Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
LUA-08-122_Report 01
.. Page 1 of 2 Haidar, Mazen From: Haidar, Mazen Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2006 1 :06 PM To: 'Sandy Bailey' Subject: RI::: ROW permits for project #'s L01 P004 and L02P0011 Hello Sandy, I just completed my review for the latest submittal you made for the subject projects Right-Of-Way User Permits applications number L05RW040 (Watershed Terrace), and L05RW041 (Hamilton Place). The information submitted does not provide what we are asking for. Each of these two permit applications shall include the followings: 1. Engineeringllilumination Plans. These plans shall show the horizontal locations for the proposed street lights, and shall show the typical road section for the road. The typical road section shall show the proposed street light poles at setback consistent with the 1993 King County Road Standard (KCRS). 2. King County Bond Quantities Calculations Work Sheets shall be submitted for each project. I hope this provide the necessary clarification so we can move these two permits forward as soon as possible. Should you have any questions, please feel free to call me, in the mean time I will place these two projects on hold pending your re-submittals. Thank you. Mazen Haidar. P.E. Engine~e~r~II~ ______ __ Land Use Serlices Division King County, DOES mazen.haidar@metrokc.gov P 206.296.7133 F 206.296.6613 From: Sandy Bailey [mailto:sbailey@novastardev,com] Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 8:28 AM To: Haidar, Mazen Subject: FW: ROW permits for project #'s LOIP004 and L02POOll Mazen, (Project names: Hamilton Place and Watershed Terrace -Extended ROW Use Permits for street lights) When we ran into each other in the DOES lobby you indicated you needed the following items for these permits: 1. Engineering plans for the street lights 2. Road Cross sections 3. Bond quantities I am about to submit all of these items however I need to clarify if the attached information on the actual cost of the street lights is sufficient for your bond quantities or if you need these on a specific bond quantity form. Please rtlview the attachment and let me know. The amounts are: Hamilton Place $5038.16 Watershed Terrace $6072.44. Thank you, Sandy Sandy Bailey Novastar Development Inc. 18215 72nd Avenue South 03/30/2006 Kent, WA 98032 425fJ56-7400 425251-8782 (fax) From: Sandy Bailey Sent: Thursday, March 02, 2006 12: 10 PM To: 'mazen.haidar@metrokc.gov' Cc: Wpotter (wpotter@novastardev.com) Subject: ROW permits for project #'s L01P004 and L02POOll Mazen, Vie dropped off the attached submittal packet requesting 2 extended right-of-way use permits bac~ on Nov 29,2005. Can you please advise the status of these? Thank you for your help. Sandy Sandy Bailey Novastar fJevelopment Inc. 18215 72nd Avenue South Kent, WA 98032 425656-7400 425251-8782 (fax) 03/30/2006 Page 2 of2 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 *** ** ** * *** * **** **** * **** *1 MPORT ANT************* *** *** ***** * * PROJECT NUMBER AND NAME IS NECESSARY FOR ALL DROP-OFFS Date Received by LUSD Project No.: La I PODo4" Loa. eDD I I Project Name: UJ~J,. J. 17: r" ~ l-kn...f (-h f?&; c (. a .(~ [R1 ~ ~ 71~ !6~ [Q) FROM: 5~ JI~~argliausen Consulting Engineers Company Name / Contact Person T~hone No. (4bh.1:6222 TO: "t..a. za,,; ~ I DA1t-- 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 Clearing / Grading Permit Additional information requested; please specify item(s) dropped off: K.C.O.O.e.s. 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 Page 1 of 1 CIVIL ENGINEERING. LAND PLANNING, SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL TO: _----=M:!!:az~e:!n!..;H~a!::id!!:a~r,'_'E:::n:!jg>.!i.o!n~ee:!r _________ _ DATE: King County DDES SENT VIA: 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest OUR JOB: Renton, W A 98055 RE: Extended Right-of-Way Use Permits Plat of Watershed Terrace -King County File No. L01P0004 and Hamilton Place -King County File No. L02POO 11 :_J I set Street Lighting plan for each project I set Road Cross Sections for each project I copy Street Lighting costs for the purpose of bond quantities March 21, 2006 Courier Delivery 11020 Pursuant to your request, I am enclosing the above referenced items. Please process these permits as soon as possible. Thank you. cc: Curtis Schuster -KBS Development Corp. w/enc Sign,%~ sandYBeY Executive Assistant 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 (425) 251-6222 (425) 251-8782 FAX BRANCH OFFICES • OLYMPIA, WA • TEMECULA. CA • WALNUT CREEK, CA www.barghausen.com 11020t.028.doc 1:29PM 03116106 Accrual Basis Total Check Check Check Check Type Date 41312004 41012004 712312002 712312002 Num 7678 7678 7031 7031 Name i,lltoliQhl ;?fl1to~igtll JntoUght 'lriloi!lfifit"~ KBS Development Corporation Find Report All Transactions Memo Street Lights Watershed Terrace 10012 SE 2001h Order for in Plat Ughts Account Class 1000 'Checkln.g, '~~:r&~"~""',-<71 i 772 . Street llghtmg ~tl.af!U!1On!.P.:la!';. 1000 . Checking 1772 . Street Lighllng Kwru.!!Ii1e({m::7' Amount .&.03~19., ~5:030:16 .0.072.4' . ~~;9;Tl"'~~ 0.00 Balance ·5.036.16 0.00 ·8.072.4. 0.00 0.00 p, r • ® Department of Development and Environmental Services Land Use Services Division 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Renton, Washington 98055-1219 206-296-6600 TIY 206-296-7217 King County ... ..".'" Are there any related penmit application(s) pending in King County? ~:il,~g~!~IEllf yes, list application number(s) o Yes ~No I 1. 2. Type of Use (work) proposed in the o Road 0 Non-franchised Utility" Description of Use (work) proposed in the 3. ____________________ ~ 4. Yes iiZl No ~~('."'.!~~i~ sketen of proposed work. A. Provide a good quality photograph showing location(s) proposed work in the right-of-way in all directions and showing all existing road features. B. Please answer the following questions as they relate to your project(s): 1. Indicate County ROW width (refer to assessor Parcel maps): f:l.. feel. 2. Is there a road currently in the ROW? & Yes 0 No If yes, answer questions 1 through 4. If no, please skip these questions. a. Indicate the road surface type and width: 2'1 ft. paved road ft. gravel road ft. dirt or logging road b. Indicate the road surface conditions: 181 Excellent (recentty surfaces) 0 Fair 0 Poor c. Are there roadside shoulders: 0 Yes 181 No C. St'ccwl/t.e.S) If yes, indicate shoulder type: shoulder width: ft. d. How many lots (dwelling units) does this road currenlly serve? 00-16 0!1. 17-50 051-100 0 Over 100 3. Are there any ditches, swales, culverts or other types of utility lines in the ROW? DYes IXJ. No If yes, indicate ditch depth: ft., ditch width: ft. If yes, is there overgrown vegetation in the ditch(es) flow line? 0 Yes 0 No If yes, indicate culvert(s) size: and type: 4. Are you aware of any drainage problems in the ROW or adjacent ;;;-;i?-------11.:ii:~~,~~:i~~~:::';~i: DYes IKI No If yes, describe: .- 5. Are you aware of any erosion problems in the ROW or adjacent to it? DYes .rgj No If yes, describe: Mine Seismic Flood plain o Weiland (Class I II or III) circle one circle one o Steep slopes (land terrain steepness along the ROW): 00-10% (rolling) 010-30% (moderate) 0 40% & over (steep) Information on mapped Critical Areas (also known as Sensitive Areas) and classifications may be found in the critical/sensitive areas portfolio maps, available at DOES. '. iT'~'[W,~~~~~~~~~~~~~:~~~31 ". ,I. " i~ ROW-App-lnstruct-SitePlan Dale Check out the DOES Web site at www.metrokc.qovlddes le-app-rowapins.pdf 12/19/03 Page 3 014 • King County Department of Development and Environmental Services Land Use Services Division 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwe·st Renton, Washington 98055-1219 206-296-6600 TTY 206-296-7217 Vicinity Map (show site 10cation) No Scale • Show all existing/proposed road features including but not limited to roadside ditches, shoulders, storm drain systems, power poles, and any other Utility lines. D NQrth Scale: 1" = Date Check out the DDES Web site at www.metrokc.qovlddes D North ROW~App-lnstruct-SltePlan le-app-rowapins.pdf 12/19/03 Page 4 of 4 .9.5 .. • .. d ... l.6){{., ....... &.0: ~.91 .. _ .........••. r~rr. ~t.~ .. O-il-D 'II ____ -l ~ &r"t.;"1 '.~~c: COSt :-'----__ -",~jI"'~'"' _________ ~.J ;J N O·'·',·lj .... ~ -,: ' .• ~ .I _ ............. _}.1t~.} .. . • • , • 01 ::.:., I -------------------------------------------------------I • ® King County Department of Development and Environmental Services Land Use Services Division 900 Oakesdale Avenue SW • Renton, WA 98055-1219 206-296-6600 TIY 206-296-7217 For alternate formats, call 206-296-6600. STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) SS COUNTY OF KING ) File Number: LoS 12. woc..\ I Application Name: HAmi LTD,.,) PLAN;:; -Row USc=: Pavnir Project Location: 153 XX S€ 133~ PL- 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 affiant's knowledge the critical areas on the development proposal site have not been illegally altered; and 4. That the affiant has not previously been found to be in violation of critical 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. ~)~ /I-Z/-O'$ (I{."". WA plicant Signat~ Date and Place (City and State) I certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Wrn\np'!o~hat the foregoing is true and correct. lnJ LS.,~ § U W § fO' iJ c.... 0 f 2005 !.!2 K.C. D.D.E S Check out the DDES Web site at www.metrokc.govlddes . • AffidavitSensitiveCriticalAreasComptiance Ic-aff-sacomp.pdf 12/19/03 Page 1 of 1 • Hamilton Place Lots 1 through 23, Tracts A,B,C,D,E of the Plat of Hamilton Place. Recording Number 20050111000949, Volume 225 Pages 099 through 102 King County Washington K.C. D.D.E.S. LOSRw __ o_~~/ __________ __ • . : • I .. K.C. D.D.E.S. Los1j2.wo"-t ( • • K.C. D.D.E.S. LoS J2woLlI K.C. D.D.E.S. L.oS 'f2woL/ ( • King County Department of Development and Environmental Services 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest • Renton, Washington 98055-1219 206-296-6600 lTY 206-296-7217 For alternate formats, call 206-296-6600, Permit Number: Activity Number: t OS lSwo 41 Permit Name: FOR INDIVIDUALS: I, ___________________ (print name), hereby certify that I am the/an owner of the property which is the subject of this permit. If I am not the sole owner of the property, I certify that I am authorized to represent all other owners of the property. My mailing address is: I further certify that I am the "Applicant" for this permit and as such am financially responsible for all fees and will receive any refunds paid. I shall remain the "Applicant" for the duration of this permit unless I transfer my "applicant" status in writing on a form provided by DOES. * Signature of Applicant ·OR· FOR CORPORA TIONS/BUSINESS ASSOCIATIONS: Date Signed I, G.. W~M" pal , E. t.. (print name), hereby certify that I am an authorized agent of KS5 lXIIiflopdleAJr COLA, a corporation or other business association authorized to do business in the State of Washington, which is the sole owner of the property that is the subject of this permit. If this corporation or business association is not the sole owner of the property, I certify that this corporation/business association is authoriz~d to represent all oth~rowners of the property. The mailing addrefB1m!~'(;j R 0 11/7 R@ corporation/business association IS: u-u L=; \(:? L5 'lJ L5 0 I 2.3~O Nt; 3-n... Sf"' 50 in:; len DEC 0 I 2005 ::Belle llCA.e • tAlA q~rx)s: , ___________________ ---'Kc.::..=:,C, D,D,E,S, I further certify that the above named corporation/business association is the "Applicant" for this permit and as such is financially responsible for all fees and will receive any refunds paid. This corporation/business association shall remain the "Applicant" for the duration of this permit unless i ansfers its a ieant status in writin on a form provided by DOES. Date Signed * By signing as the Applicant or the Applicant's Agent, I certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that the information provided above is true and correct. Certification of Applicant StatusFORM Ic-cer-apstat.pdf 01/08104 Page 10f2 ----------------------------------------------- • • 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: ~uthorize this department to return plans directly to my consultant(s) for the limited purpose of making corrections as designated on this form. CONSULTANTS: Check out the DOES Web site at www.metrokc.qovlddes Certification of Applicant StatusFORM Ic-cer-apstat.pdf 01/08/04 Page 2 of 2 soc Dye, Pete From: West, Larry Sent: Thursday, April OB, 2004 2:17 PM To: Dye, Pete Subject: L03SR034, Hamilton Place • ----------, Page 1 of 1 I have reviewed this project including a Geotechnical Engineering Report dated January 2B, 2004 by Earth Consultants Inc. I also have visited site. Based on this review I recommend that the following or similar condition be put on the "On Site Grading and Retaining Wall Plan, Sheet C5": SPECIAL GEOTECHNICAL INSPECTIONS: THE FOLLOWING SPECIAL INSPECTIONS SHALL BE MADE BY A GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER OR ENGINEERING GEOLOGIST DURING THE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY, FOLLOWED BY WRITIEN CONFIRMATION TO THE KING COUNTY SITE INSPECTOR THAT CONDITIONS ARE ACCEPTABLE ANDIOR THAT ALL RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER OR ENGINEERING GEOLOGIST HAVE BEEN COMPLIED WITH: • PERFORM FIELD DENSITY TESTING OF STRUCTURAL FILLS AS NEEDED DURING PLACEMENT AND OBSERVE THE GRADING AND EARTHWORK OPERATION. • EXAMINE ALL CUT SLOPES AND EXCATIONS TO VERIFY THAT CONDITIONS ARE ACCEPTABLE. • PROVIDE PERIODIC INSPECTION OF THE EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROLS AT INTERVALS SUFFICIENT TO CONFIRM BOTH COMPLIANCE WITH THE PLANS AND ON·SITE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE CONTROL MEASURES. 04/09/2004 Dye, Pete From: Sent: To: Subject: Hi Pete; • Wilson, Dean-A Thursday, August 14, 20034:22 PM Dye, Pete Hamilton plat -Street Tree Review • The three street trees proposed (Armstrong Maple, Bowhall Maple and Zelkova) are "acceptable" for planting within the R.O.W. as shown on the plans (dated 7/1/03) There does not seem to be any conflict with "sight distance" issues nor excessive potential for impacts to roadway improvements. I'm glad to see that root barriers for trees planted within 4 feet of the back of walks are provided and that, the Hearing Examiners report obligates the Homeowners to take care of these trees. The amount of time for property owners to maintain them in the future is minimal, but their contribution to aesthetics and property values is rewarding. Studies have shown that when property owners "adopt a tree" planted in front of their property, the overall health and lifespan is increased. This also helps to lessen the burden on our ROADS Maintenance Division. Thanks for sending me a complete plan set for review. On more complex plats, it will be necessary for ROADS to review the Grading plans along with the street tree plans for consideration of short and long term "entering & stopping" sight distances. Thanks Pete; Dean A. Wilson, ASLA ROADS 1 ® King County Department of Development and Environmental Services 900 Oakesdale Avenue SW Renton, WA 98055-1219 March 30, 2004. Arthur Seidel, ASLA • Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 18215 72 nd Avenue South Kent,WA 98032 RE: Hamilton Place (DOES File No. L02P0011) Recreation/Landscape Activity No. L04M1015} Dear Mr. Seidel: • This is in response to your March 9, 2004 request for approval of the landscape and recreation space plan associated. with the plat of Hamilton Place. We have reviewed your March 9, 2004 submittal and with. the following conditions, approve it as submitted: 1. The equipment (play structures, benches, picnic table, etc.) shall meet at a minimum, Consumer Product Safety Standards and be appropriately anchored. 2. Walkways to the play areas (play structure, sport court, etc.) shall be constructed of a material and grade that is Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) accessible. 3. Landscaping located on the south side of the fence shall be relocated internal to the recreation tract (Tract A). 4. Street trees and drainage control(s) associated with the recreation tract shall be reviewed with the engineering plans. 5. Revisions shall be incorporated into the final engineering plans. The landscaping and recreation space improvements (i.e. play structures) must be installed and inspected or a performance bond posted, prior to plat recording. The amount of the performance bond has been established at $47,711.00. This includes landscaping, equipment, surfacing materials, etc. The bond amount includes a thirty-percent contingency. Note, this approval and bond quantity amount does not include street trees, wetland details/signage or landscaping associated with the drainage facilities. This will be reviewed in conjunction with the engineering plans. • • An inspection fee is also due prior to recording. This fee covers the cost of an installation inspection and a maintenance inspection. The amount of the inspection deposit will be determined by the Land Use Inspection Section (LUIS). If a performance financial guarantee is posted, the improvements must be installed within two year's from the date of recording. At the time of inspection by the Land Use Inspection Section, if the improvements are fully installed per the approved plan, the performance financial guarantee may be reduced. Enclosed is a copy of the approved 'plans for your records. If you have ahy questions, please call me at (206) 296-7167. If you have questions regarding the financial guarantee please contact Stacy Graves, Financial Guarantee Management Unit at (206) 296-7009. Questions regarding the inspection process may be directed to the Land Use Inspection Section (206) 296-6642 . . S21;', ~qe.:.:::", Current Planning Section, LUSD Encs Cc: Curtis Schuster, KBS Development Corporation Pete Dye, P.E., Senior Engineer, Engineering Review Section, LUSD Joanne Carlson, ASII, Engineering Review Section, LUSD w/encs Steve Townsend, Supervising Engineer, Land Use Inspection Section, LUSD w/encs FGMU w/encs . Filew/encs r ---------, . ',,-. . • • King County Dept. of Development and Environmental Services 900 Oakesdale A venue Southwest Renton, WA 98055·1219 2061296·6600 LANDSCAPE BOND QUANTITY FORM PROJECf NAME: Hamilton Place (Street Trees) DDES PROJECT #: ..::L::;:;02::.:P..::O,;:.O'-'1l'--___________ ~ ______ _ ADDRESS: 160th Avenue S.E./158th Avenue S.E. PREPARED BY: Arthur M. Seidel PHONE: (425) 251-7459 Bonds are based upon required landscaping only and will be posted for performance and/or maintenance. Required landscaping includes perimeter landscaping, surface parking area landscaping, (KCC 21A.16) and any landscaping required by SEPA environmental review. The maintenance period is for the life of the project, however, after posting for maintenance, the performance bond will be reduced to 30% ($1,000.00 minimum) and be held for a two year period. Upon fe-inspection of the site the bond will be released if the site has been properly maintained (21A.16.180). If the project has not been maintained and there are dead trees, shrubs. ground cover. or other deficiencies noted in the required landscaping, the bond will be held until the deficiencies are corrected. I I UNIT PRICE I UNIT TYPE I QUANTITY I PRICE I SOIL PREPARATION A. TOPSOIL (6 INCHES DEEP) $25.00 CY (CUBIC YARD) IO $250.00 B. MULCH (2 INCHES DEEP) $30.00 CY (CUBIC YARD) 4 $120.00 E. FERTILIZER $6.67 CY (CUBIC YARD) 10 $66.70 PLANT MATERIALS A. DECIDUOUS TREES t.75" CALIPER (minimum height 10') $250.00 EACH COST & LABOR 35 $8.750.00 BOND AMOUNT SUBTOTAL: SUBTOTAL BOND AMOUNT $9,186.70 I I UNIT PRICE I UNIT TYPE I QUANTITY I PRICE I MISCELLANEOUS r-REE STAKES $2.65 EACH PER STAKE & LABOR 70 $185.50 SUBTOTAL BOND AMOUNT BOND SUBTOTAL: Add 30% of the Bond Subtotal for Contingency in accordance with Financial Guarantee Ordinance 120220, $9,372.20 Section (3. Subtotal with Contingency: $12,183.86 TOTAL BOND AMOUNT TOTAL BOND PRICE: $12,183.86 July t t. 2003 Page 1 of 1 Il020.006.xls IAMS/dmJ L02P0011 • • Bruce Whittaker DDESILUSD Prel. Review Engineer MS OAK·DE·0100 March 28, 2003 OFFICE OF THE HEARING EXAMINER KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON 850 Union Bank of California Building 900 Fourth A venue Seattle, Washington 98164 Telephone (206) 296-4660 Facsimile (206) 296-1654 REPORT AND DECISION I SUBJECT: Department of Development and Environmental Services File No. L02POOll Location: Applicant: HAMILTON PLACE Preliminary Plat Application Between 158 th A venue Southeast and I 60th A venue Southeast, on the north side of Southeast 134th Street, if extended KBS IIl,LLC represented by Wayne Potter 17423 Topaz Loop SE Yelm, WA 98057 King County: Department of Development and Environmental Services represented by Kim Claussen, Bruce Whittaker, Kris Langley 900 Oakesdale A venue Southwest Renton, Washington 98055-1219 Telephone: (206) 296-7211 Facsimile: (206) 296-6613 SUMMARY OF DECISIONIRECOMMENDATION: \ Department's Preliminary Recommendation: Department's Final Recommendation: Examiner's Decision: Approve, subject to conditions Approve, subject to conditions Approve, subject to conditions (modified) EXAMINER PROCEEDINGS: Hearing Opened: Hearing Closed: March 18, 2003 March 18, 2003 Participants at the public hearing and the exhibits offered and entered are listed in the attached minutes. A verbatim recording of the hearing is availahle in the office of the King County Hearing Examiner. • • L02POO 11 -Hamilton Place Page 2 or 10 ISSUEsrrOPICS ADDRESSED: • Transfer of density credit • Traffic impacts and mitigation • Surface water drainage • Water supply SUMMARY: Application for subdivision of 4.32 acres into 23 lots in the urban area, including transfer of density credits, is granted preliminary approval. FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & DECISION: Having reviewed the record in this matter, the Examiner now makes and enters the following: FINDINGS: I. General Information: Owner: Applicant: Engineer: STR: Location: Zoning: Acreage: Number of Lots: Density: Lot Size: Proposed Use: Sewage Disposal: Water Supply: Mary Hamilton 15821 SE 132nd Place Renton W A 98059 Robert Ruddell KBSm,LLC 12505 Bel-Red Road, #212 Bellevue, W A 98005 (206) 623-7000 BP Land Investments, LLC POBox 5206 Kent, W A 98064-5206 14-23-4 Between 1581h A venue Southeast and 160'h A venue Southeast, on the north side of Southeast 1341h Street, if extended R-4 4.32 acres 23 lots Approximately 5.3 units per acre Ranges from approximately 4,556 to 6,338 square feet Single-family detached dwellings City of Renton King County Water District #90 L02POOI J -Hamilton Place Fire District: School District: • King County District #25 Issaquah Complete Application Date: July 2, 2002 • Page 3 of 10 2. Except as modified below, the facts set forth in the DDES preliminary report to the Hearing Examiner for the March 18, 2003, public hearing are found to be correct and are incorporated herein by this reference. The said report is exhibit no. 2 in the hearing record. 3. Students from this subdivision will be bussed to the elementary school, middle school and senior high school. 4. This proposal is governed by the 1994 King County Comprehensive Plan, as amended by the Comprehensive Plan 2000 amendments adopted by ordinance no. 14044. The base density of the R-4 zone classification is four dwelling units per acre, and the maximum density is six dwelling units per acre. Density in excess of the base density, up to the maximum density, is permitted utilizing the transfer of development rights (TDR) program pursuant to Chapter 21A.37 of the King County Code. 5. The subject property was issued a transportation certificate of concurrency for 22 single-family dwelling units. These units are in addition to the single dwelling unit that currently exists on the property. This certificate reflected capacity which was available in concurrency zone no. 452 on the date of application for the certificate of transportation concurrency, and it remains in effect for the duration of this development approval. KCC.14.70.250.D. 6. The conditions of the mitigated determination of environmental non-significance will mitigate the impact of the proposed subdivision on existing downstream flooding problems. These conditions may be met by the developer of Hamilton Place alone, or in conjunction with the development of other properties in the vicinity which would have similar downstream impacts. 7. Testimony by area residents indicates that water pressure problems occasionally exist in the area of the proposed development. However, there is no evidence as to whether the cause of those problems is inadequate supply, deficiencies in the distribution system or in individual feeder lines. King County Water District no. 90 has issued a certificate'of'water availability for the proposed development, in which it certifies that 1,000 gallons per minute or more will be available for not less than two hours at the site. The District also certifies that it has water rights or claims sufficient to provide this service. CONCLUSIONS: I. If approved subject to the conditions recommended below, the proposed subdivision will comply with the goals and objectives of the King County Comprehensive Plan, subdivision and zoning codes, and other official land use controls and policies of King County. 2. If approved subject to the conditions recommended below, this proposed subdivision will make appropriate provision for the public health, safety and general welfare, and for open spaces, for drainage ways, streets, other public ways, transit stops, potable water supply, sanitary wastes, • • u)2POOII -Hamilton Place Page 4 of 10 parks and recreation, playgrounds, school and school grounds, and safe walking conditions for students who only walk to school, and it will serve the public use and interest. 3. The conditions for final plat approval recommended below are in the public interest and are reasonable requirements to mitigate the impacts of this development upon the environment. 4. The dedications of land or easements within and adjacent to the proposed plat, as recommended by the conditions for final plat approval, or as shown on the proposed preliminary plat submitted by the Applicant, are reasonable and necessary as a direct result of the development of this proposed plat, and are proportionate to the impacts of this development. 5. This proposal meets the requirements for the transfer of development rights, resulting in the authorization of six dwelling units on the subject property in addition to the base density permitted by the R-4 zone classification. The resulting total density of 5.3 dwelling units is within the maximum density permitted by the R-4 zone classification. 6. The proposed development is subject to completion of one of the alternative surface water controls set forth in the mitigated determination of non-significance for this proposal. DECISION: The proposed preliminary plat of Hamilton Place, as revised and received October 31, 2002, is approved, subject to the following conditions for 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 maximum 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 lJot result in substantial changes may be approved at the discretion of the Department of Development and Environmental Services. 4. The Applicant shall provide Transfer of Density Credit documentation to DDES prior to final approval. 5. 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). 6. The Applicant must obtain the approval of the King County Fire Protection Engineer for the adequacy of the fire hydrant, water main, and fire flow standards of Chapter 17.08 of the King County Code. • • L02POOIJ -Hamihon Place Page 5 of 10 7. A surface water adjustment (L02VOO98) is approved for this subdivision. All conditions of approval for this adjustment shall be met upon submittal of the engineering plans. 8. The 100-year floodplain for any on site 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). 9. The following road improvements are required to be constructed according to the 1993 King County Road Standards (KCRS): a. Road A shall be improved to the urban sub-access street standard. b. FRONTAGES: The frontages along both IS8"' Ave SE and along 160"' Ave SE shall be improved to the urban neighborhood collector standard. c. Tract D shall be improved to the private access tract standard per Section 2.09 of the KCRS. Tract C shall be improved as ajoint use driveway. d. Modifications to the above road conditions may be considered according to the variance procedures in Section 1.08 of the KCRS. e. Lots utilizing Tract D shall have undivided ownership of Tract D and be responsible for its maintenance. Lots 22-23 shall have undivided ownership of Tract C and be responsible for its maintenance. A note to this effect shall be placed on the engineering plans and final plat. . 10. All utilities within proposed rights-of-way must be included within a franchise approved by the King County Council prior to final plat recordi"ng. II. The Applicant or subsequent owner shall comply with King County Code 14.7S, 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: (I) 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 14.7S, 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. 12. 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 (SO%) 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. 13. The proposed subdivision shall comply with the Sensitive Areas Code as outlined in KCC 2IA.24. Permanent survey marking and signs, as specified in KCC 2IA.24.l60, shall also be addressed prior to final plat approval. Temporary marking of sensitive areas and their buffers • • L02POOII -Hamilton Place Page60fll (e.g., with bright orange construction fencing) shall be placed on the site and shall remain in place until all construction activities are completed. 14. Preliminary plat review has identified the following specific requirements which apply to this project. All other applicable requirements from KCC 21 A.24 shall also be addressed by the Applicant. Wetlands a. Class 3 wetland(s) shall have a minimum buffer of 25 feet, measured from the wetland edge. b. The wetland(s) and their respective buffers shall be placed in a Sensitive Area Tract (SAT). c. Buffer averaging may be proposed, pursuant to KCC 21 A.24.320, provided the total amount of the buffer area is not reduced and better resource protection is achieved, subject to review and approval by a DOES Senior Ecologist. d. A minimum building setback line of 15 feet shall be required from the edge of the tract. Alterations to Streams or Wetlands a. If alterations of streams and/or wetlands are approved in conformance with KCC 21A.24, then a detailed plan to mitigate for impacts from that alteration will be required to be reviewed and approved along with the plat engineering plans. A performance bond or other financial guarantee will be required at the time of plan approval, to guarantee that the mitigation measures are installed according to the plan. Once the mitigation work is completed to a DOES Senior Ecologist's satisfaction, the performance bond may be replaced by a maintenance bond for the remainder of the five-year monitoring period to guarantee the success of the mitigation. The Applicant shall be responsible for the installation, maintenance and monitoring of any approved mitigation. The mitigation plan must be installed prior to final inspection of the plat. 15. 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 and buffer conveys to the public a beneficial interest in the land within the tract/sensitive area and buffer. 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 animal habitat. The sensitive area tract/sensitive area and buffer imposes upon all present and future owners and occupiers of the land subject to the tract/sensitive area and buffer the obligation, enforceable on behalf of the public by King County, to leave undisturbed all trees and other vegetation within the tract/sensitive area and buffer. The vegetation within the tract/sensitive area and buffer may not be cut, pruned, covered by fill, removed or damaged without approval in writing from the King County Department of Development and .. I- I • I • • L02POOJ I -Hamilton Place Page70fll Environmental Services or its successor agency. unless otherwise provided by law. The common boundary between the tract/sensitive area and buffer 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 lot subject to the sensitive area tract/sensitive area and buffer. The required marking or flagging shall remain in place until all development proposal activities in the vicinity of the sensitive area are completed. No building foundations are allowed beyond the required IS-foot building setback line, unless otherwise provided by law. 16. Suitable recreation space shall be provided consistent with the requirements of KCC 2IA.14.180 and KCC 21A.l4.190 (i.e., sport court!s], children's play equipment, picnic table!s], benches, . etc.). a. A detailed recreation space plan (i.e., landscape specs, equipment specs, etc.), shall be submitted for review and approval by DOES and King County Parks prior to or concurrent with the submittal of the final plat documents. Applicant shall provide a minimum of 9,SOO square feet as shown on the preliminary plat map. 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 DOES 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 S.03 and KCC 2IA.l6.0S0): 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. S-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. c. If King County detennines 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. • • L02POO I J -Hamillon Place Page 8 of 10 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. 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 158'" Ave. SE andlor 160'h Ave. SE is on a bus route. If either road is a bus route, 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. A landscape inspection fee shall also be submitted prior to plat recording. The inspection fee is subject to change based on the current County fees. 19. The following have been established by SEPA as necessary requirements to mitigate the adverse environmental impacts of this development. The Applicants shall demonstrate compliance with these items prior to final approval. The base flow control for the storm water detention system is Level 2 per the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual(KCSWDM). To mitigate for existing downstream flooding problems, one of the following options is required: a. The stormwater detention system shall be designed to the Level 3 Flow Control criteria as specified in the 1998 KCSWDM. OR b. The storm water detention system shall be designed to the Level 2 Flow Control criteria and the following downstream improvements shall be accomplished either individually or in conjunction with other development projects in the area: The 160th Ave. SE downstream conveyance system (from SE 136'" ST to approximately SE 142"d St.) shall be upgraded to provide for the loo-year storm capacity. Downstream driveway culverts/ditches and a cross-culvert under 160'" Ave. SE shall be improved as needed. Culverts L-8 and L-IO on the west side of 160'" Ave. SE, cross-culvert L-II, and culverts L-12 and L-14 on the east side of 160'" Ave. SE shall be improved. The culvert designations are according to the Level I Downstream Drainage Analysis prepared by Daniel Balmelli, PE dated May 26, 2002 and revised Dec 3, 2002. Bank and channel stabilization are also required in the unopened right-of-way for 16200 Ave. SE, in the . . ------------------ • • L02POOII -Harnillon Place Page 9 of 10 vicinity of the easterly line of Lot 12, Rich Lea Crest (address 16046 SE 142,d St.). It is estimated that stabilizing and re-grading approximately 50 to 100 feet east of 16046 SE I 42'd St., will be adequate to resolve flooding that has occurred at this location. The culverts and channel described are located from the south site boundary to a distance of approximately 2000 feet to 3200 feet downstream. Note that the above ditch and culvert improvements are intended to duplicate the downstream improvements required for the east sub-basin of the proposed plat of Evendell LOlPOOI6. 20. The applicant shall provide additional analysis, to be reviewed and approved by DDES, to assure that downstream improvements, in conjunction with additional runoff volume from the site as developed, will not exacerbate drainage and flooding problems between the termination of the required downstream culvert and ditch improvements and SE I 44th Street. ORDERED this 28 th day of March, 2003. ounty Hearing Examiner pro tem TRANSMIlTED this 28 th day of March, 2003, to the parties and interested persons of record: Michael Rae Cooke Claudia & Michael Donnelly Mary Hamilton Randy Homer Fred & Helga Jaques Walter Kapioski Florence Nott Bob Ruddell Sandra Snyder Jeff & Julie Taylor Greg Borba Kim Claussen Carol Rogers Larry West Seattle-KC Health Department Steve Fiksdal Edward & Nancy Hilton BP Land Investments Bill & Cathy Johnson BP Land Investment, LLC Wayne Potter Mary Sackett Centre Point Surveying Gregg Zimmerman Laura Casey Kristen Langley Steve Townsend Bruce Whittaker NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL 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 April 11, 2003. 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 April 18, 2003. 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'" Avenue, Seattle, Washington 98104, prior to the close of business (4:30 p.m.) on the • • L02POOII -Hamillon Place Page 10 of JO date due. Prior mailing is not sufficient if actual receipt by the Clerk does' not occur within the applicable time period. The Examiner docs 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 a 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. MINUTES OF THE MARCH 18, 2003 PUBLIC HEARING ON DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES FILE NO. L02POOII James N. O'Connor was the Hearing Examiner in this matter. Participating in the hearing were Kim Claussen, Bruce Whittaker and Kristen Langley, representing the Department; Wayne Potter and Dan Balmelli, representing the Applicant; and Helga Jaques, and Michael Rae Cooke. The following exhibits were offered and entered into the record: Exhibit No. I Exhibit No.2 Exhibit No.3 Exhibit No.4 Exhibit No.5 Exhibit No.6 Exhibit No.7 Exhibit NO.8 Exhibit No.9 Exhibit No. 10 Exhibit No. II Exhibit No. I2 Exhibit No. 13 Exhibit No. 14 Exhibit No. 15a Exhibit No. 15b Exhibit No. 15c Exhibit No. 16a Exhibit No. 16b Exhibit No. 17 Exhibit No. 18 Exhibit No. 19 JOC:mslcp L02POOli RPT DDES file no. L02POOII DDES preliminary report dated March 18, 2003 Application dated July 2, 2002 (Complete) submitted May 30, 2002 Environmental checklist dated May 30, 2002 Mitigated determination of non-significance issued January 31, 2003 Affidavit of posting showing posting date of July 15,2002 and DDES receipt on July 18,2002 Plat map received October 31, 2002 (revision) Land use map 811 E received Oct. 3, 1977 King County Assessor's map for NE 14-23-05, revised 2-22-2000 Preliminary wetland assessment and delineation report by Chad Armour dated April 30,2002 Level I downstream drainage analysis by D. Balmelli dated May 26, 2002 Supplemental level I downstream drainage analysis dated October 24, 2002 Conceptual storm and utility plan dated 05-19-02 with attached adjacent lot owner- ship map dated 05-19-02 and preliminary recreational park plan dated 10-23-02 Letter dated January 9, 2003, reo KCSWDM adjustment request, file no L02V0098 Letter dated November 19, 2002, from Claudia Donnelly Letter dated March 9, 2003, from Claudia Donnelly Email dated March 17,2003, from MichaeVClaudia Donnelly Letter dated August 6, 2002, from the City of Renton Letter dated February 21, 2003, from the City of Renton Density credit transfer agreement received Oct. 28, 2002, with attached transfer of development rights (cert. no. 36) Email dated November 19,2003, from Curtis Schuster (Issaquah School District) Letter to James O'Connor dated 3/8/02 from Michael Rae Cooke < •• .. ..' ~ <® King County Department of Development and Environmental Services 900 Oakesdale Avenue SW Renton, WA 98055-1219 April 9, 2004 • Mr. Daniel Balmelli Barghausen Engineers, Inc. 18215 nnd Avenue South Kent, W A 98032 RE: Hamilton Place Subdivision Engineering Activity No. L03SR034 Dear Mr. Balmelli: • Our office has completed the second review of engineering plans for the Hamilton Place subdivision. The enclosed list provides a summary of design issues which must be addressed in your next submittal. The review comments are based upon the design plans and technical information report received February 25, 2004. Please note that the revised engineering plans show a proposed concrete wall within the drainage tract; however, our office has not received the design plans for structural review and approval. Please include the required wall design prepared by a structural engineer in your next submittal. Once the enclosed comments have been addressed, please submit 2 sets of revised plans and technical reports. To assist in reviewing the revised plans, the design engineer should prepare a written response for each issue identified in the review comments. If you desire an electronic copy of my review comments, please send an email to pete.dye@metrokc.gov. To discuss any design requirements for the project, please contact me at 206-296-7185. 7E~ Peter Dye, P.E. Senior Engineer Enclosure cc: Robert Ruddell • April 9, 2004 Engineering Comments - 2 nd Review Revised Plans and TlR Received February 25, 2004 Hamilton Place Plat, File No. L03SR034 Sheet CI • I. The sheet index references three landscaping plans. Please include these in the final plan set. Also reference the structural plans for the concrete wall. 2. The sheet index references CI4 as the boundary survey, however this sheet is labeled 111 .. Please re-Iabel to match the sheet index. Sheet C2 I. Revise the Tract Table to indicate that Tract E is owned by the homeowners association. Sheet C3 I. As previously mentioned, the flow line along 158 th Ave SE drains uncontrolled across . the paved ramp near CB 14A. Depending on the depth of the water line beneath the curb, can a through curb inlet or some type of WSDOT through curb drain be used to direct the gutter flow into CB 14A? As shown in KCRS Drawing 2-012 and 2-017, the depth of an inlet design is only about 25 inches and the minimum depth of cover on a water pipe is 36 inches. Sheet C5 1. To implement the geotechnical recommendations, please provide the following notes on sheet C5: SPECIAL GEOTECHNICAL INSPECTIONS: THE FOLLOWING SPECIAL INSPECTIONS SHALL BE MADE BY A GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER OR ENGINEERING GEOLOGIST DURING THE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY, FOLLOWED BY WRITIEN CONFIRMATION TO THE KING COUNTY SITE INSPECTOR THAT CONDITIONS ARE ACCEPTABLE AND/OR THAT ALL RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER OR ENGINEERING GEOLOGIST HAVE BEEN COMPLIED WITH: • PERFORM FIELD DENSITY TESTING OF STRUCTURAL FILLS AS NEEDED DURING PLACEMENT AND OBSERVE THE GRADING AND EARTHWORK OPERATION. • EXAMINE ALL CUT SLOPES AND EXCA TIONS TO VERIFY THAT CONDITIONS ARE ACCEPTABLE. • • • PROVIDE PERIODIC INSPECTION OF THE EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROLS AT INTERVALS SUFFICIENT TO CONFIRM BOTH COMPLIANCE WITH THE PLANS AND ON-SITE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE CONTROL MEASURES. Sheet C6 1. For the pond access road, please specify the minimum turning radii. As noted in the drainage manual on page 5-22, the minimum,outside turning radii is 40 feet. 2. As currently designed, the JUD paved surface in Tract C does not adequately serve lot 23. Please extend the pavement further south to allow a simple driveway connection to the paved JUD without causing the building permit applicant to redesign the County maintenance road and JUD terminus. The angle point in the JUD curvature should also be removed. 3. Label the private drainage easement along the north property line and west side oflot one. 4. Provide a note or label indicating that Tract C will include a drainage easement to King County for access to the pond in Tract B. Sheet C8 I. For the proposed concrete wall, submit design plans and calculations prepared by a licensed structural engineer. 2. As noted on page 6-71 in the drainage manual (item 4), the first cell iIi. a wet pond must have a minimum depth of 4-feet, excluding sediment storage. The wet pond design criteria also requires a gravity drain for maintenance. See page 6-73, item 7, and the diagram on page 6-79. 3. Specify the invert elevation ofthe wetland overflow to CB 14A and identify the floodplain boundary of the wetland. Technical Information Report CTIR) Section 4 Please address the following issues related to calculations for flow control and water quality designs. I. The existing conditions basin map shows 1.91 acres of pervious till grass; however, the table on page 3-26 in the drainage manual indicates that pasture is the appropriate cover type for predeveloped conditions. For developed conditions, the table also shows ~ ~~ -~~~-l r • • that impervious areas include detention and water quality ponds rather than the pervious area shown on the developed basin map. 2. The analysis for onsite bypass areas is not consistent with the procedures in the drainage manual shown on pages 1-36 and 3-52. Normally, the bypass subbasins are evaluated as separate flow rates which must be modeled in the RID sizing. In this case, a basin trade as noted in your response may be acceptable; however more detail is required to demonstrate compliance. Please evaluate the following: • The developed basin map in the TIR is a poor quality copy which makes it difficult to read and interpret the bypass issues (Font sizing is blurry). Please prepare a larger scale or better quality map which clearly labels the bypass areas and make up basins with applicable land covers. Also note that water quality treatment trades must be evaluated different than flow control due to the definitions cited in the drainage manual on page 1-57 and 1-4. Only PGIS areas should be evaluated and the paving of pre-developed gravel or dirt areas cannot be used as make up for bypass. The treatment trade areas for water quality can include only areas of existing pavement. Please provide a specific comparison of acreages for new PGIS in the bypass area versus existing pavement in the make up areas. To compare the equivalent treatment trades for both flow control and water quality, a summary table for bypass issues may be helpful on the basin map for the east and west frontage area. • Also provide a written summary in Section 4 of the TIR regarding the procedures and methods for complying with the bypass requirements for both flow control and water quality. • The wetpond sizing worksheet should recognize the minimum depth in the first cell as 4 feet rather than 3.5. ® King County Department of Development and Environmental Services 900 Oakesdale Avenue SW Renton. WA 98055-1219 January 9, 2003 Curtis Schuster KBS III, LLC • 12505 Bel-Red Road, #212 Bellevue, W A 98005 • Daniel K. Balmelli, P.E. Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 18215 _nnd Avenue South Kent, W A 98032 RE: Hamilton Place Subdivision KCSWDM Adjustment Request (File No. L02V0098) Dear Applicant and Engineer: The Land Use Services Division, Engineering Review Section, has completed review of the adjustment request for the Hamilton Place subdivision. You are requesting approval for 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. Our review of the information and a site visit provides the following findings: 1. The proposed Hamilton Place subdivision is located between 158 1h and 1601h Avenues SE at SE 133'd Street. The 23 lot, 4.3 acre, proposed Hamilton Place subdivision is filed under Land Use Services Division (LUSD) file number L02POOII. 2. The Hamilton Place subdivision is located in the Orting HiIIs subbasin of-the Lower Cedar River basin. The site is subject to the Level Two flow control and Basic water quality requirements of the 1998 KCSWDM. 3. The rectangular site slopes gently from the northeast to the southwest. Existing sheetflow either migrates to the ditch on the east side of 158 th Avenue SE or crosses the south property line onto the adjacent parcel. Sheet flow that crosses onto the adjacent parcel to the south eventually reaches the ditch on the east side of l58th Avenue SE and recombines with the rest of the site's flow. The adjacent off-site area to the north, south of SE 132 nd Place, supplies upstream tributary flow to the site. 4. The proposal is to collect most runoff from the project site and direct it to a single detention and water quality facility located near the southwest comer of the site. The allowed release would then be dispersed into the adjacent wetland area that drains to the ditch on the east side of 158 th Avenue SE. Nuisance sheetflow across the southern property line onto the adjacent parcel would be significantly reduced. A slight increase in flow will be experienced in approximately 500 feet ofthe ditch on the east r - Hamilton Place1L02V009' • January 9, 2003 Page 2 of3 side of 158 th Avenue SE immediately downstream from the southwest property cormer. The conceptual drainage plan indicates that frontage improvements on 160th Avenue SE are included. 5. No decorative ponds or shallow wells have been identified that would be affected by the proposed diversion. 6. The Level One Drainage Analysis identified some conveyance restrictions and drainage complaints associated with the natural discharge location. This downstream conveyance path is shared by the Evendell Plat (LOIPOOI6) which was conditioned through SEP A to provide downstream drainage path improvements. Through future plat or SEPA conditions, it is anticipated that Hamilton Place will be contributing to downstream conveyance improvements or providing for Level Three flow control as mitigation. 7. A consolidation of facilities for the proposed subdivision will be more economical in long term maintenance. Based on these findings, we hereby approve this adjustment to allow the diversion of runoff to a single facility draining to the east side of 158 th Avenue SE with the following conditions: I. The release rates for the detention facility will be based on the tributary area being directed to the facility. 2 .. The volume for the detention facility will be based on all flows directed to the facility at full development under current zoning. The allowed release rate will be reduced by any undetained flows that would bypass the proposed subdivision drainage facilities. The detention volume shall be sized using the Level Two flow control standard in the 1998 KCSWDM unless modified by plat or SEPA conditions. 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. All onsite or offsite drainage facilities must be located in a public right-of-way or storm drainage tract dedicated to King County . . 5. Additional storm drainage requirements identified by SEPA or the plat hearing review will apply to this project. If you have any further questions regarding this KCSWDM adjustment or the design requirements, please contact Mark Bergam at (206) 296-7270. . ------------, Hamilton Place1L02V009' . January 9, 2003 Page 3 of3 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 Randall Parsons, P.E., Senior Engineer, Engineering Review Section, LUSD Bruce Whittaker, Senior Engineer, Engineering Review Section, LUSD Kim Claussen, Planner III, Current Planning Section, LUSD Mark Bergam, P.E., Senior Engineer, Engineering Review Section, LUSD ~ I<lDg County Departmenl ofDevdopmmt aua Ezn.oiromDe:Dta ~ . 900 0akeJc:We Awnue Soulhwcst Jtauon. WA seo,ss..U19 Project Name: • 08005 INSlRIJCl10NS TO APf'UCANTIDESiGN ENGINEER: DOES Enginer/PIanner Name: SCi/[£ WHlnA/(IOI2. K i fY'l (i 11 //'5 S G:-N' City, State, Zip: Please be SII8 to include aD planS. sltetches, photos. and maps v.tlich may assist in canplete review and consideration of this aqustmenl request Faihn to provide aD pertinenl information may resuH in delayed processing or denial of yoU-~ Please submH!!Iis rem"'" and an appflCable fee to the Intake Counter at DOES, 900 oakesdale Avenue Southwest. Renton. WA 98Q55.1219. For adcttionaI infurnation. phone~600. . DESCRIPTION OF ADJUSTMENT REQUEST: .® Siandard 0 Complex 0 Elcperimental 0 Blanket 0 Pre-appflC3tion Di//&eSiOrJ 0'::: l-t£Jt·J FoiZ OI5[HI-li:0t fr/ N'1IlJt2fJt tt,("~07l./ APPUCABlE SECTlON(S) OF STANDARDS: 5 n:-rlDrJ / .z./ JUSTlRCATlON (see ·allachments. pages __ 10 ----1: 5£E. AUTHORIZATION SIGNATIJRES: DOES DirectorlDeslgnee Determination: o Approval . ,Alco o Denial o DNR-WLR Approval Signed: Date: / --9 ~O , (Experimental & Blanket a<!ustmenls only) See attached memo'daled: ODES. ODES, ~ Serv. 0;. .• Silo ~ & f'Brilg Sq>eMsor. Igned: Signed: Dale: I. r. tl 3 ORIGINAL: DOES File-Whiie [ J COPIES ra· ONR-WLR Oivis_kf J S Inspec/ion-Canaly [J AppDcanJ.GclrlentrJd [J OesigI>-Enginee-Glw> [ J Mr. Randal Parsons King County • DePartment of Development and Environmental Services 900 Oaksdalc Avc. SW Renton, WA 98055-1219 October 22, 2002 Re: Request for Adjustment from the King County Surface Water Design Manual Section 1.2.1 fur Proposed Hamilton Place Subdivision LUSD File No. L02POOII Dear Randal, • . KBS III, LLC is currently processing a Preliminary Plat Application for a new 23-lot subdivision located between 158 th Avenue Southeast and I 60th Avenue Southeast in King County, Washington. A Level I downstream drainage analysis was prepared for the project and reviewed by King County staff. A plat screening letter was received on July 15, 2002, requesting a drainage adjustment from Core Requirement No. I of the 1998 KCSWDM due to the presence of two existing on-site subbasins which will be combined into one drainage facility as part of the prQposed development. After reviewing this information, the existing topographic survey and the downstream drainage area map, it is apparent that although all of the surface water runoff from the project site drains in a northeast to southwest direction into a single downstream drainage basin, a portion of the site's runoff drains across property just south of the project site everituaUy combining into the downstream drainage system several hundred feet south of the project in the existing condition. Under the developed condition, this surface water runoff will be collected and discharged to the storm facility located. in the southwest comer of the site, thereby, diverting flows from discharging across the property just south of the property. As requested in the July 15, 2002, plat screening letter, we are requesting an adjustment from Section 1.2.1 of the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual which states "A proposed project that proposes to constntct or modifY existing drainage facilities must be discharged at the natural location so as to not divert onto or away from the adjacent dowmtream properties." Section 1.4.2 under criteria for granting adjustments states "Adjustments to the requirements in this manual may be granted provided that granting the adjustment will achieve the follOWing: Mr. RAndal Parsons King County • Department of Development and Environmental Services • ·2· October 22, 2002 a. Produce a compensating or comparable result that is in the public interest, and b. Meet the objectives of safety, .fUnction, appearance, and environmental protection and maintainability based on sound engineering judgment. Based on the results of the Level I Downstream Drainage Analysis, we believe that our request for an adjustment to Section 1.2.1 of the drainage manual can be justified. To assist you in processing this drainage adjustment application, the following plans and docwnentation are enclosed for your review: 1. One completed Surface Water Design Manual Requirement/Standards Adjustment Request Fonn 2. Two copies of the Levell Downstream Drainage Analysis completed for the project. 3. Two copies of the Conceptual Stann and Utility PIan Prepared for the project showing existing site contours and the proposed stonnwater system. 4. Two copies of a portion of the upstreamldpwnstream drainage basin map showing the area to be diverted. 5. Two copies of the adjacent lot ownership map showing the site location and surrounding properties. 6. One check for the current fee for the drainage adjustment request. The topography of the existing site is such that surface water runoff generally drains across the site in a northeast to southwest direction by sheetflow ultimately discharging into a roadside ditch along the east site of I 58 th Avenue Southeast. A portion of the site (approximately 1.8 acres) sheetflows across adjacent property to the south prior to discharging into the existing roadside ditch along 158th Avenue Southeast. Under the proposed development pIan, all stonnwater runoff from the project site will be collected and conveyed to a wet/detention pond located at the southwest corner of the site, across a smaIl wetland and then into the existing roadside ditch along 158th Avenue Southeast at the southwest comer of the site. Under the developed condition, the portion of the site which shcetflows across the southerly property and into the existing roadside ditch, will be diverted and discharged into the I 58 th Avenue Southeast ditch at the southwest corner of the site. Although all surface water runofffrom the proposed project will ultimately discharge to the same downstream drainage channel, a drainage adjustment is required since stonnwater runoff from the developed project will not discharge into the channel at the same location as it does in the undeveloped condition. Mt. Randal Parsons King County • Department of Development and EnvironmentaI Services -3- Our justification for the requested adjustment is as follows: • October 22, 2002 a. The proposed adjustment produces a compensatory or comparable result that is in the public interest because of the following: I. The proposed adjustment will not result in an increase of drainage flows to the downstream drainage system by diverting the developed flows further to the west within the existing roadside ditch. The same amount of tributary area and stonnwater flow will discharge into the existing roadside ditch under the proposed developed condition as it does under existing conditions. The only difference will be that the +/-1.8 acres of the site's existing drainage which currently sheetflows across property to the south prior to discharging into the roadside ditch will now enter the existing ditch approximately 300 to 700 feet upstream within the ditch system. 2. The proposal will not increase the peak runoff rate of discharge from the overall prqject site since all drainage flows from the project will be collected and conveyed to the proposed drainage fucility within the same drainage basin which will be designed to provide level II detention prior to discharging off site into the downstream system. 3. The level I downstream drainage analysis attached with this submittal includes a complete description of the upstream and downstream drainage systems for the project. The Upstream!Downstream Drainage Map included in the submittal shows the area of the project site that will be diverted from the easterly subbasin of the site to the westerly subbasin for detention and treatment prior to discharging into the existing roadside ditch along 158'" Avcnuc Southeast. b. The proposed adjustment meets the objectives of safety, function, appearance, and environmental protection and maintainability based on sound engineering judgment because of the following: The proposed stonn drainage detention and water quality treatment system will be designed in accordance with the 1998 King Connty Surfuce Water Design Manual for level II flow control and water quality treatment prior to discharging to the downstream drainage system. Since all stormwater runoff from the property will be collected and conveyed to the stonnwater detention and water quality treatment fucility prior to discharging off site and no increase in drainage flows will occur to the downstream drainage system, no significant impacts to the downstream drainage system will be created as a result of the proposed adjustment. ,.---------------------- I • • • Mr. Randal Parsons King County -4-October 22, 2002 Department of Development and Environmental Services 2. The granting of the proposed adjustment by King County would not alter the appearance and maintainability of the proposed drainage system. The portion of the existing site which currently sheetflows across the southerly property, uhimately drains to the same downstream draina!ie system as the remainder of the site and to the same downstream drainage system under the developed condition. Co1lecting this portion of runoff and routing it to the southwesterly portion of the site into the proposed stormwater fucility will eliminate the need for a separate detention water quality treatment system for the easterly portion of the site. Discharge of stormwater flows from the proposed drainage fucility will ultimately dischaJge to the southwest comer of the site into the existing roadside ditch along 15S th Avenue Southeast and continue in a southerly direction similar to existing conditions without creating any increased impacts to the downstream system. Please proceed to review this Drainage Adjustment Request. Thank you for your consideration. Daniel K. Balmelli, P .E. DKB/cb ene: As noted 00: . Curtis Schuster, KBS m, LLC [J I / I , --- ,. ---~--- ,,0 ® KingCountv Department of Development and Environmental Services 900 Oakesdale Avenue SW Renton. WA 98055-1219 December 20, 2003 • Mr. Daniel Balmelli Barghausen Engineers, Inc. 1821572nd Avenue South Kent, W A 98032 RE: Hamilton Place Subdivision Engineering Activity No. L03SR034 . Dear Mr. Balmelli: • Our office has completed the initial review of engineering plans for the Hamilton Place subdivision. The attached list provides a summary of design issues which must be addressed in your next submittal. The review comments are based upon the design plans and technical information report.received July 16,2003 and the revised information submitted December 5, 2003. . Once the initial review comments have been addressed, please submit-3 sets of revised plans and technical reports. To assist in reviewing the revised plans, the design engineer should prepare a written response for each issue identified in the attached comments. If you desire an electronic copy of my review comments, please send an email topete.dye@metrokc.gov.To discuss any design requirements for the project, please contact me at 206-296-7185. Sincerely, fe/t(J(!V Peter Dye, P.E. Senior Engineer . Enclosure • December 20, 2003 Hamilton Place Subdivision, Activity No. L03SR034 Engine'ering Review Comments Engineering Plans Sheet CI 1. Show the activity number in the margin -L03SR034. • 2. For the plat conditions, add a note at the top referencing the source as the Hearing Examiners report dated 3/28/03. 3. Revise the sheet index to delete the CI2 grading plan which is not included in the plan set and add a sheet for the offsite drainage plans. 4. Show the name and phone of the TESCP supervisor. 5. Show a note on the plan indicating post office approval and provide an approved plan from the post master. (See KCRS 5.04) 6. Revise all sheet numbers to reference 12 sheets rather than II. Sheet C2 I. Specify the ownership of all tracts including King County ownership of Tract B. 2. Include a PLS stamp and signature on the horizontal control plan. 3. Revise Tract D to provide 25-foot property line radii as specified in KCRS 2.10. Sheet C3 I. Specify the type of drainage pipe on all plan sheets. 2. Specify beveled end culverts per KCRS 7.03L and KCRS Drawing No. 2-00 I. 3. Show flow arrows for surface water on all applicable plan sheets. 4. Provide an additional CB along the curb line of 158 th Ave SE to prevent uncontrolled drainage across the asphalt ramp -Sta 5+00. The catch basin design may also be used to address the conveyance requirements for the wetland outlet. See comment below for sheet C6, item 7. 5. Add a note to the plan sheet indicating the need for full width street overlay in accordance with KCRS 4.0IF. Sheet C4 1. Specify beveled end culverts per KCRS 7.03L and KCRS Drawing No. 2-001. 2. Shift the location ofCB 17 further north to the curb line with an open grate to prevent excessive surface flow length along the curb. 3. Please clarify the existing 12 inch pipe shown on the profile at CB 17. Does this pipe daylight at Sta 17+29 and extend further north along the frontage? Please show and label on plan view. 4. Add a note to the plan sheet indicating the need for full width street overlay in accordance with KCRS 4.0IF. 5. Remove the heavy grid lines on the road profile. • • Sheet C5 1. Specify all 35-foot curb radii as required by KCRS 2.10. 2. Label and dimension the existing right-of-way along both road frontages. 3. Show mailbox locations and indicate the lots served by each box. 4. Show the floodplain within Tract E (Plat Condition 8). 5. Revise Tract 0 to provide 25-foot property line radii as specified in KCRS 2.10. 6. Due to the proposed grading for site development, please submit a geotechnical report to address standard design issues for soil types, lot grading, pond berms, rockery or wall designs, and site inspection. Provide a cross section of the proposed wall along the south property line and show any proposed fencing along the property line or setback area. Sheet C6 1. Show flow arrows for all surface drainage. 2. Label and dimension the existing right-of-way along both road frontages. 3. Specify all 35-foot curb radii as required by KCRS 2.10. 4. Show the location of all power poles along the road frontage and provide a note indicating the need for relocation of poles in coordination with the utility company. 5. The County standards for a private access tract (PAT) normally require curb returns like a minor access street; however, since the PAT is a small private entrance to the right-of-way, we are allowing driveway drops as an alternative. Please use an entry drop for Tract 0 rather than the rolled curb. Reference and . provide a detail similar to KCRS 3-004. 6. Show a public drainage easement for the outfall design in Tact E. 7. The current road design along 158 th Avenue SE appears to block the natural drainage flow from the wetland which may result in flooding of adjoining property. Please provide designs for adequate conveyance of drainage from the wetland which would include design flows for potential detention pond overflow. A catch basin along 158 th with an inlet pipe set at an appropriate elevation could accommodate the wetland flows and curb drainage. Sheet C7 1. Specify through curb frame inlet for the sag catch basin. ( KCRS 7.05B, Drawing 2-016). 2. Tracts C and 0 have a vertical drop atthe terminus of each profile. Please show the final grade lines extending from the road elevation and correlate with the grading plan on sheet C5. 3. Revise the length of storm line A to match with sheet C6 (l19'or 120') Also label storm line A and B on sheet C6. Sheet C8 I. Extend the spillway rock lining down the side slope of the pond berm (SWDM, page 5-29). • • 2. Provide a clean out at the end of the level spreader. Also revise the level spreader detail to show 4" or 6" pipe rather than 12". (See diagram in'drainage manual, page 4-31) 3. As indicated on the level spreader detail, quarry spalls are proposed downslope from the spreader. Show the quarry spalls on the plan view with dimensions and also address this encroachment on the wetland buffer mitigation plan. 4. Five foot setbacks from property lines are required for the proposed pond berms. (See SWDM page 5-23). 5. Pond berms greater than 4 feet must be constructed by excavating a key unless otherwise· addressed by a geotechnical engineer. (See SWDM, page 5-20). 6. The details for flow control and 'flow restrictor must be drawn to scale (SWDM, page 2-23). Also specify requirements for the flow control information plate (SWDM pg 5-41) 7. The overflow spiIlway detail should specify a I-foot of rock lining rather than 9 inches (SWDM, pg 5-29). 8. On the plan view of the flow control MR, show the elbow extending out from side of riser with a 2-foot clearance from the inlet pipe (SWDM, pg 5-42). 9. As noted in the drainage manual on page 2-23, item 4, one cross section of the pond must include the control structure. 10. Please evaluate the criteria noted on page 6-22 in the drainage manual to determine if a liner is required for the wet pond. Sheet C9 I. Revise the mailbox detail to show vertical curb as shown in KCRS Drawing 5- 010. 2. Provide a standard detail for rolled curb with vaned grate, KCRS Drawing 2-021. 3. On the detail sheet or grading plan, include a cross section detail for any proposed rockeries. 4. Show a detail for perforated roof stubs per SWDMpage 5-12. 5. The requirements for wheel chair ramps have been updated by King County and the State of Washington. Please provide a note on the plans referencing the latest WSDOT standard detail F3A and provide applicable design details per the State design manual. Sheet CIO I. When a permanent pond is being used for erosion control, a temporary or . permanent control structure should be used for an outfall. This requirement is described in the drainage manual Appendix D,-page D-25. The surface area for the pond must also satisfy the requirements for sediment retention which should be demonstrated in Chapter 8 of the TIR. Sheet CI2 I. Specify beveled end culverts per KCRS 7.03L and KCRS Drawing No. 2-00 I. Also provide a note indicating the need to coordinate with the property owners for the culvert replacements. • • Sheet L2 As stated in plat condition 16, the required approval for recreation space can be deferred until final platting. Since the recreation space plan has not been submitted or approved by the planning section, please delete sheet L2 froni the engineering submittal and include ,only the street tree plans with relevant details. If you have questions regarding future submittals for recreation space, please call Kim Claussen at 206-296-7167. Sensitive Areas See attached memo from Laura Casey regarding wetland issues. Technical Information Report (TIR) Section 1 The requirements for section one of the TlR are shown in the drainage manual on page 2- 8 and 2-9. Please provide all information as required for Figure 3. As noted at the end of Figure 4, the project overview must also summarize the soils evaluation for on site roof' downspouts. ' Section 2 Provide a copy of the Surface Water Adjustment L02V0098 for the TIR, Section2.4. Section 3 As requested in the attached letter to Dan Balmelli dated August 11, 2003, please provide an updated downstream map showing all conveyance elements, proposed improvements, and the recent culvert upgrades along 160th Ave SE. As outlined in plat condition 20, an analysis is also required for the downstream reach near SE 144th Street. Recent field inspection identified debris blockage at the culvert inlet for SE 144th Street. The required analysis of this conveyance element should include an evaluation of debris removal and/o'r installation of a trash rack if in compliance with standards in the drainage manual on page 4-36. Section 4 1. Please re-evaluate all storm water calculations to address the following: a. The site acreage of 4.13 acres used for modeling does not comprise the entire area for site alteration as defined by the drainage manual. Pre and post developed basin boundaries must consider the road frontage improvements for both storm detention and water quality. Any area proposed for bypass must comply with the bypass criteria in the drainage manual on page 1-36 and the drainage adjustment Conditions No.2 and 3. b. Based upon field evaluation and aerial photo (attached), the existing site is not entirely pasture as used in the KCRTS calculations. The south and west portion r • • •• of the site is forested with deciduous trees. Please use the appropriated land cover asoutlined in the drainage manual, Table 3.2.2C: c. The proposed impervious surface must be site specific as noted in the drainage manual on page 3-27. Please provide a clear summary of acreage for each component of impervious surface (i.e. lots, roads, rec space, RID tract, frontage roads, etc ... ) Note that in the R-4 zone, the maximum allowed impervious for . each lot is 55%. . d. Demonstrate that the final detention volume has been increased by 10% as required Condition No.2 in the approved drainage adjustment. . Section 5 I. Provide the required backwater analysis for all conveyance as outlined in the drainage manual. (See pages 4-17/19) I 2. Provide calculations for all frontage road conveyance including the outlet for the wetland adjacent to 15S th Ave SE. 3. Provide riser overflow calculations for the detention pond facility. Section 6 1. Provide a geotechnical report for the project. 2. Provide a floodplain evaluation as required by plat condition 8. Section? Include all final information for items cited in the table of contents for Section 7. Section 8 Address the requirements for a sediment pond outlet riser. See Drainage Manual Appendix 0-25. Section 9 1. Provide finalized bond quantity sheets. ·2. Finalize the stoim water facility summary sheet and provide a sketch of the facility. Section 10 Remove the operations manual Appendix A. The manual is required only for private facilities. ® King County Department of Development and Environmental Services 900 Oakesdale Avenue SW Renton, WA 98055-1219 October 2, 2003 • TO: Pete Dye, Senior Engineer, Engineering Review Section • FM: Laura Casey, Environmental Scientist III, Critical Areas Section RE: Engineering Plans for Hamilton Place, L02P0011 I L03SR034 I have reviewed the engineering plans and the Technical Information Report for the plat of Hamilton Place, prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, and dated July 15, 2003, for conformance with the wetland provisions of the KCC 21A.24, the sensitive areas code, and the Examiner's Conditions of Approval. Please request that the applicant make the following revisions to the plans: 1. The wetland and buffer have been placed in a separate tract. Tract E should be labeled "Sensitive Area Tract" rather than "wetland and buffer". 2. A 15-foot building setback line must be shown on Tracts A and B from the edge of Tract E. 3. Wetland signs are required to be placed on the outer edges of the sensitive areas tract. suggest one sign at 158'h,'one at the plat road, one at the recreation tract, and one adjacent to the stormwater facility tract. The plans must show the location of these signs, and must include a sign detail. 4, The stormwater outfall is shown within the wetland buffer. As I noted during preliminary plat review, this level spreader must be located adjacent to the northern portion of the wetland, since that area is topographically higher than the southern area of wetland by a couple of feet. Otherwise adequate volumes of water may not reach the northern part of the wetland and that area might dry up over time, adversely altering the hydrology of the wetland. 5. The stormwater outfall within the wetland buffer must be located in a manner to avoid removal of trees from the buffer. Either the applicant must show the trees in the vicinity of the outfall on the plans, or mark the area in the field for my field inspection and approval with a note on the plans to that effect. 6. The clearing limits on sheet C10 of 11 must be revised to show the clearing required within the wetland buffer for construction of the stormwater outfall. The area of the buffer that will be cleared for this outfall must be revegetated with native species. A restoration plan must be included with the engineering plans for this area. TO: Pete Dye RE: L03SR034 October 2, 2003 Page 2 • • Please forward my comments to the applicant. If you or they would like to discuss this, I can be reached at (206) 296-7291 or iaura.casey@metrokc.gov. Cc: Randall Parsons, Senior Engineer, Engineering Review Section . Steve Bottheim, Supervising Engineer, Critical Areas Section ® King County Department of Development and Environmental Services 900 Oakesdale Avenue SW Renton. WA 98055-1219 August 11, 2003 • Mr. Daniel Balmelli Barghausen Engineers, Inc. 18215 nnd Avenue South Kent, W A 98032 RE: Hamilton Place Subdivision Engineering Activity No. L03SR034 Dear Mr. Balmelli: • On July 16,2003 our office received the engineering plans and technical information report (TIR) for the Hamilton Place subdivision. As outlined in the Hearing Examiners report for this project, a key design issue involves the offsite drainage conveyance to improve capacity of culverts and ditches. As described in Section 2.1 of your TIR, the desigris and analysis for the offsite drainage improvements are included in the construction plans and technical report; . however this information was not included in your submittal. Prior to performing a site visit and further review of the engineering plans, the design requirements for the offsite work must be submitted to our office. Details regarding the offsite requirements are outlined in preliminarY plat conditions 19 and 20. It is also noted that the downstream analysis in Section 3 of the TIR does not contain mapping of the relevant downstream conveyance system. Please include this in your submittal to clearly identify the location of existing problem areas and proposed improvements. Upon preparation of information to address the drainage issues, please submit 2 copies of the required design plans and technical analysis. The Land Use Services Division will hold your application in abeyance pending receipt of the above information. If you would like to discuss any requirements for the project, please contact me at 206-296-7185. M1eIY , ~{J1f! Senior Engineer cc: Robert Ruddell Hamilton Place L03SR034 S-T-R ,'\ / QSUNES , v NseOJNES /\/1WFUNES N- w_ ..... 0- -AerI;j F'hotc:8 • 2000 Na~ i':lii!lI """ o 100 200 Feel: 1" 200 feet ®KIng County • • .' • • CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Pete Dye King County Department of Development and Environmental Services 900 Oakesdale Avenue S.W. Renton, WA 98055-1219 RE: Response to Engineering Review Comments Hamilton Place Subdivision February 25, 2004 COURIER DELIVERY King County Project No. L02POOIl / Activity No. L03SR034 Our Job No. 11020 Dear Pete: RECEIVED FEB 2 5 2004 KING COUNTY LAND USE SERVICES We have revised the plans and Technical Information Report for the above-referenced project in accordance with your Engineering Review Comments. Enclosed are the following documents for your review and approval. 1. Three sets of the revised construction plans 2. Three copies of the revised Technical Information Report (TIR) The following outline provides each of your comments in italics exactly as written, along with a narrative response describing how each comment was addressed: Engineering Plans Sheet Cl ~ow the activity number in the margin -W3SR034. Response: This activity number has been added to the plans. /. For the plat conditions, add a note at the top referencing the source as the Hearing Examiners report dated 3/28/03. Response: This date has been added to the Hearing Examiner's conditions as requested. ;JJ Revise the sheet index to delete the el2 grading plan which is not included in the plan set V and add a sheet for the offsite drainage plans. Response: The sheet index has been updated to match the plan sheets. 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT. WA 98032 (425) 251'6222 (425) 251·8782 FAX BRANCH OFFICES • OLYMPIA, WA • TEMECULA, CA • WALNUT CREEK, CA www.barghausen.com 1rodt HoA L Pete Dye King County Department of Development and Environmental Services • • -2-February 25. 2004 / Show the name and phone of the TESCP supervisor. Response: This information is shown on the construction sign detail. which is shown on Sheet C12 of the plans. ~ow a note on the plan indicating post office approval and provide an approved plan from / . ;he post master. (See KCRS 5.04) Response: Mailbox locations have been shown on Sheet C5 of the construction plans. We have also included a copy of the approved mailbox locations in the TIR. /se all sheet numbers to reference 12 sheets rather than 11. Response: Sheet numbers have been revised. Sheet C2 @specify the ownership of all tracts including King County ownership of Tract B. Response: Ownership of all tracts proposed for this development has been shown in the tract table on Sheet C2 of the construction plans. Include a PLS stamp and signature on the horizontal control plan. C z. Iii Response: The boundary and topographic survey was prepared by Centre Pointe Surveying. I We have incorporated a signed copy of the boundary and topographic map as part of the 11iwt construction plans to address this comment (Sheet 14). ~evise Tract D to provide 25-foot property line radii as specified in KCRS 2.10. Response: 1Jract D has been revised to incorporate 25-foot property line radii as required. Sheet C3 ~cify the type of drainage pipe on all plan sheets. Response: The allowable pipe material for the storm drainage system on this project is specified in Drainage Note No.9 on Sheet C9 of the construction plans. Storm drainage pipes specified as SD on the plan can be anyone of these pipe types unless otherwise noted on the plan or profile sheets. r ecify beveled end culverts per KCRS 7.03L and KCRS Drawing No. 2-001. Response: Culvert ends have been specified to be beveled as required. • • Pete Dye King County Department of Development and Environmental Services -3-February 25, 2004 /1/ dl/;4;; ~ lAriAt" dr~t,{ Jk~ (J Show floC'arrows for surface water on all applicable plan sheets. ~ Response: These flow arrows have been added to the applicable plans sheets as requested. L /%) Provide an additional CB along the curb line of 158'h Ave SE to prevent uncontrolled , V drainage across the asphalt ramp -Sta 5+00. The catch basin design may also be used to .J .. _J..J -5 address the conveyance requirements for the wetland outlet. See comment below for sheet C6, tJ]£Jrrr (/1/111 item 7. f~O() Il2vu tut p l/ ~/oflfl1f11 ~ / Response: We are unable to provide a catch basin in the flow line for 158th Avenue S.E. on .4.... the north side of the intersection with S.E. 133rd Place. This is due to an existing water line that runs parallel with the proposed curb line approximately 18 inches west of the curb. We do not feel that this catch basin is necessary for the following reasons. I. The length of flow along the curb line upstream of Catch Basin No.7 is only 110 lineal feet. In our opinion, this area will not generate a significant amount of runoff. 2. The slope of the curb line around the curb return and in front of the curb ramp is approximately 4 percent. This will eliminate any possibility of ponding water near the curb ramp. ,4d a note to the plan sheet indicating the need for full width street overlay in accordance /' ;.:i;hKCRS4.01F. Response: We have added a note indicating the need for a full-width street overlay as required. Sheet C4 ~cify beveled end culverts per KCRS 7.03L and KCRS Drawing No. 2-001. Response: Culvert ends have been specified to be beveled as required. ~ the location of CB 17 further north to the curb line with an open grate to prevent / ex~essive surface flow length along the curb. Response: The proposed storm line within 160th Avenue S.E. is designed to bypass upstream flows around our development and proposed drainage facility. Catch Basin No. 17 was intentionally left out of the flow line in order to route some of the existing asphalt area from 160th Avenue S.E. into our development and to our proposed detention facility. This was done to compensate for the proposed impervious areas south of S.E. 133rd Place, which we are unable to route into our detention facility. By doing this, we eliminate undetained bypass from proposed improvements. In our opinion, a catch basin is not necessary upstream of the proposed curb ramp for the following reasons. Pete Dye King County Department of Development and Environmental Services • • -4-February 25, 2004 I. The length of proposed vertical curb and gutter upstream of the curb ramp is less than 90 feet. In our opinion, this length of curb along with the minor amount of roadway will not generate enough runoff to necessitate a catch basin upstream of the curb ramp. 2. The proposed slope around the curb return is approximately 5 percent, and will therefore eliminate any chance of water ponding around the curb ramp. lease clarify the existing 12 inch pipe shown on the profile at CB17. Does this pipe daylight at Sta 17+29 and extend further north along the Jrontage? Please show and label on plan view. Response: This existing 12-inch culvert extends approximately 211 feet to the north from Catch Basin No. 17. This has been noted on the plan view of Sheet C4 . . ::;;;;: note to the plan sheet indicating the need Jor full width street overlay in accordance /' ~~t~~CRS4.01F. Response: We have added a note to this plan indicating the need for a full-width street overlay as required. ~lOve the heavy grid lines on the road profile. Response: These grid lines have been removed. Sheet C5 ~ all 35-Joot curb radii as required by KCRS 2. 10. Response: The 35-foot curb line radii have been specified as required. ~ and dimension the existing right-oj-way along both roadJrontages. Response: Dimensions have been added for the existing right-of-way long both frontage roads. ~w mailbox locations and indicate the lots served by each box. / Response: This mailbox information has been added to the plan as requested. '1 C'5!., Show the floodplain within Tract E (Plat Condition 8). 'YJ..J 'J; Response: We have shown the approximate floodplain area and elevation on Sheet C3 of the I ~ i rr construction plans. This floodplain elevation is based on the contributing flows from the -ftlJ&1 V' developed on-site area, as well as, the upstrea~ basin area, assuming no detention. The invert fA 'tJln~J t IJI( ~ ~/(lil )~' M/;;,; 5 .vJll~ {tal Pete Dye King County Department of Development and Environmental Services • • -5-February 25. 2004 elevation of the proposed 15-inch outlet pipe was used as the controlling factor to establish the elevation. ~ise Tract D to provide 25100t property line radii as specified in KCRS 2./0. ~o~,~ JA(~ Response: Tract D has been revised to incorporate 25-foot property line radii as required. ~ Due to the proposed grading for site development. please submit a geotechnical report to L! address standard design issues for soil types. lot grading. pond berms, rockery or wall designs, and site inspection. Provide a cross section of the proposed wall along the south property line and show any proposed fencing along the property line or setback area. J/)fl~~ { Response: A geotechnical engineering study has been prepared and included with Section 6.2 of the TIR. Sections of the proposed walls have been shown on the profiles of Tract C and Tract D. which are on Sheet C7 of the construction plans. Sheet C6 GAl n1 (Y/ (!) Show flow arrows for all sUlface drainage. rJ.;ml tla If 1. ~ Response: Flow arrows indicating surface drainage flow direction have been added to ~(a" ' Sheet C5 of the construction plans. rbel and dimension the existing right-ol-way along both roadfrontages. Response: The existing right-of-way has been dimensioned for both road frontages. ~ecify all 35100t curb radii as required by KCRS 2. /0. Response: The 35-foot curb line radius has been specified as required. 4.,/Show the location of all power poles along the road frontage and provide a note indicating / the need for relocation of poles in coordination with the utility company. Response: Existing power pole locations have been shown on this plan. Notes for relocating these power poles have been shown on Sheet CII. the Demolition and TESC plan. o ( • "I, fs) The County standards for a private access tract (PAT) normally require curb returns like a V&fYI ~ U minor access street; however, since the PAT is a small private entrance to the right-ol-way, rn~I"'ld we are allowing driveway drops as an alternative. Please use an entry drop for Tract D ~I ed (fiIY rather than the rolled curb. Reference and provide a detail similar to KCRS 3-004. d(g~ Pete Dye King County Department of Development and Environmental Services • -6- - --------------• February 25, 2004 Response: The connection of Tract D to the public roadway has been revised to propose a rolled curb driveway section similar to King County Road Standards (KCRS) Standard Drawing No. 3-004. A detail of this has been provided on Sheet C9 of the construction plans. rw a public drainage easement for the outfall design in Tact E. Response: The outfall system for the detention and water quality system has been removed from Tract E and is now located within Tract B. Therefore, no easement is required. ~e current road design along 158h A venue SE appears to block the natural drainage flow / from the wetland which may result in flooding of adjoining property. Please provide designs for adequate conveyance of drainage from the wetland which would include design flows for potential detention pond oveiflow. A catch basin along 158h with an inlet pipe set at an appropriate elevation could accommodate the wetland flows and curb drainage. Response: We have proposed a new catch basin and 12-inch storm drain to pick up flows from the existing wetland. Details for this new system have been shown on Sheet C3 of the construction plans. Sheet C7 rfy through curbframe inlet for the sag catch basin. ( KCRS 7.05B, Drawing 2-016). Response: Through curb inlets have been specified for Catch Basin Nos. 6 and 7. {) Tracts C and D have a vertical drop at the terminus of each profile. Please show the final U grade lines extending from the road elevation and correlate with the grading plan on sheet \. C5. ~Response: Profiles for Tracts C and D have been extended to the south to include the p~os~relaining~ '.~vise the length of storm line A to match with sheet C6 (119' or 120') Also label storm line A / :~d B on sheet C6. Response: This has been corrected. Sheet CB rnd the spillway rock lining down the side slope of the pond berm (SWDM. page 5-29). Response: Rock lining for the emergency overflow spillway has been extended to the toe of the 2: 1 side slope as required. Pete Dye King County Department of Development and Environmental Services • • -7-February 25. 2004 ~rovide a clean out at the end of the level spreader. Also revise the level spreader detail to /. ~how 4" or 6" pipe rather than 12". (See diagram in drainage manual. page 4-31) Response: The pipe in the dispersal trench has been revised from 12-inch to 6-inch pipe as required by the Manual. VAs indicated on the level spreader detail. quarry spalls are proposed downslope from the /. ~~reader. Show the quarry spalls on the plan view with dimensions and also address this encroachment on the wetland buffer mitigation plan. Response: Quarry spalls have been shown on the plan view for the dispersal trench. This is no longer an issue with the wetland buffer mitigation plan. as the dispersal trench has been removed from the wetland buffer. ~ foot setbacks from property lines are required for the proposed pond berms. (See SWDM / ~~g~ 5-23). Response: We have provided a 5-foot setback from the south boundary line of the plat to the toe of the fill slope for the pond berm. 00nd berms greater than 4 feet must be constructed by excavating a key unless otherwise / addressed by a geotechnical engineer. (See SWDM. page 5-20). Response: The pond sections have been revised to show a key for the pond berms. ~e details for flow control and flow restrictor must be drawn to scale (SWDM. page 2-23). / Also specify requirements for the flow control information plate (SWDM pg 5-41) Response: The details for the flow control and flow restrictor have been drawn to scale as required. We have also provided information on Sheet CIO for the flow control information plate. ~ overflow spillway detail should specify a I-foot of rock lining rather than 9 inches / (SWDM. pg 5-29). Res nse: The overflow spillway detail has been revised to incorporate I-foot of rock lining. On the plan view of the flow control MH. show the elbow extending out from side of riser with a 2-/00t clearance from the inlet pipe (SWDM. pg 5-42). Response: The plan view for the flow control manhole has been revised to incorporate the proper clearances. • • Pete Dye King County Department of Development and Environmental Services -8-February 25. 2004 ~oted in the drainage manual on page 2-23, item 4, one cross section of the pond must /. i;ci~de the control structure. Response: The cross-section of the control structure has been incorporated into Section AA. ;J15) Please evaluate the criteria noted on page 6-22 in the drainage manual to determine if a liner ,J toffy C/ is requiredfor the wet pond. Doni w/!lf/ r)lt1er Response: Based on the geotechnical engineering study prepared by Earth Consultants. Inc .• a liner will be necessary for the proposed wet pond facility. A compacted till liner is suitable for this project. On-site soils can be used as specified in the report prepared by Earth Consultants. Inc. Notes regarding this liner have been added to Sheet CIO of the plans. Sheet C9 /'vise the mailbox detail to show vertical curb as shown in KCRS Drawing 5-010. Response: The mailbox detail has been revised. ride a standard detail for rolled curb with vaned grate, KCRS Drawing 2-021. Response: This detail has been added to Sheet CIO as requested. ;tt.) On the detail sheet or grading plan, include a cross section detail for any proposed rockeries. U Response: No rockeries are proposed with the development of this project. y--Show a detail for perforated roof stubs per SWDM page 5-12. Response: Perforated roof stub-out details have been provided on Sheet CIO of the construction plans. e. The requirements for wheel chair ramps have been updated by King County and the State of Washington. Please provide a note on the plans referencing the latest WSDOT standard detail F3A and provide applicable design details per the State design manual. Response: Updated curb ramp details have been added to Sheet CIO of the construction plans. When a permanent pond is being used for erosion control, a temporary or permanent control structure should be used for an outfall. This requirement is described in the drainage manual Appendix D, page D-25. The surface area for the pond must also satisfy the requirements for sediment retention which should be demonstrated in Chapter 8 of the TIR. Pete Dye King County Department of Development and Environmental Services • • -9-February 25. 2004 Response: Please refer to Sheets Cll and Cl2 of the construction plans for the outfall system of the temporary erosion control pond. Calculations showing that the pond surface area meets the requirements are shown within Section 8.0 of the TIR. Specify beveled end culverts per KCRS 7.03L and KCRS Drawing No. 2-001. Also provide a note indicating the need to coordinate with the property owners for the culvert replacements. Response: Beveled end culverts have been specified as required. We have also added a note on Sheet C13 indicating the need to coordinate with adjacent property owners. 'A.J'-<f11ited in plat condition 16, the required approval for recreation space can be deferred until final platting. Since the recreation space plan has not been submitted or approved by the planning section, please delete sheet L2 from the engineering submittal and include only the street tree plans with relevant details. If you have questions regarding future submittals for recreation space, please call Kim Claussen at 206-296-7167. Response: We are currently in the process of revising these plans. As soon as the revisions are complete. plans will be routed to king county for review and approval. We have incorporated these into the sheet index shown on Sheet C I. Sensitive Areas See attached memo from Laura Casey regarding wetland issues. Response: We have addressed all of Laura Casey's comments regarding the wetland issues. The enclosed plans reflect the revisions that were necessary. Some items such as the storrnwater outfall within the buffer no longer apply as the dispersal trench has been relocated outside of the Sensitive Areas Tract. Other issues such as relocating the dispersal trench to the north end of the wetland have been resolved with Laura directly via email. If you need any copies of this correspondence. please let me know. Technical Information Report (TIRI Se on I The requirements for section one of the TlR are shown in the drainage manual on page 2-8 and 2-9. Please provide all information as requiredfor Figure 3. As noted at the end of Figure 4. the project overview must also summarize the soils evaluation for onsite roof downspouts. Respons7nal information has been included as required. Pete Dye King County Department of Development and Environmental Services • • -10- Provide a copy of the Surface Water Adjustment W2V0098for the TIR. Section 2.4. February 25. 