Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutReport 01Technical Memorandum ~ To: Elizabeth Higgins, Senior Planner City of Renton 10230 NE Points Drive From: Darcey Miller, Senior Wetland Scientist S11ite 400 Kevin O'Brien, Senior Ecologist IGrkland, lf7A 98033 Phone (425) 8224446 Fax (425) 827-9577 Copies: Greg Laird, PE Date: April 3, 2014 Subject: Vuecrest Estates Wetland and Stream Review Project No.: 32385.C This review pertains to the Preliminary Plat application ofVuecrest Estates (City of Renton LUA13- 000642) submitted by the applicant, Harbour Homes, to the City of Renton (City). The proposed Vuecrest Estates is located to the south of the intersection of South 47'h Street and Smithers Avenue South, and east of Morris Avenue South. Otak has been asked by the City of Renton (the City) to review the submitted critical areas documents and to provide comments regarding their applicability to the Renton Municipal Code (RMC), specifically, Section 4-3-050, Critical Areas Regulations. A separate geotechnical peer review was also conducted by Hart Crowser and the results communicated to the City. This memo addresses critical areas associated with wetland, stream, and buffers. The following documents were reviewed in terms of compliance with the critical areas sections of the City code: o Critical Area Study far Vuecrest, prepared by Wetland Resources, Inc., dated April 8, 2013; o Supplemental Stream Study for Vuecrest Estates, prepared by Wetland Resources, Inc., dated May 10, 2013; o Environmental Committee Review Report for Vuecrest Estates, prepared by the City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development, dated July 15, 2013; o Vuecrest Estates plans (Sheets Cl, C3-C7, and Nl), prepared by D.R. Strong Consulting Engineers, and received by the City on May 21, 2013_ The Critical Area Study (CAS) and Supplemental Stream Study (SSS) identify an on-site Category 2 wetland per the RMC, and a Class 4 stream-also per the RMC-associated with the wetland. The K:\projcct\32300\323HSC\Rcports\Critical Areas Review Mcmo_2014_0404.doc Elizabeth Higgins, Senior Planner, City of Renton T/uecresl Estates ll7et/and and S /ream R.eview Page 2 April 3, 2014 CAS indicates that wetland buffer averaging is proposed for the project site, and outlines the rationale for meeting the City's criteria for buffer averaging eligibility. The SSS assesses stream and stream buffer impacts, concluding that no loss of stream function or value will occur from the proposed project. Commentl Otak biologists visited the site on February 28, 2014. We determined that the wetland delineation is accurate as flagged in the field, and agree that the wetland meets the criteria for a Category 2 wetland under RMC 4-3-0SO(M). Recommendations: None Comment2 The CAS, SSS, and project plans show that the Class 4 intermittent stream begins in the southern, linear wetland and flows generally west within the wetland until it reaches the 40% slope area. During Otak's site visit, we determined that a stream does not appear to be present within this wetland; although it appears that water at rimes may flow through the wetland, no streambed, streambanks, or sorted gravels were observed. The stream begins at the 40% slope area, at wetland flag WRA-27, and continues generally west down the steep slope (as shown on Sheet Cl)-showing defined channels, some incision, and generally indicative of a system with significantly more stream flow energy due to the much steeper gradients. \Ve agree with the characterization of the stream as an intermittent, non-salmonid-bearing stream and the Class 4 rating. Recommendations: We recommend that the applicant revise the CAS and SSS (combining the content is acceptable), and remove the stream from plans where it is shown within the wetland, revising the stream description and its linear dimensions accordingly. This revision means that overall, only a very small area of the 35-foot-wide stream buffer will be impacted, in the southwest corner of the proposed development area. This stream buffer impact area is included within the wetland buffer impact area, for which buffer averaging is already proposed. Comment3 According to the CAS Map (contained in the CAS), the proposal for wetland buffer averaging reduces the wetland buffers in four areas, totaling 10,468 square feet (s0. Buffer addition areas are proposed in four areas, three of which are labeled and total 12,195 sf. The applicant should revise the CAS Map to show the square footage of the triangular buffer averaging addition area immediately cast of Lot 10. Although a minor discrepancy, page 3 of the CAS calls out 10,463 feet of buffer reduction and 12,198 square feet of buffer addition in contrast with the quantities on the CAS map. Recommendations: Minor revision of the CAS to correct these discrepancies. K: \projcct\323()0\323HSC\ Rcpnrts\Critic:11 Areas Review Mcmo_2014_0404.doc Elizabeth Higgins, Senior Planner, City of Renton Viiecrest Estates 117et/and and Stream Review Comment4 Page3 April 3, 2014 On page 3 of the CJ\S, the second sentence "Therefore buffer averaging is not proposed" should be amended to " ... buffer enhancement ... " Recommendations: Minor revision of the CJ\S to correct this discrepancy. Comment5 The buffer averaging proposal in the CJ\S has demonstrated that it meets all of the requirements in RMC 4-3-050. Buffer averaging reduction areas on the project site are vegetated with native trees and contain an undcrstory of native shrubs and some herbaceous groundcovcr. The buffer averaging addition areas contain similar vegetative communities as the reduction areas, and have approximately the same number of significant trees as, the reduced areas (16-17 trees in each the addition and reduction areas). Non-native/invasive vegetation coverage is very low in the wetlands and buffers onsitc. As such, the existing buffers and wetland areas are of moderate to high value. Adding plants could cause more disturbance to a natural and well-functioning system. For these reasons and the buffer averaging justification given in the CJ\S, it is our opinion that a wetland enhancement plan is not required to comply with Code, although the Environmental Committee Review Report (ECRR) (City ofRenton;July 15, 2013) recommends one in the Water (\Vetland and Stream) Mitigation Measure #1. However, recommended monitoring (see below) may result in wetland or buffer enhancement actions as an adaptive management response to vegetative loss or introduction of non- native invasive species. Mitigation Measure #2 in the ECRR requests "a mitigation plan demonstrating enhancement of the areas where stream buffers are reduced." The review report says that a planting plan for reduced stream buffers is required, per RMC 4-3-050.L5.c.ii; however, this section of the code is for stream buffer reduction, not buffer averaging. As discussed in this comment above, it is our opinion that the buffer averaging proposal does not require a planting plan per the RMC. This is a moot point, as the stream is considered to be located only on the steep slope (not in the southern, linear wetland where buffer averaging is proposed). The existing on-site habitat consists of contiguous, forested habitat with very little invasive plant species coverage. Much of the wetland system is contained within this interior forested habitat, although residential development encroaches on the wetland to the northeast. The proposed development adjacent to reduced buffer areas will result in overall reduction of this habitat, fragmentation of the remaining forested habitat, and a significant increase in edge habitat. These alterations arc likely to resuit in non-native/invasive vegetation (e.g., Himalayan blackberry, English ivy, Scotch broom, etc.) invading the critical areas and their remaining buffers. K:\projcct\32300\32385C\Rcports\Critical Areas Rc\·icw r-.lcmo_2014_0404.doc Elizabeth Higgins, Senior Planner, City of Renton V11ecrest Estates Wetland and Stream Review Page4 April 3, 2014 Recommendations: \Ve recommend that all wetland and buffer areas onsite be monitored for 5 years, once per year in the summer, as a condition of project approval. If non-native/invasive vegetation is observed, it should be removed immediately (by hand). The monitoring should also determine whether additional plantings or other contingency actions are recommended as adaptive management approaches, in order to preserve the baseline conditions of the critical areas. We recommend that the applicant submit a monitoring plan (which may be included in the revised CAS) prior to issuance of utility and road construction permits. We recommend that the applicant post a bond (financial guarantee) for this monitoring period. Comment6 The plans show stormwater discharging from the detention/water quality vault into the wetland/ stream buffer, approximately 40 feet to the northeast of the steep slope, at the beginning of the stream and the west end of the southern, linear wetland. According to the Geotechnical Engineering Study (Earth Solutions NW; February 25, 2013)," the sloped areas along the western margins of the site would be severely susceptible to erosion, in our opinion." In high-gradient stream systems with potentially erodible soils, any additional water could cause erosion on the slope. This erosion would likely eventually affect downstream habitat and water quality, and could destabilize the slope during rain events. Given the high risk of erosion, the position of the stormwater vault and the proposed discharge point, and the presence of protected slopes (40% or greater slopes), an alternative design and/ or additional analysis are warranted. Recommendations: We strongly reiterate and support the City's previous recommendation in the ECRR to tightline the discharge down the slope for the Vuecrest project, preferably discharging into a stormwater conveyance system that has capacity to accept these flows. Although the applicant conducted analysis of the stormwater vault using the King County Runoff Time Series Model per City of Renton Code, we recommend re-analysis of tbe proposed stormwater vault capacity and associated metrics (discharge duration and peak flow discharges) using a different model such as MGS Flood or WWHM if the proposed discharge to the wetland above the steep slope is retained as a design feature. In addition, should the proposed discharge point be retained as a design feature, greater detail concerning the outfall/ discharge structure, proposed energy dissipation, and other relevant detail should be provided by the applicant. Please feel free to call Darcey at (425)739-7977 or Kevin at (425) 739-7975 ifwe can answer any questions regarding our comments and recommendations. K:\projcct\32300\32385C\Rcports\Critica\ Areas Rc,·icw l-.lcmo_2014_0404.doc , . §UJPPLEMENT AL §TRJEAM §TU])Y FOR VUECREST ESTATES RE'.NTON, WA Wetland Resources, Inc. Project #12174 Prepared By: Wetland Resources, Inc. 9505 19th Avenue SE, Suite 106 Everett, WA 98208 (425) 337-3174 Prepared For: Harbour Hom.es by Geonerco Attn:Jamie Waltier 1300 Dexter Ave Nm #500 Seattle, WA 98109 May 10, 2013 9505 19th Avenue S.E. Suite 106 Everett, Washington 98208 (425) 337-3174 Fax (425) 337-3045 SITE DESCRIPTION Wetland Resources, Inc. (WRI) conducted a site investigation on September 6, 2012 on a 9.31-acre parcel located at the southern terminus of Smithers Avenue Sin Renton, WA (portion of Section 31, Township 23N, Range 05E, W.M.). King County Tax Parcel #3123059048 is tl1e subject property for this report. The purpose of this investigation was to identify any jurisdictional wetlands and streams on and in the vicinity of the subject parcel. This report is intended to supplement the Critical Areas Study for Vuemont, dated April 8, 2013 (CAS), and meet the requirements established in RMC Section 4-8-l 20D. The investigation area is bordered by Morris Avenue S to the west, with residential development to the north, south and east. No structures are currently present within the boundary of the subject property. A temporary cul-de-sac associated with the terminus of Smithers Ave S is located in the north central portion of the site. The remaining portion of the site is forested and appears relatively undisturbed and is vegetated with a mixed canopy, non-mature forest. Topography of the site generally trends west with a slight depression near the eastern property boundary, a linear depression roughly paralleling the southern property line, and steep west aspect slope on the western half of the site. As part of this investigation, one wetland and stream were identified on the subject property. Details related to the wetland are identified in the CAS. An intermittent stream was identified exiting the southern portion of the property flowing west down the steep slopes identified as part of plat application. At the time of investigation the stream was entirely dry. Its channel becomes incised at the point it intersects the steep slope (greater than 40%) before exiting the site near its southwest corner. The on-site stream is intermittent, non-salmonid, averaging approximately 2 feet wide has an average gradient of greater than 20 percent and is not mapped on King County iMap, Salmonscape or the Washington State Department of Natural Resources Maps. Per RMC 4-3-050L streams with these characteristics are classified as a Class 4 and is designated a 35-foot buffer from its flagged boundary. In situations where wetland and stream buffers overlap, the more restrictive shall apply. ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES The applicant is proposing to subdivide the eastern two-thirds of the property into twenty-one single-family residential lots. Access for these lots will be from the continuation of Smithers Avenue S and extending east to a temporary turn around at SE 1861h Pl. The applicant evaluated the potential for extending the road to the south, which would cross the wetland and stream system but opted to avoid the impact. No impacts are proposed to the Class 4 stream The only modification is buffer averaging which is primarily associated with the wetland buffer. Supplemenl<l/ Stream Stu<!), Vuecrest WRI# 12174 Avoidance -No impacts are proposed to the Class 4 stream: Multiple development alternatives were evaluated and it was determined that the goals of the development proposal could be accomplished by avoiding direct impacts to the stream. The buffer averaging would be necessary to accommodate the SE 186'" Pl, the proposed stormwater detention tract, and Lots 9 and 10. Minimization -Impacts to the stream have been minimized to the greatest extent possible. First by avoiding impacts as described above and second by limiting impacts to buffer averaging, primarily the wetland buffer, and only a very small portion of the stream buffer (the wetland buffer is the most restrictive). Rectifying -No permanent or temporary impacts are proposed to the Class 4 stream, therefore no restoration is proposed. Reducing-Tract B (Sensitive Area Tract) will be permanently protected and therefore the potential temporal impact associated with the buffer averaging will be reduced over time. Compensating -The buffer averaging proposal meets the requirements established in RMC Chapter 4-3-050(1)(5)(d)and (M)(6)(fj. In addition, high quality forested buffer will be provided on the southern side of the wetland and stream at the required 1: 1 ratio. IMPACT EVALUATION (a) There is one Class 4 intermittent stream located within the boundary of the subject property. The stream averages approximately 2 feet wide and is approximately 650' long on site. It has a mud bottom with no cobble-gravel substrate. This stream primarily acts as a conveyance of hydrology from the upstream wetland. It does have a moderate water quality and stormwater storage function given the presence of instream woody and emergent vegetation and its association with the on-site wetland system. No fish habitat is present within the on-site portion of the stream or immediately downstream. (b) The applicant is entirely avoiding impacts to the on-site stream. Buffer averaging is proposed along the stream/wetland system, but it mostly relates to the larger wetland buffer. It's unlikely ariy alternative site plans would have less impact to the stream system. (c) The application meets the criteria established in RMC Chapter 4-3-050(1)(5)(d) and (M)(6)(fj. and is entirely avoiding impacts to the on-site Class 4 stream therefore, no significant detrimental impacts are proposed or will occur as part of this project. ( d) Since no impacts are proposed to the Class 4 stream and the buffer averaging proposal averaging proposal has been designed to meet the criteria established in RMC Chapter 4-3-050(1)(5)(d) and (M)(6)(fj, there are no expected cumulative detrimental environmental impacts associated with this application. Suppkmental Stream Stuqy Vuecrest 2 WRl#12174 '> CONCLUSION No reduction in the functions and values of the on-site Class 4 stream are expected from the implementation of this proposed development activity. The buffers adjacent to the stream, even in their averaged form, are generally larger than the standard buffers required for this type of stream in the City of Renton and therefore this stream is adequately protected. · USE OF THIS REPORT This Critical Area Study is supplied to Harbour Homes by Geonerco as a means of determining on-site environmentally sensitive area conditions, as required by the City of Renton. This report is based largely on readily observable conditions and, to a lesser extent, on readily ascertainable conditions. No attempt has been made to determine hidden or concealed conditions. The laws applicable to critical areas are subject to varying interpretations and may be changed at any time by the courts or legislative bodies. This report is intended to provide information deemed relevant in the applicant's attempt to comply with the laws now in effect. The work for this report has conformed to the standard of care employed by wetland ecologists. No other representation or warranty is made concerning the work or this report and any implied representation or warranty is disclaimed. Wetland Resources, Inc. Scott Brainard, PWS Principal Ecologist Supplemental Stream Study Vuecrest 3 WR!# 12174 ·.~ REFERENCES City of Renton Municipal Code, Title 4 Chapter 3. Renton, WA. Ord. 5286, May 14, 2007. Castelle, AJ., C. Conolly, M. Emers, E.D. Metz, S. Meyer, M. Witter, S. Mauermann, T. Erickson, and S.S. Cooke. 1992. Wetland Buffers: Use and Effectiveness. Washington. Department of Ecology, Publication No. 92-10. Olympia, WA. Cooke, Sarah S. 2000. Wetland and Buffer Functions Semi-Quantitative Assessment Methodology (SAM). Cooke Scientific Services. February 2000. Coi:ps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual, 1987. Technical Report Y-87-1. Environmental Laboratory. U.S. Army Engineer Waterway Experiment Station. Vicksburg, MS. Cowardin, L. M., V. Carter, F. C. Golet, and E. T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of · Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. FWS/OBS-79/31. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington DC. December 1979. Hruby, T. 2004. Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington- Revised. Washington State Department of Ecology Publication #04-06-025. National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands, Northwest Region. 1996. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. Washington, D.C. Sheldon, D., T. Hruby, P.Johnson, K. Harper, A. McMillan, T. Granger, S. Stanley, and E. Stockdale. 2005. Wetlands in Washington State -Volume I: A Synthesis of the Science. Washington State Department of Ecology. Publication #05-06- 006. Olympia, WA. March 2005. Soil Survey: King County Area, Washington. U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service. November 1973. Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual. Washington State Department of Ecology. Publication #96-94. March 1997. Supplemental Stream Study Vuecrest 4 WRI# 12174 ·,. ·., .. • I • I CRl!'J'llCAL AAJEA §'!'UDY FOR VUECREST R.E.NTON, WA Wetland Resources, Inc. Project # 1217 4 Prepared By: Wetland Resources, Inc. 9505 19th Avenue SE, Suite l 06 Everett, WA 98208 (425) 337-3174 Prepared For: Harbour Homes by Geonerco Attn:Jamie Walt:ier 1300 Dexter Ave Nm #500 Seattle, WA 98109 April 8, 2013 9505 19th Avenue S.E. Suite 106 Everett, Washington 98208 (425) 337-3174 Fax(425)337-3045 c· ,ty of Renton Planning Division MAY21 ZOIJ . ' \ ' r., • SITE DESCRIPTION PROJECT DESCRIPTION TABLE OF CONTENTS WETLAND AND STREAM CLASSIF1CATIONS -COWARDIN SYSTEM WETLAND AND STREAM CLASSIFICATIONS -CITY OF RENTON WETLAND DETERMINATION REPORT BOUNDARY DETERMINATION FINDINGS WETLAND FUNCTIONS AND VALUES ASSESSMENT WILDLIFE USE OF THIS REPORT REFERENCES CRITICAL AREA STIUDY MAP ATTACHMENT: FIELD DATA FORMS 3 3 4 5 6 7 7 9 Ill ' " SITE DESCRIPTION Wetland Resources, Inc. (WRI) conducted a site investigation on September 6, 2012 on a 9.31-acre parcel located at the southern terminus of Smithers Avenue South in Renton, WA (portion of Section 31, Township 23N, Range 05E, W.M.). King County Tax Parcel #3123059048 is the subject property for this report. The purpose of this investigation was to identify any jurisdictional wetlands and streams on and in the vicinity of the subject parcel. The investigation area is bordered by Morris Avenue South to the west, with residential development to the north, south and east. No structures are currently present within the boundary of the subject property. A temporary cul-de-sac associated with the terminus of Smithers Ave S is located in the north central portion of the site. The remaining portion of the site is forested and appears relatively undisturbed and is vegetated with a mixed canopy, non-mature forest. Topography of the site generally trends west with a slight depression near the eastern property boundary, a linear depression roughly paralleling the southern property line, and steep west aspect slope on the western half of the site. As part of this investigation, one wetland and stream were identified on the subject property. The wetland is located within the depressional· areas on the eastern and southern portions of the site. It is classified as a Category II wetland and is designated a 50-foot protective buffer from its flagged boundary. In addition to the wetland, an intermittent non-salmonid stream flows through the western portion of the wetland boundary and down the steep slope. This stream is classified as a Class 4 and is designated a 35-foot buffer from its flagged boundary. In situations where wetland and stream buffers overlap, the more restrictive shall apply. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The applicant is proposing to subdivide the eastern two-thirds of the property into twenty-one single-family residential lots. Access for these lots will be from the continuation of Smithers Avenue S. In order to accomplish this development activity, the applicant is proposing buffer averaging per the provisions established in RMC Chapter 4- 3-050(M)(6)(Q, which requires: 1. That the wetland contains variations in ecological sensitivity or there are existing physical improvements in or near the wetland and buffer; and The on-site wetland varies from slightly disturbed in its northern portion with yard waste and detritus from kid-related activities to less disturbed in its southern portion. As such vegetation in the northern portion has a higher concentration of invasive species and the southern portion is more native in composition. In addition, existing single-family residential development is located immediately adjacent to the east of the wetland and buffer area. Critical Area Study Vuecrest Wetland Resources, Inc. WR!# 12174 11. That width averaging will not adversely impact the wetland functions and values; and Direct compensation of functions and values will be addressed by providing additional buffer of a similar composition to the reduction area at a 1: 1 rating. No impacts to existing functions and values of the wetland area expected by the proposed buffer averaging activity. 111. That the total area contained within the wetland buffer after averaging is not less than that contained within the required standard buffer prior to averaging; and In order to meet the requirements established for buffer averaging a greater than 1: I (reduction:addition) ratio is provided. The final buffer area will be slightly larger that prior to averaging. 1v. A site specific evaluation and documentation of buffer adequacy based upon Tlze Science qf Wetland Buffers and Its Implications for the Management for Wetlands, McMillan 2000, or similar approaches have been conducted. The proposed buffer standard is based on consideration of the best available science as described in WAS 365- 195-905; or where the absence of valid scientific information, the steps in RMC 4- 9-250F are followed. The buffer evaluation method identified above provided provides detailed descriptions of buffer widths and overall effectiveness of protecting wetland and stream functions. Table 4 within the aforementioned document described the differences between 10-meter and a 20-meter buffer. As described in the table, both buffer widths provide an approximate 60 percent sediment and pollutant removal and provide limited habitat values. The averaging proposal combined with the tree retention tract will more usable wildlife habitat and an, on average, wider corridor that allows wildlife to move freely into the forested steep slope area to the west. It is the opinion of WRI that given the increase of 1,735 square feet in overall buffer area, the proposed buffer averaging provides for an adequate width to protect the wetland and stream. v. In no instance shall the buffer width be reduced by more than fifty percent (50%) of the standard buffer or be less than twenty-five feet (25') wide. Greater buffer width reductions require review as a variance per subsection N3 of this Section and RMC 4-9-250B; and The minimum proposed buffer width as part of this averaging activity is 25-feet, which is 50 percent of the standard 50-foot buffer. VJ. Buffer enhancement in areas where the buffer is reduced shall be required on a case-by-case basis where appropriate to site conditions, wetland sensitivity, and proposed land development characteristics. Critical Area Sturfy Vuecrest 2 WetUlJld Resources, Inc. WRI# 12174 The areas of reduction areas identified as part of this averaging proposal, are generally natively vegetated and would have a limited lift of function from enhancement. Therefore buffer averaging is not proposed. The buffer averaging proposed is to average(reduce) I 0,463 square feet of buffer adjacent to SE 186th Pl, the proposed stormwater tract, and Lots 9-11, 20, and 21. In order to meet the no net loss of buffer requirement, the applicant proposes 12,198 square feet of addition buffer adjacent to Lots 10, 12-17, 21 and along the south side of the Wetland and Stream corridor. The applicant will designate all the wetland, stream and associated buffers as a Native Growth Protection Area (NGPA) Tract. WETLAND AND STREAM CLASSIFICATIONS -COWARDIN SYSTEM According to the Cowardin System, as described in Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States, the classifications for the on-site wetland and streams are as follows: Wetland: Palustrine, Forested, Broad-leaved Deciduous, Saturated. Stream: Riverine, Intermittent, Streambed. WETLAND AND STREAM CLASSIFICATIONS-CITY OF RENTON Under the City of Renton's Critical Area Regulations in Renton's Municipal Code (RMC), Title 4 Chapter 3-050, the wetlands and streams within the vicinity of the subject site are classified as follows: Wetland -Category II The on-site wetland is a depressional wetland adjacent to the intermittent stream. This wetland is Classified as a Category II under the RMC 4-3-050(M), since it is located at the headwater of the on-site stream and, as such, receives a standard buffer of 50 feet. Stream -Class 4 The intermittent stream originates witl1in the on-site wetland near the southern property boundary and flows down the stream slope to the west. Stream B is a seasonal, non-fish bearing stream and, as such, classified under RMC 4-3-050(L) as a Class 4 stream and receives a standard buffer of 35 feet. In the city of Renton, Class 2-4 streams, regulated wetlands and their buffers are designated collectively as Native Growth Protection Areas (NGPAs). As stated in RMC 3-50(E)4: The common boundary between a native growth protection area and the abutting land must be permanently identified. This identification shall include permanent wood or metal signs on treated or metal posts. Sign locations and size specifications shall be approved by the City. Suggested wording is as follows: "Protection ef this natural area is in your care. A Iteration or disturbance is prohibited by law. " Critical Area Stuqy Vuecrest 3 Wetland Resources, Inc. WR/#12174 WETLAND DETERMINATION REPORT Methodology On site, routine methodology as described in the Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual (Washington State Department of Ecology Publication #96-94, March 1997), was used for this determination, as required by the City of Renton. Under this method, the process for making a wetland determination is based on three sequential steps: I.) Examination of the site for hydrophytic vegetation (species present and percentage cover). 2.) Ifhydrophytic vegetation is found, then the presence ofhydric soils is determined. 3.) The final step is determining if wetland hydrology exists in the area examined under the first two steps. The following criteria descriptions were used in the boundary determination: Vegetation The Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual, 1997 edition, states that "more than 50 percent of the dominant species in each stratum present must be rated "Facultative" or wetter to meet hydrophytic vegetation criteria". Soils The Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual, 1997, states that hydric soils are defined as soils that are saturated, flooded, or ponded long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper part (within 18 inches of the surface). The criteria for a "wetland soil" is that a hydric soil must support hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology indicators must be present. Field indicators are used for determining whether a given soil meets the definition and criteria for hydric soils. The soils underlying this site are mapped in the Soil Survry ef King County Area Washington as Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes. The Alderwood soil unit is made up of moderately well drained soils that have a weakly consolidated substratum at a depth of 24 to 40 inches. In a representative profile, the surface layer and subsoil are very dark brown, dark brown, and grayish brown gravelly sandy loam about 27 inches thick. The substratum is grayish-brown, weakly consolidated to strongly consolidated glacial till that extends to a depth of 60 inches and more. Soils included with this soil mapping make up no more than 30 percent of the total acreage. Some areas are up to 25 percent Everett soils that have slopes of 15 to 30 percent, and some areas are up to 2 percent Bellingham, Norma, and Seattle soils, which are in depressions. Runoff is medium, and the erosion hazard is severe. Critical Area Study Vuecrest 4 Wetland Resources, Inc. WRI#12174 ,•, Hydrology Criteria The Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual, 1997 edition, states that criteria for designation as a wetland based on hydrology is met when "areas which are seasonally inundated and/ or saturated to the surface for a consecutive number of days ~ 12 .5 percent of the growing season, provided that soil and vegetation parameters are met. Areas inundated or saturated between 5 and 12.5 percent of the growing season in most years may or may not be wetland. Areas saturated to the surface for less than 5 percent of the growing season are non-wetlands." Field indicators are employed in the determination that wetland hydrology parameters are met. BOUNDARY DETERMINATION FINDINGS Wetland The on-site wetland is a linear depressional wetland located in the eastern and southern portions of the site. Vegetation within the wetland consists ofa canopy of red alder (A/nus rubra, FAC) and western red cedar (1h,ga plicata, Fae); with an understory of: salmonberry (Rubus spectabilis, FAC), spirea (Spiraea douglasii, FacW), lady fern (Athyrium.felix-fernina, Fae) edge (Carex sp., OBL), and creeping buttercup (Ranunculus repens, FACW). Soils in this wetland are typically a black (2.5Y 2.5/ I) silt loam from the surface to eight inches below. The sublayer is a dark grayish brown (2.5Y 4/2) silt loam with redoximorphic features present. Soils were dry to the surface during the September 2012 investigation. The dominance of species rated "Facultative" or wetter satisfies the criteria for hydrophytic vegetation in the areas mapped as wetland. Based on field indicators of hydric soils, it appears that the areas mapped as wetland are saturated to the surface for more tl1an 12.5 percent of ilie growing season, thereby fulfilling wetland hydrology criteria in the absence of observed primary indicators of hydrology. This wetland meets all criteria for designation as a wetland. Non-Wetland The areas mapped as non-wetland are generally forested wiili a mixed canopy non- mature forest. Vegetation species within the forest generally include Western red cedary (1h,ga plicata, Fae), big-leaf maple (Acer macrophyllum, FacU), red alder (A/nus rubra, Fae), Oso-berry (Oemleria cerasiformis, FacU), red huckleberry (Vaccinium parvifolium, FacU), dewberry (Rubus ursinus, FacU), and swordfern (Po[ystichum munitum, FacU. Non-wetland soils were typically a very dark grayish brown (lOYR 3/2) silt loam with no redoximorphic features from the surface to 3 inches below. From 3 inches to greater than 18 inches the soils changes to a dark yellowish brown (IOYR 3/4 ) silt loam with no redoximorphic features. These soils were dry during the September 2012 site visit. Based on the lack of field indicators, it appears that areas of the site mapped as non- wetland are not saturated to the surface for more than 12.5 percent of the growing season, thereby not fulfilling wetland hydrology criteria. Critical Area Study Vuecrest 5 Wetland Resources, Inc. WR!# 12174 WETLAND FuNCTIONS AND VALUES AsSESSMENT Methodology The methodology for this functions and values assessment is based on professional opinion developed through past field analyses and interpretation. This assessment pertains specifically to the wetlands and streams in the vicinity of the site, but is typical for assessments of similar systems common to Western Washington. Functional Components Wetlands in Western Was.hington perform a variety of ecosystem functions. Included among the most important functions provided by wetlands are: stormwater control, water quality improvement, fish and wildlife habitat, aesthetic value, recreational opportunities and education. The most commonly assessed functions and their descriptions are listed below. Assessments of these functions for the project site are provided in the "Analysis" section of this report. Hydrologic Functions Wetlands often function as natural water storage areas during periods of precipitation and flooding. By storing water that otherwise might be channeled into open flow systems, wetlands can attenuate or modify potentially damaging effects of storm events, reducing erosion and peak flows to downstream systems. Additionally, the soils underlying wetlands are often less permeable, providing long-term storage of stormwater or floodflow and controlling baseflows of downstream systems. Stormwater storage capacity and floodflow attenuation are generally a function of the size of the wetland and their topographic characteristics. Water Qyali!J Surface water quality improvement is another evaluated function. Surface runoff during periods of precipitation increases the potential for sediments and pollutants to enter surface water. Wetlands improve water quality by acting as filters as water passes through them, trapping sediments and pollutants from surface water. Ponded areas within depressional wetlands also allow sediments to drop out of suspension, thereby increasing water quality. As development increases, the potential for polluted water to reach wetlands and streams also increases. Unnaturally high inputs of pollutants, which are often found in urbanized areas, along with the size of the wetlands and the vegetation structure within them are the main limiting factors of this function. Wildlife Habitat Wetlands have potential to provide diverse habitat for aquatic, terrestrial, and avian species for nesting, rearing, resting, cover, and foraging. Wildlife species are commonly dependent upon a variety of intermingled habitat types, including wetlands, adjacent uplands, large bodies of water, and movement corridors between them. Human intrusion, including development within and adjacent to wetlands, and impacts to movement corridors are the most limiting factors for wildlife habitat functions. Assessments of tl1ese functions for the project site are provided below. Critical Area Study Vuecrest 6 Wetland Resources, Inc. WR!# 12174 Existing Conditions Wetland Hydrologi,c Function The wetland is in a topographic depression adjacent to the intermittent stream. In general, depressional wetlands with direct connected to an intermittent stream have moderate potential to perform hydrologic functions. This wetland collects and temporarily stores precipitation as well as floodwater entering downstream sytems during storm events. This wetland provides a low to moderate value for this function. Water Qyali!Y The wetland is moderately densely vegetated and the residence time of water within this wetland is low to moderate, given its gradient and association with the stream. These characteristics allow for the wetland to serve somewhat as a filter and allow sediment in the water to settle. This wetland provides a low to moderate value for this function. Wildlife Habitat This wetland provides a low to moderate level of habitat interspersion given that it is primarily forested. This wetland provides secondary habitat to multiple species of birds. However, the size of this wetland and its proximity to residential development limits its ability to provide a high value for wildlife functions. This wetland provides a moderate value for this function. WILDLIFE During our September 2012 visit,. few wildlife species were observed. Avian species observed during the site visit include: American crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos), American robin (Turdus migratorius), house finch ( Carpodacus mexicanus), black-capped chickadee (Poecile atricapillus), busht.it (Psaltriparus minimus), and red'breasted nuthatch (Sitka canadensis). Mammals expected to use this site include: Virginia opossum (Didelphis virgi,niana), shrews (Sorex spp.), coyote (Canis latrans), gray squirrel (Sciurus carolinensis), and eastern cottontail rabbits (Sylvilagusjloridanus). USE OF THIS REPORT This Critical Area Study is supplied to Goldsmith Land Investments, LLC as a means of determining on-site environmentally sensitive area conditions, as required by the City of Renton. This report is based largely on readily observable conditions and, to a lesser extent, on reaclily ascertainable conditions. No attempt has been made to determine hidden or concealed conditions. The laws applicable to critical areas are subject to varying interpretations and may be changed at any time by the courts or legislative bodies. This report is intended to provide information deemed relevant in the applicant's attempt to comply with the laws now in Critical Area Stuqy Vuecrest 7 Wetland Resources, Inc. WR!# 12174 effect. The work for this report has conformed to the standard of care employed by wetland ecologists. No other representation or warranty is made concerning the work or this report and any implied representation or warranty is disclaimed. Wetland Resources, Inc. Scott Brainard, PWS Principal Ecologist Critical Area Study Vuecrest Wetland Resources, Inc. 8 WR!# 12174 REFERENCES City of Renton Municipal Code, Title 4 Chapter 3. Renton, WA. Ord. 5286, May 14, 2007. Castelle, AJ., C. Conolly, M. Emers, E.D. Metz, S. Meyer, M. Witter, S. Mauermann, T. Erickson, and S.S. Cooke. 1992. Wetland Buffers: Use and Effectiveness. Washington. Department of Ecology, Publication No. 92-10. Olympia, WA. Cooke, Sarah S. 2000. Wetland and Buffer Functions Semi-Quantitative Assessment Methodology (SAM). Cooke Scientific Services. February 2000. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual, 1987. Technical Report Y-87-1. Environmental Laboratory. U.S. Army Engineer Waterway Experiment Station. Vicksburg, MS. Cowardin, L. M., V. Carter, F. C. Golet, and E. T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. FWS/OBS-79/31. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington DC. December 1979. Hruby, T. 2004. Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington- Revised. Washington State Department of Ecology Publication #04-06-025. National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands, Northwest Region. 1996. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. Washington, D.C. Sheldon, D., T. Hruby, P.Johnson, K. Harper, A. McMillan, T. Granger, S. Stanley, and E. Stockdale. 2005. Wetlands in Washington State -Volume I: A Synthesis of the Science. Washington State Department of Ecology. Publication #05-06- 006. Olympia, WA. March 2005. Soil Survey: King County Area, Washington. U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service. November 1973. Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual. Washington State Department of Ecology. Publication #96-94. March 1997. Critical Area Study Vuecrest 9 Wetland Resources, Inc. WRl#12174 '. @"? ~ TOP OF STEEP SLOPE ('>T'!· """-~-' LEGEND I ~ " -. .. t: ~ ~1 WETLAND '-··,. STREAM ' '-, ' BUFFER Ill BUFFER AVERAGING (REDUCTION) ~ BUFFER AVERAGING ~ (ADDITIQN) @) @ DATA SITES Q NGPASIGNS CRITICAL AREA STUDY MAP VUECREST SECTION 31, TOWNSHIP 23N, RANGE SE, WM CLASS4 STREAM 2 CJ D [:] CJ CJ ~ TRACT"A" --· (/J UJ ;l: (/J 0:: UJ :r: ::E (/J BUFFER AVERAGING (REDUCTION) 2,160 SF 18 1 . BUFFER AVERAGING (REDUCTION) 8,308 SF 21 BUFFER AVERAGING (ADDITION) 8,413 SF 0 ::efE> -<j -'>- ~ Scale 1" .. eo• io 60 90 "'°""('U)llN11' ,,~ ('<'!) l!HO<I l<n~t ... ., ...... .,. __ 120 CRJT1CAL AREA STU:lY MAP """"' RENTON, WA Harbour Home, Sheet 1/1 Attn:Jamle Waltler WRI Job #121 74 1300 Dexter Ave N, #SOO Drawn by: S. Brainard Seattlo, WA 98109 Date: 4/8/13 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM -Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region ProjecVSite: _V_u_e_m_o_n_t --------------City/County: Renton Sampling Date: _9_16_1_1_2 __ _ ApplicanVOwner: Harbour Homes State: WA Sampling Point: _S_1 ____ _ lnvestigator(s): SB Section, Township, Range: _3:...1cc,2::.3:...N--'-, 5:...Ec._ ____________ _ Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): +/-2% Subregion (LRR): LRR-A Lat: 47.436295 Long: -122.208721 Datum: ___ _ Soil Map Unit Name: Aldeiwood 5 -15% slopes NWJ classification: _N_i_A _______ _ Are climatic/ hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes_./ __ No ___ (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation __ , Soil ___ , or Hydrology_ _ significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes_ ./ _ No (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) Are Vegetation __ , Soil ___ , or Hydrology ___ naturally problematic? SUMMARY OF FINDINGS -Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes -,/ -No --Is the Sampled Area Hydric Soil Present? Yes -,/ -No --within a Wetland? Yes ,/ No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No ./ --- Remarks: Not present during site visit but secondary indicators were present VEGETATION -Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet: ill~ Strat1.nn (Plot size: ) % QQ.Yg[ S~!;;jes? St~tus Number of Dominant Species 1. Fraxinus latifolia 40 y FacW That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A) 2. Total Number of Dominant 3. Species Across AU Strata: 3 (B) 4. 40 = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species 66 That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (NB) SagtinglS:b[u!;! S;tratum (Plot size: ) 1. Spirea douglasii 60 y FacW Prevalence Index worksheet: 2. Rubus ursinus 20 y FacU Total 0{~ Cover of' Multig[i bl'.; 3. OBL species x1= 4. FACW species x2= 5. FAC species x3= -Total Cover FACU species x4= t!erb Stratum (Plot size: ) UPL species x5= 1. Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. 3. Prevalence Index = B/A = 4. Hydrophytlc Vegetation Indicators: 5. ,/ Dominance Test is >50% 6. Prevalence Index is :s3.01 7. Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 8. Wetland Non-Vascular Plants 1 -9. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 10. 1lndicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must 11. be present, unless disturbed or problematic. = Total Cover Wood'f. Via~ Stratyrn (Plot size: ) 1. Hydrophytlc 2. Vegetation Present? Yes ---No ---= Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast-Interim Version ,, ... SOIL Sampling Point· Profile Description: {Describe to the depth needed to document the Indicator or confirm the absence of Indicators.) Depth M!i!tri~ BedQ2!i Feat!drn::! (in!;:hes} QQlor (m2ist} _.%_ CQlor {moist) _.%_ Jl'.QL ---1.QL Texture Rem!i!rks 0-18+" 2.5Y 4/2 60 10YR 3/4 5 C M Sil ------------ ------------ ------------ ------------ ------------ ------------ ------------ ------------ 1Tvne: C=Concentration D=Depletlon, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lininn, M=Matrix. Hydrlc Soll Indicators: (Appllcable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydrlc Solls3 : _ Histosol (A 1) _ Sandy Redox (SS) _ 2 cm Muck (A10) _ Histic Epipedon (A2) _ Stripped Matrix (S6) _ Red Parent Material (TF2) _ Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) . Other (Explain in Remarks) _ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) _ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A 11) I Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A 12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) 31ndicators of hydrophyUc vegetation and Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present, Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions·(F8) unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (If present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydrlc Soll Present? Yes ,/ No Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Erima!Jl Indicators (minimum of QOe rem:!i[ed· !;;!U!:!ik all Jb~1 m:;1121~) QeconQ~iy loQii;;~to~ (2 Q[ lllQn:! rngylri:un _ SurfaceWater(A1) _ Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA :!..... Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, _ High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 40) 4A, and 40) _ Saturation (A3) _ Salt Crust (811) :!_ Drainage Patterns (810) _ Water Marks (81) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) _ Dry-Season Water Table (C2) _ Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C 1) _ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) _ Drift Deposits (B3) _ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) :f_ Geomorphic Position (02) Algal Mat or Crust (84) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) _ Shallow Aquitard (03) Iron Deposits (BS) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) . FAG-Neutral Test (DS) _ Surlace Soil Cracks (86) _ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) , Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) _ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) _ Other (Explain In Remarks) . Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (BB) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes __ No_ I _ Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes __ No_l_ Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes __ No _I_ Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes _I_ No --- (includes caoillarv frinae) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast-Interim Version , - WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM -Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: _V_u_e_m_o_n_t ________________ City/County: _R_e_n_to_n _________ Sampling Date: _9_1_61_1_2 ___ _ Applicant/Owner: Harbour Homes State: WA Sampling Point: _s_2 ____ _ lnvestigator(s): _S_B _________________ Section, Township, Range: _3_1~,2_3_N_,~5_E ______________ _ Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): _c_o_n_c_a_ve _____ Slope(%): +/-5% Subregion (LRR): LRR-A Lat: 47.436295 Long: -122.208721 Datum:----- Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood 5 -15% slopes NWI classification: _N_i_A _______ _ Are climatic/ hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes_./ __ No ___ (If no, explain In Remarks.) Are Vegetation __ , Soil ___ , or Hydrology_ _ significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes_ ./ _ No __ _ Are Vegetation __ , Soll ___ , or Hydrology ___ naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS -Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes --No -{ -Is the Sampled Area Hydric Soil Present? Yes --No --within a Wetland? Yes No _{_ Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No { ------ Remarks: Not present during site visit but secondary indicators were present VEGETATION -Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet: Tre~ Qtcatum (Plot size: ) ~ CQY~[ St!!il:f;Jes:Z Qtatu~ Number of Dominant Species 1. Thuja plicata 30 y Fae That Are OBL, FACW, or FAG: 0 (A) 2. Acer macrophyllum 30 y FacU Total Number of Dominant 3. Species Across All Strata: 6 (B) 4. Percent of Dominant Species 60 = Total Cover That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 (A/B) Sagliog[Shrub Stratum (Plot size: ) 1. Rubus ursinus 60 y FacU Prevalence Index worksheet: 2. Oemleria cerasiformis 20 y FacU T Ql51I 0t~ Cover of· Multigl:£t!t: 3. Vacclnium parviflorium 20 y FacU OBL species x1= 4. FACW species x2= 5. ·FAG species x3= 100 = Total Cover FACU species x4 = Herb Stratum (Plot size: ) UPL species x5= 1. Polystichum munitum 10 y FacU Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. 3. Prevalence Index = B/A = 4. Hydrophytlc Vegetation Indicators: 5. -Dominance Test is >50% 6. Prevalence Index is S:3.01 7. Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 8. Wetland Non-Vascular Plants 1 -9. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain) 10. 11ndicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must 11. be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 10 = Total Cover Wood:£ Vioe Stratum {Plot size: ) 1. Hydrophytlc 2. Vegetation .( Present? Yes No ---= Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum Remarks: . US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast-Interim Version I l . ., WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM-Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: _V_u_e_m_o_n_t ________________ City/County: _R_e_n_t_on _________ Sampling Date: _9_i6_i_1_2 ___ _ Applicant/Owner: Harbour Homes State: WA Sampling Point: _S_2 ____ _ lnvestlgator(s): _S_B _________________ Section, Township, Range: _3_1~,2_3_N~,_5_E _____________ _ Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): _e_o_n_ea_v_e _____ Slope(%): +/-5% Subregion (LRR): LRR-A Lat: 47.436295 Long: -122.208721 Datum:---- Soil Map Unit Name: Aldeiwood 5 -15% slopes NWJ classification: _N_i_A _______ _ Are climatic/ hydrologic conditions on the site typical for thls time of year? Yes_./ __ No ___ (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation __ , Soil ___ , or Hydrology_ _ significantly disturbed? Are~Normal Circumstances" present? Yes_./_ No __ _ Are Vegetation __ , Soil ___ , or Hydrology ___ naturally problematic? (lf needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS -Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes --No -,/ -Is the Sampled Area Hydric Soil Present? Yes --No --within a Wetland? Yes No _{_ Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No ,/ ------ Remarks: Not present during site visit but secondary indicators were present VEGETATION -Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet: Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) °!11 CQV!iJ:r S!l!i!!;:l!i!~Z Qtatus Number of Dominant Species 1. Acer macrophyllum 70 y FaeU Thal Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 5 (A) 2. Thuja plieata 20 y Fae Total Number of Dominant 3, Species Across All Strata: 8 (8) 4. 90 = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species 62 Qsigliagl~bry!;! Strsitum (Plot size: ) That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/8) 1. Rubus spectabilis 50 y Fae Prevalence Index worksheet: 2. Oemleria cerasiformis 20 y FaeU Iota! 0/it Qov!ilr Qf' MultiQI~ !;!~: 3. Sambucus racemosa 10 N FacU OBL species X 1 = 4. FACW species x2= 5. FAC species x3= 80 = Total Cover FACU species x4= Herb Stratum (Plot size: ) UPL species x5= 1. Athyrium filix-femina 30 y Fae Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. Ranunculus repens 10 y FaeW 3. Carex obnupta 10 y Obi Prevalence Index = B/A = 4. Hydrophytlc Vegetation Indicators: 5. ..!.._ Dominance Test is >50% 6. Prevalence Index is :S3.01 7. Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting 8. data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Wetland Non-Vascular Plants 1 -9. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 10. 11ndicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must 11. be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 50 = Total Cover ~cod~ Vin!;!: Str~tum (Plot size: ) 1. Hydrophytlc 2. Vegetation { Present? Yes No ------= Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast-Interim Version . ., SOIL Sampling Point· Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the Indicator or confirm the absence of Indicators.) Depth M§trix RedQ:!!: Fe§tyr!i):~ (inches) Q2lor (moist) ~ Color (moist) ~~--1.QL Texture R~ma[!ss 0-8" 2.5Y 2.5/1 80 Sil ------------ 8-18+" 2.5Y 4/2 80 10YR 3/4 5 C M Sil ------------ ------------ ------------ ------------ ------------ ------------ ------------ 'T"ne: c-concentration o-Denletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lininn, M-Matrix. Hydrlc Soll Indicators: (Appllcable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydrlc Solls3 : _ Histosol (A 1) _ Sandy Redox (SS) _ 2 cm Muck (A10) _ Histic Epipedon (A2) _ Stripped Matrix ($6) _ Red Parent Material (TF2) _ Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) . Other (Explain in Remarks) _ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) _ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) ./ Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A 12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) 3 tndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present, Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer {If present}: Type: Depth (inches): Hydrlc Soil Present? Yes ,/ No Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Edma~ ln!;!icat2rn (minimum of ooe r!ilg!.!irnd· cbeck all that agQJ:i) S;ecoada~ ladi!;;~tgrs (Z or more reg!,!ired} _ Surface Water (A 1) _ Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA .:!__ Water-$tained Leaves (89) (MLRA 1, 2, _ High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 48) 4A, and 48) _ Saturation (A3) _ Salt Crust(B11) .:!.... Drainage Patterns (B10) _ Water Marks (81) Aquatic Invertebrates (813) _ Dry-Season Water Table (C2) _ Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) _ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) _·Drift Deposits (B3) _ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) .:!__ GElomorphic Position (02) Algal Mat or Crust (84) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) _ Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) . FAG-Neutral Test (D5) _ Surface Soil Cracks (86) _ Stunted or Stressed Plants (01) (LRR A) . Raised Ant Mounds (06) (LRR A) _ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (87) _ Other (Explain In Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (07) _ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (BB) Fleld Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes __ No_ ./ _ Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes __ No_./_ Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes __ No_./_ Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ./ No ------ (includes caoillarv frinae) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), If available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast-Interim Version ... SOIL Sampling Point· Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the Indicator or confirm the absence of Indicators.) Depth Matrii:s Bedoi:s Eeatures (itJQhe§) CQ!or (moist) ___'Y._ Color (moi§t} _jL JwL ---LQL Texture R~m§rks 0-3" 10YR 3/2 90 Sil ------------ 3-18+" 10YR 3/4 90 Sil ------------ ------------., ------------ ------------ ------------ ------------ : ------------ 1T"ne: c-concentration, D=Deoletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, cs-covered o/ Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lininn M=Matrix." Hydric Soll Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otheiwlse noted.} ·~ Indicators for Problematic Hydrlc Solls3 : _ HiStosol (A 1),. _ Sandy Redox (S5) _ 2 cm Muck (A10) _ Histic Epipedon (A2) _ Stripped Matrix (S6) _ Red Parent Material (TF2) _ Black Histic (A3) .,,,, .. , Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) , Other (Explain In Remarks) ;,:"Y _ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) _ Depleted Below Dark SurfaC:e (A 11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) 31ndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Mucky Mineral (S 1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present,· ' Sandy G1eyed Matrix (S4)" · Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic. ' Restrictive Layer (if prese11t): Type: Depth (inches): Hydrlc Soil Present? Yes No ,/ Remarks: \, .-~":-,{i \:(i:.:!I.~ ·{ HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required· check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) _ Surface Water (A 1) _ Water-Stai.ned Leaves (89) (except MLRA _ Water-Stained Leaves (89) (MLRA 1, 2, _ High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 48) 4A, and 48) _ Saturation (A3) _ Salt Crust (811) _ Drainage Patterns (B10) _ Water Marks (81) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) _ Dry-Season Water Table (C2) _ Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) _ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) _ Drift Deposits (B3) _ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) _ Geomorphic Position (02) Algal Mat or Crust (84) Iron Deposits (85) _ Surface Soil Cracks (86) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) _ Shallow Aquitard (03) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilted Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (05) _ Stunted or Stressed Plants (01) (LRR A). __ :,.:.: ~7 _ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) _ Sparsely Vegetated Concave ~.!Jrface_(88) _ Other (Explain In Remarks) :~fk;')f' ::-:'.,·°J."--t:\r" . Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) . Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Water Table Present? Saturation Present? Yes __ No_./_ Depth (inches): ____ _ Yes __ No_:!__ Depth (inches): ____ _ Yes __ No_./_ Depth (inches): ____ _ Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No_./_ Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast -Interim Version 00 GD February 24, 2014 Mr. Greg Laird Otak -Water and Natural Resources 10230 NE Points Drive, Suite 400 Kirkland, WA 98033 wwwhorlcrowse,com Re: Geotechnical Review of Permit Documents -Vuecrest Residential Development 4800 Block Smithers Avenue S Renton, Washington City of Renton Project No.: LUA 13-000642 19017-00 Dear Greg: This letter provides a summary of our geotechnical review of the geotechnical permit documents pertaining to the above-referenced development site. Our work was performed in accordance with the scope of work outlined in our Task Order dated January 30, 2014 as authorized by Otak on February 7, 2014. PERMIT DOCUMENTS REVIEWED We reviewed the following geotechnical permit documents: a Geotechnical Engineering Study by Earth Solutions NW, LLC (ESNW), dated February 25, 2013; a Slope Setback Letter by ESNW, dated April 10, 2013; a Geotechnical Review Letter by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc (AESI), dated October 31, 2013; a Slope Setback Letter by, dated April 10, 2013; a Response to Geotechnical Review by ESNW, dated December 2, 2013; a City of Renton email review comments by Elizabeth Higgins, dated December 9, 2013 a Geotechnical Addendum by ESNW, dated D~cember 10, 2013; and a Preliminary Plat Plan (Cl) and Grading Plan (C4) by D.R.Strong Consulting Engineers, dated December, 2013; 1700 Westlake Avenue North, Suite 200 Seattle, Washington 98109-6212 ~~ ~UC0'ifb · ( u l)l)©/b,, ~~) I Fax 206.328.5581 Tel 206.324.9530 CJD OD Otak -Water and Natural Resources February 24, 2014 REVIEW COMMENTS 19017-00 Page 2 Based on our review of the above-referenced documents, it is our opinion that the applicant's geotechnical engineer (ESNW) has addressed the review comments provided by the City of Renton peer review geotechnical engineer (AESI; letter dated October 31, 2013) in a manner that is generally consistent with current geotechnical practice in our local area. We understand that no additional follow-up review by AESI has occurred after the ESNW response. However, in their December 2, 2014 response to the AESI review comments, ESNW submitted additional slope stability analyses and addressed AESl's questions regarding geologic cross section and deeper soil conditions. Additionally, in their December 10, 2013 letter, ESNW also provided the minimum risk statement (three conditions of no adverse development impact), as required by Renton Municipal Code (RMC 4-3-050-)2.b) and requested by the City of Renton in their email correspondence dated December 9, 2013. A brief summary of the main geotechnical review comments by AESI and final responses by ESNW, along with our comments, is provided below for your information: 1. AESI commented that additional geologic cross sections and more detailed and deeper subsurface information was required for the slope stability analysis. ESNW generally responded in their December 2 letter that additional explorations should not be necessary since the test pit explorations confirmed dense, glacially-derived soil and perched groundwater conditions across the site, and that the risk of deeper subsurface uncertainty (such as risk of a potential weaker soil slippage plane) is very low. Given the geologic mapping of glacial soils at the site and the relatively low inclination of the steep slopes (about 50 percent, or 2Horizontal:1Vertical [1 H:lV]), we concur this assessment is consistent with common geotechnical engineering practice. 2. The current proposal is to construct house footings on the planned fill slope, with a setback of 20 feet from the existing top of the steep slope area. AESI commented that the proposed 2H:1 V fill slope at the top of the existing steep slopes (sensitive area) should also be considered a regulated sensitive/protected slope (if greater than 15-foot high), with the r additional development setback requirement behind the top of the planned fill slopes. ESNW responded in their December 2 letter by reducing the fill slope height to 1 5 feet and providing a 10-foot setback from the existing top of steep slope area to the toe of the planned fill slope, while maintaining the 20-foot setback from the existing (native) top of slope. Given the provided slope stability analysis showing a static and seismic safety factor against slope failure of 1.78 and 1.22, respectively, for this condition, we would consider this a reasonable design based on common geotechnical engineering practice. For Otak -Water and Natural Resources February 24, 2014 19017-00 Page 3 reference, slope stability safety factors of 1.5 in the static case and 1.1 in the seismic case are generally considered adequate in local geotechnical engineering practice. 3. AES/ commented that there were several issues with the initial slope stability analyses provided. In our opinion, these were adequately addressed by ESNW with their supplemental slope stability runs submitted on December 2, 2013, based on common geotechnical engineering practice. 4. The original design proposal included a 4-foot high rockery at the base of the planned 2H: 1 V fill slope. AESI commented that an unreinforced rockery should not be used as a retaining wall structure. ESNW responded by removing this rockery from the design. In addition, the toe of the fill slope was also moved 1 0 feet back from the e~isting top of steep slope area, as discussed in item 2 above. 5. A stormwater detention vault is proposed near an existing drainage ravine at the south end of the site, with a planned release of stormwater into the existing ravine. Given the classification of the site soils as "high erosion hazard," AESI commented that the applicant should demonstrate that such stormwater discharge will not cause erosive flows within the existing ravine, or provide alternate discharge design to prevent stormwater directed over the site slopes. ESNW responded in their December 10 letter that storm drainage facilities have been designed to discharge stormwater at a pre-developed flow rate into the existing ravine, which will reduce the potential for instability. While this sounds like a reasonable approach, we recommend that the applicant be required to provide a stormwater collection and discharge design stamped by a licensed civil engineer with expertise in stormwater design. This design should specifically address the potential for increased surface erosion and potential for slope instability with associated with the proposed design. SUMMARY ESNW provided the following code-required minimum risk statement in their December 10 letter: a The proposal will not increase the threat of the geological hazard to adjacent or abutting properties beyond pre-development conditions; a The proposal will not adversely impact other critical areas; and a The proposal can be safely accommodated on the site. Given the presence of competent glacial soils at the site, the relatively low inclination of the existing steep slopes (2H:1 V), and the slope stability analyses demonstrating static and seismic safety factors Otak -Water and Natural Resources February 24, 2014 19017-00 , Page 4 against slope failure exceeding the generally accepted values of 1.5 in the static case and 1.1 in the seismic case, we consider this a reasonable statement based on common geotechnical engineering practice in this area. USE OF THIS LETTER Work for this project was performed, and this letter was 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 Otak and the City of Renton, or their consultants, for specific application to the referenced site'. This report is not meant to represent a legal opinion. No other warranty, express or implied, is made. We based our review on subsurface conditions interpreted from subsurface soil and groundwater conditions reported by others. The nature and extent of conditions between the explorations may differ from those presented. If significant subsurface variations become evident during construction, we recommend that the geotechnical engineer of record be consulted to provide revised design recommendations, as needed. CLOSING We thank you for this opportunity to provide geotechnical consulting services. If you have any questions, please contact Rolf Hyllseth at (206) 826-4586. Sincerely, HART CROWSER, INC. ROLF 8. HYLLSETH, PE Associate Geotechnical Engineer rolf.hyllseth@hartcrowser.com MICHAEL BAILEY, PE CEO mike.bailey@hartcrowser.com L:\Jobs\ t 901700\Geotech Peer Review · Vuecrest Residentlal Development.doc I f '"' December 10, 2013 ES-2660.01 Geonerco Properties, LLC 1441 North 34th Street, #200 Seattle, Washington 98103 Attention: Mr. Jamie Waltier Subject: Geotechnical Addendum Proposed Vuecrest Residential Plat Smithers Avenue Residential Plat Renton, Washington Reference: Earth Solutions NW, LLC Response to Review Comments ES-2660.01, dated December 2, 2013 Earth Solutions NW, LLC Geotechnical Engineering Study ES-2660, dated February 2013 Earth Solutions NW, LLC Slope Setback Letter ES-2660.01, dated July 15, 2013 D.R. Strong Consulting Engineers Revised Site Plan Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. (AES!) Geotechnical Review Letter Project TE130415A, dated October 31, 2013 Dear Mr. Waltier: Earth Solutions NW LLC • Geotechnica\ Engineering • Construction Monitoring • Environmental Sciences As requested, Earth Solutions NW, LLC (ESNW) has prepared this letter to address comments provided in the referenced geotechnical review letter for the subject project. This letter specifically addresses concerns regarding stability of the project and potential impacts to the site and surrounding properties as outlined in City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-3- 050J.2.b, as noted in a December 9, 2013 email from City of Renton staff. 