lo+sO&mri!-red 12 larks? 1 1 N MsAcw Mtdci two beck deep? V 1 N C®em: BEV RESOURCES MODEL SOIL AMENDMENT SP CiFICATIONS: APWA AND ICS FORMATS LOCATED IN THE BACK Compost from many of these Facilities is sold and mixtd into topsoil products through numerous retail outlets. County Facility Name Contact Telephone City Feedstock Materials Mason Clallam City of Port Angeles Jeff Young (360) 417-4845 Port Angeles Yard Waste/Biosolids Carrie Gregory Jefferson City of Pt. Townsend John Merchant (360) 385-7908 Pt. Townsend Yard Waste (42 5) 864-1645 Roy Compost Facility NW Organics King Cedar Grove Compost Katie Bach (415) 432-2395 Maple Valley Yard Waste Yard Waste Sawdust Supply Co. Douwe Dykstra (206) 622-4321 Seattle Yard Waste/Biosolids Livestock Manure Wood By-products Hi -Cl Howard KonZer (360) 856-4770 Sedro Wooley Chicken Manure Snohomish Livestock Manure Don Bailey (360) 568-8826 Soos Creek Organics John Sinclair (253) 639-0055 Covington Yard Waste Kitsap Emu Topsoil Ron Phillips (3 60) 779-5614 Poulsbo Emu/Horse Manure Mill Creek Yard Waste Riverside Topsoil Tina Flagstead (425) 379-9933 Snohomish Yard Waste/ Lewis Little Hanaford Farms Dennis Felt (360) 736-6673 Centralia Yard Waste/ Livestock Manure Mason No Permitted Compost Facilities Pierce LRI Compost Factory Carrie Gregory (253) 875-2104 Puyallup Yard Waste Wilcox Farms/ Eric Heunisch (42 5) 864-1645 Roy Chicken Manure/ NW Organics Yard Waste Skagit Skagit Soils John Zeilstra (3 60) 424-0199 Mt. Vernon Yard Waste Dkystra Farm Douwe Dykstra (360) 757-6376 Burlington Yard Waste/ Livestock Manure Hi -Cl Howard KonZer (360) 856-4770 Sedro Wooley Chicken Manure Snohomish Bailey Compost Don Bailey (360) 568-8826 Snohomish Yard Waste/ — Dairy Manure Pacific Topsoils, Inc Vikki Henry (425) 337-2700 Mill Creek Yard Waste Riverside Topsoil Tina Flagstead (425) 379-9933 Snohomish Yard Waste/ Dairy Manure Thurston (Pending Response) Whatcom IMS Frank Moscone (360) 384-1057 Ferndale Dried Poultry/Straw 17 • • • SECTION SEVEN SOIL AND COMPOST ANALYTICAL LABS SERVING WESTERN WASHINGTON A copy of OSU Bulletin EM 8677 "A List of Analytical Laboratories Serving Oregon" is located in the back of the manual. This bulletin identifies labs serving Washington and Idaho and can be viewed as PDF file at eesc.orst.edu/agcomwebfile/edmat/Em8677.pdf. EQUATION FOR CALCULATING. TO ACHIEVE A TARGET SOIL COMPOST APPLICATI0N RATES ORGANIC MATTER CONTENT Equation to calculate compost application rates to achieve a target organic matter content for a soil with a given bulk density and organic matter- The spreadsheet on the next page illustrates how the equation is applied on typical soils using common compost and materials. The actual spreadsheet tool is available for download. CR = D (X) Where: SBD (SOM% - FOMa/o) SBD (SOM% - FOM%) —CBD (COMO/o -FOM%) CR = Compost application rate (inches) D = Depth of incorporation (inches) SBD = Soil bulk density (Ib/cubic yard dry weight)* SOM% = Initial soil organic matter (%) FOM% = final target soil organic matter (9b] CBD = Compost bulk density (Ib/cubic yard dry weight) al COM% = Compost organic matter (%) 18 Assumption: This equation calculates compost rate using an additive approach. For example, a 3 -inch compost rate incorporated to an 8 -inch depth will be a final mix consisting of 3/8 compost and 5/8 soil by volume. * To convert soil bulk density in g/cm3 units to Ib/yard, multiply by 169T # To convert compost bulk density from Ibs./yard `as is" to lbs./yard dry weight, multiply by solids content. • SECTION SEVEN MODEL AMENDMENT RATE CALCULATOR SPREADSHEET WITH EXAMPLES Excel file available for download Sandy Soil sbd som% :` fom% : cbd com% D CR Soil bd= 1.3 g/cm3 2206 1 10 660 60 8 3"0 - - .2206 2 10 660 60 8 2.8 2206 3 10 660 60 8 3 2.6 2206 § 4 10 660 �x 60 } 8 t 2-3 2206 5 10 ' 660 60 8 2.0 71 2206 ` 6 10 660 60 8 1.7 2206 7 10 660 r i 60 8 1 Y 31.3 r1 2206 8 5 10 660 ', 60 8 < _ t 0.9 Clay Soil 1697 1 10 550 .150 8 3.3 Soil bd = 1-0 g/cm3 `=: 1697 2 10 ' 550 50 $ 3.1 1697 3 10 550 50 $ , 2-8 { 1697 4 10 550 i,X50 8 2.5 . t 1697 5 1D 550 z 50 8 ` 2.2 1697 6 10 '= 550 50 8 71.9 F 1697 7 10 550 50 1697 8 10 550 ' 50 8 -' sbd = soil bulk density ()b/yard dry wt) som%= initial soil organic matter (%) fom% = target final soil organic matter (%) _- --cbd -�st-buck-density (lb/yd dry wt) - com% = compost organic matter (%) D = depth of incorporation CR = calculated compost application rate 19 SECTION SEVEN 20 Background Science —'Compost Utilization for Erosion Control" from U. GA • Proceedings of the 1998 Salmon in the City conference: Cooperative Extension, depts.washington.edu/cuwrm/ UW Center for Urban Water www.ces.uga.edu/pubcd/B1200.htm Resources Management website. Look under "Links" to —"Erosion Control and Environmental Uses for download conference proceedings- Site also includes many Compost" by Rod Tyler et al other research papers on the effects of urbanization, stream www.p2pays.org/ref/11/1015810.pdf restoration techniques, trials of permeable paving products, —"Compost Coverage" in Erosion Control journal, and related topics. May/June 2001 • The Relationship Between Soil and Water; How SoilAmendments wAw. forester- net/ec 0105 com ost-html and Compost Can Aid in Salmon Recovery, a multi -agency report ---"Restoring Soil Health To Urbanized Lands" Oregon available on the King County website at DEQ, esp. pp14-19 on compost berm and blanket trials, dnr.metrokc.gov/swd/ResRecy/Soi]&H20.pdf and p. 26 for specifications www.deg-state.or.us/wmc/solwaste/documents/restor ingsoilhealth.pdf Compost Quality and Use —"The Use of Compost in Highway Construction" Texas DOT website includes photo examples and specifications • WA Dept, of Ecology, Solid Waste & Compost information: www.dot.state.tx.us/insdtdot/orgchart/des/landscape/ www_ecy.wa.gov/programs/swfa/swhome.html compost/topsoii.htm • Proposed WAC Chapter 173-350 on Compost Facilities and Quality: www.ecy.wa.gov/laws-rules/wacl73304/p9924a.pdf Am moli • See the Interim Guidelines for Compost Quality at: Soil Biology and Soil Functions. www.ecy.wa.gov/biblio/94038-html • Washington Organic Recycling Council / Soils for Salmon. www.compostwashinglon.ore Background and up to date Why Soil L.ife Matters • ,Soil Biology Primer. US Dept. of Agriculture, NRCS Soil information on Soils for Salmon initiative, and links on compost use and soil restoration. Quality Institute Download this excellent illustrated guide • Guidelines for Landscaping with Compost -Amended Soils, at soils.usda. ov/s Vsoil biolo .htm. or order rant copies p p City of Redmond Public Works. A useful study including soil from 1 -$00 -THE SOIL amendment costs/benefits. Fallow link at bottom of web page • Washington State University"Soil Biology" 2001 conference www.ci.redmond.wa.us/insidecityhall/publicworks/environ proceedings, slideshows, ment/education.asp www-pupilup.wsu.edu/sodmmt/SoAbio]o PPT slides.htm • Soil Foodweb Inc. site provides good basic information and updates on soil organisms and their functions, soil biological analyses, compost tea, and more. www.soilfoodweb.com/ Compost Berms and Blankets for Erosion Control • For More Information Contact: Biocycle journal at www.biocyck.net/ Search the index for various articles, especially "Compost Filter Berms and Blankets Washington Organic Recycling Council Take on the Silt Fence" by Rod Tyler, Biarycle: Vol. 42; No. 1, www-compostwashing_ton.org/ (360) 754-2085 January 2001 info@compostwashington.org • Search the internet for "Compost berms and compost blankets". Good online articles include: 20 �J 0 • SECTION SEVEN 21 • ST 1,0f ST 1.0 LA 0.9 LA 1,0 LA 1.2 ST 1.1 ' , lA�s� _ a�- T r4 ax LA 0.8 _ {■ STi0 NOr115H [OVNTY ■T KING UOU NTV y SF.STTCE ' AE hdONO r. 'a 'tip * \ 1 f I _ RILL �Illne ac } - III/ ' SEATTLE- ' orNT � 7 Tot w xl P.� TAC gyro ;_• �R�' �� c I� ST 1.1 <71 Ij'---yL-'•�— -- kEYlt f 1l 403r \ ,• PIE RtE couHLv 6 Iq C3 wi nr:,s rUL< LANDSBURG ST 1.0 NVN[UM ST 1.0/ Rainfall Regions and LA 0.8 Regional Scale Factors LA 0.9 Incorporated Area LA 1.0 River/take - Major Road LA 1.2 \� l 1 v RI SrC� �� iMDOV v'[,N �1 i of 3•CN � � I� wi nr:,s rUL< LANDSBURG ST 1.0 NVN[UM ST 1.0/ Rainfall Regions and LA 0.8 Regional Scale Factors LA 0.9 Incorporated Area LA 1.0 River/take - Major Road LA 1.2 SECHON S.3 DE MNTION FACILITIES Riser Overflow The nomograph in Figure 5.3AH can be used to determine the head (in fect) above a riser of given diameter and for a given flow (usually the l 00 -year peak flow for developed conditions). 100 • u FIGURE 5.3A.H RISER INFLOW CURVES 21 18 15 12 10 1 HEAD IN FEET (measured from crest of riser) Qw.j,=9.739 DH 311 Q o<<r;c�=3.782 fJZ H112 0 in cfs, D and H in feet Slope change occurs at weir -orifice transition 10 9!1!98 1998 Surface Water Design Manual 5-SfF Fm� "1 33 30 27 24 21 18 15 12 10 1 HEAD IN FEET (measured from crest of riser) Qw.j,=9.739 DH 311 Q o<<r;c�=3.782 fJZ H112 0 in cfs, D and H in feet Slope change occurs at weir -orifice transition 10 9!1!98 1998 Surface Water Design Manual 5-SfF • • • 6.4.1 WT•TFONDS -- BASK AND LARGE—,VE-THODS OFANAC.YSIS FIGURE 6.4-1-A PRECIPITATION FOR INI LAN ANNUAL STORM .IN INCITES (FEET) ST 1.0% ST 1.0 LA 0.8 LA. 0.9 LA 1-0 LA 1.2 ST 1.1 –� F171mc = - F,Z � C � _ � . r ; : a: ¢ 1 J � 4 .✓�I 10.039') Incorporated Area 5 –c7-- River/Lake 0-47" — Major Road (0.0391) 0. 52 NOTE: Areas east of the eastemmost isopluvial should use 0-65 inches unless rainfall data is available for the location of interest f 0 (D4 7 . ) 7' The mean annual storm is a conceplual dorm lound by d -ding the annual preupnauon by the mal number DI storm evenls per year result, generates Large amounts of runoff. For this applicaijon. till soil types include Buckley and bedrock soils. and alluvial and outwash soils that have a seasonally hjeh water table or are underlain al a shallow depth Mess than 5 feet) by glacial till. U.S. Soil Conservation Service (SCS) hvdrolooic soil groups that are classified as till soils include a few S. most C. and all D soils. See Chapler ; for classification of specific SCS sail types. 1998 Surface Water Design Manual 6-69 KCRTS Pond Modeling - North Pond Retention/Detention Facility Is Type of Facility: Detention Pond Side Slope: 3.00 H:1V Pond Bottom Length: 160.00 ft Pones Bottom Width: 124.00 ft Pond Bottom Area: 19840. sq. ft Top Area at 1 ft. FS: 28237, sq. ft 0.648 acres Effective Storage Depth: 3.50 ft Stage 0 Elevation: 0.00 ft Storage Volume: 80392. cu. ft 1.846 ac --ft Riser Head: 3.50 ft Riser Diameter: 12.00 inches Number of orifices: 2 Full Head Pipe Orifice # Height Diameter Discharge Diameter (ft) (in) (CFS) (in) 1 0.00 3.06 0.475 2 1.70 3.56 0.461 6.0 Top Notch Weir: Rectangular Length: 2.40 in Weir Height: 2.50 ft Outflow Rating Curve: None Stage Elevation Storage Discharge Percolation Surf Area (ft) (ft) (cu. ft) (ac -ft) (cfs) (cfs) (sq. ft) 0.00 0.00 0_ 0.000 0.000 0.00 19840. 0.03 0.03 596. 0.014 0.045 0.00 19891. 0.06 0.06 1194. 0.027 0.064 0.00 19942. 0.10 0.10 1993. 0.046 0.079 0.00 20011. 0.13 0.13 2594. 0.060 0.091 0.00 20062. 0.16 0.16 3196. 0.073 0.101 0.00 20114- 0.19 0.19 3800_ 0.087 0.111 0.00 20165. 0.22 0.22 4406. 0.101 0.120 0.00 20217. 0.26 0.26 5216. 0.120 0.128 0.00 20285. 0.36 0.36 7253. 0.167 0.151 0.00 20458. 0.46 0.46 9308. 0.214 0.171 0.00 20631. 0.56 0.56 11380. 0.261 0.189 0.00 20806. 0.66 0.66 13469. 0.309 0.206 0.00 20980. 0.76 0.76 15576. 0.358 0.221 0.00 21156. 0.86 0.86 17700. 0.406 0.235 0.00 21332. 0.96 0.96 19842_ 0.456 0.248 0.00 21509. 1.06 1.06 22002_ 0.505 0.261 0.00 21687. 1.16 1.16 24180. 0.555 0.273 0.00 21865. 1.26 1.26 26375. 0.605 0.285 0.00 22044. 1.36 1.36 28588. 0.656 0.296 0.00 22224. 1.46 1.46 30820. 0.708 0.306 0.00 22405. 1.56 1.56 33069. 0.759 0.317 0.00 22586. 1.66 1.66 35337. 0.811 0.327 0.00 22768. 1.70 1.70 36249, 0.832 0.331 0.00 22841. 1.74 3._74 37164, 0.853 0.338 0.00 22914- 1.77 1.77 37853. 0.869 0.351 0.00 22969. 1.81 1.81 38773. 0.890 0.371 0.00 23042. KCRTS Pond Modeling -- North Pond ---------------------------------- Route Time Series through Facility Inflow Time Series File:dev.tsf Outflow Time Series Fil.e:pond.tsf 1.85 7._85 39696. 0.911 0.395 0.00 23116. 1.89 1.89 40622, 0.933 0.426 0.00 23189. 1.92 1.92 41319. 0.949 0.460 0.00 23244. 1.96 1.96 42250. 0.970 0.531 0.00 23318- 2.00 2.00 43184. 0.991 0.546 0.00 23392- 2-10 2.10 45532. 1_045 0.584 0.00 23S77- 2-20 2.20 47899. 1.100 0.619 0.00 23763. 2.30 2.30 50285. 1.154 0.650 0.00 23950- 2.40 2.40 52689. 1.210 0.680 0.00 24137. 2.50 2.50 55113. 1.265 0.709 0.00 24325. 2.60 2.60 57554. 1.321 0.754 0.00 24514. 2.70 2.70 60015. 1.378 0.808 0.00 24703. 2.80 2.80 62495. 1.435 0.862 0.00 24893. 2.90 2.90 64994. 1.492 0.910 0.00 25084. 3.00 3.00 67512, 1.550 0.974 0.00 25276. 3.10 3.10 70049_ 1.608 1.040 0.00 25468. 3.20 3.20 72606. 1.667 1.110 0.00 25661. 3.30 3.30 75182. 1.726 1.190 0.00 25855. 3.40 3.40 77777, 1.786 1.270 0.00 26050. 3.50 3.50 80392. 1.846 1.350 0.00 26245. 3.60 3.60 83026. 1.906 1.680 0.00 26441. 3.70 3.70 85680. 1.967 2.260 0.00 26638, 3.80 3.80 88353. 2.028 3.010 0.00 26835, 3.90 3.90 91047. 2.090 3.820 0.00 2'1033- 4.00 4.00 93760. 2.152 4.120 0.00 27232- 4.10 4.10 96493_ 2.215 4.390 0.00 27432. 4.20 4.20 99246_ 2.278 4.640 0.00 27632. 4.30 4.30 102020. 2.342 4.880 0.00 27833. 4.40 4.40 104813. 2.406 5.100 0.00 28035- 4.50 4.50 107627, 2.471 5.310 0.00 28237- 4.60 4.60 110460. 2.536 5.510 0.00 28440. 4.70 4.70 113315, 2.601 5.700 0.00 28644. 4.80 4.80 116189. 2.667 5.890 0.00 26849. 4.90 4.90 119084. 2.734 6.060 0.00 29054. 5.00 5.00 122000. 2.801 6.240 0.00 29260. 5.10 5.10 124936. 2.868 6.400 0.00 2.9467- 5.20 5.20 127893. 2.936 6.570 0.00 29674. 5.30 5.30 130871. 3.004 6.720 0.00 29862. 5.40 5.40 133870_ 3.073 6.880 0.00 30091. 5.50 5.50 136890_ 3.143 7.030 0.00 30301. Hyd Inflow Outflow Peak Storage Target Calc Stage Elev (Cu -Ft) (Ac -Ft) 1 4.28 ******* 2.99 3.80 3.80 88291. 2.027 2 2.09 ******* 1.35 3.50 3.50 80359. 1.845 3 2.14 1.20 1.04 3.10 3.10 69950_ 1.606 4 2.25 ******* 0.94 2.94 2.94 66002_ 1.515 5 2.46 ******* 0.85 2.78 2.78 62117. 1.426 6 1.34 0.67 0.60 2.16 2.16 46914. 1.077 7 1.56 ******* 0.33 1.65 1.65 34998, 0.803 8 1.50 ******* 0.24 0.90 0.90 18489. 0.424 ---------------------------------- Route Time Series through Facility Inflow Time Series File:dev.tsf Outflow Time Series Fil.e:pond.tsf Inflow/Outflow Analysis Peak Inflow Discharge: Peak Outflow Discharge: Peak Reservoir Stage: Peak Reservoir Elev: Peak Reservoir Storage: KCRTS Pond Modeling --- North Pond 4.28 CFS at 6:00 on Jan 9 in Year 8 2.99 CFS at 10:00 on Jan 9 in Year 8 3.80 Ft 3.80 Ft 88291. Cu -Ft 2.027 Ac -Ft Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:pond.tsf Project Location:Sea-Tac --- Annual . Peak Flow Rates--- -----Flow Frequency Analysis------- FlowRate Rank Time of Peak - - Peaks - - Rank Return Prob (CFS) (CFS) (ft) Period 1.35 2 2/09/01 19:00 3.00 3.80 1 100.00 0.990 0.325 7 12/28/01 18:00 1.35 3.50 2 25.00 0.960 0.854 5 2/28/03 7:00 1.04 3.10 3 10.00 0.900 0.240 8 8/24/04 0:00 0.936 2.94 4 5.00 0.800 0.604 6 1/05/05 15:00 0.854 2.78 5 3.00 0.667 0.936 4 1/18/06 23:00 0.604 2.16 6 2.00 0.500 1.04 3 11/24/06 7:00 0.325 1.64 7 1.30 0.231 3.00 1 1/09/08 10:00 0.240 0.90 8 1.10 0.091 Computed Peaks 2.45 3.72 50.00 0.980 Flow Duration from Time Series File:pond.tsf Cutoff Count Frequency CDP Exceedence Probability CFS % % % 0.019 43743 71.336 71.336 28.664 0.287E+00 0.057 4477 7.301 78.637 21.363 0.214E+00 0.095 4106 6.696 85.333 14.667 0.147E+00 0.132 3067 5.002 90.334 9.666 0.967E-01 0.170 2055 3.351 93.686 6.314 0.631E-01 0.208 1323 2.158 95.843 4.157 0.416E-01 0.246 935 1.525 97.368 2.632 0.263E-01 0.283 596 0.972 98.340 1.660 0.166E-01 0.321 457. 0.735 99.075 0.925 0.925E-02 0.359 200 0.326 99.401 0.598 0.598E-02 0.397 48 0.078 99.480 0.520 0.520E-02 0.434 24 0.039 99.519 0.481 0.481E-02 0.472 14 0.023 99.542 0.458 0.456E-02 0.510 9 0.015 99.556 0.444 0.444E-02 0.548 20 0.033 99.589 0.411 0.411E-02 0.585 48 0.078 99.667 0.333 0.333E-02 0.623 44 0.072 99.739 0.261 0.261E-02 0.661 23 0.038 99.777 0.223 0.223E-02 0.699 20 0.033 99.809 0.191 0.191E-02 0.736 16 0.026 99.835 0.165 0.165E-02 0.774 22 0.036 99.871 0.129 0.129E-02 0.812 17 0.028 99.899 0.101 0.101E-02 0.850 15 0.024 99.923 0.077 0.766E-03 0.887 8 0.013 99.936 0.064 0.636E-03 0.925 9 0.415 99.951 0.049 0.489E-03 0.963 6 0.010 99.961 0.039 0.391E-03 1.00 3 0.005 99.966 0.034 0.342E-03 1.04 5 0.008 99.974 0.026 0.261E-03 1.08 3 0.405 99.979 0.021 0.212E-03 KCRTS Pond Modeling - North Pond Maximum negative excursion = 0.052 cfs (-12.3%) occurring at 0.422 cfs on the Base Data:exist.tsf and at 0.370 cfs on the New Data:pond.tsf ---------------------------------- Route Time Series through Facility Inflow Time Series File:dev_tsf Outflow Time Series File:pond inflow/Outflow Analysis Peak inflow Discharge: Peak Outflow Discharge: Peak Reservoir Stage: Peak Reservoir Elev: Peak Reservoir Storage: 4.28 CFS at 6:00 on Jan 9 in Year 8 2.99 CFS at 10:00 on Jan 9 in Year 8 3.80 Ft 3.80 Ft 88291, Cu -Ft 2.027 Ac -Ft Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:pond.tsf Project Location:sea-Tac ---Annual Peak Flow Rates_-- -----Flow Frequency Analysis ------- Flow Rate Rana Time of Peak - - Peaks - - Rank Return Prob (CFS) (CFS) (ft) Period 1.35 2 2/09/01 19:00 3.00 3.60 1 100.00 0.990 1.11 2 0.003 99.982 0.018 0.179E-03 1.15 1 0.002 99.984 0.016 0.163E-03 1.19 2 0.003 99.987 0.013 0.130E-03 1.23 0 0.000 99.987 0.013 0.130E-03 1.26 2 0.003 99.990 0.010 0.978E-04 1.30 2 0.003 99.993 0.007 0.652E-04 1.34 2 0.003 99.997 0.003 0.326E-04 Duration Comparison Anaylsis Base File: exist.tsf New File: pond.tsf Cutoff Units: Discharge in CFS -----Fraction of Time ----- ---------Check of Tolerance ------- Cutoff Base New 26Change Probability Base New WChange 0.337 0.82E-02 0.70E-02 -15.4 I 0.82E-02 0.337 0.327 -2.8 0.409 0.59E-02 0.50E-02 -14.6 I 0.59E-02 0.409 0.363 -11.3 0.480 0.47E-02 0.46E-02 -2.8 I 0.47E-02 0.480 0.451 -6.1 0.552 0.35E-02 0.40E-02 15.9 I 0.35E-02 0.552 0.574 4.0 0.624 f 0.27E-02 0.26E-02 -1.8 0.27E-02 0.624 0.621 -0.5 0.696 0.19E-02 0.20E-02 1.7 I 0.19E-02 0.696 0.697 0.2 0.768 0.14E-02 0.14E-02 0.0 I 0.14E-02 0.768 0.768 0.0 0.939 f 0.10E-02 0.85E-03 -16.1 I 0.10E-02 0.839 0.813 -3.2 0.911 0.73E-03 0.55E-03 -24.4 I 0.73E-03 0.911 0.866 -4.9 0.983 0.46E-03 0.38E-03 -17.9 I 0.46E-03 0.983 0.945 -3.9 1.05 0.26E-03 0.24E-03 -6.3 I 0.26E-03 1.05 1.04 -1.3 1.13 0.15E-03 0.18E-03 22.2 I 0.15E--03 1.13 1.19 5.3 1.20 0.65E-04 0.13E-03 100.0 I 0.65E-04 1.20 1.31 9.2 Maximum positive excursion = 0.112 cfs ( 9.7%) occurring at 1.16 cfs on the Base Data:exist.tsf and at 1.27 cfs on the New Data:pond.tsf Maximum negative excursion = 0.052 cfs (-12.3%) occurring at 0.422 cfs on the Base Data:exist.tsf and at 0.370 cfs on the New Data:pond.tsf ---------------------------------- Route Time Series through Facility Inflow Time Series File:dev_tsf Outflow Time Series File:pond inflow/Outflow Analysis Peak inflow Discharge: Peak Outflow Discharge: Peak Reservoir Stage: Peak Reservoir Elev: Peak Reservoir Storage: 4.28 CFS at 6:00 on Jan 9 in Year 8 2.99 CFS at 10:00 on Jan 9 in Year 8 3.80 Ft 3.80 Ft 88291, Cu -Ft 2.027 Ac -Ft Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:pond.tsf Project Location:sea-Tac ---Annual Peak Flow Rates_-- -----Flow Frequency Analysis ------- Flow Rate Rana Time of Peak - - Peaks - - Rank Return Prob (CFS) (CFS) (ft) Period 1.35 2 2/09/01 19:00 3.00 3.60 1 100.00 0.990 KCRTS Pond Modeling - North Pond 0.325 7 12/28/01 18:00 1.35 3.50 2 25.00 0.960 0.854 5 2/28/03 7:00 1.04 3.10 3 10.00 0.900 0.240 8 8/24/04 0:00 0.936 2.94 4 5.00 0.800 0.604 6 1/05/05 15:00 0.854 2.78 5 3.00 0.667 0.936 4 1/18/06 23:00 0.604 2.16 6 2.00 0.500 1.04 3 11/24/06 7:00 0.325 1.64 7 1.30 0.231 3.00 1 1/09/08 10:00 0.240 0.90 8 1.10 0.091 Computed Peaks 2.45 3.72 50.00 0.980 Flow Duration from Time Series File:pond.tsf Cutoff Count Frequency CDF Exceedence Probability CFS % % % 0.019 43743 71.336 71.336 28.664 0.287E+00 0.057 4477 7.301 78.637 21.363 0.214E+00 0.095 4106 6.696 85.333 14.667 0.147E+00 0.132 3067 5.002 90.334 9.666 0.967E-01 0.170 2055 3.351 93.686 6.314 0.631E-01 0.208 1323 2.158 95.843 4.157 0.416E-01 0.246 935 1.525 97.368 2.632 0.263E-01 0.283 596 0.972 98.340 1.660 0.166E-01 0.321 451 0.735 99.075 0.925 0.925E-02 0.359 200 0.326 99.401 0.598 0.598E-02 0.397 48 0.078 99.480 0.520 0.520E-02 0.434 24 0.039 99.519 0.481 0.481E-02 0.472 14 0.023 99.542 0.458 0.458E-02 0.510 9 0.015 99.556 0.444 0.444E-02 0.548 20 0.033 99.589 0.411 0.47.1E-02 0.585 48 0.078 99.667 0.333 0.333E-02 0.623 44 0.072 99.739 0.261 0.261E-02 0.661 23 0.038 99.777 0.223 0.223E-02 0.699 20 0.033 99.809 0.191 0.191E-02 0.736 16 0.026 99.835 0.165 0.165E-02 0.774 22 0.036 99.871 0.129 0.129E-02 0.812 17 0.028 99.899 0.101 0.101E-02 0.850 15 0.024 99.923 0.077 0.766E-03 0.887 8 0.013 99.936 0.064 0.636E-03 0.925 9 0.015 99.951 0.049 0.489E-03 0.963 6 0.010 99.961 0.039 0.391E-03 1.00 3 0.005 99.966 0.034 0.342E-03 1.04 5 0.008 99.974 0.026 0.261E--03 1.08 3 0.005 99.979 0.021 0.212E-03 1.11 2 0.003 99.982 0.018 0.179E-03 1.15 1 0.002 99-984 0.016 0.163E-03 1.19 2 0.003 99.987 0.013 0.130E-03 1.23 0 0.000 99.987 0.013 0.130E-03 1.26 2 0.003 99.990 0.010 0.978E-04 1.30 2 0.003 99.993 0.007 0.652E-04 1.34 2 0.003 99-997 0.003 0.326E-04 11 KCRTS Pond Modeling - South Pond Retention/Detention Facility Type of Facility: Detention Pond Side Slope: 3.00 B:IV Pond Bottom Length: 280.00 ft Ponca Bottom Width: 132.00 ft Pond Bottom Area: 36960. sq. ft Top Area at 1 ft. FB: 46053. sq. ft 1.057 acres Effective Storage Depth: 2.50 ft Stage 0 Elevation: 0.00 ft Storage Volume: 100313. cu. ft 2.303 ac -ft Riser Head: 2.50 ft Riser Diameter: 12.00 inches Number of orifices: 3 Full Head Pipe Orifice # Height Diameter Discharge Diameter (£t) (in) (CFS) (in) 1 0.00 2.88 0.356 2 1.20 3.75 0.435 6.0 3 1.60 2.25 0.130 6.0 Top Notch Weir: Rectangular Length: 1.25 in Weir Height: 1.95 ft Outflow Rating Curve: None Stage Elevation Storage Discharge Percolation Surf Area (ft) (ft) (cu. ft) (ac -ft) (cfs) (cfs) (sq. ft) 0.00 0.00 0. 