2004 Response: A copy of the Surface Water Adjustment has been included within Section 2.4. Section 3 As requested in the attached letter to Dan Balmelli dated August II, 2003, please provide an updated downstream map showin~ all conveyance elements, proposed improvements, and the recent culvert upgrades along 16(/ Ave SE. As outlined in plat condition 20, an analysis is also required for the downstream reach near SE 144'h Street. Recent field inspection identified debris blockage at the culvert inletforSE 144'h Street. The required analysis of this conveyance element should include an evaluation of debris removal andlor installation of a trash rack if in compliance with standards in the drainage manual on page 4-36. Response: The Levelland Level 3 Downstream Drainage Analyses in Section 3 of the TIR show and describe the entire existing downstream drainage system. As you previously mentioned in our telephone conversation. King County has previously upgraded three of the existing culverts required by the conditions. Our narrative for Section 3 of the TIR discusses which culverts have already been replaced and which ones will be replaced with these construction plans. Why is it necessary to show items that have already been constructed on our construction plans? The narrative in Section 3 and the proposed improvements on the construction plans meet the requirements of Condition 19. As requested. we have added notes to sheet C13 regarding the removal of debris at the culvert under SE 144'" Street. Please refer to the plans and TIR for further information. Section 4 (I) Please re-evaluate all stonn water calculations to address the following: j/ a. The site acreage of 4. 13 acres used for modeling does not comprise the entire area for site alteration as defined by the drainage manual. Pre and post developed basin boundaries must consider the road frontage improvements for both stann detention and water quality. Any area proposed for bypass must comply with the bypass criteria in the drainage manual on page 1-36 and the drainage adjustment Conditions No.2 and 3. Response: The existing and developed basin area maps shown in Section 4.3 of the TIR .e have updated to provide more detail on how the project is providing detention and water [Ifttl' ()j ~ '}uality. for all of the proposed improvements. Basically. we are capturing existing i " fI.{PP ~rea north of S.E. 133rd Place along the frontage roads to mitigate for .e'l-l~llh) U 11 Impervious areas along the frontage roads south of S.E. 133rd Place that we are Gl1( II-,~ ./ unable to gravity-drain into the proposed detention and water quality facility. The ~nh dM'lttJnJr . Pete Dye King County • Department of Development / and Environmental Services -11- ~q M fu?;'t'l ~~ develo."e~~~a' ma~ows all of these areas and should clarify any confusion regardmg ilitsitem,-. -- yBased upon field evaluation and aerial photo (attached), the existing site is not entirely / pasture as used in the KCRTS calculations. The south and west portion of the site is Ok., forested with deciduous trees. Please use the appropriated land cover as outlined in the drainage manual, Table 3. 2. 2C. Response: We have looked at the aerial photograph and updated the land cover for the pre-developed basin area. /0) The proposed impervious surface must be site specific as noted in the drainage manual Von page 3-27. Please provide a clear summary of acreage for each component of impervious surface (i.e. lots, roads, rec space, RID tract, frontage roads, etc ... ) Note that in the R-4 zone, the maximum allowed impervious for each lot is 55%. Response: A summary of all of the proposed impervious surfaces has been provided on the developed basin area map. This should clear up any confusion about where we are getting each area from. YDemonstrate that the final detention volume has been increased by 10% as required /' Condition No.2 in the approved drainage adjustment. Response: The calculations in Section 4.0 of the TIR show that the pond volume has been increased by 10 percent. Section 5 l~vide the required backwater analysis for all conveyance as outlined in the drainage /. ;;;nual. (See pages 4-17119) Response: Backwater analysis has been included within Section 5.0 of the TIR for the conveyance system. v-Provide calculations for all frontage road conveyance including the outlet for the wetland / adjacent to 15tf' Ave SE. Response: Conveyance calculations have been provided for all of the conveyance lines. as well as those proposed along the frontage. 7 Provide riser overflow calculations for the detention pond facility. Response: Riser overflow calculations have been provided in Section 5.5 of the TIR. Pete Dye King County Department of Development and Environmental Services Section 6 • • -12-February 25. 2004 (J Provide a geotechnical report for the project. Response: A geotechnical report has been prepared and included with in Section 6.2 of the TIR. rovide afloodplain evaluation as required by plat condition 8. Response: The approximate floodplain elevation and location have been shown on the construction plans. Calculations to back up this location have been shown in Section 5.3 of the TIR. ~ Include all final information for items cited in the table of contents for Section 7. Response: This information has been included. Section Address the requirements for a sediment pond outlet riser. See Drainage Manual Appendix D-25. Response: The permanent control structure will restrict flows from the temporary sediment pond. Surface area calculations have been completed and shown in this section. Se I. Provide finalized bond quantity sheets Response: Bond quantity worksheets have been updated based on plan revisions. 2. Finalize the storm water facility summary sheet and provide a sketch of the facility. Response: The facility summary sheet has been updated and a sketch of the facility has been provided. ~ ~move the operations manual Appendix A. The manual is required only for private facilities. Response: We have removed the Operations and Maintenance Manual from this report. Pete Dye King County Department of Development and Environmental Services • • -13-February 25. 2004 We believe that the above responses. together with the enclosed revised plans and Technical Information Report. address all of the comments in your Engineering Review Comments. Please review and approve the enclosed at your earliest convenience. If you have questions or would like to have a meeting to discuss this revised information further. please do not hesitate to contact me at this office. Thank you. DD/dmlca l1020c.008.doc enc: As Noted cc: Curtis Schuster. KBS III. LLC (w/encl R~;:Jj~~ Don Dawes Project Engineer Daniel K. Balmelli. Barghausen Consulting Engineers. Inc. (w/encl Ali Sadr. Barghausen Consulting Engineers. Inc. (w/encl ; • • .s oitVlV\ e P/I CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND PLANNING. SURVEYING. ENVI~~~ 11 April 30, 2004 COURIER DELIVERY Pete Dye King County Department of Development and Environmental Services 900 Oakesdale Avenue S.W. Renton, W A 98055-1219 RE: Response to Engineering Comments -2nd Review Hamilton Place Plat King County Project No. L02POOII / Activity No. L03SR034 Our Job No. 11020 Dear Pete: Q W > -W (,) W a: en .... w 0 ~~ 0 N zEfj = 5<1> .., c..>w <!J<I> c:: z::l Q", ;ZCl <I: 5 We have revised the plans and Technical Information Report for the above-referenced project in accordance with your comment letter dated April 9, 2004. Enclosed are the following documents for your review and approval: I. Three sets of the revised grading and drainage plans along with the approved structural plans and landscape planting plans 2. Two copies of revised section 4.0 of the Technical Information Report 3. Two copies of the revised Bond Quantity Worksheet The following outline provides each of your comments in italics exactly as written, along with a narrative response describing how each comment was addressed: Sheet CI 1. The sheet index references three landscaping plans. Please include these in the final plan set. Also reference the structural plans for the c,?ncrete wall. Response: We have added the landscaping and structural plans to the sheet index on this sheet. We have also included these plans as part of the plan set included in this package. 2. The sheet index references CJ4 as the boundary survey, however this sheet is labeled Ill. Please re-label to match the sheet index. Response: The sheet index has been revised to reflect the boundary survey as Sheet I of I. Sheet C2 ]. Revise the Tract Table to indicate that Tract E is owned by the homeowners association. Response: Tract E has been revised to show ownership by the homeowners association. 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT. WA 98032 (425) 251-6222 (425) 251·8782 FAX BRANCH OFFICES • OLYMPIA, WA • TEMECULA, CA • WALNUT CREEK, CA www.barghausen.com , . -------------- • Pete Dye King County Department of Development and Environmental Services Sheet C3 • 2 April 30, 2004 1. As previously mentioned, the flow line along I511h Ave SE drains uncontrolled across the paved ramp near CB I4A. Depending on the depth of the water line beneath the curb, can a through curb inlet or some type of WSDOT through curb drain be used to direct the guller flow into CB I4A? As shown in KCRS Drawing 2-012 and 2-017, the depth of an inlet design is only about 25 inches and the minimum depth of cover on a water pipe is 36 inches. Response: We have added a curb inlet at this location. Please refer to the construction plans for further details. Sheet C5 1. To implement the geotechnical recommendations, please provide the following notes on sheet C5: SPECIAL GEOTECHNICAL INSPECTIONS: THE FOLLOWING SPECIAL INSPECTIONS SHALL BE MADE BY A GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER OR ENGINEERING GEOLOGIST DURING THE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY, FOLLOWED BY WRITTEN CONFIRMATION TO THE KING COUNTY SITE INSPECTOR THAT CONDITIONS ARE ACCEPTABLE AND/OR THAT AU RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER OR ENGINEERING GEOLOGIST HA VE BEEN COMPLIED WITH: • PERFORM FIELD DENSITY TESTING OF STRUCTURAL FILLS AS NEEDED DURING PLACEMENT AND OBSERVE THE GRADING AND EARTHWORK OPERATION. • EXAMINE ALL CUT SLOPES AND EXCAVATIONS TO VERIFY THAT CONDITIONS ARE ACCEPTABLE. • PROVIDE PERIODIC INSPECTION OF THE EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROLS AT INTERVALS SUFFICIENT TO CONFIRM BOTH COMPLIANCE WITH THE PLANS AND ON-SITE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE CONTROL MEASURES. Response: These notes have been added to this sheet as requested. Sheet C6 1. For the pond access road, please specify the minimum turning radii. As noted in the drainage manual on page 5-22, the minimum outside turning radii is 40 feet. Response: The access to Cell No. I of the pond facility is via an 18-foot-wide paved joint use driveway tract and a 12-foot-wide gravel access road. We have revised the inside turning radius to 30 feet and with that modification, the turning radii as specified on page 5-22 of the 1998 King. County Surface Water Design Manual are met. We are able to meet this • Pete Dye King County Department of Development and Environmental Services • 3 April 30. 2004 requirement due to the 18-foot-wide paved access tract and the additional 30-foot inside turning radius. 2. As currently designed. the JUD paved suiface in Tract C does not adequately serve lot 23. Please extend the pavement further south to allow a simple driveway connection to the paved JUD without causing the building permit applicant to redesign the County maintenance road and JUD terminus. The angle point in the JUD curvature should also be removed. Response: We have extended the proposed asphalt beyond the end of Tract C. Please refer to the construction plans for further details. 3. Label the private drainage easement along the north property line and west side of lot one. Response: Labels have been added to this sheet to specify the location and width of the private drainage easement. 4. Provide a note or label indicating that Tract C will include a drainage easement to King County for access to the pond in Tract B. Response: We have added a note to this sheet regarding this issue. Sheet C8 1. For the proposed concrete wall, submit design plans and calculations prepared by a licensed structural engineer. Response: The structural plans have recently been approved. Enclosed within this submittal package are copies of those approved plans. 2. As noted on page 6-71 in the drainage manual (item 4), the first cell in a wet pond must have a minimum depth of 41eet, excluding sediment storage. The wet pond design criteria also requires a graVity drain for maintenance. See page 6-73. item 7. and the diagram on page 6- 79. Response: The first cell of the wet pond has been revised to now provide a depth of 4 feet excluding the sediment storage. 3. Specify the invert elevation of the wetland overflow to CB 14A and identify the floodplain boundary of the wetland. Response: We have added a reference note to this sheet that refers to Sheet C3 for the details about the pipe information. Also shown on Sheet C3 is a floodplain note that talks about the elevation of the floodplain within this wetland. The floodplain elevation of 503.78. which at this elevation only encompasses a very small area around the end of the proposed pipe and within the existing ditch line. Therefore. we have not graphically depicted this on the plan. We are proposing to cover the floodplain limits with the note as shown on Sheet C3. • • Pete Dye King County Department of Development and Environmental Services 4 April 3D, 2004 Technical Information Report (TlR) Section 4 Please address the following issues related to calculations for flow cOlllrol and water quality designs. I. The existing conditions basin map shows 1.91 acres of pervious till grass; however, the table on page 3-26 in the drainage manual indicates that pasture is the appropriate cover type for predeveloped conditions. For developed conditions, the table also shows that impervious areas include detention and water quality ponds rather than the pervious area shown on the developed basin map. Response: The current detention calculations shown in Section 4.1 of the Technical Information Report account for 1.91 acres of till pasture. The previous basin map was incorrect in stating that it was till grass. We have revised the pre-developed basin map accordingly. We have also revised the post-developed basin area map to reflect impervious areas for Tract B. This impervious area accounts for the area at the l00-year water surface elevation of the pond as well as the gravel access road. 2. The analysis for onsite bypass areas is not consistent with the procedures in the drainage manual shown on pages 1-36 and 3-52. Normally, the bypass subbasins are evaluated as separate flow rates which must be modeled in the RID sizing. In this case, a basin trade as noted in your response may be acceptable; however more detail is required to demonstrate compliance. Please evaluate the following: • The developed basin map in the TlR is a poor quality copy which makes it difficult to read and interpret the bypass issues (Font sizing is blurry). Please prepare a larger scale or better quality map which clearly labels the bypass areas and make up basins with applicable land covers. Also note that water quality treatment trades must be evaluated different than flow control due to the definitions cited in the drainage manual on page I-57 and 1-4. Only PGlS areas should be evaluated and the paving of pre- developed gravel or dirt areas cannot be used as make up for bypass. The treatment trade areas for water quality can include only areas of existing pavement. Please provide a specific comparison of acreages for new PGIS in the bypass area versus existing pavement in the make up areas. To compare the equivalent treatment trades for both flow control and water quality, a summary table for bypass issues may be helpful on the basin map for the east and west frontage area. Response: The pre-developed and post-deve1oped basin maps have been revised so that they are good quality prints that are easy to read. We have also revised this map to better show how we are accounting for proposed impervious surfaces along the frontage roads that will not be routed to the proposed detention and water quality. These maps show the specific areas of what is proposed to bypass detention and also the existing impervious areas that we are routing to our proposed detention and water quality facility. Please refer to these maps for further details. . . • • • Pete Dye King County Department of Development and Environmental Services 5 April 30. 2004 • Also provide a written summary in Section 4 of the TIR regarding the procedures and methods for complying with the bypass requirements for both flow control and water quality. Response: Enclosed within this submittal package are two complete copies of revised Section 4.0 for your insertion into the TIRs that you currently have. This revised Section 4.0 includes a new narrative that discusses how we are providing detention and water quality for all of the new proposed impervious areas along the frontage of this development as well as the new pre-and post-developed basin area maps. • The wetpond sizing worksheet should recognize the minimum depth in the first cell as 4 feet rather than 3.5. Response: Enclosed with this submittal are two copies of revised Section 4.0. Included within Section 4.0 are the new wet pond sizing worksheets that account for a Cell No.1 depth of 4 feet rather than 3.5 feet. As we discussed by telephone yesterday. we are routing one set of these construction plans and one copy of the revised bond quantity worksheet to Joanne Carlson for her use in routing to the inspection department for fee calculations. This will help to expedite that process so that it is complete by the time the plans are reviewed and approved. We believe that the above responses. together with the enclosed revised plans and Technical Information Report. address all of the comments in your letter dated April 9. 2004. Please review and approve the enclosed at your earliest convenience. If you have questions or need additional information. please do not hesitate to contact me at this office. Thank you. DD/dm l1020c.015.doc enc: As Noted cc: Curtis Schuster. KBS III. LLC (w/enc) Respectfully. ~~4-- Don Dawes 0 Project Engineer Daniel K. Balmelli. Barghausen Consulting Engineers. Inc. (w/enc) Pete Dye • RECEIVED MAY 2 1 2004 KING COUNTY LAND USE SERVICES King County Department of Development and Environmental Services 900 Oakesdale Avenue S.W. Renton. WA 98055-1219 • CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, SURVEYiNG, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES May 21. 2004 COURIER DELNERY RE: Final Submittal of Revised Engineering Plans for Hamilton Place Our Job No. 11020 Dear Pete: We have revised the plans and portions of the Technical Information Report for the above-referenced project in accordance with the minor comments in your email dated May 14. 2004. We have made the revisions based on our telephone conversation earlier today. Enclosed are the following documents for your review and approval: I. One set of the grading and drainage plans 2. One copy of the boundary and topographic survey 3. One set of the recreation space and street tree plans 4. One set of the retaining wall plans 5. Two copies of the revised post-developed basin area map for insertion into the TIR 6. Two copies of the revised bond quantity worksheet for insertion into the TIR Please review and approve the enclosed at your earliest convenience. If you have any questions or need additional information. please do not hesitate to contact me at this office. Thank you. DDIkn 11020C.017 Respectfully. ~~4- Don Dawes (f, Project Engineer cc: Curtis Schuster. KBS m. LLC (w/enc) Daniel K. Balmelli. Barghausen Consulting Engineers. Inc. (w/enc) 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 (4251251·6222 (4251251·8782 FAX BRANCH OFFICES • OLYMPIA, WA • TEMECULA, CA • WALNUT CREEK, CA www.barghausen.com .. • • CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Pete Dye King County Department of Development and Environmental Services 900 Oakesdale Avenue S.W. Renton, WA 98055-1219 April 30, 2004 COURIER DELIVERY RE: Response to Engineering Comments -2nd Review Hamilton Place Plat King County Project No. L02POOIII Activity No. L03SR034 Our Job No. 11020 Dear Pete: RECEIVED APR 30 2004 KING COUNTY LAND USE SERVICES We have revised the plans and Technical Information Report for the above-referenced project in accordance with your comment letter dated April 9, 2004. Enclosed are the following documents for your review and approval: 6J Three sets of the revised grading and drainage plans along with the approved structural plans and landscape planting plans ,------_ ... , 2. Two copies of revised section 4.0 of the Technical Information Report RV)/S't ?Cf (]) Two copies of the revised Bond Quantity Worksheet . qJ!. The following outline provides each of your comments in italics exactly as written, along with a narrative o Ua response describing how each comment was addressed: -. Sheet C1 0rhe sheet index references three landscaping plans. Please include these in the final plan set. / Also reference the structural plans for the concrete wall. Response: We have added the landscaping and structural plans to the sheet index on this sheet. We have also included these plans as part of the plan set included in this package. The sheet index references C14 as the boundary survey, however this sheet is labeled 111. Please re-label to match the sheet index. \ Response: The s~eet index has been revised to reflect the boundary survey as Sheet 1 of I. Sheet C2 ?vise the Tract Table to indicate that Tract E is owned by the homeowners association. Response: Tract E has been revised to show ownership by the homeowners association. 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT. WA 98032 (425) 251-6222 (425) 251,8782 FAX BRANCH OFFICES • OLYMPIA. WA • TEMECULA. CA • WALNUT CREEK, CA www.barghausen.com • Pete Dye King County Department of Development and Environmental Services Sheet C3 • 2 April 30, 2004 ~reViOuslY mentioned, the flow line along I5ffh Ave SE drains uncontrolled across the /" i.~:ed ramp near CB J4A. Depending on the depth of the water line beneath the curb, can a through curb inlet or some type of WSDOT through curb drain be used to direct the gutter flow into CB I4A? As shown in KCRS Drawing 2-012 and 2-017, the depth of an inlet design is only about 25 inches and the minimum depth of cover on a water pipe is 36 inches. Response: We have added a curb inlet at this location. Please refer to the construction plans for further details. Sheet C5 Y~Plement the geotechnical recommendations, please provide the following notes on sheet / C5: SPECIAL GEOTECHNICAL INSPECTIONS: THE FOLLOWING SPECIAL INSPECTIONS SHAU BE MADE BY A GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER OR ENGINEERING GEOLOGIST DURING THE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY, FOLLOWED BY WRITTEN CONFIRMATION TO THE KING COUNTY SITE INSPECTOR THAT CONDITIONS ARE ACCEPTABLE AND/OR THAT ALL RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER OR ENGINEERING GEOLOGIST HAVE BEEN COMPLIED WITH: • PERFORM FIELD DENSITY TESTING OF STRUCTURAL FILLS AS NEEDED DURING PLACEMENT AND OBSERVE THE GRADING AND EARTHWORK OPERATION. • EXAMINE ALL CUT SLOPES AND EXCAVATIONS TO VERIFY THAT CONDITIONS ARE ACCEPTABLE. • PROVIDE PERIODIC INSPECTION OF THE EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROLS AT INTERVALS SUFFICIENT TO CONFIRM BOTH COMPLIANCE WITH THE PLANS AND ON-SITE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE CONTROL MEASURES. Response: These notes have been added to this sheet as requested. Sheet C6 For the pond access road, please specify the minimum turning radii. As noted in the drainage manual on page 5-22, the minimum outside turning radii is 40 feet. Response: The access to Cell No.1 of the pond facility is via an 18-foot-wide paved joint use driveway tract and a 12-foot-wide gravel access road. We have revised the inside turning radius to 30 feet and with that modification, the turning radii as specified on page 5-22 of the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual are met. We are able to meet this • Pete Dye King County Department of Development and Environmental Services • 3 April 30. 2004 requirement due to the 18-foot-wide paved access tract and the additional 30-foot inside turning radius. 0s currently designed, the JUD paved suiface in Tract C does not adequately serve lot 23. / Please extend the pavement further south to allow a simple driveway connection to the paved JUD without causing the building permit applicant to redesign the County maintenance road and JUD terminus. The angle point in the JUD curvature should also be removed. Response: We have extended the proposed asphalt beyond the end of Tract C. Please refer to the cpnstruction plans for further details. /.~he private drainage easement along the north property line and west side of lot one. Response: Labels have been added to this sheet to specify the location and width of the private drainage easement. 4/;:;;vide a note or label indicating that Tract C will include a drainage easement to King / County for access to the pond in Tract B. Response: We have added a note to this sheet regarding this issue. Sheet C8 ft}For the proposed concrete wall, submit design plans and calculations prepared by a licensed V structural engineer. Response: The structural plans have recently been approved. Enclosed within this submittal package are copies of those approved plans. OJ As noted on page 6-71 in the drainage manual (item 4), the first cell in a wet pond must have a minimum depth of 4-feet, excluding sediment storage. The wet pond design criteria also requires,a-gravity drai~r maintenance. See page 6-73, item 7. and the diagram on page 6- 79. '-~ Response: The first cell of the wet pond has been revised to now provide a depth of 4 feet excluding the sediment storage. ~fy the invert elevation of the wetland overflow to CB 14A and identify the floodplain /' -:::'~~ary of the wetland. Response: We have added a reference note to this sheet that refers to Sheet C3 for the details about the pipe information. Also shown On Sheet C3 is a floodplain note that talks about the elevation of the floodplain within this wetland. The floodplain elevation of 503. 78. which at this elevation only encompasses a very small area around the end of the proposed pipe and within the existing ditch line. Therefore. we have not graphically depicted this on the plan. We are proposing to cover the floodplain limits with the note as shown On Sheet C3. - t ~lfD AW IJ (/ d,)~t(/JO'~ l relJth J Nfd (/ 11'" • • Pete Dye King County Department of Development and Environmental Services 4 April 30, 2004 Technical Infonnation Report (TIR) Section 4 Please address the following issues related to calculations for flow control and water quality designs. ;./rhe existing conditions basin map shows 1.91 acres of pervious till grass; however, the table /' on page 3-26 in the drainage manual indicates that pasture is the appropriate cover type for predeveloped conditions. For developed conditions, the table also shows that impervious areas include detention and water quality ponds rather than the pervious area shown on the developed basin map. Response: The current detention calculations shown in Section 4.1 of the Technical Information Report account for 1.91 acres of till pasture. The previous basin map was incorrect in stating that it was till grass. We have revised the pre-developed basin map accordingly. We have also revised the post-developed basin area map to reflect impervious areas for Tract B. This impervious area accounts for the area at the lOO-year water surface elevation of the pond as well as the gravel access road. The analysis for onsite bypass areas is not consistent with the procedures in the drainage manual shown on pages 1-36 and 3-52. Nonnally, the bypass subbasins are evaluated as separate flow rates which must be modeled in the RID sizing. In this case, a basin trade as noted in your response may be acceptable; however more detail is required to demonstrate compliance. Please evaluate the following: • The developed basin map in the TIR is a poor quality copy which makes it difficult to read and interpret the bypass issues ( Font sizing is blurry). Please prepare a larger scale or better quality map which clearly labels the bypass areas and make up basins with applicable land covers. Also note that water quality treatment trades must be evaluated different than flow control due to the definitions cited in the drainage manual on page 1-57 and 1-4. Only PGIS areas should be evaluated and the paving of pre- developed gravel or dirt areas cannot be used as make up for bypass. The treatment trade areas for water quality can include only areas of existing pavement. Please provide a specific comparison of acreages for new PGIS in the bypass area versus existing pavement in the make up areas. To compare the equivalent treattnent trades for both flow control and water quality, a summary table for bypass issues may be helpful on the basin map for the east and west frontage area. Response: The pre-developed and post-developed basin maps have been revised so that they are good quality prints that are easy to read. We have also revised this map to better show how we are accounting for proposed impervious surfaces along the frontage roads that will not be routed to the proposed detention and water quality. These maps show the specific areas of what is proposed to bypass detention and also the existing impervious areas that we are routing to our proposed detention and water quality facility. Please refer to these maps for further details. • Pete Dye King County Department of Development and Environmental Services • 5 April 30, 2004 ~AlSO provide a written summary in Section 4 of the TIR regarding the procedures and methods for complying with the bypass requirements for both flow control and water _ quality. Response: Enclosed within this submittal package are two complete copies of revised Section 4.0 for your insertion into the TIRs that you currently have. This revised Section 4.0 includes a new narrative that discusses how we are providing detention and water quality for all of the new proposed impervious areas along the frontage of this development as well as the new pre-and post-developed basin area maps . ./ /,The wetpond sizing worksheet should recognize the minimum depth in the first cell as 4 / feet rather than 3.5. Response: Enclosed with this submittal are two copies of revised Section 4.0. Included within Section 4.0 are the new wet pond sizing worksheets that account for a Cell No. 1 depth of 4 feet rather than 3.5 feet. As we discussed by telephone yesterday, we are routing one set of these construction plans and one copy of the revised bond quantity worksheet to Joanne Carlson for her use in routing to the inspection department for fee calculations. This will help to expedite that process so that it is complete by the time the plans are reviewed and approved. We believe that the above responses, together with the enclosed revised plans and Technical Information Report, address all of the comments in your letter dated April 9, 2004. Please review and approve the enclosed at your earliest convenience. If you have questions or need additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me at this office. Thank you. DD/dm 11020c.015.doc enc: As Noted cc: Curtis Schuster, KBS III, LLC (w/enc) Respectfull y, ~~ Don Dawes 0 Project Engineer Daniel K. Balmelli, Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. (w/enc) ·.' ® • King County Department of Development and Environmental Services 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Renton, Washington 98055-1219 206-296-6600 TTY 206-296-7217 FOR INDIVIDUALS: r-------------, Certification of' Applicant Status Alternative formats available upon request Permit Number: _________ _ I, , (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 to apply for this permit or approval by any and all other owners of the property. My mailing address is: I further certify that I am the "applicant" for this permit or approval and am financially responsible for all fees and will receive any refunds paid, I shall remain the "applicant" for the duration of this permit or approval unless I transfer my "applicant" status in writing on a form provided by this department By being the "applicant," that individual assumes financial responsibilitv for all fees and will receive refunds paid. Signature of Applicant OR FOR CORPORATIONS/BUSINESS ASSOCIATIONS: Date Signed I, V. , (print name) hereby certify that I am an authorized agent of , a corporation, or other business association authorized to 0 bUSiness in the State of Washington which is the subject of this application for permit or approval. If this business association is not the sole owner of the property, I certify that this business association is authorized to apply for the permit or approval by any and all other owners of the property. The mailing address of this business association is: I):J~D "/.£-fsP'Tr/ltillr ~ra:> I further certify that the above-named 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 it transfers its "applicant" status in writing or on a form provided by this department I certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that the foregoing is true and~ct "./? _ _ .# ~~~ 7-IS-a.3. " ~natureofAPl)liCaf Date Signm IE ~ IE ~ 'ij] IE fIT' Check out the DDES Web site at www.metrokc.qovlddes lJ\l JUL ·1 6 2003 I1V L 0 c:rSIRUaa 4Ic-cer-apstat.Pdl Page 1 012 05121103 K.C. D.D.E.S. • • • NOTICE TO APPLICANTS: By law, this department returns all engineering and other plans to the applicant. If, however, you wish to authorize the departrnent to return engineering and other plans directly to the engineer, architect, or other consultant for the limited purpose of making corrections, please designate below: • 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: DANIEL K. BALMELLI. P.E. Barghausen Consulting Engineers. Inc. 18215 72nd Avenue South Kent. W A 98032 (425) 251-6222 phone (425) 251-8782 fax dbalmelli@Barghausen.com L03SR034 f5.)~~~~W~f[)I tru JUL ·1 6 2003 lW . Certification of Applicant Status Ic-cer-apstat.pdf 08127/02 K.C. D.D.E.S. Page 2 of 2 I- I I --------------------------------------------------- .-----... .----_ ..... , --\ ,' ...... , ..' .. '" ,," I " -' \ / ~ \ f,... / / 1\ \ --... I I I I , ... --...... " I .. ...... I '\ I I I ... _ .... , r ...... ___ ... " 1 I I , , I , ,"; I \ I I I I I , \ \ \ \ I I I , I \ \ .. " I ,I '.T' '"'_ I , \ , .. ", 'I \ .. .. I \ ,~... 'I " , ..... "', .. ,,, ...... \,' ', ... , "".) , I " ...... 1 ", " \ • ___ , ...... _ .. / ,,, ' ... \ \ , \ \ \ .. \ ',. ..' '... ,,-.. '.. -..... ' ... , " ....... " ','--... -...... ~ ... ' \ ... _\01'"' I '\.... r\J / ......... _ .. --.::::s..." .. ""~.I r: ~~~ ~ l.:' "'" ( r'(\·~ -' ... -"./ /~.: .. ... I '. \' -"'_' . I '~ .. , .. , ... • r'Il'1 ~:\ I \ , C W > -w (,) W Il: TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT ..to ffi = ~~ = '" za: <:> 5~ M <.:>w <!:I (I) a:: z=> a... -0 <t ""z <I: ....J Hamilton Place West Side of 160th Avenue S.E. Near the Intersection of S.E. 134th Street King County, Washington King County Project No. L02P0011 Prepared for: KBSIII,LLC July 15, 2003 Revised December 5, 2003 Revised February 25, 2004 Revised April 30, 2004 Our Job No. 11020 I [;.co. .. _3 Cfl :;2.?>lOC; I CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 1821572NDAvENUESOUTH,KENTWA98032 • (425)251-6222 • (425)251-8782FAX www.barghausen.com TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 PROJECf OVERVIEW J.l Technical Information Report (TIR) Worksheet 1.2 Vicinity Map 1.3 Drainage Basins, Subbasins, and Site Characteristics 1.4 Soils Map 2.0 CONDITIONS AND REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY 2.1 Response to Hearing Examiner Conditions 2.2 Hearing Examiner Report Dated March 23, 2003 2.3 Staff Report to Hearing Examiner Dated March 18, 2003 2.4 Surface Water Adjustment L02V0098 3.0 OFF-SITE ANALYSIS 3.1 Level One Downstream Analysis .. '~ . ) 3.2 Supplemental Level One Downstream Analysis 3.3 Level 3 Downstream Analysis for Evendell Plat 4.0 FLOW CONTROL AND WATER QUALITY FACILITY ANALYSIS AND DESIGN 4.1 Detention Facility Calculations 4.2 Water Quality Calculations 4.3 Basin Maps 5.0 CONVEYANCE SYSTEM ANALYSIS AND DESIGN 5.1 25-Year and 100-Year Conveyance Calculations 5.2 Downstream Improvement Conveyance Calculations 5.3 Tract E lOO-Year Floodplain Analysis 5.4 Backwater Analysis 5.5 Emergency Overflow Spillway, Primary Overflow, and Riser Overflow Calculations IIOZ0.004.doc 6.0 ------------------------------------- SPECIAL REPORTS AND STUDIES 6.1 Preliminary Wetland Assessment and Delineation Report Prepared by Chad Armour, LLC, Dated April 30, 2002 6.2 Geotechnical Engineering Study Prepared by Earth Consultants, Inc., Dated January 28, 2004 7.0 OTHER PERMITS 7.1 PostmasterlMailbox Location Approval 7.2 Fire Marshal Approval 7.3 Metro Transit Approval 7.4 Street Name Approval 8.0 ESC ANALYSIS AND DESIGN 9.0 BOND QUANTITIES AND FACILITY SUMMARIES 10.0 OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE MANUAL 11020.004_doc 1.0 PROJECT OVERVIEW The proposed 23-lot plat of Hamilton Place contains approximately 4.32 acres. The plat is located within a portion of the Southwest quarter of the Northeast quarter of Section 14. Township 23 North, Range 5 East, Willamette Meridian, within King County, Washington. More specifically, the development is located between 158th Avenue S.E. and 160th Avenue S.E. just north of S.E. 134th Street. The existing topography of the site contains slopes ranging from 2 percent to 5 percent. The site generally slopes from the northeast to the southwest, sheet flowing through a small wetland area located at the southwest corner of the site. Stormwater flows then drain into an existing roadside ditch located the east side of 158th Avenue S.E. Stonnwater flows then continue in a southerly direction, eventually discharging into the Cedar River. The existing vegetation on-site consists mostly of patches of grass and a few scattered trees on the northerly half of site, and more dense trees and brush on the southerly portion of the site. The site currently contains one existing residential home, an existing outbuilding, and a small shed. All of these buildings will be removed as part of the development of this plat. This project proposes to construct a new public roadway in an east-west direction connecting 158th Avenue S.B. and 160th Avenue S.E. Frontage improvements will also be provided for both 158th Avenue S.E. and 160th Avenue S.E. An underground storm drainage system will be provided for both frontage roads to convey upstream flows and match the pre-developed conditions. Underground storm drainage lines will also be provided for the proposed on-site roadways to control and convey stormwater to the detention and water quality facility located within Tract B. Stormwater flows from the developed site will be treated and detained prior to being discharged through a dispersal trench into the wetland and buffer located within Tract E of this development. The project also proposes to construct a recreation facility that will be located within Tract A of this development. 11020.004.doc .---------------------------------------------- 1.1 Technical Information Report Worksheet • .) • King County Department of Development and Environmental Services TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET d'-\j'l; ,<J ""."; ,.'''j.~ "1,'i-t.(.· L,_."t ~j ".-.. -$,"':; '" /'" ;1;:1l1,it~4"f:{4;:'<.··"')tI.:illrt;LlI~, . :~~';l:!:,"p.!!g~~S!'9Y:(t-I~R;~~Ptr~9~~~11§~C3I~,~~I'I,,;ir;:1~~ " . ".,,,,~,,.,!, ~ e::-4',,~ ~ ''':;''':')'''' , •• ,1. "',,hlh},',lj ,,'J ~,~, _'H,., , ' I,' ;i:}.!,,,,J)!~,,' ,'1 ,/1:1,<;",1> , Project Owner Mary E, Hamilton Address 15821 S,R 132nd Place Renton. WA 98059 Phone Project Engineer Daniel K Balmelli. PE Company Barghausen Consulting Engineers. Inc, Address/Phone 18215 -nnd Avenue South 0 0 I8l 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Kent. WA 98032/ (425) 251-6222 Subdivision HPA Short Subdivision Grading Commercial Other Community Newcastle Drainage Basin Lower Cedar River River Stream Critical Stream Reach Depressions/Swales Lake Steep Slopes -1- Project Name Hamilton Place location Township 23 Range _0~5~ ________________________ ~ Section ~14-'-_____________ -i Section 0 DFWHPA 0 Shoreline Management 0 COE 404 0 Rockery 0 DOE Dam Safety 0 Structural Vaults 0 FEMA Floodplain 0 Other 0 COE Wetlands 0 Floodplain I8l Wetlands 0 Seeps/Springs 0 High Groundwater Table 0 Groundwater Recharge 0 Other 11020.()()8,doc ---------------------------------------------------------------------- • Soil Type Alderwood (AgC) o Additional Sheets Attached REFERENCE o N/A o o o o Additional Sheets Attached Slopes Erosion Potential Erosive Velocities LIMITATION/SITE CONSTRAINT MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS DURING CONSTRUCTION AFTER CONSTRUCTION 181 Sedimentation Facilities 181 Stabilized Construction Entrance 181 Perimeter Runoff Control o Clearing and Grading Restrictions 181 Cover Practices 181 Construction Sequence o Other 0 Grass lined Channel 0 Tank 181 Pipe System 0 Vault 0 Open Channel 0 Energy Dissipater 181 Dry Pond 0 Wetland 181 Wet Pond 0 Stream 0 0 181 0 0 Stabilize Exposed Surface Remove and Restore Temporary ESC Facilities Clean and Remove All Silt and Debris Ensure Operation of Permanent Facilities Flag Limits of SAO and Open Space Preservation Areas Other _____________________________ ~ Infiltration Method of Analysis Depression KCRTS Flow Dispersal Compensation/Mitigation Waiver of Eliminated Site Storage Regional Detention Brief Description of System Operation Stormwater conveyed via underground pipes to Tract "B" for detention and water quality treatment prior to discharge through dispersal trench along edge of wetland buffer. Facility Related Site Limitations Reference Facility limitation -2-11 020.008.doc .~D "~",,,,H"'" HR. Cast in Place Vault o Retaining Wall o Rockery > 4' High o Structural on Steep Slope C{ Other ';.', !f,' o o 181 181 o Drainage Easement Access Easement Native Growth Protection Easement Tract Other upe . ion, have visited the site. Actual site conditions as observed were incorporated into this To he best knowledge the information provided here is accurate. ,. N-Ol • -3-t 1020,OO8,doc • • 1.2 Vicinity Map • S[ 124TH COALFl[!-D 11 Sf T 1_ 15600 1 w '. V) FS ~ = -- it(': .) ~ ~L-________ ~" ___ 'cl • + • VICINITY MAP NORTH SOURCE: THE THOMAS GUIDE (USED BY PERMISSION) .) 1.3 Drainage Basins, Subbasins, and Site Characteristics ~ f-6O' hJw=¥. _.,;/! ~ 111m \IJ liP' IIEDUCIDt CF ............ --- --'::at AII::,'foLT t--+I; -CChCFE '-/IA I, ~ s ~ [5;: ;-C! ~ @> 5": 2 .3 20 DEVELOPED BASIN AREA MAP BASIN TABLE: BO ~.v: t\ 8 • [XISTItiG 5!JILDi?'i'''"; 4 TOTAL BASf..I AREA -4Jl1:AC TOTAL LOT AREA -2Jf71 AC IMPERVIOUS AREA: , PROPOSED ASPHALT ROAD -OAi AC EXJS1lNQ ASPHALT ROAD -0.08' AC CONCRETE 8!W -0.21 AC TOTAL LOT M"BMOUS -1..47 AC (55'~ of lot area) 'I TRACT '8' -0.10 AC TOTAL U"ERVIOUS -2.33' AC , PERVIOUS AFIEA: i I, TOTAL LOT PERVIOUS -t21 AC (45"~ of lot area>; MISC PSMUOS APEA -0.53 AC (Tract' A', Tract '8', RIW, eel) 5 6 21 20 ! : :,fr~ .! S..?.?.~ Gr. " ... l,4JNjNG W.t..!.L ~ , i 75 .-. T I I I I I : 8 ~ .. -.. -.. -.. -'-l , , \ , , 76 ;.t'!' l' 8 '''''' t ',IV EXiSf. 1;<' t,';,,',.'£R: _-' t::l'- LE.(N} '" Ma50¥' . Xlsrt ~: '. ; I J .', _" :.o't ~ @ ~~~~~j-:': ,,'~' - -... .... IIEIILCIDI CI' ----- ""~5 @ Q. < 10 ::Ew 0 0 zO ·CD -< 00 (1)...1 -!< <Q. £liZ .J~ CO • - w~ = W" Q....1 (I):l O-m> ...I::E ~w w< ...I >::I: ...I W W C £0 iii = I: j:: .ii jj . ~ ~ II 51 I ! '" .J o -J '" 81 81 211 ~I ~ lc"Kl" .B E ,: f ! ~ t i .f(! <0O ~ ~~ o ~'" Vl Il.:;;! UJ X cffi ~ ~:;;2 z ::'z UJ N N N -0 ~ t") N to (,!) D:: o r--. z~ o~~co l§fi Z I I z. N <: ...... .,.... -C) .... ~ ~ ~ ffi~ ~ t-"'~-;o ...J~ N~~~ :!:~ ~ ~ ......... _ t) p ·0"". "0-.,., -;. 0 h ~ 0 9"" .... • " z w 9"" ] 1 .. ~ I. ~ ) ~ BASIN TABLE: 1-410' " @ J:dlNJ; If TOTAL BASIN MEA -171,222 SF -3.93 AC ;2 8 n. 'l~" '" ~'. . '. ~, ;..! : : ;;; " ... :~ , , , , , " ,,"f. .'''. ____ "..J<~ I'{,'-"'-\,,";-"1" , I '"r I@ft ~5 @ Uj (Jj , , , , , , , , , , , 1 ~ ~ ~, ~ , .q:l ~ ~ ;1;1" f.'C!:11f.'l.ri'l , . , , , , , , , I , , , , , , , , , , , SOo>.:. ''liST ';j;: .... ,.'i". ~." ~<f, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , t ---141°' ~.~ , , , , , , , , , , ~ " IMPERVIOUS MEA: EX. BUILDINGS -3,559 SF -0.08 AC EX. GRAVE.. -6,970 SF/2-o.08 AC EX. CONCRETE-13OO SF -0.03 AC TOTAL -0.19 AC PERVIOUS AfEk 11LL FOREST -79,696 SF -t.83 AC llLL GRASS -83,181 SF -t91 AC 8~ .~ ~ ~.W9 .If @j 2 TOTAL -3.74 AC I 80 I t-*'!' f @f 3 ....... '5'1-2, • ~ ~ ,-"\ f-~rr} __ I. ~~;~. 4 ... ~ : :.1 : . I ,. . 1 . . \ '~"\ . . . '. \ . . 4"'T 'E' ~~16~~~~ .. ~ Wi'r'U~J>( , -----:.-8<:.lS'flNf; (.i.t!<.' ':-£M't\ij;O .. ~ .. ( 10 b,-" .-.. ---...... .. -.... -.... -.... TRACT'B' .' (WTv!)nr~m{)N -p&.i6; "'dO. ... \.., ~ EXISTING BASIN AREA. MAP BE. 132ND PLACE I--l = -- BASIN MEA TO SI1E 166 AC (SHEET R..OWl--. 79 :.t! " 5 ; ..... 21 I I f:~' ,~ c;S!;~··~ ,g?)O ~.;f.~;-Q,'" It,';'> ,c ..- " 78 ·······---SI6_ 6 ~,w. 4: 8 -.. EXIST. N~ R8AUt iNC WALt. [X:sn;t tlVU...,lr<I.J BE DEliOUSHt:p . ·Sf.,. C:.ee Pi! j 5228 (Xl'), R£Il.lN1NG WALL E! , -- 18 22508 i 17 23 16 -'.;.'~~---------- 2::. :23 ~t EXISTING AND PROPOSED STORMWAlER @ @ -;s ~--@ b • /6 ;~!' , WAl..J.. ····518. 12 14. --~- "'-SOs 24 ~X:sT. 12-C:JL'.'EJIT U:.(N; "" 508.:50 @) '" ---~~ .. ~J;:.>~- ,l::'-> (-,..> "-rt.j¥· " f~.:(i) ~ 2Xof;!~ ~ ,,: .~.J @ D.. <w :::Eo « w...J a:D.. <z zO -~ 0...J <~ CDc( .J: X W CD ';:I j:: 10 o o ·co Oc. • -!< ...J~ . -=u.i UJ::l m> ~W ...J ...J W CD ~ II.. " s· .!! ~ 51 -~ -l!.' 1!~ ~ -j 81 81 ~I ~I ~ 'II 'II I Sj f ! ! i ~ ",-jg ~ ~~ o ~(/) en n.:;;;! ... X Offi :::> ~:;; '" Z ::'Z ~ N N N aO < 8 ~ ~ ~~ CI~<OID 15~ Z I I ~ .. ~~~~ ~~~ L() .. __ ..... ~LOLl) ...J NZNN ::i'", CIlW .... Uti) .,....~-.......... ~ i ~ i ~ .o!." l·Olt,:,. ~ &~ <5-.,,, ~ ~ .!::! ...: ~ g ..., <' ~ ., z ! " w • ... " , • '" 0 '\ <,~$ I¥ I £ ~ ~ 'co"" g o C\I o ,.. ,.. I ~ ~ DISCHAAQE FROM SI1E , IJ~ -) 1.4 Soils Map I I I I I . .....","'I~,--, .... : I I I I I I I I .k. i .k' I . SoiLS. oN$ I'R -/tl!.L NCJi S;tJITI'$L& R:tL ~<;?oI.1r INl1i:;1ltn7lJ-.l 2. SrrE. j2£a.'Vt~ AN Uf~ ~tN M-fA of f. r.." .1'tC. l1ZmM nt£ /'JbfCrH. ~ 5tE 5wnOt-J <;;, I rot2-1:>'C . .-rA1L.tD Mt\f'. SOILS MAP NORTH \\ .. \,) f~ , j \' " QJIOE TO MAPPING UNITS For a full description of a mapping unit, read both the description of the mapping unit and that of the soil series to which the mapping unit belongs. See table 6, page 70, for descriptions of woodland groups. Other information is given in .tables as follOWS: Acreage and extent. table 1, page 9. Engineering USes of the soils, tables 2 and 3, pages 36 through 55. Town and country planning, table 4, page 57. Recreational uses, table 5, page 64. Estimated yields. table 7, page 79. Map syrool Mapping ooit AgO AldeTWood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 6 percent slopes---------- Age AldeTWood gravelly sandy loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes--------- AgD Alde'lWood gravelly sandy loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes,-------- AkF AldeTWood and Kitsap soils, very steep------------------------ AmB Arents, Alderwood material, 0 to 6 percent slopes 1/---------- AmC Arents, Alderwood material, 6 to 15 percent slopes-I/--------- An Arents, Everett material !/-------------~----------~--------- BeC Beausite gravelly sandy loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes---------- BeD Beausite gravelly sandy loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes--------- BeF Beausite gravelly sandy loam, 40 to 7S percent slopes--------- Bh Bellingham silt 10am-----------------------------------~------ Br Briscot silt loam-------------.;;----·-_________________________ _ Bu Buckley silt loam---------___________________________________ _ Cb Coastal beaches----------------------------------------------- Ea Earlmont silt loam-------------------------------------------- Ed Edgewick fine sandy loam-------------------------------------- EvB EVerett gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 5 percent slopes---------··-- EvC Everett gravelly sandy loam, 5 to IS percent slopes----------- EvD Everett gravelly sandy loam, IS to 30 percent .slopes---------- &lC 'Everett-Alderwood gravelly sandy loams, 6 to 15 percent slopes-------··---------------------------------------------- InA Indianola loamy fine sand, 0 to 4 percent slopes-------------- InC Indianola loamy fine sand, 4 to 15 percent slopes------------- InD Indianola lQCQIlY fine sand, 15 to 30 percent slopes------------ Kp8 Kitsap silt loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes----------------------- XpC Kitsap silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes---------------------- Kp~ Kitsap silt loam, IS to 30 percent slopes--------------------- KsC Klaus gravelly loamy sand, 6 to 15 percent slopes------------- Ma Maxed alluvial land------------------------~----------------- NeC Neilton ve~ gravelly loamy sand, 2 to IS percent slopes------::: --, .-~~~·=~~k S!:-~t ~============================================= No No:rma sandy loam--------------------------------.-------------- Or Orcas peat---------------------------------------------------- Os OTidia silt loam---------------------------------------------- 0vC Ovall gravelly loam, 0 to 15 percent slopes------------------- OvD Ovall gravelly loam,· IS to 25 percent slopes------------------ OvF Ovall gravelly lo~. 40 to 75 percent slopes------------------ Pc Pilchuck loamy fine sand------------------------------.-------- Pk Pi1c1IUcI<fine sandy 10am-------------------------------------- Pu Puget silty clay 10am----------------------------------------- Py Puyallup fine sandy 10am-------------------------------------- Described on page 10 8 10 10 10 10 11 11 12 12 12 13 13 14 14 15 15 16 16 RaC Ragnar fine sandy loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes---------------- Ran Ragnar fine sandy loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes--------------- RdC Ragnar-Indianola association, Sloping: 1/----.------------------ 16 17 16 17 17 18 18 18 18 19 19 20 20 21 21 22 23 23 23 23 24 24 25 26 26 Ragnar 50il-----------------------~--------------------- Indianola 50il------------------------------------"------- RdE Ragnar-Indianola asSOCiation, moderately steep: 1/------------Ragnar soil-----------_____________________ ~ ____________ _ Indianola soi1------------------------------------------- 26 Capability unit Syroo1 IVe-2 IVe-2 V1e-2 V1le-1 IVe-2 IVe-2 IVs-1 IVe-2 V1e-2 V1le-1 111 .. -2 IIw-2 Ulw-2 V1IIw-1 IIw-2 IIlw-1 IVs-I VIs-l VIe-! Vls-l IVs-2 IVs-2 Vle-l IIle-l IVe-1 Vle-2 V1s-1 VIw-2 V1s-1 IIw-l IIw-1 IIlw-3 V1IIw-l IIw-2 IVe-2 VIe-2 VIle-l Vlw-l IVw-1 IIIw-2 IIw-1 IVe-3 Vle-2 IVe-3 IVs-2 V1e-2 Vle-l ·Page 76 76 78 78 76 76 77 76 78 78 76 75 76 78 75 75 77 78 77 78 77 77 76 75 76 78 78 78 78 74 74 76 78 75 76 78 ·78 78 76 76 74 77 78 77 77 18 77 Woodland group Syrool 3d2 3d1 3dl .2d1 3d2 3d2 3£3 3d2 3dl 3dl 3w2 3w1 4 .. 1 3w2 201 3£3 3£3 3£2 3£3 4s3 4s3 4s2 2d2 ld2 2dl 3fI 201 3£3 201 201 3w2 3w1 3d1 3d1 3d1 2s1 2s1 3w2 201 4s1 4s1 4s1 4s3 4s1 4s2 U. s. GOVERNMENT PRINT"lNG OFFICE : len 0 • 4"· .--------------------------------------------------------_._---- .) 2.1 Responses to Hearing Examiner's Conditions • 2.0 CONDITIONS AND REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY 2.1 Response to Hearing Examiner Conditions 1. Compliance with all platting provisions of Title 19A of the King County Code. Response: The plat is in compliance with all the 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. Response: This condition will be met with the recording of the final plat. 3. The plat shall comply with the maximum 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. Response: This development meets the maximum density requirements of the R-4 zone classification. The Applicant shall provide Transfer of Density Credit documentation to DDES prior to final approval. Response: These documents will be provided prior to construction plan approval. 5. 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). Response: All construction of the public roadways is in accordance with the 1993 King County Road Standards. 6. The Applicant must obtain the approval of the King County Fire Protection Engineer for the adequacy of the fire hydrant. water main. and fire flow standards of Chapter 17.08 of the King County Code. 7. Response: This condition will be met prior to construction plan approval. A surface water adjustment (W2V0098) is approved for this subdivision. All conditions of approval for this adjustment shall be met upon submittal of the engineering plans. Response: All conditions of the surface water adjustment no. L02V()()98 have been met with the construction plans. lI020.004.doc 8. The lOO-year floodplain for any onsite wetlands or streams shall be shawn on the engineering plans and the final recorded plat per the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM). Response: The lOO-year floodplain elevation for the onsite wetland has been shown on the construction plans as required. 9. The following road improvements are required to be constructed according to the 1993 King County Road Standards (KCRS): a. Road A shall be improved to the urban sub-access street standard. Response: Road A has been designed as an urban sub-access street. b. FRONTAGES: Thefrontages along both 158th Ave SE and along 160th Ave SE shall be improved to the urban neighborhood collector standard. c. d. Response: The frontage improvements for both 158th Avenue S.E. and 160th Avenue S.E. have been designed as neighborhood collector road standards. Tract D shall be improved to the private access tract standard per Section 2.09 of the KCRS. Tract C shall be improved as a joint use driveway. Response: Tract D has been designed as a private access tract per Section 2.09 of the King County Road Standards. Tract C has been designed as ajoint use driveway tract. Modifications to the above road conditions may be considered according to the variance procedures in Section 1.08 of the KCRS. Response: At this time we are not proposing any modifications to these road standards. e. Lots utilizing Tract D shall have undivided ownership of Tract D and be responsible for its maintenance. Lots 22-23 shall have undivided ownership of Tract C and be responsible for its maintenance. A note to this effect shall be placed on the engineering plans and final plat. Response: A note to this effect has been added to the construction plans. /0. All utilities within proposed rights-of-way must be included within a franchise approved by the King County Council prior to final plat recording. II. Response: This condition will be met prior to final plat recording. 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: (I) pay the MPS fee at final plat recording, or (2) pay J 1020.004.doc 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 IYy 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. Response: This condition will be met prior to final plat recording. 12. Lots within this subdivision are subject to King County Code 21 A.43, which imposes impact fees to fund school system improvements needed to serve new development. As a condition offinal 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. 13. Response: This condition will be met prior to recording of the final plat and issuance of the individual lot building permits. The proposed subdivision shall comply with the Sensitive Areas Code as outlined in KCC 21A.24. Permanent survey marking and signs, as specified in KCC 21A.24.160, shall also be addressed prior to final plat approval. Temporary marking of sensitive areas and their buffers (e.g., with bright orange construction fencing) shall be placed on the site and shall remain in place until all construction activities are completed. Response: Temporary and permanent markers for the sensitive areas have been shown on the construction plans. 14. Preliminary plat review has identified the following specific requirements which apply to this project. All other applicable requirements from KCC 21A.24 shall also be addressed IYy the Applicant. Wetlands a. Class 3 wetland( s) shall have a minimum buffer of 25 feet, measured from the wetland edge. Response: A 25-foot buffer has been provided for the Class 3 wetland. b. The wetland( s) and their respective buffers shall be placed in a Sensitive Area Tract (SAT). c. Response: The onsite wetland and buffer has been located within Tract C as shown on the construction plans. Buffer averaging may be proposed, pursuant to KCC 2IA.24.320, provided the total amount of the buffer area is not reduced and better resource protection is achieved, subject to review and approval by a DDES Senior Ecologist. 11020.004.doc tt) 15. d. Response: At this time we are not proposing any buffer averaging. A minimum building setback line of 15 feet shall be required from the edge of the tract. Response: A 15-foot building setback line has been shown from the edge of Tract E as required. Alterations to Streams or Wetlands a. If alterations of streams andlor wetlands are approved in conformance with KCC 21A.24, then a detailed plan to mitigatefor impacts from that alteration will be required to be reviewed and approved along with the plat engineering plans. A performance bond or other financial guarantee will be required at the time of plan approval, to guarantee that the mitigation measures are installed according to the plan. Once the mitigation work is completed to a DDES Senior Ecologist's satisfaction, the performance bond may be replaced by a maintenance bond for the remainder of the five-year monitoring period to guarantee the success of the mitigation. The Applicant shall be responsible for the installation, maintenance and monitoring of any approved mitigation. The mitigation plan must be installed prior to final inspection of the plat. Response: At this time we are not proposing any alterations to the onsite streams or wetlands. The following note shall be shown on the final engineering plan and recorded plat: RESTRICTIONS FOR SENSlTlVE AREA TRACTS AND SENSlTlVE AREAS AND BUFFERS Dedication of a sensitive area tract/sensitive area and buffer conveys to the public a beneficial interest in the land within the tract/sensitive area and buffer. 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 animal habitat. The sensitive area tract/sensitive area and buffer imposes upon all present and future owners and occupiers of the land subject to the tract/sensitive area and buffer the obligation, enforceable on behalf of the public by King County, to leave undisturbed all trees and other vegetation within the tract/sensitive area and buffer. The vegetation within the tract/sensitive area and buffer 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 tract/sensitive area and buffer 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 lot subject to the sensitive area tract/sensitive area and II020.004.doc r-----------~ .) buffer. The required marking or flagging shall remain in place until all development proposal activities in the vicinity of the sensitive area are completed. No building foundations are allowed beyond the required IS-foot building setback line, unless otherwise provided by law. Response: This note has been shown on the constructions plans and will be shown on the final recorded plat. 16. Suitable recreation space shall be provided consistent with the requirements of KCC 21A.14.1BO and KCC 21A.14.190 (i.e., sport court[s], children's play equipment, picnic table[s], benches, etc.). a. A detailed recreation space plan (i.e., landscape specs, equipment specs, etc.), shall be submilled for review and approval by DDES and King County Parks prior to or concurrent with the submit/al of the final plat documents. Applicant shall provide a minimum of 9,500 square feet as shown on the preliminary plat map. b. Response: A detailed recreation space plan has been prepared and submitted to King County for review and approval. A performance bond for recreation space improvements shall be posted prior to recording of the plat. Response: This condition will be met 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 a/the recreation, open space and/or sensitive area tract(s). Response: A homeowners' association or other workable organization will be established to the satisfaction of DDES prior to recording of the fmal plat. lB. Street trees shall be provided asfollows (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. Response: Street trees have been planted at a rate of one free for every 40 feet of frontage along all the proposed roadways .. 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-oI-way. Response: Street trees have located within the existing and proposed right-of-way wherever possible. 11020.004.doc • 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-ol-way line. Response: Where proposed street trees were not located within the right-of-way they have been set within 20 feet of the proposed or existing 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. Response: This condition will be met with the recording of the final 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. f. Response: The proposed street tree species meet King County requirements. The Applicant shall submit a street tree plan and bond quantity sheet for review and approval by DDES prior to engineering plan approval. Response: The street tree plans and bond quantity form has been submitted to King County for review and approval. g. The Applicant shall contact Metro Service Planning at 684-1622 to determine if 158th Ave. SE and/or 160th Ave. SE is on a bus route. If either road is a bus route, the street tree plan shall also be reviewed by Metro. Response: We are currently in the process of contacting Metro Service Planning to find out whether these roads are on a bus route. If they are, street tree plans will be routed to Metro for review and approval. h. The street trees must be installed and inspected, or a peiformance bond posted prior to recording of the plat. If a peiformance 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 peiformance 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. 11020.004.doc • • Response: The proposed street trees will be installed. inspected. and approved prior to final plat recording or a bond will be posted for the remaining improvements. A landscape inspection fee shall also be submitted prior to plat recording. The inspectionfee is subject to change based on the current County fees. 19. The following have been established by SEPA as necessary requirements to mitigate the adverse environmental impacts of this development. The Applicants shall demonstrate compliance with these items prior to final approval. 20. The base flow control for the stormwater detention system is Level 2 per the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual( KCSWDM). To mitigate for existing downstream flooding problems, one of the following options is required: a. The stormwater detention system shall be designed to the Level 3 Flow Control criteria as specified in the 1998 KCSWDM. OR b. The stormwater detention system shall be designed to the Level 2 Flow Control criteria and the following downstream improvements shall be accomplished either individually or in conjunction with other development projects in the area: The 160th Ave. SE downstream conveyance system (from SE I36th ST to approximately SE 142nd St.) shall be upgraded to provide for the JOO- year storm capacity. Downstream driveway culverts/ditches and a cross- culvert under 160th Ave. SE shall be improved as needed. Culverts L-8 and L-10 on the west side of 160th Ave. SE. cross-culvert L-1I. and culverts L-12 and L-14 on the east side of 160th Ave. SE shall be improved. The culvert designations are according to the Level 1 Downstream Drainage Analysis prepared by Daniel Balmelli, PE dated May 26, 2002 and revised Dec 3, 2002. Bank and channel stabilization are also required in the unopened right-of-way for I62nd Ave. SE, in the vicinity of the easterly line of Lot 12, Rich Lea Crest (address 16046 SE 142nd St.). It is estimated that stabilizing and re-grading approximately 50 to 100 feet east of 16046 SE 142nd St., will be adequate to resolve flooding that has occurred at this location. The culverts and channel described are located from the south site boundary to a distance of approximately 2000 feet to 3200 feet downstream. Note that the above ditch and culvert improvements are intended to duplicate the downstream improvements required for the east sub-basin of the proposed plat of Evendell WI POOl 6. Response: The developer has decided to go with Option B. Please see the construction plans for downstream improvements. The applicant shall provide additional analysis. to be reviewed and approved by DDES, to assure that downstream improvements, in conjunction with additional runoff volume from the site as developed, will not exacerbate drainage and 11020.004.doc • • • flooding problems between the termination of the required downstream culvert and ditch improvements and SE J 44th Street. Response: Additional analysis of the proposed downstream improvements has been included within the Technical Information Report for this project. 11 020.004.doc .---------------------------------- • 2.2 Hearing Examiner's Report Dated March 23, 2003 " REPORT AND DECISION --------------- OFFICE OF TilE HEARING EXAMINER KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON 850 Union Bank of California Building 900 Fourth Avenue Seallle, Washington 98164 Telephone (206) 296-4660 Facsimile (206) 296-1654 March 28, 2003 SUBJECT: Department of Development and Environmental Services File No. L02POOll Location: Applicant: King County: HAMILTON PLACE Preliminary Plat Application Between 158'" Avenue Southeast and 160'" Avenuc Southeast, on the north side of Southeast 134'" Street, if extended KBS Ill,LLC represented by Wayne Potter 17423 Topaz Loop SE Yclm, WA 98057 Department of Development and Environmental Scrvices represented by Kim Claussen, Bruce Whittaker, Kris Langley 900 Oakesdale A venue Southwest Renton, Washington 98055-I 219 Telephone: (206) 296-7211 Facsimile: (206) 296-6613 SUMMARY OF DECISIONIRECOMMENDATION: Department's Preliminary Recommendation: Department's Final Recommendation: Examiner's Decision: EXAMINER PROCEEDINGS: Hearing Opened: Hearing Closed: Approve, subject to conditio~s Approve, subject to conditions Approve, subject to conditions (modified) March 18, 2003 March 18, 2003 Participants at the public hearing and the exhibits offered and entered are listed in the allached minutes. A verbatim recording of the hearing is available in the office of the King County Hearing Examiner. .) e\ L.02POOII -Hamil10n Place ISSUEsrrOPICS ADDRESSED: Transfer of density credit • Traffic impacts and miligation Surface water drainage Water supply SUMMARY: Page 2 of 10 Application for subdivision of 4.32 acres into 23 lots in the urban area, including transfer of density credits, is granted preliminary approval. FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & DECISION: Having reviewed the record in this maller, the Examiner now makes and enters the fOllowing: FINDINGS: I. General Information: Owner: Applicant: Engineer: STR: Location: Zoning: Acreage: Number of Lots: Density: Lot Size: Proposed Use: Sewage Disposal: Water Supply: Mary Hamilton 15821 SE 132 nd Place Renton W A 98059 Robert Ruddell KBSm,LLC 12505 Bel-Red Road, #212 Bellevue, W A 98005 (206) 623-7000 BP Land Investments, LLC PO Box 5206 Kent, W A 98064-5206 14-23-4 Between 158" Avenue Southeast and 160'h A venue Southeast, on the north side of Southeast 134'h Street, if extended R-4 4.32 acres 23 lots Approximately 5.3 units per acre Ranges from approximately 4,556 to 6,338 square feet Single-family detached dwellings City of Renton King County Water District #90 · .. ,--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I L02POOI I -llamilton Place Page 3 of 10 Fire District: School District: King County District #25 Issaquah Complete Application Date: July 2, 2002 2. Except as modified below, the facts set forth in the DDES preliminary report to the Hearing Examiner for the March 18, 2003, public hearing are found to be correct and are incorporated herein by this reference. The said report is exhibit no. 2 in the hearing record. 3. Students from this subdivision will be bussed to the elementary school, middle school and senior high schooL 4. This proposal is governed by the 1994 King County Comprehensive Plan, as amended by the Comprehensive Plan 2000 amendments adopted by ordinance no. 14044. The base density of the R4 zone classification is four dwelling units per acre, and the maximum density is six dwelling units per acre. Density in excess of the base density, up to the maximum density, is permitted utilizing the transfer of development rights (TOR) program pursuant to Chapter 21A.37 of the King County Code. 5. The subject property was issued a transportation certificate of concurrency for 22 single-family dwelling units. These units are in addition to the single dwelling unit that currently exists on the property. This certificate reflected capacity which was available in concurrency zone no. 452 on the date of application for the certificate of transportation concurrency, and it remains in effect for the duration of this development approvaL KCC: 14.70.250.D. 6. The conditions of the mitigated determination of environmental non-significance will mitigate the impact of the proposed subdivision on existing downstream flooding problems. These conditions may be met by the developer of Hamilton Place alone, or in conjunction with the development of other properties in the vicinity which would have similar downstream impacts. 7. Testimony by area residents indicates that water pressure problems occasionally exist in the area of the proposed development. However, there is no evidence as to whether the cause of those problems is inadequate supply, deficiencies in the distribution system or in individual feeder lines. King County Water District no. 90 has issued a certificate of water availability for the proposed development, in which it certifies that I ,000gallons per minute or more will be ' available for not less than two hours at the site. The District also certifies that it has water rights or claims sufficient to provide this service. CONCLUSIONS: I. If approved subject to the conditions recommended below, the proposed subdivision will comply with the goals and objectives of the King County Comprehensive Plan, subdivision and zoning codes, and other official land use controls and policies of King County. 2. If approved subject to the conditions recommended below, this proposed subdivision will make appropriate provision for the public health, safety and general wei far .... and for open spaces, for drainage ways, streets, other public ways, transit stops, potable water supply, sanitary wastes, L02POOli -HamillOn Place Page 4 or 10 3. 4. 5. 6. parks and recreation, playgrounds, school and school grounds, and safe walking conditions for students who only walk to school, and it will serve the public use and interest. The conditions for final plat approval recommended below are in the public interest and are reasonable requirements to mitigate the impacts of this development upon the environment. The dedications of land or easements within and adjacent to the proposed plat, as recommended by the conditions for finafplat approval, or as shown on the proposed preliminary plat submitted by the Applicant, are reasonable and necessary as a direct result of the development of this proposed plat, and are proportionate to the impacts of this development. This proposal meets the requirements for the transfer of development rights, resulting in the authorization of six dwelling units on the subject property in addition to the base density permitted by the R-4 zone classification. The resuitingtotal density of 5.3dwelJing.units is within the maximum density permitted by the R-4 zone classification. The proposed development is subject to completion of one of the alternative surface water controls set forth in the mitigated determination of non-significance for this proposal. DECISION: The proposed preliminary plat of Hamilton Place, as revised and received October 31, 2002, is approved, subject to the following conditions for final plat approval: J. Compliance with all planing 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 maximum 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 'lot result in substantial changes may be approved at the. discretion of the Department of Development and Environmental Services. 4. The Applicant shall provide Transfer of Density Credit documentation to DOES prior to final approval. 5. 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). 6. The Applicant must obtain the approval of the King County Fire Protection Engineer for the adequacy of the fire hydrant, water main, and fire flow standards of Chapter 17.08 of the King County Code. ! L02POOII -Hamilton Place Page 5 of 10 7. A surface water adjustment (L02YOO98) is approved for this subdivision. All conditions of approval for this adjustment shall be met upon submittal of the engineering plans. 8. The IOO-year noodplain 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). 9. The following road improvements are required to be constructed according to the 1993 King County Road Standards (KCRS): a. Road A shall be improved to the urban sub-access street standard. b. FRONTAGES: The frontages along both 158'" Ave SE and along 160'" AveSE shall be improved to the-urban neighborhood collector standard. c. Tract D shall be improved to the private access tract standard per Section 2.09 of the KCRS. Tract C shall be improved as ajoint use driveway. d. Modifications to the above road conditions may be considered according to the variance procedures in Section 1.08 of the KCRS. e. Lots utilizing Tract D shall have undivided ownership of Tract D and be responsible for its maintenance. Lots 22-23 shall have undivided ownership of Tract C and be responsible for its maintenance. A note to this effect shall be placed on the engineering plans and final plat. 10. All utilities within proposed rights-{)f-way must be included within a franchise approved by the King County Council prior to final plat recording. II. 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: (I) 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 Comity 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. 12. Lots within this subdivision are subject to King County Code 2IA.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. 13. The proposed subdivision shall comply with the Sensitive Areas Code as outlined in KCC 2IA.24. Permanent survey marking and signs, as specified in KCC 2IA.24.160, shall also be addressed prior to final plat approval. Temporary marking of sensitive areas and their buffers U}2POOII -Jlamil10n Place Page60f II 14. (e.g., with bright orange construction fencing) shall be placed on the site and shall remain in place until all construction activities are completed. Preliminary plat review has identified the following specific requirements which apply to this project. All other applicable requirements from KCC 21A.24 shall also be addressed by the Applicant. Wetlands a. Class 3 wetland(s) shall have a minimum buffer of 25 feet, measured from the wetland edge. b. The wetland(s) and their respective buffers shall be placed in a Sensitive Area Tract (SAT). c. Buffer averaging may be proposed, pursuant to KCC 21 A.24.320, provided the total amount of the buffer area is not reduced and better resource protection is achieved, subjeCt" to review and approval by a DDES Senior Ecologist. d. A minimum building setback line of 15 feet shall be required from the edge of the tract. Alterations to Streams or Wetlands a. If alterations of streams and/or wetlands are approved in conformance with KCC 21A.24, then a detailed plan to mitigate for impacts from that alteration will be required to be reviewed and approved along with the plat engineering plans. A performance bond or other financial guarantee will be required at the time of plan approval, to guarantee that the mitigation measures are installed according to the plan. Once the mitigation work is completed to a DDES Senior Ecologist's satisfaction, the perfonnance bond may be replaced by a maintenance bond for the remainder of the five-year monitoring period to guarantee the success of the mitigation. The Applicant shall be responsible for the installation, maintenance and monitoring of any approved mitigation. The mitigation plan must be installed prior to final inspection of the plat. 15. 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 and buffer conveys to the public a beneficial interest in the land within the tract/sensitive area and bGffer. 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 animal habitat. The sensitive area tract/sensitive area and buffer imposes upon all present and future owners and occupiers of the land subject to the tract/sensitive area and buffer the obligation, enforceable on behalf of the public by King County, to leave undisturbed all trees and other vegetation within the tract/sensitive area and buffer. The vegetation within the tract/sensitive.area and buffer may not be cut, pruned, covered by fill, removed or damaged without approval in writing from the King County Department of Development and LD2POOII -lIamilion Place l'age7ofll Environmental ServiCes or its successor agency, unless otherwise provided by law. The common boundary between the tract/sensitive area and buffer 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 lot subject to the sensitive area tract/sensitive area and buffer. The required marking or flagging shall remain in place until all development proposal activities in the vicinity of the sensitive area are completed. No building foundations are allowed beyond the required IS-foot building setback line, unless otherwise provided by law. 16. Suitable recreation space shall be provided consistent with the requirements of KCC 2IA.14.IBO and KCC 2IA.14.190 (i.e., sport COllrt!S], children's play equipment, picnic table!s], benches, etc.). a. A detailed recreation space plan (i.e., landscape specs, equipment specs, etc.), shall be submitted for review and approval by DDES and King County Parks prior to or concurrent with the submittal of the final plat documents. Applicant shall,provide a minimum of 9,500 square feet as shown on the preliminary plat map. b. A performance bond forrecreation 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 andlor sensitive area tract(s). lB. Street trees shall be provided as follows (per KCRS 5.03 and KCC 21A. I 6.050): 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 detennines that trees should not be located in the street right-of-way. c. If King County detennines 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 pIal. l.1)2POOII -Hamillon Place Page 8 of 10 19. c. The species of trees shall be approved by DOES 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 scwers, or that is notcompatiblc with overhead utility lines. f. The Applicant shall submit a street tree plan and bond quantity sheet for review and approval by DOES prior to engineering plan approval. g. The Applicant shall contact Metro Service Planning at 684-1622 to determine if 158'" Ave. SE andlor 160'" Ave. SE is on a bus route. If either road is a bus route, 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-streettrees must be iristailed and inspected within one year of recording of the plat. At the time of inspection, if the trees are found to be installed per the approved plan, a maintenance bond must be submitted or the performance bond replaced with a maintenance bond, and held for one year. After one year, the maintenance bond may be released after DOES has completed a second inspection and determined that the trees have been kept healthy and thriving. A landscape inspection fee shall also be submitted prior to plat recording. The inspection fee is subject to change based on the current County fees. The following have been established by "SEPA as necessary requirements to mitigate the adverse environmental impacts of this development. The Applicants shall demonstrate compliance with these items prior to final approval. The base flow control for the stormwater detention system is Level 2 per the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual(KCSWDM). To mitigate for existing downstream flooding problems, one of the following options is required: a. The stormwater detention system shall be designed to the Level 3 Row Control criteria as specified in the 1998 KCSWDM. OR b. The stormwater detention system shall be designed to the Level 2 Flow Control criteria and the following downstream improvements shall be accomplished either individually or in conjunction with other development projects in the area: The I 60th Ave. SE downstream conveyance system (from SE 136'" ST to approximately SE 142 00 St.) shall be upgraded to provide for the l00-year storm capacity. Downstream driveway culverts/ditches and a cross-culvert under 160'" Ave. SE shall be improved as needed. Culverts L-8 and L-IO on the west.side of I 60" Ave. SE, cross-culvert L-11, and culverts L-12 and L-14 on the east side of 160" Ave. SE shall be improved. The culvert designations are according to the Level I Downstream Drainage Analysis prepared by Daniel Balmelli, PE dated May 26; 2002 and revised Dec 3, 2002. Bank and channel stabilization are also required in the unopened right-of-way for 16200 Ave. SE, in the I L02POOII -Hamilton Place Page 9 of)O vicinity <if the easterly line of Lot 12, Rich Lea Crest (address 16046 SE 142"" SI.). It is estimated that stabilizing and re-grading approximately 50 10100 feel casl of 16046 SE 142"" SI., will be adequale to resolve flooding Ihal has occurred allhis localion. The culverts and channel described are located from the south site boundary 10 a distance of approximately 2000 feet to 3200 feet downstream. Note that the above ditch and culvert improvements are intended to duplicate the downSlream improvements required for the east sub-basin of the proposed plat of Evendell LO I POO 16. 20. The applicant shall provide additional analysis, to be reviewed and approved by DOES, 10 assure Ihat downSlream improvements, in conjunction wilh additional runoff volume from Ihe site as developed, will not exacerbate drainage and flooding problems between Ihe lemnnation of the required downstream culvert and ditch improvements and SE 144th.Streel. ORDERED this 28 th day of March, 2003. ounty Hearing Examiner pro tern TRANSMITTED this 28 th day of March, 2003, to the parties and interested persons of record: Michael Rae Cooke Claudia & Michael Donnelly Mary Hamilton Randy Homer Fred & Helga Jaques Walter Kapioski Florence Noll Bob Ruddell Sandra Snyder Jeff & Julie Taylor Greg Borba Kim Claussen Carol Rogers Larry West SeaHle-KC Health Department Steve Fiksdal Edward & Nancy Hillon BP Land Inveslments Bill & Calhy Johnson BP.Land Inveslment, LLC Wayne Poller Mary Sackell Cenlre Point Surveying Gregg Zimmerman Laura Casey Kristen Langley Steve Townsend Bruce Whillaker NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL In order to appeallhe decision of the Examiner, wriuen nOlice of appeal must be filed with the Clerk of the King Counly Council with a fee of $250.00 (check payable 10 King County Office of Finance) on or before April 11, 2003. If a notice of appeal is filed. the original and six (6) copies of a wrillen 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 April 18, 2003. Appeal statements may refer only to facts contained in the hearing record; new facts may riot be presented on appeal. Filing requires actual delivery to the Office of .the Clerk of the Council, Room 1025, King County Courthouse, 516 3"' Avenue. Seallle. Washington 98104, prior to the close of business (4:30 p.m.) on the e) .' L02POOII -liamihon Place Page 10 of 10 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 a 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. MINUTES OF THE MARCH 18, 2003 PUBLIC HEARING ON DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES FILE NO. L02POOII James N. O'Connor was the Hearing Examiner in this matter. Participating in the hearing were Kim Claussen, Bruce Whittaker and Kristen Langley, representing the Department; Wayne Potter and Dan Balmelli, representing the Applicant; and Helga Jaques, and Michael Rae Cooke. The following exhibits were offered and entered into the record: Exhibit No. I Exhibit No.2 Exhibit No.3 Exhibit No.4 Exhibit No.5 Exhibit No.6 Exhibit No.7 Exhibit No.8 Exhibit No.9 Exhibit No. 10 Exhibit No. II Exhibit No. 12 Exhibit No. 13 Exhibit No. 14 Exhibit No. 15a Exhibit No. 15b Exhibit No. 15c Exhibit No. 16a Exhibit No. 16b Exhibit No. 17 Exhibit No. 18 Exhibit No. 19 JOC:mslcp L02POOJ t RPT ODES file no. L02POOII DOES preliminary report dated March 18,2003 Application dated July 2, 2002 (Complete) submitted May 30, 2002 Environmerital checklist dated May 30, 2002 Mitigated determination of non-significance issued January 31. 2003 Affidavit of posting showing posting date of July 15,2002 and ODES receipt on July 18,2002 Plat map received October 31,2002 (revision) Land use map 811 E received Oct. 3, 1977 King County Assessor's map for NE 14-23-05, revised 2c22-2000 Preliminary wetland assessment and delineation report by Chad Armour dated April 30,2002 Level I downstream drainage analysis by D. Balmelli dated May 26, 2002 Supplemental level I downstream drainage analysis dated October 24, 2002 Conceptual storm and utility plan dated 05-19-02 with attached adjacent lot owner- ship map dated 05-19-02 and preliminary recreational park plan dated 10-23-02 Letter dated January 9, 2003, reo KCSWDM adjustment request, file no L02V0098 Letter dated November 19,2002, from Claudia Donnelly Letter dated March 9, 2003, from Claudia Donnelly Email dated March 17, 2003, from MichaeVClaudia Donnelly Letter dated August 6, 2002, from the City of Renton Letter dated February 21, 2003, from the City of Renton Density credit transfer agreement received Oct. 28, 2002, with attached transfer of development rights (cert. no. 36) Email dated November 19,2003, from Curtis Schuster (Issaquah School District) Letter to James O'Connor dated 3/8/02-from Michael Rae Cooke e') •• 2.3 Staff Report to the Hearing Examiner dated March 18, 2003 Mar 1" 03 11: 15<"1 DOES Curr~nt Plannint 206 296 7051 e) p. I Post·lt-Fax Note 7671 O"':O-/l.()" 'IIZ~." L':l) TO(l1J2i) ~ S ''''m .J6m 'lAllo<//: ColOept, cO~J OOF0- PM"" ~ Phrm,' I FII~.1 1(,-, Fu. -W DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES LAND USE SERVICES DIVISION KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON PRELIMlNARY REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER March 18, 2003 -PUBLIC HEARING AT 9:30 AM DDES Hearing Room 900 Oallesdale Avenue Southwest Relltoll, WA 98055-1219 Phone: (206) 296-6600 PROPOSED PLAT OF HAMILTON PLACE FILE NO' L02POOII A. c. PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO: 2003·0042 SlIMMARY QF PROPOSED ACTIQN: This is a request for a subdivision of 4.32 acres into 23 lots for detached single-family dwellings and tracts for drainage. recreation, and sensitive area(s). The lot sizes range from approximately 4.556'to 6,338 square feet in size. The applicant is also proposing to utilize Transfer of . Development Credits to obtain 6 of the 23 lots proposed. See Attachment I for a copy of the proposed plat map. . GENERAL INFORMATION: Owner: Applicant: Engineer: STR: Location: Mary Hamilton 15821 SE 132'" Place Renton WA 98059 Robert Ruddell KBS!II, LLC 12505 Bel-Red Road, #212 Bellevue, WA 98005 (206) 623-7000 BP Land Investments, LLC PO Box 5206 Kent, WA 98064-5206 14-23-4 The site is located between 158" Avenue Southeast and 160" AVCI)ue Southeast and north of Southeast 134· Street Zoning: R~4 Acreage: 4,32 Acres Number of Lots: 23 lots Density: Approximately 5.3 units per acre Lot Size: Ranges from approximately 4.556 to 6,33e square feet Proposed Use: Single.family detached dwellings Sewage Disposal: City of Renton Water Supply: King County Water District #90 Fire District: King County District #25 School District: Issaquah Complete Application bate: July 2, 2002 HISTORY/BACKQROUND: ,Stattrpt/maatexa!PLATFMT.Oct 1997 Mar I 'J U3 11: 1 Sa DUES Current Plannin~ 206 286 7051 C. mSTORYlBACKGROIJN!): . . .• JThe Subdivision Technical Committee (STC) of King County has conducted an on-site examination of the subject property. The STC has discussed the proposed developmeot with ti,e applicant to clarify teclmical details of the application, and to detennine the compatibility of this project with applicable King County piana, codes, und other official documents regulating tIllS development. D. THRESHOJ'p DETERMINATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL SIGNIFICANCE: Pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). RCW 43.2IC. the responsible official of the LUSD issued a mitigated threShold determination of non-significance (MONS) for the proposed development on January 31. 2003. This determination was based on the review of the envirorunental checklist and other pertinent documents, resulting in the conclusion that the proposal would not cause probable significant adverse impacts on the environment provided the following measures are complied with: The base flow control for the stormwater detention system is Level 2 per the. I 998 King County Surface Water Design Manual(KCSWDM). To mitigate for existing downstream flooding problems, one of the following options is required: I. The stonnwater detention system shall be designed to the Level 3 Flow Control criteria as specified in the 1998 KCSWDM. OR 2. The stonnwater detention system 'hall be designed to the Level 2 Flow Control criteria and the following downStream improvements shall be accomplished either individually or in conjunction with other development projects in the area: e.)n,e I 60th Ave. SE downstream conveyance system (from 1m 136· ST to approximately SE 142" St.) shall be upgraded to provide for the 1 OO-year stonn capacity. Downstream driveway culverts/ditches and a cross-culvert under 160· Ave. SE shall be improved as needed. Culverts L·8 and L-IO on the west side of 160121 Ave, SE. cross-culvert L-ll, and culverts L-12 and L-14 on the east side of 160· Ave. SE shall be improved. The culvert designations are according to the Level I Downstream Drainage Analysis prepared by Daniel Balmelli. PE dated May 26. 2002 and revised Dec 3. 2002. Bank and chOlmel stabilization are also required in the unopeoed right· of-way for 162"' Ave. SE. in the vicinity of the easterly line of Lot 12. Rich Lea Crest (address 16046 SE 142'" St.). It i. estimated that stabilizing ond re-grading approximately 50 to 100 feet east of 16046 SE 142'" St .• will be adequate to resolve flooding that has occurred at this location. The culverts and channel described are located from the south site boundary to a distance of approximately 2000 feet to 3200 feet downstream. Note that the above ditch and culvert improvements are intended to duplicate the downstream improvements required for the east subbasin of the proposed plat of Evendell L01POOI6. p.2 Agencies. affected Native Ainerican tribes and the public were offered the opportunity to .comment on or appeal the detennination for 21 days. The MONS was noi appealed by any party. including the applicant. E. AGFNCJF.S CONTACTED: 1. 2. King County Department of Natural Resources: No response. King County Parks Department: The conunents from this di~ision have been incorporated into this report, King County Fire Protection Engineer: Fire protection engineering preliminary approval has been granted; . Issaquah School District: The comments from this district have been incorPorated into this report. M~r 17 U3 11: 15~ no£s Current PI~nnin~ 206 296 7051 p.3 el 5. King County Water District #90: The comments from this district have been incorporated into this report. . . 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. II. Washington State Deparnnent of Ecology: No response. I Washington State Department ofFish and Wildlife: No response. Washington State Department of Natural Resources: No response. Washington State Department ofTransportation: No response. METRO: N~ response. City of Renton: ~ee Attachment 2. F. NADTRAl. ENVIRONMENT: I. Topography: The site is relatively level, graduaUy sloping from the northeast to the southwest. Slopes on the site are generally less ~an eight percent. 2. Soils: One surfaces soils are found on this site per King County Soil Survey, 1973. ~'Alderwood gravely, sandy loam; 6-15% slopes. Runoffis slow to medium and the hazard of erosion is moderate. This soil has a modemte limitation for foundatioIltJ, due to a seasonaUy high water lable and slope. It has ,; severe limitation for septic tank filter fields due 10 very slow permeability in the substratwn. ') .,3. Wetland/streams: A wetland report prepared by Chad Armour was submitted by the applicant May 30, 2002. The study identified a wetland approximately 7,640 square feel in size in the southwest comer of the site. It was 'detennined that this is a class 3 wetJand. which requires a 25 foot buffer. The applicant has placed the wetland and associated buffer in sensitive area tracl (SAT) shown as Tract E. The Senior Ecologist for DOES has review the site and the study and is in agreement with the classification. o. The site lies within the Lower Cedar River sub-basin of the Cedar River drainage basin. 4. Vegelation: This site is primarily pasture grasses. Areas wooded with a second and third-growth mixture of coniferous and broad-leafed trees native to the Pacific Northwest and second-story vegetation .and groundcover consists of Northwest native specios including salal, sword fern, berry vines, and grasses along .\he perimeter. 5. Wildlife: Small birds and animals undoubtedly irthabit this site; however, their population and species are limited due 10 nearby development. Larger species may visit this site on occasion. No threatened or endangered species are known to exist on or near the property. 6. Mapped Sensitive Areas: The Sensitive Areas Folio does nol identifY, any mapped sensitive areas as being present on this site. NEIGHBORHOOD CHAR ACTERISTICS: The property lies in a urbanizing area of southeast King County, southeast of the City of Renton. The neighbOring parcols surrounding the site range from approximately one to five acres in size. Adjacent to tho north is the developed plat ofWeglin's First Addition (16 lots, approximalely 10,500 square feet). The developed plat ofDerryhursl is 10 the east, with lots approximalely 10,300 square feet. The proposed plat and rezone of Evendell (DOES File Nos. LOIPOOl6 & LOlTY401) is located to the south. The sile itself is currently occupied by a house and outbuildings which will be removed with the development of this proposal. Mar 17 03 11: 16a ODES Current Plannin& 206 296 7051 .)UBDMSION DESIGN FBATIffiHS: 1. Lot Pattern and Density: The applicant i. propo.ing to utilize the provisions of King County Code 21A.37 (Transfer of Density CreditslRights) to maximize/increase the number of lots on the site. The applicant hIlS acquired density credits for six additional lot •. 2. 3. 4. Internal Circulation: The site will be served by an internal road which connects west to east ISS· Avenue Southeast BOd 160' Avenue Southeast, which are both neighborhood collectors.. . Roadway Section: The internal road (Road A) and perimeter (ISS" Ave SE and 160" A venue SE) will be constructed to urban standards in accordance with the t 993 King County Road Standards. Drainage: The site is located in the Orting Hills SUbbasin of the Lower Ceder River basin. The existing site drainage sheet /lows from the northeast to the southwest. The site drainage then leaves the site along the south boundery or enters the ditch along the east side I 58 th Ave SE. A wetland exists in tho southwest comer of the site, shown as Tract E on the proposed ,Plat map. After leaving the site, the /low path continues south in the east ditch along ISS" Ave SE through a series ofindividual culverts. The,path turns east in,a ditch within the unopened R/W for SE 136" ST. Flow continue. east to the west ditch along 160" Ave SE, then turns south along the we.t side of 160· Ave SE. The /low continues south· along the west side of 160· Ave SE to a cross culvert .t approximately SE 139" St. (2,450 ft downstream). The drainage then continues south along the east side of 16001 8t in a series of ditches and culverts, turning east at approximately SE 142'" St. (2600 ft downstream). Flow continues east through a swale and several culverts to an unnerned tributery to the . Cedar River within the unopened R/W for 162" Ave SE. Several downstream drainage complaints were evaluated and included in the Levell Downstream Drainage Analysis prepered by Daniel Balmelli .P.E.. Mitigation is proposed for these problems by either a higher flow control requirement or downstream improvements in accordance with the 1998 king County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM). I. IRANSPORTATJQN.PJ.ANS: I. Trimsponation Plans:, The subject subdivision i. not in conllict with King County Transportation plan, nor with the Regional Trails and NonMotorized plans. 