1805 -136th Place N.E .. Suite 201 • Bellevue, WA 98005 • (425) 449-4704 • fAX (425) 449-4711 Geonerco Properties, LLC December 10, 2013 Comment -Subsurface Conditions ES-2660.01 Page 2 Regarding the ESNW response letter, at least one issue seems to remain outstanding. This is the requirement that the following three conditions (RMC 4-3-050J.2.b) be met by the proposal: o The proposal will not increase the threat of the geological hazard to adjacent or abutting properties beyond pre-development conditions; and o The proposal will not adversely impact other critical areas; and o The development can be safely accommodated on the site. Response Based on the conditions encountered at the test pit locations, review and collaboration with the project design team and our understanding of the project, the following details address the three conditions provided in the comment: o There have been no recorded landslide events on the site based on review of readily available information, nor were there signs of excessive or chronic erosion or landslide activity observed during site visits conducted by ESNW representatives. Review of King County iMAP aerial photos dating as far back as 1936 show complete forested conditions and no signs of landslide activity (we acknowledge the gap of aerial coverage between 1936 and 1989). o Subsurface conditions encountered at the test pit locations indicate, from a geotechnical standpoint, relatively consistent engineering properties exist within the soil strata across the site and have been considered in developing recommendations for the current proposal. o Site designs have been modified to reduce the impacts to steeply sloped areas of the property. This approach will mitigate the potential for instability compared to the pre- development condition. o Storm drainage facilities and elements have been designed to a) collect and convey runoff to a detention vault, and b) discharge at a pre-developed rate within an existing drainage pathway. This condition will decrease the potential for instability compared to the pre-development condition. o Grading activities will be designed, i.e. structural fill, placement methods, drainage, foundation setbacks, etc. which will ensure the final configuration is as stable and resistant to landslide activity as the pre-development condition. o The proposal is consistent with surrounding developments which, to our knowledge, have not been adversely impacted by landslide activity. o Finally, the SlopeW analysis included in the referenced letter indicates a) no decrease in critical factor-of-safety values from a post-construction condition, and b) acceptable critical factor-of-safety* values from a global standpoint. This analysis agrees with the conditions encountered at the test pit locations. * Critical factor-of-safety is defined herein as the lowest factor-of-safety calculated in the SlopeW analysis. Earth Solutions NW, LLC Geonerco Properties, LLC December 10, 2013 Closure ES-2660.01 Page 3 In our opinion, based on the above criteria and our understanding of the proposal, the project: o will not increase the threat of the geological hazard to adjacent or abutting properties beyond pre-development conditions; and a The proposal will not adversely impact other critical areas; and o The development can be safely accommodated on the site. If you have any questions, or if additional information is required, please call. Sincerely, EARTH SOLUTIONS NW, LLC Kyle R. Campbell, P.E. Principal cc: DR Strong Consulting Engineers, Inc. Attention: Mr. Maher Joudi (Email only) Earth Solutions NW, LLC December 2, 2013 ES-2660.01 Geonerco Properties, LLC 1441 North 34th Street, #200 Seattle, Washington 98103 Attention: Mr. Jamie Waltier Subject: Response to Geotechnical Review Proposed Vuecrest Residential Plat Smithers Avenue Residential Plat Renton, Washington Reference: Earth Solutions NW, LLC Geotechnical Engineering Study ES-2660, dated February 2013 Earth Solutions NW, LLC Slope Setback Letter ES-2660.01, dated July 15, 2013 D.R. Strong Consulting Engineers Revised Site Plan Associated Earth Sciences. Inc. (AESI) Geotechnical Review Letter Project TE130415A, dated October 31, 2013 Dear Mr. Waltier: Earth Solutions NW LLC • Ceotechnical Engineering • Construction Monitoring • Environmental Sr.iences As requested, Earth Solutions NW, LLC (ESNW) has prepared this letter to address comments provided in the referenced geotechnical review letter for the subject project. ESNW previously prepared the referenced geotechnical engineering study and subsequent letters for the site and has been providing ongoing geotechnical consulting services during the design phase of the project. 1805 -136th Place N.E., Suite 201 • Bellevue. WA 98005 • (425) 449-4704 • FAX (425) 449-4711 Geonerco Properties, LLC December 2, 2013 AESI Comment 1 -Subsurface Conditions ES-2660.01 Page 2 Review comment 1 discusses the geologic conditions which were described in published geologic map resources and compares those to the subsurface conditions described in the referenced report prepared by ESNW. The review comment suggests that the conditions described in the referenced report do not adequately describe the stratigraphy of the subject site. Response ESNW conducted subsurface explorations across accessible areas of the subject site during preparation of the referenced report. We also reviewed readily available geologic map resources to supplement the directly observed site conditions. While a full stratigraphic exploration program was not completed for this site and the descending slope to the west, in our opinion, the exploration program provides adequate information regarding the soil and groundwater conditions which would most likely impact the proposed project. The soils J observed along the western portion of the site consisted of silt in a stiff to hard condition at depth, while the soils across the remaining area of the site generally consisted of isolated areas of outwash transitioning quickly to dense silty sand deposits. No groundwater was observed. In this respect, while soil from differing depositional environments may be present, the relative density and lack of groundwater supports a general description in terms of engineering properties. Furthermore, while there is the presence of silt deposits near the western side of the site, it is overlain by soils which have very low permeability characteristics to the east; therefore, the risk of a slippage plane being present or developing is very low. The site conditions which pose the greatest risk are related to controlling surface water flow and the effects of erosion, which are addressed in the referenced report and reflected in the current design, largely in the form of controlled stormwater management and engineered fill. The proposed project includes construction of single-family residences, access roadways and infrastructure improvements including a stormwater detention vault. It is acknowledged in the referenced report that landslide and erosion hazards are on or adjacent to the subject site and those conditions were discussed in the referenced report. A cross-section was dev_§J.m;1ec!. through the site based 011~t~E;::S2~~~-eq91:~ntere9,..,a.Qd~~e-p~opo~~d=gJ;,,a~lng~g,11'!)1~ !()-~ ~eval~,cit~ q'(e@II ~tabjlitye· irhe cross-section i~ -~~ched) f t:? AESI Comment 2 and 3 -Landslide Hazard Analysis Comments 2 and 3 relate to the descending steep slope, characterizing the potential landslide hazard and providing setbacks from the proposed fill slopes. Response The grading plans have been modified to omit the rockery at the base of the fill slope and the new slope height is lowered to about 15 feet. The current proposal addresses the comments provided in items 2 and 3. With respect to the adequacy of the potential landslide analysis, a slope stability analysis for existing and currently proposed finish grades is attached. The results of the stability analysis sugg~c!L!~.§.J~ropg~eig~~~.IJ_P,~l[I not !_ricrease the~p_Q!eriJigl=, forlandslide activity on the site or adjacent steei:, slor:ie areas. -----..... ----... ---~~,=-~-~;;:....:;.,....= ~-~·--=-.,.,,..... Earth Solutions W'I, LLC Geonerco Properties, LLC December 2, 2013 AESl·Comment 4 -Foundation Setbacks ES-2660.01 Page 3 Review Comment 4 suggests the minimum foundation setback reference be the outside face of the lowermost foundation element measured to the face of the finish grade at the permanent slope. Response We agree with this reference and it should be included in the final approved plans. AESI Comment 5 -Fill Slope Height The review comment indicates that creating a 2H:1V slope over 15 feet in height 'creates' a landslide hazard. The current plan proposal maintains permanent fill slope heights to less than 15 feet, therefore, this comment is adequately addressed. AESI Comment 6 -SlopeW Analysis The review comment suggests that inadequate input parameters were used or that the factors-. of-safety reported did not agree with the calculations for the slope stability modeling analysis. Response The attached slope stability analysis used strength parameters which reflect the soil conditions present on the site, and are valid for this project. It is important to note that computer models are a tool and part of the overall evaluation of a site and proposed project. When employing such a tool to assess a project, we use professional judgment to evaluate the results. In this respect, we filter factors-of-safety output to identify what we expect is most likely for a given site and conditions. It is often the case that a critical failure surface which is generated from a computer program may not agree with what we expect to see on a particular site. Therefore, we choose a slip surface which most agrees with what we would expect to occur and present the corresponding factor-of-safety in our report. AESI Comment 7 This comment is addressed in the current proposal. AESI Comment 8 This comment is addressed in the current proposal. AESI Comment 9 Comment 9 relates to the IBC code year recognized for this project, which is the 2012 version. Earth Solutions NW, LLC Geonerco Properties, LLC December 2, 2013 Response ES-2660.0·L Page4 The 2012 IBC recognizes ASCE for seismic site class definitions. If the project will be permitted under the 2012 IBC, in accordance with Table 20.3-1 of ASCE, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, Site Class C, should be used for design. If you have any questions, or if additional information is required, please ca IL Sincerely, EARTH SOLUTIONS NW, LLC Attachment: Slope W Computer Output cc: DR Strong Consulting Engineers, Inc. Attention: Mr. Maher Joudi (Email only) Kyle R. Campbell, P.E. Principal Earth Solutions NW, LLC C 0 ~ Q) w '.i\ 400 ~· 390 - 380 370~· 360 350 I;""·: 340 •_:_ ,,. 1-.. L 330 (, 320 310 •- -.Y-• C 300 290 280 270 260 250 240 230 220 210 200 190 180 -~{ °"t - ·-c-c/ ·"', !·""~---: . ' : ;:: .' ~. -15 .; ~5 --,"'- ' :.,,.-· . -:. : ·-·l.,;•_ .-:, ·..: ., • ,!;', "' .::"' ,\ .f -c-:: :.,,, ·-- . '. Dense Nl:iti~e Soil.' : "" -~:{ . -: ---. y_ .i -. -. ,_ -t~ - :",:, ~ ~' :-: .• ,:7 -. 'i:,. -· ·>. /; ., 4 ,ic ._.,,. :.' 1.955 o- ES-2660.01 Vuecrest Estates Existing (Residence Location), Static Condition November 26, 2013 ByHTW . -:; - ' . ' <· ,,,-;::i .,re -;,, ... : .. ____ . ---.. ;_\ / _:,. i"'-< '< ~:: ~,, , . . .. ·.· . I 150::r ·1 I 1,1 1.-1 '1' j'',f>:\\ l 1 I I I' 11 I I I ('1 .• (\ i' I I I r 1-11,'1,.·1 1: I i:.1 ~ --> ·\ ':' 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 1001.10120130140150160170180190200210220230240250260270280290300310320330340350360370380390400 Distance '! 11/30/13 Slope Stability Slope Stability Report generated using GeoStudio 2007, version 7 .21. Copyright © 1991-2013 GEO-SLOPE lnternationa I Ltd. File lnforrnation Title: Vuecrest Created By: Henry Wright Revision Number: 17 Last Edited By: Henry Wright Date: 11/26/2013 Time: 1:34:37 PM File Name: Vue crest Existing (Residence), Static Condition.gsz Di rectory: C:\Users\he nry. wright\Docume nts\SlopeW\ Vue crest Estates\ Last Solved Date: 11/26/2013 Last Solved Time: 1:34:38 PM Project Settings Length(L) Units: feet Time(t) Units: Seconds Force(F) Units: lbf Pressure(p) Units: psf Strength Units: psf Unii: Weight of Water: 62.4 pcf View:2D Analysis Settings Slope Stability Kind: SLOPE/W Method: Morgenstern-Price Settings Apply Phreatic Correction: No Side Function lnterslice force function option: Half-Sine PWP Conditions Source: Piezometric Line Use Staged Rapid Drawdown: No Slip Surface Direction of movement: Left to Right Use Passive Mode: No Slip Surface Option: Entry and Exit Critical slip surfaces saved: 1 Optimize Critical Slip Surface Location: No Tension Crack Tension Crack Option: (none) FOS Distribution fileJ/IC:/Users/henry.wighVDocurrents/SlopeWNuecrest Estates/wecrest eJcisting (residence), static condition.html 1/4 V 11/30/13 Slope Stability FOS Calculation Optior, Jnstant Advanced Number of Slices: 30 Optimization Tolerance: 0.01 Minimum Slip Surface Depth: 0.1 ft Optimization Maximum Iterations: 2000 Optimization Convergence Tolerance: le-007 Starting Optimization Points: 8 Ending Optimization Points: 16 Complete Passes per Insertion: 1 Driving Side Maximum Convex Angle: 5 • Resisting Side Maximum Convex Angle: l 0 Materials Dense Native Soil Model: Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight: 125 pcf Cohesion: 200 psf Phi: 35. Phi-8: 0 ° Pore Water Pressure Piezometric Line: 1 Slip Surface Entry and Exit Left Projection: Range Left-Zone Left Coordinate: (1.24812, 370.9532) ft Left-Zone Right Coordinate: (107.02561, 352.95612) ft Left-Zone Increment: 4 Right Projection: Range Right-Zone Left Coordinate: (113.3958, 350.93716) ft Right-Zone Right Coordinate: (400,250) ft Right-Zone Increment: 4 Radius Increments: 4 Slip Surface limits Left Coordinate: (0, 371) ft Right Coordinate: (400,250) ft Piezometric Lines Piezornetric Line 1 Coordinates fi!eJ//C:/Usersnienry.wighVDoc:urrents/SlopeWNuecrest Estates/wecrest e>lsting (residence), static condition.html 2/4 II 11/30/13 SI ope Stabi Ii ty X {ft} y (ft} 0 249.88736 46.27953 240.31824 171.63495 207.50984 302.86855 184.40726 400 183.45035 St0;is1T1ic Loads Horz Seismic Load: 0 Regions Material Points Area (ft 2 ) Region 1 Dense Native Soil 10,9,8,3,4,5,6,7,1,2 64129.713 Points X (ft} y (ft) Point 1 400 150 Point 2 0 150 Point 3 111.10083 352.14108 Point 4 172.10083 320.14108 Point 5 236 300 . Point 6 334 250 Point 7 400 250 Point 8 101.10083 354.14108 Point 9 26.67 370 Point 10 0 371 Criticei! Slip Surf aces Slip Surface FOS Center (ft) Radius (ft) Entry (ft) Exit (ft) 1 97 1.955 (372.681, 693. 708) 444.548 ( 80. 7049, 358.487) (331.989, 251.026) Slices of Slip Swrf.::1::::e: 97 Slip X (ft) V (ft) PWP (psf) Base Normal Frictional Cohesive Surface Stress (psf) Strength (psf) Strength (psf) 1 97 85.80389 354.17855 -775D.1264 242.D9876 169.51938 200 2 97 : 96.001835 345.8151 -7395.0085 826.71585 578.87267 200 3 97 1D6.1008 338.0126 -7D73.1077 1356.11D4 949.55874 200 4 97 115.4247 331.19685 -6800.0883 1682.2929 1177.9542 200 . 5 97 124.07245 325.2113 -6567.8275 1817.6223 1272.7129 200 6 97 132.72015 319.52135 -6353.9421 1933.3895 1353.7739 200 7 97 141.3679 314.11365 -6157.8067 2031.7336 1422.6352 200 file:///C:/Users/henry.'M"ighVDocuments/SlopeWNuecrest EstatesM.leCrest e>dsting (residence), static condition.html 314 11130/13 Slope Stability 8 97 150.01565 J08.97635 -5978.4111 2113.6717 1480.0088 200 9 97 158.66335 304.09875 -5815.3076 2179. 7902 1526.3055 200 10 97 167.3111 299.47115 -5667. 7721 2229.9835 1561.4512 200 11 97 171.8679 297.1008 -5593.1267 2252.4174 1577.1597 200 12 97 176.0945 295.0137 -5509.2413 2348.527 1644.4563 200 13 97 184.0819 291.17335 -5357.3289 2535.534 1775.4 200 14 97 192.0693 . 287.52635 -5217.4488 2711.3391 1898.5001 200 15 97 200.0567 284.06755 -5089.3923 2874.8323 2012.9793 200 .. 16 97 208.0441 280.79225 -4972.7354 3024.5768 2117.8315 . 200 -· 17 97 216.0315 277.69605 -4867.3107 3158.5615 2211.6486 200 18 97 224.0189 274.775 -4772.758 3274.3024 2292.6913 200 19 97 232.0063 272.0255 -4688.9979 3369.5418 2359.3786 200 20 97 240.1793 269.3.8815 -4614.1102 3349.1241 2345.0819 200 21 97 248.53785 266.8676 -4548.6951 3205.2011 2244.306 200 22 97 256.8964 264.5246 -4494.3075 3025.7366 2118.6436 200 23 97 265.255 262.3563 -4450.8388 2809.7668 1967.4199 200 24 97 · 273.61355 260.36005 -4418.1356 2557.3216 1790.6559 200 25 97 281.9721 258.53345 -4395.8811 2269.6768 1589.2448 200 26 97 290.3307 256.87445 -4384.187 1948.7888 1364.5566 200 27 97 298.6893 255.38115 -4382.8931 1598.1227 1119.0176 200 28 97 307.722 253.95875 -4342.9891 1189.3435 832.78727 200 29 97 317.4288 252.6338 -4266.3217 723.85176 506.84646 200 30 97 327.1356 251.5259 -4203.1494 237.43208 166.25173 200 file://IC:/Users/henry.wri9 hVOocUfT'ents/SlopeWNuecrest EstatesMJecrest existing ( residence), static corldition.htm! 414 C 0 :;=; C\l ~ w 400 390 360 ,~-. . •. 350 340 Ll_ : ;;_ ' 330 320 I·.· 310 ,..,.._ 300 •• 290 280 210 I'.:.. 260 250 240 230 220 210 200 190 180 --"'- ( :- .-.cc· ··-a ,;J. ' '• > ' :;,. _· ~-'," ..:,.-'" - '>-: ..., . -. ._"'.: \c> · : Derise Native Soil · ' --.-----~·,,,.,,,. ·.-'""'. . -, --· C. ·,,r· . -. ,. '" _..,·, _,9 _-1 -:-~ -~-" ,;;-· p, ,·< :,[ ---- ,,:, 1.781 o- ES-2660.01 Vuecrest Estates Proposed (Residence Location), Static Condition November 30, 2013 ByHTW >- £_-- :i ~ .-.. ~--- d,: . " ,. ,,... . ..., . 170 160 1501" I",/-, t :i.,~ 1 c1"1·-1~-1··1 1 .. ,.1-.,-_r .. 1. 1-11 1 1 .11·1 1 1 1 , i-1·,, i 1 1 ·1 , I 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100110120130140150160170180190200210220230240250260270280290300310320330340350360370380390400 Distance C 0 ., C1l > QJ w 370 36ok:. 350 1-C-·' 340 330 320 310 "' 300 " 290 I;_; ... ' 280 270 . ,--~"', . .---_,,::_-, 1.897 0 ES-2660.01 Vuecrest Estates Proposed (Residence Location), Static Condition November 30, 2013 ByHTW 260 '--'· DE;_~se. Native Soil'. .. ::: t;·,s:-~y{.:.,,"G:~=··: ' .... 230 220 210 200 190 180 170 160 150 - 0 .. , ,.''_. '"""' 0· ... ; .... -~· ·•, "'/ C ' ::;; - ,!···:-·: 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 ~"° ·-...a..·· ···~ . .::· ..::-. ~,-:..,-:.-._. F,;: ,•. 'i:· .- """ . >• .~ --, ----------::-.. _:. -~-/·c·· ·-' ___ ._ __ ;~~--~-·:. -,?. '-·· ' ·'y'· 0 I I ! !A ·_r 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240 250 260 270 280 290 300 310 320 330 340 350 360 370 380 390 400 Distance 11/30/13 Slope Stability Slope StabiHty Report generated using GeoStudio 2007, version 7 .21. Copyright © 1991·2013 GEO·SLOPE lnternationa I Ltd. File lnforrnation Title: Vuecrest Created By: Henry Wright Revision Number: 20 Last Edited By: Henry Wright Date: 11/30/2013 Time: 1:17:20 PM File Name: Vue crest Proposed(Residence), Static Condition.gsz Di rectory: C:\Use rs\henry. wright\Docume nts\SlopeW\ Vue crest Estates\ Last Solved Date: 11/30/2013 Last Solved Time: 1:17:22 PM Project Settings Length(L) Units: feet Time(t) Units: Seconds Force(F) Units: lbf Pressure(p) Units: psf Strength Units: psf Unit Weight of Water: 62.4 pcf View: 2D Analysis Settings S!ope StabiHty Kind: SLOPE/W Method: Morgenstern-Pri~e Settings Apply Phreatic Correction: No Side Function lnterslice force function option: Half-Sine PWP Conditions Source: Piezometric Line Use Staged Rapid Drawdown: No Slip Surface Direction of movement: Left to Right Use Passive Mode: No Slip Surface Option: Entry and Exit Critical slip surfaces saved: 1 Optimize Critical Slip Surface Location: No Tension Crack Tension Crack Option: (none) · · FOS Distribution FOS Calculation Option:_ Constant file:///C:/Users/henrv.wiah:tDocuments/SlopeWNuecrest Estates/1AJecrest proposed(residence), static condition.html 1/5 11130/13 Slope Slability Advanced Number of Slices: 30 Optimization Tolerance: 0.01 Minimum Slip Surface Depth: 0.1 ft Optimization Maximum Iterations: 2000 Optimization Convergence Tolerance: le-007 Starting Optimization Points: 8 Ending Optimization Points: 16 Complete Passes per Insertion: 1 Driving Side Maximum Convex Angle: 5 ° Resisting Side Maximum Convex Angle: 1 ° Materials Dense Native Soil Model: Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight: 125 pcf Cohesion: 200 psf Phi:35° Phi-B: 0 ° Pore Water Pressure Piezometric Line: 1 Select Fill Soil Model: Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight: 130 pcf Cohesion: 0 psf Phi: 32° Phi-B: 0 ° Pore Water Pressure Piezometric Line: 1 Slip Surface Entry and Exit Left Projection: Range Left-Zone Left Coordinate: (0.18509, 376) ft Left-Zone Right Coordinate: (101.63203, 354.03484) ft Left-Zone Increment: 4 Right Projection: Range Right-Zone Left Coordinate: ( 109. 77425, 352.4064) ft Right-Zone Right Coordinate: (400,250) ft Right-Zone Increment: 4 Radius Increments: 4 Slip Surface Limits Left Coordinate: (O, 376) ft Right Coordinate: (400,250) ft . ,-., .... ~ file:///C:/Users/henrv:wriohVDocuroonts/SlopeWNuecrest Estates/1.UeCrest proposed{residenca}, static condition.htrri 2/5 11/30/13 Piezometric lines v;.,,,"-·1e+.:~ L'rii:o 1 I ,1; . .._ ~j i ..,J 1'-,! • ..,, • .J,, X (ft) y (ft) 0 249.88736 46.27953 240.31824 171.63495 207.50984 302.86855 184.40726 400 183.45035 .. Surcharge Loads Surcharge load 1 Surcharge (Unit Weight): 250 pcf Direction: Vertical Coordinates X (ft) y (ft) 0 377 21 377 77 367 91 360 Seismic Loads Herz Seismic Load: 0 Regions Material · Dense Slope Stability Points Region Native 10, 9, 28, 27, 26,25,24,23,22,20,21, 19, 18, 17, 16, 15, 14,31,30, 29,8,3,4, 5,6, 7, 1,2 1 Soil Region Select um~~~~~~a~~2~~~~~1~~3~~~~uu 2 Fill Soil Points X (ft) y (ft) Point 1 400 150 Point 2 0 150 -· ·- Point 3 111.10083 352.14108 Point 4 172.10083 320.14108 file:11/C:/Users/henrv.v.riaht!Docurrents/SlooeWNuecrest Estates/wecrest proposed{residence), static condition.html Area (ft2 ) · 63994.441 654.8246 3/5 11/30)13 Slope Stability Point 5 236 30L Point 6 334 250 Point 7 400 250 Point8 101.10083 354.14108 Point 9 26.57 370 Point 10 0 371 Point 11 77 365 Point 12 21 375 Point 13 0 376 Point 14 91 355 Point 15 91 355 Point 16 81 356 Point 17 81 358 Poi.nt 18 71 358 Point 19 71 350 Point 20 51 362 Point 21 61 360 Point 22 51 362 Point 23 51 364 Point 24 41 364 Point 25 41 366 Point 26 31 366 Point 27 31 368 Point 28 26.67 368 Point 29 101 350 Point 30 96 350 Point 31 96 355 Critical Slip Surfaces Slip Surface FOS Center (ft) Radius (ft) Entry (ft) Exit (ft) 1 '77 1.781 (111.077, 400.633) 48.244 (78.0107, 365.503) ( 109. 774, 352.406) SI . -,i-S • 77 , ices o; ..,,,p urrace: Slip X (ft) y (ft) PWP (psf) Base Normal Frictional Cohesive Surface Stress ( psf) Strength (psf) Str~_ogth (psf). 1 77 78.55193 365.00855 -8307.8397 204.69065 127.90491 . 0 2 77 79.63437 364.04925 -8265.2677 .-238.54864 149.06174 0 3 77 80.71681 363.14575 -8226.6917 267.60619 167.21891 0 4 77 81.79925 362.2941 -8191.0762 292.84786 182.99165 0 5 77 82.88169 361.49095 -8158.7432 315.03813 196.85767 0 . . 6 77 83.964135 360.73335 -8129.429 334.74389 209.1712 0 7 77 85.04658 360.0187 -8102.3398 352.38995 220.19768 0 8 77 86.12902 359.3448 -8077.8242 368.25421 230.11077 0 . ·- 9 77 87.21146 358.7097 -8055.9436 382.50879 239.01802 0 10 77 88.2939 I 358.1116 -8036.4879 395.19586 246.94578 0 fil e://JC :/Userstt:ienry. Y-ri g hVDocuments/SlopeWNuecres t Estates/v.iecr est. proposed( residence) , static car.di ti on.html 415 11/30/13 Slope Stability 11 I 11 89.37634 .57.549 -8019.0364 406.24064 253.84733 0 12 I 11 90.45878 357.02055 . -8003.7117 415.48241 259.62223 0 13 77 91.5525 356.52015 -7990.3839 238.69777 149.15492 0 14 77 92.657495 356.04735 . -7978.9023 241.59862 150.96758 0 15 77 93.76249 355.60665 -7969.4867 241.29175 150.77582 0 16 77 94.86749 355.1971 -7961.93 237.39184 148.33888 0 17 77 95.709995. 354.90255 -7957.3932 249.55719 174.74182 200 18 77 96.508365 354.64405 -7954.2588 223.32383 139.54822 0 19 77 97.525095 354.3342 -7951.4927 209.75357 131.06858 0 20 77 98.54182 354.0486 -7950.2931 192.03299 119.99553 0 21 77 • 99.55854 353.78685 .. -7950. 5525 169.97944 106.21494 0 22 77 100.58385 353.5467 -7952.3034 143.22019 89.493909 0 -· 23 77 101.6429 353.3234 -7955.6988 144.76419 101.36498 200 24-77 . 102.7271 , 353.12 -7960.7301 140.74425 98.550182 200 .. 25 77 103.8113 352.94215 -7967.276 130.99465 91.723442 200 26 77 104.89545 352.78955 -7975.4809 115.83552 81.108904 200 27 77 105.9796 .352.6619 -7985.1965 · 95.755219 67.048526 200 28 77 107.0638 352.55905 -7996.5219 71.40231 49.996435 200 29 77 108.148 352.48085 -8009.3465 43.502878 30.461043 200 30 77 109.23215 352.42715 -8023.7168 12.835366 8.9874201 200 fileJ//C:/Users/henry.wighVDcx:urrents/SlopeWNuecrest Estates/wecrest proposed(residence), static condition.html 515 360 350 340 330 320 310 300 C 290 I• 0 :.:; 280 1 co c -5i 210 F~ W 260µ: 250 >--- 240 ::: ~~ 210 200 190 180 170 -: ~ ~ - ·cc -·::o.. :: ,_.-: -, ' ,,,.-~ 7 -~ ' '"-"" -J ·"-', .2-.- -Dense Native Soil : is -"'· -.-• -.,.~· ··:t;: _, ' =~~ _-.:, • "~.:c,, -"~c-? -,0 , 1 ··--.-, ' : _;; . ·-~--- '"'"·' . --.:-:·· 1.245 o- ES-2660.01 Vuecrest Estates Existing (Residence Location), Seismic Condition November 26, 2013 ByHTW -- ' -_,_. , "" -, ! J I ! (; I . I '1 I I I · 1 • "1 . I -I I I I k I r-I 1· I I f I ., . __ f. l I I I ·. f I ·:,-.·,; -I I 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240 250 260 270 280 290 300 310 320 330 340 350 360 370 380 390 400 Distance 11/30/13 Slope Stability Slope Stability Report gene rated using GeoStudio 2qo7, version 7 .21. Copyright© 1991·2013 GEO·SLOPE lnterna tiona I ltd. file lnforn1ation Title: Vuecrest Created By: Henry Wright Revision Number: 19 Last Edited By: Henry Wright Date: 11/26/2013 Time: 1:36:05 PM File Name: Vuecrest Existing (Residence), Seismic Condition.gsz Di rectory: C:\Users\henry .wright\Documents\SI opeW\ Vue crest Estates\ Last Solved Date: 11/26/2013 Last Solved Time: 1:36:08 PM Project Settings Length(L) Units: feet Time(t) Units: Seconds Force(F) Units: lbf Pressure(p) Units: psf Strength Units: psf Unit Weight of Water: 62.4 pcf View: 2D Analysis Settings Slope Stability Kind: SLOPE/W Method: Morgenstern-Price Settings Apply Phreatic Correction: No Side Function lnterslice force function option: Half-Sine PWP Conditions Source: Piezometric Line . Use Staged Rapid Drawdown: No Slip Surface Direction of movement: Left to Right Use Passive Mode: No Slip Surface Option: Entry and Exit Critical slip surfaces saved: 1 Optimize Critical Slip Surface Location: No Tension Crack Tension Crack Option: (none) FOS Distribution fileJ//C:/Users/henrv.wriahVDocuments/SlooeWNuecrest Estates/weer est e>Ostil"IQ (residence), seismic condition.html 1/4 11/30/13 Slope Stability FOS Calculation Optio1 .. _onstant Advanced Number of Slices: 30 Optimization Tolerance: 0.01 Minimum Slip Surface Depth: 0.1 ft Optimization Maximum Iterations: 2000 Optimization Convergence Tolerance: le-007 Starting Optimization Points: 8 Ending Optimization Points: 16 Complete Passes per Insertion: 1 Driving Side Maximum Convex Angle: 5' Resisting Side Maximum Convex Angle: 1 ° Materials Dense Native Soil Model: Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight: 125 pcf Cohesion: 200 psf Phi: 35° Phi-B: 0 ° Pore Water Pressure Piezometric Line: 1 Slip Surface Entry and Exit Left Projection: Range Left-Zone Left Coordinate: (1.24812, 370.9532) ft Left-Zone Right Coordinate: (107.02561, 3S2.95612) ft Left-Zone Increment: 4 Right Projection: Range Right-Zone Left Coordinate: ( 113.3958, 350.93716) ft Right-Zone Right Coordinate: (400,250) ft Right-Zone Increment: 4 Radius Increments: 4 Slip Surface Limits Left Coordinate: (0, 371) ft Right Coordinate: (400, 250) ft Piezometric lines Piezometric Line 1 Coordir,::ites file:///C:/Users/he1Yy.'Mig hUDoccrrenls/SlopeWNuecrest Estates/wecrest e:.sting (residence). seisrric condition.him 2/4 11/30/13 Slope Stability X (ft) I y (ft) 0 I 249.88736 46.27953 240.31824 171.63495 207.50984 302.86855 184.40726 400 183.45035 ~ . . L I :)eism.1c naos Horz Seismic Load: 0.2 Ignore seismic load in strength: No Material Points Area (ft2) Region 1 Dense Native Soil 10,9,8,3,4,5,6,7,1,2 64129.713 Points X (ft) y (ft) Point 1 400 150 Point 2 0 150 Point 3 ,111.10083 352.14108 Point 4 172.10083 320.14108 Point 5 236 300 Point 6 334 250 Point 7 400 250 Point 8 101.10083 354.14108 Point 9 26.67 370 Point 10 0 371 Critical Slip Surfaces Slip Surface FOS Center (ft) Radius (ft) . Entry (ft) Exit (ft) 1 97 1.245 (372:681, 693.708) 444.548 . (80.7049, 358.487) (331.989, 251.026) . Slices of Slip Surface: 97 Slip X (ft) y (ft) PWP (psf) Base Normal Frictional Cohesive Surface Stress (psf) Strength (psf) Strength (psf) 1 97 85.80389 354.17855 -7750.1264 182.89609 128.06522 200 2 97 96.001835 345.8151 -7395.0085 693.7598 485.77584 200 .. 3 97 . 106.1008 338.0126 -7073.1077 1141.8951 799.56353 200 4 97 115.4247 331.19685 -6800.0883 1408.4334 986.19571 200 5· 97 124.07245 325.2113 -6567.8275 1511.8254 1058.5916 200 . 6 97 132.72015 319.52135 -6353.9421 1601.3589 1121.2836 200 .. file:1//C :/Users/henry.wig hVDocuments/SlopeWNuecrest Estates/wecrest existing ( residence), seismic condition.htm 314 11/30/13 Slope Stability 7 97 141.3679 14.11365 -6157.8067 1680.3893 1176.6213 200 8 97 150.01565 308.97635 -5978.4111 1751.2679 1226.251 200 9 97 158.66335 304.09875 -5815.3076 1815.7317 1271.389 200 10 97 167.3111 299.47115 -5667.7721 1874.4209 1312.4836 200 11 97 171.8679 297.1008 -5593.1267 1905.0373 1333.9215 200 12 97 176.0945 295.0137 -5509.2413 2000.543 1400.7953 200 13 97 184.0819 291.17335 -5357.3289 2192.3612 1535.1078 200 14 97 192.0693 287.52635 -5217.4488 2383.4754 1668.9274 200 15 97 200.0567 284.06755 -5089.3923 2573.0199 .. 1801.6479 200 16 97 208.0441 280.79225 -4972.7354 2758.3796 1931.4382 200 17 97 216.0315 277.69605 -4867.3107 2936.0632 2055.8536 200 18 97 224.0189 274.775 -4772.758 3101.5671 2171.7407 200 19 97 232.0063 272.0255 -4688.9979 3248.9974 2274.9725 200 20 97 240.1793 269.38815 -4614.1102 3286.9996 2301.5819 200 21 97 248.53785 266.8676 -4548.6951 3200.606 2241.0884 200 22 97 256.8964 264.5246 -4494.3075 3066.511 2147.1941 200 23 97 265.255 262.3563 -4450.8388 2881.3954 2017.5748 200 24 97 273.61355 260.36005 -4418.1356 2644.9099 1851.9859 200 25 97 281.9721 258.53345 -4395.8811 2359.1568 1651.8994 200 26 97 290.3307 256.87445 -4384.187 2028.8519 1420.6174 200 27 97 298.6893 255.38115 -4382.8931 1660.8821 1162.9621 200 28 97 307.722 253.95875 -4342.9891 1229.4978 860.90365 200 29. 97 317.4288 252.6338 -4266.3217 740.9841 518.84266 200 30 97 327.1356 251.5259 -4203.1494 237.93423 166.60334 200 fileJ//C:/Users/henry.wlghUDocuments/SlopeWNuecrest Estates/wecrest e>:isting (residence), seismic condition.html 414 C 0 ~ C1l > Q) w 400, ::~ 370 360 I:· 350 340 •- 330 320 I - 310 300 290 1-.x 280 270 •- 260 250 240 230 220 ·-;· 210 , 200 ,~ 190 - 180 - 170 -· ' ·::-., ... .. _,, '. ~ '/, ~ ~ - _,.0ii' '•J :z; -. ~- ' .. ,. ;;._, ~ . - ·<~ - ,' sc' \,\;,\'.'-:· Dense·Natiite Soll ' -. . "·. .;::, '}:. .. ,, ,, . ~\ .. ~ ~,,,- -· ' '~'-.,.;. .. ,<\ ;_ ~ s' .•· . • ·~~ 1.216 o-- . ES-2660.01 Vuecrest Estates Proposed (Residence Location), Seismic Condition November 30, 2013 ByHTW -1-~ -------------------~· -------~-----------------------~-- .-,, 160 150 I I 1 •· 1 · · J ·' 1• 1 J 1 1 >1 J I J· 1 1· 1 'I r I J 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 · 1 r i 1 · 1 1 , 1 1 1 .1 1 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240 250 260 270 280 290 300 310 320 330 340 350 360 370 380 390 400 Distance 0 11/30/13 Slope Stabilir/ Slope Stability Report generated using GeoStudio 2007, version 7 .21. Copyright © 1991-2013 GEO-SLOPE International Ltd. File Information Title: Vuecrest Created By: Henry Wright Revision Number: 21 Last Edited By: Henry Wright Date: 11/30/2013 Time: 1:25:05 PM File Name: Vue crest Proposed (Residence), Seismic Condition.gsz Di rectory: C:\Users\henry.wright\Documents\SlopeW\ Vue crest Estates\ Last Solved Date: 11/30/2013 Last Solved Time: l:2S:10 PM Project Settings Length(L) Units: feet Time(t) Units: Seconds Force(F) Units: lbf Pressure(p) Units: psf Strength Units: psf Unit Weight of Water: 62.4 pcf View: 20 Analysis Settings Slope Stability Kind: SLOPE/W Method: Morgenstern-Price Settings Apply Phreatic Correction: No Side Function lnterslice force function option: Half-Sine PWP Conditions Source: Piezometric Line Use Staged Rapid Drawdown: No Slip Surface Direction of movement: Left to Right Use Passive Mode: No Slip Surface Option: Entry and Exit Critical slip surfaces saved: 1 Optimize Critical Slip Surface Location: No Tension Crack Tension Crack Option: (none) FOS Distribution FOS Calculation Option: Constant file:///C:/Users/henry.wighVDocun'\3nts/SlopeWNuecrest Esta1es/\.uecrest proposed (residence), seismic co~ition.html 115 11/30/13 Slope Stability Advanced Number of Slices: 30 Optimization Tolerance: 0.01 Minimum Slip Surface Depth: 0.1 ft Optimization Maximum Iterations: 2000 Optimization Convergence Tolerance: le-007 Starting Optimization Points: 8 Ending Optimization Points: 16 Complete Passes per Insertion: 1 Driving Side Maximum Convex Angle: S 0 Resisting Side Maximum Convex Angle: 1 ° l\llaterials Dense Native Soil Model: Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight: 125 pcf Cohesion: 200 psf Phi: 35° Phi-B: 0 ° Pore Water Pressure Piezometric Line: 1 Select Fill Soil Model: Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight: 130 pcf Cohesion: O psf Phi: 32 ° Phi-B: 0 ° Pore Water Pressure Piezometric Line: 1 Slip Surface Entry and Exit Left Projection: Range Left-Zone Left Coordinate: (0.18509, 376) ft Left-Zone Right Coordinate: (101.63203, 354.03484) ft Left-Zone Increment: 4 Right Projection: Range Right-Zone Left Coordinate: (109.77425, 352.4064) ft Right-Zone Right Coordinate: (400, 250) ft Right-Zone Increment: 4 Radius Increments: 4 Slip Surface Limits Left Coordinate: (O, 376) ft Right Coordinate: (400,250) ft fiJ,...111r-111"""""lh"'.-..r,,,, ... ;,.,httn,..,..., ,,..,....,,,..tc:!C::lr.nr,.\f\//\h,...rri:.c:t F<d::ifRc:.lvi ,~rAc:t nrn~P.rl (residence). seismic condition.html 2/5 11130/13 Piezornetric lines Piezorn-etr.ic Une 1 X (ft) y (ft) 0 249.88736 46.27953 240.31824 171.63495 207.50984 302.86855 184.40726 400 183.45035 Surcharge Loads Surcharge Load 1 Surcharge (Unit Weight): 250 pcf Direction: Vertical Coordinates X (ft) y (ft) 0 377 21 377 77 367 91 360 Seismic Loads Horz Seismic Load: 0.2 Ignore seismic load in strength: No Regions . Material Dense Slope Stability .. Points - Region Native 10, 9, 28, 27, 26,25, 24, 23, 22, 20, 21, 19, 18, 17, 16, 15, 14,31, 30, 29,8,3,4,5, 6, 7, 1, 2 1 Soil ' Region Select 2 Fill Soil 13, 10, 9, 28, 27, 26,25, 24,23,22,20,21, 19,18, 17, 16, 15, 14,31,30, 29, 8, 11, 12 Points X (ft) y (ft) Point 1 400 -150 Point 2 0 150 Point 3 111.10083 352.14108 file:II/C:/Users/henrv.1MiQhVDocuments/SlopeWNuecrest Estatesfwecrest proposed (resider.ca), seismic condition.htm Area (ft2 ) . - 63994.441 654.8246 315 11/30/13 Slope Stability Point 4 172.10083 32L._-i108 Point 5 236 300 Point 6 334 250 Point 7 400 250 Point 8 101.10083 354.14108 Point 9 26.67 370 Point 10 o 371 Point 11 77 366 Point 12 21 376 ... Point 13 o 376 Point 14 91 355 Point 15 91 356 Point 16 81 356 Point 17 81 358 Point 18 71 358 Point 19 71 360 Point 20 61 362 Point 21 61 360 Point 22 51 362 Point 23 51 364 Point 24 41 364 Point 25 41 366 Point 26 31 366 Point 27 31 368 Point 28 26.67 368 Point 29 101 350 Point 30 96 350 Point 31 96 355 Critical Slip Surfaces Slip Surface FOS Center (ft) Radius (ft) Entry (ft} Exit (ft) 1 72 1.216 (373.986, 737.223) 487.917 (52.2423, 370.421) (331. 774, 251.135) . Slices of Siio Surfa,:e: 72 ' .. . ~ . Slip X (ft} y (ft) PWP (psf) Base Normal Frictional Cohesive Surface Stress (psf) Strength ( psf} Strength (psf) 1 72 . S8.384165 365.2105 -7990.7875 525.13106 328.13831 o ' 2 72 67.762995 357.3903 -7656.1381 926.02858 648.4122 200 3 72 74 352.4417 -7449.2718 1229.7594 861.08683 200 4 72 79 348.58475 -7290.2945 1400.6884 980.77258 200 5 72 86 343.41035 -7081.6083 1512.2004 1058.8541 200 6 72 93.5 337.99755 -6866.3446 1471.2286 1030.1654 200 7 72 98.5504 334.4968 -6730.4118 1555.5744 1089.2249 200 8 72 106.1008 329.4676 -6539.8971 1757.6235 1230.7012 200 9 72 116.14535 323.04235 -6303.0322 1988.3409 1392.2513 200 file:///C:/Users/henrv.wrlQhUDocuments/SlopeWNuecrest Estates/wecrest proposed (residence), seismic condition.htni 4/5 11130113 Slope Stability 10 I 12 126.2344 16.9284 -6086.2764 2078.2261 1455.1896 200 11 72 136.3234 · 311.141 -5889.8686 2161.1997 1513.2883 200 12 72 146.4124 305.6671 . -5713.1159 2238.4985 • 1567.4135 200 13 72 156.501.4 300.4949 -5555.1514 2310.0401 1617.5075 200 14 72 166.59045 . 295.6137 . -5415.2791 2374.1638 1662.4074 200 15 72 171.8679 293.13855 -5345.759 2406.5 1685.0494 200 . 16 72 176.66505 291.01415 ,5265.9068 2515.7328 1761.5351 200 17 72 185.7935 287.08755 -5121.2189 2733.9445 1914.3286 200 18 72 194.92195 283.3785 -4989.9738 · 2945.9066 2062.746 200 19 72 · 204.0504 279.88175 -4872.1259 3147.1761 2203.6764 200 20 72 213.17885 276.5924 -4767.1248 3331.7747 2332.9338 200 21 72 222.3073 273.5061 -4674.8482 349.2 .. 4705 2445.4542 200 22 72 231.43575 . 270.6188 -4594.8905 • 3621.9153 .2536.0924. . 200 23 72 · 240.77635 . 267.8688 -4525.909 3609.6898 2527.532 . 200 24 72 250.329 265.26175 -4468.2111 3439.4613 2408.3367 200 25 72 259.88165 262.8614 -4423.3516 3207.1844 2245.6947 200 26 72 269.4343 260.6646 -4391.1752 2913.2372 2039.8707 200 27 72 278.98695 258.66855 -4371.574 2561.7475 1793.7549 200 28 72 288.5396 256.87075 -4364.2905 2159.8317 1512.3304 200 29 72 298.09225 255.269 -4369.3284 1716.9983 1202.2551 200 30 72 307.68625 253.8561 -4336.5179 1241.987 869.64863 200 . 31 72 317.32155 252.63195 -4266.0638 745.42984 521.9556 200 32 72 326.95685 251.602 -4207.7772 239.18413 167.47853 200 file:/1/CJUsers/henry.wrighVDocuments/SlopeWNuecrest Estates/v'Jecrest proposed {residence), seismic condition.html 515 C 0 :;:; Cll > Q) UJ 400 1 390 i- 380 r 37 360 350 i- 340 330 ,~ 320 31(' ::: 1= ':~. 280 270 I 260 250 240 230 220 210 200 190 180 170 '.-i ~"',_ •,-,;,_ . ,., -;... ·~j ·. ·" ".:: .~f:-· ' •: ·'· ~---~,..,- " -~ -;.:. "'·. -f'··' ~- ·,J, i ." /'" , ::;: .. ,.,-c ·,. +'. . _;Dense Native Soil .• ..,·. •. ,,.-~ °. . 'l .· "'~"" "· :· ·' --~. 7 -~ -c ;'---~- ,;.._ ·"' 1.820 o- r:~ ES-2660.01 Vuecrest Estates Existing (Vault Location), Static Condition November 30, 2013 ByHTW ·-·.' -~;:. " <-_. '· .,._· c•:-.· • ., •• , .•. :··"s-·.,·.•··-------------------"--··.-------C-·-··-"•···· ,_,,._- 160 r . 150 ~ I 1 1 1 r r·, 1 i l ·1 · 1 + '1c :1 ·i 1 :• r , 1>· r i ·1 1 1· 1 1 ,.. 1 1 1 , 1 1 , r , 1 r. 1 1 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100110120 130140150160170180190 200210220230 240250 260 270280 290 300310320 330 340 350 360 370 380 390400 Distance 0 11130/13 Slope Stability Slope Stability Report generated using GeoStudio 2007, version 7 .21. Copyright © 1991-2013 GEO-SLOPE I ntcrnatlona I Ltd. file Information Title: Vuecrest Created By: Henry Wright Revision Number: 13 Last Edited By: Henry Wright Date: 11/30/2013 Time: 1:47:39 PM File Name: Vue crest Existing, Static Condition.gsz Di rectory: C:\Use rs\henry. wright\Documents\SlopeW\ Vuecrest Estates\ Last Solved Date: 11/30/2013 Last Solved Time: 1:47:40 PM Project Settings Length(L) Units: feet Time(t) Units: Seconds Force(F) Units: lbf Pressure(p) Units: psf Strength Units: psf Unit Weight of Water: 62.4 pcf View: 2D Analysis Settings Slope Stability Kind: SLOPE/W Method: Morgenstern-Price Settings Apply Phreatic Correction: No Side Function lnterslice force function option: Half-Sine PWP Conditions Source: Piezometric Line Use Staged Rapid Drawdown: No SI i p Surface Direction of movement: Left to Right Use Passive Mode: No Slip Surface Option: Entry and Exit Critical slip surfaces saved: 1 Optimize Critical Slip Surface Location: No Tension Crack Tension Crack Option: (none) FOS Distribution filel//C :/Users/henry.wrig hUOocurrents/SlopeWNuecrest Estates/\.Uecrest existing, static condition.html ... . ,.,,, ·~ 1/4 11/30/13 Slope Stability FOS Calculation Optior. .Jnstant Advanced Number of Slices: 30 Optimization Tolerance: 0.01 Minimum Slip Surface Depth: 0.1 ft Optimization Maximum Iterations: 2000 Optimization Convergence Tolerance: le-007 Starting Optimization Points: 8 Ending Optimization Points: 16 Complete Passes per Insertion: 1 Driving Side Maximum Convex Angle: 5 • Resisting Side Maximum Convex Angle: 1 • fJlaterials Dense Native Soil Model: Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight: 125 pcf Cohesion: 200 psf Phi: 35 ° Phi-B: 0 • Pore Water Pressure Piezometric Line: 1 Slip Surface Entry and Exit Left Projection: Range Left-Zone Left Coordinate: (O, 370) ft Left-Zone Right Coordinate: (94.35876, 350.15031) ft Left-Zone Increment: 4 Right Projection: Range Right-Zone Left Coordinate: (100.25406, 347.58742) ft Right-Zone Right Coordinate: (400,250) ft Right-Zone Increment: 4 Radius Increments: 4 Slip Surface limits" Left Coordinate: (O, 370) ft Right Coordinate: (400,250) ft Plezometric Lines Piezometric line 1 Coordinates fi!e:11ic:/Users/henry.v.rig hVDocuments/SlcpeWNuecrest Estates/weer est IDisting, static condition.html 214 11130/13 Slope Stability I X (ft) y (ft) 0 249.88736 46.27953 240.31824 171.63495 207.50984 302.86855 184.40726 400 183.45035 Horz Seismic Load: O Material Points Area (ft 2 ) Region 1 Dense Native Soil 8,5,4,6,9,1,2,3 61110.399 Points X (ft) y (ft) Point 1 400 250 Point 2 400 150 Point 3 0 150 Point 4 95 350 Point 5 55 360 Point 6 193 305 Point 7 304 250 Point 8 0 370 Point 9 307.86636 248.3727 Critical Slip Surfaces Slip Surface FOS Center (ft) Radius (ft) Entry (ft) Exit (ft) 1 92 1.820 (338.979, 634.837) 386.754 ( 70. 9609, 356. 01) (305.51, 249.535) Slices of Sllp Surface: 92 Slip X (ft) y (ft) PWP (psf) Base Normal Frictional Cohesive ' Surface Stress (psf) Strength (psf) Strength (psf) 1 92 . 74.96743 352.2664 -7454.1094 177.09711 124.00473 200 2 92 82.980455 344.98445 -7130.5836 658.49769 ', 461.08504 200 3 92 90.993485 338.09765 -6831. 7057 1095.398 767.00592 200 4 92 98.83175 331.71375 -6561.2966 1417.3014 992.40514 200 5 92 106.49525 325.7956 -6317.2144 1632.6674 1143.2061 200 6 92 114.15875 320.17535 , -6091.6897 1828.197 1280.1174 200 7 92 iil.82225 314.83735 -5883.7261 2007.0231 1405.3327 200 8 92 129.48575 309.7677 -5692.5149 2171.6431 1520.6008 200 fi1A·f//r. ·/11<:.&>rc:JhP.nrv\Min ht/nnr.11rr'W"!nts/SlooeWNuecrest Esta:eslwecrest e)Qstina. static condition.htrrJ 314 11130/13 Slope Stability 9 92 137.14925 ,04.95395 -5517.3403 2323.5652 1626.9778 200 10 92 ,. 144.81275 300.3851 -5357.324 2463.8522 1725.2079 200 '' 11 92 152.47625 296.0512 -5212.058 2592.826 1815.5163 200 12 92 160.13975 291.9433 -5080.8752 '' 2710.1086 1897 .. 6.385 200 13 92 167.80325 288.05345 -4963.3424 2814.7995. 1970.9438 200 14 92 175.1958 284.4974 -4843.0998 2903.0105 2032.7099 200 15 92 . 182.31745 281.255 -4719.0994 2973.6527 2082.174 200 16 92 189.43915 278.1843 -4605.7212 3028.7405 2120.7469 200 17 92 196.9239 275.1416 -4497.9631 3052.6464 2137.486 200 . . 18 92 204.77165 272.14 -4396.9862 3039.756 2128.46 • 200 .. 19 92 212.6194 269.33155 -4307.9481 2997.8964 2099.1497 200 20 92 220.46715 266.7118 -4230.6272 2924.2866 2047.6075 200 21 92 228.3149 264.27675 .. -4164.8383 2816.1589 1971.8957 200 22 92 236.16265 262.02275 -4110.4457 . 2671.5072 1870.6095 200 '' '"' 23 92 244.0104 259.9466 -4067.1255 .. 2489.6105 1743.244 . 200 24 92 251.85815 258.04535 -4034.6139 2270.3238 1589.6979 200 . 25 92 259.7059 256.3163 -4012.9663 2014.9641 1410.893 200 26 92 267.55365 254.75715 -4001.9431 1725.9601 1208.5303 200 27 92 . ''' '' 275.40.14 253.3658 .. -4001.2569 1407.1141 985.27192 200 28 92 283.24915 252.1404 -4011.0822 1062.4639 743.94526 200 .,. 29 92 291.0969 251.0794 -4031.0528 697.15211 488.15117 200 30 92 298.9447 250.18145 -4061.1426 316.2173 221.41773 200 31 92 ,,,,., 304.18915 249.6538 -4072.1931 56.876459 39.825326 200 _ file:1//C:/Users/henry.'llfig hVDocurrents/SlopeWNuecrest Estates/wecrest existing, static condition.html 4/4 C: 0 :;::; ro a, . w 400 ,~ ! 390 -I 380, I 370 360 I 350 340 330 320 310 ·'{ 300 L,.1:- 290 280 270 260 250 240 230 220 210 200 190 180 ,~ e -, .• ;s .. . "::~ . , ,:v ~ ~-.:! ,.,. : .. · ' ~· -,_,,..-. ·,. ~ --.L<d . t:iense.Nafiv.~l,oil· .. ; / "= :- .- ~ ,,.,,, ~.:. ,.;::: -5,· ;.,. _.,:· >· . ,._: -r . 1.797 o- ·. ·. ES-2660.01 Vuecrest Estates Proposed (Vault Location), Static Condition November 30, 2013 ByH1W ··" -:.. -- '-.'.!·,. -~-· ,-·c:- --------::. .. :: .... ________________________ . ----,.;:_ ------- -r.,..'-. · .. ,· 170 p· .; , 160 ~:.: ·-·" , _-h 150 ~·, · 1 , f , , ·:, .~i;0 , ,, :1 i i i' J.r " , . 'I-1 1 •· 1 ··· i" , · i ;1· 1 1 r T , 1> 1 .. 1 1 · 1 · , 1 1 I ·,, .. 57 ~--. 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100110120130140150160170 180 190 200210220230 240250260 270280 290 300 310320330 340350360 370 380 390400 Distance 11/30/13 Slope Stability Slope Stability Report gf?ne rated using Geo.Studio 2007, version 7 .21. Copyright© 1991·2013 GEO·SLOPE lntern~tiona I Ltd. File Information Title: Vue crest Created By: Henry Wright Revision Number: 17 Last Edited By: Henry Wright Date: 11/30/2013 Time: 2:09:39 PM File Name: Vuecrest Vault, Static Condition.gsz Directory: C:\Users\henry. wright\Documents\SlopeW\ Vuecrest Estates\ Last Solved Date: 11/30/2013 Last Solved Time: 2:09:42 PM Project Settings Length(L) Units: feet Time(t) Units: Seconds Force(F) Units: lbf Pressure(p) Units: psf Strength Units: psf Unit Weight of Water: 62.4 pd View: 2D Analysis Settings Slope Stability Kind: SLOPE/W Method: Morgenstern-Price Settings Apply Phreatic Correction: No Side Function lnterslice force function option: Half-Sine PWP Conditions Source: Piezometric Line Use Staged Rapid _Drawdown: No Slip Surface · Direction of movement: Left to Right Use Passive Mode: No Slip Surface Option: Entry and Exit Critical slip surfaces saved: 1 Optimize Critical Slip Surface Location: No Tension Crack Tension Crack Option: (none) FOS Distribution fi 1 e:I/IC :/U sers/henrv. 'M'i o hVD ocuments/SlooeWNuecrest Es tates/\1.Jecrest v.3Ul t. static condition.html 1/5 11/30113 Slope Stability FOS Calculation Optior .... .instant Advanced Number of Slices: 30 Optimization Tolerance: 0.01 Minimum Slip Surface Depth: 0.1 ft Optimization Maximum Iterations: 2000 Optimization Convergence Tolerance: le-007 Starting Optimization Points: 8 Ending Optimization Points: 16 Complete Passes per Insertion: 1 Driving Side Maximum Convex Angle: 5' Resisting Side Maximum Convex Angle: 1' rJlaterials Dense Native Soil Model: Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight: 125 pcf Cohesion: 200 psf Phi: 35' Phi-8: 0' Pore Water Pressure Piezometric Line: 1 Select Fill Soil Model: Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight: 130 pcf Cohesion: 0 psf Phi: 32' Phi-8: 0' Pore Water Pressure Piezometric Line: 1 Vault Model: (None) Pore Water Pressure Piezometric Line: 1 Slip Surface Entry and Exit Left Projection: Range Left-Zone Left Coordinate: {1.24453, 353) ft Left-Zone Right Coordinate: (85.73941, 353.24121) ft Left-Zone Increment: 4 Right Projection: Range Right-Zone Left Coordinate: (91.40842, 351.25705) ft Right-Zone Right Coordinate: (400, 250) ft Right-Zone Increment: 4 Radius Increments: 4 file:J/IC:/Users/henry.wig hVDocuments/SlopeWNuecrest Estates/v'Jecrest vault, static condition.html 2/5 11/30/13 Slip Surface limits Left Coordinate: (0, 353) ft Right Coordinate: (400, 250) ft Piezornetric Lines Piezometric Line 1 Coordinates X (ft) y (ft) 0 249.88736 46.27953 240.31824 171.63495 207.50984 302.86855 184.40726 400 183.45035 Surcharge Loads Surcharge Load 1 Surcharge (Unit Weight): 71.5 pcf Direction: Vertical Coordinates X (ft) y (ft). 0 353 0 373 69 373 Seismic loads Horz Seismic Load: 0 Regions . -. Material Region 1 Select Fill Soil Region 2 Dense Native Soil Region 3 Vault Points X (ft) y (ft) Point 1 400 250 Slope Stability Points 14, 13, ll, 10,17, 16,15,9 7,12,13,11,10,17,16,15,9,4,5;6,8,l,2,3 18, 19, 14, 13, 12, 7 file:/1/C:/Users/henry.wighVDocuments/SlopeWNuecrest Estates/wecrest vault, static condition.html Area (ft2 ) 76 60341.89 1380 . 3/5 11/30/13 Slope Stability Point 2 400 15(, Point 3 0 150 Point 4 95 350 Point 5 193 305 Point 6 304 250 Point 7 0 353 Point 8 307.86636 248.3727 Point 9 85 353.5 Point 10 75 353.5 Point 11 75 355.5 Point 12 69 353 Point 13 69 355.5 ''' Point 14 69 362 Point 15 85 · 349.5 Point 16 80 349.5 Point 17 80 353.5 Point 18 0 373 Point 19 69 373 Critical Slip Surfaces Slip Surface FOS Center (ft) Radius (ft) Entry (ft) . Exit (ft) 1 92 1.797 · (338.858, 636.306) 388.384 (69, 362) (305.535, 249.354) Slices of Slip Surface: 92 Slip X (ft) y (ft) PWP (psf) Base Normal Frictional Cohesive I Surface Stress (psf) Strength (psf) Strength (psf) ''. 1 92 69.7738 · 356.24345 -7617.3187 518.22742 323.82443 0 2 92 72.7738 353.40615 -7489.4051 534.29375 374.11651 200 3 92 77.5 349.0378 -7293.9671 698.18229 488.8725 200 4 92 82.5 344.5665 -7096.645 863.1477 604.38253 200 '' 5 92 90 338.19575 -6821.5474 1133.6236 793.77177 200 6 92 98.83175 331.0093 -6517.3999 1459.1163 1021.6843 200 7 92 106.49525 325..1355 -62i'.5.9955 1671.4101 1170.334 200 -8 92 114.15875 319.556 -6053.047 1865.0631 1305.9312 200 9 92 121.82225 314.2555 -5847.4406 2043.0008 ' 1430.5246 200 10 92 129.48575 309.22045 -5658.3798 2207.4781 1545.6928 200 11 92 137.14925 304.4388 -5485.1781 2359.9502 1652.4549 200 12 92 144.81275 299.89965 -5327.1189 2501.301 1751.4298 200 13 92 152.47625 295.5933 -5183.5151 2631.7681 1842.7839 200 14 92 160.13975 291.5111 . -5053. 9952 2750.7636 1926.1054 200 15 92 167.80325 287.64515 -4937.8597 2857.5154 2000.8538 200 16 92 175.1958 284.1106 -4819.0218 2947.646 2063.964 200 17 92 182.31745 280.88755 -4696.0616 · 3020.1084 2114.7026 200 18 92 189.43915 277.835 -4583.842 3075.7616 2154.3716 200 fi I e:1//C JU sers/henrv.wi o ht!Docurrents/S!opeWNuecrest Es tates/wecr est vau! t, static condition.html 415 11/30/13 Slope Stability 19 92 196.9239 _/4.81015 -4477.2995 3101.0648 2171.389 200 F 20 92 204.77165 271.826 -4377.3251 3086.8376 2161.4269 200 21 92 212.6194 269.0338 -4289.2657 3043.1204 2130.8159 200 22 92 220.46715 266.4291 -4213.0059 2966.762 2077.3491 200 23 92 228.3149 264.00805 -4148.1084 2854.9853 1999.0822 200 24 92 236.16265 261.7671 -4094.5481 2706.1449 1894.8631 200 25 92 244.0104 259.703 -4051.8678 2519.1494 1763.9274 200 26 92 .. 251.85815 257.81285 -4020.1674 2294.2226 1606.4319 200 27 92 259.7059 256.09405 -3999.1252 2032.8086 1423.3879 200 28 92 267.55365 254.5443 -3988.619 1737.7166 1216.7623 200 . 29 92 275.4014 253.16155 -3988.4817 1412.6318 989.13543 200 30 92 283.24915 251.944 -3998.7586 1062.3547 743.86875 200 31 92 291.0969 250.89005 -4019.2069 691.90097 -484.47428 200 32 92 298.9447 249.9984 -4049.7982 306.60892 214.68988 200 33 92 303.4343 249.54f15 -4064.7394 83.084988 58.176735 200 34 92 304.7673 249.4217 -4058.0532 22.613837 15.834379 200 file:///C :/Users/henrv.w-io ht/Docurrents/SlooeWNuecrest Estates/weer est vault, static condition.html 515 C 0 :;::; Cll > Q) w 400 1 390 380 370, , .. · - )0 -·. ' 300 290 280 270 260 250 240 230 220 210 200 190 180 170 ":"'"""'..,,_ -;Sc • :.,,:, ,r: ,. •r ,. :; _'h - .~-- ,_ ~"' ' --·~ . ,i" -::\· ' .,,..,, ·,..,_ -~---\.,_~--~-. ~ .· '."; --, -~~~ ··-:_ '·i, . '. • -,,Dense N_c1tive Soil '._ }.- ---·" ,, :;, ..,t:~: ~,- ':._· -~, ' ",,!!"''. ~-~ '.::~~-:-"" -', U84 o- ~ ES-2660.01 Vuecrest Estates Existing (Vault Location), Seismic Condition November 30, 2013 ByHTW ' ,- :..., ~ _____ ,_,_- ":;_f::< ' ' ;, -' .,-,- -, . ---~ :::P\ I 1:1. ,~r ,.r:,:>r·, f I' (·1 r I I ,.·,·t-y 11 I fi f ;1 v(.·-,-~,r'j·r~., F:'1 :j:·tl 0 1 O 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240 250 260 270 280 290 300 310 320 330 340 350 360 370 380 390 400 - Distance 11/30/13 Slope Stability Slope Stability Report generated using GeoStudio 2007, version 7. 21. Copyright© 1991-2013 GEO-SLOPE !nternationa I Ltd. File ln'formation Title: Vuecrest Created By: Henry Wright Revision Number: 15 Last Edited By: Henry Wright Date: 11/30/2013 Time: 2:10:42 PM File Name: Vue crest Existing, Seismic Condition.gsz Di rectory: C:\Users\he nry .wright\Documents\SlopeW\ Vuecrest Estates\ Last Solved Date: 11/30/2013 Last Solved Time: 2:10:44 PM Project Settings Length(L} Units: feet Time(t) Units: Seconds Force(F} Units: lbf Pressure(p) Units: psf Strength Units: psf Unit Weight of Water: 62.4 pcf View: 2D Analysis Settings Slope Stability Kind: SLOPE/W Method: Morgenstern-Price Settings Apply Phreatic Correction: No Side Function lnterslice force function option: Half-Sine PWP Conditions Source: Piezometric Line Use Staged Rapid Drawdown: No Slip Surface Direction of movement: Left to Right Use Passive Mode: No Slip Surface Option: Entry and Exit Critical slip surfaces saved: 1 Optimize Critical Slip Surface Location: No Tension Crack Tension Crack Option: (none} FOS Distribution file:///C:/Users/henrv.'M'"iQ hVDocuments/SlooeWNuecrest Estates/wecrest existing, seismic condition.html . 1/4 11/30/13 Slope Stability FOS Calculation Option. _,instant Advanced Number of Slices: 30 Optimization Tolerance: 0.01 Minimum Slip Surface Depth: 0.1 ft Optimization Maximum Iterations: 2000 Optimization Convergence Tolerance: le-007 Starting Optimization Points: 8 Ending Optimization Points: 16 Complete Passes per Insertion: 1 Driving Side Maximum Convex Angle: 5' Resisting Side Maximum Convex Angle: 1 • Materials Dense Native Soil Model: Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight: 125 pcf Cohesion: 200 psf Phi:35° Phi-B: 0 • Pore Water Pressure Piezometric Line: 1 Slip Surface Entry and Exit Left Projection: Range Left-Zone Left Coordinate: (O, 370) ft Left-Zone Right Coordinate: (94.35876, 350.16031) ft Left-Zone Increment: 4 Right Projection: Range Right-Zone Left Coordinate: (100.25406, 347.58742) ft Right-Zone Right Coordinate: (400,250) ft Right-Zone Increment: 4 Radius Increments: 4 Slip Surface Limits Left Coordinate: (O, 370) ft Right Coordinate: (400, 250) ft Piezometric lines Piezometric Line 1 Coordinates file:///C )Users/henry.wig hVDocuments/S1opeWNuecrest Estates/wecrest e>lsting, seismic condition.html 2/4 11130/13 S!cpe Stability X (ft) y (ft) ,O 249.88736 46.27953 240.31824 171.63495 207.50984 302.86855 184.40726 400 183.45035 ,.,, • • i ....J '.:,E.:1Sff1IC i.Oacis Horz Seismic Load: 0.2 Ignore seismic load in strength: No Regions ' -' Material Points Area ( ft 2 ) Region 1 Dense Native Soil 8,5,4,6,9, 1,2,3 61110.399 Poin·1·'" ' . ,.,,') X (ft) y (ft) Point 1 400 250 Point 2 400 150 Point 3 0 150 Point 4 95 350 · Point 5 55 360 Point 6 193 305 Point 7 304 250 Point 8 0 370 Point 9 307.86636 248.3727 Critical S!ip Surfaces Slip Surface FOS Center (ft) Radius (ft) Entry (ft) Exit (ft) 1 92 1.184 (338.979, 634.837) 386.754 . (70.9609, 356.01) (305.51, 249.535) - Slices of Slip Surface; 92 Slip X (ft) y (ft) PWP (psf) Base Normal Frictional Cohesive Surface Stress· ( psf) Strength (psf) Strength (psf) - 1 92 74.96743 352.2664 -7454.1094 122.39315 85.700606 200 2 92 82.980455 344.98445 -7130.5836 542.11779 379.59496 200 '' 3 92 90.993485 338.09765 -6831.7057 912.1709 638.70894 200 4 92 98.83175 331.71375 · -6561. 2966 . 1176.7376 · 823.96054 200 5 92 106.49525 325.7956 -6317.2144 1348.1994 944.01936 200 6 92 114.15875 320.17535 -6091.6897 1502.9884 1052.4038 200 7 92 121.82225 314.83735 -5883.7261' 1645.7416 1152.3607 200 file:/f/C JUsers/henry.\Nl"ig ht'Documents/S1opeWNuecrest Estates/wecrest ID:lsting, seismic condition.html 314 11/30/13 Slope Stability 8 92 129.48575 J9.7677 ' -5692.5149 1780.3985 1246.6485 200 9 92 137.14925 304.95395 -5517.3403 1910.1653 1337.5122 200 10 92 144.81275 300.3851 -5357.324 2037.5052 1426.6765 200 11 92 152.47625 296.0512 -5212.058 2164.0415 1515.2781 200 12 92 160.13975 291.9433 -5080.8752 2290.5879 1603.8869 200 13 92 167.80325 288.05345 -4963.3424 2416.7305 1692.2129 200 14 92 175.1958 284.4974 -4843.0998 2537.0496 1776.4612 200 15 92 182.31745 281.255 -4719.0994 2648.9811 1854.8365 200 15 92 189.43915 278.1843 -4605.7212 2753_.8242 1928.2485 200 17 92 196.9239 275.1416 -4497.9631 2838.6044 1987.6122 200 18 92 204.77165 272.14 -4396.9862 2894.6756 2026.8737 200 19 92 212.6194 269.33155 -4307.9481 2921.4225 2045.6021 200 20 92 220.46715 266.7118 -4230.6272 2911.0655 2038.35 200 21 92 228.3149 264.27675 -4164.8383 2856.817 2000.3648 200 22 92 236.16265 262.02275 -4110.4457 2753.0724 1927.7221 200 23 92 244.0104 259.9466 -4067.1255 . 2596.5816 1818.146 200 24 92 251.85815 258.04535 -4034.6139 2387.1486 1671.4995 200 25 92 259.7059 256.3163 -4012.9663 2127.3361 1489.5768 200 26 92 267.55365 254.75715 -4001.9431 1822.3894 1276.0508 200 27 92 275.4014 253.3658 -4001.2569 1480.2665 1036.4937 200 28 92 283.24915 252.1404 -4011.0822 1109.9513 777.19628 200 29 92 291.0969 251.0794 -4031.0528 720.7846 504.69881 200 30 92 298.9447 250.18145 -4061.1426 321.46435 225.09176 200 31 92 304.18915 249.6538 -4072.1931 53.629716 37.551931 200 file:1//C :/Users/henry.wrig ht/Documents/SlopeWNuecrest Estates/weer est existing, seismic condition.html 414 C 0 ~ ro > Q) w =~ 390 380 370 360 350 340 330 320 310 ~ 300 290 " 280 --~. ";-•'., 270 ' ' 260 c. ··--::c "'"- . .,.. ,, .:: . '· ''..-,,>: ~ ,_y; ~ .,.._ •.. ,,:0 Z.: ' , .~"_-4f • ;; :,;,· . ..·oense Native:Soil; · :'- 1.172 o-- ES-2660.01 Vuecrest Estates Proposed (Vault Location), Seismic Condition November 30, 2013 ByHTW 2so r·------. ,·:"' ..,_ . -.. :z 240 230 ..... _ :.c·., 220 L !1;_,_ ·· ... ·" 210 C ·? t 200 .~, 190 {'; 180 « .•. . , 170 . 160 i:-· · · ,· · '· 150 ~ I I· I I I I . I I . I . I I: r· 11 ~y '. I i. · ·1 . I i, I . L j' J j, I J. 'J' I I , • J I J · I I I I I i' I . 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240 250 260 270 280 290 300 310 320 330 340 350 360 370 380 390 400 Distance 11/30/13 Slo;,e Stability Slope Stability Report generated using GeoStudio 2007, version 7 .21. Copyright © 1991~2013 GEO-SLOPE tnterna tiona I Ltd. File lnforn1ation Title: Vuecrest Created By: Henry Wright Revision Number: 18 Last Edited By: Henry Wright Date: 11/30/2013 Time: 2:11:32 PM File Name: Vuecrest Vault, Seismic Condition.gsz Di rectory: C:\Use rs\he nry .wri ght\Docume nts\SlopeW\ Vue crest Estates\ Last Solved Date: 11/30/2013 · Last Solved Time: 2:11:36 PM Project Settings Length(L) Units: feet Time(t) Units: Seconds Force(F) Units: \bf Pressure(p) Units: psf Strength Units: psf Unit Weight of Water: 62.4 pd View: 2D Analysis Settings Slope Stability Kind: SLOPE/W Method: Morgenstern-Price Settings Apply Phreatic Correction: No Side Function lnterslice force function option: Half-Sine PWP Conditions Source: Piezometric Line . .use Staged Rapid Drawdown: No SI ip Surface Direction of movement: Left to Right Use Passive Mode: No Slip Surface Option: Entry and Exit Critical slip surfaces saved: 1 Optimize Critical Slip Surface Location: No Tension Crack Tension Crac.k Option: (none) FOS Distribution file:1//C :/Users/henry.wig ht/Docurnents/S1opeWNuecrest Estates/vuecrest vautt, seismic condi!i on.html 1/5 11/30/13 Slope Stability FOS Calculation Option. _.instant Advanced Number of Slices: 30 Optimization Tolerance: 0.01 Minimum Slip Surface Depth: 0.1 ft Optimization Maximum Iterations: 2000 Optimization Convergence Tolerance: le-007 Starting Optimization Points: 8 Ending Optimization Points: 16 Complete Passes per Insertion: 1 Driving Side Maximum Convex Angle: 5 • Resisting Side Maximum Convex Angle: 1 • Dense Native Soil Model: Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight: 125 pcf Cohesion: 200 psf Phi: 35° Phi-B: 0 ° Pore Water Pressure Piezometric Line: 1 Select Fill Soil Model: Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight: 130 pcf · Cohesion: 0 psf Phi:32° Phi-B: 0 ° Pore Water Pressure Piezometric Line: 1 Vault Model: (None) Pore Water Pressure Piezometric Line: 1 ,slip Surface Entry and Exit Left Projection: Range Left-Zone Left Coordinate: (1.24453, 353) ft Left-Zone Right Coordinate: (85.73941, 353.24121) ft left-Zone Increment: 4 Right Projection: Range Right-Zone Left Coordinate: (91.40842, 351.25705) ft Right-Zone Right Coordinate: (400,250) ft Right-Zone Increment: 4 Radius Increments: 4 file://IC :/Usersfhenrv.\,',Kia ht/Documents/S!ooeWNuecrest Estates/Vl.!ecrest vault, seismic condition.html 215 11/30/13 i:"· ~ f l' .• ,.,llp sur ace .. 1m1i:s Left Coordinate: (0, 353) ft Right Coordinate: (400, 250) ft Plezometric Unes Coordinat'es X (ft) y (ft) 0 249.88736 46.27953 240.31824 171.63495 207.50984 302.86855 184.40726 400 183.45035 Surcharge Loads Surcharge Load 1 Surcharge {Unit Weight): 71.5 pcf Direction: Vertical Coordinates X (ft) y (ft) 0 353 0 373 69 373 Seismic loads Horz Seismic Load: 0.2 Slope Stability Ignore seismic load in strength: No Regions . . Material Points Region 1 Select Fi 11 Soi I 14, 13, 11,10,17, 16,15,9 Region 2 Dense Native Soil 7, 12, 13,11, 10, 17, 16, 15,9,4,5,6,8, 1,2,3 Region 3 Vault 18,19,14,13,12,7 Points ,~--~-X-(ft-) ~-Y-(ft-) -, file:///C:/Users/henrv.wi.o hVDocuments/SlopeWNuecrest Estates/wecrest vault, seisnic condition.htnil Area (ft2) 76 60341.89 1380 315 11130/13 Slope Stability Point 1 400 25(, Point 2 400 150 Point3 0 150 Point4 95 350 · Point 5 193 305 Point 6 304 250 Point 7 0 353 Point 8 307.86636 248.3727 Point 9 85 353.5 Point 10 75 353.5 Point 11 75 355.5 f'pint 12 69 353 Point 13 69 355.5 Point 14 69 362 Point 15 85 349.S Point 16 80 349.5 Point 17 80 353.5 Point 18 0 373 Point 19 69 373 Critical Slip Surfaces ·Slip Surface FOS Center (ft) Radius (ft) Entry (ft) .... Exit (ft) 1 92 1.172 (338.858, 636.306) 388.384 ( 69, 362) (305.535, 249.354) Sllces of Slip Surface: 92 Slip X (ft) y (ft) PWP (psf) Base Normal Frictional Cohesive Surface Stress (psf) Strength (psf) Strength (psf) 1 92 69.7738 35~.24345 -7617.3187 455.73913 284.77741 0 2 92 72.7738 353.40615 -7489.4051 L 429.12992 300.48001 200 3 92 77.5 349.0378 -7293.9671 570.67655 399.59202 200 4 92 82.5 344.5665 -7096.645 710.73119 497.65934 200 5 92 90 338.19575 -6821.5474 936.10115 655.46509 200 6 92 98.83175 331.0093 -6517.3999 1202.8683 842.25742 200 7 92 106.49525 :l25.1355 -6275.9955 1372.3839 960.95357 200 , , ·--. 8 92 114.15875 319.556 -6053.047 1'. 1526.6186 1068.9499 200 9 92 121.82225 314.2555 :5847.4406 1669.8935 1169.272 200 10 92 129.48575 309.22045 -5658.3798 1806.2284 1264.7347 . 200 11 92 137.14925 304.4388 -5485.1781 1938.4508 1357.3179 200 12 92 144.81275 299.89965 -5327.1189 2068.9509 1448.695 200 13 92 152.47625 295.5933 -5183.5151 2199.1503 1539.8616 200 14 92 160.13975 291.5111 -5053.9952 2329.7615 1631.3165 200 15 92 167.80325 287.64515 -4937.8597 2460.2608 1722.6931 200 16 92 175.1958 284.1106 -4819.0218 2584.7295 1809.8471 200 17 92 182.31745 280.88755 -4696.0616 2700.5181 1890.9232 200 file://fC:/Users/henry_wight/Documents/SlopeWNuecrest Estates/wecrest vault, seismic condition.html 415 11/30/13 Slope Stability 18 92 189.43915 . -.:77.835 -4583.842 2808.8621 1966.7864 200 19 92 196.9239 274.81015 ,4477.2995 2895.3947 2027.3772 200 20 92 204.77165 271.826 -4377.3251 2951.343 2066.5526 200 21 92 212.6194 269.0338 -4289.2657 2976.481 2084.1544 200 22 92 220.46715 266.4291 . -4213.0059 2963.2425 2074.8848 200 23 92 228.3149 264.00805 -4148.1084 2904.4577 2033.7232 200 24 92 236.16265 261.7671 -4094.5481 2794.9939 1957.0758 200 25 92 244.0104 259.703 -4051.8678 2631.842 1842.8356 200 26 92 251.85815 257.81285 -4020.1674 2414.9319 1690.9535 200 27 92 259.7059 256.09405 -3999.1252 2147.4543 1503.6637 200 28 92 267.55365 254.5443 -3988.619 1835.1681 1284.9985 200 29 92. 275.4014 253.16155 -3988.4817 1486.0479 1040.542 200 30 92 283.24915 251.944 -3998.7586 1109.6088 776.95647 200 31 92 291.0969 250.89005 -4019.2069 715.28301 500.84656 200 32 92 298.9447 249.9984 -4049.7982 311.85639 218.36419 200 33 92 303.4343 249.54115 -4064.7394 80.907527 56.652061 200 34 92 304.7673 249.4217 -4058.0532 18.813814 . 13.173574 200 fi!P.·//IC:/UsP.rs/henrv.wia ht/Documents/S!ooeWNuecrest Estates/wecrest vault, seismic condition.html 5/5 Elizabeth Higgins From: Sent: ·To: Subject: Good morning Elizabeth: Maire Thornton <mthornton@aesgeo.com> Monday, November 18, 2013 11:21 AM Elizabeth Higgins RE: Vuecrest in Renton Thank you for the positive input. Your thoughtfulness has brightened this cold gray day and has put a positive perspective on the start of the week for me. The second sentence means that the conditions have·not been met and that they should demonstrate satisfaction of each of the three conditions by providing the results of stability analyses for existing and proposed site conditions. The changes indicated in red (see below) may clarify the intent. The sentence may have been clearer if it had been written as follows: The results of stability analyses which demonstrate satisfaction of each of the three conditions listed above are required for both existing and proposed site conditions. Text taken from report: o The proposal will not increase the_ threat of the geological hazard to adjacent or abutting properties beyond pre-development conditions; and (Ord. 5676, 12-3-2012) o The proposal will not adversely impact other critical areas; and o The development can be safely accommodated an the site. The three conditions listed above have not been sati~fied by the r4erenced reports. The results of the stability analyses before and aier development demonstrating how the three conditions as listed abore are satisfied f1!i are required. Hope that helps! Please make a note: AESI Tacoma has not moved but our street name has changed to Commerce Street Maire Thornton, P.E. Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. 1552 Commerce Street, Suite 102 I Tacoma, Washington 98402 Cl 425-766-734001253-722-2992 Fl 253-722-2993 This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error pf ease notify the system manager. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. If you ore not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or toking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. · 1 From: Elizabeth Higgins [mailto:EH,,,~1ns@Rentonwa.gov] Sent: Monday, November 18, 2013 10:27 AM To: Maire Thornton Subject: Vuecrest in Renton Hi Maire Jamie Waltier forwarded the AES report to me last week. I will be meeting with an engineer from DR Strong this afternoon to hear how they intend to address the issues your report raises. I am very pleased with the report. Thank you very. much! I have one question. On page 5, #3, would you please clarify the following: "The three conditions listed above have not been satisfied by the referenced reports. The results of the stability analyses before and after development demonstrating [demonstrates?] how the three conditions as listed above are satisfied as [is?] required." Does the second sentence mean that the three conditions have been met, or does it mean, "is required" (they have not been met)? The sentence seems to be missing a verb, unless I am not reading it correctly. Thanks again for the excellent work! Elizabeth River Higgins, Senior Planner Department of Community and Economic Development City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton WA 98057 425-430-6581 2 Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. ~~······~-~~ ~~~~~ Serving tfie Pacific Nortfiwest Since 1981 October 31, 2013 Project No. TE130415A Geonerco Properties WA, LLC 1441 N 34 ili Street Suite 200 Seattle, Washington 98103-8904 Attention: Mr. Jamie Waltier Subject: Geotechnical Review Vuecrest Preliminary·Plat LUA13-000642 . Reference: "Geotechnical Engineering Study, Proposed Smithers Avenue Residential Plat, 47XXS Smithers Avenue S, Renton, Washington." Earth Solutions NW L.L.C. Report date: February 25, 2013 "Slope Setback, Smithers Avenue Residential Plat, Renton, Washington." Earth Solutions NW L.L.C. Report date: April 10, 2013 "Slope Setback Response, Viewcrest Estates Residential Plat, Renton, Washington." Earth Solutions NW L.L.C. Report date: July 15, 2013. Renton Municipal Code,' Code Publishing Company, eLibrary, current through Ordinance 5691, passed May 20, 2013; City Website: http://rentonwa.gov/ Dear-Mr. Waltier: As requested, Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. (AESI) has completed geotechnical review of the above-referenced documents prepared by Earth Solutions NW, LLC (ESNW) which are being used to support a request by the Geonerco Properties WA, LLC (Geonerco) to obtain permits · for a 21-Iot residential subdivision from the City of Renton. Authodzation to proceed with this review was granted by Mr. Jamie Wal tier of Geonerco and was accomplished in general accordance with our proposal dated August 14, 2013. The purpose of our review is to check for compliance with minimum code standards, completeness, to note obvious factual errors, consistency of data with conclusions and standards of practice. To date, our services have included review of published and unpublished literature we have in our files, review of the -referenced reports, review of the "Vuecrest Estates, Preliminary Plat, Conceptual Road and Grading Plan," Sheet C4, dated September 20, 2013 by D. R. Strong Consulting Engineers (:ORS), and preparation of this letter. · Kirkland 425-827-7701 • Everett • 425-25 9-0 522 W:Vw,aesgco.com Tacoma 253-722-2992 Site and Project Description Based on available information and the description provided in the February 25, 2013 ESNW report, the 5.3 acre site consists of an undeveloped, wooded parcel located south of South 47"' Street at the intersection with Smithers Avenue South where it enters into the site in Renton, Washington. Wetland tracts are mapped east and south portions of the site. Topography across that portion of the site to be developed slopes generally toward the south and west. Within the western portion of the site, a 2H:1V (Horizontal:Vertical) (approximate) slope descends in excess of 100 vertical feet toward the western property line; total slope height is undetermined as topography presented on the referenced DRS Plan stops approximately 100 feet short of the west property line and does not show a toe of slope. A 3H: 1 V (approximate) slope descends to the south approximately 10 vertical feet toward a westerly trending ravine within the southerly portion of the site. The February 25'", 2013 ESNW report indicates that a visual slope reconnaissance was conducted across portions of the steep slope areas of the site and that no signs of recent, large scale erosion or slope instability were observed and that "stability of the slope areas of the property can be characterized as good." It appears that ESNW did not have a detailed site plan showing current proposed development for preparation of the referenced February 25, 2013 report. The two subsequent reports referenced above describe currently proposed development and present stability sections that appear to be based on the referenced DRS Plan but do not list the specific reference. Proposed development as shown on the referenced DRS Plan includes a 21-lot subdivision with an estimated earthwork volume of approximately 3,300 cubic yards cut and 10,000 cubic yards fill. Development is concentrated to the flatter portion of the site and will occupy approximately the northeastern two-thirds of the property. Smithers Avenue is to be extended south from 47th Avenue to the central portion of the site where the roadway will turn east and extend to the eastern property line as SE 186'" Place. A storm water vault is to be located within the southwest portion of the development area. Lots 1 through 8 and the storm .water vault are situated along the top of the westerly descending 2H:1V slope. A 4-foot-high rockery wall is proposed along the western edge of these lots and vault area. A 2H: 1 V fill slope will extend from the wall to the pad grade. Excluding the height of the wall, the fill slope achieves a maximum slope height of up to approximately 20 vertical feet. As planned, the structures on Lots 1 through 8 will extend anywhere from a few feet to approximately 40 feet onto the proposed fill slope. As proposed, the storm water vault will be discharged into the westerly trending ravine within the southern portion of the site. Subsurface Conditions The referenced reports generally summarize subsurface conditions at the site as glacial till. The February 25, 2013 report indicates that soil "terraces were observed down the steep slope at the west side of the site which may correlate to the recessional stratified drift kame terrace deposits, however, the proposed development will not extend to those locations. " Test pit logs presented .with the February 25, 2013 report indicate medium dense to dense, moist to wet 2 sand to a depth of 8 feet in TP-1 within the northeast portion of the site; medium stiff to hard, moist to wet silt located along the top of the slope in TP-6 and TP-7, and between 2.5 and 8 feet below ground surface within TP-8 within the western portion of the site; and, medium dense to very dense, generally moist, silty sand with variable gravel below the sand in TP-1, below the silt in TP-8 and within TP-2 through TP-5 across the remainder of the site. Review of the Geologic Map of King County, Booth, Troost, Wisher, May 2006, indicates that recessional outwash and/or pre-Fraser, coarse grained non-glacial soils on the westerly descending siope within the western portion of the site and glacial till within the central and eastern portion of the site. An earlier publication titled: Geologic Map of the Renton Quadrangle, King County, Washington by D.R. Mullineaux, U.S. Geological Survey, Geologic Quadrangle Map GQ-405, Publication Date: 1965, Map Scale: 1 :24,000 indicates that the soils on the westerly descending slope within the western portion of the site consist of undifferentiated quaternary deposits of glaciofluvial sand and gravel, glaciolacustrine clay and sand, and non-glacial sand, clay and thin peat. Ground water was reported at a depth of 6 feet within the sandy soil reported in TP-1; ground water was not reported within the other test pits excavated at the site. Comments Based on our review, we have the following comments: 1. Our general impression is that subsurface conditions within all but the northeast portion of the site were treated in the reports as a single homogeneous unit, when it appears based on information presented on the referenced geologic maps, that site geology is more complex. Given the importance of slope stability to the project and the potential for geologic aspects of subsurface stratigraphy to play a major role in slope stability, the geology cross section of the slope and associated engineering properties should be defined in greater detail. A supplemental report should be prepared and should contain a geologic map and geologic cross-section(s). The map and sectiou(s) should show the test pit locations, location and extent of geologic strata encountered, existing and proposed grade, proposed retaining walls, proposed buildings and conceptual depths of foundations. There may not currently be enough existing subsurface information to determine the presence of potentially adversely oriented iuterbeds of silt or other plane of weakness that could affect slope stability; additional, deeper subsurface exploration borings may be necessary. 