0.000 0.000 0.00 36960. 0.03 0.03 1110. 0.025 0.039 0.00 37034- 0.06 0.06 2222. 0.051 0.055 0.00 37108. 0.09 0.09 3336. 0.077 0.067 0.00 37283, 0.12 0.12 4453. 0.102 0.078 0.00 37257. 0.15 0.15 5572. 0.128 0.087 0.00 37332. 0.18 0.18 6693. 0.154 0.095 0.00 37406. 0.21 0.21 7816, 0.179 0.103 0.00 37481. 0.24 0.24 8942. 0.205 0.110 0.00 37555. 0.34 0.34 12710. 0.292 0.131 0.00 37805. 0.44 0.44 16503. 0.379 0.149 0.00 38055. 0.54 0.54 20321. 0.466 0.165 0.00 38305. 0.64 0.64 24164, 0.555 0.180 0.00 38557- 0.74 0.74 28032. 0.644 0.194 0.00 38809. 0.84 0.84 31926. 0.733 0.206 0.00 39062- 0.94 0.94 35845. 0.823 0.218 0.00 39315. 1.04 1.04 39789_ 0.913 0.229 0.00 39570. 1.14 1.14 43758. 1.005 0.240 0.00 39825. 1.20 1.20 46153. 1.060 0.246 0.00 39978. 1.24 1.24 47754. 1.096 0.254 0.00 40081- 1.28 1.28 49359. 1.133 0.269 0.00 40183_ 1.32 1.32 50968, 1.170 0.290 0.00 40286. 1.36 1.36 52582_ 1.207 0.317 0.00 40389. 7._40 1.40 54199. 1.244 0.351 0.00 40491. 1.43 1.43 55415, 1.272 0.389 0.00 40569_ KCRTS Pond Modeling South Pond ---------------------------------- Route Time Series through Facility Inflow Time Series File_dev.tsf Outflow Time Series File:spond 1.47 1.47 57040_ 1.309 0.473 0.00 40672. 1.51 1_51 58669. 1.347 0.490 0.00 40775- 1.60 1.60 62349. 1.431 0.526 0.00 41007. 1.62 1.62 63170. 1.450 0.536 0.00 41059. 1.65 1.65 64403, 1.478 0.549 0.00 41137- 1-67 1.67 65226. 1.497 0.564 0.00 41189. 1.69 1.69 66050. 1.516 0.581 0.00 41241. 1.72 1.72 67289. 1.545 0.601 0.00 41318. 1.74 1.74 68116. 1.564 0.622 0.00 41370. 1.76 1.76 68944. 1.583 0.641 0.00 41422, 1.79 1.79 70187_ 1.611 0.653 0.00 41500. 1.89 1.89 74351. 1.707 0.699 0.00 41761, 1.95 1.95 76861_ 1.764 0.726 0.00 41917, 2.02 2.02 79801. 1.832 0.759 0.00 42100, 2.09 2.09 82755. 1.900 0.793 0.00 42284. 2.16 2.16 85721. 1.968 0.825 0.00 42467. 2.22 2.22 88274. 2.026 x.860 0.00 42625. 2.29 2.29 91264_ 2.095 0.896 0.00 42810. 2.36 2.36 94267. 2.164 0.933 0.00 42994. 2.43 2.43 97283. 2.233 0.970 0.00 43180. 2.50 2.50 100313. 2.303 1.010 0.00 43365- 2.60 2.60 104662. 2.403 1.350 0.00 43631. 2.70 2.70 109039, 2.503 1.940 0.00 43897. 2.80 2.80 113442_ 2.604 2.700 0.00 44164. 2.90 2.90 117871._ 2.706 3.520 0.00 44432. 3.00 3.00 122328. 2.808 3.820 0.00 44700. 3.10 3.10 126811. 2.911 4.110 0.00 44969- 3.20 3.20 131322. 3.015 4.370 0.00 45239- 3.30 3.30 135859. 3.119 4.610 0.00 45510. 3.40 3.40 140424, 3.224 4.840 0.00 45781. 3.50 3.50 145016. 3.329 5.060 0.00 46053. 3.60 3.60 149634. 3.435 5.260 0.00 46326. 3.70 3.70 154281. 3.542 5.460 0.00 46599. 3.80 3.80 158954. 3.649 5.660 0.00 468'13- 3.90 3.90 163655. 3.757 5.840 0.00 47148. 4.00 4.00 168384, 3.866 6.020 0.00 47424. 4.10 4.10 173140. 3.975 6.190 0.00 47700. 4.20 4.20 177924. 4.085 6.360 0.00 47977. 4.30 4.30 182736. 4.195 6.520 0.00 48255. 4.40 4.40 187575. 4.306 6.680 0.00 48534- 4.50 4.50 192443. 4.418 6.840 0.00 48813. Hyd Inflow Outflow Peak Storage Target Calc Stage E1ev (Cu -Ft) (Ac -Ft) 1 4.51 ******* 2.45 2.77 2.77 111992. 2.571 2 2.18 ******* 1.07 2.52 2.52 101133. 2.322 3 2.43 1.02 0.84 2.18 2.18 86784. 1.992 4 2.32 ******* 0.74 1.99 1.99 78435. 1.801 5 2.62 ******* 0.71 1.91 1.91 75261. 1.728 6 2.04 0.56 0.49 1.52 1.52 58987. 1.354 7 1.67 ******* 0.26 1.25 1.25 48236_ 1.107 8 1.68 ******* 0.20 0.78 0.7B 29764. 0.683 ---------------------------------- Route Time Series through Facility Inflow Time Series File_dev.tsf Outflow Time Series File:spond Inflow/Outflow Analysis 0 Peak Inflow Discharge: Peak Outflow Discharge: Peak Reservoir Stage: Peak Reservoir Elev: Peak Reservoir Storage: KCRTS Pond Modeling - South Pand 4.50 CFS at 6:00 on Jan 9 in Year 8 2.45 CFS at 10:00 on Jan 9 in Year 8 2.77 Ft 2.77 Ft 111992. Cu -Ft 2.571 Ac -Ft Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:spond.tsf 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 1.07 2 2/09/01 20:00 2.45 2.77 1 100.00 0.990 0.258 7 12/28/01 18:00 1.07 2.52 2 25.00 0.960 0.709 5 2/28/03 7:00 0.840 2.19 3 10.00 0.900 0.199 8 8/26/04 6:00 0.744 1.99 4 5.00 0.800 0.493 6 1/05/05 15:00 0.709 1.91 5 3.00 0.667 0.744 4 1/18/06 23:00 0.493 1.52 6 2.00 0.500 0.840 3 11/24/06 8:00 0.258 1.25 7 1.30 0.231 2.45 1 1/09/08 10:00 0.199 0.78 8 1.10 0.091 Computed Peaks 1.99 2.71 50.00 0.980 Flow Duration from Time Series File:spond_tsf Cutoff Count Frequency CDF Exceedence_Probabi.lity CFS 0.015 40114 65.417 65,417 34.583 0.346E+00 0.045 4738 7.727 73.144 26.856 0.269E+00 0.075 4616 7.526 80.672 19.328 0.193E+00 0.105 3761 6.133 86.805 13.195 0.132E+00 0.135 2958 4.824 91.629 8.371 0.837E-01 0.165 1931 3.149 94.778 5.222 0.522E-01 0.195 1172 1.911 96.689 3.311 0.331E-01 0.225 898 1.464 98.154 1.846 0.185E-01 0.254 533 0.869 99.023 0.977 0.977E-02 0.284 131 0.214 99.237 0.763 0.763E-02 0.314 93 0.152 99.388 0.612 0.612E-02 0.344 66 0.108 99.496 0.504 0.504E-02 0.374 30 0.049 99.545 0.455 0.455E-02 0.404 21 0.034 99.579 0.421 0.421E-02 0.434 11 0.018 99.597 0.403 0.403E-02 0.464 20 0.033 99.630 0.370 0.370E-02 0.494 40 0.065 99.695 0.305 0.305E-02 0.524 28 0.046 99.741 0.259 0.259E-02 0.554 19 0.031 99.772 0.228 0.22SE-02 0.583 11 0.018 99.790 0.210 0.210E-02 0.613 10 0.016 99.806 0.194 0.194E-02 0.643 10 0.016 99.822 0.178 0.178E-02 0.673 24 0.039 99.861 0.139 0,139E-02 0.703 19 0.031 99.892 0.108 0.108E-02 0.733 12 0.020 99.912 0.088 0.881E--03 0.763 16 0.026 99.938 0.062 0.620E-03 0.793 8 0.013 99.951 0.049 0.489E-03 0.823 7 0.011 99.962 0.038 0.375E-03 KCRTS Pond Modeling - South Pond 0.853 6 0.010 99.972 0.028 0.277E-03 0.883 3 0.005 99.977 0.023 0.228E-03 0.912 3 0.005 99.982 0.018 0.179E-03 0.942 1 0.002 99.984 0.016 0.163E-03 0.972 4 0.007 99.990 0.010 0.978E-04 1.00 3 0.005 99.995 0.005 0.489E-04 1.03 1 0.002 99.997 0.003 0.326E-04 1.06 1 0.002 99.998 0.002 0.163E-04 Duration Comparison Anaylsis 0.574 0.596 3.9 Base File: pre.tsf 26.7 I 0.15E-02 0.634 New File: spond.tsf 0.11E-02 0.11E-02 7.7 0.11E-02 Cutoff units: Discharge in CFS 1.6 0.77E-03 Cutoff 0.274 0.334 0.394 0.454 0.514 0.574 0.634 0.694 0.754 0.814 0.874 0.934 0.994 1.05 -----Fraction of Time ----- -----------Check of Tolerance Base New %Change Probability Base New %Change 0.87E-02 0.83E-02 -4.3 0.87E-02 0.274 0.268 -2.3 0.62E-02 0.54E-02 -11.9 I 0.62E-02 0.334 0.313 -6.1 0.48E-02 0.43E-02 -11.5 I 0.48E-02 0.394 0.355 -9.8 0.36E-02 0.38E-02 5.5 I 0.36E-02 0.454 0.474 4.4 0.27E-02 0.27E-02 -1.8 I 0.27E-02 0.514 0.512 -0.3 0.20E-02 0.22E-02 6.5 I 0.20E-02 0.574 0.596 3.9 0.15E-02 0.19E-02 26.7 I 0.15E-02 0.634 0.668 5.4 0.11E-02 0.11E-02 7.7 0.11E-02 0.694 0.705 1.6 0.77E-03 0.68E-03 -10.6 0.77E-03 0.754 0.743 -1.5 0.47E-03 0.42E-03 -10.3 0.47E-03 0.814 0.803 -1.4 0.26E-03 0.23E-03 -12.5 0.26E-03 0.874 0.870 -0.4 0.16E-03 0.16E-03 0.0 0.16E-03 0.934 0.949 1.6 0.65E-04 0.65E-04 0.0 0.65E-04 0.994 1.00 0.8 0.16E-04 0.16E-04 0.0 0.16E-04 1.05 1.07 1.6 Maximum positive excursion = 0.047 cfs ( 7.9%) occurring at 0.596 cfs on the Base Data:pre.tsf and at 0.643 cfs on the New Data:spond.tsf Maximum negative excursion = 0.040 cfs (-10.326) occurring at 0.386 cfs on the Base Data:pre_tsf and at 0.347 cfs on the New Data:spond.tsf L' Shamrock Property Soil Management Plan is Option 1 Amend Existing Soil In -Place • • Onsite Topsoil Calculations Description Qty Unit Notes Total Strippings 43,316 bcy Native topsoil Qty required for lot fill 26,770 be subgrade, lots to 2' below plan Qty required for mined material replacement 11,000 bcy Qty required to restore Tract B to Total onsite fill required 102,927 bcy existing grade after mining of structural material is mined Qty available to fill park from existing to finish grades 5,546 bcy 115,046 bcy required to fill park Total material deficit 68.115 be from existing to finish grades Cut/Fill Calculations Description Qtv Unit Notes Total onsite cut available after stripping 34,812 bcy ROW to subgrade and tracts to subgrade, lots to 2' below plan finish grade Total onsite fill required 102,927 bcy ROW to subgrade and tracts to subgrade, lots to 2' below plan finish grade Total material deficit 68.115 be Total common fill required in park after mining is replace, 15,046 Structural material mined onsite 11,000 bcy Material mined from Tract B Total structural import required 42,069 be Total common fill import required 9,500 bcy Material required to grade Tract B to plan finish grade r� u • 0 Shamrock —Technical Information Report 5 CONVEYANCE SYSTEM ANALYSIS & DESIGN All conveyance systems will be designed in accordance with the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM). All systems will be analyzed during the 100 -year design storm event and show that no catch basin or swale system overflows or floods at any point. 5.1 Pipe System The KCBW program sums the flows tributary to each reach (pipe) and then performs a standard step backwater analysis on the network. The steady state energy equation (Bernoulli equation) is used along each reach in the network. The friction slope is calculated by averaging Manning's equation at the upstream and downstream ends of the pipe. The hydraulic grade line is calculated from downstream to upstream. Flows to each catch basin have been determined using the KCRTS 100 -year developed storm event. To be conservative, for pipes that empty into swales, the tailwater elevation is assumed to be at the crown of the pipe. The following tables show the flow tributary to each catch basin or swale as well as the areas used to determine the flows. The tributary area (time series file) corresponds to the Catch Basin/Swale Tributary Area Exhibit located at the end of this section. ©512612004 ,fob ##01-159 Page 5-1 • • • Shamrock - Technical Information Report North Pond - Tributary Areas Tributary Area (time series file) Imp. Areas (acres) Grass Pasture Total 2- year Flows (cfs) 10- 25- year year 100 - year n c1.tsf 0.26 0.18 0.49 0.93 0.14 0.18 0.34 0.50 n c2.tsf 0.52 0.36 0.91 1.79 027 0.35 0.66 0.98 n c3.tsf 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.06 0.08 0.12 0.15 n c4,tsf 0.09 0.00 OM 0.09 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.11 n c5_tsf 0.12 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.06: 0.08 0.11 0.14 n c6.tsf 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 n c7.tsf 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.05 0.07 0A9 0,12 n c8,tsf 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.11 n c9.tsf 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.09 0,04 0.06 0.08 0.11 n pc1O.tsf 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 n cl1.tsf 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 n c12.tsf 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.14 0.07 0.09 0.13 0.17 n c 13. tsf 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.04 0.05 0.07 0.09 n c14.tsf 0.41 0.29 1.54 2.23 0.27 029 0.62 0.95 n c15.tsf 0.15 0.00 0.00 0.15 0.07 0.10 0.14 0.18 n c16.tsf 0.39 0.00 0.44 0.83 0.19 025 0.41 0.55 n po17.tsf 0.18 0.00 0.25 0.43 0.09 0.12 0.19 0.26 n pcl8.tsf 0.11 0.08 0.55 0.74 0.08. 0.08 0.19 0.28 n c19.tsf 0.19 0.13 0.92 1.23 0.13 0.14 0.31 0.48 n c20.tsf 0.22 0.00 0.15 0.37 0.11 0.14 0.22 0.29 n c21.tsf 0.19 0.13 0.52 0.83 0.11 0.13 0.26 0.40 n c22.tsf 0.07 0.05 0.21 0.34 0.04 0,05 0.10 0.15 n c23.tsf 0.43 0.18 2.04 2.65 0.27 0.30 0.68 1.02 n c24_tsf 0.20 0.00 0.00 0,20 0.10 0.13 0.18 0.24 n c25.tsf 0,08 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.04: 0.05 0.07 0.09 n c26.tsf 0.31 0.00 0.00 0.31 0.15 0.20 0.28 0.37 n c27.tsf 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 n c28.tsf 0.25 0.00 0.00 0.25 0.12 0.16 0.23 0,30 n c29.tsf 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.02 0.03 0.05 0.06 n c30.tsf 0.15 0.10 0.33 0.58 0.08 0,10 0.20 0.30 n c3l.tsf 0.10 0.00 0,00 0.10 0,05 0.07 0.09 0.12 05126!2004 Page 5-2 Job #01-159 /TRIAD • • • Shamrock - Technical Information Report South Pond - Tributary Areas Tributary Area (time series file) Imp. Areas (acres) Grass Total 2- year Flows (cfs) 10- 25- year year 100 - year s c1.tsf 0.36 0.21 0.57 0.17 0.24 0.37 0.53 s c2.tsf 0.17 0.15 0.32 0.08 0.12 0.19 0.28 s c3.tsf 0.04 0.00 0.04 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 s c4.tsf 0.04 0.00 0.04 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 s c5.tsf 0.23 0.00 0.23 0.02 0.05 0.07 0.12 s c6.tsf 0.07 0.00 0.07 0.03 0.05 0.06 0.08 s c7.tsf 0.19 0.14 0.33 0.09 0.13 0.20 0.30 s c8.tsf 0.30 0.18 0.48 0.14 0.20 0.31 0.45 s c9.tsf 0.37 029 0.66 0.18 0.25 0.40 0.58 s c10.tsf 0.06 0.00 0.06 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.07 s c11.tsf 0.05 0.00 0.05 0.02 0.03 0.05 0.06 s c12.tsf 0.07: 0.00 0.07 0.03 0.05 0.06 0.08 s c13.tsf 0.04 0.00 0.04 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 s c14.tsf 0.05 0.00 0.05 0.02 0.03 0.05 0.06 s c15.tsf 0.26 0.18 0.44 0.12 0.17 0.27 0.40 s c16.tsf 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 s c17.tsf 0.17 0.14 0.31 0.08 0.11 0.18 0.27 s c18.tsf 0.02 0.00 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 s c19.tsf 0.19 0.16 0.35 0.09 0.13 0.21 0.31 s c20.tsf 0.12 0.03 0.15 0.06 0.08 0.12 0.16 s c21.tsf 0.27 0.13 0.40 0.13 0.18 0.27 0.38 s c22.tsf 022 0.00 0.22 0.11 0.14 0.20 0.26 s c23.tsf 0.03 0.00 0.03 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 s c24.tsf 0.33 0.19 0.52 0.16 0.22 0.34 0.49 s c25.tsf 0.38 0.25 0.63 0.18 025 0.40 0.57 s c26.tsf 0.24 0.13 0.37 0.11 0.16 0.25 0.35 s c27.tsf 0.24 0.09 0.33 0.12 0.16 0.24 0.33 s c28.tsf 0.22 0.11 0.33 0.11 0.15 0.22 0.32 s c29.tsf 0.07 0.00 0.07 0.03 0.05 0.06 0.08 s c30.tsf 0.37 0.24 0.61 0.18 0.25 0.39 0.56 s c31 _tsf 0.13 0.07 0.20 0.06 0.09 0.13 0.19 s c32.tsf 0.33 0.16 0.49 0.16 0.22 0.33 0.47 s c33.tsf 0.05 0.00 0.05 0.02 0.03 0.05 0.06 s c34.tsf 0.09 0.00 0.09 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.11 s c35.tsf 0.38 0.28 0.66 0.18 0.26 0.40 0.59 s c36Jsf 0.09 3.25* 3.34 0.13 0.26 0.48 0.78 *spc36.tsf includes an undeveloped offsite area. The 3.25 acres has been modeled assuming the current ground cover of pasture and not grass. 05/26/2004 Page 5-3 Job #01-159 TRIAD rI Shamrock -Technical Information Report The following tables show the freeboard at each catch basin. For catch basins with a single cross culvert draining into it, the sum of the flows has been assumed to be the inlet flow. For example, the in -flow at CB S-12 includes the flow tributary to CB S-13. The hydraulic grade line elevation is calculated using the 100 -year, developed storm event. North Pond - Freeboard Table CB # Rim Elevation feet HGL Elevation (feet) f=reeboard (feet) N-2 450.04 449.27 0.77 N-3 450.04 449.30 0.74 N-4 450.10 449.27 0.83 N-5 451.25 449.28 1.97 N-6 1 453.00 450.55 2.45 N-7 453.89 451.04 2.85 N-8 453.33 450.67 2.66 N-9 454.77 452.06 2.71 N-10 455.18 452.37 2.81 N-13 456.39 455.25 1.14 N-14 458.60 455.74 2.86 N-15 452.50 450.73 1.77 N-16 454.81 452.65 2.16 N-17 455.64 455.05 0.59 N-19 473.09 469.54 3.55 N-22 497.33 496.91 0.42 N-23 471.43 469.56 1.87 N-24 1 477.99 475.63 2.36 N-25 479.79 476.54 3.25 N-27 484.12 481.42 2.70 N-28 490.02 487.29 2.73 N-29 508.33 506.09 2.24 N-30 509.98 507.24 2.74 N-31 475.85 472.57 3.28 N-33 477.29 472.59 4.70 N-34 475.58 472.81 2.77 N-35 512.60 509.93 2.67 N-36 518.15 515.41 2.74 05!2612004/TRTAD Page 5-4 Job #01-159 • • 0 Shamrock -Technical Information Report South Pond - Freeboard Table CB # Rim Elevation feet HGL Elevation feet Freeboard feet S-3 439.45 438.73 0.72 S-5 439.03 438.92 0.11 S-7 440.78 439.12 1.66 S-8 441.95 439.17 2.78 S-9 441.96 439.21 2.75 S-10 439.36 439.19 0.20 S-11 439.36 439.19 0.20 S-12 440.04 439.41 0.63 S-14 443.12 441.07 2.05 S-16 447.24 445.26 1.98 S-18 455.11 453.41 1.70 S-19 460.71 458.38 2.33 S-20 467.19 463.27 3.92 S-23 454.77 453.69 1.08 S-25 457.32 454.54 2.78 S-25 456.93 455.03 1.90 S-26 457.86 455.49 2.37 S-28 459.36 456.79 2.57 S-30 460.52 458.03 2.49 S-31 463.82 461.28 2.54 S-32 471.70 469.15 2.55 S-33 483.37 480.52 2.85 S-34 494.39 491.49 2.90 S-37 463.27 459.47 3.80 S-41 467.19 463.27 3.92 S-42 478.45 475.88 2.57 3-43 479.91 477,28 2.63 S-44 482.31 479.65 2.66 S-45 490.05 487.15 2.90 S-49 475.34 472.37 2.97 05/26/2004 Page 5-5 Job #01-159 ITRJAD • is Shamrock — Technical Information Report In places where a curb break is not applicable to drain the street flow into the street side swale, an open grate catch basin is used. The largest flow entering such a catch basin is at the northwest corner of the intersection of 148t1i Avenue S.E. and S.E. 124'h Street. This catch basin could potentially receive 0.24 cfs during the 100 -year storm event. The KCBW program has been run on this pipe assuming the tailwater is 1 -foot above the downstream invert of the pipe. For an added level of safety, the culvert has been analyzed assuming an fl- inch diameter pipe. The hydraulic grade line at the upstream invert of the pipe is 396.91, which is 0.91 feet above the invert elevation. Therefore, any single culvert with a tributary flow less than 0.24 cfs will not overtop as long as the rim is at least 0.91 feet above the invert. ©5126/2004 Page 5-6 Job #01-159 /TRLAJ) .--�-'. Shamrock —Technical Information Report 10 5.2 Swale System Open swales lined with vegetated, amended soils, are used wherever possible as a means of • • surface water conveyance. The open swales are designed as wide as possible and as shallow as feasible to provide a natural appearance, while still providing adequate conveyance capacity. Slopes are designed to be less than S%, with flat areas and shallow berm to encourage ponding. Where feasible, swales are provided to convey runoff from access roadways. Runoff is introduced to these swales either by using a series of narrow curb drops, or by using shallow curb inlets and connecting pipe. A theoretical Swale section has been analyzed to ensure adequate capacity. This theoretical swale will use the narrowest cross section and the flattest slope to show that all swale sections have adequate capacity. The swale is rock lined in sections where high flow velocity could cause erosion. Please refer to the swale cross section below. OR1G1�'ltC �� GR4Uti'f)+1,VE ��, l GVER EXCAVA7 ACCUMMODA7t VA MEE Swale Section Not to Scale 0512612004 Page 5-7 Job #01-159 /TPJAD Shamrock—Technical Information Report Check dams are placed every 50 -feet. This will create areas where ponding will occur. The flow over the check dams is analyzed using a weir equation. The check dams are assumed to be 6 -inches high and 3 -feet wide. To be conservative, the side slopes are assumed to be 2:1 on both sides. Equation 5-1 from the KCSWDM is used to calculate the maximum flow over the check dam. Q = C(2g)1Jz/ LH"" + g 15 tan 9)H512 where: Q = peak flow (cfs) C = discharge coefficient (0.6) g = gravity (32.2 ft/sec) L = length of weir (feet) --> 3.0 feet H = height of water aver weir (feet) -) 0.5 feet B — angle of side slopes -), 2:1 Q (0.6X2x32.2)"71Y3x0_51" + gj5(2�.55/2 0 Q=4.31 cfs • The maximum flow over the check dam is 4.31 efs. The highest 100 -year developed flow that will flow to any ditch is the section east of lots 42-94, which is 3.41 cfs. Therefore all other swales with lesser flows will have adequate capacity. 