2. Subdivision Access: The site will 'gain access from either 158 61 Avenue Southeast or 160· Avenue Southeast. 3. Traffic Generatio~: It i. expected that approximatoly 230 vehicle trips per day will be generated with full development of the proposed subdivision. ThIs calculation includes service vehicles (I.e., mail delivery, garbage pick-Up, school bQ') which may.urrenlly serve this neighborhood, as well as work trips, shopping, etc ... 4. Adeq.uacy of Arterial Roads: This proposa1 has been reviowed under tho criteria in King CoUnty Code 14.70, Transportation Concurrency Management;' 14.80, Intersection Standerds; and King County Cude 14.75; Mitigation Payment System . . King County Code 14.70 -Transportation Concurrency Management: The Transportation Certificate of Concurrency issued in 2002, indicates that' transportation improvements or strategies will be in place at the time of development, or that a financial commitment is in place to complete the impro.vements or strategies within six (6) years, according to RCW 36.70A.070(6). 8telll:l>t/n,uten/'U.'I'PHr,"OOIU.400 010 11/10/U ~ 4- p .• U..J .t;ltJiI UUt~ Curr~nt ~lann1nc 2U6 296 7U51 p.S b. King County Code 14.80 -Intellleetion Standards: The traffio generated by this subdivision falls below the threshold requiring mitigation. Thecxisting arterial system will accommodate the increased traffic volume generated by this proposal. c, King County Code 14,75 -Mitigation Payment System: King County Code 14.75, Mitigation Payment System (MPS), requites the payment of a traffic impact mitigation fee (MPS fee) and an administration fee for each single family residentiaJ lot or unit created. l\1PS fees are detennined by the zone in which the site is located, This site is in Zon~ 452 p~r the ' MPSIQuartersection list. MPS fees may be paid at the time of fmal plat recording, or deferred until building penriits are issued. The amount of the fee will be determined by the applicable fee ordinance at the time the fee is collected. 1. PIJB! IC SERVICES: 1. Schools: This proposal has been reviewed under RCW 58.17.110 and King County Code 21A.28 (School Adequacy). .. a. School Facilities: The subject subdivision will be served by Briarwood Elementary, Maywood Middle School, and Liberty Sernor High Schools, all b. c. located within the Issaquah School District. . School Capacity: The Issaquah School Board has adopted capacity figures which indicato their ability to accommodate additional students. The figures reveal the district has adequate capacity to accommodate the anticipated students generated by this proposal. School Impact Fees: King County Code requires that an impact fee per lot be imposed to fund school system improvements to SCIVe new'development within this district. Payment of this fee in a manner consistent with KeC will be a ' condition of subdivision approval. . . d. School Access:The District has indicated that the futUre students frOm this subdivision will be walk to the elementary school, middlo school and sernor high school. Walkway conditions to the consist of gravel/grass shoulders and areas of sidewalks. 2. Parks and Recreation Space: KCC 21A.14requires subdivisions in tho UR and R zone classifications t.O either provide on-site recreation spaco or pay a fcc to the Parks Division' fO,r establishment!U1d maintenance of neighborhood parks. At this time, the applicant is proposing to provide suitable recreation space as shown in Tract A (9,506 square feet). The Subdivision reclmical Committee concurs with the applicant's proposal. KCC 21A.14.190 requires subdivisions to provide toVchildren play areas within the recreation space on-site. A detailed improvement plan will be required for review and approval by DOES, prior to engineering plan approval. 3. Fire Protection: The Certificate of Water Availability from King County Water District #90 indicates that water is presently available to \he site 1'n sufficient quantity to satisfy King County Fire Flow Standards. Prior to final recording.ofthe pla~ the water service facilities must be reviewed and approved per King County Fire Flow Standards, K. IITILITIES: 1. Sewage Disposal: The applicant proposes to serve the subject subdivision by means of a public sewer system managed by City of Renton, . A Certificate of Sewer Availability, dated April 27, 2001 and extension letter dated April 2,2002, indicates the City's ability to serve the proposed development. 9tllttrpt/! .... t.n!P'"''fnn'.lfovn,doc de 11/10/" -'5,- C 1'/ U3 11:17.a ODES Curr@nt Plannin~ 206 29S "7051 Water Supply: The applicant proposes to serve the subject subdivis\on with a public water supply and distribution system managed by King County Water Diatrict #90. A Certificate.ofWater Availability, dat.ed May 24, 2002 indicates this district's capability to serve the proposed development . L. COMPREHENSIVE AND COMMUNITY PLAN: I. Comprehensive Plan: This proposal is governed by the 1994 King County Comprehensive Plan which designates this area as Urban. 2. Community Plans:. The subjoct subdivision is located in the Newcastle Community Planning Area. M. STATIITESICODES: If approved with the recommended conditions in this report, the proposed development will comply with the requirements of the County and State Platting Codes and Statutes, and the lots in the proposed subdivision will comply with the minimum dimensional requirements ofthe zone district. N. CONCLUSIONS: The subject subdivision will comply with lbe goals and objectives of the King County Comprehensive Plan and will comply with the requirements of the Subdivision and Zoning Code! and other official land use controls of King County, based on the conditions for final plat approval. o. RECOMMENDATIONS: • . ) is recommended that the subject subdivision, revised and reeei.Ved October 31, 2002, be ··granted preliminary approval.ubjeet to the following conditions ofrmal approval: L 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Compliance with all platting provisions ofTiUe 19A of the King County Code. Ali 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 CQuncil Motion No. 5952. . The plat shall comply with the base density (and minimum density) requirements of the R·4 zone classification. All lots shall meet the minimiun dimensional requirements of the R-4 zone classification or shall be as shown OD 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. The applicant shall provide Transfer of Density Credit documentation to DDES prior to final approval .. All constrnction and upgrading of public and private roads shall be done in accordance with the King County Road Standards established and adopted by OrdinanceNo. 11187, as amended (1993 .I<:CRS). The applicant must obtain the approval of the King County Fire Protection Engineer for the adequacy of the nre hydrant, water main, and nre flow standards of Chapter 17.08 of the King County Code. A surface water adjustment(L02V0098) is approved for this subdivision. All conditions of approval for this adjustment .hall be met upon submittal of the engineering plans. p.G .! 9. The lOO-year floodplain for any onsii. weUands or .t\'e~ shall b. shown on the engineering plans and the final recorded plat per the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual(KCSWDM). The following road improvements are required to be constructed acc~rding to the t 993 King County Road Standards(KCRS): ' a. Road A shall be improved to the urban subaccess street standard. b. FRONTAGES: The frontages along both ISS" Ave SE and along 160" Ave SE shall be improved to the urban neighborhood collcetor standard. c. Tract D shall be improved to the private access !mct standard per Section 2.09 of the KCRS. Tract C shall be improved as ajoint use driveway'. d. Modifications to the above road conditions may be considered according to the variance procedures in Section 1,08 of the KCRS. e. Lots 14·16 shall have undivided ownership of Tract D and be responsible for its mainienance. Lots 22-23 shall have undivided ownership of Tract C and be responsible for its maintenance. A note to this effect shall be plaCed on the engineering plans and final plat. 10. All utilities within proposed rights·of-way must be included within a franchise approved by the King County Council prior to final plat recording. " 11. The applicant or subsequent owner ,hall comply with King County Code 14.75, Mitigation Paylnent System (MPS), by paying the required MPS fee and administration fee as determined by the applicable ree ordinimce. The applicant has the option to eitller: (I) pay the MPS fee at final plat recording, or (2) pay the MPS ree at the time of building pcmnt issuance. Ir Ule first option is chosen, the fee paid shall be the ree in effect at the time of plat application and a note shail be placed on the race of the plat that reads, "All rees required by King County Code 14.75, Mitigation Payment System (MPS), have been paid." If the second option is chosen, the ree paid shall be the amount in effect as ofthe date of building permit application. 12. LoIs wiUrin Uris subdivisionar. subject to King County Code 21A.43, which imposes impacl foos 10 fund school system improvements needed to .erve new development. As a condition of final approval, fifty percent (50%) of the impact rees due for the plat .hall be assessed and coUceted immediately prior to recording, using the fee schedule. in effect when the plat receives final approval. The balance of the assessed fee shall be allocated evenly 10 the dwelling units in tho plat and shall be collected prior to building pennit issuance. 13. The proposed subdivision shall comply with the Sensitive Areas Code as ouilined in KCC 21 A.24. Permanent survey marking, and Bigns as specified in KCC21A.24 .160 shaU also be addressed prior to final plat approval. Temporary marking of sensitive areas and their buffers (e.g., with bright orange construction fencing) shall be placed on the site and shall remain in place until all construction activities are completed. 14. PreliJ]linary plat review has ideQ.tified the following sPecifiC requirements which apply to this project. All other applicable requirements from KCC 21A.24 shall also be addressed by the applicant. Wetlands a. Class 3 wetland(s) shan have a minimum buffer of25 feet, measured from the wctland edge. b. The weUand(s) and their respective buffers shall be placed in a Sensitive Area Tract (SAT). . rid'· 11 LJ,j II! IHa uu~~ Current Plannlng 206 296 7051 c. Buffer averaging may be proposed, pursuant to KCC 21A.24.320.-provided the total amount of the buffer area is'not reduced and better nosourne protection is achieved, subject to review and epproval by a DDBS Senior Ecologist. d. A minimwn building setback Iino of 15 feet shall be required from the edge of the tract. AlleraUons to Streams or Wetlands a. If alterations of streams and/or wetlands are approved in confo/lllance with KCC 21A.24, then a detailed plan to mitigate for impacts from that alteration will be required to be reviewed and.approved along with the plat engineering plans. A performance bond or other financial guarantee will be required 'at the time of plan approval. to guarantee that the mitigation measures are installed according to the plan. Once the mitigation work is completed to a DDBS Senior Beologist's satisfaction, the performance bond may be replaced by a maintenance bond for the remainder of tho five--year monitoring period to guarantee the success of the mitigation. The applicant shall be responsible for the installation, maintenance and morutoring of any approved mitigation. The mitigation plan must be installed prior to final inspection ofthe plat. 15. The following note shall be shown on the fInal engineering plan ond recorded plat: RESTRICTIONS FOR SENSITIVE AREA TRACTS AND SENSITIVE AREAS AND BUFFERS Dedication of 8 sensitive area tracVsensitive area and buffer conveys· to the public a beneficial interest.in the land within the tracUsensitive area and buffer. This"interest includes the preservation of native vegetation for all purposes that benefit the public he~lth, safety and welfare, inchidiDg cOl\lrol of surface water and erosion, maintenance of slope stability, and protection of plant and animal habitat. The sensitive area tracVs~sitive ar~a and buffer imposes upon all present and futuro owners and occupiers . of the land subject to the tracUsensitive area and buffer the obligation. enforceable on . behalf of the public by King County, to leave undisturbed all trees and other vegetation within the tracVsensit~ve area and buffer. The vegetation within the tracUscnsitive area and buffer may not be cut, pruned, covered by fill, removed or damaged without approval in writing from the King COWlty Department of Development and Environmental Services or its successor agency. unless otherwise provided by law. The common boundary between the tracVsen.itive area and buffer 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 lot subject to the sensitive area tracUsensitive area and buffer. The required marking or flagging shall remain in place until all development proposal activities in the vicinity .ofthe sensitive area are completed. No building foundations are allowed beyond the required 15-foot building setback line, unless otherwise provided by law. . 16. Suitable nocreation space shall be provided consistent with the requirements ofKCC 2IA.14.ISO and KCC 2IA.14.190(i.e., sport court [s], childri:n's play equipment, picnic table [s], benches, etc.) . . a. A detailed recreation space plan (i.e., landscape specs, equipment specs, etc.), shall be submitted for review and epproval by·DDBS and King.County Parks prior to or concurrent with the submittal of the final plat documents. Applicant shall provide a minimum of9,500 square feet as shown on the preliminary plat map. b. A perfonnance bond for recreation space improveme~ts shall be posted prior to recording of the plat. Stllttrpt"l\ ... t.rI/'~'rPH1'.Nov",doC elc: 11/111/" -8 .. p.8 l'lar' i I U.j I I : I Ha DUES Current Planning 206 296 7051 p." e) 17. A homeowners' asoociation or other workable organization shall be established to the satisf""tion of DOES which provides for the ownership and continued maint.nance of the recreation, open space and/or sensitive: aroa tract(s). 18. Street tree. shall be provided as follows (per KCRS 5.03 and KCC 21A.16.050): a, T~ees shan 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 COWlty Road Standards. Wlless King County Department of Transportation detennin .. that trees should not be located in the street right-Of-way. c, If King County detennines that the required street trees should not be located within the right-or-way. they shall belocat.d no more than 20 reet from the street right-of-way lin •. d. The trees shall be owued aud maintainod by the abutting lot owners or tho homeowners association or other wprkable organization unless the County-has adopted a maintenance program. Ownership and maintenance shall be noted on the fac. ofth. final recorded plat. e. f.· The .pecies oflrees .hall be approved by DOES iflocated within the riilht-of- .way. and shall not include poplar. cottonwood. soft maples. gum. any fruit- bearing tr •••• or any other tree or shrub whose roots are likely to obstruct sanitary · or stann sew.rs, or that is not compatible with overhead utility lines. · The .applicant shall submit a street tree plan and bom~ quantity s~eet for review and approval by DOES prior to engin.ering plan approval. g. The applicant shall contact Metro Service Planning at 684-1622 to detennine if 158" Ave. SE andlor 160· Ave. SE is on a bus route. If either road is a bus route. the street tree plan sh~l1 also be reviewed by Metro. h. The .treet trees must be installed and inspected. or a perfonnance bond posted · priorto recording of the plat. If a perfonnance bond is posted, the street trees must be installed and inspected within one year of recording of the plat. At the time of inspection, if the trees are found to be Installed per the approved plan. a maintenance bond must he submitted or the perfonnance bond replaced with a maintcnance.bond, and held for one year. After one year, the maintenance bond may be released after DOES has completed a second inspection and detennined that the trees have been kept healthy and thriving. A landscape inspection fee shall also be submitted prior to plat recording. The inspection fee is subject to change based on the CWTent CQ,unty fees. 19. The following have been established by SEPA as necessary requirements to mitigate the adverse environm.ntal impacts of this developm.nt. fho applicants shaU demonstrate compliance with these items prior to final approval. The bas. flow control for the stonnwater detention system is Level 2 per the 1998 King COWlty Surface Water Design Manual(KCSWDM). To mitigate: for existing downstream flooding problems, one of the following options is required: a. The .tonnwater detention system shall be design.d to the Level 3 Flow Control criteria as specified in the 1998 KCSWDM. ~-------------------------------------------~-------- ~...... • ••• -' Q UU~0 ~urrent ~Jannlng CUO 286 7U51 OR b. The stormwater detentionB)'stem shall be designed to thet.eve12 Flow Control criteria and the CoIlowing downstream improvements shall be accomplished either individually or in conjunction with other development projects in the area: The 160th Ave. SE downstream conveyance system (from SE 136· .ST to approximately SE 142"" St.) shall be upgraded to provide for the 100-year storm capacity. Downstream driveway CUlverts/ditches and" cross-culvert under 160· Ave. SE shall be improved as needed. Culverts L-8 and L-IO on the west side of 160· Ave. SE, cross-culvert L-ll, and' culverts L-12 and L-14 on the east side of 160· Ave. SE shall be improved. The culvert designations are according to the Levell Downstream Drainage Analysis prepared by Daniel Balmelli, PE dated May. 26, 2002 and revised Dec 3, 2002. Bank and channel stabilization are also required in the unopened right-of-way for 162"" Ave. SE, in the vicinity ofthe easterly line of Lot 12, Rich Lea Crest (address 16046 SE 142" St.). It is estimated that stabilizing and re- grading approximately 50 to 100 feet east of 16046 SE 142'" St., will be adequate to resolve flooding that has occurred at this location. The culverts and channel described are located from the south site boundary to a distance of approximately 2000 Ceet to 3200 feet downstream. Note that the above ditch and culvert improvem~ts are intended to duplicate the downstream improvements required for the east subbasin of the proposed plat of Even dell L01POOI6. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS: I. 2. The subdivision shall conform to KCC 16.82 relat.ing to grading on private property. Development of the subject property may require registration with the Washington State Department of Licensing, Real Estate Division. Preliminary approval-oflhi. application does not limit the applicant'. responsibility to obtain any required permit or licen,e .from the State or other regulatory body. This may include, but is noi limited to the following: a. Forest Practice Permit from the Washington State Dept. or Natural Resources. b. National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit IT.om WSDOE. c. Water Quality Modification Permit ITom WSDOE. d. Water Quality Certification (401) Permit from U.S. Army Corps of Engineers TRANSMITTED TO P ARIlES LISTED HEREAFTER: Hearing Examinoi's Office .. . Steven C. Townsend, P.E., Supervfsing Engineer, Land Use Inspection SeCtion, LUSD Greg Borba, Supervisor, Current Planning Section. Land Use Services Division Kim clIiussen, Planner III, Current Plaiming Section, Land Use Services Division Bruce Whittaker, Senior Engineer, Engineering Review Section, Land Use Services Division Laura Casey, Senior Ecologist, Site Development Section, Land Use Services Division Kris Langley, Senior Engineer, Traffic & Engineering, KCDOT . Hamilton, Mary 15821 SE t32"" Place, Renton WA 98059 KBSm,LLC 12505 Bel-Red Road #212 Bellevue WA 9005 . Centre Point Surveying . 336399" Ave. S., Federal Way WA 98003 BP Land Investments PO Box 5206, Kent W A 98064 Fiksdal, Stevc,-]ohn L. Soott Real Est8te . 3380 146" PI. SE #450, Bellevue WA 98007 Hilton, Edward & Nancy 13414 158" Ave. SE, Renton WA 98059 Horner, Randy 13404160' Ave. SE, Renton WA 98059 laques. Fred & Helga . 13114158" Ave. SE, Renton WA98059 lohnson, Bill & Cathy p. 1 (I 15902 SB 134· Pl., Renton WA 98059 KaiJioski, Walter 13231160·Ave.SE,Renton WA980S9 Nolt, Florence 15915 SE 134' Place. Renton WA 98059 Sackett, Mill)' . 15841 SE 132" Pl., Renton WA 98059 Snyder. Sanclrn 1915 S. 375· St., Federal Way WA 98003 Taylor, Jeff & Julie 13128158" Ave. SE, Renton WA 98059 Zimmerman, Gregg -City of Renton 1055 S. Gredy Way, Renton, WA 9805~ <::UO c~H:; '/Utll p. I I .. ,.'.,. 21 -d · ",',1 '~:"" •... '. ,'.: 3b\ld .... ' . 1 ,.:::10 . .... , ... " .... ;';'" "'~" "-""',; .' '. ;"' ... ---r-1N3~H~Vll\l ~-: .. . .'~',~,: . .. l • . .': ........ , .•.. IS0l. 962 902 , , : '. idid '1111 ce i® en?: T T F:n f 1 .JPI. uu~~ Lurr~nt ~jannln~ cUB 296 7051 p. 13 o .. ~ .......... ,~ '.~. . ··CrrPOF:RENTON . PlllllI14>gtBiill~bllcWorllsDep~oilt .... Grt£a ZlriaiJler.man: .P.E..-A~mIDII~rator August 6; 2002 . Departnient of Develop mont and Environmental Services Land Use SerVices Division .. 900 Oak.sdale"Ave; Southwest Renton, WA980$S-!219 . . '; ; :~~(.ru~· Cl~us~Qh . e)· · SUBJECT:· . CITY OF REmON COMMENTS, LO~POOll-HA~TONPLACE · Dear Ms." Claussen·: Thank you for p~oviding the .citY of Renton the opportun·ity of reviewing ond commenting UpOil . · this project... . .,'.. Tho City of Renton has j~sued s~w~~· availabilitY for this pr.oJ~ct .. :.There .are· no .other utility . impacts·.on'R~~t.ok 1 . . .. •. •• The Trimsport~tiori Syste~s Divisio~ ·state:s that the proposed d~velop·ment· is .'i.vithi~ Rentoh' s potentiai annexation area,. and we therefore ·request that street improvements for the internal. str~ef . (Road A) and off site fro·otage improvements along the portion of tho development abutting 158'" Avenue SE"and 1600. Ave. SE be installed in $ccordance with City of Renton Standards, Si~cerely, )!J~e£(17(~ Gregg ZimlDerman, Adutinistraior . · :Plaruiing/BulldlngIPublic Works Dept. . .. ., . . .. . . oc: Ly, Hornsby . Sarldra MtI)'cr Neii wattS Jennlfer Hpnn1na .... .... .. '.;. :' .. :-, . . . MAIN fiLE COpy .... ,--,JP"'Q"''''''!In''''''''''lli\'''Q;'-·-10'-S-S-S-oU-.t~h-G-ra-d-Y-W-a-Y-_:-R-.n-to-n-,':'W-"-h"'in~g':'to-n-9:-8"'OS-:-S--"---~"-it E N-TdN- ~ . "H"AD o. TH.·evan· "g:;' TIll' P'P'!" oon\lllrq·W% (aeytltd IIIlItDrlal, ;!(I% ~I cOm~rntr : ATIACHMENT 2 I C,-I PAGE. -P"'A~G'"'E'-- ·1 .) 2.4 Surface Water Adjustment No. L02V0098 • ® King County O"p.rtmenl 0' Dev,Iopmenl and Envlron .... nlal s.rvlc •• 900 Oakesdale Avenue SW Renton. WA 98055-1219 January 9,2003 Curtis Schuster lCBS m,LLC· 12505 Bel-Red Road, #212 BelJe'VlIe, W A 98005 Daniel K. Balmelli. P.E. Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 18215 -nOd Avenue South Kent, WA 98032 RE: Hamiltnn Place SubdiyiQ,on KCswpM Adjustment Request <File No. L02V0098) Dear Applicant and Engineer: The Land Usc Services Divino~, Engiueering Review Section, has completed review of the adjustment request for the Hamilton Place BUbdivision. You are requesting approval for an atljustment from the 1998 King County SllJface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM) Core Requirement No.1, Section 1.2.1, Discharge at the Natural Location. Our review of the • infornJation and a site visit pro'lidcs the following findings: ~002 ~002 I. The proposed Hamilton Place subdivision is located between ISS'" and J60'" Avenues SE at SE 133rd Street. ~rhe 23 lot, 4.3 acre, proposed Hamilton Place sUbdivision is filed under Land Use S,,mccs Division (LUSD) file number L02POO)I. 2. The Hamilton Place suhdivision is located in the Otting Hills subbasin of the Lower Cedar River basin. Tbt; site is subject to the Level Two flow control and Basic water quality requirements of the 1998 KCSWDM. 3. The rectangular site slopes gently from the Dootheast to the .outhw,est. Existbg sheetflow eithCl'migrat's to the ditch OD the east side of 1 5S'" Avenue SE or crosses the south property line onto the adjacent parcel. Sheetflow that crosoes onto the adjacent parcel to the ~)uth eventually reaches the ditch on the east side of J58'h AVenue SE and recomhines with the reBl ofthe site's flow. The kdjacent off-site area to the north, south of SE 132nd Place, suWlies upstream tributarY; flow tn the site. 4. The proposal is to collt:ct most runoff from the project site and d~rect it to a single detention and water qu!lily facility Io<::ated near the southwest corner ofthe site. The allowed release would then bo dispersed into the adjacent wetlan~ area that drains to the ditch on the east side of 158111 Avenue SE. Nuisance sheetflqw across the southern property line onto the ,l£Ijacent parcel would be significantly redl)ced. A slight increase in flow will b,: experienced in approximately 500 feet of the ditch on the east • Hamilton PlaceIL02V0098 January 9, 2003 Page 2 of3 side of 158th Avenue SE immediately downstream from the southwest property corrner. The conceptual drainage plan indicates that frontage improvements on 160th Avenue SE are included. 5. No decorative ponds or shallow wells have been identified that would be affected by the proposed diversion. 6. The Level One Drainage Analysis identified some conveyance restrictions and drainage complaints associated with the natural discharge location. This downstream conveyance path is shared by the Evendell Plat (LOIP0016) which was conditioned through SEP A to provide downstream draitlage path improvements. Through future plat or SEPA conditions, it is anticipated that Hamilton Place will be contributing to downstream conveyance improvements or providing for Level Three flow control as mitigation. 7. A consolidation of facilities for the proposed subdivision will be more economical in long term maintenance . . Based on these findings, we hereby approve this adjustment to allow the diversion of runoff to a single facility draining to the east side of I 58 th Avenue SE with the following conditions: I. The release rates for the detention facility will be based on the tributary area being • directed to the facility. • 2 .. The volume for the detention facility will be based on all flows directed to the facility at full development under current zoning. The allowed release rate will be reduced by any undetained flows that would bypass the proposed subdivision drainage facilities. The detention volume shall be sized using the Level Two flow control standard in the 1998 KCSWDMunless modified by plat or SEPA conditions. 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. All onsite or offsite drainage facilities must be located in a public right-of-way or storm drainage tract dedicated to King County . . 5. Additional storm drainage requirements identified by SEPA or the plat hearing review will apply to this project. If you have any further questions regarding this KCSWDM adjustment or the design requirements, please contact Mark Bergarri at (206) 296-7270. . ! • • U;U lU/;lUU<I 11: 11 h\.\ 4:l:; :l:)l lHrJl .-.-.--.~,-------.- 02/19/04 10:55 FAX 4254529018 HOmilton PlaceIL02VOO98 January 9, 2003 Page 3 of3 Sincerely, CB?2-.-- Development Engineer Engineering Review Section Land Use Services Division J_ JjAHGHAlI~EN ---• BeE QLYMPIA JOHN L SCOTT ADMIN. L' &t.---~han,P.E. Supervising Engincer Site Engineering and Planning Section Building Services Division cc: Curt Crawford. P .E., M,!IlIlgiDg Engineer, StorrDwater Services Section, KCDNR Randall Parsons, P.E., Senior Engineer, Engineering Review Section, LUSD Bruce Whittaker, Senim' Engineer. Engineering Review Section, LUSD Kim Claussen, Planner m, Current Planning Section, LUSD Mark Bergam, P .E .• Scr!i.or Engineer, Engineering Review Section; LUSD ~004 Ii!! 004 __ " _02_1 1_9_120_04_1_l:_11_f_AX __ 42_5_2_51_6_76_2 ___ " _BA_R~H_Al_'S_EN ______ :,_BCE ~PI_A _ ~Q5 • 02/19/04 10:55 FAX 4254529016 JOHN L SCOIT ADMIN. 1NSTRIJC1lONSTOAfFUCANTIIlES/GI'~OO 5 ~005 DOES EnginerIf'Iamer Narm: Stile€" WHI""(R/<:,Z;-fl )(,,,, Ul/t/ss~ Clb', Sta1e, Zip: _ be _ID iIduda aD plans, '*""""' . ...-. """".1IIIIdt ...,1IISkI1n QI1IPI8Ia rewlewand ",,15idoni!Gn cllhiI ......... ' request FdIn II> JlI1IV\dO aIIpdIenIlnlDnnalllll.., nsdIinrldllyodp ... ardloill afya*req.losI. ~!!!I!m!! 1111 ..... "5' and .n ........... 1!!e1l> the _CouJIloralMES,1IIII 001: IIiftAvallO~ Ron ..... WA_IZ19. ~adclltanall"~.,. phono~. DESCR/P1lON OFAlWSNENTREQUEST: & _ 0 c.n,Io:o 0 £lq>otim ...... 0 _ 0 p~ DIlIr::.eSiOtJ (),:: f'UJtv ro/?.. Ol5CHAe6E f'r'r /VPff1J{2fft t~()/V· APPI.ICAIlI..E SECTION(S) OF STANDAI~ 5~t/rID,.J I,Z.; JUSlIACAllON(see.........., ... ""g" __ "'---': Sf:.c. ftffACHt;:O i~/ Pt-I1NS fi fi7Vfrc. y5/~ 0- 00010: 1 .. 7 .. "~ ~'''I&_oI~IJII''''''''Y1 Date; !. d • ..,. t:J . -1 ---------U~<;-;IC;!~'~I <;-;U;;;U~'-!~!;-:;~!~! --;t:-';I\~A-':;-<;-:;'~<'::-:!:-::.-:-'.=-<:-----"-I\-K-"n-I\-l-''-t.N--===-~-=-=-_-_-.-=-,,-~t.-U-L-Ul-r-!-"---Ij1J-U-U-. ------------, --------------- 0211 9/04 '. 10:56 F~X 4254529016 JOHN L SCOIT ADMIN. IaJ DO 6 Mr. RaDdaI ParsOllS lUna CCNI1ly , ,Departmuut ofDevclopmeDt and &virollll\CJllal SeIvices 900 Oabda1c Ave. SW IteatQD, WA 9S05S-1219 Ootobor 22. 2002 Re: Request for AdjusImeIrt from the King CodIIty SurfDa: Water Desigll Manual SectioD 1_2.1 fot Proposed HamiIIun l'la<:c SubdiYiaiOD LVSD File No. L02PO(I11 , (" N ! = = '-'" • • .... I 0 ~ , 0 2: l KBS In. LLC is c:amzd)-processinc a PrcfuDiDaJy Plat AppIlcation (or a new 23-101 subdivision localed beIwccn ISS" AVCIIUO S:mtheast and 160" Avenue Sontheast ill King County, Wa.shingtoD_ A Levell downstream ~ analysis was prepared for the project IU1d reYiewed by KlII3 C""1IIy sIaf£. A plat scnaDns letter was received on July 15,2002, tequeSIittg a dl1liDage adjustment from Com RtquiJcn:1CIlt No.1 ofthtJ 1998 KCSWDM due to the presence of two -existing 00_ 5Ubbaaius wbiel, will be combined iIIIo ODe drainage filci\ity as pan ofthtJ proposed development. Afbtt lC\'icwing Ibis inbmaticm. the existing topOSnIJIbie !IUJYe)f and 1I1e doWD!IIre8m drainage area map, it is IIPPatell1 that altIwugh all oftbe surlhae water nmoft'fiom the projCClsitc ch-aiIIs ill a aorlhaast to ilCllltllv«st IIimlIion iIIIo a single down5IreaID drainage basin, a portion of the site's rnnolf drains across property just south ofllle project Ute eveIIIDally combiDing info the downstream dnIina8c syst.cm oevera.\ buIIdRd ti:et south of the P"liect in the CJ<isting condition. Under thD dc:\Idoped CCIIIIIition, ,Ibis BlIlface water nmoft' will be ooneclrd and discharged 10 the 5IOJ1II facility locaIed ill the southwest wmer of1lll: site, thereby, diverting Bows &om dislliuuJ!ing across the propcrty just south oC the property. As requc:sa:d in the lu~1 IS, 2002, plat ~ 1eUer, we an: reqve$ting an a<ljllslment fNm Section 1.2.1 of the 1998 King Cowny Suriilce Wilier DeuigII Manual which stms ",4 proposed project that propos"" 10 cons""'ct or mDdi/y eJdsttng drainage foci/itiru mils, I>~ disohargM at 1M naturalloca,,10n GO as to not divtm onto or aw..,. fro", the adjacent ,downstream properli •• ,." Sec:lion 1.4.2 uadcI' criteria for granb"ll adjustmenls states '''Adjustments to the rBqrUnm.trls in this manual may be g"",ted provided IMr grtVlling the adjustment will achifNIIlhe fol/owing: C';) L.l "~ '~ " J '-') Ll -" ,.:> ':;' -'~ ? J UlIIU/lUU4 ll:ll ""AA 4la lal fHl$l !}AHbHAll!)t;N ..--. ________________ . _________ . __ .--=-...Jlt;t; ULYMPIA I/!lUU7 Ii!! 007 - Ie oilio/04 10;5& FAI 42545Z9018 JOHN L SCO'IT ADMIN. Mr. lWIdai PartIlIIS King CoImty -2-()Qrober 22, 2002 DepaJUneu1 of J)uvelopn1lllll lUllS EnvirO/lllllllllal 8m"vices a. Produo. a (JOmptns.,l/ng OT compamblr reault t/rat Is ;" the publlO ''''81891. tmd b. Mul the obJe<:thlu of safety. jrln&tion, apJll'Qrrmce, and erovironmental protection and mt1Intalnabilll)" band on Boullli ",glns,,.;ng judgm.nt. Bueol on ~ resu1ta o£1i1e Lovell DOWII51Imm Dminago ADalysis, we believe Ihal our request fur aD aqustmtDt to Sec:tiOll 1.2.1 of tile draioaglllll8llllal CIIJI be justified. , To aoUt you in ptDCeSllGlg Ibis dnIiDase adjulllmellt appliClllion, the IOUowiug plaPS aDd documeIItationlllll cncIo&ed fur 'yoW' ..mew: 1. l. 3. ... S. 6. ODe compktcd Sutlilce WalBr Design MaauaI Rt.quirerneJJtItaDdatds Adj\ISI!nCIDt RapIesI Fonn Two copie! oftbt: l..ewll Downs!rtaIu Dtaioagc ADalysis completed for the prajecl. Two oopies of1he GoDCllptual Suma IUId Utility Plan PIepaRld for the projea sbowing exiJtin& lite conUrun 8l1li the proposed BIOnnwatcr systmL Two copies of a pllrtion of the upatrauDldpwnsm:am drainage basiJIllllll' showiDg the area to be diverted, Two copie9 of tbt ;1(ija«Dt lot oW!WlSllip map sbowiDs 1IIe site loc:a1ioo and fRUITR,nd;ng propel:tica. ODe cbecIt for tho .:uneat li:e tor the dminaao adjll5lmt:Dt request. The topOsntphy gf the IIXiotiDg site is ,udllhalll1lrllu>e water tIIIIOff ~y draim; am'OBB the sito in a IIOrIbeast te BOUthwest dim:tioo by sheetftow ultimately discbargin& into a J'OIIIIside ditch a1ang the east Bile of ISS'" Avmwo SooIbea!L A portion of the Bite (approximatdy 1.8 1Uni) II\ulcttlowG amoBB at:iaceJlt property to the BCIU1h prior to ~ iJIto the existing toadlIidc ditch aJq lS8"' A"e..ue Soutbeast. tJmkr the proposed deveJopmcot plan. all atonnwater IIIDOff fnIm the pn~ect site will be collected &lid cooveyc:d to a wet/dGleutiou poud IocaIed at the SOIItb_ COIIIeI' of the site, _ a smaU weiland and tbeIl iIIID the existing roadside ditch aJDD8 1'8"' A~.uc .5outhca!t at the aouth_ co.-oftbe site. UadEr the developed OQIIdidon. the portic D of the sile wbich shectfIows Bml88 the BOUtherly propmty and into the c:xistiDg JDadside ditch., will be dlvc:rted and ~ into the IS8" Avcuuc Southeast ditch at JIle southwesl OOI1Iet ofdlc aitI,. A1tbougb all sudiu:c water 1UIUIff' from !be proposed project will u~ly cIiscbaIsc tD the same dOWDllJ'Cam dmiDage clumm:1, a cItaiJIage adjUSlmclit is required siDce stonnwater t'aIlOff ftom IDc devdoped proja;t will oat discharge iDm the chaonel at the same , Iooation as it doc. in the UDd."",lopcd coodit1on. HAK(;HAli~t:;N • H~t:; ULYMYIA --------------------,--.--------- 02/19/04 10:58 FAX 4254529016 JOHN L SCOTT ADMIN. ~008 •• Mr. RAMal Parsons KiDg County --.J -Ik,pmment ofDcvelopment and EDl'irwuilCiltal Services • -,- Our justiflcatilm for the n:'lueatecl adjustmmt i& as fOllows: October 22. 2002 - a. Tho proposed adjustllll:ll1 produCCII .. comp:D&atory or oomparable result that is in the public intI:n:st beca~$O of !he fo1IowiDg: 1. The PIVPOSId adjustmmlt wiIlDOl nsuIt in an im:n:ase of dminage flows to tho cknmatreaD, clra.iDase 8)'IIcm by diveItiDg the d8vdoped tlDom fiIrtbM 10 the west within tho exisq roadside ditch. The siImo amount of tn'bUlaxy area and 5I'DIIIlw1lter t1cIw will cIiscbargc inIo 1he Clii5ling roadsioIIc ditch under the proposod dlwloped coadition as it dOfIIlIIIdcr axiBIing contiitiOllS. 'l'bc ODIy dillCreDce "riD be Ibat !be +/-1.8 acres of the BiZ'. cxiatiu8 drainage which ~UmUtIY s1J.J:ediows acrOSll property to the sou1l1 prior to discbalgiug into the roadaidc ditch willl10W ealel'the existing ditch approximately 300 to 700 feet upsmam ,. iIhiIl the ditch system. 2. Thopropotal wi1lllOt increa5c the peak runoft'rm of discharge from the ovCll'llll project aite siDc:c aD draiDasc t1cIwa tiOIII the project will be ooll=rcd a1Id C<lllveyed to the plllpOscd cbinage fiIciIity within the _ cIraina!l" basin which will -lie desigpcd to provide Ievd n dctentinn prior to discbarging oft' silB inIo thI.: downsIII:am 5yItem. 3. The lewd 1 dowDstI:tam cIra.iDase :malysia attaghed 'A'itb this subllliUal iDcIudes a c=>pIete dclCripliOll of the upstrealll-and dowustJeam dr..u. syJtmIs for the project The Up~ Drainage Map included in tho 8ubmiUal ~bows the ami of1he project site that wiD be dM:rted li'oJII the easterly BII~basin oflbo site to the WQIkIl'ly mbbasin for delaitiOll and trealmcpt ,Irior 10 cIUcIwgiag into the existiDg roadoid.. ditch aloug ISad> AYaIlIC SI:uthcast. b. The pnrpoKd adj-= ... _ the objectives of safety, fundi,!'" appear1lllce, ... d eomrollJllelltd protedioD aDd IIIJIlDtDIubility bued on Boulld elIgineerillg judgment beealut of IIae foDowiaC: 'Jb., proposed SIcm> drainage drtenrian aud ..airs qwaIity treatmmt system will be dcsigocd in aocordam:u with the 1998 xq.; CDIIDIy Surface Water Design Mmma.\ for Jcwd n flow control and ",'aiel' quality InlaImaIt prior fl. disc:ba1BiD8 to lim dowDsUeam drainage S)'8teIn. Since all sto/1lJ\WteT I'IlJIt1ff from tile pn.,erty will be coUeam and ~ to the IIIOmIWBt.cr de!eDtioo and water quality lICaIIJICDt fildlity prior to diacIwgiDg off lite and DO iDcreasc in drlliuag~ Dows will oc:cor to the down&tn:am dl'llinage system, DO sipilicant impa~ to the doWllSlJeam dJainage sys1aIt will be CIIlIltecl as a teS,Jit of the proposed adjuslmc:llt • 1J~/11'/~::UlJq 1!:U: f'J\A Ill.;) l.;)1 U/Ul ltAJ(ltHAll!jeN _____________ . ____________________ ~!,t;.J!l,¥nnA .. 02/19/04 10:58 FAX 4264529018 JOHN L SCOTT ADMIN. Mt. lUII4al Parsons KingCount)' oetob« 22, 2002 Depanmcut of DevelopIllCll1 and EtrYilOlDIlt5ltal Set\'i~ DKBlcb 2. 1be 8J1IiI~1 of the proposed adjustment by King COIIlI1y would not altllr the appe;uanco wi majlltajpabjJity of tbe ptOJIUIIOd cIraiDagc: 5~ 'J'be ponion of the cxisIi:'8 site wlDch CIQ'I't:IdIy sheetflOWSIlCl'OBS thD southerly property, u1\UDalaly draiaB 10 !be _ duwDSlraim drainage system as tbe rcmaiIIder of the = and 10 the SBSIIII downstream clraiDagc system UDder the developed CODdition. I~ this portIoa oflUDOfl' IIIId routing it to the soutbwesterly panioD of tbo sito iDto the proposed stormw.ar« &.c:iIity will c:IimInatc the Deed for a BCpBII'1II cJm:otina WBIer qual.iI.y tmdm ..... system for tile casb:rly pottioD oldie site. Discbargt: of atormwafl:r tlowu from the propoJ..ed draiDaQe facility will ultimately disc:Iwp to the IOUIhwest_ of tile site i1IID the cxistiDS rmdaide ditdJ a10l18 IS8'" AvCillllc Soulbcast and COIIIiIme in a aoutb..-ly dirootioo lilmJ.v to c:xiItiDg c;ondlliOlll without creatiDs any ~ impacts 10 the dowrlltlealJl &yS\eIn. Daniel K. 8almclli, P .E. Cle: As DDIIod 00: Curtis Schus1er, KBS lD, LLC ~uus lilJooo U'::IIUI4:UU4 11: IJ hU. 4'::~ '::51 Ins.:: --.. ,._-.. --.. --._---~i;19/o4 10:56 FAX 4254529016 -LJ "-, .. ' --::-"" 0 ... , J .\~ -----•... ~-~-, .'. 8AKGHAlISI;;N _"_.BeE OI,YMPIA JO~ L SCOTT ADMIN. ~OIO ~OlO ,. 3.0 OFF-SITE ANALYSIS Enclosed within this section is the Level I Downstream Drainage Analysis prepared for this development. as well as the Level 3 Downstream Drainage Analysis for the Evendell plat. Hearing Examiner Conditions 19 and 20 refer to the required downstream improvements for this development. The Level 3 Analysis contains a map that has each segment of the downstream system numbered. These numbers correspond to the requirements listed in Condition 19. The following are responses to Hearing Examiner Conditions 19 and 20: Response to Condition 19: The developer has chosen to go with option "b" of this condition. Sheet CI3 of the construction plans shows the required improvements to culverts "LS" and "LlO." This plan also shows the required "bank and channel stabilization" to the existing drainage course in the vicinity of Lot 12 of Rich Lea Crest and the un-opened right-of-way for 162nd Avenue S.E. B8ses eft 8 Islsfllume 'QQ"cn;atiQR ",itk Pile Dye gf KiRg CQUAt~r DD~S, IRe CQHAt~' gas .Q~pIQt8Q all 8f tRi etRs, ref}Hirea ElBw~sk8iUR iJflfJF8V8~8RtS RBted iA tbis !;QAQitiQA Furthermore, based on a field inspection on January 23. 2004. we confIrmed wHal Pste Bye 98;11 8,,11 it appears that King County replaced culverts L-II. L-12. and L-14 with LCPE pipe. Response to Condition 20: This project only makes up a small portion of the contributing basin area to this segment of the downstream system. The project will also be providing a Level 2 Flow Control facility. This flow control facility will match the pre-developed flow durations from 50 percent of the 2-year storm up to the 50-year storm event. With all of this in mind. it is our opinion that this development will not have any adverse impacts to this portion of the downstream system. A fIeld inspection identifIed debris at the culvert inlet for S.E. 144th Street. Notes have been added to Sheet CI3 to remove this debris as part of the development/construction of this project. II020.004.doc 3.1 Level 1 Downstream Analysis · oe 10· LEVEL I DOWNSTREAM DRAINAGE ANALYSIS " Preliminary Plat of Hamilton Place Located along West side of 160th Avenue Southeast near the intersection of Southeast 134 th Street King County, Washington May 26, 2002 TABLE OF CONTENTS TASK I STIJDY AREA DEFINITION AND MAPS EXHIBIT "A" Vicinity Map EXHIBIT "B"rC" Upstream/Downstream Drainage Map TASK 2 RESOURCE REVIEW EXHIBIT "D" EXHIBIT "E" EXHIBIT "F" EXHIBIT "G" EXHIBIT "H" EXHIBIT "f' FEMAMap Sensitive Areas Folios SCS Soils Map Assessor's Map Wetland Inventory Map Basin Reconnaissance Summary Report ( t-I/ PI") TASK 3 FIELD INSPECTION EXHIBIT "J" Off-Site Analysis Drainage System Table 3.1 Conveyance System Nuisance Problems (Type I) 3.2 Severe Erosion Problems (Type 2) 3.3 Severe Flooding Problems (Type 3) TASK 4 DRAINAGE SYSTEM DESCRIPTION AND PROBLEM DESCRIPTIONS EXHIBIT "K" Drainage Complaints TASK 5 MITIGATION OF EXISTING OR POTENTIAL PROBLEMS TASKl STUDY AREA DEFINITION AND MAPS e,) TASK I -STUDY AREA DEFINITION AND MAPS The proposed 23 lot Hamilton Place Subdivision contains approximately 4.32 acres located within a portion of the Southwest quarter of the Northeast quarter of Section 14, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., in King County, Washington. The project is also located between ISSIh Avenue Southeast and \601h Avenue Southeast near the "T" intersection of Southeast 134~ Street. The project includes construction of a new east/west public access road extending from \SSIh Avenue Southeast to \60th Avenue Southeast along with halfstreet improvements along the frontagt: of both streets. The enclosed Vicinity Map, Preliminary Plat Map, and Preliminary Engineering Design Plans indicate the location of the project site and surrounding conditions. The existing topography of the site contains slopes ranging from approximately two percent to five percent. The site generally slopes from the northeast to the southwest sheet flowing through a small wetland area located at the southwest comer of the site and then into an open drainage ditch located along the east side of \SSIh Avenue Southeast where it continues in a southerly direction eventually discharging into the Cedar River. Existing vegetation on the site consists of mostly pasture grass and a few scattered ornamental trees on the northerly half of the site and more dense trees and brush on the southerly portion of the site. The site currently contains one existing residential home, an existing out building, and small shed which will all be removed as part of the development of the residential project. The King County SCS Soils Survey Maps indicate the existing soils underlying the site as Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loan (AgC-Hydrologic Soil Group C). See Exhibit F. UPSTREAM DRAINAGE ANALYSIS From a review of the City of Renton aerial topographic survey maps, the detailed boundary and topographic Survey prepared for the project and field inspection, it was confirmed that the site receives off-site tributary runoff from approximately two acres of property located just north of the project site between Southeast l32M Street and the northerly boundary of the project site. The upstream tributary area contains approximately six single family residential homes which appears to sheet flow surface runoff across the project site in a northeast to southwest direction. Property to the east and west of the project site are bounded by 1601h Avenue Southeast and lS8 1h Avenue Southeast which contain open ditch drainage systems. Property located south of the project site is lower in elevation and drains in a southerly direction away from the site. Please refer to the Combined Upstream!Downstream Drainage Area Map showing the upstream drainage basin and off-site tributary area. .) .) ON-SITE DRAINAGE ANALYSIS The proposed storm drainage system for the project will consist of catch basins and underground storm pipe, tightline roof drain connections and a combined open vegetated wet/detention pond located near the southwest comer of the property. Stormwater runoff from the new public access road extending from 158th Avenue Southeast to 160th Avenue Southeast will be collected by catch basins and underground storm pipe and conveyed in a westerly direction discharging into the open combined wet/detention pond for detention and water quality treatment prior to discharging off site into the existing open ditch system along I 58 th Avenue Southeast. Surface water runoff from lots 12 through 15 and lots 17 through 22 will be collected by private storm lines located along the southerly, low end of the lots to collect surface runoff from building roof drains, driveways, and landscape areas and convey the surface runoff to the stormwater facility. According to King Country, the project site is located within an area which requires basic water quality treatment and level II flow control. All stormwater runoff from the project site including the new public roadway, and lot drainage will discharge into the proposed combined open vegetated wet/detention pond located in Tract "B" for stormwater detention and treatment. From here, stormwater will discharge through the existing wetland and proposed 25-foot buffer located in proposed Tract "D" via a dispersal system and then discharge into the open drainage ditch located along the east side of 158 th Avenue Southeast. EXHIBIT "A" VICINITY MAP -; ~~<~t , COALFIELD ~-~ S£ 124TH , , ~ PARK --f2-! ~.~ :1 ~i " ~,:: ~ I r S( ihrHp/\ £p'* _~L __ Jg4J~ __ ~~ > » ';:.1 ~; ~! ~ < <. t;: 12 -"'" ~." '" 0- '" ;'; l' '" >i >1 i!' :: Sl ""'I -0:;1 §j i:1 ~ ~I SE ~ ~! ,- ~ .~ FS- SITE PARK . , Sf 132"0 ST ,,~ ~.:;>' T <; > "'" 14 11 128TH 15600 • • t;:1 _L.. ____ -""~_, ~" SOURCE: THE THOMAS,GUIDE (USED BY PERMISSION) > q,! "'" :(! y-' > '" PARK & i < t~!1< 0-RIDE ~I ,~ " iE!V) -: fl '" !e) ::1 ~ ST l! tf kl I~ ~i I '" V) ,'" .. ........... Sf i \~ ... , ! ~ " + VICINITY MAP , --~ 12151 !: I ~i SE 17600 I", ~~ lZJRO § , Sf ! PC I --'8 wi Sf 124111 n ~13 , ~r , @): "I , ~8 I ~:! ~I j ::;1 17500 f NORTH .) EXHIBIT "B" /"C" UPSTREAMIDOWNSTREAM DRAINAGE AREA MAP • ) \ . , • lI"~.l.,n ':1'\0 --VV-.J ,. .. :on .) TASK 2 RESOURCE REVIEW TASK 2 -RESOURCE REVIEW Adopted Basin Plans The site is located within the orting Hills Sub-Basin Cedar River Watershed. Basin wide storm drainage requirements have been recommended by the Lower Cedar River Basin and Non Point Action Plan applicable to the project site which are addressed in the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual Applications Maps. Finalized Drainage Studies NoneknoWD. Basin Reconnaissance Summary Report The site is located within the Orting Hills Sub Basin of the Cedar River Watershed according to the King Country Department of Natural Resources. Critical Drainage Area Maps The site is not located within a Critical Drainage Area according to King County. Floodplain and Floodway FEMA Maps Based on a review of the FEMA 1 OO-year Floodplain Maps, the site is not located within a 100-year floodplain. Please refer to Exhibit "f' (FEMA Floodplain Map). Other OfT-site Analysis Reports A copy of the US Department of Agriculture Soils Conservation Map is included in the report as Exhibit F. The soils within the project sit~ are identified as Alderwood Grayelly Sandy Loam (AgC, 6 to 15 percent). Sensitive Area Folios From a review of the King County Sensitive Area Maps the site is not located within any sensitive areas for Erosion Control Hazard, Seismic Hazard, Landslide Hazard, or Streams and Flood Hazard areas. e.l Road Drainage Problems None identified. United States Department of Agriculture King County Soils Maps According to the US Department of Agriculture King Country Soils Maps, existing soils underlying the site consist of A1derwood Gravelly Sandy Loam (AgC, 6 to 15 percent). Wetland Inventory Maps Based on a review of the King County Wetland Inventory Maps, the site contains an area of potential wetlands. A wetland delineation and reconnaissance report prepared for the project has confirmed that the site does contain a small wetland area located at the southwest comer of the project site. Migrating River Studies Not applicable. .) EXHIBIT "D" FEMAMAP L SOUTHEAST '\ -165TH AVENUE lil SOUTHEAST 5 SE 1JOll< PLACE /b 0 '" , SE1~o........ I--SE 1JOTH AVENUE STREET I : w PlACE ::> z ! SE 132ND ~ • . ~ STREET ~ 5 i!: ~~ g ::> 0 i '" -\ 7'L-::: i w w ::> " z z w ~ t; '< ~ - w L ::> z w -'" g '< '-w w '< " Ow ~ ) z w ~(I) " SE 1JSTH STREET w ~ 14 ~1l1 " z w SOUlliEA: " SE 136TH r STREET -§ i!: ;J SE 137TH PlACE I 0 2: N ~ j I I I i lONE X I i FEMAMAP NORTH i:::~:oc·'<{t:*J?fi?1'7#!0:'ff~:;;i&!'~~~~~~%~f:J!igSifii;"',",fi.'iJ'j;>.,,;o';;f!t~:'! ,.·: .... :c:;~ig~--=---.··· .' :! .\ i i i .i i NATIONAL nOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM nOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON AND INCORPORATED AREAS PANEL 982 OF 1125 (SeE MAP INDEX FOR PANELS NOT PRINTED) KING COUNTY, UNINCORPORATID AREAS 530071 0982 f RENTON. OTY Of 530088 0982 f MAP NUMBER 53033C0982 F MAP REVISED: MAY 16,1995 Federal Emergency Management Agency !! ii " 'I II !. i; !i I I . ~ NATIONAL nOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM FIRM FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON AND INCORPORATED AREAS PANEL 1001 OF 1725 !SEE MAP INDEX FOR PANELS NOT PRINTED) KING COUNTY. 71 .001 UNiNCOAPORATED AREAS 6300 MAP NUMBER 53033C1001 F MAP REVISED: MAY 16,1995 Federal Emergency Management Agency • EXHIBIT "E" SENSITIVE AREAS FOLIOS '-.~ ~i~" .. -. nbbtts Creek " .•. ,' .~.r.: .. : . -----';--" "',,~ •.... "',,' " . ! ,..' ": ~ :-~";~: ,,"':.,. \. MayQ;'eek' ,. . WETLANDS SOURCE: 1990 KING COUNTY SENSITIVE AREAS FaUD f4,)05: 30- 1/2 0 .. ::.~. ,.:. '. ' F / I , NORTH .. -1;:. , , ..-~ :' , I .'~I : \ \ I \ , .. ,,~.:' . .) 1 I .... - \.-',,?. 1 I J\', ... _-_ ..... " ,/ /"1 , .... .,;:,~ ,'\.. :---.... ..-, ,-, ---- /.~;..-----"~ ..... ~ ... ;, \ \ \ \ . , , \ '.""--'. \ I '-\ , 112 0 STREAMS AND FLOOD HAZARD AREAS SOURCE: 1990 KING COUNTY SENSITIVE AREAS FOUO NORTH ·,," , .~p~" ". EROSION HAZARD AREAS SOURCE: 1990 KING COUNTY SENSITIVE AREAS FOUO ,; (.. .... ---~.-......... I '. . \. '. 1/2 0 i I / ) .. ,.[;~ NORTH 1/2 0 "'-, LANDSLIDE HAZARD AREAS NORTH SOURCE: 1990 KING COUNTY SENSITIVE AREAS FouO " .-. f " " , .... , ... ·~E.-""··· " .> o· o •• '.:~· ';---+--1 SEISMIC HAZARD AREAS SOURCE: 1990 KING COUNTY SENSITIVE AREAS FOLlO '- .--,~.-:~. . ) / .... -----~. { 112 0 {~-. I " / // /;--"7 "'U; NORTH 'i . ...! c. ~. ~ . =H.~ ! : :~~.-.......... . .t ,-, , , , . .. ~ . .,.' ·:\I.i. . -'~, ~.~ ~-' i ."j...,L.;' . ! COAL MINE HAZARD AREAS '. SOURCE: 1990 KING COUNTY SENSrnVE AREAS FOLIO I' :,;,:{;;"., }r .-~-........ , i. c. _.--:.: '. ., 112 0 --." .' ./ , NORTH .) EXHIBIT "F" SCS SOILS MAP ~:' "~" . ,.." ., ,",,' .... , ... ,' . .':." . ~D" ' • '; .. '. ," .' ... ' . ." . ...: ,-: ~ .. ---- . . AkF SOILS MAP ... • NORTH I \ ~i I~i " QJIDE TO MAPPING UNITS For a full description of a mapping unit .. read both the description of the mapping mit and that of t.he series to which the mapping unit belongs. See table 6, page 70 .. for descriptions of woodland groups. information is given in .tables as follows: soil Other Acreage and extent. .. table 1, page 9. Engineering uses of the soils, tables 2 and 3, pages 36 through 55, Town and country planning. table 4. page 57. Recreational uses J table 5, page 64. Estimated ~ields, table 7. page 79. Map s)'lll>ol Mapping ~it Described on page AgB AgC AgD AkF AmI! AmC An BeC BeD BeF Bh Br Bu 0> Ea Ed EvB EvC EvD &iC Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 6 percent slopes---------- Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 6 to 15 percent ~lopes-------- Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes.-------- Alderwood and Kitsap soils, very steep------------------------ Arents, AldeTWood material, 0 to 6 percent slopes 1/---------- Arents, Alderwood material, 6 to 15 percent slopes-l/--------- Arents, Everett material !I-------------7----------~--------- Beausite gravelly sandy loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes---------- Beausite gravelly sandy loam, IS to 30 percent slopes--------- Beausite gravelly sandy loam, 40 to 75 percent siopes--------- Bellingham silt 10am------------------------------------------ Briscot silt loam-----------------~-------------------------- Buckley silt 10am--------------------------------------------- Coastal beaches----------------------------------------------- Earlmant silt loam-------------------------------------------- Edgewick fine sandy loam-------------------------------------- Everett gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 5 percent slopes------------ Everett gravelly sandy loam, 5 to 15 percent slopes----------- lEverett gravelly sandy loam, 15 to 30 percent .slopes---------- Everett-AldeTWood gravelly sandy loams, 6 to IS percent slopes------------------------------------------------------ InA Indianola loamy fine sand, 0 to 4 percent slopes-------------- InC Indianola loamy fine sand, 4 to 15 percent slopes------------- InD Indianola loamy fine sand, 15 to 30 percent slopes------------ KpB Kitsap silt loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes----------------------- KpC Kitsap silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes---------------------- XpD Xitsap silt loam. 15 to 30 percent slopes--------------------- KsC Klaus gravelly loamy sand, 6 to IS percent slopes------------- Ma M[xed alluvial land------------------------~----------------- NeC Neilton very gravelly loamy sand, 2 to 15 percent slopes------ ;~ ---.. "~::o~:r~k ~!}"~t r~ci~=:========":: :=:==:===:=:=: ::==:====: ==::=:== No Norma sandy 10am---------------------------------------------- ,Or Orcas peat-':' -----. ----------------... --------------------------- Os Oridia silt loam-----------"----------------------------------- 0vC Ovall gravelly loam. 0 to 15 percent slopes------------------- OvD OvaU gravelly loam," 15 to 25 percent slopes------------------ OvF Ovall gravelly loam. 40 to 75 percent slopes------------------ Pc Pilchud loamy fine sand------------------------------_-------- Pk Pilchuck fine sandy 10am-------------------------------------- Pu Puget silty clay loam----------------------------------------- Py Puyallup fine sandy 10.,.------'-------------------------------- Rae Ragnar fine sandy loam, 6-to 15 percent slopes---------------- RaD" Ragnar fine sandy loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes--------------- RdC Ragnar-Indianola association, sloping: 1/---------------------- Ragnar soil-----------------------~--------------------- Indianola soil------------------------------------"------- RdE Ragnar-Indianola association, moderately steep: 1/------------ Ragnar soil--------------------------------~------------ Indianola soil------------------------------------------- 10 8 10 10 10 10 11 11 12 12 12 13 13 14 14 15 15 16 16 16 17 16 17 17 18 18 18 18 19 19 20 20 21 21 22 23 23 23 23 24 24 25 26 26 26 Capability mit S)'JIbo! lVe-2 lVe-2 Vle-2 Vlle-l IVe-2 lVe-2 lVs-l lVe-2 VJe-2 Vlle-l 111 .. -2 11 .. -2 ,111 .. -2 V111 .. -1 lIw-2 Il1w-l lVs-l Vls-l Vle-l Vls-l IVs-2 IVs-2 Vle-l ll1e-l IVe-! Vle-2 Vls-l VJw-2 Vls-l lIw-l llw-l 111 .. -3 Vlll .. -1 lIw-2 lVe-2 VJe-2 Vlle-l VJw-l IVw-l In .. -2 Uw-l IVe-3 Vle-2 lVe-3 lVs-2 Vle-2 Vle-l Page 76 76 78 78 76 76 77 76 78 78 76 75 76 78 75 75 77 78 77 78 77 77 76 75 76 78 78 78 78 74 74 76 78 7S 76 78 ,78 78 76 76 74 77 78 77 77 78 77 Woodland group S)'III>ol 3d2 3dl 3d! ,2dl 3d2 3d2 3f3 3d2 3d1 3dl 3w2 3wl 4wl 3w2 201 3f3 3f3 3f2 3f3 4s3 4s3 4s2 2d2 ~d2 2dl 3fl 201 3f3 201 201 3w2 3wl 3dl 3dl 3dl 2s1 2s1 3 .. 2 201 4s1 4s1 4s1 4s3 4s1 4s2 U_ S. GOVERNMENT PRlNTnlG OFFICE: 1973 0 _ 4e1_ GUIDE TO MAPPING UNITS--Continued Woodland Described Capability unit group Map . sylOol Mapping unit Re Renton sil t .1oam---------.-------------------------------"--- Jlli Ri veTWash--·------------------------------------------------- Sa Salal si 1 t loam------.--------------------------------------- Sh Sammamish silt lo~~---------------------------------------- Sk Seattle muck-----------------------------------------~------ Sm Shalcar muck------------------------------------------------ Sn 5i silt loam-~---------------------------------------------- So Snohomish silt loam----------------------------------------- Sr Snohomish silt loam, thick surface variant------------------ Su Sultan silt ·10am-----------------------------c --------------· Tu Tukwila muck------.------------------------------------------ Ur Utban 1and-------------------·------------------------------ Wo Woodinville silt loam------------------------------~------------_ ..... -_._-- on .page SylOol Page 5yOO01 26 IIIw-l 75 3w1 27 VIIIw-l 78 27 IIw-1 74 201 27 Ilw-2 75 31<1 28 IIw-3 7S 29 IIw-3 75 29 IIw-l 74 201· 30 IIw-2 75 31<2 31 IIw-2 . 7S 31<2 31 IIw-1 74 31<1 32 IIw-3 75 33 ----------- 33 IIw-2 7S 31<2 1/ -The composition of these units is more variable than that of the others in the Area, but it has been controlled well enough to interpret fOT the expected use of the soils. EXHIBIT "G" ASSESSOR'S MAP l 1 .~ ) w > « :r: t- CO _J 10 1 1 1) 0) '\ " ... •• .... - "l " .; o· " '., £ • " .. .. 'J.-'1 " II) • .. '" "- "l ,:::0 .. (" .. v - I~ SITE ~~o·O ( .,rOB ~> 8& \ s .. .... '" \ ~I ~b J 5>1~ 0' I \ 50 4-~ t"'uJ' \ 1(\ <> j;"!I "J'l 2 0 I 2\\'~~ I I~' \~1-!) -~-0 t 0 t.~~\~'7 170 ASSESSOR'S MAP .' LOT N 121 • '" . .. I ., ... I-'" .... ~ 0 0.' ., ID .. ' V' -If) 0 1 0° 130 r<l d"-, • • ,... 0 ..t ... .... • t<) 'l." \ ~ 3 ..,., .3D '" s " 0 .. • ... sad \ \(p 0... " t.t.-.~ o\~\ ... n .. ~ " 'I - ~ ".I '" 1]0 ~ $." A NORTH EXHIBIT "H" WETLAND INVENTORY MAP • • Photo Date: 5-80 WETLAND: May Creek 2 LOCATION: NW NW 13-23-5 INVENTORY DATE: 7-20-81 ACREAGE: 11 CLASSIFICATION: POW PSSl PEM5 Fish and Wildlife Service Palustrine, Open Water Palustrine, Scrub-Shrub, Broad- leaved Deciduous (Hardhack) Palustrine, Emergent, Narrow- leaved Persistent (Reed Canary Grass) North .... COMMUNITY PLAN AREA: BASIN OR DRAINAGE: Approx_ Scale: I" = 500' Newcastle Cedar River Common Name Open Water Scrub-Shrub Shallow Marsh NOTE: The wetland edge shown above Is approximate. In marshes, ponds or lakes, the transItion from standing water to uplands Is usually cIa..,. However. the edges of forested or scrub/shrub wetlands are less distinct. There, the change from wetland to uPland often occurs over a broad area called the '"tunsltlon zon .... For a discussion. see Wetland Plants of Kina County and the Pupt Hay Creek 2 OBSERVED SPECIES: (refer to list in Appendix 1) -Trees: AR, PT, PO Herbs: LA, n, VS Shrubs: AC, RS, SX, SO Sedges!RusheS/GrasslFern: EN, AF, JE, JX, LH, PA Birds: G8, CG, HA, VS, 8S, R8, AR, ST, Mammals: HU Fish: Other: OF RARE/ENDANGERED/THREATENED SPECIES: (refer to list in Appendix 2) Recorded/Observed: Potential: SS, YW, GF, RS SIGNIFICANT HABITAT FEATURES: Snags, good. variety of cover adjacent to open water. OUTLET: Type: Condition: Outflow enters: POTENTIAL STORAGE: Existing Acti.e: Potential Active: Pipe Open Stream 8 ac. ft. 8 ac. ft. GENERAL OBSERVATJONS: Urban debris and trash on perimeter. 4ItTLAND EVALUATION SUMMARY: Data was collected in the five categories shown below. Within each category the data was evaluated to produce numerical values. Composite values for each category were produced in order to compare each wetland to other wetlands in its sub-basin and In King_County. The result of that comparison was a percentile rank. The percentile is expressed on a scale of one hundred and Indicates the percent of wetlands that scored eQUal to or below that particular site. For example, a percentile rank of 80 under sub-basin means that the wetland scored equal to 01 b:etter than 80 percent of all sites within the su~b8Sin for that evaluation category. NOTE: The percentile ranks are valid only within the individual evaluation category and are intended solely for reference and comparison. E.aluation Category Hydrology: runoff storage potential, water quality, potential for minimizing damage in downstream areas Biology: quality of habitat, abundance and diversity of plant and animal species Visual: diversity and contrast of wetland and surrounding vegetation, surrounding landform. Cultura': types of access, proximity to schools/institutions, overall environmental QUality Economic: presence of agriculture/peat extraction. anadromous or game fish. game birds: or mammal. of commercial value WETLAND RATING: Rank (by percentile) Sub-basin County-wide 7J 85 64 78 92 76 14 42 35 51 t wetland was assigned one of three possible wetland ratings. The wetland ratings were determined by examining the scores of selected tory tasks, specific data or percentile ranks for individual evaluation categories. The criteria used to assign the wetland ratings are .-ibed in the Introduction. For each rating a number of specific guidelines for new development in or adjacent to wetlands: were prepared. e ~idelines are intended to assist in carrying out King County's Sensitive Areas Ordinance and other wetland policies. They are included in a separate report titled "Guidelines for King County Wetlands". Wetland Rating: 1 (b, c) EXHIBIT "I" .) BASIN RECONNAISSANCE SUMMARY REPORT (NOT APPLICABLE) .' ---------------------------- TASK 3 FIELD INSPECTION TASK 3 -FIELD INSPECTION During the on-site field inspection, there were no significant erosion or capacity problems observed in the downstream. There were several minor erosion and conveyance system nuisance problems identified in some of the open ditches and from a review of the resource material. Based on a review of the applicable drainage complaints located in the downstream drainage course, there does not appear to be any current existing significant restrictions or capacity problems in the existing downstream system. The field reconnaissance did not identifY any potential constrictions or capacity problems in the downstream system. 3.1 Conveyance System Nuissance Problems (Type I) Conveyance system nuisance problems, in general are defined as any existing or predicted flooding or erosion that does not constitute a severe flooding or erosion problem. Conveyance system nuisance problems are identified as flooding or erosion that results in the overflow of the constructive conveyance system for runoff events less than or equal to a ten year event. Examples include indignation of a shoulder or a lane of a roadway, overflows collecting in a yards or pastures, shallow flows across driVeways, minor flooding in crawl spaces or unheated garages/outbuildings and minor erosion. From a review of the available drainage complaints, there appears to be only one potential conveyance system nuisance problem identified under drainage complaint No. 91-1000 which identified a maple tree which was restricting drainage within the existing open drainage ditch downstream of the project site. 3.2 Severe Erosion Problems (Type 2) Severe erosion problems are defined as downstream channels, revines, or slopes with evidence of or potential for erosion/incision, sufficient to pose a sedimentation hazard to downstream conveyance systems or propose a landslide hazard by undercutting adjacent slopes. Severe erosion problems do not include roadway or minor ditch erosion. . Based on field inspection and review of the applicable King County Drainage Complaints, there was no identified or evidence of potential severe erosion problems within the downstream conveyance system within the portion of the system analyzed as part of this project. • • 3.3 Severe Flooding Problems (Type 3) Severe flooding problems can be caused by conveyance system overflows or the elevated water surfaces of ponds, lakes, wetlands, or closed depressions. Severe flooding problems are identified as follows: • Flooding of a finished area of a habitable bUildingfor runoff events less than or equal to a lOO-year event. Examples include flooding of finished floors of homes and commercial or industrial bUildings. Flooding and electricallheating systems in components of the crawl space or garage of a home. Such problems are referred to a "severe building flooding problems ... • Flooding over all lanes of a roadway or severely impacting a sole access driveway for runoff events less than or equal to the lOO-year event. Such problems are referred to as "severe roadway flooding problems ... From a review of the King Country drainage complaints, and from field inspection, there were no identified drainage problems within the downstream drainage system which could be identified as "severe building flooding problems" or "severe roadway flooding problems." As required by the 1998 King County Drainage Manual for projects within this drainage basin, the proposed project will provide Basic Water Quality Treatment and Level II Flow Control as part of the design of the stormwater managementsystem to help reduce the potential for any significant impacts to the downstream drainage system within the Cedar River Watershed area. . --l .) EXHIBIT "J" OFF-SITE ANALYSIS DRAINAGE SYSTEM TABLE .) • • OFF-SITE ANALYSIS DRAINAGE SYSTEM TABLE Surface Water Design Manual, Core Requirement #2 e Basin: c;:. f;OItrZ fC!!/ &2 Subbasin Name: 0 R Tit> /b H=lkkS Subbasin Number: Symbol Draihage 'Component Type; Nalne, and Size Set: Map Type: sheet flow, swale. stream, channel, pipe. pond; size, diameter. surface area - ... "B}ainage C~iftponent Description -.N:~.~-:~< " Drainage basin. vegetation. cover, depth. type of sensitive area, volume ?'t .. L /.5 '1JP J 2: I Slope '''-"-... , .. .' " ;? Z- Distanc6;:: . froin Siii: . DiScharg1;,' l)~~i:i~~{ -;~~r~~ ..... o· . :'lt3~;~. ",:;1'..1' ...~ ObserVations of Fieid Inspector' Resourcc'Rtviewer, or .. ,.z,,_ Ft At-OA/b Iwv-,r SloE 5~~7'~ 200' .f5...cX) , hSO'- 6~d-IZ50' ~250f 2000' -?---L 22:50 11 2450 1 Z450 2 SEa. '2550-2600 Re~i~~nJ_· Constrictions, under capacity. ponding, Tributary area. likelihood of problem. OVertopping, flooding, habitat or overflow pathways. potential impacts organism destruction, scouring. bank sloughing. sedimentation. incision, other erosion 50 IJ. 71+-. . t::=N 0 1:5> ..ELfV' c......,..-./> AF. 135 • - OFF· SITE ANALYSIS DRAINAGE SYSTEM TABLE Surface Water Design Manual, Core Requirement #2 - Basin: C f50 fh2... RLJ/~ ___~ Subbasin Name: 0120;vl;:; H-ILdLS u_~SYllhl!sin Number: Symbol- ·jl,· p;linHige,C6mponent Type; Naine,and Size See Map Type: sheet flow, swale, stream. channel. pipe. pond; size, diameter. surface area 1/ CVt-1/ ? OPGTJ ClfflrJN f7t tZ2.. t)rhlnage Component Description Drainage basin, vegetation, cover. depth. type of sensitive area, volume • "Sl6pe % 3 Distance' "f;tJiRting PQiirifilit{~~ from Sit~, ·#fiiblem,; prOffI~truk;· bischarg~-' . < ~:~. ~,,~:~ , :~;?- . . .~ -': -, E',';bbsdr~;'ti(;iisofFieid -' t':_~Resouitn~~~er,or . ;]:, . ';",,:~,;, FI Constrictions. under capacity, ponding. Tributary area, likelihood of problem. overtopping, flooding, habitat or overflow pathways. potential impacts organism destruction, scouring. bank sloughing. sedimentation. incision. other erosion I mltVtJlL ea.t?~/(),J 200/ 3200'-3 £;J ' I '50"'" I£-335Q -3q/JIJ ~fl" <:I/)A ) ~t2F~JV6 /V~ t/ J;:j'J~ ~ .':;:<12&; n-;/4iPNcl 5 I '77?.&.oo.. ~ ~ u ~ J..J ~IV"'\ ~ a-trfr.I~ E}(16,vO~ 772 55 /4-4-DLS'L AF.J35 .) TASK 4 .) DOWNSTREAM DRAINAGE SYSTEM DESCRIPTION AND PROBLEM SCREENING TASK 4 -DOWNSTREAM DRAINAGE SYSTEM DESCRIPTION AND PROBLEM SCREENING As indicated in the "on-site drainage analysis" section, the project site does receive some off-site runoff from upstream tributary area directly north of the project site from an area of approximately two acres in size. This runoff will be intercepted by a drainage swale which will be constructed along the northerly property line and conveyed west to the existing open ditch system within IS Sth Avenue Southeast. After stormwater runoff from the project site discharges into the existing open drainage ditch (L I) storm flows begin flowing to the south and discharge through a series of concrete culverts (L2, 3, & 4) over a distance of approximately 650 feet until entering an open east/west ditch (L6) which drains to the east for approximately 630 feet where it discharges into the existing roadside ditch along the west side of I 60th Avenue Southeast (L 7) and continues in a southerly direction for approximately 750 feet. Drainage then discharges through a 12-Inch culvert (LS) and continues in a southerly direction through the open roadside ditch (L9) where it discharges through another 12-inch driveway culvert ~ (L I 0) and continues for approximately 200 lineal feet in the roadside ditch. At this point, stormwater is conveyed to the east side of I 60th Avenue Southeast via a 12-inch concrete culvert (L II) and continues in a southerly direction for a short length until discharging through a 24-inch cmp culvert (L 12) with a pinched end. From this point, drainage continues in a southerly direction along the roadside ditch (L13) for approximately 150 feet and then discharges through an IS-inch diameter polyethylene culvert (L 14). According to King County records, drainage complaint No. 97-0423 was reported near this location. The drainage complaint was apparently related to overflow of the roadside ditch but was not available in King County records. From this point, stormwater continues in a southerly direction along the roadside ditch (L IS) for approximately 150 feet to a point where drainage then flows in an easterly direction away from 160th Avenue Southeast through a relatively flat drainage swale heavily vegetated with trees and brush. The swale contains areas of ponding water (L 16) and then becomes more defined. The drainage swale then discharges through a 12-inch culvert (L 17) and then through another 12-inch driveway culvert (L IS) and then continues in a east to southeasterly direction through an open swale (L 19). The drainage swale continues along the north edge of an existing residential development, a portion of which bas been reinforced with concrete blocks until entering an IS-inch diameter culvert with a trash rack and concrete headwall (L20). Storm flows continue in an easterly direction until reaching the unopened right-of-way along 16200 Avenue Southeast (1-21) and then turns and continues in a southerly direction in an open channel (L22). From here, the drainage channel continues in a southerly direction for approximately 600 feet down the hill until reaching southeast 144th Street. According to King County records, drainage complaint No. 97-0206 was reported at location (L20). According to the complaint, the resident has had drainage problems from runoff in the channel along the north side of his property which may have affected his septic system. It appears that some improvements have been completed along the drainage channel. r------------------ • • From field inspection of the existing downstream drainage system, there were no observed significant erosion or capacity problems. It should also be noted that portions of the roadside drainage ditch along both sides 160th Avenue Southeast both upstream and downstream of the project site have been recently cleaned and regraded. Straw wraps have also been placed within the section of the roadside ditches which were recently cleaned to help prevent erosion while the ditches restablize. REVIEW OF DRAINAGE COMPLAINTS IN DOWNSTREAM DRAINAGE SYSTEM Copies of applicable drainage complaints within the downstream drainage system were obtained from the King County Water and Land Resource Division. Copies of the drainage complaints are included in Exhibit "K" Drainage Complaints. The following is a description of each of the drainage complaints. Complaint No. 89-0867 Date: 1989 Property Owner: Address: 13902 160th Avenue Southeast Drainage complaint not available . Complaint No. 91-1000 Date: 9/17/91 Property Owner: David Nyblom Address: Southeast 136th Street, between iS6th Avenue Southeast and 160th Avenue Southeast This complaint is located within the downstream drainage system of the project site approximately 650 feet south of the project within the open drainage ditch listed as (L6 in the downstream drainage analysis). This complaint indicates that a large maple tree located midway between the drainage ditch causes drainage to overflow the ditch. Complaint No. 95-0107 Date: 2/01195 Property Owner: Steve Kohr Address: 15641 Southeast 138th Place This drainage complaint indicates a possibility of a broken culvert at the entrance of the Southeast 138th Place cul-de-sac. This drainage complaint is not located within the sub basin of the project site's downstream drainage system. • • • Complaint No. 97-0206 Date: 1/10/97 Property Owner: Don Gragg Address: 16046 Southeast 14200 Place This drainage complaint indicates that off-site water was diverted from 14200 Place to the adjacent S-acre tract and floods his property. Mr. Gragg indicates that he usually can prevent the flooding by maintaining the diversion, but was out of town during a heavy storm event, and therefore, his property including his drain field area was flooded. It appears that some additional improvements have been completed within the drainage system since the time of this drainage complaint to reduce or eliminate the flooding problem. Complaint No. 97-0423 Date: 1997 Property Owner: Address: 14028 160th Avenue Southeast Although this drainage complaint was not available, it appears that from a review of the drainage GQmplaint information identified in the Avendale Plat Preliminary Technical Information Report, a restriction in the existing roadside ditch along 160th Avenue Southeast near the existing 18-inch PE storm culvert identified as (L14) in the downstream drainage analysis caused overflow of the ditch. Complaint No. 98-0202 Date: 3119/97 Property Owner: Pam Huff Address: 14312 I 60th Avenue Southeast This complaint indicates that the neighbor on the north side of the property filled a low area and then paved it resulting in runoff discharging onto the Huff property. This property is not located directly within the sub basin of the downstream drainage system of the project site. Complaint No. 01-0015 Date: 11/05101 Property Owner: Dave Nybloom Address: 13400 1 58th Avenue Southeast This complaint indicates that the pasture area located at the above address contains bare soil, and runoff from the pasture area is discharging sediment onto the roadside ditch along the west side of 158'" Avenue Southeast. From inspection, it does not appear that there is any current sediment problem within this area. Complaint No. 01-0344 Date: 05/24/01 Property Owner: Jean Bowen Address: 13644 160th Avenue Southeast This complaint indicates that a storm pipe that outlets to the existing ditch from the house directly to the north has an iron oxide residue discharging from the pipe. The inspector who reviewed the complaint indicated that the iron oxide residue is a typical condition. • • EXHIBIT "K" DRAINAGE COMPLAINTS CUiIM'! lYP8 ... IIfPrdBI ....... c .... ~IJIIfPnailm r Bill IlnlPaaB ~1992-0082 C DRAINAGE 12817 162ND SE 657B2 1992-0082 E DRAINAGE 12817 162ND SE 65782 1992-0082 ER DRAINAGE 12817 162ND SE (lntAcByCmDt) 657B2 1992-0082 PN DRAINAGE 12817 162ND SE 657B2 1992-0208 C SEEPAGE 17381 SE 133RD ST RDSCIS 657C2 1992-0467 C DRAINAGe 13128 166TH AV SE NEW HOUSES UPSTREAM 65781 1992-0467 NOA DRAINAGE 13128 166THAV SE NEW HOUSES UPSTREAM TO CIP 657Bl 1992.0467 SR DRAINAGE 13128 166THAV SE NEW HOUSES UPSTREAM TO CIP 65781 1993-0252 C DRNG 16410 SE 143RD PLACE TURNEDTOE 65793 1993-0252 E DRNG 16410 SE 143RD PLACE CHECK STAT BY CMDT DATE 65793 1993-0264 C DRNG 17531 SE 136TH ST WET YARD 657C2 1993-0264 NDA ORNG 17531 SE 136TH ST WET YARD 657C2 1993-0471 C DRAINAGE 17381 SE 133RD STREET RUNOFF FROM ROAD FRONTAGE 657C2 1993-0504 C DRAINAGE 17525 SE 134TH STREET FILLED IN ROADSIDE DITCH 657C2 1993-0504 E DRAINAGE "17525 SE 134TH STREET FILLED IN ROADSIDE DITCH 657C2 1993-0504 ER DRAINAGE 17525 SE 134TH STREET FILLED IN ROADSIDE DITCH 657C2 1993-0521 C DRAINAGE 13301 SE 160TH PLACE BROKEN WATER LINE 65782 1993-0528 C DRAINAGE 13301 SE 160TH PLACE SEE 93-0521 65782 1993-0724 C FLOG 13516 164THAVE SE FLOODING 65782 1993-0724 RN FLOG 13516 164THAVE SE FLOODING IN WETlAND ON PROPERTY 65782 1994-0326 C DRNG 13200 156TH AVEY RD SE NEW UPSTREAM CONSTRUCTION -WILL 657A2 ~)1994-1011 C DRNG SE 132ND & 156TH A SE DIRECT DISCHARGE FROM PLAT DEVELD 657A2 " j 1995-0107 C CULVERT? 15641 SE 138TH PL POSSIBLE GROUNDWATER IMPACT TO S 65783 1995-0392 C WETLAND SE 128TH & 164TH A SE MISSING 80LLARD AT RID ACCESS 657Bl 1995-0715 C RUNOFF 184XX SE 135TH ST ROAD CULVERT DISCHARGE HIST ORNG 657B2 1995-0907 C DRAINAGE 13100 164THAVE SE LACK OF CONVEYANCE IN UNOPENED R1 65782 1995-0907 R DRAINAGE 13100 164TH AVE SE LACK OF CONVI:YANCE IN UNOPENED R1 65782 1995-1180 C DRAINAGE 13224 166TH AVE SE PIPE OUTlET ONTO RD ICINGIDRNG CON 657C2 1995-1180 E DRAINAGE 13224 168THAVE SE HLD4RSPNSE.MAY ASK RDS FOR CB AS 657C2 1995-1180 NDA DRAINAGE 13224 168THAVE SE HlD4RSPNSE.MAY ASK RDS FOR CS AS 657C2 1995-1180 R DRAINAGE 13224 168TH AVE SE PIPE OUTLET ONTO RO ICINGlDRNG CON 657C2 1995-1212 C RUNOFF 17382 SE 133ROST SHEET FLOW AND GROUND WATER IMP 657C2 1996-0039 C DRNG 15609 SE" 128TH ST NO INFORMATION AVAILABLE 657B2 1996-0320 C FLOG 12822 165THAVE SE STORM EVENT IMPACTS TO CEMETARY P 657Bl 1996-0556 C RUNOFF 14301 168TH PL SE APPARENT GROUNDWATER SURFACING 65783 1998-0556 R RUNOFF 14301 166TH Pl SE APPARENT GROUNDWATER SURFACING 65783 1996-0799 C FLOG 15630 SE 124TH ST ALLEGED COUNTY WORK ON PVT ROAD 657Bl 1996-0933 C FLOG 13235 168THAVE SE FLOODING DUE TO DAMAGE RD CULVER 657C2 1996-1078 FCS WETLAND SE 128TH & 164TH SE BOLLARD REMOVED BY VANDALS 657B1 1996-1411 C CLEARING SE 128TH & 164TH A SE LIMITED lIMBING & TREE CUTIING IN SE 657Bl Page2013 --, 1)111 lY/JI of PI'IIIIIm MnII If I'rIIIIIIm em_.11 I11'III PlIIIB IdI' CIa! e199&-1557 WQA CONSULT 13203 156THAVE SE BCW SITE CONSULTATION 657A2 199&-1724 C FLOG 14206 164THAVE SE OFF SITE FLOW IMPACTING PVT PROP 65783 1997-0056 C DITCH 13215 154THAVE SE 657A2 1997-0056 R DITCH 13215 154THAVE SE 657A2 1997-0203 C FLOG 14028 160TH AVE SE OVERFLOW FROM DMI CUI.V IMPACT PVT 65783 f--. 1997-0206 C FLOG 16046 se 142ND PL OFFSITE FLOW IMPACTING PRIVATE PRO 657B3 1997-0206 NDA FLOG 161146 SE 142ND PL OFFSITE FLOW IMPACTING PRIVATE PRO 657B3 1997-0206 R FLOG 16048 SE 142ND PL OFFSITE FLOW IMPACTING PRIVATE PRO 65783 ~ " 1997-0423 CL FLOG 14028 180THAVE SE ROADSIDE DITCH OVERFLOW-I80TH AVE 65783 1997-0833 FCR RDIMPCT 164TH SE & SE 128TH INFO REGARDING FUNCllON OF PONDS 657Bl 1997-0859 FCR VANDALIS 167TH PL SE & SE 144TH VANDAUSM TO RIO IDENTIFICATION SIGN 65783 1997-1432 C DRAINAGE 15413 SE 133RDST LOT DRAINAGE PVT DRNG SYS C8 LOWE 657A2 1997-1613 C FILLING SE 134 ST/172 AVE SE ENCROACHMENT INTO IDENTIFIED WETL 657C2 1998-0152 e DRAINAGE 13115 15BTHAVE SE PVT PROPERTY IMPACT DUE TO NTRL DR 65782 ~\ 1998-0202 C DRAINAGE 14312 l60THAVE SE LOW AREA PVT PROP AOJ PROP RAISED 65783 1998-0350 wac DUMPING 17020 SE 134TH,ST APPARENT DUMPING OF SOLVENTS AOJ 657C2 1998-0350 waR DUMPING 17020 SE 134TH ST APPARENT DUMPING OF SOLVENTS AOJ 657C2 1998-0456 FCR ROAD 16400 SE 128TH ST CHAIN CUT AT BOLLARDS YARD WASTE I 65781 1998-0490 C DRAINAGE 17381 SE 133RDST ROCKERY AND UNDERDRAIN INSTALLATI 657C2 1998-0931 woe FILL 12813 163RDAVE SE DUMPING OF COL ADJ TO DRAINAGE SYS 65783 1999-0038 C EROSION 16043 SE 125THST EROSION AT BACK OF SIDEWALK 65781 .1999.0038 NDA EROSION 16043 SE 125TH ST EROSION AT BACK OF SIDEWALK 65781 1999-0038 R EROSION 16043 SE 125TH ST EROSION AT BACK OF SIDEWALK 65781 1999-0059 CL TREE 14334 156TH PL SE TREE FALL DAMAGED FENCE 65783 1999-0407 C EASEMENT 17525 SE 134THST REQUEST TO MOVE OR MAINTAIN DRNG 657C2 2OOO'()O90 C DUMPING 16043 SE 125TH ST UNAPPROveD USE OF COUNTY TRACT 65781 2000-0151 FCR 80LLARDS 16400 SE 128TH ST DEV INSTALLING PER SUP $-4-97 657Bl 2ooo'()282 FCS wao 16400 SE 128TH ST CONCERN REGARDING HABITAT AND FA 65781 200G-0322 WOC WOI 13612 160THAVE SE APPARENT IRON OXIDE BACTERIA IN DIS 657B2 .:If. 2001-0015 wac DDM 13400 158THAVE SE SEDIMENT, MANAURE DISCHARGE INTO 65782 2oo1.()149 wac WQ8 164THA SE &sEI28TH ST ADJACENT PRPERTY OWNER TO WETLA 65781 2001'()313 R BSR 15400 SE 133RDCT BIO SWAlE RETRO FIT. CATEGORY C 657A2 ~ 2001-0344 WQC WQO 13644 160THAVE SE IRON OXIDE DISCHARGE FROM PIPE OUT 65782 2002-0002 C OTA 16337 SE 131ST Pl APPARENT GROUNDWATER IMPACT TO S 65782 2002-0032 C DTA 13615 155THAVESE SHEET FLOW FROM ROADWAY IMPACT T 657A2 2002-0214 FI REM 15620 SE 128TH ST SWM#174: REQUEST TO REMEASURE: E 65781 2002-0214 FIR REM 15620 SE 128THST SWM#174: REOUESTTO REMEASURE: E 65781 • Page 3 of3 IIna I:mmtY Watar 8IIlIlaIld I11I1II __ -JJraIIi&UB SarvtalIIJCtIOII ~.I .. r Saarcb, Prinled; 51612002 8:20:34 AM '-bdlllhl 1YPB JYpa If PI'IIIIIIInI MlrllSor ....... ClllnllII 1Ina .... .... CD .,c.. 1979-0090 C DRNG 14406 162NDAVSE 65783 ~ 1980-0117 C ' DRNG 13405 158TH AVE SE, 657A2 '*"" 1982~20 C FLOG 13612 '160TH AVE SE 85782 1983-0368 C ORNG 15243 SE 132ND ST DRNG DITCHISE 132ND STI152ND AVE SE 857A2 1~367 C FLOG 14063 171STAVESE 8RIARWOOD AREA 65783 14: 1986-0378 C FLOG 13129 160THAVE SE BLOCKED DITCH 65762 198Hl430 C TRFD TO SWM-FMlRD DRNG. 657B2 1987-0430 ER OHlSWM D/v PLY. 857B2 1987-0430 NOA OH/SWM D/vPLY. 657B2 1987-0496 C DRNG 16423 SE 135TH ST SEEPAGE 65782 1987-0589 C SEE 87-0430 WILSON. 65782 1987-C593 C DRNG 16904 SE 136TH ST DRNG ESMT WATERIDITCH NEEDS MAINT 85782 1986-0J30 C ORNG 13419 168THAVE SE PIPING LEGAllSIZE OK 657C2 1988-0330 ER PIPE 13419 168THAVE SE SWM-DI DETD NO ROAD IMPACT 657C2 1988-0377 C DRNG 14250 161ST AVE SE HAZARDOUS POND OHfTO CM. 06110189 657B3 1988-0816 DRS 657C2 1988-0816 S3 657C2 , _)989-0020 C FILL 13400 168THAVE SE NEAR ORNG CHNL 65782 _~89-0263 C FILL 17045 SE 134TH ST NATURAL POND FILLED 657C2 1989-0263 ER FILL 17045 SE 134TH ST RECONTOUR LAND BALD LD AGENT 857C2 1989-0490 C PIPE 17356 SE 135TH ST UNDERSIZED PIPE INSTALLED AT DRIVE 657C2 1989-0490 E PIPE 17356 SE 135TH ST ANALYSIS REQUIRE BIGGER PIPE 6S7C2 1989-0663 C DRNG 13224 168THAVE SE DITCH CLEANINGILOSING YARD 65782 * 1989-0867 CL DRNG 13802 160THAVE SE Cl.#12735 DUE APRIL 65782 1990-0074 C FLOG 17356 SE 135TH ST REPLACING X PIPE 857C2 1990-0074 SR FLOG 17356 SE 135TH ST WATER IN YARD/STORM (iS7C2 1990-0392 C FLOG 17343 SE 133RD ST NO DRlVEWAY CULVERT INSTALLED 657C2 1990-0392 E FlOODING 17343 SE 133RD ST CHK STAT 8Y cMDT 657C2 1990-0392 ER FLOG 17343 SE 133RD ST IN PROPER PIPING 657C2 1990-0931 C DRNG 16423 SE 135TH ST SWAMP IN NEXT LOT/STORM 65782 1990-1358 C POND 17045 se 134TH ST PILES OF DEBRIS IN POND 657C2 1990-1420 C DRNG 17371 SE 133RD ST INFO TO RDSIORNG EASEMENT BACKS U 657C2 1991-0188 C DRNG 16400 SE 143RDPLACE BROKEN PIPE 657B3 1991-0188 E DRNG 143RD SE 164THAVESE 6ROKENPIPE 65783 1991-D688 C DRNG 15243 SE 132ND ST BACKYARD IS UNUSABLE 657A2 1991-0750 C FILL 13006 156THAVE SE IN DRAINAGE AREA 657A2 ~1991-1000 C DRAINAGE 13535 160THAVE SE MAINTAINENCE OF UNOPEN ROW. DITe 65782 el page 1013 MaY-21-02 04:25P Curtis ....... '-.... '-.......... 'OJ" ....... ' " " .... Schuster KINe COUN1Y DEPARTMENT WORKS SURFACE WATER ~AII!AGE¥eNT DIVISION. COMPLAINT INVESTIGATION REPORT NA'lUAEOF Ves 9-91- SE 136th St between 158th Av Sf and 160th Av SE is not a mainteined ri~ht of way. There is a dftch thru the right of way (approx 3' x 18" in depth) ,that appearS to overflow by a large maple tree mid way between lS8th and 16Oth. This overflow is to the south and into I treed area, Did not observe any hazard to coun~ property. Photo Ij Looks east from 158th shOwing road shOulder and culvert and ditch thru brush. Z Looks east at base of maple tree where drainage appears breached. 31 Looks west with maple tree upper right. 4/ Looks west from 160th along un opened right of way. Barrier visible-approx 60' from l60th. Cclmpl8lnant advised of actton possible Cclmplalnt Acllon Handled By l...G7ra"72 ~~ ;p-e7-,J?/ M~(I.!) Persona! Contact D ~'--'-A-'----~."'-"'. cb~;d:7t?~/ ~ ~ / .) .1 May-4:::.L-U4::: U"fo;C:::~"'" l..Ur1:.1S b • .;:,~nu~,",Id' ........ c..,j.. c..t...OO.:.6 J't'.t:'If":.l." ....... ', ... ~"" .... iloUL ~ _., ------ : Ur\OLvl I 1 I I I I ~ 'f .1 1 II 1 1 - .... of... ..... -.......... -... ____ ~ I' ............ ' I , !'~~.~ I ('o'f/r /hi' f(;! t J ! • J N 1 • • • MaY-2,l;:-:R~ . .2.~_: 2~P __ C;urt.~';;._G,z Schuster '-425-644-2694 ~.v_ KING COUNTY SURFACE WATER MAN-A-G-EM-ENT DMSt~:~~' ~7;;- DRAINAGE INVESTIGATION REPORT Page t: INVESTlGATlON"REQUEST Date; ~/' I q 5 OK'd by: -j-4 Type-=C~_ FlJaNo·95-0107 Received by; :1.1. .. ~ pM' flIaJnIy fat _nlng). lIII\II N ..,oc:. 7ZS·3t.?7 H ,.,.,. NAAIE:_----'K. ... ()'-!h~,._; _sw+.::=e:Lye, .. :.....l..(.!:LA.J:::..;;~fe.::.,..::5h=I!.~II~~I:.-:.· s..:.n.:.::CJ'i'~'e::.:):..... _ PHONe :l.:3 5 -I (, 97 ADDRESS; /51. If J S{ 13 B ~ e k CIty ______ Slate_ Zip. ___ _ l..Deallon of problem. l dlllerent: PI.lnam.: ~Dr;e W~ AdcI Other agenCiN 1rntoNod: S£ J!L~L parcel No. 1;'/$?O OliO 1/4 S T ~ Council Oillt.'£' Charge No: DfSf'OsmON: Tumid '1Ic--__ on ____ by __ _ IA. No: II BtoekNo' No FIeld Investigation Needed __ _ ~ Th.Sros: New '5'183 Old )s '" OR: @O fur1her ac;\1On recommended bec:aYSjt; _ Lead agenc:y lIaS been noIIf'.ecI: _--:~==,..".,.~~==",-___ """'-::::-;:===~==;-;:;;;:;; _ Problem has be .... corracted. _ No problem has bUn Id.nllllod. prior lrIVesligatlon addresses protI/em: 0rlvala problem -NDAP wiN nor r:onaidor Oer:eUS4l: water cr1gtna!8S on<e .nd/or on nolghboling parcel -Loca!Ion Is outside SWM syaa. DAte CI.OSED: .A.lJ/Ll..;!l,S: by: .-d f V1i/t.dP -SHI'IIo# . ,I ... Cl,,)'-' .... -V'"' ........ ,; '"'VI""" \,.our""" I;:" CI. ~ ..... IIU.::.\-C. "T ..... oJ-.... -r-r _'"':'.~:-;"' .... Sketc/l: , .... ,.L..L.'-VllJ'-.J·~I·" • ., .... .--... 11 KING COUNTY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT DIVISION DRAINAGE INVESTIGATION REPORT Page 2: FIELD INVESTIGAnO,,! . COMPLA1NT _107 KOHll r.tn-di.a1dl by Dou, DobkW OJl2·7-9S Meet wilh M:L KoI&r IiIIIIIk Ibout 1he draiJlqe CODCItIIS !bey -..1IaviD~ M:L Xohr npI.l ...... dial the ptQbIcm I; !ICtlI!\II.J • CIIMIIId MIa prWlcaI. TIle Nigllbor to tile,... of thcmis Clllllpllillillg alloW. au!!Ico IIIl4 paat!l-1DIIIIIs !lam dIeIl prapen:r. 'l'be DdEhim """"'" 10 thhlk this i& !be cause ibr bit ~ _10 bad< lip. 11oabr111D12D011he XoIIr,n 1O.IIMsIIpm b • poadole 4i>'enIioII of water. TIle \ICIIIII:IIDI emilie property III dn!i1110 Ihe wectlllWlfdS !Ills Ddsbbm-I explajned ID MIll. XoIa" 1l1li "'" cb!'11Iavc IllY IJIIIIIUI' 10 dcal willi ptII!IId _II1II tbIt will be. pdvatc pK>bkm bcI-=n the ~ Closet! aasite MoilS ~ 1Sl! nannL I LJ • 'i , ;..m ) • I I I & ..... ............ . " I •... . .. ... . 4 II :=OURWII --to MI~CI ft.OW. • ••••.• IrweS1tgated by ___________ _ I. I I (e (. .·td.Y-C.1.-VL v .... ;",..... l..Urc.l!5 u .. ';:'CnUSLer ... £.o-o ........ -'v:::r .... . ••• ........ _ ......... -........ , ". .-."' ....... ~ '1\}.::>O1 .... 10-. J.~ KIll. aciuNlY SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT DIVIS!S" . A!lJ1-'-'" nRAlNAGB INV'BSTIGATION Rm;'ORT . PIQ&·1:·.INVEmGAnoN·REQU~ . Type c., R.~alvedby. e.tmD ". D..: ;)41;>, ~~d.by: FIleNo. 17-30(0. • RtHlsAt«! hm: " (PlNR PIli'll PIoInlw"for &COMlnuJ. ' (0&)') ce-ol HAM!!:'"' f.1:n?fP"~ Gr.a.~ ;'". PHoNE :235-0IGt---,:--- ADDResS: 14'0% '$£ /"t'g~; CIti 'fi1a?/Ha ,~Ia ' 7Jpffaf I.ocai!on 01 problem,' If cIlIIeranl: . . . ,'/ '. \ , ' Plat"name: . /('c'1 L EA C..Rr3"~1 'LotNg: II, Block No": , OIher agencies lnYoIvecI: . "" . No ,FIeld InVestIgation Neaded __ ~_ I ., ..... , " ou.tr (Specify): "" -tlU7.fJ- , '. eJ .) " CompIai.,97.,06; Do. Grcr. 16046 SE H2"' Pl,lI<IIlOn lDvestipted bY'Sean Groom OD 01114197 ......... --.... -,.-.. ......... -" . ,~,""'Of roo"~ • .,:. ·4 •.. -__ -,_2£ =0=. ..... _ .... Doll Gle" IIu Iivt<I at the above ~ loc.iUon .Inte the early 60s (his bouse was =4 built in the dnclopmc11\). Swla<:e ...... ""Iet;ll""," be...,llocdb\s iii. pilip approxImalely 1M>,...... ago. At his own IlC)IOUO at tIIa! time 1M brcIuIbu bode hoe III to cut a IIrIlDage-dllCh alcmglllel>ack siele oflli5 property_ This cp<I\ trench provides ftlief duri&l8 moot preclpiladoll CYtIIt:I 5Ul!a.:e water _ amm411i. psopeny. Storm Water cloes b.-h the lOp ...... ioaalIy. The ditth 1IIIJ 'M'menlllljllllCl lID clean tile dlU:h ofclcbris tIIa! floats :IoWII aDd ~ flow. He....u.s!be 4ninasc dildl dudDs SImm events (he WU!I't amm4 far the last stann C'YCIII,) to cbsenoe Ju ftmctIoDIIiIr as • precaIIIioIo as 'IIClI. Be _1Iu: ~ 10 amdnne cIowu 160" Ave SI! ~d or a ~ syNm ~ hi, ..... ..aShbor's property. AppceIII!y, as ~ IIOtIII of his property bas u.cr-d addilioUI nDlGS'iI ~ imo the cbai1Iap aIoag 160" A'VI: 52 IIlCI ~ nms 10 his plOpCrt)'. 160 111 Avr: S.E. I,. 4~t)-o,+""-,o~,,+ "V. -'0' r.v';;" "'.0-' .L.!> Problem: DRAINAGE King Couaty Water Drainage IDvesdgatioo Report Patel: ImIesliptioD Requett OK'~ by: DIH . File N1IIpbe(§ Dlte 3-19-9. lIeteInd From: PbOD.: Day 425·171·9851 PboDe' Ewaial _____ _ AddnBs: 14312 160m AVE SE CIty: RENTON State:.lYA,. Zip: 98OS9 CALLmsT [! /MMJIU"uou.....,.., RqtJTWJ ProIMm: NEIGHBOR ON NORI1lSIDE m,J.EJ) PROPERTY WITH DIRT THEN PAVED OVER THE AREA. TBEIR V AIlD NOW SITES mGRER THAN THE HllJI'F'S AND ALL 01'11 THEIR DllAlNAG£ (S GOING ONTO THE BUFF PROPERTY (FIlONTYARD). NEED TA PLAT NAME: CEDAll PAlIK 5 AC TRACTS LOTNO:S BLOCK NO: ) PAST COMPLAINTS: OTHER.AGP.NCIES INVOLVED: NO FIELD lNVESTJGATION ItEQlJIRED _ I' , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , TO'B£,CO~W~J'Il~~~~ , , .. , . , , , 7: . '····,···1 ,! '.'.,.' ..•..•...••••••.•••.•••••••••. , •.. '" ..•••••..... _.. . I, .••• ,., •.•.•.•.•.•.• ;-= .' t •• % SE 514 T23 R 5 PertelNumber 1451500113 Kroll 'Thomas Bros.: Ne.. 65793 ---Old J5F6 ~-- BIIin: LCR C01lD~1I Dislric:t 12 R~ CIII2eIl DOtUIed OIl 3·25091 By. I'll.... Leaor 111 p....... X CLOw) flU ONsm AS A PR1vATBPROIILEM. HUFF LIVES IN A OOu.IlllPRESSIDN WITH NO DRAINAGE TO ItEUEVE HEll WATBRPROBU!MS. I SUOOUTED INSTAUJNQ A DRYWELL TO HELP Wl'm HER. PROBLEMS OR INSTALL .\ SUMP PUMP TO DRAIN THE WAll!Il TO A NEIGHBORING PROPER-TV WITH DltAINAGE. FlLECLOSED. Dtlpoaltloa: l\Imed to 011 --1--1 __ IIY Oil: No I\lrt1Itr aClicm .....,lMIeIIded becauu: __ Lead agency has been aorificc!: _____ _ _ Pmh1ctn has bcIea c~, _ No problem has beea Identified. _ Prior inWlsti&ation addresses problem: See III •• ----_X_ PrIvate Pnlblem. NJ)AP wI1I DOtCOllJidu -"_ Wille: OIislDm5 oada: andfor on Mi&bboring pan:.L _ Loeatlon is outside WLJU> Service Area. _ Other (Sp"ify): DATE CLOSED: '_-,, __ BY: ______ _ KingCoUDty DepartllatDt of Natural Resoareu Wiler aDd Laad a-. ..... »Molo. LocaJ ))nIDI,. SeNlHt UDII ............... wo ......... • IV.""'!;>' Rcccive<I 3-19-9& Asaipe4 Dub l-lS-9B CiIy llENTON S_ WA Zip 91059 R.eporID4Ic 4-1-98 PIIcao: Day 4l5-Z71-98S2 PIIoDc; B_iIIg Thomas Bro •• 65711) STR $ 14-23-5 Facility' hlwstIpdaa PIlot J-25-98 Pon;ol1l14'7S001lJ DIY. , Plat NIIDC: J cal1e4 011 3-2H.' to map ID Ipplj"Ii'MWtlD IDYtsIiplllM campiaiDt. Pam ~1DiItIiDI at II iIII1lha1l1>OJ11i11&. I mot widlPIDI 01_ bGmo 10 dIsc:UU !be c_*!wI tile DCipbors Ii1liD; III th')Iard for a aew 1nIIIor. I explallled 10 Pam !hal JM Uv .. in a smaU depI"" IIIaIIw DO drainap mmres 10 dIIlIIlIIt _ eo tI:Io mer draiDap:. The IIIlipbor Iw 80f ImIlcea lAY codes for III'BdIDi ODd 1bo 1rSiIar ... ~ .Ipod off. I.aid Ibat l....ald SIIlII. cop)' or a dry .... n d...ut ...... ..",.,.....,..Iist. File Closed OIIal1o ~ Iba __ fordlo~ \ \ t ~ \ / HUFF 14312160lH AVE SE t ---------------------------------- • May-21-0Z 04:31P curt1s G. Schus~er 4~o-o~~-£o~~ : n .~--.----.... ....... .. .... --. I _ i~':'o() KlNG COUNTY WATI:R'~ LAND REsotlitEsDMSloN DRAINAGE INvEsTIGATION REpORT r ...... ..... _ ........ A .r7"'~ /4/'/44""/C.#·7"/';v c::,e> ~ O"N~~ /"A/r-rH '/IV~ltF t::L/-'V7d"/ IF /?1l>~ Is ~.,.-p d'y 2~rJ5"""~K . . . Plat_: Lot No: BloclcNo: OIlIer BasiDta... Cowell District ..lJ:.. CbargeNo. ______ _ WI\. ... f.C DIIPOSmON: Turned to _ on ( ( by_ OR: No tunber action mommended because: L 1Aad ..... cyllas_~: ,)DICi (."PcC 6JBJ'Crt!!?#S7UT _ Problem has been eomt-ted. _ No problem bas been Id""dflecJ. _ Prior investigation addresses probl .... : _ Private problem· NDAP win IIOC GOnaidor tJooavIo; _~Wllor originates ensile 1IId10l'0II neigbboring parcel. _~Localion is olZtSlde ~::ice Area. DATE CLOSED, { ,U, 01 B)': __ ~ HS7 ....... __ ~ pp,.-O J9P&S' SEU'ILE" __ _ .' KING COUNTY DRAINAGE INVESTIGATION REPORT . FI!LD INV!SnGA.TJON ADDIU!SS: 134410 158tia An BE PHONE: 425-271-6G3 , .... ' .. ..:. KROLL PAOE:811 TH. BROtH: 6S7Bl MAlNT. DIVISION:H4 DATE: Ol-ll .. l INl'IlAL.S:MAG VUitId &ite an OI-ll..ol.l.MrIotlc _...-. atdw lb •. n.n i> 110 visible ycsemdan In tbe1e~ area wh«. tbe IMSIO<:Jc is kept. AlIo DlJItd equipm_ tracb tlwuahout tIac ...... 0Dd teBelll8 BWVIaII _.d iDJide bced lite&. lI.omo1f Crom the cpen field Is altaring die opcII JUddcle cIIrda$ ""'1118 vUiI>l.1IlIbi<Il1y ill clio Immediale _ &lid _ __ There,.... put eaib","""",' on 1111> site eoII41IGIiOd in die _or IIIOIlIbs a!2000, II that tlmollO vtoJa_ was II<rmDincd. I ~ wilh LaurIc Clinton 011 01-16-01 al>out dsIs site ODd IhowecI her pbOCDjr.ll'M Dfthe C1Jma~ .ilIiIIion. Sh • ..ud wilh 110 YO£CI8IiaD I\W wOCll~ 1>0 •• onfilullllml ..... eo!. pulIR. I.outjo IIIQaICd Ibis 1"10 _ 'l"aIJJy I!nr, after a lIoted vioJatiOll wo COII!4 <Dib= the LI..,.,.,ck Mmegoma" OrdiD ...... lhb wOUld teqUire lhe propeny OWIIM lCO set UJt a fuIII pi ... md 'ollow !he requtremeau outJmod by lb. LIvestock Management 0rdlD1IIlCC. ( 13405 t ~. co: S NTS ) e .~a. 8\ :.!I 13404 I • .-J f '" -0 ,. ~ ) --~ 0) \ r .~ ., 1 \ t ,,' / ( ~~ ~~) 13414 . \ .... ... <J ! '\ ) [ I I\osiclen .. ~ 13SII ~ 1342l 13~27 ! t ~'t ___ --:::::: ~ ........ --.------....... -. . Sf UUb Sf .......... -.... -.-, --_ . . , ..... ..;'o.,j, , ........... .... PllUaame: LoINo: BloekNo: P.irc:elNo. tl'tr2S'"tX;(2fo Kroll ~ t/ ThBros: New h:s7tJ~ Basin I-CR. Council Districtt2-Charge No. ______ _ llU'DNIB! Citizen 1I000tied 011 fi{o7/~, by: .,/ phoue _ Ictter _ j" penon I""~J~ /" ,:;;.~ . .,.~ ~ .~'f'!: v.>/c.. QU~'" ~ WA1>~ I~t-I oAQ!' fl\1090'~"" ~/~1~~PLC~L."'t:o w~ DISPOSITION: Tumcdto_ on I I by_ OR; Nofurtheractionrec:ommondedbeca>lse: _ Lead A8"fIC)' '-beea notIfIad:,=-::----::-:--:---;---;-;.· --:;;:-7'-~~-:--""7"-:-:---:-:---_:_:_ PrWlcm bas been ~ ~ No problem bas bean Idco1if!ed. _ Prior In_tlption addn:ssu problem: SUFlUIl _ Private ptObtem -NDAP will DOtCOllliclerl>ocauSe: --- Watcrorlp,atca ""'1f4:.?j;.;l neigbboringpucel. ---Pliler (Specify): DATE CLOSED: '/ r,.l.. (C)( By: fJO lt4tJ LJI _e Ma:, COIIIpIainINo.: :1001-0334 mVeftirlted by: vttJil J>aeampua DET~ OF INVBSnGAnO)il • -A. 4i1::!:)-o~"-'::'C!:l'" '''''''''''-.1' N ..... : )taII Bo....., Date: SI30101 n $' 1 wtIIl ... dIe raIdoDce ofMn. 1_:Bowen on ~13OI01 at 7:45AM. She dfttted me to tile next MShbor. I proceeded ID tile sino ottbe COIIIpIalll1I11d & III illveaiSltion. Mrs. Bo,...., WQIIts 10 kDDw ifdle next 1IOIibHt'.pIpo lIIII ... dcu ... ,...to!lul clit<b fromlbobolU.1wl1111ron oxide. I tIlOk aphompapb ottlle otnIClIDd walked _ !lui nea. No body ..... homt> IIwtaa rhe iIlvettipCion. lb. bo ... 50.",. 10 be boiq rcoYOIOd, 00IIItr0>Ctias> cIobris .... ,-.I.U lIWIId!be vkinlly. I could OOIocc",. tile whole )IIopcrIy 110 .... 110 body .... ""-. ne complaizal wu tho ,_II1II1 invcoIi;lIed last year. Itefor to complaim No. 2000-0322 (Platt). IlEFIiJl ro COMPLAOONO. 2000-0322 .--------------------------------------------------, \ TASKS MITIGATION OF EXISTING OR POTENTIAL PROBLEMS TASK 5 -MITIGATION OF EXISTING OR POTENTIAL PROBLEMS From field inspection of the downstream drainage system and a review of the King County drainage complaints, there does not appear to be any significant capacity or erosion problems in the downstream drainage system within the study area. As part of the proposed development of the Hamilton Place Subdivision, the stormwater management system will be designed in accordance with the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual utilizing the Level n flow control standard and the basic water quality treatment standard as recommended for this area. With the proposed water quantity control and water quality control mitigations, the project should not have any measurable impacts on the downstream drainage system. • • 3.2 Supplemental Levell Downstream Analsyis • II() Zt> SUPPLEMENTAL LEVEL I DOWNSTREAM DRAINAGE ANALYSIS FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT OF HAMILTON PLACE LOCATED ALONG WEST SIDE OF 160m A VENUE SOUTHEAST NEAR THE INTERSECTION OF SOUTHEAST 134TH STREET KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON OCTOBER 24, 2002 R15LJt5W Dbe. 3, 'ZOOZ- • As requested in the plat screening transmittal letter dated July 15, 2002, this supplemental Level I Downstream Drainage Analysis has been prepared to respond to the additional infonnation requested by King County. The additional infonnation requested is as follows: I. King County's review of the Levell Downstream Drainage Analysis indicates that there appears to be at least two subbasins on the site that combine into one drainage facility at post development conditions. If so, this condition wonld require a drainage adjustment from Core Requirement No. I of the 1998 King County Drainage Manual. 