2. The Renton Municipal Code (RMC)4-3-050-Blc defines sensitive slopes as twenty five percent (25%) to forty percent (40%) and protected slopes, forty percent (40%) or greater. RMC 4-3-050-Jl defines "Geologic Hazards" and provides specific guidelines for activities on or within 50 feet of sites with geologic hazards. The following classifications for geologic hazards are taken directly from RMC 4-3-050-Jl: 3 a. Steep Slopes: i. Steep Slope Delineation Procedure: The boundaries of a regulated steep sensitive or protected slope are determined to be in the location identified on the City of Renton 's Steep Slope Atlas. An applicant's qualified professional may substitute boundaries independently derived from survey data for the City's consideration in determining the boundaries of sensitive or protected steep slopes. All topographic maps shall utilize two foot (2 ') contour intervals or the standard utilized in the City of Renton Steep Slope Atlas. ii. Steep Slope Types: (a) Sensitive slopes. (b) Protected slopes. b. Landslide Hazards: i. Low Landslide Hazard (LL): Areas with slopes less than fifteen percent (15%). ii. Medium Landslide Hazard (LM): Areas with slopes between fifteen percent (15%) and forty percent (40%) and underlain by soils that consist largely of sand, gravel or glacial till. iii. High Landslide Hazards (LH): Areas with slopes greater than forty percent (40%), and areas with slopes between fifteen percent (15%) and forty percent (40%) and underlain by soils consisting largely of silt and clay. iv. Very High Landslide Hazards (LV): Areas of known mappable landslide deposits. c. Erosion Hazards: i. Low Erosion Hazard (EL): Areas with soils characterized by the Natural Resource Conservation Service (formerly U.S. Soil Conservation Service) as having slight or moderate erosion potential, and that slope less than fifteen percent (15%). · ii. High Erosion Hazard (EH): Areas with soils characterized by the Natural Resource Conservation Service (formerly U.S. Soil Conservation Service) as having severe or very severe erosion potential, and that slope more steeply than fifteen percent (15%). As indicated earlier in this letter, current development plans include placement of a 4 foot wall on the face of the westerly descending slope within the western portion of 4 the site. The wall is to support the toe of a 2H: 1 V fill slope to create support pads for the proposed residences and vault along the top of the slope. The residential structures on.these pads will extend into the sloping area. 3. Based on the classifications presented above, the slope on which the retaining wall/fill slope is to be founded is a regulated steep sensitive/protected slope (RMC 4-3-050-Jla) with high erosion hazard (RMC 4-3-050-Jlb(iii)), and high landslide hazards (RMC 4-3-050-Jlc(ii)). Based on these designations, development is prohibited per RMC 4-3-050-J5a. In order for development to be allowed, RMC 4-3-050-12 requires that a study must demonstrate the following: o The proposal will not increase the threat of the geological hazard to adjacent or abutting properties beyond pre-development conditions; and (Ord. 5676, 12-3-2012) o The proposal will not adversely impact other critical areas; and o The development can be safely accommodated on the site. The three conditions listed above have not been satisfied by the referenced reports. The results of..:tlw stability analyses before and after development demonstrating ho..y th~ three conditions as listed above are satisfied:lli required. ( ~ e,fY(i.,tA-> /IV\-= (M"(_ \l/ib/11>) 4. Grading regulations outlined in RMC 4-4-060L require that a line be established from which setbacks for structures and slopes is to be measured and a minimum setback for each are presented. The report documents imply that the line from which setback is to be measured is at the top of the existing westerly steep slope. Plans indicate that residential footings will extend into the steeply sloping fill within the western portion of the site. Based on the steepness of the slope (50 percent) a setback between the lowest outside edge of footings to daylight in the adjacent slope face would be more appropriate. 5. RMC 4-4-060 N6 indicates that creation of a permanent fill slope in excess of 15 feet high at a 40 percent gradient would create a protected steep slope and would not be allowed unless conditions of RMC 4-3-050 N2a(ii) are satisfied. As presented, the stability analyses evaluate the potential for deep-seated instability of the slope under both existing and proposed conditions. The analyses should. also consider the stability of the proposed fill slope/wall where slopes in excess of 15 feet are proposed (Lots 1, 7, and 8). The conditions of RMC 4-3-050.J.2 a (i, ii, iii) as indicated in Comment 2 must be met. 6. The following Table presents a summary of factors of safety presented for existing and proposed conditions anticipated at the site as presented in the April 10, 2013 and July 15, 2013 reports. During our review of the analyses, several issues were noted 5 which require re-evaluation of various conditions and presentation of revised factors of safety. Factor of Julv 15, 2013 Safety April 10, 2013 Residential Area Vault Area Existine Proposed Exist Proposed Existine Proposed Static 2.127 1•2 1.9192 2.2003 2.091 2·' 2.1373 2.040'·'·' /1.629)4 . (1.585)4 Seismic 1.323 1•2 1.228 2 1.3822 1.3662•5(1.095)4 1.3992·' 1.3472 ·'· 6 (1.236) (1.175)4 /1.090)4 1. Shce thickness 1s less than 1 foot between toe of slope and exit pomt. Exit pomt should be re-evaluated and modified. 2. Location of center/radius of failure circle shown on section does not agree with center/radius listed in calculation. 3. Missing results for slip circle center and slices -carmot evaluate results. 4. Value in parenthesis is presented on calculation sheets -does not agree with value indicated on section 5. Failure circle analyzed and results presented is inconsistent with results on section -entry/exit points for failure circle indicate a relatively small portion of the slope. 6. The·vault should be modeled as a surcharge rather than a region with strength parameters. Stability analyses conducted on the westerly descending slope should be re-evaluated based on understanding of subsurface conditions in the vicinity of the slope enhanced through Comment 1, above. 7. ESNW indicates that rockeries will be used to "face" fill slopes. Rockeries may be used to mitigate erosion of cut slopes where very dense native soil is exposed. Unreinforced rockeries are not engineered structures and where in excess of 4 feet high (including imbedment depth), should not be used in place of retaining walls. 8. As proposed storm water from the detention vault is to be directed toward the southerly ravine and ultimately toward the westerly descending slope, ESNW has identified the soils on the slope as "high erosion hazard". and should consider alternate recommendations to prevent water from being directed over site slopes. Alternatively, the applicant should demonstrate that flow from the outfall system will not cause erosive flows. 9. February 25, 2013 report indicates design in accordance with the 2006 International Building Code (IBC). The City of Renton has adopted the 2012 IBC. Seismic design of structures should be in conformance with the 2012 IBC including recommended seismic surcharge on walls. Closure This letter has been prepared for the exclusive use of our client and their agents, for specific application to this project. Within the limitations of scope, schedule, and budget, our services have been performed in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering and engineering geology practices in effect in this area at the time our review was completed. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. 6 ' If you should have any questions, or if we can be of additional help to you, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. Tacoma, Washington MT/pc TEl30415A3 Projects\20130415\TE\WP 7 Maire Thornton, P.E. Senior Engineer July 15, 2013 ES-2660.01 Earth Solutions NW LLC Geonerco Properties WA, LLC 1441 North 34th Street, #200 Seattle, Washington 98103 Attention: Mr. Jamie Waltier Subject: Slope Setback Response Vuecrest Estates Residential Plat Renton, Washington Reference: Earth Solutions NW, LLC Geotechnical Engineering Study ES-2660, dated February 2013 Dear Mr. Waltier: • Geotechnical EnginC'cring • Construction Moniloring • Environrnental Sciences As. requested, Earth Solutions NW, LLC (ESNW) has prepared this letter to address the setback from the top of a slope. ESNW previously prepared the referenced geotechnical engineering study for the site. Site Conditions The City of Renton Municipal Code defines steep slopes as follows: o Sensitive Slopes: Areas with slopes between 25 percent and 40 percent. o Protected Slopes: Areas with slopes greater than 40 percent. Based on our observations and review of the referenced topographic survey, sensitive slopes are present along the western and southern portions of the property, and protected slopes are present along the western portion of the property. The referenced geotechnical engineering study identifies soil conditions onsite to consist of glacial till which is dense to very dense near the surface. 1805 -136th Place N.E., Suite 201 • Bellevue, WA 98005 • (42.1) 449-4704 • FAX 1425) 449-4711 Geonerco Properties WA, LLC July 15, 2013 Proposed Development Adjacent to Slopes ES-2660.01 Page2 We understand that the proposed development will incorporate a four foot maximum rockery as well as a stormwater vault structure near the top of a slope at the west side of the subject property. The rockery will be located adjacent to the top of the slope, and will be facing a 2:1 (horizontal:vertical) partial fill slope above. Single family residences will be located with a 20 foot setback from the top of the natural slope and the proposed stormwater vault is to be located with a 1 O foot setback from the top of the natural slope near the southwest portion of the subject property. Slope Fill Placement Grading activities required to achieve the design alignment will include a four foot rockery facing a 2:1 partial fill slope. Portions of the 2:1 partial fill slope will be located within 20 feet of a sensitive slope area. Placement of fill on slopes is acceptable provided the existing slope is stripped and benched and a keyway is provided at the base. A typical slope fill placement detail is provided as an attachment. Opinion and Recommendations Section 4-3-050-J-2 of The City of Renton Municipal Code requires that development within 50 feet of a sensitive or protected slope must demonstrate "i. [t]he proposal will not increase the threat of the geologic hazard to adjacent or abutting properties beyond pre-development conditions; ii. [t]he proposal will not adversely impact other critical areas; and iii. [t]he development can be safely accommodated on the site". We performed a slope analysis of the proposed development, utilizing soil condition data, visual slope reconnaissance information, existing topography, and proposed topography and development. The results of the slope analysis are provided as an attachment. Based on the results of our slope analysis, and our understanding of the proposed development, in our opinion, the proposed development is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint. In our opinion, the proposed development will not increase the threat of the geologic hazard to adjacent or abutting properties beyond pre-development conditions, will not adversely impact other critical areas, and can be safely accommodated on the site. Earth Solutions NW, LLC Geonerco Properties WA, LLC July 15, 2013 If you have any questions, or if additional information is required, please call. Sincerely, EARTH SOLUTIONS NW, LLC Henry T. Wright, E.I.T. Staff Engineer Attachments: Site Plan Plate 1 -Slope Fill Placement Slope Stability Analysis cc: DR Strong Consulting Engineers, Inc. Attention: Mr. Maher Joudi (Email only) City of Renton Kyle R. Campbell, P.E. Principal Attention: Ms. Elizabeth Higgins (Email only) Earth Solutions NW, LLC ES-2660.01 Page 3 l ! l• ·.1 ,1 l'" • l! I ~ i ' "I !l ' :1, i I• 1, 111 jl hi .I ij, ~, ; ·1 11 I i, ' ·~ dj ' " I !! . ' l •• ·1 i~ ! fii l:J s ~,I ' ,!1_ I II I I ' ; I S3lV1S3 1S3~~30A ,,,. ....... ,.,, ... ,_._-.. ......,-~~~--"' SCHEMATIC ONLY -NOTTO SCALE NOT A CONSTRUCTION DRAWi NG Bench and Keyway Fill to consist of suitable granular material approved by the Geotechncial Engineer. NOTES: o Slope should be stripped of topsoil and unsuitable materials prior to excavating Key Way or benches. o Benches will typically be equal to a dozer blade width, approximately 8 feet, but a minimum of 4 feet. o Final slope gradient should be 2 : 1 (horizontal : vertical). o Final slope face should be densified by over-building with compacted fill and trimming back to shape or by compaction with dozer or roller. o Planting or hydroseeding slope face with a rapid growth deep rooted vegetative mat will reduce erosion potential of slope area. o Use of pegged in place jute matting or geotechnical fabric will help maintain the seed and mulch in place until the root system has an opportunity to germinate. 0 Structural fill should be placed in thin loose lifts not exceeding 12 inches in thickness. Each lift should be compacted to no less than the degree specified in the "Site Preparation and Earth Work" section of this report. No additional lift should be placed until compaction is achieved. SLOPE FILL DETAIL Vuecrest Estates Renton, Washington Drwn. GLS Date 07/11/2013 Prnj. No. 2660.01 Checked HTW Date July 2013 Plate 1 400 390 380 370 360 350 340 330 320 310 300 C: 290 0 .:; 280 (1l > 270 Q) w 260 250 240 230 220 210 200 190 180 170 160 150 0 Dense Native Soil - ES-2660.01 Vuecrest Estates Existing (Residence Location), Static Condition July 11, 2013 ByHTW 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240 250 260 270 280 290 300 310 320 330 340 350 360 370 380 390 400 Distance 400 · 390 380 370 360 350 340 330 320 310 300 C: 290 0 :.:, 280 (1) > 270 Cl) UJ 260 250 240 230 220 210 200 190 180 170 160 150 0 l l l l 2.200 0 ES-2660.01 Vuecrest Estates Existing (Residence Location), Static Condition July 11, 2013 ByHTW ............. __ ~--.. ------------------------· ------- l l 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240 250 260 270 280 290 300 310 320 330 340 350 360 370 380 390 400 Distance 7111113 ) Slope Stability Slope Stability Report generated using GeoStudio 2007, version 7 .21. Copyright© 1991-2013 GEO-SLOPE lnternationa t Ltd. File lnfor111ation Title: Vue crest Created By: Henry Wright Revision Number: 14 Last Edited By: Henry Wright Date: 7/11/2013 Time: 11:26:SlAM File Name: Vuecrest Existing (Residence), Static Condition.gsz Directory: C:\Users\henry.wright\Documents\SlopeW\Vuecrest Estates\ Project Settings Length(L) Units: feet Time(t) Units: Seconds Force(F) Units: lbf Pressure(p) Units: psf Strength Units: psf Unit Weight of Water: 62.4 pd View: 2D Analysis Settings Slope Stability Kind: SLOPE/W Method: Morgenstern-Price Settings Apply PhreaticCorrection: No Side Function lnterslice force function option: Half-Sine PWP Conditions Source: Piezometric Line Use Staged Rapid Drawdown: No Slip Surface Direction of movement: Left to Right Use Passive Mode: No Slip Surface Option: Entry and Exit Critical slip surfaces saved: 1 Optimize Critical Slip Surface Location: No Tension Crack Tension Crack Option: (none) FOS Distribution FOS Calculation Option: Constant Advanced file:1//C :/Users/henry.v,,,-ig hUDoc:urrents/SlopeWNuecrest EstatesN.Jeerest e>dsting ( residence), static condition.html 1/3 7/11/13 ) Slope Stability Number of Slices: 30 Optimization Tolerance: 0.01 Minimum Slip Surface Depth: 0.1 ft Optimization Maximum Iterations: 2000 Optimization Convergence Tolerance: le-007 Starting Optimization Points: 8 Ending Optimization Points: 16 Complete Passes per Insertion: 1 Driving Side Maximum Convex Angle: 5 • Resisting Side Maximum Convex Angle: 1' Materials Dense Native Soil Model: Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight: 125 pcf Cohesion: 200 psf Phi: 35 • Phi-B: 0 • Pore Water Pressure Piezometric Line: 1 Slip Surface Entry and Exit Left Projection: Range Left-Zone Left Coordinate: (0.25417, 368.97741) ft Left-Zone Right Coordinate: (78.40479, 355.86507) ft Left-Zone Increment: 4 Right Projection: Range Right-Zone Left Coordinate: (86.04495, 352.36458) ft Right-Zone Right Coordinate: (400, 250) ft Right-Zone Increment: 4 Radius Increments: 4 Slip Surface Limits Left Coordinate: (O, 369) ft Right Coordinate: (400, 250) ft Piezometric lines Piezometric Line 1 Coordinates X (ft) y (ft) 0 249.88736 fileJJ/C:/Users/henry.v.rig hVDocurrents/SlopeWNuecrest Estates:Auecrest 0.)0sting (residence), static condition.html 213 7/11/13 Slope Stability 46.27953 240.31824 171.63495 207.50984 302.86855 184.40726 400 183.45035 Seisrnic loads Horz Seismic Load: 0 Regions Material Points Area (ft2 ) Region 1 Dense Native Soil 3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,1,2 61452.5 Points X (ft) . y (ft) Point 1 400 150 Point 2 0 150 Point 3 0 369 Point 4 45 365 Point 5 66 360 · Point 6 81 355 Point 7 148 320 Point 8 213 300 Point 9 311 250 Point 10 400 250 file:/JJC:/Users/henry.w.ight/Doci..rrents/SlopeWNuecrest Estates/\1..Jecrest e,,:isting (residence), static condition.html 313 C 0 :.:, ca > Q) 400 390 380 370 360 350 340 330 320 310 300 290 280~ 270 "-f :I I l 4 j 1.382 0 ES-2660.01 Vuecrest Estates Existing (Residence Location), Seismic Condition July 11, 2013 ByHTW W 260 250 240 230 220 210 200 190 180 170 160 Dense Native Soil 150 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 1 .. I I , I I I 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100110120130140150160 170 180 190 200210220 230 240 250260 270 280 290 300 310 320 330340350 360 370 380 390 400 Distance 7/11/13 Slope Stability Slope Stability Report generated Using Geostudio 2007, version 7 .21. Copyright~ 1991-2013 GEO-SLOPE International Ltd. file information Title: Vuecrest Created By: Henry Wright Revision Number: 15 Last Edited By: Henry Wright Date: 7/11/2013 Time: 12:09:46 PM File Name: Vuecrest Existing (Residence), SeismicCondition.gsz Di rectory: C:\Users\henry. wright\Documents\SlopeW\ Vuecrest Estates\ Last Solved Date: 7/11/2013 Last Solved Time: 12:09:50 PM Project Settings Length(L) Units: feet Time(t) Units: Seconds Force(F) Units: !bf Pressure(p) Units: psf Strength Units: psf Unit Weight of Water: 62.4 pd View: 2D Analysis Settings Slope Stability Kind: SLOPE/W Method: Morgenstern-Price Settings Apply Phreatic Correction: No Side Function lnterslice force function option: Half-Sine PWP Conditions Source: Piezometric Line Use Staged Rapid Drawdown: No Slip Surface Direction of movement: Left to Right Use Passive Mode: No Slip Surface Option: Entry and Exit Critical slip surfaces saved: 1 Optimize Critical Slip Surface Location: No Tension Crack Tension Crack Option: (none) FOS Distribution file1//C:/Users/henry.wighVDocurmnts/S1opeWNuecrest Estates/\oueerest existing (residence), seismic condition.htm 1/4 7111113 Slope Stability FOS Calculation Option: Constant Advanced Number of Slices: 30 Optimization Tolerance: 0.01 Minimum Slip Surface Depth: 0.1 ft Optimization Maximum Iterations: 2000 Optimization Convergence Tolerance: le-007 Starting Optimization Points: 8 Ending Optimization Points: 16 Complete Passes per Insertion: 1 Driving Side Maximum Convex Angle: 5 • Resisting Side Maximum Convex Angle: 1 • Materials Dense Native Soil Model: Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight: 125 pcf Cohesion: 200 psf Phi:35° Phi-8: 0 ° Pore Water Pressure Piezometric Line: 1 Slip Surface Entry and Exit Left Projection: Range Left-Zone Left Coordinate: (0.25417, 368.97741) ft Left-Zone Right Coordinate: (78.40479, 355.86507) ft Left-Zone Increment: 4 Right Projection: Range Right-Zone Left Coordinate: (86.04495, 352.36458) ft Right-Zone Right Coordinate: (400, 250) ft Right-Zone Increment: 4 Radius Increments: 4 Slip Surface Limits Left Coordin<1te: (0, 369) ft Right Coordinate: (400,250) ft Piezometric Lines Piezometric Line 1 Coordinates fi!e:/1/C:/Userslherv-y.wrig htlDocurrents/SlopeWNuecrest Estates/weer est e)Qsting (residence), seismic conditian.htrri '2/4 7/11/13 Slope Stability X (ft) y (ft) 0 249.BB736 46.27953 240.31824 171.63495 207.50984 . 302.86855 184.40726 '400 183.45035 Seisrnic Loads Horz Seismic Load: 0.2 Ignore seismic load in strength: No Regions .. Material Points Area (ft2 ) Region 1 Dense Native Soil 3,4,5,6, 7,8,9, 10, 1,2 61452.5 Points X (ft) y (ft) Point 1 400 150 Point 2 0 150 Point 3 0 369 Point4 45 365 Point 5 66 360 Point 6 81 355 Point 7 148 320 Point B 213 300 Point 9 311 . 250 . Point 10 400 250 . Critical Slip Surfaces Slip Surface FOS Ce rite r ( ft) Radius (ft) Entiy (ft) Exit (ft) 1 72 1.236 (358.026, 738.41) 490.211 (39.8904, 365.454) (309.884, 250.569) Slices of Slip Surface: 72 Slip X (ft) y (ft) PWP (psf) Base Normal Frictional Cohesive Surface Stress ( psf) Strength (psf) Strength ( psf) 1 72 42.445215 363.3048 -7624.8948 73.470895 51.444875 200 2 72 45.639765 360.6264 -7499.202 270.58802 189.46777 200 3 72 51.209645 356.1404 -7307.8444 532.71272 373.00946 200 4 72 61.06988 348.4293 -6987.6483 963.97772 674.98446 200 5 72 69.75 341.9485 -6725.0702 1278.8655 895.47124 200 . 6 72 77.25 336.6014 -6513.8947 1494.917 1046.7521 200 fileJ//C :/Users/henry. 'M"ig hVDocuments/SlopeWNuecrest Estat8SMJ8Crest e:,dsti ng (residence), seismic Condi ti on.htm 3/4 7111113 Slope Stability 7 72 85.785715 330.78475 -6290.2863 1649.3756 1154.9052 200 8 72 95.357165 · 324.5511 -6057.6176 1744.5466 1221.5447 200 9 72 104.9286 318.62825 · -5844.3848 1828.2044 1280.1225 200 ·10 72 114.5 313.0032 -5649.6729 1903.021 1332.5097 200 11 72 124.0714 307.6643 -5472.8657 1970.7862 1379.9593 200 12 72 133.64285 302.601 -5313.2347 2032.1265 1422.9103 200 13 . 72 143.2143 297.8038 . -5170.181 2086.6104 1461.0604 200 14 72 · 151.93915 293.64535 -5053.222 2205.235 1544.1221 200 15 72 159.81745 290.0786 -4959.3088 2391.7152 1674.697 200 16 72 167.6958 286.6774 -4875.7459 2575.8415 1803.6236. 200 17 72 175.7715 283.36095 -4778.5599 2760.245 1932.7444 200 18 72 184.0445 280.1338 -4668.0248 2941.9811 2059.9974 200 19 72 192.3175 277.0776 -4568.2167 3112.2163 2179.1973 200 20 72 200.5905 274.18895 -4478.7985 3,266.0911 2286.9416 200 . 21 72 208.8635 271.4647 -4399.724 3398.2113 2379.4532 200 22 72 217.49345 268.79865 -4328.1769 3406.703 2385.3991 200 23 72 226.4803 266.20225 -4264.8501 3275.7891 2293.7322 200 24 72 235.46715 263.7902 -4213.0472 3093.2024 2165.8836 200 25 72 244.454 261.5597 -4172.6603 2857.4735 2000.8245 200 t6 72 253.44085 259.5082 -4143.3209 •. 2570.2657 1799.7194 200 27 72 262.4277 257.6334 -4125.0523 2235.5629 1565.358 200 28 72 , 271.41455 255.93325 -4117.7332 1859.8087 1302.2521 200 29 72 280.4014 254.40595 -4121.0983 · 1451.0476 1016.0345 200 30 72 289.38825 253.04985 -4135.178 1018.0391 712.83867 2.00 31 72 298.37515 251.86355 -4159.8636 569.25321 398.59539 200 32 72 306.37635 250.941 -4153.8817 163.22112 114.28866 200 file:///C :/Users/henry.v,.,right/Docurnents/SlopeWNuecrest Estates/weer est E!)Gsting (residence), seismic condition.htni 414 400 390 380 37o1 250 psf Residence Surcharge v -. -.. p-Rockery 360 1~ 350 340 ,_Select Fill Soil Partial 2H: 1 V Fill Slope 330 320 •- 310 300 C 290 .Q 280 -! jjJ 270 260 250 240 230 220 210 200 190 180 170 160 Dense Native Soil ES-2660.01 Vuecrest Estates Proposed Residence, Static Condition July 11, 2013 ByHTW 150 ! I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I T I I I I I I r I I I I I I I 1 I -I I I ! 1 I· 1 ~ 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100110120130 140150160170180190 200210 220 230 240250 260270 280290 300 310 320 330 340 350 360 370 380 390 400 Distance 400 390 250 psf Residence Surcharge 380 . v 370 .• B,i .. · ,:('Rockery 360 L,11 . fn. 350 340 330 320 310 300 C: 290 .Q 280 iii ai UJ 270 260 250 240 230 220 210 200 190 180 170 Dense Native Soil ' l i 2.091 0 ES-2660.01 Vuecrest Estates Proposed Residence, Static Condition July 11, 2013 ByHTW \ 160 150 I ·. I · I I ·, .. · 1 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 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100110120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200210 220 230 240 250 260 270280 290 300 310 320 330 340 350 360 370 380 390400 Distance 7/11113 Slope Stability Slope Stability Re port generated using GeoStudio 2007, version 7 .21. Copyright© 1991-2013 GEO-SLOPE lnternationa I ltd; File lnforrnation Title: Vuecrest Created By: Henry Wright Revision Number: 19 Last Edited By: Henry Wright Date: 7/11/2013 Time: 1:05:41 PM File Name: Vuecrest Proposed (Residence), Static Condition.gsz Di rectory: C:\Use rs\he nry. wri ght\Docu me nts\SI opeW\ V uecrest Estates\ Last Solved Date: 7/11/2013 Last Solved Time: 1:05:43 PM Project Settings Length(L) Units: feet Time(t) Units: Seconds Force(F) Units: lbf Pressure(p) Units: psf Strength Units: psf Unit Weight of Water: 62.4 pd View: 2D Analysis Settings Slope Stability Kind: SLOPE/W Method: Morgenstern-Price Settings Apply Phreatic Correction: No Side Function lnterslice force function option: Half-Sine PWP Conditions Source: Piezometric Line Use Staged Rapid Drawdown: No Slip Surface Direction of movement: Left to Right Use Passive Mode: No Slip Surface Option: Entry and Exit Critical slip surfaces saved: 1 Optimize Critical Slip Surface Location: No Tension Crack Tension Crack Option: (none) FOS Distribution fi1e:I//C :/Users/henry.wrig hVDocurrents/SlopeWNuecrest Estates/\,,\JSCrest proposed { residence), static condition.him 1/5 7/11/13 Slope Stability FOS Calculation Option: Constant Advanced Number of Slices: 30 Optimization Tolerance: 0.01 Minimum Slip Surface Depth: 0.1 ft Optimization Maximum Iterations: 2000 Optimization Convergence Tolerance: le-007 Starting Optimization Points: 8 Ending Optimization Points: 16 Complete Passes per Insertion: 1 Driving Side Maximum Convex Angle: 5 • Resisting Side Maximum Convex Angle: 1 • ~JI aterials Dense Native Soil Model: Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight: 125 pcf Cohesion: 200 psf Phi:35" Phi-B: 0 • Pore Water Pressure Piezometric Line: 1 Select Fill Soil Model: Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight: 130 pcf Cohesion: 0 psf Phi: 32 • Phi-B: 0 • Pore Water Pressure Piezometric Line: 1 Rockery Model: Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight: 140 pcf Cohesion: 0 psf Phi: 40 ° Phi-B: 0 • Pore Water Pressure Piezometric Line: 1 Residence Surcharge Model: Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight: 250 pcf Cohesion: 0 psf Phi:40° Phi-B: 0 ° Pore Water Pressure file:1//C:/Users/hervy.wightJDocurrents/SlopeWNuecrest EstatesMJeerest proposed (residence), static condition.htrrl 215 7/11/13 Slope Sta~lity Piezometric Line: 1 Slip Surface Entry and E,dt Left Projection: Range Left-Zone Left Coordinate: (0, 372.5) ft Left-Zone Right Coordinate: (71.44582, 361.71672) ft Left-Zone Increment: 4 Right Projection: Range Right-Zone Left Coordinate: (74.48028, 358.21091) ft Right-Zone Right Coordinate: (397.54265, 250) ft Right-Zone Increment: 4 Radius Increments: 4 Slip Surface Limits Left Coordinate: (0, 372.5) ft Right Coordinate: (400,250) ft Piezometric Lines Piezometric Line 1 Coordinates X (ft) y (ft) 0 249.88736 46.27953 240.31824 171.63495 207.50984 302.86855 184.40726 400 183.45035 Seismic Loads Horz Seismic Load: 0 Regions Material Region 1 Select Fill Soil Region 2 Rockery .. Region 3 Dense Native Soil Region 4 Residence Surcharge Points Points 14,3,4, 10, 11, 13 12,5,10,11 6, 7,8,9,1,2,3,4,10,5 16,13,14,15 Area (ft2 ) 373.75 14 61433.25 52 fileJ//C:/Users/henry.wighUOocurmnts/SlopeWNuecrest EstatesA.uecrest proposed (residence), static condition.html 3/5 7/11/13 Slope Stability X (ft) y (ft) Point 1 400 150 Point 2 0 150 Point 3 0 368 Point 4 45 365 Point 5 72 359.5 Point 6 148 320 .. Point 7 213 300 Point 8 311 250 Point 9 400 250 Point 10 68 359.5 Point 11 68 363.5 Point 12 71 363.5 Point 13 52 371.5 Point 14 0 371.5 ' Point 15 0 372.5 Point 16 52 372.5 Critical Slip Surfaces Slip Surface FOS Center (ft) Radius (ft) Entry (ft) Exit (ft) 1 77 1.629 ( 83. 219, 394.107) 36.944 (55.3944, 369.803) (74.4803, 358.211) Slices of Slip Surface: 77 · Slip X (ft) y (ft) PWP (psf) Base Normal Frictional Cohesive Surface Stress (psf) Strength (psf) Strength (psf) 1 77 55.70952 369.4512 -8211.8676 17.083878 · 10.675192 0 2 77 56.3398 368.76535 -8179.3793 48.523808 30.32104 0 3 77 56.97008 368.11285 -8149.024 75.729556 . 47.321078 0 4 77 57.60036 367.4913 · -8120.4885 99.65228 62.26.9655 0 5 77 58.23064 366.89855 -8093.7781 121.05085 75.640964 0 6 77 58.86092 366.33275 -8068.8239 140.53016 87.812988 0 7 77 59.491205 365.7923 -8045.3514 158.59894 99.103617 0 8 77 60.12149 365.27575 -8023.4573 175.64508 109.75523 0 9 77 60.75177 364.781135 -8002.8282 191.9913 119.96948 ·o 10 77 61.38205 364.30945 . -7983.6623 207.88108 129.89851 0 11 77 62.01233 363.85755 -7965.8408 223.51799 139.66954 0 12 77 62.64261 363.42525 -7949.0785 238.99285 149.33931 0 13 77 63.27289 363.01175 -7933.5985 254.36607 158.94556 0 14 77 63.90317 362.6163 ~7919.l535 269 .. 65089 168.49657 0 15 77 64.53345 362.23825 -7905.9222 284.78182 177.95143 0 16 77 65.163735 361.87695 -7893.6703 299.65135 187.24294 0 17 77 65.79402 361.53185 -7882.4925 314.06576 196.25007 0 18 77 66.4243 361.20245 -7872.1786 327.81196 204.83964 0 19 77 67.05458 360.88825 -7862.8822 340.58603 212.82177 0 fileJ//C:/Users/henry.'MighVDocurrents/SlopeWNuecrest Estates/wecresl proposed (residence), static condition.html 4/5 7/11/13 Slope Stability 20 77 67.68486 360.58885 -7854.4259 352.0478 219.98388 0 21 77 . 68.2858 360.3165 -7847.2889 407.37415 341.8275 0 22 77 68.8574 360.0696 -7841.2744 446.89155 374.98654 0 23 77 69.429 359.834 -7835.8145 484.27895 406.35829 0 24 77 70.0006 359.6095 -7831.1033 518.98049 435.47634 0 25 77 70.6432 359.37085 -7826.7317 . 551.35905 386.06576 200 26 77 71.25 359.15605 -7823.2053 446.77 312.83172 200 27 77 71.75 358.98875 -7821.0954 208.16076 145.75573 200 28 77 72.310035 358.8113 -7819.1435 74.693799 52.301161 200 29 77 72.930105 358.6256 -7817.6889 47.940499 33.568299 200 30 77 73.550175 358.45165 -7816.9494 18.99098 13.297627 200 31 77 74.170245 358.28925 -7816.9001 -11.526695 . -8. 071()786 200 file:///C:/Users/herv-y.v.rightlDocuments/SlopeWNuecrest Estates/vUeCrest proposed (residence), static condition.him 515 400 r 390'1 ~ Residence Surcharge 380 370 360 350 340 ~Select Fill Partial 2H:1 330 -,. 320 310 300 C: 290 .Q 280 ..... l ijj 270 260 250 240 230 220 210 200 190 180 170 160 -1~ Dense Native Soil } j . . J 1.366 0 ES-2660.01 Vuecrest Estates Proposed Residence, Seismic Condition July11,2013 ByHTW 150 I _, J. 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 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100110120 130 140 150160170 180 190 200210 220230 240 250260 270280 290 300 310 320 330 340 350360 370 380 390 400 Distance 7/11/13 Slope Stabilily Slope Stability Report generated using GeoStudio Z007, version 7 .21. Copyright© 1991-2013 GEO-SLOPE International Ltd. File lnforn,ation Title: Vuecrest Created By: Henry Wright Revision Number: 20 Last Edited By: Henry Wright Date: 7/11/2013 Time: 1:09:16 PM File Name: Vuecrest Proposed (Residence), Seismic Condition.gsz Directory: C:\Users\henry.wright\Documents\SlopeW\Vuecrest Estates\ last Solved Date: 7/11/2013 Last Solved Time: 1:09:20 PM Project Settings Length(L) Units: feet Ti me{t) Units: Seconds Force(F) Units: lbf Pressure(p) Units: psf Strength Units: psf Unit Weight of Water: 62.4 pcf View: 2D Analysis Settings Slope Stability Kind: SLOPE/W Method: Morgenstern-Price Settings Apply Phreatic Correction: No Side Function lnterslice force function option: Half-Sine PWP Conditions Source: Piezometric Line Use Staged Rapid Drawdown: No Slip Surface Direction of movement: Left to Right Use Passive Mode: No Slip Surface Option: Entry and Exit Critical slip surfaces saved: 1 Optimize Critical Slip Surface Location: No Tension Crack Tension Crack Option: (none) FOS Distribution file:/1/CJUsers/henry.wight/Docuroonts/SlopeWNuecrest EstatesA.uecrest prop:)Sed (residence), seismic condition.html 1/5 7111/13 Slope Stability FOS Calculation Option: Constant Advanced Number of Slices: 30 Optimization Tolerance: 0.01 Minimum Slip Surface Depth: 0.1 ft Optimization Maximum Iterations: 2000 Optimization Convergence Tolerance: le-007 Starting Optimization Points: 8 Ending Optimization Points: 16 Complete Passes per Insertion: 1 Driving Side Maximum Convex Angle: 5 ° Resisting Side Maximum Convex Angle: 1 ° Materials Dense Native Soil Model: Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight: 125 pcf Cohesion: 200 psf Phi: 35 ° Phi-B: 0 ° Pore Water Pressure Piezometric Line: 1 Select Fill Soil Model: Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight: 130 pcf Cohesion: 0 psf Phi:32° Phi-B: 0 ° Pore Water Pressure Piezometric Line: 1 Rockery Model: Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight: 140 pcf Cohesion: 0 psf Phi: 40° Phi-B: 0 ° ,Pore Water Pressure Piezometric Line: 1 Residence Surcharge Model: Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight: 250 pcf Cohesion: O psf Phi: 40° Phi-B: 0 ° Pore Water Pressure file:///C:/Users/henry.wight/Doc:urrents/SlopeWNuecrest Estates/wecrest prQFOSed (residence), seisrTlc condition.html 2/5 7/11/13 Piezometric Line: 1 •:J:n "-"r·1~·,,c,-~ E··r·ii"'" "'"'.-i r:.,,·1•· •. ),1j"' ,,.,·~{· (:( _.,_ Lll y ,C~J H.,4 L.i't l, Left Projection: Range Slope Stability Left-Zone Left Coordinate: (0, 372.5) ft Left-Zone Right Coordinate: (71.44582, 361.71672) ft Left-Zone Increment: 4 Right Projection: Range Right-Zone Left Coordinate: (74.48028, 358.21091) ft Right-Zone Right Coordinate: (397.54265, 250) ft Right-Zone Increment: 4 Radius Increments: 4 Slip Surface Limits Left Coordinate: (0, 372.5) ft Right Coordinate: (400,250) ft Piezometric Lines Piezometric Line 1 Coordinates X (ft) y (ft) ,0 249.88736 I 46.27953 240.31824 171.63495 207.50984 '302.86855 184.40726 400 183.45035 Seismic Loads Horz Seismic Load: 0.2 Ignore seismic load in strength: No Regions Material Region 1 Select Fill Soil Region 2 · Rockery Region 3 Dense Native Soil Region 4 Residence Surcharge Points 14,3,4,10,11,13 12,5,10,11 6,7,8,9,1,2,3,4,10,5 16, 13, 14, 15 Area (ft2 ) 373.75 14 61433.25 52 file:1//C:/Users/henry.wight/DocumentsfSlopeWNuecrest Esta1es/vuecrest proposed (residence), seismic condition.html 3/5 7/11/13 Slope Stability Points X (ft) y (ft) Point 1 400 150 Point 2 0 150 Point 3 0 368 Point 4 . 45 365 Point 5 72 359.5 Point 6 148 320 Point 7 213 300 Point 8 311 250 I Point 9 400 250 Point 10 68 359.5 Point 11 68 363.5 Poil)t12 71 363.5 Point 13 52 371.5 Point 14 0 371.5 Point 15 0 372.5 Point 16 52 372.5 Critical Slip Surfaces Slip Surface FOS Center (ft) Radius (ft) Entry (ft) Exit (ft) 1 51 1.095 ( 160.623, 633.019) 287.993 (37.8633, 372.5) (74.4803, 358.211) Slices of Slip Surface: 51 Slip X (ft) y (ft) PWP (psf) Base Normal Frictional Cohesive Surface Stress (psf) Strength (psf) Strength ( psf) 1 51 38.399605 372.24865 -8130.7732 46.254716 38.812315 0 2 51 39.47211 371.74865 -8113.46 138.78409 116.45368 0 :• 3 51 40.635475 371.2126 -8095.3437 226.12457 141.29831 0 4 51 41.88971 370.6414 · -8075.23()3 283.97324 177-44618 0 5 51 43.143945 370.0774 -8056.1917 341.14518 213.17117 0 6 51 44.39818 369.5206 -8038.2369 397.77564 .. 248.55781 0 7 51 45.652415 368.97095 -8019.9186 . 453.97959 283.67793 0 8 51 46.851575 368.4519 -8004.8563 507.45387 317.09237 0 9 51 47.99567 367.96285 . -7993.0271 558.2996 348.86431 0 10 51 49.139765 367.4796 -7981.5672 609.08228 3.80.59685 0. 11 51 50.28386 367.00215 -7970.4862 659.86225 412.3277 0 12 51 51.427955 366.5305 -7959.7061 710.70797 444.09963 0 13 51 52.615385 366.04715 -7949.2286 531.65833 332.21699 0 14 51 53.846155 365.5525 -7938.3046 521.75488 _ 326.02863 ··--0 . 15 51 55.076925 365.0644 -7927.8443 511.43554 319.58039 0 16 51 56.307695 . 364.58285 -7917.8513 500.63085 312.82888 0 17 51 57.538465 364.1078 -7908.3469 489.26448 305.72638 0 fileJ//CJUsers/hervyi.•.righVDocurrents/SlopeWNuecrest Estates/wecrest proposed (residence), seismic condition.html 415 7111113 Slope Stability 18 51 · 58.769235 363.63925 -7899.3.2813 477.27328 298.23345 0 19 51 60 363.1771 -7890.8002 464.56372 290.29163 0 20 51 61.230765 362.72135 • -7882.0138 451.0577 281.85213 0 21 51 62.461535 362.27195. -7874.4969 436.69123 272.87497 0 22 51 63.692305 361.82885 · -7866.7262 421.39242 263.31521 0 23 51 64.923075 361.3921 -7859.4676 405.10436 253.1373 0 24 51 66.153845 360.9616' -7852.7361 387.77825 242.31075 0 25 51 67.384615 360.53735 . -7846.5348 369.37983 230.81414 0 26 51 68.617705 360.11855 -7840.5745 396.65391 332.83215 0 27 51 69.853115 359.70515 -7834.7836 442.46285 371.27042 0 28 51 70.73541 359.413,1 , -7831.0086 447.03481 313.01715 200 29 51 71.5 359.16345 -7827.8127 236.39673 165.52677 200 30 51 72.62007 358.8017 -7823.7949 1.6322479 1.1429123 200 31 51 73.86021 358.4068 -7818.9155 -31.133416 -21.799853 200 file:///C :/Users/henry.wig hVDocumentsfSlopeWNuecrest EstatesA,uecrest proposed (residence), seismic condition.htrrl 515 C: 0 :;:, t1I > (l) u::i 400 390 380 37 360 350 340 •- 330 320 310 300 290 280 270 26or 250 240 230 220 210 200 190 180 170 160 Dense Native Soil ? ES-2660.01 Vuecrest Estates Existing (Vault Location), Static Condition July 11, 2013 ByHTW ---------..... ____ .':'"""----------------.. -------------------------. --- 150 A I T I I I >1 I ,,, t I I I t t, I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I t I I t t I I l ! ! ~ 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100110 120130140150 160170180 190 200210 220 230 240 250260 270 280 290 300 310320 330 340 350 360 370 380 390400 Distance C: 0 ~ > Q) w 400 390 380 37, 380 350 340 330 320 310 300 290 280 270 260 Dense Native Soil 250 r-~ 240 230 220 210 200 190 180 170 160 150 ' ' I 2.137 0 ES-2660.01 Vuecrest Estates Existing (Vault Location), Static Condition July 11, 2013 ByHTW 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160170180 190 200210 220230 240 250 260 270280 290 300 310 320 330 340 350 360 370 380 390400 Distance 7/11/13 Slope Stability Slope Stability Report generated using GeoStudio 2007, version 7 .i1. cOPVright © 1991-2013 GEO-SLOPE lnternationa I Ltd. File lnformatlon Title: Vue crest Created By: Henry Wright Revision Number: 10 Last Edited By: Henry Wright Date: 7/11/2013 Time: 10:37:19AM File Name: Vuecrest Existing, Static Condition.gsz Directory: C:\Users\henry. wright\Documents\SI opeW\ Vuecrest Estates\ Project Settings Length(L) Units: feet Time(t) Units: Seconds Force(F) Units: lbf Pressure(p) Units: psf Strength Units: psf Unit Weight of Water: 62.4 pcf View: 20 Analysis Settings Slope Stability Kind: SLOPE/W Method: Morgenstern-Price Settings Apply Phreatic Correction: No Side Function lnterslice force function option: Half-Sine PWP Conditions Source: Piezometric Line Use Staged Rapid Drawdown: No Slip Surface Direction of movement: Left to Right Use Pass.ive Mode: No Slip Surface Option: Entry and Exit Critical slip surfaces saved: 1 Optimize Critical Slip Surface Location: No Tension Crack Tension Crack Option: (none) FOS Distribution FOS Calculation Option: Constant Advanced fileJI/C :/Users/henry.v.,-ig ht/Documents/SlopeWNuecrest Estates/'vuecrest e»sting, static condition.htm 1/3 7/11/13 Slope Stability Number of Slices: 30 Optimization Tolerance: 0.01 Minimum Slip Surface Depth: 0.1 ft Optimization Maximum Iterations: 2000 Optimization Convergence Tolerance: le-007 Starting Optimization Points: 8 Ending Optimization Points: 16 Complete Passes per Insertion: 1 Driving Side Maximum Convex Angle: 5 • Resisting Side Maximum Convex Angle: 1 • Materials Dense Native Soil Model: Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight: 125 pcf Cohesion: 200 psf Phi: 35 • Phi-B: 0 • Pore Water Pressure Piezometric Line: 1 Slip Surface Entry and Exit Left Projection: Range Left-Zone Left Coordinate: (0, 370) ft Left-Zone Right Coordinate: (89.06268, 352.8806) ft Left-Zone Increment: 4 Right Projection: Range Right-Zone Left Coordinate: (98.74228, 348.53635) ft Right-Zone Right Coordinate: (400,250) ft Right-Zone Increment: 4 Radius Increments: 4 Slip Surface Limits Left Coordinate: (0, 370) ft Right Coordinate: (400,250) ft Piezometric Lines Piezometric Line 1 Coordinates X (ft) y (ft) 0 249.88736 file:11/C:/Users/henry.wrig hVDOCumentsfSlopeWNuecrest Estateslwecrest e,Qsting, static condition.html 2/3 7/11/13 Slope Stability 46.27953 240.31824 171.63495 207.50984 302.86855 . 184.40726 400 183.45035 Seismic loads Horz Seismic Load: O Regions Material Points Area (ft2 ) Region 1 Dense Native Soil 9,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3 61315 Points X {ft) y (ft) Point 1 400 250 Point 2 400 150 Point 3 0 150 Point 4 80 . 357 'i>oint 5 91 352 Point 6 129 335 Point 7 193 305 Point 8 304 250 Point 9 0 370 file:f//C :/Users/henry.v-.rig ht/Documents/SlopeWNuecrest Estates/wecrest existing, static condition.html 3/3 C: 0 :;:, ro > Q) U.J 400 390 380 371 360 350 340 330 320 310 300 290 280 270 260 250 240 230 220 210 200 190 180 170 160 Dense Native Soil 1.399 0 ES-2660.01 Vuecrest Estates Existing (Vault Location), Seismic Condition July 11, 2013 ByHTW 150 I · I · I I I · 1-I .J I. I I I · 1 I ·I · -1 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 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120130140 150160170180 190 200210 220 230 240 250 260270280 290 300 310 320 330 340 350 360 370 380 390 400 Distance 7/11/13 Slope Stability Slope Stability Report generated using GeoStudio 2007, version 7 .21. Copyright CO 1991-2013 GEO-SLOPE lnternationa I Ltd .. Fiie Information Title: Vuecrest Created By: Henry Wright Revision Number: 12 Last Edited By: Henry Wright Date: 7/11/2013 Time: 10:40:57 AM File Name: Vuecrest Existing, Seismic Condition.gsz Directory: C:\Users\henry.wright\Documents\SlopeW\Vuecrest Estates\ last Solved Date: 7/11/2013 Last Solved Time: 10:41:00 AM Project Settings Length(L) Units: feet Time(t) Units: Seconds Force(F) Units: lbf Pressure(p) Units: psf Strength Units: psf Unit Weight of Water: 62.4 pcf View: 2D Analysis Set~ings Slope Stability Kind: SLOPE/W Method: Morgenstern-Price Settings Apply Phreatic Correction: No Side Function lnterslice force function option: Half-Sine PWP Conditions Source: Piezometric Line Use Staged Rapid Drawdown: No Slip Surface Direction of movement: Left to Right Use Passive Mode: No Slip Surface Option: Entry and Exit Critical slip surfaces saved: 1 Optimize Critical Slip Surface Location: No Tension Crack Tension Crack Option: (none) FOS Distribution fileJI/C-JUsers/henry.wrighVDocixnents/SlopeWNuecrest Estateslvuecrest e»sting, seismic condition.html 1/4 7111113 Slope Stability FOS Calculation Option: Constant Advanced Number of Slices: 30 Optimization Tolerance: 0.01 Minimum Slip Surface Depth: 0.1 ft Optimization Maximum Iterations: 2000 Optimization Convergence Tolerance: le-007 Starting Optimization Points: 8 Ending Optimization Points: 16 Complete Passes per Insertion: 1 Driving Side Maximum Convex Angle: 5 • Resisting Side Maximum Convex Angle: 1 • Materials Dense Native Soil Model: Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight: 125 pcf Cohesion: 200 psf Phi: 35 ° Phi-B: 0 ° Pore Water Pressure Piezometric Line: 1 Slip Surface Entry and Exit Left Projection: Range Left-Zone Left Coordinate: (O, 370) ft Left-Zone Right Coordinate: (89.06268, 352.8806) ft Left-Zone Increment: 4 Right Projection: Range Right-Zone Left Coordinate: (98.74228, 348.53635) ft Right-Zone Right Coordinate: (400, 250) ft Right-Zone Increment: 4 Radius Increments: 4 Slip Surface Limits Left Coordinate: (0, 370) ft Right Coordinate: (400, 250) ft Piezometric Lines Piezometric Line 1 Coordinates file:/1/C:/Users/henry.wig ht/Docurrents/SlopeWNuecrest Estatesfvuecrost e?4sting, seismic condition.htrri 214 7111113 Slope Stability X (ft) . V (ft) I 0 249.88736 46.27953 240.31824 171.63495 . 207.50984 302.86855 184.40726 400 183.45035 Seisrnlc loads Horz Seismic Load: 0.2 Ignore seismic load in strength: No Regions Material Points Area (ft2) Region 1 Dense Native Soil 9,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3 61315 Points X (ft) V (ft) Point 1 400 250 Point 2 400 150 Point 3 0 150 Point 4 80 357 Point 5 91 352 Point 6 129 335 Point 7 193 305 Point 8 304 250 Point 9 0 370 Critical Slio Surfaces • Slip Surface FOS Center (ft) Radius (ft) Entry (ft) Exit (ft) 1 92 1.175 ( 339. 295, 641. 678) 392.199 ( 67.3696, 359.052) (301.337, 251.319) Slices of Slip Surface: 92 Slip X (ft) V (ft) PWP (psf) , Base Normal Frictional Cohesive Surface Stress (psf) Strength (psf) Strength (psf) 1 92 70.527175 356.0809 -7619.5344 97.54932 68.304769 . . . 200 2 92 76.84239 350.26555 -7359.9058 478.95689 335.36922 200 3 92 85.5 342.7521 -7032.6246 819.27166 573.6602 200 4 92 94.8 335,05245. -6703.8116 1074.4534 75.2.34039 200 .. 5 92 102.4 329.1421 -6459.1838 1256.0165 879.47221 200 6 92 110 323.52315 -6232.6426 1420.2458 994.46678 200 7 92 117.6 318.1803 -6023.4027 1571.9501 1100,6913 200 fi!e:1//CJUsers/henry.v.righVDocixrents/SlopeWNuecrest EstatesMJecrest existing, seisrric condition.html 3/4 7/11/13 Slope Stability 8 92 125.2 313.1001 -5830.4699 1714.9219 1200.8012 200 9 92 133.2635 307.99165 -5643.4118 1853.2304 1297.6459 200 10 92 141.7905 302.8738 -5463.2883 1989.653 1393.17 200 11 92 150.3175 298.04375 -5301.2156 2124.5761 1487.6442 200 12 92 158.8445 293.48955 -5156.2418 2258.7257 1581.5767 200 13 92 167.3715 . 289.20045 -5027.9122 2391.2123 1674.3449 200 . 14 92 175.1958 285.4804 -4904.5383 2509.8503 1757.4161 200 15 92 182.31745 282.2846 -4783.316 2611.3743 1828.5039 200 16 92 189.43915 279.25695 -4672.5667 2703.4423 1892.9707 200 17 92 196.8692 276.27645 -4568.2195 2773.9704 1942.355 200 18 92 204.60755 · 273.35345 -4470.8915 2814.7271 1970.8931 200 19 92 212.3459 270.61485 -4384.9181 2824.282 1977.5835 200 -20 92 220.0843 268.0566 -4310.3788 2795.7384 1957.5971 200 21 92 227.82265 265.675 -4246.7882 2723.2373 1906.8313 200 22 . 92 235.561 263.4667 -4193.9624 2602.5173 1822.3023 200 23 92 243.2994 261.4287 -4151.7816 2431.8544 1702.8028 200 24 92 251.03775 259.55825 -4120.0747 2211.7607 1548.6915 200 25 92 258.7761 257.8529 -4098,6209 1945.9185 1362.5468 200 26 92 266.5145 256.3105 -4087.4075 1639.9661 1148)166 200 27 92 274.25285 254.9291 -4086.2563 1301.7654 911.50595 200 28 92 , 281.9912 253.7069 -4094.9493 ' 939.56792 657.89254 200 29 92 289.7,296 252.64245 -4113.4902 562.04924 393.55111 200 30 92 . 297.46795 251.73445 -4141.849 176.78827 123.78848 200 file:///C:/Users/henry.'lvfight/Documents/SlopeWNuecrest EstatesMJecrest e,dsting, seismic condition.html 4/4 400 390 380 370~ 1 Select Fill Soil 2H:1V Fill Slope j Rockery 350~-~---- 360 . \,L~µlt_ 340 330 320 310 300 c: 290 .Q 280 -~ ..Q1 w 270 260 250 240 230 220 210 200 190 180 170 160 Dense Native Soil ES-2660.01 Vuecrest Estates Proposed Vault, Static Condition July 11, 2013 ByHTW .! 150 I I I 1 I · I I I 1 I · I I I I I I 1 · I · I I I 1 I · I 1 I I I . 1 I I r I 1 1 I I I I I 1 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100110120130140150160170180190200 210 220230240 250260270280290 300310 320 330 340350 360 370380 390400 Distance C: a +l Cll > Q) LU 400 390 380 350 340 330 320 310 300 --- 280 270 260 •- 250 r·--- 240 230 220 210 •- 200 190 180 ,. 170 160 Select Fill Soil 2H: 1 V Fill Slope j _____ Rockery Dense Native Soil 2.040 a ES-2660.01 Vuecrest Estates Proposed Vault, Static Condition July 11, 2013 ByHTW 150 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 · I . I I 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100110 120130140 150160170180 190200 210 220 230 240 250260 270280290 300 310 320 330 340350 360370 380 390400 Distance 7/11/13 Slope Stability Slope Stability Report generated using GeoStudio 2007, version 7 .21. Copyright© 1991-2013 GEO-SLOPE lnternationa I Ltd. f'.i!e Information Title: Vue crest Created By: Henry Wright Revision Number: 4 Last Edited By: Henry Wright Date: 7/11/2013 Time: 10:19:00AM File Name: Vuecrest Vault, Static Condition.gsz Directory: C:\Users\henry.wright\Documents\Earth Solutions\2734 LnL\ Last Solved Date: 7/11/2013 Last Solved Time: 10:19:02 AM Project Settings Length(L) Units: feet Time(t) Units: Seconds Force(F) Units: lbf Pressure(p) Units: psf Strength Units: psf Unit Weight of Water: 62.4 pcf View: 2D Analysis Settings Slope Stability Kind: SLOPE/W Method: Morgenstern-Price Settings Apply Phreatic Correction: No Side Function lnterslice force function option: Half-Sine .PWP Conditions Source: Piezometric Line Use Staged Rapid Drawdown: No Slip Surface Direction of movement: Left to Right Use Passive Mode: No Slip Surface Option: Entry and Exit Critical slip surfaces saved: 1 Optimize Critical Slip Surface Location: No Tension Crack Tension Crack Option: (none) FOS Distribution fil e-J//C :/Users/henry.wig nVDoculllents/SlopeWNuecrest Estates/1J.J9Crest vaU t, static condition.html 1/5 7/11/13 Slope Stability FOS Calculation Option: Constant Advanced Number of Slices: 30 Optimization Tolerance: 0.01 Minimum Slip Surface Depth: 0.1 ft Optimization Maximum Iterations: 2000 Optimiwtion Convergence Tolerance: le-007 Starting Optimization Points: 8 Ending Optimization Points: 16 Complete Passes per Insertion: 1 Driving Side Maximum Convex Angle: 5 • Resisting Side Maximum Convex Angle: 1 • Materials Dense Native Soil Model: Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight: 125 pcf Cohesion: 200 psf Phi:35• Phi-B: 0 • Pore Water Pressure Piezometric Line: 1 Select Fill Soil Model: Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight: 130 pcf Cohesion: 0 psf Phi: 32 • Phi-B: 0 • Pore Water Pressure Piezometric Line: 1 Rockery Model: Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight: 140 pcf Cohesion: 0 psf Phi: 40' Phi-B: 0' Pore Water Pressure Piezometric Line: 1 Vault Model: Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight: 100 pcf Cohesion: 0 psf Phi: 40 • Phi-8: 0 • Pore Water Pressure file:J//C:/Users/henry.Vvright/Documents/SlopeWNuecrest Estates,\.uecrest vault, static condition.html 215 7/11113 Slope Stability Piezometric Line: 1 .... ,, ,.-.. .~ .,~, ~ ! 'I"' ·•. -.i· i ,., ,,j ! r·,·-;, r·,, i-•·i' -i·v ;oi '1 .-i ., .. "', •. ... , ;-,; -~·· ... Ci.,,,,.~ .. -11 ~ 1 ,.,.1 .• ,1 -,,,..,1-{_, t. Left Projection: Range Left-Zone Left Coordinate: (0.48447, 373) ft Left-Zone Right Coordinate: (93.08109, 351.06899) ft Left-Zone Increment: 4 Right Projection: Range Right-Zone Left Coordinate: (99.10306, 348.37495) ft Right-Zone Right Coordinate: (400,250) ft Right-Zone Increment: 4 Radius Increments: 4 Slip Surface Limits Left Coordinate: (0, 373) ft Right Coordinate: (400, 250) ft Piezometric lines Piezometric Line 1 Coordinates X (ft) y (ft) 0 249.88736 46.27953 240.31824 171.63495 207.50984 302.86855 184.40726 400 183.45035 Regions Material Region 1 Dense Native Soil Region 2 Rockery Region 3 Select Fill Soil Region 4 Vault Points X (ft) y (ft) Point 1 400 250 Point 2 400 150 Point 3 0 150 Points 2, 1, 16, 15, 14, 13, 10,9,5,4, 3 13,12,11,10 . 8,9,10,11 7,8,9,5,4,6 Area (ft2 ) 60469.5 18 96 1400 file:/f/C :/U sers/henry.wri g hVD ocurrents/SlopeWNuecrest Es tates/wecrest vault, static conditi on.hlrrl 315 7/11/13 Slope Stability Point 4 0 353 Point 5 70 353 Point 6 0. 373 Point 7 70 373 Point 8 70 364 Point 9 70 356 Point 10 86 352 Point 11 86 356 Point 12 90 356 Point 13 91 352 Point 14 129 335 Point 15 193 305 Point 16 304 250 Critical Slip Surfaces .. Slip Surface FOS Center (ft) Radi4s (ft) Entry (ft) Exit (ft) 1 52 1.585 (113.173, 428.033) 80.891 (53.888, 373) (99.1031, 348.375) - Slices of Slio Surface: 52 Slip · X (ft) y (ft) PWP (psf) Base Normal Frictional Cohesive Surface Stress (psf) Strength (psi) Strength ( psf) 1 52 54.620345 372.2315 -8367.3751 48.419148 40.628489 0 2 52 56.085075 370.73335 -8297.9264 142.13893 119.26872 0 3 52 57.549805 369.31 -8233.396 230.62034 193.51344 0 . 4 52 59.014535 367.9561 -8172.6971 • 315.35648 264.6155 0 5 52 60.479265 366.667 -8115.991 397.67786 333.69135 0 6 52 61.943995 365.4387 -8063.3828 478.73628 . 401.70743 0 7 52 63.408725 364.26775 -8013.9892 559.52607 469.49812 0 8 52 64.87345 363.151 -7968.6751 640.95508 537.82517 0 9 52 66.338175 362.0857 . -7925.8304 723.67246 607.23329 0 10 52 67.802905 361.0694 -7886.3168 808.30084 678.24494 0 11 52 69.267635 360.09985 -7849.6851 895.23107 751.18806 0 12 52 70.732515 359.175 -7816.0182 402.82913 251.71558 0 13 52 72.197545 358.2931 -7784.8674 428.55024 267.78791 0 iii -52 73.662575 357.45265 · -7756.5782 452.51173 282.76071 0 15 52 75.127605 356.6522 -7730.0896 474.52739 296.51762 0 16 52 76.59264 355.89035 -7706.6564 494.31817 308.88428 0 17 52 78.057675 355.1659 . -7685. 6526 511.49343 319.61657 0 18 52 79.522705 354.4778 -7666.3621 525.58433 328.42154 0 19 52 80.987735 353.82495 -7649.8599 536.04126 334.95575 0 20 52 82.452765 353.2065 -7635.3086 542.28245 338.85568 0 21 52 83.917795 352.6216 -7622.4392 543.68902 339.73461 0 22 52 85.325155 352.08995 -7612.1405 554.02442 387.93208 200 23 52 86.666665 351.61125 -7604.5681 611.88713 428.44798 200 fil eJIIC :11.J sers/henry . ....rig ht'Oocurrents/SI opeWNuecrest Estatesr.uecrest vault, static condition.html 4/5 7111113 Slope Stability 24 52 88 351.1617 -7597.9772 666.6334 466.78174 200 25 52 89.333335 350.7378 -7593.2892 715.3674 500.90564 200 26 52 90.5 350.3862 -7590.4166 493.92327 345.8488 200 27 52 91.810305 350.0183 -7588.6478 227.45113 159.263 200 28 52 93.430915 349.59245 -7588.7771 181.46165 127.06082 200 29 52 95.05153 349.20225 -7591.0423 129.1253 90.414505 200 30 52 96.672145 348.84715 -7595.0331 71.709725 50.21169 200 31 52 98.292755 348.5266 -7601.5117 10.5401 7.3802573 200 fi leJ//C -JU sers/henry. wrig ht/D ocurrents/Sl opeWNuecr est Estates/weer est vault, static condition.html 515 C: 0 ~ ro > Ql w 400 390 380 340 330 320 310 300 290 280 270 260 ·- 250 240 230 220 210 200 190 180 170 160 Select Fill Soil 2H:1V Fill Slope j Rockery ~ Dense Native Soil 1.347 0 ES-2660.01 Vuecrest Estates Proposed Vault, Seismic Condition July 11, 2013 ByHTW 150 I -I I I I I , I I I -I I I I L I I I I I I I 1· I I ·I I I I I l l l · J l I I I I I I 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240 250 260 270 280 290 300 310 320 330 340 350 360 370 380 390 400 Distance 7/11/13 Slope Stability Slope Stability Report generated using GeoStudio 2007, version 7 .21. Copyright© 1991·2013 GEO·SLOPE International ltd. file Information Title: Vuecrest Created By: Henry Wright Revision Number: 7 Last Edited By: Henry Wright Date: 7/11/2013 Time: 10:25:06AM File Name: Vue crest Vault, Seismic Condition.gsz Di rectory: C:\Use rs\henry. wright\Docu me nts\SI ope W\ Vue crest Estates\ Last Solved Date: 7/11/2013 Last Solved Time: 10:25:08 AM Project Settings Length(L) Units: feet Time(t) Units: Seconds Force(F) Units: lbf Pressure(p) Units: psf Strength Units: psf Unit Weight of Water: 62.4 pcf View: 20 Analysis Settings Slope Stability Kind: SLOPE/W Method: Morgenstern-Price Settings Apply Phreatic Correction: No Side Function lnterslice force function option: Half-Sine PWP Conditions Source: Piezometric Line Use Staged Rapid Drawdown: No Slip Surface ' Direction of movement: Left to Right Use Passive Mode: No Slip Surface Option: Entry and Exit Critical slip surfaces saved: 1 Optimize Critical Slip Surface Location: No Tension Crack Tension Crack Option: (none) FOS Distribution file:/1/C:/Users/henry.v.righVDocuments/SlopeWNuecrest Estates/\uecrest vault, seismic condition.html 1/5 7111113 Slope Stability FOS Calculation Option: Constant Advanced Number of Slices: 30 Optimization Tolerance: 0.01 Minimum Slip Surface Depth: 0.1 ft Optimization Maximum Iterations: 2000 Optimization Convergence Tolerance: le-007 Starting Optimization Points: 8 Ending Optimization Points: 16 Complete Passes per Insertion: 1 Driving Side Maximum Convex Angle: 5 • Resisting Side Maximum Convex Angle: 1 • Materials Dense Native Soil Model: Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight: 125 pcf Cohesion: 200 psf Phi: 35" Phi-8: 0 • Pore Water Pressure Piezometric Line: 1 Select Fill Soil Model: Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight: 130 pcf Cohesion: O psf Phi:32" Phi-B: 0 ° Pore Water Pressure Piezometric Line: 1 Rockery Model: Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight: 140 pcf Cohesion: 0 psf Phi: 40 ° Phi-B: 0 • Pore Water Pressure Piezometric Line: 1 Vault Model: Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight: 100 pcf Cohesion: 0 psf Phi: 40 ° Phi-B: 0 ° Pore Water Pressure fi I eJI/C :/Users/henry.wrig ht/Docurrents/SI opeWNuecrest Estates/~rest vault, seislTic condition.htm 2/5 7/11/13 Slope Stability Piezometric Line: 1 Slip Surface Entry and Exit Left Projection: Range Left-Zone Left Coordinate: (0.48447, 373} ft Left-Zone Right Coordinate: (93.08109, 351.06899) ft Left-Zone Increment: 4 Right Projection: Range Right-Zone Left Coordinate: (99.10306, 348.37495} ft Right-Zone Right Coordinate: (400,250) ft Right-Zone Increment: 4 Radius Increments: 4 Slip Surface Limits Left Coordinate: (0, 373} ft Right Coordinate: (400, 250} ft Piezometric lines Piezometric Line 1 Coordinates X (ft} y (ft} 0 249.88736 46.27953 240.31824 171.63495 207.50984 302.86855 184.40726 400 183.45035 Seismic Loads Horz Seismic Load: 0.2 Ignore seismic load in strength: No Regions Material Points Region 1 Dense Native Soil 2,1,16,15,14,13,10,9,5,4,3 Region 2 Rockery 13;12,11,10 Region 3 Select Fill Soil 8,9,10,11 Region 4 Vault 7,8,9,5,4,6 Area (ft'} 60469.5 18 96 1400 frleJ//C:/Userslhenry:\".right/DocumentsfStopeWN~rest Estates/wecrest \0ult, seismic condition.html 315 7111113 Slope Stability Points .. X (ft) y (ft) Point 1 400 250 Point 2 400 150 Point 3 0 150 Point 4 0 353 Point 5 70 353 Point 6 0 373 Point 7 70 373 Point 8 70 364 Point 9 70 356 Point. lo 86 352 Point 11 86 356 Point 12 90 356 Point 13 91 352 Point 14 129 335 Point 15 193 305 Point 16 304 250 Critical Slip Surfaces Slip Surface FOS Center (ft) Radius (ft) Entry (ft) Exit(ft) 1 52 1.090 (113.173, 428.033) 80.891 · (53.888, 373) (99.1031; 348.375) Slices of S!ip Surface: 52 Slip X (ft) y (ft) PWP (psf) Base Normal Frictional Cohesive Surface Stress ( psf) · Strength ( psf) Strength ( psf) .. 1 52 54.620345 372.2315 -8367.3751 41.177 34.551605 0 2 52 56.085075 370.73335 -8297.9264 119.60583 100.36121 0 . 3 52 57.549805 369.31 -8233.396 191.82014 160.9562 0 4 52 59.014535 367.9561 -8172.6971 259.52129 217.76422 0 5 52 60.479265 366.667 -8115.991 324.28742 272.10946 D 6 52 61.943995 365.4387 -8063.3828 387.62037 325.25211 0 7 52 63.498725 364.26775 -8013.9892 , . 450.97931 378.41657 0 . 8 52 64.87345 363.151 -7968.6751 515.76512 432.77832 0 9 52 66.338175 362.0857 -7925.8304 . 583.34646 489.4858 0 .10 52 67.802905 361.0694 -7886.3168 654.9605 549.57711 0 11 52 69.267635 360.09985 -7849.6851 731.81542 614.06605 0 12 52 70.732515 359.175 -7816.0182 308.4047 192.71265 0 13 52 72.197545 358.2931 -7784.8674 334.62924 209.09956 . 0 14 52 73.662575 357.45265 -7756.5782 361.85453 226.1118 0 15 52 75.127605 356.6522 -7730.0896 390.06443 243.73931 0 16 52 76.59264 355.89035 -7706.6564 419.0171 261.83094 0 17 52 78.057675 355.1659 -7685.6526 448.19548 280.06362 0 fileJf/C Nsers/heivy.wrig ht'Documents/SlopeWNuecrest EstatesMJeCrest wult, seismic condition.html 415 7/11/13 Slope Stability 18 I 52 79.522705 354.4778 -7666.3621 476.81532 297.94728 0 19 52 80.987735 353.82495 -7649.8599 503.82243 314.82319 0 20 -52 82.452765 353.2065 -7635.3086 527.93625 329.89118 0 21 52 . 83.917795 352.6216 -7622.4392 547.70452 342.24377 0 22 52 85.325155 352.08995 ,-7612.1405 630.5632 441.52511 200 23 52 · 86.666665 351.61125 -7604.5681 687.56435 481.43774 200 24 52 88 · 351.1617 -7597.9772 738.12994 516.84415 200 25 52 89.333335 350.7378 -7593.2892 779.53947 545.83941 200 26 52 90.5 350.3862 -7590.4166 560.18607 392.24651 200 27 52 91.810305 350.0183 -7588:6478 291.99422 204.45655 200 28 52 93.430915 349.59245 -7588.7771 229.63201 160.79007 200 29 52 95.05153 , 349.20225 -7591.0423 159.84908 111.92753 200 30 52 96.672145 348.84715 -7595.0331 85.434306 59.821745 200 31 52 98.292755 348.5269 -7601.5117 8.9886223 6.2939011 200 fileJ//C:/Users/herv-y.w-ighUDocumenls/SlopeWNuecrest Estates/wecrest vault, seismic condition.html 5/5 Elizabeth Higgins .. From: Sent: Henry Wright <Henry.Wright@earthsolutionsnw.c·om> Monday, July 15, 2013 12:37 PM To: Elizabeth Higgins Cc: Kyle Campbell Subject: RE: Vuecrest Slope Analysis Hi Elizabeth, Our letter is being reviewed by Kyle (the PE for the job , however he will be out of office for most ottbe..day_\/Y.e_should be able to get that ouLb.y..tomorrow-T.haLbeing.said we ran two more-slope a alyses, one with the vault conditio~ 1one with the,proposediresidence condition (rockery adjacent to slope with 2:1 gartial fill slope above}=Based on the . / ,results of our study, the proposed development has a negligible effect on th~ slope,stability .. , In the updated letter, we also [ address proper.placement of.fill.on.slopes. ti.the fillcslope is properly constructed, and erosion control measur@s.are , ~ _P_l})J:lerly imJ=!lemeQted, the develor1me.o\,~fe_~sible from a·geoJ,~nnical staDjP.S!J:ILSorr,y.for:the.clelay,~l.hqp_e, this help.§J clarify our findings. Please let me know if you have any·questions, comments, or concerns. Thank you, Henry T. Wright, E.I.T. Staff Engineer Earth Solutions NW, LLC 1805 136th Place NE, Suite 201 • Bellevue, WA 98005 Office (425) 449-4704 • Fax (425) 449-4711 Cell (206) 793-4193 • Radio ID 112*71686*5 From: Elizabeth Higgins (mailto:EHiggins@Rentonwa.gov] Sent: Monday, July 15, 2013 10:48 AM To: Henry Wright Subject: RE: Vuecrest Slope Analysis · "ASAP" being a relative term, when might we expect an updated letter? As I mentioned in my telephone message of earlier this morning, I will be presenting this project to the City of Renton Environmental Review Committee at 3 pm today. I will be basing staff recommendations on the ESNW report, as it now stands. Thank you! Elizabeth River Higgins Department of Community and Economic Development City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton WA 98057 425-430-6581 -·-·--~---·--··--· ----,-··----·---·-·'"·--··-~--------·---------··-. ---·-·----~----.---·-·······. From: Henry Wright (mailto:Henry.Wright@earthsolutionsnw.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2013 9:09 AM To: Elizabeth Higgins 1 Cc: Kyle Campbell .. Subject: RE: Vuecrest Slope Analy Hi Elizabeth, We will address the issues you have raised and reevaluate the proposed development near the slope. We will try to have an updated letter prepared ASAP. Thank you, Henry T. Wright, E.I.T. Staff Engineer Earth Solutions NW, LLC 1805136th Place NE, Suite 201 • Bellevue, WA 98005 Office (425) 449-4704 • Fax (425) 449-4711 Cell (206) 793-4193 • Radio ID 112.71686•5 From: Elizabeth Higgins [mailto:EHiqqins@Rentonwa.gov] Sent: Monday, July 08, 2013 1:45 PM To: Henry Wright Subject: Vuecrest Slope Analysis Mr. Wright One other item needs clarification. In your letter of April 101h, on page 2 you cite RMC 4-3-050J.2, specifically subsection b) The required studies shall demonstrate the following review criteria can be met: "i) The proposal will not increase the threa_t of the geological hazard to adjacent or abutting properties beyond pre-development conditions." There are two additional conditions that must be met, ii) The proposal will not adversely impact other critical areas; and iii) The development can be safely accommodated on the site. We would appreciate having the ESNW statement of assurance expanded to include the additional criteria. Thank you. Elizabeth River Higgins Department of Community and Economic Development City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton WA 98057 425-430-6581 2 •' April 10, 2013 ES-2660.01 Earth Solutions NW LLC Geonerco Progerties, LLC 1441 North 34 h Street, #200 Seattle, Washington 98103 Attention: Mr. Jamie Waltier Subject: Slope Setback Smithers Avenue Residential Plat Renton, Washington Reference: Earth Solutions NW, LLC Geotechnical Engineering Study ES-2660, dated February 2013 Dear Mr. Waltier: • Geotechnical Engineering • Construction Monitoring • Environmental Sciences As requested, Earth Solutions NW, LLC (ESNW) has prepared this letter to address the setback from the top of a slope. ESNW previously prepared the referenced geotechnical engineering study for the site. Site Conditions The City of Renton Municipal Code defines steep slopes as follows: o Sensitive Slopes: Areas with slopes between 25 percent and 40 percent. o Protected Slopes: Areas with slopes greater than 40 percent. Based on our observations and review of the referenced topographic survey, sensitive slopes are present along the western and southern portions of the property, and protected slopes are present along the western portion of the property. The referenced geotechnical engineering study identifies soil conditions onsite to consist of glacial till which becomes dense to very dense near the surface. 1805 -136th Place N.E., Suite 201 • Bellevue, WA 98005 • 1425) 449-4704 • FAX (425) 449-4711 ' '' Geonerco Properties, LLC April 10, 2013 ) Proposed Development Adjacent to Slopes ES-2660.01 Page2 We understand that the proposed development will. incqrporate a three to four foot rockery as well as a stormwater vault structure near the top of a slope at the west side o.f the subject property, The rockery wjll be located adjacent to the top otthe !?lope: and will be facing a ... 2, 1 partial 'fill .slope above .. ·simile family reside.noes ,Will be located with a. 20 foot setoack fr'Qm the top of the natl.l[!il slope. T~e proposed stormwater vault is to be .located with a 10 foot setback from t~etop of ihe natural slope.nea(the 1,outhwest portion of the subject property. Section 4-3-050-J-2 of The City of Renton Municipal Code requires that deve)qpment within sci feet of a sensitive or protected slope must d_emonst,rate "(t]he pre>posal will not increase. the threat of the geologic hazard to adjacent or abutting properties beyona pre-development conditions". We performed a slope analysis of the propo!,ea ~evelopment, utilizing soil condition data, visual slope reconnaissance information, existing topography·, and propo1:1ed topography and development. ·· · · Based on the results of our ·sloj5e analysis, and our understanding of the proposed development, in our opinion, the proposed development is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint. In our opinion, th!:) prqppsed de\/elopment will not increase the threat of the geologic hazard to adjacent or abuttij'lg properties beyond pre-development conditions. If you have any questions, or if additional information is required, please call. Sincerely, EARTH SOLUTIONS NW, LLC ~\ .li:ft;:J Henry T. Wright, E.1.T. Staff Engineer Attachments: Slope Analysis Data cc: DR Strong Consulting Engineers, Inc. Attention: Mr. Maher Joudi (Email only) Kyle R Campbell, P.E. Principal · Earth Solutions NI/V, LLC ' C: 0 ~ ,ii; w. 440 ' 430 420 410 400 390 380 070 ~~.o .~~o· '.~o '330 320 310 300' 2BO 270 260 2so' 2127 0 ES-2660.01 Smithers Avenue Existing Conditions Static Condition April 2, 2013 ByHTW 240'--"====== a 10 20 30 40 so eo 10 BO so 100 110 120 130 140 1so 100 110 1ao 1so 200 210 220 230 240 250 2eo 210 2ao 200 3Qo 3fo -320 330 340 aso aso Distance ' 4/2/13 SLOPl:JW Anal)Sis S~OP~_/W Analysis Report generated UsingGeoStudio 2007, version 7 .11. Copyright~ 1991-2008 GEO-SLOPE International Ltd. ·<t:i'l<> 1,...1:r,rm"""·•oYJ ! , ... --; Jj~'e,~· . !';;:-:J.,4 •• Created By: Henry Wright Revision Number: 11 Last Edited By: Henry Wright Date: 4/2/2013 Time: 9:54:19AM File Name: Smithers Ave Existing Conditions, Static Condition.gsz Directory: C:\Users\henry.wright\Documents\SlopeW\2660.01\ Last Solved Date: 4/2/2013 Last Solved Time: 9:54:23 AM Project Settings Length(L) Units: feet Time(t) Units: Seconds Force(F) Units: lbf Pressure(p) Units: psf Strength Units: psf Unit Weight of Water: 62.4 pcf View: 2D Analysis Settings SLOPE/W Analysis Kind: SLOPE/W Method: Morgenstern-Price Settings Apply Phreatic Correction: No Side Function lnterslice force function option: Half-Sine PWP Conditions Source: Piezometric Line Use Staged Rapid Drawdown: No SI i pSu rface ' Directio~ of movement:\eft to Right Allow Passive Mode: No Slip Surface Option: Entry and Exit Critical slip surfaces saved: 1 Optimize Critical Slip Surface Location: No Tension Crack Tension Crack Option: (none) FOS Distribution FOS Calculation Option: Constant "' 41'2/13 SLOPEJW Anal)Ols Advanced Number of Slices: 30 Optimization Tolerance: 0.01 Minimum Slip Surface Depth: 0.1 ft Optimization Maximum Iterations: 2000 Optimization Convergence Tolerance: le-007 Starting Optimization Points: 8 Ending Optimization Points: 16 Complete Passes per Insertion: 1 iV1ateri a ls Dense Native Soil Model: Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight: 125 pcf Cohesion: 200 psf Phi: 35 ° Phi-B: 0 ° Pore Water Pressure Piezometric Line: 1 Slip Surface Entry and Exit Left Projection: Range Left-Zone Left Coordinate: (1.532689, 369.70445) ft Left-Zone Right Coordinate: (360.14795, 250.15957) ft Left-Zone Increment: 4 Right Projection: Point Right Coordinate: (350.15593, 250.1598) ft Right-Zone Increment: 4 Radius Increments: 4 Slip Surface limits Left Coordinate: (0.1023189, 370.05196) ft Right Coordinate: (350.15693, 250.1598) ft Piezometric Lines Piezometric Line 1 Coordinates X (ft) y (ft) .. 0.13782~8 299.92062 229.98263 239.9~476 - ,.,, .. ', 412/13 SLOPE/W Anal)SiS Horz Seismic load: 0 Regions ••.p-.