05/26/2004 Page 5-8 Job #01-159I RIAD BACKWATER COMPUTER PROGRAM FOR PIPES Pipe data from file:pl.bwp Surcharge condition at intermediate junctions Tailwater Elevation:449. feet Discharge Range:5.9 to 5.9 Step of 1. [cfs] Overflow Elevation:455.64 feet Weir:NONE Upstream Velocity:3_ feet/sec OUTFALL N -15A 4 CB N-15 PIPE NO. 1: 46 LF -- 15"CP @ 11.41% OUTLET: 444.00 INLET: 449.25 INTYP: 5 JUNC NO. 1: OVERFLOW -EL: 452.50 BEND: 30 DEG DIA/WIDTH: 2.7 Q -RATIO: 0.08 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV_ * N -FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI 5.90 1.46 450.71 * 0.012 0.99 0.43 5.00 5.00 0.99 ***** 1.46 Cg N-15 4 CB N-16 PIPE NO, 2: 130 LF - 15"CP 9 1.58% OUTLET: 449.25 INLET: 451.31 INTYP: 5 TUNC NO. 2: OVERFLOW -EL: 454.81 BEND: 60 DEG DIA/WIDTH: 2.7 Q -RATIO: 0.01 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV_ * N -FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI w w w w w * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *www * * w * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * w w * w w * w * w w 5.48 1.34 452.65 * 0.012 0.95 0.72 1.46 1.46 0.95 ***** 1.34 • CB N-16 4 CN N-17 PIPE NO. 3: 40 LF _ 12"CP @ 2.70% OUTLET: 451.56 INLET: 452.64 INTYP: 5 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N -FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI 5.42 2.41 455.05 * 0.012 0.94 0.72 1.09 1.09 0.94 ***** 2.41 40 BACKWATER COMPUTER PROGRAM FOR PIPES 0 Pipe data from file:p2.bwp Surcharge condition at intermediate junctions Tallwater Elevation:449. feet Discharge Range:1.76 to 1.76 Step of 1. [cfs) Overflow Elevation:451.25 feet Weir:NONE Upstream Velocity:3_ feet/sec OUTFALL N -2A 4 CB N-2 PIPE NO, 1: 70 LF - 12"CP @ 4.20% OUTLET: 444.00 INLET: 446.94 INTYP: 5 JUNG NO. 1: OVERFLOW -EL: 450.04 BEND: 15 DEG DIA/WIDTH: 2.7 Q -RATIO: 6.04 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV_ * N -FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI 1.76 2.33 449.27 * 0.012 0.57 0.33 5.00 5.00 2.21 2.33 0.82 CB N-2 -�> CB N-4 PIPE NO. 2: 21 LF - 12"CP @ 0.48% OUTLET: 446.94 INLET: 447.04 INTYP: 5 JUNC NO. 2: OVERFLOW -EL: 450.10 BEND: 5 DEG DIA/WIDTH: 2.7 Q -RATIO: 0.79 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N -FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI **************************ww***www************************wwwww***ww*********** 0.25 2.23 449.27 * 0.012 0.21 0.21 2.33 2.33 2.23 2.23 0.28 • CB N-4 -> CB N-5 PIPE NO. 3: 117 LF - 12"CP @ 1.03% OUTLET: 447.04 INLET: 448.25 INTYP: 5 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N -FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI 0.14 1.03 449.28 * 0.012 0.16 0.13 2.23 2.23 1.03 0.89 0.13 0 BACKWATER COMPUTER PROGRAM FOR PIPES 0 Pipe data from file:p3.bwp Surcharge condition at intermediate junctions Tailwater Elevation:449.27 feet Discharge Range:1.36 to 1.36 Step of 1. [cfs] Overflow Elevation:450.04 feet Weir:NONE Upstream Velocity:3. feet/sec CB N-2 4 CB N-3 PIPE NO. 1: 23 LF - 12"CP @ 0.43% OUTLET: 446.94 INLET: 447.04 INTYP: 5 Q(CFS) HW (FT) HW ELEV. * N -FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI 1.36 2.26 449.30 * 0.012 0.50 0.53 2.33 2.33 2.26 2.19 0.57 • • BACKWATER COMPUTER PROGRAM FOR PIPES 0 Pipe data from file:p4.bwp Surcharge condition at intermediate junctions Tailwater Elevation:450.47 feet Discharge Range:0.54 to 0.54 Step of 1. [cfs] Overflow Elevation:455.18 feet Weir:NONE Upstream Velocity:3. feet/sec CB N -6A -) CB N-6 PIPE NO. 1: 106 LF - 1211CP @ 0.50% OUTLET: 449.47 INLET: 450.00 INTYP: 5 JUNC NO. 1: OVERFLOW -EL: 453.00 SEND: 90 DEC DIA/WIDTH: 2.7 Q -RATIO: 0.42 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N -FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI **********************www*ww*******************w*www*******************wwwwwwww 0.54 0.55 450.55 * 0.012 0.31 0.31 1.00 1.00 0.50 0.55 0.42 CB N-6 4 CB N-8 PIPE NO. 2: 32 LF - 12"CP @ 1.03% OUTLET: 450.00 INLET: 450.33 INTYP: 5 JUNC NO. 2: OVERFLOW -EL: 453.33 SEND: 5 DEG DIA/WIDTH: 2.7 Q -RATIO: 0.41 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N -FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI ****wwwwww**w*******w********x*x*xxwww**w*************x***wwww***************** 0.38 0.34 450.67 * 0.012 0.26 0.22 0.55 0.55 0.26 ***** 0.34 • CB N-8 '-'i CB N-9 PIPE NO. 3: 142 LF - 1211CP @ 1.01% OUTLET: 450.33 INLET: 451.77 INTYP: 5 JUNC NO. 3: OVERFLOW -EL: 454.77 SEND: 90 DEC DIA/WIDTH: 2.7 Q -RATIO: 0.35 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N -FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI *****************www********************xwwww*****************xwwwwwwwwwww***** 0.27 0.29 452.06 * 0.012 0.22 0.18 0.34 0.34 0.22 ***** 0.29 CB N-9 -) CB N-10 PIPE NO. 4: 21 LF - 1211CP @ 1.95% OUTLET: 451.77 INLET: 452.18 INTYP: 5 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N -FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI w****************wwww*********************wwww******************wwwwww*ww*w*ww* 0.20 0.19 452.37 * 0.012 0.19 0.14 0.29 0.29 0.19 ***** 0.14 0 BACKWATER COMPUTER PROGRAM FOR PIPES 0 Pipe data from file:p5_bwp Surcharge condition at intermediate junctions Tailwater Elevation:450.67 feet Discharge Range:0.12 to 0.12 Step of 1. [cfs] Overflow Elevation:453.89 feet Weir:NONE Upstream Velocity:3. feet/sec CB N-8 4 CS N-7 PIPE NO. 1: 35 LF - 1211CP C 1.60% OUTLET: 450.33 INLET: 450.89 INTYP: 5 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N -FAC DC DN TW n0 DE HWO HWI 0.12 0.15 451.04 * 0.012 0.15 0.11 0.34 0.34 0.15 ***** 0.11 • • BACKWATER COMPUTER PROGRAM FOR PIPES 0 Pipe data from file:p6.hwp Surcharge condition at intermediate junctions Tailwater Elevation:455.24 feet Discharge Range:0.2 to 0.2 Step of 1. [cfs] Overflow Elevation:458.6 feet Weir:NONE Upstream Velocity:3. feet/sec CB N -13A -i CB N-13 PIPE NO. 1: 30 LF - 12"CP @ 0.5096 OUTLET: 454.24 INLET: 454.39 INTYP: 5 JUNC NO. 1: OVERFLOW -EL: 456.39 BEND: 45 DEC DIA/WIDTH: 2.7 Q -RATIO: 0.82 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV_ * N -FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI 0.20 0.86 455.25 * 0.012 0.19 0.19 1.00 3.00 0.86 0.86 0.25 CB N-13 -) CB N-14 PIPE NO. 2: 113 LF - 1211CP @ 1.07% OUTLET: 454.39 INLET: 455.60 INTYP: 5 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N -FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI **ww*www*www*ww*w**ww*wwwww*wwww*ww*ww*******************ww*wwwwww*wwww*ww***ww 0.11 0.14 455.74 * 0.012 0.14 0.12 0.86 0.86 0.14 ***** 0.12 .7 40 BACKWATER COMPUTER PROGRAM FOR PIPES 0 Pipe data from file:p7.bwp Surcharge condition at intermediate junctions Tailwater Elevation:468.59 feet Discharge Range:1_26 to 1.26 Step of 1. [cfs] Overflow Elevation:471.43 feet Weir:NONE Upstream Velocity:3_ feet/sec OUTFALL 14-19A 4 CS N-19 PIPE NO. 1: 69 LF - 811CP C 0.49% OUTLET: 467.59 INLET: 467.93 INTYP: 5 JUNC NO. 1: OVERFLOW -EL: 473.09 BEND: 90 DEG BTA/WIDTH: 3.0 Q -RATIO: 1.63 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV_ * N -FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI ******************************************************************************* 1.26 1.61 469.54 * 0.012 0.54 0.67 1.00 1.00 1.30 1.61 0.97 CB N-19 4 CS N-23 PIPE NO. 2: 99 LF - 12"CP 0.52% OUTLET: 467.93 INLET: 468.43 INTYP: 5 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N -FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI 0.48 1.13 469.56 * 0.012 0.29 0.29 1.61 1.61 1.13 1.00 0.25 • • BACKWATER COMPUTER PROGRAM FOR PIPES 0 Pipe data from file:p8.bwp Surcharge condition at intermediate junctions Tailwater Elevation:475. feet Discharge Range:1_3 to 1.3 Step of 1. [cfs) Overflow Elevation:490.02 feet Weir:NONE Upstream Velocity:3. feet/sec CB N -24A 4 CB N-24 PIPE NO. 1: 29 LF - 12"CP @ 3.41% OUTLET: 474.00 INLET: 474.99 INTYP: 5 JUNC NO. 1: OVERFLOW -EL: 477.99 BEND: 5 DEG DIA/WIDTH: 2.7 Q -RATIO: 0.00 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N -FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI 1.30 0.64 475.63 * 0.012 0.49 0.29 1.00 1.00 0.49 ***** 0.64 CB N-24 4 CB N-25 PIPE NO. 2: 54 LF - 12"CP @ 1.59% OUTLET: 474.99 INLET: 475.85 INTYP: 5 JUNG NO. 2: OVERFLOW -EL: 479.79 BEND: 5 DEG DIA/WIDTH: 2.7 Q -RATIO: 2.25 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N -FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI ******#***w**w*ww*********************#*www*************************ww*Ww****** 1.30 0.69 476.54 * 0.012 0.49 0.36 0.64 0.64 0.49 *ww*w 0.69 CB N-25 4 CB N-27 PIPE NO. 3: 46 LF - 12"CP @ 11.46% OUTLET: 475.85 INLET: 481.12 INTYP: 5 JUNC NO. 3: OVERFLOW -EL: 484.12 BEND: 5 DEG DIA/WIDTH: 2.7 Q -RATIO: 0.00 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N -FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI #wwwW**********************WWww*w*************#****w*w*w*********************** 0.40 0.30 481.42 * 0.012 0.27 0.13 0.69 0.69 0.27 ***** 0.30 CB N-27 4 CB N-28 PIPE NO. 4: 45 LF - 12"CP @ 13.11% OUTLET: 481.12 INLET: 487.02 INTYP: 5 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N -FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI ****#**************##www****************#*#W#ww******************#*##*##**#www* 0.40 0.27 487.29 * 0.012 0.27 0.12 0.30 0.30 0.27 ***** 0.15 • BACKWATER COMPUTER PROGRAM FOR PIPES 0 Pipe data from fj.1e:p9.bwp Surcharge condition at intermediate junctions Tailwater Elevation:506.07 feet Discharge Range:0.46 to 0.46 Step of 1. [cfs) Overflow Elevation:518.15 feet Weir:NONE Upstream Velocity:3. feet/sec OUTFALL N -29A --> CB N-29 PIPE NO. 1: 52 LF - 12"CP @ 0.50% OUTLET: 505.07 INLET: 505.33 INTYP: 5 JUNG NO. 1: OVERFLOW -EL: 508.11 BEND: 3 DEG DIA/WIDTH: 2.7 Q -RATIO: 0.24 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N -FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI *ww*w*******************xwwwww****************xxwww**************x*xxwxwwww**** 0.46 0.76 506.09 * 0.012 0.29 0.28 1.00 1.00 0.75 0.76 0.38 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N -FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI * * * * * * * * * x x w w w w w * * * * * * * * * * * * * * w w w w w * * * * * * * * * * * * * x w w w w * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * x x x x w w w 0.37 0.33 509.93 * 0.012 0.26 0.17 0.32 0.32 0.26 ***** 0.33 CB N-35 4 CB N-36 PIPE NO. 4: 255 LF - 12"CP @ 2.18% OUTLET: 509.60 INLET: 515.15 INTYP: 5 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N -FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HW1 *****wwww***************xxwww************xw*w*w**************wx*wwwww********** 0.37 0.26 515.41 * 0.012 0.26 0.18 0.33 0.33 0.26 ***** 0.19 ;7 CB 1q-29 4 CB N-30 PIPE NO. 2: 35 LF - 1211CP @ 4.71% OUTLET: 505.33 INLET: 506.98 INTYP: 5 JU"NC NO. 2: OVERFLOW -EL: 508.42 BEND: 3 DEG DIA/WIDTH: 2.7 Q -RATIO: 0.00 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N -FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI *******************xxwww***************x*www**************xwwxww*************** 0.37 0.32 507.30 * 0.012 0.26 0.15 0.76 0.76 0.26 ***** 0.32 40 CB N-30 -) CB N-35 PIPE NO. 3: 89 LF - 12"CP 0 2.94% OUTLET: 506.98 INLET: 509.60 INTYP: 5 JUNC NO. 3: OVERFLOW -EL: 512.60 BEND: 0 DEG DIA/WIDTH: 2.7 Q -RATIO: 0.00 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N -FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI * * * * * * * * * x x w w w w w * * * * * * * * * * * * * * w w w w w * * * * * * * * * * * * * x w w w w * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * x x x x w w w 0.37 0.33 509.93 * 0.012 0.26 0.17 0.32 0.32 0.26 ***** 0.33 CB N-35 4 CB N-36 PIPE NO. 4: 255 LF - 12"CP @ 2.18% OUTLET: 509.60 INLET: 515.15 INTYP: 5 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N -FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HW1 *****wwww***************xxwww************xw*w*w**************wx*wwwww********** 0.37 0.26 515.41 * 0.012 0.26 0.18 0.33 0.33 0.26 ***** 0.19 ;7 BACKWATER COMPUTER PROGRAM FOR PIPES 0 Pipe data from file:pl0.bwp Surcharge condition at intermediate junctions Tailwater Elevation:472.44 feet Discharge Range:1.36 to 1.36 Step of 1. [cfs] Overflow Elevation:475.58 feet Weir:NONE Upstream Velocity:3. feet/sec OUTFALL N -31A 3 CB N-31 PIPE NO, 1: 35 LF - 12"CP @ 0.49% OUTLET: 471.44 INLET: 471.61 INTYP: 5 JUNC NO. 1: OVERFLOW -EL: 475.85 BEND: 90 DEG DIA/WIDTH: 2.7 Q -RATIO: 3.00 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N -FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI * * * * * * * w w * w w w w w * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * w Yc w * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * w w w w w * * * * * * * * * * at * * * * * * * w w w w w * w 1.36 0.96 472.57 * 0.012 0.50 0.51 1.00 1.00 0.87 0.96 0.72 CB N-31 4 CB N-33 PIPE NO. 2: 91 LF - 1211CP @ 0.49% OUTLET: 471.61 INLET: 472.06 INTYP: 5 JUNC NO. 2: OVERFLOW -EL: 477.29 BEND: 35 DEG DIA/WIDTH: 3.0 Q -RATIO: 0.13 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N -FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI 0.34 0.53 472.59 * 0.012 0.25 0.24 0.96 0.96 0.52 0.53 0.32 • CB N-33 4 CB N-34 PIPE NO. 3: 105 LF - 12"CP @ 0.50% OUTLET: 472.06 INLET: 472.58 INTYP: 5 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N -FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI * * * * * * w w w w w w w * * * * * * * * * * * * * * w w w w w * * * * * * * * * * * * * w w w w w w * * * * * * * * * * * * * * t * * w w w w w w * * * * * 0.30 0.23 472.81 * 0.012 0.23 0.23 0.53 0.53 0.23 0.20 0.16 0 BACKWATER COMPUTER PROGRAM FOR PIPES 0 Pipe data from file:pll.bwp Surcharge condition at intermediate junctions Tailwater Elevation:496.9 feet Discharge Range:0.24 to 0.24 Step of 1. [cfs] Overflow Elevation:497.33 feet Weir:NONE Upstream Velocity:3. feet/sec OUTFALL N -22A 4 CB 1q-22 PIPE NO. 1: 20 LF -- 8"CP @ 0.50% OUTLET: 495.90 INLET: 496.00 INTYP: 5 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV_ * N -FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI 0.24 0.91 496.91 * 0.012 0.23 0.24 1.00 1.00 0.91 0.78 0.17 :7 BACKWATER COMPUTER PROGRAM FOR PIPES 0 Pipe data from file:spl.bwp Surcharge condition at intermediate junctions Tailwater R]evation:438.5 feet Discharge Range:9.37 to 9.37 Step of 1_ [cfs] Overflow Elevation:494.39 feet Weir:NONE Upstream Velocity:3. feet/sec OUTFALL S -3A -) CB S-3 PIPE NO. 1: 83 LF - 2411CP @ 0.51% OUTLET: 432.75 INLET: 433.17 INTYP: 5 JUNC NO. 1: OVERFLOW -EL: 439.45 SEND: 0 DEG DIA/WIDTH: 3.0 Q -RATIO: 0.07 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N -FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI ******************************************************************************* 9.37 5.56 438.73 * 0.012 1.10 1.05 5.75 5.75 5.46 5.56 1.51 CB S-3 -) CB S-5 PIPE NO. 2: 85 LF - 2411CP @ 0.51% OUTLET: 433.17 INLET: 433.60 INTYP: 5 JUNC NO. 2: OVERFLOW -EL: 439.03 BEND: 0 DEG DIA/WIDTH: 3.0 Q -RATIO: 0.07 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N -FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI 8.78 5.32 438.92 * 0.012 1.06 1.01 5.56 5.56 5.24 5.32 1.45 CB S-7 4 CB S-12 PIPE NO. 4: 91 LF - 18"CP @ 0.51% OUTLET: 434.93 INLET: 435.39 INTYP: 5 JUNG NO. 4: OVERFLOW -EL: 440.04 BEND: 0 DEG DIA/WIDTH: 2.7 Q -RATIO: 0.12 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N -FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI 6.28 4.02 439.41 * 0.012 0.97 1.00 4.19 4.19 4.01 4.02 1.22 CB S-12 4 CB S-14 PIPE NO. 5: 179 LF - 15"CP @ 2.355 OUTLET: 435.64 INLET: 439.84 INTYP: 5 JUNC NO. 5: OVERFLOW -EL: 443.12 BEND: 0 DEG DIA/WIDTH: 2.7 Q -RATIO: 0.23 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N -FAC DC ON TW DO DE HWO HWI 5.61 1.23 441.07 * 0.012 0.96 0.65 3.77 3.77 0.96 ***** 1.23 0 CB S-5 -) CB S-7 PIPE NO. 3: 165 LF - 24"CP @ 0.50% OUTLET: 433.60 INLET: 434.43 INTYP: 5 JUNC NO. 3: OVERFLOW -RL: 440.78 BEND: 0 DEG DIA/WIDTH: 3.0 Q -RATIO: 0.30 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N -FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI 8.19 4.69 439.12 * 0.012 1.02 0.97 5.32 5.32 4.68 4.69 1.33 CB S-7 4 CB S-12 PIPE NO. 4: 91 LF - 18"CP @ 0.51% OUTLET: 434.93 INLET: 435.39 INTYP: 5 JUNG NO. 4: OVERFLOW -EL: 440.04 BEND: 0 DEG DIA/WIDTH: 2.7 Q -RATIO: 0.12 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N -FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI 6.28 4.02 439.41 * 0.012 0.97 1.00 4.19 4.19 4.01 4.02 1.22 CB S-12 4 CB S-14 PIPE NO. 5: 179 LF - 15"CP @ 2.355 OUTLET: 435.64 INLET: 439.84 INTYP: 5 JUNC NO. 5: OVERFLOW -EL: 443.12 BEND: 0 DEG DIA/WIDTH: 2.7 Q -RATIO: 0.23 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N -FAC DC ON TW DO DE HWO HWI 5.61 1.23 441.07 * 0.012 0.96 0.65 3.77 3.77 0.96 ***** 1.23 0 CB 5-14 4 CB S-16 PIPE NO. 6: 200 LF - 12"CP @ 1.50% OUTLET: 440.09 INLET: 443.09 INTYP: 5 JUNG NO. 6: OVERFLOW -EL: 447.24 BEND: 90 DEG DIA/WIDTH: 2.7 Q -RATIO: 0.00 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N -FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 4.56 2.17 445.26 * 0.012 0.90 0.79 0.98 0.98 0.90 ***** 2.17 CB S-16 4 CB S-18 PIPE NO. 7: 231 LF - 12"CP @ 3.68% OUTLET: 443.09 INLET: 451.60 INTYP: 5 JUNC NO. 7: OVERFLOW -EL: 455.11 BEND: 0 DEG DIA/WIDTH: 2.7 Q -RATIO: 0.41 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N -FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 4.56 1.81 453.41 * 0.012 0.90 0.57 2.17 2.17 0.90 ***** 1.81 CB S-18 4 CB S-23 PIPE NO. 8: 12 LF - 12"CP Q 0.50% OUTLET: 451.60 INLET: 451.66 INTYP: 5 JUNC NO. 8: OVERFLOW -EL: 454.77 BEND: 0 DEG DIA/WIDTH: 2.7 Q -RATIO: 0.09 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N -FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI ******************************************************************************* 3.23 2.03 453.69 * 0.012 0.78 1.00 1.81 1.81 1.83 2.03 1.14 CB S-23 4 CB S-25 PIPE NO. 9: 92 LF - 12"CP R 0.71% OUTLET: 451.66 INLET: 452.31 INTYP: 5 JUNC NO. 9: OVERFLOW -EL: 457.32 BEND: 0 DEC DIA/WIDTH: 2.7 Q -RATIO: 0.90 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N -FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 2.97 2.23 454.54 * 0.012 0.74 0.76 2.03 2.03 1.93 2.23 1.20 CB S-25 4 CB S-26 PIPE NO.10: 46 LF - 12"CP @ 5.30% OUTLET: 452.31 INLET: 454.75 INTYP: 5 JUNC NO.10: OVERFLOW -EL: 457.86 BEND: 0 DEG DIA/WIDTH: 2.7 Q -RATIO: 0.72 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N -FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 1.56 0.74 455.49 * 0.012 0.54 0.29 2.23 2.23 0.54 ***** 0.74 CB S-26 4 CB S-28 PIPE NO.11: 129 LF - 12"CP @ 1.16% OUTLET: 454.75 INLET: 456.25 INTYP: 5 JUNC NO.11: OVERFLOW -EL: 459.36 BEND: 0 DEG DIA/WIDTH: 2.7 Q -RATIO: 0.13 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV_ * N -FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 0.91 0.54 456.79 * 0.012 0.40 0.32 0.74 0.74 0.40 ***** 0.54 • CB S-28 -) CB S-30 PIPE NO.12: 86 LF - 12"CP @ 1.48% OUTLET: 456.25 INLET: 457.52 INTYP: 5 JUNC NO.12: OVERFLOW -EL: 460.52 BEND: 70 DEG DIA/WIDTH: 2.7 Q -RATIO: 0.05 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N -FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 0.80 0.51 458.03 * 0.012 0.38 0.29 0.54 0.54 0.38 ***** 0.51 CB S-30 4 CB S-31 PIPE NO.13: 39 LF - 12"CP @ 8.46% OUTLET: 457.52 INLET: 460.82 INTYP: 5 JUNC NO.13: OVERFLOW -EL: 463.82 BEND: 40 DEG DIA/WIDTH: 2.7 Q -RATIO: 0.09 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N -FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 0.77 0.46 461.28 * 0.012 0.37 0.18 0.51 0.51 0.37 ***** 0.46 CB S-31 4 S-32 PIPE NO.14: 100 LF - 12"CP @ 7.88% OUTLET: 460.82 INLET: 468.70 INTYP: 5 JUNC NO.14: OVERFLOW -EL: 471.70 BEND: 20 DEG DTA/WIDTH: 2.7 Q -RATIO: 4.83 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N -FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 0.70 0.45 469.15 * 0.012 0.35 0.18 0.46 0.46 0.35 ***** 0.45 CB S-32 4 CB S-33 PIPE NO.15: 122 LF - 12"CP @ 9.57% OUTLET: 468.70 INLET: 480.37 INTYP: 5 JUNC NO.15: OVERFLOW -EL: 483.37 BEND: 20 DEG DIA/WIDTH: 2.7 Q -RATIO: 1.40 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N -FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI ******************************************************************************* 0.12 0.15 460.52 * 0.012 0.15 0.08 0.45 0.45 0.15 ***** 0.14 CB S-33 4 CB S-34 PIPE NO.16: 169 LF - 12"CP @ 6.52% OUTLET: 480.37 INLET: 491.39 INTYP: 5 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N -FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI 0.05 0.10 491.49 * 0.012 0.10 0.06 0.15 0.15 0.10 ***** 0.06 0 BACKWATER COMPUTER PROGRAM FOR PIPES 0 Pipe data from file:sp2_bwp Surcharge condition at intermediate junctions Tailwater Elevation:439.12 feet Discharge Range:0.64 to 0.64 Step of 1. [cfs] Overflow Elevation:439.36 feet Weir:NONE Upstream Velocity:3. feet/sec CB S-7 4 CB S-10 PIPE NO. 1: 166 LF - 12"CP @ 0.50% OUTLET: 436.38 INLET: 437.21 INTYP: 5 JUNG NO. 1: OVERFLOW -EL: 439.36 BEND: 90 DEC DIA/WIDTH: 2.7 Q -RATIO: 7.00 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N -FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI 0.64 1.98 439.19 * 0.012 0.34 0.33 2.74 2.74 1.96 1.98 0.46 CB S-10 4 CB S-11 PIPE NO. 2: 31 LF - 8"CP @ 0.48% OUTLET: 437.21 INLET: 437.36 INTYP: 5 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N -FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI ******************************************************************************* 0.08 1.83 439.19 * 0.012 0.13 0.14 1.98 1.98 1.83 1.69 0.03 • BACKWATER COMPUTER PROGRAM FOR PIPES 0 Pipe data from file:sp3.bwp Surcharge condition at intermediate junctions Tailwater Elevation:439.12 feet Discharge Range:0.51 to 0.51 Step of 1. [cfs] Overflow Elevation:441.96 feet Weir:NONE Upstream Velocity:3. feet/sec CB S-7 4 CB S-8 PIPE NO. 1: 26 LF - 12"CP @ 9.31 OUTLET: 435.43 INLET: 437.85 INTYP: 5 JUNG NO. 1: OVERFLOW -EL: 441.85 BEND: 90 DEC DIA/WIDTH: 2.7 Q -RATIO: 0.17 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N -FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI 0.51 1.29 439.14 * 0.012 0.30 0.15 3.69 3.69 1.28 1.29 0.36 CB S-8 4 CB S-9 PIPE NO. 2: 31 LF - 12"CP @ 0.48% OUTLET: 437.85 INLET: 438.00 INTYP: 5 JUNC NO. 2: OVERFLOW -EL: 441.85 BEND: 90 DEG DTA/WIDTH: 2.7 Q -RATIO: 0.41 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N -FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI 0.43 1.16 439.16 * 0.012 0.28 0.28 1.29 1.29 1.15 1.16 0.37 CB S-9 4 CB S -9A PIPE NO. 3: 68 LF - 12"CP @ 2.94% OUTLET: 438.00 INLET: 440.00 INTYP: 5 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N -FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI 0.31 0.23 440.23 * 0.012 0.23 0.15 1.16 1.16 0.23 ***** 0.16 • BACKWATER COMPUTER PROGRAM FOR PIPES 0 Pipe data from file:sp4.bwp Surcharge condition at intermediate junctions Tailwater Elevation:453.41 feet Discharge Range:1.3i to 1.31 Step of 1. [cfs] Overflow Elevati.an:490.05 feet Weir:NONE Upstream Velocity:3. feet/sec CB S-18 4 CB S-19 PIPE NO. 1: 241 LF - 12"CP @ 2.54% OUTLET: 451.60 INLET: 457.71 INTYP: 5 JUNC NO, 1: OVERFLOW -EL: 460.71 BEND: 0 DEG DIA/WIDTH: 2.7 Q -RATIO: 0.31 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV_ * N -FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI ***************w****#********************************************************** 1.31 0.67 458.38 * 0.012 0.49 0.32 1.81 1.81 0.49 ***** 0.67 CB S-19 4 CB S-20 PIPE NO. 2: 126 LF - 12"CP @ 3.95% OUTLET: 457.71 INLET: 462.69 INTYP: 5 JUNC NO. 2: OVERFLOW -EL: 467.19 BEND: 90 DEG DIA/WIDTH: 2.7 Q -RATIO: 0.35 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV_ * N -FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI 1.00 0.58 463.27 * 0.012 0.43 0.25 0.67 0.67 0.43 ***** 0.58 • CB S-20 4 CB S-41 PIPE NO. 3: 67 LF - 12"CP @ 15.54% OUTLET: 462.69 INLET: 473.10 INTYP: 5 JUNC NO. 3: OVERFLOW -EL: 478.10 BEND: 45 DEG DIA/WIDTH: 2.7 Q -RATIO: 0.00 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N -FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI 0.74 0.41 473.51 * 0.012 0.36 0.16 0.58 0.58 0.36 ***** 0.41 CB S-41 4 CB S-42 PIPE NO. 4: 18 LF - 12"CP @ 13.06% OUTLET: 473.10 INLET: 475.45 INTYP: 5 JUNC NO. 4: OVERFLOW -EL: 478.45 BEND: 50 DEG DIA/WIDTH: 2.7 Q --RATIO: 0.57 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N -FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI 0.74 0.43 475.88 * 0.012 0.36 0.16 0.41 0.41 0.36 ***** 0.43 CB S-42 -i CB S-43 PIPE NO. 5: 46 LF - 12"CP @ 3.17% OUTLET: 475.45 INLET: 476.91 INTYP: 5 JUNC NO. 5: OVERFLOW -EL: 479.91 BEND: 45 DEG DIA/WIDTH: 2.7 Q -RATIO: 0.02 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N -FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI 0.47 0.37 477.28 * 0.012 0.29 0.18 0.43 0.43 0.29 ***** 0.37 n CB S-43 4 CB S-44 PIPE NO. 6: 28 LF - 12"CP @ 8.57% OUTLET: 476.91 INLET: 479.31 INTYP: 5 JUNG NO. 6: OVERFLOW -EL: 482.31 BEND: 30 DEG ➢IA/WIDTH: 2.7 Q -RATIO: 6.66 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N -FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI 0.46 0.34 479.65 * 0.012 0.29 0.14 0.37 0.37 0.29 w**** 0.34 CB S-44 4 CB S-45 PIPE NO. 7: 106 LF - 12"CP @ 7.30% OUTLET: 479.31 INLET: 487.05 INTYP: 5 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N -FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI 0.06 0.10 487.15 * 0.012 0.10 0.06 0.34 0.34 0.10 ***** 0.06 171 • BACKWATER COMPUTER PROGRAM FOR PIPES 0 Pipe data from file:sp5.bwp Surcharge condition at intermediate junctions Tailwater Elevation:454.91 feet Discharge Range:1.39 to 1.39 Step of 1. [cfs) Overflow Elevation:475.34 feet Weir:NONE Upstream Velocity:3. feet/sec CB 5-25 4 CB 5-35 PIPE NO. 1: 34 LF - 12"CP @ 0.50% OUTLET: 452.31 INLET: 452.48 INTYP: 5 JUNC NO. 1: OVERFLOW -EL: 456.93 BEND: 0 DEC DIA/WIDTH: 2.7 Q -RATIO: 0.96 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N -FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI *****ww*w***************xw*www****************W**wW*************x*wx*ww*ww***** 1.39 2.55 455.03 x 0.012 0.50 0.51 2.60 2.60 2.48 2.55 0.72 CB 5-35 4 CB 5-37 PIPE NO. 2: 165 LF - 12"CP @ 3.95% OUTLET: 452.48 INLET: 459.00 INTYP: 5 JUNG NO. 2: OVERFLOW -EL: 463.27 BEND: 0 DEG DIA/WIDTH: 2.7 Q -RATIO: 6.10 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW HLEV. * N -FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI ***********xxwww**************xxwW*****************xw*ww******************xw*wW 0.71 0.47 459.47 * 0.012 0.36 0.21 2.55 2.55 0.36 ***** 0.47 CB 5-37 4 CB 5-49 PIPE NO. 3: 134 LF - 12"CP @ 9.88% OUTLET: 459.00 INLET: 472.24 INTYP: 5 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N -FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI ww*w************xxxww**************xxw*w**************xxxwwww****************** 0.10 0.13 472.37 * 0.012 0.13 0.07 0.47 0.47 0.13 ***** 0.07 �1 NOIONIHSVAI 'AINl1OO `JNIN z � f�j 1► s I dOd-gH NOIl VPVHOdNl 7VOINH031 4 xOOHNVHS } "" 1S3MWbO ': rr i m Y a R.5 � x $ ? 