2. King County requests that the downstream drainage complaint at 13814 I 60th Avenue Southeast, as well as other complaints shown in the Evendell Level I Drainage Analysis, be evaluated as necessary for the plat of Hamilton Place. 3. King County requests that alternatives to the discharge proposed into the wetland be evaluated, and incorporate a level spreader dispersion system into the conceptual drainage plan. In response to comment No.1, it is our opinion that the site contains only one subbasin which drains to the downstream drainage system. However, a portion of the site sheetflows across property directly to the south of the site, prior to entering the downstream system which consists of an open-<litch and culvert system along the east side of 158 th Avenue Southeast. Since these flows will be conveyed to the detention fucility located at the southwest corner of the project site in the developed conditions, and will therefore, no longer sheet flow across the adjacent property to the south, King County considers this a diversion. Therefore, a drainage adjustment has been prepared to address this condition. Included in the drainage adjustment is a copy of a portion of the Upstream/Downstream Tributary Area Map indicating the portion of the site which currently sheettlows across the southerly property prior to discharging into the I 58th Avenue Southeast system. in response to comment No.2, additional information has been obtained from King County to evaluate the drainage complaint at 13814 160th Avenue Southeast. Since this complaint was identified as a citizen request, this infonnation was not previously available. In addition to this document, two other claims, both located at 14028 160th Avenue Southeast, were obtained from King County. A summary of these claims and citizen action requests are summarized below. Citizen Action Reqnest from Brett Bowden Address: 13814160" Avenue Southeast Date: 10/05/99 This citizen action request indicates that King County was' requested to clean a ditch, presumably in front of Bowden's residence. The document indicates that King County mowed the slope of the ditch and the action was closed on 812312000. Citizen Action Request from Brett Bowden Address: 13814 160'· Avenue Southeast Date: 12/13/2001 This citizen action request indicates that King County was requested to address a drainage ditch which was plugged presumably adjacent to the resident's home. The document indicates that King County Vectored and flushed the system, and the action was closed on 121141200 I. Claim No. 21860 Claimant: Marshal M. Brenden address: 14028 160'· Ave. SE Date: 1/25/97 This claim indicates that King County Maintenance DivisillO had been cleaning, lining and improving the drainage ditches on both sides of I 60th Avenue Southeast above the claimants property, and that these improvements caused the drainage water to be diverted to the culvert in frout of the claimants property and flooded the lower floor of the home. The claim also states that King County and/or others diverted all waters draining on the west side of 160th Avenue Southeast by the use of a culvert constructed under the roadway to the east side of 160" Avenue Southeast, thereby increasing the stormwater in the east ditch. King County's response to this claim dated September II, 1998, states that King County staffdid not locate a plugged pipe and indicated that there was, apparently, too much water flowing through the driveway culvert to handle the heavy flows. King County also indicates that the claimant's property is located below the road with no provisions to address possible overflow of the roadside ditch. King County's recommendation was to deny the claim since the ditch cleaning and improvements completed by King County was north of the claimant's property, and none of the activities altered water flows. King County also indicated that the IS-inch drainage culvert along the front of Brenden's property did not have a history of previous or subsequent problems at this location. King County also indicates that the drainage system on 160th Avenue Sontheast is being reevaluated for possible improvements. Claim No. 31249 Claimant: Chad L. Meyers Address: 14028 160th Avenue Southeast Date: 1129/02 This claim by Chad L. Meyers states that the ditch/drain on the county maintained road overflowed and flooded the garage and lower level of the residence. The claimant provides a two- page summary of telephone calls and discussions with King County requesting assistance in resolving the flooding problem. Photographs of flooded areas of the home are also included in the claim. King County's March 27, 2002, response to the claim reconunends that the claim be denied. King County staff's investigatiou confirms that installation of the 18-inch enclosed drainage • system extending across the frontage of the claimant's property appeared to have been constructed without any valid right-{)f-way use permits authorizing installation of the pipe. King County staff indicates that the pipe is most likely undersized and cannot handle flows from heavy storm events. King County indicates that they recommended to Mr. Meyers that he check his purchase paperwork to determine if the known flooding problem was disclosed. The response indicates that county engineering staff have reviewed the site, assigned tracking no. (4-1032) to the project, and are currently designing an upgraded system to correct the problem created by the improper pipe installation. In summary, the citizen action requests by Bret Bowden included minor maintenance work wbich appears to have been completed by King County as requested by the request forms. The claims by Brenden and Meyers, dated 1996 and 2001, were claims of an overflowing ditch or plugged culvert located at the same residence. The letters from King County indicate that these claims were denied since King County did not have any responsibility or liability. The information also indicates that the existing 18-inch drainage culvert in front of the claimant's property was apparently installed without any permits, and appeared to be undersized for the flow. King County's March 27, 2002, letter also indicates that King County is currently designing an upgraded system to correct the problem created by the improper pipe installation. Based on the above information, it appears that this problem will be or has been corrected by King County. The recently completed Level 3 downstream drainage analysis for Evendell Plat was also reviewed as part of this supplemental study. The results of this analysis indicate that several culverts in the ditch downstream of the site along 160'" ave s.e.may need to be upsized as mitigation for development of the Evendell Plat or level 3 flow control may be needed. In response to comment No.3, the Conceptual Drainage Plan has been revised to incorporate a level spreader/dispersion system at the outlet of the stormwater facility to more evenly discharge drainage flows into the existing wetland as requested by King County. Included in this report are copies of the citizen action requests and claims summarized above. Conclusion and Recommendation Based on the results of the supplemental downstream drainage analysis and review of the Level 3 downstream analysis completed for the Evendell Plat, it has been confirmed that some downstream flooding has occurred along 160'" ave s. due to undersized culverts at several locations. To mitigate for this downstream drainage problem which is considered a severe flooding problem (Type 3), the applicant proposes to either upsize the undersized culverts along 160'" ave s. or share in the cost of upsizing the culverts with the developer of the Evendell plat. Another option,a1though not proposed at this time, would be to provide Level 3 flow control for the project. ~::-~~g ~~:nt)' Department Qf Transpo~ati~n ! Citizen Action Request Form Requesttaken via: P (P)hone (R)adio (O)n-VieW (F)ax By: MCDONALD Caller Name: BOWDEN, BRET Caller Address: 160 AV SE @13814 Location: 160AVSE@13814 Request Details: CLEAN DITCH Request forwarded to: PU 004 0111: 4 Dispatched to: Above this line for Office Use Initial Investigation by: CAMPBElL '----findings Action-Taken:-StOPE MOWE[t-· Task Completed: 262 Responding Pit SUMMIT Second Investigation by: Action Taken: Retar'd to: Task Completed: Contact Log: I 1016/99 PM CONTACTED CITIZEN Time Refd: Req. Type: 0 RPU Request Type: Request No. 99-004152 Request Date: 10105/1999 RequestTime: 900 Day Phone: (425)255-6152 Other: Belowthis line for Field Use Investigation Date: 10/0511999 or Work Scheduled: Date Refs: Dale Reclld: Date Closed: 08/23/2000 Caller contacted by: I (P) Phone (I) In person (N) Note or letter lUI Unable to contact Type of Request Choices A. AbandonedlCom'l. Vehicle G. GuardralilFence Damage B. U01lty Inspection H. Spit Cleanup (Gene"") C. ConlJacllOveflay Issues I. Inquiries RE: Mainl Activities D. Drainage J. Spray AppHcallon E. Debris on Roadway K. Washout Repalr/S11de Removal F. Flooding Properly L Vegetation Control (Mow, Brosh, ele.) M.11egat Use of RIW N. Shoulder Maintenance O. Mise. Requests P.Pothole C. SidewalklCurb Maint R Repai' StreellPaving s. Street MalnJSweep T. TrasM..itter on R1W U. Sncw/lce V.Wals on RoadIFIooding W. lid MiSSing (CIB UIiI.) X. DItching Y. Bridge Isou .. • • KIng County Depa~ent of Tr~nspo~ion Citizen Action Request Form Request laken via: P (P)hone (R)adio (O)n-Voew (F)ax By: GALLARDO _) Caller Name: 1I0WI;)EN,IIRET Caller Address: 160 AV SE@13814 Location: 160 AV SE ~13814 Request Details: DRAINAGE DITCH PLUGGED ;;;----- Request forwarded to: PU 004 DIV: 4 Dispalched to: ;RONIN Above this rma for Office Use Time Refd:1633 In~iallnvestigation by: CRONIN Req. Type: 0 Findin911-ACflOll Taken:' VACTORED& FLUSHED SYSTEM Task Completed: 241 Refer'd to: RPU Responding pn: SUMMIT Second Investigation by: Action Taken: Task Completed: Request Type: Contact Log: Request No. 01-005339 Request Dale: 1211312001 Request Time: 1633 Day Phone: (425)793-7783 Other: Below 111m nne lor Field Use Investigation Date: 1211312001 or Work Scheduled: I Date Refs: Date Recv'd: Dale Closed: 1211412001 Caller contacted by: U (PI Phone (II In person (NI Nole or leiter lUI Unable to cC)ntact Type of Request Choices A. AbandonedlCom'L Vehicle G. GuardralllFence Damage B. Ulifity Inspect.., H. Spil Cleanup (Gen.ra~ C. ContractlOvertay issues I. tnquJries RE: Maint ActMties D. Drainage J. Spray AppIJeatjon E. Debris on Roa<tNay K. Washout Repal~Slide Removal F. FlOOding PrOperty l. Vegetation Conlml (MoW, Brush. etc.) • M. llegal Use 01 RIW N. Shoulder Maintenance O. Misc. Requests P.PothoIe Q. SideWalkJCurb Malnl R. Repa~ SlreellPaving . S. S_Maln.lS_ T. TrashIlIuer on RIW U. SnowlJce V. Water on RoadIFIoodJng W. Lid Missing (CIB UIil) X. Ditching Y. Bridge Issues . ~, .. ~ ( e September) 1, 1998 TO: FM: , RE: i Karen Graham, Claims Officer, Office of Risk Management Harold S{~i' Manager, Road Services Division Claim: 21860/Claimant: Marshall M. BrendenfAmount: $5.505.00 Thank you for your February 5, 1997 memorandum requesting comments and a recorrunendation concerning the above-referenced claim ,filed against !(jng County. This claimant alleges damage to:various pieces of personal property due to !(jng County Maintenance cleaning, piping and othelWise improving the drainage ditches on both sides of 160'" Avenue Southeast, above his prbperty at #14028. This work caused the drainage water to be diverted to the culvert at his prbperty site rather than some waters to be absorbed by properties above his. The flooding infident reportedly occurred on December 31, 1996, between 8:00 p.m. and 10:00 p.m., My staff has reviewed this claim and the findings are as follows: I I Incident Confirmation: The incident was confirmed by Road Services, Maintenance Division Four personnel who responded the same day to a report ofplugged drains. Staff did not located a plugged pipe apparently there was just too much water for the pipe. Also again on January 2,1997 County forces observed one-foot plus of water In the Brenden residence and a driveway culvert that could not handle the heavy flows. ' Damage ConfirmatIon: King County employees did not assess damages to the property. The claimant's is located below the road with no provisions to address .R,9ssible ovpf1e ; o~'" tIlt 1 oadsid; ditch. Recommendation: I recommend denying payment of this claim. Although King County has done ditch cleaning, some installation of drainage pipe and other, improvements to drainage ditches on 160~ Avenue Southeast, this work was a considerable distance north of the claimant's property and none of these activities altered, water flows. Staff did not confirm the claimant's allegations of a plugged pipe inlet. There is an 18-inch diameter culvert pipe along the front of the Brenden property and there is no history of previous or subsequent problems at this site . • • , I I Karen Graham I September 11, 19~8 Page Two . Second Party Liability: None. Staff report there was just too much water for the system to handle during the storm of December 31, 1996. The event included snow and ice melt concurrent with the rainfall. , Reinedial Action: The drainage system on 160~ Avenue Southeast is being reevaluate1 for possible improvements. I Hold Harmless Agreement: None known, i I If you have any questions concerning these findings, please contact Field Engineer Bill o 'Connor at 296·8147. HST:WEO:le cc: Roderick E. Matsuno, Maintenance Operations Manager Bill O'Connor, Field Engineer . I '. 1 ® Klng COUhty Road Strvice Dh15iOD Department ofTca.spal Road Maintenance Sect 155 Monroe Ave NE Renton, WA 98056-415 September 10, 1991 TO: Harold Tanigu( FR: Roderick Matsi RE: "onlTael C750 Attached is Change C Contracting Camp an) change does nOI resul required because the ( building permit applic; space provided and rei If you have any questi< d Cc: Kathy Brown, I Jon Cassidy, Su • • KIng County Road Services DIvision Department ofTh'an!lporta,lIon 201 SouthJawon Street Seattle. WA 98104-3856 FAX Transmittal Cover Sheet Road . Maintenance . FAX (206) 296:.s198 . I~ III ~~nm' ~: ~;:l;.,'it:,,,, _____ _ :'-=--=-~-=-~~::-=~::;~IC;;=:;=-:,--_. -=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--= F_'AX_#"",=d.~o----,(p:::---::-;)c-:-:-q~fo_-_~013 Date (Name) (Division (S9Ction I Unit) Transmitted By. __ --,-"-"""""""Azi'--~A-:-t"" ..... "'"""-,-----Telephone (206) 296-8100 (Name) Additional Comments CJJA----'-· X----,.i----rcg;-. -. -~--,--... -~-. I &¥ ........ "' ......... 1-, ~I\A ,",UV DO' ,o,~., •. s. WEBB ~DZ 101181O:l12:02:1:l 212 • • • , ,j ~ i .: .. ,,:," KING COUNTY.WA~I-UNGTON CLAIM FORDAMiiGES ClAIM (21860 NOTICE: No damages can be' paid 'ay King County unless a Cl,aim complying,->th Washirglon Stale Law'. presented to Ihe King County Council. Aner filing claim, please direcl, all 'queslions tO,'the Office of Ril;t( Management ai, (206) 296-7432, INSTRUCTIONS: 1)Cmnplete.form, giving sp'eCif'ic d~tail6 ab:out your damage or loss. Inplude dat~s: urnes ond witnesses, Z)Sign and have the (ormriolarized, 3)Return form 10 KingCouillyClerk o(the Counel., Rxm 403, King County Courthouse. Seatlle. WA ,98104, ' , INAME Ili/qr,)'AA-/{ '111,&e1/) ("tV) f~. (First, middle. last or business name) ADDRESS(jdd/ /(!zJ dV. s. <. -t;1f lrrA?td?J' OS Y (home or b!",:sl SS) Include city, &ta.lQ and zIp . ~ BUSINEflS PHONE01 a C)J71-rflo?( HOME r" {), , PHONE:\o<'d~ 'I.71-r.?1 2 1 MESSAGE PHONE:, _____ _ IADDRESS SIX MONTrlS BEFORE LOSS/ACCIDSNT' £ !OCCURRED: 10 z.f ~,/to Sf~, ~-v L . InclurJ. ci1Y,.stale and zJp I' "/.lUI / 8 10 j} '~ +-r'---~ IDATE OF ACCIDENT "'I ?" TIME OF ACCIDENT -(, r i11 -AMOUNT ClAIM;:D ~.,,£~- ILOCATION LOSS/ACCiDENT t'i02! /tlJ s:c-~ 4-<1' t,'~ , IDESCR, IPTION OF D;JAILS (~cribe how the Iosslincidenl oc::urredi: $y. tltCtd:'" Nr ;J. , ' I ~; z: -" . . --~~=------=-=~-~~~----~-'~----------~-~-=~l»~~~O-~--,-======-,=,.,..,=-==-c.,.....--,--......,...,........,.,....C"""-~-----__ -cc-""g~: ~:t;;",-ID.... ____ • KING COUNTY'S INVOLVE lENT (If possible, idenlify the employee Of department in~ i~e(') incident): <c e-vt" g " -<'" -'m aP; ~ ~ !i " n' !PROPERTY DAMAGE {Please describe the'value and extent of damage to your home, auiomoblte, 01"----.-; ,persona! pro fly. Attach estimates, bills or wt".atever documentallon of damages ~uu mif . ; I ~: ' ,--- ".... .4 mOe 0 ..... ,,;r ,?J _ Z',)(,trJ! d t. .' .'" "'-.. , ;.Ie r!1A '" ; ~ __ --4P4!L y jt;::;:~;tl!!. ~_ ~. INJURY (If '{'::.U 'Nere init..!~~. pJea~e descrihe in r'JiI): . Alw .. _-"'tV.'..", #1=(r1i"r t':;-----'-; r. r : !~------------------------------------~----~-. Identift ph~ician(6) or any other medical professional(s) involved: __ ..i.IV~,cJil>:/..!.. ___ -'-______ - I----------------------~-~---~-----~-------; 1-:;-;:-;:=.-;;;;;-;;;-:====:-=:::::--r!"7!""'-------..::..--, .. ----Are YOU ~till recer--itlg medicallreatment?:· tV, fJ. I swear enls Is a true aM aeeur.te stateMent' $0801 /J//.r 7 dY/./7', /? ' ":ffAt-. ~~~Ul?r~""./_=_ Sigfiatu(e of Claimant I RIB ~ANDSWORN~METHIS ,ffJ-fhD~YOF ! i I I I I I I i • I I I I I PROPERTY DAMAGE 35.00 Hair dryer 95:00 vac.uum cleaner 950.00 Carpet anrl pad 150.00 Removal 600.00 Doll House 40.00 Dog bed 225.00 two Ninlendos 100.00 Stereo cabinet 800.00 Hideabed 7S0.00 COllch 350.00 Recliner 250.00 Slcreo speakers 200.00 coffee lable 175.00 Picture frames 185.00 Wicker chair 450,00 Ihree d(>or, at 150.00 each 100.00 Rug cleaner·renla' 50.00' Rug ran rcnlal -5 days S5,50S.00'Total COSIS Br~i}den ciaim" .J\Uachment C . January 18,:1997 ',-i' '.' "'I1te Iota I amount docs not include hidden charges such as mildew or waler damages' fO the walls orl:: ,. insulmioll. ~. Ii. -"-., " : '. ,";' , /: ------------ King County lnvolvemellt: Bicnaen dai;" Attachment B j,\ilUary 18, 1997 ~~ ~; : ':, ". ~; :~ ,',; . . . " ", ," '. ,,:: King CUllnty Mainlenance over a period ofthiee montJis have been:Cleanitig; linmg'an-doihelWise ii~ iinproYingthe drainage ditches on both sides of I60Smib<)ve my ptOpenysiaftlng "ia pomtfrom ~t 130lh Slreel. . 11,ese improvements a.nd cleaning was eXlen.dedtoappro;;imalel}':r~ioCk·North· ofnir pmpcrty. Thl$ acflOn cau!\cd Ihe dralilage water-to be all dIVerted fo the-culv~r( at my property slte r~dlt:~r .' '.' ~, Ihan some waters be absorbed by properties above·mine: . r . -'.. /': Immedialely North of my site Ihe Counly'andlor others diverted 'all w~lers dniiniilg'oiithe''wes! $id~lof 160 SIl by the usc of a CUIYerl under Ihe roadway 10 Ihe Easl side of f60'SEr-theiebj' douDling'lht w.te~;yolume im~nedHllely above my home sUe. 'I hIS aCIIOIl'aiong whh ditcli nnprovellle~.tsto ~e'Nonband thei~ebris buildup In the d,tch next 10 my home caused an overOow of Ihe culvert area,and directly ,caused my,.hollse to be deluged wilh drainage w.'er. I believe Ihe County erred iniinproving Ihe dniinage areas abo-!~ my site ralher rhan below my sile. This left only my house to 'contain IheexceSS' flolV of water. f; I have included photographs to help you better understand the CountY's negligence in Ihis mntter. If ~ Photo No. I DrivewaY.1 13815 160 SE-shows drain Clllven and volunie orwaler on'WEST side·of 160 SB Photo No_ 2 DJ';,inftge and culvcrl WEST side of 160 SE Pholo NO.3 Dmillage of waler in dilch on WF_~T side of 160 SE and the point where this drainage is directly closed uffand rOllled 10 Ihe EAST side of 160 SE and directly feeds this water through'lny culvert. . " Photo NO.·1 ( Drainage on EAST side of 160 Sf and immediately prior to conversion ofwalers see Photo. No.3': Photo No.5 .. Drainage dilch on EAST side where walers from bOlh EAST and WEST ditches were divened byi1he County direclfy above my residence. r f!: 1: ~ Pholo No.6 Drain ctllvert from WEST ditch to EAST ditch. l ;l: PhOlo No.7) EAST ditch directly North of my residence and after Ihe conversion of both WEST and EAST drn~age dlH:hes into one dramagc di1ch. ' f " ;:' Pholo NO.8 r' West side of 160 SE (across the street from my home). Although thereis'a culvert on the South tHe culvert ends or is pltlgged before it meelS the drain walers on Ihe WEST side of 160 SE: ,Ii , r . ,." . ;: i " . ',' : 'i ·::i: " ,. ,. ; ~. "L '.' ) "','. 't', .,:"Y 1: • w' 'i· · .. ! .: ..... . i/(!, •• j .... ,' • ... ,:. ;, . . ', . ....... . ·'!I:':{.::·' ,. '.,. , ... t· ;' • . : •... ,. ,. ~ .. . ' . . : . . " .... ;, : , ... ; ... \ . . 'I~ •. ; .;, .. , .;':~\ .. . ::).:." '" ':.' "J ,~::'~i'!/::;'; ,,",,\,r"'" .... \ , ,'.'"',' -:.-', <: .. -, '.~ .. :, '''., ", .. . , . ,',;- '.' " L " '.:.:/.'. , .. ,' . ""';, .. , ;i,:,' ,,'. '. '. ;'.:': . ''':';J:'~I .. ' , , ...... . ,; : r", '~: : .. '", .. , .. ' Brenden claim Attachment A' Janu.1'Y, J 8, 1997 Description of details: (see aUachment A) '.: e, l': i< , ' . . ~: Loss resulted from approximately a foot or so'ofwater enteringtlie groundfl<ior area ofinyhome lil'I4028 . , " " "', I·, 160 Avenue SE and severely damaging or destroying th';cont.fits ofilieHyii'g'lire;\"i,fmy home. The water w.s .he result of an overflow from ,the rondsideditches and'it,drainage colv.noil.' 160' SE c:/;'sed by I. overgrow.h of vegetation 2. debris in the ditch iinmediaiely adjaceni to my' home 'and 3: excessjv~\valer droin'gc routed 10 the ditch adjacent 10 my home. by the Couflli ;;, !;: 1:; ,,' :.' ; .. '.', . :,' . -; . j"' ·.'1'-;: ":~' L . :-,.',:-, -:~'-' .•. ,"i" , . . ..... -.. ,' ";;:.; , f:: .;~ . , . ... " . ,,'~,. ., ", "., . , -: " 'r.. . ~ f '\ i j ,~-,1f' : 0 .r·'~"'''' ,;.~~, ' ~" . / ";..;~;.:-1':' "" ,.' ' . I> ' 0" "1 ~'I> ",' . " , • : .' I j '" 1 ,I>' i § i , • j 0 , I i <I'· • ' ' · , . · '. , . · . • .. , " I '. :.~ ::1: -'" . . ; ':" ;.; ': !.: "', ., .. ..: .' .:;:';1 '. ~ .,. i; ";.1 .",': : " t.':".:" '\>.::" ,.,.,:,: .: '0:' <c' , .:: :~~:: :~.I:·.i.:·~·: ·,I< .. ··~: ·";"il,,' ';'': .' :. ;:!:. .... :.!. ; .. "; .. "'k-,:.,~. J .. -'. .J. King County Road Services Division Department of Transportation 201 South Jackson Seattle, WA 98104·2637 March 27,2002 TO: Robert Hansen, Claims Officer, Office of Risk Management FM: Linda Dougherty, Manager, Road SelVices Division RE: Claim: 31249/Claimant: Chad L Meyers IAmount: $6.402.61 Thank you for your February 12,2002 email requesting comments and a recommendation concerning the above-referenced claim filed against King County. The claimant alleges . County responsibility for flooding damage to the garage and lower level of a residence located at 14028 160th Avenue Southeast, which occurred on November 14, 2001 and again on December 13, 2001 between 8:00 AM and 5:00 PM. My staff has reviewed this claim and provides the following findings: Incident Confirmation: A query of the Citizen Action Request database produced CAR 01- 005097, received from the claimant on November 30,2001 at 2:55 PM, which stated "ditch plugged from last rain, had water in basement." CAR 01-005343 and 01-5405, which were received on December 13th and 14th also confirmed the incident. Damage Confirmation: Roads staff did not confirm damage to the Meyers' residence. Used sandbags were, however, located on the north edge of the property, which would indicate a flooding problem. Recommendation: Staff recommends this claim be denied. Roads staff believes there is no liability on the part of King County. Second Party Liability: Please note Brenden Marshall, Jr. (former owner), filed a claim for flooding damage (Claim 21860), which occurred on December 31, 1996. Staff investigation confirmed the installation pran 18-inch enclose . s stem extendin across the entire frontage of the property. A check wit DDES could not locate any valid right of way use permits authoriZing installation of this pipe. Staff believes this pipe is undersized and probably was at time of installation) and canno s om event storms. Roa staff further recommend Mr. Meyers check his purchase paper work to determine if the 'known' flooding problem was disclosed. • Remedial Action: County engineering staff have reviewed the site, have assigned tracking· number (4-1032) to this project and are currently designing an upgraded system to correct the p~~:m cr~:,d 2Y Jhe imp[2l?~rlZlp.~ ~nst!I1atio!!: Hold Harmless Agreement: N/A If you have any questions concerning these findings, please contact Office Engineer Bill Hintz at 296-8709. Enclosures: ... ----... cc:-..Roderick E .. Matsuno,.MaintenanceOperaliQllS Manags:L. ________ ... _ ._--.-....•.. _ .. Bill Hintz, Office Engineer • WI' ,~ ------------- "' ,.: ... -.----,--~----,------, .... ,--.. -----.---,-..• -.. --.-----"-'-----~--"--. • ~ll KING COU1\"n"SJ~'V<?},VEMEN·~ (ifpossiblc, pleas.: idcotily .:mpIu)'tt ~(If dcp3:I1ID(,llt inV('o'v('d): , '.J __ :~'L_,~J\"'~CW ' ,., ____ . ____ --'-__ -'--_ -----.. -".--.-----.-----------~-----.--,--'------'----.,,--._---,------- "", . PROPI\1IW V,\M;,GE '(pkosc·dC:.aibd", va'" ind exl"" ofthc dornagc to.)'<'\W'horu<'-,U1.mobilc:·'.i':'pct-soi .. I'~. docunxinutioo of~ge, )-o<iril.\i'.ho,·<): . .' .. ; .• ,." ;., ,.:,. . .,. . ..':: ·:i . .... '.' ',':' <. 1:=""M .. ~w.."~~;L~j", '~M_~~~~_'-, -----!~- IN.I1.JRV (if yw "veR injurro,. pl~ si ... e details): __ . .' . . '~'. '" . ____ " .. __ . iJ lA -_ .. .. .-. -.----.--~ . Identify any ~:~=~~~~y (\100 '::rrOf~~J(~) inV(JJ~: _____ ~_ .. _ .' : __ .;.,---- ~:,.-...:....-'----.-----" Are )-(>0 $till r\.-<:c;iving mook-.allrabn.;:nt7 . --- t-dA .. .. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the Smle of Washington thai t1til foij .", png islrue and comet" I~q /2.COz. l?~k I ~~, f-~1'IJ5J. . ale and Place (City. State» U • Sign~ture ::', ,', ".' . . ', ;.', 'fZl:AI~t}'~;;12;~}9x" ",: , '\' .' .. " .. . .:, :: :',', MEYERSFLO(m -'PAGE'lOJ?2, W14/01 -Arrived home at approximately5:30'pmtofindiluiftheIoi,veflevel:ofthe ho~e had flooded that day, Most of the water had soaked mto the carpet and pad by thetimethit I got home, By that time; the ditch Wasalsci 10\1l1:r but IsusjJeCieddiat ithi:idoveffi6wed. There were signs of water and debris running dowri th~ drivewa/from ihe,aitcli soicitlied King County to • report the problein.':' ' , , 1 ]129/01 -I called King Country Roads Division again. :riley suitidih~rsOih~~rie would he out on Monday. December 3,d to investigate tlie probiem. ' '/: . .. , , 12/5/01 -I arrived homeat approximately6pm;ihad'aiiies~g~6h~Y~k~ijhgrti~chjlie*o~:.'" MatUlY Espinosa withKirig County Roads.Hesliitcdthilthe,~~irimYri~ighborh,oodand,wolild' be out to my property in approximately!!, hour", H~'didnl.itstate'the\tirne,thfiihedlllectru,dniY ,.", answering machine doesn't track it so 1 do not know whaf6irieMth'b,dliYhe1diIM.'TiiJs was ' the only message that I received from him. ldo not know.ifhewasout:tomYjioUse officif. ' " , , ': 12113/01 -My wife arrived home at approximately 3 pm tirt1~~tha(ih(i'diii:hJiadbeen , o\'erflowingand the water running into the house again through the' ganige. She'called',incand r called the King County Road Division at 3:30 pm: MikeHtidsoliariivedii.(5:30pnhHe staled that the drainage tileprobablyneeded to beupgraiied to liaiidJe a!aigeri.:apabitYot' waterflow." ' He ilistructed me to call J-800-KCroads. My wifiiiilso called91fiiij~:theRentonFire Department was dispatched. Bill Kullburgand his crew fromKingCtiuhty FlreDistrict #25 assisted in draining all ofthe water from our home that, day. " .'," , 12114/0] -I called 1-800-KCRoads and talked to Bob Napier:', All, 6ftheother employees were out at lunch. I told him that this was the second time that thishad:Jiappctted'aiidwe'needed someone out to our home to see the damage as soon aSpcissible:J·IesliiaUi~t.soirieonewouldbe contacting us aildwoiild come out and see the daniage before ,we replliredarlyihirig. He swathat this person would be out later that sanie day or Monday; December:t1";' "', ' ' " , 12/14/01 -I called and talked to Lori Kronan at 1 :45 pm., She bad caiiedlnyWifeearlierand· ,,' stated that they had a "vae truck" out to our property on the moIillng:ofpecember 11 Ih bu(~he didn't know if they had found anything that would have catlsed,tllejiI'oblem; " " 12118/01 -Called at 9:00 am and left a message for the roadS depl)rtnientto see'iftheyh'ad,been' oul yel and if they hadn't, it was imperative that ~em come ou~.ASAPbecausev\;eweie having new carpet installed and didn't want this to happeiiathirdtime; ," " ' 12/18/01 -I called 1-800-KCRoads at 3 pm. Talked to a' womailaffitst;then Iwas transferred to Lori Kronans vOicemail.lleftheramessagetocallme.ioiik.rOrianci!n~(i.lnebackthat ' same day and stated that there wouldn't be anyone fromtheird~jJilrtIUentlookingat 01rr damages, She said someone would be out to check out the drnin.that same afternoon. ", . , . ~', . . " / . . '. .". ;" ,aAlM::;:;'~s~f~t~i~;" -".'. ' .. ' MEYERS FLOOD -continued PAGE20F2 ' -';'" " . "', .' " ... , '" . . '~':/:' 12127/01-I called again at 11 :50 am, I asked forL~ri but s~~ ;wafou~i~,ih~field: The person that I talked to,looked up my file and said that riothing waS'rej>6rttd '!is being'done yet:' She' would leave a message for Lori. """ ,:','J"" ,::" " " " . " ... ' ". ':;", . .:. 12/28/01-10:30 am -Received citH froni LOriidonan;Sh6~dsheh~;d.:be~ri!lllia.tOilt:, , property and looked down ourd~ilJ,and didh~ts~a'ri,yb,()ci(~ie;'~s~e:~~W'4~lrg~r~6wi~the ' pipe near the telephone pole area, butn'othirigthatshOUJareSti1cffro\v.'Slie~si\otsilieifthe vactor cleaned outsticks or debris; but wbehthe§:y~ci,Qtcitit;:iil¥Y(f6u~d~6!hm~ih~f;WS ~f large proportion to cause blockage. She siiidshehadfiled.~~f:ip!lpe~\r?rktohavltlie~ii~hdug , ,and cleaned, ' : ': ' ,:,; "": ',""" ','-:: ',' ,.' , , /1125/02 -Called Lori Kronan at 7 a,m; inforrilingher thaUhedifch'~aScCestiilliagainandit ' " L needed 10 belnoked atinnnediately. Sometimethatfu(jinitigaffer.lOahl;s6mdo,ri~\viis: outto my ~p~~~yb~~j~~;~~t~~:; s~~~e:ti:h~~:~t~M:~;~4~~s~~i~~~'~rJi~t:~I~~::tg!t a.' not sure when thls would happen. ',' '. . ,'., .. ' ".' ".',' . ,', .' '. ," ", .:.;. ..... . CURRENT SITUATION- As of today' s. date, the ditch'.hasnotbeeh''dtig(jjJtfuid:'i~ereare.still times during.heavy rain'where the\vater.is:a:t:ill¢veliiiigfiet;th.M·.' expected, .... . . . . . . ... '," . . .. ' .... " , ;. . ,"' -'. ", '"" . ., . ,:. :., ~~. , .. :--.... • a" --) - .' 4.' , .:,:, .4 _, ., A " ~ .)Q .,i, f1~.;" .40t :,). '.,:: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ • • • • . ' .... . ' , ", : ".-.,,' . :. ': . '. . . . ..... ""' .. ,-': . ",' . ....... (t~l!tvt .. ~ri2.4·:9:· .. " ',.' . \ " . , ", ~/ . . "." . " .. "'. ",,' '." ".- ".:: ,:', ':'. ,", , ...... . -, ..... fuSS '. ::' " ;-. ',:. . '" .,', ..... ".' :.: , ',,' ',' ' .. , , , .'.; ". '" . :.":> '"" , .... ',,- .: .... "', ,"'," .• ;" ..... '.,'. '.,' ------., • ~ .. • . " • 3.4 Level 3 Downstream Drainage Analysis • ) for Evendell Plat • , . " .1 Evendell Plat Level 3 Downstream Drainage Analysis .'.) FILE COpy 4-liD 2-0 REC'='''eo AUG 2.9 ZOOZ L I\//vu LUUi'/ fY AND USE SERVICES LO I Po 016 Submitted 10: . King Courity DOES 900 Oakesdale Avenue S.W. Renton, W A 98055 Prepared by: Haozous Engineering, P.S. 9957.17]~ Avenue SE Renton, W A 98059 Tel. (425) 235-2707 Fax (425) 254-0579 August 26, 2002 , ..• --) Uti IE n gin II II r In 9 , 9957 171M Avenue SE Renton, WA 98059 fa:< (425) 254·0579 (425/135-2707 August 26, 2002 Mr. Michael Romano Centurion Development Services 22617 8th Drive SE Bothell, WA 98021 Re: Evendell Plat -Level 3 Downstream Drainage Analysis DDES File No. Dear Mr. Romano: P.S. This letter report documents the methods and results of a Level 3 Downstream Drainage Analysis requested by DDES for the Evendell Plat. Separate analyses were conducted for the two drainage courses from the Evendell site. Project Description. The Evendell Plat is a proposed residential development located withinthe Renton Highlands area of unincorporated King County (Figure I). The proposal for development includes building single-family dwellings on approximately 12 acres (Haozous . Engineering, June 2001). Road improvements along SE 136tb Street are also proposed. Level :2 RID standards are being proposed for the onsite stoimwater facility as is required by the King County Flow Application Maps and recommended by Lower Cedar River Basin and Nonpoint Action Plan; Site Description The site is located within the Orting Hills subbasin of the Cedar River watershed (King County Department ofNatura1 Resources, 1999). The site is located east of 156th Avenue SE and is bordered by SE 136th Street on the north and by 160tb Avenue SE on the east. Cover types on the site include a sirigle-family residence, pasture, and forest. A Class 2 wetland has been identified in the northeast portion of the site. The site consists of two basins with most of the project area draining to the easterly basin. The easterly basin drains to a conveyance system along 160tb Avenue SE. The westerly basin drains to a conveyance system along 156tb Avenue SE. Both downstream drainage courses eventually discharge to an unclassified tributary of the Cedar River (King County Department of Parks, Planning, and Resources, 1990). . , .. Drainage Complaints Drainage complaints along the downstream systems were investigated at King County Water and Land Resource Division as part of the Level I Downstream Drainage Analysis submitted with the project's preliminary technical information report (TIR)(Haozous Engineering, June 2001). Since the preliminary TIR was prepared, neighborhood comment forms, collected by C.A.R.E., have been reviewed for information abOut drainage-related problems in the basins. Of particular note, flooding from the ditch on . the east bOundary of the Evendell site has been observed by Mr. Bret Bowden, a resident at 13814 1601h Avenue SE. When flooding occurs, water crosses the road and flows onto Mr. Bowden's property. Mr. Don Gregg, a resident at 16046 SE I 42nd Place, has also observed portions of 1601h Avenue SE inundated by flooding during the past 5 years. Methodology A hydraulic analysis was conducted for conveyance systems along bOth 1601h Avenue SE and 1561h Avenue SE .. The conveyance system along 160·h Avenue SE was evaluated . from the east boundary of the site for a distance of 2,300 feet. The conveyance system along 1561h Avenue SE was evaluated from a location due west of the site for a distance of I ,900 feet. Both systems consist of driveway culverts, pipe segments, and open channel. The model Stormshed™ was used to' predict runoff rates from contributing basins and to model the hydraulics of the conveyance systems. Stormshed™ is widely applied in similar projects and has been adopted by Washington State Department of Transportation for assessing and designing highway conveyance systems. A field survey of the downstream systems was conducted by a licensed surveyor. Ditch cross sections, pipe inverts, catch basin rims, and road surface elevations were surveyed to obtain data for the Stormshed™ hydraulic model. A swmnary of each structure surveyed is provided in Table I. Basin boundaries contributing to the conveyance system were based on aerial topography and the Cedar River Basin Plan. The basin bOundaries were field-verified and divided into subbasins contributing to various branches of the conveyance system (Figure 2). The easterly basin was divided into seven subbasins (el -e7), ranging from 1.1 to 33.9 acres in size (Table 2). The westerly basin was divided into eight subbasins (wI -w8), ranging from 1.2 to 16.3 acres in size. Cover types and land uses in the subbasins were based on a 1990 aerial photograph and updated for recent development by conducting a field reconnaissance. The basins consist of mostly single-family residential land use with housing densities ranging from about I to 6 dwelling units per acre. Land uses and cover types are shown in Figure 3. The east basin was estimated to have a total of 124.4 acres, with 35.6 acres in forest, 20.2 in 2 , .-,1 pasture, and 68.7 acres in single-family residential land use (Table 3). The west basin was estimated to have a total of 48.3 acres, with 6.5 acres in forest, 7.0 in pasture, and 33.4 acres in single-family residential land uSe, and 1.4 acres occupied by a church. Based on IGng County Soil Survey (U.s. Department of Agriculture, .1973) soil types in the basins consiSt of Alderwood soils. The Santa Barbara Urban Hydrograph (SBUH) model was used to model the runoff from each of the subbasins contributing to the conveyance systems. Curve numbers for the subbasins were based on the weighted averages of the various land uses in the watershed (Table 4). _ Hydrographs for the 2-, 10-, 25-, 50-, and 100-year Storms were routed through the Stormshed™ hydraulic model of the conveyance syStems to determine flooding locations and their approximate return periods. The Evendell site and other contributing areas in the basins were modeled under their existing land use conditions. Travel paths for each subbasin were based on aerial topography. The type of flow, flow length, and slope used to calculate time-of-concentrations are summarized in Table 5. Rainfall amounts of2.0, 3.0, 3.5, 3.75, and 4.0 inches were used for the 2-, 10-,25-,50-, and 100-year Storms design Storms in the SBUH model. Modeling Results Details of each subbasin modeled in Stormshed are presented in Appendix A.I for the eaSterly basin and in Appendix A.2 for the weSterly basin. Model results for routing the design Storm hydrographs through the drainage networks are presented inTables B.l through B.l2 of Appendix B. Table 6 presents a summary of flow rates at key locations in each of the conveyance systems. A summary of predicted flooding, for all surveyed structures, including open channels, is provided in Table B.6 for the easterly basin and in Table B.l2 for the weSterly basin.' The locations and return periods of flooding related to pipes and culverts are identified in Figure 4. Many of the driveway culverts and pipes along 160tb Avenue SE flood at a return period of2-years (Table B.6 and Figure 4). Several reaches of ditch also overtop at this return period, likely as a result of conStrictions in the pipe capacities. Modeling results are consistent with drainage complaints from residents along this reach of the drainage course. Similar modeling results were obtained for the westerly drainage course, where several culverts and catch basins were predicted to overtop at 2-year or I O-year return periods (Table B.l2 and Figure 4).' . Conclusions Several flooding locations with return periods of2c years were identified in the downstream conveyance systems. Flooding in the east basin that overtops and inundates l601h Avenue SE is considered a severe road flooding problem by the King County 3 ,. ,) I . . _J e l Surface Water DrainageManual. Residential structures have been flooded at 14028 16cf' Avenue SE and at 16046 SE 14:zOO Place. If the finished space or the electrical!heating components of these residential structures were flooded in the past, the flooding would be classified as a severe problem. Otherwise, flooding that occurs at these residences is considered a nuisance problem. Channel erosion observed along the east boundary of the property at 16046 SE 14200 Place, downstream from Pipe P-Il 0, has been a persistent problem over the past several years and would likely be considered a severe erosion problem. Continued bank erosion is likely at this location, with potential for reducing the capacity of channel sections further downstream where sediment is deposited. The flooding that occurs at the adjacent residence is likely related to the reduction in channel capacity due to sediment deposition from the eroded banks. Based on modeling results and information available, flooding problems in the .westerly basin would likely be classified as nuisance problems by theKingCountySurjace Water Drainage Manual (1998). We found no documentation indicating that 1561h Avenue SE or residential structures along the westerly drainage course have flooded in the past. However, a drainage complaint (Complaint No. 97-0318) related toflooding due to a . plugged culvert, was not available for review (Haozous Engineering, June 200 I). Proposed Mitigations Leve12R1Dstandards are currently being proposed for new development in the westerly basin of the Evendell Plat. No additional flow control or othei-mitigations are therefore required in this basin to reduce project impacts to nuisance flooding problems . Level 2 RID standards are also currently being proposed for new development in the easterly basin of the Evendell Plat. With severe flooding and severe erosion problems located in the downstream drainage course, additional measures to mitigate drainage impacts could be required. For the severe road flooding problem along 1601h Avenue SE either of the following mitigations could be required: • Providing Level 3 detention in the easterly basin. OR • Upgrading the downstream conveyance system along 1601h Avenue SE to eliminate road flooding. This would likely entail replacing driveway culverts P-117 and P- 116 on the west side of l601h Avemie SE, cross culvert P-U5, and pipesP-1I4 and P-I13 on the east side of 1601h Avenue SE (Figure 4). For the severe erosion problem along the east boundary ofthe property at 16046 SE 14200 Place, the Level 2 RID standards provide the mitigation required by code. Other types of mitigations to reduce erosion at this location, such as bank stabilization in the eroded section of channel or Level 3 RID standards, can be imposed through the King County Surface Water Drainage Manual under certain circumstanceS. It is our opinion that either stabilizing the eroding section of channel or the use of Level 3 RID standards would mitigate project-related drainage impacts that occur at this location. 4 :·t • ·~ If you have questions regarding these analyses or need additional documentation, please do not hesitate to call me. Sincerely, Edward McCarthy, Ph.D. P.E. Hydrologist 5 References Haozous Engineering, June 15, 2001. Evendell Plat -Preliminary Technical Information Report. Renton, Wash. King County Department of Natural Resources, 1998. King County Surface Water Design Manual. Seattle. King County Department of Natural Resources, 1997. Lower Cedar River Basin and Nonpoint Pollution Action Plan. Seattle. . . King County Department of Parks, Planning, and Resources, 1990. SenSitive Areas Map Folio. Seattle. u. S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, 1973. Soil Survey of King County Area, Washington. Seattle. 6 " " .. ~ Table 1. Sumary of Surveyed Structures in Downstream System . Reach ID Reach Pipe Dia. Manning's Length Upstr IE Dwnst IE Slope Type (IN) n (Ff) (FT) (Ff) (%) East Basin D-1I0 X-Section 0.035 48 408.54 407.59 1.99 D-III X-Section 0.G35 58 409.57 408.54 1.78 D-I12 X-Section 0.035 20 411.25 409.57 8.57 D-I13 X-Section 0.035 12 411.86 411.25 5.28 D-1I4 X-Section 0.035 48 412.96 411.86 2.31 .P-1I0 Circular 24 0.010 60 413.6 412.96 1.06 D-I15 X-Section 0.035 3 414.27 413.6 25.24 D-1I6 X-Section 0.035 33 415.1 414.27 2.48 D-1I7 X-Section 0.035 24 415.34 415.1 1.01 D-1I8 X-Section 0.035 25 417.07 415.34 . 7.01 D-1I9 X-Section 0.G35 48 419.77 417.07 5.61 D-120 X-Section 0.G35 79 420.05 419.77 0.35 P-III Circular 18 0.013 29 419.3 420.05 -2.56 D-121 X-Section 0.035 6 421.94 419.3 45.68 D-122 X-Section 0.035 24 422.17 421.94 0.96 P-1I2 CircUlar 12 0.013 85 423.42 422.17 1.47 D-123 X-Section 0.035 43 424.16 423.42 1.73 D-124 X-Section 0.065 90 424.6 424.16 0.49 D-125 X-Section 0.065 107 426.13 424.6 1.43 D-126 X~Section 0.065 48 428.17 426.13 4.27 "-D-127 X-Section 0.G35 79 429.74 428.17 1.99 e) 0-128 X-Section 0.035 56 431.36 429.74 2.87 P-I13 Circular 18 0.01 124 434.95 431.36 2.91 D-129 X-Section 0.035 12 434.81 434.95 -1.21 D-130 X-Section 0.035 61 436.28 434.81 2.40 D-131 X-Section 0.G35 66 439.1 436.28 4.30 P-1I4 Circular 24 0.024 21 439.59 439:1 2.37 0-132 X-Section 0.035 10 440.26 439.59 7.02 P-1I5 Circular 12 0.013 45 441.31 439.59 3.78 D-133 X-Section 0.035 . 2 44L15 441.31 -730 D-133A X-Section 0.G35 35 442.14 441.15 2.80 D-134 X-Section 0.035 50 443.4 442.14 2.53 .0-135 X-Section 0.035 106 444.67 443.4 1.20 . D-136 X-Section 0.035 54 445.89 . 444.67 2.25 CL-IO) P-1I6 Circular 18 0.024 28 446.34 445.89 1.62 D-137 X-Section 0.035 3 446.6 446.34 10.15 D-138 X-Section 0.035 88 448.4 446.6 2.04 D-139. X-Section 0.035 106 451.13 448.4 2.58 D-140 X-Section 0.035 55 452.3 45LI3 2.15 (t''6) P-ll7 Circular 12 0.013 18 452.9 . 452.3 3.39 D-141 X-Section 0.035 3 452.65 452.9 -9.42 D-142 X-Section 0.035 102 454.76 452.65 2.07 D-143 X-Section 0.035 160 459.46 454.76 2.93 D-I44 X-Section 0.035 103 462.79 459.46 3.24 D-145 X-Section 0.035 100 466.72 462.79 3.92 e! ;., 1---l " 'J 'iI Table 1 (continued) jJ Reach ID Reach Pipe Dia. Manning's Length UpstrlE DwnstIE Slope Type (IN) n (Ff) (Ff) (Ff) (%) West Basin P-OOI Circular I2 0.013 113 378.62 372.66 5.27 D-OOI X-Section 0.035 3 379.22 378.62 20.00 D-002 X-Section 0.035 114 381.68 379.22 2.16 D-003 X-Section 0.035 153 388.9 381.68 4.72 D-004 X-Section 0.035 157 397.4 388.9 5.41 D-005 X-Section 0.035 2 396.77 397.4 -31.50 P-002 Circular 12 .0.013 25 397.51 396.77 2.96 D-006 X-Section 0.035 3 398.49 397.51 32.67 D-007 X-Section 0.035 35 399.58 398.49 3JI P-003 Circular 12 0.013 19 400.17 399.58 3.11 D-008 X-Section 0.035 2 400.4 400.17 11.50 0-009 X-Section 0.035 36 400.91 400.4 1.42 P-004 Circular 12 0.013 59 403.71 400.91 4.75 P-005 Circular 12 0.013 9 404.21 403.51 7.78 P-006 Circular 12 . 0.013 42 406.09 404.26 4.36 P-007 CirCular 12 0.013 150 411.17 406.34 3.22 P-008 Circular 12 0.013 157 417.58 411.77 3.70 P-008A Circular 12 0.013 28 418.1 417.58 1.86 P-009 Circular 12 0.013 142 427.25 420.75 4.58 P-OIO Circular 12 0.013 86 431.9 427.35 5.29 -e) P-OII Circular 12. 0.013 62 434.34 432 3.77 P-OI2 Circular 12 0.013 33 435.68 434.39 3.91 " D-OIO X-Section 0.035 3 436.07 435.68 13.00 D-OII X-Section 0.035 48 438.87 436.07 5.83 D-OI2 X-Section 0.035 53 442.78 438.87 7.38 P-OI3 Circular 12 0.013 19 444.46 . 442.78 8.84 D-OI4 X-Section 0.035 3 444.63 444.46 5.67 D-OI5 X-Section 0.035 43 446.52 444.63 4.40 P-OI4 Circular 12 0.013 23 447.67 446.52 5.00 D-016 X-Section 0.035 3 448.08 447.67 13.67 D-017 X-Section 0.035 57 450.3 448.08 3.89 P-OI5 Circular 12 0.013 22 451.33 450.3 4.68 D-OI8 X-Section 0.035 3 451.83 451.33 16.67 D-OI9 X-Section 0,035 52 454.6 451.83 5.33 P-OI6 Circular 12 0.013 34 457.55 454.6 8.68 D-020 X-Section 0.035 3 457.71 457.55 5.33 D-021 X-Section 0.035 107 465.05 457.71 6.86 ~------------------------------------------, .7TabJe 2. Summary of Existing Basin Cover Types by Subbasin Curve ' Number-810 850 980 860 980 - COvei:'rype , ' Subbasin 1i/l~fomt 'rill-pasture Wetlilnd '., Til/~grass ImjJerv To/ill ,(Ae). ,(Al') (Aq" (AC)" , (Aq (Aq, East Basin el -5.8 12.0 1.9 19.7 e2 6.0 5.2 '15.6 7.0 33.9 e3 -L7 0.7 0.1 2.4 e4 --0.9 0.2 l.l e5 4.0 1.8 12.3 5.4 235 e6 14.9 3.5 9.8 2.3 30.4 e7 L8 ---1.8 Site -East 8.9 2.2 0.4 -0.1 11.6 Subtotal 35.6 20.2 0.4 51.4 16.9 1245 West Basin ) wI --2.3 0.6 2.9 w2 -0.7 13.8 1.8 163 w3 --1.0 0.2 I.2 w4 --2.7 05 3.2 w5 --1.8 0.4 2.2 w6 0.8 -1.8 I.3 3.8 w7 1.6 -3.8 2.4 7.8 w8 3.8 4.9 0.4 0.0 9.1 Site - West 0.4 1.4 --0.1 1.9 Subtotal 6.6 7.0 -27.6 7.2 48.4 ~ • Table 3. Summary of Land Uses by Subbasin % Grass % Imperv 92.5% 7.5% !S~~basi~j; ·.:;,i~1':;:~~,a~~;e . . ·t~J East Basin el e2 e3 e4 e5 e6 e7 Site -East Total West Basin wI w2 w3 w4 w5 w6 w7 w8 Site -West Total 6.0 4.0 14,9 1.8 8.9 35.6 0.8 1.6 3.8 0.4 6.5 5.8 5.2 1.7 1.8 3.5 2.2 20.2 0.7 4.9 1.4 7.0 . 4.5 2.1 0.8 4.7 0.1 12.1 14.5 0.6 0.4 0.1 15.6 83.5% 16.5% ..... ' SF2i~ (ACY-:' 9.5 6.7 1.1 7.9 4.5 29.8 2.6 1.2 3.2 2.2 9.2 .~ .. ....../ 58.4% 41.6% 0.0% 100.0% ., ."... .,-~-~--,. ". -. . . ,.;, '.:,~~;: "'~ ~.:.' .>~-,:·\)A·, -_, SF6,'" ... 'Wetlilnd· :.: .:_~;/ ;li:~:;.::·::;·~·_ .~-{::o~,::~"':;:i>. . . fA .. C) .. 'X ,>>: ·", . .fAC'. (4, .. __ ~-'.; .,Of ,.'_J, (", ___ ',I, 13.8 9,8 2.8 0.4 26.4 3.0 5.6 8.6 Notes: SFl = Single-family residential with 1 DUlAc; SF2 = 2 DUlAc; SF6 = 6 DUlAc 36.0% 64.0% '. Church (,4C) OJ 1.1 1.4 '. Tbtal . "(1:8' •• 19.7 33.9 2.4 1.1 23.5 30.4 1.8 1l.6 124.4 2.9 16.3 l.2 3.2 2.2 3,8 7.8 9.1 1.9 48.3 .• ' I • . ..j,/ 'I '1 It) Table 4. Curve Numbers for Subbasins Subbasin Pervious Pervious 1mpI'rV .. . CN .. 0C) . ·09< East Basin eI 85.7 17.8 1.9 e2 84.7 26.9 7.0 e3 853 2.3 0.1 e4 86.0 0.9 0.2 e5 84.8 18.1 5.4 e6 83.2 28.1 2.3 e7 81.0 1.8 - Site -East 81.8 II.I 0.5 West Basin wI 86.0 2.3 0.6 w2 86.0 14.5 1.8 w3 86.0 1.0 0,2 w4 86.0 2.7 0.5 w5 86,0 , 1.8 0.4 ) w6 84.5 2.5 1.3 , w7 84.5 5.4 2.4 w8 83.4 9.0 0.0 Site - West 84.0 1.8 0.1 • •• ~-; Table 5. Travel Path Distances and Slopes for Pervious Land Areas "-;..: 300.0 5.0 0.017 1,484.0 20.0 e2 300.0 5.0 0.017 922.0 15.0 e3 300.0 5.0 0.017 264.0 . 3.0 e4 300.0 5.0 0.017 e5 300.0 8.0 0.027 1,248.0 23.0 e6 300.0 3.0 0.010 1,777.0 35.0 e7 300.0 3.0 0.010 3.0 0.010 876.0 13.0 wI w2 300.0 5.0 0.017 585.0 70.0 w3 300.0 32.0 0.107 w4 300.0 10.0 . 0.033 292.0 22.0 w5 300.0 30.0 0.100 322.0 22.0 w6 300.0 . 2.0 0.007 613.0 40.0 w7 300.0 20.0 0.067 655.0 40.0 w8 300.0 20.0 0.067 1,020.0 70.0 Site - West 210.0 10.0 0.048 .. 0.013 950.0 0.016 1,824.0 0.011 106.0 200.0 0.018 705.0 0.020 0.015 2,610.0 0.120 I 272.0 0,075 0.068 0.065 0.061 0.069 10.0 18.0 3.0 4.0. 10.0 70.0 13.0 .·Slope f1i"TI1i"1 0.011 0.010 0.028 0.020 0.014 0.027 0.048 .,./ . -.J..i .= . 'e-Table 6. Peak Flow Rates at Selected LoeatioDs. ::1"~:'< ... , c" ......... . . . .... . ··S/iJ,.iiiRdUrtihi-rod .. . ...... <J2 ......... . L'ocatiOli 2~Year JO-year • 2~Year . 50-Year UJO-YeflT L .. .• (CFS) (CFS) . (CFS). (CFS) , . ((J~S) .. ., '.' East Basin P-110 12.0 24.5 31.6. 353 38.9 P-lil 12.1 24.9 32.0 35.6 39.4 P-112 9.9 20.0 25.5 28.3 31.2 P-I13 10.2 20.3 25.9 28.7 31.6 P-1l4 10.2 20.4 25.9 28.8 31.7 P-115 7.4 15.2 19.4 21.6 23.8 P-1l6 7.3 14.9 19.1 21.2 23.4 West Basin P-OOI 6.8 13.7 17.5 19.4 21.2 P-002 6.2 12.2 15.4 17.0 18.6 P-006 4.8 9.6 12.2 13.5 14.7 P-OOSA 4.1 8.4 10.8 11.9 13.1 P-009 3.8 7.7 9.8 10.9 11.9 P-013 3.2 6.7 8.5 9.4 10.4 P-OI5 3.0 6.2 8.0 8.8 9.7 .. P-016 2.8 5.7 7.3 8.1 8.9 .. e )~ote: Flow rates are those predicted by Stormsbed usmg the SBUH method. I " ) SOURCE: USGS 7.5 x 15 Minute Series -Renton, Washington SCALE: 1 :25 000 Figure 1. Vicinity Map 1-5 01/03/01 > .~, " :; " .. .:. .' :;.. , 1 " , , ......---:, __ ~. ________ ~>e~· ________ .. ~~'. til 200 400 . SCAt.L IN ra;T .... \ HaozousEngineering CIVIL El4GD€ERlHG 1~6 $E U6TH Sf, RENTDN. VA ,a~, _2707 .. ,.. _ .. 8/12/02 _ .. ..'" 8/12/02 EVENDELL PLAT Drainage Basins PROJECT NO, 2 --~ "- "~' LEGEND o Co. tc:hBo.sln P5 Pipe ID ~O-Yeo.r I flooding Return Period PROJEC T . . NO. EVENDELL PLAT VA_ I='ICURE . DAT[z Flooding Locations 4 ,; . Appendix A. Storm shed Model InpuUOutput Design Storm Rainfall Amounts Return Rainfall Period Amount (YRS) (IN) 2 2.00 10 3.00 25 3.50 50 3.75 100 4.00 --------------._-----------1 '( " ... ', Appendix A.l. Subbasin Summary -East Basin .• -) Drainage Area: e-OOl Hyd Method: SBUHHyd Loss Method: SCS CN Number Peak Factor: 484.00 SCS Abs: 0.20 StonnDur: 24.00 hrs Intv: 10.00 min Area CN TC Pervious 17.8000 ac 85.70 0.98 hrs Impervious. 1.9000 ac 98.00 0.17 hrs Total 19.7000 ac Pervious CN Data: Subbasin e-OO IPerv 85.70 17.8000 ac v e) Imp¢ryious CN Data: Subbasin el Imperv 98.00 1.9000 ac Pervious TC Data: Flow type: Description: Length: Slope: Coeff: Travel Time Sheet el sheet 300.00 ft I.70"10 0.1500 31.85 min Shallow el shallow 1484.00 ft 1.50% 11.0000 18.361nin Channel el channel 950.00 ft ].10"10 17.0000 8.88 min Impervious TC Data: Flow type: Description: Length: Slope: Coeff: Travel Tinie Fixed None Entered 0.00 ft 0.00% 10.0000 10.00 min ,I' • eJ Drainage Area: e-002 HydMethod: SBUHHyd Loss Method: SCS CN Number Peak Factor: 484.00 SCS Abs: 0.20 StormDur: 24.00 hrs Intv: 10.00 min Area CN TC Pervious 26.9000 ac 84.70 1.01 hrs Impervious 7.0000 ac 98.00 O.17hrs Total ·33.9000ac Pervious CN Data: Subbasin e-002 Perv 84.70 26.9000ac Impervious CN Data: Subbasin el Imperv 98.00 7.0000ac .) Pervious TC Data: Flow type: Description: Length: Slope: Coeff: Travel Time Sheet e2 sheet 300.00 ft 1.70% 0.1500 31.85 min Shallow e2 shallow 922.00 ft 1.60"10 11.0000 1I.04 min Channel e2 channel 1824.00 ft 1.00"10 17.0000 17.88 min ImperviousTC Data: Flow type: Description: Length: Slope: Coeff: Travel Time Fixed None Entered 0.00 ft 0.00% 10.0000 10.00 min .------------------------------ ,I' ,J -') Drainage Area: e-003 HydMethod: SBUHHyd Loss Method: ses CN Number Peak Factor: 484,00 ses Abs: 0,20 Storm Dur: 24,00 hrs Intv: 10,00 min Area CN. TC Pervious 2.3000ac 85.30 0.60 hrs Impervious 0,1000 ac 98.00 0.17hrs Total 2.4000 ac Pervious eN Data: Subbasin e-003 Perv 85.30 2.3000 ac Impervious CN Data: . Subbasin e3 Imperv 98.00 0.1000ac e'l Pervious TC Data: Flow type: Description: Length: Slope: Coeff: Travel Time Sheet e3 sheet 300.00 ft 1.70"10 0.1500 31.85 min Shallow e3 shallow 264.00 ft 1.10% 11.0000 3.81 min Channel e3 channel 106.00 ft 2.80"10 17.0000 0.62 min Impervious TC Data: Flow type: Description: Length: Slope: Coelf: Travel Time Fixed None Entered 0.00 ft 0.00"10 10.0000 10.00 min •. l " " .-"", Drainage Area: e-004 el HydMethod: SBUHHyd Loss Method: SCS CN Number Peak Factor: 484.00 SCS Abs: 0.20 StormDur: 24.00 hrs Intv: 10.00 min Area CN TC Pervious 0.9000ac 86.00 0.55 hrs Impervious 0.2000ac 98.00 0.17 hrs Total 1.I000 ac Pervious CN Data: Subbasin e-004 Perv 86.00 0.9000 ac Impervious CN Data: Subbasin e4 Imperv 98.00 0.2000ac .> Pervious TC Data: Flow type: Description: Length: Slope: . Coeff: Travel Time Sheet e4 sheet 300.00 ft 1.70% 0.1500 31.85 min Channel e4 channel 200.00 ft 2.00"/0 17.0000 1.39 min Impervious TC Data: Flow type: Description: Length: Slope: Coeff: Travel Time Fixed None Entered 0.00 ft 0.00% 10.0000 10.00 min " ·) • Drainage Area: e-005 Hyd Method: SBUH Hyd . Peak Factor: 484.00 Storm Dur: 24.00 hrs Area CN Pervious 18.1000 ac 84.80 Impervious 5AOOOac 98.00 Total 23.5000 ac Pervious CN Data: Subbasin e-005 Perv Impervious CN Data: Subbasin e5 Imperv Pervious TC Data: Flow type: Description: Sheet e5 sheet Shallow e5 shallow Sheet e5 channel Impervious TC Data: Flow type: Description: Fixed None Entered 84.80 98.00 Loss Method: SCS CN Number SCSAbs: Intv: 0.20 10.00 min TC 1.81 hrs 0.17hrs 18.1000 ac 5AOOOac Length: Slope: 300.00 ft 2.70% 1248.00 ft 1.80% 705.00 ft lAO% Coeff: 0.1500 11.0000 0.1500 Travel Time 26A7 min 14.09 min 68.19 min Length: Slope: Coeff: Travel Time 0.00 ft 0.00% 10.0000 10.00 min "'; " 'J e) e.> .) Drilinage Area: e-006 HydMethod: SBUHHyd Peak Factor: 484.00 StonnDur: 24.00 hrs Area Pervious 28.1000 ac Impervious 2.3000 ac Total 30.4000 ac Pervious CNData: Subbasin e-006 Perv Impervious CN Data: Subbasin e5· Imperv Pervious TC Data: CN 83.20 98.00 83.20 98.00 Flow type: Description: Length: Sheet e6 sheet Shallow e6 shallow Impervious TC Data: Flow type: Description: Fixed None Entered Loss Method: SCS CN Number SCS Abs: Intv: TC 1.35 hrs 0.17hrs 28.1000 ac 2.3000ac 0.20 10.00 min Slope: Coeff: Travel Time 300.00 ft 1.00% 1777.00 ft 2.00"10 0.1500 39.38 min 5.0000 41.88 min Length: Slope: Coeff: Travel Time 0.00 ft 0.00% 10.0000 10.00 min -) Drainage Area: e-007 HydMethod: SBUHHyd Loss Method: SCS CN Number Peak Factor: 484.00 SCS Abs: 0.20 Storm Dur: 24.00 hrs Intv: 10.00 min Area CN TC Pervious 1.8000 ac 81.00 1.44 hrs Impervious O.OOOOac 98.00 0:00 hrs Total 1.8000 ac Pervious CN Data: Subbasin e-007. Perv 81.00 1.8000 ac Pervious TC Data: Flow type: Description: Length: Slope: Coefi": Travel Time -) Sheet e7 sheet 300.00 ft 1.00% 0.4000 86.31 min , I " ... ~", Draimige Area: ex_east ~. Hyd Method: SBUHHyd Loss Method: ·SCS CN Number Peak Factor: 484.00 SCSAbs: 0.20 StonnDur: 24.00 hrs Intv: 10.00 min Area CN TC Pervious 11.1000 ac 81.80 2.10 hrs Impervious 0.5000 ac 98.00 0.17 hrs Total 11.6000 ac Pervious CN Data: Subbasin ex_east Perv 81.80 11.1000 ac Impervious CN Data: Subbasin ex_east Imperv 98.00 0.5000 ac -.) PerviousTC Data: Flow type: Description: Length:· Slope: Coeff: Travel Time Sheet ex east sheet 300.00 ft 1.00% 0.4000 86.31 min Shallow ex_east shallow 876.00 ft 1.50% 3.0000 39.74 min Impervious TC Data: Flow type: Description: Length: Slope: Coeff: Travel Time Fixed None Entered 0.00 ft 0.00"10 10.0000 10.00 min _.1 " " Appendix A.2. Subbasin Summary -West Basin Drainage Area: w-OOI Hyd Method: SBUH Hyd Loss Method: SCS CN Number Peak Factor: 484.00 SCS Abs: 0.20 Stonn Dur: 24.00 hrs Intv: 10.00 min Area CN TC Pervious 2.3000 ac 86.00 0.26 hrs Impervious· 0.6000 ac 98.00 0.17 hrs Total 2.9000 ac Pervious CN Data: Subbasin wI Perv 86.00 2.3000 ac Impervious CN Data: Subbasin wI 98.00 0.6000 ac Pervious TC Data: Flow type: Description: Length: Slope: Coeff: Travel Time Channel wI 2610.00 ft 2.70% 17.0000 15.57 min Impervious TC Data: Flow type: Description: Length: Slope: Coeff: Travel Time Fixed wI· 0.00 ft 0.00% 10.0000 10.00 min _.1 ,I' ~) Drainage Area: w-002 HydMethod: SBUHHyd L.oss Method: SCS CN Number Peak Factor: 484.00 SCS Abs: 0.20 Storm Dur: 24.00hrs Intv: 10.00 min Area CN TC Pervious 14.5000 ac 86.00 0.57 hrs Impervious 1.8000 lic 98.00 0.17 hrs Total 16.3000 ac Pervious CN Data: Subbasin w2Perv 86.00 14.5000ac Impervious CN Data: Subbasin w2 Imperv 98.00 1.8000 ac .) Pervious TC Data: Flow type: Description: Length: Slope: Coeff: Travel Time Sheet None Entered 300.00 ft 1.70"10 0.1500 31.85 min Shallow None Entered 585.00 ft 12.00% 11.0000 2.56 min Impervious TC Data: Flow type: Description: Length: Slope: Coeff: Travel Time Fixed None Entered 0.00 ft 0.00% 10.0000 10.00 min . • -') Drainage Area: w-003 HydMethod: SBUHHyd Loss Method: SCS CN Number Peak Factor: 484.00 SCS Abs: 0.20 StormDur: 24.00 hrs Intv: 10.00 min Area CN TC Pervious 1.0000 ac 86.00 0.27 hrs Impervious 0.2000 ac 98.00 0.17 hrs Total 1.2000 ac Pervious CN Data: Subbasin w3 Perv 86.00 1.0000 ac Impervious CN Data: Subbasin w3 Jrnperv 98.00 0.2000 ac .') Pervious TC Data: "_ .J Flow type: Description: Length: Slope: Coeff: Travel Time Sheet w3 sheet 300.00 ft 10.70% 0.]500 ]5.26 min Channel w3 channel 272.00 ft 4.80% 17.0000 1.22 min Jnlpervious TC Data: Flow type: Description: Length: Slope: Coeff: Travel Time' Fixed None Entered 0.00 ft 0.00% 10.0000 10.00 min " ~ e-) Drainage Area: w-004 '-.. HydMethod: SBUHHyd Loss Method: SCS CN Number Peak Factor: 484.00 SCS Abs: 0.20 Storm Dur: 24.00 hrs Intv: 10.00 min Area CN TC Pervious 2.7000 ac 86.00 0.43 hrs Impervious 0.5000 ac 98.00 0.17 hrs Total 3.2000 ac Pervious CN Data: Subbasin w4 Perv 86.00 2.7000 ac Impervious CN Data: Subbasinw4 98.00 0.5000ac -~) Pervious TC Data: Flow type: Description: Length: Slope: Coeff: Travel Time Sheet w4 sheet 300.00 ft 3.30"/0 0.1500 24.43 min Shallow w4 shallow 292.00ft 7.50% 11.0000 1.62 min Impervious TC Data: Flow type: Description: Length: Slope: Coeff: Travel Time Fixed None Entered 0.00 ft 0.00% 10.0000 IO.OOmin ·, ... • ~) Drainage Area: w-005 Hyd Method: SBUHHyd Loss Method: SCS CN Number Peak Factor: 484.00 SCS Abs: 0.20 StormDur: 24.00 hrs Intv: 10.00 min Area CN TC Pervious L8000ac 86.00 0.29 hrs Impervious 0.4000 ac 98.00 0.17 hrs Total 2.2000 ac Pervious CN Data: Subbasin w5 Perv 86.00 L8000ac Impervious CN Data: Subbasinw5 98.00 0.4000 ac --) Pervious TC Data: Flow type: Description: Length: Slope: Coeff: Travel Time Sheet w5 sheet 300.00 ft 10.00% 0.1500 15.68 min Shallow w5 shallow 322.00 ft 6.80% 11.0000 1.87 min Impervious TC Data: Flow type: Description: Length: Slope: Coeff: Travel Time Fixed None Entered 0.00 ft 0.00% 10.0000 10.00 min .-._---------------------------------- " .. Drainage Area: w-006 I ' ') HydMethod: SBUHHyd Loss Method: SCS CN Number Peak Factor: 484.00 SCS Abs: 0.20 Storm Dur: 24.00 hrs Intv: 10.00 min Area CN TC Pervious 2.5000 ftC 84.50 0.82 hrs Impervious 1.3000 ac 98.00 0.17hrs Total 3.8000 ac Pervious CN Data: Subbasin w6 Perv 84.50 2.5000ac Impervious CN Data: Subbasin w6 98.00 1.3000 ac .) Pervious TC Data: Flow type: Description: Length: Slope: Coeff: Travel Time Sheet w6sheet 300.00 ft 0.70"10 0.1500 45.42 min Shallow w6 shallow 613.00 ft 6.50% 11.0000 3.64 min Impervious TC Data: Flow type: Description: Length: Slope: Coeff Travel Time Fixed None Entered 0.00 ft 0.00"10 10.0000 10.00 min • ·' . e' Drainage Area: w-007 . ) Loss Method: SCS CN Number HydMethod: SBUHHyd Peak Factor: 484.00 SCS Abs: 0.20 Storm Dur: 24.00 hrs Intv: 10.00 min Area CN TC Pervious .5.4000 ac 84.50 0.53 hrs Impervious 2.4000 ac 98.00 0.17hrs Total 7.8000 ac Pervious CN Data: Subbasin w7 Perv 84.50 5.4000 ac Impervious CN Data: Subbasinw7 98.00 2.4000ac e) Pervious TC Data: Flow type: Description: Length: Slope: Coeff: Travel Time Sheet w7 sheet 300.00ft 6.10% 0.2400 27.83 min Shallow w7 shallow 655.00 ft 6.10% 11.0000 4.02 min Impervious TC Data: Flow type: Description: Length: Slope: Coeff: Travel Time Fixed None Entered 0.00 ft 0.00010 10.0000 10.00 min " , e' Drainage Area: w-008 , } Hyd Method: SBUHHyd Loss Method: SCS CN Number Peak Factor: 484.00 SCSAbs: 0.20 Storm Dur: 24.00 hrs Intv: 10.00 min Area CN TC Pervious 9.0000 ac 83.40 0.79 hrs Impervious 0.0000 ac 0.00 O.17hrs Total 9.0000ac Pervious CN Data: Subbasin w8 Perv 83.40 9.0000ac Pervious TC Data: Flow type: Description: Length: . Slope: Coeif: Travel .) Time Sheet w8 sheet 300.00 ft 6.70% 0.4000 40.33 min Shallow w8 shallow 1020.00 ft 6.90% 9.0000 7.19 min Impervious TC Data: Flow type: Description: Length: Slope: Coeff: Travel Time Fixed None Entered 0.00 ft 0.00% 10.0000 10.00 min • .' . el .) Drainage Area: ex_west HydMethod: SBUHHyd Peak Factor: 484.00 Storm Dur: 24.00 hr$ Area Pervious 1.8000 ac Impervious 0.1000 ac Total 1.9000 ac Pervious CN Data: Subbasin ex west Perv Impervious CN Data: Subbasin ex_west Imperv Pervious TC Data: Flow type: Description: Time Sheet ex west sheet Impervious TC Data: Flow type: Description: Time Fixed wI Loss Method: SCS CN Number SCS Abs: 0.20 Intv: 10.00 min CN TC 84.00, 0.381irs 98.00 0.17 hrs 84.00 L8000ac 98.00 O.IOOOac Length: Slope: Coeff: Travel 210.00 ft 4.80"10 0.2400 23.02 min Length: Slope: Coeff: Travel 0.00 ft 0.00% 10.0000 10.00 min ,.' · ... , Table B.1. Hydrograph Routing -East Basin -2-Year Stonn . e)ROUTEHYD 0 THRU [Existing East) USING TYPE1A AND [2 yr) NOTZERO ACTUAL Reach Area Flow Full Q % Full nDepth Size nVel Nel CBasinl Hyd O-Dum2 0-Dum1 0-145 0-144 0-143 0-142 0-141 P-117 0-140 0-139 0-138 0-137 P-116 0-136 0-135 0-134 0-133A 0-133 P-115 0-132 • .. )P-114 . 0-131 0-130 0-129 P-113 0-128 0-127 0-126 0-125 0-124 0-123 P-112 0-122 0-121 P-111 0-120 0-119 0-118 0-117 0-116 0-115 P-110 0-114 0-113 0-112 .;0-111 ac cfs cfs ratio ft fils fils 19.7 2.1303 122.33 0.02 0.3312 X-Sect 3.0688-- 53.6 6.625 122.33 0.05 0.5728 X-Sect 4.4532 -__ _ 53.6 6.5953 121.12 0.05 0.5744 X-Sect 4.4169 __ _ 53.6 6.5642 117.92 0.06 0.6659 X-Sect 4.3432 --- 53.6 6.5478 122.41 0.05 0.6381 X-Sect 4.0213 ---- 53.6 6.5467 82.3869 0.08 0.6881 X-Sect 3.5759 -- 53.6 6.5465 10.3949 0.63 1.6141 X-Sect 1.1146- e-001 e-002 65.2 7.0246 6.5804 1.07 0.9037 12" Diam 9.4073 8.3784 ex_east 65.2 7.0224 124.5 0.060.4782 X-Sect 3.1305 ---. 65.2 7.018 117.81 0.06 0.4685 X-Sect 3.4675- 65.2 7.013 94.8108 0.07 0.6314 X-Sect 3.4413- 67.6 7.2807 279 0.03 0.4113 X·Sect 5.3323 --e-003 67.6 7.2787 7.25351 1.2342 18" Diam 4.6787 4.1046 67.6 7.2745 61.7242 0.12 0.6832 X-Sect 3.5858- 67.6 7.2645 66.6905 0.11 0.7836 X-Sect 2.9393- 67.6 7.2596 70.9939 0.1 0.5719 X-Sect 3.6244 --- 67.6 7.2557 93.7984 0.08 0.6719 X-Sect 3.6325- 67.6 7.2549 26.6671 0.27 1.4156 X-Sect 1.1841 - 68.7 7.4254 6.9473 1.07 0.906712" Diam 9.9203 8.8456 e-004 68.7 7.4237 226.87 0.03 0.5902 X-Sect 5.7063 -' - 92.2 10.2247 18.9199 0.54 1.047424" Diam 6.1392 6.0224 e-005 92.2 10.2216 338.51 0.03 0.5631 X-Sect 4.9185- 92.2 10.2183 33.2703 0.31 0.8395 X-Sect 4.3224 -- 92.2 10.2164 8.6723 1.18 -1 X-Sect 1.178- 92.2 10.212 23.5738 0.43 0.690218" Diam 12.8615 13.34 92.2 10.2081 266.41 0.04 0.6392 X-Sect 4.3565 - 92.2 10.1973 1354.11 0.01 0.6263 X-Sect 2.0863- 92.2 10.1853 491.48 0.02 0.3323 X-Sect 1.4977-- 92.2 10.132 3470.27 0 0.3539 X-Sect 0.8642 -'- 92.2 9.9841 549.84 0.02 0.2991 X-Sect 0.5983 - 92.2 9.9643 3827.85 0 0.4105 X-Sect 1.946- 92.2 9.9216 4.3371 2.29 -1 12" Diam 2.2876 5.5221 92.2 9.9128 50.2681 0.2 0.904 X-Sect 2.771 --- 122.6 12.0698 594.02 0.02 0.2893 X-Sect 10.2968 ---e-006 122.6 12.0648 15.3148 0.79 1.003618" Diam 9.6013 8.6684 122.6 12.0245 18.2879 0.66 1.4658 X-Sect 2.1936-- 122.6 12.0107 17.5281 0.6!! 0.6067 X-Sect 4.6997 -.-- 122.6 12.0027 179.94 0.07 0.4436 X-Sect 5.2531 --- 122.6 . 11.9926 61.1492 0.2 1.0638 X-Sect 2.9017- 122.6 11.9823 27.9865 0.43 1.096 X-Sect 4.2499- 122.6 11.9814 78.2241 0.15 1.2007 X-Sect 4.2155- 122.6 11.972 30.6525 0.39 0.86824" Diam 9.156 9.757 122.6 11.9572 47.75 0.25 1.1715 X-Sect 4.2164 --- 124.4 12.0112 319.76 0.04 0.6751 X-Sect 5.8978 ----e-007 124.4 12.0055 1134.16 0.01 0.5548 X-Sect 5.7484 --- 124.4 11.9853 413.21 0.03 0.7639 X-Sect 3.7479-- • e ~ D-110 124.4 11.9689 241.55 0.05 0:698 X-Sect 3.9096 ----.J ___ Rch App Bend Junct HW Max Ell Loss Head Loss Loss Elev RimEl Fr Node To Node fI ft ft ft ft ft N-110 408.288 N-111 N-110 409.238 -na--na--na--409.238 411.92 N-112 N-111 409.9703 -na---na---na--409.9703 414.13 N-113 N-112 411.6608 -na---na---na--411.6607 415.64 N-114 N-113 412.5349 -na--na----na--412.5349 415.67 N-115 N-114 414~1314 -mi_ -n3--na-414.18 414.08 N-116 N-115 415.5033 -na--na---na--415.5033 416.5 N-l17 N-116 415.5562 -na--na--na-415.5562 4.16.39 . N-118 N-l17 416.3861 -na--na--na--416.3861 .416.39 N-119 N-118 416.626 -na--na---na--416.71 416.61 N-120 N-119 418.44 -na---na--na--418.24 418.14 N-121 N-120 420.9399 --na---na--na-420.43 . 420.33 N-l22 N-121 421.5157 -na--na--na--421.5157 422.69 N-123 N-122 422.9861 --na---na---na-422.9861 42.3.31 N-124 N-123 425.626 -n3--na--na-423.41 423.31 N-125 N-124 423.64 -n3--na-- -na--423.64 424.05 N-126 N-125 433.8967 -na--na- -na-424.9 424.8 N-127 N-126 425.6399 -n3--na.--na-425.6399 426.02 N-128 N-127 426.0798 -na--na--na-426.0798 426.52 N-129 N-128 427.6098 --n8--na-- -na--427.6097 428.27 .$130 N-129 429.6497 -na--na--na-429.4 429.3 131 N-130 430.9699 -na--na--na-430.83 430.73 N-132 N-131 432.4499 --na--na--na-432.45 432.79 N-133 N-132 437.2623 -na--na--na--436.5 436.4 N-134 N-133 436.5119 --na---na---na--436.03 435.93 N-135 N-l34 437.4999 -na--na--na-437.57 437.47 N-136 N-135 440.3899 -na---na---na--440.25 440.15 N-137 N-136 441.418 --na--na--na-441.418 442.1 N-137A N-137 442.088 -na--na---na--441.99 441.89 N-138 N-137A 445.5185 --na--na---na-442.9 442.8 N-139 N-138 442.9019 -na---na--na-442.9 442.8 N-140 N-139 443.8899 -na---na---na-443.14 443.04 N-141 N-140 444.3999 -na-. -na--na-444.3999 444.84 N-142 N-141 445.6699 -na-.-na---na--445.6699 446.11 N-143 N-142 446.8898 -na--na---na-446.8898 447.71 N-144 N-143 448.3436 -n3---na---na-448.2 448.1 N-145 N-144 448.4599 --na--na--na-447.84 447.74 N-146 N-145 449.6399 -na--na-- -na--449.6399 449.84 N-147 N-146 452.3699 ~na--na--na-452.3698 452.71 N-148 N-147 453.5398 -na--na---na-453.5398 453.89 N-149 N-148 . 456.7368 -na--na---na-454.3 454.2 N-150 N-149 454.303 -na--na--na-454.3029 454.65 N-151 N-150 456.4129 --na--na-.-na--455.87 455.77 N-152 N-151 460.5699 -na---mi---na-460.56 460.46 • N-153 N-152 463.89 --na---na---na--463,89 464.17 °J_l54 N-153 467.8199 -na--na---na--467.44 467.34 I ·' . . -tt Table B.2. Hydrograph Routing -East Basin -10-Year Storm . ,~OUTEHYD 0 THRU [Existing East) USING TYPE1A AND [10 yrJ NOTZERO ACTUAL Reach Area Flow Full Q % Full nDepth Size oVel WeI eBasinl Hyd ac cfs cfs ratio ft fils fils ---.-------- D-Dum2 19.7 4.4884 122.33 0.04 0.4719 X-Sect 3.935 ---e-OOl O-Dum1 53.6 13.1058 122.33 0.11 0.81 X-Sect 5.5304 --e-002 0-145 53.6 13.1051 121.12 0.11 0.8142 X-Sect 5.4927 - 0-144 53.6 13.1036 117.92 0.11 0.9649 X-Sect 5.2679 ---- 0-143 53.6 13.1 122.41 0.11 0.9032 X-Sect 4.856 ---- 0-142 53.6 13.0953 82.3869 0.16 0.9821 X-Sect 4.3102 - 0-141 53.6 13.0948 10.3949 1.26 -1 X-Sect 1.2597 -- P-117 65.2 14.3238 6.5804 2.18 -1 12" Diam 2.1767 8.3784 ex_east ·0-140 65.2 14.3181 124.5 0.12 0.6926 X-Sect 3.9913 --- 0-139 65.2 14.3076 117.81 0.12 0.6891 X-Sect 4.3262- 0-138 65.2 14.2973 94.8108 0.15 0.9065 X-Sect 4.2086 ---- 0-137 67.6 14.8971 279 0.05 0.5622 X-Sect 6.5644 --e-003 P-116 67.6 14.8875 7.2535 2.05 -1 18" Diam 2.0525 4.1046 0-136 67.6 14.8791 61.7242 0.24 0.9641 X-Sect 4.5155 --- 0-135 67.6 14.86 66.6905 0.22 1.1209 X-Sect 3.6062 ---- 0-134 67.6 14.8509 70.9939 0.21 0.8189 X-Sect 4.472 -- 0-133A 67.6 14.8437 93.7984 0.16 0.899 X-Sect 4.4767 - 0-133 67.6 14.8424 26.6671 0.56 1.9795 X-Sect 1.4503- P-115 68.7 15.1643 6.9473 2.18 -1 12" Diam 2.1828 8.8456 e-004 0-132 68.7 15.1617 226.87 0.07 0.8315 X-Sect ·7.0313- •• P-114 92.2 20.3817 18.9199 1.08 -1 24" Diam 1.0773 6.0224 e-005 »-131 92.2 20.3728 338.51 0.06 0.8183 X-Sect 6.0985 -- -0-130 92.2 20.3642 33.2703 0.61 1.2093 X-Sect 5.2653 - 0-129 92.2 20.3511 8.6723 2.35 -1 X-Sect 2.3467- P-113 92.2 20.3415 23.5738 0.86 1.0749 18" Diam 15.0091 13.34 0-128 92.2 20.3328 266.41 0.08 0.9398 X-Sect 5.4109 ----- 0-127 92.2 20.3088 1354.11 0.01 0.7502 X-Sect 2.4283 -- 0-126 92.2 20.2866 491.48 0.04 0.428 x-Sect 1.9106 --- 0-125 92.2 20.1873 3470.27 0.01 0.4582 X-Sect 1.0267 -- 0-124 92.2 20.03 549.84 0.04 0.4223 X-Sect 0.7679- 0-123 92.2 19.9985 3827.85 0.01 0.5331 x-Sect 2.3162- P-112 92.2 19.9587 4.3371 4.6 -1 12" Diam 4.6019 5.5221 0-122 92.2 19.9456 50.2681 0.4 1.2487 X-Sect 3.3192 ---- 0-121 122.6 24.93 594.02 0.04 0.4161 X-Sect 13.223-e-006 P-lll 122.6 24.8832 15.3148 1.62 -1 18" Diam 1.6248 8.6664 0-120 122.6 24.8416 18.2879 1.35 -1 X-Sect 1.3474 - D-119 122.6 24.5438 17.5281 1.4 -1 X-Sect 1.4002 --- 0-118 122.6 24.5308 179.94 0.14 0.6339 X-Sect 6.562- 0-117 . 122.6 24.5144 61.1492 0.4 1.4223 X-Sect 3.6544 -- 0-116 122.6 24.4971 27.9865 0.88 1.4271 x-Sect 5.1474 -- 0-115 122.6 24.4955 78.2241 0.31 1.6574 X-Sect 5.1522 - P-ll0 122.6 24.4801 30.6525 0.8 1.3515 24" Diam 10.8367 9.757 0-114 122.6 24.4557 47.75 0.51 1.5399 X-Sect 5.2816 -- 0-113 124.4 24.6393 319.76 0.08 1.0057 X-Sect 7.2971 --e-007 0-112 124.4 24.6301 1134.16 0.02 0.742 X-Sect 7.4221 - .;-111 124.4 24.5979 413.21 0.06 1.1252 x-Sect 4.8448 -- ., . . . 124.4 24.5719 241.55 0.1 1.0455 X-See! 4.8977 ---e 0-110 J--Rch App Bend June! 'HW Max Ell Loss Head Loss Loss Elev RimEl Fr Node To Node fl fl fl fl fl fl N-110 408.6355 N-111 N-110 409.5854 --na--na---na-409.5854 411.92 N-112 N-111 410.6952 --na---na- -na--410.6952 414.13 N-113 N-112 412.3751 -na--na---na--412.3751 415.64 N-114 N-113 412.985 --na---na----na-412.985 415.67 N-115 N-114 414.5504 -na--na--na--414.18 414.08 N-116 N-115 417.346 --na--na--na-416.6 416.5 N-117 N-116 416.6529 -ns--na--na-416.49 416.39 N-118 N-117 417.3199 -na--na--na--416.49 416.39 N-119 N-118 416.7623 -ns--na--na--416.71 416.61 N-120 N-119 418.4399 -na---na- --na-418.24 418.14 N-121 N-120 420.9399 --na--na---na-420.43 .420.33 N-122 N-121 421.3322 -na--na--na-421.3322 422.69 N-123 N-122 427.5867 -na--na--na--423.41 423.31 N-124 N-123 426.0499 -na--na---na-423.41 423.31 N-125 N-124 423.6399 -nlr---nlr--na--423.64 424.05 N-126 N-125 465.1461 -na--ns--ns-424.9 424.8 N-127 N-126 425.6399 -ns--ns--n8-425.6399 426.02 N-128 N-127 426.0798 -na--ns--na-426.0798 426.52 N-129 N-128 427.6098 -ns--ns---na-427.6097 428.27 e)N-130 N-129 429.6497 -ns--ns--na-429.4 429.3 N-131 N-130 430.9699 -na--ns--n8-430.83 430.73 . N-132 N-131 432.4499 -ns--na- -na-432.45 432.79 N-133 N-132 441.2068 -na--na--na-436.5 436.4 N-134 N-133 436.5119 --n8--na- -na-436.03 435.93 N-135 N-134 437.4999 -ns--na--na--437.57 437.47 N-136 N-135 440.3899 -n8--na--n8-440.25 440.15 N~137 N-136 442.9103 -ns--na--n8-442.2 442.1 N-137A N-137 442.87 -na--na---n8--441.99 441.89 N'138 N-137A 458.8658 -na--ns--n8-442.9 442.8 N-139 N-138 443.1294 -na--na- -na-442.9 442.8 . N-140 N-139 443.89 --na--ns--ns-443.14 443.04 N-141 N-140 444.3999 --na--na--na-444.3999 444.84 N-142 N-141 445.7908 -na--nlr--nlr-445.7908 446.11 N-143 N-142 447.0108 -ns--na---n8-447.0107 447.71 N-144 N-143 451.3791 -n8--na--na--448.2 448.1 N-145 N-144 448.46 -n8·--na- -na-447.84 447.74 N-146 N-145 449.6399 -na--ns--n8--449.6399 449.84 N-147 N-146 452.3698 -ns--na--ns-452.3698 452.71 N-148 N-147 453.5397 -na--ns--na-453.5397 453.89 N-149 N-148 464.129 -na--na--na-454.3 454.2 N-150 N-149 454.3029 -na--na--na--454.3029 454.65 N-151 N-150 456.4128 -na--na--na--455.87 455.77 N-152 N-151 460.5699 -na---na---na-460.56 460.46 N-153 N-152 463.8899 --na--na--na-463.89 464.17 . e ~-154 . N-153 467.8199 -na--na---na-467.44 467.34 :.\ " . '.'\ Table B.3.Hydrograph Routing -East Basin -25-Year Storm e:9 ROUTEHYD 0 THRU (Existing East] USING TYPE1A AND (25 yr] NOTZERO ACTUAL Reach Area Flow Full Q % Full nDepth Size nVel Nel CBasin I Hyd ac cfs cfs ratio ft ftls ftls --- O-Dum2 19.7 5.7736 122.33 0.05 0.5347 X-Sect 4.2649 ----e-001 O-Dum1 53.6 16.6641 122.33 0.14 0.9204 X-Sect 5.9522-. e-002 0-145 53.6 16.6623 121.12 0.14 0.9253 X-Sect 5.911 -- 0-144 53.6 16.6597 117.92 0.14 1.095 X-Sect 5.6169 - 0-143 53.6 16.6543 122.41 0.14 1.0156 X-Sect 5.1746 -- 0-142 53.6 16.6461 62.3669 0.2 1.1029 X-Sect 4.6242 -- 0-141 53.6 16.6444 10.3949 1.6 -1 X-Sect 1.6012 --- P-117 65.2 16.3166 6.5604 2.78 -1 12" Diam 2.7636 6.3764 ex_east 0-140 65.2 16.3116 124.5 0.15 0.7894 X-Sect 4.3271 --- 0-139 65.2 16.2992 117.61 0.16 0.766 X-Sect 4.6556- 0-136 65.2 16.2666 94.6106 0.19 1.0247 X-Sect 4.5015 --- 0-137 67.6 19.0686 279 0.07 0.6269 X-Sect 7.0354 ----e-003 P-116 67.6 19.0592 7.2535 2.63 -1 16" Diam 2.6276 4.1046 0-136 67.6 19.0493 61.7242 0.31 1.0913 X-Sect 4.8719 - 0-135 .67.6 19.0273 66.6905 0.29 1.2672 X-Sect 3.66 -- 0-134 67.6 19.0167 70.9939 0.27 0.926 X-Sect 4.7959 -- 0-133A 67.6 19.0062 93.7964 0.2 0.9906 X-Sect 4.6691 - 0-133 67.6 19.0069 26.6671 0.71 2.2269 X-Sect 1.5564 - P-115 66.7 19.4194 6.9473 2.6 -1 12" Diam 2.7952 6.6456 e-004 0-132 66.7 19.4163 226.67 0.09 0.9372 x-Sect 7.5367- ... ,{114 92.2 25.943 16.9199 1.37 -1 24" Diam 1.3712 6.0224 e-005 0-131 92.2 25.9323 336.51 0.08 0.9321 X-Sect 6.5545- .~ 0-130 92.2 25.9219 33.2703 0.78 1.3721 X~Sect 5.6512 - 0-129 92.2 25.9106 6.6723 2.99 -1 X-Sect 2.9677 - P-113 92.2 25.6992 23.5736 1.1 -1 16" Diam 1.0966 13.34 0-126 92.2 25.6868 266.41 0.1 1.076 X-Sect 5.616 -- 0-127 92.2 25.6608 1354.11 0.02 0.8003 X-Sect 2.5676 -- 0-126 92.2 25.6356 491.46 0.05 0.4713 X-Sect 2.076- 0-125 92.2 25.7224 3470.27 0.01 0.5016 X-Sect 1.0906- 0-124 92.2 25.5469 549.64 0.05 0.476' X-Sect 0.636- 0-123 92.2 25.5134 3627.65 0.01 0.564 X-Sect 2.4616- P-112 92.2 25.4763 4.3371 5.67 -1 12" Diam 5.6741 5.5221 0-122 92.2 25.4617 50.2661 0.51 1.3679 X-Sect 3.5601 - 0-121 122.6 32.0466 594.02 0.05 0.4735 x-Sect 14.376 -e-006 P-111 122.6 32.0049 15.3146 2.09 -1 16" Diam 2.0696 6.6664 0-120 122.6 31.7666 16.2679 1.74 -1 X-Sect 1.7361 - 0-119 122.6 31.6961 17.5261 1.61 -1 X-Sect 1.6063 -- 0-116 122.6 31.6612 179.94 0.18 0.7203 x-Sect 7.0637- 0-117 122.6 31.6627 61.1492 0.52 1.5906 X-Sect 3.9591 - 0-116 122.6 31.6418 27.9665 1.13 -1 X-Sect 1.1306 - 0-115 122.6 31.64 76.2241 0.4 1.666 X-Sect 5.5166- P-110 122.6 31.6228 30.6525 1.03 1.702724" Diam 11.096 9.757 0-114 122.6 31.5955 47.75 0.66 1.7176. X-Sect 5.6991 -- 0-113 124.4 31.8576 319.76 0.1 1 .1564 X-Sect 7.6462 --e-007 0-112 124.4 31.6471 1134.16 0.03 0.8307 X-Sect 8.1092 - • )0-111 124.4 31.6116 413.21 0.08 1.2906 X-Sect 4.9987- .,i , -) 0-110 124.4 31.7828 241.55 0.13 1.207 X-Sect 5.2894 ---- Rch App Bend Junct HW Max Ell - Loss Head Loss Loss Elev RimEl FrNode To Node fI fI fI fI fI fI N-ll0 408.797 N-lll N-ll0 409.747 -na--na---na-409.747 411.92 N-112 N-lll 410.8606 -na---na----na-410.8606 414.13 N-113 N-112 412.5405 -na--na----na-412.5405 415.64 N-114 N-113 413.1504 --na----na---na--413.1505 :415.67 N-115 N-114 414.8065 -na--na--na-414.18 414.08 ,N-116 N-115 418.962 -na---na--na--416.6 416.5 N-117 N-116 416.6529 -n8o--na--na-416.49 416.39 N-118 N-l17 417.3199 -na--na----na-416.49 416.39 N-119 N-118 416.9307 -na---na---na--416.71 416.61 N-120 N-119 418.4399 -na--na---na-418.24 418.14 N-121 N-120 420.9399 -na---na---na-420.43 420.33 N-l22 N-121 421.5229 --na----na----na-421:5229 422.69 N-123 N-122 431.8698 -na---na--na-423.41 423.31 N-124 N-123 426.0499 -ns--na---na-423.41 423.31 N-125 N-124 423.64 -na---na---na--423.64 424.05 N-126 N-125 4912671 -na---na--na-424.9 424.8 N-127 N-126 425.6399 --na--no--na-425.6399 426.02 N-128 N-127 426.0798 -na--ns--na-426.0798 426.52 N-129 N-128 427.6098 -ns--na--na-427.6097 428.27 ."N-130 N-129 429.6497 -na--na--na--429.4 429.3 ).1.131 N-130 430.9699 -na--na- -na-430.83 430.73 N-132 N-131 432.45 -na---na----na-432.45 432.79 N-133 N-132 437.2202 -na--na--na-436.5 436.4 N-l34 N-133 436.5119 --na--na---na-436.03 435.93 N-135 N-l34 437.85 -na---na--na-437.57 437.47 N-136 N-135 440.39 -na----na--na--440.25 440.15 N-137 N-l36 444.033 -na---na----na--442.2 442.1 N-137A N-137 442.8699 --na---na--na-441.99 441.89 N-138 N-137A 469.665 -na----na-"-na-442.9 442.8 N-139 N-138 443~3789 -na---na--na-442.9 442.8 N-140 N-139 443.89 --na----na---na--443.14 443.04 N-141 N-140 444.3999 -na--na---na-444.3999 444.84 N-142 N-141 445.9371 --na----na---na--445.9371 446.11 N-143 N-142 447.157 -na---na--na-447.157 447.71 N,144 N-143 453.928 -na---na--na--446.2 446.1 N-145 N-144 446.46 -na--na--na-447.64 447.74 N-146 N-145 449.6399 --na----na----na-449.6399 449.64 N-147 N-146 452.3699 -na--n3---na-452.3699 452.71 N-148 N-147 453.5396 -na---na---na-453.5396 453.89 N-149 N-148 470.6597 -na--na--na--454.3 454.2 N-150 N-149 454.3029 -na--na---na--454.3029 454.65 N-151 N-150 456.4129 -na--na- -na-455.67 455.77 N-152 N-151 460.5699 -na----na----na--460.56 460.46 . N-153 N-152 463.8981 -na----na--na-463.8981 464.17 : ..• jI-154 N-153 467.828 -na--na---na--467.44 467.34 ---------------------------- ,. '. """ Table B.4. Hydrograph Routing -East Basin -50-Year Storm "~ROUTEHYD D THRU (Existing East) USING TYPE1A AND (50 yr) NOTZERO ACTUAL Reach Area Flow FullQ % Full nDepth Size nVel Nel CBasin I Hyd ac cfs cfs ratio fI fils . fils O-Dum2 19.7 6.4328 122.33 0.05 0.5644 X-Sect 4.4125 --e-001 O-Dum1 53.6 18.4875 122.33 0.15 0.9737 X-Sect 6.1401 --e-002 0-145 53.6 18.4851 121.12 0.15 0.9789 X-Sect 6.0973 --- 0-144 53.6 18.482 117.92 0.16 1.1561 X-Sect 5.7757 -- 0-143 53.6 18.4757 122.41 0.15 1.0682 X-Sect 5.3178 --- 0-142 53.6 18.4689 82.3869 0.22 1.16 X-Sect 4.7688 ---- D-141 53.6 18.4652 10.3949 1.78 -1 X-Sect 1.7764 - P-117 65.2 20.3744 6.5804 3.1 -1 12" Diam 3.0962 8.3784 ex_east 0-140 65.2 20.3667 124.5 0.16 0.8355 X-Sect 4.4786 -- 0-139 65.2 20.3531 117.81 0.17 0.8317 X-Sect 4.8035 -- 0-138 65.2 20.3398 94.8108 0.21 1.0799 X-Sect 4.6329 --- 0-137 67.6 21.2149 279 0.08 0.6572 X-Sect 7.2468 --e-003 P-116 . 67.6 21.2056 7.2535 2.92 -1 18" Diam 2.9235 4.1046 0-136 67:6 21.1949 61.7242 0.34 1.152 X-Sect 5.0314 - 0-135 67.6 21.1716 66.6905 0.32 1.3357 X-Sect 3.9737 - 0-134 67.6 21.1602 70.9939 0.3 0.9762 X-Sect 4.9411 --- 0-133A 67.6 21.1511 93.7984 0.23 1.035 X-Sect 5.0466 --- 0-133 67.6 21.1496 26.6671 0.79 2.3487 X-Sect 1.6064 - P-115 68.7 21.6082 6.9473 3.11 -1 12" Diam 3.1103 8.8456 e-004 0-132 68.7 21.605 226.87 0.1 0.9869 X-Sect 7.7628- .• t 114 92.2 28.7909 18.9199 1.52 -1 24" Diam 1.5217 6.0224 e-005 131 92.2 28.7784 338.51 0.09 0.9857 X-Sect 6,7585- 0-130 92.2 28.7663 33.2703 0.86 1.4508 X-Sect 5.8219 - 0-129 92.2 28.7555 8.6723 3.32 -1 X-Sect 3.3158 - P-113 92.2 28.7428 23.5738 1.22 -1 18" Diam 1.2193 13.34 0-128 92.2 28.731 266.41 0.11 1.1405 X-Sect 5.9997-' 0-127 92.2 28.699 1354.11 0.02 0.8231 X-Sect 2.6309- 0-126 92.2 28.6712 491.48 0.06 0.4918 X-Sect 2.1506 --- 0-125 92.2 28.5445 3470.27 0.01 0.5218 X-Sect 1.1196 -- 0-124 92.2 28.3566 549.84 0.05 0.5043 X-Sect 0.8666 -_ 0-123 92.2 28.3183 3827.85 0.01 0.6073 X-Sect 2.5267- P-112 92.2 28.2813 4.3371 6.52 -1 12" Diam 6:5208 5.5221 0-122 92.2 28.2656 50.2681 0.56 1.4497 X-Sect 3.6834 - D-121 122.6 35.6853 594.02 0.06 0.5006 X-Sect 14.8923 -e-006 P-ll1 122.6 35.8419 15.3148 2.33 -118"Diam 2.3273 8.6664 D-120 122.6 35.4329 18.2879 1.94 -1 X-Sect 1.9375 - 0-119 122.6 35.3437 17.5281 2.02 -1 X-Sect 2.0164 - 0-118 122.6 35.3278 179.94 0.2 0.7605 X-Sect 7.315 -- 0-117 122.6 35.308 61.1492 0.58 1.6707 X-Sect 4.0938-' 0-116 122.6 35.2852 27.9865 1.26 -1 X-Sect 1.2608 - .D-115 122.6 35.2833 78.2241 0.45 1.9632 X-Sect 5.68- P-110 122.6 35.2651 30.6525 1.15 -1 24" Diam 1.1505 9.757 0-114 122.6 35.2359 47.75 0.74 1.8022 X-Sect 5.8823- 0-113 124.4 35.5397 319.76 0.11 1.2299 X-Sect 8.0881 ---e-007 D-112 124.4 35.5284 1134.16 0.03 0.8726 X-Sect 8.4163 - • »-111 124.4 35.4908 413.21 0.09 1.3677 X-Sect 5.1548 --- ',." • 0-110 124.4 35.4602 241.55 0.15 1.2828 X-Sect 5.4622- )--Rch App Beod Juoct 'HW Max Ell Loss Head Loss Loss Elev RimEl Fr Node To Node ft ft ft ft II ft N-ll0 408.8728 N-lll N-ll0 409.8228 --oa----oa---oa-409.8228 411.92 N-112 N-lll 410.9377 -oa--oa--oa-410.9377 414.13 N-113 N-112 412.6176 --oa---oa--oa--412.6176 415.64 N-114 N-113 413.2275 --oa--oa----oa-413.2275 415.67 N-115 N-114 414.9305 -oa--oa--oa-414.18 414.08 N-116 N-115 415.8377 -oa---oa---oa--415.8377 416.5 N-117 N-116 416.2331 --oa--oa---oa-416.2331 416.39 N-118 N-117 417.0631 -oa--oa--o~ 416.49 416.39 N-119 N-118 417.0166 -oa---oa----oa-416.71 416.61 N-120 N-119 418.4399 -oa---oa-' -oa-418.24 418.14 N-121 N-120 420.9399 --oa---oa---oa-420.43 420.33 N-122 N-121 421.6109 -oa-- -oa---oa-421.6109 422.69 N-123 N-122 434.4431 --oa--oa---oa-423.41 423.31 N-124 N-123 426.0499 -oa--oa- -oa-423.41 423.31 N-125 N-124 423.6399 -oa----oa- --oa-423.6399 424.05 N'126 N-125 506.9789 -oa--oa--oa-424.9 424.8 N-127 N-126 425.6399 -oa---oa--oa-,425.6399 426.02 N-128 N-127 426.0798 -oa---oa--oa-426.0798 426.52 N-129 N-128 427.6098 -oa--oa- -oa-427.6097 428.27 .t-13O N-129 429.6497 --oa--oa- -oa-429.4 429.3 -131 N-130 430.9699 -oa--oa--oa-430.83 430.73 /N-132 N-131 432.5004 -oa--oa--oa-432.5004 432.79 N-133 N-132 438.2302 -oa--oa- -oa-436.5 436.4 N-134 N-133 436.5119 -oa---oa-- --oa-436.03 435.93 N-135 N-134 437.85 -oa--oa--oa-437.57 437.47 N-l36 N-135 440.3899 -oa---oa--oa-440.25 440.15 N-137 N-136 444.7122 -oa---oa---oa--442.2 442.1 N-137A N-137 442.8699 -oa--oa- -oa-441.99 441.89 N-138 N-137A 476.2553 -oa--oa-.:..oa-442.9 ,442.8 N-139 N-138 443.4986 -030--na--na':" 442.9 442.8 N-140 N-139 443.8899 -oa--oa--oa-443.14 443.04 N-141 N-140 444.3999 --oa----na- -oa--, 444.3999 444.84 N-142 N-141 446.0057 -oa--oa--oa-446.0057 446.11 N-143 N-142 447.2256 -oa--na--oa-447.2256 447.71 N-144 N-143 455.48,35 -oa-- -oa---oa-448.2 448.1 N-145 N-144 448.46 -oa--oa--oa-447.64 447.74 N-146 N-145 449.6399 -oa---oa--oa-449.6399 449.84 N-147 N-146 452.3699 --oa---oa---oa-452.3698 452.71 , N-148 N-147 453.5398 --oa---oa---oa-453.5398 453.89 N-149 N-148 474.9647 -oa--oa--oa-454.3 454.2 N-150 N-149 454.3029 --oa---oa--oa--454.3029 454.65 N-151 N-150 456.4129 --oa----oa--oa-455.87 455.77 N-152 N-151 460.5836 -oa---na--oa-460.56 460.46 N-153 N-152 463.9726 --oa----oa- --oa-463.9726 464.17 • ~-154 N-153 467.9025 --oa---oa--oa-467.44 467.34 :.1 I . ..• Table B.S. Hydrograph Routing -East Basin - 1 DO-Year Stonn . . )ROUTEHYD 0 THRU [Existing East) USING TYPE1A AND [100 yr) NOTZERO ACTUAL Reach Area Flow Full Q % Full nDepth Size nVel Nel CBasin I Hyd ac cfs cfs ratio It fils fils ------ O-Dum2 19.7 7.1007 122.33 0.06 0.5932 X-Sect 4.5504--e·001 D-Duml 53.6 20.334 122.33 0.17 1.0256 X-Sect 6.3154 --e-002 0-145 53.6 20.3311 121.12 0.17 1.0311 X-Sect 6.2711 - 0-144 53.6 20.3274 117.92 0.17 1.2148 X-Sect 5.9225 ---- D-143 53.6 20.3204 122.41 0.17 1.1183 X-Sect 5.4519 ---- 0-142 53.6 20.3129 82.3869 0.25 1.2157 X-Sect 4.9037 ---- D-141 53.6 20.3094 10.3949 1.95 -1 X-Sect 1.9538 --- P-l17 65.2 22.46 6.5804 3.41 -1 12" Diam 3.4132 8.3784 ex_east 0-140 65.2 22.4518 124.5 0.18 0.8802 X-Sect 4.6208 - 0-139 65.2 22.4372 117.81 0.19 0.8757 X-Sect 4.9419 -- 0-138 65.2 22.4229 94.8108 0.24 1.1329 X-Sect 4.756- 0-137 67.6 23.3927 279 0.08 0.6862 X-Sect 7.4448 --e·003 P-116 67.6 23.3835 7.2535 3.22 -1 18" Oiam 3.2238 4.1046 0-136 67.6 23.3721 61.7242 0.38 1.2109 X-Sect 5.1805 --- D-135 67.6 23.3475 66.6905 0.35 1.4016 X-5ect 4.08- 0-134 67.6 23.3353 70.9939 0.33 1.0244 X-Sect 5.0771 --- 0-133A 67.6 23.3254 93.7984 0.25 1.0782 X-SeCt 5.2133 -- 0-133 67.6 23.3239 26.6671 0.87 2.4653 X-Sect 1.6511 -- P-1l5 68.7 23.829 6.9473 3.43 -1 12" Diain 3.43 8.8456 e-004 0-132 68.7 23.8256 226.87 0.11 1.0347 X-Sect 7.9743- •. ~~!~ 92.2 31.6894 18.9199 1.67 -1 24" Diam 1.6749 6.0224 e-005 92.2 31~6761 338.51 0.09 1.0378 X-Sect 6.9502- ··0-130 92.2 31.6628 33.2703 0.95 1.5281 X-Sect 5.9813 -- 0-129 92.2 31.6529 8.6723 3.65 -1 X-Sect 3.6499- P-113 92:2 31.6395 23.5738 1.34 -1 18" Diam 1.3421 13.34 0-128 92.2 31.627 266.41 0.12 1.2034 X-Sect 6.1704 -- 0-127 92.2 31.5932 1354.11 0.02 0.8449 X-Sect 2.6909 --- 0-126 92.2 31.5642 491.48 0.06 0.5117 X-Sect 2.2214 -- 0-125 92.2 31.4314 3470.27 0.01 0.541 X-Sect 1.1469 -- 0-124 92.2 31.2367 549.84 0.06 0.5301 X-Sect 0.8959 - 0-123 92.2 31.1967 3827.85 0.01 0.6298 X-Sect 2.5886 - P-112 92.2 31.1607 . 4.3371 7.18 -1 12" Diam 7;1847 5.5221 0-122 92.2 31.1444 50.2681 0.62 1.5106 X-Sect 3.8005 -- 0-121 122.6 39.4139 594.02 0.07 0.527 X-Sect 15.3819 --e-006 P-l11 122.6 39.3717 15.3148 2.57 -1 16" Oiam 2.5706 6.6664 0-120 122.6 39.1738 18.2879 2.14 -1 X-Sect 2.1421 -- 0-119 122.6 39.0873 17.5281 2.23 -1 X-Sect 2.23- D-118 122.6 39.0705 179:94 0.22 0.7996 X-Sect 7.5336 -- 0-117 122.6 39.0498 61.1492 0.64 1.7492 X-Sect 4.2208 -- 0-116 122.6 36.9434 27.9865 1.39 -1 X-Sect 1.3915 -- D-115 122.6 36.9414 76.2241 0.5 2.0557 X-Sect 5.629 -- P-l10 122.6 38.9219 30.6525 1.27 -1 24" Diam 1.2696 9.757 0-114 122.6 36.6904 47.75 0.61 1.8636 X-Sect 6.0506 -- 0-113 124.4 39.2371 319.76 0.12 1 .298 X-Sect 6.3113 --e-007 0-112 124.4 39.225 1134.16 0.03 0.9129 X-Sect 8.7019 -- • ")-111 124.4 39.1846 413.21 0.09 1.4411 X-Sect 5.2991 ---.. J : .• " I .-'. 0-110 124.4 39.1518 241.55 0.16 1.3552 X-Sect 5.6219-~ Rch App Bend Junct HW MaxEV "-./ ----- Loss Head Loss Loss Elev RimEl Fr Node To Node fI fI fI fI fI fI -N-110 408.9452 N-111 N-110 409.8951 --na----na---na-409.8951 411.92 N-112 N-111 411.0111 -na-- --na---na-411.0111 414.13 N-113 N-112 412.691 -na--na----na--412.691 415.64 N-114 N-113 413.3009 --na---na- -na-413.3009 415.67 N-115 N-114 415.03 -na----na- --na-414.18 414.08 N-116 N-115 416.0292 -na--na--na-416.0292 416.5 N-117 N-116 416.3256 -na--na--na-416.3256 416.39 N-118 N-117 417.1555 -na---na--. --na--416.49 416.39 N-119 N-118 417.1629 ~na--na---na-416.71 416.61 N-120 N-119 418.4399 -na---na--ila-418.24 418.14 N-121 N-120 420.9399 -na---na-- --na-420.43 420.33 N-122 N-121 421.696 -na--na--na-421.696 422.69 N-123 N-122 437.3544 -na--na--na--423.41 423.31 N-124 N-123 426.0499 -na----na--na-423.41 423.31 N-125 N-124 423.6805 -na---na----na--423.6805 424.05 N-126 N-125 524.8533 -na--na--na-424.9 424.8 N-127 N-126 425.6399 -na---na--na-425.6399 426.02 N-128 N-127 426.0798 -na--na-. -na-426.0798 426.52 N-129 N-128 427.6098 -na-~na--na-427.6097 428.27 .~-130 N-129 429.6497 -na--na--na-429.4 429.3 -131 N-130 430.9699 -na-~na---na-430.83 430.73 '-N-132 N-131 432.5633 --na--na--na-432.5633 432.79 N-.133 . N-132 439.3671 -na---na- -na-436.5 436.4 N-134 N-133 436.5119 --na---na----na--436.03 435.93 N-135 N-134 437.85 -na--na---na-437.57 437.47 N-136 N-135 440.3899 -na--na- -na-440.25 440.15 N-137 N-136 445.4762 -na---na----na--442.2 442.1 N-137A 1'1-137 442.8699 -na---na---na-441.99 441.89 N-138 N-137A 483.6605 -na--na--na-442.9 442.8 N-139 N-138 443.6152 -na--na- -na-442.9 442.8 N-140 N-139 443.8899 --na---na---na-443.14 443.04 N-141 N-140 444.4243 -na---na- -na-444.4243 444.84 N-142 N-141 446.0716 -na----na--na-446.0716 446.11 N-143 N-142 447.2915 -na---na- -na-447.2915 447.71 N-144 N-143 457.2313 -na--_ ~na---na--448.2 448.1 N-145 N-144 448.4599 -na--na--na-447.84 447.74 N-146 N-145 449.6399 -na--na----na--449.6399 449.84 N-147 N-146 452.3698 -na---na--na-452.3698 452.71 N-148 N-147 . 453.5398 -na--na- -na-453.5398 453.89 N-149 N-148 479.5756 -na---na---na-454.3 454.2 N-150 N-149 454.3031 -na---na--na-454.3031 454.65 N-151 N-150 456.413 -na---na--na-455.87 455.77 N-152 N-151 460.6481 -na---na-- -na--460.56 460.46 N-153 N-152 464.0445 --na---na-- --na-464.0445 464.17 • )'l-154 N-153 467.9954 -na---na--na-467.44 467.34 , . I. _ .... , Table B.6. Hydrograph Routing -East Basin -Summary Table ;-) 2-Year lO-Year 2S,Year 50-Year l00-Year Freeboard Freeboard Freeboard Freeboard Freeboard Reach 10 From Node To Node (Fl) (Fl) (Fl) (Fl) (FT) N-ll0 D-ll0 N-lll N-l1 0 2.68 2.33 2.17 2.10 2.02 0-111 N-112 N-lll 4.16 3.43 3.27 3.19 3.12 0-112 N-113 N-112 3.98 3.26 3.10 3.02 2.95 D-113 N-114 N-113 3.14 2.69 2.52 2.44 2.37 D-114 N-115 N-114 Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop P-ll0 N-116 N-115 1.00 Overtop Overtop 0.66 0.47 D-115 N-117 N-116 0.83 Overtop Overtop 0.16 0.06 0-116 N-118 N-l17 0.00 Overtop Overtop. Overtop Overtop D-117 N-119 N-118 Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop D-118 N-120 N-119 Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop D-119 N-121 N-120 Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop 0-120 N-l22 N-121 1.17 1.36 1.17 1.08 0.99 P-lll N-123 N-122 0.32 Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop D-121 N-124 N-123 Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop D-122 N-125 N-124 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.37 P-112 N-126 N-125 Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop D-123 N-127 N-l26 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 D-124 N-128 N-127 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.44 D-125 N-129 N-128 0.66 0.66 0.66 0.66 0.66 .)D-126 N-130 N-129 Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop . Overtop D-127 N-131 N.130 Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop '._' . D-128 N-132 N-131 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.29 0.23 P-113 N-133 N-132 . Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop D-129 N-l34 N-133 Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop D-130 N-135 N-134 Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop D-131 N-136 N-135 Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop P-114 N-137 N-136 0.68 Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop 0-132 N-137A N-137 Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop P-1l5 N-138 N-137A Overtop Overtop Overtop' Overtop Overtop D-133 N-139 N-138 Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop D-133A N-140 N-139 Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop 0-134 N-141 N-140 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.42 D-135 N-142 N-141 0.44 0.32 0.17 0.10 0.04 0-136 N-143 N-142 0.82 0:70 0.55 0.48 0.42 P-1l6 N-144 N-143 Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop D-137 N-145 N-144 Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop D-138 N-146 N-145 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0-139 N-147 N-146 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 D-140 N-148 N-147 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 P-l17 N-149 N-148 Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop D-141 N-150 N-149 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 D-142 N-151 N-150 Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop D-143 N-152 N-151 Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop D-144 N-153 N-152 0.28 0.28 0.27 0.20 0.13 e.?145 N-154 N-153 Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop .. .. _ Table B.7. Hydrograph Routing -West Basin -2-YearStonn I) - --ROUTEHYD 0 THRU [Existing VIlest] USING TYPE1A AND [2 yrl NOTZERO ACTUAL Reach Area Flow Full Q % Full nDepth Size oVei Nel CBasio I Hyd ac cIs cIs ratio It fils fils ------ D-021 2.9 0.5767 215.99 0 0.3321 X-Sect 3.0535 --w-OOl 0-020 2.9 0.5766 75.0242 0.01 0.3244 X-Sect 2.7143 --- P-016 19.2 2.8102 10.5228 0.27 0.3529 12" Diam 11.3425 13.398 w-002 0-019 19.2 2.8096 212.76 0.01 0.6667 X-Sect 4.1816 ----- D-018 21.1 3.0333 _ 251.93 0.01 0.2382 X-Sect 5.8108 ----ex_west P:015 21.1 3.0325 7.7298 0.39 0.4351 12" Diam 9.2462. 9.8418 D-017 21.1 3.0318 138.18 0.02 0.3561 X-Sect 3.5277- [)"016 -21.1 3.0316 452.04 -0.01 0.254 X-Sect 5.0894 - P-014 22.3 3.2439 7.9881 0.41 0.4436 12" Diam 9.6423 10.1708 w-003 0-015 22.3 3.2432 160.64 0.02 0.451 X-Sect 3.7541 - 0-014 22.3 3.2429 200 0.02 0.6317 X-Sect 4.3238 -~ P-013 22.3 3.2423 10.6228 0.31 0.3791 12" Diam 11.8787 13.5253 0-012 22.3 3.2413 290.67 0.01 0.6234 x-Sect 4.8101 - 0-011 22.3 3.2403 320.43 0.01 0.3609 X-Sect 4.0339 -- 0-010 25.5 3;7564 1040.88 0 0.57.71 X-Sect 6.1421 --w-004 P-012 25.5 3.7551 7.0631 0.53 0.5186 12" Diam 9.1309 8.9931 P-Oll 25.5 3.7536 6.9402 0.54 0.5239 12" Diam 9.0097 8.8365 P-Ol0 25.5 3.7521 8.217 0.46 0.4742 12" Diam 10.2249 10.4623 P-009 25.5 3.7507 7.6431 0.49 0.4945 12" Diam 9.6859 9.7315 P-OOBA 27.7 4.1444 4.8684 0.85 0.709 12" Diam 6.9597 6.1986 w-005 .1-008 31.5 4.8063 6.8722 0.7 0.6161 12" Diam 9.4657 8.75 w-006 . _, -007 31.5 4.8057 6.4104 0.75 0.6459 12"Diam 8.9569 8.162 P-006 31.5 4.8039 7.4569 0.64 0.583912" Oiam 10.0875 9.4945 P-005 39.3 6.248 9.9629 0.63 0.574 12" Oiam 13.3954 12.6852 w-007 P-004 : 39.3 6.2406 7.7824 0.8 0.6778 12" Oiam 11.0133 9.9088 0-009 39.3 6.2233 93.993 0.07 0.6278 X-Sect 2.79 -- 0-008 39.3 6.2231 112.96 0.06 0.414 X-Sect -6.2056 -- P-003 39.3 6.2205 6.2952 0.99 0.8091 12" Oiam 9.1373 8.0153 0-007 39.3 6.2079 107.57 0.06 0.'5256 X-Sect 3.8357 -- 0-006 39.3 6.207.7 964.56 0.01 0.3936 X-Sect 8.1166 --- P-002 39.3-6.204 -6.1462 1.01 0.8284 12" Oiam 8.9179 7.8256 0-005 39.3 6.2035 ---0 0.915 X-Sect 2.1497 - 0-004 39.3 6.1864 44.3354 0.14 0.5256 X-Sect 4.8288 --- 0-003 39.3 6.1853 313.41 0.02 0.5341 X-Sect 4.3358 -- 0-002 39.3 6.1799 7.70.99 0.01 0.6454 X-Sect 1.5651 -- 0-001 39.3 6.1797 146.32 0.04 0.4209 X-Sect 7.1705 -- P-OOl 48.3 6.7994 8.2043 0.83 0.6946 12" Oiam 11.67.78 10.4461 w-008 Rch App Bend Junct HW Max Ell Loss Head Loss Loss Elev RimEl From Nod To Node It It It It It It N-OOl 373.6321 N-002 N-OOl 382.2466 -na----na----na-380.5 380.4 N-003 N-002 381.0999 -oa---oa---na-380.43 380.33 N-004 N-003 382.8899 --oa----na---na-382.3 382.2 .•. rr-005 N-004 389.8769 -na----na---na-389.8769 390.25 ,-' . .• ~:~~; ,. N-ooil N-010 N-011 N-012 N-014 N-015 N-016 N-017 N-018 N-019 N-019A N-020 N-021 N-022 N-023 N-024 N-025 N-026 N-028 N-029 N"031 N-032 N-033 • . i\N-035 I )N-036 N-037 N-039 N-040 N-041 N-043 N-044 N-005 N-006 N-007 N-008 N-010 N-Oll N-012 N-014 N-015 N-016 N-017 N-018 N-019· N-019A N-020 N-021 N-022 N-023 N-024 N-025 N-026 N-028 N-029 N-031 N-032 N-033 N-035 N-036 N-037 N-039 N-040 N-041 N-043 398.3768 -na- 397.7699 -na-- 400.6486 -na- 400.3799 -na-- 400.4899 --na-- 403.3211 --na-- -na---na-- -na--na-- -na----na- -na--na--. -na---na- --na---na- 401.9299 --na---na---na- 402.4099 -na--na-- -na-- 406.8691 0.9827 0.0089 ---, 407.6445 0.5809 0.0075 ----- 408.2272 0.5814 0.0023-- 411.1539 ----- 419.722 0.4324 0.0032 ---- 420.102 ----- 428.8048 0.3544 0.0039-- 431.8735 1.2605 0.0049 ,---- 435.9002 0.355 0.0013 --- 437.2402 -na- -na- -na- 437.6302 --na- -na-- -na-- 440.4301 --na---na---na-- 444.3401 -na--na---na- 445.7641 -na--na--na- 445.934 -na--na- -na- 447.8239 -na-.-na---na-- 448.994 -na--na---na- 449.4039 -na- 451.6238 -na- 452.5651 -na- 453.065 -na- 455.835 --na- 458.6864 --na-- 458;8464 --na- 466.1862 --na- -na--na- -na-. -'-na- --na--na- -na--na-- --na--na-- -na----na-- --na---na- -na---na-- 398.3768 397.7699 399.4 399.4 400.32 401.7 401.9 402.4099 405.8952 406.41 407.6481 411.1539 419.2928 420.102 428.4543 430.6179 435.5465 437.2402 437.6302 440.4301 444.3401 445.764 445~934 447.8239 448.994 ·449.4039 451.6238 452.5651 453_065 455.835 458.6864 458.8463 466.1862 398.68 398.68 399.3 399.3 400.22 401.6 401.8 402.6 406.01 406.31 408.14 413.72 420.68 422.5 429.85 434 436.59 438.2 438.9 441.52 444.82 446.2 446.47 449.01 450.1 451.24 452.98 453.8 454.27 457.02 459.3 459.71 467.86 _,1 ~ ------------ , r • Table B.8. Hydrograph Routing -West Basin -10-Year Stonn '. ~iOUTEHYO n THRU [Existing West) USING TYPE1A AND [10 yr) NOTZERO ACTUAL Reach Area Flow Full Q % Full nOepth Size· nVel Nel CBasin I Hyd ae cfs cfs ratio fI fils fils .------ 0-021 2.9 1.1262 215.99 0.01 0.4269 X-Sect 3.6099 ----w-OOl 0-020 2.9 1.126 75.0242 0.02 0.417 X-Sect 3.2085 ---- P-016 19.2 5.7252 10.5228 0.54 0.5258 12" Oiam 13.6802 13.398 w-002 0-019 19.2 5.7243 212.76 0.03 0.8706 x-Sect 4.9958- 0-018 21.1 6.2369 251.93 0.02 0.3597 X-Sect 7.2932 --ex_west P-015 21.1 6.2355 7.7298 0.81 0.6807 12" Diam 10.9508 9.8418 0-017 21.1 6.2346 138.18 0.05 0.5336 X-Sect 4.3923- 0-016 21.1 6.2343 452.04 0.01 0.3664 x-Sect 6.4244 - P-014 22.3 6.6546 7.9881 0.83 0.6973 12" Diam 11.3797 10.1708 w-003 0-015 22.3 6.6534. 