-• • Material Points Area (ft') Region 1 Dense N.atiye .!'ioiJ 1,2,3,4,.5,6, 7 24331.82 · Points ' X (ft) ·' Y(ft) . Point 1 360.15693 239.90718 ,, Point 2 360.15693 250.1598 Point 3 320.34257 249.56173 Point4 76.861983 }50.99278 Point S 71.583836 352.19544 Point 6 0.1023189 370.06196 Point 7 0.1681653 239.98345 Critical Slip Surfaces ' Number FOS Cel}ter (ft) Radius (ft) Entry (ft) Exit (ft) 1, 2 2.127 . (325.704, 744.497) 495.536 ( 1.53269, 369. 704) (360.157, 250.16) ·-- Slices of Slip Surface: 2 ·- Slip X (ft) y (ft) PWP (psf) Base Normal Frictional Cohesive Surface Stress (psf) Strength (psf) Strength (psf). ,, 1 2 7.3702845 364.8101 -4166.921 273.25277 191.33365 200 2 2 19.045475. 355.31605 -3764.5686 911.52386 -638.25588 200 3 2 30.720665 346.39085, -3397,7.82 1488.7533 1042.4363 200 4 2 ··--42.395855 337.9969 -3064.1643 2015.6757 1411.3913 200 ·- 5 2 54.07105 330.1019 -2761.6263 2501.0942 1751.285 200 6 2 65.746245 322.67785 -2488.5083 2952.2598 2067.1946 200 . . -. - 7 2 74.22291 _ 317.5259 -2305.072 3271.6678 2290.8464 200 8 2 82.7512~;.i 312.6582 -2140.2008 '. 3473.4236 ' 2432.1174 200 9 2 -94.529745 306.2384 ~i.n1.4rn9 3666.9022 2567.5926 200 ' . " 10 2 106.30825 300:22355. -1747.9622 383_5_,_2857 --2685.4959 200 11 2 118.08675 294.59765 · -1588.7063 3978.7422 .. .. 2785.9453 200 - 12 2 ' 129.86525 , _289.3459 ' -1452.8323 4096.5363 2868.4256 200 .. ... ' 13 i 141.6438 284.45565 -1339.4807 4186.8131 2931.6381 200 14 2 153.42235 279.9155 -1248.0199 4247.15?2 2973,§88 200 -. 15_ 2 165.20085 275.7152 -1177.6934 4274.3796 2992.9528 200 16 2 176.97935 271.8457 -1128.0506 4264.5481 2986.0687 200 17 2 188.75785 268.29895 -1098.5729 4213.5624 2950.3682 200 ··-·· --- ;:.,,,.,,, ; 412113 SLOPEM/ Analy.,is 18 2 200.53635 265.06775 ! -1088. 775.:l .. , 4117.2861 ' 2882.9548 200 ~ ~ ... : 19 2 212.31485 262.1458 -1098.2199 3971.3775 2780.7885 200 .. ·-· ' 20 2 . 224.Q9335 259.5275 -1126.6999 3772.2303 2641.3441 ' 200 ... , 21 2 235:6301 257.2496 0 3523.2193 . 2466.9847 200 - 22 2 246.9251 255.29615 0 3225.3807 2258.4359 200 .. 23 2 258.2201 253.6103 0 2873.9907 201?,3899 200 24, 2 269.5151 252.18935 0 2470.2858 1729.7128 200 - 25: :2 280.8101 )_51.031 0 2016.5514 1412.0045 200 26. 2 292.1051 250.1334 0 1516.908~ i062.151 .. 200 .. --27 2 ' 303.4001 249.4951 0 976.25692 ., 683.58245 200 28 2 314.6951 249.1151 0 400.81326 280.~5246 200 29 2_ . 326.9783 249.0067 0 112.15763 78.533619 200 ' 30 2 340.24975 249.2187 0 101.90417 71.354068 200 ' - 31 2 ' 353.5212 249.7867 0 45.720042 32.013518 200 - ., • '"''• • • .; • .;.,_· a-·-..J::•:~;;; ~,.;., '" C 0 j w 440 430 420 410 400 390 380 250 PSF Surcharge 20 Foot Structure Setback from Top of Natural Slope .___L_. · /Rockery ES-2660.01 Smithers Avenue Static Condition April 2, 2013 ByHTW 10 20 30 405r BO 70 aQ· 90 10()··1·fo···120 130 140 150 160 170 1BO 190 200 210 220 230 240 250 260 2io 260 290 300 310 320 330 340 350 360 Distance 412/13 SLOPE/IN Anal~is SLQPE/W Analysis Repo·r·t generated using GE!oStudio 2007, version 7 .11. Copyright© 1991 ·2008 GEO-SLOPE International Ltd. File Information Created By: Henry Wright Revision Number: 13 Last Edited By: Henry Wright Date: 4/2/2013 Time: 9:52:08AM File Name: Smithers Ave 3 Foot Rockery, 2 to 1 Slope Static Condition.gsz Directory: C:\Users\henry.wright\Documents\SlopeW\2660.01\ Last Solved Date: 4/2/2013 Last Solved lime: 9:52:12 AM Project Settings Length(Lt Units: feet Time(t) Units: Seconds Force(F) Units: lbf Pressure(p) Units: psf Strength Units: psf Unit Weight of Water: 62.4 pcf View: 2D Analysis Settings SLOPE/W Analysis Kind: SLOPE/W Method: Morgenstern-Price Settings Apply Phreatic Correction: No Side Function lnterslice force function option: Half-Sine PWP Conditions Source: Piezometric Line Use Staged Rapid Drawdown: No SlipSurface Direction of movement: Left to Right Allow Passive Mode: No Slip Surface Option: Entry and Exit Critical slip surfaces saved: 1 Optimize Critical Slip Surface Location: No Tension Crack Tension Crack Option: (none) FOS Distribution FOS Calculation Option: Constant ;..:, ,; .. 412/13 SLOPE'W Anal)Gls Advanced Number of Slices: 30 Optimization Tolerance: 0.01 Minimum Slip Surface Depth: 0.1 ft Optimization Maximum Iterations: 2000 Optimization Convergence Tolerance: le-007 Starting Optimization Points: 8 Ending Optimization Points: 16 Complete Passes per Insertion: 1 l\llaterials Dense Native Soil Model: Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight: 125 pcf Cohesion: 200 psf Phi:35° Phi-B: 0' Pore Water Pressure Piezometric Line: 1 Select Fill Soil Model: Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight: 130 pcf Cohesion: O psf Phi:32' Phi-B: 0 ° Rockery Model: Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight: 140 pcf Cohesion: O psf Phi: 40• Phi-B: 0 ° Slip Surface Entry and Exit Left Projection: Range Left-Zone Left Coordinate: (1.75904, 373.98196) ft Left-Zone Right Coordinate: (70.0334, 3S5.S2029) ft Left-Zone Increment: 4 Right Projection: Range Right-Zone Left Coordinate: (199.82186, 300.29886) ft Right-Zone Right Coordinate: (360.15693, 250.1598) ft Right-Zone Increment: 4 Radius Increments: 4 412/13 SLOPEIW Analy.,ls Slip Surface limits Left Coordinate: (0.1023189, 370.06196) ft Right Coordinate: (360.15693, 250.1598) ft ;:·i·:l7,0l''1~s .. ,.i,·· L:-.. ':'l -1 I . i.:; -·l ._ t.1 ..... l ~ J..., ,.t, Cocr<linats-s X (ft) y (ft) . . 0.1378248 299.92062 229.98263 239.93476 Surcharge loads Surcharge Load 1 ' Surcharge (Unit Weight): 250 pcf Direction: Vertical Coordinates X (ft) -y (ft) 0.9875556 375.19653 33.881393 375.1053 56.23.71!11 363.67271 Seismic Loads Horz Seismic Load: 0 Regions -··· Material -. Points' Region 1 Dense Native Soil 1,2,3,4,5,6, 7,8,9 Region 2 . Rocke_ry 5, 4, 10, 11, 6 Region 3 Select Fill Soil : &,11,12,13,8,7 Points X (ft) y (ft) Point 1 360.15693 239.90718 Point 2 360.15693 250.1?98 Point 3 320.34257 249.56173 Point 4 76.861983 352.06283 . ,, ·, Area (ft2) , 24470:112 20. 631255 ' . 548.2873 ,;.;, ;. I 412113 SLOP.E/W An81,sis Point 5 76.861983 350.99278 Point 6 71.791243 351.01674 Point 7 43.05417 360.0836 Point 8 0.1023189 370.06196 ·Point 9 0.1681653 239.98345 . Point 10 . 76.501308 355.15984 Point 11 · 71.596931 355.04006 ' Point 12 . 33.684832 373.95884. Point 13 · 0.1598139 373.98312 •. . Critlcal Slip Surfaces .•. Number FOS Center (ft) Radius_(ft) Entry (ft) ., Exit (ft) 1 47 1.919 (344.793, 737.405) . 487.488 ... ( 19.8962, 373.969) (317.709, 250.671) . ... -... Slices of Slip Surface: 47 . Slip . . . Base Normal Frictional Cohesive X (ft) y (ft) PWP (psf) Surfac~ .. . •. -~--Stress (psf) . Strength (psf) Strength (psf) 1 47 26.79053 3.6i!,0333 -0 804.08119 502.44569 0 2 47 33.78311 362.0164 -4422.5686 1296.8402 908.05728 200 . 3 47 38.46778 358.22975 :4262.6735 1418.234 ... ~93.05816 200 . 4 47 49.64599 349.50885 -3900.5536 . 1661.5246 ·1163.4121 200 . . . 5 47 . 60.07759 341.7302 -3585.1079 1691.5613 1184.444 200 6 47 67.75715 336.}i5o5 -3372.~05 1835.1378 1284.9773 200 7 47 74.04912 332.02515 -3207,9?42 _2096.607 1468.0601 200 8 47 76.681645. 330.26865 -3140.1664 2107.785_4 1475.8873 200 ' 9 47 . 81.966005 326.88215 -3015.0401 2056.8605 1440.2292 .. 200 .. -. 10. 47 92.17405 320.5215 -2784.3522 • 2276.1413 1593.7713 200 11 47 , 102.38208 314.50295 . -2575.0139 2476.0861 1733.7741 200 12 47 112.59015 '. 308.81205. -2~8fi,145 2658.1533 1861.259 200 -· 13 47 122.7982 · 303.43585 -2216.9642 2822.8356 1976.5708 _200 14 47 133.0062 298.3628 ' -2066.5875 2970.0026 2079.6182 200 . _15 47 ' 143.21425 293.5825 -1934.6017 3098.2169 2169.3949 200 16 47 153.4223 ·: 289.0856 ;1820.2278 3205:648 2244.6189 200 17 47 ----- 163.63035 284.86365 -1722.9572 3289.5796 2303.3884 200 18 47 173.8384 280.90895 -1642.4198 3346.8558 2343.4937 200 19 47 184.04645 277.21465 ·:1578.209 .. 3373.4737 i 2362.1317 200 . 20 47 194.2545' 7?3,77455 -1529.7219 3365.7981 2356.7572 200 ·. 21 47 .. 204.4625 470.583 -1496.815 3319.6364 2324.4344 200 .. 2i 47 214.67055 267.6349 ,1479.1724 3231.6536 2262.8282 200 23 47 224.8786 264.9257 -1476.3077 I 3098.9358 2169.8982 200 24 47 234.85625 262.5021 0 2924.4144 2047.697 200 . ... 25 47 244.6036 26Q35035 0 ' 2710.1517 1897.6687 200 . 26 47 254.35095; 258.406_55 . o_ 2453.5397 1717.987 200 27 47 264.09825 256.66825 · b 2156.6861 1510.1279 200 . --~-... _ . 412/13 :scopEJW Anal)Ois 28 147 273.84555 255.1332 ' Cl .1$n,93s3 .127fi.4351 200 ' ' -- 29 .. .47 283.59285 253.'79945 0 .. 14.5_6.4801 101!/:83_83 ·200 -. 30 47 293'340i5 . 252.6654 0 1062:3263 . 743,84$89 ' .200 31 47 303.0875 251.'7296 0 646.13907 -.452.43145 200 ·1 32 47 312.8348~-250.99085 0 ' 2:1.3.27082. 149.33384 200 ' ' · ..... 440 430 420 410 400· o.ldll 390 ES-2660.01 Smithers Avenue 360• Existing Conditions Seismic Condition 0.2 370 April 2, 2013 ByHTW C 0 :.:; "' > Ql [iJ 330 320 300 Distance ' 4/2/13 SLOPEJW Anal)GIS SLOPE/W Analysis Report generated using GeoStudio 2007, version 7. 11. Copyright© 1991·2008 GEO-SLOPE lnte rna tlonal Ltd. ''''! l ,t t' i,1.e ;n.1orrni:i.1on Created By: Henry Wright Revision Number: 10 Last Edited By: Henry Wright Date: 4/2/2013 Time: 9:53:02AM File Name: Smithers Ave Existing Conditions, SeismicCondition.gsz Directory: C:\Users\henry.wright\Documents\SlopeW\2660.01\ Last Solved Date: 4/2/2013 Last Solved Ti me: 9:53:04 AM Project Settings Length(L) Units: feet Time(t) Units: Seconds Force(F) Units: lbf Pressure(p} Units: psf Strength Units: psf Unit Weight of Water: 62.4 pcf View: 2D Analysis Settings SLOPE/W Analysis Kind: SLOPE/W Method: Morgenstern-Price Settings Apply Phreatic Correction: No Side Function lnterslice force function option: Half-Sine PWP Conditions Source: Piezometric Line Use Staged Rapid Drawdown: No SlipSurface Direction of movement: Left to Right Allow Passive Mode: No Slip Surface Option: Entry and Exit Critical slip surfaces saved: 1 Optimize Critical Slip Surface Location: No Tension Crack Tension Crack Option: (none} FOS Distribution FOS Calculation Option: Constant ; 412/13 SLOPE/W Analysis Advanced Number of Slices: 30 Optimization Tolerance: 0.01 Minimum Slip Surface Depth: 0.1 ft Optimization Maximum Iterations: 2000 Optimization Convergence Tolerance: le-007 Starting Optimization Points: 8 Ending Optimization Points: 16 Complete Passes per Insertion: 1 Nlaterlals Dense Native Soil Model: Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight: 125 pcf Cohesion: 200 psf Phi: 35 ° Phi-B: 0 ° Pore Water Pressure Piezometric Line: 1 Slip Surface Entry and Exit Left Projection: Range Left-Zone Left Coordinate: (1.532689, 369.70445) ft Left-Zone Right Coordinate: (360.14795, 250.15967) ft Left-Zone Increment: 4 Right Projection: Point Right Coordinate: (360.15693, 250.1598) ft Right-Zone Increment: 4 Radius Increments: 4 Slip Surface limits Left Coordinate: (0.1023189, 370.06196) ft Right Coordinate: (360.15693, 250.1598) ft Piezon1etric lines r Piezometric Line 1 Coordinates X (~t) y (ft) 0.1378248 299.92062 '' 229.98263 239.93476 .. . ~·-~-· .... -...... " .-. ,,, i 412113 SLOPEN/ Anal)Sis e . " ~ ..J _,e1s1111c .. oa'US Horz Seismic Load: 0.2 . Ignore seismic load in strength: No ·i'ti:-, ,;ti o n s ,_ ,...,~,, . . . ·-··· ·-·--. Material Points Area (ft') Region 1 [)ense_Native $oil 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 · 24331.82 Points X (ft) y (ft) Point 1 360.15693 239.90718 Point 2, 360.15693 250.1598 Point 3 320.34257 249.56173 Point4 76.861983 350.99278 Point 5 71.583836 352.19544 Point 6 0.1023189 370.06196 Point 7 0.1681653 239.98345 Critical Slip Surfaces Number FOS Center (ft) Radius (ft) Entry (ft) Exit (ft) 1 2 1.323, {325. 704, 744.497) 495.536 (1.53269, 369.704) (360.157, 250.16) . -- Slices of Slip Surface: 2 Slip ' Base Normal-Frictional Cohesive X (ft) y (ft) PWP (psf) Surface St{ess. (psf) Strength (psf) Strength (psf) 1 2 7.3702845 , 364.8101 -4166.921 209.65876 146.80464 200 2 2 19.045475 · 355.31605 -3764.5686 769.:10036 538.52987 200 3 2 ..• 30.720665 346.39085 · -3397.782 1264.1981 .. 885.20107 200 4 ' 2 42.395855 337.9969 -3064.1643 1708.5284 1196.3245 .. 200 5 2 54.07105 330.1019 -2761.6263 . 2113.627 1479.9775 200 6 2 65)46245 322.67785 -2488.5083 2489.602 1743.2381 200 7 2 : z.4_.22291 317.5259 -2305.072 2757.7608 1931.0049 200 ... 8 2 82.751235 3)_2.6582 -2140.2008 2928.2362 2050.3731 200 '9 2 94.529745 30§.2384 -1931.4109 3098.2924 2169.4477 . ,.200 10 2 106.30825 300.22365' -174?,~622 3258.4932 2281.6215 200 11 2 118.08675 294.59765. -1588. 7063. 3410,5267 238J! .. 0765 200 12 2 .. 129.86_~25 289.3459 -1452.8323 3554.5999 2488.9577 200 . .. ·---. 13 2 141.6438 284.45565_ , -1339.4807 3689.4246 2583.3629 200 ... 14 2 153:42235 279:9155 -1248.Q199 3811.6428 2668.941 200 15 ',I 2 165.20085: 275.7152 -1177.'6934 3916._1397 2742.U.06 200 16 2 176.97935 · 271.8457 -1128.0506 3995.9183 2797.9721 200 ' ' .. - -' 412/13 SLOPENI Analiois ·' 17 2 188-75785 268.29895 -1098.5729 4041.9716 2830.219 200 ... .. 18 2 200.5~635 265,06775 -1088.7754 4044.3396 2831.8771 200 19 2 21.2,, 31485 262 .. 1458 -1098.2199 3992.2047 2795.3718 200 i 20 2 224.09335 259.5275 -1126.6999 3875.2694 2713.4929 200 -21 2 235.6301 257.2496 0 .. '3689.8515 2583.6619 200 _22 2 246.9251 255.29615 0 3433.8504 2404.4079 200 23 2 258.2201 253.6103 0 3102.2996 2172.2536 200 ,. 24 2 269.5151 252.18935 0 --'•. - 2696.6166 1888.1912 200 ' . 25 2 280.8101 251.031 .... ' 0 2221.9891 1555 .. 8535 200 26 2 292.1051 250.1334 0 1687.211 · 1181,3979 200 2_7 __ .. 2 303.4001 249.4951 0 1103.7947 772.8854 200 28 1 2 314.6951 249.1151 0 484.90942 " 339:53723 200 29 2 326.9783 249.0067 I 0 165.6934 116.01977 200 ' 30 2 ' 340.24975 249.2187 0 134.87051 94.437346 200 31 2 353.5212 249.7867 0 58.895972 41.239404 200 . .. . ...... . 440, 430 420 410 400, 3901 380' 370 360 C 350 0 ~ 340 > Q) iii 330 320 310 300, 290 280 1 270 260 250 250 PSF Surcharge 20 Foot Structure Setback from Top of Natural Slope -L... · · /Rockery Distance ES-2660.01 Smithers Avenue Seismic Condition 0.2 April 2, 2013 ByHTW 412113 SLOPE/W Analysis Report generated using GeoStudio 2007, version 7 .11. Copyright© 1991-2008 GEO-SLOPE lnternationa I Ltd. flle lnfol'mation Created By: Henry Wright Revision Number: 11 Last Edited By: Henry Wright Date: 4/2/2013 Time: 9:S0:32AM File Name: Smithers Ave 3 Foot Rockery, 2 to 1 Slope Seismic Condition.gsz Directory: C:\Users\henry.wright\Documents\SlopeW\2660.01\ Last Solved Date: 4/2/2013 Last Solved Ti me: 9:50:34 AM Project Settings Length(L) Units: feet Time(t) Units: Seconds Force(F) Units: ibf Pressure(p) Units: psf Strength Units: psf Unit Weight of Water: 62.4 pcf View: 2D Analysis Settings SLOPE/W Analysis Kind: SLOPE/W Method: Morgenstern-Price Settings Apply Phreatic Correction: No Side Function lnterslice force function option: Half-Sine PWP Conditions Source: Piezometric Line Use Staged Rapid Drawdown: No SI i pSu rface Direction of movement: Left to Right Allow Passive Mode: No Slip Surface Option: Entry and Exit Critical slip surfaces saved: 1 Optimize Critical Slip Surface Location: No Tension Crack Tension Crack Option: (none) FOS Distribution FOS Calculation Option: Constant ..... -.-·, '· ... •'• .............. ,.;,_, 412/13 SLOPE,W Anal)<liS Advanced Number of Slices: 30 Optimization Tolerance: 0.01 Minimum Slip Surface Depth: 0.1 ft Optimization Maximum Iterations: 2000 Optimization Convergence Tolerance: le-007 Starting Optimization Points: 8 Ending Optimization Points: 16 Complete Passes per Insertion: 1 i'vlaterials Dense Native Soll Model: Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight: 125 pcf Cohesion: 200 psf Phi: 35 • Phi-B: 0 • Pore Water Pressure Piezometric Line: 1 Select Fill Soil Model: Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight: 130 pcf · Cohesion: O psf Phi: 32 • Phi-B: 0 • Rockery Model: Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight: 140 pcf Cohesion: O psf Phi: 40° Phi-B: 0 • Slip Surface Entry and Exit Left Projection: Range Left-Zone Left Coordinate: (1.75904, 373.98196) ft Left-Zone Right Coordinate: (70.0334, 355.82029) ft Left-Zone Increment: 4 Right Projection: Range Right-Zone Left Coordinate: (199.82186, 300.29886) ft Right-Zone Right Coordinate: (360.15693, 250.1598) ft Right-Zone Increment: 4 Radius Increments: 4 . ! 412113 Slip Surface Limits Left Coordinate: (0.1023189, 370.06196) ft Right Coordinate: (360.15693, 250.1598) ft Fi€2ometrir; Linsc 1 u)ordinates X (ft) . y (ft) 0.1378248 299.92062 229.98263 239.93476 d Surcharge loads Surcharge Load 1 1. I· Surcharge (Unit Weight): 250 pcf Direction: Vertical Coordinates X (ft) y (ft) 0.9875556 375.19653 33.881393. 375.1053 56.237811 363.67271 ,. ,,, Seismic Loads Herz Seismic Load: 0.2 Ignore seismic load in strength: No Regions Material Points SLOPE/W Analy5is . ··· · Area (ft2 ) , Region 1 Dense Native Soil 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9 ~ 24470.172 Region 2 . Rockery 5,4,10,11,6 20.631255 Region 3 Select Fill Soil 6, 11, 12, 13, 8, 7 5.48.2873 Points X (ft) y (ft) Point 1 360.15693 239.9Q718 Point 2 360.15693 25Q.1598 Point 3 320.34257 249.56173 .. - 412113 SLOPE/W Analy,;is P_oint 4 76.861983 352.06283 ' Points· 76.861983 350.99278. Point 6 71.791243 1 351.01674 ' Poi_nt 7 43.05417 360:0836 i Point 8 Q.1023189 · 3?0.06196 · Point 9 0.1681653 ·' 239.98345 Point 10 ' '76.501308 355.15984 Point 11 71.59693f 355.04006. Point 12 33.684832 373i95884 I Point 1.3 0.1598139. 373.98312 Critical Slip Surfaces Numbe.r FOS Cent~r.(ft) Radius (ft) Entry (ft) Exit (ft) 1 47 1.229 (344.793,J_37.405) . 487.488 . (19.8962, 373.969) . (317.709, 250.671) •••rt"• .•. Slices of Slip Surface: 47 . --" - Slip X (ft) y (ft) PWP (psf) Base Normal Frictional Cohesive Surface ! Stress (psf) Strength ( psf) Strength ( psf) f 47 26.79053 368.0333 0 707.67939 442.20716 ·o 2 47 33.78311 362.0164 -44.22.5686; 1099.2761 769.72139 200 3 47 38.46778 358.22975 -4262.6735 . • .1203.0057 842.35368 200 4 47 49.64599 349.50885 -3900.5536. 1406.8481 985.08563 200 5 4~ 60.07759 341.7302 . -3585.1079 1414.9544 990)6177 . ' ' 200 ! 6 47 67,75.715 336.31505, -3372.205 1531.6029 1072.4399 200 7 47 ' 74.04912 • 332.02515 I -3207.0542 1750.8746 1225.9756 200 8 47 ' 76.681645 330.26865 -3140.1664 1758.4098 1231.2518 200 9 47 81.966005 326.88215 . -3015.0401 ' 1712.0016 . J_198. 7564 ' 200 . 10 47 92.17405 320.5215 -2784.3522 1898.0411 1329.0227 200 ... 11 47 102 .. 38208 314.50295 -2575.0139 2073.1505 1451.6356 200 12 47. ·-·' 11~.59015 308.81205 -2386.145 2240.4078 1568.7504 200 13 47 122.7982 303.43585 -2216.~642 2402.1182 1681.9813 200 14 47 133:0062 . 298.3628 . "2066 .. 5875 • 2558.838 1791.7177 200 15 47 143 .. 21425 .. 293.5825 .. ;1934.6017 2710.1371 .1897.6584 200 16 41 153.4223 289.0856 -1820.2278 2853.8196 199S:266 200 17 47 163.63035 284.86365 · -1722.9572 2986.0044 2090.8228 . 200 .. 18 47 173.8384 280.90895 -1642.4198 3101.268 2171.5313 200 19 47 184.04645 277.21465 -1578.209 3192.393S 2235.3?8 200' 20 47 194.2545 273.77455 ~1529.7219 1 3251.5674 2276.772 200 21' _47 204.4625 27\J.5-83 -1496.815 3269.9145 2289.6188' 200 22 47 214.67055 267.6349 . ~1479,1724 3239:395 2268.2488 200 23 47 224.8786 264.9257 I -1476,3077 3152.9632 2207.7286 200 24 47 234.85625, 262.5021 ' 0 3010.2708' i 2107.8143 200 47 244.6036 . 260.35035 6 2812.7626 ' -·· 1969.5176 200 25 . 26 254.35095 258.40655 0 2559.3913 .. 1792.1051 200 47 .. . . \ 0 I t - .4/2/,13 SLOPE,W Anal)Sis 27 47 264,09825 ·.256.66825 0 2254:0183. 1578.2806 .200 .28 , 47 273,84$55. 255.13~2 0 I 1903,1232 '1332.5812 200 I - ! 29 47 283.59285 253. 7994s I o 15J4.8Q04, 1060 .. 6746 200 -... -··- 30 47 I 293.34015 · 252,6654 I 0 I . 1098'.2371 .768,99388 200 .31 47 ' 303,0875 251.7296 0 662.26878 463.72559 ·200 ' ' .. ,. 32 47 I , 312,83485, 250,99085, :o. ·215"18517 . 150:67428 :zoo . . . ···-... . . . ;-,. ' .. -,,;, ... City of Renton Plani 11ng Division MAY 2 I lU13 ' =-----------------------~ ES-2660 •, PREPARED FOR GEONERCO PROPERTIES, LLC February 25, 2013 Kyle R. Cainpbell, P.E. Principal GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY PROPOSED SMITHERS AVENUE RESIDENTIAL PLAT 47XX SMITHERS AVENUE SOUTH RENTON, WASHINGTON 98055 ES-2660 Earth Solutions NW, LLC 1805 -136TH Place Northeast, Bellevue, Washington 98005 Ph: 425-284-3300 Fax: 425-449-4711 1-866-336-8710 . ' ) .-----lmnorfanf l·nto~mation About You~ ~ • ~ j Geotechnical Engineering Report ------S1i8suriace pro5ie11Ts are a pr111c11iilcause of consriuciwn delays, cost overruiisicli11rns, and disputes ·-· The /ollowmo mlmma/10111s p1ov1decl to help you manage your nsks ' ' . , ~ . - Geotechnlcal Services lire Performed lor Speclllc Purposes, Persons, and Projects Geotechnical engineers structure their services to meet the specific needs of their clients. A geotechnical engineering study conducted for a civil engi- neer may not fulfill the needs of a construction contractor or even another civil engineer. Because each geotechnical engineering study is unique, each geotechnical engineering report is unique, prepared sole/yfor the client. No one except you should rely on your geotechnical engineering report without first conferring with the geotechnical engineer who prepared it. And no one -not even you-should apply the report for any purpose or project except the one originally contemplated. Read the Full Report Serious problems have occurred because those relying on a geotechnical engineering report did not read It all. Do not rely on an executive summary. Do not read selected elements only. i Geotechnical Engineering 8811111'1 ls Based on i Bnlque Set otProJect~speclffc Factors Geotechnical engineers consider a number of unique, project-specific fac- tors when establishing the scope of a study. Typical factors include: the client's goals, objectives, and risk management preferences; the general nature of the structure Involved, its size, and configuration; the location of the structure on the site; and other planned or existing site improvements, such as access roads, parking lots, and underground utilities. Unless the geotechnical engineer who conducted the study specifically indicates oth- erwise, do not rely on a geotechnical engineering report that was: • not prepared for you, • not prepared for your project, • not prepared for the specific site explored, or • completed before important project changes were made. Typical changes that can erode the reliabilily of an existing geotechnical engineering report include those that affect: • the function of the proposed structure, as when it's changed from a parking garage to an ottice building, or from a light industrial plant to a retrigerated warehouse, • elevation, configuration, location, orientation, or weight of the proposed structure, • composition of lhe design team, or • project ownership. As a general rule, always inform your geotechnical engineer of project changes-even minor ones-and request an assessment of !heir impact. Geatechnical engineers cannot accept 11/Sponsibi/ity or liability for problems that occur because their reports do not consider developments of which they were not intonned. SUbsurlace Conditions Can Change A geotechnical engineering report is based on conditions that existed at the time the study was pertormed. Do not rely on a geotechnical engineer- ing reportwhose adequacy may have been affected by: the passage of time; by man-made events, such as construction on or adjacent to the stte; or by natural events, such as floods, earthquakes, or groundwater fluctua- tions. Always contact the geotechnical engineer before applying the report to determine if it is still reliable. A minor amount of additional testing or analysis could prevent major problems. • Most Geotechnlcal Findings Are Prolessional Opinions Site exploration identifies subsurtace conditions only at those points where subsurtace tests are conducted or samples are taken. Geotechnical engi- neers review field and laboratory data and then apply their professional judgment to render an opinion about subsurtace conditions throughout the site. Actual subsurtace conditions may differ-sometimes signilicantly- trom those indicated in your report. Retaining lhe geotechnical engineer who developed your report to provide construction observation is the most effective method of managing the risks associated with unanticipated conditions. A Report's Recommendations Are Nat Rnal Do not overrely on the construction recommendations included in your report. Those recommendations are not final, because geotechnical engi- neers develop them principally from judgment and opinion. Geotechnical engineers can finalize their recommendations only by observing actual ) subsurtace ccnditions revealed during ccnstruction. The geotechnicaf engineer who developed your report cannot assume responsibility or tiabllity tor the report's recommendations if that e{rJineer does not perform construction observation. ll Geotechnlcal Engineering Report Is Subject to Misinterpretation Other design team members' misinterpretation of geotechnical engineering reports has resulted in ccsUy problems. Lower that risk by having your geo- technical engineer center with appropriate members of the design team after submitting the report. Also relain your geotechnical engineer to review perti- nent elements of the design team's plans and specifications. Contractors can also misinterpret a geotechnical engineering report. Reduce that risk by having your geotechnical engineer participate in prebid and preconstructiiln conferences, and by providing ccnstruction observation. Do Not Redraw the Engineer's Logs Geotechnical engineers prepare final boring and testing fogs based upon their interpretation of field logs and laboratory data. To prevent errors or omissions, the logs included in a geotechnical engineering report should neverbe redrawn for inclusion in architectural or other design drawings. Only photographic or electronic reproduction is acceptable, but recognize that separating togs from the report can elevate risk. Give Contractors a Complete Report and Guidance Some owners and design professionals mistakenly believe they can make contractors liable for unanticipated subsurtace conditions by limiting what they provide for bid preparation. To help prevent costly problems, give con- tractors the complete geotechnical engineering report, but preface it with a clearly written letter of transmittal. fn that letter, advise contractors that the report was not prepared for purposes of bid development and that the report's accuracy is limited; erx:ourage them to confer with the geotechnical engineer who prepared the report (a modest fee may be required) and/or to ccnduct additional study to obtain the specific types of information they need or prefer. A prebid conference can also be valuable. Be sure contrac- tors have sufficient time to pertorm additional study. Only then might you be in a position to give ccntractors the best Information available to you, while requiring them to at least share some of the financial responsibilities stemming trom unanticipated conditions. Read ResponsiblHty Provisions Closely Some clients, design prolessionals, and contractors do not recognize that geotechnical engineering is far less exact than other engineering disci- plines. This lack of understanding has created unrealistic expectations that have led to disappointments, claims, and disputes. To help reduce the risk of such outcomes, geotechnical engineers commonly include a variety of explanatory provisions in their reports. Sometimes labeled "limitations" many of these provisions Indicate where geotechnical engineers' responsi- bilities begin and end, to help others recognize their own responsibilities and risks. Read these provisions closely. Ask questions. Your geotechnical engineer should respond fully and frankly. GeoenvirDnmental Concerns Are Not Covered The equipment. techniques, and personnel used to pertorm a geoenviron- mentatstudy differ significantly from those used to pertorm a geotechnicaf study. For that reason, a geotechnical engineering report does not usually relate any geoenvironmental findings, conclusions, or recommendations: e.g., about the likelihood of encountering underground storage tanks or regulated contaminants. Unanticipated environmental problems have fed to numerous project failures. If you have not yet obtained your own geoen- vironmental information, ask your geotechnical consultant for risk man- agement guidance. Do not rely on an environmental report prepared tor someone else. Obtain Professional Assistance To Dean With Mold Diverse strategies can be applied during building design, construction, operation, and maintenance to prevent significant amounts of mold from growing on indoor surtaces. To be effective, all such strategies should be devised for the express purpose of mold prevention, integrated into a com- prehensive plan, and executed with diligent oversight by a professional mold prevention consultant. Because Just a small amount of water or moisture can lead IQ the development of severe mold infestations, a num- ber of mold prevention strategies focus on keeping building surtaces dry. While groundwater. water infiltration, and similar issues may have been addressed as part of the geotechnical engineering study whose findings are conveyed in-this report, the geotechnical engineer in charge of this project is not a mold prevention consultant none of the services per- formed In connection with the geotechnical engineer's study wsre designed or conducted for the purpose of mold preven- tion. Proper implementation of the recommendations conveyed in this report will not of itself be sufficient to prevent mold tram 11rowln11 In or on the structure Involved. · Rely, on Your ASFE-Member Geotechnclal · Engineer lor Addltlonal Assistance Membership in ASFE/The Best People on Earth exposes geotechnical engineers to a wide array of risk management techniques that can be of genuine benefit tor everyone involved with a construction project Confer with you ASFE-member geotechnical engineer for more Information. .ASFE TU' Desi hHh aa llflll 8811 Colesville Road/Suite G106, Silver Spring, MD 20910 Telephone: 301/565-2733 Facsimile: 301/589-2017 e-mail: info@aste.org www.asfe.org Copyright 2004 by ASFE, Inc. Dupficarion, reproduction, or copying otthls documeftt, in whole or In part, by any means whatsoever. is strictly prohfbltBd, except with ASFE's speclffc wrltt8n permission. Excerpting, quotina, or otherwise extracting wordina from this document is permitted only with the exprass wrmen permission of ASFE, and only for purposes of scholarly research or book revfBw. Only members of ASFE may use this document as a complement to or as an element of a aeorachnfcaf enginetrlnQ report. Any other firm, Individual, or other entity that so usBS this document without being all ASFE member could b& commftting negligent or irrtsntionaf (fraudulent) misrspresentation. IIGER06045.0M February 25, 2013 ES-2660 Geonerco Proeerties, LLC 1441 North 34 h Street, #200 Seattle, Washington 98103 Attention: Mr. Jamie Waltier Dear Mr. Waltier: Earth Solutions NW LLC • Geotf!c:hnic.al Engineering • Construction Monitoring • Environmental Sciences Earth Solutions NW, LLC (ESNW) is pleased to present this report titled "Geotechnical Engineering Study, Proposed Smithers Ave Residential Plat, 47XX Smithers Avenue South, Renton, Washington 98055". This study has been prepared to address the feasibility of the proposed development from a geotechnical standpoint. The proposed 19 residential lot development is bordered to the west by a steep slope. Based on the conditions observed during our fieldwork, the subject site is underlain primarily by native soils consisting of medium dense to very dense glacial till. Groundwater seepage was observed in one test pit at a depth of six to nine feet. Based on the results of our study, the proposed development is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint. The residential buildings and associated structures can be supported on a conventional foundation system bearing on competent native soil or structural fill. Where loose or unsuitable soil conditions are exposed at foundation subgrade elevations, compaction of the soils to the specifications of structural fill, or overexcavation and replacement with structural fill, may be necessary. This report provides recommendations for critical areas assessment, foundation design, structural fill recommendations, and other geotechnical recommendations. The opportunity to be of service to you is appreciated. If you have any questions regarding the content of this geotechnical engineering study, please call. Sincerely, EARTH SOLUTIONS NW, LLC ~-=1··~/1~ ;~ry T. ~ght, EIT Staff Engineer 1805 -136th Place N.E., Suilc 201 • Bellevue, WA 98005 • (425) 449-4704 • FAX (425) 449-4711 TABLE OF CONTENTS ES-2660 PAGE INTRODUCTION ....................................................... , ........... , ..... ;;. 1 General ........................ :; .................... · ............ ,.......... ...... 1 Project Description ....... • ................. : ................... , ..... , .... ,.. . 2 Surface ............................... , .. ·., ....... , .... ,.: ........ · ........ ·.· .. ·,,.,..... 2 Slope Reconnaissance,, ........................................................ 2 Subsurface ......................................... ··'·''"•··"''·'·, .. ,, ..... :·..... 3 Groundwater, .. · ..... , .............. ,,., .... , ... ,,................................. 3 CRITICAL AREAS AND GEOLOGIC HAZARDOUS AREAS ASSESSMENT ........... ·.: ........................ , ....... , ... , ........ , ................... 3 Site and Construction Plans .. , ............ , .. , ............. ,., ...... , .... ,., ........ ,, 3 Landslide Hazard ................................... ,.,.......................... 4 Steep Slopes ................................................................... ,.... 4 Erosion Hazard ........................................... , ... .-,,., ..... , .... ,·....... 4 Analysis of Proposal..................................................................... 5 Critical Areas Functions and Values ............... · ....... ,,." 5 Minimum CriticalArea Buffer and Setback ...... ,.;; .. :;,:.: ... ,........... 5 DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............ , ....... ,. .......... :, .. ,.,. 6 General ............................................ ,., .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. . .. .. . ... 6 Site Preparation and Earthwork .................... , .. ,., ................ , ... 6 Erosion Control ................................ ,,.,., ............... ,.............. 6 In-Situ Soils .................................................... , .... , .......... ,,··,.··· 6 Structural Fill ................................................ , ................. .;...... 7 ,Foundations ................................................................... ,... 7 Seismic Considerations ............................ ., ......... ·, ........ , ....... , ... 8 Slab-on-Grade Floors.......................................................... 8 Retaining Walls ................................... ,, .. , ................ ,., .. , ....... 8 Drainage ............................................... , ...... , ...................... 9 Preliminary Infiltration Evaluation ......................... , ....... 9 Utility Trench Backfill ............................. , .............. ,., ...... '"... 9 Pavement Sections ............................... ,............................. 10 LIMITATIONS ......................................... ,., .......... , ........ , .. , ...•.. ,, ... 10 Additional Services ... , ............. , .. , .........•. : ........................ , .. 10 Earth Solutions NW. LLC GRAPHICS PLATE1 PLATE2 PLATE3 PLATE4 APPENDICES Appendix A Appendix B TABLE OF CONTENTS Continued ES-2660 VICINITY MAP TEST PIT LOCATION PLAN RETAINING WALL DRAINAGE DETAIL FOOTING DRAIN DETAIL Subsurface Exploratloil Test Pit Logs Laboratory Test Results Sieve Analysis Results Eaiih Solulli:ins NW, LLC. General ) GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY PROPOSED SMITHERS AVE RESIDENTIAL PLAT 47XX SMITHERS AVENUE SOUTH RENTON, WASHINGTON 98055 ES-2660 INTRODUCTION This geotechnical engineering study was prepared for the proposed 19 lot residential development on Smithers Avenue South, south of South 4ih Street in Renton, Washington. The purpose of this study was to prepare geotechnical recommendations for the proposed development. To complete the scope of services detailed in our proposal PES-2660 dated January 16, 2013, we performed the following: · o Subsurface exploration and characterization of soil and groundwater conditions by way of test pits excavated on the accessible areas of the site; • Laboratory testing of soil samples obtained during field exploration; o Engineering analyses, and; • Preparation of this report. The following documents and/or resources were reviewed as part of our report preparation; o Geologic Map of the Renton Quadrangle; • Preliminary Site Plans Provided by the Client; o The King County online GIS property research database; o The City of Renton online GIS property research database, and; o City of Renton Critical Areas Regulations (4-3-050J). Earth SolutJons NW, LLC Geonerco Properties, LLC February 25, 2013 Project Description ES-2660 Page2 Based on the plans provided to us, the site will be developed with 19 single family residential lots with associated roadways and stormwater facilities. Based on the City of Renton GIS data, sensitive slopes are located at the south and west portions of the site, with a protected slope at the west portion of the site. Grading activities will include cuts and fills to establish the planned building lots and access roadway alignments. Site improvements will also include underground utility installations and construction of stormwater detention facilities. Based on the preliminary site plans provided to us, we estimate cuts and fills to establish finish grades throughout the site will be on the order of two to eight feet on average. Engineered rockeries or modular block walls may also be utilized as part of the overall grading plan. A storm detention vault facility is planned to be constructed at the south end of Smithers Avenue South as part of the proposed development. The proposed residential structures will consist of relatively lightly loaded wood framing supported on conventional foundations. Based on our experience with similar developments, we estimate wall loads on the order of 2 kips per linear foot and slab-on-grade loading of 150 pounds per square foot (psf). If the above design assumptions are incorrect or change, ESNW should be contacted to review the recommendations in this report. ESNW should review the final design to verify that our geotechnical recommendations have been incorporated into the plans. Surface The subject site is located south of South 47'h Street on Smithers Avenue South in Renton, Washington, as illustrated on the Vicinity Map (Plate 1). The site is approximately square in shape and consists of mostly undeveloped wooded land, with a paved temporary cul-de-sac at the north end of the site. A wetland tract is mapped at the east and southeast portions of the site. The topography of the site is slightly undulating with an overall ascending slope to the east, with a steep descending slope at the west side of the site. The Test Pit Location Plan (Plate 2) illustrates the approximate limits of the property and approximate existing topography. Slope Reconnaissance During our fieldwork, we performed a visual slope reconnaissance across portions of the steep slope areas of the site. The main focus of our reconnaissance was to identify signs of instability or erosion hazards along the site slopes. The typical instability indicators include such features as; head scarps, tension cracks, hummocky terrain, groundwater seeps along the surface and erosion features such as gulleys and rills. During the slope reconnaissance, no signs of recent, large scale erosion or slope instability were observed. In general, based on the slope reconnaissance, stability of the slope areas of the property can be characterized as good. Earth Solutions ~. LLC Geonerco Properties, LLC February 25, 2013 Subsurface ES-2660 Page3 As part of the subsurface exploration, eight test pits were excavated on accessible portions of the site for purpose of assessing the soil conditions. Please refer to the test pit logs provided in Appendix A for a more detailed description of the subsurface conditions. Topsoil was encountered to an average approximate depth of two to four inches. Underlying the topsoil, medium dense brown silty sand with gravel was observed, transitioning to a dense to very dense brown and/or gray silty sand with gravel at an average depth of two to six feet. The referenced geologic map of the area identifies glacial till (Qgt) across the east portion of the site with recessional stratified drift kame terrace deposits (Qi!) of sand and gravel to the east side of the property and possible undifferentiated deposits (Qu) to the north of the site. The soil conditions observed at our test sites generally correlate with glacial till (Qgt). Soil terraces were observed down the steep slope at the west side of the site which may correlate to the recessional stratified drift kame terrace deposits, however, the proposed development will not extend to those locations. Grouildwater Groundwater seepage was encountered during our fieldwork at the test pit at the northeast portion of the site (TP-1). The seepage was observed at six to nine feet and likely represents perched groundwater. The presence of groundwater seepage should be expected in deeper site excavations such as deeper foundation and utility trench excavations. Groundwater seepage rates and elevations fluctuate depending on many factors, including precipitation duration and intensity, the time of year, and soil conditions. In general, groundwater elevations and flow rates are higher during the wetter, winter months. CRITICAL AREAS AND GEOLOGIC HAZARDOUS AREAS.ASSESSMENT As part of this geotechnical engineering study and critical areas report, the City of Renton Critical Areas Regulations (4-3-050J) were reviewed. Per the City of Renton Critical Areas Regulations requirements, the following topics related to development plans and site conditions are addressed. Site and Construction Plans The attached Test Pit Location Plan (Plate 2) illustrates the proposed building footprint area and local site topography. Construction of a 19 residential lot development and associated improvements is planned. The building pad elevations will vary according to existing grades. We anticipate the maximum cuts for the proposed development will be on the order of six to eight feet, or to the extent required to maintain the minimum allowable setback from the top of the slope. The overall stability of the steep slope areas can be characterized as good. Earth Solutions NW, LLC • Geonerco Properties, LLC February 25, 2013 Landslide Hazard ES-2660 Page4 With respect to landslide hazard areas, Part 4-3-050J-1b of the City of Renton Critical Areas Regulations defines landslide hazard areas as the following: • Low Landslide Hazard: Areas with slopes less than 15 percent. • Medium Landslide Hazard: Areas with slopes between 15 percent and 40 percent and underlain by soils that consist largely of sand, gravel or glacial till. • High Landslide Hazards: Areas with slopes greater than 40 percent and areas with slopes between 15 percent and 40 percent and underlain by soils consisting largely of silt and clay. • Very High Landslide Hazards: Areas of known mappable landslide deposits. The natural slope at the west portion of the site exhibits high landslide hazard characteristics, as demonstrated by the City of Renton GIS data, based on a greater than 40% slope condition. However, it is generally underlain by glacial till, and the overall stability of the slope can be characterized as good. As previously described in the Slope Reconnaissance section of this study, typical indicators of instability such as head scarps, tension cracks, hummocky terrain, groundwater seeps along the surface and erosion features such as gulleys and rills were not observed. Steep Slopes With respect to steep slope critical areas, the referenced section of the Renton Code defines steep slopes as follows: • Sensitive Slopes: Areas with slopes between 25 percent and 40 percent. o Protected Slopes: Areas with slopes greater than 40 percent. Based on our observations and review of the referenced topographic survey, sensitive slopes are present along the western and southern portions of the property, and protected slopes are present along the western portion of the property. The overall stability of the slope areas can be characterized as good. Erosion Hazard With respect to erosion hazard areas, the referenced section of the Renton Code defines erosion hazards as follows: Earth Solutions NW, LLC Geonerco Properties, LLC February 25, 2013 ES-2660 Page 5 o Low Erosion Hazard: Areas with soils characterized by the Natural Resource Conservation Service as having slight or moderate erosion potential, and that slope less than 15 percent. o High Erosion Hazard: Areas with soils characterized by the Natural Resource Conservation Service as having severe or very severe erosion potential, and that slope more steeply than 15 percent. The sloped areas along the western margins of the site would be severely susceptible to erosion, in our opinion. However, the sloped areas of the property will remain largely unaltered and vegetated. In our opinion, the planned development will not increase the erosion hazard at the site, provided appropriate Best Management Practices are implemented during the earthwork and development activities. General guidelines for erosion control are provided in the Site Preparation and Earthwork section of this study. Analysis of Proposal The planned development activity will involve grading and construction of a 19 residential lot development with associated improvements adjacent to the steep slope area to the west. The proposed development activity will include 9 single family residences to be located near the top of steep slope areas located along the western portion of the property. As previously described, the slopes exhibit good stability, and the planned development activity will not involve alterations to the areas of 40 percent slope. The proposed development activity is feasible in our opinion, and will not decrease stability of the site or surrounding properties. The project designs must comply with the City of Renton Critical Areas Regulations. Critical Areas Functions and Values The geologic hazard critical areas associated with the subject property include potential landslide, steep slopes and potential erosion. In our opinion, the impacts to the function and value of the geologic hazard critical areas will be minimal. The scale of the project relative to the critical area is such that negative impacts to the function and value of the landslide and steep slope area will be negligible, in our opinion . . Minimum Critical Area Buffer and Setback In our opinion, the proposed grading and development activity can be completed as currently planned without adversely impacting the slope area. Sections 4-3-050J5 and 4-3-050J6 specify the requirements for development on sites which contain protected and sensitive slopes. The code requires erosion control measures, slope stabilization, and buffer zones. The proposed nine residential structures to be located adjacent to the steep slope area will be setback at least 20 feet from the top of the slope. Given the overall stable characteristics of the slope area, it is our opinion that the proposed 20 foot setback of the residential structures is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint. Earth Solutions NW, LLC Geonerco Properties, LLC February 25, 2013 DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS General ES-2660 Page6 Based on the results of our study, in our opinion, construction of the proposed residential development at the subject site is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint. The primary geotechnical considerations ,associated with the proposed development include the steep slope buffer, foundation support, structural fill placement, and the suitability of the on-site soils for use as structural fill. The proposed structures can be supported on conventional spread and continuous foundations bearing on undisturbed competent native soil or structural fill. Where loose, organic or other unsuitable materials are encountered at or below the footing subgrade elevation, the material should be removed and replaced with structural fill or crushed rock, as necessary. This study has been prepared for the exclusive use of Geonerco Properties, LLC and their representatives. No warranty, expressed or implied, is made. This study has been prepared in a manner consistent with the level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by other members of the profession currently practicing under similar conditions in this area. Site Preparation and Earthwork Given the existing grades, grading for the new development will be moderate. Cuts and fills of up to eight feet are anticipated. Once the existing vegetation and topsoil has been cleared, grading operations can commence. Where possible the existing asphalt can be left in place to act as a working surface. Erosion Control Temporary construction entrances and drive lanes, consisting of at least one foot of quarry spalls can be considered in order to minimize off-site soil tracking and to provide a temporary road surface. Temporary slopes and stockpiles should be covered when not in use. Surface water should not be allowed to flow down the face of any natural or cut slope, nor should water be allowed to pond near the top of any slope. Proper care and measures should be taken to ensure that development does not adversely affect the natural slope areas. Erosion control measures should conform to the Washington State Department of Ecology (DOE) and city of Renton standards. In-Situ Soils From a geotechnical standpoint, the soils encountered at the test pit locations are generally suitable for use as structural fill. However, successful use of the on-site soils will largely be dictated by the moisture content of the soils at the time of placement and compaction. The site soils were generally in a moist condition at the time of the exploration (February 2013). Soils encountered during site excavations that are excessively over the optimum moisture content will require moisture conditioning prior to placement and compaction. Earth Solutions NW. LLC Geonerco Properties, LLC February 25, 2013 ES-2660 Page? Based on the conditions encountered during our fieldwork, the site soils have a moderate to high sensitivity to moisture. During periods of dry weather, the on-site soils should generally be suitable for use as structural fill, provided the moisture content is at or near the optimum level at the time of placement. Successful placement and compaction of the on-site soils during periods of extended precipitation will be difficult. If the on-site soils cannot be successfully compacted, the use of an imported soil may be necessary. Imported soil intended for use as structural fill should consist of a well graded granular soil with a moisture content that is at or near the optimum level. During wet weather conditions, imported soil intended for use as structural fill should consist of a well graded granular soil with a fines content of five percent or less defined as the percent passing the #200 sieve, based on the minus three-quarter inch fraction. Structural Fill Structural fill is defined as compacted soil placed in foundation, slab-on-grade, and roadway areas. Fills placed to construct permanent slopes and throughout retaining wall and utility trench backfill areas are also considered structural fill. Soils placed in structural areas should be placed in loose lifts of 12 inches or less and compacted to a relative compaction of 95 percent, based on the laboratory maximum dry density determined in accordance with the Modified Proctor Method (ASTM D-1557). Foundations Based on the results of our study, the proposed buildings can be supported on conventional spread and continuous footings bearing on competent native soil or structural fill. Where loose or unsuitable soil conditions are observed at foundation subgrade elevations, compaction of the soils to the specifications of structural fill, or overexcavation and replacement with granular structural fill or crushed rock may be necessary. Provided the building will be supported as described above, the following parameters can be used for design of the new foundations: o Allowable soil bearing capacity o Passive earth pressure o Coefficient of friction 3,000 psf 300 pcf (equivalent fluid) 0.40 A one-third increase in the allowable soil bearing capacity can assumed for short-term wind and seismic loading conditions. With structural loading as expected, total settlement in the range of one inch is anticipated, with differential settlement of about one-half inch. The majority of the settlements should occur during construction, as dead loads are applied. Earth Solutions NW, LLC Geonerco Properties, LLC February 25, 2013 Seismic'Considerations ES-2660 Page8 The 2006 International Building Code (IBC) specifies several soil profiles that are used as a basis for seismic design of structures. Based on the soil conditions observed at the site, Site Class C from Table 1613.5.2 should be used for design. In our opinion, the site is not susceptible to liquefaction. The soil relative density and the lack of an established shallow groundwater table is the primary basis for this opinion. Slab-On-Grade Floors Slab-on-grade floors should be supported on a firm and unyielding subgrade consisting of competent native soil or at least 12 inches of structural fill. Unstable or yielding areas of the subgrade should be recompacted or overexcavated and replaced with suitable structural fill prior to construction of the slab. A capillary break consisting of a minimum of four inches of free draining crushed rock or gravel should be placed below the slab. The free draining material should have a fines content of five percent or less (percent passing the #200 sieve, based on the minus three-quarters inch fraction). In areas where slab moisture is undesirable, installation of a vapor barrier below the slab should be considered. If used, the vapor barrier should consist of a material specifically designed to function as a vapor barrier and should be installed in accordance with the manufacturers specifications. Retaining Walls If retaining walls will be utilized, they should be designed to resist earth pressures and applicable surcharge loads. For design, the following parameters can be used for retaining wall design: o Active earth pressure (yielding condition) o At-rest earth pressure (restrained condition) o Traffic surcharge (passenger vehicles) o Passive earth pressure o Coefficient of friction 35 pcf 55 pcf 70 psf (rectangular distribution) 300 pcf 0.40 Drainage should be provided behind retaining walls such that hydrostatic pressures do not develop. If drainage is not provided, hydrostatic pressures should be included in the wall design. Retaining walls should be backfilled with free draining material that extends along the height of the wall, and a distance of at least 18 inches behind the wall. The upper one foot of the wall backfill can consist of a less permeable (surface seal) soil, if desired. A perforated drain pipe should be placed along the base of the wall, and should be connected to an approved discharge location. A typical retaining wall drainage detail is provided on Plate 3 of this report. Earth Solutions NW, LLC Geonerco Properties, LLC February 25, 2013 Drainage ) ES-2660 Page 9 Groundwater seepage was observed at one test pit location at a depth of six to nine feet below grade during our fieldwork (February 2013). Perched groundwater seepage should be expected in site or utility excavations. Temporary measures to control groundwater seepage and surface water runoff during construction will likely involve interceptor trenches and sumps, as necessary. In our opinion, perimeter footing drains should be installed at or below the invert of the building footings. A typical footing drain detail is provided on Plate 4 of this report. Preliminary Infiltration Evaluation As part of this geotechnical engineering study, the 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM) was reviewed. The City of Renton recognizes an amended version of the 2009 KCSWDM as the governing code. At test pit TP-1, near the proposed residential lots 17, 18 and 19, poorly graded sand was observed to a depth of five feet where an increasing amount of gravel and silt was observed, as detailed in Appendices A and B of this report. In our opinion, for preliminary design purposes, an infiltration rate of four inches per hour may be achievable at these locations. ESNW can perform in-situ infiltration analyses upon request if infiltration will be pursued. Based on the soils observed throughout the remainder of the site, as discussed in the Subsurface section of this report, adequate infiltration will not be achievable. Dispersion methods per section C.2.4 of the KCSWDM may be utilized where slopes less than 15 percent are present. Utility Trench Backfill In our opinion, the soils observed at the test sites are generally suitable for support of utilities. In general, the soils observed at the test pit locations should be suitable for use as structural backfill in the utility trench excavations, provided the soil is at or near the optimum moisture content at the time of placement and compaction. Moisture conditioning of the soils may be necessary at some locations prior to use as structural fill. Utility trench backfill should be placed and compacted to the specifications of structural fill provided in this report, or to the applicable requirements of the city of Renton. Earth Solutions NW, LLC Geonerco Properties, LLC February 25, 2013 Pavement Sections ES-2660 Page 10 The pertormance of site pavements is largely related to the condition of the underlying subgrade. To ensure adequate pavement pertormance, 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 compacted to the specifications detailed in the Site Preparation and Earthwork section of this report. It is possible that soft, wet, or otherwise unsuitable subgrade areas may still exist after base grading activities. Areas containing unsuitable or yielding subgrade conditions may require remedial measures such as overexcavalion and thicker crushed rock or structural fill sections prior to pavement. Cement treatment of the subgrade soil can also be considered for stabilizing pavement subgrade areas. Heavier truck-traffic areas generally require thicker pavement sections depending on site usage, pavement life expectancy, and site traffic. For preliminary design purposes, the following pavement sections for heavy traffic areas can be considered: o Three inches of hot mix asphalt (HMA) placed over six inches of crushed rock base (CRB), or; o Three inches of HMA placed over four and one-half inches of asphalt treated base (ATB). For relatively lightly loaded pavements subjected to automobiles and occasional truck traffic, the following sections can be considered: o Two inches of HMA placed over four inches of CRB, or; o Two inches of HMA placed over three inches of ATB. The HMA, ATB and CRB materials should conform to WSDOT specifications. LIMITATIONS The recommendations and conclusions provided in this geotechnical engineering study are profession.al 6pinioris•9ohsister,J with .the level of care and skill that is typical of other members in ·t~e-profession currently practicing und\;i.'r sinjilar conditions in this area. A warranty is not expressed or implied. Varjaliciris In the soil an_d groundwater conditions observed at the test pit locatie>ns:may,exis!, and may notbecome evident until construction. ESNW should reevaluate the conclusions in this geotechnical engineering study if variations are encountered. Additional Services ESNW should have an opportunity to review the final design with respect to the geotechnical recommendations provided in this report. ESNW should also be retained to provide testing and consultation services during construction. Earth Solutions NW, LLC Reference: King County, Washington Map 686 By The Thomas Guide Rand McNally 32nd Edition NORTH @ NOTE: This plate may contain areas of color. ESNW cannot be responsible for any subsequent misinterpretation of the information resulting from black & white reproductions of this plate. Vicinity Map Smithers Avenue South Development Renton, Washington Drwn. GLS Date 02/15/2013 Proj. No. 2660 Checked HTW Date Feb. 2013 Plate 1 I I I ___ _[_ 0 50 100 200 1"•100'~ LEGEND TP-1-f-Approximate Location of ESNW Test Pit, Proj. No ES-2660, Feb, 2013 r·-·-1 Subject Site 10 Proposed Lot Number Do Existing Building IIOTE:Tho~"1'ti<10-o,tnpi.. .. "°'-fordooig,, Drv,n,By ~.,,._--.bul""Jlol"'l'llllho GLS ::::,i:=:.=i::::.loc= CheckedBy ~=.:::==::.=:.:=~=-',-,",~"lW-"---<11 cr~dlhodalb)'OC.S 02/18/20 13 lol'JTE· Tn11 plate may 0<11,t,in ... of color. ESlffl ""~ a ---..,.~---ollho- ~ him tilacl, ,_,.prodoe1<1noollnl1ploto Pro] No. ""' NOTES: 18" Min. <ll-----1 000000000 o• • Oo .() o n o oO o oO oo.1 00 0 0 o()o ooo O O ooOooO (J 0 0 ° o O o o O o • • • 0 • 0 Qoo 0 0 coo 0 O O O O o 0 Do O O 00000() "oooo 00 (\ O O O oo 0 0 t!l' 0 0 0 0 cc, 0 cooooOOoOo"o 0 0 0 0 Oo oO O O () o o O ,;,Ooooq,og 000°0 o<>oOoc,0° "cfO o 0 0 0 oOoo c,Oo o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 oo 0 o O oO O o O Ci 0 o O 0 o O 0 ('),,o oo o SI; -o O O O O O O O O O u 0 O O O O o 0 O ooQooOo 0 o:oooooon~ o Do o a"' 0 oo O O O O O 0 coo oQooo Qo o 4,oo 0 o 0 Do 0 c,O O O O Oo O O O t9 'bO O B o O Oo"o Q°., o o Free Draining Backfill should consist of soil having less than 5 percent fines. Percent passing #4 should be 25 to 75 percent. Structural Fill o Sheet Drain may be feasible in lieu of Free Draining Backfill, per ESNW recommendations. SCHEMATIC ONLY -NOT TO SCALE NOT A CONSTRUCTION DRAWING o Drain Pipe should consist of perforated, rigid PVC Pipe surrounded with 1" Drain Rock. LEGEND: 0°0 0 o 000 0 Free Draining Structural Backfill . . •,!'•,/'•,/'•,/'• ............ i;~~~~~~~ 1 inch Drain Rock RETAINING WALL DRAINAGE DETAIL Smithers Avenue South Development Renton, Washington Drwn. GLS Date 02/19/2013 Proj. No. 2660 Checked HTW Date Feb. 2013 Plate 3 Slope ..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I> 2" (Min.) Perforated Rigid Drain Pipe (Surround with 1" Rock) NOTES: o Do NOT tie roof downspouts to Footing Drain. o Surface Seal to consist of .f'•,l'•,,O•o"•I' ............. ,l'•,l'•,1'•."•.!' ............. /'•,l'•.f'•,l'•,I' ............. 12" of less permeable, suitable soil. Slope away from building. LEGEND: Surface Seal; native soil or other low permeability material. 1" Drain Rock SCHEMATIC ONLY· NOT OT SCALE NOT A CONSTRUCTION DRAWING FOOTING DRAIN DETAIL Smithers Avenue South Development Renton, Washington Drwn. GLS Date 02/19/2013 Proj. No. 2660 Checked HTW Date Feb. 2013 Plate 4 APPENDIX A SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION ES-2660 The subsurface conditions at the site were explored by excavating eight test pits at the approximate locations illustrated on Plate 2 of this report. The test pit logs are provided in this Appendix. The subsurface explorations were completed in February 2013. The test pits were advanced to a maximum depth of 12 feet below existing grades. Logs of the test pits advanced by ESNW are presented in Appendix A. The final logs represent the interpretations of the field logs and the results of laboratory analyses. The stratification lines on the logs represent the approximate boundaries between soil types. In actuality, the transitions may be more gradual. Earth Solutions NW, LLC ) Earth Solutions NWLLc SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART MAJOR DIVISIONS SYMBOLS LEITER TYPICAL DESCRIPTIONS COARSE GRAINED SOILS MORE THAN 50% OF MATERIAL IS LARGER THAN NO. 200 SIEVE SIZE . FINE GRAINED SOILS MORE THAN 50% OF MATERIAL IS SMALLER THAN NO. 200 SIEVE SIZE GRAVEL AND GRAVELLY SOILS MORE THAN 50% OF COARSE FRACTION RETAINED ON NO. 4 SIEVE SAND AND SANDY SOILS CLEAN GRAVELS (UTILE OR NO FINES) (APPRECIABLE 1 AMOUNT OFFINES) CLEAN SANDS (LITTLE OR NO FINES) SANDS WITH MORE 1HAN 50% FINES OF COARSE FRACTION PASSING ON NO. 4 SIEVE (APPRECIABLE SILTS AND CLAYS SILTS AND CLAYS AMOUNT OF FINES) I LIQUID LIMIT LESS THAN 50 LIQUID LIMIT GREATER THAN 50 HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS GW GP GM GC SW SP SM SC ML CL OL MH CH OH PT WELL-GRADED GRAVELS, GRAVEL- SANO MIXTURES, LITTLE OR NO FINES POORLY-GRADED GRAVELS, GRAVEL -SANO MIXTURES, LITTlE OR NO FINES SILTY GRAVELS, GRAVEL-SANO - S1LT MIXTURES CLAYEY GRAVELS, GRAVEL-SAND- CLAY MIXTURES WELL-GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLY SANOS, LITTLE OR NO FINES POORLY-GRADED SANOS, GRAVELLY SAND, LITTLE OR NO · FINES SIL 1Y SANDS, SAND -SILT MIXTURES CLAYEY SANDS, SAND-CLAY MIXTURES INORGANIC SILTS AND VERY FINE SANOS, ROCK FLOUR, SIL TY OR CLAYEY FINE SANOS OR CLAYEY SILTS WITH SLIGHT PLASTICITY INORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW TO MEDIUM PLASTICITY, GRAVELLY CLAYS, SANDY CLAYS. SILTY CLAYS, LEAN CLAYS ORGANIC SIL TS AND ORGANIC SILTY CLAYS OF LOW PLASTICITY INORGANIC SILTS, MICACEOUS OR OIATOMACEOUS FINE SAND OR SILTY SOILS INORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGH PLASTICITY ORGANIC CLAYS OF MEDIUM TO HIGH PLASTICITY, ORGANIC SILTS PEAT, HUMUS, SWAMP SOILS WITH HIGH ORGANIC CONTENTS ··--·· DUAL SYMBOLS are used to indicate borderline soil classifications. 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. ) • Earth Solutions NW TEST PIT NUMBER TP-1 1aos 136th Place N.E., Suite 201 PAGE 1 OF 1 Bellevue, Washington 98005 Telephone: 425-284-3300 CLIENT Harbour Homes PROJECT NAME, Smithers Avenue South Development PROJECT NUMBER 2660 PROJECT LOCATION Renton 1 Washington . DATE STARTED 2/B/13 COMPLETED 2/B/13 GROUND ELEVATION TEST PIT SIZE . EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR NW Excavating GROUND WATER LEVELS: EXCAVATION METHOD AT TIME OF EXCAVATION LOGGED BY HlW CHECKED BY HlW AT END OF EXCAVATION NOTES DeQth of Topsoil & Sod 3"-4" AFTER EXCAVATION - w . L, ~ffi iL" "' -. :c (!J ' W ID TESTS <-! to MATERIAL DESCRIPTION w-., :; "' ., 0 a.:, :::i (!J ~z "' ' 0 . ! i ' Brown poorly graded SAND, medium dense, moist --\ ' SP -MC= 21.20% -increasing medium to coarse sand -. -becomes gray, dense, moist to wet ' 5 ' MC= 9.70% ' 5.0 ~ Becomes brown SAND and GRAVEL with silt, dense, moist " . .. ·.:: SP- SM ... ., ,'.• -becomes very dense, wet .. MC:::.9.30% .. 8.if . ... . Becomes-brown gray silty SAND with gravel and cobbles, very dense, wet I'.• --SM ' . .fa MC= 19.50% ,; ·, 10:0 Test pit terminated at 10.0 feet beloW ·existing grBde. Groundwater seepage encountered at 6.0 feet during excavation. Bottom of test pit at 10.0 feet. ' I ' ' ' ,, ' ' ' • Earth Solutions NW TEST PIT NUMBER TP-2 1805136th Place N.E., Suite 201 PAGE 1 OF 1 Bellevue, Washington 98005 Telephone: 425-284-3300 CLIENT Harbour Homes PROJECT NAME Smithers Avenue South DeveloQment PROJECT NUMBER 2660 PROJECT LOCATION Renton, Washington CATE STARTED 2/8/13 COMPLETED 2/8/13 GROUND ELEVATION TEST PIT SIZE EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR NW Excavating GROUND WATER LEVELS: EXCAVATION METHOD AT TIME OF EXCAVATION ~ LOGGED BY HTW ...• CHECKED BY HTW AT END OF EXCAVATION - NOTES De12th of Topsoil & Sod 3"~ 4" AFTER EXCAVATION ' w ii:..-~ ffi en : u :i: Cl w a, TESTS cj' ~g MATERIAL DESCRIPTION w-_,:. ui 0 Q.::, ::i :!z Cl "' 0 '.-' Brown silty SAND, medium dense, moist r,' -. ' " ' •": I SM . C . MC=8.40% . :, ' -. _i_ •, s.o MC= 11.10% ,-Becomes gray silty SANO with gravel, dense, moist ' ' •:• C . .· '. ~.' -· . -becomes very dense ' SM .. ;, : .. -. ' •:, . ' _1Q._ MC= 18.80% ·-' ' 10,0 TeSt'Pit terminated at 10.0 feet below existing grade. No groundwater encountered during excavation. ' Bottom of test pit at 10.0 feet. ' ' .. .... • Earth Solutions NW TEST PIT NUMBER TP-3 1605136th Place N.E., Suite 201 PAGE 1 OF 1 Bellevue, Washington 98005 Telephone: 425-264-3300 CLIENT Harbour Homes PROJECT NAME Smithers Avenue South OeVelopment PROJECT NUMBER 2660 PROJECT LOCATION Renton, Washington DATE STARTED 2/6/13 COMPLETED 2/6/13 GROUND ELEVATION TEST PIT SIZE EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR NW Excavating GROUND WATER LEVELS: EXCAVATION METHOD AT TIME OF EXCAVATION ·~·· LOGGED BY HTW CHECKED BY .HTW AT END OF EXCAVATION - NOTES Oe~th ofTOQSOil & Sod 3"-4" AFTER EXCAVATION w ~g ~ ffi en u :i: Cl ~"' TESTS ti o.o MATERIAL DESCRIPTION ll. :!! cti ~-' 0 ~~ ::i Cl U) 0 .. Brown silty SANO, medium dense, moist --'• " .,, MC=27.00% .. -becomes dense to very dense, moist to wet . •, / .· .. ---increasing fine sands SM ,, _L . I • -becomes gray I --·:, ' ~ .' .. -MC; 19.10% . : . ' . 