1181HX3 173N b .L �l b'1119/N1 k � 37VM S/NIS d8 H,91VO 113 xe NOISIAaa alva I'ONI 11: i I R ¢ Z. �m w s _ — � V p O Ln a f � V) 71 0 • I II �,�m::��a i �, v L1 � Of' fr SII } J} ! ■ tt `� Q 6 a [ I f N I U t i [r 9C r•� i M i r � ■r .rPZ �.1 \ii PIZr9 [OdSPf �d J TIMI 1*}! /� IZ • ——.... ____ _ — a_ E ` ZDdS £DdS _ ,,,+•••`r••• V ! '� OidNfl :E T � • • 99 I r jrf rr I 1 f6 � A tG ry ■ I �{�ilff J r i P9 w ,I fr-f+Yl/ J l 4 1,IIy tli't I I • • • 1 If is aff■ ss fig I}1 } } 1 96 `} ■...... �rfi Q 09 � � • IL + +j fl \\\ rer icl .0 rrt �er • } %/! j � Z Be 6P +r•.r [G BS r• f rr !!f fib i •`•' • + •.. ... • +PR el? 9P �' E e cP ,a ra re CL aal � ool � � 0 ` 1� for v ■ !�E... s[ 1 • ZOdN L01 ®A � � � � 1 19 ' ••y O iL+o'� N 7 [01 ` ■ rol Lod L " •�r. lapoW '5anp•90uodenuoD6g, LO\i9ZuUOAOnuoO\s; q!W buijaaui6uI\S@I!JOMQ\59LLD\Si3]rObd\:3 L xudg�=Z — VOOZ '9Z Aovl !MsmoM;njq Shamrock —Technical Information Report • 6 SPECIAL REPORTS AND STUDIES Note: There is an un -permitted fill being addressed separately from the analysis provided in this section. The remediation will consist of a re -connection of the west wetland described below to another wetland Iocated south of the proposed pond. The "south" wetland to be re- connected should not be confused with the wetlands described in the "Wetland Recharge" or "West Wetland Directional Flow" analysis as follows. 6.1 Wetland Recharge West Wetland The King County Department of Development and Environmental Services (DDES) has developed guidelines for managing wetland hydroperiods during post -development. The guidelines categorize the wetlands analysis into two groups; basic and high value. The wetland areas associated with this site require a basic analysis. 49 The basic analysis does not model the wetland hydraulics, but instead matches the project's hydrologic contribution to the wetland. In other words, the area to provide wetland recharge • will have similar runoff flow characteristics as the area that was tributary to the wetland in the pre -developed condition_ The primary storm events of concern are the events which occur most frequently. The most frequent storm event calculated by KCRTS is the 1.10 year event. In addition, the primary season of concern is spring, which is typically the wettest season. For the purpose of the KCRTS analysis, spring is defined as February I through May 30. Procedure The following is an outline of the procedure used to determine and compare the hydrological contribution to the west wetland in the pre -developed and post -developed condition. 1. The area tributary to the wetland in the pre -developed and post -developed condition is determined. 05/26/2004 Page 6-1 Job #01-159 /TRJAD • Shamrock —Technical Information Report 2. Using KCRTS, a Time Series File is created and the peak flow rates for each storm event are determined. The peak flow rate of the pre -developed condition for the 1.10 year storm event will become the focal point of the analysis. (The 1.10 year event is the most frequent storm event that KCRTS calculates.) 3. For the pre -developed and post -developed condition, a Probability of Exceedence table for values that window the 1.10 -year storm event peak flow is created. (This will show the probability that the particular peak flow will be exceeded) A separate analysis should be conducted far each season. The seasons are defined by the following dates: Spring, February 1 through May 31; Summer, June 1 through August 31; Fall, September 1 through November 30 and Winter, December 1 through January 31. The analysis of the fall season is not allowed by the KCRTS program since it spans two hydrology years. 4. The probability of exceedence for the pre -developed and post -developed conditions is compared graphically as well as analytically in the form of the percent change in probability. For background information on the KCRTS program please refer to the KCRTS Computer Software Reference Manual published by the King County Department of Public Works. The west wetland will receive discharge from the north pond along with runoff from an area designated to provide wetland recharge. Approximately 15.2 acres of onsite land in the existing condition is tributary to the west wetland. The wetland itself covers approximately 3.0 acres and within it, are topographically two separate sub -wetlands, a north and a south wetland. These sub -wetlands are connected by an inter -wetland ditch. Discharge for the entire wetland flows north and south in all storm events except for the 1.10 -year event. During this low event, the flows discharge to the north. The north discharge location for the wetland system is through a 12 -inch CMP and a 6 -inch concrete pipe into a man-made pond located in the adjacent property to the north. The south discharge location for the wetland flows is through a V -ditch offsite into another wetland. ©512612004 Page 6-2 Job #01-159 /TRLA 0 Shamrock — Technical Information Report In the existing condition 15.2 acres are tributary to the wetland located near the west property line. The land cover is as follows: 0.9 acres impervious (driveways and roofs with 50% effective impervious multiplier) and 14.3 acres till pasture. The resulting time series file is shown below. Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:w-predev.tsf Project Location:Sea-Tac -----Annual Peak Flow Rates --- Flaw Rate Rank Time of Peak (CFS) Frequency Analysis------- 1.16 2 2/09/01 15:00 0.572 7 1/05/02 16:00 1.15 3 2/28/03 3:00 0.292 8 8/26/04 2:00 0.657 6 1/05/05 8:00 1.10 4 1/18/06 16:00 1.04 5 11/24/06 4:00 2.16 1 1/09/08 6:00 Computed Peaks 0.231 0:292:3 -----Flow Frequency Analysis------- - - Peaks - - Rank Return Prob (CFS) Period 2.16 1 100.00 0.990 1.16 2 25.00 0.960 1.15 3 10.00 0.900 1.10 4 5.00 0.800 1.04 5 3.00 0.667 0.657 6 2.00 0.500 0.572 7 1.30 0.231 0:292:3 8; 1.1:0 0.091 1.83 50.00 0.980 To maintain the hydrological contribution to the wetland, runoff from the backyards and roofs from lots 72-79 (0.90 acres total) will be allowed to drain directly into the wetland to provide recharge. The land cover of this recharge area is as follows: 0.48 acres Till Pasture, 0.21 acres Till Grass 0.21 acres Impervious. 0.90 acres Total ©5/26/2004 Page 6-3 Job #01-159 /TRIAD • • • Shamrock - Technical Information Report The KCRTS time series file is shown below. Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:wrchrg.tsf Project Location:Sea-Tac ---Annual Peak Flow Rates --- Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak (CFS) (CFS) Period Period 0.096 5 2/09/01 2:00 0.067 7 1/05/02 16:00 0.114 2 2/27/03 7:00 0.059 8 8/26/04 2:00 0.072 6 10/28/04 16:00 0.103 3 1/18/06 16:00 0.096 4 11/24/06 3:00 0.202 1 1/09/08 6:00 Computed Peaks 0.172 50.00 -----Flow Frequency Analysis Flow Rate - - Peaks - - Rank Return Prob (CFS) Period Period 1.42 0.202 1 100.00 0.990 0.114 2 25.00 0.960 0.103 3 10.00 0.900 0.096 4 5.00 0.800 0.096 5 3.00 0.667 0.072 6 2.00 0.500 0.067 7 1.30 0.231 1 1/09/08 10700 Computed Peaks 0.172 50.00 50.00 0,980 The time series file for the recharge area is combined with the time series file for the pond control structure release rate. This time series is shown below. Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:pond+wrchrg.tsf Project Location:Sea-Tac ---Annual Peak Flow Rates --- Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak (CFS) Period 1.42 2 2/09/01 19:00 0.347 7 12/28/01 16:00 0.894 5 2/28/03 7:00 0.253 8 8/23/04 23:00 0.636 6 1/05/05 14:00 0.984 4 1/18/06 22:00 1.09 3 11/24/06 7:00 3.08 1 1/09/08 10700 Computed Peaks 50.00 -----Flow Frequency Analysis- - - Peaks - - Rank Return Prob (CFS) Period 3.08 1 100.00 0.990 1.42 2 25.00 0.960 1.09 3 10.00 0.900 0.984 4 5.00 0.800 0.894 5 3.00 0.667 0.636 6 2.00 0.500 0.347 7 1.30 0.231 Q°=:253 `, 8 ." 1 ;f? - .." 0 .091 2.53 50.00 0.980 For the duration analysis, please see the tables and graphs located at the end of this section. The comparison of the annual flow rate at the 1.10 year storm event (0.29 cfs) shows that the duration of the runoff tributary to the wetland during the developed condition is approximately 46% more than that of the predeveloped condition. This also includes the discharge from the detention facility. The excess in duration will be utilized as recharge to other connected wetlands located offsite and not analyzed in the predeveloped condition. The annual flow is an average of all the seasonal flows. ©6/26/2004 Job #01-169 Page 6-4 0 Shamrock -- Technical Information Report The analysis of the same storm event for the spring season shows that the duration of the runoff tributary to the wetland during the developed condition is approximately 35% more than that of the predeveloped condition_ The analysis of the winter season showed the runoff from the developed condition to be 55% more than that of the predeveloped condition. Since the summer season receives relatively little rainfall, it was not useful in this evaluation. However, the probability of exceedence table and chart are included at the end of this section. The comparison of the flow durations for the predeveloped and post developed wetland flows varies dramatically from season to season. This is due to the various rainfall characteristics associated with each season. The winter season contains fewer storm events but a higher peak flow rate per event. The spring season contains more frequent storm events that last a longer period of time, but have a lower peak flow rate. There is relatively little rainfall during the summer season making the analysis of summer insignificant. As mentioned before, the fall season spans two hydrology years and is not possible to evaluate. North Central Wetland Analysis The analysis of the North Central wetland has been conducted differently than that of the West wetland. This is because the majority of this wetland is located offsite. Since we don't have control of the land that is tributary to the other parts of the wetland it would not be possible to model the durations. Instead, the total volume of flow during the Spring Season (February 1 — May 30) has been evaluated. This has been done by analyzing the full historical record for the predeveloped and developed conditions from 1948 to 1998. The following is a summary of these findings_ ©512612004 ) Page 6-5 Job #01-159I-r�D �� -- 01 Shamrock —Technical Information Report Predeveloped Land Cover In the existing condition 2.25 acres of the site is tributary to the wetland located near the north property line, approximately 600 feet west of 148th Ave SE. The following is a breakdown of the land cover. 0.10 acres Impervious (driveways and roofs with 50% impervious multiplier) 2.15 acres Till Pasture 2.25 acres Total Total flow for all Spring seasons (1948-1998) 4 1,670,959 cubic feet Average flow for per Spring Season -> 33,419 cubic feet Developed Land Cover (lots 80-81, 85-88, 100-104) These lots will utilize a backyard dispersion system to provide wetland recharge. The driveways will drain to the in -street conveyance system. Therefore, based on the assumptions made in Section 4. 1, the land cover is assumed to be 25% impervious, 25% till grass and 50% till pasture_ The following is a breakdown of the total land cover associated with these lots. 0.39 acres Impervious 0.39 acres Till Grass 0.76 acres Till Pasture 1.54 acres Total Total flow for all Spring Seasons (1948 1998) 4 1,534,575 cubic feet Average flow per Spring Season 4 30,692 cubic feet From this analysis it is found that the average flow from the developed condition is 8% less than that of the predeveloped condition. Since this wetland is also fed by a much larger offsite tributary area the 8% reduction in spring flow volume should not have an affect on the wetland. 05!2612004 Job #01 -159 Page 6-6 Z'�D • [-I Shamrock — Technical Information Report South Wetland Analysis The south wetland will be connected to the west wetland by a manmade wetland hydraulic connection as a corrective measure for an un -permitted wetland fill from the previous owner of the property. The onsite areas that are tributary to the south wetland are shown on the South Wetland Recharge Existing Conditions Exhibit located at the end of this section. The size of the onsite wetland and the onsite tributary area is too small to evaluate using the previous analysis methods. Instead, the peak flow rates for the 1.10 year storm event for the developed condition will be matched to the predeveloped condition. In the predeveloped condition, 2.18 acres of onsite pasture are tributary to the wetland. The following is the KCRTS output for the Predeveloped Wetland Tributary Flow. Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:s-predev.tsf Project Location:Sea-Tac ---Annual Peak Flow Rates--- -----Flow Frequency Analysis ------- Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak - - Peaks - Rank Return Prob (CFS) (CPS) Period 0.154 2 2/09/01 18:00 0.263 1 100.00 0.990 0.057 7 1/05/02 16:00 0.154 2 25.00 0,960 0.140 3 2/28/03 3:00 0.140 3 10.00 0.900 0.015 8 3/24/04 19:00 0.131 4 5.00 0.800 0.078 6 1/05/05 8:00 0.126 5 3.00 0.667 0.131 4 1/18/06 16:00 0.078 6 2.00 0.500 0.126 5 11/24/06 4:00 0.057 7 1.30 0.231 0.263 1 1/09/08 6:00 0:015 " fl, ':; 1""Jo 0.091 Computed Peaks 0.227 50.00 0.980 The peak flow rate for the predeveloped 1.10 year, 24-hour storm event is 0.015 cfs. In the developed condition, 0.10 acres of impervious (rooftop from lot 3$) will provide recharge to the wetland. ©5/26/2004 Job #01-159 TRIAD Page 6-7 11 • • Shamrock —Technical information Report The following is the KCRTS output for the Developed Wetland Tributary Flow. Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:s-dev.tsf Project Location:Sea-Tac ---Annual Peak Flow Rates --- Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak (CFS) Period 0.024 7 2/09/01 2:00 0.021 8 1/05/02 16:00 0.029 3 12/08/02 18:00 0.025 6 8/26/04 2:00 0.029 4 10/28/04 16:00 0.026 5 1/18/06 16:00 0.036 2 10/26/06 0:00 0.047 1 1/09/08 6100 Computed Peaks 50.00 0.980 -----Flow Frequency Analysis ------- - - Peaks - - Rank Return Prob (CFS) Period 0.047 1 100.00 0.990 0-036 2 25.00 0.960 0.029 3 10.00 0.900 0.029 4 5.00 0.800 0.026 5 3.00 0.667 0.025 6 2.00 0.500 0.024 7 1.30 0.231 0.091 0.044 50.00 0.980 The peak flow rate for the developed 1.10 year, 24-hour stonn event is 0.021 cfs, compared to 0.015 cfs for the predeveloped condition_ Due to the relatively small flow rates for the predeveloped and developed conditions, the difference between the two conditions is negligible. CG5/26/2004 Job #01-159 /TRLAD Page 6-8 • Shamrock —Technical Information Report 6.2 West Wetland Directional Flow Analysis The Directional Flow Analysis was conducted during the preliminary design phase. Therefore the elevations listed for the pond design are not necessarily the actual final pond design elevations, but are relevant to determining the directional wetland flow. Approach Since the primary discharge for the entire wetland drains to the north, tail water elevations are established by ponding conditions in the downstream pond to the north_ Currently the pond to the north discharges through a 12 -inch CMP (443.48') at an elevation higher than that of the discharge point of the subject wetland (443.4'). Therefore, the starting tail water elevation for the analysis is governed by the discharge point of the downstream pond. To be conservative the maximum tail water surface has been set at the overflow elevation of this pond (top of berm, approximately 444.5'). Considering the elevation for the inter -wetland ditch connecting the north and south wetland is 444.45' (slightly below that of the assumed tail water elevation), it is assumed that there will be no contributing storage volume from the north wetland below elevation 444.5'. Given these assumptions, the south wetland will be analyzed with the primary outlet as the inter -wetland ditch discharging north from the subject wetland_ Tributary flows and volumes for the south wetland are presented below. Analysis The King County Runoff Time Series (KCRTS) program was used to calculate flows and surface water elevations for the south wetland. Peak runoff calculations were determined using Sea -Tac scale factor of 1.0 and Till soils. Areas tributary to the south wetland are given below. Refer to the Welland Basins Exhibit at the end of this section for basin delineation. Impervious (roof and roads) 1.78 acres "fill Pasture 12.79 acres Till Forest 0.81 acres Wetland 1.23 acres Total 16.61 acres (D5!26!2004 Job #01-159 /TRLAJ) Page 6-9 i • • Shamrock -Technical Information Report inflow The following table shows the peak flow tributary to the south wetland in existing conditions. Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:exst-sw.tsf Project Location:Sea-Tac ---Annual Peak Flow Rates --- Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak (CFS) (CFS) (Sq -Ft) Period 1.42 3 2/09/01 15:00 0.751 7 1/05/02 16:00 1.50 2 2/27/03 7:00 0.500 8 8/26/04 2:00 0.773 6 1/05/05 8:00 1.27 4 1/18/06 16:00 1.20 5 11/24/06 3:00 2.53 1 1/09/08 6:00 Computed Peaks 2.19 0.50 -----Flow Frequency Analysis ------- Storage - - Peaks - - Rank Return Prob (CFS) (Sq -Ft) Period A 2.53 1 104.00 0.990 1.50 2 25.00 0.960 1.42 3 10.00 0.900 1.27 4 5.00 0.800 1.20 5 3.00 0.667 0.773 6 2.00 0.500 0.751 7 1.30 0.231 0.500 8 1.10 0.091 2.19 0.50 50.00 0.980 Reservoir The following table shows the 2 -outlet reservoir file. Discharge A is the flow rate for the inter -wetland ditch to the north. Discharge B is the flow rate for the V -ditch to the south. Refer to Ditch Flow Calculations in the end of this Section for ditch cross sections and calculations. South Wetland 2 -Outlet Reservoir Data Two Outlet Reservoir Routing File Stage Discharge Storage Perm -Area (Ft) (CFS) (Cu -Ft) (Sq -Ft) A B 0.00 0.000 0.000 0. 0. 0.10 0.110 0.000 1704. 0. 0.15 0.210 0.000 3462. 0. 0.20 0.350 0.000 5329. 0. 0.30 0.730 0.040 9393. 0. 0.40 1.230 0.140 13907. 0. 0.50 1.930 0.340 18881. 0. 0.60 2.770 0.650 24324. 0. 0.70 3.800 1.100 30248. 0. 0.80 5.030 1.710 36661. 0. 0.90 6.460 2.490 43572. 0. 1.00 8.120 3.460 50991. 0. 444.50 Ft : Base Reservoir Elevation 0.0 Minutes/Inch: Average Perm -Rate CD5/2612004 Job #01-159 ./TFJAD Page 6-10 Shamrock -Technical Information Report Outflow North 0 The following table shows the discharge from the inter -wetland ditch to the north. 0 • Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series Filen-ditch.tsf Project Location:Sea-Tac ---Annual. Peak Flow Rates --- Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak (CFS) Prob (CFS) (ft) 1.16 2 2/09/01 19:00 0.388 7 1/05/02 18:00 0.972 3 2/27/03 9:00 0.184 8 8/23/04 20:00 0.593 6 1/05/05 9:00 0.952 5 1/18/06 21:00 0.970 4 11/24/06 5:00 1.90 1 1/09/08 10:00 Computed Peaks 0.388 0.21 Outflow South ---Flow Frequency Analysis ------- Flow Rate - - Peaks - - Rank Return Prob (CFS) (ft) 0.126 Period 2/09/01 1.90 0.50 1 100.00 0.99C 1.16 0.39 2 25.00 0.96C 0.972 0.35 3 10.00 0.90C 0.970 0.35 4 5.00 0.80C 0.952 0.34 5 3.00 0.667 0.593 0.26 6 2.00 0.500 0.388 0.21 7 1.30 0.231 0.184 0.14 8 1.10 0.091 1.65 0.46 50.00 0.980 The following table shows the discharge from the V -ditch to the south. Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:s-ditch.tsf Project Location:Sea-Tac ---Annual Peak Flow Rates--- Flow Rate Rank Time Of Peak (CFS) Prob (CFS) (ft) 0.126 2 2/09/01 19:00 0.004 7 1/05/02 18700 0.088 3 2/27/03 9:00 0.000 8 8/23/04 20:00 0.026 6 1/05/05 9:00 0.084 5 1/18/06 21:00 0.088 4 11/24/06 5:00 0.330 1 1/09/08 10700 Computed Peaks 0.004 0.21 -----Flow Frequency Analysis------- 444.85' - - Peaks - - Rank Return Prob (CFS) (ft) Period 0.330 0.50 1 100.00 0.990 0.126 0.39 2 25.00 0.960 0.088 0.35 3 10.00 0.900 0.088 0.35 4 5.00 0.800 0.084 0.34 5 3.00 0.667 0.026 0.26 6 2.00 0.500 0.004 0.21 7 1.30 0.231 0.000 0.14 8 1.10 0.091 0.262 0.46 50.00 0.980 Results The tail water elevation for the above out -going flow rates is 444.50'. The surveyed elevation of 444.45' of the inter -wetland ditch was assumed as the primary outlet of the south wetland. The water surface elevation for the south wetland for the 2, 10, and 100 -year storm are as follows: 2 -yr: 444.76' 10 -yr: 444.85' 100 -yr: 445.00' ©5/26/2004 Job #01-159 /TRIAD Page 6-11 • Shamrock — Technical Information Report The water surface elevation for all three storm events is above both discharge elevations of the south wetland (444.45' for inter -wetland ditch and 444.64' for the V -Glitch to the south). Therefore water travels in both directions in all storm events except for the 1.10 -year event which flows only to the north. The predicted storm event water surfaces are conservative. The 100 -yr water surface elevation for the onsite wetland was detennined to establish the bottom of live storage elevation (live/dead interface) for the proposed detention pond. Only the South Wetland was considered for the analysis since the tail water elevation (conservatively determined from downstream conditions) is higher than both discharge points for the North Wetland. From the KCRTS reservoir modeling the 100 -year water surface elevation of the wetland was determined to be 445.00', therefore the bottom of live storage elevation has been designed at 445.00'. ©512612064 Page 6-12 Job #01-159 /TRIAD Shamrock -- Technical Information Report 0 6.3 North Pond Detention Comparison • • Low Impact Development (LID) reduces the amount of impervious surface on a development site using distributed source control and treatment practices. Native vegetation, landscaping, and small-scale stormwater controls capture, treat, infiltrate, evaporate, and transpire rainfall at the parcel or subdivision level. A comparison of the required detention volumes for LID methods and standard development (non LID) has been conducted. In each scenario the same amount of bypass area has been considered. However, each scenario has unique land cover assumptions. The following table shows the land cover and required detention volume for each scenario. The detention . volume does not include a factor of safety. These values should only be used for comparison purposes and may not reflect final engineering calculations. Percent Coverage Per Lot Impervious Till Grass Till Pasture Required Detention Volume (cubic feet) Scenario A 55% 45% 0% 140,100 Scenario B 32.5% 22.5% 45% 90,200 Scenario C 0% 55% 45% 54,000 Scenario A Scenario A uses traditional stormwater management methods using a piping system and a large detention facility to collect rainwater. In addition, the maximum impervious coverage per zoning regulations is assumed. For this site, the maximum impervious coverage per lot is 55 percent. The remaining lot coverage area is assumed to be Till Grass. Scenario B _. Scenario B assumes the site to be developed using LID concepts. Because of these concepts (listed above and also in section 1. l of this report) the impervious area created by the building footprint is modeled as 50 percent Till Grass and 50 percent impervious. The driveway is estimated to be 500 square feet and is modeled entirely as impervious. The total actual impervious coverage per lot remains 55 percent. The remaining landscaped areas are modeled as Till Pasture due to the soils being amended. 65/26/2004 Page 6-13 Job #01-159 /TRIAD Shamrock —Technical Information Report Scenario C Scenario C assumes the site to be developed using LID concepts, similar to iScenario B. The Scenario C modeling assumes complete infiltration of all impervious areas • 0 associated with each lot. The 55 percent impervious coverage per lot is modeled as Till Grass. The remainder of the lot is modeled as Till Pasture due to the amended soils. Scenario B is the condition that was applied to the site. it conservatively assumes the building footprint to be 50 percent impervious and 50 percent Till Grass. Please see section 4.1 in this report for the actual land coverage areas. 'J5/26/2004 Page 6-14 Job #01 -159 Shamrock —Technical Information Report 0 6.4 Soil Management Plan • • Included in this section are the soil management plan and the Guidelines & Resources for implementing Soil Depth & Quality — BMF T.5.13 in WDOE Western Washington Stonnwater. 05/26/2004 Page 6-15 Job #01-159 /tRMD Shamrock Property Soil Management Plan Description CamWest Development May 18, 2004 2002 Guidelines & Resources for Implementing Soil Depth & Quality BMP T.5.13 in WDOE Western Washington Stormwater Option # 1 Amend Existing Soil In -Place Procedure 1) Mobilize, install silt fence, construction entrance and other TESL measures as required. 2) Clear and Grub 3) Construct North Pond. 4) Disc entire site to break up vegetation in topsoil layer 5) Strip and pile topsoil_ i) 'Topsoil to be used for lot Ell to be stockpiled on various onsite areas to allow efficient placement on lots after structural fill is completed. ii) Topsoil to be used for replacing mined structural material in Tract R to be stockpiled on lots 1-6 6) Cut/ ill onsite native structural material and import sufficient additional structural material to rough grade roadways to subgrade and lots to two feet below finish grade. In addition to importing structural material, native structural material will be mined from Tract B and replaced with native strippings. 7) Place balance of stripping material that is not used for replacement of mined structural material, along with imported common fill, on lots to bring grades to one foot below plan finish grades. 8) After houses are constructed on each lot, rototill composted material into native soil @ pre -approved rates for planting beds and turf areas prior to landscaping. (Guideline & Option 1. Amending Existing Sol] In -Place) 0 NOIDNIHSVM :UNnOO 9NIX E IdOd-gH NOIIVPVHO-41VI 7V0IN14031 I t: 44 C, SNOIJIGNOO ONIISIX3 30HV140361 GNV713M b . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 3S 3A V 1418 P't Now 'ROW Lu is IJ LU 3 Now 'ROW 0 • • DITCH FLOW CALCULATIONS Mannings Equation Q - (1.49ARh"S 112)/n R„ - AiP, Ditch - N Trapezoid IE (fl) = 444 50 Trapezoid ditch equations ss,' - 0-91 H.V A = wa4y2H S1,11nP0) = 0.135 P,., = 2"(Y7 +(YH)2)Q5+wr wo = 050 n = 0.055 average Mannings Contour (tt} y (fit)Area (sf)L. I'w (fi) Rh tri) 0 (CIS) 444.50 0.00 0.00 0.50 0.00 0 00 444.60 0.10 0.06 0.10 0 71 0.91 0 08 Oil 0.21 444.65 0.15 011 444^70 020 0.14 0.23 1 04 1.31 013 0.18 035 0.73 444.80 _ 0.30 444.90 0-40 03") 0 4-8 1-58 1 85 022 0.26 1 25 193 44500 0.50 445.10 0 60 0.63 080 2, 12 2.39 0, 10 2-77 - 3 80 445 20 0.70 0 33 445 30 0.80 0.98 2.66 0.3 r 5.03 44540 090 4-15.50 1 00 1 19 1 41 293 320 040 0,14 646 8 12 Ditch S V IE (ft) = 444-64 55z,.e - 4 36 sdRch ("t) "- 0 005 n = 0.055 average mannmgs V -ditch equatiuns Contour (ft) y (N) Area (st) P- (H) Rh (ft) 0 (cfs) 444.70 0.06 002 0.54 0.03 0.00 444 80 0.16 0.11 1 43 008 004 444.90 0.26 0.29 � 2.33 0.13 0.14 44_5-00 036 057 3 22 0.18 0.34 445.10 0.46 0.92 4.12 0,22 0.65 445-20 0.56 1.37 5-01 0.27 1.10 445.30 0.66 1.90 5.90 0.32 1.71 44540 0 76 2 52 6 80 0.37 2.49 T 445.50 0.86 3.22 7.69 0.42 3.46 0 0 • tn -7t ti LO 0-) co I-- CD LO LO 7t It ,Zt III -t I�r I -T �f I:t d l7t It (1j) LJOIJU'AaJA Lo C) WE Ln tn -7t ti LO 0-) co I-- CD LO LO 7t It ,Zt III -t I�r I -T �f I:t d l7t It (1j) LJOIJU'AaJA Lo C) WE C7 0 Lf) ---------- ---- cy-) LC) If) LO 0') LO co LO r-- LO J) 00 LO 7T (1j) U01jeA@jA • • 216 ChapWr .1 F4ow in t?pen Channels ' �' " „� ,�----� Correction factor —�� �� � Degree of sinaousne55 ,, p Table 4.15 —_--� 1.00 Currertion Factors for Straight channels 0 9Q []egree U( Sintsousne>s ;lightly sinuous channels 0 Al derale ,, sinuous channels 0 0 m0 Very sinuous channels meli SouFce. Lane, E. w "Design of SEabre Channels" Tra^I�£ht^ 1955 t,1 AASCE- can S"icly of Civil Engineers, �•. i2U, p i73A-"+9. Copy RepnnFed by Pcrmisyion " ,-�.—, „---- J` ,hich states that n--0C131ri ,vhere d is the charaetesistic par(ham elt C on the boundary (in feet). USin`. the 7lor d 5 -percentile diameter, d; y I p.031(rf;s) b— 0.03100 x 3.281) 6 0-02Q phis compares Cawurabl} with I7 = 0 025 e,iim;iicd from Fable 4.16, and the more conser,'atiE e altle u[ 0 025 will be used n3 11,e design. prep 2 TIic -II'Sle of rel ore of the channel nI,,teria4 is estlm,ted from 13�ure 4 31,'•tihere d, =2c1-Ta=0{�m 74}erefore. the �rslgle of repose, cr: i, equ.11 to 3>" {k,ased on nlr�ler�}lely rnrns�lcri maierla4)- Vl Y3 Yv`f^ 1 vv rT� t, SLS/ X v : s T - - ` Normal n A Table 4.16 1eCen111' (Orrll')fled f�0Ug47nes5 �hE'ft1Clf'IZts In E,ith, �IIalgllr, Oprsn Cllanneis uniform Lle3r1. clean, aFler «ealheslrlg Fxcati'aled and ra•e1. uni(erm section. clears 0Q,n tuith stied grass, fe •' • eeds Earth, winding. and slu ish no +'egetaliorl _�— �asS some wee 0 021, denseor aquatic plants 0 430 in deep channels 0 027 earth bottom and rubble ssdes 0023 stony bottom and weed} banks Q 03(1 cobble bottom and clean sides Drdgline-exca,°aie n0 vegelalion light brush on banks or dredged and uni(arin Rock cuts smooth jagged and irregular i ease weeds high as floe° depil Channels not clean ottom, rus on sr es rnaintained, weeds and same, ftighest stage of flow dense brush, high stage Vl Y3 Yv`f^ 1 vv rT� t, SLS/ X v : s T - - ` 0-028 0.025 0.030 U 0?5 0.035 0.025 0.035 0.050 0-040 00415 0.060 brush uncut Cpmcc' Chow (i°so). ,Cho< [195?) rcCommer.ded ihistal ue roc vsr in desEgn " J ' 0.030 0 035 0 040 Q.028 0.050 0 035 0.040 0.080 0-050 00:0 0-100 0.035 0 040 t).050;". 0 033; 111 0 U60fl 0-040 0.1 Normal n m N13xiur"n Minimum n 0Q,n 0 rd I S 0 021, 0.425 0 430 00,41, 0 027 0 033 0023 0025 Q 03(1 n 025 � 0__ n 033 51.044 0.030 4.035 0-028 0.025 0.030 U 0?5 0.035 0.025 0.035 0.050 0-040 00415 0.060 brush uncut Cpmcc' Chow (i°so). ,Cho< [195?) rcCommer.ded ihistal ue roc vsr in desEgn " J ' 0.030 0 035 0 040 Q.028 0.050 0 035 0.040 0.080 0-050 00:0 0-100 0.035 0 040 t).050;". 0 033; 111 0 U60fl 0-040 0.1 r LLI a 2 cr cliN z 3 0 rY' V "WI o NOi9NIHSHM :L1NfTOO gmtx IHOd3H NOII VPVH09NI 7VOINI4031 z uXOOHW o3 h'HS $ r ®. r o a _ 1S3MWb'O�� p4 am SISA 7VNV 'ON ` g MO73 WN01103HIQ QNV713M �a ae HOISI�3Y 8SY0 sail do w b U r C) W a r LLI a 2 cr cliN z 3 0 rY' V "WI o 04/0G/? -a84 15:15 4258275424 AESI Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. Technical Memorandum Date: April 6, 2004 To: CarnWest Development, Inc. 9724 NF 120''Place Kirkland, Washington 98034 Attention: Ms, Sara Slatten FAX: 425-825-1565 cc; Ms. Rebecca Cushman Triad Associates 425-821.-3481 Project Name: Shamrock Nursery From: Melissa Magnuson. Pralect No: KF,01508G Kurt D. Merr. iman, 1' Subject: Detention Pond Recommendations PAGE 01/01 is c lose to he The maximum measured ground water elevation within vrg the d entiantpond �11 need tot elevation of the dead water storage elevation. Therefore provided vvith a liner. The liner may consist of till silt and claith a m contentand mum sb ess of 18 inches. t ould be placed as The till fill should contain a minimum of 20 percent si structural fill in accordance with the recommendations contained ,",ithin AEST's September 7, 2003 geotechnical report. If you should have any questions, or require further assistance, please do not hesitate to cal.l- MAMIM KE0150SaG N,,jcC,552t)01509%V E1W p - W 911 r-tFTR AVENUE 0 SUM 100 - KIRKLAND. WA 98033 - p:4251827-7701 - F:4251827-5424 CA L Q �i m O _0 � c r o T CL �Q) 0 O 0 LL C) N ( M N N Cl q) a? Cn co i17 � LC) L4 E w � � E O N o O c �: O y0 c r o0 �N1 Ly 0 1 o r E m O � o � O m a 3 Lv o o Q) Q to ) N r- d � T (n CO (U U') E Eo cn 09 C 0 O C Y o O Co N ❑ � N 0 LL 0 N T LA_ m w 0 A LL V � 3 0 La] u 0 V ale(] buijdS - puellaM ISaM • 0 0 CD N N T* -.--0 -.-0 E D D NItoomtoco O Q D D D O LOcclt00oNtmItV) Q Q D D D D D 4 D D Q LO0MCO0N0)00d'mNIl-TN00to0 Q D D O Q O O O D O O D O O O N Ln 1-- LC) 't 00 N co LC) 1` 1` 0 co co 0 1` 0) fL 1' M m 't m N V) O O 1. 1` co co co M M LC] O M 4 N M 0 LO m r N M�lql' Liz In O 6 4 4 M M O O I- CD 4 4 ('i T O L6 T 00 L6 N f• (D N T N CO � -;I- LC) LC) Lt) LC) LO LC) Liz LC) LI) LC) Ln L!) Lf) LS) Lf) It M M N N N Y Y Y N N" N N" N CV N N N N N N N N N N N N N O o 0 C) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww tfj m T 1- O 1- I- LC) O LC) O m 1- O LO O LC) M m yr (D I- m Y m r N co Y N O d M T LC) 1- wm1l N0wcoItMNO(.Qrl-tiONLC)O Tl- O(0N01l_cc'Tr N000coLnItn M N N N N N r r r r 07 co ti CQ CQ LCD LCD co, co, co, N N C1 ('y N T r e- r- T -- LO Lf) N T (M00 Il- N co U') m Q O M CO M N N N N 0 (0 CO r CD r Y (D CD T T T (D LD M Y 4? CD N 00 T O I- Q 0) O 1• Li) I- Li) M 0 1-a)LnmLC)Maod�(DCD000moN00o 00 � m (0 CD M O It . (D O cc [%-co N Ln O -t O � O CD N O 1- co It N O 00 to LI) ICT co N Y CD m co N fl-cV 0 m NN N N Y T co m M t• (6 (6 L6 L.C) Y T T I' 't co M M N N N N C%4 Y Y T Y T r U')OM 43 TNr)00"tLf) ~ YCDNI-NM1CO 00 OD�d 'It mItmmNr',I-Omm11If) M r 00 LC) O CO I- T 00 M m N O M N t N ql, CO N O "t O � (D T LC) 0 CO CO N Y 1- � O LC) M CO r m (D m I- Y LC) O M I-- M N CO Lj) 1- m m 00 CO LC) T CO :t CD M LS) 00 UC) (D (` co O N ti 1` m r co CO � O O r N co M � � LO 'o CO O CA 1- 1- I- I- I� co OD m m CJo 00 t� C41•t• �1`oOGt)OC)00 00 commmmOOmma)0)mmmmmOOOOm�mmm LO ti 0� m q 1• N M N M m M1 m Lf) w LS) N Lo t M O w CD N m m M m (D N r M cc ao Li)Ln00M1�NMNO-t 'It ONMMM(DI- 'It OMNtMNNr�YN�'TrrTO Ca CO (D N N r N N T- 0 0 Q O O O O O Cl 0 0 Ca 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CD 00 0) O c0 00 M M Ln LC) OD M Liz m m O c0 O 07 O O M ti ti eD Li7 00 - N Lo N L() CD co I- c0 LC) 't m"t N M 00 T Ln m M 1• N m N 1• 1- 1'- L() � M M N Liz M M N N N T r N T LC) "' M S M'T n N N N N r �- Y Y �- T t-- N M rr Lf) CD 1- 00 m o = N M -t Ln (D I- w m CD Y N M 'It LC) CO 1- 00 b) O T N CO -;I- LC) CD O 0 0 00 O O 0 0 T T T T r Y Y T r r N N N N N N N N N N M M M M M M M oo00'6O000000'CD, o60CD000000CD 0000000 N N N N N N N Y T T T r e- N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N O O O O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 w w w LL w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w W LL w w w w w w w w w w w w W w w N T O M1 LO O M m ^ � m N M r M tD 1~ M Y T-1- ti CD 1�- Y Liz m m Ln r CO LO N T M M r N O O 00 M T LC) M N M �t T Co Ln M Y O m 1- (D LC) r� CO N NTT ■- O O O CO N T T T T M I,- CO CD Liz It 4 co r) co N N N N N T r Y Y T T T T e- Y r T r r -- (D (D Ln q m r) I- N N I- I- CD CD O CD CD T (D O O (D T T (D co r d LO r LC) Lf) U') o) N 0' O co 0) 0 Y't M r N O N L1) O 00 O O CO CD CD 1- 0 It O)00 N ti It s .- O m 1- co L() O o0 aQ T Lf) eD N w ct r w L() M Y O m M1 CD U') "T It M N T O O 0 Y M I- N 0 m ti Co CD U-) M Cl M N N N N N T r r Y r r T r T r T Y T r r CO N Y T r r 00 (c co Itil LO CD CD I- ti co co 00 M M "t � -CI- --tr Nt m � -�;r KY -ct m m m tD Lij Lf] m Lt) LC) U-) O N ! ap m N ti r LC) m CD o N (D � m Y O m M LD T M 1- m I` Itr M T M- r f� Y U) c0 T vr (D Y m m M m M N m Lid co m O N M� LC) L() CO 01%- r' -M Y co co N LC) Co 0) m 0) CD CD 1� M1� ti ti m M c0 O c0 o0 cQ M o0 CO OD c0 00 CO N Liz 1- m O N CO M It LO LO 0 m mo m co1�0000co0ommmmmmmmmrnmmmmmmmmmmmmrn T N O LI) m 0 1- (D I- m N w 1- m m c0 0�r O T m 1- CO 0 Ln cD 't'tI�r M M O co T T N M w L() T m M1 cc w u-7 t M M C4 N r T T T r Y Y O 0 Q 0 O 0 00 0 0 . 0pL1� Co. N 0.000000000OCa00000o00000 CD, 000 CMD co M m LO N T O 00 CO 00 � co 1- 0) "t T o tr Co <t Co Lo o r co M oa r, (D (o I- co O In (D (D o r) a0 - CY> I m 0 LS) M m m N (o T- M M N N N( Y T T 'r.- T T T co CD � M M N r T Y T T LC) O 1- M 0 0 0 O m O r N M It Ln tD I-- w m O T T T r- r Y T T r Y O T N m d U) CD 1- oo N N N N N N N N N M N O T N M M M M Ln Co M M M M 000oaCD,o 0oo0000,0oo000Q000000000o0' • 0 0 CD N N T* 0 (SIO) MOIL co N m 0 C) C) W LU O 0 ■ 0 C) C6 C) E E U) 7 a) ro C:) o CL N U- O N Lo cIJ CD T CS_ O O N co cz -a Ero O a Q C r O O C cD a MQ) o� a� l� 11O in T E W • O IL O 3 O' U r= r .Q .Q 0 L. LL. i! W .Q �1 ij K W LL _ O C d iL. .w _ O 0 0 O V ele(] jewwnS - puelleM jSeM Qi O O O O O O O 4 O O 4 O 4 4 4 4 D O O O 4 O O O 0 RCOaCOQRrRMROLO �CDCDMMONOCDN�CDCDCD C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 M to r O CD "t R (D N O CO O N N d' 00 00 CO LO 't d) M R M N O Q O Q Q O 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 r 0 CD CT) , N N e-- N N N M LLT L6 M O O LO N R O O O Q O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (,} LLT R 00 co co 0) CT) CTS CTS CJ) CTS CY) CT) CJS CSS CTS CJS 0) CSS Cf) co 00 co L!7 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N M M M co M M M M M dr Lo O O O O a O a a a a a O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O o O Q O O O 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W WWW W W W W W W W W W W W N N M r N W O N 00 00 LL) It T Ln CD 1:3, LL) M It CO L!) Ci) N M r 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 (D 0 0 a) rr R N R r zt 00 CO 0) (D 't N O N LO r�t O r 00 M T CR CD Opp Q O o 0 0 0 0 O I� O to LC) 4 -It Cl) N N r r r r r CT) R CD 4 M N r T r 1t7 C0 O O o 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 M N 00 LS) N 00 N Kt T CO M LC) N (D S U) CO It 00 Lrj M N O I- N N N N O N 0) N 00 R V) M rC)C) N LL) T O O T CO CO r Nr 0 it R N R -t 00 coM O O I N G CJ) R CD -t M N r ■-- r a 0 0 Cl Cl 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 RCD MNNrrr`-TOOOOOQOCDaaa R oo N LD 00 co CD Ci) N R L!7 M O LO R O N U) r CO � M R R R CJ) R N co C0 R r N'T CD CA R �t 00 Ln C37 00 T C0 CO LOO O b O 0 0 0 0 0 0 a a e a U) N R N U) r CD C) M Ln R O O N M Lf) CO R 00 CO CO CTS CT) a0 0 0 0 0 O O0 O O LL)T r r i- T-- N M �' 'ct �� C0 R R CX) co' CD CA O O O O O O 0) Q C� O CJS CJ) o') CTS CJ) a) O m O m 07 CA 0) m m m CT) C3) O O O O CT) 0) CD O m N 00 � 0) R�r a N N co O M R d R't CT) M LL) co R r 0 0 0 0 a O Q (D 0 0 p 0 Ln CO Ln 't LLQ O CD "It "r M N N T r r r r T O O O O O a O O O O o 0 0 O a O O C\i '00 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O o O C' o 6 0 0 0 a o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O Ca O 0 N N'- LO, m M SV N r R r 0) co StO co r O T M a mN0RI-00 CD CDItmC'7NrNNNNTLC)R rorQaoOOOaoQa T r N M It Lo CoR 00 CTS T N CO d Lf) CD R CO O c) T N M -t LC) CD N r N CD LL) co R 00 O r N LL 0 0 0 0 a O C7 0 0 0 r T T r T T r r r N N N N N N N N N co M co co M M 000aaCD, OC700CD 0C)CO 0QOC700QC) CD 0 C N N N co co co M M M M co co M 't -t d 'gr't'tq- qj 't r'Lo u) Ln 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a Q O 0 0 0 Q O 0 0 0 0 Q O 0 0 0 0 0 C7 0 0 0 o 0 W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W OU -)O O r o0 Co N LLT N CD CD q r M Lo 00 U0 CSO W M 00 a0 M N r r r a O O0 O O a LC) 00 r 0) CTS 't LC) r 0) co M N O O co co co CJ) O O Q m CTS O O M Co O (D o Q O O O O O (M Y r CD � CO. N N r � T � r R co � N r� r r r r� r � CD (0 CD Q a 0 0 0 0 a r LC) It193" (D Nt 00 W N LLQ N (0 M 0 (D CD CO N N N N N N N N M C) R R e CT) � O 0) CJS 't LL) r Q O M N O R co It N p O O Q Q 0 O (Dr 0 a O O O a 0 0 0 0 Ln 00 r CD � M N N r r T T r 0 0 0 0 O o 0 a C')r r000000OO6O0ao0OO0000C OC> oo O LC) CD CD -t CD N N 00 Ln CO 't 'qT � � M r "t 00 00 00 00 00 W M R co M M 40 O LC) M Q O LCT d' 00 a M CD R O N M LCT R C37 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 m C7) Ci) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r 00 M LLT co R R 00 00 M CJ 00 m O O M O C� O CS) O p O O O Ca O eC3) C3) O O CJS m M CT) C� O 6 O r r T r T r r CD a0 co O O Om 0) 0) OM 0) CD C)) 07 C� 4) Cn 0) CJ) O CA O 4) CT) O C3) C3) O CT) m 0) 0) 0) CJ) O O CD CTS C3) m 0) O Chi CD m Tr ' O a O0 00 T- T O Q r 0 0 OCD O O LL) � r O li} O� M M M r N M r N N C a R R L N t- O O O Q O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Q Q 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a O O O a a c O oo0,00040000000000CD00000000oCa0oOC7C R � N O MM (0 �� LLT T M� N M M r 0 CD O a O p O r r- O O r O O o (D 0 O Qo M N r r (Jy r N M LO (D R 00 CD r N M� LC) rO R 00 Q N T N M� LO (D R M O r N M� LO Co O O O a 0 00 a O T r r T r r r T T r N N N N N N N N N M M M M M M t? o000oo00oCD6o60060000000006066a000CD00 0 0 0 0 N co N LO1 L C) ryryWl� W LL (SI3) M01.4 0 O N N LO Q W C 0 r- r O I LU CD ir N v D C) W r 21 Lid U CD CDx C) C) r I' WU 4-- 0 p O � L co �+ . r. � T C) — 1 W C) 0 � L 1 W C) C) r Lid O I w C) C) r I' m U 0 N Qa) � T ►2 � C � I Q CO O C: 0 O N O � � M � N O CD O U) C� H O T - E O v) 20 0 C r C] 2 =3 r ❑ � C �s ❑ n) O T LL m 0 LL 0 U- >1 A CJ A Q 2 L LL C v C? T t: LL O C7 .w ci C O Q u 0 Cl LJ C3 � eleCl aaIuiM - puelIGM ISaM • 0 LC) m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ° (7) M N O - N 't 't M T Il- N C) LO CO ' r C3) N CO N LO O d7 O 't -t C.0 -t O CO M 0) LO 0 04 N N 0) CO O CD OR O— M CO 00 CO CY) M1 LC) N (N 00 M1 CO C7) 00 I' 0) M1 CY) CO M T N r 0) � CO Ln O 00 r` CO Ln 00 O M (Y) UO Ln M1 Co co M1 M1 M1 i~ M1 (o OO M1 Ln co UO UD UO M1 LC) Co M1 OO UO (D r r N M ¢tt t LO LCT LCT LC) LO LCT LO U) LC) LC) LCT LC) LO LO LCT LO LO Ln LC) U) Ln Ln Ln 'Ct M CN r T- r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r c- r N N N N N N N N N N N N N N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Q Q C7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 t W r W r i W W r t t W W W t W r W r W t t t W W W r i W W t W � W r i i t t r W W LLJ W W W r r r W W W t , W W r i t , W W W W r W t W t W r w M CO Ln M1 0) CO r O CN r C7) O M M CD 't N M1 M1 't O U) 00 N N M M1 r- 00 CO N CD 1- O CO Ln N 4) E~ �t — OO Ln M O CO ml CO O 00 M1 LCT N T O Co M r 't M1 r U7 N t - O M CO �t •y (CDC) L LC) 4 CY � ':7 c+T M' C) M N N N N m OO M1 CD Lo to -t M M N r r- � LCT N LO N M A co LC) N N 00 Q N m `� co M1 O N m� M N r O N M M1 O Co M1 M1 O LC) M M1 Ictr r M1 M M CD M N O M N r Ln 00 N OD M `r M ti� (D LL ) CD IL M1 M N� N C.D M � O r� N UO � CO r I f) O) r 037 O N N CO N M1 