160.64 0.04 0.6285 X-Sect 4.6707 -- D-014 22.3 6.653 200 0.03 0.827 X-Sect 5.1746 -- P-013 22.3 6.652 10.6228 0.63 0.5735 12" Oiam 14.2771 13.5253 D-012 22.3 6.6504 290.67 0.02 0.8162 X-Sect 5.757 -- D-Oll 22.3 6.6488 320.43 0.02 0.516 X-Sect 5.0632- 0-010 25.5 7.6794 1040.88 0.01 0.7546 X-Sect 7.3444 --w-004 P-012 25.5 7.6772 7.0631 1.09 -1 12" Diam 1.0869 8.9931 P-Oll 25.5 7.6747 6.9402 1.11 -1 12" Oiam 1.1058 8.8365 P-Ol0 25.5 7.6721 8.217 0.93 0.7657 12" Diam 11.8864 10.4623 P-009 25.5 7.6702 7.6431 1 0.8229 12" Oiam 11.0927 9.7315 P-008A 27.7 8.4447 4.8664 1.73 -1 12" Diam 1.7346 6.1986 w-005 .,.P-008 31.5 9.6483 6.8722 1.4 -1 12" Diam 1.404 8.75 w-006 ._P-007 31.5 9.6459 6.4104 1.5 -1 12" Diam 1.5047 8.162 P-006 31.5 9.6425 7.4569 1.29 -1 12" Diam 1.2931 9.4945 P-005 39.3 12.2397 9.9629 1.23 -1 12" Oiam 1.2285 12.6852 w-007 P-004 39.3 12.2337 7.7824 1.57 -1 12" Oiam 1.572 9.9088 0-009 39.3 12.2305 93.993 0.13 0.867 X-Sect 3.43 -- D-008 39.3 12.2302 112.96 0.11 0.5807 X-Sect 7.6019- P-003 39.3 12.2269 6.2952 1.94 -1 12" Diam 1.9423 8.0153 0-007 39.3 12.2225 107.57 0.11 0.7439 X-Sect 4.7079 -- O-tl06 39.3 12.2223 964.56 0.01 0.5074 X-Sect 9.6143 -- P-002 39.3 12.2172 6.1462 1.99 -1 12" Diam 1.9878 7.8256 0-005 39.3 12.2169 -0 0.915 X-Sect 4.2335- 0-004 39.3 12.207 44.3354 0.28 0.7349 X-Sect 5.8637 -- 0-003 39.3 12.1945 313.41 0.04 0.7226 x-sect 5.3815 - 0-002 39.3 12.1624 770.99 0.02 0.7234 X-Sect 1.7335 - 0-001 39.3 12.1621 146.32 0.08 0.5527 X-Sect 8.9201 - P-OOl 48.3 13.7386 8.2043 1.67 -1 12" Oiam 1.6746 10.4461 w-008 Rch App Bend Junct HW MaxEU Loss Head Loss Loss Elev RimEl From Nod To Node fI It It fI It It N-OOl 373.66 N-002 N-OOl 397.4953 -na--na-~na-380.5 380.4 N-003 N-002 381.0999 -na--na---na-380.43 380.33 N-004 N-003 382.8899 -na---na-- -na--382.3 382.2 • i'-005 N-004 390.363 -na----na---na--390.35 390.25 • • ~-006 N-005 398.8499 -na--na--na--398.78 398.68 _ -007 N-006 398.1499 -na---na----na-398.1499 398.68 '-. -008 N-007 406.7091 -na----na-- --na--399.4 399.3 N-01O N-008 400.3799 --na----na---na-399.4 399.3 N-Oll N-Ol0 400.4899 --n3----na----na--400.32 400.22 N-012 N-Oll 402.893 --na---na--na--401.7 401.6 N-014 N-012 401.9299 --na---na---na-401.9 401.8 N'015 N-014 402.4099 --na----na----na--402.4099 402.6 N-016 N-015 414.9783 3.7712 0.0341 ---406.11. 406.01 N-017 N-016 412.823 2.3405 0.0303 ----406.41 406.31 N-018 N-017 412.9798 2.3422 0.0092 -----408.24 408.14 N-019 N-018 421.5153 ----413.82 413.72 N-019A N-019 428.7839 1.7952 0.0134 ------420.78 420.68 N-020 N-019A 424.1394 ----422.6 422.5 N-021 N-020 431.693 1.4817 0.0162 -----429.95 429.85 N-022 N-021 431.8735 1.4827 0.0057 ----430.3965 434 N-023 N-022 438.0848 1.4837 0.0053 ---436.69 436.59 N-024 N-023 440.4391 --na---na---na--438.3 438.2 N-025 N-024 438.69 --na---na----na--438.69 438.9 N-026 N-025 441.4899 --na---na--na--441.4899 441.52 N-028 N-026 445.3998 -na---na----na--444.92 444.82 N-029 N-028 447.9408 --na---na----na--446.3 446.2 N-031 N-029 446.47 --na---na---na-446.47 446.47 N-032 N-031 448.3599 -na---na--na-448.3599 449.01 N-033 N-032 451.1722 -na---na---na-450.2 450.1 .1-035 N-033 450.6099 -na---na---na--450.6099 451.24 __ -036 N-035 452.8299 -na---na--na-452.8299 452.98 N-037 N-036 454.9681 -na---na---na-453.9 453.8 N-039 N-037 454.3999 --na---na----na--454.37 454.27 N-040 N-039 457.14 --na---na---na--457.12 457.02 N-041 N-040 460.2915 --na---na---na--459.4 459.3 N-043 N-041 459.5599 --na----na---na--459.5599 459.71 N-044 N-043 466.8998 --na----na---na--466.8998 467.86 .) , .. , ,. I. e Table B.9. Hydrograph Routing -West Basin -25-Year Storm '~OUTEHYO 11 THRU (Existing West) USING TYPEIA ANO '(25 yr) NOTZERO ACTUAL Reach Area Flow Full Q % Full nOepth Size nVel Wei CBasinl Hyd ac cfs cfs ratio II fils fils ----~ 0-021 2.9 1.4193 215.99 0.01 0.4655 X-Sect 3.8249 --w-OOI 0-020 2.9 1.419 75.0242 0.02 0.4548 X-Sect 3.3995 -- P-016 19.2 7.2941 10.5228 0.69 0.6125 12" Oiam 14.4658 13.398 w-002 0-019 19.2 7.2903 212.76 0.03 0.9533 X-Sect 5.3071 --- 0-018 21.1 7.9622 251.93 0.03 0.4124 X-Sect 7.8517 --ex_west P-015 21.1 7.9606 7.7298 1.03 0.8494 12" Oiam 11.1952 9.6416 0-017 21.1 7.9596 138.18 0.06 0.6103 X-Sect 4.7161 --- 0-016 21.1 7.9593 452.04 0.02 0.4154 X-Sect 6.9302- P-014 22.3 6.4903 7.9661 1.06 0.694312" Oiam 11.4571 10.1706 w-003 0-015 22.3 8.4669 160.64 0.05 0.7052 X-Sect 5.0142 - 0-014 22.3 8.4884 200 0.04 0.9062 X-Sect 5.4996 ---- P-013 22.3 8.4672 10.6228 0.6 0.676 12" Oiam 15.0227 13.5253 0-012 22.3 8.4854 290.67 0.03 0.6943 X-Sect 6.1186 - 0-011 22.3 8.4635 320.43 0.03 0.5636 X-Sect 5.4511 - 0-010 25.5 9.7892 1040.88 0.01 0.8265 X-Sect 7.6039 --w-004 P-012 25.5 9.7867 7.0631 1.39 -I 12" Oiam 1.3856 6~9931 P-Ol1 25.5 9.7842 6.9402 1.41 -1 12" Oiam 1.4098 8.8365 P-Ol0 25.5 9.7611 8.217 1.19 -1 12" Diam 1.1903 10.4623 P-009 25.5 9.7791 7.6431 1.28 -1 12" Oiam 1.2795 9.7315 P-008A 27.7 10.7564 4.8684 2.21 -I 12" Oiam 2.2095 6.1986 w-005 e--p -008 31.5 12.2532 6.8722 1.78 -1 12" Oiam 1.783 6.75 w-006 . ~»-007 31.5 12.2295 6.4104 1.91 -1 12" Oiam 1.9077 6.162 P-006 31.5 12.214 7.4569 1.64 -1 12" Oiam 1.6379 9.4945 P-005 39.3 15.4537 9.9629 1.55 -1 12" Oiam 1.5511 12.6652 w-007 P-004 39.3 15.439 7.7624 1.98 -1 12" Oiam 1.9838 9.9088 0-009 39.3 15.4332 93.993 0.16 0.9703 X-Sect 3.6728- 0-008 39.3 15.4329 112.96 0.14 0.6524 X-Sect 8.1307 - P-003 39.3 15.4277 6.2952 2.45 -1 12" Oiam 2.4507 6.0153 0-007 39.3 15.4211 107.57 0.14 0.8378 X-Sect 5.0372 --- 0-006 39.3 . 15.4209 964.56 0.02 0.5537 X-Sect 10.1896 -- P-002 39.3 15.4136 6.1462 2.51 -1 12" Diam 2.5078 7.8256 0-005 39.3 15.4133 ---0 0.915 X-Sect 5.3412 -- 0-004 39.3 15.3973 44.3354 0.35 0.8232 X-Sect 6.2522 -- 0-003 39.3 15.3784 313.41 0.05 0.8043 X-Sect 5.7771 -- 0-002 39.3 15.3305 770.99 0.02 0.749 X-Sect 1.8482 - 0-001 39.3 15.3302 146.32 0.1 0.61 X-Sect 9,5841 --- P-OOI 48.3 17.4769 8.2043 2.13 -1 12" Oiam 2.1304 10.4461 w-008 Rch App Bend Junct HW Max Ell Loss Head Loss Loss Elev RimEl From Nod To Node II II II II II II N-OOI 373.66 N-002 N-OOI 412.2399 -na---na---na--360.5 360.4 N-003 N-002 381.1 -na--na--na--380.43 380.33 N-004 N-003 382.8899 --na---na----na-382.3 382.2 •. )1-005 N-004 390.6017 -na----na---na--390.35 390.25 ;., ~ , '. N-006 N-Q05 398.85 -na--na--na--398.78 398.68 e~-007 N-006 398.1499 --na----na----na--398.1499 398.68 . ./ -008 N-007 411.7735 --na----na-- --na--399.4 399.3 N-010 N-008 400.3799 --na----na---oa--399.4 399.3 N-011 N-01O 400.4899 --oa---oa-- --oa-400.32 400.22 N-012 N-011 404.2625 --na----na----oa--401.7 401.6 N-014 N-012 401.9299 --oa----oa----oa--401.9 401.8 N-015 N-014 402.4099 --oa----oa- --oa-402.4099 402.6 N-016 N-015 422.4271 6.0118 0.0544 --406.11 406.01 N-017 N-016 416.8114 3.7554 0.0486 ------406.41 406.31 N-018 N-017 416.9514 3.7649 0.0148 ----408.24 408.14 N-019 N-018 429.5789 ---413.82 413.72 N-019A N-019 437.9548 2.9125 0.0218 --420.78 420.68 N-020 N-019A 426.2303 -----422.6 422.5 N-021 N-020 436.8487 2.4083 0.0264 ---429.95 429.85 . N-022 N-021 438.8036 2.4098 0.0093 ----434.1 434 N-023 N-022 442.3643 2.4111 0.0087 -----436.69 436.59 N-024 N-023 442.7826 --oa----na----oa--438.3 438.2 N-025 N-024 438.69 -oa----oa- -oa--438.69 438.9 N-026 N-025 441.4899 --oa----oa---na-441.4899 441.52 N-028 N-026 445.3998 --oa----oa----na-444.92 444.82 N-029 N-028 .449.7335 --oa---oa---na-446.3 446.2 N-031 N-029 446.47 --oa---oa--oa-446.47 446.47 N-032 N-031 448.3599 --na----na---oa-448.3599 449.01 N-033 N-032 452.966 --oa--.. --oa---oa--450.2 450.1 .• ~-035 N'033 450.6099 --na---na----na-450.6099 451.24 -036 N-035 452.8299 -oa---na--na--452.8299 452.98 N-037 N-036 456.3148 --na--na--na-453.9 453.8 N-039 N-037 454.3999 -na----na--na-454.37 454.27 N-040 N-039 457.1399 -oa----oa- --na-457.12 457.02 N-041 N-040 461.6094 --oa---na---oa-459.4 459.3 N-043 N-041 459.5599 --oa----oa---oa-459.5599 459.71 N-044 N-043 466.8998 --oa---oa---oa--466.8998 467.86 1-------------------------------------------- 4' • . Table B.10. Hydrograph Routing -West Basin -50-Year Storm e10UTEHYO D THRU (Existing West) USING TYPE1A AND (50 yr) NOTZERO ACTUAL Reach Area Flow FullQ % Full nOepth Size nVel Nel CBasin IHyd ac cIs cfs ratio ft IUs IUs ----- D-021 2.9 1.5685 215.99 0.01 0.4833 X-Sect 3.9215 _. w-OOl 0-020 2.9 1.5683 75.0242 0.02 0.4722 X-Sect 3.4853 - P-016 19.2 8.0999 10.5228 0.77 0.6581 12" Diam 14.7787 13.398 w-002 0-019 19.2 8.0896 212.76 0.04 0.9912 X-Sect 5.4469 -- 0-018 21.1 8.8435 251.93 0.04 0.4372 X-Sect 8.1008 --ex_west P-015 21.1 8.8417 7.7298 1.14 -1 12" Diam 1.1439 9.8418 0-017 21.1 8.8407 138.18 0.06 0.6463 X-Sect 4.8603 -- 0-016 21.1 8.8404 452.04 0.02 0.4384 X-Sect 7.156- P-014 22.3 9.434 7.9881 1.18 -1 12" Diam 1.181 10.1708 w-003 0-015 22.3 9.4262 160.64 0.06 0.7412 X-Sect 5.1673 ---- 0-014 22.3 9.4257 200 0.05 0.9425 X-Sect 5.6454- P-013 22.3 9.4245 10.6228 0.89 0.7329 12" Diam 15.2781 13.5253 0-012 22.3 9.4224 290.67 0.03 0.9301 X-Sect 6.2809 -- 0-011 22.3 9.4204 320.43 0.03 0.6154 X-Sect 5.6241 - 0-010 25.5 10.8663 1040.88 0.01 0.8595 X-Sect 8.0101 --w-004 P-012 25.5 10.8659 7.0631 1.54 -1 12" Diam 1.5384 8.9931 P-Oll 25.5 10.8622 6.9402 1.57 -1 12" Diam 1.5651 8.8365 P-Ol0 25.5 10.8581 8.217 1.32 -1 12" Oiam 1.3214 10.4623 P-009 25.5 10.8544 7.6431 1.42 -1 12" Oiam 1.4201 . 9.7315 P-008A 27.7 11.9326 4.8684 2.45 -1 12" Oiam 2.4511 6.1986 w-005 •• P"008 31.5 13.5621 6.8722 1.97 -1 12" Oiam 1.9735 8.75 w-006 '\:>-007 31.5 13.5297 6.4104 2.11 -1 12" Diam 2.1106 8.162 ",) P-006 31.5 13.5123 7.4569 1.81 -1 12" Diam 1.8121 9.4945 P-005 39.3 17.0801 9.9629 1.71 -1 12" Diam 1.7144 12.6852 w-007 P-004 39.3 17.0634 7.7824 2.19 -1 12" Diam 2.1926 9.9088 0-009 39.3 17.0568 93.993 0.18 1.0185 X-Sect 3.7809 --- 0-008 39.3 17.0564 112.96 0.15 0.6858 X-Sect 8.366 -- P-003 39.3 17.0509 6.2952 2.71 -1 12" Oiam 2.7086 8.0153 0-007 39.3 17.0435 107.57 0.16 0.8816 X-Sect 5.1838 -- 0-006 39.3 17.0432 964.56 0.02 0.5748 X-Sect 10.4477 - P-002 39.3 17.0355 6.1462 2.77 -1 12" Diam 2.7717 7.8256 0-005 39.3 17.0353 -0 0.915 X-Sect 5.9032-. 0-004 39.3 17.0172 44.3354 0.38 0.8642 X-Sect 6.4254 -- 0-003 39.3 16.9961 313.41 0.05 0.8428 X-Sect 5.9539- 0-002 39.3 16.9427 770.99 0.02 0.7591 X-Sect 1.9232 - 0-001 39.3 16.9424 146.32 0:12 0.6369 X-Sect 9.8817 -- P-OOl 48.3 19.3916 8.2043 2.36 -1 12" Diam 2.3636 10.4461 w-008 Rch App Bend June! HW Max Ell Loss Head Loss Loss Elev RimEl From Nod To Node fI fI fI fI fI fI N-OOl 373.66 N-002 N-OOl 421.1453 -na--na~ -'na--380.5 380.4 N-003 N-002 381.1 -na---na--na-380.43 380.33 N'004 N-003 382.8899 -na--na---na--382.3 382.2 e~-005 N-004 390.6621 -na---na--na--390.35 390.25 :·1 •• k .. " . N-006 N-005 398.8499 -na---na--na-398.78 398.68 .1-007 N-006 398.1499 --na--na---na--398.1499 398.68 .. -, -008 N-007 414.7916 --na----na---na-399.4 399.3 N-Ol0 N-008 400.3799 --na----na----na--399.4 399.3 N-Oll N-Ol0 400.5191 --na----na----na--400.32 400:22 N-012 N-011 405.0781 --na----na----na--401.7 401.6 N-014 N-012 401.9299 --na----na----na--401.9 401.8 N-015 N-014 402.4099 --na---na~ --na--402.4099 402.6 N-016 N-015 426.8611 7.3437 0.0665 -----406.11 406.01 N-017 N-016 419.1824 4.5962 0.0595 -----406.41 406.31 N-018 N-017 419.3115 4.6079 0.0181 -----408.24 408.14 N-019 N-018 434.3575 ------413.82 413.72 N-019A N-019 443.3864 3.5843 0.0268 ----420.78 420.68 N-020 N-019A 427.4875 ------422.6 422.5 N-021 N-020 440.1545 2.9679 0.0325 -----429.95 429.85 N-022 N-021 440.8607 2.9701 0.0115 ------434.1 434 N-023 N-022 444.2857 2.9721 0.0107 ------436.69 436.59 N-024 N-023 444.2004 --na----na--na--438.3 438.2 N-025 N-024 438.6899 --na---na----na-438.6899 438.9 N-026 N-025 441.4899 --na----na- -na-- 441.4899 441.52 N-028 N-026 445.3998 --na----na---na--444.92 444.82 N-029 N-028 450.8166 --na---na---na--446.3 446.2 N-031 N-029 446.47 --na----na---na-446.47 446.47 N-032 N-031 448.3599 -na---na---na-448.3599 449.01 N-033 N-032 453.324 -na---na---na-450.2 450.1 .}-035 N-033 450.6099 -na---na---na-450.6099 451.24 -036 N-035 452.8299 -na---na--na--452.8299 452.98 N-037 N-036 457.129 --na---na--na--453.9 453.8 N-039 N-037 454.3999 --na---na--na--454.37 454.27 N-040 N-039 457.1399 -na----na----na--457.12 457.02 N-041 N-040 462.4097 --na--na- -na-459.4 459.3 N-043 N-041 459.5599 -na---na----na--459.5599 459.71 N-044 N-043 466.8998 --na----na----na--466.8998 467.86 "'. >- 'e Table B.ll. Hydrograph Routing -West Basin -100-Year Stonn ~ '-ROUTEHYD D THRU (Exisling Wesl) USING TYPE1AAND (100 yr) NOTZERO ACTUAL Reach Area Flow Full a % Full nDepth Size nVel Nel CBasin I Hyd ac cIs cfs ratio II fils fils -------- 0-021 2.9 1.7191 215.99 0.D1 0.5002 X-Sect 4.0124 -w·OOl 0-020 2.9 1.7188 75.0242 0.02 0.4887 X-Sect 3.5662 --- P-016 19.2 8.9147 10.5228 0.85 0.7064 12" Diam 15.0315 13.398' w-002 0-019 19.2 8.8982 212.76 0.04 1 .0272 X-Sect 5.5783 -- 0-018 21.1 9.7341 251.93 0.04 0.4611 X-Sect 8.3334 ----ex_wesl P-015 21.1 9.7323 7.7298 1.26 -1 12" Diam 1.2591 9.8418 0-017 21.1 9.7313 138.18 0.07 0.6809 X-Sect 4.9949 -- 0-016 21.1 9.7309 452.04 0.02 0.4605 X-Sect 7.3672 -- P-014 22.3 10.3918 7.9881 1.3 -1 12" Diam 1.3009 10.1708 w-003 0-015 22.3 10.3745 160.64 0.06 0.7757 X-Sect 5.3102 -- D-014 22.3 10.3736 200 0.05 0.977 X-Sect 5.7823 -'--- P-013 22.3 10.3718 10.6228 0.98 0.7991 12" Diam 15.4151 13.5253 0-012 22.3 10.3694 290.67 0.04 0.9642 X-Sect 6.4331 ---- 0-011 22.3 10.3672 320.43 0.03 0.6459 X-Sect 5.7856 ----- 0-010 25.5 11.9547 1040.88 0.01 0.8908 X-Sect 8.2036 .,----w-004 P-012 25.5 11.9546 7.0631 1.69 -1 12" Diam 1.6925 8.9931 P-Oll 25.5 11.9518 6.9402 1.72 -1 12" Diam 1.7221 8.8365 P-Ol0 25.5 11.9391 8.217 1.45 -1 12" Diam 1.453 10.4623 P-009 25.5 11.8!l94 7.6431 1.56 -1 12" Diam 1.5569 9.7315 P-008A 27.7 13.0768 4.8684 2.69 -1 12" Diam 2.6861 6.1986 w-005 • "t-008 31.5 14.8216 6.8722 2.16 -1.12" Diam 2.1567 8.75 w-006 -007 31.5 14.7641 6.4104 2.3 -1 12" Diam 2.3031 8.162 "----P-006 31.5 14.7397 7.4569 1.98 -1 12" Diam 1.9766 9.4945 P-005 39.3 18.6376 9.9629 1.87 -1 12" Diam 1.8707 12.6852 w-007 P-004 39.3 18.6131 7.7824 2.39 -1 12" Diam 2.3917 9.9088 0-009 39.3 18.6037 93.993 0.2 1.0612 X-Sect 3.8828 - D-008 39.3 18.6034 112.96 0.16 0.7161 X-Sect 8.5744 - P-003 39.3 18.5959 6.2952 2.95 -1 12" Diam 2.954 8.0153 0-007 39.3 18.5866 107.57 0.17 0.9214 X-Sect 5.3133 ---- 0-006 39.3 18.5863 964.56 0.02 0.5938 X-Sect 10.6766 ---- P-002 39.3 18.5762 6.1462 3.02 -1 12" Diam 3.0224 7.8256 0-005 39.3 18.576 -0 0.915 X-Sect 6.4371 - 0-004 39.3 18.5514 44.3354 0.42 0.9012 X-Sect 6.5778- 0-003 39.3 18.5234 313.41 0.06 0.8774 X-Sect 6.1089 -- D-002 39.3 18.4536 770.99 0:02 0.7682 X-Sed 1.9897 --- 0-001 39.3 18.4532 146.32 0.13 0.6611 X-Sect 10.141 --- P-OOl 48.3 21.1994 8.2043 2.58 -1 12" Diam 2.5839 10.4461w-008 Rch APP B.end Junct HW Max Ell Loss Head Loss Loss Elev RimEl From Nod To Node II II II II II II N-OOl 373.66 N-002 N-OOl 430.4121 -na---na---na--380.5 380.4 N-003 N-002 381.0999 --na--. -na---na--380.43 380.33 • N-004 N-003 382.8899 --na---na---na--382.3 382.2 )'1-005 N-004 390.6975 --na--na---na-390.35 390.25 :.\ -'I t, . N-006 N-005 398.8499 -na-. -na----na-398.78 398.68 e:::}l-007 N-006 398,1499 -na---na----na-398.1499 398.68 . , /N-008 N-007 417 .9379 --na----na----na--399.4 399.3 N-010 N-008 400.3799 -na---na----na-399.4 399.3 N-011 N-010 400.5711 --na---na---na--400.32 400.22 N-012 N-011 405.9302 --na----na----na--401.7 401.6 N-014 N-012 401.9299 -na---na----na-401 .. 9 401.8 N-015 N-014 402.4099 -na---na----na--402.4099 402.6 N-016 N-015 431.5039 8.7441 0.0791 ------406.11 406.01 N-017 N-016 421.6752 5.469 0.0707 ----406.41 406.31 N-018 N-017 421.7617 5.4872 0.0216 -----408.24 408.14 N-019 N-018 439.3409 ---413.82 413.72 N-019A N-019 449,133 4.3046 0.0322 ----420.78 420.68 N-020 N-019A 428.8355 ----422.6 422.5 N-021 N-020 443.6975 3,5882 0.0393 --429.95 429.85 N-022 N-021 443.1411 3,5959 0.0139 -----434.1 434 N-023 N-022 446.4317 3.5976 0.0129 ------436.69 436.59 N-024 N-023 445.7808 -na--na---na--438.3 438.2 N-025 N-024 438.6899 -na---na--na-438.6899 438.9 N-026 N-025 441.4899 -na---na----na-441.4899 441.52 N-028 N-026 445.3998 -na--na---na--444.92 444.82 N-029 N-028 452.0266 -na---na--na--446.3 446.2 N-031 N-029 446.47 -na---na---na-446.47 446.47 N-032 N-031 448.3599 -na--na---n3o-448.3599 449.01 N-033 N-032 454.3832 -na--na--na-450.2 450.1 .-!)I-()35 N-033 450.6099 -na--na--.-na-450.6099 451.24 _ J-036 N-035 452.8299 -na--na----na-452.8299 452.98 N-037 N-036 458.0387 -na---na---na--453.9 453.8 N-039 N-037 454.3999 -na--nil----na--454.37 454.27 N-040 N-039 457.1399 -na---na---na-457.12 457.02 N-041 N-040 463.3042 -na---na----na--459.4 459.3 N-043 N-041 459.5599 -na---na"---na--459.5599 459.71 N-044 N-043 466.8998 -na---na---na--466.8998 467.86 ·-:3 .:;~ ~ ... ', e Table B.12. Hydrograph Routing -West Basin -Summary Table C) 2-Year 10·Year 25-Year Freeboard Freeboard Freeboard \ \ -, Reach 10 From Node P·001 N·002 0·001 N·003 0-002 N·OO4 0-003 N·005 0-004 N·006 0-005 N·007 P·002 N-008 0-006 N·010 0-007 N·011 P,003 N-012 0·008 N-014 0-009 N-015 P-004 N-016 P·005 N-017 P-006 N-018 P-007 N-019 P·008 N·019A P-008A N·020 . P·009 N-021 .~P.ol0 .».011 N-022 N·023· P·012 N-024 0-010 N-025 0-011 N-026 0-012 N·028 P-013 N-029 0-014 N-031 0-015 N-032 P-014 N-033 0-016 N-035 0-017 N-036 P-015 N-037 0-018 N-039 0-019 N-040 P-016 N·041 0-020 N-043 0-021 N-044 To Node N·OOl N·001 N·002 N·003 N-004 N-005 N-006 N-007 N-008 N·01O N-011 N-012 N-014 N-015 N-016 N·017 N-018 N·019 N·019A N-020 N-021 N-022 N-023 N-024 N-025 N-026 N-028 N-029 N-031 N-032 N-033 N-035 N-036 N-037 N-039 N-040 N-041 N-043 fI fI fI Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop 0.37 Overtop Overtop 0.30 Overtop Overtop 0.91 0.53 0.53 Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.11 Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop 0.49 Overtop Overtop 2.57 Overtop Overtop 1.39 Overtop Overtop 2.40 Overtop Overtop 1.40 Overtop Overtop 3.38 3.60 Overtop 1.04 Overtop Overtop 0.96 Overtop Overtop 1.27 0.21 0.21 1.09 0.03 0.03 0.48 Overtop Overtop 0.44 Overtop Overtop 0.54 0.00 0.00 1.19 0.65 0.65 1.11 Overtop Overtop 1.84 0.63 0.63 1.36 0.15 0.15 1.23 Overtop Overtop 1.20 Overtop Overtop 1.19 Overtop Overtop 0.61 Overtop Overtop 0.86 0.15 0.15 1.67 0.96 0.96 50-Year 100-Year Freeboard Freeboard fI fI Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop 0.53 0.53 Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop 0.19 0.19 Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop 0.21 0.21 0,03 0.03 Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop 0.00 0.00 0.65 0.65 Overtop Overtop 0.63 0.63 0.15 0.15 Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop Overtop 0.15 0.15 0.96 0.96 :·1 4.0 FLOW CONTROL AND WATER QUALITY FACILITY ANALYSIS AND DESIGN As mentioned in previous sections of the report. the total project site area is approximately 4.32 acres. The existing vegetation onsite consists of grass and some scattered trees. The onsite soils are Alderwood. which are considered to be till soils based on the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM). Stormwater runoff on the site generally sheet flows from the northeast to the southwest to a small wetland area located in the southwest comer of this development. This project proposes to construct a detention and water quality facility adjacent to this small wetland and buffer. Stormwater flows from the developed site area will be detained based on Level 2 Flow Control from the KCSWDM. These same flows will also be treated with a basic wet pond, which meets the basic water quality requirements of the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual. Once the stormwater flows have been routed through the detention and water quality facility, they will be discharged through a dispersal trench located on the outer edge of the wetland buffer. The intent of the dispersal trench is to simulate the existing conditions as closely as possible. We are not able to get some of the proposed asphalt and sidewalk along both frontage roads into the proposed on-site detention and water quality facility. To compensate for this. we are capturing existing asphalt areas from both frontage roads and routing those areas to the proposed detention and water quality facilities. The post-developed basin map in Section 4.3 shows the exact locations of these areas. As you will see on the map, we are actually providing detention and water quality for a larger area than the new impervious area that will bypass. With all of this in mind, we do not have a bypass condition. we are simply trading the new developed area for an equal amount of existing area. Please refer to the enclosed calculations and maps for further details regarding the proposed detention and water quality facility. 11020.004.doc ~--------------------------- II j .: 4.1 Detention Facility Calculations • 13k;tN k?fAs r) KCRTS Program ... File Directory: -C:\K.C _ SWDM\K.C _ DATA \ [C) CREATE a new Time Series ~-D£.V BASIN ST -1.83 0.00 0.000000 Till Forest - _1.91 0.00 0.000000 Till Pasture __ 0.00 0.00 0.000000 Till Grass 0.00 0.00 0.000000 Outwash Forest 0.00 0.00 0.000000 Outwash Pasture 0.00 0.00 0.000000 Outwash Grass 0.00 0.00 0.000000 Wetland -0.19 0.00 0.000000 Impervious_ 11020-PRE.tsf ~ BI't5! N Ar2b'\" 3_ i? Pte... T 1.00000 T [C] CREATE a new Time Series FbST-bW· 6f\$IN ST 0.00 0.00 0.000000 Till Forest 0.00 0.00 0.000000 Till Pasture -,-1.74 0.00 0.000000 Till Grass _ 0.00 0.00 0.000000 Outwash Forest e) 0.00 0.00 0.000000 Outwash Pasture 0.00 0.00 0.000000 Outwash Grass 0.00 0.00 0.000000 Wetland _2.33 0.00 0.000000 Impervious __ 11020-DEV.tsf ~ 13ASI"l NUA -:;. 4-.07 AC-T 1.00000 .) -------------~------------------------------------------------------------------ .) Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:l1020-pre.tsf Project Location:Sea-Tac ---Annual Peak Flow Rates--- Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak (CFS) 0.279 2 2/09/01 18:00 0.120 7 1/05/02 16:00 0.256 3 2/28/03 3:00 0.056 8 8/26/04 2:00 0.149 6 1/05/05 8:00 0.245 4 1/18/06 16:00 0.230 5 11/24/06 4:00 0.451 1 1/09/08 6:00 Computed Peaks -----Flow Frequency Analysis------- --Peaks Rank Return Prob (CFS) Period 0.451 1 100.00 0.279 2 25.00 0.256 3 10.00 0.245 4 5.00 0.230 5 3.00 0.149 6 2.00 0.120 7 1. 30 0.056 8 1.10 0.394 50.00 0.990 0.960 0.900 0.800 0.667 0.500 0.231 0.091 0.980 .J Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:11020-dev.tsf Project Location:Sea-Tac ---Annual Peak Flow Rates--------Flow Frequency Analysis------- Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak -Peaks Rank Return Prob (CFS) (CFS) Period 0.721 6 2/09/01 2:00 1. 47 1 100.00 0.990 0.577 8 1/05/02 16:00 0.891 2 25.00 0.960 0.868 3 2/27/03 7:00 0.868 3 10.00 0.900 0.613 7 8/26/04 2:00 0.764 4 5.00 0.800 0.741 5 10/28/04 16:00 0.741 5 3.00 0.667 0.764 4 1118/06 16:00 0.721 6 2.00 0.500 0.891 2 10/26/06 0:00 0.613 7 1. 30 0.231 1. 47 1 1/09/08 6:00 0.577 8 1.10 0.091 Computed Peaks 1. 28 50.00 0.980 .; Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:rdout.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 0.312 2 2/09/01 20:00 0.975 5.18 1 100.00 0.990 0.070 7 12/28/01 18:00 0.312 5.03 2 25.00 0.960 0.164 5 3/06/03 22:00 0.188 4.43 3 10.00 0.900 0.061 8 8/26/04 6:00 0.165 3.95 4 5.00 0.800 0.114 6 1/05/05 16:00 0.164 3.93 5 3.00 0.667 0.165 4 1/18/06 23:00 0.114 3.14 6 2.00 0.500 0.188 3 11/24/06 8:00 0.070 2.62 7 1.30 0.231 0.975 1 1/09/08 10:00 0.061 2.01 8 1.10 0.091 Computed Peaks 0.754 5.14 50.00 0.980 DETENTION POND VOLUME TABLE FOR HAMILTON PLACE ELEVATION AREA (SF) INCREMENTAL TOTAL VOLUME(CF) VOLUME(CF) 505.00 7,309 0 0 506.00 7,793 7,551 7,551 507.00 8,258 8,025 15,576 508.00 8,745 8,501 24,077 509.00 9,230 8,987 33,064 510.00 9,721 9,475 42,539 510.18 9,800 1,756 44,295 Detention Pond Volume = 44,295 Detention pond volume required = 42,423 CF Detention pond volume provided = 44,295 CF (at maximum water surface elevation = 510.18) -) • LwfL'L D f::rtNn DI\j f1tu L II{ CI\CC~ 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: Detention Pond 2.00 H:1V 110.00 ft 54.00 ft 5940. sq. ft 10452. sq. ft 0.240 acres 5.00 ft 505.00 ft Stage 0 Elevation: Storage Volume: 38567. 0.885 5.00 cu. ft ac-ft ft + lo/. '" 42. I 4Z-3 CF ?W'O Riser Head: Riser Diameter: Number of orifices: Orifice # Height (ft) 1 0.00 2 2.90 Top Notch Weir: Outflow Rating Curve: Stage Elevation 12.00 inches 2 Full Head Diameter Discharge (in) (CFS) 1.26 0.096 1. 70 0.114 None None Pipe Diameter (in) 4.0 Storage Discharge Percolation (ft) (tt) (cu. ft) (ac-ft ) (cfs) (cfs) 0.00 505.00 o. 0.000 0.000 0.00 0.01 505.01 59. 0.001 0.005 0.00 0.03 505.03 179. 0.004 0.007 0.00 0.04 505.04 238. 0.005 0.009 0.00 0.05 505.05 298. 0.007 0.010 0.00 0.07 505.07 417. 0.010 0.011 0.00 0.08 505.08 477. 0.011 0.012 0.00 0.09 505.09 537. 0.012 0.013 0.00 0.11 505.11 657. 0.015 0.014 0.00 0.21 505.21 1262. 0.029 0.019 0.00 0.31 505.31 1873. 0.043 0.024 0.00 0.41 505.41 2491. 0.057 0.027 0.00 0.51 505.51 3115. 0.072 0.031 0.00 0.61 505.61 3747. 0.086 0.033 0.00 0.71 505.71 4385. 0.101 0.036 0.00 0.81 505.81 5029. 0.115 0.039 0.00 0.91 505.91 5681. 0.130 0.041 0.00 1. 01 506.01 6340. 0.146 0.043 0.00 1.11 506.11 7005. 0.161 0.045 0.00 1. 21 506.21 7677. 0.176 0.047 0.00 1. 31 506.31 8356. 0.192 0.049 0.00 1. 41 506.41 9042. 0.208 0.051 0.00 1. 51 506.51 9736. 0.223 0.053 0.00 1. 61 506.61 10436. 0.240 0.055 0.00 1.71 506.71 11143. 0.256 0.056 0.00 1. 81 506.81 11858. 0.272 0.058 0.00 1. 91 506.91 12579. 0.289 0.059 0.00 2.01 507.01 13308. 0.306 0.061 0.00 Surf Area (sq. tt) 5940. 5947. 5960. 5966. 5973. 5986. 5993. 5999. 6012. 6078 . 6145. 6212. 6279. 6346. 6414 . 6482. 6550. 6619. 6688. 6757. 6827. 6897. 6967. 7038. 7109. 7180. 7251. 7323. r---I I . ; .) .) 2.11 2.21 2.31 2.41 2.50 2.60 2.70 2.80 2.90 2.92 2.94 2.95 2.97 2.99 3.01 3.02 3.04 3.06 3.16 3.26 3.36 3.46 3.56 3.66 3.76 3.86 3.96 4.06 4.16 4.26 4.36 4.46 4.56 4.66 4.76 4.86 4.96 5.00 5.10 5.20 5.30 5.40 5.50 5.60 5.70 5.80 5.90 6.00 6.10 6.20 6.30 6.40 6.50 6.60 6.70 6.80 6.90 507.11 14044. 507.21 14787. 507.31 15537. 507.41 16295. 507.50 16983. 507.60 17755. 507.70 18534. 507.80 19321. 507.90 20115. 507.92 20274. 507.94 20434. 507.95 20514 . 507.97 20675. 507.99 20836. 508.01 20997. 508.02 21077 . 508.04 21239. 508.06 21400. 508.16 22214 . 508.26 23035. 508.36 23864. 508.46 24700. 508.56 25544. 508.66 26396. 508.76 27255. 508.86 28122. 508.96 28997. 509.06 29880. 509.16 30771. 509.26 31669. 509.36 32576. 509.46 33490. 509.56 34412. 509.66 35343. 509.76 36281. 509.86 37228. 509.96 38183. 510.00 38567. 510.10 39533. 510.20 40507. 510.30 41490. 510.40 42480. 510.50 43479. 510.60 44487. 510.70 45502. 510.80 46527. 510.90 47559. 511.00 48600. 511.10 49649. 511. 20 50707. 511. 30 51774. 511.40 52849. 511.50 53933. 511.60 55025. 511. 70 56126. 511.80 57236. 511.90 58354. 0.322 0.062 0.00 7395 . 0.339 0.064 0.00 7468. 0.357 0.065 0.00 7541. 0.374 0.067 0.00 7614. 0.390 0.068 0.00 7680. 0.408 0.070 0.00 7754. 0.425 0.071 0.00 7828. 0.444 0.072 0.00 7902. 0.462 0.073 0.00 7977. 0.465 0.074 0.00 7992. 0.469 0.076 0.00 8007. 0.471 0.079 0.00 8014 . 0.475 0.084 0.00 8029. 0.478 0.089 0.00 8044 . 0.482 0.096 0.00 8060. 0.484 0.102 0.00 8067. 0.488 0.105 0.00 8082. 0.491 0.107 0.00 8097. 0.510 0.116 0.00 8173. 0.529 0.125 0.00 8249. 0.548 0.132 0.00 8325. 0.567 0.139 0.00 8401. 0.586 0.145 0.00 8478. 0.606 0.151 0.00 8555. 0.626 0.156 0.00 8633. 0.646 0.161 0.00 8711. 0.666 0.166 0.00 8789. 0.686 0.171 0.00 8867. 0.706 0.176 0.00 8946. 0.727 0.180 0.00 9025. 0.748 0.185 0.00 9104. 0.769 0.189 0.00 9184. 0.790 0.193 0.00 9264. 0.811 0.197 0.00 9344. 0.833 0.201 0.00 9425. 0.855 0.205 0.00 9506. 0.877 0.208 0.00 9587. 0.885 0.210 0.00 9620. 0.908 0.521 0.00 9702. 0.930 1. 090 0.00 9784. 0.952 1. 820 0.00 9866. 0.975 2.620 0.00 9949. 0.998 2.900 0.00 10032. 1. 021 3.160 0.00 10115. 1. 045 3.400 0.00 10199. 1. 068 3.620 0.00 10283. 1. 092 3.830 0.00 10367. 1.116 4.030 0.00 10452. 1.140 4.210 0.00 10537. 1.164 4.390 0.00 10622. 1.189 4.560 0.00 10708. 1. 213 4.730 0.00 10794. 1. 238 . 4.890 0.00 10880 . 1. 263 5.050 0.00 10967. 1. 288 5.200 0.00 11053. 1.314 5.340 0.00 11141. 1. 340 5.480 0.00 11228. e) 7.00 512.00 59481. 1. 366 5.620 0.00 11316. Hyd Inflow Outflow Peak Storage Target Calc Stage Elev (Cu-Ft) (Ac-Ft) 1 1. 47 0.45 0.97 5.18 510.18 40309. 0.925 2 0.72 ******* 0.31 5.03 510.03 38883. 0.893 3 0.72 ******* 0.19 4.44 509.44 33282. 0.764 4 0.76 ******* 0.17 3.95 508.95 28903. 0.664 5 0.87 ******* 0.16 3.93 508.93 28740. 0.660 6 0.45 ******* 0.11 3.14 508.14 22020. 0.506 7 0.58 ******* 0.07 2.62 507.62 17889. 0.411 8 0.61 ******* 0.06 2.01 507.01 13333. 0.306 ---------------------------------- Route Time Series through Facility Inflow Time Series File:11020-dev.tsf Outflow Time Series File:rdout Inflow lOut flow Analysis Peak Inflow Discharge: 1. 47 CFS at 6:00 on Jan 9 in Year 8 Peak Out flow Discharge: 0.975 CFS at 10:00 on Jan 9 in Year 8 Peak Reservoir Stage: 5.18 Ft Peak Reservoir Elev: 510.18 Ft Peak Reservoir Storage: 40309. Cu-Ft 0.925 Ac-Ft Flow Frequency Analysis .) Time Series File: rdout. 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 0.312 2 2/09/01 20:00 0.975 5.18 1 100.00 0.990 0.070 7 12/28/01 18:00 0.312 5.03 2 25.00 0.960 0.164 5 3/06/03 22:00 0.188 4.43 3 10.00 0.900 0.061 8 8/26/04 6:00 0.165 3.95 4 5.00 0.800 0.114 6 1/05/05 16:00 0.164 3.93 5 3.00 0.667 0.165 4 1/18/06 23:00 0.114 3.14 6 2.00 0.500 0.188 3 11/24/06 8:00 0.070 2.62 7 1.30 0.231 0.975 1 1/09/08 10:00 0.061 2.01 8 1.10 0.091 Computed Peaks 0.754 5.14 50.00 0.980 Flow Duration from Time Series File:rdout.tsf Cutoff Count Frequency CDF Exceedence Probability CFS % % % 0.004 37226 60.708 60.708 39.292 0.393E+00 0.013 5421 8.841 69.548 30.452 0.305E+00 0.022 5444 8.878 78.426 21.574 0.216E+00 0.031 3914 6.383 84.809 15.191 0.152E+00 0.039 3505 5.716 90.525 9.475 0.947E-01 0.048 2350 3.832 94.357 5.643 0.564E-Ol 0.057 1421 2.317 96.675 3.325 0.333E-Ol 0.066 1002 1. 634 98.309 1. 691 0.169E-01 .) 0.074 598 0.975 99.284' 0.716 0.716E-02 0.083 60 0.098 99.382 0.618 0.618E-02 0.092 39 0.064 99.446 0.554 0.554E-02 .J .) .. _--_ .. _-------_.- 0.101 21 0.034 99.480 0.520 0.520E-02 0.109 51 0.083 99.563 0.437 0.437E-02 0.118 43 0.070 99.633 0.367 0.367E-02 0.127 23 0.038 99.671 0.329 0.329E-02 0.136 23 0.038 99.708 0.292 0.292E-02 0.144 24 0.039 99.747 0.253 0.253E-02 0.153 28 0.046 99.793 0.207 0.207E-02 0.162 41 0.067 99.860 0.140 0.140E-02 0.171 26 0.042 99.902 0.098 0.978E-03 0.179 12 0.020 99.922 0.078 0.783E-03 0.188 18 0.029 99.951 0.049 0.489E-03 0.197 14 0.023 99.974 0.026 0.261E-03 0.206 8 0.013 99.987 0.013 o .130E-03 0.214 5 0.008 99.995 0.005 0.489E-04 0.223 0 0.000 99.995 0.005 0.489E-04 0.232 0 0.000 99.995 0.005 0.489E-04 0.241 0 0.000 99.995 0.005 0.489E-04 0.249 1 0.002 99.997 0.003 0.326E-04 0.258 1 0.002 99.998 0.002 0.163E-04 0.267 0 0.000 99.998 0.002 0.163E-04 0.276 0 0.000 99.998 0.002 0.163E-04 0.284 0 0.000 99.998 0.002 0.163E-04 0.293 0 0.000 99.998 0.002 0.163E-04 0.302 0 0.000 99.998 0.002 0.163E-04 0.311 0 0.000 99.998 0.002 0.163E-04 Duration Comparison Anaylsis Base File: ll020-pre. tsf New File: rdout.tsf Cutoff Units: Discharge in CFS -----Fraction of Tirne--------------Check of Tolerance------- Cutoff Base New %Change Probability Base New 0.075 0.73E-02 0.70E-02 -4.3 0.73E-02 0.075 0.074 0.091 0.54E-02 0.56E-02 4.5 0.54E-02 0.091 0.096 0.107 0.42E-02 0.47E-02 12.5 0.42E-02 0.107 0.110 0.122 0.31E-02 0.35E-02 12.2 0.31E-02 0.122 0.132 0.138 0.23E-02 0.28E-02 21.1 0.23E-02 0.138 0.149 0.154 0.17E-02 0.20E-02 20.4 0.17E-02 0.154 0.158 0.170 0.12E-02 O.99E-03 -15.3 0.12E-02 0.170 0.165 0.185 O.85E-03 0.6SE-03 -23.1 0.8SE-03 0.185 0.178 0.201 0.60E-03 0.21E-03 -64.9 0.60E-03 0.201 0.186 0.217 0.42E-03 0.49E-04 -88.5 0.42E-03 0.217 0.191 0.233 0.20E-03 0.49E-04 -75.0 0.20E-03 0.233 0.203 0.248 O. llE-03 0.49E-04 -57.1 o .llE-03 0.248 0.207 0.264 0.49E-04 0.16E-04 -66.7 0.49E-04 0.264 0.249 Maximum positive excursion = 0.013 cfs 10.0%)-" ID/. QE occurring at 0.128 cfs on the Base Data:11020-pre.tsf and at 0.141 cfs on the New Data:rdout.tsf Maximum negative excursion = 0.053 cfs (-20.2%) occurring at 0.263 cfs on the Base Data:11020-pre.tsf and at 0.209 cfs on the New Data:rdout.tsf Route Time Series through Facility Inflow Time Series File:11020-dev.tsf %Change -1.6 < O.D 5.4 3.6 7.8 7.9 2.6 -2.9 -4.2 -7.3 -12.0 -12.9 -16.7 -5.8 O~ .-en LL 0 -Q) C) I-4t) .1/) 0 N o co o '<t 0 0 0 co ..- 0 N ..- 0 co R '. \ \ \ \ rdout.dur 0 11020-target.dur + 04-----------------------------~r_----------------------o 00 ______ __ S4-------------------------------------------~----------o .) g Q--\~--,I _'1 ---r-T1'1-nllrTl 'I --'I --'--1 '1'1'1'1 TTl 1'1 --'1--'--1 '1'1'1'1 TTl 1'1 ---'--"1'1'1'1 TTl 1'1 --'1-'-1 '1'1'1'1 mill 10 -5 10 -4 10 -3 10 -2 10 -1 10° Probability Exceedence e J SECflON 3.2 RUNOFFCOMPlJfA1l0N AND ANALYSIS METIlODS FIGURE 3.2.2.A RAINFALL REGIONS AND REGIONAL SCALE FACTORS ST1.1 ST1.0 Rainfall Regions and Regional Scale Factors f' 7 d Incorporated Area -..G;:3 Riverllake --Major Road 9/1/98 LA 1.0 1998 Surface Water Design Manual 3·22 ·') 4.2 Water Quality Calculations • . ) • Wetpond Sizing Worksheet Summary of the 1998 Surface Water Design Manual Requirements Project Name: Hamilton Place Project Number: L02P0011 Step 1) Determine volume factor f. Basic size ............................................ . Large size ............................................ . Step 2) Determine rainfall R for mean annual Storm Detemine rainfall R for mean annual storm Rainfall ................................................ . Step 3) Calculate runoff from mean annual storm V, = (0.9A. + 0.25A.. + 0. 1 OA" + 0.01A.,g) X R A. = tributary area of impervious surface A.. = tributary area of till grass A" = tributary area of till forest A.,g = tributary area of outwash grass R = rainfall from mean annual storm V, = Volume of runoff from mean annual storm Step 4) Calculate wetpool Volume Vb = fV, f = Volume Factor Vb = Volume runoff, mean annual atorm V, = Volume of the wetpool Step 5) Determine wetpool dimensions a) Determine geometry of first cell Volume in first cell Depth h 1st cell (minus sed. Storage) Determine horizontal xs area at mid-depth using A mid = Vol. 1 st celli h Mid-width Mid-length Determine xs area at surface f= 3 ----f= 4.5 _ .............. - _..;0,;.;.0..;.3.;..9 _ (feet) 101,495 (sf) 75,795 (sf) ° (sf) ° (sf) 0.039 (feet) 4,301 (cf) 3 4,301 (cf) 12,904 I(cf) 3,871 (cf) 4 (feet) 968 (sf) 31 (feet) 31 (feet) Z = Side slope length (_H:1V) 2(h/2 x Z) = 2:01 3:1 recommended Dimensions of top of pond adjusted for geometries Top width 0.33611111 31 (feet) (feet) 7797.008.xls [DED/ca] .J Top length 31 (feet) Area ofTop 989 (feet) b) Determine geometry of second cell Volume in second cell 9,033 (cf) Depth h 2nd cell 3.5 (feet) Determine xs area at mid-depth using 2,581 (sf) A mid = Vol. 2nd celli h Mid-width 31 (feet) Mid-length 83 (feet) Determine horizontal xs area at surface Z = Side slope length (_H:1V) 2:01 3: 1 recommended 2(h12 x Z) = 0.29409722 (feet) Dimensions of top of pond adjusted for geometrics Top width 31 (feet) Top length 83 (feet) Area of Top 2615 (feet) Adjustment to cells (If necessary) -) Geometry check: Overall pond L:Wat mid-depth = 3: 1 Pond width (mid-depth) 31 Cell 1 length (mid-depth) 31 Cell 2 length (mid-depth) 83 Pond Length (mid-depth) = Cell 1 + Cell 2 114 Lmid :Wmid= 3.67 Total Wetpond Surface area required = 3,603 Total Wetpond Bottom area required = 3,494 7797.008.xl' [DED/ca] WET POND VOLUME TABLE FOR HAMILTON PLACE ELEVATION AREA(SF) INCREMENTAL TOTAL CELLI CELL 2 VOLUME (CF) VOLUME (CF) 500.5 750 0 0 0 501.0 867 0 404 404 501.5 1,047 1,959 968 1,372 502.0 1,230 2,153 3,194 4,566 503.0 1,633 2,592 3,804 4,604 504.0 5,297 4,761 9,365 505.0 6,099 5,698 15,063 Wet Pond Volume = 15,063 Wet pond volume required 12,905 CF Wet pond volume provided 15,063CF (at static water surface elevation = 505.0) .) 6.4.1 WETPONDS -BASIC AND LARGE -METHODS OF ANALYSIS FIGURE 6.4.1.A PRECIPITATION FOR MEAN ANNUAL STORM IN INCHES (FEET) ST l.0 0.54" (0.045') [771 Incorporated Area -.co RiverlLake --Major Road 0.47" (0.039') 0.47" (0.039') NOTE: Areas east of the easternmost tsopluvial should use 0.65 inches unless rainfall data is available for the location of interest 24 The mean annual storm is a conceptual stonn found by c:ividing 1he annual pteCipilation by the total number 01' stonn events per year 0.9 LA l.0 Il (0.047') LA 1.2 0.65" (0.054' ) result, generates large amounts of runoff. For this application, till soil types include Buckley and bedrock soils, and alluvial and outwash soils that have a seasonally high water table or are underlain at a shallow depth (less than 5 feet) by glacial till. U.S. Soil Conservation Service (SCS) hydrologic soil groups that are classified as till soils include a few B, most C, and all D soils. See Chapter 3 for classification of specific SCS soil types. 1998 Surface ~ater Design Manual 911198 6-69 4.3 Basin Maps '. , J ~I ~ 8 :2 @ ~ 1"-80' h;}::! J' f'''1d'-- Q &tB7·~ " '" )";:' ';! , , , , , -' ,. '·7 " W "" ;;, 1$:, ____ 'R-If:~~') .. 1 11.i aj ~ ~ ~: , , , , , , , , , , , .1",.. ~ ,." , , , , , , , 1 BASIN TABLE: TOTAL BASIN MEA -171,222 SF -3.93 AC IUPEFMOUS AREA: EX. BUILDINGS -3,559 SF -0.08 AC EX. QRAYa -6,970 SF/2-o.08 AC EX. CONCAETE-13OO SF -0.03 AC TOTAL -0.19 AC PERVIOUS AREA: TILL FOREST -79,696 SF -183 AC TD..1.. PASTURE -83,181 SF -191 AC 8~ :,$': ~ ~ ... .....• ~ 2 TOTAL -3.74 AC 1 BG ! ;.~ t @ 3 4 EXISTING BASIN AREA MAP S.E 132ND PLACE i----l - I, :t,--- BASIN MEA TO SITE 1.66 AC (SHEET ~OW)- ::8 i'.i< :~~' .'0 .,:;!>"~:~: {p ~:B ;!J': r~ ~,C~ £ @ L ,;; . . , .~ ~ 1-- - - -__ .fo. Wo' \ 1 ___ 8 j2}~~P : ":.;1L ::-5 I. : £i)SH"G HOUSE ~ • .::; • .:,:::,'S",l>-. ;,~ ~ 8 ~";;N"iG •. "-.L ....... ~ -'5'6. 5 ~~-::::~I.J~ EXlST~ SU;LDil'{;l :0 Sl EC N:;';O!.,51·U:P ., 6 -.-.. ~~ .... • D. 10 c(w 0 II ~o 0 -co c(c( OQl w...J - 'f a:D. -!c( 1 I I c(z ..J;: 1 1 4-; -zO -1 1 :Z!;l -- I, I" I 8 -I-W "Ti . " rn..J U)~ I~ g~ll1.I .. c(-m> ~ I ~ c. .~ OJ m~ ~w >, I, , :i < ..J l l I: UJ <~ u -:t: ..J 1 1 I' '( (' X W 1 1 .r.~'" C, . . ". j :ik# if; w m I I ,,'}; I. • >' ~I iii I~ i~ " ~ . I ~ l ~ , 8(;:).1". I?~ <;lot. 0 :l -~ I.E.(S) = 51KE -"5'12' ~ 81 ~ ~I ~I ; I J I .. r ! ~ £ ! 04 @~ -.~, ..... ;. ~:,: <.: ;6 @ l8 ""/ 0. 1··. , '. , , , , , , ) /' 151-. ;,.~rtlW'!'1' , , Soa.: , , , , , , , , : t , , , , , 'm. 19+ OR""'A' 8)\ :='l : :./ : . I . :"\ ~"\ ..... \ . '. \ . . 21 TRAC'" .~. .~.:,~ - ~.wAC 20 19 ".18 , ·22· ··'nR·· .. 17 .. -·····"·5 1"8 .. -t::' @J> 13 12 .13 i': ~ 0 => z~ Sl ~ II) W Q. ;;i ~ x ot; Z ~:;:;CJ W N ~2 ~ I") N N .~ ONce ~cr: ~ ~~ ~ ~~ Nil iii ,....< ............ 2:t5 ~ IS)' to C) z It) _~~ G'i~ ...... ~U')LO • I" .\. I':' <> \ 1.::" "" !·1'!_1~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ =--. I :: \1 ..,..... :::.::: __ 0 (/) 14. • ! l t ~ j ~ ~"" '" , ieL' ··508··.. 17 !, ... j\ 14".. ".1 1 ,; """ ,~"-,, ";i/,,;-' '~-"':'-.,.l I ' ..... \ :: I' /. ~'. ~"'-'j;"''-''''~'''''~' .... ·,.n) \----t· ! 'If 0. \ 1 .. 1 I -&4- '" " . . l ~ ; 0. \ I: : I \1 ~ . : .n:L."r 'EO ".. ,---.. _-_ ..... _._ .. _-T-.. ----.e.J' •••.. :~-------.:. ... --.-... _'-' .-'" (I 1 liST '% .. "'.. .J ~ ,-. ••••• £x...:<;"1'~t.-WiR[ ~.b~l--..-........ ..•. I" II 4 Z ; .. .... ..\ ~ -~ '---""10. "I l ••••• "0 at R£k.t0'.£J '..... :. I: 1IJ c. ; .. .. """" " ". " I .. ;'---;-",~ <;I!'!N" "J!' '. '" 23 16 ····-tS. :: I I' fl ~ 1 '1',:-""/ .. ; .. ~T::_~~ ...... " ''------., . ..,.,. I" E.>c.1Sf~¥.~C1_WNU;..~~ In) ,: "........ ! ----11 • .,. ";"'1"" •. --=-.... ~ --.-~... I \,.--~----------.. -----------________ .. _ ... '"' .. ..,=',;; ... ___ .. _ ",. '" ,.~. ca ~","" , ,0 : .. ' :"\" '-.',' " /f,;-';;'"g,,> 'CO" I I',' -----, !:;'£fiiGff££N "'42 588...3J -"J \ _. -', -; /'" 1'-" '50&6 e : ::,'" . t.x;snN\~ I tJ..EDC-E I '. I? ".. :: it '" 5~~A:' ;:- , '."} .-c. BU,WING \ I -U!I . <f.~ , : : I ,.£ ~".,.-' II i i,~,: -'0\b..~" \L~.m:;,,~ Wt,-,~'\i ~." ",,% .. "«, . ..\:1 • 0 .,... ~ l ',·-·-~i>..: .. -.-~ -. ..... .... ' '1") L-'X1Sr. 6~ f.);0-1 .... "".'f'fJt. .J J N _ ~ I "A ", <,." . -. ,-,_ """"" iiACl L~"') • =.3<l v S\.. ,,0 ~ i i . ~ -~i'i }~Ulci2" w.::w ar ...... ...,"..-.:::D @!l> ~ 2.~ " "'. :\.... z 0 ili ~ .19 oei' EXIS11NQ AND PROPOSED ~'''''''''''''''',<;;n ~ ~ : . ~ ",sr. (:. ~ .,....,... ..... or ---+-".~ . :K ~ & 'l!:1 J!., '-"4. _ ~!"~, , ;; 17 ., 'i' DISCHARGE FROM SITE '. NOTE, IMPERVIOUS RUNOFF BY PROPOSED ASPHALT ~ T-ecr hJ*-¥ if = 1 ,483 SF=O.0340 "". ! PROPOSED CONCRET~ AREA =1,073 SF "" 82 2 3 ~o ":1..-' DEVELOPED BASIN AREA MAP E):J5.T,!';G S;;Ww.> 4 BASIN TABLE: TOTAL BASIN AREA TOTAL LOT AREA IMPERVIOUS AREA =4.07 AC ~2.57 AC PROPOSED ASPHALT ROAD ~0.43 AC EXISTING ASPHALT ROAD ~0.08 AC CONCRETE S/W ~0.19 AC TOTAL LOT IMPERVIOUS =1.41 AC (55% of 101 area) TRACT 'B' TOTAL IMPERVIOUS PERVIOUS AREA TOTAL LOT PERVIOUS (45% of 101 area) MISC PERVlUOS AREA (Tract 'A', R/W, ectJ TOTAL PERVIOUS <, . 5'5 __ .. 5 6 21 23 20 =0.22 AC =2.33 AC =1.15 AC =0.59 AC 19 22 1Sf. .• ~TAA'<I..lf..' 'ttI>1i. 17 16 73 "/6 [Xrsr. ;:1:" Wl\i!liT U:.{l«1 '" 5OO.Y.l "tl ,~S , .(' .(' /.-,)"""..'J' +.;§~;.1 EXISTING ASPHALT AREA _==1,745 SF =0.0401 AC. ..---\--EXISnNG GRAVEL AREA DMDED BY 2 =728 SF =0.0167 AC. TOTAL EXISTING IMPERVIOUS TO DETENTION/WO FACILITY SF =0.0568 AC. THIS PROJECT WILL REDUCE THE EXISTING UNDETAINED/ UNTREATED IMPERVIOUS AREA RUNOFF BY 383 SF .• j TO , 1 D. J < len ~w zO . .... I w -< 0 g s:::S2 0...1 ....i ('oJ 'zEC <D. ,...... "0 UJ • oen mZ ...I co.::t pw • UJ ->-~=> .. -.... CO <t -0 -::;; ::CZ wt-1:5 D....I 0::> l 0- , m> ! ...I~ ~W l w< ...I I >:I: ...I W I W j C m , I iii ;.: I ;: i= 0 I&. , 1 i I ~ -I j " , ~ -~ I j I 81~~1~1; j I ~ I I .. • ! ] ~ tl i I , ./3 <><.> 5 ~~ I~ 1 o ~C/) '" 11. ~ W ~ 0ffi ~ '" ~::r , W N Z ~ ~ '" N ~ <i!il ON .... z~ ~ c~~ro I!i~ 1 Z I I z. g N < ..... .--0 ! .... :1'1010 i5 z N '" ~ ! U') ___ ~izlO~ -' NWN.q-~;:) ~ ~.:!........... 0 en .-~~"O",,,, ~ 6." ~ ~ ;;1' ~ % ~ W • :s: " , ~ 0 ~ ~ .cs.~ ",,,,,, ~ co~ J 0 '" ~ 0 z 11 .... , .... ~ 5.0 CONVEYANCE SYSTEM ANALYSIS AND DESIGN Enclosed are typical calculations necessary for the sizing of the pipe facilities proposed for this project. The rational method and Manning's formula were used for sizing purposes. Conveyance pipes have been sized to accommodate the IOO-year storm event at a flowing-full condition. The intent of the pipe system within the project is to convey stormwater runoff into the detention and water quality facility. The proposed facilities have not been sized to accommodate any off-site development. Please refer to the calculations and basin maps within this section for further details. 11020.004.doc • J 5.1 25-Year and 100-Year Conveyance Calculations • JOB NAME: JOB#: REVISED: ~ HAMILTON 11020 2/23/2004 A= Contributing Area (Ac) C= Runoff Coefficient Tc= Time of Concentration (min) 1= Intensity at Tc (in/hr) d= Diameter of Pipe (in) L= Len91h of Pipe (ft) 0= Water Depth at Qd (in) FROM TO A s I. 1101",-,,!xls BARGHAUSEN CONSULTING ENGINEERS· PIPE FLOW CALCULATOR using the Rational Method & Manning Formula KING COUNTY DESIGN FOR ~5 YEAR STORM NOTE: ENTER DEFAULTS AND STORM DATA BEI'ORE"E!E,GiNNING DEFAULTS 1 C= 0.61 n= 0.012 l d= 12 Te= 6.3 ad= Design Flow (cfs) Qf= Full Capacity Flow (cfs) Vd= Velocity at Design Flow (fps) Vf= Velocity al Full Flow (Ips) s= Slope of pipe (%) n= Manning Roughness Coefficient Tt= Travel Time at Vd (min) L d Te n C COEFFICIENTS FOR THE RATIONAL METHOD "Ir"·EQUATION --_. STORM Ar Br 2YR 1.58 0.58 10YR 2A4 0.64 PRECIP= 3.4 25YR 2.66 0.65 Ar-2.66 50YR 2.75 0.65 Br-0.65 100YR 2.61 0.63 SUM A I A'C I SUM A'C Qd Qf OdlOf DId D Vf ------====== ====== ====== ===========:====== ======1====== ======== ====== ====== ====== ====== ====== ====== CB13 CB12 0.57 0.50 22 12 6.3 0.012 0.6 0.57 0.34 0.34 2.73 0.94 2.73 0.343 OA04 4.85 3A8 CB12 CB10 0.27 0.50 121 12 6A 0.012 0.6 0.84 0.16 0.50 2.70 1.36 2.73 0.499 0.499 5.99 3A8 CB10 CB8 0.56 0.50 123 15 7.0 0.012 0.6 1.4 0.34 0.84 2.55 2.15 4.95 0.434 0.462 6.93 4.03 CB8 CB4 0.75 0.77 125 15 7.5 0.012 0.6 2.15 OA5 1.29 2.44 3.14 6.14 0.512 0.507 7.61 5.01 CB7 CB6 0.52 0.50 31 15 6.3 0.012 0.6 0.52 0.31 0.31 2.73 0.85 4.95 0.172 0.278 4.17 4.03 CB6 CB4 0.29 0.50 198 18 6.5 0.012 0.6 0.81 0.17 OA9 2.69 1.31 8.04 0.162 0.270 4.86 4.56 CB4 CB2 OA3 0.94 62 24 7.9 0.012 0.6 OA3 0.26 2.03 2.35 4.79 23.75 0.202 0.301 7.23 7.57 CB2 CBl 0.29 1.17 127 24 8.1 0.012 0.6 0.72 0.17 2.21 2.32 5.12 26.50 0.193 0.295 7.07 8.44 CBl POND 0.00 3.17 7 24 8.4 0.012 0.6 0.72 0.00 2.21 2.26 5.00 43.62 0.115 0.230 5.51 13.90 CBll CB10 OA9 10.28 25 12 6.3 omi 0.6 OA9 0.29 0.29 2.73 0.80 12.37 0.065 0.173 2.08 15.76 CB9 CB8 0.27 7.64 25 12 6.3 0.012 0.6 0.27 0.16 0.16 2.73 0.44 10.66 0.042 0.142 1.70 13.59 CB5 CB4 0.37 6A8 25 12 6.3 0.012 0.6 0.37 0.22 0.22 2.73 0.61 9.82 0.062 0.169 2.03 12.52 CB3 CB2 0.29 3.74 74 12 6.3 0.012 0.6 0.29 0.17 0.17 2.73 OA8 7A6 0.064 0.172 2.06 9.51 CB20 CB19 1.66 1.42 130 12 15.0 0.012 0.6 1.66 1.00 1.00 1.56 1.55 4.60 0.337 0.401 4.81 5.86 CB19 CB18 0.00 1.44 25 12 15A 0.012 0.6 1.66 0.00 1.00 1.53 1.52 4.63 0.329 0.395 4.74 5.90 DITCH CB15 7.00 14.90 13 12 20.0 0.012 0.6 7 4.20 4.20 1.29 5.42 14.89 0.364 OA16 5.00 18.98 CB15 CB14 0.00 2.94 128 12 20.0 0.012 0.6 7 0.00 4.20 1.29 5.42 6.62 0.819 0.688 8.25 8.43 CB14 CB14A 0.00 1.39 188 15 20.2 0.012 0.6 7 0.00 4.20 1.28 5.38 8.25 0.652 0.592 8.87 6.73 CB14A DITCH 0.00 1.39 9 15 20.7 0.012 0.6 7 0.00 4.20 1.26 5.30 8.25 0.643 0.588 8.83 6.73 TRACT E CB14A 0.33 2.00 7 15 6.3 0.012 0.2 0.33 0.07 3.27 2.73 8.94 9.89 0.90. 0.739 11.09 8.07 Page ,. .J Vd Tt 3.16 0.12 3A9 0.58 3.92 0.52 5.05 0.41 3.02 0.17 3.34 0.99 5.88 0.18 6A9 0.33 9.16 0.01 8.77 0.05 6.65 0.06 6.86 0.06 5.26 0.23 5.31 OAI 5.30 0.08 17A9 0.01 9.39 0.23 7.17 0.44 7.16 0.02 9.12 0.01 DITCH CB17 CB16 CB1A e CB17 CB16 DITCH CB1B 2.97 0.00 0.08 0.00 2.86 3.83 4.17 5.34 211 229 12 58 12 12 12 12 15.0 15.4 15.9 6.3 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 2.97 2.97 3.05 o ie 110<-..":xfs 1.78 0.00 0.05 0.00 Page 1.78 1.78 1.83 2.21 1.56 1.53 1.50 2.73 2.77 2.72 2.74 6.04 6.53 7.55 7.88 8.92 0.425 0.360 0.348 0.677 0.457 0.414 0.408 0.601 5.48 4.97 4.89 7.22 8.31 9.62 10.04 11.36 .~ 8.03 0.44 8.85 0.43 9.16 0.02 12.17 I 0.08 • JOB NAME: J08#: REVISED: HAMILTON 11020 2/23/2004 A= Contributing Area (Ae) C= Runoff Coefficient • 110~,-./) xis BARGHAUSEN CONSULTING ENGINEERS -PIPE FLOW CALCULATOR using the Rational Method & Manning Formula KING COUNTY DESIGN FOR 100 YEAR STORM NOTE: ENTER DEFAULTS AND ST6Rt.rtlATABEFORE BEGINNING DEFAULTS I C= 0.61 n= 0.012 I d-12 Te= 6.3 Qd= Design Flow (cfs) COEFFICIENTS FOR THE RATIONAL METHOD "If'-EaUATION Of=: Full Capacity Flow (cfs) STORM Ar Br Te= 11me of Concentration (min) 1= Intensity at Te (In/hr) Vd= Velocity at Design Flow (fps) Vf= Velocity at Full Flow (fps) 2YR 10YR 1.56 0.56 2.44 0.64 PRECIP= 3.9 d= Diameter of Pipe (in) L= Length of Pipe (ft) 0= Water Depth at Qd (in) FROM TO ====== CB13 CB12 CB12 CB10 CB10 CB6 CB6 CB4 CB7 CB6 CB6 CB4 CB4 CB2 CB2 CBl CBl POND CB11 CB10 CB9 CB6 CBS CB4 CB3 CB2 CB20 CB19 CB19 CB16 DITCH CB15 CB15 CB14 CB14 CB14A CB14A DITCH TRACTE CB14A A s 5= Slope of pipe (%) n= Manning Roughness Coefficient Tt= TravelTIme at Vd (min) L d Te n 25YR 50YR 100YR C SUMA I A"C ====== ====== ======r===='====== ====== ====== ====== ====== 0.57 0.50 22 12 6.3 0.012 0.6 0.57 0.34 0.27 0.50 121 12 6.4 0.012 0.6 0.84 0.16 0.56 0.50 123 15 7.0 0.012 0.6 1.4 0.34 0.75 0.77 125 15 7.5 0.012 0.6 2.15 0.45 0.52 0.50 31 15 6.3 0.012 0.6 0.52 0.31 0.29 0.50 196 16 6.5 0.012 0.6 0.61 0.17 0.43 0.94 62 24 7.9 0.012 0.6 0.43 0.26 0.29 1.17 127 24 8.0 0.012 0.6 0.72 0.17 0.00 3.17 7 24 8.4 0.012 0.6 0.72 0.00 0.49 10.26 25 12 6.3 0.012 0.6 0.49 0.29 0.27 7.64 25 12 6.3 0.012 0.6 0.27 0.16 0.37 6.46 25 12 6.3 0.012 0.6 0.37 0.22 0.29 3.74 74 12 6.3 0.012 0.6 0.29 0.17 1.66 1.42 130 12 15.0 0.012 0.6 1.66 1.00 0.00 1.44 25 12 15.4 0.012 0.6 1.66 0.00 7.00 14.90 13 12 20.0 0.012 0.6 7 4.20 0.00 2.94 126 12 20.0 0.012 0.6 7 0.00 0.00 1.39 166 15 20.2 0.012 0.6 7 0.00 0.00 1.39 9 15 20.7 0.012 0.6 7 0.00 0.33 2.00 7 15 6.3 0.012 0.2 0.33 0.07 Page 2.66 0.65 Ar-2.61 2.75 0.65 Br-0.63 2.61 0.63 SUM A"C Qd af Qd/Qf =======: ====== ====== ====== 0.34 3.19 1.09 2.73 0.400 0.50 3.16 1.59 2.73 0.563 0.84 3.00 2.52 4.95 0.509 1.29 2.67 3.70 6.14 0.602 0.31 3.19 1.00 4.95 0.201 0.49 3.14 1.53 8.04 0.190 2.03 2.77 5.64 23.75 0.238 2.21 2.74 6.04 26.50 0.228 2.21 2.67 5.90 43.62 0.135 0.29 3.19 0.94 12.37 0.076 0.16 3.19 0.52 10.66 0.048 0.22 3.19 0.71 9.62 0.072 0.17 3.19 0.56 7.46 0.074 1.00 1.65 1.64 4.60 0.400 1.00 1.62 1.61 4.63 0.391 4.20 1.54 6.46 14.69 0.435 4.20 1.54 6.47 6.62 0.979 4.20 1.53 6.43 6.25 0.779 4.20 1.51 6.35 6.25 0.769 3.27 3.19 10.44 9.69 1.055 ~ Did D Vf Vd Tt ====== ====== ====== ====== 0.440 5.28 3.48 3.29 0.11 0.548 6.57 3.48 3.60 0.56 0.505 7.57 4.03 4.06 0.50 0.556 6.35 5.01 5.22 0.40 0.301 4.52 4.03 3.13 0.16 0.292 5.25 4.56 3.46 0.95 0.330 7.92 7.57 6.19 0.17 0.322 7.74 8.44 6.62 0.31 0.248 5.96 13.90 9.61 0.01 0.166 2.23 15.76 6.99 0.05 0.151 1.62 13.59 6.94 0.06 0.162 2.19 12.52 7.13 0.06 0.184 2.21 9.51 5.42 0.23 0.440 5.26 5.66 5.54 0.39 0.434 5.21 5.90 5.54 0.06 0.463 5.55 18.96 18.46 0.01 0.799 9.59 6.43 9.53 0.22 0.663 9.94 6.73 7.44 0.42 0.657 9.65 6.73 7.42 0.02 0.660 13.20 6.07 9.12 0.Q1 DITCH CB17 CB16 CB1A • CB17 CB16 DITCH CB1B 2.97 0.00 0.08 0.00 2.86 3.83 4.17 5.34 211 229 12 58 12 12 12 12 15.0 15.4 15.8 6.3 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 2.97 2.97 3.05 o • 110~\ ___ j.XIS 1.78 0.00 0.05 0.00 Page 1.78 1.78 1.83 2.21 1.85 1.82 1.79 3.19 3.29 3.24 3.27 7.05 6.53 7.55 7.88 8.92 0.505 0.429 0.415 0.791 0.503 0.459 0.450 0.670 6.03 5.51 5.40 8.04 8.31 9.62 10.04 11.36 •• "-'} 8.37 0.42 9.33 0.41 9.61 0.02 12.58 I 0.08 » 5 §) .. ~ CONVEYANCE AREA MAP r-ea fad 'f 'r UPSREAM AREA MAP (SEE ATTACHED SH ..... EE-"I) UPSTREAM AREA TO ~ :!; ~ ~ / I , , "' I :.t':' SI , @ , 0PsTIEAM AREA TO CULVEHT-7.0 ~~. n-.. u ~: ::. ! @> I --l- i : , , I .~ ;.C: !o . CULVERT-2.97 AC. I --I --y " I I ~ .. ~dAM BASIN +0 .~. I 1~Rq:PTOR-1.66~._~~_____ ! ~ d! : _._. , :,:): , I .:.: • I' ., .... ~ @ , OIS'. Rl'..:NING WAlt , :: • 0 :.:':~ , ------, ... \ [X:S!lN{; i-tO'J$f ~:'::=:"~;;;;':<:1"\ @ -, - - --f t '-A-o.:t1J! AC 'l' 5 J..~~------'-! -----, ' I, ' "'ffj 3 , , I 4" I 'It-k--='f5'--'1=. I . I i I I I jL ~~~ lI.t...~ 0_ ,0 @ r ~ "j : -. .£-.. i:: I 21 Ii~JIL __ 22 @> 23 @ ., . ,-, 'S06> [)C1S1. 12-CUL\1:RT U:.(N) '" !J06.JO @> ~ ~---- I I t:r.' a @ ,:~ (f-;}-,-(: ,(.<~r':/ f" ... -~ [lIST. n" cu. !.E.{S) " !>18.f A-Q.08 AC .~.:. @ I Q. e( 10 :E w 0 0 e(0 ·co We( 00> a:..J • e(Q. ~e( wz ..J~ a 00 -_ a zt--w e(..J (JJ~ )--m> w:E ~w >e( ..J zl: ..J W 0 m ..0 • I~ ;: i= '6. .B Jf S ~ ~ J! i ~ i 8181~~1~ I 1 I .. f j R j .~ I CIt.> I-~~ => 0 ~l)I I (I) W c~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~NN z i .~ 0"100 i~ i 0 00 "" ...... Zo>COCO "I I I ... ....... <--Z • ~ ~IOIO ~I "I N III .. "-....,,..... J -l--lOlI) a NZNN ~iil cow"""". -~-........ ~" • -Ott,. rtJ 4'6- .::J \ ~ ~ :t w '" '\ ~ ~ ,," e . co~ .. I 0 C\I II i 0 ~ .... .... it • 02~19/200~ 16:53 F~' 425 251 8782 . Map Olltput BARGHAl1SEN • BQLru.YMPJA .-. -----'-.-----. o AI Legend lakeJ and UJge RHo" 1apo eo.Iou .. (5ft) Ij!J001/001 Page 10(1 httn·I'wwwS.mettol<c.20v(~ervle!lc')m.esri.esrimap.Esrimap?ServiceNarne=overview&Clie ... 211912004 e) SECflON 3.2 RUNOFF COMPUTATION AND ANALYSIS ME1lIODS I WESTERN KING COUNTY 2-Year 24-Hour Precipitation in Inches 9/1/98 FIGURE 3.2.1.A 2-YEAR 24-HOUR ISOPLUVIALS o 2 4Wes , , ", 3-14 I ----3.5 1998 SuJface Water Design Manual .) ---~----- SECDON 32 RUNOFF COMPUTATION AND ANALYSIS MEIllODS I FIGURE 3.Z.1.C zs. YEAR Z4-HOUR lSOPLUVlALS WESTERN KING COUNTY 25-Year 24-Hour Precipitation in Inches 9/1/98 o 2 -4Mies , , , 3-16 ------- 1998 Swface Water Design Manual 3.2.1 RATIONAL METHOD I FIGURE 3.2.I.D lOO·YEAR 24·HOUR ISOPLUVIALS I WESTERN KING COUNTY 1><9 "-6.0 N 1><' 'J,. * 1><' 100-Year 24-Hour 1><'> Precipitation in Inches 0 2 ...... , , , ",'? .)' 1998 Surface Water Design Manual 3·17 911/98 • S.2 Downstream Improvement Conveyance Calculations •. ) Project Description Project File Worksheet Flow Element Method Solve For Input Data PIPE La FULL FLOW CAPACITY CALC Worksheet for Circular Channel c: Ihaestadllmwl 11 020-pi. 1m2 HAMIL TON PIPE CAPACITY CALCS Circular Channel Manning's Formula Full Flow Capacity Mannings Coefficient Channel Slope Diameter 0.013 0.033300 ftlft 24.00 in Results Depth 2.00 ft Discharge 41.28 . cIs > 100 Yi!-fU> w of 2-3,4-CF$ Flow Area 3.14 ft2 fiZaw\ l4N£'\...:3 J)oWf..Jsr(2&t.JAA Wetted Perimeter 6.28 ft Top Width 0.00 ft Critical Depth 1.96 ft Percent Full 100.00 Critical Slope 0.029748 ftlft Velocity 13.14 ftls Velocity Head 2.68 ft Specific Energy FULL ft Froude Number FULL Maximum Discharge 44.40 cIs Full Flow Capacity 41.28 cIs Full Flow Slope 0.0333001tlft 10/22103 02:05:52 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06706 (203) 755-1666 DI'=----- FlowMaster v5.15 Page 1 of 1 -------------------- .-.) .) Project Description Project File Worksheet Flow Element Method Solve For Input Data PIPE L 10 FULL FLOW CAPACITY CALC Worksheet for Circular Channel c:lhaestadlfmwl 11 020-pi.fm2 HAMILTON PIPE CAPACITY CALCS Circular Channel Manning's Formula Full Flow Capacity Mannings Coefficient Channel Slope Diameter 0.013 0.014300 ftlft 24.00 in Results Depth Discharge Flow Area Wetted Perimeter Top Width Critical Depth Percent Full Critical Slope Velocity Velocity Head Specific Energy Froude Number Maximum Discharge Full Flow Capacity Full Flow Slope 2.00 ft 27.05 cfs '> IOo~ ftow ~ 23.4-c.~ 3.14 ft2 f1z6M WJt,L. '3 D>\ISI-I~ 6.28 ft 0.00 ft 1.81 ft 100.00 0.012538 ftlft 8.61 ftls 1.15 ft FULL ft FULL 29.10 cfs 27.05 cfs 0.014300 ftlft 10/22103 02:06:13 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 DIL FlowMaster vS.15 Page 1 of 1 .------------I • .--5.3 Tract E lOO-Year Floodplain Analysis ------------- 1l020-FLD.exc e r\ KCRTS Program ... Fi 1 e Di rectory: "1 , } C:\KCSWDM\KCDATA\ O"R:::4"f?t':. A... A -..L..-ri?~,.,.-' [C] CREATE a new Ti me seri es '(.?f fLCT\VV \,-I H"\\....-! E ST • 0.00 0.33 0.75 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.91 1l020-FLD.tsf T 1.00000 T 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000000 Till Forest \ 0.000000 Till pasture ~ M-~ fi;bW\ T'PAGi £-' 0.000000 Till Grass = 45/. of IRS~~ 1'0 fl\l-rE-"(lL£f1l>f'Z.- 0.000000 outwash Forest 0.000000 Outwash Pasture 0.000000 outwash Grass 0.000000 wetland 0.000000 Impervious", '7'5/. r;:: UW~ 70 1~E.f'1l5(2... [T] Enter the Analysis TOOLS Module [p] Compute PEAKS and Flow Frequencies 1l020-fld.tsf 1l020-FLD.pks [R] RETURN to previous Menu [x] exit KCRTS program Page 1 ------------------------------------ .) Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:11020-fld.tsf Project Location:Sea-Tac ---Annual Peak Flow Rates--------Flow Frequency Analysis------- Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak - -Peaks Rank Return Prob (CFS) (CFS) Period 0.305 5 2/09/01 2:00 ~0.629 1 100.00~0.990 0.237 8 1/05/02 16:00 0.367 2 25.00 0.960 0.367 2 2/27/03 7:00 0.351 3 10.00 0.900 0.242 7 8/26/04 2:00 0.324 4 5.00 0.800 0.294 6 10/28/04 16:00 0.305 5 3.00 0.667 0.324 4 1/18/06 16:00 0.294 6 2.00 0.500 0.351 3 10/26/06 0:00 0.242 7 1.30 0.231 0.629 1 1/09/08 6:00 0.237 8 1.10 0.091 Computed Peaks 0.542 50.00 0.980 • '/)0J~ I 00 y~ fM1t-.-1t>,::. uP7'"[7lf1rM t-~ [ - • ~mpEo I (X)('~ ~ 1012-ON> lIE (FfoM $EC.-nON 4-./) • fb.Jrt Z .10 Cps, ntl2V ouTLtJr F'I PE- 10 fST1\i5LA S (-\ two -p...m "-.) WJJttf7 rY1'J CSu.-'F6uow 10& Ctr:l-C ~ filfl De;P11l.-SJ Project Description Project File Worksheet Flow Element Method Solve For Input Data TRACT 'E' OUTLET -FLOODPLAIN LIMITS Worksheet for Circular Channel c:lhaestadlfmwl 11 020-fl.fm2 FLOODPLAIN -OUTLET PIPE FOR TRACT 'E' Circular Channel Manning's Formula Channel Depth Mannings Coefficient Channel Slope Diameter 0.013 0.020000 tuft 15.00 2.10 in cfs Discharge Results Depth 0.41 ft <! o,~"'-----I)A1-ft~=--\<C =-5D3."3/ t-0 AI ~5"D3.7l? FLcoP f.l-OJ, Flow Area 0.35 ft· f1:,(Z.. T?Itc:., '£:' Wetted Perimeter 1.52 ft Top Width 1.17 ft Critical Depth 0.58 ft .) Percent Full 32.61 Critical Slope 0.005537 tuft Velocity 6.04 fVs Velocity Head 0.57 ft Specific Energy 0.98 ft Froude Number 1.96 Maximum Discharge 9.83 cfs Full Flow Capacity 9.14 cfs Full Flow Slope 0.001057 tuft Flow is supercritical. .) 02/25/04 09:34:41 AM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755·1666 FlowMaster vS.1S Page 1 of 1 • 5.4 Backwater Analysis • --------------- e) BACKWATER COMPUTER PROGRAM FOR PIPES Pipe data from file:ll020-1.bwp Surcharge condition at intermediate junctions Tailwater Elevation:5l0.l9 feet Discharge Range:4.12 to 5.12 Step of 0.1 [cfs] Overflow Elevation:511.78 feet Weir: NONE Channel Width:3. feet PolliO -vB>/ PIPE NO.1: 7 LF -24"CP @ OVERFLOW-EL: 511.50 2.71% OUTLET: 504.00 INLET: 504.19 INTYP: 5 JUNC NO.1: BEND: 90 DEG DIA/WIDTH: 4.0 Q-RATIO: 0.00 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N-FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI ******************************************************************************* 4.12 6.06 510.25 * 0.012 0.72 0.44 6.19 6.19 6.01 6.06 0.97 4.22 6.05 510.24 * 0.012 0.73 0.44 6.19 6.19 6.00 6.05 0.99 4.32 6.06 510.25 * 0.012 0.74 0.45 6.19 6.19 6.00 6.06 1. 00 4.42 6.06 510.25 * 0.012 0.74 0.45 6.19 6.19 6.00 6.06 1. 01 4.52 6.06 510.25 * 0.012 0.75 0.46 6.19 6.19 6.00 6.06 1.03 4.62 6.06 510.25 * 0.012 0.76 0.46 6.19 6.19 6.00 6.06 1. 04 4.72 6.07 510.26 * 0.012 0.77 0.47 6.19 6.19 6.00 6.07 1. 05 4.82 6.07 510.26 • 0.012 0.78 0.47 6.19 6.19 6.00 6 . .07 1.07 4.92 -6.07 510.26 • 0.012 0.79 0.48 6.19 6.19 6.00 6.07 1. 08 5.02 6.08 510.27 • 0.012 0.79 0.48 6.19 6.19 6.00 6.08 1. 09 5.12 6.08 510.27 • 0.012 0.80 0.49 6.19 6.19 6.00 6.08 1.11 5.12 6.08 510.27 • 0.012 0.80 0.49 6.19 6.19 6.00 6.08 1.11 c.-bl-C~2- PIPE NO. 2 : 127 LF -24"CP @ 1.17% OUTLET: 504.19 INLET: 505.67 INTYP: 5 JUNC NO. 2: OVERFLOW-EL: 512.41 BEND: 90 DEG DIA/WIDTH: 4.0 Q-RATIO: 0.07 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. • N-FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI ******************************************************************************* 4.12 4.67 510.34 • 0.012 0.72 0.54 6.06 6.06 4.62 4.67 0.99 4.22 4.66 510.33 * 0.012 0.73 0.55 6.05 6.05 4.61 4.66 1. 00 4.32 4.67 510.34 * 0.012 0.74 0.55 6.06 6.06 4.62 4.67 1. 02 4.42 4.68 510.35 * 0.012 0.74 0.56 6.06 6.06 4.62 4.68 1. 03 4.52 4.68 510.35 * 0.012 0.75 0.56 6.06 6.06 4.62 4.68 1. 04 4.62 4.69 510.36 * 0.012 0.76 0.57 6.06 6.06 4.63 4.69 1.06 4.72 4.70 510.37 * 0.012 0.77 0.58 6.07 6.07 4.63 4.70 1.07 4.82 4.71 510.38 * 0.012 0.78 0.58 6.07 6.07 4.64 4.71 1.08 4.92 4.71 510.38 * 0.012 0.79 0.59 6.07 6.07 4.64 4.71 1.10 5.02 4.72 510.39 * 0.012 0.79 0.60 6.08 6.08 4.65 4.72 1.11 5.12 4.73 510.40 * 0.012 0.80 0.60 6.08 6.08 4.65 4.73 1.12 5.12 4.73 510.40 • 0.012 0.80 0.60 6.08 6.08 4.65 4.73 1.12 L~1....J-C-e>+ PIPE NO. 3 : 62 LF -24"CP @ 0.94% OUTLET: 505.67 INLET: 506.25 INTYP: 5 JUNC NO. 3 : OVERFLOW-EL: 512.62 BEND: 90 DEG DIA/WIDTH: 4.0 Q-RATIO: 0.52 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N-FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI *************************************.****************************************** 3.85 3.94 4.19 4.18 510.44 * 0.012 0.69 0.55 4.67 4.67 4.11 510.43 • 0.012 0.70 0.56 4.66 4.66 4.10 4.19 4.18 0.99 1.00 .) 4.04 4.19 510.44 * 0.012 0.71 0.56 4.67 4.67 4.11 4.19 1. 02 4.13 4.20 510.45 * 0.012 0.72 0.57 4.68 4.68 4.11 4.20 1. 03 4.22 4.22 510.47 * 0.012 0.73 0.58 4.68 4.68 4.12 4.22 1. 05 4.32 4.23 510.48 * 0.012 0.73 0.58 4.69 4.69 4.13 4.23 1. 06 4.41 4.24 510.49 * 0.012 0.74 0.59 4.70 4.70 4.14 4.24 1. 08 4.50 4.25 510.50 * 0.012 0.75 0.60 4.71 4.71 4.15 4.25 1. 09 4.60 4.27 510.52 * 0.012 0.76 0.60 4.71 4.71 4.15 4.27 1.11 4.69 4.28 510.53 * 0.012 0.77 0.61 4.72 4.72 4.16 4.28 1.12 4.79 4.29 510.54 * 0.012 0.77 0.61 4.73 4.73 4.17 4.29 1.14 4.79 4.29 510.54 * 0.012 0.77 0.61 4.73 4.73 4.17 4.29 1.14 ~4 -c...-~ PIPE NO. 4: 125 LF -15"CP @ 0.77% OUTLET: 506.25 INLET: 507.21 INTYP: 5 JUNC NO. 4 : OVERFLOW-EL: 513 . 87 BEND: 0 DEG DIA/WIDTH: 4.0 Q-RATIO: 0.46 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N-FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI ******************************************************************************* 2.53 3.48 510.69 * 0.012 0.64 0.56 4.19 4.19 3.40 3.48 0.91 2.59 3.48 510.69 * 0.012 0.65 0.57 4.18 4.18 3.39 3.48 0.92 2.66 3.50 510.71 * 0.012 0.66 0.58 4.19 4.19 3.41 3.50 0.93 2.72 3.52 510.73 * 0.012 0.67 0.59 4.20 4.20 3.43 3.52 0.95 2.78 3.55 510.76 * 0.012 0.67 0.60 4.22 4.22 3.45 3.55 0.96 2.84 3.57 510.78 * 0.012 0.68 0.60 4.23 4.23 3.48 3.57 0.97 2.90 3.60 510.81 * 0.012 0.69 0.61 4.24 4.24 3.50 3.60 0.98 2.96 3.63 510.84 * 0.012 0.70 0.62 4.25 4.25 3.52 3.63 1. 00 3.03 3.65 510.86 * 0.012 0.70 0.63 4.27 4.27 3.54 3.65 1. 01 3.09 3.68 510.89 * 0.012 0.71 0.63 4.28 4.28 3.56 3.68 1.02 .) 3.15 3.71 510.92 * 0.012 0.72 0.64 4.29 4.29 3.59 3.71 1.04 3.15 3.71 510.92 * 0.012 0.72 0.64 4.29 4.29 3.59 3.71 1.04 C-!b( -U3> 10 PIPE NO. 5 : 123 LF -15"CP @ 0.50% OUTLET: 507.46 INLET: 508.07 INTYP: 5 JUNC NO. 5: OVERFLOW-EL: 515.40 BEND: 90 DEG DIA/WIDTH: 4.0 Q-RATIO: 0.58 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N-FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI ******************************************************************************* 1. 74 2.77 510.84 * 0.012 0.53 0.52 3.23 3.23 2.70 2.77 0.76 1. 78 2.77 510.84 * 0.012 0.53 0.52 3.23 3.23 2.69 2.77 0.77 1. 82 2.80 510.87 * 0.012 0.54 0.53 3.25 3.25 2.72 2.80 0.78 1. 86 2.83 510.90 * 0.012 0.55 0.54 3.27 3.27 2.75 2.83 0.79 1. 90 2.86 510.93 * 0.012 0.55 0.54 3.30 3.30 2.78 2.86 0.80 1.95 2.89 510.96 * 0.012 0.56 0.55 3.32 3.32 2.81 2.89 0.82 1.99 2.93 511.00 * 0.012 0.57 0.56 3.35 3.35 2.84 2.93 0.83 2.03 2.96 511.03 * 0.012 0.57 0.56 3.38 3.38 2.87 2.96 0.84 2.07 3.00 511.07 * 0.012 0.58 0.57 3.40 3.40 2.90 3.00 0.85 2.11 3.03 511.10 * 0.012 0.59 0.58 3.43 3.43 2.93 3.03 0.86 2.16 3.07 511 .14 * 0.012 0.59 0.58 3.46 3.46 2.97 3.07 0.87 2.16 3.07 511.14 * 0.012 0.59 0.58 3.46 3.46 2.97 3.07 0.87 b-f!;JIO -~.812.. PIPE NO. 6 : 121 LF -12"CP @ 0.50% OUTLET: 508.07 INLET: 508.67 INTYP: 5 JUNC NO. 6: OVERFLOW-EL: 511. 78 BEND: 90 DEG DIA/WIDTH: 2.0 Q-RATIO: 0.45 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N-FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI e·! ******************************************************************************* 1.10 2.32 510.99 * 0.012 0.45 0.45 2.77 2.77 2.27 2.32 0.64 1.12 2.33 511. 00 * 0.012 0.45 0.45 2.77 2.77 2.27 2.33 0.64 .) 1.15 2.36 511.03 * 0.012 0.46 0.46 2.80 2.80 2.30 2.36 0.65 1.18 2.40 511. 07 * 0.012 0.46 0.47 2.83 2.83 2.34 2.40 0.66 1. 20 2.44 511.11 * 0.012 0.47 0.47 2.86 2.86 2.38 2.44 0.67 1.23 2.49 511.16 * 0.012 0.47 0.48 2.89 2.89 2.42 2.49 0.68 1.26 2.53 511.20 * 0.012 0.48 0.48 2.93 2.93 2.46 2.53 0.69 1.28 2.57 511.24 * 0.012 0.48 0.49 2.96 2.96 2.50 2.57 0.70 1. 31 2.62 511.29 * 0.012 0.49 0.49 3.00 3.00 2.54 2.62 0.71 1. 34 2.66 511.33 * 0.012 0.49 0.50 3.03 3.03 2.58 2.66 0.72 1.36 2.71 511. 38 * 0.012 0.50 0.51 3.07 3.07 2.62 2.71 0.73 1. 36 2.71 511. 38 * 0.012 0.50 0.51 3.07 3.07 2.62 2.71 0.73 V t91 z.... -e,.e:--I 'b PIPE NO. 7 : 22 LF -12 "CP @ 0.50% OUTLET: 508.67 INLET: 508.78 INTYP: 5 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N-FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI ******************************************************************************* 0.76 2.25 511.03 * 0.012 0.37 0.37 2.32 2.32 2.23 2.25 0.50 0.78 2.25 511.03 * 0.012 0.37 0.37 2.33 2.33 2.22 2.25 0.51 0.79 2.29 511. 07 * 0.012 0.38 0.37 2.36 2.36 2.26 2.29 0.52 0.81 2.33 511.11 * 0.012 0.38 0.38 2.40 2.40 2.30 2.33 0.52 0.83 2.37 511.15 * 0.012 0.39 0.38 2.44 2.44 2.34 2.37 0.53 0.85 2.41 511.19 * 0.012 0.39 0.39 2.49 2.49 2.39 2.41 0.54 0.87 2.46 511.24 * 0.012 0.40 0.39 2.53 2.53 2.43 2.46 0.55 0.89 2.50 511.28 * 0.012 0.40 0.40 2.57 2.57 2.47 2.50 0.55 0.90 2.55 511.33 * 0.012 0.40 0.40 2.62 2.62 2.52 2.55 0.56 0.92 2.60 511.38 * 0.012 0.41 0.41 2.66 2.66 2.56 2.60 0.56 0.94 2.64 511. 42 * 0.012 0.41 0.41 2.71 2.71 2.61 2.64 0.57' .) 0.94 2.64 511 .42 * 0.012 0.41 0.41 2.71 2.71 2.61 2.64 0.57 .! ·) • BACKWATER COMPUTER PROGRAM FOR PIPES Pipe data from file:11020-2.bwp Surcharge condition at intermediate junctions Tailwater Elevation:510.49 feet Discharge Range:0.31 to 1.31 Step of 0.1 [cfs] Overflow Elevation:510.65 feet Weir:NONE Channel Width:3. feet 1102-0-z.. Z--2 ... :;-0+ PIPE NO.1: 198 LF -18"CP @ OVERFLOW-EL: 510.62 0.50% OUTLET: 506.50 INLET: 507.49 INTYP: 5 JUNC NO.1: BEND: 90 DEG DIA/WIDTH: 2.0 Q-RATIO: 0.54 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N-FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI ******************************************************************************* 0.31 0.41 0.51 0.61 0.71 0.81 0.91 1. 01 1.11 1.21 1. 31 3.01 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.02 3.02 3.03 3.03 3.04 3.04 510.50 510.49 510.50 510.50 510.50 510.51 510.51 510.52 510.52 510.53 510.53 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 0.21 0.24 0.27 0.29 0.32 0.34 0.36 0.38 0.40 0.42 0.43 0.21 0.24 0.26 0.28 0.31 0.33 0.35 0.36 0.38 0.40 0.41 3.99 3.99 3.99 3.99 3.99 3.99 3.99 3.99 3.99 3.99 3.99 3.99 3.99 3.99 3.99 3.99 3.99 3.99 3.99 3.99 3.99 3.99 3.01 3.00 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.02 3.02 3.02 3.03 3.01 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.02 3.02 3.03 3.03 3.04 3.04 0.27 0.32 0.35 0.39 0.42 0.45 0.48 0.51 0.54 0.56 0.59 PIPE NO.2: 31 LF -15"CP @ 0.52% OUTLET: 507.49 INLET: 507.65 INTYP: 5 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N-FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI ******************************************************************************* 0.20 0.27 0.33 0.40 0.46 0.53 0.59 0.66 0.72 0.79 0.85 2.86 2.85 2.85 2.85 2.86 2.86 2.87 2.88 2.88 2.89 2.90 510.51 510.50 510.50 510.50 510.51 510.51 510.52 510.53 510.53 510.54 510.55 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 0.18 0.20 0.23 0.25 0.27 0.29 0.30 0.32 0.34 0.35 0.37 0.18 0.20 0.22 0.24 0.26 0.28 0.29 0.31 0.32 0.34 0.35 3.01 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.02 3.02 3.03 3.03 3.04 3.04 3.01 3.00 3.01 3.01 3.01 3.02 3.02 3.03 3.03 3.04 3.04 2.86 2.84 2.85 2.85 2.85 2.86 2.86 2.87 2.87 2.88 2.89 2.86 2.85 2.85 2.85 2.86 2.86 2.87 2.88 2.88 2.89 2.90 0.23 0.27 0.30 0.33 0.36 0.38 0.40 0.43 0.45 0.47 0.49 .) BACKWATER COMPUTER PROGRAM FOR PIPES Pipe data from file:11020-3.bwp Surcharge condition at intermediate junctions Tailwater E1evation:510.4 feet Discharge Range:0.28 to 0.48 Step of 0.1 [cfs] Overflow Elevation:511.89 feet Weir:NONE Channel Width:3. feet Ito lJ) -"3> PIPE NO.1: 74 LF -12"CP @ 3.74% OUTLET: 505.67 INLET: 508.44 INTYP: 5 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N-FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI ******************************************************************************* 0.28 0.38 0.48 1. 97 1. 97 1. 98 510.41 510.41 510.42 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 0.22 0.26 0.29 0.14 0.16 0.18 4.73 4.73 4.73 4.73 4.73 4.73 1.97 1.97 1.97 1. 97 1. 97 1.98 0.28 0.33 0.38 • 5.5 Emergency Overflow Spillway, Primary Overflow, and Riser Overflow Calculations • 5.5 • • Emergency Overflow Spillway Calculations Q,oo = 1.47 cfs L = [Q\Oo / (3.21 WI2)] -2.4H L = [1.47/ (3.21 (0.20 312 ] -2.4 (0.20) L = 4.64' required; 10' provided Riser overflow water surface elevation Emergency overflow spillway water surface elevation Minimum top of berm elevation Minimum top of berm elevation provided = = = = 510.18 511.20 511.50 511.50 11020.004.doc • • • ..JA:7,t t4Qv~~ ~I/. ,CAti. IS SECFION 5.3 DETENnON FACILITIES 9/t/98 Rectangular, Sharp-Cre~ted Weir The reCtangular, shiup-crested wei~ design shown in l'igure5.3.4.E may be analyzed usin-g standard weir equations for the fully contracted condition. I FIGURE 5.3.4.E RECTANGuLAR, SHARP-CRESTED WEIR riser . ,. P:;: 5io ", . PLAN NTS SECTION NTS Q = C (L -0.2H)B'" (5-6) where Q = flow (cfs) C = 3.27 + 0.40 HIP (ft) H.P are as shown above L = lengtll (ft) of tlle portion of the riser circumference as necessary not to. exceed 50% of the circumference D = inside riser diameter (ft) Note that this equation accounts for side contractions by subtracting 0.1 H from Lfor each side of the notch weir. '. ">/z. Q:: ~.~ol( 3 -O.U.40)).<ro . D:;. l.'?D c.fS > {.U:-7 c.PS. o\L- 1998 Surface Warel' Design Manual 5-46 • • SECIlONS3 " C D " .. .. .. ., a. 1» J!! ,U :0 " u ~ a ca:#:Tt.N +~{S;~,~'i1: DIl'J'FNfION F "dLrriEs Riser Overflow . The 1I0niograpb ill figure $:~.4:H 9.'l,j,e ~Se<lJod~temiiDe.tbehead:(infeet)a1\Ove'II'Iiser.ofgjViil1' diameter and,for a given flow (usually ihelOO;year peak'fli:>w;fotdeveI6~;c:lii)di!i6riS), '. .,. I +----f-----i--f--+-f-l-t-+-h,1f-'-/: ,h,,+V_r:,.ii',, 4 ~ \." ............ ~ .... )-... '~ ;, . II........ '/'"",'. k 1 0 1 : 10 0,1 1 HEAD IN FEET (measured from crest of riser) I t-I~ o:z.g' 'foil 11." I °w.i.=9,739 DH'" -':'--tJ-~--'-''----l QDrilic.=3.782 [)i2HlIZ --=-Q In cfs. D and H in teet Slope change occurs at weir-orifice transition 911198 1998 Surface Water Design Manual 5-50 · 6.0 SPECIAL REPORTS AND STUDIES Miscellaneous reports have been included for review. 11020.004.doc • \ , • 6.1 Preliminary Wetland Assessment and Delineation Report Prepared by Chad Armour, LLC Dated April 30, 2002 n • n ! l n , J f' 11 :1 , I · j • j . 1 · 1 , .. j · I I , , ! , , e J , · , CHAD ARMOUR, LLC April 30, 2002 lob Number 01·0014 Mr. Curtis Schuster KBS 111, LLC c/o lohn L. Scott Real Estate P. O. Box 807 Bellevue, Washington 98009-0807 6500 126'" Avenue S.E. Bellevue, Washington 98006·3941 (425) 641·9743 annour@msn.com Subject: Preliminary Wetland Assessment and Delineation Report Hamilton Place (Tax ID No. 366450-0100) Renton Area of King County, Washington Dear Curtis: We are pleased to present the results of our preliminary wetland assessment and delineation for the above-referenced property located in the Renton area of King County, Washington (Figure I). The work was accomplished in accordance with Chad Armour, LLC proposal (No. 0032) dated March 22, 2001 and a verbal request from you to flag the wetlands and prepare a report. The purpose of the work was to identify wetland areas, flag and/or stake the wetland boundaries, and prepare a written report to document our findings . The report is organized in sections and includes: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS that presents a synopsis of the pertinent issues related to wetlands; SITE DESCRIPTION of the subject property (site) and adjacent properties; BACKGROUND INFORMATION that presents existing information about the site; SITE CONDITIONS that describes on-site wetlands and uplands; CONCLUSIONS that summarize the results of the wetland assessment; and LIMITATIONS of this project. A list of references, tables, figures, and appendices follow the text. Table 1 lists the plants observed on the site. Figure 1 is a Vicinity Map showing the location of the site. Figure 2 is a Site Plan that shows the location of the wetland boundaries, sampling points, and other pertinent site features. The soil type mapped for the site is shown on Figure 3. HamiltonIDelineation Report.doc Chad Annour, LLC 04130/02 n n r !J i ! I ! I 11 u , . , t · I ; J ;.\ ,~. , , · I ; i , j · , · I I • I , t · , · I • t i I • I , J Wetland Assessment and Delineation King County, Washington KBS I1J,LLC Wetland assessment methods and field data forms are presented in Appendix A. Our wetland functional assessment form is presented in Appendix B. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS KBS III, LLC proposes to improve the 4.32-acre (ac) Hamilton site before selling it to a homebuilder. The site is located in the Renton area of King County, Washington at 13305 -160th Avenue SE. A single Class 3 wetland covering 0.18 ac or 7,640 square feet (sf) is located in the southwest comer of the site. A few widely scattered red alder (Alnus rubra, F AC) trees that are dying and grazed pasture grasses dominate it. Water that accumulates in this wetland during the rainy season flows off site to the south via an adjacent roadside ditch. The wetlands small size, simple plant community, and on-going grazing pressure limit its functional value. The minimum buffer setback for Class 3 wetlands is 25 feet. Buildings, pasture, and upland forest dominate the remainder of the site. SITE DESCRIPTION The rectangular-shaped Hamilton site covers 4.32 ac and is located at 13305 -160th Avenue SE in Section 14, Township 23 North, Range 5 East in the Renton area of King County, Washington (Figure I). The site is composed ofa single tax lot (366450-0100) that support a single-family home, associated outbuildings, lawn, pasture, deciduous forest, and wetland (Figure 2). Several cows and a bull were present on site at the time of our site visits. The cattle have complete access to almost the entire site and the grass in the pasture and the grass and herbs in the forest are heavily grazed. Consequently, the soil in some areas is exposed and cut up by their hooves. Site topography is relatively level with site elevations ranging from a low of about 505 feet to a high of about 523 feet above mean sea level. The northern two-thirds of the site is relatively level and supports all of the improvements; including the pasture. The southern third of the site slopes gently (range 2 to 4 percent) generally from north to south and is the location of the deciduous forest. Land use adjacent to the site is similar to the site. Single-family residential homes on small to medium-sized lots surround the site .. BACKGROUND INFORMATION We understand that KBS III, LLC intends to subdivide the site and construct roads and utilities before selling the improved site to homebuilders. We reviewed existing available maps at the King County Department of Development and Environmental Services to assess the potential for wetlands or streams to be present on or adjacent to the site. According to Wetland Map 9 in the Sensitive Areas Map Folio, there are no wetlands located on or adjacent to the site (King County, 1990). The closest mapped wetlands are Wetlands 2 and 3 in the adjacent May Creek sub-basin. They are located somewhat more than Y. mile northeast ofthe site. Stream Map 9 in the same folio HamiltonlDelineation Report.doc 2 04130/02 Chad Annour, LLC .----------------------------- f.l ! lJ' ~ lr : I ! 1 , I , I 1 .i · ) · I i ,.; , ! I ; 1 • 1 · i 1 I • I , ; i , , : 1 i • I · I · , • Wetland Assessment and Delineation King County, Washington KBS III, LLC indicates that no streams are located on or in the near vicinity of the site. The closest known salmon-bearing streams are the Cedar River and May Creek, which are located approximately 6,000 feet south and north of the site respectively. According to the Flood Insurance Rate Map the site is mapped as Zone X indicating that it is outside the SOO-year floodplain (FEMA, 1989). SITE CONDITIONS We visited the site on March 28,2001 and May 4,2001 to assess vegetative, soil, and hydrologic conditions on the site. We flagged one wetland area on the site and Center Pointe Surveying surveyed the location of the flagged wetland boundaries. The following subsections of the report depict the results of our efforts. On-Site Wetland The site contains a single 7,640 sf (0.18 ac) wetland that is located entirely on the site. The wetland is located in a slight depression in the southwest comer of the site. The depression appears to accumulate water during prolonged periods of precipitation during the rainy season. The accumulated water drains off site to the south via a small ditch. (Figure 2). The wetland is dominated by widely spaced red alder trees and grazed pasture grasses (Appendix A; Plot ID SP-2). Because there were no inflorescence (i.e., flowering structures) on the grasses, we were not able to identifY the individual grass species. However, we assumed that the grasses are hydrophytic based on topography, soils, and hydrology indicators. Other plant species present in lesser amounts in or adjacent to the wetland include big-leaf maple (Acer macrophyllum, F ACU) trees, Himalayan blackberry (Rubus disc%r, F ACU) and Indian plum (Oemlaria cerasiformis, FACU) shrubs, and soft rush (Juncus effusus, FACW). The upland-adapted plants generally grow on hummocks or on the upland around the perimeter of the wetland. All of the tree species in the wetland were dying presumably because they are rooted in an area subject to seasonal ponded water. The presence of these upland-adapted species suggests that this a:ea of the site was once likely upland and the wetland is a recent phenomenon. The soil on the site is mapped as Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes (Figure 3). In the wetland, the soil appears to resemble the mapped soil unit as modified by prolonged saturation. The soil to a depth of more than 12 inches is a black (lOYR2/l) gravelly sandy loam without mottles. Because cattle have full access to this area, the soil is exposed in much of the wetland. A1derwood gravelly sandy loam soil is a non-hydric soil (NRCS, 1996). Wetland hydrology was present during both of our March and May site visits. The depth to freestanding water was 4 inches below ground surface (bgs) and it was saturated within 2 inches of the surface. Standing water was present in hoof prints and tire tracks. During our March site visit excess surface water drained off site to the south via a small roadside ditch . HamiitonIDelineation Report.doc Chad Armour, LLC 3 04130/02 1 1 u ~ I ! [ . I f , , : I , , i .i , ! .. J , , , -, -I , . I. '. i I I ~ ; -1 . j . , , j Wetland Assessment and Delineation King County, Washington Wetland Functions KBS III, LLC We performed a functional assessment of the wetland using qualitative observations. Wetland functions assessed include shoreline protection, hydrologic support, storm/flood water abatement, groundwater exchange, water quality improvement, and natural biologic support. Field observations suggest that the wetland appears to provide low to moderate wetland functions (Appendix B). The wetlands relative small size, simple plant community, and continual disturbance by c!lttle tends to limit its functional value. Wetland Classification The wetland is classified as a palustrine emergent wetland (Cowardin et aI., 1979) (the trees present in the wetland are located on upland hummocks and are dying). Because the wetland is smaller than one acre but greater than 2,500 sf and has two or fewer classes of vegetation, it is classified as a Class 3 wetland (King County, 2000). Wetland Buffers The nllnimum buffer setback for Class 3 wetlands is 25 feet (King County, 2000). The County may allow buffer averaging as long as it provides additional protection to wetlands or enhances their function and as long as the total area of the buffer is not decreased. . On-Site Uplands The remaining 4.14 ac of the Hamilton site is composed of uplands. We did not observe any indications of wetlands or streams in the upland areas. Pasture Grazed or mowed grasses dominate the pasture and residential areas of the site. For these reasons, we were not able to identifY the species of grasses present in these two locations, We assume that they are non-hydrophytes based on the presence of non-hydric soils and the lack of wetland hydrology. Other plant species present in the pasture include white clover (Trifolium repens, FACU), common plantain (Plantago major, FACU+), and common dandelion (Taraxacum officinale, FACU) (Plot ID SP-3). The soil at this location resembles the mapped soil unit with a surface layer of very dark brown (I0YR2/2) gravelly sandy loam over dark brown (IOYRJ/3) gravelly sandy loam (Snyder, et al. 1973). There was no hint of mottling in this soil profile. There was no indication of wetland hydrology to a depth of more than 16 inches. This sampling point is located on the crest of a slight hill. Deciduous Forest Native and non-native trees and native shrubs dominate the deciduous forest. Big-leaf maple trees and Indian plum and California hazel (Corylus cornuta, F ACU) shrubs dominate the forest (Plot ID SP-I), Other plant species also observed in the deciduous HamillonlDelineation Report_doc 4 04130/02 Chad Armour, LLC n '1 1 , U j! i I .. · ~ : i ~ 1 ; i : T, , i , ) · , \ • J , ! • • , \ , i · I I ! • J , I : ! Wetland Assessment and Delineation King County, Washington KBS I1I,LLC forest include red alder and English holly (llex aquifolium, FACU) trees. There are no grasses or herbs present in the forest. The cattle presumably removed those that were once present. The soil in the deciduous forest resembles the mapped soil unit. It is composed of very dark grayish brown (I 0YR3/2) gravelly loam to a depth of more than 16 inches. There was no indication of reducing conditions in this soil profile. When we first visited the site in late March, we observed freestanding water in the test hole 12 inches bgs and saturated soil 8 inches bgs. When we revisited the site in early May, neither standing water nor saturated soils were present within 16 inches of the soil surface. There also was no indication of oxidized root channels. Based on our May observations and the lack of hydrophytic vegetation and hydric soils, the wetland hydrology indicators present in March were not typical. CONCLUSIONS Most ofthe Hamilton site consists of uplands dominated by grazed or mowed grasses and a deciduous forest. The forest is not typical of Western Washington deciduous forests because cattle grazing has removed all of the herbaceous grasses and forbs. A single wetland covering a total of 7,640 sf or 0.18 ac is present in the southwest corner of the site. Based on the surrounding vegetation and topography, it was likely upland before the soil was compacted by cattle. Although a ditch in the wetland adjacent to the southern site boundary allows accumulated water to flow off site via the roadside ditch, compacted soil and the road likely promote standing water during the rainy season. This wetland contains characteristics typical of Class3 wetlands. The minimum buffer setback for Class 3 wetlands is 25 feet. LIMITATIONS Work for this project was perfonned, and this letter report prepared, in accordance with generally accepted professional practices for the nature and conditions of the work completed in the same or similar localities, at the time the work was perfonned. It is intended for the exclusive use of KBS Ill, LLC and its assigns for specific application to the referenced property. This report is not meant to represent a legal opinion. No other warranty, express or implied, is made. It should be noted that Chad Annour relied on infonnation provided by others indicated above. Chad Annour can only relay this infonnation and cannot be responsible for its accuracy or completeness. HamiltonIDelineation Report.doc Chad Annour. LLC 5 04130/02 ---------------------------- fJ ! n , , · . r I I " , , ·1 · . • J : 1 i : j · , , , , , I 1 , ,1 · 1 · , Wetland Assessment and Delineation King County, Washington KBS m, LLC Any questions regarding our work and this report, the presentation of the information, and the interpretation of the data are welcome and should be referred to the undersigned. Sincerely, Chad Annour, LLC CHAD ARMOUR Principal Attachments: References Table I -Plants Identified on the Hamilton site Figure I -Vicinity Map Figure 2 -Site Plan Figure 3 -Soils Map Appendix A -Wetland Assessment Methods and Wetlands Rating Field Data Forms Appendix B -Field Rating Forms for Wetland Function Evaluation HamiitonIDelineation Report.doc Chad Armour, LLC 6 04130/02 r1 " I , n 1J n t ) u 11 . , J J , 1 : I j i j 1 : , i " j ) i \ , , 1.1 , I I I LJ i I I 1 t .. [~ L Wetland Assessment and Delineation King County, Washington KBS Ill, LLC REFERENCES Cooke, S. S. 1997. A Field Guide to the Common Wetland Plants of Western Washington and Northwestern Oregon. University of Washington Press. Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of Biological Services. Ecology (Washington State Department of Ecology). 1997. Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual. Publication No. 96-94. 88 pages plus , appendices. Environmental Laboratory. 1987. U.S. Anny Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual, Technical Report Y-87-1, U.S. Anny Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi. FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency). 1989. Flood Insurance Rate Map Panel 982 of 1725. Hitchcock, C. L. and A. Cronquist. 1973. Flora of the Pacific Northwest. University of Washington Press. King County. 1990. Sensitive Areas Map Folio. King County. 2000. King County Code. Chapter 21 A.24, Environmentally Sensitive Areas. NRCS (U.S. Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service). 1996. Hydric Soils of the United States. http://www.statlab.iastate.edulsoilslhydric/national.html. Reed, P. B., Jr. 1988. National List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: Northwest (Region 9). US Fish and Wildlife Service, Biological Report 88(26.9). 89 pages. Snyder, D. E., P. S. Gale, and R. F. Pringle. 1973. Soil Survey of King County Area, Washington. USDA Soil Conservation Service in cooperation with Washington Agricultural Experiment Station. 100+ pages plus maps. HamiitonIDelineation Report.doc Chad Armour, LLC 04130/02 ] u n l \ , j r 1 j \ tJ . , , , 1 j 1 ; 11 , Wetland Assessment and Delineation King County. Washington Alnus rubra Cory/us comuta IIex aquifolium Juncus eJJusius Oem/eria cerasiformis Plantago major Rubus disc%r Taraxacum officinale Trifolium repens red alder California hazel grass English holly soft rush Indian plum common plantain Himalayan blackberry dandelion white clover Refer to Appendix A for an explanation of Indicator Status . HamiltonlDelineation Report.doc Chad Annour, LLC KBS III, LLC FAC FACU FACU FACW FACU FACU+ FACU FACU FACU 04130/02 o D fj , f 1 \ , 1 ; j , I ; J [ • j , , i , ! Source: The Thomas Guide, 1997, King/Pierce/Snohomish Counties; Page 657 IUUII'\I::: 1: VICINITY Hamilton King County, Washington NOT TO SCALE Chad Armour, LLC 6500 126~ Avenue SE Bellevue, Washington 98006 n r. n n n ( 1 ; J , . ~ ! ; ! • I ; J · ) · . : , J , I , ! '.' · , , , ) o o N o o 0 .E .;; c: '5- " > ~ c " Vl S 0 ~ " 0> ~ .S .!; II.. .c ~ 0 II) a. ~ 0 ::! " ~ N ~ ~ en >. ~ c " (,j ~ ~ U C W c " 8 ;,; II:: 0 0 0 ~ u ~ ::l " (!) E 0> 0 Vl u:: 0 c I ~ j;! ~ [J n u U II lee ! J '."."-' I . t l ) 11 i ) r I U , I , J [ I '. I ; I , , ) AgC -Nderwood gravelly sandy loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes Source: Soil Survey King County Area, Washington; Sheets 11 and 12 FIGURE 3: SOILS MAP Hamilton King County, INashington NOT TO SCALE Chad Armour, LLC 6500 126~ Avenue SE Bellevue, Washington 98006 ;-·1 j l , , ! . , , [J 1 \ , ~ J · , , i · i · 1 , · i : I ; J ~ \ , ; J , , • , i ; ~. j Wetland Assessment and Delineation King County, Washington APPENDIX A KBS III, LLC Chad Annour reviewed the King County Sensitive Areas Map Folio (1990) to assess the nature and relative extent of wetlands and streams in the vicinity of the site prior to assessing on-site wetlands. After we arrived at the site, we traversed the entire site to look for indications of wetlands such as depressions and ditches. We also looked for the presence of plant species that tend to favor wetland conditions. We used the Routine On-site Determination method detailed in the U.s. Anny Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987) and Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual (Ecology 1997). We identified plant species using the Flora of the Pacific Northwest (Hitchcock and Cronquist 1973) and A Field Guide to the Common Wetland Plants of Western Washington and Northwestern Oregon (Cooke 1997). The associated indicator status for each plant species was determined using the National List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: Northwest [Region 9] (Reed 1988, updated in 1993). Wereferenced the Environmentally Sensitive Areas regulations (King County 2000) to assess applicable wetland issues. Soils were identified using the Soil Survey of King County Area, Washington (Snyder et. aI, 1973). We referenced the Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) web page to determine if mapped soils or soils identified on site were hydric or non-hydric (NRCS, 1996). We marked the location of sampling points and wetland boundaries with consecutively numbered flagging and/or stakes with indelible ink. Following.our site visit, Centre Pointe Surveying surveyed the flagged boundaries to determine the exact location of the sampling points and wetland boundaries. Centre Pointe Surveying also calculated the wetland areas. Wetland determination and wetland rating forms completed by Chad Armour are presented at the end of this appendix. Indicator categories shown on the field data forms are defined as follows: FACW (fucultative wetland) FAC (facultative) FACU (facultative upland) UPL (upland) 67%-99% 34%-66% 1% -33% <1% No Indicator A positive or negative sign more specifically defines the regional frequency of occurrence for FACW, FAC, or FACU species in wetlands. A positive sign (+) indicates a frequency toward the higher end of the category. Conversely, a negative sign (-) indicates a frequency toward the lower end of the category . HamHtonlDelineation Report.doc Chad Annour, LLC 04130/02 n r 1 i I t-j , , , l ; '1 , , . , ~ .J , , d " j ".i , I DATA FORM 1 (Revised) Routine Wetland Detennination (W A State Wetland Delineation Manual or "\ Applicant/owner: !<. ~S"$) LLG l2J1 '''''lll-t./ LLL on the site? Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)? Is the area a potential Problem Area? VEGETATION INDICATORS: %OfdOmirianISOBL'FACW'&FAC~ _ 0 0 /0 Check all indicators that apply & explain below: Date: County: State: Community Transect ID: PlotlD: :5 f- 01 SE- Visual observation of plant species growing in areas of prolonged inundation/saturation Morphological adaptations ~e.-~L¥hYSiOIOgjCaVreprodUCtive adaptations Wetland plant database Literature vegetation Rationale for decisionlRemarks: HYDROLOGY Is it the growing season? yes Q no Based on:. ___ soil temp (record temp·-7I<--_....J) 7 Dept. of Depth to free water in pit: to saturated soil: all that apply & explain below: Stream, Lake or gage data: bydrology present? Rationale for decisionIRemarks: inches . inches Personal knowledge of regional plant communities Water Marks: yes Sediment Deposits: yes Drift Lines: yes Drainage Patterns: Local Soil Survey: Water-stained Leaves ye!(:no) (; no ?O~~I\' I.e.. ef II..-f,o VI j., SOILS Map Unit Name . &~hase) Prome Description AiJ.UwocJ fs'"hf/1 $.r;,.J.-; /oB.W>.(A.§.) Ev,+, Field observations confirm <!§) No Depth Horizon Matrix color Mottle colors Mottle abundance Texture, concretions, Drawing of soil (inches) (Munsell (Munsell size & contrast structure, etc. profile moist) moist) (match descrilltion) Ib A)6 ro Yf!..5/Z, --j,,&,JdI 1 i4 0 /.:o:t/ h-~ --IDe. .. ~ Hydric Soil Indicators: (check all that apply) __ Histosol --Matrix chroma::; 2 with mottles __ Histic Epipedon jJD1.o.E-__ Mg or Fe Concretions --Sulfidic Odor __ High Organic Content in Surface Layer of Sandy Soils -__ Aquic Moisture Regime __ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils __ Reducing Conditions __ Listed on NationallLocal Hydric Soils. List Gleyed or Low·Chroma (=1) matrix Other (explain in remarks) Hydric soils present? . yes ~ S6// 4'f-Rd..'~ 10 i4.L. VV'.~)., Ol'coe p 10,-,><" J... Rationale for decisionlRemarks: Wetland Determination (circle) Hydrophytic vegetation present? yes ~ G Hydric soils present? yes Is the sampling point yes Wetland hydrology present? ~. no within a wetland? RationalelRemarks: /'VO',-£- '--'~ . jo' Js M I<d (0 f"'1 +-.~ \/.(>::/'-+",.h", ''-J /1£'" _ h l ,J./·< P'R:'~. F<1.Js~ pDj,i'0~ "'"' h'l J./~/D'JI NOTES: :)011 W'-fk~""J OV.e< 71'"'LJb.~+'·c:.5'+~' Sa, { <2..!"'fD:S~; / e'LI<../i-;, R.c··~5C"l'; (,,,Ale -rA.,.,.-L,. <->·e.le.~'" 0 ",-,.<.:.,...1« ~~ lr'-;A1 AI 1, 2-DD I. ? • fl n n Project/Site: 11 .... \M,J -ft. V) DATA FORM 1 (Revised) Routine Wetland Detennination IllpS e an e neation anu (WA State Wetland Delineation Manual or 1987C W tl dD Ii M aI) Applicant/owner: J< e:,S /1 \ I LLL- Investigator(s): ~ .... eR I~r( --= ..... '" UL Do Nonnal Circumstances exist on the site? dfV no Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)? yes ~ Is the area a potential Problem Area? yes no Explanation of atypical or problem area: VEGETATION (For strata, indicate T = tree; S = shrub; H = herb; V = vine) Dominant Plant Species Stratum % cover Indicator ,Dominant Plant Species AIH£tS .,. -{ '-/0 (AL {...J/,f~ ~* --r /~ /-ALL<. AL~/ /A<N-'oP~ -dl .... ", 1 /" (ALIA. Rl.<.b iJ-.> d I SLo 10 r -.5 I:::> rOe I« k" ~ c.e'''s. {r;,,, 'j. s b f'ALL.( b,fbf,;> If '15 -- I-:-:s;:. VI (.lA $ e.Jf·,~~ H-I ~ALvJ Date: 3/2. i/o/ County: K~ State: IN srrlR: , 1{/2. 3JJ / ~ C. Community ID: Transect ID: Plot ID: .5P-2.. Stratum % cover Indicator ; J !-, HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION INDICATORS: -i' ~1''''~ i ) , it , , ! [ i } , , i ) , ) :1 ; I I '_.' , .. % of dominants OBL, FACW, & FAC ~ ,." .. fODt ... J.. ~>.k. '614-~ .4!.:ft .D. V< .L Check all indicators that apply & explain below: Visual observation of plant species growing in PhysiologicaVreproductive adaptations --areas of prolonged inundation/saturation --Wetland plant database -;r Morphological adaptations --Personal knowledge of regional plant communities Technical Literature Other (explain) Hydrophytic vegetation present? ~ no -n,..., ",J '6 fl~ ~~, Rationale for decisionlRemarks: ~-4L <> !--._,)" ,J" aiL 'o",vJ Lll-lt k~ .. :e /10 ,.j fJt;Ac·"est£v., '" r <!. F ,4-c: D / ..., (' ~i.,,r. ) HYDROLOGY Is it the growing season? ~\ no Water Marks: yes ,'Ii0 Sediment Deposits: yes (Il§) on ~- Based on: XSOil temp (record t1P ) Drift Lines: yes ~ Drainage Patterns: ® no other (explain) I'~~L Dept. of inundation: /::il:i:linches Oxidized Root (live roots) Local Soil Survey: yes(§) linches. Channels <12 in, yes no Depth to free water in pit: FAC Neutral: yes no Water-stained Leaves yes@ Depth to saturated soil: 2.. inches Check all that apply & explain below: Other (explain): P "", S<," -#<. ) k 'I Stream, Lake or gage data: --..L r-f -t-k.. Vt:: "-J~' '" , ' I-.Jo"'-'!~ '" je. ,Aerial photoaraphs: ~ Other: I )Wetland hydrology present? & no hI.-> P'" -+ ,;'{ t1 .... ~. -I,.. S·· , Rationale for decisionIRemarks: tC""f1~<hll ~Cdjl ..... , >/1"1' ,1,. '.5 j . ./ ,.,......,.r .... ( .. Jer 1- 11 1- Field observations confirm' @ No ProfIle Description Depth Horizon Matrix color Mottle colors Mottle abundance Texture, concretions, Drawing of soil (inches) (Munsell (Munsell size & contrast structure, etc. profile moist) moist) (match descril1tion) . 1\ • }2.-t It )6 /" yr,z 2-/1 """ ,.",) ~. , ':1. L,J...,:'f ----.--' I CU'. - Hydric Soil Indicators: (check all that apply) __ Histosol --Matrix chroma :5: 2 with mottles __ . Histic Epipedon __ Mg or Fe Concretions __ Sulfidic Odor __ High Organic Content in Surface Layer of Sandy Soils -__ Aquic Moisture Regime __ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils ~educing Conditions __ Listed on NationallLocal Hydric Soils.List Gleyed or Low-Chroma (=1) matrix Other (explain in remarks) Hydric soils present? ~~ no Rationale for decisionlRemarks: /....o<.>.l c..k" 0"'-,_ V\AA... +7; 1- Wetland Determination (circle) Hydrophytic vegetation present? r~ no i ~ .. ...---'~. Hydric soils present? ( y~J no Is the sampling point (!:~ Wetland hydrology present? .~ no within a wetland? '-,' Rationale/Remarks: A'I ? CJ,+-e{,e.... f{.e.H "'G ~ i NOTES: -rJ,. S '$ I '. I.:'J l'!c Iv <. (If ···r",··; .. A v"' [1/,' , Ii, /! I . , J~.n'. -t ..... ( I" ,..;.~ --I . ! I'\I!> 1'0 . 'J '.". c. ,._. '_I' C .. · •.. 1.1.:_ •.. ,., -rl r <. I I. -/ ),'1 \"':' "S' tl. I,' :;) , //I, ,.._ 1.1 c.' no I ! n o n u n bJ DATA FORM 1 (Revised) Routine Wetland Detennination (WA State Wetland Delineation Manual or Applicant/owner: II/ LLL., I Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)? Is the area a potential Problem Area? no yes @ yes d§) VEGETATION (For strata, indicate T = tree; S = shrub; H = herb; V = vine) o rAe INDICATORS: + % of dominants OBL, FACW, & FAC ~ 5(;)0/0 Date: Community Transect !D: 'i) 0 1 Plot!D: .5 p;.. : 1 Check all indicators that apply & explain below: I I 11 ; I , , f 1 I J j i tI Visual observation of plant species growing in e. • \1)"1 areas of prolonged inundation/saturation I~ Morphological adaptations Hydropbytic vegetation present? yes Rationale for decisionIRemarks: &, or ~ z-e.d l" t:-tf! ~ . HYDROLOGY Is it the growing season? Based on: _--,1-- hydrology present? Rationale for decisionlRemarks: 6 no yes POI'" -t PhysiologicaVreproductive adaptations Wetland plant database Personal knowledge of regional plant communities Other Water Drainage Patterns: Local Soil Survey: FAC Neutral: yes no Water-stained Leaves Other (explain): 17 I r e.-l50'" '" SOILS Map Unit Name Aldie/woo£! ~ ('" -.Ie f\6 & phase) :",,'ei'1 IDGV''-(A5L rrolU" " Depth Horizon Matrix color Mottle colors (inches) (Munsell (Munsell ~n;ct\ moist) I A /D')fZ-.z./2--- err 6 I /v,R,3Js -- Hydric Soil Indicators: (check all that apply) --Histosol __ Histic Epipedon Drainage Class 01 0 J. i'0 e /I c J,.r",," Field observations confmn ~ No Mottle abundance Texture, concretions, ~ "6 of soil size & contrast structure, etc. profile (match descril!tion) --5' e,..J",' \ -I ~Q.,J 1 J 17"""'" bA>-f --~r:'::);;;ta~~ /"IOl5-t. . I --Matrix chroma :5 2 with mottles __ Mg or Fe Concretions --Sulfidic Odor Nr)t--:J e __ High Organic Content in Surface Layer of Sandy Soils __ Aquic Moisture Regime __ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils __ Reducing Conditions Listed on NationallLocal Hydric Soils List ;u or Low·Chroma (=1) matrix -: Other (pv~l.;,\ in . Hydric soils present? yes c§) Rationale for decision/Remarks: No /A1d.",~ SOl) , ~d\ r .... -Ir:N 5 p.r -e 5"'~ -t. Wetland Determination (circle) Hydrophytic vegetation present? yes~ Hydric soils present? yes Is the sampling point ,,; .. , .... ves within a wetland? RationalelRemarks: f\Jo.~ e of /1'<.Q.. '3 VIA", ~J! 6. fc. y 1 ~.(.1o('V, 6- NOTES: :) d c r--f Dj'''-P)'''.o )eliG) ! (O!).".:)·) ,? -L! 0/0 < e"-'--('..-L-L:( .s o'~ 'j-"(L.. yes G f';~':S~'" t. I , Revised 4/97 f j r r 1 t L-- ...., .... -.. --J c-.--'==_ _: ::.::::::: __ ::.::..::~ ,-_~ ---= .f~-::::::: :::::: :=:J ,:::J .. ---.' "I .!!J )<}f'tt'.l<1.~"~';';';,,~r.~ Field Rating Form for Wetland Function EvalUatitc WeI/and No. VII <.;ti",-",,t. ft Project a~1 (I-o~ Date: :;-/-1/01 Shoreline Protection Hydrologic Support Storm/Flood Water Abatement Groundwater Exchange Waler Quality Improvement £ii .t; a; 60 Criteria lor Low Value ~~P ~e baceous layer "no vegelalion . Iia xtends < 1 00 yards from shore .