1,1 J -'. =i . I J.::: . MC; 16.10% 9.0 -Test pit terminated at 9.0 feet below existing grade. No groundwater encountered during I excavation. Bottom of test pit at 9.0 feet. ' I ,, " I ' ' ' -·- • Earth Solutions NW TEST PIT NUMBER TP-4 1805136th Place N.E., Suite 201 PAGE 1 OF 1 Bellevue, Washington 98005 Telephone: 425-284-3300 CLIENT Harbour Homes PROJECT NAME Smithers Avenue South Development PROJECT NUMBER 2660 PROJECT LOCATION Renton, Washington DATE STARTED 218/13 COMPLETED 2/8/13 GROUND ELEVATION TEST PIT SIZE EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR NW Excavating GROUND WATER LEVELS: EXCAVATION METHOD AT TIME OF EXCAVATION LOGGED BY HlW CHECKED BY HTW AT END OF EXCAVATION NOTES DeE!th of Topsoil & Sod 3"-4" AFTER EXCAVATION --- - UJ I a. u; I u ~"' ~ffi il:g UJ al TESTS d. MA TE RIAL DESCRIPTION w-1 __,::; ~. ii! __J a.::, 0 ~z ::, CJ 0 I I Brown silty SAND with gravel, medium dense to dense, moist I .: -. : ,, .' --)I -becomes dense to very dense ' ' .. : -., : -MC= 12.20% .i ·.' ~· ._§__1 -becomes gray, very dense I . I,; -. MC=9.40% SM •,, t '1 ': -. -. . '. '.,; .. . - i -· l •, .. JQ__ ,r I', ' a· . I.; ' ., I. •· ,. MC=9.60% '. ~ 12.0 Test pit terminated at 12.0 feet below existing grade. No groundwater encou·ntered during excavation. Bottom of test pit at 12.0 feet. I: ' I I I ' • Earth SoluUons NW TEST PIT NUMBER TP-5 1805136th Place N.E., Suite 201 PAGE 1 OF 1 Bellevue, Washington 98005 i Telephone: 425-284-3300 CLIENT .Harbour Homes PROJECT NAME Smithers Avenue South DeveloE!ment PROJECT NUMBER 2660 PROJECT LOCATION Renton 1 Washington DATE STARTED 2/8/13 COMPLETED 2/8/13 GROUND ELEVATION TEST PIT SIZE EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR NW Excavating GROUND WATER LEVELS: EXCAVATION METHOD AT TIME OF EXCAVATION · LOGGED BY HlW CHECKED BY HlW AT END OF EXCAVATION NOTES Depth of Topsoil & Sod 5" AFTER EXCAVATION . UJ a. () :,:: ~ffi en re, fue: ~ ID TESTS cj "-o MATERIAL DESCRIPTION a.::. "1 ~-' C ~~ :, C) U) 0 ' Brown sllty SAND, medium dense, moist SM ., ' >-' --·, 2.0 Grey silty SAND with gravel, dense to very dense, moist >--MC= 16.10% >-. ',., .....L SM I· I . ~ . ,· ' MC= 11.10% ' ' . -' MC=B.00% ,.o --Test pit terminated St 8.0 feet below existing grade. No groundwater encountered during I excavation. Bottom of test pit at 8.0 feet. I I ' ' i • Earth Solutions NW TEST PIT NUMBER TP-6 1805136th Place N.E., Suite 201 PAGE 1 OF 1 Bellevue, Washington 98005 Telephone: 425-284-3300 CLIENT Harbour Homes PROJECT NAME Smithers Avenue South DeVeloDmen! PROJECT NUMBER 2660 PROJECT LOCATION Renton, Washington DATE STARTED 2/8113 COMPLETED 2/8/13 GROUND ELEVATION TEST PIT SIZE EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR NW Excavating GROUND WATER LEVELS: EXCAVATION METHOD AT TIME OF EXCAVATION LOGGED BY .. HTW CHECKED BY H1W --AT END OF EXCAVATION . NOTES ..!1!1J1th of Topsoil & Sod 6" AFTER EXCAVATION - w a. 0 I j': ffi .,; i£8 Ii: i? wm TESTS (.) MATERIAL DESCRIPTION w-..J::; .,; ~..J C a.::, ::i ~z (!) <I) I o I ·-Brown Sandy SILT, medium stiff, wet f-.I ' MC= 28.90% ML' -increaSing fine sands ' 40 -intermittent g~~Y .. -· -' ~ Becomes brown sandy SILT, stiff, moist to wet --L· MC=29.00% ; ' '. ' f-' ML -Increasing medium sands ' f-. MC= 15.00% -becomes hard, moist ' 9.0 f--Test pit terminated at 9.0 feet below existing grade. No groundwater encountered during " excavation. ., . Bottom of test pit at 9.0 feet. ' ' ,, ' I. ···- • Earth Solutions NW TEST PIT NUMBER TP-7 1605136th Place N.E., Suite 201 PAGE 1 OF 1 Bellevue, Washington 98005 Telephone: 425-284-3300 CLIENT Harbour Homes PROJECT NAME Smithers Avenue South Develo~ment PROJECT NUMBER 2660 PROJECT LOCATION Renton 1 Washington DATE STARTED 218113 COMPLETED 2/8113 GROUND ELEVATION TEST PIT SIZE EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR NW Excavating GROUND WATER LEVELS: EXCAVATION METHOD AT TIME OF EXCAVATION LOGGED BY HTW CHECKED BY HTW AT END OF EXCAVATION NOTES Oeeth of TOESOII & Sod 3"-4" AFTER EXCAVATION UJ t;;? ~ffi <ii u UJ"' TESTS cj ~8 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION w-... :; <ii ~ ... (l a.:::, :::i !z Cl 0 Brown silty SAND, medium dense to dense, moist to wet " . ' SM ' •':, I. ~ -increasing fines . : 2.5 Brown sandy SILT, stiff, moist " . MC=30.70% ML I 5 ' ~ I -intermittent gray 5.5 ,_ Becomes brown gray sandy SILT, hard, wet . MC=27.80% . . I ., ML -becomes very dense ~ I " . ' ' MC=31.20% 12.0 -t?.ecomes gray . ~ Test pit terminated at 12.0 feet below existing grade. No groundwater encountered during I. ' excavation. Bottom of test pit at 12.0 feet. ' ' .. ,. .. TEST PIT NUMBER TP-8 Earth Solutions NW 1805136th Place N£., Suite 201 PAGE 1 OF 1 Bellevue, Washington 98005 Telephone: 425-284-3300 CLIENT Harbour Homes PROJECT NAME Smithers Avenue South Develoj;!ment PROJECT NUMBER 2660 PROJECT LOCATION, Renton, Washington DATE STARTED 2/8113 COMPLETED 2/8113 GROUND ELEVATION TEST PIT SIZE EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR NW Excavating GROUND WATER LEVELS: EXCAVATION METHOD AT TIME OF EXCAVATION, LOGGED BY HTW CHECKED BY HTW AT END OF EXCAVATION NOTES .Jl!lP.th of To~soil & Sod 2"-3" AFTER EXCAVATION --. w a. 0 :,: 1: ffi en ii: 8 a;g wm TESTS u MATERIAL DESCRIPTION .J:; . en il: .J 0 a.:::, :;j ~z (!) Cl) 0 ' Brown silty SANO, medium dense to dense, moist -' SM ' .~ -increasing fines -'' ' ·. 2.5 -' Brown sandy SILT, stiff to very stiff, wet -MC=37,70% ' I .__L ML -trace gravel " ' MC=33.20% -intermittent gray -' -becomes hard ~ 8.0 •! Gray silty SAND with gravel, very dense, mOist ' ·. ~ ' ,-I', SM 10 1 ·, -""'-7 ' t .. " ' MC= 11.40% •J 1. , .. 11.0 -,,. Test pit tefminated at 11.0 feet below existing grade. No groundwater encountered during excavation .. Bottom of test pit at 11.0 feet. I ' '···-·· . ' t.. Earth So!Utions NW GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION . ~·.: ... ' 1805 -136th Place N.E., Suite 201 Bellevue, WA 98005 Telephone: 425-284-3300 CLIENT Geonerco Pro~erties WA 1 LLC PROJECT NAME Smithers Ave PROJECT NUMBER ES-2660 PROJECT LOCATION. Renton U.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES ·I U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS I HYDROMETER • • 3 2 • 1 3/'4 1/2 3/8 3 • • ,,·,~ 3D •o: ..... 100140 200 100 ' I 1\1 ' I I I I I -l I i' 95 ~-·~~ I \ '' i " I' ' ' ' 90 ' \__ . ' '. i ' ' :1 J : ' 85 '· ~ ' 80 ''" '' I-..,. I ., . I I 75 ... -_,. - ,I. I i ! 70 : i -· .. ·····-~ i '; 65 " I . I-'' '· . :,: .. ' (!) 60 . . ~ ' : \ ' >-55 ·r "' " I w 50 -z ,\ u: I I-45 . z : w I 'l '' i ,. \ I () 40 " i I \ ., w I: I ' C. ' ' 35 ! \ I ' : : 30 ' . I ! I : 25 · ' : : ' " 20 ' ' . 15 . ' I ' 1. I : 10 . : ~ ' I ' .. I ' I 5 .. ' : 0 . --' . 100 .. 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS . GRAVEL ·1 -SAND ' COBBLES I coarse fifle SILT OR CLAY coarse fine medium .. Specimen identification , Classification LL PL Pl Cc Cu 0 TP-1. 3.0ft .. Brown poorly graded SAND, SP 0.89 1.82 lill TP-4 6.0ft, I Giay silty SAND with gravel, sli,f . . " TP-6 5.0ft. Brown SILT, ML * TP-8 6.0ft. Browri"SILT, ML Specimen Identification D100 D60 D30 D10 · %Gravel %Sand %Silt %Clay 0 TP-1 3.0ft. 4.75 0.279 0.195 0.154 0.0 97.0 3.0 lill TP-4 6.0ft. 37.5 0.37 0.075 .. 17.9 52.2 30.0 " TP:.S 5.0ft. 4.75 ... o.o 9.9 90.1 * TP-8 6.0ft. 4.75 0.0 8.5 91.5 ,. '" ·- '. EMAIL ONLY REPORT DISTRIBUTION ES-2660 Geonerco Pro~erties, LLC 1441 North 34 Street, #200 Seattle, Washington 98103 Attention: Mr. Jamie Waltier Earth Solutions WI, LLC . ~[ f[y foi (i', l .. D R. STR O ~· .. ~ [Y~~J CONSULTING ENGINEERS July 15, 2014 Elizabeth Higgins City·of Renton Planning Division 1055 South Grady Way ' Renton, WA 98057 Re: Vuec~est Estates LUA13~000642 Dear Ms. Higgins:· ,-----~--·-='D~R:.'=S~-P__,r~o.ject No. 12102 ~u@~W&IB:,~ ~r;,,n u ~8 Thank you for. review and coordination of this project_ We have carefully reviewed ·and . analyzed your comments provided in your.letter dated April 1 ~, 2014. Below is a summary of how each request was addressed: · 1. [Provide].An analysis of the anticipated full water weight of ttie proposed storm drainage vault on Tract "A." and the slope., A letterfr~mEarth Solutions NW, LLC has been provided with thi; resubmittal. • · 2 [Provide] Proposed structural design for the vault construction. · A structuraldesignprepared by Dan Kosnik, Site Structures has been provided with this re submittal. · 3. [Provide] A Level 2 downstre1;1~ quantitative analy~is through Tai.bot Road S;·include all data and all assumptions for the existing conditions. · · . . ' The offsite analysis was revised to .include analysis of the proposed downstream path . through the· Campen· Springs Development. , Backwater analysis, maps and the Campen. Springs Drainage Repori have, been provided in Appendix· B of that report (Section ·II/. of the. TIR). · Additionally, a Letter of Intent to provide per(!1anent and temporary construction · easements, from . the Campen Springs Condominium Association has beenprovided with this resubmit/al. 4. [Provide] A determination that the capacity· of the downstream system is sufficient with . the proposed project. ' See response to Item 3. 5 .. [Provide] A Le~el 3 flow control analysis. demonstrating conservation di~charge to the full 100-year storm event is recommended for this·project. ' .The TIR has been updated with a Level 3 flow control analysis for the · proposed detention vault. Engtneers Planners·· . RECE\VED. . JUL 16 7.G\4 CITY Of RENTON p[ANNiNG DIVISION , 620 7th Avenue Kirkland, WA 98033 Phone: (425) 827-3063 Fax: (425) 827-2423 Toll Free:-(800) 962•1402 www.drstrong.com l Surveyors :July 15, 2014 Page 2 of 2 ' ' Thank you for your time and consideration in this matter .. Should' you have any questions or request·any clarifications, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely yours, D. R. SJJ ONG Consulting Engineers Inc. MAJ/lie Enclosures: 4 -Revised Preliminary Plat Plan Set 2 -Revised Technical Information Report including updated Level 2Downstream Analysis 1 -Structural Design Plans and Calculations for proposed stormwater vault 1 -Geotechnical Letter regarding weight of proposed stormwater vault 1 -Updated Tree Retention ,Worksheet 1 -Updated Density Worksheet 1 -Letter of Intent from Campen Springs Condominium Association R:\2012\ 1\12102\Correspqndence\Lette"rs\o(!t\L 140714_Resubmittal.doc ~-- ' (0 ' THE COE LAW FIRM ----·-----~-1'1.1.C VIA E-MAIL ONLY John C. Baringer Vice President/Corporate Counsel Geonerco Management, LLC. 1441 North 34th Street,-Suite 200 Seattle, Washington 98103 July 14, 2014 jCoe@coefaw.com RECEIVED JUL 1 6 ZOi* CITY OF RENTON Re: PLANNING DIVISION Campen Springs Condominium Association (" Association") Letter i>f Intent -Vuecrest Project Dear Mr. Baringer: Your company has been working on a project adjacent to and upslope from the Association known as Vuecrest ("Project"). You have asked the Association if you could tie into the Association's storm drain system. You have aske_d for this letter of intent as the City of Renton has requested that our clients submit to the City a signed letter of intent regarding the Association's willingness to grant the easement and your.client's willingness to abide by certain conditions of the grant. As such, I have been authorized to issue this letter on behalf of the Association. At the Association's regular and duly noticed monthly Board meeting on June 24, 2014, . . ·the Board approved proceeding with allowing the Project to tie into the storm drain system at a Catch Basin No. 14 shown on sheet 7 of 33 of the Campen Springs Apartments engineering plans prepared by Daley0 Morrow-Poblete, Inc., dated June 19,2002 in a roadway a few tens of feet west of the birdcage. (Not at the upstream bypass pipe.) This storm drain system handles the storm water runoff from the Association's development. This would keep the Project's storm water out of the Association's water features, but it would route it through the Association's detention vault. This approval is contingent upon: I. The execution of mutually agreeable temporary construction easements and permanent easements effecting the tie in. (As discussed previously, the Association will require John C. Baringer July 14, 2014 Page 2 ' (G ' that both the temporary and permanent easements contain language requiring all upslope homes jointly and severally defend, indemnify an_d hold the Association harmless from any and all losses, damages and the -like, for (i) the construction, use, maintenance, repair, or replacement of the lines and storm drain system and catch basins on Association property, (ii) any and all costs for clean outs and/or fines imposed by the City of Renton for the Association's lines and storm drain system and catch basins, (iii) any .dl!mages to or breach of the Association's system caused by flooding, or acts and/or omissions of the upslope homes. There will be other conditions as well, including, but not limited to, payment and reimbursement of legal and expert fees and costs.) 2. Details and calculations to be confirmed by Owen Reese when available from DR Strong, to ensure the Association's storm water system could safely and sufficiently handle the discharge without flooding. 3. Your plans include_ a couple other elements related to storm water fuanagement and slope stability such as: a. The NW comer of the Vuecrest property will require buildi(!g up by several feet. From a geological/slide perspective, the Association will insist that the retaining wall be a properly engineered retaining wall rather than just a simple rockery embankment to hold the fill. (Thus, if there is any movement of the hillside in the future, rocks from retaining wall will be .less likely to come loose and tumble doWrihill into Campen Springs.) Second, in relation to the substantial amount of fill required for a few of the western line of lots, we would insist that, rather than using native soils from the site a:s fill, imported, more structured fill be utilized to provide greater stability to the slope/lot foundation. b. Finally, for the other western lots, utilizing the small slope of the lot to enable storm water runoff and natural permeation to the soil is preferable to digging a trench for an interceptor pipe with gravel fill. Neither party is bound to one ·another until the execution of any easements. This letter of intent is not intended to be, and shall not constitute, a binding and enforceable agreement-between the parties. It merely sets forth their present intentions with respect to the terms proposed, which terms may or may not become part of a definitive agreement, as a basis for future negotiations. It is not based upon any existing agreement between the parties, and is not intended to ·i111pose any obligation other than an obligation to bargain in good faith. No other legal or equitable rights, responsibilities or duties are created hereby, or by the response to any competitive bid proposal. The Association shall have no liability with respect to this letter of intent, for any incidental, consequential, exemplary, special, indirect or punitive Counsc:I 1-',,r Lil~· & You,· Lil~-\ \Vorl, ·-. John C. Baringer July 14, 2014 Page3 (@ ' damages, including loss of use, loss ofre\'.enue, anticipated profits or lost business, even ifithas been advised of the possibility of such damages. Sincerely, THE COE LAW FIRM, PLLC omeyatLaw JAC cc: Campen Springs Condominium Association c()llllSC,I For Lilt· 8: Yolll' Lil,-', \\'ml TIEC~NICAl ~NfORMAT~ON R!Ef>ORT for VUECREST ESTATES ; Preliminary Plat 4800 Block of Smithers Avenue S in Renton, Washington DRS Project No. 12102 Renton File No. LUA 13-000642 Owner/Applicant Harbour Homes, LLC 1441 North 34th Street, Suite 200 Seattle, WA 98103 Report Prepared by l~I D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers, Inc. 10604 N.E. 38th Place, Suite 232 Kirkland WA 98033 (425) 827-3063 Report Issue Date May 21, 2013 Report Revision Issue Date ©2014 D.R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Technical Information Report July 15, 2014 Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat RECEIVED JUL 16 2014 CITY OF RENtON PLANNING DIVISION Page i of iii City of Renton TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT VUECREST ESTATES Preliminary Plat TAIBLIE OF CONTENTS SECTION 1 ..................................................................................................................... ,.1 Project Overview .......................................................................................................... 1 Predeveloped Site Conditions ...................................................................................... 1 Developed Site Conditions ........................................................................................... 1 Natural Drainage System Functions ............................................................................. 1 SECTION II .................................................................................................................... 11 Conditions and Requirements Summary .................................................................... 11 SECTION Ill ................... '. ............................................................................................... 13 Off-Site Analysis ......................................................................................................... 13 SECTION IV .................................................................................................................. 14 Flow Control and Water Quality Facility Analysis and Design .................................... 14 Existing Site Hydrology (Part A) .............................................................................. 14 Pre-developed Hourly Time Step Modeling Input: .................................................. 15 Pre-developed Hourly Time Step Modeling Output: ................................................ 15 Developed Site Hydrology (Part B) ......................................................................... 17 Developed Site Area Hydrology .............................................................................. 17 Developed Hourly Time Step Modeling lnput: ........................................... : ............. 18 Developed Hourly Time Step Modeling Output: ...................................................... 18 Performance Standards (Part C) ................................................................................ 21 Flow Control System (Part D) ..................................................................................... 21 Flow Control BMP Selection ................................................................................... 21 Flow Control Facility Design Output.. ...................................................................... 22 Water Quality Treatment System (Part E) .................................................................. 29 SECTION V ................................................................................................................... 31 Conveyance System Analysis and Design ................................................................. 31 SECTION VI .................................................................................................................. 33 Special Reports and Studies ...................................................................................... 33 SECTION VII ................................................................................................................. 34 Other Permits, Variances and Adjustments ................................................................ 34 SECTION VIII ............................................... : ................................................................ 35 ESC Plan Analysis and Design (Part A) ..................................................................... 35 ©2014 0. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Technical Information Report Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat Page ii of iii City of Renton SWPPS Plan Design (Part B) ..................................................................................... 36 SECTION IX .................................................................................................................. 37 Bond Quantities, Facility Summaries, and Declaration of Covenant .......................... 37 Stormwater Facility Summary Sheet .......................................................................... 38 SECTION X ................................................................................................................... 40 Operations and Maintenance Manual ....................................................................... .40 APPENDICES ............................................................................................................... 41 Appendix "A" Legal Description ................................................................................. .42 List of Figures Figure 1 TIR Worksheet. .............................................. , ................................................... 2 Figure 2 Vicinity Map ....................................................................................................... 6 Figure 3 Drainage Basins, Subbasins, and Site Characteristics ...................................... 7 Figure 4 Soils ................................................................................................................... 8 Figure 5 Predevelopment Area Map .............................................................................. 16 Figure 6 Post Development Area Map ........................................................................... 20 Figure 7 Detention & Water Quality Facility Details ........................................................ 30 ©2014 D.R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Technical Information Report Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat Page iii of iii City of Renton SECTION I PROJECT OVERVIEW The Project location (Site) is near the 4800 Block of Smithers Avenue S. The proposed Project is to subdivide 3.98 acres of the 9.31 acre parcel into 20 detached single-family residential homes, per the City of Renton's subdivision process. The Tax Parcel Number is 3123059048. The Project will meet the drainage requirements of the 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual (Manual), as adopted by the City. PREDEVELOPED SITE CONDITIONS Total existing area is approximately 405,395 s.f. (9.31 ac) and the total proposed Project area is 173,253 s.f. (3.98 ac). The Parcel is currently undeveloped and heavily vegetated with two wetlands onsite. The 9.31 acre parcel is situated with a portion atop a ridge continuing into a steep hillside discharging runoff into the Black River subbasin. Runoff follows a channel through the southern portion of the Site and discharges near the southwest corner. It flows through a vegetated channel near S 50th Street, and then proceeds to a conveyance system within Talbot Road S. A negligible area from the developable area near lots 7 and 8 appears to sheet flow down the steep slope and into the conveyance system within the Campen Springs Condominium development before entering the conveyance system within Talbot Road S. For the purpose of hydrologic calculations, the entire developable Site is modeled as till forest. DEVELOPED SITE CONDITIONS The applicant is seeking approval to create 20 lots with lot sizes ranging from approximately 4,500 s.f. to 8, 134 s.f. The 20 single-family residences combined with their driveways will create approximately 73,087 s.f. (1.68 ac) of impervious area. The proposed 55-foot right of way will be improved with 28 feet of pavement, vertical curb, gutter, 8-foot planter strip and 5-foot sidewalk. A stub road is also proposed to serve Lots 17-20 while Lots 12-60 will gain access via a private alley. The improvements from right-of ways and private access tracts will add approximately 41,027 s.f. (0.94 ac) of impervious surface. The Project will result in a total of 2.62 ac of new impervious surfaces. The remainder of the developed Site (1.36 ac) will consist of landscaping and lawns. The Project is required to provide Basic Water Quality treatment and Level 3 Flow Control, per the 2009 KCSWDM (Manual). All surface water runoff from impervious surfaces will be collected and conveyed to a storm detention/water quality vault located in Tract "A". NATURAL DRAINAGE SYSTEM FUNCTIONS The Site topography slopes from the east of the site to the west. The vegetation consists of trees and moderate underbrush. A portion of Site runoff travels westerly and flows off the Site, through a vegetated channel near S 501h Street, and eventually into a conveyance system within Talbot Road S. Runoff from the remainder of the Site area ©2014 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Technical Information Report Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat Page 1 City of Renton sheet flows down the steep sleep and into the conveyance system within the Campen Springs Condominium development before entering the conveyance system within Talbot Road S. A review of the SCS soils map for the area (see Figure 4, Soils) indicates Alderwood gravelly sandy loam with 6 to 15 percent slopes (AgC) and 15 to 30 percent slopes (AgD). Per the Manual, this soil type is classified as "Till" material. The SCS Soil series descriptions follow Figure 4. In evaluating the upstream area, we reviewed King County IMAP aerial topography and imagery and conducted field reconnaissance. We concluded that the upstream area does not drain to the developable area of the Site. A portion of the properties east of the Site appear to drain in an easterly manner towards 102nd Avenue SE. The western portion appears to drain towards the Site, however is intercepted by the two onsite wetlands and does not reach the developable Site. This area is approximately 6.34 acres. Properties to the north drain westerly not encroaching the Site. Properties to the south drains southerly away from the Site. ©2014 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Technical Information Report Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat Page2 City of Renton FIGURE 1 TIR WORKSHEET King County Department of Development and Environmental Services TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT {TIR) WORKSHEET Part 1 PROJECT OWNER AND PROJECT ENGINEER Project Owner: Harbour Homes, LLC Address/Phone: 1441 North 341" Street, Suite 200 Seattle, WA 98103 Project Engineer: Maher A. Joudi, P.E. Part 2 PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION Project Name: Vuecrest Estates Location: Township: Range: Section: 23 North 05 East 31 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Address/Phone: 10604 NE 381" Place, Suite 232 Kirkland WA 98033 (425) 827-3063 Part 3 TYPE OF PERMIT APPLICATION IZI Subdivision D Short Subdivision IZI Clearing and Grading D Commercial D Other: Part 4 OTHER REVIEWS AND PERMITS D DFW.HPA LJ Shoreline Management D COE404 D Rockery D DOE Dam Safety 1Z! Structural Vault D FEMA Floodplain D Other: D COE Wetlands Part 5 SITE COMMUNITY AND DRAINAGE BASIN Community: Soos Creek Drainage Basin Black River ©2014 D.R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Technical Information Report Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat Page 3 City of Renton Part 6 SITE CHARACTERISTICS 0River: 0 Floodplain ~ Wetland ~ Stream: Unnamed 0 Seeps/Springs 0 Critical Stream Reach 0 High Groundwater Table 0 Depressions/Swales 0 Groundwater Recharge 0 Lake: 0 Other: ~ Steep Slopes Part 7 SOILS Soil Type: Slopes: Erosion Potential: Erosive Velocities: Alderwood 6-15% (AgC) Moderate Slow to Medium {AgC & AgD) 15-30% {AgD) Severe Medium ~Additional Sheets Attached: SCS Map and Soil Description, Figure 4 Part 8 DEVELOPMENT LIMITATIONS REFERENCE LIMITATION/SITE CONSTRAINT ~ Level 1 Downstream Analysis None _____________ _ ~ Geotechnical Engineering Study ~ Environmentally Sensitive Areas . ~ Level 2 Offsite Stormwater Analysis ~ Level I Traffic Impact Analysis 0 Structural Report 0 Additional Sheets Attached Part 9 ESC REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS DURING CONSTRUCTION ~Sedimentation Facilities ~Stabilized Construction Entrance ~Perimeter Runoff Control ~Clearing and Grading Restrictions ~Cover Practices ~Construction Sequence 0 Other ©2014 D.R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Technical lnfom,ation Report MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS AFTER CONSTRUCTION ~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 0 Other Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat Page 4 City of Renton Part 10 SURFACE WATER SYSTEM D Grass Lined Channel ~ Pipe System D Open Channel D Dry Pond D Wet Pond D Tank ~ Vault D Energy Dissipater ~ Wetland D Stream D Infiltration D Depression D Flow Dispersal D Waiver D Regional Detention Method of Analysis: KCRTS Compensation/Mitigation of Eliminated Site Storage NIA Brief Description of System Operation: Runoff from impervious surfaces will be collected and conveyed to the detention facility. From there it will be discharged through a tightline down the hillside and connect into the Campen Springs conveyance system. Facility Related Site Limitations: Reference Facility Limitation Part 11 STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS ~ Cast in Place Vault D Retaining Wall ~ Rockery > 4' High D Structural on Steep Slope D Other: Part 12 EASEMENTS/TRACTS ~ Drainage Easement D Access Easement ~ Native Growth Protection Easement ~ Tracts D Other: Part 13 SIGNATURE OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER I or a civil engin as observed wer of my knowled r under my supervision have visited the site. Actual site conditions incorporated into this worksheet and the attachments. To the best e information provided here is accurate. ©2014 D. R STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Technical Information Report Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat Page 5 City of Renton \ \ FIGURE 2 VICINITY MAP --:; (/' . I The information included on this map has been compiled by King County staff from a variety of sources and is subject to change without notice. King County makes no representations or warranties, express or implied, as to accuracy, completeness, timeliness, or rights to the use of such information. King County shall not be liable for any general, special, indirect, incidental, or consequential damages including, but not limited to, lost revenues or lost profits resulting from the use or misuse of the information contained on this map. Any sale of this map or information on this map is prohibited except by written permission of King County. ©2014 0. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Technical Information Report Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat Page6 City of Renton FIGURE 3 DRAINAGE BASINS, SUBBASINS, AND SITE CHARACTERISTICS ©2014 D.R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Technical Information Report Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat Page 7 City of Renton ' - ©2014 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Technical lnfom1ation Report FIGURE 4 SOILS Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat ' <-J' Page 8 City of Renton AgC-Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes Map Unit Setting • Elevation: 50 to 800 feet • Mean annual precipitation: 25 to 60 inches • Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 52 degrees F • Frost-free period: 180 to 220 days Map Unit Composition • Alderwood and similar soils: 95 percent • Minor components: 5 percent Description of Alderwood Setting • Landform: Moraines, till plains • Parent material: Basal till with some volcanic ash Properties and qualities • Slope: 6 to 15 percent o Depth to restrictive feature: 24 to 40 inches to densic material • Drainage class: Moderately well drained • Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to moderately low (0.00 to 0.06 in/hr) • Depth to water table: About 18 to 37 inches • Frequency of flooding: None • Frequency of ponding: None • Available water capacity: Very low (about 2.5 inches) Interpretive groups • Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance ~\ • Land capability (nonirrigated): 4s j o Hydrologic Soil Group: B Typical profile • O to 12 inches: Gravelly sandy loam • 12 to 27 inches: Very gravelly sandy loam • 27 to 60 inches: Very gravelly sandy loam Minor Components Norma • Percent of map unit: 1 percent • Landform: Depressions Bellingham • Percent of map unit: 1 percent • Landform: Depressions Seattle o Percent of map unit: 1 percent o Landform: Depressions Tukwila • Percent of map unit: 1 percent o Landform: Depressions Shalcar • Percent of map unit: 1 percent • Landform: Depressions AgD-Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes Map Unit Setting • Elevation: 50 to 800 feet o Mean annual precipitation: 25 to 60 inches ©2014 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Technical Information Report Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat Page 9 City of Renton C C • Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 52 degrees F • Frost-free period: 180 to 220 days Map Unit Composition • Alderwood and similar soils: 100 percent Description of Alderwood Setting • Landform: Moraines, till plains • Parent material: Basal till with some volcanic ash Properties and qualities • Slope: 15 to 30 percent • Depth to restrictive feature: 24 to 40 inches to densic material • Drainage class: Moderately well drained • Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to moderately low (0.00 to 0.06 in/hr) • Depth to water table: About 18 to 37 inches • Frequency of flooding: None • Frequency of ponding: None • Available water capacity: Very low (about 2.5 inches) Interpretive groups • Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance • Land capability (nonirrigated): 4e • Hydrologic Soil Group: B Typical profile • 0 to 12 inches: Gravelly ashy sandy loam • 12 to 27 inches: Very gravelly sandy loam • 27 to 60 inches: Very gravelly sandy loam ©2014 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Technical Information Report Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat Page 10 City of Renton SECTION II CONDITIONS AND REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY The Project must comply with the following Core and Special Requirements: o C.R. #1 -Discharge at the Natural Location: The Site will discharge at its natural discharge location. o C.R. #2 -Offsite Analysis: Analysis is included in Section Ill. The Analysis describes the Site's runoff patterns in detail. A Level Two Downstream Analysis was performed on the Campen Springs conveyance system into which the Project is discharging. o C.R. #3 -Flow Control: The project is located in the Conservation Flow Control area, however due to connection through the downstream system will adhere to Level 3 Flow Control Standards. A detention vault will provide flow control as required. The Project is required to match durations for 50% of the two-year peak flow up to the full 50-year peak flow. Also match developed peak discharge rates to predeveloped peak discharge rates for the 2-year, 10-year and 100-year return periods (KCSWDM, Sec. 1.2.) Furthermore, the Project must meet the Flow Control BMP requirements as specified in Section 1.2.3.3 of the Manual. The Project will utilize the reduced impervious surface credit to meet this requirement. o C.R. #4 -Conveyance System: New pipe systems and ditches/channels are required to be designed with sufficient capacity to convey and contain (at minimum) the 25-year peak flow, assuming developed conditions for onsite tributary areas and existing conditions for any offsite tributary areas. Pipe system structures and ditches/channels may overtop for runoff events that exceed the 25-year design capacity, provided the overflow from a 100-year runoff event does not create or aggravate a "severe flooding problem" or "severe erosion problem" as defined in C.R. #2. Any overflow occurring onsite for runoff events up to and including the 100- year event must discharge at the natural location for the project site. In residential subdivisions, such overflow must be contained within an onsite drainage easement, tract, covenant or public right-of-way. The proposed conveyance system was analyzed using the KCBW program, and is capable of conveying the 100-year peak storm without overtopping any structures or channels. This analysis will be performed at time of construction plan preparation. o C.R. #5 -Erosion and Sediment Control: The Project provides the nine minimum ESC measures. o C.R. #6 -Maintenance and Operations: Maintenance of the proposed storm drainage facilities will be the responsibility of the City. An Operation and Maintenance Manual will be included in Section X at the time of construction plan preparation. ©2014 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Technical Information Report Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat Page 11 City of Renton o C.R. #7 -Financial Guarantees: Prior to commencing construction, the Applicant must post a drainage facilities restoration and site stabilization financial guarantee. For any constructed or modified drainage facilities to be maintained and operated by the City, the Applicant must: 1) Post a drainage defect and maintenance financial guarantee for a period of two years, and 2) Maintain the drainage facilities during the two-year period following posting of the drainage defect and maintenance financial guarantee. o C.R. #8 -The Project is located in the Basic Water Quality Treatment area. The combined detention/water quality vault will accommodate this requirement. o S.R. #1 -Other Adopted Area-Specific Requirements: Not applicable for this Project. o S.R. #2 -Floodplain/Floodway Delineation: Not applicable for this Project. o S.R. #3 -Flood Protection Facilities: Not applicable for this Project. o S.R. #4 -Source Control: Not applicable for this Project. ©2014 D.R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Technical Information Report Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat Page 12 City of Renton SECTION Iii OFF-SITE ANALYSIS An offsite Level Two Downstream Analysis was prepared by D.R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. and is included in this Section. ©2014 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Technical Information Report Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat Page 13 City of Renton llEVIEl TWO DOW~STRIEAM A~Al YS!S for VUIECRIEST ESTATES Preliminary Plat 4800 Block of Smithers Avenue South, Renton, Washington DRS Project No. 12102 Renton File No. LUA13-000642 Owner/Applicant Harbour Homes, LLC 1441 North 34th Street, Suite 200 Seattle, WA 98103 Report Prepared by !~I D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers, Inc. 10604 N.E. 38th Place, Suite 232 Kirkland WA 98033 (425) 827-3063 Report Issue Date May 21, 2013 Report Revision Issue Date July 15, 2014 ©2013 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. llEVIEl lrWO IDOW~SlrRIEAM A~Al YS~S VUECRIEST ESTATES TABllE OIF CONTENTS TASK 1 DEFINE AND MAP THE STUDY AREA ......................................................... 1 TASK 2 RESOURCE REVIEW ..................................................................................... 5 TASK 3 FIELD INSPECTION ..................................................................................... 16 Upstream Tributary Area ............................................................................................ 16 General Onsite and Offsite Drainage Description ...................................................... 16 TASK 4 DRAINAGE SYSTEM DESCRIPTION AND PROBLEM DESCRIPTIONS ... 17 Drainage System Description ........................ , ............................................................ 17 Downstream Path ................................................................................................... 17 NDA1 ..................................................................................................................... 17 NDA2 ..................................................................................................................... 17 Proposed Downstream Path and Analysis .............................................................. 17 TASK 5 MITIGATION OF EXISTING OR POTENTIAL PROBLEMS ......................... 22 Appendix A. Basin Reconnaissance Program .......................................................... 23 Appendix B. Downstream System Backwater Analysis ........................................... 24 List of Figures Figure 1 Vicinity Map ....................................................................................................... 2 Figure 2 Site Map ............................................................................................................ 3 Figure 3 King County iMap Topography ......................................................................... .4 Figure 4 Streams and 100-Year Floodplains and Floodway ............................................ 6 Figure 5 King County iMap Wetlands ............................................................................... ? Figure 6 City of Renton Erosion Hazard Areas ................................................................ 8 Figure 7 City of Renton Landslide Hazard Areas ............................................................. 9 Figure 8 King County iMap Seismic Hazard Areas ........................................................ 10 Figure 9 FEMA -Flood Insurance Rate Map ................................................................. 11 Figure 1 O King County iMap Drainage Complaints ........................................................ 12 Figure 11 USDA King County Soils Survey Map ........................................................... 13 Figure 12 Downstream Map ........................................................................................... 19 Figure 13 Downstream Table ......................................................................................... 20 ©2014 D.R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Level TWO Downstream Analysis Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat Page i of i City of Renton • TASK1 DEFINE AND MAP THE STUDY AREA This Offsite Analysis was prepared in accordance with Core Requirement #2, Section 1.2.2 of the 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual (Manual). The Site is located at the 4800 Block of Smithers Avenue S in Renton, Washington. See Figure 1, Figure 2, and Figure 3 for maps of the study area . ©2014 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Level TWO Downstream Analysis Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat Page 1 City of Renton FIGURE 1 VICINITY MAP The information included on this map has been compiled by King County staff from a variety of sources and is subject to change without notice. King County makes no representations or warranties, express or implied, as to accuracy, completeness, timeliness, or rights to the use of such information. King County shall not be liable for any general, special, indirect, incidental, or consequential damages including, but not limited to, lost revenues or lost profits resulting from the use or misuse of the infonnation contained on this map. Any sale of this map or information on this map is prohibited except by written permission of King County. ©2014 D.R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Level TWO Downstream Analysis Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat Page2 City of Renton PERFORMANCE STANDARDS (PART C) The Project is required to adhere to Level 3 Flow Control criteria. The Level 3 performance criteria requires that the developed condition's durations must match the predeveloped durations ranging from 50% of the two-year peak flow up to the full 50- year peak flow and also match developed peak discharge rates to predeveloped peak discharge rates for the 2-year, 10-year and 100-year return periods (KCSWDM, Sec. 1.2). The Project was evaluated for onsite infiltration and dispersion of roof downspout runoff. The lots have insufficient space to allow for infiltration or dispersion of roof runoff and will utilize the reduced impervious footprint BMP option. The Basic Water Quality Treatment goal is to remove 80% of TSS for flows or volumes up to and including the WQ design flow or volume. Conveyance criteria for the Project require that all new pipes be designed to convey and contain (at minimum) the 25-year peak flow. The conveyance system design will be analyzed at time of final engineering. FLOW CONTROL SYSTEM (PART D) The Site will utilize a detention vault meeting the Level 3 Flow Control Criteria. The King County Runoff Time Series (KCRTS) software was used to size the detention facility. The detention vault design information is included in this section. FLOW CONTROL BMP SELECTION Subdivision projects are required to mitigate for impervious surface equal to a minimum of 10% of each lot area by use of Flow Control Best Management Practices (BMP's). The reduced Impervious Surface Credit BMP as described in Appendix C, Section C.2.9 of the KCSWDM will be utilized for the Project. The maximum impervious surface coverage allowed per zoning code for the total lot area 75%. Lots 1-20 inclusive shall be restricted to a maximum impervious coverage equal to 65% of each lot area. A restricted footprint covenant shall be recorded on the face of the final plat map. This satisfies the flow control BMP requirements in Section 1.2.3.3 and 5.2 of the 2009 KCSWDM. ©2014 D.R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Technical lnfonnation Report Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat Page 21 City of Renton FLOW CONTROL FACILITY DESIGN OUTPUT Retention/Detention Facility Type of Facility: Detention Vault Facility Length: 73.00 ft Facility Width: 72. 00 ft Facility Area: 5256. sq. ft Effective Storage Depth: 10.00 ft Stage 0 Elevation: 359.00 ft Storage Volume: 52560. cu. ft Riser Head: 10.00 ft Riser Diameter: 18.00 inches Number of orifices: 3 Full Head Pipe Orifice # Height Diameter Discharge Diameter (ft) (in) (CFS) (in) 1 0.00 0.80 0.055 2 6.00 1. 52 0.125 4.0 3 8.20 0.95 0.033 4.0 Top Notch Weir: None Outflow Rating Curve: None Stage Elevation Storage Discharge Percolation (ft) (ft) (cu. ft) (ac-ft) (cfs) (cfs) 0.00 359.00 0. 0.000 0.000 0.00 0.01 359.01 53. 0.001 0.002 0.00 0.02 359.02 105. 0.002 0.002 0.00 0.03 359.03 158. 0.004 0.003 0.00 0.04 359.04 210. 0.005 0.004 0.00 0.05 359.05 263. 0.006 0.004 0.00 0.06 359.06 315. 0.007 0.004 0.00 0.07 359.07 368. 0.008 0.004 0.00 0.26 359.26 1367. 0.031 0.009 0.00 0.46 359.46 2418. 0.056 0.012 0.00 0.65 359.65 3416. 0.078 0.014 0.00 0.85 359.85 4468. 0.103 0.016 0.00 1. 05 360.05 5519. 0.127 0.018 0.00 1.24 360.24 6517. 0.150 0.019 0.00 1. 44 360.44 7569. 0 .174 0.021 0.00 1. 64 360.64 8620. 0.198 0.022 0.00 1. 83 360.83 9619. 0.221 0.024 0.00 2.03 361. 03 10670. 0.245 0.025 0.00 2.22 361. 22 11668. 0. 268 0.026 0.00 2.42 361. 42 12720. 0.292 0.027 0.00 2.62 361.62 13771. 0.316 0.028 0.00 2.81 361. 81 14769. 0.339 0.029 0.00 3.01 362.01 15821. 0.363 0.030 0.00 3.20 362.20 16819. 0. 386 0.031 0.00 3.40 362.40 17870. 0.410 0.032 0.00 3.60 362.60 18922. 0.434 0.033 0.00 3.79 362. 79 19920. 0.457 0.034 0.00 ©2014 D.R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat Page 22 Technical Information Report City of Renton 3.99 362. 99 20971. 0.481 0.035 0.00 4.18 363.18 21970. 0.504 0.036 0.00 4.38 363.38 23021. 0.528 0.036 0.00 4.58 363.58 24072. 0.553 0.037 0.00 4.77 363.77 25071. 0.576 0.038 0.00 4.97 363.97 26122. 0.600 0.039 0.00 5.16 364.16 27121. 0.623 0.040 0.00 5.36 364.36 28172. 0.647 0.040 0.00 5.56 364.56 29223. 0.671 0.041 0.00 5.75 364.75 30222. 0.694 0.042 0.00 5.95 364.95 31273. 0. 718 0.042 0.00 6.00 365.00 31536. 0. 724 0.043 0.00 6.02 365.02 31641. 0. 726 0.043 0.00 6.03 365.03 31694. o. 728 0.045 0.00 6.05 365.05 31799. 0.730 0.047 0.00 6.06 365.06 31851. 0.731 0.050 0.00 6.08 365.08 31956. 0.734 0.055 0.00 6.09 365.09 32009. 0.735 0.060 0.00 6.11 365 .11 32114. 0.737 0.064 0.00 6.13 365.13 32219. 0.740 0.065 0.00 6.14 365.14 32272. 0.741 0.067 0.00 6.34 365.34 33323. 0.765 0.080 0.00 6.53 365.53 34322. 0.788 0.090 0.00 6.73 365.73 35373. 0.812 0.099 0.00 6.93 365.93 36424. 0.836 0.106 0.00 7.12 366.12 37423. 0.859 0.113 0.00 7.32 366.32 38474. 0.883 0.119 0.00 7.51 366.51 39473. 0.906 0.125 0.00 7. 71 366. 71 40524. 0.930 0.130 0.00 7.91 366.91 41575. 0.954 0.135 0.00 8.10 367.10 42574. 0.977 0.140 0.00 8.20 367.20 43099. 0.989 0.143 0.00 8.21 367.21 43152. 0.991 0.143 0.00 8.22 367.22 43204. 0.992 0.144 0.00 8.23 367.23 43257. 0.993 0.145 0.00 8.24 367.24 43309. 0.994 0.146 0.00 8.25 367.25 43362. 0.995 0.148 0.00 8. 26 367. 26 43415. 0.997 0.150 0.00 8.27 367.27 43467. 0.998 0.151 0.00 8.28 367.28 43520. 0.999 0.151 0.00 8.48 367.48 44571. 1. 023 0.162 0.00 8.67 367.67 45570. 1. 046 0.170 0.00 8.87 367.87 46621. 1.070 0.178 0.00 9.06 368.06 47619. 1. 093 0.185 0.00 9.26 368.26 48671. 1.117 0.191 0.00 9.46 368.46 49722. 1.141 0.197 0.00 9.65 368.65 50720. 1.164 0.203 0.00 9.85 368.85 51772. 1.189 0.209 0.00 10.00 369.00 52560. 1.207 0.213 0.00 10.10 369.10 5308 6. 1. 219 0.678 0.00 10.20 369.20 53611. 1. 231 1.520 0.00 • 10.30 369.30 54137. 1.243 2.620 0.00 10.40 369.40 54662. 1. 255 3.920 0.00 ©2014 D.R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat Page 23 Technical Information Report City of Renton 10.50 369. 50 55188. 1. 267 5.390 0.00 10.60 369.60 55714. 1. 279 6.820 0.00 10.70 369.70 56239. 1. 291 7.350 0.00 10.80 369.80 56765. 1. 303 7.840 0.00 10.90 369.90 57290. 1.315 8.310 0.00 11. 00 370.00 57816. 1. 327 8.750 0.00 11.10 370.10 58342. 1. 339 9.170 0.00 11.20 370.20 58867. 1. 351 9.560 0.00 11. 30 370.30 59393. 1. 363 9.950 0.00 11. 40 370.40 59918. 1. 376 10.320 0.00 11. 50 370.50 60444. 1. 388 10.670 0.00 11. 60 370.60 60970. 1. 400 11. 020 0.00 11. 70 370.70 61495. 1. 412 11. 350 0.00 11. 80 370.80 62021. 1. 424 11. 670 0.00 Hyd Inflow Outflow Peak Storage Stage Elev (Cu-Ft) (Ac-Ft) 1 1. 37 0.21 9. 96 368.96 5235 6. 2 0.69 0.20 9.54 368.54 50140. 3 0.83 0.15 8.35 367.35 43888. 4 0.96 0.14 8.17 367.17 42929. 5 0.74 0.09 6.58 365.58 34569. 6 0.79 0.04 5.89 364.89 30970. 7 0.59 0.04 5.95 364.95 31284. 8 0.66 0.04 4. 02 363.02 21138. Hyd R/D Facility Tributary Reservoir POC Outflow Outflow Inflow Inflow 1 0.21 0 .11 ******** 2 0.20 0.05 ******** 3 0.15 0.06 ******** 4 0.14 0.05 ******** 5 0.09 0.05 ******** 6 0.04 0.03 ******** 7 0.04 0.03 ******** 8 0.04 0.01 ******** Route Time Series through Facility Inflow Time Series File:rdin.tsf Outflow Time Series File:rdout POC Time Series File:dsout Inflow/Outflow Analysis Peak Inflow Discharge: Peak Outflow Discharge: Peak Reservoir Stage: Peak Reservoir Elev: 1.37 0.212 9.96 368. 96 CFS CFS Ft Ft Target 0.32 ******* ******* ******* ******* ******* ******* ******* at 6:00 at 13:00 Peak Reservoir Storage: 52356. Cu-Ft Add Time Series:bypass.tsf Peak Summed Discharge: 1. 202 Ac-Ft 0.279 CFS at 9:00 Cale 0.28 0.24 0.19 0.18 0.13 0.07 0.06 0.04 on Jan on Jan on Jan ©2014 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Technical lnfonnation Report Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat 1.202 1.151 1.008 0.986 0. 794 0. 711 0. 718 0.485 9 in 9 in 9 in Year 8 Year 8 Year 8 Page 24 City of Renton • Point of Compliance File:dsout.tsf 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 0.200 2 2/09/01 20:00 0.212 9. 96 1 100.00 0.990 0.042 6 1/07/02 4:00 0.200 9.54 2 25.00 0. 960 0.155 3 3/06/03 22:00 0.155 8.35 3 10.00 0.900 0.035 8 8/26/04 8:00 0.142 8.17 4 5.00 0.800 0.042 7 1/08/05 5:00 0.092 6.58 5 3.00 0.667 0 .092 5 1/19/06 0:00 0.042 5.95 6 2.00 0.500 0.142 4 11/24/06 8:00 0.042 5.89 7 1. 30 0.231 0.212 1 1/09/08 13: 00 0.035 4.02 8 1.10 o. 091 Computed Peaks 0.208 9.81 50.00 0.980 Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:dsout.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 0.244 2 2/09/01 18:00 0.279 1 100.00 0.990 0.062 7 1/05/02 16:00 0.244 2 25.00 0.960 0.187 3 3/06/03 21:00 0.187 3 10.00 0.900 0.043 8 8/26/04 2:00 0.176 4 5.00 0.800 0.067 6 1/05/05 8:00 0.127 5 3.00 0.667 0.127 5 1/18/06 23:00 0.067 6 2.00 0.500 0 .176 4 11/24/06 7:00 0.062 7 . 1. 30 0.231 0.279 1 1/09/08 9:00 0.043 8 1.10 0.091 Computed Peaks 0.267 50.00 0.980 Flow Duration from Time Series File:rdout.tsf Cutoff Count Frequency CFS % 0.003 25868 42.185 0.008 7743 12.627 0.014 7316 11. 931 0.020 6824 11.129 0.025 4952 8.076 0.031 4031 6.574 0.036 2345 3.824 0.042 1630 2.658 0.048 248 0.404 0.053 10 0.016 0.059 6 0.010 0. 064 14 0.023 0.070 25 0.041 0.076 41 0.067 0.081 35 0.057 0.087 27 0.044 ©2014 D.R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Technical Information Report CDF Exceedence Probability % % 42.185 57.815 0.578E+OO 54.812 45.188 0.452E+OO 66.743 33.257 0.333E+OO 77. 872 22.128 0.221E+00 85.947 14.053 0.141E+00 92.521 7.479 0.748E-01 96.345 3.655 0.365E-01 99.004 0.996 0.996E-02 99.408 0.592 0.592E-02 99.424 0.576 0.576E-02 99.434 0. 566 0.566E-02 99.457 0.543 0.543E-02 99.498 0.502 0.502E-02 99.565 0.435 0.435E-02 99.622 0.378 0.378E-02 99.666 0.334 0.334E-02 Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat Page 25 City of Renton 0. 092 35 0.057 99.723 0.277 0.277E-02 0.098 24 0.039 99.762 0.238 0.238E-02 0.103 17 0.028 99.790 0.210 0.210E-02 0.109 12 0.020 99.809 0.191 0.191E-02 0.115 11 0.018 99.827 0.173 0.173E-02 0.120 8 0. 013 99.840 0.160 0.160E-02 0.126 19 0.031 99. 871 0.129 0.129E-02 0 .131 13 0.021 99. 8 92 0.108 0.108E-02 0.137 13 0.021 99.914 0.086 0.864E-03 0.143 15 0.024 99.938 0.062 0.620E-03 0.148 5 0.008 99.946 0.054 0.538E-03 0.154 6 0.010 99.956 0.044 0.440E-03 0.159 7 0. Oll 99.967 0.033 0.326E-03 0.165 1 0.002 99.969 0.031 0.310E-03 0 .171 3 0.005 99.974 0.026 0.261E-03 0.176 1 0.002 99.976 0.024 0.245E-03 0.182 3 0.005 99.980 0.020 0.196E-03 0.187 3 0.005 99.985 0.015 0.147E-03 0.193 4 0.007 99.992 0.008 0.815E-04 0.199 3 0.005 99.997 0.003 0.326E-04 Flow Duration from Time Series File:dsout.tsf Cutoff Count Frequency CDF Exceedence Probability CFS % % % 0.003 26287 42.869 42.869 57.131 0.571E+OO 0.010 9494 15.483 58.351 41. 649 0.416E+00 0. 017 7743 12.627 70.978 29.022 0.290E+OO 0.024 6909 ll. 267 82.246 17.754 0.178E+OO 0.031 4898 7.988 90.233 9. 767 0.977E-01 0.038 2695 4.395 94.628 5.372 0.537E-01 0.045 1638 2. 671 97.299 2.701 0.270E-01 0.051 956 1. 559 98.858 1.142 0. ll4E-01 0.058 226 0.369 99.227 0. 773 0.773E-02 0.065 90 0.147 99.374 0. 626 0.626E-02 0 .072 27 0.044 99.418 0.582 0.582E-02 0.079 29 0.047 99.465 0.535 0.535E-02 0.086 44 0. 072 99.537 0. 463 0.463E-02 0.093 38 0. 062 99.599 0.401 0.401E-02 0.099 32 0.052 99.651 0.349 0.349E-02 0.106 23 0.038 99.689 0 .3ll 0. 3llE-02 0. ll3 14 0.023 99. 711 0.289 0.289E-02 0.120 27 0.044 99.755 0.245 0.245E-02 0.127 22 0.036 99.791 0.209 0.209E-02 0.134 16 0.026 99.817 0.183 0.183E-02 0.141 10 0.016 99.834 0.166 0.166E-02 0.147 12 0.020 99.853 0.147 0.147E-02 0.154 14 0.023 99.876 0.124 0.124E-02 0.161 10 0.016 99. 8 92 0 .108 0.108E-02 0.168 12 0.020 99.912 0.088 0.881E-03 0.175 13 0.021 99.933 0. 067 0.669E-03 0.182 10 0.016 99.949 0.051 0.506E-03 0.189 8 0.013 99. 962 0.038 0.375E-03 0.195 3 0.005 99. 967 0.033 0.326E-03 ©2014 D.R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat Page 26 Technical lnfomiation Report City of Renton 0.202 3 0.005 99.972 0.028 0.277E-03 0.209 1 0.002 99.974 0.026 0.261E-03 0.216 2 0.003 99.977 0.023 0.228E-03 0.223 2 0.003 99.980 0.020 0 .196E-03 0.230 2 0.003 99.984 0.016 0.163E-03 0.237 5 0.008 99.992 0.008 0.815E-04 0.243 2 0.003 99.995 0.005 0.489E-04 Duration Comparison Anaylsis Base File: predev.tsf New File: dsout.tsf Cutoff Units: Discharge in CFS -----Fraction of Time--------------Check of Tolerance------- Cutoff Base New %Change Probability 0.055 0.95E-02 0.87E-02 -8.1 I 0.95E-02 0.070 0.63E-02 0.60E-02 -6.2 I 0.63E-02 0.085 0.50E-02 0. 46E-02 -6.3 I 0.50E-02 0.100 0.37E-02 0.35E-02 -6.2 I 0.37E-02 0.115 0.29E-02 0.28E-02 -2.8 I 0.29E-02 0.130 0.22E-02 0.19E-02 -12.5 I 0.22E-02 0.145 0.15E-02 0.15E-02 3.3 I 0.15E-02 0.160 O.lOE-02 0. llE-02 6.3 I O.lOE-02 0.175 0. 62E-03 0.67E-03 7.9 I 0.62E-03 0.190 0.34E-03 0.36E-03 4.8 I 0.34E-03 0.205 0.21E-03 0.28E-03 30.8 I 0.21E-03 0.220 0.16E-03 0.20E-03 20.0 I 0.16E-03 0.236 0. llE-03 0.98E-04 -14.3 I O.llE-03 Maximum positive excursion= 0.017 cfs ( 8.0%) occurring at 0.211 cfs on the Base Data:predev.tsf and at 0.228 cfs on the New Data:dsout.tsf Maximum negative excursion= 0.006 cfs ( -8.1%) occurring at 0.070 cfs on the Base Data:predev.tsf and at 0.064 cfs on the New Data:dsout.tsf Base 0.055 0.070 0.085 0.100 0.115 0.130 0.145 0.160 0.175 0.190 0.205 0.220 0.236 ©2014 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Technical Information Report Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat New 0.054 0.064 0.082 0.097 0.114 0.125 0.147 0.163 0.178 0.193 0.219 0.230 0.235 %Change -2.2 -8.1 -3.1 -3.4 -1. 2 -4.3 1. 3 1. 9 1.3 1. 2 6.8 4.3 -0.2 Page 27 City of Renton PEAK PLOT e P1""d -flOIY F1o,q•i,f'ty -KCRTS 10·1 - [ - -• ll' ~ ~ 10·~ : 10• 1 <> rdout.pks ill Sea-Tac • dsout pks o pradsv r,lis 2 • • 10 DURATION ANALYSIS e P1u1cd • O..ir.tion An1ly>i1 • KCIIT$ m ~ 1\ 0 R 0 ~ 0 " m ~ .., 8. 0 • 000 r ~ m q 0 11 " 0 0 :l a 10. 10 •4 20 ©2014 D.R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Technical Information Report I • .. JO 10 •3 2 . R = • • • " 40 50 ea Cumu!a!IV9 Probeb!lity Prob~birily E~ceooence ' • 70 10 ·l Return Period 5 . BO Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat ' • 90 20 ' ' 95 10 -1 50. 100 0 98 99 -s " rdout.dur • dsoutdur • TARGET.dur ' 10' Page 28 City of Renton WATER QUALITY TREATMENT SYSTEM (PART E) The Project is located in the Basic Water Quality Treatment area. The treatment goal is 80% removal of total suspend solids (TSS) for a typical rainfall year, assuming typical pollutant concentrations in urban runoff. The combined detention/water quality vault will accommodate this requirement. Rainfall (R) of the mean annual storm = ! : Area of im_Penious surface ('.'\i) =, Area of WI soi~crn.ered wit~_til~ g..rass (Atg) = I I Area of till soil co,.ered with till forest (Atf) =; Area of outwash soii co,.ered with grass ;r ft,rest (Aoi = I I . . Volume factor (I) = I ' : Calculations i ~olume of runoff from mea~ annual storm (Vr) = j : Minimum Wetpool \Olu_me required (Vb) = I 0.47 113,314 29,965 0 0 3 4,288 12,863 ©2014 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Technical Information Report Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat ;in. ls.f. !s.f. Is. r. : s. f. ;NiA IC. f. , C. f. Units Page 29 Cily of Renton • FIGURE 7 DETENTION & WATER QUALITY FACILITY DETAILS This will be provided at time of final engineering . ©2014 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Technical Information Report Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat Page 30 City of Renton • SECTION V CONVEYANCE SYSTEM ANALYSIS AND DESIGN Per C.R. #4 of the KCSWDM, the conveyance system must be analyzed and designed for existing tributary and developed onsite runoff from the proposed project. Pipe systems shall be designed to convey the 100-year design storm. The Rational Method will be used to calculate the Q-Ratio for each pipe node. A conveyance system consisting primarily of pipes and catch basins has been designed for the Project. . Onsite runoff will be collected by the multiple catch basins. Pipes are typically twelve-inch diameter LCPE material. The pipes will have a minimum slope of 0.50% . ©2014 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Technical Information Report Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat Page 31 City of Renton • BACKWATER ANALYSIS A backwater analysis will be provided at time of final engineering . ©2014 0. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Technical Information Report Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat Page 32 City of Renton SECTION VI SPECIAL REPORTS AND STUDIES The following report and studies have been provided with this submittal. 1. Traffic Impact Analysis -TraffEx, Inc. April 23, 2013 2. Critical Area Study -Wetland Resources, Inc. April 8, 2013 3. Supplemental Stream Study -Wetland Resources, Inc. May 10, 2013 4. Geotechnical Engineering Study -Earth Solutions NW LLC, February 25, 2013 5. Slope Stability Analysis -Earth Solutions NW LLC, April 10, 2013 6. Proposed Stormwater Vault-Earth Solutions NW LLC, June 24, 2014 ©2014 D.R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Technical Information Report Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat Page 33 City of Renton SECTION VII OTHER PERMITS, VARIANCES AND ADJUSTMENTS None at this time. ©2014 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Technical lnfom1ation Report Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat Page 34 City of Renton SECTION VIII ESC PLAN ANALYSIS AND DESIGN (PART A) The Erosion and Sedimentation Control Design meets the nine minimum requirements: 1. Clearing Limits -Areas to remain undisturbed shall be delineated with a high- visibility plastic fence prior to any site clearing or grading. 2. Cover Measures -Disturbed Site areas shall be covered with mulch and seeded, as appropriate, for temporary or permanent measures. 3. Perimeter protection -Perimeter protection shall consist of a silt fence down slope of any disturbed areas or stockpiles. 4. Traffic Area Stabilization -A stabilized construction entrance will be located at the point of ingress/egress. 5. Sediment Retention -Surface water collected from disturbed areas of the Site shall be routed through a sediment vault or sediment traps prior to release from the Site. The sediment vault or traps will be installed prior to grading of any contributing area. · 6. Surface Water Control -Interceptor berms or swales shall be installed to control and intercept all surface water from disturbed areas. Surface water controls shall be installed concurrently with and/or immediately following rough grading. 7. Dewatering Control -Will be provided as needed. 8. Dust Control -Dust control shall be provided by spraying exposed soils with water until wet. This is required when exposed soils are dry to the point that wind transport is possible which would impact roadways, drainage ways, surface waters, or neighboring residences. 9. Flow Control -Runoff collected in the sediment vault will discharge to the permanent detention vault outfall system. ©2014 D.R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Technical Information Report Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat Page 35 City of Renton SWPPS PLAN DESIGN (PART B) Construction activities that could contribute pollutants to surface and storm water include the following, with applicable BMP's listed for each item: 1. Storage and use of chemicals: Utilize source control, and soil erosion and sedimentation control practices, such as using only recommended amounts of chemical materials applied in the proper manner; neutralizing concrete wash water, and disposing of excess concrete material only in areas prepared for concrete placement, or return to batch plant; disposing of wash-up waters from water-based paints in sanitary sewer; disposing of wastes from oil-based paints, solvents, thinners, and mineral spirits only through a licensed waste management firm, or treatment, storage, and disposal (TSD) facility. 2. Material delivery and storage: Locate temporary storage areas away from vehicular traffic, near the construction entrance, and away from storm drains. Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) should be supplied for all materials stored, and chemicals kept in their original labeled containers. Maintenance, fueling, and repair of heavy equipment and vehicles shall be conducted using spill prevention and control measures. Contaminated surfaces shall be cleaned immediately following any. spill incident. Provide cover, containment, and protection from vandalism for all chemicals, liquid products, petroleum products, and other potentially hazardous materials. 3. Building demolition: Protect stormwater drainage system from sediment-laden runoff and loose particles. To the extent possible, use dikes, berms, or other methods to protect overland discharge paths from runoff. Street gutter, sidewalks, driveways, and other paved surfaces in the immediate area of demolition must be swept daily to collect and properly dispose of loose debris and garbage. Spray the minimum amount of water to help control windblown fine particles such as concrete, dust, and paint chips. Avoid excessive spraying so that runoff from the site does not occur, yet dust control is achieved. Oils must never be used for dust control. 4. Sawcutting: Slurry and cuttings shall be vacuumed during the activity to prevent migration offsite and must not remain on permanent concrete or asphalt paving overnight. Collected slurry and cuttings shall be disposed of in a manner that does not violate ground water or surface water quality standards. The complete CSWPPP will be submitted at the time of final engineering. ©2014 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Technical lnfonnation Report Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat Page 36 City of Renton SECTION IX BOND QUANTITIES, FACILITY SUMMARIES, AND DECLARATION OF COVENANT 1. Bond Quantity Worksheet -will be submitted at final engineering 2. The Stormwater Facility Summary Sheet is included in this section 3. Declaration of Covenant-a draft has been provided with this submittal. ©2014 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Technical Information Report Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat Page 37 City of Renton • STORMWATER FACILITY SUMMARY SHEET Development ___ ~V~u~e~cr~e~s~t=E=s~ta~t~es~ ___ Date May 21, 2013 Location 4800 Block of Smithers Avenue S, Renton, WA ENGINEER DEVELOPER Name Maher A. Joudi, P.E. Name Firm D. R. STRONG Consulting Firm Harbour Homes, LLC Engineers, Inc. Address 10604 NE 38"' Place, #232 Address 1441 North 34'" Street, Suite 200 Kirkland, WA 98033 Phone (425) 827-3063 Developed Site: 3.98 acres Number of lots 20 Number of detention facilities on site: 1 vault ___ pond tanks --- Seattle, WA 98103 Phone (206) 315-8130 Number of infiltration facilities on site: vaults --- vaults --- tanks --- Flow control provided in regional facility (give location) ______________ _ No flow control required __ Exemption number D ownstream D . ramaae B . asms Immediate Major Basin Basin Black River Duwamish -Green River Number & type of water quality facilities on site: ___ biofiltration swale (regular/weU or continuous inflow?) ___ sand filter (basic or large?) sand filter, linear (basic or large?) ___ CONTECH Stormfilter ---'1'--combined detention/WQ vault __ sand filter vault (basic or large?) combined detention/wetpond ___ stormwater wetland ___ compost filter ___ wetvault (basic or large?) ___ filter strip ___ Wetvault ___ flow dispersion ___ pre-settling pond ___ farm management plan ___ flow-splitter catchbasin ___ landscape management plan ©2014 D.R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Technical Information Report Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat Page 38 City of Renton C ___ oil/water separator (baffle or coalescing plate?) catch basin inserts: --Manufacturer_,,-_________________ _ ___ pre-settling structure: Manufacturer ___________________ _ DESIGN INFORMATION INDIVIDUAL BASIN Water Qualitv desian flow Water Qualitv treated volume Drainaae basin(s) Onsite area (includes frontaae) 3.98 Offsite area Tvoe of Storaae Facilitv Vault Live Storaae Volume !rec uired) 52,560 Predev Runoff Rate 2-vear 0.110 10-vear 0.193 100-year 0.321 Develooed Runoff Rate 2-year 0.067 ( dsout.tsf) 10-vear 0.187 100-vear 0.279 Tvoe of Restrictor Frop-Tee Size of orifice/restriction No. 1 0.80 No.2 1.52 No. 3 0.95 ©2014 D.R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Technical Information Report Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat Page 39 City of Renton SECTION X OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE MANUAL Excerpts from the 2009 KCSWDM will be provided at final engineering. ©2014 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Technical Information Report Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat Page 40 City of Renton ©2014 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Technical Information Report APPENDICES Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat Page 41 City of Renton APPENDIX "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION PARCEL "C" OF CITY OF RENTON LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NUMBER LUA-02-045- LLA, RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 20020823900003, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. ©2014 D.R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Technical Information Report Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat Page 42 City of Renton • ! ~ r ' i l ' ' t ~ I • I w ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N st <O 0 0 0 I t') ~ <( ::::, _J en w I- <( I-en w I-en w 0:: CJ w ::::, > ----, v TRACT"F" SENSJ1111: AREA 142,070 S.F. SE 1/4 SECTION 31, TOWNSHIP 23 N, RANGE 5 ~ W.M .. VUECREST ESTA TES (Fr.AL _DfSCRfP770N· ---- ) , • , 1 , : : • : '. \:: : ! tt :-;-, J • ,S,.llo,Ru\lF"'-JYOCl!!R'--'--sw,Ns.O«TFS=,..·----------------- r .• " , • ' , , l , ' " , 1 , r ' -----i 7. A1.1. 111LE INFORJIATION 91()\tN ON THIS JIAP HAS 8£EN EXTRA.Cr@ fflOl;I CHICAGO T/1l£ 1 "' ,, :;1~(_,fl~f, \ i::::tfff5tf.[t'P~[,~'i:;fti:::Jlfll~~0~1~~3.~11t"f,;#:o,~~SUAP, t, ~ r:~~-,; ' D.R. STRONC CONSUl.1/NG CNGINEERS INC. HAS CONDlJCTro NO IND£PENO£NT TIT[£ S£ARCH NOR IS ;;-1, ~ ~',1_12<3. :-,J~ ~~,fg5"'-,,:;rf:sc~~A~~::::::;:M.=:/:JiJlffC£D~':itFfiru: C ' L • 1NSURIWC£ CO/JPANY COIIMJTIIENT. D.R. STRONG CONSUi.TiNG !NGINFIRS INC. HAS REl..JED l!Ha.LY ON a«:AGO 1111.E COIIPANY Rf;PR£S£NTATION5 OF 711£ 1111.E'S CON0/1/(J/ 10 PREPARE THIS SUR1.£Y AND 4 TH£R£FOR(: D.R. STRONG CONSIJI.T/l{G £NGINURS INC OUAJ.JFl£S TH£ UN>'S ActUi'ACY AND -----\ COMPl.£TD/£SS TO T/-IAT fXTVIT. THE RESERVE AT STONOlA'o'W !.t. ~~~:osn:: ~w~~ a::~~::' oc~ -:,'i VOL 2"-PG's. 43-47. 4. AU. DISTANCES ARE IN FIT7. 5. ~ISA Fl£lD mA~ SURIEY. A l..EICA R-.£: SECOND COllflH£D £1..£C1FKINIC TOTAi.. $TA1ION WAS usm TO MEASURE rH£ ANGUU.R ,t,N() DISTANCE R£Ut TIONSHJPS BCnlffN TH£ COHTROLJJNG UONU/.1£NTATION AS SHOWN. CLOSURE RATIOS OF 11-1£ TRA1o£RS£ I/CT OR £XCCED£D THOSE: SP£C/F1£D IN WAC .ll2-l.30--090. AU. J/£4SVRJNG INS7RUJ.l£N1S AND EOIJIPll£VT AR£ JIAJNTAINED IN A/MJS11KNT ACCORDING 10 lilNIUFAC1URffi'S SP£CIF1CATIOHS. 6. UT/UT/£S OTHER THAN rH0S£ SHOWN AMY Dt15T ON THIS Sl1E ONLY TH0S£ U111J11£5 lffrH I ~cZ.11~:g~AR£11GW~}k~~=C=~~ /I". STRAIGIIT UN£S 8£TlfffN SURFACC UTHJTY LOCA170NS BUT NAY COli'TAIN BENDS OR CURVES NOT 1 SHOffN. SO#£ UNIXRGROVNO Loct71DNS SHOV>N HER£ON MAY HA\£ 8ffN TAJ<£N FROIJ PU8UC 7 ~Rf'.~STRCWG CCNSVl.11NG £NGlN££RS INC. A5SUIJES NO UAIIJLJTY FOR TH£ ACCURACY OF ·1"--='"--,""'"""-"-'C....--ll \ -un F RfSTR(CUONS- TRACT A ,. rHIS Sl7E: IS 51.JB..£CT ro 1H£ TERMS NID COMJ11/0NS CF AN £:ASEJIENT ro 111£ QTY CF RD/TUI 'I' \" ,2 "' AND TALBOT 0£1/£l.OPUENT PART1ERS,. L.J..C. FOR A ~ARY CUf_-0£-SAC AS DISCL0S£D BY '>~ • if•-1 .~-INSIRUJl£NT R£CORD£D UN0£R R£CmDING N1JUB£R RECORDING NJll8£R 19990826000429. TH£ ·1 £:ASD/£NT ARf'A DESlRIB£D rlfTH!N 5AIV INSTRfhtl£NT IS SHO'M'1 H£R£r:M. ~ ·;·· . 2 ~[.:Jfc.~~~'fy";f.s=5~:ffmno:J:~f!/'!ffDl~sc:~JTB7;,°,lJ'~SOlf'° 1--,,'-------'"'"'-__:____:___~J '--'.;~!'~t.f~.;c.s ~new ~1HIN ~:::::; I~~ ~rx:;88 ~£N~£XACT I . LOCA 7ION 1111HIN 1H£ SIT£ A ~AGE DEPTH AND I .x mis Sire 1s SUB.ECT TO TH£ rE:RUs NID CONDITIONS OF QTY er R£NTDN ORDSNANC£ NWB£R WIDTH TABLE , \ = = = ~~/(,t~~JrcR£~r=/ff'r:.L01t£!/J/:flft,/:f:li~f('/J'THER LOT NO. DEPTH WIDTH \' ( £ • 0 Off-SIT£ PR<P!RTY. , ,22 50 I .,, ~~rc~~J?:=rJ!J'l,/f.:1'!,f2'~~=8:::;Jl.'Jcff./'{.,ff 2 124 50 I CONN£C1/0H TO A WAID<' SYSTEJI AS D/SQ..05£D BY INSTRUl,l£N1 R£CORD£D UND£R R£CORDINC .3 ,u ~ / ~'<.,lo ~:o::;:;;29~£:ff:lfff!/,_1~:SBT:tJ/fD,JYJ:im£~~~AJN'f? 4 124 50 LEGAL D£SCRJP110N FOR 1HIS AND OTHER Off-S/7E: PR<P£RTY. : ::: : ( £ ~~ S::,£Cd:;r:'s,£ ~::.AN~ :n:~ ~~~~~TUE ~ AD.JiSTMCNT RECORDED UNDCR RECORDING NUJ,/Blli 20020eZJ9(}(J(J(ll NO SUCH CO\.£N..\N~ 7 f20 ~ ,, COND/710NS. R£SiRJCTIONS, D.S£/J£N1S, NO~ D£D/CA110NS OR SflBAa<S IIERf" PRODUCED BY 8 1.32 50 5AltJ BOUNDARY/1._0T UH£ AD.IJSTIKNT. i 9 97 10 RFFfRFNCfS- ,0 95 50 t. QTY OF R£NTtll LOT UN£ /u)JJSTIIENT NUMBER WA-D2-/US-ll.A, ReCORD£D UNDER KING 11 lllJ 50 CDUNTY R£CORDnlG NUIIB£R 2002082J900(Xll. 12 90 6(J ~ ... /}:~;GAllJ~ ~~ VOI..UUE 194 OF Pl.A~ PAGES 15-17, UNDER KING 1.3 90 SO : 14 90 SO ! ~:;:,:; ~~ ~r,:,,,,~;t;~f:f/' iat/11£ 2.J:J OF PU,~ PAGCS 43-41, ,s 90 50 ; VERTlCAL DA TUM: • ;~ : : I ; ".,=~~.,"'"""='"a"n-"'w='ro,='rr,,=c.,,.=-=cccCCN::::::""'-=::,---------------- 1 ,8 so 56 ; : _ 1 /P+f2.'9 H=a~R~1~z,~a~t>1~r.~A"L~o~A""rui?:i1.1":""===-------------- 1 19 89 Iii I • -·, NAD 19BJ'/!n P£R aTY OF RENTON IJONUM£NTS. • 20_ 89 6.J , 1=B,,,A,.s,,1s.._,o,,_,_..a,.£,,A,.,R,,1N,,G,,s,,: ____ ~~~-------- , N20ll9'04"W BET,££N TH£ UONUME:NTS FOUND IN PU.a; AT CITY OF RENTON HORIZONTAL COHTROL I POINTS 1872 AND 1227. I BENCHMARK: =,."a"n-""w""""'"""'""""'"=="""-="m=•"•",,,.,==-=•,.=,•,--------------- FOUND CONCR£7E: /JC/NfJJ/£NT 111m BRASS PIN. 00'111'1 I.I' IN VONUIJ£NT CAS£ IN1CRSECTIDN OF S. 192ND STR£U AHO 99TH Pl.ACES. El.EVATIOH -J/9.47 FEIT. r C'.ZilM•,J 2. QTY OF RfNT"OH CONiRa. POINT NUUS£R 1227: •:;,c~,{-~-FOUND CONCR£1C MONUIIENT 111111 BRASS PU.JC, DO~ t.O IN IKMJll[Jff CASF DIVA170N -54.78 ,m ,. ~;'if'" n'~, ""C< · P~R~OuJE;=C~[~C~O~t/=T,~AuC~TS=;------------------ f:W-~43 ,;~ ¥.S:•~5 . ~~.:...