Co M r't M1 T LC] N M1 O M 00 T M Lf) N 0) M1 � O M co N QCO M M 4 M O M CD 6 N T O O C)0 M1 CO LCT LC) d M CY7 N r r T CD Ln L[) . M CV N N N r r r r r T r CO N UO N It CO M M r (0 O O 0) M N zt N CD M1qr M1 O UO N 00 CO M1 M M N M1 00 It M 'r -- Ln Lr) M1--zf LO co O CO Q O M1 CO r 0) M1 M1 O Co M1 N CO LCT �t CD 00 Ln N CO Nr M1 (N 0) (o r Ln CO co t M1 Q N LO CO r� M1 M r LC) CC Ci r M It U) M1 00 CA O r N co 4 T Ln UC ) co C.O M1 00 00 Cd C.) It It LC) LCT LCT UO Co co (D CD M1 M1 M1 M1 00 00 co 00 co CO co 0) 0) 0) O O C) 0) a) O Q Q m C3) 0) LO O 't M M1 N zl- r ,:1- 00 Ln M r 0) "t C3) N 00 d OM1 M M Ln M1 CO Q 0) r` 0) O It e- CD 0) 00 CO M1 T M1 O 00 1- CD N O M1 � N 00 1` M M U) T UO O N 00 N i` M1 Ln U) N LC) M1 r- 't M N cc M1 co N" N N M M N N N m r CV r �- r r r r r- 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 CO M M N O N M O N M N CO CD r't LCT N M1 d' O CO Ln co O N O CO d T Co M M1 O rl-OD N co r 00 O M1 M � 00 r N 0) C O O M CO r LO r N N N F- M1 M1 Co t[) CM Ln M1 M1�� N N c 7 M1 M N N N N CO CO N N N CO T N NT� T r r N M't LCT CD M1 00 (7)T r N M It LCT CO M1 00 C) N r N M N N N � LCT Co CV N CV M1 00 N N M M r Nm N C] M M d' M LO M CD CO O 00CD O Q O O 0 0 6606C)00C),CD, 0(D r r r r T r T r CD C), 0oQ0C N N N N O O O O o0oo N Q N O N O N O O O O O C) C) 0 0 0 C CD Ca 0 N N 0 0 N 0 N 0 N N N N N N 0 CD CD O O O N N N (N N O Q O Q Q wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwWwwwwww 1 1 I r r I t t I r r I I 1 r r I ! r r t I t I r r I t 1 1 1 1 1 00 I,- � O� r M1 M LO M 't O O W U) M1 M CO M1 M OU U7 LCT Q 00 N � M M M1 � M' r m M N U) O CO N Q r• UO N T 00 M1 O N UO Q M m m Lf} r M1 U7 N O 00 CD In M N Y LS) CY3 M N N r r r r r r 0) 00 r� M1 CQ UO UO It dt M co M N CN N N r � � r r- r r M1 r 00 0) 0o 0) M r M1 co CO CD (D "t M1 CD CO T CD LO rItI, CO C.D LO M1 M1 N C}) CO M LO M1 N 1- 00 O N 00 00 to N M1 Ln N N r 00 S LCT (D 00 T d CD LSO 00 M M 00 M1 It 1'- N CD M N T - OD CD it 0) M T ti00 Ln co C ) co m ti M1 0) N U) 0) M m It 0) LC) — M1 Ln N CO 00 co LC) �t co N T m 0) N LC] O CD N Q ti U. -tCV OM1 070 M1 CD LC) In M M M N N N N U-) It�t co co N N� � r r r r� CO O CO CO CO O LCT T CO �r -�r UO N O N LC) co r N M M1 N Lo U7 �t N CO CD CO ti r CYT Co IL CD a) r M Ln O Co C77 N T CO O CD O N N O t- 't O CO CD UO CD "t 00 N 't M1 O r M'r UO CO 1- 00 O Nt O LO M1 LC) Co 07 M 1` C.0 i• M1 O N co 00 4 OD U) M1 CA 00 00 00 O r Q 0) N 0.) N O M 4 U) Lo CO 0) 0) 0) C7) 0) C) Co Co M1 M1 M1 0) 0) 0) a) C3) ti 00 o0 OD 0) a) 0) O OD 0) co 0) oO O O 0) 00 N to N LCT Co co co M1 Co O � 00 w N M M 00 r N� LC) M Q O w CO M1 r � to N M N C D M r T T N UO Ln N M 00 CO r M M1 M T-- O 00 Co CQ Co CD ticl' UO It M M CV N N N r r r r O T d M1 CO UO CI- M N CN CV r r r Q CO O O O O O C) O O 60' O b O O O O O O O co c --t 00 Cn M1� CO M T CYT LC) r li) O O N M LCT Co r O O M1 OO r r Ln N M N Q M r O CD CD M C� N M M1 d N O 04 M1 M1 CD CQ 't 't U) � M N N N N r r r r T- r M1 CD LCT qr M N N N r r r r r N co d LC) C.o 1- 00 M T r N CYT �f u C.D M1 00 C3) N r N M r N N N .t LC) Cfl M1 co N N N N N a) T N N M M M CO M It M LO M CO M 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r r r 0 0 T T 6 0 0 r (D r 0 0 0 0 C) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Q 0 C) 0 0 CD 0 P o C) C) CD C) • 0 LC) m (SIO) AAO I =I R CN 0 1 LLI C) 0 am LO 0 0 0 0 x cu C> LU LU 10 0 0 *0 0 L. IL CN 0 1 LLI C) 0 am LO 0 0 0 0 m a C Q 0 a) (1) L 9- 1 U - CV L Q) CA Q) H O 2 C O 4 - CO 7 3 0 LL alga lanuuy - puallaM IsaM *'' LU 0-.-o \ 0 0 0 0 0 0 o a o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o a o 0 o a o 0 o a o 0 0 0 0 0 0 a o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o v C N U-) M1 b (D b O M M1 M1 M M d O 00 r O M1 M -r O r r't M O r M r r r CO I- M I` M M1 (D O O N CO CO N CO M1 Cr) N CO 0I�r 00 CN It N 00 M CO N M1 M1 �t N CO M to N O LC) zt r Q� CO 4 M N co N Lf) co CO 0 CD r r r r O O o b 6 M M1 M1 (o M M N <- (D LC) r CO CD 6 66 d ( r N M -t -t LO M Lo LC) CD LO (D CO CD CD (D co CO (D LC) LO LI) T) U) Lf) Lt) U') U') n N r T r T T r r r Y r Y Y r r r r CN N N N N (N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N M M n OOOCOOCOCDCO0000Od000000CDCD0OQOOOOOOdd 000 y/1 I I 1 1 1 1 I I 1 1 I I I I 1 1 I 1 1 , 1 I 1 1 1 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 l4 W W W W W W L1 L1 L1 W W W W W W W W W W W W W U1 W W W W W W W W Li W W W Lf) N LO O N L17 Lf) CX) Li? T O CO r O O N O CO f� r LS) N r lL7 C7) M1 Cc N C i �t N r 00 a. M 00 CD �t co r C7 ti Lf) � M N O (D � LL7 CO Y LC) 0) � O CD CJ 00 LO CV O M1 (O ri N O t— CO O V M N N N N N r r T T T r Y C7) M M1 (D (.D Lo 4 Cr Nr CO co, N N N N r r r r r co M1 CD G. V T-- r LC) LD I- W M1 r r r O `Cr Li O N r Liz M M1 M� M M1 r M Liz CO L{) 0 O C) m M1 N M M N M1 CO N r r CD M r N N M d r- r 00 C Lf) M N� b N Ln -t 00 � O m LC) O M CO CD Ln Ln COr LM m M1 O CON r LM1 CO N M Cr) r M � \ iz d' O CO CV OO O N N O M1 CO "t N CO M C%) M1 LO co co CO lqr C's T a) M1 LC) Ct M r O O) 06 M1 to (o LC) 't� TT co CO N N N N r r r r r o b M N N N N N r r r T T r T X W C3) O) LO M (D u) CO M M N LC) r LC) M C) CO r CO Y M1 M M L!) W M LO Y M N CO ti COCO M N r U\ co O(DC) Co LL7 0) M1 Lal r LS) M b d. M LO � r 00 � O Ln O) M M1 r R M1 O) N M Liz I` C D r N CO _ Lo0 O N LS') co CO 6 O r N M C) LC) Co. ,t U.) LCD (oI� I` M1 M1 O) 00 00 00 co 00 M, 6 CO i� ti M1 M1 M1 00 00 co 00 co co 00 0) O) O) O O CD () 0) m o) b O CD O) 0) C) 0) b cm O CD C3) CD A R] d 00 Co (D -t M r ti O M M M1 M L!) O M1 LO CO M CD (D I- CO N r CD O N M CD d) O N LC) M M r Y M1 M1 M1 O CO M� b� to r M co M1 LO (fl t� M�'t N N N Nrr T N r O O cr (o Lf) N T- r r (� r r T- r O r O 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CD O O d 0 0 CO L$ CD L �+ C00 CA N M1 O M1 coL() Li) Ld) O r CO M O 00 LO LO M U,) T b N O ti O b CO 00 0-) (D CD M1 00 m� O r r M1 Liz M1 00 M1 O m (D N b 00 00 N co LL) O Lo M ROY r M CO Ln LC) r o N0 r r r r r r M r r M Y r r r CO O Co Co0 LC) CO LD coC) C 7 N N N N N (J} r N M Liz CD M1 M M r N M LL-) O M1 00 M N r N M '9t X) CD I- M M M r N C7 "t LO *. Lp O O O O O O d C) r r Y r r T T r r N N N N N N N N N M M MC") CO M V C3 0 0 0 0 o o o 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r r r r r r N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N CO M M CO M CO M M O O O O d O 0 0 d O (D 0 d O(D 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 d O O d d O O CD O 0 0 b j� { 1 1 ''11 ' 1I' 1 kI� k'k' 1'II 1 ''I1 I ' !{' 1 ''i1 I 1 1 ''11 I I 11k' ''1I ''1I ''11 I I I 1'1' 1 I { 1 1 I II1 I riL1w! � W W W W W W L4 W W W � W W W � � W W � � W W UA W w W w W w W w w W W w A d C'7 N O) r M L(7 O O i` -�r r O r OD d M r r Tt r-qj, r d 00 C7) T 0) (D Lr) T LO CO O 00 it,-T M1 r b O LC) CO M1 N cD r d M C D M1 N O CO M1 Liz dr M r O C7 � W M O� d CO p j (y r 00 M1 CO Ln L) �� C7 M N N N N N r r �- Y r r C� CO Mr— M1 M1 (O CO a 0 c r r T r T M (D CO M1 00 N M M m co LC) r Lt) M d N C3) L() M co - M1 CO r O M r r O M O b coC3) CO d M 00 Q N N r M d' O O) CD � r CO O M 0 M r LL7 CY7 O O (D V .o C) M M (3) r O Lo CO i` N (o r co M m (D dr N O CX) M1 Lo � N Y O O m 00 CO i,- M1 CD N cV Y r 6 C6 M1 co L() Ln -t� M M N N N N N r r r r Y r- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 X W M1 N O CO CD M N Liz O r M (O C)) r b N CO M1 (3) C D O d CD 0) d N r m X) r M1 r O O"t 00 p O co M1 I-- o 00 M <r � N M1 M CO M CO O M Ln M1 d r N cfi LC) M1 00 0) C Orr N N M M M U N 00 N LD 00 O) � N co � � LC) Lo CO cO M1 M1 M1 t- M1 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 C3) O C3) CD CA 6166 ?) C3) M1 M1 00 00 co m C7) O) O M M O M M O m cm O (7) Cil O) C7) C3) 0) m O) O) CA C D C7) C D C3) 0) d MM V M1 L(7 00 (D N T M m r M N M M 00 M 0) co N O f` M1 M r N M 00 O O LO ct U) 'T O Liz O O M ClJ r C� CC} U. CO Ln � M Im NNNN r r Y r r r O O d 0 CO O O Ca b d 4 4 � CD IT' M, r O 0 C:, C) CD 0 0 o CD C) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 b O CO b O Nf L LL C M O (3) N O_ CO LO (T 00 M r LC) N� C3) LO r CO M M O M1 r Ln (3) 0) O r r- 00 CO O r O C)�� r M1 CA M1 m N o0 N CO M M 1` CO M N b W O M1 CO la LC) � M M M N N N N `7 N r T Y M CD Lf] M m Ce) N CV r r r r r r LL RJ} Y N C) LC) CD T'- Cao O r N M � L!) CD M1 co 0) N r N M� lii CO M1 00 d M r N C) m lC) O d 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 T r r T r -- 60 r r r N N N N N N N N N M M M C+') M co C? o a o Q o 0 0 0 6 0 o a o 0 o a o 0 0 0 0 o a o o a o CD a o o a o 0 0 0 0 0 0 C) N f.C3 N m a� 0 Q rn -0 LO m h Ca m m Q 1 v� 2 0 (SIO) AAO 14 0 C) W O r C7 0 L1J C) 0 r W O Q r i C6 d t3 U O (� 47 x 3: W p o cry O CL N O W D I Q C7 0 L1J C) 0 r Shamrock — Technical Information Report IS 7 OTHER PERMITS t� J 005/2612004 Job #01-159 /TRLAD Page 7-1 • Shamrock —Technical Information Report 8 TESC ANALYSIS AND DESIGN Flows for onsite areas to be disturbed during construction will be detained in an onsite TESC pond. The site will utilize Appendix D of the September 1998 KCSWDM for the erosion and sedimentation control design_ Onsite flows will be directed to the projects two permanent onsite detention facilities. In addition to these facilities, a temporary sediment pond will be constructed southwest of the intersection of 146`h Avenue SE and SE 125th Street - Temporary treet_ Tem ora Sediment Pond Surface Area The surface area for the temporary pond had been calculated using the following equation.. SA = 2Q'o Y ld Where: SA = Surface Area (ft) Qlo = Developed peak flow for the 10 year, 24-hour storm --) 0.8I2 efs Vea = Settling Velocity (0.00096 ft/s) SA = 2 x 0.812 _1,692 ft2 0.00096 ©5126!2004 Job #01-159 Required Surface Area =1,692 ft2 Provided Surface Area = 1,758 ftz Page 8-1 • Shamrock -Technical Information Report Dewatering Orifice The dewatering orifice is designed per the 1998 Icing County Surface Water Design Manual. The orifice size is dependent on the surface area of the pond, which is calculated based on the developed l0 -year, 24-hour storm event. Required Area of the Orifice: A — A, (2hy' 0.6 x 3600Tg os where: Ao = orifice area (ft') As = pond surface area (ft) h = head of water above orifice (height of riser in feet) T = dewatering time (24 hours) G = acceleration due to gravity (32.2 ft/sect) Convert the Required Area to Orifice Diameter: D = 24A° where: D = diameter of orifice (inches) Ao = required area of the orifice Permanent North Detention Pond Assumptions: 9 -feet of head (pond bottom to design water surface elevation) 33,338 ft2 of pond surface area A = 33,338(2 x 9.0)°5 = 0.48 ft' (0.6)(3600)(24)(32.2f' 0.48 D=24 -=4.38" �r 05/2612004 Job #01-159 Diameter = 9-3/8 inches 4RI.AD M. - Page 8-2 • Shamrock –Technical Information Report Temporary Sediment Pond Assumptions: 3.5 -feet head 1,758 ft2 of pond surface area A = 1,758(2 x 3.5)'5 = 0.0158 ft2 (0-6)(3600)(24)(32.2)"" D=24 0.0158_1.70" Diameter = 1-314 inches Permanent South Detention Pond Assumptions: 4 -feet of head 49,875 ft' of pond surface area = — 49,875(2 x 4.0)° 5 = 0.480 f12 (0.6)(3600)(24)(32.2)0.' D=24,00189_938„ Y � Diameter = 9-318 inches Principal Spillway A riser pipe will be used as the principal spillway. The diameter has been sized to pass the developed site flowrate. For the two permanent facilities, the chosen developed flowrate is the 100 -year storm event. For the temporary sediment pond the developed flowrate will be the 10 -year storm event. The size of the diameter has been determined using Figure 5.3.4.H from the 1998 KCSWDM_ ©512612004 Job #01-159 /TRLAD Page 8-3 Shamrock —Technical Information Report Permanent North Detention Pond Assumptions. Q,()O — 4.36 cfs H = 1 -foot D = 36 -inches (3 -feet) Qweir = 9.739 D H3/2 where: D = diameter (feet) H = head above riser (feet) Qweir = 9.739 (3') (1.0)312 Qweir = 29.22 cfs Qrequired = 4.36 efs Qprovided — 29.22 efs Temporary Sediment Pond Assumptions= Qto = 0.81 cfs H = 1 -foot D = 24 -inches (2 -feet) Qor;tce — 3.782 D2 H1/2 where: D = diameter (feet) H = head above riser (feet) 3.782 (2')2 (1.0)112 Q„.e;r = 15.12 cfs Qrequired — 0.81 CfS Qprovided _ 15.12 efs Permanent South Detention Pond Assumptions. QtOO = 4.55 efs H = 1 -foot D = 24 -inches (2 -feet) Qorifire 3.782 D2 Ht/2 where: D = diameter (feet) H — head above riser (feet) Qtiveir = 3.782 (2')2 (1.0)'12 05/26/2004 Job #01-159 /OJAD Page 8-4 0 • • Shamrock —Technical Information Report Qweir = 15.12 cfs Qrequired 4.55 efs Qprovided 15.12 efs Redundant Overflow Measures The permanent north pond will utilize the permanent overflow spillway that has been designed to accommodate the developed 100 -year storm event. For the sizing calculations of this spillway please refer to Section 4. The temporary sediment pond and the permanent south pond will utilize a type two catch basin with a birdcage riser. Please see Section 4 for the sizing calculation for the permanent south pond overflow structure. The overflow structure has been sized using Figure 5.3.4.H from the 1998 KCSWDM and the calculations are shown below. Assumptions: Q1« — 0.81 cfs H 0.5 -feet D = 48 -inches (4 -feet) 9.739 D H312 where: D — diameter (feet) H = head above riser (feet) Q�aeir = 9.739 (4') (0.5) 3/2 Qweir = 13.77 efs @512612004 Job #01-159 Qrequired — 0.81 cfs Qpro,ided — 13.77 efs TRIAD Page 8-5 Shamrock —Technical Information Report 1* 9 BOND QUANTITIES, FACILITY SUMMARIES, AND U • DECLARATION OF COVENANT 9.1 Bond Quantities A Site Improvement Bond Quantity Worksbeet has been provided under separate cover. 9.2 Facility Summaries Provided. 9.3 Declaration of Covenant Not applicable. ©5!26!2004 Job #01-159 Page 9-1 • • KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL STORMWATER FACILITY SUMMARY SHEET Development Shamrock Date_ 5/20/04 Location NW Intersection of NE 4th St & 148th Ave SE ENGINEER DEVELOPER Name Rebecca Cushman, PE Name Sara Slatten Firm Triad Associates Firm CamWest Address 11 Al4-11 Sth Ave NE Address 9720 NE 120th Place 100 Kirkland, WA 98034 Kirkland, WA Phone (475)821 -8448 Phone 425 B25-1955 Developed Site: Acres 34.5 Number of lots 1 29 (_In_c_luding Renton) Number of detention facilities on site: Number of infiltration facilities on site: 2 ponds ponds vaults vaults tanks tanks Flow control provided in regional facility (give location) No flow control required Exemption number Downstream Drainage Basins Immediate Ma -or Basin Basin A Honey Creek May Creek Basin Lower cedar River Cedar River Basin C Basin D. Number & type of water quality facilities on site: biofiltration swale (regularlwet/ or continuous inflow?) 1 combined detention/WQ pond (WQ portio asi P or large?) combined detention/wetvault compost filter filter strip X flow dispersion farm management plan X landscape management plan oil/water separator (baffle or coalescing plate?) catch basin inserts: Manufacturer pre -settling pond pre -settling structure: Manufacturer flow -splitter catchbasin sand filter (basic or large?) sand filter, linear (basic or large?) sand filter vault (basic or large?) stormwater wetland wetpond (basic or large?) wetvault DESIGN INFORMATION INDIVIDUAL. BASIN A B C D Water ua] ty design flow Water Quality treated volume or wet and VT 14,536 14 1998 Surface Water Design Manual 911198 4 KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL IGN ORMATION, confd Vj TOTAL INDIVIDUAL BASIN nage basin(s) Onsite area A 17.80 AC- B C D 3.52 AC Offsite area 11.13 A,r. Type of Storage Facility eveLevel 2 Live Storage Volume BU,JY2 103,313 Predevelo d Runoff Rate 2 -year 10- ear 1 - 100 -year Devqoped runoff rate 2 -year 10 -year 100 -year Q Type of restrictor Size of orifice/restriction No_ 1 3-1 Z16" 2-7/611 No.2 3-9/16" 3-3/4" No.3 Notch 2.4" 2-1/4" No.4 Notch 1.25" FLOW CONTROL & WATER QUALITY FACILITY SUMMARY SHEET SKETCH All detention, infiltration and water quality facilities must include a sketch per the following criteria: 1. Heading for the drawings should be located at the top of the sketch (top right-hand corner). The heading should contain: • North arrow (point up or to left) • D9# • Plat name or short plat number • Address (nearest) • Date drawn (or updated) • Thomas Brothers page, grid number 2. Label CBs and MHs with the plan and profile designation_ Label the control structure in writing or abbreviate with C.S. Indicate which structures provide spill control. 3. Pipes-- indicate: Pipe size Pipe length Flow direction Use s single heavyweight line 4. Tanks— use a double, heavyweight line and indicate size (diameter) 5. Access roads • Outline the limits of the road • Fill the outline with dots if the road is gravel. Label in writing if another surface. 6. Other Standard Symbols: • Bollards: • • i • ■ ■ ■ ■ • Rip rap 000000 000000 Fences --x---x---x---x---x---x-- • Ditches 4D-----D---D-•--;D 7. Label trash racks in writing. S. Label all streets with the actual stteet sign designation. If you don't know the actual street name, consult the plat map. 9. Include easements and lot lines or tract limits when possible. 10. Arrange all the labeling or writing to read from left to right or from bottom to top with reference to a properly oriented heading- IL eading_IL Indicate driveways or features that may impact access, maintenance or replacement. 0 9/1/98 1998 Surface Water Design Manual 2 LU 'LLI V z Ci N CL 3 r 0 z 0 u LU U) ui cn LI.: u �r i NO1rJNlNSbM A1NnO0 'JNIN z 3eldpNY15 � � .r N E = X _ V v 6•r �y2 le. � N 1����� 4t„o � n� U I I D �� rF,6 $ l dz L) :1 _ $ ry -.c. ry p� xam,0a n?�X anma arr rN O�Ki'/ v ums�¢I:styn rdrt/r ou C � a .a � pV `w �a r •� EF2it go + o O i� o um u � 9310N ONV 971%'130 GNOd H -LYON w� xe r LU 'LLI V z Ci N CL 3 r 0 z 0 u LU U) ui cn LI.: u �r i j y p I M S �C 3eldpNY15 � � .r N E = X _ V J O~V � n� U k• l dz L) :1 $ ;4 -.c. � G�m!' =W go + o O i� o um u U[- LI - E= qr �- v¢ N ?•. G %� 0, � 4 G N�r RNA-' I�yod��6 i— ad Hca f j y p I M S �C 3eldpNY15 � � .r W A 3eldpNY15 � � .r O~V dz q5 $ ;4 uj U) LU C7 z (1) clia 3 a z _O F- L) W N r W N W N NOIDNINSVM .S1NDOD 9NIJI tl 1 N L ��O��r17� 1 r�d�r�R f =I ' �v �� r. N K3 v S310N ONV S71VI.90 GNOd WHOM .. � = E o i IWa uj U) LU C7 z (1) clia 3 a z _O F- L) W N r W N W N I; I, Ip Zm o us¢ NO1`JNINSD'M A1N1700 `JNIX ar ��q x4Chi4 ♦y1{ �a� ! 1S3MWV'O Z` wake �kj .�dqs� o� r' i�3 N4l5 �y , I _ Asx ase, � nv asx anrw .NrUk � G . G� G C x3rxro� xm3r urro9 � S31ON QNV SWV130 4NOd HlnOS ss Aa Noisd3a arra nx d a r S L k i (J O O I c� o � Zm o us¢ ar ��q x4Chi4 Z` Zm o us¢ S L ~ x, fou k �'I�R Fu L"�go3 IB h Zm o us¢ N41`JNlNSb'M ;I1Nf10J DNlil i �i I i i . ................ Noomw1�Hs D O $ m�$ Ls3mpvvD S31QN ON7 STV130 ONQd H1ROS M� ae xmsn�e airn off 6 O z ......................................... ' l 1 3 W LO LU 0 Z N .......... .......... ._....''.. t .... n. W y }` J k� 4� I i i . ................ rpt Shamrock — Technical Information Report 0 10 OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE • • The ponds will be publicly maintained systems, whereas the swales and rain gardens will be privately maintained. ©5126/2004 Job #01-159 ARLAD Page 10-1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Shamrock Level 1 Downstream Analysis King County, Washington Date: 1119104 Revision Date(s) 6/29/2002 9/12/2003 Prepared By: Ben Rutkowski Schwin ChaosilapakuI Reviewed By: Rebecca Cushman, PE Job # 01-159 ti00Z f � NVF RECEIVED JAN 2 12004 MAIN FILIE COPY. J'A 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Shamrock LEVEL ONE DOWNSTREAM ANALYSIS King County, Washington Prepared For: Prepared For: CamWest Real Estate Development, Inc. Prepared By: Schwin Chaosilapakul Ben Rutkowski Reviewed By: Rebecca Cushman, PE Issued July 29, 2002 Revised September 12, 2003 Revised January 19, 2004 Shamrock — Level 1 Downstream Analysis Table of Contents 1 1 INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................1 2 SITE....................................................................................................................2 ' 3 UPSTREAM DRAINAGE ANALYSIS..................................................................2 3.1 Upstream Basin.................................................................................................... _ 2 4 DOWNSTREAM DRAINAGE ANALYSIS............................................................3 4AOnsite Runoff........................................................................................................................ 3 4.2 Offsite Runoff........................................................................................................................ 4 4.3 Downstream Drainage Problems.......................................................................................... 7 5 RESOURCES USED FOR ANALYSIS...............................................................8 5.1 Sensitive Areas Folio............................................................................................................ 8 5.2 King County Basin Reconnaissance Program...................................................................... 8 5.3 Soils Survey for the King County Area................................................................................. 8 5.4 King County Community Planning Area............................................................................... 8 ' 6 DRAINAGE CONCEPT.......................................................................................9 Appendix............................... .................................................................................... A Existing Conditions Exhibit Developed Conditions Exhibit Downstream Drainage Exhibit Upstream Tributary Areas Exhibit (onsite, for downstream analysis) ' Soils Map and Legend, Hydrologic Soils Group Table Sensitive Areas Folio King County Basin Reconnaissance Program King County Community Planning Area Complaints Excerpt from Sienna Improvement Plans (6 Sheets) n 1 r 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 i Shamrock Level 1 Downstream Analysis 1 INTRODUCTION The project proposes to create 118 single-family lots on an approximately 29.6 acre property. Approximately 22.1 acres will be included in the development site, and the remainder left as protected wetlands and associated buffers. The site is located north of 128"' St. SE and west of 148`h Avenue SE. The property is within Section 10, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., King County, Washington. Please see the Vicinity Map below. TO 900 -1- v �S 1 v�QC/ i v� SF ilbth 57 I L �iE 117th I _— S] 300 W iu f � 17E 120th N s SE L 124th rU PAf?IC TO 1-4 5 & — NF 41h ST �.