• _ I ong undeveloped shoreline .. ... ... .. ... -. _. LJ._1 isolated depression LJ.-J t~ary saturaUon or InUndation size <5 acres In remote selting <10% woody vegetation -,L- S1a gg Criteria lor Moderate Value ~sparse W'OOdy or dense herbaceous vegetation weiland extends 100 -200 yards trom shore _~J:::'=::::t~YUnd_oped sh"~;ne .-J seasonally ncoded ,,= .t:j ; 60 Criteria lor High Value ~_.-dense woody vegetation wetland extends >200 yardS from shore- .. located on highly developed shoreline l±1 opes;, tidal system permanent satur al.oo Of .nlllCla'bon ----------------._---•.. ~ze 5 -10 acres in rural selting ~: 10·30% woody vegetation --.'--..• ----~ ... -size 5· 10 acres ... easonally Hooded open system permanent shallO\oV Inundation semipermeable substrate E6 ~ze >10 acres --in urban setting . "_ >30% woody vegelation ---------.- ~ $Ize > 10 acres .. - . ... permanently flooded syslem _ deep inundation permeable substrate ermitlently flooded lakes W" estuary ex perennial stream <50% vegetation density 50·80% vegetation density >80% vegetation density SIze <10 acres size 10· 100 acres size >1<)()acres . no proximity to non-point discharge dOwnstream 'rom non-point discharge downstream Irom municipal point disCharge retains <25% 01 overland runoff retains 25·50% 01 over1and runoff relains >50% of overland runoff --,--,"--..... ~~mll%W~~;Y.2.},,%~~i&!i$il;"',!~W".. 'C.!i"r,q.1;;" .. ~,t"'t;:t~~w.;:::!l ·.~I'I"~:7~""'~~f::..·!:,~-;"",,'·p':,~i~ ~' SlinJ~ swamp marsh Of bog Isolaled system upper' tldal marsh inl«Udal tnal'shes associated with ephemeral streams associated with IntermiUent slreams aSSOCiated with permanent streams low plant COfmlUOlty divefsity moderate plant community diversity high plant community diversity Natural single layer several layers many layers Biologic Support special habitat features lacldng special habitat features present complex habJlsl features present no unique species unique species potentialty present urnque species presenl no waler dependent species water dependent species potential .~. -water dependenl species present relatively smaH size relatively medium size ._ relatively large size a~enl to minor fishery adjacent 10 minor fishery .. adjacenllo significant fishery corel\419136\welland_form • • 6.2 Geotechnical Engineering Study by Earth Consultants, Inc. Dated January 28, 2004 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY HAMILTON PLACE 160TH AVENUE SOUTHEAST AND SOUTHEAST 134TH STREET RENTON, WASHINGTON E-10952-1 January 28, 2004 PREPARED FOR KBS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION ~: Eric Woods /~ --\ ! Staff Geologist Raymond A, Coglas, P.E, Manag'er of Geotechnical Services Earth Consultants, Inc. 1805 -136th Place Northeast, Suite 201 Bellevue, Washington 98005 (425) 643-3780 Toll Free 1-888-739-6670 ~ " ,l / . .J:7 ._1 ,------------------------- m m 01 Hl 111 f1J UJ ill I III III III I] J ! 11 I ) IlJ 111 IJ IMPORTANT INFORMATION ABOUT YOUR GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT More construction problems are caused by site subsur- face conditions than any other factor As troublesome as subsurface problems can be. their frequency and extent have been lessened considerably in recent years. due in large measure to programs and publications of ASFE/ The Association of Engineering Firms Practicing in the Geosciences. The following suggestions and observations are olfered to help you reduce the geotechnical-related delays. cost-overruns and other costly headaches that can occur during a construction project. A GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT IS BASED ON A UNIQUE SET OF PROJECT-SPECIFIC FACTORS A geotechnical engineering report is based on a subsur- face exploration plan designed to incorporate a unique set of project-specific factors. These typically include, the general nature of the structure involved. its size and configuration; the location of the structure on the site and its orientation; physical concomitants such as access roads. parking lots. and underground utilities. and the level of additional risk which the client assumed by virtue of limitations imposed upon the exploratory program. To help avoid costly problems. consult the geotechnical engineer to determine how any factors which change subsequent to the date of the report may affect its recommendations. Unless your consulting geotechnical engineer indicates otherwise. your geotechnical engineerin9 report should not 6e used; • When the nature of the proposed structure is changed. for example. if an office building will be erected instead of a parking garage. or if a refriger- ated warehouse will be built instead of an unre- frigerated one; • when the size or configuration of the proposed structure is altered; • when the location or orientation of the proposed structure is modified; • when there is a change of ownership. or • for application to an adjacent site. Geoteehnical engineers cannol aaepl responsibility for problems which may develop if they are not consulled afler faclors consid- ered in their reporl's developmenl have changed. MOST GEOTECHNICAL "FINDINGS" ARE PROFESSIONAL ESTIMATES Site exploration identifies actual subsurface conditions only at those points where samples are taken. when they are taken. Data derived through sampling and sub- sequent laboratory testing are extrapolated by geo- technical engineers who then render an opinion about overall subsurface conditions .. their likely reaction to proposed construction activity. and appropriate founda- tion design. Even under optimal circumstances actual conditions may differ from those inferred to exist because no geotechnical engineer. no matter how' qualified. and no subsurface exploration program. no matter how comprehensive. can reveal what is hidden by earth. rock and time. The actual interface between mate- rials may be far more gradual or abrupt than a report indicates. Actual conditions in areas not sampled may differ from predictions. Nothing can be done 10 prevenllhe unanticipaled. bUI sleps can 6e taken to help minimize their impacl. For this reason. mosl experienced owners retain their geotechnical consullanls through Ihe conslruclion slage. to iden- tify variances. conduct additional tests which may be needed. and to recommend solutions to problems encountered on site. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS CAN CHANGE Subsurface conditions may be modified by constantly- changing natural forces. Because a geotechnical engi- neering report is based on conditions which existed at the time of subsurface exploration. construction decisions shoufd not be based on a geotechnical engineering report whose adequacy may have been affected by time. Speak with the geo- technical consultant to learn if additional tests are advisable before construction starts. Construction operations at or adjacent to the site and natural events such as floods. earthquakes or ground- water fluctuations may also affect subsurface conditions and. thus. the continuing adequacy of a geotechnical report. The geotechnical engineer should be kept apprised of any such events. and should be consulted to determine if additional tests are necessary GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES ARE PERFORMED FOR SPECIFIC PURPOSES AND PERSONS Geotechnical engineers' reports are prepared to meet the specific needs of specific individuals. A report pre- pared for a consulting civil engineer may not be ade- quate for a construction contractor. or even some other conSUlting civil engineer. Unless indicated otherwise. this report was prepared expressly for the client involved and expressly for purposes indicated by the client. Use by any other persons for any purpose. or by the client for a different purpose. may result in problems. No indi- vidual olher than the clienl should apply this report for its inlended purpose without first conferring with the geotechnical engineer. No person should apply this report for any purpose olher Ihan that originally contemplated without first con/erring wilh the geotechnical engineer A GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT IS SUBJECT TO MISINTERPRETATION Costly problems can occur when other design profes- sionals develop their plans based on misinterpretations of a geotechnical engineering report. 1b help avoid these problems. the geotechnical engineer should be retained to work with other appropriate design profes- sionals to explain relevant geotechnical findings and to review the adequacy of their plans and specifications relative to geotechnical issues. BORING LOGS SHOULD NOT BE SEPARATED FROM THE ENGINEERING REPORT Final boring logs are developed by geotechnical engi- neers based upon their interpretation of field logs (assembled by site personnel) and laboratory evaluation of field samples. Only final boring logs customarily are induded in geotechnical engineering reports. These logs should 1101 ullder any circumstances be redrawn for inclusion in architectural or other design drawings. because drafters may commit errors or omissions in the transfer process. Although photographic reproduction eliminates this problem. it does nothing to minimize the possibility of contractors misinterpreting the logs during bid prepara- tion. When this occurs. delays. disputes and unantici- pated costs are the all-too-frequent result. To minimize the likelihood of boring log misinterpreta- tion. give contractors ready access to the complete geotechnical engineering report prepared or authorized for their use. Those who do not provide such access may proceed un- der the mislaken impression that simply disdaiming re- sponsibility for the accuracy of subsurface information always insulates them from attendant liability. Providing the best available information to contractors helps pre- vent costly construction problems and the adversarial attitudes which aggravate them to disproportionate scale. READ RESPONSIBILITY CLAUSES CLOSELY Because geotechnical engineering is based extensively on iudgment and opinion. it is far less exact than other design disciplines. This situation has resulted in wholly unwarranted claims being lodged against geotechnical consultants. 1b help prevent this problem. geotechnical engineers have developed model clauses for use in writ- ten transmittals. These are nol exculpatory clauses designed to foist geotechnical engineers' liabilities onto someone else. Rather. they are definitive dauses which identify where geotechnical engineers' responsibilities begin and end. Their use helps all parties involved rec- ognize their individual responsibilities and take appro- priate action. Some of these definitive clauses are likely to appear in your geotechnical engineering report. and you are encouraged to read them closely. Your geo- technical engineer will be pleased to give full and frank answers to your questions. OTHER STEPS YOU CAN TAKE TO REDUCE RISK Your consulting geotechnical engineer will be pleased to discuss other techniques which can be employed to mit- igate risk. In addition. AS FE has developed a variety of materials which may be beneficial. Contact AS FE for a complimentary copy of its publications directory. Published by A5iFE THEASSOCIAnON OF ENGINEERING FIRMS PRAcnCING IN THE GEOSCIENCES 8811 Cole5Vilie Road/Suite G 106/Silver Spring. Maryland 20910/(301) 565-2733 07as/1M b r P- r] ( " I ., [ I l l. , . I t: L L L I 1.. I '. ESlablished 1975 I)" OH<;(runi<"lT{~in~& ICll,(){WAI\OIIlSjX'HionScJ'vic{';S OJ ' tl 01 ~I III n ,1 Ul III r_) Hl 111 I , ) III \ ]1 L, J III 1 ! I l ") January 28, 2004 KBS Development Corporation 12320 Northeast 8th Street, Suite 100 Bellevue, Washington 98005 Attention: Mr. Curtis Schuster Dear Mr. Schuster: E-10952-1 Earth Consultants, Inc. (ECI) is pleased to present this geotechnical engineering study for the proposed Hamilton Place residential development, Renton, Washington. This study presents the results of our field exploration and geotechnical engineering analyses for the proposed development. Our scope of services for producing this geotechnical engineering study was outlined in our proposal PR-10952-1, dated January 8, 2004. Based on the results of our study, development of the site as planned is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint. Medium dense to dense native silty sand with gravel glacial till soil suitable for support of foundations was encountered at our test pit locations. Based on the subsurface conditions observed at the exploration sites, it is our opinion the proposed building structures can be supported on conventional spread and continuous footings bearing on the medium dense to dense competent native soils or granular structural fill. During wet weather conditions, use of the on-site soil as structural fill will be difficult due to the moisture sensitive nature of the soil. If grading is performed during wet weather conditions, use of a free draining granular soil will likely be necessary. The presence of groundwater seepage in the building excavation should be expected. Due to the moisture sensitive nature of the on-site soils, measures to protect exposed subgrade surfaces may be necessary. Recommendations for site preparation, foundations, site drainage, and other geotechnical related issues are presented in this geotechnical engineering study. We appreciate the opportunity to provide our services during the design phase of the project. If you have questions about the content of this geotechnical engineering study, or if we can be of further assistance, please call. Sincerely, rEARTHCONfUn. r1tTS, INC. ',k:~~:J){J!U~ 1 Ffa~ond A. Coglas, pJ=r Manager of Geotechnical Services ELWIRAC/csm ·L ------------------- 1805136th Place N,E" Suite 201, Bellevue, WA 98005 j I Bellevue (425) 643·3780 FAX (425) 746-0860 Toll Free (888) 739-6670 ~. ) Ul Ul UJ HI r_J H' -, I III nl Ul Lt I HI U' u.) 1,- L,j It! TABLE OF CONTENTS E-10952-1 PAGE INTRODUCTION........... ................ ........... ...... ..... ........... .... ............. ... .... ............. 1 General ........................................................................................................ 1 Project Description........................................................................................ 1 SITE CONDITIONS ............ .... ..... .... .... .... ... ......... ...... ........... ...... ..... .... ........ ........ 2 Surface ........................................................................................................ 2 Subsurface................................................................................................... 2 Groundwater................................................................................................. 3 Laboratory Testing ........................................................................................ 3 DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS............................................................. 4 General ........................................................................................................ 4 Site Preparation and General Earthwork... ..... .......... .................. ......... .... ....... .... 5 Foundations.............................................................................................. .... 7 Compact Till Liners .................................................... .'................................... 8 Permanent Retaining and Foundation Walls ....................................................... 9 Seismic Design Considerations ....................................................................... 10 Slab-an-Grade Floors ..................................................................................... 11 Site Drainage ............................................................................................... 11 Excavations and Slopes ................................................................................. 12 Utility Trench Backfill...... .............................................................................. 13 Rockeries and Modular Block Walls ................................................................. 14 Pavement Areas........................................................................................... 1 4 LIMITATIONS ................................................................................................... 15 Additional Services....................................................................................... 1 6 Earth Consultants. Inc. ij} .~ Ql nl 81 III III o! · I III r_) tIl III III • J 1]1 I ' • J ! )1. I l , J ! ! , I. . J ILLUSTRATIONS Plate 1 Plate 2 Plate 3 Plate 4 APPENDICES Appendix A Plate A1 Plates A2 through AS Appendix B Plate B1 TABLE OF CONTENTS, Continued E-10952-1 Vicinity Map Test Pit Location Plan Typical Footing Subdrain Detail Typical Utility Trench Fill Field Exploration . Legend Test Pit Logs Laboratory Test Results Grain Size Analyses Earth Consultants. Inc. n .1 Ql Q1 rll III 111 , I ,-) HI III , j ill III , J 10 1.]1 I,l i I j :~) ! j , l _, J Jl . General GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY HAMILTON PLACE 160TH AVENUE SOUTHEAST AND SOUTHEAST 134TH STREET RENTON, WASHINGTON E-10952-1 INTRODUCTION This report presents geotechnical recommendations for the proposed Hamilton Place residential development, 160'h Avenue Southeast and Southeast 134'h Street, Renton, Washington. The general location of the .site is shown on the Vicinity Map, Plate 1. The approximate locations of our test pits and the approximate limits of the property are illustrated on the Test Pit Location Plan, Plate 2. The scope of our services was outlined in our proposal PR-1 0952-1, dated January 8, 2004. Our scope of services included a subsurface exploration to characterize soil conditions at the site, and preparation of this report with geotechnical recommendations for the proposed site development. As part of our geotechnical report, we reviewed a Preliminary Site Plan prepared by Centre Pointe Surveying. Project Description We understand construction of twenty-three (23) single family residences are planned for the subject site. An east-west running access road will cross the site, connecting 158'h Avenue Southeast and 160'h Avenue Southeast, and a detention pond will be constructed near the southwest corner of the site. We understand the mass grading of the site will be relatively minimal, with cuts and fills on the order of five to six feet or less. Development of the storm water detention pond will require the construction of compacted fill berms around the perimeter of the pond. We understand the pond berms will have a maximum height of approximately five and one-half feet. Construction of a rockery or modular block wall is also proposed along the south property line. We understand the maximum wall height will be four feet or less. Earth Cons':!ltants, Inc. III 11 ! l I UJ ! J I L, I GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY KBS Development Corporation January 28, 2004 SITE CONDITIONS Surface E-l0952-1 Page 2 The approximate property limits and proposed lot locations are illustrated on the Test Pit Location Plan (plate 2). The subject property is located immediately northwest of the intersection of 160lh Avenue Southeast and Southeast 1341h Street, Renton, Washington (see Plate 1, Vicinity Map). The site it bordered to the north and south by existing residences, to the east by 160'h Avenue Southeast, and to the west by 1581h Avenue Southeast. The site topography is gently sloping to the southwest, with approximately 18 feet of elevation change across the length of the property. A wetland area has been identified in the extreme southwest corner of the site. Surface vegetation consists primarily of grass pasture areas with evergreen and deciduous trees located primarily along the margins of the property. A single-family residence and several outbuildings are currently located throughout the easterly portions of the site. These structures will be removed as part of the planned development. Subsurface Seven test pits were excavated throughout the site for purposes of assessing the subsurface conditions. Please refer to the Boring Logs, Plates A2 through A8, for a description of the conditions encountered at the test pit locations. The soils encountered at the exploration sites consisted primarily of native silty sand with gravel (Unified Soil Classification SM). The geologic mapping of the site identifies glacial till (Qvt) deposits throughout the site and surrounding areas. The native soils observed at the test pit locations were generally consistent with glacial till soil deposits. Underlying the surficial layer of topsoil, loose, reddish brown silty sand to silty sand with gravel soil was encountered to depths of approximately two and one- half feet to four feet below existing grade. Underlying the reddish' brown silty sand soils, medium dense to dense silty sand with gravel glacial till soils were encountered. Earth Consultants. Inc. nl ij} Ul lil ill II I [-) Hl III III • I III IJ I !. I III • .I :.) , j . LLI I j I • > GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY KBS Development Corporation January 28, 2004 E-10952-1 Page 3 At the time our field exploration was performed (January 15, 2004), the upper reddish brown native silty sand with gravel soil was in a moist to wet condition, with moisture contents generally in the range of 1 5 percent to as high as 54 percent throughout the upper weathered zone of glacial till. The underlying native glacial till was also moist to wet, with moisture contents in the range of 7 percent to 17 percent moisture. The native soils are moisture sensitive, and will degrade rapidly if exposed to excessive moisture. Moisture contents of the soil samples collected at the site are recorded on the test pit logs included in Appendix A of this report. Groundwater At six of the test pit sites, moderate to heavy groundwater seepage was observed. Groundwater seepage was generally observed at the contact between the upper weathered soils and the underlying medium dense to dense glacial till. The presence of groundwater seepage should be expected in the proposed excavations for the building and underground utilities. The rate of groundwater seepage could be moderate to heavy at some locations. The contractor should be made aware that groundwater seepage levels and the rate of seepage are not static; fluctuations in the level and rates can be expected depending on the season, amount of rainfall, surface water runoff, and other factors. Generally, the level and rate of seepage is higher in the wetter winter months (typically October through May). However, confined zones of groundwater may produce moderate to heavy groundwater flows year around. Laboratory Testing The results of laboratory tests performed on specific samples are provided in Appendix B, or at the appropriate sample depth on the test pit logs. It is important to note that these test results may not accurately represent the overall in-situ soil conditions. Our geotechnical recommendations are based on our interpretation of these test results. ECI cannot be responsible for the interpretation of these data by others. Earth Consultants, Inc. Ql nl.. Q,-J n1 ~l Ul nl III !I I Id 1_) ll:! lJ'1 ; ) ! II , I ! 1 ! I . , J Itl U,l ! I' i I ( j 11': I J i . -J Ij-," I, i ' , I L GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY KBS Development Corporation January 28, 2004 DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDA nONS General E-' 0952-' Page 4 Based on the subsurface conditions observed at the test pit locations, development of the site is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint. The primary geotechnical considerations related to the proposed development include foundation support, fill placement and compaction, pond berm construction, and moisture sensitivity of the on- site soils. Preparation of the access roadway subgrade is also an important geotechnical consideration. The proposed single-family residences can be supported on conventional spread and continuous footings bearing on the medium dense to dense native silty sand with gravel, or on granular structural fill. Based on test pit data, we anticipate native soils suitable for foundation support will be encountered at approximately two and one-half to three and one-half feet below existing grade throughout the site. In our opinion, the foundations should be supported on granular structural fill in areas where fill is to be placed to foundation subgrade elevation. Recommendations for structural fill placement are provided in the Site Preparation and General Earthwork section of this report. As previously mentioned, due to the moisture sensitive nature of the on-site soils, and the potential for groundwater seepage entering excavations, measures to protect exposed subgrade surfaces will likely be necessary. The presence of groundwater seepage should be expected in the proposed excavations for the building foundations and underground utilities. Measures to control groundwater seepage entering excavations may be necessary. Recommendations for temporary and permanent control of groundwater seepage are presented in the Site Drainage section of this report. Due to the moisture sensitive nature of the native silty sand with gravel soils, fill placement and compaction will be difficult, particularly during wet weather conditions. Successful use of the on-site soils as structural fill may require aeration and moisture conditioning of the soils prior to use. Fill placement and compaction, and recommendations for imported soils are discussed in the Site Preparation and General Earthwork section of this report. Earth Consultants. Inc. III ~) ijl OJ RI 1]1 , J III III Itl 1_) III I , I III I J ) i. I j III : I j I \ , , II : , , ! I ' I,: ) ll'~ . ' , J I] , L, GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY KBS Development Corporation January 28, 2004 E-10952-1 Page 5 The slab-on-grade for the single-family residences can be supported on the medium dense to dense native soils or on a granular structural fill. Recommendations for slab subgrade preparation are discussed in the Slab-On-Grade Floors section of this report. This geotechnical engineering study has been prepared for the exclusive use of KBS Development Corporation and their representatives. This study was prepared for specific application to this project only and in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by other members of the profession currently practicing under similar conditions in this area. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. We recommend that this geotechnical engineering study, in its entirety, be included in the project contract documents for the information of the contractor. Site Preparation and General Earthwork The ground surface where structural fill, or foundations are to be placed should be observed by a representative of ECI. An ECI representative should also observe the excavation for the building pad. Due to the relatively high fines content of the native soils, moisture sensitivity of the soils will be moderate to high. Building and pavement subgrade areas that are exposed to extended periods of precipitation will likely become unstable. If the subgrade soil in the proposed foundation and pavement areas becomes saturated and unstable, overexcavation of the unstable soil and replacement with a granular structural fill will be necessary. To minimize the need for overexcavation resulting from disturbed subgrade conditions, the contractor should prepare a strategylprocess for preserving the integrity of the subgrade soils. Delaying the site stripping in the existing pavement areas and leaving the subgrade high, where possible, can be considered for purposes of minimizing disturbance to the building and pavement subgrade during periods of extended wet weather conditions. Establishing rock surfaced construction roadways, and restricting construction traffic where possible will also help preserve the subgrade soils. Many of the issues related to soil moisture sensitivity can be significantly minimized if the earthwork phase of construction is performed during the drier summer months. Earth Consultants, Inc. ITl ~ ij-l OJ Hl III III III UI r_) iII III W .J III IJ 1 ! . ) u GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY KBS Development Corporation January 28, 2004 E-10952-1 Page 6 In our OpIniOn, the native silty sand with gravel soils can be considered for use as structural fill, provided the soil is placed during dry weather conditions, and provided the moisture content of the soil is at or near the optimum moisture content at the time of placement. Aeration and moisture conditioning of the soils may be necessary. In general, the underlying native silty sand with gravel was in a moist to wet condition, with moisture contents that were generally in the range of 7 percent to 1 7 percent moisture. The native silty sand with gravel soils are moisture sensitive, and the soils will degrade rapidly if exposed to excessive moisture. Moisture contents of the soil samples collected at the site are recorded on the test pit logs included in Appendix A of this report. Successful use of the native soils as structural fill will require that soil stockpiles be immediately covered with plastic sheeting. The entire stockpile down to the toe of the pile should be covered with the plastic sheeting. Excavation and placement of the on- site soils should only be performed during dry weather conditions. ECI should periodically meet with the contractor during construction to assess the suitability of the on-site soils for use as structural fill. Imported soil intended for use as structural fill should consist of a free draining well- graded granular soil with a moisture content that is at or near the optimum moisture content, and having a maximum aggregate size of four inches. The imported soil should have no more than 5 percent fines passing the No. 200 sieve based on the minus 3/4-inch fraction. During periods of extended dry weather conditions, use of a granular soil with less than 30 percent fines can be considered. Samples of imported - soil should be submitted to ECI for sieve analysis testing. Structural fill is defined as compacted fill placed under foundations, roadways, slabs, pavements, or other load-bearing areas. Structural fill under slabs and footings should be placed in horizontal lifts not exceeding twelve (12) inches in loose thickness and compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of its laboratory maximum dry density. The maximum dry density should be determined in accordance with ASTM Test Designation 0-1557-91 (Modified Proctor). The fill materials should be placed at or near the optimum moisture content. Fill under pavements and walks should also be placed in horizontal lifts and compacted to 90 percent of the maximum dry density except for the top twelve (12) inches, which should be compacted to 95 percent of the maximum dry density. Earth Consultants, Inc. 01 ') ttl 01 RI OJ [Jl III Ul r_) ill III III III Itl Ul ! J I I,) UJ I.!J GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY KBS Development Corporation . January 28, 2004 Foundations E-l0952-1 Page 7 In our opinion, the building foundations can be supported on conventional spread and continuous footings bearing on the medium dense to dense native silty sand with gravel or granular structural fill. As previously mentioned, we estimate competent native soils suitable for support of foundations should be encountered at depths of two and one-half to. three and one-half feet below existing site grades. For foundations bearing on the medium dense to dense native silty sand with gravel or granular structural fill, an allowable soil bearing capacity of two thousand five hundred (2,500) pounds per square foot (pst) should be used to design the foundations. This allowable soil bearing capacity has a factor-of-safety in excess of 3.0 against shear failure, provided the foundations are placed on competent native soils or granular structural fill. A one-third increase in the above allowable soil bearing capacity can be assumed for short-term wind and seismic loading conditions. Continuous and individual spread footings should have minimum widths of eighteen (18) and twenty-four (24) inches, respectively. If loose or unstable soil conditions are encountered at the footing subgrade elevation, the soil will need to be overexcavated, and replaced with granular structural fill. The width of the overexcavation should extend a minimum of twelve (1 2) inches beyond each edge of the foundation. As previously discussed, care will need to be taken to protect and preserve exposed subgrade surface to limit the amount of disturbance to the subgrade, and to limit the need for overexcavation. To help protect and preserve exposed foundation subgrade surfaces, we recommend placement of two inches to four inches of crushed rock as a working surface. Use of a crushed rock working surface may not be necessary if the earthwork is performed during the drier summer months. Exterior foundations elements should be placed at a minimum depth of eighteen (18) inches below final exterior grade. Interior spread foundations can be placed at a minimum depth of twelve (12) inches below the top of slab, except in unheated areas, where interior foundation elements should be founded at a minimum depth of eighteen (18) inches. Earth Consultants, Inc. m t m Hl 01 11l III 1]1 [-) III ! II tIl III III lJJ GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY KBS Development Corporation January 28, 2004 E-l0952-1 Page 8 Provided the foundations are placed in accordance with the recommendations contained in this report, we estimate total settlement of approximately one inch and differential settlement of approximately one-half inch across a span of fifty (50) feet. Most of the anticipated settlements should occur during construction as dead loads are applied. Lateral loads can be resisted by friction between the base of the foundation and the supporting soil, and by passive soil pressure acting on the face of the buried portion of the foundation. Resistance to lateral loads from passive earth pressures should be calculated using an equivalent fluid with a unit weight of three hundred fifty (350) pounds per cubic foot (pct). To achieve adequate passive resistance, the foundations must be backfilled with structural fill. As an alternative, the foundations can be poured neat against the undisturbed native soil. For frictional capacity, a coefficient of 0.40 should be used for foundations bearing on competent native soils or granular structural fill. These lateral resistance values are allowable values; a factor-of-safety of 1.5 has been included. Footing excavations should be observed by a representative of ECI prior to placing the formwork and rebar. ECI should also perform compaction testing of structural fill and observe areas where overexcavation is required to remove loose or unstable soils. Compacted Till Liners In our opinion, the native glacial till soils observed at the test pit locations should be suitable for use as a compacted till liner in the proposed storm water detention pond. The soil used for the compacted till liner should meet the following gradation: Sieve Size Percent Passing 6-inch 100 4-inch 90 No.4 70 -100 No. 200 20 -100 The thickness of the compacted till liner should be at least eighteen (18) inches, and the soil should be compacted to a relative compaction at least 95 percent (ASTM D- 1557). ECI should observe the placement of the till liner and provide testing of the compacted soil. Earth Consultants, Inc. _._----------------------------------------- 01 \) ~l 01 HJ In fll III III '-) l~, HI III III III : ~ I ill ~~) LU IU GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY KBS Development Corporation January 28, 2004 Permanent Retaining and Foundation Walls E-10952-1 Page 9 Retaining and foundation walls should be designed to resist lateral earth pressures from the retained soils, and any surcharge loading. Walls that are unrestrained and free to move at the top should be designed using an equivalent fluid with a unit weight of thirty-five (35) pct. The earth pressure imparted on restrained walls should be calculated using an equivalent fluid with a unit weight of fifty (50) pct. The above equivalent fluid values assume surcharges due to traffic, sloping backfill, adjacent foundations, construction loads, or any other loadings will not apply. If surcharges are to apply, they should be added to the above design lateral pressures. For traffic surcharge loading consisting of passenger vehicles or light delivery trucks, a uniform pressure of seventy (70) psf should be applied in a rectangular distribution along the height of the retaining wall. Where traffic surcharge loading from heavy trucks will be present, ECI should review the wall and roadway configuration and provide modified surcharge values, if necessary. If sloping backfill conditions are present behind the walls, ECI should review the slope configurations and provide modified equivalent fluid values, as necessary. Retaining and foundation walls should be provided with a four-inch diameter perforated drainpipe and backfilled With a free-draining granular soil with less than 5 percent fines (percent passing the No. 200 sieve based on the minus 3/4-inch fraction). The zone of free-draining granular soil should extend along the entire height of the wall, and a distance of at least eighteen (18) inches behind the wall. A surface seal consisting of a less permeable silty sand soil can be placed along the upper one foot of the wall backfill, if desired. The remainder of the backfill behind the zone of free draining soil should consist of a suitable granular structural fill. Earth Consultants, Inc. rt1 (~ Ql U1 QJ nl [l] III UJ [~) It)] Ul Ill] 1111 IIll III l :,J UJ GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY KBS Development Corporation January 28, 2004 Seismic Design Considerations E-10952-1 Page 10 The Puget Sound region is classified as Zone 3 by the Uniform Building Code (UBC). The largest earthquakes in the Puget Sound region have been subcrustal (intraplate) events, ranging in depth from fifty (50) to seventy (70) kilometers. Such deep events have exhibited no surface faulting. Weaver and Shedlock (1989) researched the probable or known source areas for the crustal, intraplate, and subduction zone earthquakes in the Washington and Oregon area. Crustal and intraplate earthquakes are the only events in Washington and Oregon in which there is a historical record. Shallow crustal earthquakes occur within the North American Plate, and typically do not exceed focal depths of approximately 20 kilometers. Intraplate earthquakes occur in the subducting Juan de Fuca plate, and typically occur below depths of 40 kilometers. The recent February 28, 2001, earthquake that was focused just north of Olympia, Washington was an intraplate earthquake, and had a magnitude of ML = 6.8. The subduction zone earthquake, in which there is no historical record in the Washington and Oregon area, would have its source along the interface between the North American Plate and the subducting Juan de Fuca Plate. Magnitude 8 + earthquakes are thought to be possible along this interface, and would occur at depths of approximately 50 to 60 kilometers (Weaver and Shedlock, 1989). The UBC Earthquake regulations have established a series of soil profile types that are used as a basis for seismic design of structures. Based on the encountered soil conditions, it is our opinion that soil type Sc from Table 16-J of the 1997 UBC should be used for design. For IBC based design, Site Class C from Table 1615.1.1 of the 2003 IBC should be used. Liquefaction is a phenomenon in which soils lose all shear strength for short periods of time during an earthquake. The effects of liquefaction may be large total and/or differential settlement for structures with foundations founded in the liquefying soils. Groundshaking of sufficient duration results in the loss of grain-to-grain contact and rapid increase in pore water pressure, causing the soil to behave as a fluid for short periods of time. To have potential for liquefaction, a soil must be cohesion less with a grain size distribution of a specified range (generally sands and silt); it must be loose to medium- dense; it must be below the groundwater table; and it must be subject to sufficient magnitude and duration of groundshaking. Earth Consultants, Inc. m rl j m OJ Hl m III 111 1]] f_) Hl III III III til III ~.) UJ lJI GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY KBS Development Corporation January 28, 2004 E-10952-1 Page 11 Based on the soil and groundwater conditions observed at the site, it is our opinion that the site has a low susceptibility to liquefaction. The dense condition of the native soils is the primary basis for this conclusion. Slab-on-Grade Floors Slab-on-grade floors should be supported on competent native soils or granular structural fill. Loose or unstable subgrade soils should be stabilized prior to construction of the slab. Fill areas will be particularly susceptible to disturbance during wet weather conditions. Care will need to be taken to preserve the integrity of the subgrade soils, particularly during the installation of the under slab utilities. If the construction is performed during the drier summer months, measures to preserve the subgrade soils will likely be minimal. During periods of wet weather, however, a free draining structural fill may need to be utilized throughout the upper twelve (12) inches of the building pad to help preserve the integrity of the subgrade. A minimum four-inch capillary break consisting of a free draining poorly graded gravel with less than 5 percent fines (percent passing the No. 200 sieve, based on the minus 3/4-inch fraction) should be placed below the slab. A vapor barrier consisting of a minimum 6-mil plastic membrane should be placed above the capillary break. To aid in curing of the concrete slab, two inches of sand can be placed over the plastic membrane. As an alternative to a plastic membrane vapor barrier, use of a concrete admixture such as Cadman Rheo-Mix or equivalent can be considered. The subgrade soils in slab-on-grade areas of the site should be observed by a representative of ECI prior to placing the capillary break material. Site Drainage During construction, surface water runoff must not be allowed to stand in construction areas. Interceptor trenches should be established, as necessary, along the perimeter of the building site to intercept surface water runoff or groundwater before it enters the construction area. During construction, loose surfaces should be compacted to reduce the potential for moisture infiltration into the soils. Finish grades around the buildings must be sloped such that surface water is directed away from the buildings. Earth Consultants, Inc. I rn " m 01 Hl If] 1"1 tl III I1J :-.) HI I1J IJI IlJ III IlJ :.J I 11 ; J UJ GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY KBS Development Corporation January 28, 2004 E-10952-1 Page 12 Perimeter footing drains should be installed around the perimeter foundations to intercept groundwater seepage. A typical perimeter footing drain detail is illustrated on Plate 3. Under no circumstances should roof downspout drain lines be connected to the footing or foundation wall drain systems. All roof downspouts must be separately tightlined to the site storm water system. In building and deep utility excavations, the presence of groundwater seepage should be expected, particularly if the excavation is performed during the wet season. Due to the generally dense condition of the glacial till soils observed at the test pit locations, we do not anticipate the groundwater seepage will create a stability problem. However, measures to intercept the groundwater seepage and direct it to an appropriate discharge location may be necessary. Excavations and Slopes The following information is provided solely as a service to our client. Under no circumstances should this information be interpreted to mean that ECI is assuming responsibility for construction site safety or the contractor's activities; such responsibility is not being implied and should not be inferred. In no case should excavation slopes be greater than the limits specified in local, state, and Federal safety regulations. Based on the information obtained from our field exploration, the upper deposits of loose, reddish brown silty sand with gravel that . extends to a depth of approximately three to four feet below existing site grades, would be classified as Type C soils by OSHA. Temporary cuts in Type C soils should be sloped at an inclination no steeper than 1 .5H: 1 V (Horizontal:Vertical), respectively. The unweathered glacial till observed below a depth of approximately three to four feet would be classified as Type A and Type B soils by OSHA. Temporary slopes constructed in Type A and Type B soils should be inclined no steeper than 0.75H:1V and 1 H:1 V, respectively. ECI should observe the excavations to assess soil and groundwater conditions, and to verify the OSHA soil type. Permanent cut and fill slopes should be inclined no steeper than 2H: 1 V. Cut slopes should be observed by ECI during excavation to verify that conditions are as anticipated. Supplementary recommendations can then be developed, if needed, to improve stability, including flattening of slopes or installation of surface or subsurface drains. In any case, water should not be allowed to flow uncontrolled over the top of slopes. Earth Consultants, Inc. 01 ~ Ql m Al IJ] I1J UJ U] 1_) 111 ! 11 Ul III : II l) ) I , J ; I i -,') :L III GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY KBS Development Corporation January 28, 2004 E-10952-1 Page 13 Permanently exposed slopes should be seeded with an appropriate species of vegetation to reduce erosion and improve stability of the surficial layer of soil. Utility Trench Backfill Based on the soil .conditions encountered at the time of our exploration, the native soils should provide adequate support for utilities. If remedial measures are necessary to provide adequate support for utilities, the unsuitable soils should be overexcavated and replaced with crushed rock and a pipe bedding material such as pea gravel. In our opinion, the native silty sand with gravel soils can be considered for use as backfill for the utility trenches, provided the soil moisture content is at or near its optimum level. As previously mentioned, the native soils were generally moist to wet, and had a moisture content that was above its optimum level. Some moisture conditioning of these soils will be necessary prior to use as structural fill in the utility trenches. Due to the moisture sensitive nature of the native silty sand with gravel soils, placement and compaction of the soil will need to be performed during dry weather conditions. To protect the soils from wet weather conditions, soil stockpiles should be covered with plastic sheeting. The plastic sheeting should cover the entire stockpile. Due to the moisture sensitive nature of the native silty sand with gravel soils, the upper twelve (1 2) inches of the trench backfill in building and pavement areas may become disturbed if exposed to wet weather conditions and construction traffic. Construction traffic should be kept to a minimum along utility trench alignments where backfilling and compaction have been completed. As an alternative, a free draining gravel can be used to backfill the upper twelve (12) inches of the trench excavations to provide a wearing surface, and to help protect the underlying moisture sensitive backfill. Use of a free draining backfill along the upper twelve (1 2) inches of the trench excavation would likely only be necessary if construction is performed during the wet season. Earth Consultants, Inc. rn \) m OJ m rn OJ Ul UJ r_) I]J IJl .1 II I " ) Ill· OJ ')1 I . j GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY KBS Development Corporation January 28, 2004 E-10952-1 Page 14 Utility trench backfill is a primary concern in reducing the potential for settlement in pavement areas. It is important that the utilities be adequately supported in the bedding material. The material should be hand tamped to ensure support is provided around the haunches of these structures. Fi" should be carefully placed and tamped to about 12 inches above the crown of the pipe before heavy compaction equipment is brought into use. The remainder of the backfill should be placed in lifts having a loose thickness of less than twelve (12) inches. A typical trench backfill section and compaction requirements for load supporting and non-load supporting areas is presented on Plate 4. Rockeries and Modular Block Walls In our opinion, the use of rockeries or modular block walls at the site is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint. If walls are utilized, an engineered design wi" need to be completed for rockeries and walls that exceed four feet in height. ECI can provide an engineered design for the site, if requested. At a minimum, ECI should review the .Iayout of the proposed walls and the proximity of foundations to the walls. Supplement geotechnical recommendations can then be prepared, if necessary, to address wall design and surcharge loading. Pavement Areas The adequacy of site pavements is related in part to the condition of the underlying subgrade. To provide a properly prepared subgrade for pavements, the subgrade should be in a firm and unyielding condition when subjected to proofrolling with a loaded dump truck. Structural fill in pavement areas should be prepared as described in the Site Preparation and Genera/ Earthwork section of this report. This means the pavement subgrade should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density. It is possible that some localized areas of soft, wet or unstable subgrade may exist after the pavement subgrade is prepared. Overexcavation and a greater thickness of structural fill or crushed rock may be needed to stabilize these localized areas. As previously discussed, the contractor should prepare a strategy/process for limiting disturbance to the subgrade areas, thereby minimizing the amount of overexcavation in the pavement areas. Earth Consultants, Inc. III ~j 01 01 81 III IJ] Ul UJ '--) 1]1 Ul ill UI [ II 1/ J , I Iii GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY KBS Development Corporation January 28, 2004 E-10952-1 Page 15 Assuming a properly prepared subgrade that is in a firm and unyielding condition when subjected to proofrolling, the following pavement section for lightly-loaded areas can be considered: • Two inches of asphalt concrete (AC) over four inches of crushed rock base (CRB) material, or • Two inches of AC over three inches of asphalt treated base (A TB) material. Heavier truck-traffic areas will require thicker pavement sections depending upon site usage, pavement life, and site traffic. As a general rule, the following sections can be considered for truck-trafficked areas: • Three inches of AC over six inches of CRB, or • Three inches of AC over four and one-half inches of A TB. Asphalt concrete (AC), asphalt treated base (ATB), and crushed rock base (CRB) materials should conform to WSDOT specifications. All rock bases should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density. LIMITATIONS Our recommendations and conclusions are based on the site materials observed, selective laboratory testing and engineering analyses, the design information provided to us, and our experience and engineering judgement. The conclusions and recommendations are -professional opinions derived in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by other members of the profession currently practicing under similar conditions in this area. No warranty is expressed or implied. The recommendations submitted in this report are based upon the data obtained from the test pits. Soil and groundwater conditions between exploration sites may vary from those encountered. The nature and extent of variations between our exploratory locations may not become evident until construction. If variations do appear, ECI should be requested to reevaluate the recommendations of this report and allowed to modify or verify our recommendations in writing prior to proceeding with the construction. Earth Consultants, Inc. rn !j.~~ Q1 m III III n1 III III r_) !n [ll III Ul III , ) r II I 1 J :,J GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY KBS Development Corporation January 28, 2004 Additional Services E-10952-1 Page 16 We recommend that ECI be retained to perform a general review of the final design and specifications to verify that the earthwork and foundation recommendations have been properly interpreted and implemented in the design and in the construction specifications. We also recommend that ECI be retained to provide geotechnical services during construction. This is to observe compliance with the design concepts, specifications or recommendations and to allow design changes in the event subsurface conditions differ from those anticipated prior to the start of construction. ECI should be retained to review the construction drawings and specifications, and to provide construction observation and testing. Earth Consultants, Inc. .' • c, v, .'1, " 1:1111;1 "' ~; S~ l]!) III .n I .~ I~: 1'1 " " .. " , ',' " Reference: King County Map 657 By Thomas Brothers Maps Dated 2004 NOTE: This plate may contain areas of color. ECI cannot be responsible for any subsequent misirterpretation of the information resulting from black & white reproductions of this plate. Vicinity Map Hamilton Place King County, Washington Drwn. GLS Date Jan. 2004 Proj. No. 10952-1 Checked RAC Date 1/28/04 Plate 1 • I I I I I I I I I I I I ~ ___ ---tL----1-___ 1 ___ -1---TL-_____ j I 1 +1 TP-4 1 1 1 1 1 1-0-1 1 I I I I I I I I I I 1 TP-7 1 I 1 ~ ~ 1 ; 2 ; 3 ; 4 ; 5 ; 6 ; 7 ; 8 ; 9 ; 10 ; 11 J E? 1'----1---1-1 -1---1---1---1---1---1-T _1 ___ 1 __ ~I 1 -0-Road"A" -0-I B! I 1 TP-6 TP-1 1 I I I ~ ,----------Ti--i--r--i--TT--r-----I r '" Tract A I <.l I I I I I a I I 1 1 --I V" -' /I ~ I 21 I 20 I 19 I 18 I ~ I 13 I 12 I 1 ~-------1"'1 1 1 1 1"'1 1 1 1-" I 1 TP-2 I '" I I I I I I I I ,0-~ ~ I \ \ TractB ' \ - - - - -T --- ---I ,---- -~ - --I ~o I' Ti~tE\ \ yl 1 " n \ 1 I I 22 I 17 I \ 14 I' '" \ '--- -" -jTP-5 \1-- - -1--1-____ / ~ ______ : I -1 ,"--, I -jTPls I 1 '-,1. ~l; .!: -:t~" 1 23 I 16 \ 15 I~."' --.±'-" , 1-" --" "" -' -=-,.:, --' ---I - - --1--'--I - - - --1 1 -- - - - - -\ LEGEND TP-1-t-Approximate Location of ECI Test Pit, Proj. No. E-10952-1, Jan. 2004 r-----, I , Subject Site L ___ ' 12 Proposed Lot Number Existing Wetland Area (Delineated By Others) Reference: Horizontal Control Plan DOES File No. L02P0011 Job No. 11020 Sheet C2 of 12 By Barghausen Consulting Engineers Dated 7/1/03 NOTE: This plate may contain areas of color. Approximate Scale o 50 100 200ft. E~J Earth Consultants, Inc. -",. ' \. Geotechnical Engineering. Geology. EnVironmental SCiences , .,' Construction Testing & ICBO I WABO Inspedion services Test Pit Location Plan Hamilton Place King County, Washington ECI cannot be responsible for any subsequent Drwn. GLS Date Jan. 2004 Proj. No. 10952-1 misinterpretation of the information resulting from black & white reproductions of this plate. Checked RAC Date 1/28/04 Plate 2 1] t " J , I, :" ..-Slope To Drain ..•• ,:.:.;' 6 inch min. o 4 Inch min. Diameter Perforated Pipe Wrapped In Drainage Fabric t 2 Inch min. I 4 inch max. LEGEND Surface sea~ native soli or other low permeabinty material. 1" Drain Rock Drain pipe; perforated or slotted rigid PVC pipe laid with perforations or slots facing down; tight jointed; with a positive gradient Do not use flexible corrugated plastic pipe. Do not tie building downspout drains Into footing lines. Wrap with Mlrafi 14{) Riter Fabric or equivalent 12 inch min. ~I 18 inch min. t 2 Inch min. SCHEMATIC ONLY -NOT TO SCALE NOT A CONSTRUCTION DRAWING Earth Consultants, Inc. Geotechnical Engineers. Geologists &. Envtrorvnemal SCiemists Consttualon Testing & ICBO I WABO Irlspecrlon Services TYPICAL FOOTING SUBDRAIN DETAIL Hamilton Place King County, Washington Drwn. GLS Date Jan. 2004 ProJ. No. 10952-1 Checked RAC Date 1128104 Plate 3 m RI III rn U1 Ifl r-.) I., HI III ! 11 III I I I ill dJ 1 1.,1 iU , , , ! II I, . . , - ~o 00 0 00 Backfill Bedding LEGEND Non-Load Supporting Areas Asphalt or Concrete Pavement or Concrete Flcior Slab Base Rock or Capillary Break, as Appropriate t1i!'~;:'::!l Bacldill; Compacted On-Site Soil .. :>:.,: or Suitable Imported Fill Material Minimum Percentage of Maximum Laboratory Dry Density as detennlned by ASTM Test Method D 1557-91 (Modified Proctor), unless otherwise specified in the attached report lext. Floor Slab or Areas Varies 1 foot min. Varies Varies SCHEMATIC ONLY -NOT TO SCALE NOT A CONSTRUCTION DRAWING Earth Consultants, Inc. Gc:ofcchnlcal En~s. OeoIogB!s &. Environmenl<d SCieolisfs COOsttuclion Testing" ICBO I W .... BO inspection services TYPICAL UTILITY TRENCH FILL Hamilton Place King County, Washington Bedding Malerial; malerial type depends on type of pipe and laying conditions. Bedding should confonn 10 the manufacturers recommendations for the type of pipe selected. Drwn. GLS Date Jan. 2004 Proj. No.1 0952-1 Checked RAC Date 1128104 Plate 4 01 ~ Q] n-l Ql Ql III III fl.] n_) H] 11' I I , 1 Ul , I It 1 III I t I 'I' 1:_) III '. , I j' I I I , ) APPENDIX A FIELD EXPLORATION E-10952-1 Our field exploration was performed on January 15, 2004. Subsurface conditions at the site were explored by excavating seven test pits to a maximum depth of nine feet below existing grade, The approximate test pit locations were determined from existing landmarks presented on available plans. The locations of the test pits should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the method used, These approximate locations are shown on the BoringLocation Plan, Plate 2. The field exploration was continuously monitored by a geologist from our office, who classified the soils encountered and maintained a log of each test pit, obtained representative samples, measured groundwater levels, and observed pertinent site features. All samples were visually classified in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System that is presented on Plate A 1, Legend. Logs of the test pits are presented in Appendix A, Plates A2 through A8. The final logs represent our interpretations of the field logs and the results of the laboratory tests of field samples. The stratification lines on the logs represent the approximate boundaries between soil types, In actuality, the transitions may be more gradual. Earth Consultants. Inc. QJ ~l III U1 [}.] HI n II '1· , L , I I I' \ L; j I I MAJOR DIVISIONS GRAPH i.SYMBOL LETTER SYMBOL TYPICAL DESCRIPTION Coarse Grained Soils More Than 50% Material larger Than Gravel And Gravelly Soils More Than :SO% Coarse Fraction Retained On No.4 Sieve Sand And Sandy Soils Clean Gravels H:i;;Ll;;.r-~Ll;~~-""':':::O+--------'-----------I (little or no lines) Gravels With Fines ( appreciable amount 01 lines) Clean Sand (Ii"'e or no fines) Clayey Gravels, Gravel· Sand' Clay Milclures We 11-Graded Sands, Gravelly Sands, Uttle Or No Fines Poorly-Graded Sands, GraveHy Sands, Utl!e Or No Fines . No. 200 Sieve Size More Than 50% Coarse Fraction Passing No.4 Sieve Sands With Silly Sands, Sand -Sill Mixtures Fine Gramed Soils MOre Than 50'10 Material Smaller Tran No. 200 Sieve Size C qu W P * pel LL PI Silts Nid Clays Silts And Clays Fines (appreciable .amount of lines I liQuid limit less Than 50 liquid limit Greater Than 50 Highly Organic Soils. Topsoil Fill , -I- -I- ~ -I- -I-~ tnorganic Clays" Of High Plasticity, Fat Clays. Plasticity, Silty ·Clays, lean Diatomaceous Fif'€_ Organic Clays Of Medium To'High Plasticity, Organic Silts Peat. Humus, Swamp Soils With High Organic Conte'.lts Humus And Duff layer H~hly Variable Constituents The discussion In the text of this report Is necessary for a proper understanding of the nature of the material presented in the attached logs. DUAl SYMBOLS are used to Indicate borderline soil classification. TORVANE READING. tsl PENETROMETER READING. ts! MOISTURE. % dry weight SAMPLER PUSHED SAMPLE NOT RECOVERED DRY DENSITY. lb •. per cubic ft. UQUID LIMIT. % PLASTIC INDEX Earth Consultants Inc. I 2' 0.0. SPUT SPOON SAMPLER n 24' 1.0. RING OR SHELBY TUBE SAMPLER I WATER OBSERVATION WELL sz DEPTH OF ENCOUNTERED GROUNDWATER DURING EXCAVATION :r SUBSEQUENT GROUNDWATER LEVEL W / DATE LEGEND Jan,2004 Ai ~-------------------------------------------1 01 ~I 111 n , 1 nl ii' , I r_J 11 I , ) Il' 1 : , , I J 1 , I 1]\ L j , ) ! 11 ~ L i , I S ! I ; I; " i3 w I. , ~ , , Q. " l ~ i , ~ L! " \~ 1 ' t; ! w , ... -, , , Test Pit Log Prqecl Name: I Sh~ of Hamilton Place 1 Job No. Il~~ I ~;~5/04 Test pn No.: 10952-1 TP-1 E>x:avation Cootactor: Ground Surface Elevation: NW Excavating 516' Notes: 0 :ii ~ ~ ",0 Surface Conditions: 6" Alternating Aspahlt & Soil General W E a. . "-un "-E G.I LL E '" E Notes (%) g iJi o c:! =>iJi r--SM Reddish brown silty fine SAND with gravel, loose, moist 1 r-- 21.7 r- 2- --moderate water seepage at 3' 17.2 3 SM Gray silty fine to medium silty SAND with gravel, dense, moist - 4- -19.3% fines - 5- - 6- - 7 Test p~ terminated at 7.0 feet below e><isting grade. Groundwater seepage encountered at 3.0 feet during el<Cavation. -~!!~~~!!~~~. Test Pit Log Hamilton Place King County, Washington Prq. No. 10952-1 I Own GLS I Date Jan. 2004 Checked RAC Date 1128104 I Plate A2 Subsurface con<fdoons depicted represent our observatlOllS at the time and kx:at1Oll 01 thIS ~oratO/)' hole, modified by engneenng tests, analysIS and jud!Plent. They are not necessarily represenlative 01 other times and kx:ations. We cannot IICCef1 responsibility for the use or interpretation by others of .nf ............. """ f"OO"GoCO ...... --t ....... hie I"" nn I ~ j rl) ~l n!l nj tIi III III r11 I 1. , i I itl r,,) HI 1 t I I ,j !J:l U\ , I I I' 1 tj I I' , ! i . , ! j' '. ; i ( , • ~ ~ b 0 iii ~ 0 ~ 8 0 " I ~ t; w ~ Test Pit Log Project Name, IS~ cI Hamilton Place 1 Job No. I Logged by: I ~~;5/04 Test Pit No.: 10952-1 EW TP-2 E><:avatioo Coolaclor: Ground Surface Elevation: NW ElCavating 515' Notes: 0 :& .c .., (/)0 Surface Conditions: Depth of Topsoil & Sod 12" General W ~ 15. . a. u D Notes (%) I!! E 4) u: E (/) E Jj" o m :::>Jj" Cl (/) oJ, I--TPSL TOPSOIL oJ, 1 I--SM Reddish brown silty fine SAND with gravel, loose, moist 24.0 2C-- I---moderate water seepaQe 3 SM Gray silty fine to medium silty SAND with gravel, medium dense, moist I--to wet 41---becomes dense, moist I-- 51-- - 6- - 11.9 7 Test p~ terminated at 7.0 feet belowelCisting grade. Groundwater seepage encountered at 3.0 feet during e>«:aVation. _~!!~~~.I!~!~,~E Test Pit Log Hamilton Place King County, Washington Proj. No. 10952-1 lewn GLS I Date Jan. 2004 Checked RAe Date 1128/04 I Plale A3 'l~ I ! . , J Subsurface conditions depicted represent our _ al the time and Iocaloon 01 thIS ~alory hole, modified by engmeermg lests, analysIS and judgment They are not necessarily representaliw 01 other times and Iocalioos. We cannot ac:<:eP responsibility for the use or interpretation by others 01 ... r ............ inn roroeanfAli n" thico I ........ I], I . ,,-: ~'1 Test Pit Log r~) Qn ~I ~l nl 111 llll Itl rlt) HI III • J III , I I J, 1 . i J III , I III , J ~ b " iii ~ Project Name: Hamilton Place Job No. I L~b)< 10952-1 Excavation Cootaclor: NW E>a::avating Notes: .2 }j General W -a E Notes (%) e >-Clcn 39.5 13.7 I s~ 01 1 I ~~;5/04 Test Pit No.: TP-3 Ground Surface Elevation: 50T .c J!! cn}j Surface Conditions: Depth of Topsoil & Sod 2" a....; g-U E ~ ... cn >-a ~ en "'en :--SM Reddish brown silty fine SAND, loose, moist to wet 1 :-- ~ 2 r---26.8% fines :---moderate to heavy water seepalle 3 r-- SM Gray to brown silty fine to medium SAND with gravel, medium dense, moist to wet 4- - 5 :---becomes gray, dense, moist - 6 r-- '-- 7 Test pit terminated at 7.0 feet below existing grade. Groundwater seepage encountered at 3.0 feet during e>a::avation. ~ " ) 1 \' i § t,:' l~~ 1M ~,!!~,.£?~.I!~~,~S· Test Pit Log Hamilton Place King County, Washington 0: In Proj. No. 10952-1 IDNn GLS I Date Jan. 2004 Checked RAC Date 1128/04 I P1ate M w >- , Subsurface conditIons depicted represeoot our obseIvaIions at the tome and location of this e>ipIoratory hole, modified by engoneenng tests, anaJysIs and iudgment. They "'" not necessarily representative of other times and locations. We cannot accept responsibility for the use or Interpretation by othefs of Imtvn"O;;"'" f"\UM>ont0.4 ..... Ih .......... Pi l I I , , 01 Test Pit Log \; fin - Hll Rl 1]1 nl ill ! }i I . j ! j 1 . I i . • J r j' , ~ \ I . i ~ t I tJ.1 It, I i , . , .j I I ' I i , I I ) , I , i , I It· '. , .11 , -I • , ! ~ b ~ il w ~ a ~ i \ i Eo a t; w ~ Pn~edName: I~ of Hamilton Place 1 Job No. /logged by: I D~;;5/04 Test pnNo_: .- 10952-1 EW TP-4 Excavation Conlactor: Ground Surface Elevation: NW B«:avating 515' Notes: 0 :g -C .S! u)o Surface Conditions: Depth of Topsoil & Sod 6" General W E 1'i -Q. 0-" Q. E Q.I u:: E U) E Notes (%) i5 ~ o t1l ::>i}; U) -SM Reddish brown silty SAND with gravel, loose, wet 1- - 41_7 1111 2--heavy water seepage at l' - 3 SM Gray silty fine to medium SAND with gravel, medium dense, moist - 4 '-- - 5- - 6 '-- -becomes dense, moist 9.9 r--- 7 Test ptt terminated at 7.0 feet below eJ<isting grade_ Groundwater seepage encountered at 1_0 feet during eJ<Cavation_ -~~£?!!~}!~~,~~. Test Pit Log Hamilton Place King County, Washington ~_No_ 10952-1 /Own GLS / Date Jan. 2004 Checked RAC Date 1128/04 / Plate A5 Subsurface conditlOOS depicted represent our observatlOllS at Ihe lIme end Iocal.,n of IhlS exploratory hole, modified by englneenng tests, analysIS end judgment They are not necessarily representative of other limes and locations. We cannot accept responsibility for lhe use Of Inlerpretation by oIhenl of .... f"""" ......... I"V'A<>QnfAo'f ....... fh'" ........ rn Test Pit Log Prqect Name: Hamilton Place Il) ~] Job No. 10952-1 I Logged by: EW nl Hl III In In , 11 L.J 'a') I~- III '11 I , . ~ ~ r 0 " 0 w i! C> Excavation Contador: NW Excavating Notes: General W Notes (0/0) 54.0 15.7 7.1 ~ :8 o. E !'! " ill " " 1s~ of 1 I ~;~5/04 Testpn No.: TP-5 Ground Surface Elevation: 508' .c .!! "'2 Surface Conditions: Depth of Topsoil & Sod 12" Ci....: e-U E ~ u. '" ~ o t'l "'''' I-TPSL TOPSOIL 1 GM Reddish brown silty fine SAND with gravel, loose, wet I- 2 f--moderate to heavy seepage at 2.5' 31-SM Brown to gray silty fine to medium SAND with gravel, medium dense, moist f- 41--becomes gray, medium dense, moist I--14% fines sf- f- 6- - 7- -becomes dense , - 6- - 9 Test pit terminated at 9.0 feet below el<isting grade. Groundwater seepage encountered at 2.5 feet during e>«:avation. ill IlJ Ul tIl 1\1 ;; ~ !l " 11M ~~ .. ~~}!~!~,E::S-Test Pit Log Hamilton Place King County, Washington .~ ;.1 T Subsurface cooditoons depicted represent oor oi>sefvations at the tone and location of thIS e>pIorntory ~, modified by engllleenng tests, analysIS and judgment They are not necessarily representative of other times and locations. We cannot aa:ept responsibility for the use Of interpraatlon by otheI1I of II] lnf_ .. "'" ~ .... "" ~ Ok;' "'" In Proj. No. 10952-1 I Own. GLS I Date Jan. 2004 Checked RAC Date 1128/04 I Plate A6 w r rn Test Pit Log n .1 n III n] III III tIl tIl I J III III ! l' u ! II ! II NW Noles: General Notes Logged by: EW w ~:8 <l.E (%) ~ >-ClUl 37.5 W:LUI.U 10.9 Illltt1lj Proj. No. 10952-1 UI] U E UI >-"'UI SM Date: 1/15/04 Sheet of PrtNo.: Ground Surface Elevation: 512' 1 1 Surface Conditions: Depth of Topsoil & Sod 2" gravel, loose, 2~~~~~~~~~~~~~ __ ~~~ __ ~ SM with gravel, medium dense, 3 4 -becomes gray, medium dense, moist 5 6 7H~~~~~~~~~ at 7.0 sel~palgeencountered at 2.0 feet during e~:av.ltioln. Test Pit Log Hamilton Place King County, Washington Plate A7 01 no Test Pit Log Project Name: I Sh~ 0/ ~ Place 1 Job No. Il~17t I 0.;;;5/04 Test Pit No.: 10952-1 TP-7 Ground Surface Elevation: Dn NW 520' Notes: rnl ." :8 "':8 Surface Conditions: Depth ofTopsoil & Sod 6" General W a ~-'l E U E Notes (%) I!! "u. '" >-" iTi 0 =>", Wl t-SM 1 brown silty fine SAND with gravel, loose, moist n-- l- I]] lS.0 2 f-- I- IIIII 3f- [ll lim f- 4 SM Brown to gray silty fine to medium SAND with gravel, .. ~ dense, f-mOist ' U] Sf- f- 6 f---becomes dense f- [1J 7f- 12.5 l- S TeSt ptt '''''"'' ,.,,"" at 6.0 feet below el<isting grade. No grOUt t_l encountered during el<Cavation. itl III I r 1 ·d UJ III ~ , !.ll ~ U ~ -~~~?~!!~~~. Test Pit Log Hamilton Place King County, Washington I "m I Date Jan. 2004 I. Proj. No. 10952-1 OWn. GLS Checked RAe Date 1/26/04 Plate AS UJ loor I o/-Oiiiej. d the and klCl:';'~tWeo/c!~ accept responSibility for tIie ~~~ They are n~ 'h" ..... "f 0/ m I~ 01 m Hl III I]] III Ul 1:_) III III III III ! jl I. i III I J I 1) j , U~) I J 1 . I APPENDIX B LABORATORY TESTING RESULTS E-10952-1 Earth Consultants, Inc. III r~ Q . ] n ij II n U U 1 ] ] 1 1 1 I- II i) I ] II I. 1] ! t I L U II 1] I lU Particle Size Distribution " .. " .E " " " ~ .. g 0 1\ s ~ 0 ~ II 0 i . ~ n N I " • I " " 100 :, N r\. Ii : 90 -~: , : ~ 80 Ii , ...... r\ ~ :1 ~t-... 70 "'Q" '\ n:: w 60 : : -Z : ~ J' u:: : t-: , r\ z 50 ~ " : W : 0 \J. n:: : W 40 : \ N D. :r\ : N 30 : ,: . : " ~'\ : : 20 : ji :~ : : : il 10 ' , : : I: I : 0 : : : 200 100 10 1 0.1 GRAIN SIZE -mm % COBBLES % GRAVEL % SAND % SILT 1 % CLAY 0 25,9 54.8 19.3 0 8,1 65.1 26.8 {; 18,6 67.4 14.0 SIEVE PERCENT FINER SIEVE PERCENT FINER """'" 0 0 {; number 0 0 {; sile "'-1.5 100,0 100,0 100,0 #4 74,1 91.9 81.4 3/4 88.0 100,0 97,7 #8 68.3 82,1 73.1 3/8 81.0 98,7 87,1 #16 59,7 73.8 58.4 #30 51.8 65,0 45,7 #50 41.5 53,6 33,4 #100 28.8 39,7 21.7 #200 19,3 26.8 14,0 >< GRAIN SIZE 060 1.21 0.433 1.27 030 0,161 0.0895 0,249 010 ,.?-<... COEFFICIENTS Cc Cu o Source: Sample No.: TP-I o Source: Sample No,: TP-3 {; Source: Sample No.: TP-5 EARTH Client: Project Hamilton Place CONSULTANTS, INC. Project No,: E-10952-1 Report ~ : : : : 0.D1 0,001 USCS AASHTO PL LL SM SM SM SOIL DESCRIPTION o TP-I: J'. SM Gray silty Sand with gmvel; 17.2%moisture o Tp·3: I' -SM Reddish brown silty Sand; 39.5% moisture {; TP-5: 4' • SM Gray silty Sand with gravel; 15.7% moisture REMARKS: o Tech:ELW o Tech:ELW {; Tech:ELW Elev.lDeplh: 3' Elcv./Depth: I' Elev.lDepth: 4' Plale Bl m m ijJ OJ OJ Ul III r_J III III 1.11 UI T L J III I ]1 U ) u,- Ul 4 Copies DISTRIBUTION E-10952-1 KBS Development Corporation 12320 Northeast 8 th Street. Suite 100 Bellevue. Washington 98005 Attention: Mr. Curtis Schuster Earth Consultants, Inc. ·----l 7.0 OTHER PERMITS 7, I PostmasterlMailbox Location Approval .' 1I020.004.doc ·) 7.1 PostmasterlMailbox Location Approval • .': / • • ~ 1'.-40' po. "' ... .:r .. WAFS d <@ ---j <§ @ ?* ';' ® lor e @ ala7~ j I to: ",' @ I Ir , ~1~ I I 1 Eli! 2 HORIZONTAL CONTROL PLAN A PORTlON OF THE fN{ 1/4 OF THE NE 1/4 SEC.14, T.23N. R.5E., WM ('- CI1Y OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON . ~"..r ..... IA~,.. '" ~ 01:' • OI~ ~""~1>"~,~ \/f'V v,..... (tAl)) I ~.tV.lS .'/ U\ ~if" 'j l!lT e ·,n" I @ I 'O:~\'I .' 3 --- t.O! e @> . .(),Il:. ~l'e5 VJ'';) 1 .i' 'l, ""' .'1: ~.~ @> 5 II .~ 4 1 ~ f,,-----, ON-SITE RECREATION AREA' JI£ttIEA11DN IfIrA ItEQQIAEO: I U70" C21OlS. 310 IIB:RE'RIlN M£A PACMDED: I 9,5011" (I1W:T A) LeT ~ LO~:S @ @ I S88':snn 585.i7' re LOT AREA TABLE "", II1£A (SF.) om, .... "" , ...., " ..... , . .,. .. .'" , ..,.. " ",,. • "" " .,,. , .... " ...., • ..,.. " . ...., , ..... .. .... • .... ,. .... • . .,. " . ..., " ..... " ..... " ... " " ..... " ...., -""-li4,5oQ U. ..,,, ....... "' ..... ......... G.., AC. TRACT TABLE "'"" ... NID. ($,F.) , -"'" . .., • 'IEr,/tJElElf1Df f"CN) NallY ,...., , 2ft JCK USE DRM.WIiY f1tfiCI" ..... • 21' PAIIAlE IICttSS 'lRCr .... , ............. ''-'" OH-$IlE 1IIGHT-oF'-1IJn' ... , .. .... -..... 7l,Blt 5.1, , ..... 9 " ___ @ ""It "t"'" .ffif..I!'i~, ,~;---: I ,e" \ @ ~ ;'r1:l c' 10 NOlES I.WI:.~OO 2. sm: NIV< 4..32 Ie .... 1 c· ! "t oo 11 :.:;4- :s. DCISlIC USE: SIIClE-F.WI.Y ~ of. PIIOPOSED USE: SIIG.t-fMllLY RESIOOICt,IDEWH 5. £XI5IIC lCNtC:: R-4 .. PROf'tlS[[I ztMC'; R-4 7. D!IStJrIG cot.FfID«JISM: PI.M IlESDWlCM: IRIWt RESIIlEHTW.. 4-12 ruiN: I. I'RCPOSt:O ~ PlAN IlESICIWDI: tIR&IJI RESIIDlW. 4-12 oo/IC t. I'fIOF'OSD) MIl IDI' WIImt 50" AEa.HtI lilt lOT 1IIJnt Xl(' f'R!I'OSU) wtt. lOT NfEk .fSOD SF f>IIQIEC1' DENSITY: !5.J2 D.l1. PER GROSS ACRE REQUIRED .... !IUl.DIC smw::KS: fIItIHr YMD: Irt (20' RlR CWMGE) sa: T.IIRO:: ~ (10' AOMCOO' TO R/W OR PAT.) R[Nt '\'MIl: " (10' tc.W::ENT 10 R/fl 011 PAT.) FJIDII' SAT. LIlt: 15" § SPECIAL NOlES 1. Ul1S 22 AND 23 stW.J.. IiIro'E UNIlMDED OIINERSNP OF tAICf ~ ..., BE RESPONSII..E ....... --... ~ 14 -17 StWJ. HIM: \KIMlED CIIIIIERSHIP 2. OF nw::r .". AND !IE RESI'ONSMLE nil: IJ"$ -...... ~ I ~ ~ ~ 6 .~ ~ :)9 0..0 15 Z ~~ ::;;0: ~f3 g g u.!go Zcol'"j-Og!O>~ ::l<t~~ Ef~~~ ~;~~ ~ I n I~ ~ ~ ~ !~~~ z Qo 1 1 f::!~:q:q ~ ~.Vi''''' N NN ~ ~v --- ~~~ ...... '. ~---I ( ·'1 D ........... ....-~ .. ~ CornP'etiOn I)g\et....:. .. ~.)" -II t CO ---------- • ·7.2 Fire Marshal Approval • • • • • LEGEND p ocrsr. Af.Q. 8I0.Il' -0-DCJST..POIIEIt PQE f-flCIST. GtIl".-.: -S[)-[)I!:ST;.~1Mt o £lIIST.CA1t:HUSW -w-DSS1: ... 'IDt UIE' t4 DUJ: CA'II: v.u.1£ t1 £lIIST." IfIfIfWiT !!I £lIIST. 1IIt1Dt III£lER EXIST: OWN tMK FDIC£ """ --Z7..zz ,..,...-, ...... -~ ~ :.,..,:.~ ,r:3L~ £XImfO ctWDi£lE ------$f().--DI$1WC CDNftUI' &_- """""""'0ENGn f.= • 1'RCl"'OS!J:I.snDI awHXE ~ SNnNrr.snEll' t.a€ • PRCFCISBI CA fDI' ... • 1'RfiI'OS£D 51QIW ~ -"""' ... _ .... '" ... 1'RtRI$ED".. Hm'WIf H I'I!CI'OSltI .. R:JiIlIIII.'o£ fRtf'OSltI "''IDI' 1M" @ ® @ PAR. 2 <@! I....r CXlIIM:IUI I:EPIII ;;; ... ~ a;N;II£Il - '-I-lIZ" CCIII'IICIGI1Vnt CIMIIE1II1XX _ 11;1' CDI!!:t } __ _ '-G'"~DEl'fllCIMIIE1IIOCII __ auISt ~CI:IWIIICIEII_.crII ~....!!!..~r,=~DP'lJI'IIICat ... CCINDIIIINS JaIWT USE DRIVEWAY lRACT _ro_ Lor 7 @ IZ' Cl(..{1?1 .=~ HAMILTON PLACE A PORTION OF THE SW 1/4 OF THE NE 1/4 SEC.14, T.23N., R.5E., W.M. CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON LOT 6 @ @ ". l'F-Gt-ltfS J RS ;S_5 9Z~ . LOT S @ 23 roP nt'V. -5OP.OO .............. "'~ ~ 44.000* cr _ ~()()O± CF DHEHTlON STANDARDS LC>a I Il.OIO' COfflfQ. WA1ER OUAUTY STANDARDS 8.lSIC IlAJtR ou.ouTY 1JI£ATOIEJWT P£1I 1993 I<ft(; C(UiTY """VAt. PROPOS£1) 1If"1HOO -II£IP(MI LOT 4 @ <@> 16 1'1'1 • 1'1 !£ J !£ Pl r 1'19 ...... ROAD'A' _ lHIX aJiIOIf CIDIICIEJ( 1'1111ICII5P11l.IIO.l-OOI ·r CIM'JCIID IlD'III CUISS ... .o\iIPMIIU ~ 1-1/y a.teIDI _ CIIUSIIE\J IIXX SUfF,CIII; 1tP t;OIIItk}~ - ~_Clll5KJII'XIt~IJIIiI:CCUIIIE: •• ~_.IiIII __ IIMI.BJaIUlSS '1'. IE~ DEJlf)ll8DGlSDI. CCIIIDIIaII on: SlCIOI5 4.CZ .. 4Q Itell$.) KJNQ COUNTY SIJBCOlLEC"TOR -~- j LOT e @ ~I V%M.,··'I ~ i @ §l IS! ~nN w._ ..,., IINJ ccun-r .sun£T IXWlJfQ. ~ prno. BRASS eN> II oor«:R£/£ _ I'lMOC. ~ AT »£ ~ OF _ A'IIME s.£ MID :u. f27JH.I'I.ACC. EILV. _ 505.90 SI1£ (UI., aT PIC IfM. U UST OF FtJQME AT NCII1HIIDT CCII!N:£R OF SfJE Et£v. -S13.P04 CONTOUR INTERVAL = 2' PRELIMINARY REVIEW APPROVED ~~77'lJb~ .JIlI. 312003 .... COUNt"< ............. SE.(JM.ItrE.-}(/#J.tY (1. Fr,llE £N6...,.:I6EA/~G f£hf ITA£/?U'~.b ;:i9/l.~...j. i9Ufl ~ Pc.'lJ; '!' ,£:1lIlU/T ~ ~ '" -h..,"'X. '" c:cww:rm DD'III ClAD T A9IIIU CDaDI: POI ICtfIS 4.OL\ MJDIIIIiI[ • 1-1/2" ~ DEPftI CIlU!HD 110: SUIDCIIIO 'lIP cnasr }~_ CCIWJIC!EtI D£f1II taI8IED !IDa{ IIIIfJICINII ... CXXIISE 4' caFI\CIED D£P'IM .GIl 1IIQ. .. a.-y_I[II:llIUKD_Pf __ ~ (SEE: ImIOIIS 4JI2 .. 4.D.l JU:R.S,) 1581H AVENUE NE AN> 16O"TH AVENUE NE KING COUNTY NEIGHBORHOOD COlLECTOR -~- I !IJ ~ f ! 818 !I ~I ~ I! ~I~ ~Ii il~~1 ~ ~ ~ ~ .. Iii I ~ ~ i I:l ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ! • ~ ~ II. " Q il ~ro e~ .~ j~~ O!t~~ ~ &l <> >< ~ "i ~.~~g !ij~I 0) '<1:2 C !i~ ~ ~ : ~ CD:!;;(/) L. 0 ~ , ~ r ~ " lit ~ ~ " )J ~. At: , ~ ~~ CI)::5 -In:: I;t: • ~~ !b§ ~a 0<:: ()<I: ~ k \io.. -,~ ~ i ""..,"'. ~ .1. ~ J~7DIG ~ -Ill 2OF3 I~ 7.3 Metro Transit Approval • Paul Alexander King County Department of Transportation Metro Transit Planning, KSC-TR-0413 201 South Jackson Street Seattle, WA 98104-3856 CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES July 17,2003 COURIER DELIVERY RE: Verification of Bus Route on 158th Avenue S.E. and/or 160th Avenue S.E. Plat of Hamilton Place King County Project No. L02POOli Our Job No. 11020 Dear Paul: Per King County Hearing Examiner's Condition No. 18g (highlighted on the enclosed plan), this letter is . written to verify whether 158th Avenue S.E. and/or 160th Avenue S.E. are on a Metro bus route for the plat of Hamilton Place. Hamilton Place is a 23-lot single-family development located between 158th Avenue S.E. and 160th Avenue S.E. in nnincorporated King County near Renton. Please review the enclosed plan for Hamilton Place so that you are familiar with the location of this project. If 158th Avenue S.E. and/or 160th Avenue S.E are not on a bus route, please verify that by signing this letter in the area provided, and return it to my attention at this office. If 158th Avenue S.E. and/or 160th Avenue S.E Street are on a bus route, please contact me as soon as possible so that I can send the street tree plan for your review and approval. If you have any questions or need additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me at this office. Thank you. Sincerely, Kris Nelson Permit Specialist KNlns 11020c.002 enc: cc: (1) copy of Sheets C 1 and C2 Curtis Schuster, KBS III, LLC Daniel K. Balmelli, Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. Ali Sadr, Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. Don Dawes, Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. XS~~ Date \ 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 (425) 251-6222 (425) 251-8782 FAX BRANCH OFFICES • OLYMPIA, WA • WALNUT CREEK, CA www.barghausen.com 7.4 Street Name Approval • ~) ~ r -40' 02040 80 eJSf fig .d @ @ -') @ "':.R 2 <@> -_J HORIZONTAL CONTROL PLAN A POR1lON OF THE 5'N 1/4 OF THE NE 1/4 SEC.14, T.23N, R5E., W.M. CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON , , , J r~ l--~----j \ \ \ L--~----I "r·m , I .\ \ ,~, \ "" \ '"" \ I , 1 ' .-" ' @ '@ , @ , I @ \ § \ --i ... ,.,.., .... ,y' !1i=i @ ~ .'~ .Ii r''! r', f', r', r'~l r'l i' 1 i'l r"'l ."~! "t'", 1 ·1 ~ * ~.I ~.I" ~ ~ ~ .I U ".I ~ 1 L t ~ ._ I~ ;, L.JL~r 3 rl4JL~~JLJ~I' 9 f 10 rL.J; , 1 I~-;-_-f---=---P=---t--c---f-----t----f---::..-----I--:..--~ t uJl I~~ 32."" Sl.7B' 51.# sur 51.77" 51.77" 51.77' 51.7T 51.71' sur 37.tr.Al Cd -I ROAD 'A' "".., . , W I gJ2' ': -, _, • ni<iiH'"""""" , _ \ -! _ ' .. ~I '~Loo·' , ''5E 13?/t" I·PlQ.~e..' , ,,~ iii" ~,I~ "',. ..., L....""" .. ., f-. '"'" ""'" "., _~ ;t: :>~ ,,=,.. l! I -. f-; ---.-----j-, 61 <~' . ~I" ..... lRACT'A' • •• r-, / 1'-1 rTi . [~,----. \ "11 j!: 1. ~ (a>ot SPAC£) ;;; ~ J~ ~ J.. , , . • ~ t . I :: (fll \ ~":': ~,..; "'>OM '1fW'"'-----~ * J 21 ~~ 20 ~~ 19 ~;' :18/ ill ~~I 13 l!~ 'I' ~ '1 g ''''''. ~ 3" -'I.f 11:1 1'112 0; , I' : . '1 "" ~ ~ f , , U·!' r ~ I LJ...., I "::, ~. · ,.~ 1 L 1 I' / .. o. ~ -.J :; ~ ~ ~ i~"W ~~ ~~ ~ '" F--se;.oct--=-r' 6 00 ~ •• \ 2a. JO'2!*E-J05.00' ~ • iii 1~ 00 !l' •• \ m1'" TRACT"S" \~~ ~ ~ Ii; , ~.:./~ \'\?~;i;;"--'~'""'~'\"t r 22 €"L-;J} 1-1. ~~ '" ' ., I I r- tOT a @ <@ .,1., :.:. »T-~.~.... ~. L .. oo---.J _~ ~ .~~ ~ .,. '" . .,. t . '. '. I.. L;.... -"""----r,,--"-,,.J ! ,..". I l' :~~$~7:->" t\ t~L "@' ~L 16 -,. i~ ~L 15 1.J'i\ ' '~ . • • • --,fin. '." "61.82 15.DO'.-.-1 .U5.QO"'-----l ' 00 ! N88'42.Q4-.r ! M8.39. 'S 00 _ , , , ' , \' , S.E. 134lH STREET I <® \ @l \ i I ,@ @ 4 J1.7' : ': ,4 Jl.R1 ' J I r r r---------------------,---~'71 LOT AREA TABLE 1m' "'" (1F> "'" AR£A (5.F.) , ..., " . ..., , .... .. "'" , ...,. " ''''' • ..... " .." , ..... " ...., • ..... " .... , .... " .... • .... " .... • "" " .... " ..... " ... " '''' " .... " ,-"" -"" .... 114.543 sr. ." ... NOlES 1. _I: ~oo 2. SITE AR£1c 4.lZ N; 3. DI:ISTIC USE: Sfra.[-fMa.Y ~ -4. PACI'OSED US£: SMU-DMLY ~ $. ElOS11NC ZONIC: R-4 S. PAC1POSED ZONING: R-4 7. ElCISIlMO COIiIPRODSM: PlAIt ~ IIIIM RESUIftW. 4-12 WIN; L PAC1POSED c:tU'REHEMSI\IE PlM DDIONAmN: 1.IIIWI RESIlDfTIAL. 4-12 PJ/M;; I. PROPOSED ... lDf WIJ11-t r:II SPECIAL NOlES I. tars 22 NCO 23 9W.J.. KIK lIIlMlm OJINERSRP Of "IIW:T 'C" NCO BE: RESfONSIILE "" ... ..........,. tmS 14 -17 StW..L IWo1! tINDMDm CII'IfD!SHp 2. Ofnw:T '"D""AHO BE ~ RIll IrS --... ~ ~ 6 d w~ ~ ~g ll.. • 0 zO 0 Oz -I 5~ ~ ::!IC ~ <rn J:w a: 8 ~ o u.jfi8 Zfi)~ • • 0> C? 0!M N ::I<~!!a E!f~6~ .f !B~iw ""on z N 0 ;1;""iE ! n ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ !!iN ~ <8~~ o CO"" I'--~CJ)'f'? ..... ~--~~~~ ...-x.:!-.:!- , .. ,., ::,q;~"." I'~~DDU I I~ .-;) R-r-f"..m-"~ ,~ r~-. n..t.. ",<>" • cO"" -""-....... 0.11 IC.. TRACT TABLE -. "" NI£A (S.r.) , _ .... ..., 10. RECUIREJ) MK. \.(IT WIJIIt XX' 11. PIU'OStD ... t.ar M£A: «iOO SF 12. PI'IC1LCI" ~ !U2 o.IJ. PDt CROSS IICAE 13. 1I6lJIIfl)"'!IlaDIC SEJlIliCKSi: F1I(Itt lMtI: Ilf [20'" RIll ~ • wD"/DDEImON f'OItID FACUJY , 11f oIOKT USE ~ 1RACT • Zfj PIIMU[ I1CCDS 1RIiCI [ """" "" ""'" ON-SITE RECAEA llON AREA' AECIIE1\l1ON NIDi REWRED: I. U70 SF cu.ms ~ 3!10 QN-srrt: RICHT-oF-WC'I' RECR£.m:JIf MtA PRIMm: 1 9.SD6 SF (TRACT II) ---13,812 Y. "..., .... ,,, . ''''' """ , ...... sa: YARD: 5· (10' ~ ltJ R/rI 011: PAT.) JI£Nt YARD: 5" (11f .IID.IIC8fT ltJ R/W OR PAT.) 1JICII SAT. tilt: IS" J S . ;: 8.0 .) e) \ \ ESC ANALYSIS AND DESIGN The limits of clearing have been shown on the construction plans to encompass the developed site area. Silt fences and temporary V -ditches have been shown on the construction plans to control and convey sediment-laden stormwater to the temporary sediment pond prior to discharge into the existing wetlands and buffer. The permanent detention and water quality facility will be utilized for the temporary sediment pond. This facility will provide more than adequate sediment retention and surface area for the temporary sediment pond. Notes have been added to the construction plans regarding removal of sediment once the site is stabilized. Please refer to the construction plans for further details regarding the erosion control for this development. The following equation is provided to check the required SA in the pond and make sure the proposed facility exceeds the minimum requirement. SA REQ = 2,080 SF x Q""l<PRF.) Q,oo = 0.45 CFS SAREQ = 2,080 SF x 0.45 SAREQ = 486 SF SApROV = +9,000 SF OK JI020.004.doc 9.0 BOND QUANTITIES AND FACILITY SUMMARIES Enclosed within this section is the facility summary sheet and sketch. Bond quantity fonns will be completed after the initial plan review. 11020.004.doc KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL STORMWATER FACILITY SUMMARY SHEET Development Hamilton Place Date 2-25-04 Location Between 158th Avenue S.E. and 160the Avenue S.E. at S.E. 133rd Street ENGINEER DEVELOPER Name Daniel K. Balmelli, P.E. Name Robert W. Ruddell Firm Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. Firm KBS Ill, LLC Address 18215 nnd Avenue South Address 12320 N.E. 8th Street, Suite 100 Kent, W A 98032 Bellevue, W A 98005 Phone (425) 251-6222 Phone (206) 623-70000 Developed Site: Acres 4.32 Number of lots 23 Number of detention facilities on site: _I_ponds vaults tanks Number of infiltration facilities on site: __ ponds vaults tanks Flow control provided in regional facility (give location) .....,N",/ A:>..... _________________ _ No flow control required N/ A Exemption number ~N'-'!..!/ A"---___________________ _ D D' B' ownstream ramage aSlns lmmeniafe Rasin A 1 ,ower r.eelar Rive.r Basin R Basin r. Rasin n Number & type of water quality facilities on site: __ biofiltration swale regular/wet/or continuous inflow?) I Basic combined detentionIWQ pond (WQ portion basic or large?) combined detention/wet vault __ compost filter __ filter strip __ flow dispersion __ farm management plan __ landscape management plan Mninr Rasin r.e.n:lr R i Ve.T __ sand filter (basic or large?) __ sand filter, linear (basic or arge?) __ sand filter vault (basic or large?) stormwater wetland __ wetpond (basic or large?) wetvault __ oiUwater separator (baffle or coalescing plate?) catch basin inserts: Manufacturer ______________________ _ __ pre-settling pond __ pre-settling structure; Manufacturer _____________________ _ __ flow-splitter catchbasin DESIGN INFORMATION Water Quality design flow Water Quality treated volume or wetpond V. DESIGN I TOTAL 1998 Surface Water Design Manual INDIVIDUAL BASIN A B C J INDIVIDUAL BASIN D 9/1/98 I ID20.014.doc eJ KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL INFORMATION, cont'd Drainage basin(s) A B C D Offsite area 4.07 Type of Storage Facility POND Live Storage Volume 42,423 Predeveloped Runoff Rate 2-year 0.149 lO-year 0.256 lOO-year 0.451 Developed Runoff Rate 2-year 0.721 lO-year 0.868 lOO-year 1.47 Type of restrictor ORIFICE Size ofthe orificelrestrictor No.1 1.26" No.2 1.70" No.3 No.4 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 comer). 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 How direction Use a single heavy weight line 4. tanks·· use a double. heavy weight 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 •••••••• • Riprap 000000 000000 Fences --x--x--x--x--x--x-- • Ditches -D--->D--->D 7. Label trash tracks in writing 8. :Label all streets with the actual street 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. 11. Indicate driveways or features that may impact access, maintenance or replacement. 1998 Surface Water Design Manual 2 911198 II 020.0I4.doc DE I ENTION AND WA TEA QUALITY POND PLAN A PORTION OF n£ BW 1/4 OF ltE IE 1/4 SEC.14. T.23N. R.s:.. W .... ~ f' -111 CITY OF fENTON. QIQ COIMTY, WASHNCJTON _ kJ 'f r I) ... tIllS a !LCINL 111 IIWI. 2) GUUI~"IDI---i ... 1 . --,--",*,<xr.,.",;: >:-.......... f~i~OCIf~ /: ", _~.it:gc[' /. .1. - IE133R>PL . --""-_ ... _-...... i)'~:or. .., ... ~ VA oe.. .. _--4 cc--. __ .-_ vr_ _ Ot~"""''' If W~SIUlNIL -......,.,....... .. ., .m-.... ~- &:::::: -. ,. .... o.c. - 4) ................. ........ .q Q.£tIIU c.a: IS ..-..: _ ... 10 ~...a: _ car. " ..:It • Qf.IIIIIIU 01.: • r. q ..... ~flo.a ., PI.ICftIII[ -.&. • a "" • ..... _-I'~U v 2 ..... .J. ........ ' ~ ... , ~ ---='=.,..-r __ --a. ..ell _ QIICIIIPI _ __ IIIIA..-._ .... _fl_ L-J, .... ~._ ~ __ IDG. .r---- l.E\B. a iUDEJt r ------IDG. • fU:W a.-. C8I1A 1lI'E 1-54' R.OW <XlNTftOl.. MA/IHOlJ: ROW li£iliCTOR B.BOW CETAL ......... -::::..n:ar-= ~IIOCID-~ ....... " .. ILooIIO.CIO 0VEII'1..0W IiPLl..WAY CETAL ........ =111·11 U U 1111 II Dull II "_'''''!!'''''''''''''' .J I 1----JJr UIIIIa&D ... ~ . . _.~" ~GIIOI._. ,....tro.c,. JAUiOUEIE 'SIIlCAL BAR QflAlE CETAL .... - ---...... u. ---------...... u. ----..... u. ----- _ ..... .. C8I1A 54' B,OW CONJBC!..Ift SOU: "-1 . 801. AM) COM'ACDON !EO! ern "~""".~fII~"2:!_'" 0DaII'I) I'\GO. ,. ":1n':':~""" tlbNl ..: __ ..., DIPl" ~ ....u." .. til tlJ ... ~A_~t1I"""A -. fI_.", ......... c:c.J:~ ~......:) DI CIUQIL _ ..... 'IIOL __ .. ... ... ~ oc.p ..... -...:DIl_.-o. .... ~ •• CIClIQIIG 1IftI ... ~lS.1 fJllIC W!/IIfJIII--_.... me II .... 10 • ......,. cu. CIIIJCID __ IIIICX caouo. ,. fCIIDe =:===~~: S'==lI~ .... ,IOt .......... S 011 l ____ r ee'wew L ~ ... .........,..,... COIIJI,IICD CIt 111M ~ ..... ICItIiIUdrP' awcu .. ...., ..... as ~ • .to ~ DOCaIJ" til ~ *--'Cl ......... ICJDId. .. gIoG: OIDIIC -. t. ~_~CIIPD:".fU'I.""'''.~'''~AIIl'f_ Dstf/l __ ~c:ce5-~ICOII _______ ..... w ..a:If'CAll' IIr:DIMDCD .. A ~ IJOCP. .;;J • 8 ~~~; Io~~ .r~~B !i~~ ~ ·nE i JI ~ ~ ~I ~~n 1-~~g: gl ~ tIC ... ~ $JIJU,. • ~ fIT 0iWtCID SlIt.. .. _ OM' 0DdIIT. IIICIDftO M:ICICII ~'''' C:'A,=="ar(W ...... -=-~ t=-a:or ~-: r..: =r& "'.; 1U • .u...u_ ... ~...... " ---+----.. -;~;-'~ .. ;.:;-~.:.----~-----~'-------.:'.----+_~",;,:;:; __ ,_;~':~~;;;'':;_~'L .. -~-: :------[' -----: .. -ecc;:_ -~---: ---.. -.:.~ ---.. -~'-----+--+-l-~ " :.: . ! . . . !' i . ;' ': .... ~ :. I : • _; :'" • ••• f "': '"' , , I, "'," I I I •• ••• • ••• , I ' I , . , " I I " I I I , , " I'" " ", I' ~ , I , "0 ! t _.,; J ___ I~ ____ J __ IChIOO 'II! _ DtII7~ I-lOl L"'-_ M ~ ... , • i!IIP M ....a ~' ... I'DIG CXUfIY D.D~,S. z,: ~ ,~ ~~ .' I~" ~o... -" 'co"'· ~O/DM_I ! ~ , nllA'1JY POfC) BECJioN A-A OEJBrnONIWAlER OUAUTY !'ON) IIEC1ION !HI WI;Ird) ____ "-711 ...... ... .... ted: .................. I~ ---------------------~ .. - • Site Improvement so! Quantity Worksheet King County Department 01 Development & Environmental Services 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Renton, Washington 98055-1219 Project Name: HAMILTON PLACE Location: WEST SIDE OF 160TH AVE S.E. NEAR THE INTERSECTION OF S.E. 134TH ST. Date: Project No.: Activity No.: • 5/20/2004 L02P0011 L03SR034 Clearing greater than or equal to 5,000 board feet of timber? Note: All prices include labor, equipment, materials, overhead and profit. Prices are from RS Means data adjusted for the Seattle area or from local sources if not included in the RS Means database. ______ yes no If yes, Forest Practice Permit Number: (RCW 76.09) Page 1 of 9 11020.016.xls £: ::D 2::;>;: ~ m C z !!:( 0 c::'" ~(") N m 000 ...... _ me:: < ::cz ....., 5=<! g m ~ ~ C Unit prices updated: 02112102 Version: 04/22102 Report Date: 5121/2004 • Page 2 of 9 11020.016.xls Site Improvement BO! Quantity Worksheet ESC SUBTOTAL: 30% CONTINGENCY & MOBILIZATION: ESC TOTAL: COLUMN: • S 71,942.94 $ 21,582.88 $ 93,525.82 A Unit prices updated: 02112102 Version: ..04122102 Report Date: 5121/2004 • Pag!3 3 at 9 "Kec 27A authorizes only one bond reduction. 11020.016.xls Site Improvement S. Quantity Worksheet SUBTOTAL 2,567.45 19,535.71 • 32,218.60 Unit prices updated: 02112102 Version: 4/22102 Report Date: 5/21/2004 • Page 4 of 9 *KCC 27 A authorizes only one bon\i reduction. 11020,016.x15 Site Improvement B. Quantity Worksheet SUBTOTAL 44,688.41 40,658.74 • Unit prices updated: 02112102 Version: 4122102 Report Date: 5/21/2004 • Page 5 of 9 ·KCC 27A authorizes only one bond reduction. 11020.016.xls Site Improvement See Quantity Worksheet SUBTOTAL 38,172.06 36,324.12 • 5,012.60 Unit prices updated: 02112102 Version: 4/22102 Repprt Date: 5/21/2004 • Page 6 of 9 -KCC 27 A authorizes only one bond reduction. 11020.016.xls Site Improvement S. Quantity Worksheet SUBTOTAL 14,604.34 57,957.10 • 11,392.42 Unit prices updated: 02112102 Version: 4/22102 Report Date: 5/21/2004 • Page 7 of 9 -Kec 27A authorizes only one bond reduction. 11020.016.xls Site Improvement S. Quantity Worksheet SUBTOTAL 19920.84 • 15719.2 Uni1 prices upda1ed: 02112102 Version: 4/22102 Report Dale: 5/21/2004 • Site Improvement B. Quantity Worksheet SUBTOTAL SUBTOTAL (SUM ALL PAGES): 30% CONTINGENCY & MOBIUZATION: PageSof9 ' *KCC 27A authorizes only one bond reduction. 11020.016.<1. GRANDTOTAL: COLUMN: 9,661.29 57,999.58 109,693.55 232,396.09 32,908.07 69,718.83 142,601.62 302,114.92 B C • 32,400.00 96,742.82 29,022.85 125,765.67 0 E Unit prices updated: 02112102 Version: 4/22102 Report Date: 5/21/2004 • • • Site Improvement Bond Quantity Worksheet Original bond computations prepared by: Name: Danial K. Balmelli Dale: 5/20/2004 PE Registration Number: 25672 Tel. #: 425-251-6222 Firm Name: Barghausen Consulting lOrlgineers, inc. Address: 18215 72nd avenue south Kent, Wa 98032 Project No: L02POOIl ROAD IMPROVEMENTS & DRAINAGE FACILITIES FINANCIAL GUARANTEE REQUIREMENTS Stabilization/Erosion Sediment Control (ESC) (A) Existing Right·of-Way Improvements (B) Future Public Road Improvements & Drainage Facilities (C) Private Improvements (D) Calculated Quantity Completed PERFORMANCE BOND' AMOUNT $ 93,525.8 $ 142,601.6 $ 302,114.9 $ 125,765.7 Total Right·of Way andlor Site Restoration Bond'r (First $7,500 of bond' shall be cash.) (MB) $ 236,127.4 Performance Bond' Amount (A+B+C+D) = TOTAL (T) $ 664,008.0 MInimum bOna: amount IS $1000. Reduced Performance Bond' Tolal .. , Maintenance/Defect Bond' Total BOND' AMOUNT REQUIRED AT RECORDING OR TEMPORARY OCCUPANCY'" (E) $ T x 0.30 $ 199,202.4 (T·E) $ 664,008.0 Use larger of T x30% or (l-E) OR NAME OF PERSON PREPARING BOND' REDUCTION: Date: .. NOTE; The word -bond" as used in this document means any financial guarantee acceptable to King County . .... NOTE: KeC 27A authorizes right of way and site restoration bonds to be combined when both are required. PUBLIC ROAD & DRAINAGE MAINTENANCEIDEFECT BOND' (B+C) X 0.25= $ 111,179.1 The restoration requirement shall include the total cost for all TESC as a minimum, not a maximum. In addition, corrective work, both on-and off-site needs to be Included. Quantities shaU reflect worse case scenarios not just minimum requirements. For example, if a salmonid stream may be damaged, some estimated costs for restoration needs to be reflected in this amount. The 30% contingency and mobilization costs are computed in this quantity . ..... NOTE: Per KeC 27A, total bond amounts remaining after reduction shaH not be less than 30% of the original amount (T) or as revised by major design changes. SURETY BOND RIDER NOTE: If a bond rider is used, minimum additional perlormance bond shall be I $ 427,880.6 I(C+D)·E REQUIRED BOND' AMOUNTS ARE SUBJECT TO REVIEW AND MODIFICATION BY DOES Page 9 of9 11020.016.xls Unit prices updated: 02112102 Version: 4/22102 Report Date: 5/21/2004 10.0 OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE MANUAL The conveyance, detention, and water quality facilities proposed for this project will be maintained by King County. Therefore, the Operations and Maintenance Manual is not required. II020.004.doc SITE ENGINEERING & PLANNING STRUCTURAL REVIEW TRANSMITTAL . TO: Hou-Ching Chow, Plan Review Services *OATE: :jd;/!,r *FM: ide ~& ' Review Engineer ~ if) *RE: Stru:ture for ,t/ttmdll? f!t2tf. fitJA~j/t2~ *Projec #)..035)foi3Y (proJect) _ _ Please accept and review the attached Structural Review Package. The Site Engineering and Planning Review Unit has begun reviewing the engineering plans for the road and storm system; we anticipate completion by :r"/2 .. 09' . Your efforts in assisting us with this deadline are greatly appreciated. Please contact me at 6 ~ 7/71 ~ when your review begins or at any time you require additional information. Upon structural approval, please return the plans and approval documentation to the Site Engineering and Planning Section with an approval memo stating any required fees. *OescriptionofStructure: R-d 4tVJ'trJ ; Waif, /(}t,Y{-tvi 11' ,!trl/1J /{J,:tiI&'/~I1I. *Location of Structure (Page # andlor describe location): 1/?;c t !3 V1f4';j; ~~ft' I' Existing ______ _ Existing ______ _ Existing ______ _ ___ -:-:--,-__ ): Existing ______ _ (type) Restrictions/Requirements Related to the Structure: (e.g. other approvals (HPA, DOT), ordinances, elevations) *Submittal Package Includes: Engineering Plans (Road/Drainage) ~ . s ~ ft Manufacturin S ecifications necessary) K --~'DesIgn Calculations .%"': ~Soils Report Future CFuture » 1/dCr a '-ruture ______ _ Future ______ _ ~ Note: If this is a REVISION to an approved structural plan, then include the approved plans. List of Key Contacts: / _ /, j -r King County Sensitive Area Staff: _.e.LA=.L0!..,.";.;.."7--1t.!I1/(=-·""eLl.LL __________ _ Design Engineer: Structural_=--__________________ _ ~ ~ Engineerizn Plans: Other: _I ~a glAd? -~4J. I 't '7 t.77 C/ f./! \'; ; Installationllnspection Inspection Responsibility of Commercials: ________________ _ Contractor License # (if needed), _______ _ Structural Value $ _____ _ Attachments ____________________________ _ REVISION OATE: _________ ..,..-____ _ SIGNATURE: _______ --''--______ _ *REQUIRED ~ T-eo' o _____ ., 120 [C ;z't 9 * -------------j ~ 2 3 ) ., ~ 8;.) DEVELOPED BASIN AREA MAP 4 5 21 6 20 -4.f17 AC -2.~ AC ..n1QAC 2.33 Ar- 19 -.. ~.:." 1r""~1 L"': . - 76 ... ~ bl~ I ~r-'" . / L...f):IST. 5-E.x;sr. 12 w :"V'_\.'!R':' ---···--.~I P.UJ\lNIl'IG WAll.. I.Ut'n '" !.Oe.30 )(~_ i-. ! .~ ." ttr: a @I , ,~~ ,,~>.& .-.<0' C"J -,f-',·r;;'2.' 111m ., .. IIEP.CIDI Of ----- ..;.5 @ ""'*"'**11: ItEA 0.. 10 < 0 ::Ew 0 zO ·CO 0(» -< • CI).J .J< <0.. .J~ mZ • CO --=w w~ t/):J 0...J m> 0-.J::E ~~ w< ...J >::I: W W m C CD I~ = j:: j . ~ ~ .l! 2 , .II a -~ " 81 81 ~I ~I ~ 1 ~ I I i ~ .!: ts .1:1 "0 ~ ~~ 5 5'" VI 11.;;i W X offi => L!: '!: 2 Z :'z ~ ~ N N .;51 < o~~ !i!:~ O~CDCO (§t5 Z I I z. ~~~~ ~~~ IJ") ... __ ..-I--LO Lt) ...J ~ ~~ ~ ~~ .-~-- f g ~ , " ~ i ~ ~ .-!." '·0"".. ~ q,V <1<",,,, ~ ~ oj ..: -; g ..., " ! ., z "- "' w • X ~ 8 '\ ,,$ ~ t co~t; ! • ~ i ~ ~ 1 0 E C\I II I; 0 --I II i! ! 'r" t' , King County Department of Development and Environmental Services 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Renton, Washington 98055-1219 fax (206) 296-6729 ** CONDITIONS OF PERMIT I APPROVAL ** DATE: 412112004 Project No: L03SR034 Location Hamilton Place Subdivision Renton, WA. Allan Block Retaining Walls in storm water pond COMMERCIAL COR. I ORDINANCE 0001 -GENERAL: This correction sheet is an abridged version of code requirements and is a review aid only. It shall not be used in lieu of the Uniform Building Code, Uniform Mechanical Code, Uniform Fire Code, or any King County regulation or state law. Corrections noted below are part of the approved plans and shall remain attached to them at all times. The approval plans and specifications does not permit the violation of any section of the Uniform Building Code, Uniform Mechancial Code, UniformFire Code, or any King County regulation or state law. Corrections as indicated below, along with the unchanged information shown on the drawings, must be complied with. In addition, since this correction sheet is a review aid, it shall not be used in lieu of the above mentioned codes, regulations, and laws. Therefore, code compliance with all noted applicable code sections on this correction sheet, as well as other applicable code sections not specifically noted, shall be required. The approved plans shall not be changed, modified, or altered without authorization from the building official. The approved plans are required to be on the job site. Section 106.4, U.B.C. 0350 -SPECIAL INSPECTION: Provide special inspection by Geotechnical Engineer of Record for compliance withsoil report recommendations. Submit field inspection reports, test lab. reports and final reports to the Land Use Services Division, Development Inspection Unit, in compliance with Section 1701, U.B.C. The following items shall have special inspection: 1) Excavation and foundation sub grade preparation; and soil bearing load capacity confirmation. 