~-~:::::::::::::~/iHOMS~C SUITE 200 ···---··-.. ·-·--··-·-·----····Sl"ATII..£ WASIIINGTON 9810., ·····--··---··-(206) .315-81:JO .................................................. CONTACT: JAM/£ WAL71£R J.~.J ~-·" ;:~~:::~::~~;:;;;:;:;;:;;;;:~~ ~ -· / :::::::::::::=::::~·---=:::~-~CTON 980.D ----__,.. / ···-· .. -····-··· ..... _.::·:::::::::c:::~=~~·~ SUR\£l"tlR... • ........................... D.R. STRONG CONSl.fl TING ENGIN££RS, /NC. •••-··-·-.................. -........ -.... 10604 N£ .JBrH PU.CE, SV/7E: 2J2 ••-····-·--··-·-·-·--·--·-l<IRKI..AND, WASHINGTON 980.JJ :::::::::::::::~~:::::::=::::::::::::=:::::~/A'f:.:s~£N J. sam£J. P.LS ··--·---···-·-··-·-·--SJD£.5afi£100RSTRONG.C061 SHE:£[ INQ£X: Cl I OF 7 PREU/tlJNARY Fr.AT UAP 10: 'I' C2 2 OF 7 TOPOGRAPHC I/AP C). ~ ~:~ ~=~~~::t:: VICINITY MAP 1·-1soo' @ PROJECT /NFORMA TION: NORTH TOTAi. EXISTING SITE AREA: TOTAL PRO.ECT AR€A: snc <DeR£5S, TAX PARCEL NIJUBER: PROPOS£D NI.JME£R OF LOTS: £»SWNG ZQNM; PROPOSED ZONING: D£NSITY PROP05£D/POMTTED: TRACT "A": u.Hl) IN PUBUa. y DEDtCA TED STR££TS: u.Hl) IN CRITICAL AMA~ u.ND IN CRITICAL ~ 8UF7'CRS: LAND IN PRJVArE: ACCESS E'ASDIENTS: SEIIER Dl51RJCT: WA1ER 0/SIRICT: SCHOOi. DISTRICT: LEGEND; 405,.J" 5.F. (9 . .Jt ACRe;) 17.3.25.J S.F. (.J..98 ACRES) SIJl71-1£R5 A\£ SOUTH, SOUTH OF, 50/JTH 47111 51R££T, RENTON WASHINGTON .312:JOS9fJ<fB "' " " <M/8 STORltl DRAINAGE 'TRACT 16,426 V. (0..377 ACRES) .38.506 S.F. (0.886 ACR£S) 155,081 S.F. (.X/560 ACRES) 59,85.J S.F. (1.J74 ACR£S) OS.F. QTY OF RENTON == ""'"" "'" EB 0 FOUND IIONU/tl£NT AS NOTED FOUND C0RN£R MONUJ,1£NT AS AS N07E:D. = """""' Ht • ffi C, ® STREU UGHT WATER VAi.\£ WATER UETFR CATa1 BASIN SANITARY Sf1IOl JIANHa.E 0 D£QDU0(JS TR££ 0 £VfRGR££N TR££, F=FIR, <:=CEDAR \fF \£R71CAL BOARD FDIC£ HWF HOG 111/!f" FENCE IIRAl8 flfll.AND FU,G • @ SQl. BORING, RN 1«-2 {DG£ OF PA'\£MEJiT NO TE FOR GER TIFICA TION OF SURVEY INFORMATION 11,£ rrJP{X;RAPHY AND BOUNDARY SHOWN H£R£DN ts 8AS£D UPON A FID..D SU/fl£Y BY D.R. STRafG CONSUL TING ENQNEERS. C/ : :, ;~~ ~ : : : =:ff:J:J-11CSPU.NPlAN ~;z:t;::;;tttttt:;:~t;c-i~ftfj;t,jf;;~filt'~~b!,,~~~m~ili.i.;c"~~~;;!12~~~±;;~if,-''+,¥<"•e,;___::__:,:_;~J j_.:~J;'.,',,-1,•~' J:\·~~·,~·;,_l C7 7 OF 7 ROAD PROF1L£ ANO CROSS-SECTION DETAJt..S . NORTH ·-, '.\•."· •. . -', 1'1""' _ LI I OF2 CONCU'11JA1.LANDSCAPEANDR£Pf.ACEJJ£NT1R£Cf'f.M / .J 1 ·::.; ·.~··:;":.' • ; / l;'i l ~.1;·1,:,:0, '.i,{'.'.',\.J". .. _ \\ -------L2 2 OF 2 CCIICEP71JAI. U,N05CAP£ AND RU't.ACDIDIT TR££ Pf.AN Cal 2 Wori:lrg DeYI Before You Dig 811 UISles ~Olh:I Loc:e!kin Center CD.MT,ND,OR,WA) [[D)RSJm D.R.STRONG CONSUL TING ENGINEERS -"""""' -fOIJ(>ltE.-R...C!JZ~WAM:lD 0~.3tJIJ3F42!1.1121.:KD NO. / ~ ... ~.:J ~~~. -_ j \ 1'' ;:I/-" '~'' ''' \ ... COi<,' E,U)C< WAU NI I OF 1 NEJGHBalHOQ} D£TA1l. MAP RCW> AND llRAIN,,GE REV • 15.14 -... -.... -= -.... REV1SION BY DATE APPR -.... Tl I OF I AS NOTED ·--..... ---- PRWWNARY TRAFFIC CONTROi.. Pl.AN ,.gf""::'l~ .. , ~ ~ CITY OF RENTON Plonning/Building/Public Works Dept. GRAPHIC SCALE 2.0 40 "" 11NCH•,40FT. VUE CREST ESTA TES PRELIMINARY PLAT PRELIMINARY PLAT PLAN -05.20.13 C1 ~7 DRS PROJECT NO. 12102 IAI-ININININIAJA! FIGURE 3 KING COUNTY IMAP TOPOGRAPHY @ Highlighted Feature -. ·-County Boundary X Mountain Peaks tr-JI Contours (5ft dark) /;::l ;./ 100;500; 1000 ;./ 0th« ©2014 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Level TWO Downstream Analysis Legend Highways D Streets ;./ HighW3)' A,!criol, Locol Parcels Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat Lakes and Large Rivers Streams Page4 City of Renton TASK2 RESOURCE REVIEW o Adopted Basin Plans: None at this time. o FloodplainlFloodway (FEMA) Map: The 500-year floodplain and 100-year floodplain with average depths of less than 1-foot exist on site, See Figure 9. o Other Offsite Analysis Reports: Other Offsite Analysis Reports include Campen Springs Condominiums and Borgata Apartments and Townhomes. o Sensitive Areas Folio Maps: See Figures 4-8 for documentation of the distance downstream from the proposed project to the nearest critical areas. Included, are sections of the King County Sensitive Areas Folio which indicate the following: o Figure 4 Streams and 100-Year Floodplains and Floodway: There is a 100 year floodplain within one mile of the Site along the downstream path. o Figure 5 Wetlands: There are mapped Wetlands that exists onsite. o Figure 6 Erosion Hazard: There are mapped Erosion Hazard Areas within one mile of the Site along the downstream path. o Figure 7 Landslide Hazard: There are mapped Landslide Hazard Areas within one mile of the Site along the downstream path. o Figure 8 Seismic Hazard: There are no mapped Seismic Hazard Areas within one mile of the Site along the downstream path. o DNRP Drainage Complaints and Studies: As shown in Figure 10, there are no drainage complaints within 1 mile of the Site along the downstream path. o Road Drainage Problems: None noted. o USDA King County Soils Survey: See Figure 11. o Wetlands Inventory: Vol. 2 South (1990) -The wetland inventory revealed no additional wetlands within the downstream path. o Migrating River Studies: None are applicable to the site. o Washington State Department of Ecology's latest published Clean Water Act Section 303d list of polluted waters: None listed along the downstream path. o King County Designated Water Quality Problems: None at this time. o Adopted Stormwater Compliance Plans: None applicable to this site. o Basin Reconnaissance Summary Reports: A report is available for the Black River Bain. See Appendix A for a copy of this report. ©2014 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Level lWO Downstream Analysis Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat Page 5 City of Renton FIGURE 4 STREAMS AND 100-YEAR FLOODPLAINS AND FLOODWAY ~ ·-Highlighted Feature County 8C)undary x Mounbln Peaks Highways Streett, ~ Highw;J)' lutmi.:ils .'v' ..... I.. 1 Parcels ·1 \ \ i I • • ) ( \ Legend SAO Stream # C"'51 # Cbn2Poronnbl ~ C~2Salmonid ;./ ..... , D Lakes and Large Rivera ;./ Streams D 100 Year Floodplain ; l ~- ©2014 D. R STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Level lWO Downstream Analysis Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat Page 6 City of Renton FIGURE 5 KING COUNTY IMAP WETLANDS -·--.,.~.n-----~-- ! : ent i i I / ····-/-.... I 1 I I j 4 " / •' ,. ' I I I ~ -. ·-X rJ!l i l f i I / Highlighted feature County Boundary Mountain Peaks Highways Streets W11hw;,y (cont) 17? ' i J D ;./ Ifill , ©2014 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Level 1WO Downstream Analysis Legend Attcri:lts local Parcels Lakes and Large Rivera Streams SAOW..Uand Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat -/ !/ .. j i Page 7 City of Renton FIGURE 6 CITY OF RENTON EROSION HAZARD AREAS If'"" (.Jl'Jl Renton City Limits ,t Education ~ Fire Stations * Police Department [[I Valley Medical Center ©2014 D. R STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Level TWO Downstream Analysis LEGEND Seversfcyr 5 High Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat Page8 City of Renton FIGURE 7 CITY OF RENTON LANDSLIDE HAZARD AREAS ll..i!!,c-/i='i11 1. Ii====' ::d=(f\'· ""16=!bJ ;~ D \ \ \ .,~--1 1./ , I S 55th LEGEND Renton City Limits Education Fire Stations Police Department Valley Medical Center Landslide Hazard Severity C8 Very High w High (';:) Moderate C3 Unclassified ©2014 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Level TWO Downstream Analysis Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat Page 9 City of Renton FIGURE 8 KING COUNTY IMAP SEISMIC HAZARD AREAS ent j -·--; ' .i 'I /, . ' i I i ! ' ' ) l / i @ -, ·-X rP l .~1 Highlighted Foature County Bounda,y Mountain Peake ,-I Highways D Streets ;./ High....ay ~ (cont) ©2014 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Level lWO Downstream Analysis Legend A.rtcrrl:ih L<>cal Parcels Lakes and Largo Rivera Streams SAO Seismic Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat Page 10 City of Renton FIGURE 9 FEMA-FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP CITY 01' KENT 530080 ~ \ 31 ZONE X CITY 01' REN'l'O"I rnioa~ NOTl! UA.P AREA :SHO\I.IN ON Tl-11$ PANn IS, lOCi!i.ll:tJ WJ!MIN TOW,..SHIP 1:.1 NO~fH'. f!AN(il; 5 ~A.ST AND tOWNS.1-flP :ZJ NOl{flf, RANGE 5 £AST, - '· LEGEND SPECIAL rLOoD tlAZARlJ ,\/([.\,<; INUND,\ffl) UY lllO-YEAR HOOD ZON( A ZONE AE u,,,,. 11 .. ,,1 ~I,·,,,,;.,,,, c~·l,•m,;""'· ZONE AH FJ,,,d 1~1,tlu ,~ l 1" I NM ,..,,,,,n... ·"''" ,.( l"'"''"'JI'; ,~,.... ,h,tl .,i, ........ ,. ,i..werni,.,<I ZONE AO 11<>"1 <lq~h; .,f I 1<, ,I i<,·t ·,~.,,di;, W,1 jl."' <NI ,J,.pl<ll; !,.,.,ain,; '"'"•'It" <l•.j~h, ,lrl,·,mio,..t. r,~ """' ,,1 .~l.ol JJn n,~,111,'!:- wl",·r.;,,. als., cld<'m"n"I ZONE Att T,, t.· l"''"~,t f~,m 11)>-t~"' th•I I,. fol,•ral /t..~I .,,,,,.,Ii"" 'l"'"" '"~~' ,,~,<111•1"1' 11<> h.1>1• ,J,'\,U'"'" cl,•Wmlo.<I. ZONE V t. .. »1.,1 n,~,.t .. , ..... .i«~ 11.va,<l ;"·"~ .• ,;,.,1; "'' 1,,.,.. ,1 .. ,1 ,11~.'"""" <11,,~"""~'1. ZONE VE ( ,.-,,;.,! ~, .. d wlll> ,-.,1,o<il) h,17.mJ '"'"'" ,1<'1im1l; !,,..., 11,<><I ,·~-.,11;,.,. d..-tem,;c,e;I. flOOOW,\Y AREAS !N ZONE ,\E OTH£R fl OOD ARfAS ZONE X .~'''" ,,1 ~()[J.yeo, lkou<I; ....,., nl IU()..,...~ 1\..,,t with """'·'~ d,-pt!,~ .,f le-" 11,.,, 1 ,.,..~ "' ,.;<!, d,aln.'l,'t' .,M•< ~ ... , 1h..o 1 "I"''"' n,11<-: .,,,,1 ""'·" pn,T<~L•:il ht l<1<•"" fmm 100-}'>•" n,~,d ()Tl l[R AREAS ZONI! X ZONED "'"'" dort1min«I ~' he "'"sick, 51l0.~)"" "'~~lpl,lOn. ''"'"' in whid, 11,ul hu~<tl, ••~ ......i.i<rm•R\..;l --r---.:---· --H I ' ~ F S· " ~ ' ~ ~ ·• ~ l SITE I ,, ~ '·' ~ I ~~ ©2014 D.R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Level lWO Downstream Analysis Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat \ ' - Page 11 City of Renton FIGURE 10 KING COUNTY IMAP DRAINAGE COMPLAINTS L•gond .[g Soltctodl P,arcola v" W11tiffflll -, county aound•r;, ,1;/J A.rt- I - Mountalri PeaK6 loc,l X Hlglwoy1 I ; Par-coll ' • j</ tncorl)CN'at1ld Are.a D Lak08 and largo Rl•,e1n S¥4iE1t& // Sb'Q.aTIUi (contl 0 DralnagQ Com_plalnt5 ©2014 D.R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Level lWO Downstream Analysis Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat Page 12 City of Renton FIGURE 11 USDA KING COUNTY SOILS SURVEY MAP AgC-Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes Map Unit Setting o Elevation: 50 to 800 feet o Mean annual precipitation: 25 to 60 inches o Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 52 degrees F o Frost-free period: 180 to 220 days Map Unit Composition o Alderwood and similar soils: 95 percent o Minor components: 5 percent Description of Alderwood Setting o Landform: Moraines, till plains ©2014 D.R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Level TWO Downstream Analysis Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat Page 13 City of Renton o Parent material: Basal till with some volcanic ash Properties and qualities o Slope: 6 to 15 percent o Depth to restrictive feature: 24 to 40 inches to densic material o Drainage class: Moderately well drained o Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to moderately low (0.00 to 0.06 in/hr) o Depth to water table: About 18 to 37 inches o Frequency of flooding: None o Frequency of ponding: None o Available water capacity: Very low (about 2.5 inches) Interpretive groups o Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance o Land capability (nonirrigated): 4s o Hydrologic Soil Group: B Typical profile o O to 12 inches: Gravelly sandy loam o 12 to 27 inches: Very gravelly sandy loam o 27 to 60 inches: Very gravelly sandy loam Minor Components Norma o Percent of map unit: 1 percent o Landform: Depressions Bellingham o Percent of map unit: 1 percent o Landform: Depressions Seattle o Percent of map unit: 1 percent o Landform: Depressions Tukwila o Percent of map unit: 1 percent o Landform: Depressions Shalcar o Percent of map unit: 1 percent o Landform: Depressions ©2014 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Level lWO Downstream Analysis Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat Page 14 City of Renton AgD-Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes Map Unit Setting o Elevation: 50 to 800 feet o Mean annual precipitation: 25 to 60 inches o Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 52 degrees F o Frost-free period: 180 to 220 days Map Unit Composition o Alderwood and similar soils: 100 percent Description of Alderwood Setting o Landform: Moraines, till plains o Parent material: Basal till with some volcanic ash Properties and qualities o Slope: 15 to 30 percent o Depth to restrictive feature: 24 to 40 inches to densic material o Drainage class: Moderately well drained o Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to moderately low (0.00 to 0.06 in/hr) o Depth to water table: About 18 to 37 inches o Frequency of flooding: None o Frequency of ponding: None o Available water capacity: Very low (about 2.5 inches) Interpretive groups o Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance o Land capability (nonirrigated): 4e o Hydrologic Soil Group: B Typical profile o Oto 12 inches: Gravelly ashy sandy loam o 12 to 27 inches: Very gravelly sandy loam o 27 to 60 inches: Very gravelly sandy loam ©2014 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Jnc. Leve11WO Downstream Analysis Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat Page 15 City of Renton TASK3 FIELD INSPECTION UPSTREAM TRIBUTARY AREA In evaluating the upstream area, we reviewed King County IMAP aerial topography and imagery and conducted field reconnaissance. We concluded that the upstream area does not drain to the developable area of the Site. A portion of the properties east of the Site appear to drain in an easterly manner towards 102nd Avenue SE. The western portion appears to drain towards the Site, however is intercepted by the two onsite wetlands and does not reach the developable Site. This area is approximately 6.34 acres. Properties to the north drain westerly not encroaching the Site. Properties to the south drains southerly away from the Site. GENERAL ONSITE AND OFFSITE DRAINAGE DESCRIPTION The total parcel area less the steep slopes which encumber the western half is approximately 6.05 acres; 2.10 acres of which is encumbered by wetland and open space tracts. For purposes of this report, the 6.05 acres will be considered the "Site". The Site topography slopes from the east of the .site to the west. The vegetation consists of trees and moderate underbrush. The Site contains two Natural Discharge Areas (NOA) whose downstream paths converge within one-quarter mile and are therefore contained within one Threshold Discharge Area (TOA). NOA 1 A portion of Site runoff (2.84 acres, 0.90 developable) travels westerly and flows off the Site, through a vegetated channel near S 50th Street, and eventually into a conveyance system within Talbot Road S. NDA2 Runoff from the remainder of the Site (3.21 acres, 3.08 developable) sheet flows down the steep sleep and into the conveyance system within the Campen Springs Condominium development before entering the conveyance system within Talbot Road S. ©2014 D.R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Level TWO Downstream Analysis Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat Page 16 City of Renton TASK 4 DRAINAGE SYSTEM DESCRIPTION AND PROBLEM DESCRIPTIONS DRAINAGE SYSTEM DESCRIPTION The downstream analysis is further illustrated and detailed in the Downstream Map and Downstream Table located in Appendix A. The downstream area is located within the Duwamish-Green River; more specifically the Black River sub basin. The downstream area was evaluated by reviewing available resources, and by conducting a field reconnaissance on February 13th, 2013 under overcast conditions. Downstream Path NDA 1 Runoff travels westerly through the site and appears to channelize as within the steep slope area before entering a defined channel on the neighboring property to the southwest. Runoff flows through a ductile iron pipe which appeared to be partially blocked before entering a manicured drainage channel heading west towards Talbot Road South (±800'). Runoff continues through a series of pipes and catch basins in a southerly direction within Talbot Road South until it tees into an 18" LCPE pipe (±1365') which conveys runoff westerly into a heavily vegetated area located within the Springbrook Apartments development, west of Talbot Road South (±1405') NDA2 Runoff travels westerly as sheet flow across the on-site steep slope area. Runoff eventually enters a series of birdcage structure catch basins on the Campen Springs property and is conveyed west through the property via a conveyance system consisting of catch basins, twelve inch pipes and the development water feature. Runoff eventually discharges into a wetland mitigation area just east of Talbot Road South before it continues south through the conveyance system within Talbot Road South. Runoff from NOA 2 converges with runoff from NOA 1 in front of the Borgata Apartments property (±1250'). Proposed Downstream Path and Analysis The proposed detention facility will discharge via an above ground HOPE pipe which will connect to CB No. 14 of the Campen Springs conveyance system. The conveyance system eventually discharges to the project's southerly detention facility before discharging to the southerly wetland mitigation area and out to Talbot Road South. Per the "Drainage Report for Campen Apartments" prepared by Daley-Morrow-Poblete, Inc. dated February 6, 1998, the Campen Site generates a total of 6.97 cfs in the 100- year, developed condition. There are essentially two conveyance systems within the Site, north and south, that are mirror images of one another and drain to two separate detention facilities; one for the northern portion, the other for the southern portion. Per the report, facility sizing was performed for the entire site, and then the required volume was split between the two detention vaults. Given the total site generated runoff of 6.97 ©2014 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Level TWO Downstream Analysis Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat Page 17 City of Renton cfs, it was assumed that 3.5 cfs is conveyed through each conveyance system. The 100-year discharge from the Vuecrest Estates Detention Facility is 0.212 cfs. A backwater analysis was performed with the following assumptions: o Discharge rate of 3.75 cfs through the entire southern conveyance system; and o Tailwater Elevation of the top of the riser within the Campen Springs Southern Vault, El. 185.5 These are both extremely conservative assumptions given the fact that discharge from the Campen site would only be 3.5 cfs at the inlet to the vault and would get incrementally smaller as it is analyzed upstream. Further, to assume a 100-year Tailwater Elevation for an analysis of the 100-year storm through the conveyance system essentially assumes a storm of 100-year intensity for 48 hours where the vault fills up to the 100-year stage in the first 24 hours and the conveyance system would continue to convey another 100-year storm in the second. Appendix B contains the backwater spreadsheet and maps as well as the analysis results. It was found that with these conservative assumptions, the addition of the Vuecrest Estates discharge would increase the headwater within the conveyance a maximum of 1.5 inches which does not appear to create any new downstream problems within the system. The conveyance system downstream of the detention facility was quantitatively analyzed (uniform flow analysis) using a maximum vault discharge flow of 3.75 cfs. The pipes downstream are 12-inch minimum diameter, smooth wall pipe with a minimum slope of 1.55%. Capacity of a 12-inch, smooth wall pipe (n=0.012) with a slope of 1.55% is approximately 4.81 cfs. Negligible impacts to the downstream system are expected. iffi/1 C:\Users\MAJ-1.DRS\Desktop\KCRTSF-1\FM.EXE Ci:rcula1" 'Channel: f1anning 1 S Eqi.fation Co111111eht: kti!::;t-·4ttt·M!ffef?~tiff.f,~j@.:;fu;.ijQ9ftJ·!ft;.t: .. So.lue •Fo1• •••••• fftrii\ll !i'fum ~OOV Diametel" ........ . S'10pe ... ,M ........ .. Nailn-ing,1 s n ... ;;. .. D'ischa1•ge ....... .. Depth., .. ; •..... ©2014 D.R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Level TWO Downstream Analysis Ueloc·i_ty-...... . Flow 'Are.a ..... . C_ritical Slope C~it ical Depth · ,Pe1•cent Fl.lll ... F:roude ,Nulllhe1• .. Full Cap~city .. QMAX @. 94D •••• Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat Page 18 City of Renton B1 I· I [ ---------~ ....... ,1111 ,11;" , "'-'\i..l"l';;;;;..:T• r·;;:,~,il. a7i1~,;,:s:."';,·"aa"~"ail'~.J .~ L:=:..J ;.:~·-:. ~ •mr't'I' ll"J'J ·'-"'.""r'.'7('tfl---j]~-· ·· ·· ~ . ., .... ~-=--r.i,,,,~11 t n~~w · ,,,,,1,,«'''f''." ;.;,cY,·.:11;1,· r/ -~ ".?,1 $~ I ''-,c.u ~.· '". .,:..;,,s= \ 1 ·r t''il!f//, /'.ti,,,-:v',.... -1r , 'f""~ r,i \.. .,.,~ ... Lt:e. "9: Jl!/1/i/i/1//i/Jlft~'[?':~{~li!fr· .._}(, I '~ I ~$'° .... ',~--~ I .• J /111,i_,'· "'"''j''1 '/·,··:"''i .,,.~..,.,, {S'~, I ~ '~ JI// HIii !1111 !1f I I;\ ,. 1::::.-~ ., \Jl ;'l !1111!,i11:;::1,11:',,,1. ,., . .:'t. .-'/ ,"'·;.o!:f.w ,;t~~""' .i -· '·/; 111H!ilj' ,i11\'i~: f· ',).:;~ ·' ;-~~ :.t 'rt "'~ . ltl" '(£.~"" li111l11.1 1\.' 1 ,;; 1 ,1i,::,\'II' I,,;~ 'i\ ~4;~ I J.>t.:Jk ·'.n c:i:' · ;., """"-1""1:'· l,111 "·.·.Ii'! I'¥ I I ,3:l"t\',Ql:lt., I / ,ef'~::J ,· {!' { '"; 'i,;:111111 111 :1',1: ' , of I , of!_~, 1n ii" ··.,61> ~, '('.) ,i,, ,\~ 1 1~J1\!;111\\\1;~ 1 l;·11~\, \ : :£1·: I P/ _f;/ / ,u'O I o.· ~f\~~~=t~. ;.Po 1111Hj:''.~ iJU llll :1 1 1 ! i , 'r, . ·1· '. / fi'lf J :: ,.. ' \ ~ (;)~ '" "-...,., 1 HI' ii,' 1·aJ1·1'\' 1 ~_.(f1 ?:'~, · ·~1 ~-, ';A c 1 ~ 'IITli\11111:::: :1111,1 , , /~."'~.·I . I a; ,'Q .. e!J' o..·~, ' ... ~ 1 111rn11 11 1,111111 1 -~J .:e:~ ~.·Jt .:cf' 1 '""' ~ ' '.J..n't~, -" \ 1 j11n\11111111 '·1,11i;\\ t'?.\ 'f'~'t,n .,,,._ (iJ,, ~-'fJ.":,y [J.' }W,. • · I 8 1111 1:;\:1\~~~j1H(\i1: fi~~ "itifO:,/ {=•,-~-~ .1 '· ,'(\.:' , : :0~, '"" ;.,, ""1"'; ·'. ,.i,,'!.<t: ~?ff' / i:,1{ ... ,-, '"~=,;, -;;,u~;.ri"'.'-~__,.,. i11t,, ·1,,oY'. '1 -~ \ i , • • , rQ-1'~,,... C= 'r:..,r.:.;: ,{::r.., ·-:I:'.::' -- tHiilll:',:" Iii' -,ir.t-... \r_, ,,;-,r r;., c.., , i:;,4,r',\ .,... ;·~ • 9 ---:::: ., - 1111 w11·· /·1J.& , · 1 f.i' ~ ~ ... ~11(', r. 10 0...,.. ""·'"' ~ ... -.... 1111,n: ::::.:~'.'' b_>.' 1,-:t,1'· 5",' 1;;,1r; i\), ,' "'ii1{:'<ft.ry \ ,rw ·~ '.;»::."::: 1:::1;~i'i\111i\\\~~Tu'~f, \ (S / ! I &t'~ct._j \' ·){ o. .... ~ .. W.~ -_-_-- Jl l'li\Jlil, .\\\ J,',;/i)) l~m,.,;. I §i.,l I 1'g;, , ,),,,."""'", ';_ :,,, / Ill ' 11rtsll• I ,_;:, 1 'I '.l!\ /' "'/"4 I ..,) ... 1-... • ,r.:.. .... L..-• ~ lllll'ii\\ ;/li'JC I-~-• "J,' ~ "~· .. '?"' .. , ~ ~--~ .:• \ ""t -J/lfJJJl!I• , i.'fl-tj I ·-' • --" • re ; -~ ,3tt ,',J,. 1 I' Ill . lf!fl /. Hi.:P . .. · • l I . 'Q _ {j";:: -;!Pt,,l e,\Y,, -ri11,;;;:11u1f:l ~~1-d,;r.; '<-,);g:81'·""k~·~ ;.p;~ ....... z::·~~ ~~:.,~ :_. ~ Iii!\ I t•\I ,f J IUJ £1t....,\0,;,.-.l \ " ~~.,. ?~~ -~l -' ~ '- A 1 flllli\·!~-.t' .~~"-'"\.,1'!>\~'?."'""~\ ,,:::,::,,:".,{I:_,.;;~-~~ :'--:,.,.., ,,.~ •IIH\1111 ',\,, Ill ' .. ,..;>,i:,W I )';\!,l,.,..,,,lf, 1,;~' .,,'-. -~_;,";s,.c'.1 f_,::_:;;,:.-. (f!!fSN1 \IJ\l,l!!\\Llll\tl\l1, A '-~h>(°"~ .. \' ,J;}, 1 ~,.;p-1 ~ // ,,. ·~_:,,;::1:§~ ....-, -:,,; "'7 I ,-.,,,,,,= \w\\"'\-,:.;,~,". 'Ul."."~,\;1\ 1 · ,;.~/'~-J;:'~o,ri;::,~-· ',, -:;;;.:_,. = --,,_ =~~~l ~\\4-,~;,.,~.,,'._~~s.,,! \ ' '' \ L '. .... ,, " ' ' · r l..,;): .-.. · \ \ \ -.._ ' -....,.. "'>\',\\\,\•\~':s,~.::;;_·::..~~·~· • ~.~.O""-// ,/'. ,• ,.,,.,_,,.-: I \',-t., )_,. r1 / .... --..t«"i~ \, • .-,.,,'<'~~~ .... .i:~,.,t· '-tl.i• . ":\,,.,'~:;,._;,,'l? //:, ~;;,,/i_..·'"~1-Q·}...;;· ;:,,,, / ,lfjill\"1':\'\: '\\\\\.\\'°:.~-"~~~~;,,~fi I ~~ r,~~~/ •r.fi~~;;J/ \\ ,'-~:::-,:: '11111·,i\\ \'.."'N:'"~~~ .. ~~'f;l>~f,, . :-,,,.,:;,,,h, .. / . ( '-~'::... , I 1111l\\\\\~\'~'z'\; ;,,,/::J!f!f,}/f1:.flfu }·l·~"'if'.,.. , -,,_..,/'{f?M'1~t I. '--"'_;l';;\:: ·l ) l J I I ~ 1,H.;..-a.1 ''.l,f// nil,' 1 t{i;f'~~5n'~!!!)fi'/;t .~ :: ;_· ;.;._ . ~ ii ',_:;Ji {lir.ii·:;,, ~\ e!lf r~ . { II HJ\ 11 !J/1 II/JAl1~/trl!.f'/tflif,,i ~ lie],._--~...s,.{,,. '( " \ ' \ ~_r,;, ~ , ,·~,; ~1,fi//1t~:.r'f:,7J~(i~:r:;;;~~~j1{:,i1Jr&11,,.J ~17;~~, I. /c5~\~~\~~ ·· \ ~~1'.'.11 !lll~'.~)l_,11_1J,I!:!~~~~ ;f;}~'-='~-J.~'i-ffl'· __ }Ql'r;r_ .1_[ ~.J J~_ I ~I• (f) 0 <( 01 0::: 111 F ~7:. 'iiiii\i11t'i\l'1l"11l111\!l\~~f.f.'~v:,·,,'"""11 _..--. ~ E r 1-~~~1 1ti1\lli1n, \~·~~ 1 \~\'~\\'-J.-=~....,.."'J ..... !:J'af"~..//l v~P>:f .----------.-1,. ,;m. ~,,-- 0 ID =--,.. __ .,,,..., . --·J '"""'"'·'· ,~ ,11~ .k~ ····----- c L_J f-- 0 IT) I _J <( f-- -1-1 L1 M I G - H / ~ :=J lf,---l ~ "" . I i J _____/ IE ~ NORTH I 0 GRAPHIC SCALE 75 150 300 I 1 INCH= 150 FT. I COPYRIGHT @ 201 J, D.R. STRONG CONSUL TING ENGINEERS INC. 81 Ill ;;;; (!) ~ <> <> ~~ ~5 "' !!l 0: ~ ci 8 fa i,.;;; ~ ta I,.. m f3 ~ :s. ~ i ~ ~ ~ > . " ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ .. ~ ~ ii a; ii ...: ii; ~ ~ 0 ~ I Q. ~ ~ ~ I,;;: ~ ;::: 8 ~ ~ ~ Li: DRAFTED BY: QHH DESJGNED BY: QHH PRO.ECT ENGINEER: MAJ DA TE: D7.t$.t4 PRO.ECT NO.: t2t02 ORAWfNG: f SHEET: f ~ NOA 1 Symbol. Drainage Drainage Component Component Type, Description Name, and.Size Typ_e: sheet flow, swale, drain3ge -basin, vegetation, See map Stream, channel, pipe, cover, Pond; Size: diameter depth, type of sensitive area, Surface area volume A Natural Discharge Point Channel flow across southwest property comer A-B Southwesterly Channel Trapezoidal Channel: 0.5' Deep, Flow 3' wide tapering to 1' wide, heavitv veaetated B-C Southwesterly Pipe Flow 12" Ductile Iron Pipe (DIP) to a ditch C-D Westerly Channel Flow Trapezoidal Channel: 1' Deep, 4' wide, heavilv venetated D-E Northwesterly Pipe Flow 12" LCPE Pipe to a Type 1 CB E-F Westerly Pipe Flow 12" LCPE Pipe to a Type 1 CB F-G Southerly Pipe Flow 12" DIP to a Type 1 CB G-H Southerly Pipe Flow 12" LCPE Pipe to a Type 1 CB H-1 Southerly Pipe Flow 12" LCPE Pipe to a Type 1 CB 1-J Southerly Pipe Flow 12" LCPE Pipe to a Type 1 CB J-K Southerly Pipe Flow 12" LCPE Pipe to a Type 2 CB K-L Westerly Pipe Flow 18" LCPE Pipe to a Type 2 CB FIGURE 13 DOWNSTREAM TABLE Slope Distance Existing Potential From site Problems Problems Discharae Constrictions, under capacity, ponding, % 1/4 mi=1,320 ft overtopping, flooding, habitat or organism destruction, scouring, bank sloughing, sedimentation, incision, other erosion ±0' None Observed None Anticipated ±180' None Observed None Anticipated ±225' None Observed None Anticipated ±695' None Observed None Anticipated ±740' None Observed None Anticipated ±800' None Observed None Anticipated ±1,015' None Observed None Anticipated ±1,050' None Observed None Anticipated ±1,200' None Observed None Anticipated ±1,230' None Observed None Anticipated ±1,320' None Observed None Anticipated ±1,365' None Observed None Anticipated ©2014 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Level 1WO Downstream Analysis Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat Page 20 City of Renton .Observations of field inspector resource reviewer, or resident tributary area, likelihood of problem, overflow pathways, potential impacts. Trickle Flow Trickle Flow at Outlet Moderate Flow, Water 1" Deep Moderate Flow Moderate Flow Moderate Flow Moderate Flow Moderate Flow Moderate Flow Moderate Flow Moderate Flow L-M Symbol See map A1 A1-B1 81-C1 C1-D1 D1-E1 E1 Westerly Pipe Flow 36" LCPE Pipe to a ditch ±1,405' NDA2 Drainage Drainage Component Slope Distance Component Type, Description From site Name. and Size Disch a roe Type: Sheet · flow, swale, drainage basin, vegetation, Stream, channel, pipe, cover, %· 1/4 mi;1,320 fl Pond; Size: diame_ter depth, type of sensitive area, Surface area volume Natural Discharge Point Sheet Flow across Western ±0' property line Westerly Pipe Flow Campen Springs Conveyance ±675' Svstem Southwesterly Wetland Wetland Mitigation Area ±950' Flow Southerly Pipe Flow 12· Pipe Discharge from Wetland ±1025' Area Southerly Pipe Flow 12" Pipes and Catch Basins ±1250' within Talbot Road South Convergence Point NOA 2 converges with NOA 1 at ±1250' catch basin west of Borgata Aoartment Prooertv ©2014 D.R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Level TWO Downstream Analysis Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat None Observed None Anticipated Existing Potential Problems Problems Constrictions, under capacity, ponding, overtopping, flooding, habitat or organism destruction, scouring, bank sloughing, sedimentation, incision, other erosion None Observed None Observed None Observed None Observed None Observed None Observed None Anticipated None Anticipated None Anticipated None Anticipated None Anticipated None Anticipated Page 21 City of Renton Moderate Flow Observations of field inspector resource reviewer, or resident tributary area, likelihood of problem, overflow pathways,. potential impacts. Trickle Flow Trickle Flow at Outlet Moderate Flow, Water 1" Deep Moderate Flow Moderate Flow TASKS MITIGATION OF EXISTING OR POTENTIAL PROBLEMS A review of the King County Water and Land Resources Division -Drainage Services Section Documented Drainage Complaints within one mile of the downstream flow paths revealed no complaints within the downstream path of the Site. The project should not create any problems as specified in Section 1.2.2.1 of the Manual and therefore is not required to provide Drainage Problem Impact Mitigation subject to the requirements of Section 1.2.2.2. Project runoff from the TDA will be collected and released per the Manual's requirements to accommodate Level 3 Flood Problem Flow Control and Basic Water Quality requirements. During construction, standard sediment and erosion control methods will be utilized. This will include the use of a stabilized construction entrance, perimeter silt fencing, and other necessary measures to minimize soil erosion during construction. ©2014 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers lnc. Level lWO Downstream Analysis Vuecrest Preliminary Plat Page 22 City of Renton C APPENDIX A. BASIN RECONNAISSANCE PROGRAM ©2014 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Level TWO Downstream Analysis Vuecrest Preliminary Plat Page 23 City of Renton • P:BR.TOC/mlm RECONNAISSANCE REPORT NO. 14 BlACK RIVER BASIN JUNE 1987 Natural Resources and Parks Division and Surface Water Management Division King County, Washington Department of Public Works Don LaBelle, Director King County Executive Tim Hill King County Council Audrey Gruger, District I Cynthia Sullivan, District 2 Bill Reams, District 3 Lois North, District 4 Ron Sims, District 5 Bruce Laing, District 6 Paul Barden, District 7 Bob Grieve, District 8 Gary Grant, District 9 P.nts, Planning and Resources Joe Nagel, Director Surface Water Management Division Joseph J. Simmler, Division Manager Jim Kramer, Assistant Division Manager Dave Clark, Manager, River & Water · Natural Resources and Parks Division Russ Cahill, Division Manager . Bill Jolly, Acting Division Manager Derek Poon, Chief, Resources Planning Section Bill Eckel, Manager, Basin Planning Program Resource Section L1ny Gibbons, Manager, Project Management and Design Section Contributing Staff Doug Chin, Sr. Engineer Randall Parsons, Sr. Engineer Andy Levesque, Sr. Engineer Bruce Barker, Engineer Arny Stonkus, Engineer Ray Steiger, Engineer Pete Ringen, Engineer . Consulting Staff Don Spencer, Associate Geologist, Earth Consultants, Inc. John Bethel, Soil Scientist, Earth Consultants, Inc. P:CR· Contnbuting Staff Ray Heller, Project Manager & Team Leader Matthew Clark, Project Manager Robert R. Fuerstenberg, Biologist & Team Leader Matthew J. Bruengo, Geologist Lee Benda, Geologist Derek Booth, Geologist Dyanne Sheldon, Wetlands Biologist Cindy Baker, Earth Scientist Di Johnson, Planning Support Technician Robert Radek, Planning Support Technician Randal Bays, Planning Support Technician Fred Bentler, Planning Support Technician Mark Hudson, Planning Support Technician Sharon Clausen, Planning Support Technician David Truax, Planning Support Technician Brian Vanderburg, Planning Support Technician Carolyn M. Byerly, Technical Writer Susanna Hornig, Technical Writer Virginia Newman, Graphic Artist Marcia McNulty, Typesetter Mildred Miller, Typesetter Jaki Reed, Typesetter Leia Lira, Office Technician Marty Cox, Office Technician ( C • TABIE OF CONTENTS I. SUMMARY II. INTRODUCTION III. FINDINGS IN BLACK RIVER BASIN A. Overview B. Effects of Urbanization C. Specific Problems IV. RECOMMENDATIONS A. Expand existing and/or construct additional R/D facilities B. Preserve wetlands on plateau to provide natural storage C. Protect steep valley walls from erosion and landslides D. Reduce sedimentation in streams along valley floor E. Enforce prohibitions against dumping domestic trash F. Increase the ov_erall effectiveness of surface_ water managenlent V. MAP APPENDICES APPENDIX A: . Estimated Costs APPENDIX B: Capital Improvement Projects Rating List APPENDIX C: Detailed Findings and Recommendations P:BR.TOC/mlm I I 2 2 4 5 7 7 7 7 7 7 8 9 A-1 B-1 C-1 I. SUMMARY Black River Basin, located in south King County, is named for a river that ceased to exist in 1917, after major alterations to river systems were made to build the Lake Washington ship canal. The reconnaissance was conducted along the streams and tributaries still remaining in this basin. Development in the basin in and around the cities of Kent, Renton, and Tukwila has produced extensive areas of impervious surface, which are expected to double by the time the basin reaches its development capacity. Storm runoff from impervious surfaces is drained through pipes and discharges in some cases directly into the stream system. Field investigation of problems in the Black River Basin revealed that volumes and rates of stormwater flows have contributed to serious acceleration of erosion of streambanks and lower slopes and have produced downcutting and landslides in some places. Sedimentation resulting from these processes has, in turn, clogged existing conveyance systems, rendering many of them ineffective, and destroyed fish habitat for spawning, rearing, and migrating. In addition, the general inefficiency of the basin drainage system has increased the potential for flooding. Another problem cited was visibly poor water quality resulting from large amounts of domestic trash placed in streambeds and from commercial/industrial runoff, particularly near the Longacres Racetrack in Renton. Recommendations for action in the Black River Basin include: 1) expanding RID facilities and preserving wetlands to assure adequate stormwater storage, 2) taking measures to protect steep valley walls from erosion and landslides, 3) reducing sedimentation on the valley floor with sediment traps, 4) increasing enforcement of regulations against the dumping of trash into streams, and 5) increasing the overall effectiveness of surface water management in the basin through doing more maintenance of facilities, continuing intergovernmental agreements, lowering volumes and rates of release for stormwater, and other measures. ll. INTRODUCTION: Histo,y and Goals of the Program In 1985 the King County Council approved funding for the Planning Division (now called the Natural Resources and Parks Division), in coordination with the Surface Water Management Division, to conduct a reconnaissance of 29 major drainage basins located in King County. The effort began with an initial investigation of three basins··· Evans, Soos, and Hylebos Creeks --in order to determine existing and potential surface water problems and to recom- mend action to mitigate and prevent these problems. These initial investigations used available data and new field obseIVations to examine geology, hydrology and habitat conditions in each basin. Findings from these three basins led the King County Council to adopt Resolution 6018 in April 1986, calling for reconnaissance to be completed on the remaining 26 basins. The Basin Reconnaissance Program, which was subsequently established, is now an important ele- ment of surface water management. The goals of the program are to provide useful data with regard to· 1) critical problems needing immediate solutions; 2) basin characteristics for use in the preparation of detailed basin management plans, and 3) capital costs associated with the early resolution of drainage problems. The reconnaissance reports are intended to provide an evaluation of present drainage con- ditions in the County in order to transmit information to policymakers to aid them in deve- loping more detailed regulatory measures and specific capiial improvement plans. They are not intended to ascribe in any conclusive manner the causes of drainage or erosion problems; instead, they are to be used as initial sutveys from which choices for subsequent detailed engineering and other professional environmental analyses may be made. Due to the limited amount of time available for the field work in each basin, the reports must be viewed as P:BR/jr 1 • Black River Basin (continued) 0. descriptive environmental narratives rather than as final engineering conclusions. Recommendations contained in each report provide a description of potential mitigative measures for each particular basin; these measures might provide maximum environmental protection through capital project constn,ction or development approval conditions. The appropriate extent of such measures will be decided on a case-by-case basis by County offi- cials responsible for reviewing applications for permit approvals and for choosing among com- peting projects for public construction. Nothing in the reports is intended to substitute for a more thorough environmental and engineering analysis possible on a site-specific basis for any proposal. m. FINDINGS IN BLACK RIVER BASIN P:BR/jr Tlie field reconnaissance in Black River Basin was conducted in February 1987 by Ray Heller, resource planner; Ray Steiger and Doug Chin, engineers; and Matthew J. Brunengo, geologist. Their findings and recommendations are presented here. A Overview of Black River Basin Geographic and land use features. Black River Basin is generally, bounded on the north by the cities of Renton and Tukwila and on the south by the city of Kent. The western and eastern boundaries are formed by the Green River and 116th Avenue SE, respectively, in this southern King County basin. The Black River, which gives its name to this basin, actually ceased to exist in 1917, when the Lake Washington ship canal was built and the level of Lake Washington was lowered, cutting off flow to the Black River. The 28-square-mile basin investigated by this field team includes what remains of the network of tributaries that formerly connected with the Black River. The .Black River Basin is split nearly equally into an eastern upland plateau and a western floodplain in the Lower Green River Valley along State Road (SR) 167. The flood plain is almost wholly contained within the cities of Tukwila, Renton, and Kent, where extensive development in the last two decades has changed the landscape from a rural farming area to a commercial and industrial one. While open space and farming still exist here, the area will be infilled, primarily by a combination of commercial, industrial, and some multi-family complexes, by the year 2000. The King County Comprehensive Plan shows that the upland area will be developed at urban densities. This transition is already in progress, with commercial developments emerging along the Kent-Kangley Highway (SR 516), the Benson Highway (SR 515), and the Carr Road-176th Street SE-Petrovitsky Road corridor. Multi-family· land use occurs in the uplands also and surrounds commercial developments. New single-family units are being built throughout most of the eastern upland portion of the basin. The amount of impervious surface is expected to nearly double between 1985 and the time the basin is fully developed. This will require strict controls on surface water discharge to assure prevention of further degradation of the stream system, which has already begun to exhibit adverse environmental impacts resulting from urbanization. Other factors of concern in this basin are those sensitive areas occupied by wetlands, streams, floodplains, coal-mine zones, and landslide zones. Mostly located in the eastern portion of the basin, these areas have already been damaged by the effects of develop- 2 -- P:BR/jr Black River Basin ( continued) ment. Details of the damage, along with suggestions for mitigation, are contained in later section of this report. Dominant geologic and geomorphic features. Black River Basin consists of the part of the Duwamish Valley east of the Green River and the western edge of the Covington drift plain, a plateau underlain by glacial deposits. Small creeks, which flow across its rolling surface, have eroded deep, narrow ravines up to 1.5 miles into the plateau. Downcutting is migrating headward in the upper reaches, and erosion of banks and lower slopes causes landsliding in the canyon walls, most of which are naturally unstable. Both of these processes are accelerated by increased flows attributable to urbanization. Sediment is deposited where the streams flow onto the valley floor. The surface of the Covington drift plain is dominantly basal till, mantled in places with recessional outwash or deposits of post-glacial lakes. Near the edge of the plateau are several lenses of sediment deposited adjacent to a glacier lobe in the Duwamish Valley. Older sediments are exposed in the ravines and bluffs. In the north, unconsolidated sediments lap up onto the southern limb of the Newcastle anticline; sedimentary and volcanic rocks crop out in the bluffs north of Panther Creek and form the Renton, Talbot, and Earlington Hills in the northern end of the valley toward Tukwila. Coal was mined from this area from 1853 until the 1940s. The Duwamish Valley is part of a trough carved into the drift plain during the last glaciation; it later became an arm of Puget Sound. A catastrophic mudflow originating on Mount Rainier approximately 5700 years ago dumped massive amounts of debris into the trough. This and other events, plus the deposition of alluvial sediment, expelled the salt water. Through the nineteenth century, the combined White and Green Rivers meandered through the valley. Near Renton, the Cedar River flowed into the Black which drained Lake Washington and flowed into the Duwamish. Beginning in 1906 a . series of changes was made to these river systems. The Cedar River was diverted into L1ke Washington, and the White River was diverted south to the Puyallup. The Black River itself ceased to exist. Geomorphic processes in the Black River Basin are most active on the western edge of the plate.au. Lakes and wetlands forn1ed here in the poorly drained swales. Where conditions of drainage and percolation are appropriate, small streams flow between the drumlins, eroding deep ravines into the unconsolidated sediments in the process. Over time, the ravines have been widened by mass-wasting of their walls (a process aided by groundwater) and erosion by tributary creeks; their upper ends have migrated their upstream into the plateau. Sediment carried by these streams was deposited in the Duwamish trough; after the trough became an alluvial valley, small fans formed on its edge. Hydrologic and hydraulic features. There are three distinct geographic features asso- ciated with the hydraulics of Black River Basin: the plateau east of the Lower Green River Valley, the steep (5-35°) erosive hillsides, and the flat floodplain of the valley floor. · Mill, Garrison, Springbrook, and Panther Creeks, as well as three small, unnamed tri- butaries (0023, 0006B, and 0006C), all originate from locations on top of the plateau. Panther Creek originates from Panther Lake and the surrounding wetlands. The 3 • Black River Basin (continued) remarn,ng tributaries originate primarily from surface water stored in natural depressions and wetland areas along the top of the hill. The surface water is collected and routed generally north and west via natural swales, open roadside ditches, culverts, and pipelines within street rights-of-way and, finally, down the steep hillsides to the valley floor. Mill Creek, located at the southernmost end of the Black River Basin, flows north between the Green River and SR 167 and then crosses under the highway at various locations. Mill, Springbrook, and Garrison Creeks continue north along the west side of SR 167 and eventually combine as Springbrook Creek before being pumped into the Green River through King County's Black River pump station. Tributaries 0006B and 0006C flow north independently down the hillside adjacent to Interstate 405 and into Renton, where they enter the city's storm drain system. Habitat characteristics. The use of natural streams for urban stormwater conduits has had a detrimental effect on most stream systems in the Black River Basin. Increased stormwater release rates that are higher than streams can convey without problems have resulted in extensive erosion, sedimentation, and landslides. Water quality problems caused by domestic garbage placed in streams and point discharges of pollutants are additional factors. What is striking about this basin is that these habitat problems exist everywhere. While some problems are worse than others, their impact on the fish habitat of each stream examined was profound. No fish were observed in any streams during the investigation. For this reason it is surprising that the fish counter at the Black River pump plan! located on Monster Road (through which all water in the basin is discharged into the Green River recorded 84 fish entering the stream system in 1986. While this figure is higher than that for fish counts in the previous five years, it is significantly lower than historical levels or the potential levels that might be achieved if streams were in better condition for spawning. The current habitat conditions offer little hope for the future of these salmon runs. To reach spawning areas fish must first pass through an open flood-control drainage ditch for a minimum of five miles. This ditch has no vegetation or pool protection for fish to take refuge against predators or water-temperature increases. In addition, water quality is visibly poor. The eggs of fish that do reach spawning territory are likely to be smothered with sediment or washed out during heavy rai.nstorms. If these problems associated with development worsen, stream systems will probably be left biologically sterile. Reversing this pattern of degradation is dependent on revising the policies and priorities in the planning and zoning activities, the develop- ment review processes on the Surface Water Management programs of King County, Renton, Tukwila, and Kent. B. Effects of Urbanization in the Basin The existing upper reaches of the Black River Basin were once heavily vegetated, and natural depressions retained much of th·e surface water. _ Water was released slowly then, and !he stream systems could convey flows easily. Development has brought about the removal of this vegetative cover and filling of the natural depressions. Many streams are now being piped. Impervious surfaces are increasing and will eventually account for 50 percent of the basin's surface area. In general, surface water is entering natural systems at a faster and higher rate than before development accelerated two decades ago. P:BR/jr 4 C Black River Basin (continued) Earlier discussions pointed out the serious effects this is producing in the form of ero- sion and sediment transport to lower stream reaches. Additionally, sedimentation decreases the efficiency of the entire basin drainage system by filling culverts and chan- nels. This in turn increases the potential for flooding. The city of Kent removes an estimated 1,100 cubic yards of sediment annually from its sediment facility at Mill Creek Park. The Washington State Department of Transportation also employs a. regular cleaning schedule to remove gravel and sediment from its culvert under South 212th Street on Tributary 0023. Sediment from Springbrook Creek has been transported downstream from the erosive hillside to a pri- vate .trout farm west of Talbot Road and· rendered it inoperative. Similar examples occur throughout the basin along the bottom of the steep hillside and east of State Road 167. · Erosion is further accelerated by drainage outlets from developments and public areas. Discharge from a pipe into Garrison Creek adjacent to Benson Road freefalls for approximately JO feet before scouring the ravine it enters. Similar erosion occurs on Tributary 0006B where water is discharged from the Fred Nelson Junior High School across Benson Road to the top of a severely eroded ravine. An onsite detention facility downstream at the Victoria Hills housing development accumulates large amounts of sediment. Its capacity is decreasing, and the function of the facility is threatened. The development trends in this basin mean that land for regional RID facilities will become more difficult to obtain at the same time that erosion and potential for flooding are increasing. Additional problems may arise if existing onsite RID systems malfunction from improper design or constrnction or from lack of maintenance. An onsite facility for a privately developed trailer park, located west of the Benson Road adjacent to Garrison Creek, exemplifies the potential hazard. Unstable fill was placed . on the steep ravine and an RID pond built on its edge. The fill becomes saturated when the pond is in use, and tension cracks in the fill along the slope indicate potential failure. .Such an event would add large amounts of sediment to the drainage system. Development may create similar problems elsewhere if the proper design, constrnction, inspection, and maintenance of RID facilities is neglected. C. Specific Problems Identified Black River Basin exhibits serious problems throughout its system, with exceptions only in the south fork of Springbrook Creek and on Panther Creek in subcatchment 10. The most significant problems noted by the field team during its investigatirin are listed below. 1. Stream channel erosion accelerated by the routing of runoff from developed areas into streams. Major problems exist in the ravines, where streams are cutting into till at the upper ends of canyons and associated landsliding and surface erosion occur (see section 3 below). Although these processes have been taking place naturally for a long time, increased runoff from developing areas on the plateau is causing acceleration of the erosion. a. The worst cases of erosion observed include those on Mill Creek (0005), P:BRljr 5 P:BR/jr Black River Basin. (continued) Garrison Creek (0022) and its tributaries (0023, 0024, and 0025), the north fork of Springbrook Creek (0021), and Panther Creek (0006). b. Prominent examples of gullying at drainage-stmcture outfalls are in Mill Creek (0005), Springbrook Creek (0021 ), Panther Creek (0006), and below Benson Road on both Garrison Creek (0022) and Talbot Creek (0006B). c. Examples of accelerated downcutting resulting from increased mnoff from developing areas are located in Talbot Creek and . two small streams (0064A and 0006C) in Renton. 2 Landsliding associated with stream erosion in ravines, as a result of steep slopes and saturated soils. Instability generally takes the form of rotational failures or debris slides triggered by stream undercutting. In many cases, natural instability is exacerba.ted by filling and/or by constmction on canyon walls; for example, a new fill above Garrison Creek at Benson Road is failing, and old .fills are being under- cut. All of the ravines should be considered landslide-hazard areas. The same is tme. of the bluffs at the western edge of the plateau, even though there have not been many problems yet. These are moderate to steep, landslide-susceptible slo- pes, especialiy in the northern (Renton) and southern (Kent) ends of the basin -- the area under the most development pressure. 3. Damage to ( or destruction of) habitat due to: a. High flows and high velocities, which remove macrophytes and benthic orga- nisms, plants, insects, and possibly fish. Visible evidence of high velocities was noted on all the streams in this basin except the south fork of Springbrook Creek. b. Sedimentation from exce,;.gve erosion,. which is filling pools, choking spawning gravels, and in some cases filling stream beds to the point of making channels impassible to fish. All of the four big stream systems in Black River Basin exhibit this problem. The Kent parks department annually removes 1,100 cubic yards of material from Mill Creek. A large sediment flow has filled the Springbrook Creek stream channel to a depth of approximately 5 feet, and Panther Creek just north of Valley General Hospital has a large alluvial fan. c. Visibly poor water quality: 1) Large amounts of domestic trash have been deposited in these stream canyons. Mill Creek has become a dump for appliances at river mile 9.60, and Garrison Creek appears to be more of a landfill than a creek at 1.30. Such practices have a detrimental effect on water quality as well as the visual quality of the environment. 2) Commercial and industrial enterprises are producing mnoff that causes many streams to be oily, turbid, and sudsy. Springbrook Creek (Trib. 0005 at RM 1.30), flowing under the bridge of Southwest 16th Street just east of Longacres in Renton, is one of the worst examples noted. The Western Processing facility just upstream has been identified as a source of toxic wastes entering both surface and groundwater systems. 6 IV. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ACTION Black River Basin ( continued) Habitat, erosion, landsliding, and flooding problems in the Black River Basin can be addressed by the measures identified below. Most of the solutions listed here will mitigate specific problems obseived during field investigation or will prevent similar problems in the future. However, additional recommendations have been included to suggest administrative or regulato1y measures that would increase the overall effectiveness of surface water management in this basin. · A Expand existing and/or construct additional regional R/D facilities on the plateau in order to control storm flows that originate there. Site facilities upstream of the four large creek ravines that are experiencing the worst damage. Facilities should .be regional in scope and should follow the general specifi- cations outlined in Appendix A of this report. These will impede the direct conveyance of runoff into the steep, naturally erosive ravines, thereby reducing erosion rates that result in sediment transport and slope instability and that damage habitat. B. Preserve wetlands on the plateau to provide natural storage. In addition, reconsider Panther Lake for use as a regional RID site. Although the lake has been classified as a # 1-C wetland, the amount of storage it offers is substantial with a moderate addi- tional (.25-to .50-foot) fluctuation in depth. C. Protect steep valley walls from erosion and landslides caused from direct discharges of stormwater: 1. Tigbtline discharges or provide other appropriate nonerosive conveyance over steep hillsides; provide energy dissipation at the outfalls. This has already been done at several points on Mill Creek (Tributary 0005) with good results. 2 Consider rerouting flow in eases where tigbtlining or other methods are not feasible. For example, runoff from the area southeast of Springbrook Creek might be piped down Southeast 200th Street rather than routed into the north fork (0021) as it is now. 3. Lower the potential for landslides by restricting development in and along the tops of ravines. In particular, strongly discourage filling along the edges; the fill at Benson Road above Garrison Creek (0022) will probably have to be removed. D. Reduce sedimentation in streams along the valley floor in cases where sedimentatibn is not adequately prevented by R/D and other upstream measures. In extreme cases (probably including Panther Creek [0006]), construct sediment traps (with convenient access for removal of accumulated material) at points where streams flow onto the valley floor. E. Increase enforcement of regulations against the dumping of domestic trash into ravines and-stream channels. The Seattle-King County Health Department and the King County office of Building and Land Development should be asked to investigate thiS ongoing problem and to take appropriate action when violators are identified. P:BR/jr 7 P:BR/jr Black River Basin ( continued) F. Increase the overall effectiveness of surface water management in the Black River Basin: 1. Continue cooperative intergovernmental arrangements between the cities of Tukwila, Kent, and Renton; the Washington State Department of Transportation; and the King County Surface Water Management Division to identify and propose solutions to habitat and hydraulic problems in the basin. These efforts should include de. veloping cost·Sharing agreements where capital improvements are required. 2. Evaluate and reduce, if appropriate, the volumes and rates of release for storm.water originating from developments. Present release rates and volumes are causing erosion, sedimentation and habitat problems. 3. Increase the maintenance and inspection of existing King County and city 'drainage systems to ensure that they are functioning properly. 4. Encourage pµblic participation in maintaining water quality and in 5. 6. stormwater management in the basin, including citizen action projects to clean trash from streams and education about citizens role in maintaining clean water and stream systems. Perform more detailed and comprehensive hydrologic/hydraulic analysis of all drainage systems within the basin to determine how the existing facilities will function under existing and future flows. Prepare a comprehensive basin plan with participation by all agencies concerned with surface water management in the basin. The plan should assess the econo· mic, hydrologic, and habitat impact of individual projects on a basin.wide scale. 8 • BLACI< RIVER BASIN ® 0006 00301 Basin Boundary Subcatchment Boundary Collection Point Stream Tributary Number Proposed Project N + _.,, J ' 0.: u APPENDIX A ESTIMATED COST: PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS BLACK RIVER BASIN • Indicates project was identified by Surface Water Management office prior to reconnaissance. NOTE: All projects are located on map included in this reQQ_rt. Project Number 0301* 0302* 0303* Collect. Point 10 22 29 P.BR.APA/mlm Project Description Increase RID capacity of Panther Lake by constructing earthen berms and outlet control structure. Trib. 0006, RM 3.40. Provide regional R/D facility by constructing earthen dam across drainage swale. Provide control structure and overflow spillway on Trib. 0021 at RM .40 (Springbrook Creek). Construct instream RID facility at point where Benson Rd. crosses Garrison Creek. Reinforce Benson Rd. Construct outlet-control structure around existing cross culvert R.M. 1.40. A-1 Problem Addressed Reduce erosion and flooding downstream in Panther Creek. Prevent erosion to sensitive slopes downstream of proposed site by reducing peak flows. Reduce erosion and flooding of of Garrison Creek by reducing peak flows. Estimated Costs and Comments $345,000 (Panther Lake is #1 Wetland and will require agreement to use as RID site. Further biological study also needed at time of basin planning.) $208,000 (Project costs should be shared with City of Renton.) $125,000 (Project should be constructed in conjunction with proposed Projects 0304 and 0305.) Project Number 0304° 0305· 0307* 0309 Collect. Point 28 30 19 27 P.DR.APA/mlm ) Project Description Construct instream R/D facility in Garrison Creek. Construct dam across existing ravine with outlet control structure and overflow spillway. Provide for fish passage. ('I'rib. 0022, RM 1.0.) Construct RID facility. Install proportional discharge outlet and overflow spillway. Excavate to existing streambed level and provide earthen berms around site. (Trib. 0024 at RM .30.) Construci regional RID facility in Mill Creek Wetland 8 (rated #2). Construct berms around north and west sides to increase existing capacity, and provide an outlet control struc- ture. Enhance downstream conveyance capacity and stabilize channel with · dense native vegetation. Provide habi- tat enhancement to mai~tain existing wetland Values. Construct an instream R/D facility in sewer line right-of-way adjacent to SE 208th St. (Trib. 0023 at RM 1.00.) A-2 Problem Addressed Reduce erosion and flooding of Garrison Creek by reducing peak flows. Reduce erosion and flooding downstream in Garrison Creek by reducing peak flows. Reduce erosion in Mill Creek and prevent downstream flooding. Will reduce flows that cause severe erosion to unstable downstream ravine. ) Estimated Costs and Comments $151,000 (Wash. State Dept. or Transportation has cost- sharing agreement with King County and the city or Kent. Coordinate with Projects 0303 and 0305.) {,iiiJ;;; ~ $116,000 (Construct in conjunction with Projects 0303 and 0304.) $309,000 $26,000 (Dependent on the availability or right-of-way for R/D. Addi- tional cost will result if sewer-line relocation is required.) ) • APPENDIX B CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT RAN.KING BLACK RIVER BASIN Prior to the Black River Basin field reconnaissance, seven projects had been identified and rated using the CIP selectio11 criteria developed by the Surface Water Management (SWM) and Natural Resources and Parks Divisions. Following the reconnaissance, seven projects remain proposed for this area. They include one new, previously unidentified and unrated project. This displaces one previously selected project, which was eliminated based on the consensus of the reconnaissance team because no problem was apparent in the field. The previous SWM capital improvement project list for the Black Ri.ver Basin had an estimated cost of $1,250,000, while the revised list increases to an estimated cost of $1,280,000. This 2.4 percent increase in estimated capital costs is due mainly to upward revised cost figures for securing or acquiring easements over wetlands and costs associated with a new project to solve a previously uni- dentified problem. The following table summarizes the scores and costs for the C!Ps proposed for the Black River Basin. These projects were rated according to previously established SWM Program Citizen Advisory Committee criteria. The projects ranked below are those for which the first rating qu.estion, ELEMENT 1: "GO/NO GO," could be answered affirmatively. These projects can be considered now for merging into the ''live" CIP list. RANK PROJECT NO. SCORE COST 1 0302* 125 $ 208,000 2 0303* 110 125,000 3 0309 100 26,000 4 0301* 95 345,000 5 0305* 90 116,000 6 0307* 60 309,000 7 0304* 55 151,000 TOTAL $1,280,000 • Indicates project was identified by the Surface Water Management Division prior to recqnnaissance. P:BR.APB. B-1 • APPENDIX C DETAILED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS BLACK RIVER DASIN All items listed here are located on final display maps in the offices of Surface Water Management, Building and Land Development, and Basin Planning. Trib. & Collect. Existing Anticipated Item• River Mile Point Categorv Prop. Proj. Conditions and Problems Conditions and Problems 1 2 .3 0005 3 RM .30 0005 12, 6 RM 1.30- 4.65 0005 RM 8.30- 8.70 18 P:BR.APC/mlm Habitat Habitat Habitat Fish ladder through pump plant. Automatic counter .records all returning anadl'Omous species (apx. 84 in 1986). Drainage district has removed all stream cover along drainage channel. Water quality looks very poor. Some oil and suds on surface, also very turbid water. Large amounts of sediment moving down the stream ·system has filled in all the pools. Kent removes 1,100 cubic yards of sedi- ment from Mill Creek at Canyon Park annually. C-1 Based on the condition of the basin habitat and future development, these numbers will probably decre_ase. Condition will continue. More erosion, sedimentation, and loss of fish habitat. Recommendations Develop and implement a comprehensive Black River basin plan in agreement with all local jurisdictions. Habitat improvement would be one goal of this plan. Contact drainage district about the feasibility of select plant- ings along the ditch levees. Develop a plan to address point and nonpoint water quality problems originating from the thousands of acres of commercial and industrial land in the basin. Increase size and number of R/D facilities upstream to reduce flow volume and rates to non- erosive levels. Item 4 5 6 7 Trib. & Collect. River Mile Point 0005 RM 8.50- 9.70 0005 RM 9.10- 9.20 0005 RM 9.40 0005 RM 9.60 18 18 18 18 P:DR.APC/mlm ) Category Geology Habitat Habitat Habitat Prop. Proj. Existing Conditions and Prohlems Erosion in· narrow, steep· · sided ravine --intermit- tent bank erosion, slump- ing; gullies below cul- verts; downcutting near upper end. · Deposition at mouth of ravine. Left bank has lots of gar- bage deposited from access road above. Right bank is a major dumping ground of used appliances. 12" culvert discharges onto _top of left bank and has caused landslide into the stream. Good spawning gravels. Protection from high storm nows and velocities needed. Most large organic debris flushed out of the · ravine. C-2 ) Anticipated Conditions and Problems Increased flows from tribu- taries on plateau will cause continued or accelerated erosion. Flow directed over the edge of the ravine causes gullying of walls. Erosion of banks and lower slopes causes accelerated landsliding in lower slopes ( e.g., around old dam at RM 9.40). Potential water quality problem; since inside Mill Creek Canyon park, it could be a public hazard. If not tightlined in a safe, nonerosive manner to the bottom of the ravine, more erosion will occur with resulting sedimentation downstream. Without increased rate and velocity and volume controls, new development will further threaten this spawning area. Recommendations Increase control of stormflow in streams originating on the plateau ( especially Trib. 0005). Direct local drainage (below RM 9.80) around the ravine, or tight- line to bottom of ravine. • Remove or repair old dam. • Restict any further development on the edge of the ravine. ., • Remove garbage (preferably by the parties who placed it there). Increase enforcement of regulations prohibiting the random dumping of garbage in non-approved disposal sites. Kent Surface Water Utility should put this tightlining project on their list of future CIP projects. • SWM/Dasin Planning should deter-• mine the allowable rates and velo- cities to maintain a stable, nonerosiVe channel. New deveJ. opment must then be conditioned to meet these requirements. • Add structures or large organic debris to create pools. ) Trib. & Collect. Item River Mile Point 8 9 10 11 0005 RM .10.05 0005 RM 10.10- 10.30 0005A RM 0.2 0006 RM .50- 1.40 P:BR.APC/mlm 19 19 19" 7 Catcgorv Prop. Proj. Habitat Habitat Hydrology 0307 Habitat Existing Conditions and Problems Fish blockage due to con- crete and asphalt debris piled in stream. Native vegetation removed down to stream edge and replaced by pasture. Tributary contributes to Mill Creek, which experien- ces erosion and sediment transport. Wetland 0308 now provides some R/D and has much more potential capacity. Stream flows throuth wet- land. No visible channel. Fish transit through this cattail wetland looks difficult. C-3 Anticipated Conditions and Probletns Condition will continue. Livestock will erode stream- bank and defecate in stream channel. This will result in erosion, sedimentation, and water quality problems. This area will continue to develop and will contribute greater runoff to the downstream conveyance system. The. wetland area may be damaged by development around the perimeter and this may decrease the ability of the surface water to infiltrate. Runoff will continue to increase and erosion and sedimentation will likewise continue . . Condition will continue. Recommendations Encourage State Fisheries person- nel to organize a citizen-action project to construct a stepped pool or other solution to allow fish passage. -Fence to provide a stream corri- dor. Plant native plants or allow natural revegetation along stream banks. Obtain required easements and construct a regional RID facility in wetland area. -Construct berms along the western and northern sides of the existing wetland. Increase the storage capacity of the wetland by excavation. lf anadromous fish were rein- troduced to Panther Creek, wetland pas.sage would need to be assured. A biological as.sessment by fisheries and wetland biolo- gists would be needed to formulate a viable solution. Trib. & Collect. Hem River Mile Point . 12 0006 • RM 1.40- 2.60 13 0006 RM 1.50 14 0006 RM 1.70 15 0006 16 17 RM 1.75 0006 RM 1.80- 2.55 0006 RM 1.95 P:BR.APC/mlm 8, 10 7 8 8 10 8 Existing Categorv Prop. Proj. Conditions a~d Problems Geology· Habitat Habitat Habitat Habitat Habitat Channel downcutting at .upper end; bank erosion and mass-wasting. Deposition above 180th and at wet- land below Talbot Rd. Alluvial fan from upstream erosion; landslides filling wetland and blocking stream for fish use. 3' drop out of culvert under Talbot Rd with no pool. Potential fish barriers. Two debris jams pose potential fish barriers. E,--iensive bank erosion, channel downcutting and . sedimentation has elimi- nated most pools, fish, and benthic organisms. Both large organic debris and bedload material are active. 