� IR1DE In4 SF (_32nd S JJ SE 133rd C7 4— 1 VICINITY MAP Not to Scale Site visits were performed on July 2, 2001 and July 15, 2002 and July 14, 2003 to observe the upstream and downstream drainage conditions. The following analysis is based on these site visits and related research of available records. January 19, 2004 Job # 01-159 Page l 1 1 Il 1 1 Ll Shamrock — Level I Downstream Analysis 2 SITE The existing site is a wholesale nursery with two residences and several outbuildings that will be demolished (see Existing Conr{itions Exhibit, in Appendix). The site generally slopes from the east to west. An onsite wetland exists on the northwestern portion of the site. Slopes range from 2-12 % with pasture ground cover. The site exists within two basins. 3 UPSTREAM DRAINAGE ANALYSIS 3.1 Upstream Basin There are two upstream areas that are tributary to the site_ Upstream from the southeast section of the site is a development called Morgan Place which contributes 3.1 acres. The slopes in that area range from 5-10% in a westerly direction. Bordering the western side of the site is a 5 acre area with varying slopes of 2-10% consisting primarily of pasture, some light forest, wetland and two existing houses. This area flows to the onsite wetland and then to the north. Refer to the Tributary Areas Exhibit in the Appendix. January 19, 2004 Job # 01-159 /TRLAD Page 2 n 1 t Shamrock -- Level 1 Downstream Analysis 4 DOWNSTREAM DRAINAGE ANALYSIS Refer to the Downstream Drainage Exhibit and Upstream Tributary Map from. the Loken/Johnson Report, Sheets 1 and 2 from the approved King County Project L02SR037 and Sheets 10, 11 and 15 from the approved City of Renton Project of Sienna in the Appendix. 4.1 Onsite Runoff North Approximately 17.0 acres of the northern portion of the site slope from east to west. Slopes range from 2-12 %. This northern portion of the site is tributary to an onsite wetland located in the northwestern portion of the site. The wetland covers approximately 5.5 acres and discharges offsite to the north. South The remainder of the site drains in a southwest to south direction over gentle slopes. Runoff is collected in an existing detention pond located north of the intersection of SE 128`h Street and 146th Ave. SE_ Runoff from the pond discharges south offsite beneath SE 128th Street through a 42" pipe. January 19, 2004 Job # 01-159 Page 3 IShamrock Level 1 Downstream Analysis (Sienna). The flow is then picked up by the 36 -inch bypass conveyance pipe within the Sienna development and continues in a southerly direction until passing the quarter -mile downstream point at its intersection with SE 132"' Street. From there, the flow continues to travel in the 36 -inch pipe approximately 200 feet west on SE 132n' Street before changing course to the south on 144`h Avenue SE. The flow then travels south on 144`h Avenue SE for approximately 600 feet where it connects to a 24 -inch cross culvert. The flow then continues to the west in a defined stream channel. 4.3 Downstream Capacity The Sienna project included the design of an upstream bypass conveyance line. The sizing of this pipe system was based on assumptions made of the upstream basin. These assumptions were made based on limited topography. As a result of more detailed topography, it is found that the original assumptions arc conservative. Please see the Upstream Tributary Areas Exhibit located in the Appendix. January 19, 2004 Job # 01-159 /fRIf1D Page 4 4.2 Offsite Runoff North Discharge from the onsite wetland flows offsite to the north through a 12 -inch CMP and a 6 - inch concrete culvert and into a pond in the adjacent property. The pond discharges north into a wetland, then to Honey Dew (Honey) Creek which, according to the December 1990 King County Sensitive Areas Map Folio, is an unclassified stream in the May Creek Sub - Basin. Honey Dew Creek combines with May Creek over two miles downstream (north) of the site. May Creek is in the Cedar River Drainage basin and ultimately discharges into Lake Washington. South ' Runoff to the south flows through a 42 -inch pipe then into a ditch behind a residence at 14415 SE 128th St. The ditch ranges from 2 to 3 feet deep and then travels under a driveway via an 18 -inch culvert. The storm water enters the north property line of a new development (Sienna). The flow is then picked up by the 36 -inch bypass conveyance pipe within the Sienna development and continues in a southerly direction until passing the quarter -mile downstream point at its intersection with SE 132"' Street. From there, the flow continues to travel in the 36 -inch pipe approximately 200 feet west on SE 132n' Street before changing course to the south on 144`h Avenue SE. The flow then travels south on 144`h Avenue SE for approximately 600 feet where it connects to a 24 -inch cross culvert. The flow then continues to the west in a defined stream channel. 4.3 Downstream Capacity The Sienna project included the design of an upstream bypass conveyance line. The sizing of this pipe system was based on assumptions made of the upstream basin. These assumptions were made based on limited topography. As a result of more detailed topography, it is found that the original assumptions arc conservative. Please see the Upstream Tributary Areas Exhibit located in the Appendix. January 19, 2004 Job # 01-159 /fRIf1D Page 4 ri Shamrock -- Level 1 Downstream Analysis The following is an excerpt from the Final Corrected Technical Information Report provided to King County under Permit 4L02SR037 dated September 16, 2002. Begin Excerpt Conveyance for Upstream Flows The KCRTS 15 -minute time step was used to determine the overall flows tributary to the pipe system conveyance. 67.2 acres upstream area has been recently developed. Those areas pertaining to new development were modeled using the information obtained from previous Technical Information Reports. The remaining areas were modeled using approved Technical Information Reports, Aerial maps and actual survey. All of NE 4th Street right-of- way was assumed impervious. An additional 7.81 cfs from the 100 year outflow of the detention pond from the City of Renton approved project of Sienna was added at CB 4 making the total flaws piped at 75.41 cfs. Please .see the upstream tributary map. The following is the ground cover breakdown of the 159.43 -acre tributary area upstream and the KC -RTS 15 -minute time step printout_ Till Forest: 7494 acre Wetland: 4.81 acre Till Pasture: 9.76 acre Impervious: 36.06 acre Till Grass: 33.86 acre Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series Fi.Ie. jan28. tsf Project Location:Sea-Tac ---Annual Peak Flow Rates --- Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak (CPS) Period 20.50 6 2/09/01 12:30 14.40 7 1/05/02 15:00 44.13 2 12/08/02 17:15 I3.82 8 8/23104 14:30 25.62 3 11/17/04 5:00 21.65 5 10/27/05 10:45 24.49 4 10/25/06 22:45 67.60 1 1/09/08 6:30 Computed Peaks 50.00 -----Flow Frequency Analysis -------- - - Peaks - - Rank Return Prob (CFS) Period 67.60 1 100.00 0.990 44.13 2 25.00 0.960 25.62 3 10.00 0.900 24.49 4 5.00 0.800 21.65 5 3.00 0.667 20.50 6 2.00 0.500 14.40 7 1.30 0.231 13.62 8 1.10 0.091 59.78 50.00 0.980 This conveyance system has been designed to convey flows up to the 100 -year storm without overtopping_ January 19, 2004 Job # 01-159 /TRIAD Page 5 t t U] 1 1 Shamrock - Level 1 Downstream Analysis Freeboard Tables from Storm Sewer Output Upstream Tributary Pipe System Catch Basin Rim Elev. HGL Bev. Freeboard outfall -1 410.00 409.08 0.92 1 -upstream 410.00 409.10 0.90 2 415.80 409.96 5.84 3 420.10 411.96 8.14 4 421.84 419.37 2.46 5 428.50 423.27 5.23 6 430.65 424.72 5.92 7 431.32 425.43 5.88 8 432.52 429.49 3.02 9 433.00 430.17 2.82 10 431.25 430.88 0.37 End Excerpt Additional survey and analysis of the onsite wetland located on the west property line of Shamrock determined that approximately 22 acres of assumed tributary area to the bypass conveyance system flows to the north as apposed to the south. Therefore, the designed flows to the bypass conveyance system are more conservative with less tributary area. January 19; 2004 Page 6 Job # 01-159 /TRIAD s- t 1 1 u 1 t Shamrock — Level 1 Downstream Analysis 4.4 Downstream Drainage Problems North According to King County Water & Land Resources Division, there have been no recent problems downstream of this project. The complaints that have been documented are associated with downstream properties near the East Renton project. These complaints are over 12 years old. King County suggests not following up on any complaints before 1990 due to their age, development that has occurred, etc. Additionally, no complaints have been documented at those addresses for 12 years, so the problem most likely has been corrected. The complaints are linked to a private home drainage system and a private road washout due to no drainage system rather than flooding, or erosion of the large drainage course that our site will discharge to. Since no complaints have been documented at this location in the last 12 years, it is assumed that corrections have been made as a result of subsequent development. South According to complaints compiled by the King County Water and Land Resources Division, several instances of flooding have been reported in areas near the downstream drainage path of the site. Problems of flooding and drainage in these areas seem to have been alleviated with the recent installation of a 36 -inch pipe system shown in the Downstream Drainage Exhibit. Details of complaints are included in the Drainage Complaints exhibit located in the Appendix. Since the installation of the 36 -inch conveyance system there has been one downstream complaint. This complaint comes from the resident at the address of 5511 NE 2nd Street. The resident complains of the roadside ditch overtopping. Per conversations with Ron Straka with the City of Renton, this is not considered a major issue and the City currently does not have plans for maintenance. In addition, available topography suggests that flow from the 36 -inch bypass conveyance system would flow south along Lyons Avenue rather than east to the subject property. A copy of this complaint along with photographs can be found in the Appendix. Also see the Downstream Drainage Map 42 included in the Appendix. January 19, 2004 Job # 01-159 TRI, AAD Page 7 ri 1 1 1 1 t 1 n Shamrock — Level 1 Downstream Analysis 5 RESOURCES USED FOR ANALYSIS Refer to the appendix for a copy of the following maps and figures. 5.1 Sensitive Areas Folio Maps from the King County Sensitive Areas Folio, dated December 1990, show that the site is not in a sensitive area with regards to seismic hazards, coal mines, landslide hazard, erosion hazard, streams or wetlands. 5.2 King County Basin Reconnaissance Program According to the King County Basin Reconnaissance Program, the site is located within the Lower Cedar River sub -basin of the Cedar River Drainage Basin. 5.3 Soils Survey for the King County Area The site is underlain with Alderwood gravelly sandy loam according the Soils Survey for the King County Area. 5.4 King County Community Planning Area The site is located within the Newcastle Community Planning Area. January 19, 2004 Joie 11 01-159 1 ITS Page 8 t 1 1 Shamrock -- Level 1 Downstream Analysis 6 DRAINAGE CONCEPT The proposed drainage system will consist of road and ditch section to convey the street runoff. Roof and footing drains serving individual lots will be directed to swale systems which will increase travel times, convey runoff, as well as provide water quality treatment. All conveyance, detention, and water quality systems will be designed per the 1998 King County Surface Water Drainage Manual. It is anticipated that there will be two detention facilities. One facility will be near the western border of the site at the end of SE 124'h St. The second facility will be located south of the site on the Bales Property. A public storm drainage easement will be required to convey site runoff across the Bales Property to the detention facility. This facility will be sized to accommodate both the Shamrock Plat and the Bales Plat. The portion of the site between SE 124'h Street and the northern boundary will incorporate Low Impact Development (LID) concepts. The LID concepts utilized are amended soils for increases infiltration, open swales used for the conveyance system to attenuate flow rates and roadways slopes in one direction to decrease the need for cross culverts. Roof and footing drains will drain to open swales or dispersion trenches via a perforated drain pipe. This will increase the time of concentration to the proposed pond. Additionally, the public right-of- way has been narrowed and private drainage tracts have been created to reduce the need for public maintenance. The portion of the site between SE 124'h Street and the southern boundary will be designed using standard development methods. January 19, 2004 Job # 01-159 TRIAD Page 9 11 f I'] 1 1 f January 19, 2004 Job # 01-159 Shamrock — Level 1 Downstream Analysis Appendix TRIAD Page A NOIONJUS bM 'AlNnO-1 ONIN 01S3MLNb'D ��'�=¢1 Y a £ o 1 J8JHX3 2 SNDI110NDD VAUSJX3 IDI All, nolslnati I arra roN s m Li I 3- + + r I I f I I ,-- ' � 7 l I 1 yy I ' I I 1 I I i 1 7 \•'� /f r� 'I r ..-i ../�y. C4�-Ilk I I QQ n 04��` }\LJ L 111LO � r;� r ���` *\; 4 l ( � �� � ## !! I! ✓ }/+ LU h � J I VI I t � � + Y ztial + • ,+t \ ..... .. .... U, II l •JfI `, 1Y 1 �. LU. , ;:... 4!J 9 "3 1 11 1 - ' .,, -------- -6- ..: +-`+ .'' r \ s I 4! I _J Ili. 1 3 V ._" y 1 , ;1 , � \ "^. \,. I � ! - '•+ \l'. 1 111h t ly l� 1 l l y I,y 1 ` , 1 1 � � i � \ rr I I �^ � 4 �, � •! III I1!I u � �i �� l -.l%'- � \ I \I \ 1\ \t 1 1 1 y 1 1 V 4 I � 1 ti I+. ��1 � r`��� F�..- `r � � � �• \�\ �+ . _ i . + m - . + __ ..� _. !ai 1\ �^�,.,�.�•-� \ ,� \+.�., +1 V Vy Il V4 I II I Y ,. I I` - V I \/ :>' - v I� I ` ly JL �I� � - � 1\ � � .� R �1 A 1 1 1 , 111\ +1 + � +1 +y }\ \1 � ��; � • + V � 1 "."-''"� - _ + ��, 1 x � v 1 \ } } + , � v , 1 } \ + v ', Ill / r�+ , + I I •1 ! T T _ - _ r\ LE J � '�� � VV }y }'lL�� I I + , } � ly', 1 } ' 1 ' y �I , '� `, I � �•. �1\+ _ 1M !J !f F' t+ Ir I� v vy v r � l Y + y �++}, , � � v+ y ,,� ,� �. � ,L" - - �•� � � � — I � � I � ; .. - . .. ! IIII � � 1 r.!1;+ �� �-,r'-.y.��::\{.��. 1 Y� + r � � :, �� I� �• {� +� � '6MP'03--,'7 6920\,' 73A37\s�rgr4x3 6ur� aurbu31saf7��M0�6Sl1 1G3l0bd� COC 'SZ r� �� r � � rr � '• � � ■rte � r � � � � � � '40 1 "V, r�j-czj .6 L4k! ctl1 Aw 00 -4 PC a I. X - "bib NOl-9NIHSVM :UWOO OMY Ld In UJI cu CD 41 z !L UKP' Y 1181HX3 SNOMONOD 03dO73A30 I S.- H1 11 3m �I i � � O 4 E f "I Lj PI) CD '40 1 "V, r�j-czj .6 L4k! ctl1 Aw 00 -4 PC a I. X - "bib Ld In UJI cu CD 41 z !L '40 1 "V, r�j-czj .6 L4k! ctl1 Aw 00 -4 PC a I. X - "bib LU %IN •.N IN k k oil. N 'A' IVIII f I o u It: ML 44P v 'I,, k 11111. ............ IL Ij X, 3 L.\ 01, m6S l l0\ i 3A I sI q!'� x 3 6uljaau 15 u sal i om (1 6S I, 1��rodj\ -d 0 g !L Y LU %IN •.N IN k k oil. N 'A' IVIII f I o u It: ML 44P v 'I,, k 11111. ............ IL Ij X, 3 L.\ 01, m6S l l0\ i 3A I sI q!'� x 3 6uljaau 15 u sal i om (1 6S I, 1��rodj\ -d 0 g CA a LU U) LU 0 z Q 3 ac D z CV) N CL N z O r C r z O H V W NO11NINS�'M 'AIN/700 `JNfN 1` MOOMW I HS t a o �3 xz 1191HX3 Sb3Mb At!t+inaiyi Wv3huSdn NOISIAaa I aara I ON $ r a o cn0 co ,r H L, E_ { fapo{�r 'bMp-gl�l 31IS��C 6SlIC�1 73/137�s�rglyx� 6ur�aaurbu��salr�.�P11Q�6�'110�51C�I'DZld�. .3 NO1JNIHSVM :11Nnoo JN1?f III o nY3tl15 c-„ N � � F -- < z C -err-�-,-�- I ------------ —� aI w s yXOOHNVHS x CN III .III N III N 30VNI VYG W V3H.L ShfM Oa Ma xe voisusl arra aw a a a Ir w 3 a -------------3 C,3 0 t iii i---------------0 0 3 i 0 Li a I 1 I I I i I I I I I L I J L I I L---------- — J � Tib Ii k+ I I I r—Tr -7-1 L III o O F -- f I -err-�-,-�- I ------------ —� aI w CN III .III N III N Ir ----------- ------- i ]{ ----------rtes II I I r----------------- I I -------- � L. SLI I ILI j jl 1 1� — E � I ------------ -----L--------1----J- ---------------- I I I I -------- — ------L------- i ! I -W 1 __ _L _ �- — — — — —'_�———-------- -- ----- iIr_—_— I---- I �: -----�-- I I ------ _ �_ I it I I I I I I I --- I 1 I I I i I I I I I L I J L I I L---------- — J � Tib Ii k+ I I I r—Tr -7-1 L e a f+XwNwlNwee a q IrNNaaamaaXp N /r ... .......Fa `mIMNNwYmensNs � •. �•N ve F -- f I -err-�-,-�- I e a f+XwNwlNwee a q IrNNaaamaaXp N /r ... .......Fa `mIMNNwYmensNs � •. �•N ve o u9�3 x 1EL43 x u7 is z x 1 .r x1l us x x 22L.<5 A 9N N FS bare V x x n"x iL739 x tLe.ss Ditch x usa, O 1x7,96 x x NO x ur,7s x184.46 L M7R IMA2 X7.ra x 7 x 1�+>, I 2�n VT , x LO'& 1x!169 se6 6r x x •c.Mr x lt6 ►� x x G421732 x it x 1214" in laasa U iPsai x x V7 U MAG x 124M U (14UO �` x x x 1R?A9 > N il7.r0 K x 1444 1 Sea�al gttea l� x It, x u� x LEL41 x 274 it= iL77! x x x x x119.77 1taJi9 x x le�.4s o AR t3 � XMI'm cis xIt,123.73 x uaas x It1 1t3.75 117 x 4 C:2 x x� 117.98 ox x117.01 xu`0a 1x4.4 x x Wom 7aur x !till w v ( lll�1 tP.3G 1 x x I" 1L3.67 x x S17.7S x ICJ lam 1 x 72 x ll3 4? x 10331 x i>!7.311 x 11t4J41 .11 x x � x X11610 x u� x u7A6 x 117J<7 x x s» x uarl 176JK x x x q 0 W x I'go wr.7 x N IA 7t 1 fxiR'J1 . 1� 1 � hear x x l ' rW►� 130.2 r x ie726 x I32 x =49 A x i " SITE x 127.ts I x x 190.93 131.4Z� f N r% 79 ua, 3 x I!R x / A o u9�3 x 1EL43 x u7 is z x 1 .r x1l us x x 22L.<5 A 9N N FS bare V x x n"x iL739 x tLe.ss Ditch x usa, O 1x7,96 x x NO x ur,7s x184.46 L M7R IMA2 X7.ra x 7 x 1�+>, I 2�n VT , x LO'& 1x!169 se6 6r x x •c.Mr x lt6 ►� x x G421732 x it x 1214" in laasa U iPsai x x V7 U MAG x 124M U (14UO �` x x x 1R?A9 > N il7.r0 K x 1444 1 Sea�al gttea l� x It, x u� x LEL41 x 274 it= iL77! x x x x x119.77 1taJi9 x x le�.4s o AR t3 � XMI'm cis xIt,123.73 x uaas x It1 1t3.75 117 x 4 C:2 x x� 117.98 ox x117.01 xu`0a 1x4.4 x x Wom 7aur x !till w v ( lll�1 tP.3G 1 x x I" 1L3.67 x x S17.7S x ICJ lam 1 x 72 x ll3 4? x 10331 x i>!7.311 x 11t4J41 .11 x x � x X11610 x u� x u7A6 x 117J<7 x x s» x uarl 176JK x x x 1 i SHEET NO. 1.1 KING COUNTY AREA, WASHINGTON (RENTON QUADRANGLE) 1 680000 FEET 122"07`30" 4 7'30, ] 6D 000 FEET 27'30" G n R7h1ENT Of AGRICULTURE ERVATION SERVICE SOri. EEGEND The d sl F'.rst [apirol let+es is the ;n idol —. of the soil name_ A second cop;iol Ir rrer, A, FS C, 0, E, a F ind-.copes the class ope. Symbols w-=rhovr a slope )etre. o c )hose of r,e a=ly le,•el sols. SYMBOL T . NAME AgB k;der+-good grove I I y sondy Foam, 0 to 5 pertenr slope: AgC -- - / sondy loon, 6 to 15 pr,crnr slopes Agf) Alderyrood grayetly sandy loom, 15 to 30 percent slopes A;F 'Mcfe wood and Kitsap soils, very srrep AmB A=enn, Aldrrwood matrrio 1, 0106 percrnr slopes AmC A,rnt s, Alder —a mat er;ol, 610 15 p- ear s I T,— ,—An ,ft n A,e �, Ewe a mo e.ral- Bec Efeuvsi le g,a„rlly sandy loom, 6 to 15 percent sFopes BeD E—it, aro*111y sondy loom, 1510 30 percent sJOPes Fr F f3rot.s=te grovelly sandy 1—, 40 ro 75 percent slopes Sr. B...y..a... s. r ;-- 13, Briscor sill Ioam Fit, (?ac kler s=Ir [Dorn Cb Crslsloi Beor hes Ea Eor )meat sdr loom Ed Edyewick fine sor•dy I- 1:113 E,cr.n p.—lly sandy loam, Oro S persenr stupes F C E•erers pro-elly sandy Ianm, 5 to 15 P"—t slopes ESD E•eresr 9—H, sondy loom 1510 30 percer•r slopes E -1C A lder•.•o d g—a Ily sandy )crams, 6 1a 15 percent sF.Pes 1r1A Ir=d;a==cola loamy 1',r,e son d, 01a d pert —, slopes I.. C' Ind,oaa to iwmy f'me �or.d. 4fo 15 Percent 0 P"Inp hdinnr. to coo my Fine sa ted, 15 io 30 pe,cenr slopes Y. pFj K,svv •_., 1, 1vOm r0 8 pe,cr 51app5 KPC Kitsop si11 loom, 6 ra 15 prrc r==r s[oPrs KpE) K. sill loam l5 +a 30 Prat slopes Kst Y. lays aro•-cl ly Irromy sond, 610 15 perce t slopes rn„ Fn—d lorld NrCflrihor. �e,y gravelly foo my sod, 210 15 P --slope. Ng ti P. -berg 3=11 loom tlf rloakeoek z,lr foam 1`10 Narrr•o sandy I-- 01 Chc Os poor 0- a,dia .It I-- oom0•C 0• c D„oll 9, o,rlly Iaom, 0 ro 15 percent slopes DID DwaIl gr—$17 loom, 15 to 25 percent slopes D,.F pvall yro"lly loos•, 410 -0 75 percent slopes Pc Pilckt 1, loamy Finr sand Pk pilchvck V.— s.lr.dy Iwm Pv Puget s i 11y 'joy I -- Py Puyp11'=p fine sondy Iwm Rat Rognar fide sandy loom, 6 ro 15 prrcrnr slopes P.1) Ragnor fine —dy loom, 15 so 25 Percent slopes RdC Rog—I d;anola osso ;o tion, sloping RdE sleep ■ Re Renton si3r loom Rh p; --l' Sa W.1 silt loom $h Sommomish s,h loam �k yotrre muck $m Sha l[or muck Sn Si srh loom 5a Snohomisl. silt Iwm Sr Snohomish silt loam, thick surface vorion+ 5u oo.., Sultan silr I— Trr Tut,—i to rrr.rc k Ur U ban land Wo Wo'd;—;)lr ih loom • The composition u1 tl.ese units is more oorio fe Ihan thol of ehe others ,n the Oreo, Ftn ,y has F—controlled ,.ell enav�h ro inter Prer for rhe er Pec red use of +F.e sods. KING COUNTY AREA, WASHINGT( 13—dm y, —?;—.I St Bre............... C coal y, Poash, C;�;1 township, p Inc ar pw o+rd c i t y Small pork, c�mr Faw shin r. 0�-1c Semon line, Un;arc 5cc r0� Fiat, Deur a. Se<+ion hne, nor Vn Set .o _a foo F3o—dor man vme of V^^rd S,o1cs m= r Bs.ild•ngs Ed•--eff�no, St hoo 1, tharc l., ar.d 8vad-,ngs Sha. n, ,,.a= P c�.e ons m=ss ion T rte Phw+e 1,.,e, v�rx !le i15 .