2) Wall lateral load design--soil parameters confirmation. \~ I . \ r , 0357 - 3) Preparation of base leveling pad on finn soil (compacted crushed rock). 4) Placement of Allan blocks and Geogrid reinforcement. 5) Backfill soil materials selection and compaction. 6) Installation of drainage system behind walls . SPECIAL INSPECTION: Any fill emplaced under footings, slabs, or other foundation systems must be certified by a special inspection as having been compacted to at least 95% of ASTM D-1557. 0366 -.SHOP DRAWING: Engineer of record shall review and approved all shop drawings. An approved copy shall be submitted to the Land Use Services Division, Development Inspection Unit. Section 106.3.4.2, U.B.C. 1) Concrete mix design of Allan block units. 2) Report of the qualified strength of the geogrid materials from an approved testing laboratory. .-HAMILTON PLACE RENTON, WASHINGTON ALLAN BLOCK RETAINING WALL DESIGN SHEET INDEX # OF SHEETS SHEET TITLE TITLE SHEET GENERAL NOTES 2 SPECIFICATIONS 1 SITE PLAN 2 WALL #1 2 WALL #2 AB THREE -3 DEGREE 2 CONSTRUCTION DETAILS ~ ALLAN BLOCK CORPORATION 5300 Edina Industrial Boulevard, Suite 100 Edina, Minnesota 55439 Ph. (952) 835-5309 Fax (952) 835-0013 www.allanblock.cotn Allan Block Northwest 22509 SE 228th Street Maple Valley, WA 98038 Ph. 20fH98-2879 Fax 425-413-7980 Seal This design is preliminary. Upon review and certification by a Profes$ional Engineer, it may be issued as a construction document (]) U ~« ~$ .- (]) 0 c::~ (]) --.-.J:: OJ _ E .-0 Vl '" E ..... ji (]) z ~ c:: .t:: "'P U I~ r __ OJ 'OJ I-'e OJ .<: 0... tr) Date: 3/24/04 Project Number. 128.04 Revisions: IDate: t: Drawn By; CO, Checked By: SlH Scale: Not to Scale Sheet Number: 1 of 1 RETAINING WA~E~ ~E~) ~ ~yL~ D'>to ~~ 1. Retaining wall installation shall conform to the Allan Block Modular Retaining Wall Systems Specification Guidelines, Geogrid Reinforcement Systems Specification Guidelines, and Water Management Specification Guidelines contained herein or in the Allan Block Spec Book ABENG4-00. 2. Hydrostatic loading is not considered in this analysis. Sufficient drainage must be provided such that hydrostatic loading (pore pressure) does not develop in the reinforced zone. 3. Soil loading considered in this design is based on the following parameters: Infill Soil: Internal Angle of Friction = 33 degrees Soil Unit Weight = 120 PeF Retained Soil: Internal Angle of Friction = 33 degrees Soil Unit Weight = 120 PeF Foundation Soil: Internal Angle of Friction = 33 degrees Cohesion = 0 PSF Soil Unit Weight = 120 PeF This information is based on the finding of the geotechnical reports from Earth Consultants, Inc. dated January 28, 2004. 4. Seismic loading considered in this design is based on the following parameters: Seismic Coefficient Ao = 0.3 Allowable Lateral Deflection Extemal = 3 inches Allowable Lateral Deflection Internal = 3 inches 5. Global stability is not considered in this design unless otherwise noted. 6. Retaining walls must be staked according to the contract drawings. The retaining wall plan view generated by Allan Block Corporation is for wall identification only and is based on the grading plan prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers dated February 25, 2004. 7. The block type shall be the AB Three and must have a 3 degree batter. 8. Geogrid spacing is determined by structural cross·section design requirements. To insure proper geogrid placement, contractor must review both elevation view and cross sections prior to wall construction. 9. This design is preliminary. Upon review and certification by a Professional Engineer, it may be issued as a construction document PRE CONSTRUCTION CHECK-LIST REVIEW RETAINING WALL DESIGN FOR: A. Compliance to the Latest Site Plan and Site Conditions. 1. Does the retaining wall design reflect the most current site plans and/or site conditions? 2. Do the top and bottom retaining wall elevations match the proposed grading of the job-site? 3. Have property lines and other obstructions behind the wall been accounted for? B. Surcharges. 1. Have all slopes above and below the walls been taken into account in the retaining wall design? 2. Have all surcharges above the wall been acounted for in the retaining wall design? 3. During construction are there any temporary surcharges that should be accounted for? C. Review of Reported Soil Conditions with On-site Soils Engineer. 1. Are on·site soils consistent with soil parameters used in the retaining wall design? 2. Does the site show indications of multiple types of soil? Are these soils acceptable for the wall construction? 3. Is there evidence of non·native fill areas on site? Are these areas adequately compacted? D. Review of Surface Water Management with Project Civil Engineer. 1. Has surface runoff been accounted for in the site design? Is the runoff directed away fron the retaining wall? 2. Will this site be irrigated? Is the irrigation directed away from the wall? 3. If the site storm drainage system becomes inoperable where will the water migrate to? 4. Will temporary construction drainage be an issue? E. Review Retaining Wall Water Management with Wall Design Engineer and General Contractor. 1. How and where will drain pipes be installed? 2. Is it possible to vent drain pipes to daylight? 3. Is venting to a storm drainage system an option? 4. How will the drain pipe be protected from blockage or damage caused by subsequent construction activities? 5. Is there any unforseen or unanticipated water source near the retaining wall. PRE CONSTRUCTION PROCEDURES A. Verify that the correct color and setback of block has been ordered and delivered to the job. B. Verify that the correct grid type and strength has been ordered and delivered to the job. C. Mark station points where changes in wall elevation or wall direction occur. D. Identify changes in grid length, grid spacing, and grid type. E. Detennine and locate proper base size for each section of wall. F. Verify that compaction testing will be perfonned, at what intervals and locations along the wall and who is responsible for contracting and coordination of the testing. G. Detennine what methods will be used to verify construction materials, methods and sequence of construction (ie: written documentation of as-built condition, full time inspector on site, photographic documentation.) H. Verify who has authority to accept or reject the retaining wall installation and establish acceptable appearance criteria. rm! _.c._c .. ·"·'1' BLOCK ALLAN BLOCK CORPORATION 5300 Edina Industrial Boulevard, Suite 100 Edina, Minnesota 55439 Ph. (952}635-5309 Fax (9521635-0013 www.allanblock.com Allan Block Northwest 22509 SE 226th Street Maple Valley, WA 96036 Ph. 20&498-2679 Fax 425-413-7980 s,. This design is preliminary. Upon review and certification by a Professional Engineer, it may be issued as a COllStruction document. Q) VI U Q) ~ « ....., c:::: 0 c 3: z 0 C' cti Oi ....., ..... E 0 Q) E ....., '" C Oi C Z ~ -;:; Q) Q) i= U I D::: lJ '" OJ B '" 0: ..c: Vl Date: 3/24/04 Project Number. 128.04 Revisions: IDate: Drawn By: CD) Checked By: SLH Scale: Not to Scale Sheet Number. 1 of 1 Specification Guidelines: Allan Block Modular Retaining Wall Systems SECTION 1 PART 1: GENERAL 1.1 Scope A. Work includes furnishing and installing modular concrete block retaining wall units to the lines and grades designated on the construction drawings and as specified herein. 1.2 Applicable Sections of Related work A. Geogrid Wall Reinforcement (see Section 2, pg. 4 of Spec Book) 1.3 Reference Standards A. ASTM C1372-97 Standard Specifications for Segmental Retaining Wall Units. 1.4 Delivery, Storage, and Handling A. Contractor shall check the materials upon delivery to assure proper material has been received. B. Contractor shall prevent excessive mud, wet cement, and like materials from coming in contact with the materials. C. Contractor shall protect the materials from damage. Damaged material shall not be incorporated in the project. (Ref. ASTM C1372) PART 2: MATERIALS 2.1 Modular Wall Units A. Wall units shall be ALLAN BLOCK Retaining Wall units as produced by a licensed Manufacturer. B. Wall units shall have minimum 28 day compressive strength of 3000 psi (20.7 MPa) in accordance with ASTM C1372-97. The concrete units shall have adequate freeze-thaw protection with an average absorption rate of 7.5 Ib/ft3 (120 kg/m3) for northern climates and 10 Ib/ft3 (160 kg/m3) for southern climates. e Exterior dimensions shall be uniform and consistent Maximum dimensional deviations shall be 0.125 in (3 mm), not including textured face. D. Wall units shall provide a minimum of 110 Ibs total weight per square foot of wall face area (555 kg/m3). Fill contained within the units may be considered 80% effective weight E. Exterior face shall be textured. Color as specified by owner. 2.2 Wall Rock A. Base material must be well graded compactible aggregate, 0.25 inch to 1.5 inch, (5mm -38mm) with no more than 10 % passing the #200 sieve. B. Drainage material may be the same as base material. 2.3 Infill Soil A. Infill material shall be site excavated soils when approved by the Onsite Soils Engineer unless otherWise specified in the drawings. Unsuitable soils for backfill (heavy days or organic soils) shall not Qe used in the reinforced soil mass. Typically day soils with high plasticity will not be acceptable, unless specifically addressed by the Wall DeSign Engineer. B. Where additional fill is required, contractor shall submit sample and specifications to the Wall Design Engineer or the Onsite Soils Engineer for approval. PART 3: WALL CONSTRUCTION 3.1 Excavation A Contractor shall excavate to the lines and grades shown on the construdion drawings. Contractor shall use caution not to over-excavate beyond the lines shown, or to disturb the base elevations beyond those shown. 3.2 Foundation Soil Preparation A. Foundation soil shall be defined as any soils loc~ted beneath a wall. B. Foundation soil shall be excavated as dimensioned on the plans and compacted to a minimum of 95 % of Standard Proctor prior to placement of the base material. e Foundation soil shall be examined by the Onsite Soils Engineer to ensure that the actual foundation soil strength meets or exceeds assumed design strength. Soil not meeting the required strength shall be removed and replaced with acceptable material. 3.3 Base A. Base material shall be placed as shown on the construction drawing. Top of base shall be located to allow bottom wall units to be buried to proper depths as per wall heights and specifications. B. Base material shall be installed on undisturbed native soils or suitable replacement fills. C. Base shall be compacted at 95 % Standard Proctor to provide a level hard surface on which to place the first course of blocks. The base. shall be constructed to ensure proper wall embedment and the final elevation shown on the plans. Well-graded sand can be used to smooth the top 1/2 inch (13mm) on the base material. D. Base material shall be a 3 inch (75mm) minimum depth for walls under 4 feet (1.2m) and a 6 inch (150mm) minimum depth for walls over 4 ft (1.2m). 3.4 Unit Installation A. The first course of wall units shall be placed on the prepared base with the raised lip facing out and the front edges tight together. The units shall be checked for level and alignment as they are placed. B. Ensure that units are in full contact with base. Proper care shall be taken to develop straight lines and smooth curves on base course as per wall layout C. All cavities in and around the base row shall be filled with base materials and compacted. Backfill front and back of entire base row to firmly lock in place. Check again for level and alignment All excess material shall be swept from top of units. D. Install next course of wall units on top of base row. Position blocks to be offset from seams of blocks below. Perfect nrunning bond" is not essential, but a 3 inch (75mm) minimum offset is recommended. Check each block for proper alignment and level. Fill all cavities in and around wall units and to a 12 inch (305mm) depth behind block with wall rock. Spread backfill in uniform lifts not exceeding 8 inches (200mm) in uncompacted thickness and compact to 90 % of Standard Proctor behind the consolidation zone. E. The consolidation zone shall be defined as 3 feet (1 m) behind the wall. Compaction Within the consolidation zone shall be accomplished by using a hand operated plate compactor and shall begin by running the plate compactor directly on the block and then compacting in parallel paths to the wall face until the entire consolidation zone has been compacted. Two passes of the plate compactor are required with maximum lifts of 8 inches (200 mm). Employ methods using lightweight compaction equipment that will not disrupt the stability or batter of the wall. F. Install each subsequent course in like manner. Repeat procedure to the extent of wall height G. Allowable construction tolerance at the wall face is 2 degrees vertically and 1 inch (25mm) in 10 feet (3m) horizontally. 3.5 Additional Construction Notes A. Filter Fabric use is not suggested for use with cohesive soils. Clogging of such fabric creates unacceptable hydrostatic pressures in soil reinforced walls. When filtration is deemed necessary in cohesive soils, use a three dimensional filtration system of clean sand or filtration aggregate. B. Embankment protection fabric is used to stabilize rip rap and foundation soils in water applications and to separate infill materials from the retained soils. This fabric should permit the passage of fines to preclude dogging of the material. Embankment protection fabric shall be a high strength poJypropyiene monofilament material designed to meet or exceed typical Corps of Engineers plastic filter fabric specifications (CW-02215); stabilized against ultraviolet (UV) degradation and typically exceeding the values on Table 1 (see pg. 7) C. Water Management is of extreme concern during and after construction. Steps must be taken to ensure that drain pipes are properly installed and vented to daylight and a grading plan has been developed that routes water away from the retaining wall site. Site water management is required both during construction of the wall and after completion of construction. Refer to Section 4 for more water management infonnation. Specification Guidelines: Geogrid Reinforcement Systems SECTION 2 PART 1: GENERAL 1.1 Scope A. Work includes furnishings and installing geogrid reinforcement, wall fill, and backfill to the lines and grades deSignated on the construction drawings and as specified herein. 1.2 Applicable Section of Related Work A. Section 1: ALLAN BLOCK Modular Retaining Wall Systems. (see Section 1) 1.3 Reference Standards A. See specific geogrid manufacturers reference standards. 1.4 Delivery, Storage, and Handling A. Contractor shall check the geogrid upon delivery to assure that the proper material has been received. B. Geogrid shall be stored above ·20B F (·298 C). C. Contractor shall prevent excessive mud, wet cement, or other foreign materials from coming in contact with the geogrid material. PART 2: MATERIALS 2.1 Definitions A. Geogrid products shall be of high density polyethylene or polyester yams encapsulated in a protective coating specifically fabricated for use as a soil reinforcement material. B. Concrete retaining wall units are as detailed on the drawings and shall be ALLAN BLOCK Retaining Wall Units. C. Drainage material is free draining granular material as defined in section: Modular Concrete Retaining Wall systems as nDrainage Material.ft D. Backfill is the soil used as fill for the reinforced soil mass. E. Foundation soil is the in-situ soil. 2.2 Products A. Geogrid shall be the type as shown on the drawings having the property requirements as described within the manufacturers specifications. 2.3 Acceptable Manufacturers A. A manufacturer's product shall be approved by the Wall DeSign Engineer. PART 3: WALL CONSTRUCTION 3.1 Foundation Soil Preparation A. Foundation soil shall be excavated to the lines and grades as shown on the construction drawings, or as directed by the Onsite Soils Engineer. S. Foundation soil shall be examined by the Onsite Soils Engineer to ensure that the actual foundation soil strength meets or exceeds assumed design strength. C. Over-excavated areas shall be filled with compacted backfill material approved by Onsite Soils Engineer. 3.2 Wall Construction Wall construction shall be as speCified under Section 1, Part 3, Wall Construction. 3.3 Geogrid Installation A. Install ALlAN BLOCK wall to designated height of first geogrid layer. Backfill and compact last 8 in (200 mm) lift behind wall to depth equal to designed grid length before grid is installed. rmJ 'i.111E111 ALlAN BLOCK CORPORATlON 5300 Edina Industrial Boulevard, Suite 100 Edina, Minne!>ota 55439 Ph. (952) 835-5309 Fax (952) 835-0013 www.aJlanblock.com Allan Block Northwe!>t 22509 SE 228th Street Maple Valley, WA 98038 Ph. 206-498-2879 Fax 425-413-7980 Seal This de!>ign is preliminary. Upoo review and certification by a Professional Engineer, it may be issued as a construction document Cl) U '" n:l « C Cl: 0 c :s: 'p n:l 0 C' U Q; ...... <+= -0 E E ...... Q; '0 '" C Cl) Z n:l .. Cl) i= C. u I 0:::: -CJ) OJ OJ 'e OJ ..<:: "-Vl Date: 3/24/04 Project Number: 128.04 Revisions: IDate: Drawn By: eDI Checked By: SLH Scale: Not to Scale Sheet Number: 1 of 2 j B. Cut geogrid to designed embedment length and place on top of ALLAN BLOCK to back edge of lip. Extend away from wall approximately 3% above horizontal on compacted backfill. C. Place next course of ALLAN BLOCK on top of grid and fill block cores with drainage fill to lock in place. Remove slack in grid and stake to hold in place. D. Lay geogrid at the proper elevation and orientation shown on the construction drawings or as directed by the Waft Design Engineer. E. Correct orientation' of the geogrid shall be verified by the contractor and Onsite Soils Engineer. Strength direction is typically perpendicular to wall face. F. Follow manufacturers guidelines for overlap requirements. In Curves and corners layout shall be as specified on Construction Details, Sections 10.13. G. Adjacent sheets of geogrid shall be butted against each other at the walLface to achieve 100 percent coverage. H. Geogrid lengths shall be continuous. Splicing perpendicular to the wall face is not allowed. 3.4 Fill Placement A. lnfill material shall be placed in lifts and compacted as specified under Section 1, Part 3.4, Unit Installation. B. Backfill shall be placed, spread and compacted in such a manner that minimizes the development of slack or movement of the geogrid. C. Only hand-operated compaction equipment shall be allowed within 3 feet. (1 m) behind the wall. This area shall be defined as the consolidation zone. Compaction in this zone shall begin by running the plate compactor directly on the block and then compacting in parallel paths to the wall face until the entire consolidation zone has been compacted. Two passes of the plate compactor are required with maximum lifts of 8 inches (200 mm). D. When fill is placed and compaction cannot be defined in terms of Standard Proctor DenSity, then compaction shall be performed using ordinary compaction process and compacted so that no deformation is observed from the compaction equipment or to the satisfaction of the wall design engineer or on-site soils engineer. E. Tracked construction equipment shall not be operated directly on the geogrid. A minimum backfill thickness of 6 inches (150mm) is required prior to operation of tracked vehides over the geogrid. Turning of tracked vehicles should be kept to a minimum to prevent tracks from displacing the fill and damaging the geogrid. F. Rubber-tired equipment may pass over the geogrid reinforcement at slow speeds, less than 10 mph (16 Kmfh). Sudden braking and sharp turning shall be avoided. G. The infill shall be compacted to achieve 90 % Standard Proctor. When roadways or strucrures are located above the reinforced zone the infill shall be compacted to 95% of Standard Proctor. Compaction shall be taken at 4 feet (1.2 m) behind the block and at the back of the reinforced zone and frequency shall be as determined by the site soils engineer or as specified On the plan. Soil tests of the backfill material shall be submitted to the Omite Soils Engineer for review and approval prior to the placement of any backfill. The contractor is responsible for achieving the specified compaction requirements. The Onsite Soils EngIneer may direct the contractor to remove, correct or amend any soil found not in compliance with these specifications. 3.5 Special Considerations A. Geogrid can be interrupted by periodic penetration of a column, pie! or footing structure. B. ALLAN BLOCK walls will accept vertical and horizontal reinforcing with rebar and grout C. If site conditions will not allow geogrid embedment length, consider the following alternatives: -Masonry Reinforced Walls -Soil Nailing -Earth Anchors . -D. ALLAN BLOCK may be used in a wide variety of water applications. Specification Guidelines:Water Management SECTION 3 PART 1: GENERAL DRAINAGE 1.1 Surface Drainage Rainfall or other water sources such as irrigation activities collected by the ground surface atop the retaining wall can be defined as surface water. Retaining wall design shall take into consideration the management of this water. A. At the end of each day's construction and at final completion, grade the' backfill to avoid water accumulation behind wall or in the reinforced zone. Surface water must not be allowed to pond or be trapped in the area above the wall or at the toe of the wall. B. Existing slopes adjacent to retaining wall or slopes created during the grading process shall include drainage details so that surface water will not be allowed to drain over the top of the slope face and/or wall. This may require a combination of berms and surface drainage ditches. C. Irrigation activities at the site shall be done in a controlled and reasonable manner. D. Surface water that cannot be diverted from the wall must be collected with surface drainage swales, and drained laterally in order to disperse the water around the wall structure. Construction of a typical swale system shall be in accordance with Construction Details Page 13, Sections 4 & 5. 1.2 Grading The shaping and reconrouring of land In order to prepare it for site development is grading. Site grading shall be designed to route water around the walls. A. Establish final grade with a positive gradient away from the wall structure. Concentrations of surface water runoff shall be managed by providing necessary structures, such as paved ditches, drainage swales, catch basins, etc. B. Grading designs must divert sources of concentrated surface flow away from the wall such as parking lots. 1.3 Drainage System The internal drainage systems of the retaining wall can be described as the means of eliminating the buildup of incidental water which infiltrates the soils behind the wall. Drainage system design will be a function of the water condftions on the sfte. Adequate drainage facilities will be required to completely drain the retaining wall structure. A. All walls will be constructed with a minimum of 12 in (300 mm) of drainage rock directly behind the wall facing. The material shall meet or exceed the specification for wall rock outlined in Section 1, 2.2 Wall Rock. B. All walls will be constructed with a 4 in (100 mm) diameter drain tile placed at the lowest possible elevation within the 12 in (300 mm) of drainage rock. This drain tile is referred to as a Toe Drain. e. Geogrid Reinforced Walls shall be constructed with an additional 4 inch (100 mm) drain pipe at the back bottom of the reinforced soil mass. This drain tile is referred to as a Heel Drain. 1.4 Toe Drain Drain Pipe should be located at the back of the rock drain field behind the wall as close to the bottom of the wall as allowed while still maintaining a positive gradient for drainage to dayligh~ or a stOml water management system. A. For site configurations with. bottoms of the base on a level plane it is recommended that a minimum one percent gradient be maintained on the placement of the pipe with outlets on 50 ft (15 m) centers, or 100 ft (30 m) centers if pipe is crowned between the outlets. This would provide for a maximum height above the bottom of the base in a flat configuration of no more than 6 in. (150 mm). B. For rigid drain pipes with drain holes the pipes should be positioned with the holes located down. Allan Block does not require that toe drain pipes be wrapped when installed into base rock complying with the specified base material. C. Pipes shall be routed to storm drains where appropriate or through or under the wall at low points when the job site grading and site layout allows for routing. Appropriate details shall be included to prevent pipes from being crushed, plugged, or infested with rodents. D. On sites where the natural drop in grade exceeds the one percent minimum, drain pipes outlets shall be on 100 ft (30 m) centers maximum. This will provide outlets in the event that excessive water flow exceeds the capacity of pipe over long stretches. 1.5 Heel Drain The purpose of the heel drain is to pick up any water that migrates from behind the retaining wall structure at the cut and route the water away from the reinforced mass during the construction process. A. The piping used at the back of the reinforced mass shall have a one percent gradient over the length, but it is not critical for it to be positioned at the very bottom of the cut Additionally the entire length of the pipe may be vented at one point and should not be tied into the toe drain. B. The pipe may be a rigid pipe with holes at the bottom with an integral sock encasing the pipe or a corrugated perforated fleXible pipe with a sock to filter out fines when required based on soil conditions. For infill soils with a high percentage of sand and/or gravel the heel drain pipe does not need to be surrounded by rock. When working with soils containing more than fifty percent clay, one cubic foot of drainage rock is required for each foot of pipe. 1.6 Ground.Water Ground water can be defined as water that occurs within the soil. It may be present because of surface infiltration or water table fluctuation. Ground water movement must not be allowed to come in contact with the retaining wall. A. If water is encountered in the area of the wall during excavation or construction, a drainage system (chimney, composite or blanket) must be installed as directed by the Wall Design Engineer. B. Standard retaining wall design does not included hydrostatic forces aSSOCiated with the presence of ground water. If adequate drainage is not proVided the retaining wall design must consider the presence of the water. 1.7 Concentrated Water Sources All collection devices such as roof downspouts, storm sewers, and curb gutters are concentrated water sources. They must be designed to accommodate maximum flow rates and to outlet outside of the wall area. A. All roof downspouts of nearby structures shall be sized with adequate capacity to carry storm water from the roof away from the wall area. They shall be connected to a tiling system in closed conduit and routed around the retaining wall area . S. Site layout must take into account locations of retaining wall structures and all site drainage paths. Drainage paths should always be away from retaining wall structures. C. Storm sewers and catch basins shall be located away from retaining wall structures and designed so as not to introduce any incidental water into the reinforced soil mass. . D. A path to route storm sewer overflow must be incorporated into the site layout to direct water away from the retaining wall structure. 1.8 Water Application Retaining waifs constructed in conditions that allow standing water to overlap the wall face are considered water applications. These walls require specific design and construction steps to ensure performance. A. Base trench and back cut for geogrid reinforcement shall be lined with embankment protection fabric meeting or exceeding the followi ng criteria: Mechanical Property Tensile Strength = 375 Ibs (170 kg) Puncture Strength = 145 Ibs (66 kg) Equrvalent Opening Size (EOS) = 70 (U.S. Sieve #) Determination Method ASTM D-4632 ASTM 1).3787 CW.02215 Mullen Burst = 480 psi (3.3 MPa) ASTM 1).3786 Trapazoidal Tear = 105 Ibs (48 kg) ASTM D-4533 Percent Open Area = 4 % CW.Q2215 Permeability = 0.01 cm/sec ASTM 04491 B. Infill material shall be free draining to meet the site requirements based on wave action and rapid draw down conditions. C. Rip-rap or alternative products such as "Trilock" may be required as a toe protector to eliminate scour at the base of the wall. ~ ••• ,U I ALlAN BLOCK CORPORATION 5300 Edina Industrial Boulevard, SUite 100 Edina, Minnesota 55439 Ph. (952) 83>5309 Fax (952) 835{)()13 www.aDanblock.com Allan Block Northwest 22509 SE 228th Street Maple Valley, WA 98038 Ph. 206-498-2879 Fax 425-413-7980 5 •• This design is preliminary. Upon review and certification by a Professional Engineer, it may be issued as a construction document Q) U tll « <Jl 0-S C C 0 0 C' .p Qj +-' tll 0 '+- E E +-' ;; '0 '" C Q) Z tll ., Q) i= Q. ti I ~ Qj V) OJ .~ OJ ..c: "-Vl Date: 3/24/04 Project Number; 128.04 Revisions: I Date: Drawn By: CD) Chec::ked By: SlH Scale: Not to Scale Sheet Number: 2 of 2 , I . I ~ I I 0 1 -I rill I I I \ .,'-. ~\ ----506--_._._. \ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .) \ ~ \ .\.... ....... I I I LEVEL #2 ~PREADER TIllS SHEETI ~ It'IJ I I I TRACT 'A' (RECREAllON SPACE) , .;t TW=51L50 :'" I BW=505.00 I 6.5' SDE--. IE=504.00 CELLH1 ---->---- INSTALL QUARRY SPALLS ~~ PER DETAIL TIllS SHEET --...."" ....... ~ 'I::' ~ ...... _ """' RACT '" . >-~--", B (SO AT.) .." "" ~ '" ,~ ~ ~ ~ ~ "" ~ -.,/._-qj EXlSTNG CHAitV UNK ~ ~ WALL 1 24" SD---- . 10' SDE 6' CHAINUNK FENCE AS SHOWN PER DETAIL SHEET C9 ------ "I S·.·~· I. cELLH2 '< '\ \ , CHAlNUNK GATE PEk DETAIL SHEET C9. 21 U"-OJII . ..JV [~ B~_-505.00 -/ 22 ! '(, . - @ .Il.~ -"Y~..!'1e . ~A = 1 I' IlL' l-t_~,'-,GRAVEL ACCESS ROAD _'.. . . <:IIRFACE W/4" MIN. ! I ALLAN BLOCK CORPORATION 5300 Edina Industrial Boulevard, Suite 100 Edina. Minnesota 55439 Ph. (952) 83505309 Fax (952) 8)5-0013 www.aDanbloc::k.com Allan Block Northwest 22509 SE 228th Street Maple Valley, WA 98038 Ph. 206-49~2879 Fax 425-41).·7980 5 •• This design is preliminary. Upon review and certification by a Professional Engineer, it may be issued as a construction doc:umef1t Q) U C1l « 0-S c 0 C' C Qj ..... C1l -0 0:: E E ..... Qj "' C Q) Z C1l ., -I Q) i= :t= u ~ ;:; trl Il) 'e-ll) .s= "-V'l Date: 3/24/04 Project Number: 128.04 Revisions: IDate: Drawn By: CD) Checked By: SLH Scal~ Not to Scale Sheet Number: 1 of 1 I Top 51l.5 I 511.S I 51l.5 I 511.S .. I Grade 51l.5 50S 505 506 Rnttnrn 1\ 1 n ?" "01.24 503.24 504_51 ! Station 0 I 22.03 I 62.43 I 92.55 Section I ~ Top 511.5 Grade 505.24 Bottom 503.24 Sta. Cut 69.78 Sta. End 118.99 Allan Block Retainin!! Wall Elevation - 1 Horizontal Scale: 1"= 10'..0" Vertical Scale: 1"= 10'-0" C) North o 22.03 62.43 92.55 118.99 Allan Block Retainin!! Wall Plan - 1 Scale: I" = 20'-0" Note: Wan identification onJy_ I 511.S 510 508.96 118.99 I" Grid uoAAb "I ~ • !. f't,.Gwe -.:: 'r-Slew-- ~ - _I--r-'--- ~ ... Helgbt 1/ t-V ~-'---r a o~ J~O~:ln ,n Section Notes .J: Allan Block Corp. 5300 Edina Industrial Boulevard Suite 100 Edina. MN 55439 Phone 9521835·5309 Fax 9521835-0013 http://www.a1Ianblock.com Allan Block Northwest 22509 SE 228th Street Manle Vallev. WA 98038 206498-2879 425413-7980 -fux I Grid Number Grid Type Grid Number Grid Type Grid Number Grid Type Grid Number Grld Type Section Number OftTbruOft Allan Block Retaining Wall Legend Project Name: Project Number: Hamilton Place 128.04 Location: WaUNumber: Renton, WA I Designer: CDJ Checked by: SL-.Jf 1 of 2 Date: 3/24/04 ABwalls 2000 Y.3.7 Allan Block Corporation I 6.s ft Sft 0 ii ~ -r SiloS ft _ :- ..,I ~A 6-A .3ft 4-A 3-A 1/ 2_A -505.24 ft / I-A ...c 503.24 <i;~ r ...Q Or-I Section 1 -+ ~ • .3:r o f't Tbru 118.99 ft 2. Section 1 Notes ~ k~ ~ ~ ~ ~i~;:f Allan Block Corp_ 5300 Edina Industrial Boulevard Suite 100 Edina. MN 55439 Phone 9521835-5309 Fax 9521835-0013 http://www.aUanblock.com Allan Block Northwest 22509 SE 228th Street Maole Vallev. WA 98038 206-498-2879 425-413-7980 -fax ....,,....-::> Project Name: Hamilton Place Project Number: 128.04 WaUNumber: 1 Designer: COl Cheeked by: Date: 3/24/04 AB Three 0_6354 ft Geogrid Legend A-Raugrid 3/3-20 8-Raugrld 4/2-15 C-Raugrid 6/3-15 I 2-Grouted Con. 2 of 2 ABwalls 2000 V.3. 7 Allan Block Corporation Section Top Grade Bottom Sta. Cut Sta. End ITop 505.78 Grndc 505 Bottom 503.88 IStation 0 1 2 512.14 512.14 SO, SO, 50l8S 503.S8 SI.41 51.41 51.41 146.9 1512.14 2 505 ~~~ ~~ 503.88 151.41 1 511.5 505 ~~-~~ 503.88 1 71.25 Allan Block Retainin!! Wall Elevation - 2 Horizontal Scale: 1" = 20'-0" Vertical Scale: 1" = 10'-0" 121.9,134.41146.9 51.41 71.25 o Allan Block Retainin!! Wall Plan - 2 ScaJe: 1" = 40'-0" Note: Wall identification only. 8 North 1 511.5 505- ~~~ ~~ 503.88 1 134.41 1 511.5 511.5 510.23 1146.9 I. Grid unph -I i • Co ........ \e -~r.§\Ol"' - ~ -[- ~osed Height V ~L-r II C =.-1~O3:;" '" S""tion Notes Allan Block Corp. 5300 Edina Indu5trial Boulevard Suite 100 Edina. MN 55439 Phone 9521835·5309 Fax 9521835.0013 http://www.allanblock.com Allan Block Northwest 22509 SE 228th Street Maple Vallev. WA 98038 206-498·2879 425-413·7980· fax Grid Number Grid Type Grld NUDlber GrldType Grld Number Grid Type Grid Number Grid Type Section Number OftTbruon Allan Block Retaining Wall Legend Project Name: Project Number: Hamilton Place 128.04 Location: Wan Number: Renton. WA 2 Designer: CDJ Checked by: s,(..,(.{ 1 of 2 Date: 3/24104 ---- ABwalls 2000 V.3.7 Allan Block Corporation I 7 .. ... 250 PSF Uve St:z.14 rt <>-A 5-A 4-A r7.1 ft 3-A I_A SO," I-A I~L :J.-\ Section 1 -1 !:-:~:i o It Thru .51.41 ft Section 1 Notes 7ft . .. ~/-'L tdf&~ .14 ft ----r-r 250 PSFUve --I ~ 11111 J Itf~~U{ &$,~ .1 ft r @ ~ O~>O ~ 07>1 ~ (EIP ~f(H ,- ~.ft L 50'.88 n;:~ r ~ ....c:f 0.--I ~o~'S --1ft Section 2 Notes .,I <>-A ~ 4-A '-A 1/ I-A I_A --.C Section 2 .'ft 51.41 ftThru .46~ Allan Block Corp. 5300 Edina Industrial Boulevard Suite 100 Edina. MN 55439 Phone 9521835-5309 Fax 9521835-0013 httpJ/www.a1lanblock.com Allan Block Northwest 22509 SE 228th Street Maole Vallev. WA 98038 206498-2879 425413-7980 -fax Project Name: Hamilton Place Project Number: 128.04 Wall Number: ~ Designer: COl Cheeked by: Date: 3124/04 AB Three 0.63S4 ft Geomjd !&2;end -=-;~ A-Raugrid 3/3-20 8-Raugrid 4/2-15 C-Raugrid 6/3-15 g..(;routed Con. 2 of 2 ABwalls 2000 V.3.7 Allan Block Corporation *REFER TO SECTION 1: ALLAN BLOC< TYPICAL SECTlON FOR Al..L. OTHER NOTEs. OETAILS AND S?£OACA TlONS. HIGH WATER El..EVAllON ALLAN BLOCK UNIT CUT NOT01 IN ALLAN 81..00< TO AllOW fOR DRAIN PIPE 4 in (100 mm) DRAIN TILE VENTED THROUGHT THE fACE OF THE WALl AT THE LOW WATER E!..EVAllON ON 30 ft (10 m) CENTERS MAXlNUN- LOW WATER E!..EVATIQN L-INSTAU. EWBANKMEtoIT PROTECTION fABRIC TO A NININUM OF 1 ft (300 mm) ABO\l£ HIGH WATER UNE t:\': ~: " :.':~ ~-GRAO£O. 1 in -2 in (25 mm -60 mm) COMPACTED GRANULAR AGGREGATE WITH NO FINES INSTALl GEOGRIO LAYERS PER DESIGN REQUIREMENTS ............ EMBANKMENT PROTECTION fABRIC (TERRA lEX EP OR EQUIVALENT) 1.1: ALLAN BLOCK 1YPICAL SECTION -WATER APPLICATION ,--~I .. 4011 ""---..., • o -1111--" PLAN VIEW ~ .... §t)y-N":';::i:~;'. ~i625 0.959 ft :1 469 ~ SECTION VIEW ISOMETRIC VIEW 1.3: ALLAN BLOCK THREE -BLOCK PROFILE EXPOSED WAll. HEIGHT ALLAN BLOCK WAlL BA TIER fROM VERTICAL ~ OPTIONAL ALl.AN BLOCK CAPSTONE Ic 3 ft (1 m) ~ COU:~CETION ----l CONSQUOATlON I ZONE FINISH GRADE ABOVE WAlL '-IMPERMEABLE FlUro "-__ -;.-________ , MINIMUM THICKNESS Of -i 8 in (200 mm) in (300 mm) mm to FlHES CTAINED SOIL) '-....f-GEOGRID REINFORCEMENT TYPE AND LENGTH VARIES PER WALL. DESIGN 4 in (100 mm) DRAIN TILE VENTED TO DAYLIGHT 1.2: ALLAN BLOCK 1YPICAL SECTION -GEOGRID REINFORCED °REFDI TO DESIGN DETNlS SECTION 1, AI..LAN 8I..OQ( TIPlCN. SECTION FOR ALL OTHER NOlES, DETAIlS N«J """"'" .... CRIllT TOP 'lHREE " """ QJT GEOGRID TO AI.l.OW FOR POST ...-~.:.~~ r<;;r;MI:. utCl.L CAPSTONE TO ALLOW OREF'ER TO OESlON DETAILS SECT10N I: AI..LAN EILOC:I( nPlCA!. SECTION FOR ALL OTHER NOlES, [)£fAIlS NIO SPEOFlc:ATION$. CQ..UMN rusr OR PVC: P1P£ TO ~~~OI.IRlNG~ ....-~.:.'III!IE~ 1.4: ALLAN BLOCK TYPICAL SECTIONs -GUARDRAIL ABOVE THE WALL ALl..AN BLOCK CORPORATlON 5300 Edina Indu~trial Boulevard, Suite 100 Edina, Minnesota 55439 Ph. (952) 83S.5309 Fax (952) 835..()()13 www.allanblock.com AUan Block Nonhwest 22509 SE 228th Street Maple Valley, WA 96038 Ph. 206-498-2879 Fax 42S.413-7960 Seal This design is preliminary. Upon review-and certification by a Professional Engineer, it be issued as a construction document <J) . iii ..... Q) Q) 0 U C <Il « 0 0.. > 'p C> U O -:::l C .... Q.i .== 0 -:n E .-..... iii C '" E c ., 0 Z <Il Q) i=U U I ~ Q) <II <II '-..<:: e V"l 0. 1 of 2 • SU8SEQU SHOULD I THE WAll LOCATIO: NT GEOGRIO LAYERS ><TENO ONE, QUARTER OF HEIGHT PAST lHE CORNER IN AL TERN A TE DIRECTIONS '-... t-I _H/ __ PRINCIF R£INFORCI DIRECT )'iJD'iJ[ )~ II ALLAN BLOCK UNIT I PRINaPLE 11111 REINFORCEMENT DIRECTION 2.1: INSIDE CORNER GEOGRID OVERLAP SPECIFIED REINFORCEMENT ELEVATION ADDITIONAL REINFORCEMENT LAYER PLACED NEXT COURSE ABOVE SPEaFiED REINFORCEMENT ELEVATION TO EUMINA 1£ GAPS PRINCIPLE REINFORCEMENT DIRECTlON LE MENT ON GEOGRIO LAYER MUST 8E INSTAlLED INTO mE OUTSIDE CORNER WITH THE PRINCIPLE DIRECTION RUNNING PERPENDULAR TO THE WALL FACE AlLAN BLOCK UNIT PRINCIPLE REINFORCEMENT DIRECTION GEOGRID MUST BE PLACED ONE CORSE ABOVE OR BELOW ADJACENT LAYER ON THE RETURN SIDE OF THE CORNER TO EUMINA TE GEOGRID CONTACT ALLAN BLOCK UNIT 2.2: OUTSIDE CORNER GEOGRID OVERLAP >----TRIM REINFORCEMENT TO FIT CURVE ___ ALLAN BLOCK UNIT AlLAN BLOCK ""ADE MINIMUM OF ONE BURRito BLOC!( EXTENDED INTO SLIYE TO PREVENT EROSION 2.3: STEP UP AT BASE COURSE PRINCIPLE REINFORCEMENT DIRECTlON TRIM REINFORCEMENT FIT CURVE in (75 mm) OF SOIL REQUIRED BETWEEN OVERLAPPING REINFORCEMENT TO AVOID GEOGRID CONTACT T PRINCIPLE REINFORCEMENT DlRECTlON ~ 2.4: INSIDE CURVE GEOGRID OVERLAP 2.5: OUTSIDE CURVE GEOGRID OVERLAP ~ ALlAN BLOCK CORPORATlON 5300 Edina Industrial Boulevard, Suite tOO Edina, Minnesota 55439 Ph. (9S2) 835-5309 Fax (952) 835-0013 www.ananblock.com Allan Block Northwest 22509 5E 228th Street Maple Valley, WA 98038 Ph. 206-498-2879 Fax 425--413-7980 Seal This design is preliminary. Upon review and certification by a Professional Engineer, it may be is$ued as a construction document '" .~ ..... (]) (]) 0 U (1) « c 0... 0 S 'p c u 0 , :::l iV ..... C .... 0 ..... E E ..... iV Vl '" C C Z (1) (]) i= 0 -u I c:.::: Qj U Q) "e-Q) ..t:: 0.. V) Date: 3/24/04 Project Number: 128.04 Revisions: I Date: Drawn By: CD) Checked By: SLH Scale: Not to Scale Sheet Number: 2 of 2 ALLAN BLOCK Materials and Labor Work Sheet 5300 Edina Industrial Boulevard Suite 100 Edina, MN' 55439 Phone 952/835-5309 Fax 952/835-0013 http://www.allanblock.com Project Information Project Name: Hamilton Place Location: Renton, W A Project Number: 128.04 Wall Number: 1 Designer: CDJ Date: 3/24/04 Materials calculated form the Elevation View. (Assumes the wall is straight) Item Quantity Overage Total Cost AB Three 852 Units 0 Percent Units 0 Caps 81 Units 0 Percent Units 0 Raugrid 3/3-20 385 sq. yards 0 Percent sq. yards 0 Raugrid 4/2-15 0 sq. yards 0 Percent sq. yards 0 Raugrid 6/3-15 0 sq. yards 0 Percent sq. yards 0 Base Grid 0 sq. yards 0 Percent sq. yards 0 *Base Rock 7.1 tons 0 Percent tons 0 'Drainage Rock 66.8 tons 0 Percent tons 0 Infill Soil 110 cubic yards 0 Percent cubic yards 0 Drain Tiles 238 Feet 0 Percent Feet 0 Other 0 0 Percent 0 Other 0 0 Percent 0 AB Three -Three Course Pattern Item Quantity Overage Total Cost Full Size Blocks 0 Units 0 Percent Units 0 AB Juniors 0 Units 0 Percent Units 0 AB Lite Stones 0 Units 0 Percent Units 0 AB Lite Stones Cut in Half 0 Units 0 Percent Units 0 Labor Item Length-Area Prodnction Rate Cost per Hour Base Crew 119 Feet 0 Linear Feet per Hour 0 Wall Crew 757 sq.ft. 0 Square Feet per Hour 0 Engineering Total I Area sq. ft. I ~ost per Day Total sq.ft. 832 Sub Total Overhead 0 Equipment Profit 0 Cost per Day Area Total Grand Total 0 Day 0 Day 0 Day 0 Day Cost per sq.ft. Disclaimer: Cost per Block Total Cost Total Cost Total Cost Percent Percent The accuracy and use of numbers contained in this document and program are the sole responsibility of the user of this program. Allan Block Corp. assumes no liability for the use or misuse of this worksheet. The user must verify each estimate and calculation for accuracy as they pertain to their particular project. 'Quantity calculation based on an assumed unit weight of 120 Cu.ft. ABwalls 2000 V .3. 7 Allan Block Corporation 5300 Edina Industrial Boulevard Suite 100 Edina, MN 55439 Phone 952/835-5309 Fax 952/835-0013 http://www.allanb10ck.com ALLAN BLOCK Materials and Labor Work Sheet Project Information Project Name: Hamilton Place Location: Renton, W A Project Number: 128.04 Wall Number: 2 Designer: CDJ Date: 3/24/04 Materials calculated from the Plan View. (Takes into account curves and angles) Item Quantity AB Three 1026 Units Caps 101 Units Raugrid 3/3-20 418 sq. yards Raugrid 4/2-15 0 sq. yards Raugrid 6/3-15 0 sq. yards Base Grid 0 sq. yards 'Base Rock 8.8 tons 'Drainage Rock -80.4 tons Infill Soil 136 cubic yards Drain Tiles 294 Feet Other 0 Other 0 AB Three -Three Course Pattern Item Full Size Blocks AB Juniors AB Lite Stones AB Lite Stones Cut in Half Labor Item Base Crew Wall Crew Engineering I ~ost per Day Equipment Cost per Day o o Disclaimer: sq. ft. Day Day Quantity 0 Units 0 Units 0 Units 0 Units Length-Area 147 Feet 911 sq. ft. I Area 1004 sq. ft. Area 0 Day 0 Day Overage Total Cost 0 Percent Units 0 0 Percent Units 0 0 Percent sq. yards 0 0 Percent sq. yards 0 0 Percent sq. yards 0 0 Percent sq. yards 0 0 Percent tons 0 0 Percent tons 0 0 Percent cubic yards 0 0 Percent Feet 0 0 Percent 0 O. Percent 0 Overage Total Cost 0 Percent Units 0 0 Percent Units 0 0 Percent Units 0 0 Percent Units 0 Production Rate Cost per Hour 0 Linear Feet per Hour 0 0 Square Feet per Hour 0 Total Total Sub Total Overhead 0 Profit 0 Total Grand Total Cost per sq.ft. Cost per Block Total Cost Total Cost Total Cost Percent Percent The accuracy and use of numbers contained in this document and program are the sole responsibility of the user of this program. Allan Block Corp. assumes no liability for the use or misuse of this worksheet. The user must verify each estimate and calculation for accuracy as they pertain to their particular project. 'Quantity calculation based on an assumed unit weight of 120 Cu.ft. ABwalls 2000 V.3.? Allan BlockCOJporation I I I • •• I· I abo ALLAN . . . I I , . 'ALLAN BLOCK RETAINING WAll . , ' DATE: March 24, 2004 , . , PROJECT NAME: ,Hamilton Place' ,PROJECT LOCATION: Renton, Washington ALLAN BLOCK PROJECT.NUMBER: 128,04 PREPARE!;:> BY: ' ) ,Allan Block Corporation Engineering Depa~tnient , 5300 Edina Industrial Blvd., Suite 100, Edina, MN 55439' ' 952-835-5309 -PHONE 952-835-0013 -FAX ailanblock.com " cALLAN' BLOCK MANUFACTURER: I . CCI -.Allan Block Northwest 22509 SE 228th Street Maple Valley, WA 98038 . 206-498-2879 -PHONE . . 425-413-7980 -FAX ' . . .', , . " . . I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Dear Retaining Wall Client, Allan Block is a customer and service orientated company. With this in mind, we will provide technical assistance and preliminary design for your retaining wall projects. To insure that all components of the overall site have been considered, a local engineer must be employed. These local engineers, for a fee, will provide a final stamped review of the preliminary design based on their review of actual site and soil conditions, local codes and ultimately the final design. The preliminary design found on the following pages are based on the information we received and is presented to you without cost. This design utilizes evaluation techniques and engineering principals found in the Allan Block Engineering Manual, which incorporates the Coulomb equation to calculate the active earth pressure and a log-spiral theoretical failure plan. All Allan Block Specifications must be followed in the installation of the block and geogrid. Our analysis is based on a review of the internal and external stability of the wall(s) and does not include either global or seismic analysis unless specifically noted. Actual block and geogrid quantities must be determined by the installation contractor, with final totals being determined after the final plans have been approved by a local registered professional engineer. Thank you for choosing Allan Block. I m!I I I I I Engineering Review Calculations Outline I I 1. AB Walls 2000 Design Sections I 2. Hand Calculations (MathCAD) Verification I I 3. Geogrid Manufacturers Specifications I I I I I I I I I I I • .!In I I 0 2 • I 511.~ ft -- I 6-A I ~A .3n 4-A I 3-A / 505.24 ft 2-A I I / I-A .3.24 'ii-'---r ....J Or- -+ ~ • .33r Section 1 2n o ft Thrll 118.99 ft SectIOn 1 Notes I I~--------------~ Project Name: Location: Renton, W A I Hamilton Place Project Number: 128_04 Wall Number: 1 Designer: CDJ I Date: 3/24/04 I~------------------------~ I I I I !I Allan Block provides this software as a service for its clients. The sole purpose of this software is to assist engineers in the design of mechanically stabilized retaining walls. The software uses evaluation techniques and engineering principles found in the Allan Block Engineering Manual. (Refer to R0904 and supporting references.) It is the responsibility of the engineer or user to detennine the propriety and accuracy of input parameters and to review and verify the correctness of the results. Allan Block Corporation, its licensees or agents do not assume any liability or responsibility for damages which may result from the use or misuse of this software. This software only considers on critical failure surface and does not address global. All potential modes of failure, including proper water management, must be evaluated by the engineer of record. The final design must provide for proper wall drainage to prevent the buildup of hydrostatic pressures over the service life of the structure. In the event additional water is introduced into the general wall area, either above or below grade, any designs from this software would be invalid. All installations must confonn to Allan Block installation specifications. (Refer to ROS02) Allan Block Corp_ S300 Edina Industrial Boulevard Suite 100 Edina. MN 55439 Phone 9521835-5309 Fax 9521835-0013 http://www.allanblock.com Allan Block Northwest 22509 SE 228th Street Manle Valley. WA 98038 206-498-2879 425-413-7980 -fax ABThree Total Wall Height = 8.26 Feet Block Height c 0.6354 Feet Amde of Setback = 3 Deg. Denth of Block = 0.97 Feet Lenlrth of Block = 1.469 Feet lnfill Soil Retained Sgil Friction Angle Friction Angle = 33 Deg. = 33 Deg. Unit Weight Unit Weight = 120 PCF = 120 PCF Foundation Soil Friction Arude Cohesion = 33 Deg. = 0 PSF Unit Weight = t20 PCF BeariD':; CaRac:l~ Factor of Safety .= 5.22 / SafeD: Factors Static: Actual Sliding = 3.38 / Actual Overturning = 5.381 Safe~ Factor~ Seismic Actual Sliding = 1.959 / Actual Overturning / = 2.5~ --, -Geo.:;rJd Lea:end ~ A-Rauorid 3/3-20 , B-Rauorid 412-15 < C-Rauorid 6/3-15 g-Grouted Con. Min. Length of Geogrid , = 5 Feet I ,------~ -10£ 1 ABwalls 2000 V.3. 7 Allan Block Corponltion I Project Name: Hamilton Place ~ Location: Renton, WA Project Number: 128.04 1 I Wall Nnmber: I Designer: CDJ Ir Iwr' Date: 3124/04 I KaI = Active Earth Pressure Coefficient Infilt = 0.2609 Wf KaR = Active Earth Pressure Coefficient Retained = 0.2609 He Hi = Wall Height:: 8.26 Feet He = Effective Height = 8.696 Feet I i ::; Effective Slore = 6 Deg. j Beta c Beta An! e = 87 Deg. Wf= Weight 0 Facing = 1049.624 Ib/ft Ww = Total Weight = 5271.969 Ib/ft Fa = Active Force = 1183.98 Ib/ft Fv = Vertical Force = 443.105 Ih/ft I Fh::: Horizontal Force = 1097.931 Ib/ft Fr::: Resistance Force::: 3711.412 Ib/ft Internal Design Calculations (STATIC) » Fr I Section 1 Geogrid Geogrid Geogrid Length Tensile Force AUowable Load Factor Safety Factor Safe~ Factor Safety Efficiency I Number Elevation Overstress PuUout Bloc Pullout Soli 6A 510.23 ft 6.5 ft 62.65 Ib/ft 781.33 Ib/ft 18.71 13.89 10.96 8 5 A 508.96 ft 5ft 100.1 Ib/ft 781.33 Ib/ft 11.71 9.82 7.95 13 I 4A 507.69 ft 5ft 146.99 Ib/ft 781.33 Iblft 7.97 7.46 7.74 19 3 A 506.42 ft 5ft 193.88 Ib/ft 781.33 Ib/ft 6.04 6.24 8.21 25 2A 505.15 ft 5ft 240.77 Ib/ft 781.33 Ib/ft 4.87 5.49 10.19 31 I I A 503.88 ft 5ft 287.66 Ib/ft 781.33 Ib/ft 4.07 4.99 12.16 37 I I I I I I I I Base Reinforcement I Geogrid Gcogrid Geogrld Length Allowable Load Toe Length Base Depth Total Base Number Elevation Extension Length N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 0.33 ft O.S II 2ft 1 of 1 I ABwalls 2000 V.3.7 Allan Block Corporation I Project Name: Hamilton Place f7<'1 Location: Renton, WA Project Number: 128.04 I WaUNumber: 1 Designer: CDl Date: 3/24/04 I Ao "" Seismic Coefficient = 0.3 d 1 = Allowable Lateral Deflection Internal = 3 inches H' J WI ~~:dyn He d2 = Allowable Lateral Deflection External = 3 inches Kaei = Dynamic Earth Pressure Coefficent Infill = 0.3441 il~Z j I Kaer = Dynamic Earth Pressure Coefficent Retained = 0.3441 Khi = Horizontal Seismic Coefficent Internal = 0.113 Khr = Horizontal Seismic Coefficent Retained = 0.113 DFdyn = Dynamic Earth Force = 377.203 Ib/fi DFdynb = Dynamic Earth Fon:e Horizontal = 349.791 Ib/ft DFdynv = Dynamic Earth Force Vertical = 141. J 68 lb/ft I Pir = Seismic Inertial Force = 493.824 Ib/ft Hir= Seismic Inertial Force Location = 4.196 Feet Internal Design Calculations (SEISMIC) :> Fr I Section 1 Geogrid Geogrid Geogrld Length Tensile Force Allowable Load Factor Safety Factor Safety Factor Safety Efficiency I Number Elevation Overstress Pullout Block Pullout Soil 6 A 510.23 ft 6.5 ft 560.13 Ib/ft 1619.49 Ib/ft 3.18 1.55 1.23 35 5 A 508.96 ft 5ft 367.33 Ib/ft 1619.49 Ib/ft 4.85 2.68 2.17 23 I 4 A 507.69 ft 5ft 377.12 Ib/ft 1619.49 Ib/ft 4.72 2.91 3.02 23 3 A 506.42 ft 5ft 386.91 Ib/ft 1619.49 Ib/ft 4.6 3.12 4.11 24 2 A 505.15 ft 5ft 396.71 Ib/ft 1619.49 Ib/ft 4.49 3.33 6.18 24 I IA 503.88 ft 5ft 406.5 Ib/ft 1619.49 Ib/ft 4.38 3.53 8.61 25 I . I . I I I I I I Base Reinforcement I Geogrld Geogrid Geogrid Length Allowable Load Toe Length Base Depth Total Base Number Elevation Extension Length N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 0.33 ft 0.5 ft 2ft 1 of 1 I A8waJls 2000 V.3.7 Allan Block Corporation I I I' 1 I 1 I I 1 I 1 I I I I I I I I 7ft 250 PSF Live ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 512.14ft _~ r .1 ft l-I 505 ft / 03,88 ~-'--I J< ( Or- __ ~033J 2ft Section 1 Notes Project Name: Hamilton Place Location: Renton, W A Project Number: 128.04 Wall Number: 2 Designer: CDJ Date: 3124/04 I 6-A --- 4-A 3-A 2-A I-A Section 1 Oft Thru !Ill.". ft , Allan Block provides this software as a service for its clients. The sole purpose Qf this software is to assist engineers in the design of mechanically stabilized retaining walls. The software uses evaluation techniques and engineering principles found in the Allan Block Engineering Manual. (Refer to R0904 and supporting references.) It is the responsibility of the engineer or user to detennine the propriety and accuracy of input parameters and to review and verify the correctness of the results. Allan Block Corporation, its licensees or agents do not assume any liability or responsibility for damages which may result from the use or misuse of this software. This software only considers on critical failure surface and does not address global. All potential modes of failure, including proper water management, must be evaluated by the engineer of record. The final design must provide for proper wall drainage to prevent the buildup of hydrostatic pressures over the service life of the structure. In the event additional water is introduced into the general wall area, either above or below grade, any designs from this software would be invalid. All installations must conform to Allan Block installation specifications. (Refer to R0502) I , . " AUan Block Corp. 5300 Edina Industrial Boulevard Suite 100 Edina, MN 55439 Phone 952/835-5309 Fax 9521835-0013 http://www.allanblock.com AUan Block Northwest 22509 SE 228th Street Maple ValleY. WA 98038 206-498-2879 425-413-7980 -fax AB Three Total Wall Height -8.26 Feet Block Hei2ht -0.6354 Feet AnnIe of Setback -3 Deg. Death of Block = 0.97 Feet Lene:th of Block -1.469 Feet Infill Soil Retained Soli Friction Annie Friction An21e -33 Deg. -33 Deg. Unit Weight Unit Weight -120 PCF -120 PCF Foundati!}D Soil Friction AneJe Cohesion -33 Deg. : 0 PSF Unit Weight c 120 PCF Bearine; Ca~ad!)': Factor of Safety : 3.52 S8fe!)': Factors Static Actual Sliding : 2.582 / Actual Overturning : 3.642 <' 5afe!),: Factors Seismic Actual Sliding / : 1.705 Actual,Overturning /"-2.157 .,- Geoe;rid Lee;end A-Raumd 3/3-20 B-Raumd 4/2-15 C-Raumd 6/3-15 g-Grouted Can. Min. Length of Geogrid = 5 Feet ~-.~ ,.J--1 of 2 -., --, I /" ABwalls 2000 V.3.7 Allan Block Corporation I I II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Project Name: Location: Project Number: WaUNumber: Designer: Date: Hamilton Place Renton, WA 128.04 2 CDJ 3/24/04 KaI = Active Earth Pressure Coefficient Infill = 0.2438 KaR = Active Earth Pressure Coefficient Retained = 0.2438 Hi ~ Wan Height ~ 8.26 Feet He = Effective Height"" 8.26 Feet i = Effective Slope = 0 Deg. Beta -Beta Anl'le -87 Oeg -- Wf~ Weight 0 Facing ~ 1049.624 Ib/ft Ww~TotaIWeight~ 5163.352 Ib/ft Fa = Active Force = 998.055 th/ft Fv = Vertical Force = 373.523 Ib/ft Fh = Horizontal Force = 925.524 Ib/ft Fr = Resistance Force = 3595.688 Ib/ft Internal Design Calculations (STATIC) Section 1 Geogrid Geogrid Geogrld Length Tensile Force Allowable Load Number Elevation 6 A 510.86 ft 7ft 124.01 lb/ft 781.33 Ib/ft 5 A 510.23 ft 5ft 107.26 Ib/ft 781.33 Iblft 4A 508.96 ft 5ft 181.35 Ib/ft 781.33 Ib/ft 3 A 507.69 ft 5ft 225.17 Ib/ft 781.33 Ib/ft 2 A 506.42 ft 5ft 268.98 lb/ft 781.33 Ib/ft 1 A 505.15 ft 5ft 485.61 Ib/ft 781.33 Ib/lt Base Reinforcement Geogrid Geogrld Geogrld Length Allowable Load Toe Length Number Elevation Extension N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 0.33 ft He I ~ ~ .. 1 ;. Fr Factor Safety Factor Safe~ Factor Safety Efficiency Overstress Pullout Bloc: Pullout SoU 9.45 7.02 5.48 16 10.93 8.64 5.28 14 6.46 5.73 5.07 23 5.2 5.12 5.56 29 4.36 4.7 7.22 34 2.41 2.84 5.93 62 Base Depth Total Base Length 0.5 tl 2ft 1 of 2 ABwalls 2000 V.3.7 Allan Block COIpomtion I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Project Name: Location: Project Nnmber: WaUNnmber: Designer: Date: Hamilton Place Renton, WA 128.04 2 CDJ 3124/04 Ao :::: Seismic Coefficient :::: 0.3 dl = Allowable Lateral Deflection Internal::: 3 inches d2 = Allowable Lateral Deflection External::: 3 inches Kaei:::: Dynamic Earth Pressure Coefficent lnfiH::: 0.3155 Kaer:::: Dynamic Earth Pressure Coefficent Retained::: 0.3155 Khi:::: Horizontal Seismic Coefficent Internal = 0.113 Khr= Horizontal Seismic Coefficent Retained c 0.113 DFdyn = Dynamic Earth Force = 293.577 Ib/ft DFdynb::: Dynamic Earth Force Horizontal"" 272.242 Ib/ft DFdynv:::: Dynamic Earth Force Vertical:::: 109.871 Ib/ft Pir::: Seismic Inertial Force"" 486.154 Ib/ft Hir::: Seismic Inertial Force Location::: 4.13 Feet Internal Design Calculations (SEISMIC) Section 1 Geogrid Number Geogrid Elevation Geogrid Lengtb Tensile Force Allowable Load 6 A 510.86 ft 7ft 472.84 Ib/ft 1619.49 Ib/ft 5 A 510.23 ft 5ft 303.81 Ib/ft 1619.49 Ib/ft 4A 508.96 ft 5ft 409.39 Ib/ft 1619.49 Ib/ft 3 A 507.69 ft 5ft 419.18 Ib/ft 1619.49 Ib/ft 2 A 506.42 ft 5ft 428.98 Ib/ft 1619.49 Ib/ft 1 A 505.15 ft 5ft 674.58 Ib/ft 1619.49 Ib/ft Base Reinforcement Geogrid Number Geogrid Elevation Gcogrid Length Allowable Load Toe Length Extension N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 0.33 It Fr Factor Safety Factor Safe3;. Factor Safety Efficiency Oventress PuUout Bloc PuUoutSoil 3.77 1.84 1.44 29 5.86 3.05 1.86 19 4.35 2.54 2.25 25 4.25 2.75 2.99 26 4.15 2.95 4.52 26 2.64 2.04 4.27 42 Base Depth Total Base Length 0.5 ft 2ft 1 of 2 ABwalls 2000 V.3.7 Allan Block Corporation I I 7n I ,n I 250 PSFLlve ~I~~~~~ , Sll.14 ft _:----r I 6-A I ~ .1 ft 4-A I 3-A L-1/ I l_A 505(1 / I_A Ol.88~~ r -c Or---1.-0 .33 Section 2 1ft 51.41 £t Thru 146.9 n I I SectIOn 2 Notes I I~--------------~ I I I I I I I I Project Name: Hamilton Place Location: Renton, W A Project Number: 128.04 Wall Number: 2 Designer: CDJ Date: 3/24/04 Allan Block provides this software as a service for its clients. The sole purpose of this software is to assist engineers in the design of mechanically stabilized retaining walls. The software uses evaluation techniques and engineering principles found in the Allan Block Engineering Manual. (Refer to R0904 and supporting references.) It is the responsibility of the engineer or user to determine the propriety and accuracy of input parameters and to review and verify the correctness of the results. Allan Block Corporation, its licensees or agents do not assume any liability or responsibility for damages which may result from the use or misuse of this software. This software only considers on critical failure surface and does not address global. An potential modes of failure, including proper water management, must be evaluated by the engineer of record. The final design must provide for proper wall drainage to prevent the buildup of hydrostatic pressures over the service life of the structure. In the event additional water is introduced into the general wall area, either above or below grade, any designs from this software would be invalid. All installations must conform to Allan Block installation specifications. (Refer to ROS02) Allan Block Corp. 5300 Edina Industrial Boulevard Suite 100 Edina, MN 55439 Phone 952/835-5309 Fax 952/835-0013 http://www.allanblockcom Allan Block Northwest 22509 SE 228th Street Maple Valley. WA 98038 206-498·2879 425-413·7980 -fax ABThree Total Wall Height -8.26 Feet Block Heirt -0.635 Feet Angle of Setback = 3 Deg. Depth of Block -0.97 Feet Length of Block = 1.469 Feet InOll Soil Retained SI!i1 Friction Angle = 33 Deg. Friction Angle = 33 Deg. UnitWei~ = 120 F Unit Weirct = 120 CF Foundation SoU Friction Angle Cohesion = 33 Deg. = 0 PSF Unit Weif!(t -120 CF Bearins: CaRaci!! Factor of Safety ,. = 3.52 Safe!! Factors Static Actual Sliding = 2.582 Actual Overturning / = 3.642 Safe!! Factors Seismic Actual Sliding " = 1.705 ActuaIOvertuming,-f. _ = 2.157 /' Geos:rid L~e;end A-Raugrid 3/3-20 B-Raugrid 4/2-15 C-Raugrid 6/3-15 ~-Grouted Con. MID. Length of Geogrid :r:::I 5 Feet -, 2 of 2 _. ABwalls 2000 V .3. 7 Allan Block Corpomtion I Project Name: Hamilton Place ~ Location: Renton, WA I Project Number: 128.04 Wall Number: 2 Designer: CDJ Date: 3/24/04 I KaI = Active Earth Pressure Coefficient lnfill "" 0.2438 KaR = Active Earth Pressure Coefficient Retained = 0.2438 Hi"" Wall Height = 8.26 Feet He = Effective Height"" 8.26 Feet I i = Effective Slo~e;::: 0 Deg. Beta = Beta An~ e c 87 Oeg. Wf= Weight 0 Facing = 1049.624 Ib/ft Ww = Total Weight = 5163.352 Ib/ft Fa = Active Force = 998.055 Ib/ft I Fv = Vertical Force"" 373.523 lb/ft Fh = Horizontal Force = 925.524 Ib/ft Fr = Resistance Force = 3595.688 lb/ft Internal Design Calculations (STATIC) :> Fr I Section 2 Geogrid Geogrld Geogrid Length Tensile Force Allowable Load Factor Safety Factor Safety Factor Safety Efficiency I Number Elevation Overstress Pullout Block Pullout Soil 6 A 510.86 ft 7ft 157.02 Ib/ft 781.33 Ib/ft 7.46 5.54 4.33 20 5 A 509.59 ft 5ft 159.45 Ib/ft 781.33 Ib/ft 7.35 6.17 4.67 20 I 4A 508.32 ft 5ft 203.26 Ib/ft 781.33 Ib/ft 5.77 5.39 5.35 26 3A 507.05 ft 5ft 247.07 Ib/ft 781.33 Ib/ft 4.74 4.89 6.23 32 2A 505.78 ft 5ft 290.88 Ib/ft 781.33 Ib/ft 4.03 4.54 8.21 37 I IA 504.51 ft 5ft 334.7 Ib/ft 781.33 Ib/ft 3.5 4.29 10.22 43 I I I I I I I I Base Reinforcement I Geogrid Geogrid Geogrid Length Allowable Load Toe Length Base Depth Total Base Number Elevation Extension Length N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 0.33 ft 0.5 ft 2ft 2 of 2 I ABwalls 2000 V .3. 7 Allan Block Corporation I I Project Name: Hamilton Place , Location: Renton, WA f7<'1 Project Number: 128.04 I Wall Number: 2 Designer: CDJ Date: 3/24/04 . I Ao = Seismic Coefficient ;;; 0.3 d I = Allowable Lateral Deflection Internal c: 3 inches H' J WJ /~:dyn He d2 = Allowable Lateral Deflection External = 3 inches Kaei = Dynamic Earth Pressure Coefficent Infill = 0.3155 I Kaer = Dynamic Earth Pressure Coefficent Retained = 0.3155 il~ / j Khi;;; Horizontal Seismic Coefficent Internal = 0.113 Khr= Horizontal Seismic Coefficent Retained = 0.113 DFdyn = Dynamic Earth Force = 293.577 Ih/ft rrl ~ 1 DFdynh = Dynamic Earth Force Horizontal = 272.242 Ib/ft DFdynv = Dynamic Earth Force Vertical = 109.871 Ib/ft I Pir= Seismic Inertial Force = 486.154 Ib/ft Hir = Seismic Inertial Force Location = 4.13 Feet Internal Design Calculations (SEISMIC) .. Fr I Section 2 Geogrid Geogrld Geogrid Length Tensile Force Allowable Load Factor Safety Factor Safety Fador Safety Efficiency Number Elevation Overstress Pullout Block PuUout SoU I 6 A 51O.B6 ft 7ft 575.63 Ib/ft 1619.49 Ib/ft 3.09 LSI I.1B 36 5 A 509.59 ft 5ft 404.5 Ib/ft 1619.49 Ib/ft 4.4 2.43 I.B4 25 I 4 A 50B.32 ft 5ft 414.29 Ib/ft 1619.49 Ib/ft 4.3 2.65 2.63 26 3 A 507.05 ft 5ft 424.0B Ib/ft 1619.49 Ib/ft 4.2 2.B5 3.63 26 2 A 505.7B ft . 5ft 433.87 Iblft 1619.49 Ib/ft 4.11 3.05 5.5 27 I IA 504.51 ft 5ft 443.67 Ib/ft 1619.49 Ib/ft 4.02 3.23 7.71 27 I I I I I I I I Base Reinforcement I Gcogrid Geogrid Geogrid Length Allowable Load Toe Length Base Depth Total Base Number ElevatJon Extension Length N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 0.33 ft 0.5 ft 2ft 2 of 2 I ABwalls 2000 V .3. 7 Allan Block Corporation L. I I ~ I tlll,111 I BLOCK I I Engineering Review Calculations Outline I I 1. AB Walls 2000 Design Sections I 2. Hand Calculations (MathCAD) Verification I I 3. Geogrid Manufacturers Specifications I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ALLAN BLOCK MORTARLESS TECHNOLOGY Retaining Wall Hand Calculations INPUT INFORMATION WALL NUMBER: 2 CROSS SECTION: 2 PROJECT NAME: Hamilton Place PROJECT NUMBER: 128.04 DATE: 3/24/04 PREPARED BY: CDJ Version 3.7 ALLAN BLOCK PARAMETERS WALL PARAMETERS FOOTING DIMENSIONS block height: Ih:= 0.6354'.ftj nultlber of block courses: In:= .1~ footing width: ILwidth:= 2· ftj block depth: block length: It :-0.97· ftj II := 1.4OB9· ftj unit percent concrete: le:= 60· ~ total wall height: H:= n' h H = B.26ft embedment depth In courses: le:= 1.76§ total embedment depth: D := e· h D = 1.12ft footing depth: ILdepth :-.5. ftj toe extension: ILtDe := .33· ftj geogrid length: ILgrid :-,0· ftI unit percent voids: block setback: Iv:-40· '/l IOJ:= 3: de~ geogrid length: SURCHARGE PARAMETERS surcharge: I' Ib q :=250- '. "ft' surcharge type: POINT LOAD PARAMETERS point load: Ip:= 0 . I~ Surcharge Types: l=Retained Soil Dead Load 2=Retained Soli LIve Load 3=lnfill Soil Dead Load 4=lnfill Soil Live Load Surcharge Type: l=Live Load 2=Dead Load Contact area boundaries from toe of wall: starting point: IXl :;=.0 . ftj IStype:-4 ending point: 1<2:-O· ftj GftI ILtop :=7ft1 BACKSLOPE PARAMETERS TUMBLE EUROPA COLLECTION backslope angle: 11:'-O· de~ ITUMBLED:-4 l=YES backslope height: Ihl:~ O· ftj 2=NO . ASHLAR BLEND (Reduction for Abby Blend Included In Europa) SEISMIC pARAMETERS acceleration coeffiCient: IAo:= O.~ allowable lateral deflection: Internal: Idl:", 3· i3 external: Idr.:= 3· i3 IASHLAR:= 4 l=YES 2=NO I SOIL PARAMETERS I I I I I I INFILL SOIL friction angle: 1$1':= 33'· deg unit weight: yi:= 120: a····11i ···ft3 RETAINED SOIL friction angle: I$r:= 33.deg unit weight: 'Ib rr:= 120·- " , ,'ft3 Preliminary design calculations. Review and certification by a professional engineer required. FOUNDATION SOIL (Standard Method) friction angle: unit weight: ~"'''Ib rf;= 12.0." .'" " 3 '('. ft cohesion E]'.""."lb of:= O· ' .... " 2 .. ft P#: 1 I I I I I I GEOGRID PARAMETERS number of geogrJd layers: 19:= ~ layers geogrid type A: r A:= "RaUgrld-;;:ZO~, -I , I geogrid type B: B := "Raugrld 4/2-15" long term allowable design strength geogrid type A: geogrid type B: Ib L TDS_A := 1172· ft Ib LTDS B:= 1517·--ft reduction factor for long term creep: geogrid type A: RFcr _A:= 1.52 I geogrid type B: RFcr_B:= 1.52 I I I I I I factor of safety geogrid overstress: FSos := 1.5 geogrrd interaction coefficient: Ci:= 0.75 CONNECTION STRENGTH PARAMETERS PEAK CONNECTION CAPACITY. in the form of a linear equation. y=Mx+B where: y=connection strength and x=normal load GEOGRID TYPE A segment #1 Y intercept: segment #2 y Intercept: GEOGRID TYPE B Ib B1a:= 505·- ft Ib B2a:= 505·- ft Intersecting Normal Load slope: slope: B2a -B1a Ib Ninta := Ninta = 0- M1a -M2a ft GEOGRID LAYOUT PARAMETERS range of geogrid layers: j:= 9 .. 1 geogrid courssing: M1a := tan(25· de g) M2a := tan(25· deg) geogrid type: type j :. . .::. .~ ~ ~ A A . .,-. A segment #1 Y intercept: Ib B1b:= 830·- ft slope: M1b:= tan(29· deg) I I I I I I segment #2 Y intercept: Ib B2b:= 830·- ft Intersecting Normal Load B2b -B1b Ib Nlntb := Nlntb = 0- M1b -M2b ft Preliminary desjgn calculations, Review and certification by a professional engineer re9ulred. slope: M2b:= tan(29· deg) Version 3.7 geogrid length: lengthj :. Ltop . T -:'-" L .. T T T PH: 2 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I BROKEN BACK SLOPE DETERMINATION BROKEN BACK SLOPE CALCULATIONS. I', ONLY IF THE HORIZONTAL LENGTH OF THE SLOPE IS LESS THAN 1WICE THE WALL HEIGHT Determine the true backs lope angle: ( hi) i':=atan -- 2·H i' = OdBg 1:= ifCi' ~ i,i,I') THEREFORE: 1= Odeg CALCULATION OF STATIC AND DYNAMIC EARTH PRESSURE COEFFICIENTS 2 weighted friction angle: Ij>wi:= - . cj; 3 $wi = 22deg wall batter. ~:= 90 . deg -ro ~ = 87 deg setback per block: s:= 0.1035· ft+ (tan(ro) .~) effective wall height: He:= H + [L -(t -5)]' tan(l) STATIC: 2 ~:=-'<Pr 3 s = 0.12ft Ho =B.26ft ~= 22deg Active earth pressure coefficient: Inftll Soil r csc(~)· sin(~ -cj;) 12 Kai '-Kal = 0.244 '-1 ( ) I (~sln\cj; + Ij>wi). sin\cj; -iTg Lv sin ~ + $wI + ( 'J J ~ sin ~ -I Retained Soil Kar " __ 1 ese(p)· sin(~ -$r) 12 sln\$r+ $wr)· sin\$r-iJ L "sln\~+~J+'1 ,J Kar = 0.244 DYNAMIC: Seismic Coefficients: Internal Stability Kv:= ° Khll:= (1.45 -Ao) . Ao For: di=O in Ao·'· in ( ) 0.25 Khi2:= 0.67· Ao· F dl l' dl or >= In Khi:= If(dl = 01n,Kh11,Kh12) Khl = 0.113 ( Khl ) 9i :=atan-- 1 +Kv Dynal'flic earth pressure coeffiCient: Infill 5011 el = 6.449 deg Kael:= If(Ao = O,O,Kael) Kael = 0.316 Prelilflinary deSign calculations. Review and certification by a professional engineer reqUired. , sln(~-iJ . External Stability Khr1:= Ao For: dr=O in Ao"'!n ( ) 0.25 Khr2;= 0.67· Ao· dr For dr>=1 In Khr:= If(dr = 0ln,Khrl,Khr2) Khr = 0.113 er := atan( Khr ) er = 6.449 dog 1 + Kv Retained 5011 ( . 2 'I ______ c~o~s(~$~r+~ro~-~e~r) ______ 1 Kaer := ~lc.co:.:s~( e~r=) ~. c=0=S(=ro=):::2~. c=o=s(~$w=r:::-=ro:::+:::e~r)i~ ( sln\$r+ ~J. sln\$r-I-eeJ) 1+ ~ cos($wr-ro+erl'COS(ro+l) Kaor:= If(Ao = O,O,Ka.r) Kaor = 0.316 Version 3.7 PI: 3 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Version 3.7 EXTERNAL STABILITY Free Body Diagram Where: He=EffeGtive Wall Height H= Total Wall Height Wi=Weight of the Backslope Wq=lnfillSurcharge Dead Load Wi I I I p Wf=Weight of the Allan Block Facing We. ! -------------------------------r Ws=Weight of the Geogrid He Reinforced Soil Mass Pir=Seismic Inertial Force for I L~ir I I I I I I DFd~n ~ I ~p,::;! ! 1 YQp' For Each Gravity Force Hfr=Pir Resultant Vertical Location P=Paint Load Surcharge Qpt=Translated Point Load DFdyn=Dynamic Earth Force F9=Surcharge Force FQpt=Point Load Force YQpt= Translated Point Load Hir Fr I I I ---r 0.bHe I 05'(0 r.5He 1/3He' P I I I Ib Vertical Location Fa=Active Earth Force concrete unit weight: yc:= 135· -unit fill unit weight: ft3 Ib yuf:= 125·- ft3 DRIVING FORCE CALCULATIONS ACTIVE EARTH FORCE: DYNAMIC EARTH FORCE: SURCHARGE FORCE: 1 2 Fa :=-. Kar·yr· He 2 Fah:= Fa· cos(<I>wr) Fav:= Fa· 5in(~wr) Ib Fa = 998.024- ft Ib F ah = 925.352- ft Ib Fav = 373.866- ft 1 2 Fae := _. (1 + Kv)· Kaer· yr· He 2 Ib Fae = 1291.641- ft DFdyn:= {AO = 0,0 ~ ,DFdyn) Ib DFdyn = 293.618-. ft OFdynh:= DFdyn· cos(cpwr) Ib DFdynh = 272.237- ft DFdynv := DFdyn . sin( $wr) Ib DFdynv = 109.991- ft Fq := q . Kar· He Ib Fq = 503.43- ft Fqh:= Fq· cos(cpwr) Fqh = 466.772~ MOMENT ARMS: 1 FaArmh := _. He 3 FaArmh = 2.753ft 1 FaArmv:= L + s +-. He· tan(ro) FaArmv = 5.264ft 3 DFdyn := Fae -Fa MOMENT ARMS: Ib DFdyn = 293.62- ft DFdynArmh := 0.6· He DFdynArmh = 4.956 ft DFdynArmv := L + s + 0.6 . He . tan( ro) DFdynArmv = 5.38ft MOMENT ARMS: FqArmh := 0.5· He FqArmh = 4.13 ft ft { { Ib))FqArmv:= L +s+ 0.5· He· tan(ro) Fqv:=i xq=1,Fq,sln(<I>wr),i xq=3,Fq,sin(cpwr),0 ft FqArmv = 5.337ft Ib Fqv = o- ft Preliminary design calculations, Review and certification by a professional engineer required. P#: 4 I I I I I Elevation of Surcharge above top of wall: Qh:= Lxl-(t+ H· tan(ro))J' tan(i) POINT LOAD SURCHARGE: Location of the end of grid at the top of the wall plus the influence zone buffer of H/4: H Endg:= L + S + H· tan(ro) +- 4 Minimum application distance for zero influence: Endg = 7.61Bft Version 3.7 Qh=Oft ( ( H "") +~+L+S-t-H.tan(ro)l.tan(i).sin(90.deg+i) . H H l tan 45· deg -2' ) Mlnxl:= L +s+4 + ( $r) + () . cos( 45· deg -~) tan 45· deg -2' sin 45· deg -~ - i I Minxl = 22.399 ft I I I I I I I I I I I I I Location oftha translated point load surcharge: [ ( H) (( $c),] r ( 4>r) (sin(9o.deg +ro).tan(ro)'Il YQpt:= (H + Qh) -xl - L - s -4 . tan 45· deg -2') . 1 + sin 45· deg -2' . $r'l l l s+5'deg +2'-ro) )J YQpt:= iflxl > Endg, YQpt, He) YQpt = B.26 ft Location of the end otthe g~id at the YQpt elevation plus the influence zone buffer of H/4: H EndgYQpt := L + s + YQpt . tan( ro) +- 4 EndgYQpt = 7.61Bft Tnt:! point load will be distributed over Its contact area, Qp and translated though the soil if it acts behind the reinforced mass, Qpt. P -2 Qpi: Qpl = Olbft (u-xl)·l·ft Point Load Surcharge influence P Qpti := -:-:-:---C::-:-:-::c-7-::--:--::--::::-:---;'-[(xl-EndgYQpt)· 2+(u-xl)J ·l·ft EndgYQpt = 7.61Bft -2 Qpti = Olbft If the point load contacts only with the reinforced mass it will add stabJlltyta the wall structure. therefore the loads are only considered In the internal stability calculations. Note: Qp := lX2 <: L +5+ H· tan(ro) -2· ft,Qpi,O ftlb 2 1) -2 \ Qp = Olbft If the point load contacts In beyond the reinforced mass and its Influence zone buffer it will only affect the external stability. If It overlaps both the influence zone and retained soil it will effect both internal and external stability. Qpt:= iflxl <: Endg,Qpti,Qp) -2 Qpt = Olbft If the point load contact beyond the reinforced mass plus Its influence zone buffer It will have no effect on the wall. Qpt=O. t Ib'l Qpt:= I ( < Minxl, Qpt, 0 ft2) Ib Qpt= 0- ft2 Qpt is the translated distributed pOint load surcharge used to determine the point load force that will be influencir:'g the external stability of the retaining wall structure. Qpt Is a function of the location of the contact area with respect to the geogrid reinforcement. Qp will be used to calculate the point load surcharge if it acts directly on top of the reinforced soil. No translation calculations are necessary for Qp because its applications area is on top of the reinforced mass and Its influence zone buffer. Preliminary design calculations, R.evlewand certification by a' professional engineer re'lulred. PI: 5 I I Ve rslon 3.7. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I POINT LOAD SURCHARGE FORCE: POINT LOAD SURCHARGE WEIGHT: FQpt := Qpt· Kar· YQpt FQpth := FQpt· cost $wr) WQptl := Qpl· (x2 -xl) Ib WQptl = o- ft Ib FQpt= o- ft MOMENT ARM: YQpt FQptArmh :=-- 2 FQptArmh = 4.13ft -1 FQpth = 0 Ib ft Ib FQptv = o- ft FQptArmv := L + s + .5· YQpt . tan( co) FQptArmv = 5.337ft MOMENT ARM: (x2 -xl) WQptArml := xl + ..:--:.. 2 Endg = 7.618 ft WQptArm 1 = 0 ft WQpt2:= Qpi' (L + s + H· tan(co) -xl) f(Endg -~-x~l WQptArm2 := xl + l 2 4 J WQptArm2 = 2.mft Ib WQpt2 = O- ft WQptArm := 1~x2 ,; L + s + H . tan( co) -2· ft, WQptArm 1, WQptArm2) WQpt:= i~x2'; L + s+ H· tan(co) -2·ft, WQptl,WQpt2) WQpt:= {Xl> L + s+ H· tan(co),O ~ ,WQPt) Ib WQpt= o- ft RESISTING FORCE CALCULATIONS: WEIGHT OF THE BACKS LOPE: WEIGHT OF THE DEAD LOAD SURCHARGE: WEIGHT OF THE FACING: WEIGHT OF THE REINFORCED SOIL MASS: TOTAL WEIGHT: Wi:= O.5·yr· (He -H)· [L -(t-s)] Ib Wi=O- ft Wq:= {xq = 3,[L -(t-s)]· q,O ~J Ib Wq = o- ft Wf:=H.t.(c.yc+v.yuf) Ib Wf = 1049.624- ft Ws := H· [L -(t -s)] . yl Wt:=Wf+Ws Ib Wt = 5163.352- ft Ib Ws = 4113.728- ft WQptArm = 0 ft MOMENT ARM: 2 Ib WQp = o- ft WiArm := _. [L -(t-s)] + H ·tan(co) + t 3 MOMENT ARM: WiArm = 4.17 ft 1 WqArm :=-. [L -(t-s)] + H ·tan(co) +t 2 MOMENT ARM: WtArm:= 0.5· (L +s) + 0.5· H·tan(co) WtArm = 2.mft SLIDING Frstatic := (Fav + Fqv + FQptv + Wi + Wq + Wf + Ws + WQp) . tan(~i) RESISTANCE: Frseismic := (Fav + DFdynv + Fqv + FQptv + Wi + Wq + Wf + Ws + WQp) . tan(~i) I P,eUminary desigo ,al,"'atio05. Reviewaod certification by a professional engineer required. I P#: 6 I I I I I I I Version 3.7 SEISMIC INERTIAL FORCE: The weight of each component of the wall structure has a horizontal inertial force acting at Its centroid during a seismic event. The three components that have this inertial force are the block facing the reinforced 5011 mass and the backslops soil. The resuitarlt Pir Is the sum of all three. The weight of the reinforced soil mass and the backslaps soil is based on a reinforcement length of O.5H. Ib weight of the block face: Wf = 1049.624- ft weight of the reinforced Ws':= [0.5· H-(t-s)]·yi· H soil mass: Ib Ws' = 3251.462- ft weight of the backslope soil: 1 2 Wi':= -. [0.5· H -(t-s)] . yr· tan(l) 2 Ib WI'=O- ft SEISMIC Pir:= Khr· (Wf + Ws' + WI') Ib Pir = 466.154- ft INERTIAL FORCE: MOMENT ARM: Khr· Wf·.!2.+ Khr·Ws".!2.+ Khr'Wi"[H +2.. [0.5· H -(t-s)].tan(i)] 2 2 3 Hir:= -------------'=-------------=- fir Hir = 4.13ft I EXTERNAL STABILITY FACTORS OF SAFETY I I I I I I I I I I I FACTOR OF SAFETY FOR SLIDING: Static Conditions: F5statlcsliding>=1.5 Frstat!c FSstatlcsliding := ------- Fah + Fgh + FQpth Seismic Conditions: FSseicmlcsliding>=1.1 Frseismic FSseismlcsliding:= ------------ .Fah + DFdynh + Fgh + FQpth + Pir FACTOR OF SAFETY FOR OVERTURNING: Static Conditions: FSstaticoverturnlng>=2.0 FSstatlcsllding = 2.55 FSseismicsliding = 1.71 . . Wt· WtArm + WI· WIArm + Wg· WgArm +WQp' WQptArm + Fav· FaArmv + Fgv· FgArmv+ FQptv· FQptArmv FSstatlcoverturnlng : Fah· FaArmh + Fgh· FgArmh + FQpth' FQptArmh FSstatlcoverturnlng = 3.643 Seismic Conditions: FSseismicoverturning>=1.5 numerator:= Wt· WtArm +WI· WiArm +Wg' WgArm +WQp' WQptArm + Fav· FaArmv + Fgv. FgArmv+ FQptv' FQptArmv + DFdynv· DFdynArmv numerator FSselsmlcoverturnlng := .,,-,.-:-,.-,.---=:-,.---=:-,.--,.---:-,.-.,,-,.-,.--::---:---:-:-,.-,.--::-c-:- Fah· FaArmh + DFdynh . DFdynArmh + Fgh· FgArmh + FQpth . FQptArmh + Plr· Hir FSselsmicoverturnlng = 2.157 Preliminary design calculatJons. Review and certification by a professional engineer reguired. PI: 7 I Version 3.7 I BEARING CAPACITY CALCULATIONS: Standard Method Vertical Force Resultant: I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I R:= Wf + Ws + Wi + Wq + Fav + DFdynv + Fqv + FQptv + WQpt Location of the Resultant Force: Ib R = 5647.209- ft positive := Wt· WtArm + Wi· WiArm + Wq . WqArm + WQpt· WQptArm + Fav· FaArmv + DFdynv· DFdynArmv + Fqv· FqArmv + FQptv' FQptArmv negative := Fah· FaArmh + DFdynh· DFdynArmh + Fqh· FqArmh + FQpth· FQptArmh + Pir' Hlr positive -negatIve x := R x = 1.605ft positive = 16596.112Ib negative = 7532.7571b Deterrtline the eccentricity. E, of the resultant vertical force. If the eccentricity is negative the maxImum bearing pressure occurs at the heal of the mass. Therefore, a negative eccentricity causes a decrease in preasure at the toe. For conservative calculations E will always be considered great6r than or agual to zero. E := 0.5· (L + 5) -X E = 0.955ft El := If(E < Oft. Oft. E) El = 0.955ft Determine the average bearing pressure acting at the centerline of the wall. R O'avg:=--- (L + s) Ib "avg = 1102.938- ft2 Determine the rtlOrfHmt about the centerline ofthfl wall due to the resultant bearing load. Mcl:= R· El section modulus ft Mcl = 5393.954lb- ft 2 5 := ..:,(1_.0_·.:...ft:..-) . ...:,(_L +_5.:.,)_ 6 3 5 = 4.369ft Differenced in bearing pressure due to the eccentric loading. Mel·l·ft crmom:= 5 Ib crmom = 1234.506- ft2 ULTIMATE BEARING CAPACITY CALCULATION: therefore: amax := aavg + Icrmoml crmin := aavg -Icrmoml Meyerhoff bearing capacity equation: "ult=1/2'yf'Lwidth 'Ny + of'Nc + yf'(Ldepth+D)"Nq Where: Nq := (exp{,t. tan(#))) -(ran( 45. deg + ~))2 Nc:= (Ng -1)· cot(#) Ny:= (Nq -1)· tan(1.4. #) Nq = 26.092 Ne = 38.638 Ny = 26.166 Ib "max = 2337.444- ft2 Ib "min = -131.567- ft2 Therefore: 1 ,,"It :=_. yf. Lwidth· Ny+cf· Nc+yf' (Ldepth + D)· Nq 2 Ib "ult = 5212.53- ft2 F actor of safety: ault FSbearing := -- amax Preliminary design calculations. Review and certification by a professional engineer reCjulred. FSboarlng = 3.514 P#: B I I I I I I I ----------------------------------------------- INTERNAL STABILITY Free Body Diagram Where: Dj=Depth to each geogrid layer O.3H=Orientation of line of maximum tension 45+phil2=Orlentation of the line of maximum tension ACj=influence area of each geogrld layer Hel=effeetiye wall height for internal stability grid elevation: elevj:= grid j · h Hel:= H + [0.3· H -(t-s)] . tan(i) Hei = 8.26ft Note: tDj / L D5T D~ r ~ el / -4' Ac2 ~'Phll2 ---I--L---,e--If---=---'~ W-=------1 'I' LINE OF MAXIMUM TENSION For Internal stability calculations sample calculations will be shown for grid layer #1. All other grid layers will be shown through tabular calculations at the end of this section. DETERMINATION OF THE FORCE ACTING ON EACH GRID LAYER I STATIC LOADS, use the subscript "s" I I I I I I I I I I influence area: AC1 = 1.271 ft active earth pressure: Ib Fai 1 = 262.522 ft surcharge pressure: (gridr h+gridj-1.h) (gridj+,-h+gridj.h) 2 2 Fgij := {x g " 3, g' Kai· COS(~Wi)' ACj' ifg "4, g' Kal· COS(~i)' ACj' 0 ~)) point load surcharge pressure: FQptij := {X1 > (L + s + H· tan(",)) + 2ft, 0 ~ ,Qpl' (Kai. COS(~Wi))' ACj] Preliminary deSign calculations. Review and certlflcation by a professional engineer regulred. Ib FQpti = 0- 1 ft Version 3.7 P#: 9 I Version 3.7 I SEISMIC (DYNAMIC) LOADS: use the subscript. "d" dynamic earth pressure: I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I [ (Hel-gridj'h)] DFdyni j := 0.8 -0.6· . . Kaei· cos(.)wi). yi· Hei· ACj Hel Ib DFdyni, = 90.705ft' seismic inertial force: TENSILE FORCE ON EACH GRID: STATIC: GEOGRID TENSILE OVERSTRESS geogrid tensil e strength Ib Plri, = '8.252 ft Ib FiS, = 334.633-. ft SEISMIC: Ib L TDS, = "72 ft FACTOR OF SAFETY. Static: FACTOR OF SAFETY. Seismic: LTDS j FSoverstresssj :=-- Fis j FSoverstresss1 = 3.502 GEOGRID/BLOCK CONNECTION CAPACITY normal load: TUMBLED REDUCTION FACTOR Ib Fcs, = 956.798 ft FSoverstressd J : LTDSJ'RFcrj Fid j ASHLAR REDUCTION FACTOR RFcr, = 1.52 FSoverstressd, = 4.016 TRF := ifCTUMBLED = '.0.7,1.0) ARF := ifCASHLAR = ',0.9.1.0) TRF =, FACTOR OF SAFETY CONNECTION STRENGTH. Static: (TRF· ARF) . Fcs j FSconns := --:---:-::-::=--'- j Fis j , 0.667 FSconns, = 4.287 Preliminary design calculations. Review and certification by a professional engineer reqUired, ARF = 1 FACTOR OF SAFETY CONNECTION STRENGTH. Seismic (TRF· ARF)· Fcsj FSconnd j := ----.,...,-- Fid j ·0.667 FSconnd 1 = 3.234 PI: 10 -------------------------------------------- I I GEOGRID PULLOUT FROM THE SOIL: Equations for each segment of the'liM of maximum tension: I segment #1: yl=tan(45'deg+oi!2Y(x-t) where: x=distance to the line of maximum tension segment #2: x=(H)'(0.3+tan(wll I I Setting these two equations equal to each other yields the elevation of their Intersection point: yint := tan( 45· deg + :} LH. (0.3 + tan(w)) -tJ yint = 3.575ft Therefore the length of geogrid embedded beyond the line of maximum tension is the following: End of G eogrid Location I EG j := lengthj + s + tan(w)· (gridj' h) Line of Maximum Tension Location I For geogrid elevation < ylnt For geogrid elevations> yint I MTlj:= ( ~.) +t tan 45· deg +-i MT2j:= H.(0.3+tan(w)) I geogrid embedment length": surcharge geogrid length Le1 = 3.535 ft I point load geogrld length For x1 < the line of maximum tension I For x1 is between the line of maximum tension and the end of geogrid LQpt2J ;= j~ x2 < EG j' x2 -xl, EG j -xl) I I I I I I I I Forxl >the end of the geogrld LQpt3j := O· ft LQptj:= i~xl < MTj,LQptlj,i~xl > EG j ,LQpt3j ,LQpt2j)) LQptj:= I~Stype = 1,0 ·ft,LQptj ) LQpt, = Oft pullout capacity: Fpj := 2· CHan(o/i). L(Hei -grid]' h). yi. Lej + q. (Lqj) + Qpi' LQptjJ FACTOR OF SAFETY GEOGRID PULLOUT. static: FACTOR OF SAFETY GEOGRID PULLOUT, dynamic: Fpj Fpj FSpuliouts j := -FSpuilouts 1 = 10.224 Fls j FSpulloutd j :=-- Fid j FSpulloutd, = 7.712 GEOGRID EFFICIENCY Static Conditions: FIS j effecsj := __ "---c_ ·100 1 LTDS j ·- 1.5 Preliminary design calculations. Review and certification by a professional engineer reguired. Seismic CoI'('Htif'll')<;' Fid j effecd j := . 100 RFcrj LTDS j .--effecs1 = 42.525 1.1 effecd1 = 27.391 ··_---1 Version 3.7 PI: 11 I Version 3.7 I LOCALIZED STABILITY. TOP OF THE WALL STABILITY LOCAL WALL PARAMETERS: I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I unrelnforced height: Ht:= H -grid g • h Ht = 1.271 ft local weight of facing: Wft:= Ht· t· (c. rc + V· rut) SOIL AND SURCHARGE FORCES: Ib Wft = 161.481- ft active force: Fat:=.2.. Kai· 11. Ht2 2 Ib Fat = 23.622- ft dynamic force: 1 2 Faet:= _. (1 + Kv) . Kael· rl· Ht 2 Ib Faet = 30.571- ft DFdynt:= Faet-Fat Ib DFdynt = 6.95- ft Ib seismic Inertial force: Plrt := Khl· (Wft) Plrt = 18.252- ft surcharge force: Fgt := {xg = 3, g . Kai . Ht, i\Xg = 4, g . Kai . Ht, 0 ~)) Ib Fgt = 77.451- ft point load surcharge: FQptt:= '~Lx1-(H. tan(Ol) + t)J < ( Ht $i) .Qpt· Kal· Ht,O ~ 1 l tan 45· deg +"2 J ( Ib FQptth := FQptt . cos $wi) FQptth = O- ft FQpttv:= {stype = 2, FQptt· sin(cj>wi). 0 ~) LOCAL SLlDNG RESISTANCE: Ib FQpttv = O- ft Note: Ib FQptt = o- ft Ib DFdynt = 6.95- ft Total weight acting to resist sliding oftne top of wall: This eguatlon is based on the Allan Block shear strength. The e9uation was developed through empirical test data and is a function of the normal load acting at that point. Wtatalstatlc:= Wft + Fat· sin ($wi) + Fgt· sin($wi) + FQpttv Ib Wtotalstatic = 199.343- ft Wtatalseismic := Wft+ Fat· sin($wi) + DFdynt· sin($wi) + Fgt· sln($wi) + FQpttv Ib Wtotalseismlc = 201.946- ft local sliding resistance: Ib Frtstatlc := 805· - + Wtatalstatlc· tan(56· deg) ft Ib Frtseismlc := 805· - + Wtotalselsmlc· tan(56· deg) ft Preliminary design calculations. Review and certi-ncatlon by a professional engineer reguired. Ib Frtstatic = 1100.538- ft Ib Frtselsmic = 1104.398- ft PH: 12 I I FACTOR OF SAFETY LOCAL SLIDING. Static: I I I I I I Frtstatlc FSslldlngst := (Fat + F9t + FQptt)· cos(<!>wI) FSslidlngst = 11.744 FACTOR OF SAFETY LOCAL SLIDING. Seismic: Frtsefsmic FSslidingdt := (Fat + DFdynt + F9t + FQptt + Plrt)· cOS(<!>wi) FACTOR OF SAFETY LOCAL OVERTURNING. Static: FSslldlngdt = 9.433 Wft· (.;:. tan( ro) +~) + Fat· sin (<!>wi) . (~. tan(ro) + t) + (F9t. sln(<!>wi) + FQpttv). (.;:. tan(ro) + t) FSoverturningst := Fat. cos(cpwi). (:t) + F9 t . cos(<!>wI)' (:t) + FQptth. (:t) FSoverturningst = 2.214 FACTOR OF SAFETY LOCAL OVERTURNING. Static: Version 3.7 I num := Wft. (:t . tan( ro) +~) + Fat· sln(<!>wI)' (:t . tan( ro) + t) + (F9t. sin(<!>wI) + FQpttv). (:t . tan(ro) +t) + DFdynt· sln(<!>wI)' (0.6· Ht+ t) num I FSoverturnlngdt := -----..".,""'------------------,~o_--__,__,___,__--___ - Fat. cos(<!>wI)' (:t) + DFdynt. cos(<!>wI)' (0.6. Ht) + F9 t . COS(<!>wi) . (~) + FQptth·. (:t) + Pirt. :t I FSoverturnlngdt = 1.766 I I I I I I I I Preliminary design calculations. Review and certJfication by a professional engineer reqUired. PI: 13 I Version 3.7 I SUMMARY OF RESULTS DE51GN PARAMETER5: 50lL PARAMETER5: I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Wall Height: H = 8.26ft Block Setback: ro = 3 deg Backslope Angle: i = 0 deg Backslaps Height: hi = 0 ft Surcharge Load: Ib 9 =250- ft2 Point Load 5urcharge: P = Olb Point Load Location: x1 = 0 ft Innll Soil: $i = 33deg Retained 50il: Ib yi =120- ft3 5urType = 'Mill 5011 Live Load" 5urTypePoint = "Dead Load" BLOCK TYPE AND PATTERN: $r = 33deg Ib yr= 120- ft3 Foundation 50il: # = 33 deg Ib yf= 120- ft3 Ib cf=O- ft2 GEOGRID PARAMETER5: x2 = Oft Seismic Coefficient: Ao = 0.3 BlockType = "ORIGINAL COLLECTION" BlendType = "NO PATTERN" Geogrid Type A: A = "Raugrid 3/3-20" Geogrid Type B: B = "Raugrld 4/2-15" Allowable Deflection: di = O.25ft dr = 0.25ft Number of Layers: 9 = 6 Layers Geogrid Length: L = 5ft EXTERNAL 5TABILlTY: Ltop = 7ft Static Conditions: SeismiC Conditions: Factor of 5afetyfor 5lidlng: F5staticslidlng = 2.583 Factor of Safety for Sliding: FSssismicslidlng = 1.705 Factor of Safety for Overturning: F5staticoverturning = 3.643 Factor of Safety for Overturning: FSselsmicoverturning = 2.157 Bearing Capacity: Ultimate Bearing Capacity: Bearing pressure: Ib "ult = 8213- ft2 Ib "max = 2337.444- ft2 Factor of Safety: F5bearing = 3.514 INTERNAL 5TABILlTY: Local Top of the Wall5tability StatIc CondItions: Factor of Safety for 5liding: FSslidingst = 11.74 Base Footing Dimensions: Width of Footing: Lwldth = 2.0ft Toe Extens!on: Ltoe = O.3ft Depth of Footing: Ldepth = O.5ft Note: Width of Rolnforcement: Lgrid = 0 ft When reinforcement is present it shall always be placed 6in from the bottom of the footing. The minimum footing dimensions are 6in deep by 241n wide. Iftne values specifying the footing dimensions are not greater than 61n X 241n the minimum size should be used. When geogrid reinforcement 15 present the minimum footing depth shall be 12Jn to provide 6in of cover above and below the gBogri~. SeIsmIc Conditions: Factor of 5afety for 5liding: FSslidingdt = 9.43 Factor of Safety for Overturning: FSoverturningst = 2.21 Factor of Safety for Overturning: F50verturnlngdt = l.n Preliminary design calculations. Review and certification by a professional engineer required. PI: 14 I I INTERNAL STABILITY: I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Static Conditions: Geogrld Length: L=5ft Ltop = 7ft Geogrld Number j = 6 5 4 3 2 1 Geogrld Elev. 6.989 5.719 4.448 3.177 1.906 0.635 ft Allowable Load LTDS J --= 15 781.333 781.333 781.333 781.333 781.333 781.333 I Preliminary design calculatJons. Review and certificatlon by a professional engineer regulred. Tensile Force FiS J = 156.996 159.418 203.222 247.026 290.829 334.633 I Factor Safety Overstress F actor Safety Pullout Block: FSoverstreSSSj = FSconnsj = 7.465 5.542 7.352 6.166 5.767 5.392 4.744 4.893 4.03 4.544 3.502 4.287 Factor Safety Pullout. Soli: FSpullouts J = 4.329 4.676 5.356 6.234 8.211 10.224 Version 3.7 Geogrld Effeclency. % effecsj = 20.093 20.403 26.01 31.616 37.222 42.828 PH: 15 I I INTERNAL STABILITY: I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Seismic Conditions: Geogrld Length: L=5ft Ltop = 7ft Geogrld Number j = 6 5 4 3 2 1 Geogrld Elev. 6.989 5.719 4.448 3.177 1.906 0.635 ft Allowable Load RFccj LTDS .. --= J 1.1 1619.491 I 1619.491 1619.491 1619.491 1619.491 1619.491 -, bft Preliminary design calculations. Review and certlfication by a professional engineer required. Tensile Force Fid j = 575.539 404.433 414.222 424.012 433.801 443.59 Version 3.7 Factor Safety Factor Safety Factor Safety Geogrld Overstress Pullout Block: Pullout, 5011: Efteclency, % F50verstressd j = FSconnd j = FSpulloutdj = effecdJ = I 3.095 1.512 1.181 35.538 4.405 2.43 1.843 24.973 4.301 2.645 2.628 25.577 4.201 2.851 3.632 26.182 4.107 3.047 5.505 26.786 4.016 3.234 7.712 27.391 P#: 16 I r;m I ti111~~1 I BLOCK I I Engineering Review Calculations Outline I I 1. AB Walls 2000 Design Sections I I 2. Hand Calculations (MathCAD) Verification I 3. Geogrid Manufacturers Specifications I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ---------~-----~ ~ -~- RAUGRIDTM 2/3 -30 GEOGRID Liickenhaus Raugrid™ geogrids, for soil aud aggregate reinforcement, are manufactured of high tenacity, high molecular weight, polyester yarns, woven into a stable interlocking grid and then PVC coated to provide damage protection during installation. Raugrid™ geogrids, developed for the reinforcement of steepened slopes and segmental retaining walls, and for road base stabilization, are: • biologically inert, resistant to most naturally encountered chemicals, alkalies, and acids • resistant to ultra violet exposure and installation damage • resistant to long-term creep • flexible for easy installation Physical Properties of Raugrid™ 2/3 -30 Geogrid I PROPERTY I I UNIT I TEST METHOD I VALUE' WEIGHT (Average) ozlsq yard ASTM D-5261 6.8 APERTURE SIZE (Average) MD Inch Measured w/calipers 1.0 TD 1.2 PERCENT OPEN AREA (Average) % COE method 75+ WIDE WIDTH TENSILE STRENGTH @ULTIMATE MD Ib/ft ASTM D-4595 1418 TD 1884 @ 5 % Strain MD 417 TD 513 ELONGATION AT BREAK MD % ASTM D-4595 9.0 TD 12.0 Long Term Design Strength (LTDS) TD Ib/et AASHTO 1996 979 RFc.=1.52,RFID=1.1,RFD=I.15 Roll Dimensions (Width x Length) Ft 16.4> 328 Roll Area Square yards 598 Roll Weight (Average) Pounds 299 1 All values stated here are Minimum Average Roll Values (unless otherwise stated) and are based on 8 95% confidence level. (MD Machine Dlrectlon; TD-Transverse Direction, also called Cross Direction) RAUGRIDTM is maDufactured from polyester with a molecular weight (M..) > 25,000 grams/mole and Carboxyl End Groups (CEG's) < 30 mmollkg. LTDS (TD)= _--,-T::.!UL~l1~MA~TE~(T:.:D::,)~_ = ---::--::-~18:::8:.:4----:-....,..",_ RFCR • RFID • RFD 1.52 X 1.1 X 1.15 artiat reduction factors: CR= for creep deformation ID = for installation damage D = for biological and chemical degradation LUCKENHAUS NORTH AMERICA, INC. = 9791b/ft 841 East Main Street, Spartanburg, SC 29302 • Tel: 8001794-0910,864/583-8663· Fax: 864/583-8664 . E-Mail: luckenhaus@bellsoutb.net RAUGRIDTM Geogrids are distributed by CARTHAGE MILLS 4243 Hunt Road, Cincinnati, OH 45242 • Tel: 800-543-4430,5131794-1600· Fax: 5131794-3434 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I RAUGRIDTM 3/3 -20 GEOGRID Liickenhaus RaugricJfM geogrids, for soil and aggregate reinforcement, are manufactured of high tenacity, high molecular weight, polyester yarns, woven into a stable interlocking grid and then PVC 'coated to provide damage protection during installation. Raugrid™ geogrids, developed for the reinforcement of steepened slopes and segmental retaining walls, and for road base stabilization, are: • biologically inert, resistant to most naturally encountered cbemicals, alkalies, and acids • resistant to ultra violet exposure and installation damage • resistant to long-term creep • flexible for easy installation Physical Properties of Raugrid™ 3/3 -20 Geogrid PROPERTY UNIT TEST METHOD VALUE' WEIGHT (Average) ozlsq yards ASTMD-5261 7.4 APERTURE SIZE (Average) MD Inch Measured w/caIipers 0.8 TD 0.8 PERCENT OPEN AREA (Average) % COE method 75+ WIDE WIDTH TENSILE STRENGTH @ULTIMATE MD Ib/ft ASTM D-4595 2254 TD 2219 @ 5 % Strain MD 918 TD 596 ELONGATION AT BREAK MD % ASTM D-4595 10.4 TD 13.2 Long Term Design Strength (LIDS) MD Ib/ft AASHTO 1996 1172 RFcR=1.S2,RFlD=1.1,RFD=1.15 Roll Dimensions (Width x Length) Ft 16.4 x 328 Roll Area Square yards 598 Roll Weight (Average) Pounds 323 I All values stated here are Minimum Average Roll Values (unless otherwise stated) aod are based on a 95% confidence level. (MD Machine DlrecdoDj Tn-Transverse Dlrecdon • also called Cross Dlrec:don) RAUGRIDTM is maDufactured from polyester with 8 molecular weight (Mp) > 25,000 grams/mole and Carboxyl Eod Groups (CEG's) < 30 mmollkg. LTDS (MD)= TULTIMATE(MD) = 2254 = 1172lb/ft RFCR • RFID • RFD 1.52 X 1.1 X 1.15 ~artial reduction factors: ~CR= for creep deformation ~;. = for installation damage ~~ = for biological and cbemical degradation LUCKENHAUS NORTH AMERICA, INC. 841 East Main Street, Spartanburg, SC 29302 • Tel: 800/794-0910, 864/583-8663 • Fax: 864/583-8664 E-Mail: luckenbaus@bellsoutb.net RAUGRIDTM Geogrids are distributed by CARTHAGE MILLS 4243 Hunt Road, Cincinnati, OH 45242 • Tel: 800-543-4430,513/794-1600· Fax: 5131794-3434 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I RAUGRIDTM 4/2 -15 GEOGRID Liickenhaus Raugrid™ geogrids, for soil and aggregate reinforcement, are manufactured of high tenacity, high molecular weight, polyester yarns, woven into a stable interlocking grid and then PVC coated to provide damage protection during installation. Raugrid™ geogrids, developed for tbe reinforcement of steepened slopes and segmental retaining walls, and for road base stabilization, are: • biologically inert, resistant to most naturally encountered chemicals, alkalies, aod acids • resistant to ultra violet exposure and Installation damage • resistant to long-term creep • flexible for easy Installation Physical Properties of Rau2rid™ 4/2-15 Geo2rid PROPERTY UNIT TEST METHOD VALUE' WEIGHT (Average) ozlsq yards ASTM D-5261 7.7 APERTURE SIZE (Average) MD Inch Measured w/calipers 0.6 TD 0.6 PERCENT OPEN AREA (Average) % COE method 75+ WIDE WIDTH TENSILE STRENGTH @ULTIMATE MD 2918 TD Ib/ft ASTM D-4595 1479 @ 5 % Strain MD 781 TD 376 ELONGATION AT BREAK MD % ASTM D-4595 10.6 TD 11.9 Long Term Design Strength (LTDS) MD th/ft AASHTO 1996 1517 RFcR;1.52,RF'D;1.1,RFD=I.15 Roll Dimensions (WIdth x Length) Ft 16.4 x328 Roll Area Square yards 598 Roll Weight (Average) Pounds 334 1 All values stated here are Minimum Average Roll Values (unless otherwise stated) and are based on 8 95% confidence level. (MD Machine Direction; TD-Transverse Direction. also called Cross Direction) RAUGRIDTM is manufactured from polyester with a molecular weight (Mn) > 25,000 grams/mole and Carboxyl End Groups (CEG's) < 30 mmoUkg. LTDS (MD)= T ULTIMATE (MD) = 2918 RFCR • RFID • RFD 1.52 X 1.1 X 1.15 Partial reduction factors: RFCR; for creep deformation RF ID = for Installation damage RF~ = for biological and chemical degradation LUCKENHAUS NORTH AMERICA, INC. = 1517 Ibfft 841 East Main Street, Spartanburg, SC 29302 • Tel: 8001794-0910, 864/583-8663 • Fax: 864/583-8664 E-Mail: luckenhaus@bellsouth.net RAUGRIDTM Geogrids are distributed by CARTHAGE MILLS 4243 Hunt Road, Cincinnati, OH 45242 • Tel: 800-543-4430,513/794-1600· Fax: 513/794-3434 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I RAUGRIDTM 6/3 -15 GEOGRID Liickenhaus RaugrilfTM geogrids, for soil and aggregate reinforcement, are manufactured of high tenacity, high molecular weight, polyester yarns, woven into a stable interlocking grid and then PVC coated to provide damage protection during installation. Raugrid™ geogrids, developed for the reinforcement of steepened slopes and segmental retaining walls, and for road base stabilization, are: • biologically inert, resistant to most naturally encountered chemicals, alkalies, and acids • . resistant to ultra violet exposure and installation damage • ·reslstant to long-term creep • flexible for easy installation Ph IYSlca IP roper ti es 0 fR ·d™ 6/315 G augn -·d eogn PROPERTY UNIT TEST METHOD WEIGHT (Average) ozlsq yards ASTM D·5261 APERTURE SIZE (Average) MD Inch Measured w/calipers TD PERCENT OPEN AREA (Average) % COE method WIDE WIDTH TENSILE STRENGTH @ULTIMATE MD TD Ib/ft ASTM D-4595 @ 5 % Strain MD TD ELONGATION AT BREAK MD % ASTM D·4595 TD Long Term Design Strength (L TDS) MD Ib/ft AASHTO 1996 RFcRt::l.52,RFID =1.1,RFo=1.15 Roll Dimensions (Width x Length) Ft Roll Area Square yards Roll Weight (Average) Pounds VALUE' 10.4 0.6 0.6 68+ 3994 1959 1144 452 13.1 12.1 2077 16.4 x 164 298 238 1 All values stated here are Minimum Average Roll Values (unless otherwise stated) and are based on a 95% confidence level. (MD Machine DirectioQ; TD-Transvene Direction. also called Cross Direction) RAUGRIDTM is manufactured from polyester with 8 molecular weight (1\111) > 25,000 grams/mole and Carboxyl End Groups (CEG's) < 30 mmolikg. LTDS (MD)= T VLTIMATE (MD) = 3994 RFCR • RFID ' RFD 1.52 X 1.1 X 1.15 artial reduction factors: CR= for creep deformation ID = for installation damage D = for biological and chemical degradation LUCKENHAUS NORTH AMERICA, INC. = 20771b/ft 841 East Main Street, Spartanburg, SC 29302 • Tel: 8001794-0910,864/583-8663' Fax: 864/583-8664 E-Mail: luckenhaus@bellsouth.net RAUGRIDTM Geogrids are distributed by CARTHAGE MILLS 4243 Hunt Road, Cincinnati, OH 45242 • Tel: 800-543-4430,5131794-1600' Fax: 5131794-3434 I I I I~ J ..., I jl fIl <l Q) J w .<:: ..., " " " T 0 • rn ~ rn '" OJ re " '" ~ § I~ ;:l ,::: ~I '" . '" > , ;> « g « z ~I .