12' waterfall and concrete channel creating fish barrier. C-4 ) Anticipated Conditions and Problems Problem will get much worse as development proceeds along the ravine and in the upper basin. Ravine is sensitive to high flows in channel, and slopes are susceptible to gullying. Sediment is filling a major wetland. Killing of trees from sedi- ment inundation. Little or no fish pas.sage. Condition will remain. Condition will remain. Worsening of current condi- tions. No future fish access to upstream areas. Recommendations -Provide additional RID facilities in upper basin . -Restrict development along ravine edges. · Route runoff around ravine or tightline it to bottom in a safe, nonerosive ·manner (gully at RM 2.50). Provide a sediment pond and increase' maintenance· or reduce flows upstream to nonerosive levels. Improve system only if a fisheries biologist deems the Panther Creek system viable for fish. Remove debris or improve passage through the debris jams. Same as Trib. 0006, RM 2.55-3.00. (See Item 19 below.) • If the upstream habitat justifies improvement, then a fish ladder should be constructed over the falls. ) Trib. & Collect. Item River Mile Point Categoiv Prop. Proj. 18 0006 8 Geology RM 2.15 19 0006 10 Habitat RM 2.55- 3.00 20 0006 10 Hydrology 0301 RM 3.40 P:BR.APC/mlm Existing Conditions and Problems Large landslide (transla- tional and rotational failure), with raw slope remaining; gullying_ of slope. Apparently caused by combination of under- cutting by· stream and routing of road drainage over slope from above. Stream in good condition. Setbacks and protective vegetation needed at points along the-strea~. Some good pools and spawning gravel in a few places. Panther Lake is a #1-C wetland that provides a large amount of natural storage; the downstream system is in fair condition with some erosion. The contributing drainage area is not currently densely dcvel- oped. C-5 Anticipated Conditions and Problems Slide will continue to contribute to sedimentation downstream. Possible erosion and loss of habitat if future develop- ment increases volume and rate of flow. Future development in this area will triple the amount of impervious area. The available area for regional RID facilities may soon be exausted and the system will continue unchecked downstream. Erosive · soils throughout the area are further threatened as higher amounts of runoff will increase the rate at which the existing stream erodes. RC-commendations Direct surface runoff away from top of slope to gravel pit (to west). -Maintain stream flows at non- erosive levels Maintain a natural stream corri- dor from Panther Lake down into and along Panther Creek. The sensitive nature of the wetland would require precise boundary surveys and control over the amount of water artificially retained by the proposed control. Use Panther Lake as an RID facili- ty by constructing earthen berms on the north and west sides of the wetland area; construct a control outlet, enhance and increase the capacity of the downstream channel (stabilize with vegetation), and obtain easements. Trib. & Collect. Item River Mile Point 21 22 23 24 0006A RM .10 0006A RM .10-.20 0006B RM 1.55- 1.70, 1.00 0006B P:BR.APC/mlm _) 7 7 4 4 Existing Category Prop. Proj. Conditions and Prohlems Hahitat Geology Geology Habitat Incised stream eroded to bedrock above Talbot Rd. Little or no habitat value. Two slides are depositing sediment in large wetland on east side of Valley Free- way (inside city of Renton). Erosion in short channel reach below development: downcutting at upper end, failure of lower slopes throughout. Extreme gullying below cul- vert outfall (below Benson Rd.) causing rapid sedi- mentation, especially in R/D pond (RM 1.55); · probably contributing to deposition at RM 1.00. Drainage from Fred Nelson Jr. High School is causing extensive. erosion problems between Benson Rd. and SR 515. Large sediment build up in s· 22nd Ct. R/D . pond at-S Puget Dr. No fish habitat in this system. C-6 ) Anticipated Conditions and Problems Reduction of wetland area and values. Loss of flood storage. Stormflow is discharged rap- idly into channel from cul- vert below street. Down- cutting is prevented at lower end {by bedrock and culvert at Talbot Rd.) but will continue to undercut slopes at upper end.· Runoff from Benson Rd. and area ·to the east is d_is- charged onto erodible sand and gravel, which is depos- ited downstream. Most of the coarse material is caught by the RID pond --· will require more frequent maintenance. More property loss from unrestricted flows from Jr. High. High maintenance costs to dredge RID ponds of silt. Recommendations Consider tightlining stream from Whitworth Ave. S to Talbot Rd. RID and/or energy dissipation at upper end of channel needed: Reroute some or all of the runoff or tightline through the erodible reach. (Problem. area is slated for development.) . -Provide RID at Jr. High School. -Other possibility is to pipe the stream. ) ~ • Trib. & Collect. Item River Mile Point Category Prop. Proj. . 25 0006C 5 Habitat 26 0009 9 Geology RM .00- . 15 27 0009 9 Habitat RM .15-.20 28 0020 12 Habitat RM .20 29 0020 21 Geology RM .50- .70 P:BR.APC/mlm Existing Conditions and Problcm0s Rolling Hills Creek exhib- its oil sheen on water in upper portion of the creek. Little or no fish habitat ( or potential) exists. Bank and lower-slope erosion in small tributary channel, especially behind construe- lion equipment lot. Lots of litter; stream has extcnsiye downcutting, bank . erosion, and bedload movement. Sediment has destroyed fish habitat. City of Kent removes sediment each year. Bank erosion,. landsliding in canyon due to outfalls at end of SE 196th St. and from R/D on 200th plus natural· sensitivity (landslides). Heavy damage in Jan. 86 storm. Sedi- mentation above old road, and in trout farm below Talbot Rd., as well as ero- sion in the ravine. C-7 Anticipated Conditions and Problems Little change due to riprap along stream to protect sewer line that parallels stream. Flows in tributary will in- crease; erosion will continue causing sedimentation down- stream and· perhaps threaten stability of building. Worsening of water quality, sedimentation, and erosion. Possible flooding and sedi- mentation along S .192nd St. Problems will continue. . Recommendations None. -RID in upper basin. -Remove fill along stream . -Reduce the volume and rate of water to non-erosive levels by new RID . -Consider restricting future develop- ment (down-zone). -Community action projects could remove litter. Remove sedimentation source (see also Trib. 0023, RM.95). Control storm flows. Increase RID above RM .40 in 0021; reroute or control flows from vicinity of SE 200th (tightline west on 200th). Provide energy dissipation at RID outfall (RM .40). -Restrict development on north side of 0021 ( runoff to be tightlined or routed around ravine). Trib & Collect Item River Mile Point 30 31 32 0020 RM .60 0021 RM.DO 0.50 0021 RM .40 P:DR.APC/mlm :) 21 ?? -~ 22. Existing Catego,:v Prop. Proj. Conditions and Problems Habitat Geology. Hydrology 0302 Excess sediment from upstream ·bas destroyed a private trout farm. Thousands of fish were killed. during Jan. '86 storm. Bank erosion, landsliding in ravine due to outfalls at end of SE 196th St. and from RID pond at SE 200th plus natural sensitivity (landslides). Heavy damage in Jan. '86 storm. Sedimentation above old road and in trout farm below Talbot Rd. (0020), as well as erosion in the canyon. The upper reaches of Springbrook Creek lie within the city of Renton City Watershed. The creek originates in highly ero- sive and .steeply sloping soils. Alterations of the natural drainage patterns by development, roadway construction, and poor practice in handling . runoff have increased ero- sion and sediment lransport . to the lower gradient downstream reaches .... C-8 • ,• Anticipated Conditions and Problems Further sedimentation from upstream sediment sources. Problems will continue. Development will continue and impervious area will continue to grow. Increased runoff will further erode the unstable soils carrying sediment and debris downstream, where they will reduce the · efficiency of· or even destroy culverts, pipe- lines, and streambeds. Flooding could result from the inefficienr facilities coupled with the greater runoff. Recommendations Several options: construct sediment pond above Talbot Road. Reduce flow rates and volumes in Trib. 0021. Increase RJD upstream of Talbot Rd. Down-zone land to · reduce surface water impacts of future development. -Control storm flows: RID· above RM .40 in 0021; reroute or ~ control flows from vicinity of SE 200th (tightline flows west on 200th). -Provide energy dissipation at RID outfall (RM .40). -Restrict development on north side of 0021 (runoff to be tightlined or routed around canyon). -Construct a regional RID faci- lity in the natural drainage swale at the upper reaches of this system. -Construct a dam across the swale with an outlet control structure and an overflow· spillway. • -Tightline eidsting drainage into area to further reduce erosion and raise existing roadway to prevent flooding. ) Item 33 34 35 36 ·v Trib. & River Mile 0022 RM .20- 1.40 0022 RM .30- 0022 RM .30- 2.30 0022 RM .80 P:DR.APC/mlm Collect. Point 26, 28 26 29,28 26 28 Category Geology Habitat Habitat Habitat Existing Prop. Proj. Conditions and Problems Bank cutting and slope failure in canyon of Garrison Creek. Soine ero- sion caused by outfall over edges or flow out of tight- lined culverts impinging on opposite banks. Deposition in vicinity of SE 218 St. Large sedimentation zone has filled channel and pools. Surface water runoff is causing severe erosion and sedimentation. Instream habitat for fish and benthic organisms is very poor. Most pools are gone, in- stream large organic debris and bedload ·are both moving. Stream has a whitewashed, sterile look due to the water volume and veloci- ties. These have created a very unstable system that has destroyed the fish habitat and removed . most fish, benthos, and macrophytes. C-9 Anticipated Conditions and Problems Natural instability of canyon walls is aggravated by increased flows from upper part of catchment. Flooding of adjacent proper- ties due to rising streambed caused by sediment deposition. More development will exa- cerbate the problem. Worsening of existing problems. Recommendations -Increase RID capacity, especially upstream of Benson Road. -Tightline flows to bottom of canyon; provide energy dissipa- tion. Restrict further development on edges of canyon. Reduce flow rates and volumes to non-erosive levels. Then consider habitat improvements. such as large organic debris for pools and instream protection. Reduce flow rates to nonerosive levels by providing more RID. Stricter development controls by down-zoning development areas. Reduce stream flow rates and volumes to non-erosive levels. Then consider habitat improve- ments such as large organic debris for pools and instream protec- tion. Trib. & Item River Mile 37 0022 RM 1.10 38 0022 RM 1.30 39 0022 RM 1.40 40 ~ (See items #42-43 below) P:I3R.APC/mlm ) Collect. Point 28 28 28 26 Catcgq_ry Geology Habitat Geology Hydrology Existing Prop. Proj. Conditions and Problems Erosion below culvert out- fall; downcutting of side- gully into loose sandy materials. These are causing some slope failure in backyards. Large quantities of domestic trash instream. Mass failure of new fill on edge of canyon; erosion of culvert outfall; under- cutting of slopes. Trash disposed of by nursery is entering stream. Fill was emplaced poorly is settling toward creek; side is failing. Runoff from streets and development east of Benson Rd. is eroding slopes at outfall. Garrison Creek experiences erosion arid downcutting because of the step gra- dient and erpsive soils in this reach. Development in the upstream areas has further accelerated this prot>lem by concentrating runoff into the stream. C-10 • Anticipated Conditions and Problems Gullying and failure of sideslopes will continue unless outfall is controlled. Water quality and visual problems. Problems will continue. Additional development upstream and along Garrison Creek will continue to exacerbate the erosion problem and degrade the existing conveyance system. Sediment load and erosion will reduce the efficiency of (and potentially destroy) existing facilities. · . Recommendations Tightline to bottom of canyon, with energy dissipator. Remove trash. -Fill should be rebuilt or removed. -RID pond on edge should be moved north. Culvert outfall should be rerouted into a new RID facility southeast of Benson Rd. ( or tightlined to bottom of hill). -Removal of trash from stream should be required. There are three recommended pro- jects along Garrison Creek • that would impede peak runoff ~ flows and would thus reduce ero-• sion and flooding potential. The system would need to be hydraulically modelled to deter- mine the individual/joint impact of the recommended projects. Potential cost sharing should be reviewed -..ith the Washington State Dept. of Transportation and the city of Kent. ) Item 41 42 43 44 · Trib. & River Mile 0022 RM 1.40 0022 RM 1.00 0024 0023 RM .50- . 90 P:BR.APC/mlm Collect. Point 29 28 30 27 • Existing Category Prop. Proj. Conditions and Problems Hydrology 0303 Hydrology 0304 Hydrology 0305 Geology 7* See Item 40. See Item 40. See Item 40. Downcutting, undercutting of lower slopes •• extreme in upper reach (RM 0.70- 0.90); box-gully up to 22' deep. Deposition in field at mouth. C-11 Anticipated Conditions and Problems See Item 40. ~ See Item 40. See Item 40. Erosion in this ravine has been aggravated by increased flows from upper basin and runoff from resi- dential area to the south. Worst erosion occurs at knickpoint of headward migration ( currently RM .80 -.90) and will move up- stream with time. Recommendations Construct instream R/D facility at intersection of Benson Rd. and Garrison Creek. Roadway would be reinforced to act as impoundment. Construct outlet control structure and tie to existing cross culvert. Check realignment schedule with WSDOT. Provide fish passage. Construct instream RID facility in Garrison Creek. Construct a dam across the ravine with an outlet control structure and an overflow spillway. Provide access road from SE 220th without increasing landslide potential. Project will provide fish passage. Construct RID facility. Would require excavation of soil, remo- val of existing vegetation, and construction of berms. Facility would require proportional discharge outlet and overflow spillway. -Control flows into canyon with RID upstream of RM 1.00 . If possible, route runoff (from development to south RM .70-.90) around the canyon to S 212th St. -Restrict further development along ravine edges; in areas north of ravine any future ou !- falls should be tighlined into canyon or (preferably) routed around. Trib. & Collect. Item River Mile Point 45 46 47 0023 RM .60- . 80 0023 RM .95 0023 RM 1.0 P:DR.APC/mlm • 27 27 27 Catcgo')'.. Habitat Habitat Hydrology Prop. Proj. 0309 Existing Conditions and Problems Whitewashed, sterile channel. Channel material is very unstable. Little fish habitat· remaining. Steep, incised valley. · Construction-yard drainage from existing pipe on top of slope causing eroded left bank. Large amounts of sediment are transported from the highly erosive soils and steep gradient to the lower-gradient downstream reaches. This problem is ag,,=vated by peak storm runoff and poor develop- ment practi~s ( e.g., development on steep slopes). The resulting erosion and sediment transport have led to decreased conveyance- system capacity and need for increased maintenance. C-12 fj Anticipated Conditions and Problems Worsening of existing problem .. Further erosion and possible toxic runoff from private construction busines.s. Erosion and sediment transport will continue to degrade the system and require continued maintenance of the downstream system. Recommendations Reduce stream flow rates and volumes to nonerosive levels, then consider habitat _improve- . ments such as large organic debris for pools and instream protec- tion. Notify Dept. of Ecology and King County Health Dept. -Reduce the rate of erosion and sediment transport by constructing an instream · RID facility to reduce peak discharges, using the existing sewer-line right-of-way. Increase storage capacity by expanding size of the existing berm. -Construct an· outlet-control facility. As part of project, downstream channel will need proper erosion-control facili: ties. ) ~ .... • Trib. & Collect. Item River Mile Point 48 49 50 0024 RM .20 0024 RM .10- .30 0024 RM .70 P:13R.APC/mlm 30, 31 30 30 Categorv Geology llabitat Habitat Prop. Proj. • Existing Conditions and Problems Channel downcutting, bank erosion, landslides in ravines. Natural instabi- lity aggravated by increased streamflows. Loss of pools and instream habitat from high-flow ero- sion. Large quantity of garbage deposited in the stream. C-13 Aniicipated Conditions and Problems Increase in impetvious area on plateau will continue to aggravate erosion in the ravines and cause deposition in Garrison Creek. Any remammg fish, benthos, or macrophytes will be lost due to the high, erosive stream flows. More garbage and increased water quality problems. Recommendations Increase R/D, especially in upstream area of Trib. 0024 (where most future development will occur). -The downstream analysis required by BALD for new developments should fully address the impacts of new developments on the conditions foun at this site during reconnaissance. New development that will aggravat~v conditions should be required to include mitigation proposals prior to approval. Reduce flow rates and volumes to nonerosive levels with development controls and/or with additional RID at existing sites. -Encourage citizen project to clean up the . stream. -Large commercial area and parking lot runoff need oil and metals separation before discharge into the stream. Trib. & Collect. Existing Anticipated Item River Mile Point Category Prop. Proj. Conditions and Problems Conditions and Problems Recommendations 51 0025 30, 31 Geology Channel downcutting, bank Increase in impervious area -Provide energy dissipation below RM .00-erosion, landslides in on plateau will continue to culvert outfall at RM .70 . . 70 canyons. Natural instabi-aggravate erosion in the Restrict development along canyon lity aggravated by ravines and cause deposition edges. increased stream flows. in Garrison Creek. -The downstream analysis required by BALD for new developments should fully address the impacts, these developments will have on the conditions found at this site during reconnaissance. Developments that will aggravate E) conditions should be required to include mitigation proposals prior to approval. 52 NA 7 Hydrology 0306 None observed. None. Drop project from priority listing; small tributary area at top of knoll; city of.Renton in agreement with this· recommendation. 53 NA 7 Hydrology 0308 Project completed. None. • P:BRAPC/mlm C-14 ) • ) ) APPENDIX B. DOWNSTREAM SYSTEM BACKWATER ANALYSIS R:120121111210213\Documents\Reports\Preliminary\Level 2 DS 12102.docx ©2014 D.R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Level TWO Downstream Analysis Vuecrest Preliminary Plat Page 24 City of Renton Storm Water Runoff Variables: A""-Total ofSubasin and Tributary Areas C= Runoff Coefficient (the anticipated proportion of rainfall volume that runs off the area) see 2009 KCSWM Table 3.2.IA Cc= Composite Runoff Coefficient ~ S(C,,'A.,)IAT•• u T,= Time of Concentration (fypically 6.3 minutes which is the minimum value used in caJculations) R= design return frequency iR= Unit peak rainfall intensity factor i,-(a,J(TJA(-b,J -Al-I __ I l~C-1, ~-~-· ---___ • ----_··v:s aR>bR= coefficients from '98 KCSWM Table 3.2.1.B used to adjust !!!_e equation for the design stonn IR= Peak rainfall intensity factor for a storm of return frequency 'R' IR= PR*iR PR= total precipitation (inches) for the 24-hour stonn event for the given frequency. See Issopluvial Maps in 2009 KCSWM Figures 3.2.1.A-D QR= peak flow (cfs) for a storm of return frequency 'R' (a= Cc*iR*A The Q-Ratio describes the ratio of the tributary flow to the main upstream flow. R= 100 wyear storm aR= 2.61 b,-0.63 PR= 4 inches Conveyance System Variables: d= pipe diameter n= Manning's Number I= length of pipe ~\ . l e-t) '/ &vv-'" -n\) \ V\ .; ~\-\-(j\,\_ ~ °FLY\l\i OQ ~~ C-f-~(t}-~ n~)+-O.ZIZ-cf5: AA!~~ -W vNJJ.-\-C"°V'-v~ ~"'--- VAt,v-e.-V\J\N',... -?'V4 (,GV\.1re\lVNhv0 =~-,_c;cfs-. Pipe Structures Subasins C A A C cc Tc iR IR QR SQR Q-d Material n I Slope invert invert overw Q V Bend er Tributaries subasin Ratio in out flow Full Full Dia elev. Flow Flow FROM CB To CB sf Ac Ac Min. els els in ft % ft ft ft els fps CB#9 TO INLET 1 9 9 8 9 0 0.00 0.90 6.3 0.82 3.27 8.00 8.00 0.00 12 PVC 0.011 59 2.01 236.12 234.93 244.00 5.99 7.62 0 4 8 8 7 8 0 0.00 0.90 6.3 0.82 3.27 0.00 8.00 0.00 12 PVC 0.011 92 12.00 234.93 223.95 239.93 14.63 18.62 35 2 7 7 6 7 0 0.00 0.90 6.3 0.82 3.27 0.00 8.00 0.00 12 PVC 0.011 55 13.01 223.67 216.54 228.67 15.23 19.39 50 2 6 6 5 6 0 0.00 0.90 6.3 0.82 3.27 0.00 8.00 0.00 12 PVC 0.011 47 2.29 211.28 210.2 220.54 6.39 8.14 15 4 5 5 4 5 0 0.00 0.90 6.3 0.82 3.27 0.00 8.00 0.00 12 PVC 0.011 40 12.02 208.20 203.38 213.20 14.64 18.64 0 2 4 4 3 4 0 0.00 0.90 6.3 0.82 3.27 0.00 8.00 0.00 12 PVC 0.011 46 12.00 202.38 196.81 207.38 14.63 18.62 20 2 3 3 2 3 0 0.00 0.90 6.3 0.82 3.27 0.00 8.00 0.00 12 PVC 0.011 85 2.00 191.46 189.75 203.12 5.98 7.61 5 4 2 2 1 2 0 0.00 0.90 6.3 0.82 3.27 0.00 8.00 0.00 12 PVC 0.011 44 12.01 189.75 184.43 197.62 14.63 18.63 0 4 1 INLET 1 1 0 0.00 0.90 6.3 0.82 3.27 0.00 8.00 0.00 12 DI 0.012 4.2 5.00 181.21 181 195.07 8.65 11.02 90 4 BACKWATER COMPUTER PROGRAM FOR PIPES Pipe data from file:CB#9 TO INLET 1.bwp Surcharge condition at intermediate junctions Tailwater Elevation:185.5 feet Discharge Range:0.25 to 10. Step of 0.25 [cfs] Overflow Elevation:244. feet Weir:NONE Upstream Velocity:O. feet/sec PIPE NO. 1: JUNC NO. 1: 4 LF -12"CP @ OVERFLOW-EL: 195.07 5.00% OUTLET: 181.00 INLET: 181.21 INTYP: 5 BEND: 90 DEG DIA/WIDTH: 4.0 Q-RATIO: 0.00 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N-FAC DC ON TW DO DE HWO HWI ******************************************************************************* 0.25 4.30 185.51 * 0.012 0.21 0.12 4.50 4.50 4.30 4.30 0.25 0.50 4.30 185.51 * 0.012 0.30 0.17 4.50 4.50 4.29 4.30 0.38 0.75 4.32 185.53 * 0.012 0.37 0.20 4.50 4.50 4.29 4.32 0.48 1.00 4.34 185.55 * 0.012 0.43 0.23 4.50 4.50 4.29 4.34 0.58 1.25 4.37 185.58 * 0.012 0.48 0.26 4.50 4.50 4.29 4.37 0.67 1.50 4.40 185.61 * 0.012 0.52 0.29 4.50 4.50 4.30 4.40 0.75 1.75 4.44 185.65 * 0.012 0.57 0.31 4.50 4.50 4.30 4.44 0.84 ·2.00 4.48 185.69 * 0.012 0.61 0.33 4.50 4.50 4.30 4'.48 0.93 2.25 4.54 185.75 * 0.012 0.65 0.35 4.50 4.50 4.30 4.54 1.02 2.50 4.59 185.80 * 0.012 0.68 0.37 4.50 4.50 4.31 4.59 1.11 2.75 4.66 185.87 * 0.012 0.72 0.39 4.50 4.50 4.31 4.66 1.20 3.00 4.73 185.94 * 0.012 0.75 0.41 4.50 4.50 4.32 4.73 1.29 3.25 4.80 186.01 * 0.012 0.78 0.43 4.50 4.50 4.32 4.80 1.41 3.:.50 4.8_9 186.10 * 0.01:_2_0.:._8~0.45 4.50 4._5jl_4.32 4.89 1.53 (3.75 4.97 186.18 * 0.012 0.83 0.47 4.50 4.50 4.33 4.97 ~ . 4"'."oo--s-:-o7-r86728-*-o-:-012-o-:-85-oc-4·8-4"'."50-4-. 5·0--c3·4-5707-1-:-siJ 4.25 5.17 186.38 * 0.012 0.87 0.50 4.50 4.50 4.34 5.17 1.96 4.50 5.28 186.49 * 0.012 0.89 0.52 4.50 4.50 4.35 5.28 2.11 4.75 5.39 186.60 * 0.012 0.91 0.53 4.50 4.50 4.35 5.39 2.28 5.00 5.51 186.72 * 0.012 0.92 0.55 4.50 4.50 4.36 5.51 2.46 5.25 5.63 186.84 * 0.012 0.93 0.57 4.50 4.50 4.37 5.63 2.65 5.50 5.76 186.97 * 0.012 0.94 0.58 4.50 4.50 4.38 5.76 2.84 5.75 5.90 187.11 * 0.012 0.95 0.60 4.50 4.50 4.38 5.90 3.04 6.00 6.04 187.25 * 0.012 0.96 0.62 4.50 4.50 4.39 6.04 3.26 6.25 6.19 187.40 * 0.012 0.97 0.64 4.50 4.50 4.40 6.19 3.48 6.50 6.35 187.56 * 0.012 0.97 0.65 4.50 4.50 4.41 6.35 3.71 6.75 6.51 187.72 * 0.012 0.98 0.67 4.50 4.50 4.42 6.51 3.95 7.00 6.68 187.89 * 0.012 0.98 0.69 4.50 4.50 4.43 6.68 4.20 7.25 6.85 188.06 * 0.012 0.98 0.71 4.50 4.50 4.44 6.85 4.46 7.50 7.03 188.24 * 0.012 0.99 0.73 4.50 4.50 4.45 7.03 4.73 7.75 6.73 187.94 * 0.012 0.99 0.75 4.50 4.50 4.46 6.73 4.52 8.00 6.89 188.10 * 0.012 0.99 0.77 4.50 4.50 4.47 6.89 4.77 8.25 7.06 188.27 * 0.012 0.99 0.79 4.50 4.50 4.48 7.06 5.04 8.50 7.23 188.44 * 0.012 0.99 0.81 4.50 4.50 4.49 7.23 5.31 8.75 7.40 188.61 * 0.012 0.99 0.84 4.50 4.50 4.51 7.40 5.59 9.00 7.58 188.79 * 0.012 1.00 0.87 4.50 4.50 4.52 7.58 5.87 9.25 7.77 188.98 * 0.012 1.00 0.92 4.50 4.50 4.53 7.77 6.17 9.50 7.96 189.17 * 0.012 1.00 1.00 4.50 4.50 4.54 7.96 6.47 9.75 8.15 189.36 * 0.012 1.00 1.00 4.50 4.50 4.56 8.15 6.78 10.00 8.35 189.56 * 0.012 1.00 1.00 4.50 4.50 4.57 8.35 7.10 PIPE NO. 2: JUNC NO. 2: 44 LF -12"CP @ 12.01% OVERFLOW-EL: 197.62 BEND: Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N-FAC oc OUTLET: 184.43 INLET: 189.75 INTYP: 5 0 DEG DIA/WIDTH: 4.0 Q-RATIO: 0.00 ON TW DO DE HWO HWI ******************************************************************************* 0.25 0.22 18 9. 97 * 0.012 0.21 0.10 1. 08 1. 08 0.21 ***** 0.22 0.50 0.34 190.09 * 0.012 0.30 0.14 1. 08 1. 08 0.30 ***** 0.34 0.75 0.43 190.18 * 0.012 0.37 0.17 1.10 1.10 0.37 ***** 0.43 1. 00 0.51 190.26 * 0.012 0.43 0.19 1.12 1.12 0.43 ***** 0.51 1.25 0.58 190.33 * 0.012 0.48 0.21 1.15 1.15 0.48 ***** 0.58 1. 50 0.65 190.40 * 0.012 0.52 0.23 1.18 1.18 0.52 ***** 0.65 1. 75 o. 71 190.46 * 0.012 0.57 0.25 1. 22 1. 22 0.57 ***** o. 71 2.00 0.76 190. 51 * 0.012 0.61 0.27 1. 26 1. 26 0.61 ***** 0. 76 2.25 0.81 190.56 * 0.012 0.65 0.28 1. 32 1. 32 0.65 ***** 0.81 2.50 0.87 190. 62 * 0.012 0.68 0.30 1. 37 1. 37 0.68 ***** 0.87 2.75 0.91 190.66 * 0.012 0.72 0.31 1. 44 1. 44 0.72 ***** 0. 91 3.00 0. 96 190. 71 * 0.012 0.75 0.33 1. 51 1.51 0. 75 ***** 0. 96 3.25 1. 03 190.78 * 0.012 0.78 0.34 1. 58 1. 58 0.78 *.**** 1. 03 J._5_0 __ 1_.10 190.85 * 0.012 0.80 0.35 1. 67 1. 67 0.80 ***** 1.10 ,L7,5 1.17 190.92 r-o:auQ.83·o.37 1.75 1.75 o:-,r3-*·*·*·*·-·r11-:_J 4.00 1.25 i.---n-:·o·o-*-o:'on-o·:s5-o:-38--r.lf5-1-:-8s--o-:-85-**..-.-.--i-;-25 4.25 1. 33 191.08 * 0.012 0.87 0.39 1.95 1. 95 0.87 ***** 1. 33 4.50 1. 42 191.17 * 0.012 0.89 0.40 2.06 2.06 0.89 ***** 1. 42 4.75 1. 51 191.26 * 0.012 0.91 0.42 2.17 2.17 0.91 ***** 1. 51 5.00 1. 61 191.36 * 0.012 0.92 0. 43 2.29 2.29 0.92 ***** 1. 61 5.25 1. 71 191. 46 * 0.012 0.93 0.44 2.41 2.41 0.93 ***** 1. 71 5.50 1. 81 191. 56 * 0.012 0.94 0.45 2.54 2.54 0.94 ***** 1. 81 5.75 1. 93 191. 68 * 0.012 0.95 0.46 2.68 2.68 0.95 ***** 1. 93 6.00 2.04 191.79 * 0.012 0.96 0.47 2.82 2.82 0. 96 ***** 2. 04 6.25 2.17 191. 92 * 0.012 0. 97 0. 49 2.97 2. 97 0.97 ***** 2.17 6.50 2.29 192.04 * 0.012 0.97 0.50 3 .13 3.13 0.97 ***** 2.29 6.75 2.42 192 .17 * 0.012 0.98 0.51 3. 29 3.29 0.98 ***** 2.42 7.00 2.56 192.31 * 0.012 0.98 0.52 3. 46 3.46 0.98 ***** 2.56 7.25 2. 70 192.45 * 0.012 0.98 0.53 3.63 3. 63 0.98 ***** 2.70 7.50 2.85 192. 60 * 0.012 0.99 0.54 3.81 3.81 0.99 ***** 2.85 7.75 3.00 192.75 * 0.012 0.99 0.55 3.51 3.51 0.99 ***** 3.00 8.00 3.16 192. 91 * 0.012 0.99 0.56 3. 67 3. 67 0.99 ***** 3.16 8.25 3.32 193.07 * 0.012 0.99 0.57 3.84 3.84 0.99 ***** 3.32 8.50 3. 4 9 193.24 * 0.012 0.99 0.58 4.01 4.01 0.99 ***** 3.49 8.75 3.66 193.41 * 0.012 0.99 0.59 4.18 4.18 0.99 ***** 3.66 9.00 3.84 193.59 * 0.012 1. 00 0. 61 4.36 4.36 1. 00 ***** 3.84 9.25 4.02 193. 77 * 0.012 1. 00 0. 62 4.55 4.55 1. 00 ***** 4.02 9.50 4.20 193. 95 * 0.012 1. 00 o. 63 4.74 4.74 1. 00 ***** 4.20 9.75 4.40 194.15 * 0.012 1.00 0. 64 4.93 4. 93 2.44 3.69 4.40 10.00 4.59 194. 34 * 0.012 1.00 0.65 5.13 5.13 2. 79 4.10 4.59 PIPE NO. 3: 85 LF -12"CP @ 2.00% OUTLET: 189.75 INLET: 191.46 INTYP: 5 JUNG NO. 3: OVERFLOW-EL: 203.12 BEND: 5 DEG DIA/WIDTH: 4.0 Q-RATIO: 0.00 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N-FAC DC ON TW DO DE HWO HWI ******************************************************************************* 0.25 0.27 191. 73 * 0.012 0.21 0.15 0.22 0.22 0.21 ***** 0.27 0.50 0.39 191.85 * 0.012 0.30 0.21 0.34 0.34 0.30 ***** 0.39 0. 7 5 0. 48 191.94 * 0.012 0.37 0.26 0.43 0.43 0.37 ***** 0. 48 1. 00 0.56 192.02 * 0.012 0.43 0.29 0.51 0.51 0.43 ***** 0.56 1. 25 0.63 192.09 * 0.012 0. 48 0.33 0.58 0.58 0.48 ***** 0.63 1. 50 0.70 192.16 * 0.012 0.52 0.36 0.65 0.65 0.52 ***** 0.70 1. 7 5 0. 7 6 192.22 * 0.012 0.57 0.39 0.71 0.71 0.57 ***** 0. 76 2.00 0.81 192.27 * 0.012 0.61 0.42 0. 76 0.76 0.61 ***** 0.81 2.25 0.87 192.33 * 0.012 0.65 0.45 0.81 0.81 0.65 ***** 0.87 2.50 0. 92 192.38 * 0.012 0.68 0.48 0.87 0.87 0. 68 ***** 0.92 2.75 0.97 192.43 * 0.012 0.72 0.51 0.91 0.91 0.72 ***** 0.97 3.00 1. 02 192.48 * 0.012 0.75 0.53 0. 96 0.96 0. 75 ***** 1. 02 3.25 1. 08 192.54 * 0.012 0. 78 0.56 1.03 1. 03 0.78 ***** 1. 08 3 . .50 1.15 __ 192.61 * 0.012 0.80 0.59 1.10 1.10 0.80 ***** 1.15 ~--192:~~r2 o.83 0.61-1.17 1.n o.83 ***** 1.23 .J 4.00 1.30 4.25 1.39 4.50 1.47 4.75 1.57 5. 00 l. 66 5.25 1.95 5.50 2.24 5.75 3.36 6.00 3.75 6.25 4.17 6.50 4.60 6.75 5.04 7.00 5.51 7.25 5.99 7.50 6.49 7.75 7.00 8.00 7.53 8.25 8.08 8. 50 8. 64 8.75 9.23 9.00 9.83 9.25 10.44 9.50 11.07 **************** ******** OVERFLOW 9.75 11.72 10.00 12.39 192.76 192. 85 192.93 193.03 193.12 193.41 193.70 194.82 195.21 195.63 196.06 196.50 196.97 197. 45 197.95 198.46 198.99 199.54 200.10 200.69 201.29 201. 90 * 0. 012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0. 012 * 0. 012 * 0. 012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0. 012 * 0. 012 * 0. 012 * 0.012 0.85 0.87 0.89 0.91 0.92 0.93 0.94 0.95 0.96 0.97 0.97 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 l. DO l. 00 0.64 0. 67 0. 70 0.73 0.76 0. 79 0.83 0.88 l. 00 l. 00 l. 00 l. OD l. DO l. OD l. DO l. OD 1. OD l. OD l. 00 l. DO l. 00 1. DO 202.53 * 0.012 1.00 1.00 OVERFLOW ENCOUNTERED AT 9.75 CONDITIONS CALCULATED ASSUMING 203.18 * 0.012 1.00 1.00 203.85 * 0.012 1.00 1.00 l. 25 l. 33 l. 42 1. 51 l. 61 1. 71 1. 81 l. 93 2.04 2 .17 2.29 2.42 2.56 2. 70 2.85 3.00 3.16 3.32 3. 49 3.66 3.84 4.02 4.20 1. 25 l. 33 1. 42 l. 51 l. 61 l. 71 1. 81 l. 93 2.04 2.17 2.29 2.42 2.56 2.70 2.85 3.00 3.16 3.32 3.49 3.66 3.84 4. 02 4.20 0.85 0.87 0.89 1.10 1. 33 l. 58 1. 84 2 .11 2.40 2.69 3.00 3.32 3.66 4.00 4.36 4.73 5.11 5.51 5.91 6.33 6. 76 7.21 7.66 ***** ***** ***** l. 40 1. 66 1. 95 2.24 3.36 3.75 4 .17 4.60 5.04 5.51 5.99 6. 49 7.00 7.53 8.08 8.64 9.23 9.83 10.44 11. 07 l. 30 l. 39 1. 4 7 l. 57 l. 66 1. 77 l. 88 2.79 2.98 3.18 3.38 3.60 3.82 4.05 4.29 4.53 4.79 5.05 5.32 5.60 5.89 6.18 6.48 CFS DISCHARGE***************** SURCHARGE CONDITIONS********* 4.40 4.40 8.13 11.72 6.79 4.59 4.59 8.61 12.39 7.11 PIPE NO. 4: 46 LF -12"CP @ 12.00% OUTLET: 196.81 INLET: 202.38 INTYP: 5 JUNC NO. 4: OVERFLOW-EL: 207.38 BEND: 20 DEG DIA/WIDTH: 2.0 Q-RATIO: 0.00 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N-FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI ******************************************************************************* 0.25 0.22 202.60 * 0.012 0.21 0.10 0.00 0.10 0.21 ***** 0.22 0.50 0.34 202.72 * 0.012 0.30 0.14 0.00 0.14 0.30 ***** 0.34 0.75 0.43 202.81 * 0.012 0.37 0.17 0.00 0.17 0.37 ***** 0.43 1.00 0.51 202.89 * 0.012 0.43 0.19 0.00 0.19 0.43 ***** 0.51 1.25 0.58 202.96 * 0.012 0.48 0.21 0.00 0.21 0.48 ***** 0.58 1.50 0.65 203.03 * 0.012 0.52 0.23 0.00 0.23 0.52 ***** 0.65 1.75 0.71 203.09 * 0.012 0.57 0.25 0.00 0.25 0.57 ***** 0.71 2.00 0.77 203.15 * 0.012 0.61 0.27 0.00 0.27 0.61 ***** 0.77 2.25 0.83 203.21 * 0.012 0.65 0.28 0.00 0.28 0.65 ***** 0.83 2.50 0.88 203.26 * 0.012 0.68 0.30 0.00 0.30 0.68 ***** 0.88 2.75 0.93 203.31 * 0.012 0.72 0.31 0.00 0.31 0.72 ***** 0.93 3.00 0.99 203.37 * 0.012 0.75 0.33 0.00, 0.33 0.75 ***** 0.99 3.25 1.05 203.43 * 0.012 0.78 0.34 0.00 0.34 0.78 ***** 1.05 3.50 1.13 203.51 * 0.012 0.00 o.~_._o_o_~___Q_._00 ***** 1.13 (3.75 1.20 20·3.58 * 0.012 0.83 0.37 0.00 0.37 0.8J __ *_*_*_*_*_-=1._2_0J coo--1-;20--203-:-66-•-o:-or2-o-:-ss-o-:-:l"s~o. 38 0. 85 ***** 1. 28 4.25 1.37 203.75 * 0.012 0.87 0.39 0.00 0.39 0.87 ***** 1.37 4.50 1.46 203.84 * 0.012 0.89 0.40 0.00 0.40 0.89 ***** 1.46 4.75 1.56 203.94 * 0.012 0.91 0.42 o.oo 0.42 0.91 ***** 1.56 5.00 1.66 204.04 * 0.012 0.92 0.43 o.oo 0.43 0.92 ***** 1.66 5.25 1.77 204.15 * 0.012 0.93 0.44 0.00 0.44 0.93 ***** 1.77 5.50 1.88 204.26 * 0.012 0.94 0.45 0.00 0.45 0.94 ***** 1.88 5.75 2.00 204.38 * 0.012 0.95 0.46 0.00 0.46 0.95 ***** 2.00 6.00 2.13 204.51 * 0.012 0.96 0.47 0.00 0.47 0.96 ***** 2.13 6.25 2.25 204.63 * 0.012 0.97 0.49 0.00 0.49 0.97 ***** 2.25 6.so 2.39 204.77 * 0.012 o.97 o.5o o.oo a.so o.97 ***** 2.39 6.75 2.53 204.91 * 0.012 0.98 0.51 0.00 0.51 0.98 ***** 2.53 7.00 2.67 205.05 * 0.012 0.98 0.52 0.16 0.52 0.98 ***** 2.67 7.25 2.82 205.20 * 0.012 0.98 0.53 0.64 0.64 0.98 ***** 2.82 7.50 2.98 205.36 * 0.012 0.99 0.54 1.14 1.14 0.99 ***** 2.98 7.75 3.14 205.52 * 0.012 0.99 0.55 1. 65 1. 65 0.99 ***** 3.14 8.00 3.30 205.68 * 0.012 0.99 0.56 2.18 2.18 0.99 ***** 3.30 8.25 3.47 205.85 * 0.012 0.99 0.57 2.73 2.73 0.99 ***** 3.47 8.50 3.65 206.03 * 0.012 0.99 0.58 3.29 3.29 0.99 ***** 3.65 8. 7 5 3.83 206.21 * 0.012 0.99 0.59 3.88 3.88 0.99 ***** 3.83 **************** OVERFLOW ENCOUNTERED AT 9.00 CFS DISCHARGE ***************** ******** OVERFLOW CONDITIONS CALCULATED ASSUMING SURCHARGE CONDITIONS ********* 9.00 5.81 208.19 * 0.012 1. 00 0.61 4.48 4.48 1. 00 ***** 5.81 9.25 6.10 208.48 * 0.012 1. 00 0. 62 5.09 5.09 1. 00 ***** 6.10 9.50 6.42 208.80 * 0.012 1. 00 0. 63 5.72 5.72 2.97 6.37 6.42 9. 75 7.35 209.73 * 0.012 1. 00 0. 64 6.37 6.37 3. 76 7.35 6. 73 10.00 8.36 210.74 * 0.012 1. 00 0. 65 7.04 7.04 4.58 8. 36 7.06 PIPE NO. 5: 40 LF -12"CP @ 12.02% OUTLET: 203.38 INLET: 208.20 INTYP: 5 JUNC NO. 5: OVERFLOW-EL: 213. 20 BEND: 0 DEG DIA/WIDTH: 2.0 Q-RATIO: 0.00 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N-FAC DC ON TW DO DE HWO HWI ******************************************************************************* 0.25 0.22 208. 42 * 0.012 0.21 0.10 0.00 0.10 0.21 ***** 0.22 0.50 0.34 208.54 * 0.012 0.30 0.14 o.oo 0.14 0.30 ***** 0.34 0.75 0.43 208.63 * 0.012 0.37 0.17 0.00 0.17 0.37 ***** 0.43 1.00 0.51 208. 71 * 0.012 0.43 0.19 0.00 0 .19 0.43 ***** 0.51 1. 25 0.58 208.78 * 0.012 0.48 0.21 0.00 0.21 0.48 ***** 0.58 1.50 0.65 208.85 * 0.012 0.52 0.23 0.00 0.23 0.52 ***** 0.65 1. 75 0.71 208.91 * 0.012 0.57 0.25 0.00 0.25 0.57 ***** 0. 71 2.00 0. 76 208.96 * 0.012 0.61 0.27 0.00 0.27 0.61 ***** 0.76 2.25 0.81 209.01 * 0.012 0.65 0.28 0.00 0.28 0.65 ***** 0.81 2.50 0.87 209.07 * 0.012 0.68 0.30 0.00 0.30 0.68 ***** 0.87 2. 75 0. 91 209.11 * 0.012 0. 72 0.31 0.00 0.31 0.72 ***** 0.91 3.00 0. 96 209.16 * 0.012 0.75 0.33 o.oo 0.33 0.75 ***** 0.96 3.25 1. 03 209.23 * 0.012 0.78 0.34 0.05 0.34 0.78 ***** 1. 03 3.50 1.10 209~_30 * 0.012 0.80 0 ._3_5 0.13 0.35 0.80 ***** 1.10 Cf.15 1.11 209.37 * 0.012 0.83 0.37 0.20 0.37 0.'83~**** -1~ 4.0-0--i-:-2 2·0·974·5--•-o-:o·r2---o:-0·5 0.38 o-~2·0----0:-3 s--o--:-s s--* ** * *--1-:---2 s 4.25 1. 33 209.53 * 0.012 0.87 0.39 0.37 0.39 0.87 ***** 1. 33 4.50 1. 42 209.62 * 0.012 0.89 0.40 0.46 0. 4 6 0.89 ***** 1. 42 4.75 1. 51 209. 71 * 0.012 0.91 0.42 0.56 0.56 0.91 ***** 1. 51 5.00 1. 61 209.81 * 0.012 0.92 0.43 0.66 0.66 0.92 ***** 1. 61 5.25 2.35 210.55 * 0.012 0.93 0.44 0.77 0.77 0.93 ***** 2.35 5.50 2. 52 210. 72 * 0.012 0.94 0.45 0.88 0.88 0.94 ***** 2.52 5.75 2.70 210.90 * 0.012 0.95 0.46 1. 00 1. 00 0.95 ***** 2.70 6.00 2.89 211. 09 * 0.012 0.96 0.47 1.13 1.13 0. 96 ***** 2.89 6.25 3.09 211. 29 * 0.012 0.97 0. 49 1.25 1.25 0.97 ***** 3.09 6.50 3.30 211. 50 * 0.012 0.97 0.50 1.39 1.39 0.97 ***** 3.30 6.75 3.51 211. 71 * 0.012 0.98 0.51 1.53 1.53 0.98 ***** 3.51 7.00 3.73 211. 93 * 0.012 0.98 0.52 1. 67 1. 67 0.98 ***** 3.73 7.25 3.96 212.16 * 0.012 0.98 0.53 1. 82 1.82 0.98 ***** 3.96 7.50 4.20 212.40 * 0.012 0.99 0.54 1. 98 1. 98 0.99 ***** 4.20 7. 75 4.45 212.65 * 0.012 0.99 0.55 2.14 2.14 0.99 ***** 4.45 8.00 4.70 212.90 * 0.012 0.99 0.56 2.30 2.30 0.99 ***** 4.70 8.25 4.97 213.17 * 0.012 0.99 0.57 2.47 2.47 0.99 ***** 4.97 **************** OVERFLOW ENCOUNTERED AT 8.50 CFS DISCHARGE ***************** ******** OVERFLOW CONDITIONS CALCULATED ASSUMING SURCHARGE CONDITIONS ********* 8.50 5.24 213. 44 * 0.012 0.99 0.58 2.65 2.65 0.99 ***** 5.24 8.75 5.52 213. 72 * 0.012 0.99 0.59 2.83 2.83 0.99 ***** 5.52 9.00 5.80 214.00 * 0.012 1.00 0.61 4.81 4.81 1.00 ***** 5.80 9.25 6.12 214.32 * 0.012 1.00 0. 62 5.10 5.10 2.59 5.81 6.12 9.50 6.43 214.63 * 0.012 1. 00 0.63 5.42 5.42 3.03 6.43 6.42 9. 75 7.67 215.87 * 0.012 1.00 0.64 6.35 6.35 4.09 7.67 6. 73 10.00 9.00 217.20 * 0.012 1. 00 0. 65 7.36 7.36 5.23 9.00 7.06 PIPE NO. 6: 47 LF -12"CP @ OVERFLOW-EL: 220.54 2.29% OUTLET: 210.20 INLET: 211.28 INTYP: 5 JUNC NO. 6: BEND: 15 DEG DIA/WIDTH: 4.0 Q-RATIO: 0.00 Q(CFSJ HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N-FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI ******************************************************************************* 0.25 0.27 211.55 * 0.012 0.21 0.15 0.00 D.15 0.21 ***** 0.27 0.50 0.39 211.67 * 0.012 0.30 0.20 0.00 0.20 0.30 ***** 0.39 0.75 0.48 211.76 * 0.012 0.37 0.25 0.00 0.25 0.37 ***** 0.48 1.00 0.56 211.84 * 0.012 0.43 0.28 0.00 0.28 0.43 ***** 0.56 1.25 0.63 211.91 * 0.012 0.48 0.32 0.00 0.32 0.48 ***** 0.63 1.50 0.70 211.98 * 0.012 0.52 0.35 0.00 0.35 0.52 ***** 0.70 1.75 0.76 212.04 * 0.012 0.57 0.38 0.00 0.38 0.57 ***** 0.76 2.00 0.82 212.10 * 0.012 0.61 0.41 0.00 0.41 0.61 ***** 0.82 2.25 0.87 212.15 * 0.012 0.65 0.44 0.00 0.44 0.65 ***** 0.87 2.50 0.92 212.20 * 0.012 0.68 0.46 0.00 0.46 0.68 ***** 0.92 2.75 0.97 212.25 * 0.012 0.72 0.49 0.00 0.49 0.72 ***** 0.97 3.00 1.03 212.31 * 0.012 0.75 0.51 0.00 0.51 0.75 ***** 1.03 3.25 1.10 212.38 * 0.012 0.78 0.54 0.00 0.54 0.78 ***** 1.10 3.50 l__.),6 212.44 * 0.012 ___().80 0.56 0.00 0.56 0.80 ***** 1.16 [3. 75 1.24 212.52 * 0.012 o.83 0·.59 o.o-o·-·0~59-o-:-8T-•.••. ,.---1-:-247' 4-:-o·o----r.rz--2T2-;·50-•-o-:Of2-·o-;-95-0761-o-:-oo-o-:-6l-0~85·-*****--r;-323 4.25 1.41 212.69 * 0.012 0.87 0.64 0.00 0.64 0.87 ***** 1.41 4.50 1.50 212.78 * 0.012 0.89 0.66 o.oo 0.66 0.89 ***** 1.50 4.75 1.59 212.87 * 0.012 0.91 0.69 0.00 0.69 0.91 ***** 1.59 5.00 1.69 212.97 * 0.012 0.92 0.72 0.00 0.72 0.92 ***** 1.69 5.25 1.80 213.08 * 0.012 0.93 0.75 0.35 0.75 0.93 ***** 1.80 5.50 1.91 213.19 * 0.012 0.94 0.78 0.52 0.78 0.94 ***** 1.91 5.75 2.03 213.31 * 0.012 0.95 0.81 0.70 0.81 0.95 ***** 2.03 6.00 2.97 214.25 * 0.012 0.96 0.85 0.89 0.89 0.96 ***** 2.97 6.25 3.17 214.45 * 0.012 0.97 0.91 1.09 1.09 1.25 2.72 3.17 6.50 3.38 214.66 * 0.012 0.97 1.00 1.30 1.30 1.55 3.15 3.38 6.75 3.59 214.87 * 0.012 0.98 1.00 1.51 1.51 1.87 3.59 3.59 7.00 4.05 215.33 * 0.012 0.98 1.00 1.73 1.73 2.20 4.05 3.82 7.25 4.53 215.81 * 0.012 0.98 1.00 1.96 1.96 2.55 4.53 4.05 7.50 5.02 216.30 * 0.012 0.99 1.00 2.20 2.20 2.90 5.02 4.29 7.75 5.54 216.82 * 0.012 0.99 1.00 2.45 2.45 3.27 5.54 4.53 8.00 6.06 217.34 * 0.012 0.99 1.00 2.70 2.70 3.65 6.06 4.79 8.25 6.61 217.89 * 0.012 0.99 1.00 2.97 2.97 4.04 6.61 5.05 8.50 7.17 218.45 * 0.012 0.99 1.00 3.24 3.24 4.44 7.17 5.32 8.75 7.75 219.03 * 0.012 0.99 1.00 3.52 3.52 4.86 7.75 5.60 9.00 8.34 219.62 * 0.012 1.00 1.00 3.80 3.80 5.28 8.34 5.88 9.25 8.98 220.26 * 0.012 1.00 1.00 4.12 4.12 5.74 8.98 6.18 **************** OVERFLOW ENCOUNTERED AT 9.50 CFS DISCHARGE***************** ******** OVERFLOW CONDITIONS CALCULATED ASSUMING SURCHARGE CONDITIONS********* 9.50 9.62 220.90 * 0.012 1.00 1.00 4.43 4.43 6.20 9.62 6.48 9.75 11.19 222.47 * 0.012 1.00 1.00 5.67 5.67 7.60 11.19 6.79 10.00 12.87 224.15 * 0.012 1.00 1.00 7.00 7.00 9.09 12.87 7.11 PIPE NO. 7: 54 LF -12"CP @ 13.01% OUTLET: 216.54 INLET: 223.67 INTYP: 5 JUNC NO. 7: OVERFLOW-EL: 228.67 BEND: 50 DEG DIA/WIDTH: 2.0 Q-RATIO: 0.00 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N-FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI ******************************************************************************* 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25 1. 50 1. 75 2.00 0.21 0.33 0. 43 0.52 0.59 0. 67 0.73 0.80 223.88 224.00 224.10 224.19 224.26 224.34 224.40 224.47 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0. 012 * 0. 012 0.21 0.30 0.37 0.43 0.48 0.52 0.57 0.61 0.10 0.13 0.16 0.19 0.21 0.23 0.24 0. 26 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 0 .13 0 .16 0.19 0.21 0.23 0.24 0.26 0.21 0.30 0.37 0.43 0.48 0. 52 0. 57 0.61 ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** 0.21 0.33 0.43 0.52 0.59 0. 67 0.73 0.80 fZPZ'LZB'!lZP ::J F:90£'LZ9'9Zr 0 a.:098 'l'M 'ONtt"'OOJDI ~ "7d l/llJf: 3N t,()9()t Sl:JO,GJ\l:JnS SH3NN'tf1d SH33Nl$N3 Sl/33NlfJN3 fJNU 7nSNO:J ~ Cf:! a {ii) fJNOll~S 'IJ'G ~ CJ ~ SOI.LS/~310\m'rtHO 31/S ON'r/ SNIS'r/88ns 'SNIS'r/8 39'r/NJ'rm0 :e 3~n9Jd S3.J. tl.J.S3 .J.S3H:J3nll , ' ll \ I I ' ' I ( , \\~, ., I \ \ \ , / .... " ~ 'r· " I I / , / I '.'<"'-', ~l' t B ''"! ' ... ,.,i.. ~ l'i-.'/JI , ', ' \)"\\\)I~ ff 0 < '9: I I~ ..,. \ ' , I I/ I 1\J \ -pf::.) 1----,,,' ,,,if!; r .... ~t \ /,,,~111 ,~.,r, ,', I /'"""'/ 1f/,/ \;, //":2's)\'fil\ '.,_ • - I r ~ 0 z j !I ~~~ :! !i ' ' ~ ~ ~ -~ ~ ~ !:lfj'-'-G - ~(5~8~ i ~ ~~rte§&: ~ ~ "' 0 " CD ~ ~ ~ ~ i;j § w z ~ w --' 0 <( u. z ~ (.) 0 ~ ~ en co ~ z !:2 0 II 0 co u :c :c 0 z a. (.) 0 <( z ~ 0:: 0 ~ Cl ~ .... d n 5 N @) 0 ~ 6 ~ ~ 0 u • 2.25 0.87 224.54 * 0.012 0.65 0.28 0.00 0.28 0.65 ***** 0.87 2.50 0.93 224.60 * 0.012 0.68 0.29 0.00 0.29 0.68 ***** 0.93 2.75 0.99 224.66 * 0.012 0.72 0.31 0.00 0.31 0.72 ***** 0.99 3.00 1.06 224.73 * 0.012 0.75 0.32 0.00 0.32 0.75 ***** 1.06 3.25 1.14 224.81 * 0.012 0.78 0.33 0.00 0.33 0.78 ***** 1.14 3.50 1.23 224.90 * 0.012 0.80 0.35 0.00 0.35 0.80 ***** 1.23 (3·.·1·s 1.32 -224.99 * 0.012 o.83 o.36 o:-oo--o-:-:i'6. o.83 ***** 1.32j 4 . oo 1-:-4°2-2 2 5-co 9-•-0-:-0 r2-o-:-8 s-o-:-31-o:-oo-o:-31-o:-ff5-•···.-.··--1-:-4 2 4.25 1.52 225.19 * 0.012 0.87 0.38 0.00 0.38 0.87 ***** 1.52 4.50 1.64 225.31 * 0.012 0.89 0.40 0.00 0.40 0.89 ***** 1.64 4.75 1.75 225.42 * 0.012 0.91 0.41 0.00 0.41 0.91 ***** 1.75 5.00 1.88 225.55 * 0.012 0.92 0.42 0.00 0.42 0.92 ***** 1.88 5.25 2.01 225.68 * 0.012 0.93 0.43 0.00 0.43 0.93 ***** 2.01 5.50 2.15 225.82 * 0.012 0.94 0.44 0.00 0.44 0.94 ***** 2.15 5.75 2.29 225.96 * 0.012 0.95 0.45 0.00 0.45 0.95 ***** 2.29 6.00 2.44 226.11 * 0.012 0.96 0.46 0.00 0.46 0.96 ***** 2.44 6.25 2.59 226.26 * 0.012 0.97 0.47 0.00 0.47 0.97 ***** 2.59 6.50 2.76 226.43 * 0.012 0.97 0.49 0.00 0.49 0.97 ***** 2.76 6.75 2.92 226.59 * 0.012 0.98 0.50 0.00 0.50 0.98 ***** 2.92 7.00 3.10 226.77 * 0.012 0.98 0.51 0.00 0.51 0.98 ***** 3.10 7.25 3.28 226.95 * 0.012 0.98 0.52 0.00 0.52 0.98 ***** 3.28 7.50 3.47 227.14 * 0.012 0.99 0.53 o.oo 0.53 0.99 ***** 3.47 7.75 3.66 227.33 * 0.012 0.99 0.54 0.28 0.54 0.99 ***** 3.66 8.00 3.86 227.53 * 0.012 0.99 0.55 0.80 0.80 0.99 ***** 3.86 8.25 4.07 227.74 '* 0.012 0.99 0.56 1.35 1.35 0.99 ***** 4.07 8.50 4.28 227.95 * 0.012 0.99 0.57 1.91 1.91 0.99 ***** 4.28 8.75 4.50 228.17 * 0.012 0.99 0.58 2.49 2.49 0.99 ***** 4.50 9.00 4.73 228.40 * 0.012 1.00 0.59 3.08 3.08 1.00 ***** 4.73 9.25 4.96 228.63 * 0.012 1.00 0.60 3.72 3.72 1.00 ***** 4.96 **************** OVERFLOW ENCOUNTERED AT 9.50 CFS DISCHARGE***************** ******** OVERFLOW CONDITIONS CALCULATED ASSUMING SURCHARGE CONDITIONS********* 9.50 5.20 228.87 * 0.012 1.00 0.61 4.36 4.36 1.00 ***** 5.20 9.75 5.44 229.11 * 0.012 1.00 0.62 5.93 5.93 2.30 4.60 5.44 10.00 6.57 230.24 * 0.012 1.00 0.63 7.61 7.61 4.15 6.57 5.70 PIPE NO. 8: 91 LF -12"CP @ 12.00% OUTLET: 223.95 INLET: 234.93 INTYP: 5 JUNC NO. 8: OVERFLOW-EL: 239.93 BEND: 35 DEG DIA/WIDTH: 2.0 Q-RATIO: 0.00 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N-FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI ******************************************************************************* 0.25 0.22 235.15 * 0.012 0.21 0.10 0.00 0.10 0.21 ***** 0.22 0.50 0.34 235.27 * 0.012 0.30 0.14 0.05 0.14 0.30 ***** 0.34 0.75 0.43 235.36 * 0.012 0.37 0.17 0.15 0.17 0.37 ***** 0.43 1.00 0.52 235.45 * 0.012 0.43 0.19 0.24 0.24 0.43 ***** 0.52 1.25 0.59 235.52 * 0.012 0.48 0.21 0.31 0.31 0.48 ***** 0.59 1.50 0.66 235.59 * 0.012 0.52 0.23 0.39 0.39 0.52 ***** 0.66 1.75 0.72 235.65 * 0.012 0.57 0.25 0.45 0.45 0.57 ***** 0.72 2.00 0.79 235.72 * 0.012 0.61 0.27 0.52 0.52 0.61 ***** 0.79 2.25 0.85 235.78 * 0.012 0.65 0.28 0.59 0.59 0.65 ***** 0.85 2.50 0.90 235.83 * 0.012 0.68 0.30 0.65 0.65 0.68 ***** 0.90 2.75 0.96 235.89 * 0.012 0.72 0.31 0.71 0.71 0.72 ***** 0.96 3.00 1.02 235.95 * 0.012 0.75 0.33 0.78 0.78 0.75 ***** 1.02 3.25 1.10 236.03 * 0.012 0.78 0.34 0.86 0.86 0.78 ***** 1.10 3. 50 __ 1...1.7--.. 236 .. 10_*.. 0 .. 012 0. 80 0. 35-0 .. 95-0 .. 95 0. 80 *-*-*-*-*--..=lc.:..-"1-'7- c:3·.-7·5-1.26 .._.236.19 • 0.012-0·:8:3531_1 .. 04_1_ . .Q..4-·o·:83-***** 1.26_j 4.00 1.35 236.28 * 0.012 0.85 0.38 1.14 1.14 0.85 ***** 1.35 4.25 1.44 236.37 * 0.012 0.87 0.39 1.24 1.24 0.87 ***** 1.44 4.50 1.54 236.47 * 0.012 0.89 0.40 1.36 1.36 0.89 ***** 1.54 4.75 1.65 236.58 * 0.012 0.91 0.42 1.47 1.47 0.91 ***** 1.65 5.00 1.76 236.69 * 0.012 0.92 0.43 1.60 1.60 0.92 ***** 1.76 5.25 1.88 236.81 * 0.012 0.93 0.44 1.73 1.73 0.93 ***** 1.88 5.50 2.00 236.93 * 0.012 0.94 0.45 1.87 1.87 0.94 ***** 2.00 • 5.75 6.00 6.25 6.50 6.75 7.00 7.25 7.50 7.75 8.00 8.25 8.50 8.75 9.00 9.25 9.50 9.75 10.00 2.13 2.27 2.41 2.55 2.71 2.86 3.03 3.20 3.37 3.55 3.74 3.93 4 .13 4.34 4.55 4.76 4.98 5.21 237.06 237.20 237.34 237.48 237.64 237.79 237. 96 238.13 238.30 238.48 238. 67 238.86 239.06 239.27 239.48 239.69 239.91 240.14 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0. 012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 0.95 0.96 0.97 0.97 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 0. 46 0.47 0. 49 0.50 0.51 0.52 0.53 0.54 0.55 0.56 0.57 0.58 0.59 0.61 0.62 0. 63 0.64 0.65 2.01 2.16 2.31 2.48 2.64 2.82 3.00 3 .19 3.38 3.58 3.79 4.00 4.22 4. 45 4.68 4. 92 5 .16 6.29 2.01 2.16 2.31 2.48 2. 64 2.82 3.00 3.19 3.38 3.58 3. 79 4.00 4.22 4.45 4.68 4.92 5.16 6.29 0.95 0.96 0. 97 0. 97 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 1.00 1.00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** 2.13 2.27 2.41 2.55 2.71 2.86 3.03 3.20 3.37 3.55 3.74 3.93 4.13 4.34 4.55 4.76 4.98 5.21 PIPE NO. 9: 59 LF -12"CP @ 2.01% OUTLET: 234.93 INLET: 236.12 INTYP: 5 Q(CFS) HW(FT) HW ELEV. * N-FAC DC DN TW DO DE HWO HWI ******************************************************************************* 0.25 0.50 0. 7 5 1. 00 1.25 1. 50 1. 75 2.00 2.25 2.50 2.75 3.00 3.25 3.50 Q.75 4.00 4.25 4.50 4.75 5.00 5.25 5.50 5.75 6.00 6.25 6.50 6.75 7.00 7.25 7.50 7.75 8.00 8.25 0.27 236.39 * 0.012 0.21 0.15 0.22 0.22 0.21 ***** 0.27 0.39 236.51 * 0.012 0.30 0.21 0.34 0.34 0.30 ***** 0.39 0.49 236.61 * 0.012 0.37 0.26 0.43 0.43 0.37 ***** 0.49 0.58 236.70 * 0.012 0.43 0.29 0.52 0.52 0.43 ***** 0.58 0.67 236.79 * 0.012 0.48 0.33 0.59 0.59 0.48 ***** 0.67 0.75 236.87 * 0.012 0.52 0.36 0.66 0.66 0.52 ***** 0.75 0.83 236.95 * 0.012 0.57 0.39 0.72 0.72 0.57 ***** 0.83 0.91 237.03 * 0.012 0.61 0.42 0.79 0.79 0.61 ***** 0.91 0.99 237.11 * 0.012 0.65 0.45 0.85 0.85 0.65 ***** 0.99 1.07 237.19 * 0.012 0.68 0.48 0.90 0.90 0.68 ***** 1.07 1.15 237.27 * 0.012 0.72 0.51 0.96 0.96 0.72 ***** 1.15 1.24 237.36 * 0.012 0.75 0.53 1.02 1.02 0.75 ***** 1.24 1.34 237.46 * 0.012 0.78 0.56 1.10 1.10 0.78 ***** 1.34 1.45 237.57 * 0.012 0.80 0.59 1.17 l~-~1~7c__~0~-~8~0~****-*~~l_._4_5~ 1.57 237.69 * 0.012 0.83 0.61 1.26_)..,.2_6 0.83 ***** (jjj7 -r:-69 237.81 * 0.012 o.ss~o-:-6~~1-:-3s 1.35 o.8s ***** 1.69 1.83 237.95 * 0.012 0.87 0.67 1.44 1.44 0.87 ***** 1.83 1.97 238.09 * 0.012 0.89 0.70 1.54 1.54 1.16 1.93 1.97 2.21 238.33 * 0.012 0.91 0.73 1.65 1.65 1.35 2.21 2.12 2.51 238.63 * 0.012 0.92 0.76 1.76 1.76 1.56 2.51 2.27 2.83 238.95 * 0.012 0.93 0.79 1.88 1.88 1.78 2.83 2.44 3.16 239.28 * 0.012 0.94 0.83 2.00 2.00 2.01 3.16 2.61 3.50 239.62 * 0.012 0.95 0.88 2.13 2.13 2.25 3.50 2.79 3.87 239.99 * 0.012 0.96 1.00 2.27 2.27 2.51 3.87 2.98 4.25 4. 64 5.05 5.47 5.91 6.37 6.84 7.33 7.83 240.37 240.76 241.17 241. 59 242.03 242.49 242. 96 243.45 243.95 * 0. 012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0.012 * 0. 012 0.97 0.97 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 2.41 2.55 2.71 2.86 3.03 3.20 3.37 3.55 3.74 2.41 2.55 2.71 2.86 3.03 3.20 3.37 3.55 3.74 2.77 4.25 3.18 3.04 4.'64 3.39 3.33 5.05 3.60 3.62 5.47 3.82 3.93 5.91 4.05 4.24 6.37 4.29 4.57 6.84 4.54 4.91 7.33 4.79 5.26 7.83 5.05 **************** OVERFLOW ENCOUNTERED AT 244.47 * 0.012 0.99 245.00 * 0.012 0.99 245.55 * 0.012 1.00 246.11 * 0.012 1.00 246.69 * 0.012 1.00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1.00 1. 00 8.50 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 CFS DISCHARGE***************** 3.93 3.93 5.61 8.35 5.32 4.13 4.13 5.98 8.88 5.60 4.34 4.34 6.36 9.43 5.89 4.55 4.55 6.76 9.99 6.18 4.76 4.76 7.16 10.57 6.48 8.50 8.75 9.00 9.25 9.50 8.35 8.88 9.43 9.99 10.57 • Flow Frequency Analysis Time series File:rdout.tsf Project Location:sea-Tac ---Annual Flow Rate (CFS) 0.200 0.042 0.155 0.035 0.042 0.092 0.142 0.212 Peak Flow Rates--- Rank Time of Peak 2 6 3 8 7 5 4 1 2/09/01 20:00 1/07/02 4:00 3/06/03 22:00 8/26/04 8:00 1/08/05 5:00 1/19/06 0:00 11/24/06 8:00 1/09/08 13: 00 computed Peaks rdout.pks -----Flow Frequency Analysis------- --Peaks --Rank Return Prob (Cf..S) (ft) Period r-o. 212-:---9-:-96--r-100-:-00-0-:-990} 0~'200-9,-54--2-25-:-00-0.,-960 0.155 8.35 3 10.00 0.900 0.142 8.17 4 5.00 0.800 0.092 6.58 5 3.00 0.667 0.042 5.95 6 2.00 0.500 0.042 5.89 7 1.30 0.231 0.035 4.02 8 1.10 0.091 0.208 9.81 50.00 0.980 Page 1 i'.'' ,. l .• • ·; ""I "' ' . r~- ... ···------~ --~ . . " :.·~~ , ... r\"··· ,.,.,; .... .••. II , -,,--. i .. l .. t --__ ..,, ':".~~- '°· 93X:.-·::. ~:.' I I I I I l· REVISION BY DATE APPR a ' I -PEM MLD· LM MLD MLD .,. I I I f I ·' ·~·· 0 ·~ .·~··· ~ -n-~. -~- -r.:;t;; -~ ·~-· 1" = 20' l,!~I ' t1. .~ ":!R CITY. OF .RENTON Pl11Mlng/8uHdln9/Pubilc Works D,pL Gr.gg Zlmmwnan P.t., Admlnlstnllot ii •• ;~ I I ~ I r---- 111 @-1 Cl I ;~ L ____ ~ f:ll!.l ~-· FILECODE JUN. !U, ~na2 ROAD AND STORM PLAN -AREA I CAMPEN SPRINGS APARTMENTS 973110!NC -7 33 r·r I Clliff ·,=:-:z::· W': ,, ";, 5\ ... ·-I \ I ~ ~ ·~ I \ \ \ 1 1 11 '§ I I \ \ q _.............~·-·-··-·---7-------~, ag4.,4.7• ' .' I · \ I \ \ ~ I \ I I I ! "' 0 \ \ \ ,-., ;! ? • " ·~ 0~ u, '" > &; ' ( I I ol' ;° I / .. I i';.. "" ~ q, .;,-:'. -1- , • • ' , ! ; 2 I I I I ' •• ! I i i I j f I § ~ r. wfilJ!tj" 0 " 0. 0 • r, o 11 g "' s w _J G: U) -E---z < "' "" ::,;: :;;§ E-- 1 :'1 z 0.. :"i <t 0. (/J :,a '-' "' z 0 -e-0:: u, 0.. C, U) z < z C, "' < 0.. &l ::,;: <t u ia.z Oo ... ~i of~ I,; :,.. Ii-< E--z -rz:l uiz I ·tf "· II •' g;!i u f .~ 0 N 1- ~!I J:~i w ~ 210 ~ 2 2 191a ~2~ WH I ~ ~ ! i:: r , I ---- ~ ! ~ -0-o -~#~ . • ....: .. :. ~~ ~ _.::.: .::. IE TQ_ SHEET 1.o'>~ ~~~~-,oo,~~~~~;-----200....._ M.F.F. B.F.F. I @ I: 186.86 ,n.86 I M.f.F. "' I 188.86 I I I 8.F.F. "' I I .M.F.F. I 179.86 I I B.f.F. 188 1,_ -::!.1'~,,.1 1186[· ~ ~ f~~i:;;1 :~:.~:,~= / /-.. -.-~ ~ tro. 45 -~-5(t ..• • AROONO EXISTING·POND / .-;,,' '-......._ --"B' STA. --&44.36.-13.25° ,LT. ~87~~-L11L---=-------=---=.:=---=-:-: .. ;; ":....:_. ~ ----=-17~ _:; =--=---=--==VAJS) ~~: ~~ .. 178.00 (12"' IN) . , . _ I£.. .. 1~ ~ !75.50 (4" LN) . . . /." ST": 1+47.07, 13.25' RT. \ ,.e;. -"t70..50 (H!"' ou:r)·------. -... C' STA: 21+47.07, _ _!,3.~·RT;-··. . .. . f -·· ' · · 'o' STA. 31+47.07, 13.25' RT.-• " · • • · '-· -Ex~'C?EP"0-4:64'" CB No.,,)15·::. TIP.EI __ -__ '.ALBOT STA. 118+87.53. 52.S•L_l'!T, __ 11lQQ• ....... ......---...--,,..<:U?n ... R~-;,~,1·RT. ··v~~-~A~~. ~ R11.1-·16S:B6 EXISTING POND W/SOUD LOCKING UD --+---, 0/F • 164.19 :9-f:78.41, 59.38' RT. . . EXIST. 12" ~ EXIST. 58.2·L.F•!2". CPO> o 7.46X (REMOVE) [KIST. CB -;yp£"1 (flbJ.i:i\'E) -'e'-STAc-20-l-"'35:82.-22.01!.-ft"T. - RlliA = 164.04 . _________ w;souo LOCKING UO·. / I.E. = "160.52 {1.?" 0.1. SW) (R(MO'!'!c} EXIST. 14.4 L.F 12" I.E. : 159.56 (1r CPU' "'1:.1 [REMO\£) !.£. = 156.M (IN) & .... .==:~~ n• ~,.- ORIFICE .. 15-4.84 (PLUGCEO) "TALBOT' STA. --EXfST. O.t. 0 0.56% I.E. = 159.54 (1r 0.1. W) (EXTEND TO CB NO. 12) ."~ I.E.~ 159.50 (1ZW CPEP_;.~) (REMO'vf:) NW30'20"'E ~GJ..33' _ 18" ct P OUTlET _... l60.50....(BD4.0'£) 8 TAlllOT ROAO s... 132.2 lF 16" LCPE'. ~ nge/L_/=y4'""'-H'""'"-<>C-e-<"°oL'..__ _ _J -----t_----~ ::----____... · -7 _ ?_ H~i!. H" 1a· e.L e a.ss; ./ ~ _____ ,__J. 'TALBOr STA. 119+95.26~.~s· RT. •T -r .E-XIST G.V. ON --!. . . -. -. ' -. S~ R~I~ _l---...._ __ __... --mo __;E._:i~~...:: - -..-~ • .•• --:-.-:7 .. -.·-.-.--.. .er,.)' ~,1 '·;,., -'"' ~~,o~---- t, ~,''l ~.1 ·~ ~ /-,eo- / _,,..170, . ~ " SLOT DRAIN O 0.50!!: MIN. ' E~~()~..-_\)J"'J('IJ_£T ~-157. "TALBOr STA. 1 EX. ce ::_ 1:"f!'E. =-•·<--...P. -~ --.::, I.~. "'-155.52 t, -·-1.r--·155.52 (t ..!-I.E. " 155.48 (1 I" ~ NORTH GRAPHIC SCALE " ' " " ~ h 1 I L C Ill f'ttT ) I Inch • 20 rt. !H~?~tP)$iPJ~: . ' . . ; RECOMMENDED FOR APPROYAL BY( 9Y ____ _ DALEY-MORROW-POBLETE, INC. 726 AUBURN WAY N. : AUBURN. WASHINGTON 98002 , • · PHONE, (253) .'133 2200; FAX: (253) 333 2206 ' ': . i ~-~a ~ ···.'., . ·-' ::~71=' C·D:/?-299~otf 'SCANNED SEP:·u.zmt . i : ' .... -_ . ':_. . ;'.ir·, 1 :, ~.-;° ·,-c-o, ; ::=: , .. ~ '.. :.·.~; -~-~:,' .:. ; . ~ ;}t~:~~ tJ~)~-· - J ,., .:J J . ''-' ?:{,q J ·' 1.·';:''.1·::~·'.:,1 .• ··:,:.:,:_._::.•,:_; __ :_:_i':: . . ·'~;';,_~,/)(;_(}/ .,Hli '.~~If. ttif•J'.;;" , .• ,. ,, 1\., ·,·i,:; .. ;:::.,, j J ] . . J J ·1 ·.' I ·1 ..., '.I" /ll1t ~ _, . ' • • j:(/~· .. '.t~--". -;.~t~-~_:;;,·.:·'··'"·"·'.'··,,o'.'."-:.' .,.: ··' ,,,; . ' ' DRAINAGE REIPOJRT FOR CAMPEN AP AR1rMJEN1f§ CLIENT: Schneider Homes, Inc. 6510 SGuthcenter Blvd.. II I Tukwila, WA 98188 Phone: (206)248-2471 PREPARED BY: Daley-Morrow-Poblete, Inc . 1215 South Cent, .. ! A\'c., Suite l.lJ Kent, WA 98032 Phone: (253)854-9344 PRO.JECT No. <J7390 DATE: Feh 6. l 9CJ8 .I I :1 ! i I · 1 ·, ! . ' I 1 .. , '1 ,.J J "1 .J ...., ! .. -, I .J ..., ., J --1 .., .., J J ·1 ~ ···1 ... J J Paga 1 ol 2 King Counly BuHdlng and Land Development Division TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET r, PAR-if'2' ·'l!!Rl!~¢f ~Q.q!"JipN' ~-~ • -~ -~~ ~ ~.:-~.•\,.._ ,..-t.!ili.P..!2~ffit.Pr1!9tl ', ,~' t I c;,:_ •. '>.\ -· J.~;,-.Jl ProjoclOwner $r,ho.1e1oeR. _ /-lqHff.'?.1 .!nc, ... Addross v.~!0. .. SoY,!i.!=.ff."!!ll. Sil!f?../111,l!;.v//l-ll 'fP!.SS Phone a"£l2/l..6.·. 2_1, .?L .... -···---------.... Proj<>ct Engineer ,ijE'_t._ I.,. :/:14{&7 £?.§ •.... Company ,t)_A_(,_ti_ 'i.: . .HOJ!.&J.W.c: ,l!0,&£7E/ IM:'. Addross Phone CZSJ)_fl,31.:: 9-<3.t,!q'.. _ IM;if•tlP1#•1i#t1IMitu/il!ffln•m ·[1 / r·: ·1 Subdivision I ( _I Shon Su:>division 1 I . I Grading-/ [ ;;.,! Commercial i . ' . 1-::1 1 ·1 : ·1 r. .1 LI Projecl Name .C:At1/?W..Ae1J.&1:.tf{[!YIS, Location Township __ 23.ll _____ _ AMge _,5_£_ ____ _ Section . _3_/ ______ _ / Projecl Size ____ E/.:!:...c_ AC Upslroam Drainage 6asin Size ___ AC L. ----------------- • DOF/GHPA COE404 DOE Dam Salely FEMA Floodplain COEWollands ShoreliM Managemonl Rockery Structural Vault• Other HPA I . .I ! / 1 I Oihor / ······-···--·----------·-···· .• , •.••.• .__ .1 Community Drainage Basin I .. ) River 1· :J Slroam .. L' \ Crrlical Slroam Roach ! · ·; Depressions/Swalos I ·1 Lake L. I Sloop Slopos I ! lakoside/Erosion Hazard I · I Floodplain I_ • .J Wetlands I I SoepstSpnngs I I High Groundwaler Table Groundwaler Rochargo Oiher :·1pJilf(7'·s6iLs··~---------··· -·-c -~~ ··=··-~ ·=-~ ---· --~ ----,-~--,·~ ...,,.-\1 I ~,.,., .. =~ -. . ' .... ' ' . ... -.. . . -' " ' . ' . IJ Sk1pc:~s C lo 1.S :· .'. IS fo 3o :X, /\1lrl1!1,,,1,1/ '.;t,,,,,1~. /l.~!.1~1·!1111! ;, ,,,,., ... ~, .. -··· f: rosron Polonl;a/ Ho,-lr+-4k.. Se-ver<- Erosive Voloc1ties 2, :r,{j,s 2-S/ ps ... ~··.. .. ~-··· . . -.- J,11 11(' ·5.1 :_,. ,.,.·· '"(• .: . :~}; . ' ' . .;'-.. ..... , . r··, .... :"1',· .: ' ; ·I I ' I 1 ..• / REFERENCE . 1 C.h,.4: Oo•,yrg;t~9~_rn.Ari_~ly.;;is .. I I I I .l ] Addi!ional Sf1eels Attafched MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS DURING CONSTRUCTION /i Sodimontalion Facilities "'1 Slabihzed Construction Enlranoo- /i Porlmoter Runoff Control ~ Cloaring and Grading Restrictions ~; Cover Practicos v1' Conslrucrion Soqoenco Olhor LIMIT A nor,usirE CC•NSTRAINT 'v ivf :~ l.'J MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS FOLLOWING CONSTRUCTION Stabilize Exposed Surfaco Romovo and Ros fore Temporary ESC Facili11os Cloan and Romove All Sill and Debris Ensure Opera lion of Permanent Fac1lilios Flag L1mils of NGPES Olher Fage 2 of 2 Grass Lcnod Channel V"'7'" Pipo Syslom I. Tc:tnk .I lnfillralion Molhod cl Analysts Vault I Dopross1on S/!,3_L,'H Open Channel I _J [] I I I I Energy 01ssapator ) Flow 01spo,sal ComponsaliontM:11,galion Wo!land I Waiver or Elrmmalod Si!o Slorage ..:J O,y Pond Wei Pond Slro::irn I Rogionol.l Ootonlion ··~;: 1n(?f Doscnp!lon of Syslem Oporal1on ' __J -, i ,1cllity Relalod SIio Limilalions : · 11)/oronco F ac1lrry l.1n11laho11 -! ..•. , I i fAITT1'1STRUCTURlt'ANALYSIS--~-" •7 --=-_,, (May require spacial structural review} ) ,.!f.,\11<1<. ' ' I' ~ of.. .'.-.....t ~ 1-e ~~ "'' ' · Ct.t..c.1 m Pfaco Vault no:.:un,ng Weill Hcx;ko'}' ~ •I' Ht(lh t;1,rn;tur;t/ on t;r.,op Slopo O!hor u, 11 c1v1I nn9,111)(1t undc.r my S1JJ)<lrv1S1on t1nvn .,,,~tl~I 111n "''<> Ar.tun! · 111 cund1fl<1111 n:t Clb:wrvod woro incorpo,olN.I 11,1r1 1•w, wnrlo ,honl nnd Ulo .,1 ";1!ff111rnnl'.1 In lhn hint pf a1y lc.r1owlnd911 l!H• rnln111111!H•t1 JH(rvt111'1d ,,ru ,, ncnHnTo · / Add•honal Shoo ls Al!alchcd Drainago Easomont A<x:oss Easomonl N.11,vo GroW1h Prolocfion F: ,1:;omrmf Trar:i Olhor ,1-,.,.... • ' ••• ·,""'-' ,-.-c •• ..,,,.,. ... --•••• ):_ ,,, t~ ~ ~ & I I Q i i tW~;"~,·~t,:~·-. '"'~ ... ON ' ' . f-1".:' •-·:-. -1-!.,,m,,J·-t..t,,t,,+;'\-HH-t+++n'l--HHH-t-i-' ~•c. ,... :r, · +-·+-+•,-.•1•,.+-+-.,..+-+,-jt\iHr-<--1--!--1-t-r ;~,rl"-+-+-+-+-~'t-h G,GOO. Un1;9,..1i1:,, 1A10,.1«hon1 L• "Mi, I.All Twtt1 1111 v6 S•S1or11tt '--"9"' Ae,q,..td V"•40"'flll - ~;, . ·, :;·;~;,~ ,,~ ·: ~i;~:·-.. •,,+-,-+ , .. , ......... -+ : ........................ : ......... . L 'a ... ' ' I ' I t I I , I ' ' ' I ' ' I I ' I I I I I I ' ' ' ' I " I . ' : ' ' I '' t I .; I I I I ' I I I I ' I --v, ••• ,.c ..... '--' ..... Figu,o 2. Wonanl for foh-tum s:orago lane1 on fll'll';;)-lane high'Ntt)'I. "lo L..:f'. = '3~1.. 1100 S 0 /o 4-ov. VOL. -:: Or' p. vi)\.. . = 1100 t-r" tv~f'S o,.J 7>'fc-6or @, ~,lf.../cf;. ... ,,;, ......... _ . ' ' I ' ' I ' i' - .·: .. ··-., --~ .. r: : .:;;1/~f ~g . ·)_j/ :}Jtii ±~,~ ···,,:J:tf; ··''.·.,._..; :·t:·.r \i:,:_ l',,,/ J .. , •.. ·. ~;£.I : '' t .,.., . ' ·i _, .J J "."1 ,\.;i:".:1 '. IJ1f \'i ~ .:>~·.:·· v··.···r· :-:1 ..;;) '.l ";i ...., .:.J :•) :1 ., -'- n ... --, [l{""'•1'c"• ·,, .. ,, l·'."· ~Jf.~,t\:\~1 :ti l'RO.JECT OVERVIEW The project silc is within a porlion of lhc Northeasl quarter. of the Southeast quarlcr, or Seel ion JI, Township 23 North, Range 5 l:.asl, Wil/amclte Meridian, King County, Wa~hington. The properly is localed to the e11s1 ofTalhol R,iad between S. so''' S1. and S. 5 I '' Cl. There are three existing residences on lhc property that arc to be removed. The remainder of the site is prescnlly undeveloped and is mostly covered wilh paslure grass, shrubs and !recs nalive to the northwest. The western portion of the site will be developed into an apartment complex with associated parking and driveways. Wetland areas will be created on both sides of the entrance lo mitigate for the loss of the existing wetlands. Runoff from the upstream areas will be collected and conveyed through man-m~de streams and ,ulverts to !he new wetland areas, and will bypass the proposed detention facilities. There arc two proposed detention vault/wetvault facilities proposed for this development, which will be constructed on both sides of the entrance road. The wetvault portion of the facilities was oversized by 50 percent to compensate for the lack of hiofillralion facility. Water to the property across Talbot Road will be provided by extending the existing pipe lo the new wetland areas. The drainage plan shows the pwposcd drainage facilities. the cxisling drainage features . The attached I .eve! I explains ;,/•fij'f{•,,!I,·,;, ,·, .ji,L :~:;l1f &{~;~Ml~~-,:~f r~~;:~;;.;~:f~~-:::;-x:c·c;::, .. ::·~c~" ... ~-~,-~· ffj\~idli? J ] 1 • J J J . ' ' ... J ' _J J ,., ' ' . . , ' • . . . ... · •.. ·. .• . ·• . .· . : .'i_ ':: ;,_ :·; ~ ·. .· . • . . . .. . . . • '"''-·· • ._... • • .• ••"••• • •... ,• • • M~ ¥~ • •• • • • CORE UEOl/lREMENT #I: DISCHARGE AT TIIE NATIIRAL LOCATION Post-devclopmenl discharge from lhis project will be lhe same as the pre-developm~nt discharge points . CORE REQlllREMENT #2: OFFSITE ANALYSIS A Level I Off-site Analysis is included in the report. CORE REQIIIREMENl' #J: RUNOFF CONTROL Detention and biofiltration facilities will he provided, and wili he sized per City of Renton and King County requirements. A conceptual drainage plan is included with this package. CORE REQUIREMENT 1/4: CONVEYANCE SYSTEM Conveyance facilities will be provi,jed and w,11 be designed per City of Renton and King County requircmenls . CORE REQ(IIREMENT #5: TEMPORARY EROSION AND SEDIMENTA TJON CONTROL Temporary erosion and sedimentation control measures will he provided. SPECIAL REOIIIREMENT #1: CRITICAi. DRAiNAGE AREA NIA SPECIAL REOIIIREMENT #2: ('()l\ll'I.IANCE \\-'ITII AN EXISTING MASTER DRAINAGE PLAN NIA SPECIAL REOlllREMENT #J: CONDITIONS REO(IIRING A :,l,\fillili DRAINAGE PLAN NIA SPECIAi. RE()(IIR•:MENT #4: ADOPT.:!> IIASIN OR COl\lMl'NIT\' Pl.ANS NIA i'.;j J !~Jlr-1i'l??TKPt,:e .•• --~ -.. >~{{~/\\J,~:t,,?(\\:.: .... ;;;~.-\\:\i.i( .\ ·. -... . : ,-~!".~,-..,-,,.\..t"~ ,. •••·~•-,V•,··~•'·'" • ,-...... , •-•. • ·~-..• ,. ··· ........ ,,,-.-......... ..,."" : ; __ :;.:.:_. j "".1 . J 'i .J "-:"j . ' _, i ~ . ' ,. ' ,.;.:J .'"i ~ .. , .~ ..,.., . , .,'. '"·°) '1 ttt:~1-<;J·; , •.. ·,iA J :,.,_ -,,,,.••;1 ~-t' 1' i• •l )"PECIAL REQt 1m~:MENT #5: SPH:IAI. WATER OlJALITY CO:'ITROI.S A wctvault will be provided. SPECIAL REQl!IREMENT #(,: COALESCING PLATE 011.JWATER SEPARATORS ~lli]h.', REOllfREMENT #7: CLOSED DEPRESSIONS NIA SPECIAL REOUlREMENT #8: USE OF LAKES, WETLANDS OR CLOSED DEPl{ESSIONS FOR RllNOFF CONTROL NI,\. SPECIAL REOlllREMENT 119: DEl,INEATI~ OF TIIE JOO YEAR fi,OOOPLAIN NIA SPECIAL REQUIREMENT 1110: FLOOD PROTECTION FACILITIES FOR TYl'E l AND TYPE 2 STR•:Al\lS NIA SPECIAL REOIIIREI\U:NT #11: GEOTt:CUNl('AI. ANAL\'SIS AND R•~.·OR'f' NIA SPECIAL IU:Ol 11RE!\U:NT 1112: so,_,A .. ANAL\'SIS ANO R~:.!!Q!!I NIA V~H~~~ ~1"'-:~,··'.:! 1tr 1f J~i~~ilri:?2:~~r~srr-~ :~··.~ :···:·_·:~· illt/.C _,-:._.L' -~'qi·,., ·'.·-· ,.:r. ,... ; .-:r.t. < ,' • , :. • •_~,.. 1 ·,\ , -q·:\~' •• " • .J>, "r-• •, ,, I "'t:..'' 1-•,H• "• <>' " ~ 'i:::4:1,>~~'. ~-:.:. ,;,.:./1 ;-: .7 . ,.,.,t, ',1.., •!' ~-' .i .;..;;;...;.;.,..·. :··· I ~ • I '. •. '-··' ·-··.,.·-·· • ,: "rcu e~S1N ·'.',.Ml'1,M1 I "'"NHl)\.f. ltRf H'l0..'?ANJ WA T(R U( l[R WM[R VAL'it POWl:R POL!' .. AtLfJOJt 9CN POW£~ ''-MtUM?t ~(.'1-\(R . i:• I i' IIIX)<lllf I \ ·· ... ,/ I( ·.-:'~ .'·::'.:;{_ ':.:.: . '.\> ·;,?~> ,.\::··. ··/;_.~,; .· :t~:~ ..... ~,~;;~.~.JiJfiiti f . . ,· I ; ! i j ' ) ( ff I ) l / '· / ~ / ( . '\. . . \·~-~-~: 1 ~ •• :·. : -· •• , : /j/', ....... _ ' . ' . ) .. -, . I EXISTlNQ CONDr CAMPEN APART EXHBIT I i " ,.._ 1 .. J J J J DMP, INC. •.,,,11 rr<•.J .. 1.)1 •• Engineering -Surveying -Land Planning 1215 So. Central Ave. Sui'. 133 KENT, WASHINGTON 98032 '-Al-' u: ,.1; oav ..• A .se IJ.\ll (253) 854,9)44 •·,,1 i YI t, IJ'T .. 11<1,lf ·············------ FAX (253) 854-6663 S.,"Ail, ··----•.•..• ----~···. Z 89/ r./ , , </ P,'€PX //8 U>N6X 3/ WK>t VA(l{.T weTuA1&r f>//@fACt CEJcjU!t&eD: f:vRFACt f£()<JJQliQ = l'-1, 8'71./ rr3 7().JO J)t Tf:1\/Tto/V //Aver/ wert.1AvlT i:,;,c, t'li:€D I.A.S IAJG /: tl.J6 (!()utvf'/ (;CJtOEl INl'S. Ou£iR.!:1afl> B'1 S<> /o Tb <YoµPtll/.fltTf' {3€ PRo I/ 11>€ I) "' tvfi/2£ 7.l/.:· u,.r;-vAv, n c..,,;9ze !OR !J1or1l TR-1 TIO/\). -n-1c: Ol'ST/lf'AM AllE.A VJ" l l>FAtAI /11/T() '.#f7<-ANOS I/IA /4.llAJ-1'·1111)(;;: ~li< E Al-I "f 711€. P/ccpo<:;~ iJ CUll/6/Z.TS1 AAID W/lC J'(P,ASS TII( f)!lf.N!Ft'J fA<!tC.1 i';. 1Hl .iJ,eA1NA 61: /t /..A.I t;Hows T11r ,,:,,e,,,.,():; f .' :·/1 i:-, .. -.'<',· -.......... , .. . . ' .. -~. .. r 3 . . ;f t~~i:> '. ;, J 7:J.,:3 1 \;·;,}f,:../.>· '-' :•,',·.··~\).\,;·::: ~lf i'/"', ; ':J \ttC < ': / ; ...J ] J J J DMP. INC. Engineering • Surveying • Land Planning 1215 So. Central Ave. Suite 133 KENT, WASHINGTON 98032 t!N (253) 854-9344 FAX (253) 854-6663 / n PE.'! wo IA.h .,6'CI/UJ/Nf!:r;. /<OAD/,V,4 'I wETL.ANl>S . T!Hc t?f" CO,vCfiNTTZA77<JII/; /1,5: L = (j ) "·,; o. yz.ns t ?z•5 So"11 o. 1/o (wooos) 3o:,'. /' ... ~ 2 /,v So~ (Z7'1· z17)/3ao -t o. ;ql'f lri 7c:;: -f Z.tJ lf{.t.owMU ,ee-c.€ASE ,.eATcS: + ::. J{}[l ___ ·_r~_tt? ... --·--·---·-···----·····~---...... --·· ' ---.... ···---····-.... ·- Sl1fET TIO t:A1 cut A I ED ov_~A"S.u.P ______ _ CIICO(f;\) o~· ·--- ,:;GAU: ___________ --- Ai€EA /0.0 I.I 4,9 4.9 0,2. i,,, 0,3 o., L CcJ>!K/Su L ~ I/So 1 I<= /I So -::(.zt7· /6z)/l/[o .!" ", IZ II /fl CN ts 9<r 0'-----·------ DATt: ---··------- DA.Tli __ .. ------·-• 8/ 85 13'/ 78 ,e. loo V<ISTIIJ6 r'eAK ~ &'!PASS ftiAK R/},IS o.98 = A l(,(Jwl\8(£ o,3.3 e-k. 1.2 3 e:fs 2.</Y cfs z. '1/?. lo· 'fR I CO -'t /?. /,31 ~ ?, 80 o/s If., 1,8 els /,57 2. Z.'-/ a 0 ,>TORM OPTIONS: S.C.S. TYPE-JP. 7-DAY DESIGN STD~M STORM DATA FILE 3 ··.' .. ,. :OPECIFY sroRM OPTION: Jt EX /5,1/N6 CarJDrr,aJ ,.c.s. TYPE-J.A RAINFALL DISTRIBUTION Jt::NTER: :.: . 2 l, 2 FtxEQ(YEAR), DURATION(HOURJ. PRECIPCINCHES) --------------------------------------------------·---------------------. !**'**************** S.C.S. TYPE-IA DISTRIBUTION******************** j j '******** 2·-YEAR 24·-HOllr.: STORM **** 2. 0(1" TOTAL PRECJr·. ********* ('{(.:jft~;:r )~,~· ~ .. :. .. ~""f,~t '.J6'1,Ft~~~\ ~,1 \;,•":-'\ C ,:•4,' '"'~),i., .... ·f.') ,.,. • • •'!' ~·:{· :...,::~' ·~•h ~ • \;o·1~:t..n--~"·i0tf ::1 .. NTER: A (PER ; l O, 8.3, 1. l . 99 -·.: ',l\TA PR AR!,'.A<ACRES> 11. I PEAK-Q( 1. 31 A ( I Mr-•E/~V) • CN ( !MF[F,·I)) • TC FDR BASIN NO. PERV!OIJS A CN 1(1.() 83. (I T ··PEAi< O·io:S > 7.83 I MPEr.:v rous TC(MINUTES) A CN 1.1 99.(> 28.6 VOL <CU··FT) 32595 FOR STOF<:AGE OF COMPUTED HYDROG~:APH: 71 J :,. TYPE-lA RAINFALL DISTRIBUTION .'.'.NT FREQ (YEAR). DURATION (Hour.·) . pr.·ECIF' ( INCHES) ]i_i:i.24~2-9 ______ _ .• '************ Jr'******* __ io- "'.J NTER: A<PER ~1•).83~1-1,99. • : ,t-\TA PRINT··O AREA<ACfi'ES) 11. J F'F:Ai'.-fl ( CF"S l 2.80 TYPE-IA DISTRIBUTION ******************** STORM 1111 2.90" TOTAL PRECIP. ********* /\ < I MF'Eli\') • CN < I MPE~·V) • TC r or;· Bi\S I N NCl. PEfi:V!OlJ\, A CN 11).(1 a::· .• (1 ·r ··PEA~·. < H/-·S, '/. a::. I MPEf,:V I DUS A CN 1 . 1 99. (1 VOL , CU·-F r > t,4.i.":.36 TC(MJNUTC"S) ] ~lTEt~ [d:JtoathJ·f.iJ,;arwmol.r.•::tJ ror:· ~irOR{)t"1t: or COMPUTED I IY!)fiDC.f"f\l ·ff: i ,v.,_;,;;'::J§.4.. 'I. ,l ··-l'(•;J,:f ~)~, j t:if :;_:,.,· a:t FILE ALREADY EXIST; OVE STO~:M OPTIONS: 1 ] 3 S.C.S. TYPE-1A 7-DAY OF-SIGN STORM STORM DATA FILE [X!ST!tv6 CONDJTlc,rJ SPECIFY 1 STORM OPTION: TYPE-1A RAINFALL DISTRIBUTION s.c.s. C:::NTER: FREQ(YEAR), DURATION<HOUR), PRECIP<INCHES> 100. 24. 3. 9 ·'' ·-----------------·-·---------------·------·--------------··-···---·------------- ' .J .-, ******************** s.c.s. ********* 100-YEAR 24-HOUR TYPE-IA nISTRIBUTION ******************** STORM **** 3.90" TOTAL PRECIP. ********* ENTER: A<PERV>, CN<PERV) J0,83.1.1.99,28.6 A ( IMPERVl, CtH IMPER'./), TC FOR BASIN NO. 1 DATA PRINT-OUT: AREA<ACRES) 11. 1 PEAK-Q(CFS) 4.68 PERVIOUS A CN 10.() 83.0 T-PEAK(HRS> 7.83 IMPERVIOUS A Cf,,I 1. 1 99. (> VOL (CU-FT> 9.1399 TC(MINUTES> 28.6 J ENTER [d:][path]filename[.extJ FOR STORAGE OF COMPUTED HYDROGRAPH: ··~ i .J ' 'I . . ... . . ~ .,,, il ~:~·-''; :,-i~.·-;.:J ' I ·:.: r!l. :.,jj JJ . . . ' I D .. ' 11: TJ ' . .r DMP, INC. Engineering · Surveying · Land Planning 1215 So. Central Ave. Suite 133 KENT, WASHINGTON 98032 (253) 854-9344 FAX (253) 854-6663 /JfvUQl>eo <' 9",10/ ii ON CtV VAlUf ( . .IJNI) /'ck'v1ou;;, !H f'C:€(,}/OU.S I /vJ Pr:,z 111 oU ':J ,,,eT(AAJD 7?Mt' Ot CM.Cti./TRA 770'1/ "VIit!<{: tt, : 0.1~ (Ul<vN) ' L : 5o fz "' 2 1IJ So X ( /'10 -/CG )/.;o -0.08 {1/f{ ~- ,,,1, .... c:r.1 r:w 111ru u;- cwce.:Kl.lJ uv •.... !lCAl l" -··. A.e.eA /, IS /,58 0,93 o.,J; 60x V C/. I f-3,.5 :: 7. 6 HIAI, (J/111 Wll l . C,v 9, 9"? 9~ loo :".1 ;;;J "1 ~J 1·1·,~;:t-1 ur:·1·ror·t3: 71 J D . . s.c.s. 7···DA'f STOl':11 TY!"·t.-J t"1 OE:~; T (~!,1 '::; rop1~1 DAT/\ l"JI..I' ,,Pl':C I f'Y ',TOF:M OPT.TON: 13 '1PA5S AR.EA TYPE ... in r;:n [ rJHH .. L DI !:i n;:r BUT! ON l'lfER: . 24. -::: Ff;·[IJ < YEA,: l • DUJ;:AT JON< HDIJF: I • F·fiEC I 1-· < l NCl·IC'~, ···----·----.. -· --·e-· --·-------........ ---.. ·--·-········ ··--··-· -······ •... ~ tlfll*******'*****'* S.C.3. !tllltl• 2-YCAR 24-HOLlF' T i'PE-·· ! (1 [, 1 s ·rF: I BUT 1 f}J•! •::TIJF.:M HH ::.·:,,:," l~lN**fi*t***i**tttt .. ! :··ri[T IF'. q n: :t H .j.'i ] J ·.1 d .!·.t'fER: A<PERVl~ (!1l(PERV> . L5. 86. t. :~;o. <'Y}. 7. f~- A ( 1111 ·l.'Y '' ,,.d'f, Pf:: l NT Dl.!T: (lf?EA < ACf<LEl) ,., --, ~- r-·Et4L ··-Q < CI-F,} .9U f''[fr\.' LOU~, 1-t Chi t. l f!-6. •) I' ·l"T{)I ( i 1P~; _) 7. ff:: r Mr·rr·,. r tJl _:~. (\ (:11 t • f...· '-/DL ,· ·:~U t": 1· ·, 1 ,1-:. •1 ~:; :.c.s. TYFE-·-1A r~:f.'1fr·W('1LL D1SH?1rqJTJUN 'i,JTE[;:; FPFfJ ( 'tT f-·,ii: :, • DUJ~r.tT I qi',! ( HOI .. IF,"· ·1 .. r·h:EC : !'• ( 1 :-1u-1r_~~ ' '. ·-·~ .>-1. :: . q !7 CJf.: BA~:"i 11·.J i.JO. ii«t*i**t~tTtfWtiit r,·:<: n-.1 i::1n i OM l-,.; -t t: .--.: :tt.*'+ • 1-it .. tir-. ii t 'i . t. :~· t. t t t I"-: •_1 · Y[ nP ~ ~ ~ 1 : 1: ; ,.,1 r··r ·r. c 1 r·. 1 t 1 t 1 ·t , t t ------------··-··--· ----·---·-. '. '. :··1 .. r·11 f"J • L!" I •. -I'( I I I 'I \•1,1'> l I' '.•! \ j f'1( ,·;. . ', l' '.'I 1:1t•·.· h ' ' · II.• ,; I ' ,! · 1• ,_,·,:-1· i Y:·K', m LlJ . .TOf,:M 0 7-DAY sror,M ·r YFT: .. .t A DE:!3 J CiN G TCJf~'.M f//.\TA FI 1..E "·;PECIFY ·,:M OPTION: .B ~PASS AUA -.Df)/c LiJPtD eoND/110. DI·:; Tl': J F•UT l ON · .. c.s .. .t.JTER: TYF·E· .. 1 A ·1~:AXNF1il.L r-r.:ECJ C YE/:\1,:) JlUl<l',T IIJl·I • ll[J; JI.',, -:=1 !1)0.24.3. -~ ·-·------- JNC:1-lCG) ~ ''****•••• :.i******* '.:,.C.:0,. TYF'E··Jr, [•l'l'!Rll<l.'Jl<JN I**lttlf>t*tff>t**i't '.:4 · HOUF: ,.::rr.ir;:11 I :n t '.. •1,:," fOT ,~L r··r:c:,: l P . H H * U U ::. 1 ~ ·.' •• .:.\ Pf': Hff · OUT: F·FM.:-.IJ (iT:o) 2. CN (F[f;:V) F'l:T\V I n·.s:; A C:N J. j 86. :J : . a::: C !'J { J MPEP'v' .1 I Mr'r.F'.J l rJUc; CN ,., \'L):. 1.cu .. r· -.:.~ 1 •;.·;.,1 [d: J[oalhJfil-FJf'lt::UllC:L.1-::,,;;l·l i-DE: STf)F'lltA-=: ur TC FtJF r:Hs j !·: :,JO. ) . .:. :: . . .:· .... :~. ··• .. ~:,'.. ; v'..t-:.y·_,~\.,. '.' ~f: ,,.~,:i-s,••':'·i11:;:1,•t,.-.-~.,.1.j,•.:(-;--,:,, 1~»..~111 ·,~,,.,)·-•..r-· .. ·:·_., ... _ .. ,., .•. ,., ...... · ... -·'\'.·i""''·•,1~ ,' ., 1~~~~·-· t.·Ir•,,1,,~ · · ;~:,i~i~iEi\;)i~t? r }.::~::'. diitll~itf \::\:: ·, ···•:;,.:?r; 1lli!\rli:)t~l1)f ;~);~.' ;:",:, {i3i{aii:t:f!tt~1~i~~i1 ] . ' J OMP, INC. Engineering · Surveying • Land Planning 1215 So. Central Ave. Suite 133 KENT, WASHINGTON 98032 7/H€ O.VH Ef,fi ; (253) 854,9344 FAX (253) 854·6663 />cR///01,< c; LAWN I /1 !'( l<.1/tOU ::_ l.:Ju1lD11VG::. t)Ktvl"-·,, •1:0 Of (',IA.HJ t>fft:?11 TION .' 'Tc ('. )"·8 o,'-lz_~f' Pi. .-' 5'o, 'I n~ ' O. f:j{ 1. ~WN) l ' 90 P2 2,°,.J .S'o ~( Zs 2 zi,)/90 ~ C), /'I /f/(f -,. + '"" -· : 17!, '}CJ. :01111.IM• C.:llECl".I O[JV. !;(;All._ •... L z. c:;. 2,78 (,ox V t. = '/30 / v.e :, fp$ Tc ' 5', 2 7, (:, HIN. "' D/111 ·····-···----·· 1111 Tf, ··---·---·----·-• C'N u ~ :1,LJHiSCti ~IFTf.JCID For.: ClJMl''IJT !Ill(; f':llNfJFF llr'Pl•:OLfi,;l'l·I TOf,'M or:·r lfJH'.l: S. C. ~/. rVPE>-lA 7--DAY DF!i 1. GN STORM STORM [1/\TA r-·ILE • C. s. TYFE. ](\ ~'.A I NFAL_L DI !,Tr.: mun CJN DtUtLOP€D COtJDl1JOt.J l·/TEf,: FREEi ( \'C?\R) ' our.:AT ION ( H[IIJf,:) • r-r;:Ec) I:, ( ) NCH[S ·, . , 24. 2 "*****H1.,t '*·*** nu s. C. s. fYF'C··· 1'1 IJ!SlP[(<III 1111-1 I H ***** ***tHtlH n '·******* ?-'{EAR ::'4·-1101.Jr.· STORM HH ,:,,, .. -u;.;Tnl. Pl,:CCIF .. i.!i****ll rlTEr.:: A <F'Ef.:V) • CN <PEr.:v) ~ .99~86~5-~8.98.7.6 A ( Il1f-·ERV • • r N ( 1 I'll''"··'·'' • TC FOi,: DAS .I ~I NO. ] ·,'1T/\ F'f.J. l'J r ·· lll/T: H. 'I PERVTOL/S h 3. (I CM 86. O F·[i.\f'>[J ( CT '.i) ·1 ·-PE/\V ( Hf?S) 3 .. 09 7.ff3 ( /•!r'f:]?V I OU£; (.', CH 5. •1 VOL.0:1-:::U···FT '~ ·:tY:<~ J ·1·JTE);: (d: J[r.iat.hJ·fi l.1:n,::1meC.e:-;I· .. :! r r.m fVP!:->tF) RAINFALL. DIST!' [OUT .u,ti F~·1:::fJ(Y[f.)Pt. DIJR.t~rTt.HJil·WilJh· :··F·(t.'fl·'• J1·1i •·!· .·,_,.?'I. 2. 9 1tt1t1r,,t1t1,1t*** S.C.G. ~.~fl.:f.* t':t 11) ··t[{)f;: ·2:J.+IDtJF· !"YrT .. , rt, r,1:-::TFJJi1J·: .,1{'. ,;_1+:t*!l"•·'+.:t'tftll'f.l~.~~:, g 0 irER: ' l r fl F·F I N r n, J i P. ·t rt.,..,, 1J,, ·: ·I .. ,. r ·i: f:\.' 1 DI.IS {', ,·,· . , .. •.• ~-:roPH .+.~.ft ·.•1 ,i1 ~·er:r1r-·. '-io?'iilt:f .J 1, ,· r• ,I /1.i! j,,1 1,_n1,,·,r .•: r I r·,·1!· ·.J11t ,,,-.\ •<I_ .. ; : 3TORM OF'T IONS: ~J. C, S. TYF'E--J/.\ 7-DAY DESIGN STORM STURM [)/.\T/\ F' I LE j ,;PECIFY STOF:M IJF·T ION: .DE/JtL/JPE.fJ CotJDITlcJ TYPE--· l/.\ r.:/Hi'IF'ALL. DISTRTt'LITTOtl Fr,:EO ( YEAF:) :1 )!). ::~JJ. 3. 9 '.99.86.5.38.98.7.6 J ,·,1'iTA F'f~INT·-OUT: l'\R:EA (ACRES,\ F'[l':V I OU:, A C:N D1S1RIBUT!0N '**llltllf•t•tttrill 11tl 3.90'' TOTAL PRCSlP-tlittttft Ctl ( IMr·[J··'J). .i l·Jr·E f'•'-J I ClUS ,, Chi 98. (1 '.'01 (C:U-FT . . . .. • .. ·-. -'. i!X~tti~t1i~~ ::" · ,~~;~!tL~::(''' :":id1;c11,:;;i~2Xciis~tiltJ:[;1,,:;sil · ~:r-~-r;..~ t,}:;;,i ·,, ,~q ""';~ ;,«1.,;r:J. $,~.".;J~i,,~·1;lJ. i ,:~ ~ .... ""}~ ''i t .. t;~ ~,·,1..:f.~1 ··>'.J';--if' -.V§A"~ /o' ,_ J ' .. '1iiit'•,',V'.){" '/ocll'..J' r '.:/JYJJ-1 ,;}r~t?-/!'lri·.i: ·+·\' &\~'~'~1''• ·.-.:,._,p. ~~'t;\~i".~~;"1'/J~ :;~it k,tl 1~-'•)k/,(•'1•\I X ... ., H-:h .!l'.r,/ut,-,!'ib, 1':: •,,, , ; ti' 1-~;1,1i.,, 11c, '-~:··~. ;. '}-:_i;r.