�rh-r rhon �n T nnk s, oil, o e e f�a,ed a 1ond-1, H -i-- of vad —'k T Oblr>, stir it Ir�r Di hrr rrrn>-rr ob le Har rlo�rol con,. of str Any roc n�e.able m. v e+,:c 01 ct-,-,rroi sroti prhe. rrco er ob Fe r C hoc ked spot ele+'o�h SJnchetkrd spar clove fl 1 fl T;iT3T 3 B EQ V I y E TiYEEN SCS 507JJTVPE9-A1ND _KCR_TS SDIGTYPFS .,, ,- SCS Soil Type SCS Hydrologic Soil Group KCRTS Soil Group Notes Aldenvood (AgB, AgC, AgD) C Till Arents, Aiderwood Material (AmB, AMC) C Till Arents, Everett Material (An) B Outwash 1 Beausite (BeC, BeD, BeF) C Till 2 Bellingham (Bh) D Till 3 Bristol (Br) D Till 3 Buckley (Bu) D Till 4 Eadmont (Ea) D Till 3 Edgewick (Ed) C Till 3 Everett (EvB, EvC, EvD, EwC) A/B Dutwash 1 Indianola (InC, 1nA, InD) A Out -wash 1 Kitsap (KpB, KpG, KpD) G Till Klaus (KsC) C DuMash 1 Neillon (NeG) A Outwash 1 Newberg (Ng) B Till 3 Nooksack (Nk) C Till 3 Norma (No) D Till 3 Occas (Or) D Wetland Dridia (Os) D Till 3 Ovall (O -,,C, OvD, OvF) C Till 2 piIchUCk (Pc) C Till 3 Puget (Pu) D Till 3 Puyallup (PY) B Till 3 Ragnar (RaC, RaD, RaG, RaQ B Ouhvash 1 �Rentcn (Re) D Till 3 Salal (Sa) C Till 3 Sarnmamish (Sh) D Till 3 Seattle (Sk) D Wetland Shalcar (Sin) D Si (Sn) C Till 3 Snohomish (So, Sr) D Till 3 Sultan (Su) C fill 3 Tukwila (Tu) D Till 3 Woodinville (Wo) D Till 3 Notes: 1. Where out -wash soils are saturated or underlain at shallow depth (<5 leet) by glacial tilt, they should be treated as till soils - 2. These are bedrock soils, but calibration of HSPF by King County DNR sho,.vs bedrock soils to have similar hydrologic response to till soils. 3. These are alluvial soils, some of which are underlain by glacial lilt or have a seasonally high water table. In the absence of detailed study, these soils should be treated as till soils_ 4. Buckley soils are formed on the low -permeability Osceola mudilow Hydrologic response is assumed to be similar to that of till soils. 1998 Surface Water De�jsm Manual 9;-1199 3-25 NTs I ij . x s fl1;ai:kei19 jr� ITE' �r L fr �— l? } 3 t J J �� "4,�� s-,�'. 27U fob. s �+ ]abs} i� LD •.F -}11 CY I � - 4 except 1tOR the_E �PrP iCWetlands G�Fs�r2i711Sh i[:ntis lni'e n;R" ThE iesignafed z" O na2 n Wafer n by a ,a ely ' P� _ I '.d b ars Basin Boundariesr ,g tlai r�� CU1 `.heir I:Ca- r fie: F�od. S O.J Sub- basin Bounares `r s ,no di�tY-1 ,]dual :1r Oinaca l5. -p u=i[� _`2._r - WIM ,' , .t1TLl - ti- •> \_� 1- f, }.. 41 {" 'r l ea 'Y y _ SIT E r � K � xf_ '�� r•.r^ F�/ //] �'�' � � 4�, y -1 N .key ,f -, y7_ E - c -� t � _ Streams - fi Y - .,(,�jl��ai {ass ll Dtni3mish L r fECOCM.aa nS extend In- Stream( and 1fi F6 7-a f vvr on macs, Flood In, ►7 and iiifill// s----+--� C1 ass2lwfthSalmonids cs no not alti�ays 5how one h ea d'::at ers cf streams- pr3� F �0 3 e31_nS Class (perennial; salmonid 3I' use undetermined) e • • a • Class 3 5�`0 ear Appzt[rs — Undassfed — Erosion Herd Areas Duwan ish i' 4 v. L,anasnoe.nazziro Areas ULM,A I I IF J] I q , r�-JI Sl IYF �. ^•� E. I'.'�'�� r \ � �ti. � - } r ��, -. � p� dg� �� ..ate i- � �, � r IFI - Ij � ��i `� � :�. � f y � � N'� x��•} - ' I � i Imo. r - �. lF r ✓ r �� r l; >r � • � } �s� ,,� �" � :d r'- ; i' i � � � '�� .`- ' ti`s ;I lcie hazard �TidPS for ismic Hazard Du�'ar�iis �1 el5m'C hz2 ar li areas. IS--I'�■1Al areas are Sc: S[ep[rble Q;h er SoiSrnic "2T'i.i3i_ ^.is mao are Areas c S�tllf'-i r, ptt• _ �. •t,11 tion I•� i ,� ',, 5 10 'R was filed with L of Natural Re. Inai occurs preceded cry the tunnels. k�oal M- ne ."azard A reas uuwamisn fes' g 4 4 DRAINAG King C 198 mmmom Major Basl Sub -Basin source_ King Cot ems. Reconnaissance f .r r i 1 ~l 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Miles 1: 300,000 F' aj ILI EAR_ CREEK AST ST L f_ -r �ty _--SITE �J _N�A MA _ 1. S .OVEN HE16qS" ., tl 1 TFL'OM w` 1 Figure 4 KING COUNTY _ Kirsg County T 105Z — 7 8 1N114! 11300.000 n i t 1 iDna COM Water and land Aoseurres Division - Stormwator sorvical Saotim Compialnt SORITh Printed: 7!1812002 4:10;45 PM 1"WI>f Type TYPO Of PAN= Address d Prd" Gtl�mmelrts -imbw code mros PEOe 1993-0224 C PONDING 12217 148TH AV SE POSSIBLE Sao VIOLATION/DITCH ENCRO 658J1 1998-0788 C DISCHARG 14328 SE 128TH ST COMPLAINT REQU NO INV@ THIS TIME 65611 1995-0991 WOC DUMPING 1251B 142NDAVE SE: APPARENT PROPERTY DISPUTE 656J1 1996-0880 WQC EROSION 14328 -SE 128TH ST 65611 1996-1401 C FLDG --SE 128TH 8 142ND SE MAINTENANCE OF EXISTING CHANNNEL 65611 1997-1625 WQA BMP'S 14413 SE 128TH ST 656J1 Page 1 of 1 IKI90 County Water and land Resorces olvislan - stomwater sees swuun Page i of 3 PrImplalnt $Barth printed: 7/22/2002 2;147*22 PM avahli TypeTYPO of Problem Addrom ...,mbar coke o i Pr loin CIi>rlotlerris Thrns rape 1975-0135 C FLDG 13921 SE 136TH PL SWAMP/SE 136TH PL/HIDEWA`{ HTS 656J2 1981-0197 C DRNG 13832 SE 131ST ST BILKED 656J2 1982-0341 C FLDG 14005 SE 133RD ST 656J2 1982-0386 C DRNG 12808 138TH AVE SE & FLDG 656.J2 1982-0491 C FLDG 14009 5E 128TH ST MAPLEWOOD HTS 656J2 1982-0525 C DVR 16935 116TH AVE SE @ SE 132ND/144TH AVE SE 656.12 1983-0353 C FLDG 13224 144TH AVE SE 656J2 1984-0221 C DVR 140X( SE 132ND ST FLDG 656J2 1985-1010 C DRNG 14100 SE 132ND ST SEE 84-1005/TO ROADS 656J2 1986-01D9 C DRNG 14011 SE 132ND ST SURFACE WATER 556J2 1986-0256 C 656.12 t 1988-0256 F 656-12 1986-0256 S1 COMMITTED DATE:1 ST QTR 1989, 656J2 1966-03A4 C DRNG 138TH AVE SE SYSTEM SILTED 658,12 1986-03A4 E PROS CRTD, 656J2 1986-0739 C FLDG 13323 146TH AVE SE WATER FROM SCHOOL 656,12 '1987-0255 C FLDG 14639 SE 132ND ST STANDING WATER $ MUD 656..'2 10R7-0328 C DRNG 13323 146TH AVE SE CO DIVERTED DRNG ONTO PROPERTY 656J2 '-0405 C FLDG 13025 138TH AVE SE SEE 87-0463 OVER STREET 656J2 '-0445 C FLDG 13837 SF 128TH ST FILLING OF LOT 656J2 1987-0445 ER FLDG 13837 SE 128TH ST SEE 86-03A4 PENTON_ 87-0707 656-12 1987-0463 X 1988-0280 C FLDG DRNG 13025 14106 SE 138TH AVE 135TH ST SE ON 136TH AVE SE STRORM DRAIN FAILURE 656J2 656J2 1989.0036 C DEBRIS 14003 SE 132ND ST DEBRI CN RD TO DET POND 656-12 1989-0113 C DRNG 13852 SE 128TH AVE DRAINAGE OF NEIGHBORS FILLlROAD CO 656J2 1989-0200 C SETTLING 13120 138TH AVE SE SINK HOLE IN YARD 656,12 1989-0461 S2 FLDG/DVR 14011 SE 132ND ST SEE:86-0256 YAHN PH I 656J2 1989-0472 X INQUIRY 14105 SE 133RD ST STATUS OF STUDY(YAHN STUDY) 656J2 1989-0636 X DRNG 14103 SE 132ND ST YAHN STUDY COMPLAINTS 656J2 1990-0209 C FLDG 14639 SE 132ND ST DITCH OVERFLOW/STORM EVENT 656J2 11990-0388 C DRNG 14105 .SE -133RD ST FLOODING IN NBRHD 656-12 1990-0512 C DRNG 13600 138TH AVP SE CROSS PIPE ERODING RAVINE 656J2 1990-0556 C DRNG 13323 148TH AVE SE DITCH ENDS/DIVERTED WATER 656,12 1990-0556 ER DRNG 13323 146TH AVE SE XPIPE AND POND/DITCH ENDS 656,12 1990-0804 X FLDG 14105 SE 133RD ST COMPLETION OF STUDY 656J2 X FLDG 14105 SE 133RD ST CAPACITY OF PLAT DRNG 656J2 I1990-1511 I 991-0081 SR DRNG 14105 S 133RD ST PUGET COLONY HOMES 656J2 Page i of 3 ' CwValnt Typo Number Code Typo of Prnwum AddraSs of Ppnhkn Gurn mad Thru Pap ' )1-0081 X DRNG 14105 S 133RD ST CCF#191-321YAHN STUDY/FLOODED YAR 656,12 11-0093 SR DRNG 14105 SE 133RD ST CCF#SWM0124 PUGET COLONY HOMES 656J2 1991-0098 X 1991-0246 C DRNG 14105 SE 133RD ST CCF#SWM01241DEVEL0PEMENT 656J2 DRNG 14013 SE 133RD ST PLUGGED 656J2 1991-0240 SR DRNG 14013 SE 133PD ST PLUGGED PUGET COLONY HOMES 656-12 1991-0315 C FLDG 14011 SE 132ND DIVERSIONICULVERT OVERFLOW 656J2 1991-0619 NDA DRAINAGE 10403 147TH AVE SE STORM EVENT - 01W FLOODING 656J2 1991-0636 NDA FLDG 14105 SE 133RD ST CCF#491-32 NOT NDA PUGET COLONY H 656J2 ' 1991-0636 X FLDG 14105 SE 133RD ST CCF#491-32/PLAT DRAINAGE 656J2 1991-0650 NDA DRNG 14105 SE 133RD ST CCF#591-2 NOT NDA PUGET COLONY HO 656J2 1991-0650 X DRNG 14105 SE 133RD ST CCF##591-2 SAME OLD PROS 656,12 ' 1991-0682 CL FLDG 14105 SE 133RD ST CCF.# 591-2 DUE JULY 656J2 1991-0712 NDA DRNG 14103 SE 132ND ST CCF# SWM 0520 NOT NDA PUGET COLON 656J2 '1991-0712 X 1991-0715 C DRNG DRAINAGE 14103 14105 SE 132ND ST SE 333RD ST CCF# SWM 0520 MANY COMP NEIGHBORHOOD FLOODING 656J2 656J2 1991.0715 SR DRAINAGE 14105 SE 133RD ST PUGET COLONY HOMES 656J2 SR DRAINAGE 14105 SE 133RD ST CCF# 591-37 PUGET COLONY HOMES 658J2 '1991-0723 1991-0723 X DRAINAGE 14105 SE 133RD ST CCF#F 591-37 656J2 1991-0732 C DRAINAGE 14024 SE 133RD ST /LAMB (CLAIM) 656-12 '1991.0732 SR DRAINAGE 14024 SE 133RD ST /LAMB (CLAIM) NOT NDAP 656, 2 1991-0739 SR DRNG/FLD 14103 SE 132ND ST CCF# SWM -061D NOT NDAP 656,12 I-0777 NDA FLOODING 14103 SE 132ND ST CCF# 591-39 NOT NDA PUGET COLONY 656J2 -0777 X FLOODING 14103 SE 132ND ST CCF# 591-39 656J2 1991-0812 C DRAINAGE 14639 SE 132ND ST 656J2 1991-0868 SR DRAINAGE 14010 SE 134TH ST CCF# SWM0279 NOT NDAP 656J2 ' 1991-0868 X DRAINAGE 14010 SE 134TH ST CCF# SWM0279lPUGET COLONY 656.12 1991-0865 X FLOODING 13405 142ND AVE SE CCF# SWM-0854/L)RAINAGE IMPROVEME 656J2 SR FLOODING 13800 SE 128TH ST CCF#SWM-0852-NOT NDA-PUGET COLON 656,12 '1991-0888 1991-0888 X FLOODING 13800 SE 128TH ST CCF# SWM-0852WETLAND PROBLEMS 656J2 1991-0946 X DRAINAGE 14105 SE 133RD ST CCF#: 91-0822/GRANTING EASEMENTS 656J2 1991-1214 X DRAINAGE 14105 SE 133RD CCF# SWM 1217/PROJECT SCHEDULE 656.12 1993-0179 C DIVERSON 137XX 144TH AVE SE POSS CLEARING VIOLATION 656,12 1993-1064 C FLDG 14400 SE 136TH ST GROUND WATER UNDER ROADWAY 656J2 R993-1085 E DRNG 14600 SE 132ND ST CHKSTATBYCMDT 956,12 993-1085 ER DRNG 14600 SE 132ND ST 656J2 1997.0055 C FLDG 14105 SE 133RD ST PUGET COLONY HOMES 656J2 1997-0055 NDA FLDG 14105 SE 133RD ST PUGET COLONY HOMES 656J2 1997-0055 R FLDG 14105 SE 133RD ST PUGET COLONY HOMFS 656J2 998-0360 C DRAINAGE 14454 SE 132NO ST APPEARS PRE GRADING ACTIVITY NO PE 656J2 998-0534 WOC WASHWAT 13224 144TH AVE SE APPARENT GREY WATER DISCHARGE 65632 Page 2 of 3 i iNumberber Cada mTypes HuType of problem Address of Pnablern )8-0534 WQR WQe 13224 144TH AVE �. 19-6609 C CONSTRUC 14606 SE 136TH ST —JB -0625 C STND H2O 13741 148TH PL 2001-0697 C DDM 13309 146TH AVE SE 1 1 1 comments Tbra Pop SE APPARENT GREY WATER DISCHARGE 656J2 CONCERNS RE NEW DEVELP CITY OF RE 656J2 SE SOGGY BACKYARD SOURCE OF WATER 656J2 65SJ2 Page 3 of 3 vr.+vI I i i i'SIL_J'I 1 Vl r-UULfI_'e YY4 — SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT DIVISION ' COMPLAINT INVESTIGATION REPORT Q s Dole Fim'o; IRE OF COMPLAINT: r ►�,� i i ►q�--fs ; - 1 r? SEC LLTVVP 23 AGE ' LOCATION: KROLL PG. COMPLP INAN7: 1 �� }�°� �` COUNCIL DIST. ! ( PF,pNe FiQ. Address ( 3 Z-3 � e } Ckly State zlp HOME: 1 I WORK 41 �zr F DETAILS OF COMPLAINT: :�y j ► m-� s '� # E c a y fYt� N-n--�7--���a--f-� V14- __" P t Ic S . jC c� ! rr. e i t ,� �j s V , !i� a ` ` \C [ 1►— c ' [ L S i I STT tib%� i)C1� 1s P�E/�'�c�f=G%�� '151 i �-- -- MPLAINT RECEIVED BY: o� �,3t .✓�-- _ _^. _� to - C LS OF INVES PGATION' Sketch on reverse side: Yes [3' No ❑ Photos: Yes Ea' No ❑ o,anr)r7 z site 3-8-90. -'----..._ ' .t had been raining earlier in the day and there was considerable run off at the time. Topo- graphic maps for this area indicates run off should flow towards the Wofford property, and ditches direct the flow in this direction, Woffo�d has approx 30 loads of fill in the north ' east corner of tris lot. The Tot to the north has�a ponded area adiacent to the fill. Part of that pond drains to the west and part over tops the drive to Woffords house and drains to the east into the newly cleared area (photo 4). q was told by Wofford ' that fill had been 'brought into the back portion of the cleared lot and the owner ditched run off to the south (photo 5 & 6), diverting it from the original drainage direction, southeasterly. This im- pacts Wofford's 5 acre parcel to the south of the newly cleared area, and to other parcels in that area. Photo 1) books south on 146th from SE 132nd_ 2) Shows fill at the northeast corner of Wofforts lot. 3) Shows culvert outlet on east side of 146th at cleared lot_ '4) Cleared lot. ,area beyond gravel is saidito have been a 3'pord before fill with out- let in sealed background. 68 Said to be diverted drainage flow. ' Diverted flow into Wofford's acreage. MPLAIN7 INVESTIGATED BY;.L�y DATE: noN TAKEN. 1or linanf advised of action possible or taker. by Phone O Letter DPersona[ Contact IMPlaint Action Handled By _ Ciased: DS OK'd. Name — Darr nldola r � qA S� N ICING COUNTY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT DJVI� E COPY DRAINAGE ESTIGATIONT REPO PROBLEM Pape 1- )WESTJ6ATION REDUEST TvpF L``/ _ f�/1�}ln1f��G F r,,et3 by. Date= O}{'d by: File No. t. jived from, (P%&print plainly Ter rNAME- 6Z -1 - ADDRESS: GLADDR=SS: Of -j //ry/�[�T. _ Ciry S -.ate__ _ 7jp Location of pro fem, if difierenL: /��.�!/f�-IHARGE T 'Derails of Problem, �- r r r I Iothe= agencies involved: (Give details) ,3ep0r,ed Impecrs' VProaert�es: riome Access road Septic system outbuildings, garage 17 Yard/landscaping Other property Stream, lake, wetland to—Mm er7 rs. r Dates/Arecvency of occurrences: iseSjn Council 17i5r Dln Ref/Chg No: Pletnzme: �Lr�C1L L-ovrvt / -P-` FF 5 taken: Assioned to: i urned to on (4rCiLyrr PEfef_7564-,) CField inves[jc2lion needed? Blozi: No / / Initials_ E hur1Q$ SRQS HEW: 6 92- OAT= CLOSED, OLD: 5' P5- OK'd: Lot No: KROLL . •.... r'--•.......�-:�:-r:;:..- F%� ,pyaw�- ! vca:ionlTracking Info: _J�_1/4 S -TqLR Par�ei No. 0547/C - 0 c c- i) -pe iseSjn Council 17i5r Dln Ref/Chg No: Pletnzme: �Lr�C1L L-ovrvt / -P-` FF 5 taken: Assioned to: i urned to on (4rCiLyrr PEfef_7564-,) CField inves[jc2lion needed? Blozi: No / / Initials_ E hur1Q$ SRQS HEW: 6 92- OAT= CLOSED, OLD: 5' P5- OK'd: Lot No: KROLL DRAINAGE INVESTIGATION REPORT Page I: INVESTIGATiONRFQUEST Type C— PROB LEN4 --Lf Pq RECEIVED BY: �2 Date: OK'd by: DF7�n � �FiLE NQ. Received from: (Day) 4 Z� (Eve) NAME: Cry { D� �'{ ' _ PHoNE 2_�(^ �I� r -30 2_°� [r - -r -IN, ADDRE55; City State ZiF�J ' Location of problem, if different: Reported Problem; CALL IF] RS•T t._.] (Would Like To Be Present) K`.� � pit U,cL V r !o fit r. - -� t 1 i ng, , 0- r Ste �S ? CY17t7 i�� t Ll Ln� hCG i°i[d ' hit name: 6&uC'� c�r�- 5-c Lot No, 7 Block No-- Other agencies involved: No field investigation required I - 2 - (initials) To BE CONIPLETFD BY COASPL DU PROGRAM STAFF %4 S T R Parcel No_ ID?' 4 "11 L) K.roil d I a e Th.Bros: New �f'3[x T-1— Old L,3,5 E7 '�5 Bas]n-fit' Council District G' Charge No. RESPONSE: Citizen notified on t - -2-7- ? F_ by: phone letter in-person -leC�r'o Q? "i C-C) p 3 v,-� a. � � wo r tc� Foss . 10 Jt? ',-.,'P L DISPOSITION: Tumed to on ! / by OR: No further action recommended because: i /� Lead agency has been notified; Problem has been correOed_ No problem has been identified_ __ Prior investigation addresses problem - SIE E roblem:SrE F)1'r0 ' Privare problem - NDAP will not consider because: Water originates onsite and/or on neighboring parcel. Location is outside WLRD Servi ea Other (Specify): DATE CLOSED: r I_ By. f Complaint 48-0360 Meyer Investigated by Robert Manns on 5-27-9$ 1 found rbat a large area had been cleared, approxirmady 112 acre. Ars existing depression with water is located at the south fide of Tax parcel 08471 -4045, next to Meyer's property. Some dirt and debris ha been pushed into the water frons the grladusg work being done on parcel --0045. I checked Sierra and found no permits for the grading tiyork Clarence Weyer is the property owner of this parcel. His house is on the adjoining parcel; house 4 14602. Meyer's property is not impacted by the work- because of the higher elevation above the gracing. I�ATNAGE INVESTIGATION REPORT Pagel: INVESTIGATJON REQUEST Type PROBLEM; Tr �' OK'd by, Frig No. R Ei� ED BY; - Date- cceived from: 1. (pay) L, CEVO C NTAME: FHOtvE'o�CS ,� ADD RESSt S:- �r���T_ � ���� �/�c3UCity ate zip ' Location of problem, if different: Reported Problem: CALL FIRST (Would Li7cc To Be PFesent} t� ,-i _u aCCfAX J ce r� r laves' lame:So6,`4I.ot No: f� Block No: ttne-r agencies invok,rd: f fL E C 0 1Pzaz��,, /6f No field investigation required '/ S T R FESPONSE: _I tMMaisI To BE COMYLET£D BY COriPLAINT PROGPLMnJ STAFF Parcel No. Kr011 Th -Bros; New 65� C% L Z/Old Basin er' Citizen notified on Council District Charge No. by: phone lerter in-person ITSPOSITION: Turned to on ! ! by OR: No further action recommended because - Lead agency has been notified: Problem has becn.corrccted. No problem has been identified. Prior investigation 'addresses problem- SEE Frn-F I Private problem - NDAP will not consider because: - Water originates onsite and/or on neighboring parcel. Location is outside WLRD Service Area. Other (Specify): ITE CLOSED: 1 ! By; [I DEC . 29.2002 10 : 09AM ICC WLRD KENO COUNTTVrATER AND LAND RESOURCES DMSION DRAINAGE NwsuGATION REPORT DWESTIOATION REQUEST PROBLEM: Received from:. NAms. ADDRESS. -am_ 1- P11 '✓�`� F. c/!:> V lP, Type Ee&:. (Day) (live)' . , : .. , ' • PHONE �; r;T � _ + - -�Cit3►`. State Zi 1 LOCATION OF PROB�>rIM, IF DMERENT' . -AL47 rlccss Permission Granted ❑ Catt'irst (Would Like To Be Prasent) 1 a ab6 Aeo q.- *wJ6 or& "IWA114� ; H n� fit.fin; aL �- l l 44e. 1 Plat name: Other agencies involved: Lot No: No field investigati Block No: I/a S T R Parcel No. (d,:jUQM&40 — Krol]SLO _ Th.Bros: New iQ5(v Basin. -G Council District _LL_ Charge No, RESPONSE: Citizen notified on by: phone letter in person ' DISPOSITION: Turned to on / / by OR No further action recommended because: Lead agency has been notified: Problem has been corrected. No problem has been identified. �� Prior investigation addresses problem: SEE FILE # Private problems - NDAP will not consider because: Water originates onsite Rnd/or on neighboring parcel. Location is outside WLRD Se ice Area Other (Specify): DATE CLOSED: t—Y j / d By: 1 1 1 1 r DEC.29.2003 10:03AM KC WLRD Complaint No 00-0763 Naini Investigated By. Virgil Pacampara Date; DETAILS OF INVESTIGATION I went to the residence of Mrs. Lola Archer on 11129/00 at 3:00 PM. She was not home at time of the visit. -T was able to spoke with Mr. Rene Treadwell (neighbor of Mrs. Archer) who lives at # 14005 SE I33" St He is also concern on the damaged gate and people eutering/using the easement as a trail/access which is located at the backfrear side of his property. Mr_ Treadwell showed me the damaged /tom down gate. He informed me that the King county has installed the fence gate and showed me also drainage catch basin aloty the undeveloped nail. Investigation shows that the gate is located at the south end of the culdesac of SE 132 Sr. The gate is made of aluminum grill/ round bar and attached to a wooden post (4"by 4" by 6 fact). The gate is at the comer of 140°e Ave. SE and SE 13Vd Ave. St. The fence gate is detached from the wooden post and bent. Inquiry reveals that the access road is not included in the list of KC maintained road. It is a dirt road and undeveloped and no street vehicular access. TO R/D POND Trail Crrav -.l Road Damage Fence Gate on. 9132"D air. 1 1 2 13 14 Archer 014004 am. 733 Ro am �. Treadwell #14005 is 7 31 32 �J 33 BE. d134TH ST. DEC.29.2003 10:03AM KC WLRD N0.515 P.4,15 iKING COUNTY WATER AND LAND RESOURCES DMSION• DRAINAGE INVESTIGATION REPORT r � INVESTIGATION REQUEST Type PROs 1 LOCATION OF PROBLEM, IF DIFFERENT: Received from: PHONE % —C199 oe�v City State Zip Access Permission Granted Q Call First (Would Like To Be Present) ��/ 'I', ` --r') "' PIat name: kcs� Other agencies involved: . .r, of o 9c," .6- ; `-'4 I TJX �(f, FILE COPY Lot No: '3o, No field investi -Block No,:. 4 5 T R Parcel No. 12 411 'Db b Kroll Th.Bros: New RDF RESPONSE: BasinCouncil District 17— Charge No__.., Citize nori t':fled n by: phone letter in person DISPOSITION: Turned to on / / by OR. No further action recommended because: ' Lead agency has been notified: Problem has been corrected. No problem has been identified. Prior investigation addresses problem: SEE FILE # Private problem - NDAP will not consider because: ' Water originates onsite and/or on neighboring parcel. Other(Speci fy): n4Tr ("I.OSED: / By: Dec. . 2ee3 10: 0aAMLC-. SAGE INVESTIGATION REPORT�o. pis P. �.5 'PJILE// INVESTIGATION REQUEST Type n - O -7-0Qi(/ e4/ e' FILE'.Copy.- Plat name: �Lot No: B� . Iock No: Other a encies Involved: No.field investi 'on r aired ' �4 S T R Parcel No, Kroll _ Th.Bros: New jRDP _4 Basin ,66R—_ ^ Council District � � , C c No. W SPDNS+E. Citizen notified on by: _ _ phone letter in person 1%wrrzom t rand to on by OR No further action recanunend ed because. Lead agency has been notified: Problem has been corrected. -No problem hes been identified. Prior investigation• T. A, �-�— addtrs probIam: r SET FII.E Private problem -NDAP will not consider beeeuse: Water originates onsite sndlar n on ei $ , .hbotrteg parcel. -777.1 .. -:4. ;i Ji ''. �:, 1. "• •ii .` w: •• _ '�X •�''r�•Ny�l°, s • Vie. r..�.• - 'I�ti• •,a -� 'a�•�• ,1, •{.-.i��. � f- �' ,IF ��".��.a�a��� �T'.� L-$ �from: Date: OKC d b LE No. 200V[I) ved (Day) (Eve) [ 4' S' ) NAME: _ 1t/ i�7 �� PHONE 6 C— Z,: Z ADDRESS: �f 4 r 2 ,5' r331<oCity /� c=ov State 1Zip_gQr7 iLOCATION OF PROBLEM, IF DIFFERENT: Access Permission 'Granted ❑ Call First (would Like To Be Present) n - O -7-0Qi(/ e4/ e' FILE'.Copy.- Plat name: �Lot No: B� . Iock No: Other a encies Involved: No.field investi 'on r aired ' �4 S T R Parcel No, Kroll _ Th.Bros: New jRDP _4 Basin ,66R—_ ^ Council District � � , C c No. W SPDNS+E. Citizen notified on by: _ _ phone letter in person 1%wrrzom t rand to on by OR No further action recanunend ed because. Lead agency has been notified: Problem has been corrected. -No problem hes been identified. Prior investigation• T. A, �-�— addtrs probIam: r SET FII.E Private problem -NDAP will not consider beeeuse: Water originates onsite sndlar n on ei $ , .hbotrteg parcel. -777.1 .. -:4. ;i Ji ''. �:, 1. "• •ii .` w: •• _ '�X •�''r�•Ny�l°, s • Vie. r..�.• - 'I�ti• •,a -� 'a�•�• ,1, •{.-.i��. � f- �' ,IF ��".��.a�a��� �T'.� 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Drainage Problems Start Date problem strladdr cross street 10/23/2003 5 51 1 NE 2nd St Lyons Ave NE Category minor Description from Mr. Brad Pugsley at 5511 NE 2nd Street: The corner lot SE of the intersection with Lyons Ave NE_ Reportedly the open ditches to the South of the intersection have capacity problems. The property at 5511 NE 2nd St. has experienced flooding. He was not paying storm water bill because of ditch flooding Investigation Status active First Name Last Name House number Address Street Brad Pugsley 5511 NE 2nd St City Renton Friday, January 16, 2004 Page 1 of 1