<:: ..., OJ If) - HAMILTON 60.00' ..,.-T------!l1-, , !'", •• to Stor. to".,n.o~ h ....... t TRACT "E" (SENSITlVE AR!A) 5S. :7 LEGEND: .. '''''' '.'.~. '" • MO/MOfl;l FOUNO AS NlITEll, ';'re.ITfU ~H 3:~.~OO! •• SEI .. REelJl ~11t; 'flLOfI I'LA~i'r.:::. .. pp SIAH;;';b-.. PLACE Note: 086.15 " " , , ". g g 20 , ~ " , ; z !> f'r .. au 51 ... .. or.lnage (n .... nt l ___ _ I NeB '<12"0<1 "OJ 586.5\' " I ~ • 22J39/36!iE!>" .,,>.." )1: ~ 5£1 ,.' IN BRASS elSC IN." ~ ." (lJNI;il;tE J'OS! .~\ .... ~8~t!~~e~e~~t~;~~do~I~~:t~g~n~:r~!~ "\,.,01 ttl]!} Oli'lt. UN' U BEARING NOI "23' 32"E N70'OS"1S-E DISTANCE 2.9S" 1 .87' I"~NTC.l$(. SS6\. • BUILQU'G SE'!I.C~ LloE e Centre ,mot 9th A""n". South ~ F"d~nll Way, rA 98003 _~_ Pointe (253) 66!-1g01 • Surveying w •• o ""DO~S ~. 5 WOOdS ~ JMu~ry 3 ;>005 .oil ~>Jj~ 1808 ~ ,. . 30· m. 1BOB 653.50' " u " " saa '53 Otl"E 1307.00 N8S'3S'28-W NBO·36'2S"W 557°19'14"E 4.8S' 4.86' l.87" Southeast 136th Street Kes OeveloOlllent Co'-O. 12320 NE 8t~ 5t .. SU) te 100 6el1Ilvu~. W~ 9a005 HAMILTON PLACE A PORTION OF THE SW 1/4 OF THE,NE;. 1/4 OF SEC. 14, TWP. 23N., KING COUNTY, 5 i SCALE: 1" 30' "'" BeARING DISTANCE " NOl '23' 32"( 2.86 ' " t.oO·OS'lS-E 7.87' " N8S'315'2S"'W -4.86' CO NBS'3Ei'2S"W 4.66' "0 557 'j9' 14" , . ,. NQt~: Tr'II':' 100"t7,lr flOOD ~i"-&V..,tlon DU\Sllle 0 -".!le boundar]~ .. O! ';:::'''--' 150 all ("ontainell trllS plat ; ..... . 653.50' ------------.------ sea'53'08'E 1307.00' Southeast 136th Street ,. LEGEND: o • "_111 f'0lHJ AS N:)Tro. \'ISHED .... J. 0'001. I • -SlOT .. R£1I4f1 .nH Y£LLOto "I..t.STIC CAP ST4HPEO -Z2J3B/l89fi~·. )( -SEI -x-t .. IIR~SS 0151; IN 4" ~ .' CCIOOItTE PaST IN I<CNJI<ENT CAS£. JSIlL _ ll<.I!lC1NG seTBACK L lOE 33701 9th AvenUe South Federal Way, WA. 98M3 Pointe (2~3) 661-(SOI Surveying KING WM KBS Development Corp. l2320 NE 8th St. SUite 100 Bellevu~. WA 98005 ~. I I I .I il I I I l "' -"' '" -I: O~ Ot; o..~ ('J~ 0" ...J King County Depa.rt:Incnt of Development and EnvU-onrnental Services nOD O:lk""sd"Je An'nue Southwest Rl'lllon, \\,,\ 88055-1219 MEMORANDUM FROM: Site Investigator BETH CH E S HIE R TO: Engineer BRUCE WH I ITA k:m RE: Field Check Observations I. PRO.) E C T N U M B E R I N A M E Date "7. I· '2. i="1EL{) CHECK. Co· I CO) .?.. L02POOII /HAMILTDN • PLACE· Address I Location 133D5 I (oDTH A'Irc SE Related Project # I Name ... A~O:::::....!Il...'P~O~r~3.L.-Z-l-______________ _ Thomas Map Page (new) f.o 5] e:,z.. Thomas Guide Page (old) _______ _ 2. SYNOPSIS OF PROPOSAL d 3 LOT SuB,1)) V I S I ON ON Lj. 33 ACRES FLOW CDNTf<OL LEVEL ;;2 LHDA's, 1. SIERRA FILE INFORMATION Parcel #(s) 3(o(P Y 50 -0 I 00 S·T·R NE r'=l '2.. 3 -05 Kroll Map g II E Acres I Feet' Ll. ?,"3 A Current Zoning -.J1?::::..:-...:Y:::1-____ _ Community Plan N BJJ CASTLE Comprehensive Plan --'l'""):...tt-l\-'--.l.. ______________ ~ _____ _ limited Text Entry NO P-3uffix.. C(NDI'T"lC1'-JS R:::ut-.,lD PA GE , 4. SENSITIVE AREAS INFORMATION HAP FOLIO PAGE#: SITECOHTAINS SITE ABUTS YEI NO YEI NO COMMENTS ·Wetiands ___ rRl 0 . 0 ~ Wetland # _____ Wetland Closs ~ ____ Droinage Basin ____ --'-__ _ Sub Basin lcMJER c..ElYti?. RIVER Critical Basin? ill 0 • Streams 0 CRI 0 0 . Stream Closs Stream Nome _______ -----____ _ • IOO-year Floodplain _0 [RJ _. 0 ~ • Erosion Hazard __ 0 [2?J _0 51 • Landslide Hazard _0 ~ _0 ~ • Seismic Hazard __ 0 ~ _0 ~ • Coal Mine Hazard _0 ~ _0 I2J • Other known SA's _0 12':1_0 ~ Class I. or 2 Stream or Class I Wetland within one mile downstream of project site? -------!N~O--L-__ _ FEMA FIRM number --.:'~' _____ '--~~ _______ 'n FEMA Floodplain? ill 0 Soils Mapped '.' A@/_ Map # 11 Best available Topographical Map V S~ 5 *I 2 S 50 SITE DESCRIPTION MATCHES T.I.R. DESCRIPTION! , Y.73 AcgE:" PARCEL. mE SITE SLOPES 8£NTLY TO T1-l E soUTH. Ttl E NQ(2Jl-\ 112. DE :n--J E SITE IS OPgN 'PASTVi2.-E w/C.Ows, kND A 50J0j V2-IS W DODED \IV 1m "cow T'2A I LS" kN D "For2.13J ElJ 'PASl\JI2.E: fDZV>lS': f\ \I\J£1l-f'\ND IS IN Il-\\S (>(f!..EA I t-...l -n-\ E SQ0CH WEST (£)'12-"-1 ER.. P AGE 1 6. EXISTING SITE FEATURES Unmapped Sensitive Areas: _-'-N"'O=<....L:!>.\>O.JE"--_S""""'E£N ........ -'--"' ____ ~---------- Soils types seen and evidence of soil movement, slides. slumps. erosion. or deposition: _____ _ NO SOIL HoYl?Jv1ENT S~ Ground Cover: 'PASIVQ\2.. ~eAS'SE:S, COIIDUUJOOO, P, rz I LAw"-l 'BL-ACICB0?i2'( I Q.USt-\-, ByTmz.Lc.P i L-AN'l):s<:ApE: Vf1::::J. ... Existing Utilities (hydrants. signs. poles. etc.) shown on site plan?_Y""'E"""'S"-________ _ Wildlife and habitats: AC1J\JE PASlYRE -C.Ow'S C!jJCIL.8NS; Water Wells: NONE sEEN Work started on site? -'N...:..::O"---_______________ ~ _____ _ Closed depression >5000 feet'? W ~ Steep slopes? W IN '_--' ____ --,-____ _ 7., DRAINAGE Drainage complaint records SEE A-rTAcHED 61 S Proposal will add >5000ft' of new impervious surface? [IJ ffiJ Approximate Area ______ _ Proposal will collect and 'concentrate surface and storm water runoff from an upland and site drainage area of over 5000 ft'? [IJ ffiJ Approximate Area ______ _ , Upland Drainage Basin (draining directly onto site): ABouT 7... ACI2ESNol2.1]-\ of WE. Sn-£. P!2AlNS 'D1/?EDLi C\'JTI) '\HE SITE. 11+10( vEq AWf\,Ib gDADSIDB-ankH (W~ST SIDE) MA1)~ II DIEflWLI Tb D£11:::l2MIN£ IE ANY of 1l-J E RtADSIDE. PITL-H DJ2.AJNED INTO "Tl;.E 'vI.!~D, IT MAY S'fA'( 11---1 DI1V-l pl.-OAJlf'-119 ~o;:m:J. On-SIte Drainage: _________________________ _ 11-\ E 511"£ D\2.A1 N S :rp -r1-I E 'SOOTH. TPPob i2A1? H Y Sl6q ps;rS ONTP AD) AC€:.:kl T PAgeRS 11-11 S Aj?~ '1l2.\Je: Fq?1J:l E E H u.JATE:12 WeST I NTD T.H e: W~D Downstream Drainage (minimum 1/4 mile distance): _______________ _ IH E W~'5T 'POE2-lJO"-i Of THE SerE L8\VES VIA A 'SMALL D'RH Di2AJNIf\.t~ ~4E wETLl'll--iD ~LOu)S. s.oun4 , ']l-tQoUb tl A SEl2.1 B. o~ WEN Q('JLH-~ A-ND 12.." CULVE]2.TS T7) Tl-\ E t::ND of 159-iill A\lE SE . lVeNS t:AsT I10TO AN , OP!2N DITL/=! o"EJ2. TO 'loont AyE SF PeND TU@JS s..o0fr\- • I~ II t:::o»t-..\ THE we;r SIDE OE lloon-t. @ XSE 140TH ,-ruE DITL.H-I ~ CAJ\...V8.2..1e1$) UNDEl2\(oQD-! PNE SC:;;: AND [ChiT'S SQun1 fO!2.. I ' CO-l' S01el2!'l1...: 'DO WI!b12e 1'-= $=NT?!2.S A WDOD ED At:2.Q. f::! Q E s..... PHte y Drainage Description Matches T.I.R.1 YES -a Ifv\Quab oat ALL ON-s.jk dYll,JOOq,C. leaye:;, fw,.y\ 1he u.;etteu-d 5<:>.JIv, bOJM flow> l'1Ot MdV'l'sf~. PA G £ 3 8. E X I ST IN G' R 0 A D NET W 0 R K On~site Roads G eAya P12-!\J E" Closest Transit Stop __________ ,--__________ _ 8. ESTIMATE OF PROJECT IMPACTS ON SOIL AND WATER 9. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS • 120 l)tJ ST12.e7rM CDtVT ... 11tJ?O,..AgH-ClJL..Ve12:rs, IN A '2rTlrRkE/AA12-N Af2-EA, IWU r ) 'J}± I CIL 'i612.0SH I N A 5 ~ I' Den NED ctIt\NWEL. wt±eN TliE cHJqV.f...lSL 12..EQKt\S.s:mE:: Y~s f\1..9WC] SE 'IY?' YL 1$ IS PI(<'EL'1 ED iAST IN A LLJ8U..DEnNED DinK-Tt\i2DUgH i A '2-4" 0-A's1e. PIPE:" 1t-..JTb A~ cPru DIILH -ntA-T I-\-AS A • C)oo 'SoLJT1-\ 'BOuND ru12."-\ t'a.1D e:N11?Qs. A wooDED 'D 12A11-.1 A: Er E -n-tA-'l 8}T[b"lZS. TI-1 ~ e}j c:..L os. ED :;. 'r'5TEM i WI~ 1\ \2.eALttE:S 'S~ IY4T1-1 ST. .• Tl-I E EAST 'Po}2:n 01\1 of TH~ S fTE'" Pt...ouJS. S05lli Ac.C-f?oss ,P\QJAl:.t::NI ,?~C.£LS fIND MOST APPE-lsRS 'TV ~ 'D1QrrTffi EPrSI:m A WELL 'DrnN@ .~LLlr-Jro l2.o/'<.i)6IDE DIll-I-\-Ol-.l IIPOD-l fr.J~ se-. WI:':> 'D11Z:.H· 1-1 EEl S v{J lJJ.Ial-T \1-1 E. v06S T S(DE: DeAt t-J Aft ~ P tsTB AT SE (31oTH AND IlpQl11..oN E 58'; • Cows frPPE7'G2.ED Pt2..1I?:NDk'r' MAMA COW DID /YoT I_O()~ PA12-.TILUk/s12..L'( t1?si?PY A-Bot5T" ME t::Nrt;j2,,1 N E::z PASDJI2.E vJ 11l-\ =ruE 13>6$1-' COvJ. c.ru1U2.. of SITE NoT WAL~E"D. PAGE .. 10 CONSTRUCTION SIGNS WITHIN 500 FEET AND ADJACENT USE I I NUMBER OF PHOTOGRAPHS TAKEN PA GE 5 ATTACHMENT TO MEMORANDUM PROJECT NUMBER: FIELD/OFFICE SKETCH WORK: Drainage systems, features, channels within the upland site plan areas, on the development site, and in the downstream receiving areas: SKETCHED BY: seA L E Notes: __________________________ _ I" = ---o PAGE 6 Stotus: IAPPLIED Plat N.me: IHAMILTON PLACE Do.ed Pac~Nu.~I~~4"~~·0~1~00~----- Loc.tion: 113305 160TH AVE SE C'Y 1 Zip: 1 Owner: I~HAMmT.I;:"LT~O;;;N::::MARY;::;:;:;E;;======== AppIicort IKBS III LLC PIonner: I~KCLA§:::::!'I Aov. Engr.:I~BW~HI=:::!!._oI Oeeup.ncy:I:===::::! • . Aero., 1 ___ ......1 AmounIpoidl $17.380.00 Dovolop; 1 Friday , Jun 14 , 2002 11 :16AM King County -DOES Boionco Due: 1 $0.00 I No.'" Lots: Deemed Complete:::1 :::/~/=~ Vo.tod:I~/_1 SEPA(YIN~1tj SEPA TO : L/_I Ao"",1: ;:1 ::'/'=I=~ Docision: _1_1_ E><PiIes: _I 1 Aocordod:L /_1 ~e:I_I_/~~ Last Stoton Chonge: 105l30l2002 Entorod by.IPlNTNMAG Doto EntOfod:I05I3012002 Record: 1 of 3 P",ceI No: 1366450.0100 A1tKey. , _______ -~..J .. No Oir I Streel Name Cay Id: IKC r:'"113=3::::05-'ID 1160TH AVE SE F ract: I I .!itlt.t An Add/t •• Situs 113305160TH AVE SE Harne: IHAMILTON MARY E Address 1: 15821 S E 132N 0 PL Address 2: RENTON WA Address 3: Address 4: 1=----=-=======:;; Zip: 198059 Phone 1:1 Phone 2:1=1 =======41 Notation: Friday, Jun 14 , 2002 11 :18 AM King County· ODES I I I Subdivi$ion:~1 =~~ ___ __ Lot: Area':~l =::~:;-;-;;:;;'il ZOnin g:i=IR=.4===-;r:--: ... ,' ',:=~ Census Tract::1 ===~" XCoOId: ,--_ .... Legal Description UseCode:1 81 _pep ......... ..--__ .... TRA: ~;::::::--;::'I Stlltus:l ACTIVE 8 Ii'~ DDES Custom Parcel Screen I!!!I~ 13 Pareel Numbe/ S~usAddre" Postal City Owner's Name < < < < <Identification InfO/mation> > > > > 1366450·0100 Status 113305 160TH AVE SE IHAMILTON MARY E «<<<Location Inlollnation»)~)! 1/4·Sec-Twp·Rng NE·14 ·23·05 Ref,No. Plat Name IJANETTS RENTON BOULEVARD TRS Zip 1 Lot No. 15 I Blk No, j1 Acres 14.33 . Sq. Fll::;1;;8B::;.6;:;=14;=~ Kroll Pg 1811 I Engr Map No·1 T raffie M~. Zone 1452 C VOUpg .I~0;17::;/0::;6:;:;0 =~ School District 1403 (Renton] I Fire District 125 Water District J~9~O =====!!!:!:~ Sewe/ District I'-____ ~~ .. FridaY ,Jun14 .200211 :19AM King County· DOES Zone 2 Zone 3 Zoning Effective Date: Land Use Code Comprehen sive Plan Cornmri.Y Plan Pubic Water Avafl Public Sewer Aval1 Vacancy Code BDOA KING COUNTY DEPT OF ASSESSMENTS BD01 PAIl1260-S1 REAL PROPERTY CHARACTERISTICS 06/14/02 11:21:03.2 ACCOUNT: 366450-0100-0 SITUS: 13305 160TH AV SE 98055 TAXPAYER: HAMILTON MARY E QSTR: NE 14 23 05 LOT: 5 BLK: 1 PLAT: JANETTS RENTON BOULEVARD TRS JURS: KING CO * L AND D A T A * * * B U I L 0 I BLDG SQ FOOTAGE FIRST FLOOR N G D A T A * * BLDG MISC BLDG INFO 1 OF 1 * * ZONE ACTUAL JURISDICTION KING CO ACRES 4.33 WATER SYSTEM WTR DIST SEWER VIEW OPEN SPACE TIDELANDS WATERFRONT FEET WFT LOCATION WFT BANK WFT RIGHTS ONLY PRIVATE NO 1/2 FLOOR 2ND FLOOR UPPER FLOOR TOTAL BSMT FIN BSMT BSMT GARAGE DATA 1000 YEAR BUILT 480 #STORIES 900 #LIVING UNITS DAYLIGHT BSMT HEAT SOURCE HEAT SYSTEM TOTAL LIVING AREA 1480 ACCESSORY IMPS POOL AREA POOL CONSTR ATTACHED GARAGE ROOMS BEDROOMS 3 DET GARAGE AREA CARPORT AREA MOBILE HOME 1943 1.5 1 ELEC RADIANT ================================================================= ( 0.2) == CHOOSE ONE OPTION: PRESS <PRINT> TO PRINT SCREEN, <PF4> FOR LEGAL, <PF6> FOR HISTORY, <PF7> FOR TAXES OR <PF8> TO END. BDOA KING COUNTY DEPT OF ASSESSMENTS BD01 PAIl1280-S1 REAL PROPERTY LEGAL DESCRIPTION 06/14/02 11:21:16.8 ACCOUNT: 366450-0100-0 SITUS: 13305 160TH AV SE 98055 TAXPAYER: HAMILTON MARY E QSTR: NE 14 23 05 JURS: KING CO LEGAL DESCRIPTION -PAGE 1 LOT 5 BLOCK 1 PLAT: JANETTS RENTON BOULEVARD TRS JANETTS RENTON BOULEVARD TRS * END OF LEGAL DESCRIPTION * 0.1) =============================================================================== CHOOSE ONE OPTION: PRESS <PRINT> TO PRINT SCREEN, <ENTER> FOR MORE LEGALS, <PF2> FOR CHARACTERISTICS, <PF6> FOR HISTORY, <PF7> FOR TAXES OR <PF8> TO END. ------------------------------------------ Parcel Number: 3664500100 Taxpayer: HAMILTON MARY E Annexalion: N/A Jurisdiction: Unincorporated King County Silus Address: 13305 160TH AVE SE Postal Cily: Renton, 98059 Plat Name: JANETTS RENTON BOULEVARD TRS Rec: nil Lot: 5; Block: 1 Kroll Page: 811 E Thomas Bros. Page: 657 1/4-S-T-R: NE-14-23-5 Acres: 4.33 (188614 SqFt.) Current Zoning: R-4 Potential Zoning: Compo Plan Land Use: um Assessors Open Space: N/A Commercial Use: N/A Number of Units: N/A Mobile Home: N Land Value: 174000 Improvements Value: 103000 Community Plan Area: Newcastle Unincorporated Area Council: Four Creeks Unincorporated Area Council School District: Renton 411 Fire District: 25 Roads MPS Zone: 452 ($2128.00) Waterfront: PRIVATE Water Service: WATER DISTRICT Water Service Planning Area: King County Water District 90 Sewer Service: PRIVATE Airport Noise Remedy Program: N/A Bald Eagle Flag: N/A Council District (1996-2001): 12 David Irons Jr. (R) Council District (2002): 12 David Irons (R) Drainage Basin: Lower Cedar River, WRIA 8 Police: King County, Pct: 3, Dist: F2 Service/Finance Strategy Area: Service Planning Snowload Zone: Standard Agricultural Production District: N Forest Production District: N Rural Forest Focus Area: N TOR Type: N/A TOR Status: N/A TOR Permit Number: N/A Building Inspection Area: Keller Rockey Clearing Inspection Area: Bruce Engell Code Enforcement Inspection Area: ESA Inspection Area: Chris Tiffany Grading Inspection Area: Chris Tiffany Land Use Inspection Area: Gary Casad Sens. Areas Notice(s) on Title: NONE Dev. Condo Query Result -DOES, King County Washington Page 1 of 1 @)King County -=-~ Comments No P-Suffix Conditions Found The Parcel Number you entered "3664500100" does not have any Development Conditions. To start over click on the New Query link be/ow . . - Updated: December 29. 1998 King County I DOES Page I DOES/GIS Page I New Query I News I Services I Comments I Search links to external sites do not constitute endorsements by King County. By visiting this and other King County web pages, you expressly agree to be bound by terms and conditions of the site. The details http://www6.metrokc.gov/ddes/new_direct.cfm 06/14/2002 -------------------------------------------------------------~ SHEET NO. 11 KING COUNTY AREA, WASHlNGTON (RENTON QUADRANGLE) RENTON QUADRANGLE WASHINGTON-KING CO. 7.5 MINUTE SERIES (TOPOGRAPHIC) 564 "65 1 BAD 000 FEET 122 'D~ 00" 180000 FEET t ~( .. , M' U1>I S '3Nv~"!iO"£~" 66'966~ 'I --, ~)O ~ :laa~ z ... o o W ..J « u (f) ':0 'D <Ij Of) O? '\ , \ t:r - • " ° • " . ~. . " •• ,0 • ° , sl1 ,6 oB ,-" "'c' ~,.. cp 0 ... .. "'0 .... , "0' \I) ~ .. ," oN""Z oS .1.,.':, • .1 f---/J.J " il ~ " • ~ r-, ~ WA 1998-99 -23-05-14NE Sheet· 1 of 1 King, , 'C'.J ,U " .. 'In .- I , I I 1------- , I ~ '-. , • , • • .: t I , -~I " - o I -. " , I , I .: • ~ 1, I), (.. .. " .. . ., , " ':: '-.: -0 _'_' I ~ .... "---"".-'-'.="--j,.,.,.;;-:j .. I l NO ' ., • ; 'II "'. ® "4',,,, .. ~ CI ,; I\J " " rr"-";: ~.;':-: --·----Ir~;i ~ :r," • :.~ ... 'Ii .. ~".' \ ~.I·"oQ·'" ., • I ... • c:.. .--------1 , ~ ~ '. . " VV "'Q , ~.o FLOWCONTRI ~--- III II ~ LEVEL 2- o LHDA' MAPPED -0- ~ ~ «II III "' t::, L02P0011 HAMILTON 1998 DRAINAGE MANUAl NT_""" S-T-R /',/asuNES "b/,SECUNES l\!TWPUNe; N- r ." /' 2"'§t ~ WatMBodieI '....... 7';;; 0 Pan:ell N City Bouldaries DCitia. Sensitive Slope ~ 2 Ptea C3"" [[J ERS ''\L '3-/'/ "'-;'1 "" .... ' ••• niL_2 ...... ,7 ./ -' DA III!lI U<O Ar8II Spa:ific RCNrI CortltlI Reql.iraments ;---~ l.eIIel1 FeAree ri?: Lewl2 Fe Area f --!~..' 1...e11e13FCArea Balin-'Mde AI7NContmI ~ D l.eYeI 1 Fe Area o LeYel2 Fe Aru S~ 1~4(h_ St WATER QUAL,TY LEVEL 1 o 100 200 Feet ... 1 .... 200fMl ® King County nu map it; based on • diljtlf ciaIabase oompiIfId by King Cot.nty fftlm a variety of 8OU'C:8L King COunIy camet aa:ept ~ponaibillty for errors, omssic:lns or poeitiI;:nII ac:cur.:y. The,. .. no 'Munl,tlel, ~d or Implied. ".Jun '''. 2002; G:\eY_~jec:ts\bllse2.8pr "+ I 's\ \ i ,'-! r I~~" , "G C 0 U " T Y , -r---'I t..r , , -, 1 // --'----j~ t, , ". -.r " t-- D·: ~~-i ~.-~:.;:;" l __ ......... r---hJ', .. -. -.;" : --' ~~ --.. f- I ~_i II I -0" f 'i I ~. I r-I 1--"--,/ ./ ! f--/~/\ .' --,-----j // I ~ , \ . r 'r--,. I ,I,; L-....._ 1 /::"1 ! I 1 1 H'iR~,3'\SU--)l/ ,i~ /17')~, L02P0011 HAMILTON PL.ACE ZONING ~l~O ~,' I , 1 _ J..C I ,/.: 'i' ,e--;; ! ' , I i'~, I" JL-LJ:tll~ ; ... ,41l1J§ I I' It:::."""""" ... ", ~r ' ~ -p , ~ I-l JVT_U_ , ' I L" . I /--,&f.R f--.1 ,Eli, I 1 1f-L-,!f;I 1:-L ' '" 1...i.. /./QSUNES I--,I J-\--l!: h-cl:L :~' 'J-'" ~!Ii~ I I I I I I r==! ~ " :~ ~ \ ~> 1\ ; 1'-~=8od" I--IU W .Eil~oo;rSI;'Y"~ I ii iii -I--ORoad",-",·W., L llJ ';l'-,.L i IIITir" '~ m L. ~-_ r--8=" I ~ I ! ' • " .. ,,:a~3jv~ · I --0"'- , SE1~1 ~a, M~~'t~i'J -'~iil}¥-"T t=:: ~ 'iI I f--B1:g:;::~::::::::~=:g::::: 111111" 1111 F -, :tiWl! L r-----m ,I t--El~··':':.':. lf~11 J I II; II~' H E.132ndJ;1/!J ~ II-U~ ,;>,:1", RA-25·"""_,_0IJ,..5~ H I I I f---I (D . r-~-I I r1 R.A.-5· RIn ArM, one OU pel" 5 acres : i,n I C, -r--<:~ J= Cl RA-10· RuJ1III MIa. one OU per 10 a:::teS 1 I li ~_":J UR ·l..JrtIan Re$emt, ooe DU per 5.an R·1 -Residential, me OUpera:nt I": ': • n ~ -' "--I ; :'-~ ~ .. '. ,._-I--. : -1- ~. 1.11= ' 1 I i~ !rr~rf~' -,.:1 Ilarwoo ,JH:=::~S= .. SE1 PI \ ~J: ~~ I DR-12-Re&ide~.12DUpera:nt _ I f-r -~"'; --,--=---'-"" c:J ~:J: -~' 18 DU per 8CnI , ! I I -II!:' I" '" "= i~ El R-48:-==:l;~:::::::: H :I---.L 1 ~1\"'-r~J~!lhEl ',-,-'''"fFt'I~~, ',n~ ~~:~"?" , 1/ j/I I ..ll I : rm ~I~~ l~-I' '=J ITT El~i=" Iii " "I 0 11' ~ , =--{>'G:l-:iH / ~mrf J -~mI8@ ~P=:f:L---High 'S~I:Iii, (f~~~ ': J J I J------H lS={hi 500 1000 Feet r -lE,:b& J:rH1 ~ t'fr IU ~ J-~ .J.l 1- I r u #:ffiITI=tfE! 1"·1000fellt ®-County Thi, map i. baed a by KiIV Col.llly from a VII'iety CJf IlCU"QI!IIi. King Ccurty t:aT'r\IX IIICX:ept AIIpCnIibiIity tor emn.onnsIcosOl"~~. l'hIIre .. no HmnIeI, IIXplIaIId or irnJ:jied. Plot elate: ..u, 14, 2002; G:\r.f_~'Qase2.apr L02P0011 HAMILTON HYDRO & GEO '* Bald~NeQ ~Fi"1WId 0itd'1 Data ~5m ... -vaIIey ~20 ~100 '"T~renton ~~ '~"100 ~'.'.,-""""" .. "'" ... ~ d.. 'NikIifo Ne\wJrk &T-R ~~W~ ~NES N ...... ~- ~u IDJ SAO Weiland C:g= Iff! SAO Seismic: ~ SAO Erosion ~ Water Bodlel Cl'M.RD 0nIir.ge ~lrtI oPart:ela Pa~~ HatXtat i=~:m~~~ FEMA Ci'osa 5eaions FEW. AooctMIy o FEMA 100-yr. AooI:\?taio c:::J Cities N CIty 8ou'IdIrIe. L/"'IIVE o 50CI 1000 1500 Feet 1" .. 1333 feet ® KIng County T1'ia mIp is based on a digital ~ cxxnpillld by King CoI.I'IIy from • vaiety of &clU'OIIS. King: County c:amot 8CCepI responsibility for emn, OITisslons or positional eo::uracy. c.. I ~ Z "-0 i ;U L H I "-1-8 ~ O....J 0 0_ .... . ~ c.. ~ §? " ~HnJH~ N « Q. 9I ~ ~~.~:<~ 0 <. 0 0 '0 0 , . 0 0 0 0 ~ ,'~ . ., • o. J t' ,- 0' 0 " I I , I '. " , .};r II ,o.iI I, . " . I ... ,'( . " ~ .,.~ \ ,\ " I ' • " ' ; r~ ~ t. :~~ .-' " • 1 • " \, , , , I' ~ ( , ( , , " . " ., • t, \ ' 1 .1 ~ \ iI • .. ..:... 1 '., .... •• .... • '. • t • j -~ ./ ,.-" .. , ... ..... .~ , " . ..,. ~, . . ... .- • , • I • } , . . <' " "'~ '\. . " • >, . ~ I:' " , l < • .. J, ... ~\l ,\ , ~ !' , ;-; f.\ , \t ~, ". '! .... (~ .\t ~, , ; d i' '. " /. " .. ;(; • " , • •• , \ • ,i V • " • " , . , f •• > . ; ',' , r ,\, . . " . . ' ~ .. 'l '\ ! . '.' , j 3/18/03 Mr . James O'Conner Deputy Hearing Examiner King County Hearing Examiners office 850 Union Bank of California Bldg. 900 4th Avenue SeattIe , WA 98 104 Dear Examiner O'Conner: Re hearing on Proposed Plat of Hamilton Place, L02POO 1 I Impacted by Rezone & Proposed Plat of Evendell LOITY40I and LOlPOOl6 Please add this letter to both Plat files : This morning in testimony before you as the examiner, I said tImt tIle Evendell Plat would result in controlled outflows being released further upstream in the ditch system of I 56th Ave . SE . You then asked DOES and the developer if this would occur. TIley said to their knowledge no . I refer you to tIle EvendeU DOES submittal , Preliminary Repon to tIle Hearing Examiner, March 6, 2003, Attachment 9, ",'ge 2, lines 8 and 9 of paragraph one . I quote" As a result, controlled outflows from the western area will be released fartller upstream in the ditch system of 156th Avenue SE , .. ", TIle ditches are located on the East Side of I 56th Avenue SE . TIleir overflow flows eastward. Upstream is to the North, and affects my propeny as the flow of water comes from SE I 56th EAST across my propeny since the regrading by the neighbor behind me , which causes springs to surface in tIle winter montIls on my propeny at the base of his regrade and these flow EAST across my propeny . The springs are joined by a 7 montIl creek flowing from the NOnll to tIle Southeast across tile Reynolds , tile Fishers , to meet tIle springs on my propeny, tIlen across tIle Smiths and on down 158"' in the ditch where it angles across to SE 136"', and runs in that ditch to 160 Ave . SE. where it Dows south in the ditch on the west side 160 Ave . SE before crossing to tIle East Side of 160"' Ave . SE . See the attached map . In several sections of the Hamilton submittal it refers to drainage conditions which seem to hinge on tIle Evendell Plat development and some coordination between the developers . Both tIle Evendell and the Hamilton proposals cite that regarding the propeny immediately to the Southeast of my propeny " ... runoff is slow .... TIlis soil type has a moderate limitation for low building foundations due to a seasonally higll water table , and severe limitations for septic tank filter fields due to a very slow penneability in the substratum ." (See Evendell F.2 on page 4. See Hamilton F.2 on page 3.) TIle land is currently handling the existing septic systems well, including mine, due to the fact that the current housing was built on land which would perk twice a year, once in the wet and once in the dry . TIle implosion of R-4 housing or greater on those· lands which would not perk tItreatens the areas ability to handle the currently functioning septic systems . Especially , as when in paragraph tile Evendell plat will back up tile water as cited in paragraph two . R-4 already will dramatically increase tIle water table level from sheer run off from tile roofs of the 132 new houses or so , and for removal of existing forestation (12 acres all told) where each tree gobbles about 500 gallons of water a day according to tile arborist who testified March 6, 2003 , at tIle Evendell hearing. The Hamilton Plot application at F2.4 States this site is primarily pasture grasses . Fully one half of it if forested and contains several gigantic stumps five feel around which provide shelter for a wide variety of wild life (on the 158th Ave . SE . side). TIle Hamilton Plot application at G. Neigllborhood Characteristics , states "the neighboring parcels surrounding the site range from approximately one to five acres in size . At four hOllses to the acre we , the current residents , ask that the Transfer of Density Credits not be allowed . As explained by DOES , the transfer of density credits allows the cOllnty to give someone else more space wltile shoning us . We maintain that if 16 houses are built rather than tIle 23 using a transfer of density credits , the character of the neighborhood will be best served, and future tenements be prevented . We cite U-120 "King County shall not approve proposed zoning changes to increase density witItin the Urban area unless : a. TIle development will be compatible with tIle character and scale of tile surrounding neighborhood ." Twenty tItree houses in the space of 4 and 112 acres , one-Imlf acre or more which must be protected wetland, is not in character with the neigllborhood . I take strong exception tIle ODES judgement tIlal tIle area is under utilized . [believe the propeny owners who have paid for tIle propeny they live on have a rigllt to say whether it is under utili zed or not, not speculators . . ' 2 With some 80 families re presented a t the Evende U hearing, expressing dismay over the de nsi ty planned in four projected plat developments , it is obvio us that th e current residents do not wish for the full range of services which would a llow developers to over-develop tile land . The services are not being asked for by the current residents , but are being asked for by the deve lopers so th at they may rezone and profit at our expense, Until the co unty was shan on funds, they c leaned out the ditches every year. TIley have not been by for two or tllfee years th at I can te U and that is tile cause of tile flooding , At F. 5, Wildlife : "The populations and species are limited due to nearby development" is not valid at this point, but will be if tile deve lo pers have their way . I have submitted an extensive list of bird (including snowy owl , great homed owl , pileated woodpeckers ; mammals (inclu d ing opossum , weasel , beaver (one was in my acre las t week) raccoon , rabbits , coyotes and black tail deer, insects (wild bumbl e bees, domestic bees , wasps , mud wasps, hornets, butterflies (great monarch) etc.) and reptiles (newts, salamanders, snakes) whi ch frequently feed on our adjoining lands . In a ddition , animal life regularly asce nd s up here from the Cedar River and Maple Val ley , and in from Cougar Mountain, Squak Mountain , and May Valley adjoining lan ds . Bear are across a t May Valley . Cougar have been 200 yards from my home the last 2 yea rs running, coming up from the Cedar River (as noted in the newspaper). So, with tile native animal life , this area has lon g been host to wildlife. Regarding dom est ic animals, 50 geese a nd ducks are maintained 2 lots nonh of me . I have 2 goats and 2 ducks , 2 dogs, and a cat. Next door are 38 chickens and 6 ca ts . South of me about 1,000 yards or less run 5 cattle and approximately 20 horses . There is a carrier pigeon coop right across from th e proposed Eve nd ell development. Both the Hamilton and Evendell plat applicatio ns confuse til e City of Renton zo ning at R-4 , R-5 , and greater, witll King County zoning a t R-4 , R-5 , and greater, and these zonings are not th e same. Lastly , I would like to address traffic . We already receive a steady stearn of traffic coming over I 60th Ave . SE . and across SE 132 nd and that detours up and back (in reverse pa ttern) our minor dead-end road of I 58th Ave . SE . With an increa se of 930 cars a da y (700 forecast by DDES for Evendell, and 230 Hamilton) our co untry side dead-end street will become a major thoroughfare . DDES stated today th at tile road stand ard s being used as statistics were from 1993 since tile 1997 road standards are being contested or amen ded and not final . It doe s not make sense nor does it serve the taxpaying public to be using road standards that are 10 years old . We seek the public safety and tbis means adequate road conditions, maintenance and signing should the developers have their way. Mitigation fees go into the general budget, as I understand it and ma y or may not be used for tbe roads and traffic. The same can be sai d for developers bein g able to skirt around tbe Red Zone enactment for this area. It does not make se nse that b y the use of tran sfer of densit y land credits and mitigation fees develollers are allowed to skirt the Red Zone rutings. It is not in the public interes t, but ratber in commercial interests, that developers are allowed to speculate 10 ,20. and 50 years in advance and therefore escallC current statutes or regulations meant to contro l develollment. Sileculation yes, but it should have to be coupled with current zoning at the time of the final aplllication, without the use of den sity credits or mitigation fee s. Thank you for li stening to the current residents and considering their desire to make growth in character with the area and safe. We do not need tenements built here, a nd crowding so many in so small a space will surely produce that in 10 to 15 yea r s. I represe nt the Taylors, the Fi shers, the Smiths, the Synders, a nd the Peterson s, as well as u s Cookes, As I stated. there is law , but it needs to be apillied morally and ethically. As a Program Analyst and a Freedom of Information Act Officer in my profess ional life, I well know that people in places of power do not always apilly mora lity or ethics, preferring to go the patb of least resistance. I was happy to hear tbat you came out of retirement to hear these cases because you will not have to fear for your job. We are counting on you to make judgements that will be fair to both tbe developers and the current landown~bank yo u for your time. Renton, WA 98055 Message phon e 425-227-2505 days f _ ' • \ -... "'. \ ~ , t.i~ '( aY S";v. W e. .-'-'.l VI f-'7------I ~ +-~!-.---I ~ iJO t---7----== ~6,;..;....._-+ ,l.-) }a.u'e.. -"' ---- I , ('yo , \) q.;J :(. -"-I fV~-L - ~. • , . ,. • , ~-\8-0~ I I 'B'-tJ...) I +-l . ,\+ ... --~\.... .... +-\a:.. ..... • r I r"\.. Q,. -.-J h ro..J. '1"'>0-\. .... '" ''"' ...... .~ ~v-e u -h..:. _ ... :-h ~ ~ ,,-h:. ~ .... -3.~ d....-o. ,:-.. " ~ -1t.--. k. '-'P ~ -'-c.6:>~-.J o£ :e.~~ ~n..~..}; ~~ ~~ "lb e~\s.-t-. c::(',~ co..". E . s.d-0 ~ 'a'tt. ~>~ ~ . .p lC!:> .. c...5 ... -~ eo nU , ••• :0.. ,A c.Jl.. .o&h. ...L o.,l~ ........ " ~ .s ~ ~ClU '. :~. + e:.. 'be: • ..J -• !!: C::a~ k..... I b ~ ..l :} :::a.:t ~17\./ ~ .... ~ Ad. ~ !~-\. NI\.~ ( U::)'~ .. 1t/ ~cq~4 Ie ~v :r-I ~~ 71 , .. I -<1'-... ct.... .... .-~ 0""1 d. 'lC"'C>-~.r... C> ~ (2x,h" b rl- \J . I ?~b \QI>'). ~ r / J • c:::l '('"Q....l n G..A. ., ~-e.. -\ V'"'> 0 u"'-..1 . ,~~ ..d-" J :..::. ..... ~,"'2.....~ <:.. <..l\ ~J~~se.J ~ 'S 'e\"¥\ l-V\-. ( .h._ c...~\, ,..l ~r ~ .... ,e,.. \ ~ ~ \b~ G,......;:..l .1 N lV") lc;a ve-l '"e R. C. ,...., , . Red o-f'C: ~\ . ~~~ , j~ ........ \..,. ... ~ -\~ ~ .-.c...u.. ~ ~ t.J t._.r-\ c::.. , . . I ~,nV"I C. I BLLU 3-\ g-c:::)'~ 'B~ue~ll \Gr,,'! .\1 <..J r ( \ ~ t 'LeI. r.o .. l-\.e.ac.~ no... ....J ~AZL-rC . ~.-_ ,...., "" ~t." ""'" ~ .-C:. 'r'-.-.............. +-/ cc>~~-L A ."\ ~ . \ , I , z.~\.c:A-0--.... D -: \ __ ~ \ ~ .~. ~. I .J::--.. ~ j .\ .-:1-A [) • , =RQ.>f'~ .......,~~ ~~~ ... -.l , .1 d .. fi---. . 0 ~ ,,' , rOV\.<:'I\l"'~'· ~_ .c._-\""{:.\~ D.1 ...l .1 \..1 \qq~ nb..li:. "> • \.ct. q", . Ar: ... :::~ \ v. ~ _-r tA:b, ~ ......e. ?o~\ \ 10....Q. __ 4!>J c:...oV'\ ~~-\-1. ~ ~ .. l?_'L l~ 10..,. e::--, -;> §....,.,. ..l_ .... aJrc::.. bu~e..ct E~t -L ,"-:J 5cJ\_t~ . N@>\ r::tn b-~ ~ . U_I .... o.. ...Jc,... ... ,_c • l5~~ ~ \3l\ ~ ...l. _ .... ... ..-{ ~ .1. l?A~ w/¥.~ J~ 11 --l ___ .. A a . , ..-te~:::.~L t,o.--, h.~~:,t-1 .... !f'~n':5€...t -0..-<:... ~ . -. :,-t8-o 3 B::I uJ , M.. nO. J) RD &> ""_~ - t ~\ ZJ;; - \ --= "t... ..... ,:;. R-4 Lo.v..J c~~-t St:.~'" A_" ~ '"Pv-e t., ~ =-7 J-w.."., 1_ ~., . £.~ \A.::) 1 t r~.! -':R~~~ R".~V\ <...t • -1.' t .... __ t,... .l eve:>\ A ..41 ........ , <:::.c-e-.J,* ~~ ~~--.l Gb. ---..... conJ~6 ~ .0 .b. (lR , ...-A. . '-C>_~ re\ <e ~5 --, I Irk.o.. \~a .... .,.e ., -=-/ c:; "'. -ilL -, +\ .1\"" CA.,... ~ .-e..."!;" ~..\_. A --Cf ..1 , ........ ..J ( . \ o.ll .•. - , • .o c.... • ') -"""'A :, or \~ ~ -.~-'" I I.... t'O> j...,.~ • ~ , ~L~;<:' ...... +-.~ """ ': ~ u e. £l ....J ~ \ 7 ,..\ ~-e...A-d..~ -~ l=-..r~A.Q (,\. \ {'C>,.u t-...l ... -t!>V-- , -, .- ii ~ •• ... • .' ., I •• f-" , ,. J , . - ~ . • , \ -, -.--. , • , , • '-. " .'. . I I • --------------.---- . -. aw :>-'8-03, K~t~ " S6 \'2.13.y.. -/ s \SP"l { d\.~-l ~ I ~5\3b ~n=> .1t "".....l. h .. f~ ,., ,.. .. : ..1.., .1-c:::.crr. 1 I ~ l-' ~"W.. C......,..,. d.. ecA· L VW'\.O( ua.Q. -.i~~ ~ l~ J 1~'6'L I ("'Q. ..l. :d:t,,~ ~ , ~ ---turn~c::....., c..= u \ J. u.,.".::--.. / ,\A'Q. 'D~\::>"'-u ~).. ~""~~Q In .\~~ k> .~ ~t~'\, =7 \J..';'~ J. ,l'"'\ .... ~ ~~9 ~ .- I ~ I I . . . -*--. Hamilton Place L02POOll Proposed Conditions Bruce Whittaker 2126/2003 8. A surface water adjustment(L02Y0098) is approved for this subdivision. All conditions of approval for this adjustment shall be met upon submittal of the engineering plans. 9. The 100-year floodplain for any on site wetlands or streams shall be shown on the enginee ring 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. Road A shall be improved to the urban subaccess street standard. b. FRONTAGES: The frontages along both 158 th Ave SE and along 160 th Ave SE shall be improved to the urban neighborhood collector standard. c. Tract D shall be improved to the private access tract standard per Section 2 .09 of the KCRS. d. Modifications to the above road conditions may be considered according to the variance procedures in Section 1.08 of the KCRS . Drainage Narrative The site is located in the Orting Hills subbasin of the Lower Cedar River basin . The existing site drainage sheet flows from the northeast to the southwest. The site drainage then leaves the site along the south boundary or enters the ditch along the east side 158 th Ave SE. A wetland exists in the southwest comer of the site, shown as Tract E on the proposed plat map. After leaving the site, the flow path continues south in the east ditch along 158 th Ave SE throu gh a series of individual culverts. The path turns east in a ditch within the unopened RJW for SE 136 th ST. Flow continues east to the west ditch along 160th Ave SE, then turns south along the west side of I 60 th Ave SE. The flow continues south along the west side of I 60 th Ave SE to a cross culvert at approximately SE 139 th St. (2,450 ft downstream). The drainage then continues south along the east side of I 60th St in a series ----------------------------------------------, .. --......... of ditches and culverts, turning east at approximately SE 142 nd St. (2600 ft downstream). Flow continues east through a swale and several culverts to an unnamed tributary to the Cedar River. Several downstream drainage complaints were evaluated and included in the Level I Downstream Drainage Analysis prepared by Daniel Balmelli P .E .. Mitigation is propos ed for these problems by either a higher flow control requirement or downstream improvements in accordance with the 1998 king County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM). Proposed SEPA Condition Hamilton Place L02POOIl Bruce Whittaker 1/10/03 The base flow control for the stormwater detention system is Level 2 per the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual(KCSWDM). To mitigate for existing downstream flooding problems, one of the following options is required: I. The stormwater detention system shall be designed to the Level 3 Flow Control criteria as specified in the I 998KCSWDM. OR 2 . The stormwater detention system shall be designed to the Level 2 Flow Control criteria and the following downstream improvements shall be accomplished either individually or in conjunction with other development projects in the area: The 160th Ave SE downstream conveyance system(from SE I 36 th ST to approximately SE 142 0d St) shall be upgraded to provide for the 100-year storm capacity. Downstream driveway culverts/ditches and a cross-culvert under 160 th Ave SE shall be improved as needed. Culverts L-8 and L-I 0 on the west side of 160'h Ave SE, cross-culvert L-ll, and culverts L-12 and L-14 on the east side of 160'h Ave SE shall be improved . The culvert designations are according to the Level I Downstream Drainage Analysis prepared by Daniel Balmelli, PE dated May 26 , 2002 and revised Dec 3, 2002 . Bank and channel stabilization are also required in the unopened right-of-way for 1620d Ave SE, in the vicinity of the easterly line of Lot 12 , Rich Lea Crest(address 16046 SE I 42 0d St.). It is estimated that stabilizing and regrading approximately 50 to 100 feet east of 16046 SE I 42 0d ST, will be adequate to resolve flooding that has occurred at this location. The culverts and channel described are located from the south site boundary to a distan ce of approximately 2000 feet to 3200 feet downstream . Note that the above ditch and culvert improvements are intended to duplicate the downstream improvements required for the proposed plat of Even dell LOIPOOI6 . ; . --.,~ . SEE DRAWINGS) .. , ...... -FE lh!4-~ I:ltF44 l.. I I Y L.t-t<t.N I LN t"'tft"W ~a 'f.lt:) (~'f 1 t"" • t:U .... tr.:J CiIV 01 RellOn PLANNINGIBUILDINGI PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Administration -Fifth Floor 1055 South Grady Way Renton. WA 98055 Date: 02124/03 TO; Kim Claussen . FROM: Gregg Zimmerman DOES -Land Use Svcs. Div. P/B/PW Administrator Attn : Permit Center City of Renton Phone: (206) 296 -6600 Phone: (425) 430-7311 Fax Phone: (206) 296-7051 Fax Phone: (425) 430-7241 I SUBJECT: L02P0011 . Hamilton Place REMARKS: 0 Original to be m81/8d 181 Urgent I Number of pages including cove, sheer 9 o Reply ASAP o Pleas8 c:: For your Comment review Please find comments on the above subject, due today. Thank you! "'HI"'1t or TN. eU".1: FE B -24-~~ ~:44 L 1 I Y U-t<tN I lA'I t"tlt"W :!R Jesseranner, Mayor February 2 J, 2003 Kim Claussen DDES -Land Use Services Division Attn : Permit Center 900 Oakesdale Ave. SW Renton, WA 98055·1219 SUBJECT: L01POOll, HAMILTON PLACE Dear Ms . Claussen : "f~ "4 .)tJ (~t.f l ,.. • t:J.::' .... t'T:' CITY UJ:4' IC.EN ·.l Ul~ PlanningIBuildingIPublic Works Department Greg Zim_nalA P.L, Adniiabtrator Thank you for the opportunity of reviewing this subdivision . The City of Renton PlanninglBuildingIPublic Works Department has the following comments. The project has exiSling sewer availability. Water service will be from Water District 90 . The proposed development is within .Rent",,'s potential annexation area . Therefore, we request that the internal street (Road A) and off-site frontage improvements along the portion of the project site abuttin, 1158" Ave . SE and 160· Ave SE be installed in accordance with City of Renton standards . Sincerely, JJA('1i 3m111(e( ft.- Gregg Zimmennan, Administrator PlanningIBuildinl¥Public Works Dept. tc: Jenn lft r HeRO in, Sandra MC)er lys lIonuby o.YC: Chrinenttn BobMohn _.Ilo.oDpc • ....,,;,""""">Ill<IL. __ -------,-------R EN T O~N 1055 South Grady Way -Renton, Wasbington 98055 * Tt'li l P.,* ClO"IIeIo,'~ ..cyo:MMf._ ... ;tI , 30'"1. ~ e6I'I'~ AM.AD OP THa cu.,,& DATE: TO: cc: FROM : SUBJECT: . , - CITY OF RENTON PLANNINGIBUILDINGIPUBLIC WORKS MEMORANDUM Febnwy 4. 2003 Jim OraylFiR Dcparlmcnt Lys HomsbylUtiUty Systems S31ldra Meyerrrransportation LC-'ley Bc:tlacblPuka DUeclOr Grell Zimmerman; PIB/PW Adminislnltor Jennifer Henning: Development Planning f(f) 6IJrl KlaC CODDty DDES Notic. or DeclaloD File II: L02POOll Bamllto. Place-SlapplemeDbJ brermado. r . Attached is a copy of the above subject notice. Comments must be submlned \0 the Depu1meat ofo..velopmcnt and Enviroomcntal Services (DOES) by February 24. 2003 . Please refer \0 the attachment for complete details. Please submit all comments \0 Gregg Zimmerman. allowing sufficient response time . w~ QitJvV d-';1-0 -~ 5rtWVI"'-~ ~~~ ~~ 81lt~7{~ I.""-J'VJ DATE : TO: • cc: FROM: SUBJEc[: \".1 I I ur r\1:. ...... UI'I ror-w CITY OF RENTON PLANNIN(;IBUILDINGIPUBLIC WORKS MEMORANDUM Februafy 4, 2003 Jim ClraylFire DeparbneDt Lys HomabylUtility Systems . Sancha Meycr/Transpodation Lesley BetlacbIParlcs Director emgg Zimmerman; PIBIPW Administrator RECEIVED FEB -~ 2003 T~nsponilion SYSl4t~ Oi .... Jennifer HenninS; Development Planning ~ ~~ ~ KiIi& COllDty DDES Notice of Dec:hloD FIle.: L02Pooll-RamIltoD Place Attached is a copy oflbe above subject notice . Conunents must be submitted to the: Dq>utmcnt of Development and Environmental Services (DOES) by Febnwy 24, 2003 . Please refer to the at1llchmcDt for complete details . Please submit .11 comments to Ore" Zimmerman, allowing sufficient response time . Co~,",e ... + ne.. pYD,Dse! Jeve(op .... c,\t, s .v I~'''' R.e"fd,.'s Pllfe,.-h7l' .4.t .. eu -17... ,4re'l. n.~.,e..,~,,') c..cJ (.. V'~1o(6Sf ft.,:>-f -tke. , ",-tn-II. ( sh-ee.+ (~ •• J ,A.) 2 .. J e>~ -S'/f.e {; ... +~ IOtff""ve ... c .... 4s a/,".!. K£. f."fr~ ... #.{. Kc. IU"J"-+ S I'I-c 3-{,o.(1/"'-1 15itt... Ave. .... Sf a",;.L ,(,0 ~e"u( 5~ b~ ''''s+~.((eJ I;>. sec.."""d,, ... r:.«. w,fet c..,-? o,fl!4,.,h", S+~,J~"J.r. 1 .- DATE: TO: cc: FROM: CITY Of RENTON PLANNINGIBUILDINGIPUBLIC WORKS MEMORANDUM FebJuary 4, 2003 Jim Gray/Fire DcputInent LY3 HomsbylUtili\Y Systans Sandra Meyerfltmsportation Lesley BetlechlParb DiIeo\or ORa ZimmennID; P/BIPW Administrator Jconifer HcaninS: Development PlllII1ing ft} !p,orl SUBJECl: Kial COday DDES Notice of DecIsIOD n. .: LOll'OOl1 HamIIloD PIac:e-S.ppIelllCDtaJ IoronulJoD Attached is a copy of the above subject notice. FEB -UOO3 CollllllCllts must be 5\lbmitted to the Depanmc::nt ofDmllopment and Enviromnc:ntal Savi= (DOES) by Fc1m.wy 24, 2003. Please refer to !he altac:hmcD1 for I:Omplctc details. Please submit all comments to Gregg Zimmerman. allowing sufficient response time . " . .r-. ......oI~IIIIIEa. '~ Notice of Decision ...... '-"*-....... _~A ... ~ .-.. ........... ,.'·nl' File No.: Project NiI/tIC : DOES PIWltr: Tolepllolle No .: Appllaur: PrOjecl Loeatio.: Project Descriptio.: Permlu Reque"ed : L02POOll IIamiIIOD Plot< KimCbll"'''' 201>-~7167 JIlIS m. LLC 1150511eJ..R.cd RNd. nu BcIIcnJo. WA H005 ~23-7000 ' FEll 132003 CITY OF RENlON ,...., ....... - noolile .. Iocaled btlweaa 15.· A , ... 1It Soutllelst ud 160'" AVeDue Soutbout ad DOrilo oC SE 1~ Street. Rcquost '" ""bdlvlde 4.3% 1<nO inlo 23 loll Cor SIDcl",Camil1 dotKlltd d"eWap aDd IncIs for ...... 11". recnadoD aDd saooItlv ..... Cs). Tb. loll shes ..... c. from IpprGlbtlaId,y 4,556 10 ',338 .quare feolla size . Tb. IpplJcull< oho propod., 10 1IIIIIz. Trust ... of Dev.lopmoDI Credits 10 obtaID 6 of Lbe 231011 propoled. Fol1llll! SubcllvWOD SEPA Thtt4bold Determination: M1U,lted DelermlDadob oCNo.-SIp1t1cabct ~NS) wutd J •• Ulry 31.2003 • Co_nl/Appeal Proeedll/'e: Ccmm<:Du OD thiI SEI' A detamibation In: wel<Oll>O. This SEI' A detamilllliOD IDly abo be oppeaIed ill wriliDa 10 !he Kine CoIInIy HeariD& Examiner. A notico of oppeaI must be 6Ied with thO Land U .. Savi ... Division al the addras till'" below prior 10 4:30 p. ..... Febnory14, 10OJ.and be ..... mpllliccl with I fiI.iq fee 0(12S0.00 pa)l1blelo th, JC.iDg Co<mty Office ofFiDaoce . Ih timely Notice of Appeal .... been fil .... the appellant shllillso file a Statement of Appell with the Land Use SeM ... DivUioo II th.ld ....... Jist'" below prior 10 4:30 p.m. o. F.bn.ry14.1003. Tho Stalcmcnt of Appeal shill identify tile docision beina """caled (iDcludin, the liI. oumber) and th.llleCed CITOrs in that deeision. FurIh<r, \be Sweme" of Appeal slWl sUt.: I) opccific ....... whylhc decision should be ......... or modifi"'; and 2) the harm sua ..... or aoticip.ted by tile appeUIII~ IItd tho rtU.C 5CXJ8bI. The scope of 1ft appeal rhaJI be based OD /bill ... or i.wcs raised in the SIII"",.,,1 oC AppUI . FaillW to timely file I Notice of Appeal, appuI fee or Stal ..... t of ApptOi, deprivt4 tho Hwina Exuniner ofjurildictioo 10 cooaidor the appell . AppI81s must belllbmiH ... 1O tho Dcpanmcnt oCDevelopment IIId Environmetlw Services (DDI!S) at Iha . followin, ocIdreu : DDES-LaDd Use SeJ'\lices DivisioD Attn: Permit Center 900 OakHdale AveDue Southwest Renton, Washington 98055-1219 206-296-6600 Dlte Melled; J •••• "". 200J If you !lave lilY qUClliobS .. ,ardine the Ippeal proeeduru, please contact the Land U .. Strvka Division It (%06) %96-6600. !fyou nqulre Ibis material in braille, audio cwette, or large prin~ call (206) 1"-"00 (voico) or (206) 191>-nJ7 (TIY). ";. , .... all ur ~CI'lIUl'l rorw ... c.J ... ..JC.,I IC. .. J. r .v';V:1 King County Department of Development and Environmental Services Mitigated Determination Of Non-Significance (MDNS) for HamHton Place (DDES File No. L02POOll) Projed: KiIIg CO.Dty Permit.: Coaaty CODtad: PropoaeDt: Zoaillg: Comm.alty Plu: Dra.agc Sabbasla: Sec:lioll/I'oWIIs.ipIRIDge: Notes: January 31, 2(0) This is a request to subdivide 4:32 acres into 23 'Iofs for sin&1e fllDlily detached dwellinlPl and tracts for drainage, recreation and sensitive uea{s). The lot IlZCS range from approximately 4.556 to 6)38 ,square feet in sizc. The applicant is also proposing to utilize Transfer of Devclopment Credits to obtain 6 of the 23 lots proposed. The site is located between ISS" Avenue Southeast and 1~ Avenue Southeast and aorth of SE 134" Street Formal Plat Kim Claussen , ProgramlProjcct Manager m (206) 296-7167 KBSru,LLC 12505 Bel-Red Road, #212 Bellevue, W A 9S00S R-4 Neweastle Lower Cedar River/Cedar River Basin' NE 14 -23..QS ' 1.-This findiDg is based on review of the project site plan received October 31, 2002 (revision), environmental cbccldisl dated May 30, 2002 , Levell Drainage Analysis received May 30, 2002 wfsupplemental studies received October 31 ,2002 and December 6, 2002, wetland study received May 30, 2002, drainaee variance (filc no . L02VOO9S) and other documents in the filc. B. Issuance oflhis thresbold determination does not constitute approval of the permit This proposal will be reviewed (or compliance with all applicable King County codes which regulate development activities, including the Uniform Fire and Building Codes, Road Standards, Surface Water Design Manual, and the Sensitive Areas Re&ulatlons . I L..U c. ... c.1UC.I..... CAJ' ... J .... j I I UI "L..I'tIUl' lUI'" ... c..-, ... ..x.o 'c.."'& "~ ... .,, Hamilton Plac:e -L02PooII January 31. 2003 Page 2 Threshold DetermiDatioD The responsible official finds that the above described proposal does not pose a probable significant adverse impact to the enviromnent, provided the mitigation measures listed below are applied as conditions of permit issuance. This finding is made {,ursuant to RCW 43.21C,KCC 20.44 and WAC 191-11 afterrevicwingthe environmental ehccJclist and other information on file with the lead agency and considering mitigation measW'CS which the agency or the. applicant willlmplemc:Dt IS pan of the proposal. The responsible official finds this information reasonably sufficient to evaluate the environmental imp~t of this proposal. MitigatioD List The fullowin& mitigation measures &ball be attached as conditions of permit issuance. These mitigation measwcs are consistc:Dt with policies, plans. rules, or regulations designated by KCC 20.44.080 aa a b83is for the exercise of substantive authority and in effect when this t1ueshold determination is issued. Key &ources of substantive authority for each mitigation measure are in parentheses; however, other soun:es of substantive authority may exist but are not expressly listed. The base flow control for the stormwater detention system is Level 2 per the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual(KCSWDM). To mitigate for existing downstream flooding prOblems, one of the following options is required : I. The stormwater detention system shall be designed to the Level 3 Flow Control criteria as specified in the 1998 KCSWDM. OR 2. The stonnwater detention systCll\ shall be designed to the Level 2 Flow Control criteria and the following downsbum improvements shall be accomplished either individually or in conjunction with other development projects in thc area : The I60th Ave SB downstream conveyance system(from SE 136" ST to approximately SH 142" St) sball be upgraded to provide for the lOO-year stonn capac:ity. Downstream driveway culvensldilches and a cross -culvert under 160* Ave SE shall be improved as needed. Culverts lo8 and loIO on tho west side of 160* Ave SE, cross-culvert loll, and culverts loI2 and L-14 on the east side of 160* Ave SE shall be improved. The culvert designations are according to the LGYell Downstream Drainage Analysis prepared by Damel Balmelli, PH dated May 26, 2002 and revised Dec 3, 2002. Bank and channel stabilization are also required in tho unopened right-of-way for 162" Ave SR, in the vicinity of the easterly line of Lot 12, Rich Lea Cmt (address 16046 SE 142" St.). It is estimated that stabiiizing and re-grading &ppr!)ximately SO to 100 feet east of 16046 SE 142" St, will be adequate to resolve flooding that has occurred at this loCation . The culverts and channel described are located from the south site boundary to a distance of approximately 2000 feet to 3200 feet downstream. Note that the above ditch and culvert improvement. are intended to duplicate the downstream improvements required for the east subbasin of the proposed plat of Evendcll LO I POO 16. HanliltOn Place -L02POO 11 January 31. 2003 Page 3 This finding "is made pursuant to RCW 43 .21C , KCC 20.44 and WAC 197-11 after reviewing tho environmental c;beclclist and other Infonnation on file with the lead agcoc;y and c;oll&ideriug mitigation measures whicll the agency or the applicant will implement as part of the proposal The . rcspoDSiblo official finds this Information reasonably sufficient to evaluate the environmental impact of this proposal. Tho lead agellC)' has determined that ~ iequircments for environmental analysis, protection, and mitigation measures have been adcqullcly addressed in the developmcut regulations and comprehensive plan adopted under cbaPter 36.70A RCW , and in other applicable local, state, or federal laws orrulea, as provided by RCW 43.2 I C.240 and WAC 197-11 -158 . Our agency will not require any additional mitigation meas\D'CS under SEPA . Comments and Appeals Written comments or any appea1 oflbis threshold determination must be stamped received by King County berore 4 :30 PM o. February 14, 1003. Appeals must be accompanied by a nonrefundable filing fee. Please reference the file numbcn: when corresponding . Appeals must be in writing and slale the perceived errors in the thrcsbold determination, specific reasons why the determination should be reversed or mpdified, the hlUUl the appellant will sutTer if the threshold detennination remains uncb8llged, and the desired outc;ome of the appeal . If the appellant is a gxouP. the harm to any onc or more members must be stated . Pailun: to meet these requirements may result in dismi5s&l of the appeal. CommeDtJappeal deadline: Appeal filiDg reel Address lor commeBtlappeal: Responsible Omelal : GregBOri;upervlsor Current Planning Section Land Use Services Division TJ>LOOO 2191 4:30 PM on February 24, 2003 $250 check or money order made out to the King County Office of Finance King County Land Usc Services Division 900 Oalccsdale Avenue SW Renton , WA 980SS -1219 AlJN:. Current .Planning Section J4>o---:;:> 30, ~ J Date TOTIt. P.09 ---- , \ 9~'--~'. w \. "4:..,,," oS l ~""" v _v-. ~ > ) ~y-t<::-( T:\ C>y."'~ c.c,... ~\~-:£ t"'.O--i:_\V"L~~~·~-t C!: \351..4--((be. ~ -'B-......:..,\,......,...,. \.""'-6-QC:_"s"e \.\ 'P-., ~O' tT -(:..----C~.~E Dd-~ -r"\ 1..\::)e.~~::::S ~ 0-9 \ 60~ "'-C>"L) C!.. \~ <: G -e3) n.ee~ \."'~~~ o..,...-\~~ (~\\ Q~~ ~~~'(f'" n,1=-,) ~,", ... e"~"h)J ~". ~ee.J. ~e..\ =\:c4 • ...lea...-- "< ~ R ~"" J:s \~"'!\.. ~<-~E: ~ \SS~· ~rc.."'~ T.,. ~W"Ove ~ ~ts~ '\l"'"C-J.. ~~ h bo.,..~~ iltl c....\ \<en=h:.~ :S.ho~ .s.\.:>b_\\..~ 0,,", ~ ~ -? c5k~\~ 10<. ,Nc:.'1s(,.,.,~$V-~O~ C-\~~'r 3~ ~o ... At;> ' . . f -., L~_ ..... _ = .1 f.""""o \..-0 ... \.<.. F-~~-\e .J.. -= -- = - -----------~- ~----- ~----~~~~,------------_T----- , - $1 - , . - = , p < ., ---~ • - Ct - -.......--.. ~--~--------. ----- ® King Count y Depa rtm enl of Deve lopm ent and En vironm ental Services Land Use Servic es Di vision 900 Oak es dale Av enu e Soulhw es t Ren ton. Wash in gton 980 55 -12 19 Plat Screening Transmittal Preliminary Plat Application of Hamilton Place LUSD File No . L02P0011 Date of Information Request : July 17, 2002 Deadline for Submittal of Information : October 21 ,2002 Please provide ten (10) copies of the following. unless otherwise noted. D rainage: It appears that there are at least two subbasins on the site . The subbasins are proposed to combine into one drainage facility post development. Please submit a drainage adjustment from Core Requirement 1 of the 1998 KCSWDM (discharge at the natural location) to divert the nows to one facility . Please show the existing and post developed drainage basins on the conceptual drainage plan . • Please evaluate the downstream drainage complaint at 13814 160" Ave SE(Bret Bowden) as well as include other complaints as shown in the Evendell Level 1 drainage analysis and discuss proposed mitigation as necessary for the plat of Hamilton Place. Please note that the applicant for Evendell(Mike Romano) is now preparing a Level 3 downstream analysis for submittal shortly . This info could be helpful since both plats share the same downstream drainage course . • Evaluate alternatives to the discharge proposed into the wetland (i.e . level spreader, etc .) and revise the conceptual drainage plan accordingly. W etland Stu d y: The wetland shown in the southwest corner of the site may be considered a class 2 forested wetland, which w ill require a 50-foot buffer. This determination is subject to field review by Lau ra Casey, Senior Wetland Ecologist. In the event is determined that it is in fact a Class 2 forested wetland, the plat shall be revised accordingly. Please contact Laura Casey at (206) 296-7291 for additional information and/or questions regarding the wetland classification . Recreati on 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 21 A .14 .180 E2 for equipment requirements. Walkways: Prov ide 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. Density : Provide written documentation and/or verification that the proposed density credits are available for use on this site or revise the plat to comply with the minimum and/or base density requirements . Note, the TDR certificate #36 is sufficient for three of the six additional lots proposed, however, at this time, it is unknown if the d evelopment credits are available from the plat of Stoneridge, as this project is not recorded at this time. For fu rther questions related to the Transfer of Density Credit program , please contact Kate Stenberg, King County Office of Regional Policy and Planning at (206) 296-3441 . 1581h A ve nu e Southe as t: The Subdivision Technical Committee has determined that 158'" Ave . SE is classified as a ne ighborhood collector, and will be recommending urban neighborhood collector frontage improvements (i.e. 32 ft. of pavement) in accordance with the 1993 King County Road Standards. Please revise the road sections shown accordingly . Rev ised Prelim i n ary Pl at: 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. 1 • LAND USE SERVICES DIVISION ROUTINGITRANSMITTAL FORM June 6, 2002 TO : Trudy Hintz, Office Technician Site Development Services, ATTN: GEO REVIEW FM : Kim Claussen , Planner III, Current Planning Section W RE : Proposed Plat of Hamilton Place LUSD File No. L02P0011 Screening Meeting: WEI). 7)" II. l} 0 ,tJ~f" Location: Planner: Kim 6·7167 Attached are the following items for your review: Preliminary Plat Map Environmental Checklist Level One Drainage Analysis . \~D y"Y\lL"? W~ d. COt\! 6..'1 If you have any questions regarding the meeting, please contact the assigned planner. If you are unable to attend the meeting, please forward written comments, requests for additional info to the planner, prior to this meeting. Thanks . Attachments Cc: Bruce Whittaker , LAND USE SERVICES DIVISION ROUTINGfTRANSMITTAL FORM June 6,2002 TO : Trudy Hintz, Office Technician Site Development Services, ATTN: WETL REVIEW FM: Kim Claussen , Planner III, Current Planning Section ~ RE : Proposed Plat of Hamilton Place LUSD File No . L02P0011 Screening Meeting: IIllil). 7)tJ //,i!)/) /»'f/ Location : Planner: Kim 6-7167 Attached are the following items for your review: Preliminary Plat Map Environmental Checklist Level One Drainage Analysis \0\>0 mo-.:? ~~'b~ If you have any questions regarding the meeting, please contact the assigned planner. If you are unable to attend the meeting, please forward written comments, requests for additional info to the planner, prior to this meeting. Thanks. Attachments Cc : Bruce Whittaker LAND USE SERVICES DIVISION ROUTINGITRANSMITTAL FORM June 6, 2002 TO: Kris Langley, Senior Engineer Traffic & Engineering Section, KCDOT FM: Kim Claussen, Planner III, Current Planning Section .'(1../ RE : Proposed Plat of Hamilton Place LUSD File No. L02P0011 Screening Meeting : WE/.). 7?t:J //;LJc:/ ;J~-'/ Location: Planner: Kim 6·7167 Attached are the following items for your review : Preliminary Plat Map eK\\J. ~~l~ tot>o rY)0-:t' If you have any questions regarding the meeting , please contact the assigned planner. If you are unable to attend the meeting, please forward written comments, requests for additional info to the planner, prior to this meeting. Thanks. Attachments Cc: Bruce Whittaker .' LAND USE SERVICES DIVISION ROUTINGfTRANSMITTAL FORM June 6,2002 TO : Steve Foley , SEPA Coordinator Regulations Program, Water & Land Resources Division FM : Kim Claussen, Planner III, Current Planning Section 'i>---' RE : Proposed Plat of Hamilton Place LUSD File No . L02P0011 Screening Meeting : W E .() Location : Planner: Kim 6-7167 Attached are the following items for your review : Preliminary Plat Map Environmental Checklist Level One Drainage Analysis '\0,,0 m~ We.,t\OX\O-~Nd.'1 If you have any questions regarding the meeting, please contact the assigned planner. If you are unable to attend the meeting, please forward written comments, requests for additional info to the planner, prior to this meeting. Thanks. Attachments Cc : Bruce Whittaker I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I CHAD ARMOUR, LLC April 30, 2002 Job Number 01·0014 Mr. Curtis Schuster KBS III, LLC c/o John L. Scott Real Estate P . O. Box 807 Bellevue, Washington 98009·0807 6500126"' Avenue S.E. Bellevue, Washington 98006·3941 (425) 641 ·9743 annour@msn.com Subject: Preliminary Wetland Assessment and Delineation Report Hamilton Place (Tax ID No. 366450·0100) ~rn©rn~wrn[ID MAY 30 2002 Renton Area of King County, Washington K.C. D.D.E.S. Dear Curtis: We are pleased to present the results of our preliminary wetland assessment and delineation for the above·referenced property located in the Renton area of King County, Washington (Figure I). The work was accomplished in accordance with Chad Armour, LLC proposal (No . 0032) dated March 22, 2001 and a verbal request from yo u to flag the wetlands and prepare a report. The purpose of the work was to identify wetland areas, flag and/or stake the wetland boundaries, and prepare a written report to document our findings. The report is organized in sections and includes: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS that presents a synopsis of the pertinent issues related to wetlands; SITE DESCRIPTION of the subject property (site) and adjacent properties; BACKGROUND INFORMATION that presents existing information about the site; SITE CONDITIONS that describes on·site wetlands and uplands; CONCLUSIONS that summarize the results of the wetland assessment; and LIMITATIONS of this project. A list of references , tables, figures, and appendices follow the text. Table 1 lists the plants observed on the site. Figure I is a Vicinity Map showing the location of the site. Figure 2 is a Site Plan that shows the location of the wetland boundaries, sampling points, and other pertinent site features . The soil type mapped for the site is shown on Figure 3. HamiltonfDelineation Report.doc Chad Armour, LLC Lot-POOI\ M r+ i 3D'2~C2 K.C. D.D.E.S. D 04130/02 I I I I I I I I I I I · I I I I I I I I Wetland Ass ess ment and Delin ea tion King County, Wash ington KBS Ill, LL C Wetland ass essment methods and field data forms are presented in Appendix A. Our wetland functional assessment form is presented in Appendix B. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS KBS ill, LLC proposes to improve the 4 .32-acre (ac) Hamilton site before selling it to a homebuilder. The site is located in the Renton area of King County, Washington at 13305 -160 lh Avenue SE. A single Class 3 wetland covering 0.18 ac or 7,640 square feet (sf) is located in the southwest comer of the site. A few widely scattered red alder (Alnus rubra, F AC) trees that are dying and grazed pasture grasses dominate it. Water that accumulates in this wetland during the rainy season flows off site to the south via an adjacent roadside ditch. The wetlands small size, simple plant community, and on-going grazing pressure limit its functional value. The minimum buffer setback for Class 3 wetlands is 25 feet. Buildings, pasture, and upland forest dominate the remainder of the site . SITE DESCRIPTION The rectangular-shaped Hamilton site covers 4.32 ac and is located at 13305 -160lh Avenue SE in Section 14 , Township 23 North, Range 5 East in the Renton area of King County, Washington (Figure I). The site is composed ofa single tax lot (366450-0100) that support a single-family home, associated outbuildings, lawn, pasture, deciduous forest , and wetland (Figure 2). Several cows and a bull were present on site at the time of our site visits. The cattle have complete access to almost the entire site and the grass in the pasture and the grass and herbs in the forest are heavily grazed . Consequently, the soil in some areas is exposed and cut up by their hooves . Site topography is relatively level with site elevations ranging from a low of about 505 feet to a high of about 523 feet above mean sea level. The northern two-thirds of the site is relati vely level and supports all of the improvements, including the pasture. The southern third of the site slopes gently (range 2 to 4 percent) generally from north to south and is the location of the deciduous forest. Land use adjacent to the site is similar to the site. Single-family residential homes on small to medium-sized lots surround the site. BACKGROUND INFORMATION We understand that KBS ill, LLC intends to subdivide the site and construct roads and utilities before se lling the improved site to homebuilders . We reviewed existing available maps at the King County Department of Development and Environmental Services to assess the potential for wetlands or streams to be present on or adjacent to the site . According to Wetland Map 9 in the Sensitive Areas Map Folio, there are no wetlands located on or adjacent to the site (King County, 1990). The closest mapped wetlands are Wetlands 2 and 3 in the adjacent May Creek sub-basin. They are located somewhat more than '!. mile northeast of the site. Stream Map 9 in the same folio Hamilto nlD el ineati on Report.do c 2 04 13 0102 Chad Arm o ur, LL C ,------------------------ --------------------------- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Wetland Assessment and Delineation King County, Wa shington KBS III , LLC indicates that no streams are located on or in the near vicinity of the site. The closest known salmon-bearing streams are the Cedar River and May Creek, which are located approximately 6 ,000 feet south and north of the site respectively. According to the Flood Insurance Rate Map the site is mapped as Zone X indicating that it is outside the 500-year floodplain (FEMA, 1989). SITE CONDITIONS We visited the site on March 28, 2001 and May 4,2001 to assess vegetative, soil, and hydrologic conditions on the site. We flagged one wetland area on the site and Center Pointe Surveying surveyed the location of the flagged wetland boundaries. The following subsections of the report depict the results of our efforts. On-Site Wetland The site contains a single 7,640 sf(O.l8 ac) wetland that is located entirely on the site . The wetland is located in a slight depression in the southwest comer of the site . The depression appears to accumulate water during prolonged periods of precipitation during the rainy season. The accumulated water drains off site to the south via a small ditch. (Figure 2). The wetland is dominated by widely spaced red alder trees and grazed pasture grasses (Appendix A; Plot ID SP-2). Because there were no inflorescence (i.e., flowering structures) on the grasses, we were not able to identify the individual grass species. However, we assumed that the grasses are hydrophytic based on topography, soils, and hydrology indicators. Other plant species present in lesser amounts in or adjacent to the wetland include big-leaf maple (Acer macrophyl/um , FACU) trees, Himalayan blackberry (Rubus discolor, FACU) and Indian plum (Oemlaria cerasiformis, FACU) shrubs, and soft rush (Juncus effusus, FACW). The upland-adapted plants generally grow on hummocks or on the upland around the perimeter of the wetland. All of the tree species in the wetland were dying· presumably because they are rooted in an area subject to seasonal ponded water. The presence of these upland-adapted species suggests that this area of the site was once likely upland and the wetland is a recent phenomenon. The soil on the site is mapped as Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 6 to IS percent slopes (Figure 3). In the wetland, the soil appears to resemble the mapped soil unit as modified by prolonged saturation. The soil to a depth of more than 12 inches is a black (lOYR2/I) gravelly sandy loam without mottles. Because cattle have full access to this area, the soil is exposed in much of the wetland. Alderwood gravelly sandy loam soil is a non-hydric soil (NRCS, 1996). Wetland hydrology was present during both of our March and May site visits. The depth to freestanding water was 4 inches below ground surface (bgs) and it was saturated within 2 inches of the surface. Standing water was present in hoof prints and tire tracks. During our March site visit excess surface water drained off site to the south via a small roadside ditch. HamiltonIDelineati on Report.doc Chad Annour, LLC 3 04130102 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Wetland Assessment and Delineation King County, Washington Wetland Functions KBS Ill, LLC We performed a functional assessment of the wetland using qualitative observations. Wetland functions assessed include shoreline protection, hydrologic support, storm/flood water abatement, groundwater exchange, water quality improvement, and natural biologic support. Field observations suggest that the wetland appears to provide low to moderate wetland functions (Appendix B). The wetlands relative small size, simple plant community, and continual disturbance by cattle tends to limit its functional value. Wetland Classification The wetland is classified as a palustrine emergent wetland (Cowardin et a1., 1979) (the trees present in the wetland are located on upland hummocks and are dying). Because the wetland is smaller than one acre but greater than 2,500 sf and has two or fewer classes of vegetation, it is classified as a Class 3 wetland (King County, 2000). Wetland Buffers The minimum buffer setback for Class 3 wetlands is 25 feet (King County, 2000). The County may allow buffer averaging as long as it provides additional protection to wetlands or enhances their function and as long as the total area of the buffer is not decreased. On-Site Uplands The remaining 4 .14 ac of the Hamilton site is composed of uplands. We did not observe any indications of wetlands or streams in the upland areas. Pasture Grazed or mowed grasses dominate the pasture and residential areas of the site. For these reasons, we were not able to identify the species of grasses present in these two locations. We assume that they are non-hydrophytes based on the presence of non-hydric soils and the lack of wetland hydrology. Other plant species present in the pasture include white clover (Trifolium repens , FACU), common plantain (Plantago major, FACU+), and common dandelion (Taraxacum officinale, F ACU) (plot ID SP-3). The soil at this location resembles the mapped soil unit with a surface layer of very dark brown (I 0YR212) gravelly sandy loam over dark brown (l0YR3/3) gravelly sandy loam (Snyder, et a1. 1973). There was no hint of mottling in this soil profile. There was no indication of wetland hydrology to a depth of more than 16 inches. This sampling point is located on the crest of a slight hill. Deciduous Forest Native and non-native trees and native shrubs dominate the deciduous forest. Big-leaf maple trees and Indian plum and California hazel (Cory/us cornuta, FACU) shrubs dominate the forest (plot ID SP-I). Other plant species also observed in the deciduous HamiltonIDelineation Report.doc 4 04/30/02 Chad Armour , LLC I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Wetland Assessment and Delineation King County, Washington KBS III, LLC forest include red alder and English holly (flex aquifolium, FACU) trees . There are no grasses or herbs present in the forest. The cattle presumably removed those that were once present. The soil in the deciduous forest resembles the mapped soil unit. It is composed of very dark grayish brown (l0YR3/2) gravelly loam to a depth of more than 16 inches. There was no indication of reducing conditions in this soil profile. When we fIrst visited the site in late March, we observed freestanding water in the test hole 12 inches bgs and saturated soil 8 inches bgs. When we revisited the site in early May, neither standing water nor saturated soils were present within 16 inches of the soil surface. There also was no indication of oxidized root channels. Based on our May observations and the lack of hydrophytic vegetation and hydric soils , the wetland hydrology indicators present in March were not typical. CONCLUSIONS Most of the Hamilton site consists of uplands dominated by grazed or mowed grasses and a deciduous forest. The forest is not typical of Western Washington deciduous forests because cattle grazing has removed all of the herbaceous grasses and forbs. A single wetland covering a total of 7,640 sfor 0.18 ac is present in the southwest comer of the site. Based on the surrounding vegetation and topography, it was likely upland before the soil was compacted by cattle. Although a ditch in the wetland adjacent to the southern site boundary allows accumulated water to flow off site via the roadside ditch, compacted soil and the road likely promote standing water during the rainy season. This wetland contains characteristics typical of Class3 wetlands. The minimum buffer setback for Class 3 wetlands is 25 feet. LIMITATIONS Work for this project was performed, and this letter report prepared, in accordance with generally accepted professional practices for the nature and conditions of the work completed in the same or similar localities, at the time the work was performed. It is intended for the exclusive use of KBS III, LLC and its assigns for specific application to the referenced property. This report is not meant to represent a legal opinion. No other warranty, express or implied, is made. It should be noted that Chad Armour relied on information provided by others indicated above. Chad Armour can only relay this information and cannot be responsible for its accuracy or completeness. HamiltonIDelineation Report .doc Chad Annour, LL C s 04130 /02 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Wetland Assessment and Delineation King County, Washington KBS Ill , LLC Any questions regarding our work and this report, the presentation of the infonnation, and the interpretation of the data are welcome and should be referred to the undersigned. Sincerely, Chad Armour, LLC CHAD ARMOUR Principal Attachments: References Table 1 -Plants Identified on the Hamilton site Figure I -Vicinity Map Figure 2 -Site Plan Figure 3 -Soils Map Appendix A -Wetland Assessment Methods and Wetlands Rating Field Data Fonns Appendix B -Field Rating Fonns for Wetland Function Evaluation HamiitonIDelineation Report.doc Chad Artnour, LLC 6 04130/02 • I I J I I I I I I I I I I I Wetland Assessment and Delineation King County, Washington KBS III, LLC REFERENCES Cooke, S. S. 1997 . A Field Guide to the Common Wetland Plants of Western Washington and Northwestern Oregon . University of Washington Press. Cowardin, 1.M ., V . Carter, F.C . Golet, and E .T . LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. U.S . Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of Biological Services . Ecology (Washington State Department of Ecology). 1997 . Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual. Publication No. 96-94. 88 pages plus appendices. Environmental Laboratory. 1987 . U.S . Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual , T echnical Report Y-87-1 , U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi . FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency). 1989. Flood Insurance Rate Map Panel 982 of 1725. Hitchcock, C. 1. and A. Cronquist. 1973 . Flora of the Pacific Northwest. University of Washington Press . King County. 1990. Sensitive Areas Map Folio. King County. 2000. King County Code. Chapter 21A.24 , Environmentally Sensitive Areas. NRCS (U.S. Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service). 1996. Hydric Soils of the United States . http://www.statlab.iastate.edulsoilslhydric/national .htrnl. Reed, P . B., Jr. 1988. National List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands : Northwest (Region 9). US Fish and Wildlife Service, Biological Report 88(26.9). 89 pages . Snyder, D. E., P. S. Gale, and R. F . Pringle. 1973 . Soil Survey of King County Area, Washington . USDA Soil Conservation Service in cooperation with Washington Agricultural Experiment Station . 100+ pages plus maps . HamiltonlDelin eation Repon .doc Chad Armour, LL C 0413 0/02 I I I • I I I • • I • I I I I I I I I Wetland Assessment and Delineation King County, Washington Table 1 Plants Identified on the Hamilton site Species CommonN8me Acer macrophyllum big-leaf maple Alnus rubra red alder Cory/us comuta California hazel ----grass f/ex aquifolium English holly Juncus efJUsius soft rush Oemleria cerasiformis Indian plum Piantago major common plantain Rubus discolor Himalayan blackberry Taraxacum officinale dandelion Trifolium repens white clover Refer to Appendix A for an explanation of Indicator Status. HamiltonIDelineation Report.doc Chad Armour, LLC KBS Ill, LLC Indicator Status FACU FAC FACU --- FACU FACW FACU FACU+ FACU FACU FACU 04130 /02 I I I I • I I • • I I I I I Source : The Thomas Guide. 1997. King/Pierce/Snohomish Counties; Page 657 NOT TO SCALE I ·~ FIGURE 1: VICINITY MAP Chad Armour, LLC ;:: Hamilton 6500 126~ Avenue SE jLK_i_n_g_C_o_un_~_._~ __ S_h_in_g_to_n __________________________________ ~~B_e_"_ev_u_e_._w_a_S_hi_n_gt_o_n_9_80_0_6 ____ ~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I -_;;;:-z----...._ .... .. ,,' ... , ," ". o o N o o ~ -" " "- .£ " "0 u (/) 5 11- ~ t/) N ~ ;:) (!) u::: c: 0 -'" .£ l .s::: I/) c " ~ >. ~ -~ c: c ::> 8 o 0 _u E '" o .~ ~ I~ 11 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 8 ~ S; 0 ~ I 13 .,; j ~ I I ~ I ~ AgC -Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 6 10 15 percent slopes Source : Soil Survey King County Area, Washington ; Sheets 11 and 12 FIGURE 3: SOILS MAP Hamilton King County, Wa s hington NOT TO SCALE Chad Armour , LLC 6500 1 26~ Avenue SE Bell e vue , Wa shington 98006 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Wetland Assessment and Delineation King County, Washington APPENDIX A KBS III, LLC Chad Annour reviewed the King County Sensitive Areas Map Folio (1990) to assess the nature and relative extent of wetlands and streams in the vicinity of the site prior to assessing on-site wetlands. After we arrived at the site, we traversed the entire site to look for indications of wetlands such as depressions and ditches. We also looked for the presence of plant species that tend to favor wetland conditions. We used the Routine On-site Detennination method detailed in the U.S. Anny Coms of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987) and Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual (Ecology 1997); We identified plant species using the Flora of the Pacific Northwest (Hitchcock and Cronquist 1973) and A Field Guide to the Conunon Wetland Plants of Western Washington and Northwestern Oregon (Cooke 1997). The associated indicator status for each plant species was detennined using the National List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: Northwest [Region 9] (Reed 1988, updated in 1993). We referenced the Environmentally Sensitive Areas regulations (King County 2000) to assess applicable wetland issues. Soils were identified using the Soil Survey of King County Area, Washington (Snyder et. al, 1973). We referenced the Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) web page to detennine if mapped soils or soils identified on site were hydric or non-hydric (NRCS, 1996). We marked the location of sampling points and wetland boundaries with consecutively numbered flagging and/or stakes with indelible ink. Following our site visit, Centre Pointe Surveying surveyed the flagged boundaries to detennine the exact location of the sampling points and wetland boundaries. Centre Pointe Surveying also calculated the wetland areas. Wetland detennination and wetland rating fonns completed by Chad Annour are presented at the end of this appendix. Indicator categories shown on the field data fonns are defined as follows: ~'iJ~~·i5TL1;lIg'))H}l$;:''i.i[ii;lnilicator~€ateiio ': ~ r\f!:i"111~jRh)babilliVAcif,OccitJ,feDce:iD1wetI."nasi;j;~,:· OBL (obligate) >99% F ACW (facultative wetland) 67%-99% FAC (facultative) 34%-66% FACU (facultative upland) 1% -33% UPL (upland) <1% NI No Indicator Assigned A positive or negative sign more specifically defines the regional frequency of occurrence for FACW, FAC, or FACU species in wetlands. A positive sign (+) indicates a frequency toward the higher end of the category. Conversely, a negative sign (-) indicates a frequency toward the lower end of the category. HamiltonIDelineation Report.doc Chad Armour. LLC 04130/02 , , ,------------------------------ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Project/Site: f1 ""-"-', I -It> "\ DATA FORM 1 (Revised) Routine Wetland Detennination OI")}S e an e neation anu (WA State Wetland Delineation Manual or 1987 C W tl d D Ii M all Applicant/owner: I< 6S ~ LLG Date: 3/2.'6)01 County: \< I "':.S Investigator(s): ~ e.J. -;it, .... 0'"' /, iLL State: IlA SfflR: , / <i/z..3 N / S"c.. Do Normal Circumstances eXtst on the site? <f§) no Community m: Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)? yes & Transect m: Is the area a potential Problem Area? yes (§! Plotm: Sf-I Explanation of alVpical or problem area: VEGETATION (For strata, indicate T = tree; S = shrub; H = herb; V = vine) Dominant Plant Species Stratum % cover Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum % cover Indicator AuI' ~~cOD~-iiJu ... ,-T J,o rk;/A. A \"'IAS r0({A. -Iff fA? I tJtlA<.k/l-l(. a~MI(r, ~. '!> .s 45" rAt.U" I &"'''1/~ Co."", ..... +<... s L/5' (~bl-\ -rJ~ , I L, S (--A£..u.., a.q b 'TD; \ 0 .... ~ U HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION INDICATORS: % of dominants OBL, FACW, & FAC $ -OD/o Check all indicators that apply & explain below: ~e- Visual observation of plant species growing in t--J 'UPhysiologicaUreproducti ve adaptations -- areas of prolonged inundation/saturation --Wetland plant database -- Morphological adaptations --Personal knowledge of regional plant communities -- Technical Literature Other (explain) Hydrophytic vegetation present? yes ~. Rationale for decisionlRemarks: HYDROLOGY Q Is it the growing season? no Water Marks: yes ® Sediment Deposits: yes ~ on Based on: soil temp (record temp L ) other (explain) ./ Drift Lines: yes <:.ng) Drainage Patterns: yes® Dept. of inundation: ..!::!.)..!i inches Oxidized Root (live roots) Local Soil Survey: ye@ Channels <12 in. yes rrti>J_ Depth to free water in pit: ..Lb..inches, FAC Neutral: yes '"iilr Water-stained Leaves ye~ Depth to saturated soil: ]i inches Check all that apply & explain below: Other (explain): ? \ II .' ) Stream, Lake or gage data: / e.()c"" " .... 0<.>-'1'" ".:::---of' « ~)'(; -,-Aerial photoaraphs: .. Other: . Wetland hydrology present? c!'V no ?D~~I~\-e.. f-'1~ PO; d· -.l e 0f'<.S "" J Rationale for decisionIRemarks: .... l ,.$~. o 11/ P (".e: S t'" t.<o r51 t-10~-0-;J'D pl<f ftC \I e a. ef'l.--f,o '" ~ I'lV;V j,. ~ ,J'.r, <'-So: 15 " I!.t 1/ '-"' f SOILS Map Unit Name (Series & Phase) ProrJIe Description Depth Horizon (inches) Ib A)6 Matrix color Mottle colors (Munsell (Munsell moist) moist) In '(0) z. -- Hydric Soil Indicators: (check all that apply) __ Histosol __ Histic Epipedon /JD1..::,f---Sulfidic Odor __ Aquic Moisture Regime __ Reducing Conditions Gleyed or Low-Chroma (= 1) matrix Drainage Class r\.{o tP < W~,II jj",~~ ~ Field observations confirm <1§) No e? Mottle abundance Texture, concretions, Drawing of soil size & contrast structure, etc, profile (match descrilltiQn) --f) Y&.Je/lj I [) e., ,''<-I4DI'::>-rl-).,.+ __ Matrix chroma S 2 with mottles __ Mg or Fe Concretions __ High Organic Content in Surface Layer of Sandy Soils __ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils __ Listed on NationaIlLocal Hydric Soils,List Other (explain in remarks) I I I I I I I I Hydric soils present? yes C!!V 561/ Rationale for'decision/Remarks: ~~4.<~ +0 I I ?I lu.-VV'.>-~,; ... 0 '"e.e p /0<»'" ~ • Wetland Determination (circle) Hydrophytic vegetation present? yes ~ c9 Hydric soils present? yes Is the sampling point yes Wetland hydrology present? ~ no within a wetland? RationalelRemarks: '-.-'"' , .)c, ,15 /\JOI1-G ° j'd..o f"'1 t-,~ \/.Q.,5e.-j-,J,,,'" J 11~" -"'1')'/,,,- prR:'~_ F&../s<.. PD5,f,-.)><-p .... h1 J.rbJ':;:Sl NOTES: '70' I C-CJ '-fc.~J~ eI 0 Ve.f 1f'<. ~~ -I, ,<'-5. +~, Sci { q P05-('J I utJtl/i" R"('t~5cn,. (' -"JI/.e . -rA",",," L-',«;,'e.,oll'\ 0 v..:><-1-/" ",J lr'" f1 "'"I 1} 2.DD / , Pre:;..." ~ +-. I \ Revised 4/97 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I .I Project/Site: /-t ~ ~ d .jz, '" DATA FORM l(Revised) Routine Wetland Detennination orps e an e nea on anu (WA State Wetland Delineation Manual or 1987 C W tI d D Ii ti M aI) Applicant/owner: K J3, S /1 I / LU- Investigator(s): ~.:1J1 A./ ~. ,"",-,J LLL Do Nonna! Circumstances exist on the site? rfiS' no --=-1 Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)? yes .:::® Is the area a potential Problem Area? yes _ ...... -.-., Explanation of atvpical or problem area: ~ VEGETATION (For strata. indicate T = tree; S = shrub; H = herb; V = vine) Dominant Plant Species Stratum % cover Indicator Dominant Plant Species AI VI I{.S -t" ,-40 ~AL (" t.<..II ,{ cI-. -JI" .y' '"/ IS Au/ I« ev:-'D{1~ -III., '" I-ACL" f /"' RLL~ 1..0--> if, 5<-0 /0 r ..s /:J (ALI.-t I(1)el-' k-<, 4-C .. tY (,51 ·ftJ .... .j, s .5' f"Aal 0 f (..f,:> H '15 -- 15"'L"'> e.Jf·,s~ H-I t-ALvJ HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION INDICATORS: -I' - Date: :'/2.. i/ol County: K ~ State: \AI SfflR: J'-I /z 3/.J I !: c.. Community ID: Transect ID: Plot ID: .5\/-2.. Stratum % cover tf( --; , ~ 5, % of dominants OBL. FACW. & FAC ~ ~; -(DOt", J. ~>.h.1S f/ ..... ~~+I ... ~ .R.. Check all indicators that apply & explain below: Visual observation of plant species growing in Physiological/reproductive adaptations areas of prolonged inundation/saturation --Wetland plant database Morphological adaptations --Personal knowledge of regional plant communities Technical Literature Other (explain) Indicator -- ~r Hydrophytic vegetation present? ~ no 11"i ,",,~...J 'Z 7"1"'-1N-~1 Rationale for decisionlRemarks: ~~ J " , In fJt,;.t.t:(.(:~t:_£V\~ l/V t, 'Lh g.i,L 1:('7.£ ' /,., (i.. v, (···;t 110 ,!.. " <'. f"A'L D / <-> <': ./1.., .... \ HYDROLOGY ~. /rio \ Sediment Deposits: yes C!2§) Is it the growing season? /Y<v no Water Marks: yes '---on ~" Based on: -=i=..SOil temp (record temp' ) Drift Lines: yes ci9-i Drainage Patterns: &f!;; no other (explain) If t'.j .l- Dept. of inundation: Ni i-< inches Oxidized Root (live roots) Local Soil Survey: yese:§) linches. Channels <12 in. yes no Depth to free water in pit: FAC Neutral: yes no Water-stained Leaves yes/nO) Depth to saturated soil: 2... inches \.--=: Check all that apply & explain below: Other (explain): r .... ,. s..'~"",) .... u ,. I Stream. Lake or gage data: -- Other: 1 rf "11 ....... 1I"t'. -<,)~, '" " /', t1 "-' ,..,. '" j e. Aerial photooraphs: , \IV e!land hydrology present? 0:Y Rationale for decisionlRemarks: no t~....., pb." .+ '-' "1-Tr-<. ~ J -i.,., .c; ,. I I (. c: '--(' .. < 4 t. ,.1 lJ..\ C r.. ,jI..( , :>-1 :,"" ,I ":,) I . .....,:'" .... i f ./ /l.( ~.! 11- .J SOILS MapUnitName flU;-'t~,,,c,; .:."Mc ll ,,' (Series & Phase) , :;',i' ?f 7 1,,[. .. ) (AS c) Taxonorn (sub fOU ) f"J,/ l:t..roc,l.-/-<-':.::. Profile Description Depth Horizon Matrix color Mottle colors (inches) (Munsell (Munsell moist) moist) }2.{ IU6 It, '(~ t-/l -- Hydric Soil Indicators: (check all that apply) __ Histosol __ Histic Epipedon --Sulfidic Odor __ Aquic Moisture Regime ~Reducing Conditions ~ Gleyed or Low-Chroma (=1) matrix Hydric soils present? (~) no DrainageClass /ljoef/. l0.g/I-J./",~ "- Field observations confirm c9 No rna ed e? Mottle abundance Texture. concretions. Drawing of soil size & contrast structure. etc, profile (match descril1tion) , 1\ ' " "I ,',,,,> (, ' --/ t.."-1..G~ ~-. ,-...J !o;.j- __ Matrix chroma $ 2 with mottles __ Mg or Fe Concretions __ High Organic Content in Surface Layer of Sandy Soils __ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils __ Listed on NationallLocal Hydric Soils. List Other (explain in remarks) Rationale for decisionlRemarks: hoW c...kvolA--,-"'" "'--h'; i- Wetland Determination (circle) Hydrophytic vegetation present? (~; /' yes ,. no Hydric soils present? no Wetland hydrolo,!:y present? ?Yes) no RationalelRemarks: '--A II ? Gr, +e{, e~ NOTES: -rJ!, ~ I:!;;; Is the sampling point within a wetland? f{-<!:H "'G ' ~,,-,.~. (~~ r '-;t~!: ;,.;) no I \ Revised 4/97 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Project/Site: 116-"'-" j-IP '1 Applicant/owner: k6.5 Iii iU, DATA FORM 1 (Revised) Routine Wetland Determination orps e an e neation anu (W A State Wetland Delineation Manual or 1987 C W tI d D Ii M al) Date: S-l{Oi County: Y I -5 Investigator(s): (1MAJ! 'A (V'vt",-,./ iLL State: IN A \ / SfTlR: . / i /2.3 N S; f- Do Normal Circumstances exist On the site? ~ no Community to: Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)? (@ Transect !D: Is the area a potential Problem Area? yes <::§> Plot!D: .5 p~ 3 Explanation of atypical or problem area: VEGETATION (For strata, indicate T = tree; S = shrub; H = herb; V = vine) Dominant Plant SpeCies Stratum % cover Indicator .Dominant Plant Species Stratum % cover Indicator "'(/!..$S r+ JDo 7 . I ~.'+r.I(O "'-''''\D< H 5" 'rPaA'r ~fz:~ J (, D Illl V-< , (f-F'''':5 !-\ fa /-AcL.\ ~(6. 'ftr.a. ~ D{f,C.I"~! fl-S-~A<::.lA. If; ~1 LA~ y' .Ji "of-,--bD F"A Co - HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION INDICATORS: .;. (oo-/-.uJ o~,<)d-€ ~,f 'f-f"" P lu-+, . % of dominants OBL, FACW, & FAC ~ 56 D/o Check all indicators that apply & explain below: Visual observation of plant species growing in ~e, Physiological/reproductive adaptations -- areas of prolonged inundation/saturation Wetland plant database -- Morphological adaptations --Personal knowledge of regional plant communities -- Technical Literature Other (explain) Hydrophytic vegetation present? yes ®, / Rationale for decisionlRemarks: &t.r .. 2'-e.~ f"'-S ~(' e, }oJ () I" T la" esc.p"'~e. 6re -z.e,}. "01 (1(.11'1 € • n &""~.7 &55' .... '''-e~\ -k> ~ FI1<::.-j-tl'j.e oi he..pJ 0"". $Pi!:; i /6.:.k 0+ • I, ".':/ HYDROLOGY '-",/d <;:;"""1'1 Is it the growing season? c9 no Water Marks: yes ~) Sediment Deposits: Y~ on Based on: Z t. soil temp (record temp other (explain) "Ai;,,·1 C- ) Drift Lines: yes C'.i! Drainage Patterns: ye~~) Dept. of inundation: to J.... 1-1 inches Oxidized Root (live roots~ Local Soil Survey: yes(~) Channels <12 in. yes 'iioJ Depth to free water in pit: ? lib. inches FAC Neutral: yes no Water-stained Leaves ye~ Depth to saturated soil: V inches Check all that apply & explain below: Other (explain): PeI50"' .... 1 J<!.woU-J)-<.J S e. ~-+ Stream, Lake or gage data: -- Other: 1 /f>..1i-(~<Z.,'D "" Aerial photoaraphs: ~ . Wetland hydrology present? yes ~. '-' Rationale for decisionlRemarks: ~'jM POI ~-i ? ' ).J D ,,,j,c.~ -/0'5 P'--~ ,.o~-C. D, 1'11.(', SOILS MapUnitName AIJe/t~",oJ) {"'''Ei l i (Series & Phase) :;, '" ,., e '/ I {Ail . ,~':::. (AS c:: Drainage Class 01 0 d ' \\J e /1 c rJ,tfe.. ' ., ... j 'v (.> C[" <'.... +:s Field observations confirm (Y~ No rna d e? ~ ProfIle Description Depth Horizon Matrix color, Mottle colors Mottle abundance Texture, concretions, Drawing of soil (inches) (Munsell (Munsell size & contrast structure, etc. profile moist) moist) (match descrigtion) ( A /Dje....z.j2-----5'«''';''''''_( .5"'''&1 10"""'" ))A ...... p 1.r 6 /v)R3js 5 ,(~'J-e/li /00IS-t , ----5'" ~O£ -/, / l> '" "-" , Hydric Soil Indicators: (check all that apply) --Histosol __ Matrix chroma $.2 with mottles __ Histic Epipedon __ Mg or Fe Concretions _._ Sulfidic Odor tJ r)t--Jt2-__ High Organic Content in Surface Layer of Sandy Soils __ Aquic Moisture Regime __ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils __ Reducing Conditions __ Listed on NationalJLocal Hydric Soils List Gleyed or Low-Chroma (=1) matrix Oiher (exQlain in remarks) Hydric soils present? yes ~ Rationale for decisionlRemarks: No "''taJ'''L SOl) I '" d \ '" "'-feN .::, p{'-e5.;.~-t. Wetland Determination (circle) Hydrophytic vegetation present? yes~ Hydric soils present? yes no Is the sampling point Wetland hydrology present? yes 0 within a wetland? RationaIelRemarks: j\Jo 10 e of i1....a "3 lA.' til "ji t'1. +c ~ 1 ¢.f, t<"v, "'- NOTES: 5,-1 G ~,? Dj r!~I)I'-'t? )e.Ii~) I ('o'),-5') P. -Li 90 < "--'i-Ld-.s b,~ 'M!.... yes G r,i<.5'b,t, , i .. Revised 4/97 I I I I I I I • I I I I I I I I I I I -------------------Field Rating Form for Wetland Function Evaluatiop Wetland No. w~-H.!\.",L It . __ .. Project:_ /tIlL"",", /hyoJ _Date s:/~ Shoreline Protection Hydrologic Support Storm/Flood Water Abatement Groundwater Exchange Water Quality Improvement .~ : 60 Criteria lor Low Value G= .~ i 00 Criteria lor Moderate Value J!!'ijj "iii Gi c > 00 Criteria lor High Value ~-. t~e baceous layer C)( no vegetallon I xtends < 100 yards from shoJe .. ~ _ 1 undeveloped shoreline ~sparse woody (J( dense hert>aceous vegetation ErJ dense woody vegelal;on wetland extends 100 -200 yards from shore wetland extends >200 yards from shore' .... -. . _~~t~ aI~~. ~a~~_.undevefoped.~a:~n.e_. __ located on highly developed shore/ine tj ~ isolaled depfession [ ..J temporary saturation or inundahon size <5 acres In remote setting <10% woody vegelalion ~J open drainage system I:::J=l open tidal system .=J seasonally flooded -] permanent saturation Of inundation ~e5-10aCfes _ in rural setting ~ 10 -3O%woodyvegetaH"" -~size 5 -10 actes .... asona!ly _ open syslem permanent shallow inundation _ _ semipermeable substrate --~--~----. ---------_. __ .,_ ... -----. ED size > 10 acres -in urban sening .. _ >30% WOOdy. vegetation .. --~ .---.' permanently Hooded system ; stze > 10 aaes deep inundation permeable substrate nlerminently flooded [llakes [~ estuary or pefenniai stream <50% vegetation density ~] ~ 50 -80% vegetation density . >80% vegetation den sHy size < 10 acres size 10·100 acres size> 100 acres no proximity to non-point disdlatge _I-downstream from non-point discharge downslream 'rom municipal JX)int discharge retains <25% of overtand runof( ~ retains 25 -50% of overland runoH retains >50% of overland runofl ~i;~'c..'l"U;'3' ;'\,~~.i<~~~-.:::~~':,"'i;:Y~::'7:f:~I¢;'_"<.ll-"h~::;'1~·~-"'~-' --:-i~-:-at-':':!,"::i9-""'L'''''''''~'"'''' ·'A' 1-" t .'~=;:~"""""''''"'''''''«''''''''''"~"~="'='=:''5:~ ~"""'=~"''''''''''$ associated 'Nith ephemeral streams associated with interminenl streams associated with pefmanent streams Natural 10Yi plant community diversity h ~ moderate p(ant community diversity high plant community olVersity single layer IV' / several layers many layers Biologic Support special habital features lacking l~ 1 special habitat features present complex habilalleatures present no unique species unique species potentially present i un}que species present no water dependent species t~ water dependent species potential -~ waler dependent species present relatively small size relatively medium size _ relatively large size ad}acent to mincr fishery adjacent to minor fishery . ad}acenIIO significant fishery corel\419136\welland _'orm Whittaker, Bruce From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Hello Bruce: Casey, Laura Wednesday, November 06, 2002 1 :46 PM Whittaker, Bruce Claussen, Kimberly Hamilton Place, L02P0011 I looked through the information submitted by the applicant in response to the screening letter. The Conceptual Storm and Utility Plan (10/24/02) shows a level spreader at the outfall from the storm pond into the wetland buffer. This outfall should be located adjacent to the northern portion of the wetland, since that area is topographically higher by a couple of feet. Otherwise, the water may not reach the northern part of the wetland and that area may dry up over time. I think this could be addressed as a plat condition. I also read through the Supplemental Levell Downstream Drainage Analysis (10/24/02) , and I suspect that the questions you raised on Evendell (L01 P0016) will also apply here. Improvements to the downstream drainage system through upsizing culverts will have to be reviewed to ensure that no wetlands are being drained or flooded as a result, no streams placed in pipes, or no streams damaged by increased flows downstream from replaced culverts. Upsizing culverts.irL.a sensitive area requires a clearing and grading permit. Laura Casey Environmental Scientist -Ecologist 6-7291 1 ./ ® King County Department of Development and Environmental Services 900 Oakesdale Avenue SW Renton, WA 98055-1219 July 15, 2002 Robert Ruddell KBS III, LLC 12505 Bel-Red Raod, #212 Bellevue, WA 98005 RE: Notice of Request for Additional Information or Studies Application No. L02P0011 -Hamilton Place Date Filed: May 30, 2002 Date of Complete Application: July 2, 2002 Dear Mr. Ruddell: 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. 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 coniplete application shall not affect the validity of such application. The deadline for the submittal of the necessary Information is October 21,2002. 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. i ince Iy, . 'la~ 1m Claussen, Senior Planner Current Planning Section Cc BP Land Investments LLC Mary Hamilton Bruce Whittaker, Senior Engineer, Engineering Review Section, LUSD w/enc Laura Casey, Senior Ecologist, Site Development Services, LUSD, w/enc Application File w/enc ./ ® King County Department of Development and Environmental Services Land Use Services Division 900 Oakesdale A venue Southwest Renton. Washington 98055·1219 Please provide ten (10) copies of the following, unless otherwise noted. Drainage: It appears that there are at least two subbasins on the site. The subbasins are proposed to combine into one drainage facility post development. Please submit a drainage adjustment from Core Requirement 1 of the 1998 KCSWOM (discharge at the natural location) to divert the flows to one facility. Please show the existing and post developed drainage basins on the conceptual drainage plan. • Please evaluate the downstream drainage complaint at 13814 160th Ave. SE (Bret Bowden) as well as include other complaints as shown in the Evendell Level 1 drainage analysis and discuss proposed mitigation as necessary for the plat of Hamilton Place. Please notei that the applicant for Evendell (Mike Romano) is now preparing a Level 3 downstream analysis for submittal shortly. This info could be helpful since both plats share the same downstream drainage course. • Evaluate altematives to the discharge proposed into the wetland (i.e. level spreader, etc.) and revise the conceptual drainage plan accordingly. 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. Walkways: Provide an inventory map (i.e. existing conditions -widths, surface type, etc.) of the walking routes to the elementary, junior highlmiddle and high school andlor the appropriate bus stop location associated with each school. Density: Provide written documentation andlor verification that the proposed density credits are available for use on this site or revise the plat to comply with the minimum andlor base density reqUirements. Note, the TOR certificate #36 is sufficient for three of the six additional lots proposed, however, at this time, it is unknown if the development credits are available from the plat of Stoneridge, as this project is not recorded at this time. 158'· Avenue Southeast: The Subdivision Technical Committee has determined that 158'· Ave. SE is classified as a neighborhood collector, and will be recommending urban neighborhood collector frontage improvements (i.e. 32 ft. of pavement) in accordance with the 1993 King County Road Standards. Please revise the road sections shown accordingly. 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. 1 .' .... " '-', " ... , ., '-". , ......... t~te .... - CITY OF RENTON PlanningIBuildinglPublicWorks Department Gregg Zimmerman P.E .• Administrator Jesse Tanner, M:lyor August 6, 2002 Department of Development and Envirorunental Services Land Use Services Division . 900 Oakesdale Ave. Southwest Renton. WA 98055-1219 attn: Kim Claussen SUBJECT: CITY OF RENTON COMMENTS. LOIPOOll-HAMILTON PLACE Dear Ms. Claussen: Thank you for providing the City of Renton the opportunity of reviewing and commenting upon this project. The City of Renton has issued sewer availability for this project. There are no other utility impacts on Renton. The Transportation Systems Division states that the proposed development is within Renton's potential annexation area, and wether.fore request tb.t street improvements for the internal street . (Road A) and offsitc frontage improvements along the portion oflbe development abutting ISS" Avenue SE and 160" Ave. SE be installed in accordance with City of Rcnton Standards. Sincerely, )!j,q17/~ Gregg Zimmennan, Administrator PlanninglBuildingfPublic \yorks Dept. cc: Lys Hom$by Sandra Meyer Neil WalU hnni(cr H~nnins ~QncUIWYlllWmcn=I2\CQ~[ ~:::::-:::--.:-;;-;--::--:--;;~--:-:::-:-::-----R E N· T· ~O N 105S South Grady Way· Renton, WlIlIhington 98055 * Thl, peper~;""I0% recYCled mmen..rl .. '\n~ ""'., ,. ....... " .... r AHBAD 0' TUB cuaVB