~1_~':t· / -i~:7., ., .·.' ;: :;~:f, ·-~',J·,'(t:t, ..J,rtf~i~t ] 'l :il J J J J J 3 TI ] ".'.l ;J :'1 :ii .u1·w1Afff or l hF·lJT J/'1.Dt06!ZAPI-I 1'0UIIM TYPE OF FhC:ILITY: ',Ji.,U;_T ·) STORAl;E [)1,TTfl(J'U 4J .. :, '.) VEF?TICAI.. F"E:1-:MEABJLJ ry (m1n!1n) f'fdMAJ;:'i FF: I M(,F,·\' [1r ::·, J bN f-lYDF·r:1t·,1;·(1r ··i I I: l LENAME: ,,; ;:-:: l. ~::,:i<.:;E f~:ATE (c:-f-,;, •: 1 ~ ::.:-; NLIMBEJ;· UI'' J lT~JT I l'(DPOGJ"..:AFt ~: ~ f''ILENriME: ;,,\: ~-;:-TEST TE:'.,T ~·IYC· If(!) r-I L[N(.1ML": ,.t: ! '. ··~) • J NL/MBEr.· -or· !T[:F:AT I ('H·I •J!,'. JI .r CE~;~ r, I ::Jr·u·, ·r, l T[M NU!'li:,r:r.: n, ''NITJ/\L SF.JF<,f',[ \/Al.UC ··11TTOM nr-:rr IIT: .. : I. /.MCHl::~, F I <:.r rlO l''l·. · f ,:, , :::. 1. 9·;. UP OF J F 1 er U•HF..'f;· HE I !',I IT ( ! t 1 J[(1J) if l: .::::r.• ... I{-\.·::: 1 O. ·~.t, TES'T n:sT HY[• 11,n JMCHES '.;:) ~;·,LI .'I f)IJf l l/1t, 1-1 I i.·t · 1e.1 • -1: Id ... I :l•,J•/• ">tc, ,. • -~ , ... c,1 n Fi. i)t,.1 I I·· (/.q; ok ---f ~o '{'MY IIDLUt1f RE QUIJ2£D .,_ Z.2241 X 1,3 ( .?O '/, F.S. AbPED) • :'. l ·i·I 28 q I 9 cu. FT. ., ; \ 11 ] J ~ .·:i . ..:i J ·.··1 . cl .:J ·,1 j TI 21 ;] ;;;J OM?, INC. Engineering . Survc,ying . Land Planni,1g 1215 So. Central Ave. Suite 133 KENT, WASHINGTON 98032 (253) 854,9344 FAX (253) 854,6663 /,l)tZuAU! T J2[S16N l/,JlUM€ l/Oli.JH€ = 9921 qqzq X /, :5 " .... ,.,,.,·""I···.,. ...• , ... t •ill<. ·/./,:;.' /t;J ·,,111 tr1•1 .. r.!1.1C\Hl\ll"{JIIV TLA.10 -'11?. STOl?.N Ne,l'T i"AG~) .; SI f. Cu, FT. lol\11 ,: ] :UUH/:;;cs i'IETI l[Jf) F-CIR crmr·t_JT I HC f,:lj1'J(J[T I J'vDt~·O(if.'f\f''H WRI~ OPT l ONS,: s. c. s. ryn:-1A 7 -DAY DESIGN STOl"'1 ·· STORM DAT/~ FII_E ] _ F'[CIFY STORM OPTION: 31 . , .C.S. TYPE-IA F,·AJNF'ALL DISTl"Jl'<UTION HTEP: FREfl ( '/EAr.:) • DIJRATl Otl < IJ[ll.!f:· :• r-·r;·u; ! PO !•JC! n: ':'i) -24, . o7 ~•'*******'**'*'*** s.c.s . • I H HU c," 'IE.Ar, 24 ---HOLJr,· A<PEfN>. CN,. PFF't/) (. -, t r·E. . 1 r 1 1., 1 :.~ 1 r.-1 nu1 1 DN t :f i ;+ -+ • * * * ~ .. , ., " 1 • .,: .,.. ~ 1 ;o• . ,'.i'" TOTM Pr.:ECTF·. HO Htlt : ''·! \ : l'!! t. j:•\/' ~ t: F(lr-·· Ph'.:, Ir•! '. /( _1. :3 ··.TA PRINT -OU'f: ilf.:E A ( r\C'F:ES > PEF:V!OUS i; CH ! t,: [. :' . .-: ( ll)~ ... e. <J i:-c,;1·--fl(CFc,' • t-,G FOR. CDMP..1tJ1~0 R.EOLJI/EP Cl'i ,,.,f. \ t'~ I ·t · ·r \ WE..Tu.ll.t1Lr/l,10':.WALE A:JO ~o1o VOLUME qql'l l( ,.s . kl .a B . . . LIEVIEL n JDOWN§TREAM ANAL vsns IF'OR CAMPEN PROJPJER.TY CLIENT: S :hncidcr Homes. Inc . 6510 Suuthccntcr Blvd. Suite #6 Tukwila. WA 98188 Phone. (206) 248-2471 PREPARED BY: !1.M.P. Engin<:cring Inc. 1215 Socth Central Ave .• Suite 133 Kent, WA 98032 Phone: (206) 854-9344 PROJECT: 95068 l>ATF.: January 1998 ~--------- TABLE OF CONTENTS TASK I: STUDY AREA DEFINITION AND MAPS TASK 2: RESOURCE REVIEW TASK 3: FIELD INSPECTION TASK 4: DRAfNAGE SYSTEM DESCRIPTION AND PROBLEM SCREENING TASKS: MITIGATION APPENDIX I Typed Field Observation Notes of Downslrcam components. APPENDIX II EXHIBIT A EXHIBIT B Copy of King County Drainage Complaint Informal ion Copy of Talbot Road Preliminary Plat -Nolice of Application Copy of City of Page 533 l Renton Surface Water Drainage Syslem D.M.P .. Inc. Field Survey of Site Showing Location of Existing Drainage Features Onsite and Along Talbot R0ad. Exhibit Incorporating City of Renton Acriai Topography Showing Site. Upstream Contribuiing Basin Arca. and Downstream System. "il ~ TASK J: STUDY AREA DEFINITION The Campen property is.within a portion of the Northeast quarter, of the Southeast quarter of Section 31, Township23 North, Range 5 East, Willamcllc Meridian, King County Washingwn. The site is located to the cast of Talbot Road between S 50 11 ' St. and S 51'' Ct. The Campen property consists of approximately 19 acres. There are three existing residences on the property that are to be removed. The remainder of the site is presently undeveloped an.d is mostly covered with par.:ure grass, shrubs and trees native to the northwest. The western portion of the site has at some time iri the past been partially cleared. The field survey of the existing condition for the site is included in this report as Exhibit A. The existing ground has slopes ranging from generally flat (northeast comer oflhc site) to 42% (central steep portion of the site). A small area in the vicinity oflhe existing ditch in the cen!rnl portion of Tax Parcel 87 has slopes that are 67%. The slopes within the area of the proposed condominium development have slopes Iha! average 12%. In the existing condition surfoce s!ormwatcr runoff, and year round spring water generally flows lo the wesl lo be intercepted by the existing open ditch drainage system on the eastern side of Talbot Road. A very small amount of the surface slormwa!er runoff that enters !he dilch near the northwest corner of the property !lows to the north. There is a 12" CPEP culve.rt midway along the Talbot frontage that is designed lo interce:,t spring water and direct it lo the wesl. The remainder of the surface and spring water flows lo !he southwest comer of the property where it is directed to the west under Talbot in a 12" CPEP culvert. The site is within the Black River Drainage sub-basin of the Green River basin. At the presen! time, it is proposed to dcvdop the western IO acres+/-oflhe property into a 154- unil condominium project. The s1ruc1· ·., arc to be II combination of3 and 4 unit Townhouses and 6-8 unit f!,!!~ __ The.rcmaining.ca~1cr_n portion ofth.:-propcrty;wilJ·in·iJrcflltUrc. liccomc a ·separate single fa"niily rcsidcnti;tl proposal. This downstream analysis is primarily for the condominium project. however it docs con!ain stormwater runoff informal ion concerning the entire property. A copy oflhc Thomas Brothers -palJc (,36 -with the suhjcc1 site included vicinily map is included in this section. .. ~. r ~ L . .,----·---< 1-· -·----·-1"'-,·-'@ -----·-·---_,_---Al'----1 ··---------------·- S!E 31-23-5 -- ••• ... - ..... £1i ·······'' 1 ~r1-·~w· )j J :1 I ' •I I I :;1 :1 .,.I · I :1 I • .: "'ii : / "t 'I ' • ., i· ,. , I ~; .. : ,· .;,: Ir. ' 12W " . , •· ~-. ... ... " . ;,1; , ..... \I .'!~'• .. , , . ·., .. -.. ---.--. ;~t . . . ,' ~ t:i.\~-. tit~if•{ij\~!\~itl~f: ~ ;.·t~c'.1 o:Jit' ~1!\·~ .,· · <· .i'"~'.<(·.t •. 1 f if!f. •,. ~5 r; . . J J ., .J a J , .;.I TASK 2: RESOURCE REVIEW The following resources have been reviewed in !he preparation oflhis Downstream Analysis: .!.,___King County Basjn Rcco;umissancc Summary Rcm\r!~ The sile is within lhc Black River Drainage Basin. King County is not providing general public assistance for basin information Iha! is within areas recently annexed . The site is not within a I 00-yr floodplain. 3. Sensitive Area.s Folio Copies oflhc Streams. Wetlands, und Erosion flawrd portions oflhe Sensitive areas Folio showing the location of the site arc included within this section. There arc no King County mapped sensitive areas within or immedialely adjacent 10 the sile. ~ Drainage.!!lvefiligation Information A chronological prinloul ofhisloric drainage complaints made lo the County within !he area on grids 28 & 2C of page 686 of the Thomas Guide is provided in Appendix I. This information was obtained from King Counly DNR Drainage Investigations. The contact person was Dave Hancock @ 296-8230. It docs nol appear !hat there are any drainage complaints that relate to lhe project or the downstream system. The City of Renton has been informally contacted with a request for drainage complaint information within !he area. Telephone conversations with Mr. Scott Woodhurry al the City revealed thal there is nut a history of drainage problems within site or !he Y, ·mile distance downstream. However. !he stom1watcr runoff from the silc will eventually converge with . conveyance systems on the valley floor that nrc a concern lo the City due to past capucily problems. 5. King County Soi!.:u>!!n'.!tl' M.QJlJ; A copy ofn portion of Sheet 11 ufthe King County Soils Survey Map is included. The site is underlain with Alderwood (AgC & Ag!)) soils. The wetlands page oft he folio docs 1101 shown King County Inventoried wetland within the silc. The Existing Condi1i,,11 Exhibit A shows the licld surveyed wetland houndarics '"' the proper1y 1ha1 were idenlilied hy the applicnnt. The City hus hcen provided copies of the Wetland delineation report under a scparuw cover . ... ~ ~·~tf f it:;t:;:;)).' r~:-: }?{JZ;.;:t-~;?~:JF ·?_'·. ·~ -.:-'~~~·,· .. ·._ ... : .. ~ .... :.···: .:.,;·· ... ·-·.·.·.·.:"·.·,: .... -,·',·... '' ~ ~r~~-· l :! :~~ -........ ~.·-·.•-:'•·.·.• .. -.. ·.:.··-.·. ·.··,:·-·._:_.,·.:·:·.~-'.~~.; ··_,, .·.··_··.·:.:~,~ ... : .. ,.: .. _·.':-,'.·.·._~ .. · .. ·._: ... : ... -,·~.~-:: ... ·.·_~ .... · .. ',.:-.',·.·· ... :·.· . .t,·.:.~_·,,· .• ··-.·.',.: ... _::.::_:_ .. _: .•• ·.·.·,·.,_·.· .. ·.'.·.::: .... :_ .. ~.-.-~.'.; ... "'.·.;-.. ' ~~ :~t{jf J~iJ;\'i~~tf {l't.:.t~:}:1/r:f:::Jt:.:: ·.· ~ ;; .. ,. i , "} · -, · -· · • Ame •• tL • '''\1\. :l "" '· . . . . . . ' . = =· ,-.- .J. ....::....:." ... 7.-~:-: .~. ! + 0 MILE N !'·,, •i•.'11•••:~· "I t••,• ,.,,.,,:,·,,• ·.1''',n ,,., c,,.1, ,.,, ·1·-• .•• ,.. ,, .,c•, J•· ,r:,ti" ,.,11.,·.,, •",tl•; : •tt',1< ~-•" I !•'•'' ..l'"'.0 •,·,,: ,,n,• "''' ,,•··~·· "•.•u1•••:! ··.t· ti•• ,, , ,. , .• ,,, , , ,:,· ,.., .,,,. .. • .,, :>· ,• I ,, \ ~" . ;,,,, •• , \1 ' .. , .... ,·,. •• '•' :'•" \ •r' .•,••,!' , "•H'• •'•·•! •' "'•,V 0 -11", \'•-! • 'C' • ,.o•,•,j •' "'\,, ... I • p • H' ...... , .... ,i,, .. ·, .. , ····· ' ,,. ' . ' ... -~- 1\ ,, ' •'P<f "' ••• · ',• 'I\ ' • ;• 1 , ,., .. ,. o"•· hundr"'l'l-,•.1, 11oodPl••nl ,ottnd bll· yond lh(UII' SIIOW" o:,n ntolPI. F!Qod In, ,.,,,.ne;f' R.1111 '1.U:11 de no1 .iw,1y1 tho""' tile 11 'JOdPI-'"' u~ I!'!• 11udw•t•11 llf s1r,e,,1m\, c::J IOO.Yo11r Floodplotno L f ··/ I I I I Stre~ Year --·-- ti '<.10\Jot,111n1 tllltifnd r,,t. I ,n ,n.gl, FIO<ltl In• t,, 1 nol ••w•v• Show'"' , t,. ,1<1.1dW.Altt\ o, llrtl,Ufll. ~You Aooclplalno •.. Streams and 100- Year Floodplains 0 0 0 0 0 '• Clu&I Cl.iu '2 twlth Mtilmorud:.) Clua 2 ipOtit"nninl; snlmc,nid usu uncfolorminod) Chu.,3 llndMSl1od ' ' ·1/Cir·:-... ' ' ', ' ' 5 .... .... '--·-·· ;#) .. - 1/2 • 0 I .... . --.. 1 MILE .... N r "" 1:"ono.J,1,,,., ,1f ll•r \'!''•·1,t,vl! ,., ... u 11,,. •"JY•·•! u11 \II••"! "•,Ill\ ,lffl .io1,••:•,t1>.1'P. •<•hl•f•"'•,11 t01n,,1,,.~ ,11,•n ,.,,11 '·'"" "'·'I U('•'lt ·h,ll•••"rJ "'•W h"' (l••"lt""I •)" ,) •ll"vf"l· 011,,•,:• I 1.•.~1•,,1.11 ••!•· wn ... .-u,, , •. , ... ,: ,., ,,. : .. , ."l"t .,.,,.p,, ,,,,.,\! ,, .,•,.,:,.11•:•t .,,, .,,,.v· .,.11,, Ind !It,: I I" ~'"'•lt!-,••u, .......... ,.11 ~ .. .. 1• •1:,, " .1h1••••1 c' •u• i!'o• j,I•; ,i• H,•· I• ,,~,t , .. . ,•,•., ,I• •l"'""'.l "' !"o' ;,•n11:,~,• I\•,· 1 • /od·•!.l•H ,, u :•·•· '~'1,11 · ,,!·/,<>· \--·-, r-rt-+-- Erosion H Areas + l\1rLE N . ~-· . . · ·-··--· .... "'---·~·-··. ·, ' •· 1, .... ,1,···"'· ..... , ..... , ..... \ 1J, \. i.···: ,·~ ............... . "": ~ ' ,. •• L •' ' ' •" '" • • •· ., • • ., •' •>· \' • •. ,•, .•• ,;•,,. ; • ••• • .••• ~-' ..... •h•,.-. .·· ., .... ···•-, -:~ ...... .... . , ... '. ,•· .. ,,.-~. ""'I'" •• , ,; •••. '.,:,.· ·" -~-.. ·.•. ~-- . ' ·-~-..... .... ,,. ,1-· , •. .,• ....... ' . .. ... ··-·--···_~ .. ---....... ,.. ...... . .. ,._ .. ,.,. ... !_1 N•: I ·,!.',! . . , ,:,.,, ,•, J •• ,, .. ,_, ... , . ., ...... , .··•'·': . l"•1 , .•• , .. , . ,,,. •;,•,,., .. ,,., . ,., . • . .::r: L ·: ' ' L I~~-,=-~·· ' i: . ~ Wetlands ,. 133 -W.Uand> IJlii!l!I QsMtnWctor = Boain Bounc:.,kn. -Suh-bAsln n,und,u~s Kt?n1 ... ·:..-· ', .... -..--... • ' D::· •23 ,, ..... 221> -!1b 5 71 Ll "] Ji.I n .8 TASK 3: FIELD INSPECTION The site has been field surveyed. Topographic contours arc shown on the site plan-Exhibit A. City of Renton Aerial Topographic informalion has been obtained to determine the route of the downstream conveyance system. The upstream drainage basin boundary for the area that contributes stormwater lo the site has been identified using the City of Renton Aerial Topography data that has heen incorporated into Exhibit B. The site and the downstream system for V. mile was most recently visited on January 20. 1998. The weather during the site visit was overcast. and threatened to rain. Stonnwater was observed to be flowing in the majority of the dminage features observed. 1, lnventigation of Reported or Observ~d Problems During Resource Review The review ofrcsources did not indicate that there are arty ongoing problems with the downstream system. Due to the absence of significant stonnwaler it was not possible to observe any problems in the field. 2. Location "f Existing/Potential Constrictions or Lack of Capacity in the Ex~ting Drainag~ System There were no indications that the existing downstream conveyance system for a distar1ce of approximately V. mile contained any existing constrictions or lack of capacity. It is reco111mcndcd that there be some coordination between the Campen Design Engineer and the Talbot Road Preliminary Plat Design Engineer to ensure that the design of the Talbot Road Preliminary Plat takes into consideration the capacity requirements of the Campen property in the fully developed condition · 3. ldcntificaUQ!.l.of Existi!!glPoteru[;!I Floodin_g There were no indications of existing llooding within the ,,h:,crvcd d1>\\11Strcam system. In the future. due to increased im;,crvinus surface.< there mny he" potential for tlooding. i...llk!Jtili£!!.! ion of Ex isl ing/Pot<m!.iul.Jb:\;IJ!!P.JliQg,Ji£OU~ir,i;. IW!!.L'> lougbi!Jll..ill Scdjme.nl!!UQ!J All oflhe downstream componems nh,;crwd were in wry good condition. The dirchcs were generally very slahlc. <iivcu the lite! lhal lhc soil in the :11\.'U is Aldcrwnod. il is often the ens..· that convcyoncc ditches cun he constructed i11 tltis nullerial with nearly wnic11I side sloix-s. The site is within un urcn that is in lhl' prnc,·~< ofurl,;1:ii1inl! ,ind lms cx,,..•rienc,-d u 11mdtml dt.'Cline in the procc~s. All oftlic hhtork· tril>Uwries west nflalhnt Road lu1vc h..'Cn altcn.-d nr climin.ucd in some fiirm in the past. "!fa· :ircus with the l>cs! nh,;crwd h:ihi!ut arc the Sll"\"nm ~ .J 1 .J that is described as System II, Reach 4, and the shorl stretch of roadside ditcn along Talbot that conveys spring water runoff I. Collection ofQ,Jti.ruiJive Data on L~!!!.l Use. Impervious Su.rf.l!ce~.i111y, and~oil Types The upstream contributing drainage basin that contributes stonnwater to the site is mostly undeveloped. The soil type for the majority of the basin is Alderwood (AgC). The topography of the site:upstream basin. and downstream system is shown on Exhibit B that incorporates the City of Renton Aerial topography data -Exhibit B. 2. Collection ofJnformatjon on Pipe Sizes. Channel Characteristics. and Drainage Structurg. Exhibit A shows the field surveyed on-site conveyance system ar.d the existing storn1 structu;es along Talbot Road that discharge stormwater and spring water from the site to the downstream systems. The Information provided in the Appendix I is based upon field observation taking measurements with a 2S' tape and a distance-measuring wheel. J. Verili~otioQ __ ofTril!111azyJ3_@.si!!s The approximate upstrel!m tributary basins is identified on Exhibit B. 4 Contacting ollie.ishbori.!l_g.1'.r!l11.eny_Qm1_e!] During the process of walking the site to field verify the direction ofstormwattr runoff. the son of the property owner (Mik(' Campen) was at the properly. Mr. Campen provided information concerning the history of the spring waler thal leaves the site to the west approximately midway along the western frontage of the properly Mr. Campen indicated that the properly owner of tax parcel 22 had a water right of lei's of the spring. Mike. the renter of the properly to the west (tax parcels 37, 53. and 149) that is currently proposed for development as the Talbot Road Preliminary Plar. l.UA-97-1 IO.PP,SA-H.V- H,ECF, ailowed access to the his site and p~vided information concerning the gcn<.'ral characteristic ofsrormwarer nmolf once it enters the sile he is renting L.D~l!l~.n!l!.ti®9.Cfa1i~jJ!J1$i1~ C9ndi.1ions The existing site conditions arc documented in this report by the field topography. walking the site and com·cr!!8tions with Mr Campen and Mr. Mikc. Documentation of the downstream system immediah:I)· adjnl•cnt lo the sire along Talbot fa based upon field sur\'cy. Documenmion of the downstream system and condition is based upon walking the downstream and laking notes l'hc 1ypcd field observation notes of the downstrtam system is contained within Apperufix I 11.CoJleclion g[Q~and1ative Field Data Quantitative lidd data !,as been collected for the sile and downstream to Talbot Road in the form of field s11rvcy. The off-site cul\'erts and ditches were measured in lhc field with d 25' tape. The quanlilativc field data is shown on Exhibit A and on Exhibit 8. TASK 4: DRAINAGE SYSTEM DESCRIPTION AND PROBLEM SCREENING L.lm!inage System_c_o.mponents Attached to this report is Exhibit A that shows the field surveyed storm drainage adjacent to the site along Talbot Road. Exhibit B shows the downstream system from the site west for Y. mile. A copy of the downstream analysis for the proposed Talbot Road Preliminary Plat has no: been obtained in the preparation of this report as the 14 mile distance is shown on Exhibit B. However, it is important that the design of the Talbot Road Preliminary Plat take into consideration the upstream contributing basin that includes the Campen property to ensure that the conveyance within the Talbot Road i'reliminary Plat site provides adequate conveyance capacity for the off-site upstream Campen area. ;2. Existing/Potential Problems There were no indications of existing problems. The mrjority of the area that contributes to the downstream system is currently undeveloped and covered with vegetation. This condition generally results in relatively minor runoff problems. TASK 5: MlTIGATJOl'i, The design of the Campen propose.: condominium project will provide adequate mitigation in the form of providing on-site stormwater detention and weter quali:y facilities. The deter.lion standards «ppl;ed to the project will be the standard design criteria contained within the 1990 King County SWM Manual or:,·, detennined by the City thr<,ugh the S.E.PA process. The forrn~l application p; ">(;SHI lu oe submitted to the City will contain a prc•iminary storm dralnage plar. that will in,, :e the proposed area to be used for water quality and detention purposes. The plan will al:;o include preliminary calculations ,0 substantiate the design. ;,;] ill APPIENDIX I The following item is contained within this appendix. Typed Field Observation Notes of Downstream Systems for a Distance of Y. Mile. The information in this Appendix is to be used in reference with Exhibit 13. ~ . . 'l J '::1 :w Field Observation Notes of Downstream Systems for a Distance of Y. Mile. SYSTEM I System I consists ofthe spring water that leaves the site midway along the Talbot frontage. The system was walked/observed on January 20, I 998. The weather was cloudy and had rained within the past several days. See Exhibits A and B. REACH I • Reach I is the short scclion ufroadsidc ditch on the eastern side of Talbot between the outfall of the Existing Type I CB that discharges spring water and the 12" CPEP that directs the spring waler lo the west. The sprint,t water flows to the south in a well-defined ditch for a short distance of JO'. The roadside ditch is generally 2-3' wide and 1-2' deep. A stack of rocks has been placed in the ditch 10 direct spring water into the 12" CPEP. REACH 2. Reach 2 is the piped conveyance from the iniet of the 12" CPEP to the existing CB on the west side of Talbot Road. The Existing CB has a shear gate on the inlet side and a 4" PVC pipe on the discharge side. Mr. Campen indicated thal the shear ga1e is in place to regulate the spring water entering the property that has water rights for lcf.s of continuous flow. During periods of high flow, the shear gate only allows a certain amount of water to flow to the west. The overflow continues south in the ditch o~ the cast side of Talbot to become part of the System II downstream component. REACH 3. Reach 3 was visually observed from Talbot. as the property owner was not at home. The 4" PVC appears to be buried in the ground across the fmnt of the property and to run in a western direction lo discharge directly into the ornamental p,,nd located behind the residenr · on tax parcel 2.2. Water leaves the ponct on its western side and llows ii' a shallow ditch to the west wl:ere ii leaves the parcel 22 property REACH 4. This reach was observed by walkinl( on the Tulbol RoaJ Preliminary Plat site. A ditch t>n the western side of the property line immediately interce1>1s water leaving the ta.x parcel 21 r,rope1ty (green house) The ditch directs the water to the south for a shon distance (approx. 1 $0') where ii is intercepted by a i 2" CPEP culvctt The ditch is .i · .4 • wide at the top and 2'-J' wide at the bottom. Side slopes arc nearly v~r.icrl REACH 5. This teach begins at the 12" Cf'EP inletting pipe. The apparent direction of conveyance flow, is to the south-southwest. The natural direction of runoff is to the west. The area to the west was investigated and no outfall was discnvcrcd within the logical locations. It is therefore assumed that the 12" CPEP continues to the south to combine with the stormwater runoff described as System II. See Exhibit 8. SYSTEM II System II consists of the downstrcarn system that begins at the existing ditch on the ea~t sid~ of Talbot at the southwest comer of the site. The system was walked/observed on January 20, 1998. The weather was cloudy and had rained within the past several days. See Exhibits A and 8. REACH I. Reach I is the short scciion (160') of roadside ditch on the eastern side ofTalbot from the southwest corner of!he site to the 18" CPEP that discharges stonnwater to the wcs! under Talbot. The ditch CL is 4' east of the edge of pavement. 1-2' Jeep. I '2' wide al bottom with side slopes approx. 2: I or greater. At the inlet to the 18" CPEP the ditch is J' bclc;w the edge of paved should.. The I 8" CPEP intercepts stormwatl!r runoff from the norih ditch. u short section of the ditch to the south and waler that was trickling down the bank. Oowing overfond ftom the cast. REACH 2, Reach 2 is the open ditch that conveys stormwutcr from the 18" <.:PEP at Talbot to the west. The c/itch varies from n shallow swalc meandering through \'cgetation to a clcurly dclined channel of 1-2' wide, 1-2' dL'Cfl with near velrtical side slopes. The ditch tlnws for u distnncc of approximately JOO' ton point where it is intcrccptecl by u 12" CPf:P convey:mcc system. The gentleman who is renting the site (Mike) stated that the water in the ditch !lows continuously year round. REACH J, · Reach 3 is thi: 12" CPEP tlull conveys slonnwatcr from the end of Rench 2 lo a J><>int wh<:rc it outfalls into a well-defined 11111uml druinngc course. The overland di~tuncc between the cnJ of Reach 2 and the beginning of Rench 4 is 310'. At some point :ilung this reach there arpcars to be a convergence with the System I stormwutcr. This stutemcnt is ha..:d upon :h. ub:<ervation that the volurnr r slllnnwater discharging from the c11nvcynncc ,s grc;1tcr than the vnlume ol\tormwntcr entering the cunwyancc.nt the ,•nd ofRcal'h 2. I fo,w,-cr. no CH structure wus visihlc in 1h,· 1~1s1urc :irca that would provide a conclusive determination. .~;;,.,_,;: ~·i·.fij:J f·.ff{~.;i;?! "'.'.".1 f:J~t~( >:.;1 i·.~:,,t;:!: ..:..J ~-·1.:~f't :.1,i] . @ ~&~·'.'<··· \')l~t··:,; III 3 [iii ] rk•c J ~~f~~ ill R3~~1 }'5.M_.'ii 1_,_,_; < < 'TI i~J,~11' J t;?ff;~; ~;;;;;, ·n -~j&!;j' jJ If m i'.f;J: t!f,J;i: "rtyi! rti.'.•l~ l REACH 4. Reach 3 begins at the outfall of the 12" CPEP within a well-defined natural drainage course/stream that conveys stormwater generally to the west down the hill. The drainage course is within a natural treed arcJ. The stream at the outfall is 3-4' wide at the bottom, 3' deep with slopes that are generally vertical. Within a s~ort distance, the s1ream enters a wooded ravine with cedars, cottonwood, maple and other brushy vegetation native to the northwest -including non-native blackberries. The stream within Reach 4 continues down the hillside where it eventually reaches SR 167 and becomes a part of the valley Ooor drainage system. SYSTEM III System Ill consists of the downstream system that begins at the northwest comer of the site. A project located immediately to the north of the Campen property "Springbro,)k" is currently under corLstruction. During the review of the Springbrook project, a downstream analysis prepared by Triad Associates was submitted to the City. II is assumed that the City files still contain a copy of the Springbrook Downslream W!ulysis. It is therefore not included in this report. Due to the small size of the Campen site that currently b'Cnerates stormwater to the System Ill route, the applicant is proposing to divert the entire site into lhe route described in System II, with the exception of the spring water Oows that will continue to be provided to the Syslem I route. GENERAL ODSERV A TIONS: When the information was collected for the City of Renton Aerial topography that is shown on EY.hibit 8, it appears that the System I and System II stonnwntcr within the Talbot Road Preliminary Plat ~itc was conveyed as surlace water within ditches that converged near the soutl:wcst comer of tax parcel# 122. At some time in the rcccn• past a 1 r CPEP piped conveyance system wus installed. The visual ubsente ofujunction CH where the System I and System II conveyance lines converge (cuds to II bit of conllrsion. llowcver. the quantity of stormwatcr hcing discharged from the .conveyance at the hcginnin!) ofthc stream lc:ids one to conclude that the to systems do converge. §<l ' . I . . I ' . APPIENDfiX UI The items contained within this appendi.< are as follows: Copy of King County Drainage Complaint Information Copy of Talbot Road Preliminary Plat -Notice of Application Copy of City of Page 5331 Renton Surface Water Drainage System 1: SSHl1 K( t,it_P.[! t;,. J ·C: r<:ing County Water and Land Resources Division 700 f"illb An, SUilO 2200 Selltrle, WA 98104 FAX Fax Number:@-ffi) P>S -'4b'f+ Pbone:~t,,J.U1 -iv 8 --- RE: Leyel 1 Agalylln Date: l· l'l · °1¥' Number of pages including cover sheet: .1J... Faxed by: ________ _ From: Cm;dj McKay, Eng. Aide WLR LoSAI Dninase Str:Yices Phone: 296-8045 FaxNwnber: 29\S:J)192 To follow is a list of compl2ints received by the Water and Land Resources Division Local Drainage Services Unil Complaint numbers beginning prior to 90.XXXX (1990) · an: not easily retrieved and/or may not be beneficial due to their age, deyelopment which has 0\1Clll't8d, eto. If you are interested in reviewing the actual complail!ts, I can pull them (time permitting) for your review. Copies can be obt.ainod for $.SO for the first Pa.€1" (ij-lf.Z " 11), S.2S for each additional page, aoci $2.00 per page for plans. Additio.1l81 notes: JAN.21.1~~8 I :sSAr1 KC I.JLRD r·IO. 294 P.2.-2 COMt>LN TY Pll0BLJ1111 TYPE OF N1JMBER PE ADDl!BSS PROBL;;:r.r COl'IMBNTB 1 ...... lltQ ... a.a••• oo ••••a111m•••••aa• .. .DDQlll••a a•~•M••••••••ooa•••aoa~••aoo•~ 1 75-0066 C l.9225 SPRINODROOK RD S POND MUDDY CONDIT1011 G 82•018J C 10034 BE 190TH ST Fl,l)Q 6 8S•OJA7 C 18500 TALBOT RD ss v;oo IN RENTON 6 88-~130 X 1'219 10211D AVB SI 1lRIIG · 9 PlllUIIIIDGB l!:IIST /CM!RPLOlf l'.NO 6, BROSION t0-1'10 C 730 B 99'1'R ST !>WO BROSION, SL:D!/HOUSE COH6T 61 93,0084 C 102 AV 41 187 S'1' INO WINDSOR HORTS.DBVIILOPNEIIT GI Sl•096S C 18811 104TH PX. 6ll !IIUiG COIJGAJI MEADOWS 61 '4·01°3? C 19223 '8TH PL s SROUOH DETIIIXORl\TtllG PVT ROAD 61 94-0SSS C: 10320 SB 1 B&'l'H ST DRNC OROWD Wlll'SI\ IMPACT 'l'O 61 CIU\WL6PACII 9S·OSS0 WQC: SE 104TH & 1,2Nt> A SE l!SIUIICID 1'1l EVIDENCE OF IISIIIIAC:IDE 68 AJIP!.ICATION 99 ... 0,10 C l.U862 lOJIU) CT SB DRAINAOE Ax.X.EDGED DRAINAGl! FROM Pl.AT 68 IMPACT PROP 95-0770 R 10862 1031UJ CT SB Dn.tNA<JI, ALLEGED DRAINAGE FROM PLAT SB IMPACT PROP ,S-001, C 10339 SE 187TH PL C:/11 PVT DRNO SYS CONCIIRIIB 8LIIV 05' n, CB 96-0146 FCR 18808 102ND AVB SB POND SIIEBT FLOW IIPREADSR IMPACT 581 NlllGHBORl!OOI.. 95•014' R 10809 102ND AVS SB POND SHEET !'LOIi SiRBAl)BR IMPACT 01 NEIGIIIIOIWOOD 96-0701 C 10320 86 194TH ST DRNtl SHl!ET FLOW ORNII HATBR IMPACT 681 PVT PROP 95-0817 PC:lt 10J3S SE 18'1::H PL li.i.."• •ALL VAJmAI,ISM OP BLOCK IUITAININC "' 11.u.L u-1n, R 18862 lOlRD CT. B BASBMENT D/S NEIGllllOll WILL MINTAXN Of 96•1ll, FCR 18851 103RD CT, B R/D POND NAI'IITEIII\IICI! ACTIVITY R/D POND GU 97•0GOO C 19121 104TH PL B DRAllW:E OBSTRIJCTED llRAilUOS PVT PROP 685 IMP ''·07511 ~ 1'215 98 TII AW S, #E DRAINAOB C:ONCERN 11B POND 91DE 6L0PB6 68&• MIIBTS STAND 97•1107 KQC 19223 '8 TH PL IR0ll0X1D S!IBIT FLOW IR!»! OXIDS 5861 DISCHARGE OVER SK 97•llll C 1996, lOlRD CT II PIPE PVT PIPS IN9TALL ffl BAS!IMl!NT 68'( PVT REPAIR 91•ll84 C 18646 100TH B CIJINBRT SIIEBT FLOW FROM PR:CVATE RD IMP 6861 PVT PROP u~~~~ + .. + ~~,{O~ NOTICE OF APPLICATION PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS DATE: DECEMBER 30, 1997 A Master Appllcallon has bean med •nd acceoted wllh lho Oovolt:,,nenl Services Division or lho Clly or Ronlon. The followfng briefly descr1bos lha appllcallon and the nocassary Put-:.~ \pptovals. ill PROJECT NUMBER/NAME: LUA,17-110,PP,SA-H,V-H,ECF /TALBOT ROAD PRELIMINARY PLAT ] ] ':1 21 ] J J .ill :I jJ ] ' . ~ ' ' DESCRIPTION: The appllcanl, Bumstead Construction, seeks Prellmlnary Plal, Site ?Ian and Variance approval to subdivide a 26.8 acre alto lnlo 51 single ramify reskienUal lots and rwo lols for townhomes and condominiums ror a total of 53 lots. The proposed site plan would aUow for Iha construction of 108 lownhomes and 2.t condominium dw<llllng unlls. The reque,tod variance from lhe Wetlal'ld Management Ordinance would allow to: Iha construction of the roadways and utllllles within the butler areas of 1hr wetlands. GENERAL LOCATION: STUDIES REQUIRED/OR AVAILABLE: PUBLIC APPROVALS: 4915 Talbot Road South an.:f 5017 Talbot Road soulh Wetland Sludy Environmental Review Site Plan App,oval Prellmlna,y Plat Approval Variance Approval Comments :m the a!>ove appllcatlon must btt submitted In writing to Mart Pywell, PrcJect Manager, Project Manager, Oevelopmenl Sorvlces Division, 200 MIii Avenue South, Ronton, WA. 98055, uy'S:00 PM on Ftbruary e, 1 H8. Thls maU11Jr Is also seheduled tor o publlc heartng on Fobf'Ull,y 17, 1198 at D:00 AM, Council Chamber1, Second Floor Munlclpel Building, 200 MIU Ave. South. If you are lntereslod In altendlng tho hearing, please contact the Oevulopment Services Otvlslon, 277,5582. to ensure that the hearing has not been resdu,clrJled. If c:omments c:onnot be submitted In wrtllng by the dale Indicated above, you may still appear al the hearing and present you, !;.Otllments on the proposal bcron, the Hearfng Examiner. II you have quesUons about this proposal, or wish lo bo made a party or record and receive oddlllonal lnfonnollon by mall, conlac1 Martt Pywoll, al 425·2'17·5588. Anyone who submits vtritten comments wlll autom.illcally become a party of record and will bo notlned or any dedalon on this proJoct. PLEASE INC~UDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION DATE OF APPLICATION: NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION; DATE OF NOTICE OF APPLICATION: O(NMALOJ 00C AUGUST 14, 18'7 DECEMBER 30, 1917 DECEMBER 30, 1197 I I I , , I i I , i I 4 f I I I I ' ; .......... . ;- ' ' 5331 NE 1/4 ' i 1 / 11, I L -·· ~ ,· ; ""' • TJ J&C.0· I CY. H·· ' .. 'I .8 ,, - ,1 t!. I,) i :1' '' , C.AMPlN /JfARTtfE.1'17 s:so . ( :'": I ~·~ :_: .,· ... _!J.;!!!t.~.t-........... ______ .............. ··--·-..................... -......... i 1, .. 5206 NE 114 -~-a;"""i1i714:o---:------------- II I I ' II ... t!.AMl'E.N APARTt1El'IT5 't1t __ 0._wc,; 11«,ntt ,,,, .... ,.. : ; ··r:·-r· .. 1· <; ) )''.'..} -........ ~:·,· .. . ·-·~.·.·.·· .. ' ... \.."' • ... ' ... \;· ' I ---------.....i ! I I l ;/[ j ,,. SE 187th St) I SE i88th St } f ' I i ! rr I : I I;:: SE: I ?D.~t>.J I 'iit'1/ I l i f ~/·"·•,.,"-... : ;' . ·----·-<. ::::--.... .I L ·.·,r-': d ;I '( 'I I !i CITY Of REN' SURFACE WA1 . DRAINAGE SYS1 0 @ .. ------ 0 t="1 LEGEND STOftM S£Wal DlTOi llNES CATOi BAS!NS MANl-!OlES DlllEC110M ARRC CU. VBtT CllOSSI RENTON OTV U1 400 8( b...sw; .. :"9 1:4800 533] / .f • ( / .· \ / -;/\ \ / _,' i /'' \ ! j l. ' ' ' EXIS lhQ CONCmON MA CAMPEN APARTMENT EXHiSIT A c:r-,., [" .•.• -~,,..,. .. -~··· ,.....,----~_.,-.~ :·: ' • C - '.i/:r;~,;:~ ~ :},, .. '.l\f:<';' /\.\/::: _,,:~/ .,. -i, --'.t , ::;>:If'.;/{:.~</:: ·f~t})'. ::;:,\:'.·.'1,1:1:r~~t~i{I~f}l ,-,.,. - !,;,!... ,,.l,•"iher.°.·1~,!·,' ', •.,<• '•l" H" ;l,,\,./•,,,·~,·",:(,j,•,1• .j• ,•[ .• ' <<-'_I; lt)~~~,_,.., ... ,-, ;,~•t ••• --·~ -~~-",;MtiMis,,,&,,ii&,'0?.'1&.~12>.5!!\i~~, .•• --!l~~~~M~»---,..;....~-,··~ .. :~~.--~,,., ..... - I ' . ff i i I I I ' I I I I I D CAICH BASIN ~ I g SANITARY MANHOI.£ I FIRE HYDRANT I !£1 WATER METER I I !XI WA!ER VALVE I •O· POWER POLE I C:I MAltBOX I .o. SICN I -·-••··--POWER 1:,_~tMU -~1.;-SANITARY SEWER II,. IU:NI SECTION IV FLOW CONTROL AND WATER QUALITY FACILITY ANALYSIS AND DESIGN EXISTING SITE HYDROLOGY (PART A) KCRTS was used to model the peak runoff from the Site. Per Table 3.2.2.b of the Manual, the soil type is modeled as "Till" for the Alderwood gravelly sandy loam SCS classification as shown in Figure 4. Soils. The entire Site is modeled as "Forest." Results of the KCRTS analysis are included in this section. Area Breakdown KCRTS INPUT: EXISTING TILL FOREST= . ' I I 173253: ©2014 D.R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Technical Information Report 3.977 Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat Page 14 City of Renton PRE-DEVELOPED HOURLY TIME STEP MODELING INPUT: .~ ~nd use Su!llln~ry 1 c1 IEJ I )Z I . ~Ar.e~ 11 Till F~rest .·3.98:acies Till Pasture ·o.oo ·acres 'Till Grass 0.00 _ai:ies Outwash Forest 0'.00 ac·r~s Outwa;h Pasture :o.OO.acies Outwash Grass ll.00 acres .-, ,. Wetla~d 0.00 ac,res lm"·pervio··us ·o.oo acres rTlital ·3.98 acres! Scale Fa_ctor :. 1.00 Hri~rl");'> Re.du_ced Time S~ries: !predev l>>I 'compute 'iime·.series I M~dify User Input I I Fil_e· for c,oinjluh:d Time Se~ies l,TSF] PRE-DEVELOPED HOURLY TIME STEP MODELING OUTPUT: Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:predev.tsf Project Location:Sea-Tac ---Annual Peak Flow Rates--------Flow Frequency Analysis------- Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak (CFS) 0.251 2 2/09/01 18:00 0.068 7 1/06/02 3:00 0.186 4 2/28/03 3:00 0.006 8 3/24/04 20:00 0 .110 6 1/05/05 8:00 0.193 3 1/18/06 21:00 0.163 5 11/24/06 4:00 0.321 1 1/09/08 9:00 Computed Peaks ©2014 D.R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Technical Information Report --Peaks Rank (CFS) 0.321 1 0.251 2 0.193 3 0.186 4 0.163 5 0.110 6 0.068 7 0.006 8 0.297 Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat Return Period 100.00 25.00 10.00 5.00 3.00 2.00 1. 30 1.10 50.00 Prob 0.990 0.960 0.900 0.800 0.667 0.500 0.231 0.091 0.980 Page 15 City of Renton FIGURE 5 PREDEVELOPMENT AREA MAP ©2014 D.R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Technical Information Report Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat Page 16 City of Renton • >.---- ' :11,,111·1jl'"1"! ' ,,_11.l!_____:::"'i_ " r • , ' /1J1!{t1/1)J J 111 •· 1111111,'(, ,,,,.11 tiilfti":11 I 1111/10 l'i ,'1 ·,11'! /// / 11//1/ I j1i/l /// I rll !.11i,111lt!l1 _. ... , JI' ". -' t" 11111(';'/i/i''' /I/I 11, r i I 111 ! t I 1,1. I I HI/ ''1 'f 11 l ! 1 I 11 , , I jl I ! It I I ' f I I I 1 11!1jll1q::1:1111: :1 11!1 ll I I'" I, '""""""<l-' I ! 11 I ii I! I 111 It 111 I I I I fl I I I IL I I I' I \: /\I ! I! I l t \I': I\ t I ll; ! ; II, II \ I l I! I 11 Ii" 1111 j I I \ 11 H \ I Jl 11 t I j\ ! I\ I I! J 11 L 11111 'I' I ....... L"""""-J ~! I' ~- ~ 1 1111 \ I I 11 \ 111 l 1 1111 \\111 \:1, 111q~1, ,::::,,,• ·'""'"" ,:, ' ~1~ 1 /1;1~~~;1::;~1 1 \\\i::: z,«J ·0. 't· ~ ·1 11 i11" 'I'" ,. '" " '" 0 /' ~ i illi 11\1 111 :1i11\'1''' "1 w~c=-) . ,/ •11111\11111•" " ,,, , , ' < "" " 0 "" < .. ,... ' < Q ( I b ---.__,, • i"" I":' I"': I::;: '• I '.'J'"' ce-() -1 itll 11,I 1 11 I"',,,. , ~ • < , ' ,,,,,,,,,.,I"" ,,""' ' ' • ~ , - ,111 11'1 11111' 'I"' ' ',' " , I I'•\""""'' ' i .,1'M '\I I I t I I I I l I' \I 11 \ I I \ \ : , ~"'' V.:U.l ,1111•'111' ·'""" ' ' I I ii I I '1' \ l \ I l ii 11' I', lils ,~IP.},\ :,t ""' (;'\ ( ) 1111 1 " , 1 11 1,, " w • , " '1111 i,1, i111 ;1111"'' ',.-'I {' 1111111 1 11""1' ,"•'' ' '\" ' "" .. :, "'I ::,:1 '•' >' ·,' Ol>' -, • - _,._,, .. ~, : :::t:it/////:'1'::::,ii;~ / ~,:-_, !:-t, ) : 1il 1 / 1 ·,t/i 11 i or~, >l:, "A',?'' ' 111 ,, 1 1 r/'"' , ' W' ,.Jlc> """·'':::, '"' ""'' '. -. ' ' 111 tl111,1i1\1\\ ~1tv'"-,1<.)( 111\\\,1 ·'"" •" , ' -· 1111 1'\II' '' ' I ' I·"'""'.. ' , ,~---~ ::::l:::;1::::i::'/,1'. '. ',' :<:S,,--1111 111' ,11 1!11\ -................... ....... 111111"•:1: .. ,,.... '·~','"' ,or 11 1 1 ;1I""' ,,·--_,, ,, ... , .. ,,,:,,, •"' -~· 1lfl ,,, . 1//'/"'' ' -I'" 'I"'''"" ",,, ' ------.,,,1 111' o/"" , -l•"'i"• •i::., "" '·, ,- 1tll 11,1,, "'"" " < ''"""': ,: .. "" ( . , \ 11,1111' ·1""'"" ' •,-. .- '"' ,,,, ,,,, '"' ' , ' < \ 1!1'11111\""'""' • -• •• ', • , •""' ,' "' "" , / , " ' _, ·-""'\" 1i: .. ,, .... ,.. _.-,:,;:· ----,·, . ' " ' '"""' ,' "" ""' " ' ' _,. ,,-r.s --~ ---0 ' / '' "'"'I" •'I ,,,1 .. ,·,' .' '',. ' ' ' -',, =-----.. 0 ,>" '' , .,,, ,,,,,,·"•"""",,·.'' ,,:)1'/' ~-:; ... ~, , ... , .... ~,," \itij/ SWALE(m>) \\'""""'"''"'' ._..,,·, , , ,.,,,, ,~,, ,',' ,Ov, I J I I !\I\"" "'"'"' ""'"'", ""''" ' • '' ' <, ',;c---"""~ , • ,:. "10 \ \ ~ ' --,; "I:"' ,., i\\ \I"" ".,,,,,.,,,,_,.,...,,,>=.'" "-\ , , ' · /• / '-".:, ·, _, ~-' , ,:,;/' ,,,, 1 ,,,1 1 1\''\,' '*'"'\"~~-~-,,~~~-::e-<:---"'·_,.,._ -~ , , -, ·-,']~'~ (;,'/~,~~-::::~---' r-'-·· :::,::,_;,,-,,,.-, , I ,1,1 \\\\ ",>'",,,,,,,,,'':.~~':': ,,1rt ~,~' •' > , I :,;,)~--.... ---·· ,I,_" ,,,_,,,' I '.' " ' "'" '" '°'""'"'''"° ,·, ·•/•"' "" , ' . ' " , , . -/, ,,, /• ;•/,'-· -' ', ,, ' ,-,. ,,-,~ f,, 1 r' i : : : ' v!,1..::\.\\~,,~ ;~ ... 1~ :u ,' /,',~/}1,i 1 /,'f,~,:~~~~'/~\~~';, :;:r :@-''"", J '~~:-r.-.. ·_;:,;:/ J;,7if/zj-?,'';',~;o ;, __ --_g~,~\\:<·.,-i_l.,\~~ :;: ~.;;--~ ~ { /\ \ /I 'I' ;11111,1/1 ,, 11'1' 1r'1',1,'~. ,',i:,_,v .... -~-·' b) I / . ---:-;;,;, ,, . , "," " " " , u/ " , " " ' ,,.,,,:, ,,,, """' c ' --·,, C' , • "' · · , ', 'I, ,, _., ' ' e '" ,, ' --, w". ,',: " 1 ,:;.t;" ,; , : 1,,//:":,,;:..rc·, .. rt ... --·--"'· , · _ ... , ,:y/,,;,,J: ,;.< , "-J.'-,:, ', , '!/(, / I:; ( !A' :1,£'/,, 'J: 1;;.:-:::,?:::1::,: ::,: , .. --.-: : .. -----C ... ·,;" ; ,:,; /,// 'k < I ,, / " ',, '--:::·--·: , • i . " ,t"" ,,, '!""I" ••I'",/,•,•/,.,,,..,/.," , , " ---&.~ ----: ,, •', "d"-, , I ' --·<' . ~ ,_ >' '.:',:I::::':::: I:::: I:: r i I :tr':1:::,',~,;':t1'N,,,,,,,,,,,,,!i \ i· ·""' .c•:cc' .-: :::.,:-:1, .,,.c'., o ' =::."-n-, ---- ,di'' r " " .. " • " " " • , •' I" I "" ""'" ... ' ., .-= '0.,. '" ii ' ' -V 0 · ~;:,,.:)' 1111\~~1 1 1 •,11\I"' :••' 1 111::,:,:1,1'11;;;:1 11/ 1 1 \· : • ('()\'Qi!,• ,--P, ' ', \ \ \ 0 / , Jllllllllll l\1\1111\1111'\'ll'II' ,11,,"'11 111 I,-,,~· (!f_c:::--/"i I I '\' I O· ( I I I ) I \ I l I I l l ' l \ I I \ \ I I \""' ' ~ ' ., ' ' ' ' ' " " ., I I I q ~\I I I I \ I I \ \ ,,•: .. ,, .. ._ ,.,•(',;,,, ... ' "'' C';c-!·-" '. : ,;J ,,,-JfJ f ' ' "' ' ' ' \ ' I 11 I I' 'I ,_,',",,\\'•' I 1 "·'--'.W/ , ~ ( I iJ ,C::J I '""'· I 'O ' ' ,' ,,.... ' ' ' ' ' '"' ") ,, ' , II' ,.,.,,, '' ! .' , i : e,' 1 • l:.nJ 1 ~-. .~ ,_ \ 1, f'lo\f'itf~ ' " ( AREA BREAKDOWN TOTAL EXISTING SIT£ AREA: TOTAL PROJECT AREA: TOTAL PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AREA: LEGEND = = = PROJECT BOUNDARY ~ TILL FOREST 405,395 S.F. {9.307 ACRES) 173,25.J S.F. {3.977 ACRES) 174,253 S.F. (3.977 AC) MODELED AS TILL FOREST NORTH 0 ~ GRAPHIC SCALE 40 80 q '~" j-;z-= 1 INCH= 80 FT 160 j "' ili ~ " ill ~~ 0;::: I': 5 ., "' a: ~ c:i 0 «I» ~ ~ fa i,;;: ~ ~ 1-,. fa l1 ~ :s;; ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ !:l ~; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t ij ii~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ I Q. ~ ~ <:c ... a:i ~ C) u:l :s: ~ lli R: .;; tl! :::i Q) ii: DRAFTED BY: HP DESIGNED BY: l1P PROJECT ENG!NffR: l:IA,I DATE: D1.t4.1f PROJECT NO.: tzt02 [ DRAWING: 1 COPYRIGHT@ 2013, D.R. STRONG CONSULTING ENGINEERS INC. SHEET: 1 ~ ) DEVELOPED SITE HYDROLOGY (PART 8) DEVELOPED SITE AREA HYDROLOGY KCRTS was used to model the developed peak runoff from the Site. The soil types are unchanged from the pre-developed conditions. The portions of the Site within the proposed clearing limits tributary to the proposed detention vault were modeled as "Till Grass" and "Impervious" as appropriate. Results of the KCRTS analysis are included in this section. Area Breakdown ' I I ;Till Forest ' I 0 0.000; !RD in I I 0.688! iTill Grass ' 29964.7: . I llmpervious I 113314.3 2.601: '.Bypass . . i I ' 'Till Forest I 12017• 0.2761 . Ti II Gr~ss i 17157 0.394i I · impervious I soo: 0.018, Proposed Maximum Impervious per Lot is 65%. ©2014 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Technical Information Report Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat Page 17 City of Renton DEVELOPED HOURLY TIME STEP MODELING INPUT: @ Land Use Sumr:nary 1·.= ·1 0 I ·1;3 J Jili'forest 0,00 acres Till Pastur~ o)iD.acres 'Till Gras .. s 0.69 acres outwash Forest o.oo ·acres Oufy,a~~ Pasture 0.00 acres Outwash Gr~s~ O.Qli a~res · Well.and o,oo acres Impervious '2.60'acres [ To:~~9. ~cr~~I Scale.fiu:tor: 1.00; Hoil,rly Reduced 11 Ti.me Series': !rrd"'i-n-----------~I >>I Compute Time Seiie~ J Modify ,IJser input I . File. for conipu\ed. Time Series (.TSF) DEVELOPED HOURLY TIME STEP MODELING OUTPUT: Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:rdin.tsf Project Location:Sea-Tac ---Annual Peak Flow Rates--------Flow Frequency Analysis------- Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak (CFS) 0. 692 6 2/09/01 2:00 0.587 8 1/05/02 16:00 0.828 3 12/08/02 18:00 0.661 7 8/26/04 2:00 0.790 4 10/28/04 16:00 0.738 5 1/18/06 16:00 0. 962 2 10/26/06 0:00 1. 37 1 1/09/08 6:00 Computed Peaks ©2014 D. R STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Technical Information Report --Peaks Rank (CFS) 1.37 1 0. 962 2 0.828 3 0.790 4 0.738 5 0.692 6 0.661 7 0.587 8 1. 24 Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat Return Period 100.00 25.00 10.00 5.00 3.00 2.00 1. 30 1.10 50.00 Prob 0.990 0.960 0.900 0.800 0.667 0.500 0.231 0.091 0.980 Page 18 City of Renton ( BYPASS HOURLY TIME STEP MODELING INPUT: Till F.o_rest 0,28 acres Tm F'ast~re "Till Grass outwash Forest O~l\yash F'a?tur~ Outv,ash Gras~ Weiland /., o,39 acres 0.00 ac"res o:oo acres o:citj .'!cres 0,00 _a~re"s Impervious 0.02 acies (Total L 0.~6~ ~.cr~~I Scali, Factor: 1.00 Hourly Redu~~d 'rime Series: "lb-y-pa_s_s-------~--~I >>I Comput~ iime_Seri~s I litodify,U_ser Input fl_etrl~ye r~nofffiles _an~ comp~tc Timi(Series BYPASS HOURLY TIME STEP MODELING OUTPUT: Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:bypass.tsf Project Location:Sea-Tac ---Annual Peak Flow Rates--------Flow Frequency Analysis------- Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak (CFS) 0.054 3 2/09/01 15:00 0.027 7 1/05/02 16:00 0.061 2 2/27/03 7:00 0.012 8 8/26/04 2:00 0.030 6 1/05/05 8:00 0.053 4 1/18/06 16:00 0.047 5 11/24/06 3:00 0 .111 1 1/09/08 6:00 Computed Peaks ©2014 D.R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Technical lnfonnation Report --Peaks Rank Return Prob (CFS) Period 0.111 1 100.00 0.061 2 25.00 0.054 3 10.00 0.053 4 5.00 0.047 5 3.00 0.030 6 2.00 0. 027 7 1. 30 0.012 8 1.10 0.095 50.00 Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat 0.990 0.960 0.900 0.800 0. 667 0.500 0.231 0.091 0.980 Page 19 City of Renton FIGURE 6 POST DEVELOPMENT AREA MAP ©2014 D.R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Technical Information Report Vuecrest Estates Preliminary Plat Page 20 City of Renton -------------------- ,,--~ "' / I TRACT"B" ~:EA TRACT"C" 1REfB.M~ '-..._ --- --- - CPEN SP,ur ,,a S.F. IZl ~ . ' ~ D mi - = == I AREA BREAKDOWN TOTAL EXISTING SITE AREA: TOTAL PROJECT AREA: I.Q[ d8f'd (CQL/LC:ZEQ); IMPERVIOUS: TILL GRASS: I.Q[ d8f'd (ll~;dSSf'Q); TILL FOREST: IMPERVIOUS: TILL GRASS: 8Q~~L.l.f:l'. d8f'd (C.Ql L f'C.lEQ.1; IMPERVIOUS: TILL GRASS: 'lB.dC.[ d8f'd (QQu.t:C.lf'Q); IMPERVIOUS: TILL GRASS: 'IB.AC.r. d8f'd (ll~A~~1; TILL FOREST: IMPERVIOUS: TILL GRASS: LEGEND PROJECT BOUNDARY 0 405,395 S.F. (9.307 ACRES) 173.253 S.F. (3.977 ACRES) 91,733 S.F. (2.106 AC) 72,287 S.F. &1.659 AC) 19,446 S.F. 0.446 AC) 115,769 S.F. (2.658 AC) 5,260 (0.121 AC) 800 S.F. (0.018 AC) 14,649 S.F. {0.336 AC) 42,927 S.F. (0.985 AC) 38,227 S.F. (0.878 AC} 4,700 S.F. (0.108 AC) 8,619 S.F. {0.198 AC) 2,800 S.F. &0.064 A9 5,819 S.F. 0.136 AC 9,265 S.F. (0.213 AC) 6,757 S.F. (0.155 AC) 0 S.F. (0.000 AC) 2,508 S.F. (0.058 AC) NORTH GRAPHIC SCALE 40 80 160 1 INCH= 80 FT. "' ili ll/ <!, ai ~~ Q j::: I!: '5 "'!/2 0: ~ c:S8 fa i,.;; i:5 fa ..... la fi § :s ~ I i ~-~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ !r! ;r ~ ij ij ,J ~ ~ ~ :1 ~ " ~ il; ~ 0 ~ I ~ ~ <C I- ~ ~ 0 !il ~ I- (/) ft <o IJJ ~ Q) Li: DRAFTcD BY: l'lP DESIGNED BY: ttP PRO..£CT ENGINEER: IIAJ DATE: 07.14.14 PRO.ECT ND.: 1zt02 l DRA'MNG: 1 ~ COPYRIGHT @ 2013, O.R. STRONG CONSULTING ENGINEERS INC. SI/EFT, 1 ' ~ --'--S SITE STIRU( I A Division of Kosnlk Engineering, PC Vuecrest Estate§ Storm Water Detention Vault Renton, Washington Structural Calculations '. }- • Project No. S-14-045 First Issue 07-07-14 RECEIVED JUL 16 2014 CITY OF RENTON PLAhJN:/\JG DIVISiON 1051119TH Ave SE, Suite C, Everett, WA 98208 ¢ {425} 357-9600 (phone)¢ e-mail: dan@kosnlk.com Vuecrest Estates Storm Water Detention Vault Project No. S-14-045 STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS INDEX Design Criteria Lid Review Wall Design & Footing Design Grated Opening Framing 01-03 04-07 08-15 16-20 0 DESIGN CRITERIA Code: Permitting Agency: Soil Cover: Lid Loading: Grating: Foundation Design: Vuecrest Estates Storm Water Detention Vault 2012 IBC City of Renton 18" over the entire vault HS20-44 truck loading 150 psfuniform live load 61:lBGT f 7 h ,,,, Uniform live load not to act concurrently with truck wheel loading. lOOpsfpedestrian loading on raised grate Foundation design is based on the following values provided by Earth Solutions NW Allowable Bearing Pressure: Soil Design Values: At Rest Pressure: Active Pressure: Seismic Addition: Saturated Soil Density: Material Requirements: Rebar: Grade 60 4,000 psf 55 pcfEFW (Drained Level Back.fill) 35 pcfEFW ( Drained Level Backfill) E = lOH psfUniform 125 pcf Concrete: Lid: fc= 4000 psi walls and lid, fc=3000psi figs & grade slab Pre-cast, Pre-stressed Hollow Core Plank 12-1/2" thick. SITE STRUCTURES FRQNTAXEL: REARAXEL#l: REAR AXEL #2: 0 1-i i, 0 .. ~ ,:- I I. _,,.__ II if I w !. · 14! · · ~I< Y•M'mao· ~I • HS20-44 72 OOOLBS 8,000LBS 32,000LBS 32,000LBS S;OOP lb H$20~4 3'2,000 lb 32:,000•lb axle ·s,ooo lb HS1S~44 24.000 lb 24,000-ib axle sheet date pfJ. no. e,-1'-1-oL/S . ~-~ . _ffi-sQrlle 0$~,espondinir i:¥" Q.1W ¥ 0.4W~ l+t1'11Ck W • combined weight Gf fht llill axles V • l'Orloble, 1158 11po.lng ~icll produeet mo1lmum strm F1:1r ,;le1,lqn of i,!11b$, ~1er6ot of wheel tQ be f ft f,(Jm curb -• -~ - HS 20 -44 ·TRUCK LIVE LOAD ON WALLS 8 ·'--I f . . \ I I ' I ' ___ :1tz./J!:-L _____ ... :;, ·I~,: OLL~-----·- -~- .. . \ IA.. 6_,i_-Jl,.U.w.l.:1~-i.--l-...._--1---1--1.--.L i ~- 0:: w > 0 u > • ·:_, ~ ' ' \ \ l\ ' ' 4 ,~ \ \ i1--: \ \ \ \ . ~ '\ I"-" i..:. r--.. "'" ........ ~ . ...... r--,.... 0c6---'--,.,,.,_..1,..+.~-i--........... -'--::l:l......~-l--.:.e:.-L-...L-..L::l'"+--i.--i.---.!..-~...,:P.~ 0 ·. ·\Otf t?.O'. . _ 200 i 300' AVERAGE UNIFORM HORIZONTAL LOAD .. 400; SITE STRUCTURES 1051119th Ave SE, Suite C Everett, WA, (425)-357-9600 Project Vuecrest Estates PRECAST HOLLOW CORE PLANK REVIEW Lid Data Soil Desity Soil Cover depth over lid Plank design clear span Design Uniform Live Load Design Superimposed Load IJIIL •337:5 psf Plank capacity based on uniform superimposed load tables Plank span No of tendons Allowable superimposed loads Allowable superimposed loads base of design span of Based on flexural capacity Based on shear capacity Plank capacity based on truck load charts Plank span No of tendons Allowable soil cover without knee-walls Allowable soil cover with knee-walls sheet 4 date 7/7 / 1L{ prj. no. .;:Sc...;-1::...;4c...;-0::...;4~5--- 23.25 ft ' 599;psf · .• '.497:psf g __ O_O_N_C_L __ TE_TE_C~H_N_O_LOG_~_C_L_~_PO_RA_JlO_N__;~=2-=1_i:;;;;;;1~~;;;;:..-s 12.1/2 11 HOLLOW CORE SLAB DIMENSIONS FOR DETAILING 6" 111/2'' ·. 6' SPAN-LOAD TABLE ALLOWABLE SUPERIMPOSED LOAD In pounds per square foot Effective No. of SIMPLE SPAN In feet ' Prestress 1/2" 111 (KIPS) STRANDS 28 32 36 40 44 ~ 52 56 60 70;7 3 78 44 20 77;7 4 126 80 49 26 101.3 5 F4 117 78 50 27 124.8 6 221 153 106 70 43 23* 148.4 7 267 186 129 89 59 36 -172.0 8 307 216 153 108 74 49 29 195.5 9. 343 243 174 125 89 61 40 23' 219.1 10 378 1 270 195 142 103 73 50 31' 242.7 11 413 1 297 217 160 117 85 60 40 24' SECTION PROPERTIES (with shear keys grouted) 10 A= 313 ln2 I = 6136 in4 Zt =1019in3 Yt = 6.02 In zb =947ins Yb= 6.48 In w =84psf .NOTES: . . , . 1. The values given In this table are based on hollow core slabs without shear reinforcement. Superscripts (1, 2, etc.) lollowlng values In the table lnfficate the number of filled voids required at the ends of slabs to develop the allowable superimposed load. See page 2, "SHEAR' for discussion. 2. Asterisk(*) following values In the table Indicate that the total deflection under all loads Is greater than U360 but less than U180. 3. Interpolation between values Is acceptable. Do not extrapolate values Into the blank spaces of the table. 4. These Span-Load Tables are Intended as an aid to preliminary sizing. Sound engineering Judgement Is required for the application of this Information to specific design cases. MANUFACTURERS OF PRESTRESSED CONCRETE o TACOMA, WASHINGTON • ) 4/96 ( ..,;.._ __ " __ __ (ji • ·-. 7/_2/tl{ ·---- ~~____;:C~O~N=C~R-ET~E~T~E=C~H~N~O~L=O~G~Y~C~O~R~P O~RA~T~I O=..:..;N:...__~ Ii s 121/2" HOLLOW CORE SLAB -tj z ::i LL 0 Cl. 0 N ... II ..J 1 -t: -6 1 150 PSF . ·-· .. ·--· --. ···--· ···---.... 1-- I .J .. ..•. ···-·-·-····. -·· ·-····-. --..... ·---- 0 -J--+--+-l--+--+--+-1--+--H-+-,-l--+--+--+~l--+--+---+~I--+--+---+-~ 14 16 22 / 24 fy'ti~~ SIMPLE SPAN (ft) 32 34 38 36 26 28 30 16 20 GENERAL NOTES: 1.) A minimum cover depth of six inches OR a three inch thick cast in place concrete topping slab is required. 2.) Simple Span is centerline of bearing to centerline of bearing. 3.) The! Knee Wall envelope represents the maximum span and height of soil cover that can be supportei:l by slabs with standard notches for manhole openings, assuming void fill concrete fc = 3,000 psi. Points falling outside this envelope require knee walls to support the slabs at manhole openings. 4.) Interpolation between strand contours Is acceptable. DO NOT extrapolate beyond the bounds of this chart. 5.) Soil cover Is assumed to be uniform. 6.) Except as noted, soil cover unit weight is assumed to be 120 pcf. 7.) Minimum span length= 14'-0". 6.) The values shown on this chart are in ccimpliance with IBC 2003 & ACI 316-05. 9.) The Vent Notch envelope represents the maximum span and height of soil cover that can be supported by slabs with 6Y:i" standard notches in adjacent slabs to accommodate 12" diameter vents, assuming void fill concrete fc = 3,000 psi. Refer to Detail 3 on page 15 of this brochure for vent notch details. 2/18/08 MANUFACTURERS OF PRESTRESSED CONCRETE • TACOMA, WASHINGTON 9 L.)[11;:>p··, / 7-)-/L{ S. ,~, -0'{5 ___ c .... o._.N""""'C=-R __ E"'""'T.:....E ~TE=C::a.:.H.:.:.N~O=:..:L=O .... G~Y:...C=.=O~R.:....PO=,..i..l;;RA:....:.T.:..:..10=.!..lN __ ~I 121/2 11 HOLLOW CORE SLAB IY!!J HS20-44 12 I i ~--~ ~ ' 11 1. ... , .. -tj . ,\ 1 · 10 -, " ; • • -, ------· · -------r· -1 -----z :::, u. 0 a. 0 N .... 9 • -~ ~ ~ ~~ 7 1 ---I -l r ---+-1----l·------+----1---I----1- 1 ----1----1 ' _ ~'. • \ '--~ =. Number of Filled Voids required II 8 · 1 ·;.;,··, ·--,~-·· · for2'-0"ateachendofeachslab. · ··· ., ...... ., .... ·-··----- f-\.3 I l .... • _ 7 L . I\ ~ l i . --· I I I l J .... \ i -\ f \-.~I _.-Vent Notch' ! -· .. J5 ) . -.-...... -----. ! -- -, I I O +---+--+I --1-+---+--+I --1-+---+'--+--+-+-,I --+-l--+--1---+-l--+--l--+--''i--+--I 2~ 24 26 28 r,fl')/~SIMPLE SPAN (ft) 14 30 32 34 38 36 16 18 20 GENERAL NOTES: 1.) A minimum cover depth of six inches OR a thre~ inch thick cast in place concrete topping slab is required. 2.) Simple Span is centerline of bearing to centerline of bearing. 3.) The Knee Wall envelope represents the maximum span and height of soil cover that can be supported by slabs with standard notches for manhole openings, assuming void fill concrete fc = 3,000 psi. Points falling outside this envelope require knee walls to support the slabs at manhole openings. 4.) Interpolation between strand contours is acceptable. DO NOT extrapolate beyond the bounds of this chart. 5.) Soil cover is assumed to be uniform. 6.) Except as noted, soil cover unit weight is assumed to be 120 pcf. 7.) Minimum span length= 14'-0". 8.) The values shown on this chart are in compliance with IBC 2003 & ACI 318~05. 9.) The Vent Notch envelope represents the maximum span and height of soil cover that can be supported by slabs with 6Y." standard notches In adjacent slabs to accommodate 12" diameter vents, assuming void fill concrete fc = 3,000 psi. Refer to Detail 3 on page 15 of this brochure for vent notch details. I 2118/08 MANUFACTURERS OF PRESTRESSED CONCRETE • TACOMA, WASHINGTON 7 i) . · ProJect Vuecrest Estates 8 SITE STRUCTURES 1051119th Ave SE, Suite C Everett, WA, (425)-357-9600 ~heet: date: prj. no. S-14-045 Vault Walls -Lateral Pressures Review Minimum soil cover depth to top of wall: Maximum soil cover depth to top of wall: Wall Height: At-Rest soil pressure: Active soil pressure: Uniform Addition to At-Rest soil pressure: Soil Density: Load Combinations: : ,: /, .(i;1Jf L (soil pressure)+ (./¥,'.\I,\tfli L (surcharge/wheel load) ·•·· ·······1··6·L( ·1 J · :·',, .. ,,,,·o·L( · · J ·.:'/,·.:\;::: /~ .;;_ . soi. pressure + r;.;·,'.f)~~;::-"::~);i.i/. .. , se1sm1c Due to HS20 Truck Loading: 1.5 ft min cover over lid: 1.5 ft max cover over lid: Total Factored Lateral Force: 1.5 ft min cover over lid: 1.5 ft max cover over lid: Due to Uniform Surcharge Load: Uniform surcharge: Equivalent lateral force: Total Factored Lateral Force: 1.5 ft max cover over lid: Due to Seismic Activity:· '.17014 plf ~'1'11.,-,l-5 PLC).,.., i17014plf ---,~-c:;;.,...-... p...J '(.,;y,·1"·5·0· ' f :.:!\~'t}._ ..... i ps 66 psf Uniform 16910 plf Uniform seismic addition: E = :k:~;f}:~19; H . Seismic lateral force: . ~63.psf Uniform Total Factored Lateral Force: 1.5 ft max cover over lid: Combined Load Factor: . 12309 plf 1.47 Project Vuecrest Estates 9 SITE STRUCTURES 1051119th Ave SE, Suite C Everett, WA, (425)-357-9600 sheet date prJ. no. 7/7/,t./ S-14-045. Design Data Soil Density Soil Cover depth to the top of the wall Wall height Soil Pressure EFW Surcharge Information Ws1 = Ws2= 137.5 psf 893.75 psf uniform truck S1 = ... J50 psf (on surface of ground) Equiv Ws = Ws = ;i; .·. i'.-7p psf ( on surface of wall -see design chart } 66 psf Critical Design Surcharge pressure Calculated Design Forces W1= 207.5 W2= 893.75 F1 = 3371.875 lbs F2 = 7261.719 lbs R top= R bot= 4107 lbs 6527 lbs M1 = 6849 M2 = 15140 M total= · 21989 ft-lbs Wall Reinforcing Wall thickness Clear cover Rebarsize Rebar area Bar spacing Rebar strength fy Cone strength fc Load Factor .-:j2, inches 2 inches ii{··· .. :',j'I'. . 0.7~. sq-in l(f;f Comp block (a) = Depth to CL bar (d} = d-a/2 = Cl>Mn = Mu= 1.39 inches 9.50 inches 8.81 inches · • ·,37351. ft-lbs • 26387 ft-lbs max tension reinforcing spacing: f, = 31790 psi s= s= Smax = 13.9 in 1s:1 ·in Anchorage at Top of the Wall Ru = . 4928 plf Shear capacity of Dowel = Bearing capacity of Dowel = . 11376 plf 5670 plf Anchorage at Bottom of the Wall Ru= 7833 plf Nominal Shear friction capacity of the footing to wall Dowel 11383 plf 13.9 in -OK Rebar Dowel Size = i:F '' '<':';'/8 Dowi~:=~~;:~: 'i j{{-;tf::~!( ~~t Dowel Spacing = :••/ }r..:·20 inches Dowel brg length = ;: )f{ ~:2& inches cone strength re = : '. :f : ~QQQ psi Rebar Dowel Size = \)/i;f;'.')}t5: Dowel Area = ]·,:,g;,6,~j'. sq-in D~:~:it~;;~~:: :1;.Jj'f~;J(_j~i ~s~hes Coefficient of friction = .::'i'_/c•: ··o:lf smooth surface ,:u·.·.····.-., .:····· .... SITE STRUCTURES Project Vuecrest Estates sheet date prj. no. 10 7/7/,'-{ S-14-045 10511 19th Ave SE, Suite C Everett, WA, (425)-357-9600 ----- Design Data Soil Density Soil Cover depth to the top of the wall Wall height Ws1 = Ws2= 137.5 psf 893.75 psi Soil Pressure EFW Surcharge Information uniform truck S1 =}; • J!;iO psf (on surface of ground) Equiv Ws = · .. Ws = :{ :. ifo: psi ( on surface of wall -see design chart ) Critical Design Surcharge pressure =i!:i. i\o: psf (on the surface of the wall) 66 psf Calculated Design Forces W1= 137.5 W2= 893.75 F1 = 2234.375 lbs F2 = 7261.719 lbs R top= R bot= 3538 lbs 5958 lbs M1 = 4539 M2 = 15140 M total= .: 19678 ft-lbs Wall Reinforcing Wall thickness Clear cover Rebar size Rebar area Bar spacing Rebar strength fy Cone strength fc Load Factor ,;,,·;/,),12 inches · · ·' · '.'2 inches Comp block (a) = Depth to CL bar (d) = d-a/2 = <!>Mn = 1.39 inches 9.50 inches 8.81 inches 37351 ft-lbs Mu = ... ·•· 23614 ft-lbs max tension reinforcing spacing: f. = · 28450 psi s = 16.1.in Anchorage at Top of the Wall Ru= · -4245.plf Shear capacity of Dowel = Bearing capacity of Dowel = · 11376 plf 5670 plf Anchorage at Bottom of the Wall Ru= 7150 plf Nominal Shear friction capacity of the footing to wall Dowel 11383 plf s = • 16.9 in Smax = _. :16;t in -OK Rebar ii:::il :::: : ;!~J{;?]~~;{~; sq-in Dowel strength fy= ,Nt{\('f:'.ElO,: ksi Dowel Spacing = :·\:;If:;)Jiiq; inches Dowel brg length = ;\\\'.: }c.2;g5•: inches cone strength fc = /:\()~@Qi psi "~;f~}t!ili~:: Coefficient of friction= .··:-.:(;-',q:il" smooth surface ' ( SITE STRUCTURES 10511 19th Ave SE, Suite C Everett, WA, (425)-357-9600 Project Vuecrest Estates INTERIOR WALL HEADER GEOMETRY AND LOADS ANALYSIS Header Overburden & Uniform Loads Lid weight Soil Desity Soil Cover depth over lid Plank design clear span left Plank design clear span right Design Uniform Live Load Lid tributary width to header Uniform service load to header Uniform factored load to header Truck Wheel Loads to Header Truck type Axle Load Wheel Spacing Cover depth r::1:1i;11 ~~~ .;::~~;~ ' ii§Opsf ;23 ft 10638 plf 14145 plf Axle assumed centered over & perpendicular to header sheet // date 7/7 (!'-{ prj. no. S-14-045 Load Factors LL :\:.' .. ;::.\{6 DL ::'G.'1'.2' distribution width distribution length 3.50 ft 10.00 ft opening width•• ,J/jqfqQift uniform load @ top of plank wheel load to header from left span wheel load to header from right span Total wheel load to header Factored wheel load to header Design Loads & Forces in Header Service Factored 914 psf 4075 plf 4075 plf 8149 plf 13039 plf · : 18.8 kif .··. 27.2 kif length ea side of hdr 5.00 ft Critical section for shear is at Design Vu= Design Mu= 1.5 feet from the face of the support 95 k 340 k-ft SITE STRUCTURES 1051119th Ave SE, Suite C Everett, WA, (425)-357-9600 ~roject Vuecrest Estates sheet l ;:J. INTERIOR WALL HEADER DESIGN Header Data Header width Header span Header depth ln/d ratio 0.012 date ]/] /1<( prj. no. S-14-045 Concrete Strength ;;:,:,4poo:psi d = 60.00 inches Deep Beam limit ln/d < 5.0 Min Rebar spacing Min shear steel ( Area I spacing ) ratio Max spacing of shear steel 12.6 inches #3@ 9.17 #4@ 16.67 Min horiz steel ( Area / spacing ) ratio Max spacing of horzontal steel Review shear capacity of header Reinforcing yield strength Shear reinforcing area spacing 0.02 21 inches Horz reinf area Horz reinf spacing #4@ #5@ Reinf shear capacity ¢Vs Total Shear Capacity Max ct>Vn @ ln/d < 2 83 k 135 k 206 k 21784 k Cone shear capacity ¢Ve Factored shear Vu Max ct>Vn @ 2 < ln/d < 5 Review flexural capacity of header min As based on 200 bwd/fy min As based on eq 10-3 As reqd based on bending model As reqd based on tie -strut model 1.6 sq inches 1.52 sq inches · ·. · . 1.30 sq inches assume Vu is focused @ the center of the header · then Tu= 95.14 k As reqd = · . ·1.16 sq inches 10.00 15.50 95 k 52 k ( -@ Project _ Sheet . ._ti'UC'i@:~r@$ dueC..'\2.[;';:,T E::,J:l"tTE"::. Date B A DMalon of Koanlk Engineering PC Job No •• ~ J' l!M~~#E "~~ < • . . . VJre-1--v1ce, "':" 11, pl Ii . -/?L, t-vL: . . . . r~ ~(/ ~ t i 0 11-~ t-1 J,e -· ·_ '. f~~ --~ r1-f . A -~~ .~ /Y.bt • --. . "Wrt ~ 1 27 11 ~tr fir!? A-~-!W-tp . . • •. ,'Yf ~: ~ 1~-4 _( 7f'l) ,. I lb7 f F~"~ -.. /1%~1, 1 ~*f . • M~· -i,~(tf,1\'i;2cG = l'f~-v, •. · •. ·. • • I 2 11 ~ . J~4-~ ~ b II: · : t%r;, 11 (/t\ ~ o,?4'1Pfi . Wt~ 1411~.rt& + . _·.. vt(b) •. . ! : : : :(~1tt G t~i-18-A',)~ . A-=-~;~1~1, . I. . : '6ject Vuecrest Estates ,y SITE STRUCTURES 1051119th Ave SE, Suite C Everett, WA, (425)-357-9600 .sheet date prj. no. S-14-045 Design Data : Wall Foundation Loads Analysis Soil Desity Soil Cover over the lid Plank weight Uniform Live Load Truck Rating Wall Height · '• ' ;;1}51 pcf . J!'.1¥: ft 9b, sf -____ ,_p f ::1WJi ctl~l psf 16.25 ft Per. wall Cell Width Int. wall Cell Width left Int. wall Cell Width right F rent Axle Load ; i/}BQOl:\' lbs Rear Axle #1 Load -\~?:q'o§ lbs Rear Axle #2 Load :;:,~:32000 lbs Total vehicle wt 72000 lbs Truck Wheel Load Distribution to Perimeter Wall Foundation i:t:i:2~ft I~ll~ Truck Perpendicular to the perimeter wall wl rear. axle #2 directly over wall & distance to axle #1 = 14ft total truck load to wall = 44522. lbs distribution width = 43.5 ft Load @ base of wall = 1023 -plf Truck Parallel to the perimeter wall wl one wheel over wall & 2nd wheel on plank (incl axle 1 &2 only ) . total truck load to wall = 55652 lbs calc distribution width= · --• · 51.5 ft Load @base of wall= _ 1081 plf Truck Wheel Load Distribution to Interior Wall Foundation Truck Perpendicular to the int. wall wl rear axle #2&#1 centered over the wall & dist between axles -14ft total truck load to wall = 44522 lbs distribution width = 43.$. ft Load @ base of wall= · 1023 plf Truck Perpendicular to the interior wall wl rear axle #2 directly over wall & distance to axle #1 = 14ft total truck load to wall = · 44522 lbs left plank Load @ base of wall = -. _ "1 il2(plf total truck load to wall = __ --. • , 44522-· lbs right plank Load @ base of wall = _ J023 plf distribution width = · ·' 43'.5 ft · · · Truck Parallel to the interior wall wl one wheel over wall & 2hd wheel on plank (incl axle 1 &2 only ) total truck load to wall = · :. ($5652 lbs left plank Load @ base of wall = · 1081• plf total truck load to wall= · ' 55662.lbs right plank Load@ base of wall= · 1081 plf distribution width = 51 ,5 ft Truck Parallel to the interior wall wl the truck centered over the wall (incl axle 1 &2 only ) total truck load to wall = -5565_2 lbs distribution width = tit5_ ft Load @ base of wall= • 1081 plf Uniform Live Load distribution to Wall Footings Perimeter Wall Interior Wall 1725 plf 3450 plf SITE STRUCTURES _ .oject Vuecrest Estates 15 10511 19th Ave SE, Suite C Everett, WA, (425)-357-9600 sheet date prJ. no. S-14-045 Design Data : Wall Foundation Design Allowable Bearing Pressure {i:t['.}',,4009 psf Rebar strength fy = ):\ Y>??''.ao. ksi Concrete strength = ... .. . . \~a@: psi Soil Desity Soil Cover over the lid 125 pcf 1.5 ft Perimeter Wal/Footing Design Design live load Soil Cover dead load Plank dead load Wall dead load total dead load {,T'.~:,,,+~:1?'$ p1f 2344 plf 1125 plf 2437.5 plf 5906 plf L.F 1.6 1.2 1.2 1.2 Per. wall Cell Width Int. wall Cell Width left Int wall Cell Width right Plank weight Wall Height Wall Thickness Wu 2760·plf 2812.5 plf 1350 plf 2925 plf 7087.5 plf Total live + dead Load. Required Ftg Width Selected Ftg Width 7631plf ~ . h.ili ft .... £i/ii:;:/g~~Sj ft · · .. Selected Ftg Thickness 9848 plf Qu= As regd = Asmin = 1.33xAsregd= 4226 psf 0.02 sq-in/ft 0.43 sq-in/ft 0. 03 sq-in/ft Mu= Vu= phi Vn= Interior Wall Footing Design Design live load SoH Cover dead load Plank dead load Wall dead load total dead load 4313 plf 2070 plf 2437.5 plf 8820 plf 935 ft-lbs 2811 plf 11732 plf L.F 1.6 1.2 1.2 1.2 at face of wall at face of wall at face of wall Wu 5520 plf 5175 plf 2484 plf 2925 plf 10584 plf 12270 plf A 1 ,.._n 16104 plf 23 ft 23 ft 23 ft 90 psf 16.25 ft 12 inches Total live+ dead Load Required Ftg Width Selected Ftg Width 3.07 ft ~-·-~ '.:),::r_ .. ,:_3.5. ft Selected Ftg Thickness }'_::/\14: in Qu= As regd = Asmin = 1.33 x As regd = 4601 psf 0.08 sq-in/ft 0 .43 sq-in/ft 0.10 sq-in/ft Mu= Vu= phi Vn= 3595 ft-lbs 5751 plf . 11732 plf at face of wall at face of wall at face of wall i. SITE STRUCTURES Project Vuecrest Estates • 10511 19th Ave SE, Suite C Everett, WA, (425)-357-9600 Reinforcing at Top of Wall Below Grated Opening Design Data SURCHARGE SOIL PRESSURE curb height curb horz rein! bar curb horz rein! spacing depth to center of rein! curb thickness sheet: date: prj. no. /(J; S-14-045 Ws1 = 1031.25 Ws2 = 70 __ ws2 .•.• _______ WS1 _ Calculated Design Forces Fbot or cum = FbolofwaD = . 15Z:5 pit 1101;25 plf Mu horzcurt =· .: < q>Mncurb = ·. Mbase of wall = · · , 1 ~06 ft-lbs 0 3726. ft-lbs curb self-supported Mwan uniform = Mwan trtangle = .: 22ea.\l. ft-lbs 39334, ft-lbs R= :·, ·;,. !32023 ft-lbs 3817 plf Load Factor _!('i)i\'#_:~; Mu horzwaD :.'· > 76337 ft-lbs Wu.= · .6107. Wall Reinforcing ::~~~~::;i~:; 1(0irf t~)?}f ~!1 :~ Rebar Area 0.79 sq-in cone strength fc '.'.(C:.}.<:;::,4000:' psi • _,. , •. ,,•.,,,_. .,., .......... ? ··-:·, . .:·.··:;': .• ,:..: ;.:,>;i :: Closure Remf (3)-#:(3..:,.c:, -:\·'.:C:Y':··.; As in Closure 1 .. 33 sq-in ll>Mn =. · 104203· ft-lbs Addi Herz Reinf \:'.,51,f-!\:.f.6; # f Addi B :·. •.:-_c·::,,:,;;'/.c:·•,:4""• o ars.,. :·::, ,:,:-,-.:,.\.: As@Top of Wan· ·· · · 1:if sq-in depth to reinf (d) comp block (a) · d-a/2· Mu= B,63.in . 2.2_7 in · . :7A9 in .. , 76337ft-lbs ( SITE STRUCTURES 10511 19th Ave SE, Suite C Everett, WA, (425)-357-9600 Beam Design Below Grated Opening Design Data Height of Curb: Curb Thickness: Soil Density: Beam Width: Beam Span: Truck Rear Axle Load: Calculated Design Forces Soil Weight= Curb Weight = Self Weight= Max Beam Reaction 104 plf 250 plf 1!56 plf /i'230001b ... • ..... ~ ........ ,-., Load Factor: Wu= ·. 61~.plf Pu = . . 36800 lb Design for Flexure =~~n~:~z: Bot Reinf fMJ;f ;!]/If ( Area of Steel 1/~3 sq-in Depth to Reinf (d) · 2~J.3 in Comp Block (a) . · g,13,0 in d -a/2 •. 2ELB3 in <l>Mn = .15~987 ft-lbs ·Design for Shear Tie Reinf Size Area of Steel Depth to Reinf (d) Max Spacing Reinf Spacing <l>Vc = 0.2Q . 19,$0 5;25 in {i!\ttfI~ftf in <l>Vs = . 42057 lbs <l>Vc +<l>Vs = . 479~3 lbs '17 7 /7/1tj sheet: date: ptJ. no. '::.-/Y · ot/5 = -~ u -:c ~ ~ )0 , 1'-011 OR 21-011 1 "11-S (~J 11 ~ a 11ziil_ W (Pb ~M L 1 )it &,e 1411 WI~~ B7~ . -----. ·------- .. . (13 • .. @ . ProJaot VuEc.1L15'$[ l:.';:,IA1 E,':, Sheet ._ ili"i1!il@t6l:Elffi@ , Data A DMslon of Koanlk Engineering PO Job No s -)'-/ -C,l/5 I 't ,-~ 0 STIEIEIL .ISAR ... GAAT.IT,NG. !L.<0.A:to) TABLE fUiif.iliY1~tNiltN:H ---------I --. ;' -UNSUPPORTEUSPAN -- 19-2 15-4 15-2 11-4 11-2 7-4 7-2 4.8 4.9 5.7 6.4 7.2 9.7 10.7 6.4 6.9 7.7 9.2 10.0 14.5 16.0 5.9-6.2 7.1 8.2 9.0 12.9 14.2 8.4 9.2 10.2 12.l 13.1 19.4. 21.3 7.4 7.8 · 8.8 10.3 11.3 15.8 17.l - 10.0 11.2 12.2 14.9 15.9 23.8 25.7 8.4 9.2 10.2 12.l 13.1 18.8 20.0 12.5 13.7 15.l 18.1 19.6 28.1 30.1 14.1 15.7 17.l 20.9 ZZ.3 32.5 34.4 15.7 17.8 19.2 23.7 25.l 36.9 38.8 17._4 19.8 21.2 26.5 27.9 41.3 43.2 119.0 21.81 23.3 129.2130.7145.6 147.5 NOTE: WHEN GRATINGS WITH SERRA1BJ BEARIND BARS ARE SElETED, THE DB'11! DF 6HA11ND REQUIRED TQ SERV!t:E A SPECIF1ED WAD W1LL BE 114• GREATER THAN 1HAT SHOWN IN THE TABLES ABOVE .:. . -. . .. . -. --. . . I ~ ~ For deflection of not more than ]J4• when subjected to tbe severest of the following: (1) tbe unlform. loads i-...1ow; ,.,, tmder concentrated m i...-. .... loads of 300 lbs. up to 6-0' span; or (3) 400Ibs. for spans s-0• and over. ~ ill' !'11 SAFE UNTFDRM LIJAIJ 2•-5n 3'-0" 3'-6· 4'-0" 4'-6" 5'-0" 6'-6" 6'-0" 6'-6" 7'-0" s•-o• 9'-0" w I...'. n, I.BS.ISi}. FJ: 10 .r:. -\ 50 lxl/8 1 X 1/8 1 X 1/8 1 X 118 1 x3/16 1-1/4 X 1/8 1-1/4 X 3/16 1-1/Zx 3/16 l-3/4x 3/16 1-3/4 X 3/16 2x 3/16 Z.1/4 X 3/16 "" ' :c. -75 lXl/8 . lxl/8 1 X 1/8 lxl/8 l X 3/16 1-1/4 X 1/8 1-l/4x3/16 1-1/2 X 3/16 1-3/4x 3/16 1-3/4 X 3/16 2x3/16 2-1/4 X 3/)6 v' 0' 1DD lxl/8 1 X 1/8 lxl/8 lxl/8 1 X 3/16 1-1/4x 1/8 1-1/4 X 3/16 1-1/2 X 3/16 1-3/4 X 3/16 1-3/4 X 3/16 2-1/4 X 3/1~ Z.1/2 X 3/16 '"I ..c:. i 1- 125 1 X 1/8 lxl/8 1 X 1/8 1 X 1/8 1-1/4 X 1/8 1•1/4 X 3/16 l-"l/2X J./O 1-1/2 X 3/16 1-3/4 X 3/16 2x 3/16 2-1/4x3/16 -l/11 ...J 15D lxl/8 1 xt/8 lx 1/8 1 x3/16 1-1/4 X 1/8 1-1/4 X 3/16 1-1/2 X 3/16 1-3/4 X 3/16 1-3/4 X 3/16 2x3/16 2-1/2 X 3/16 -I 2DD lxl/8 l xl/8 lxl/8 l•l/4 X 1/8 1-1/4 X 3/16 1-1/2 X 3/16 1·3/4x3/16 1-3/4 X 3/16 2x3/16 Z.1/4 X 3/16 --' I 3DD 1 :t 1/S-1 x3/1.fi. 1 x3/16 1-1/4 X 3/16 1-1/2x3/16 1-3/4 X 3/16 2x3/16 2x3/16 2-1J4 X 3/16 2-1/2 X 3i16 --J. Tension Loads In Normal-Weight Concrete See Notas Below ~ 'i:i ~ i 'ii Shear Loads In Normal-Weight Concrete ,I! " ~ I ,124 1. The allowable loads listed are based on a safety factor of 4.0. 2. A!!awable loads may be Increased 3314% for short-term load!ng due to wind or seismic forces where permftted by code. S. Refer to allowable load-adjustment factors for spacing and edge distance on pages 128-129. •see page 10 for an explanatJon of the load table Icons 4. Thll minimum concrete thickness Is 1 Mi times the embedment depth. 5. Tension and Shear loads for the Tlten HD anchor may be combined using the e11!ptlcal Interaction equation (n..¥,i). Allowable load may be Interpolated for concrel:B comprasslve strengths batween 2000 psi And 4000 psi. -~ .. June 24, 2014 ES-2660.01 Geonerco Proeerties, LLC 1441 North 34h Street, #200 Seattle, Washington 98103 Attention: Mr. Jamie Waltier Subject: Proposed Stormwater Vault Vuecrest Residential Plat Renton, Washington Reference: D. R. Strong Consulting Engineers Vuecrest Estates Vault Detail Sheet · Dated June 19, 2014 Dear Jamie: Earth Solutions NW LLC • Geotechnical Engineering • Construction Monitoring • Environmental Sciences Earth Solutions NW, LLC (ESNW) has prepared this letter to provide an assessment regarding the weight of the proposed stormwater vault and its effect on the adjacent slope. Based on information provided by the project structural engineer (Mr. Dan Kosnik, P.E.), the vault, when full and including 18 inches. of soil cover will weigh 1,500 pounds per square foot. With a footprint of 5,900 square feet, the maximum weight of the vault will be· 4,425 tons. Based on information provided by the project civil engineer (Mr. Maher Joudi, P.E.), the volume . of soil displaced by the vault will be 3,676 cubic yards or 99,250 cubic feet. Using an in-situ soil unit weight of 120 pounds per cubic foot, the weight of soil displaced by the vault will be 5,955 tons. Therefore, even when the vault is full of water, it is 1,530 tons lighter than the soil it replaced. As currently designed, the setback from the top of the steep slope to the edge of the vault is 40 to 58 feet from the top of the steep slope. Given the setback from the slope and the fact that the vault will weigh 1,530 tons less than the soil it replaces, the vault will increase the overall stability of the slope RECEIVED JUL 16 2014 CITY OF RENTON PLAN!'~lh!G Di\/1~,iON 1805 -136th Place N.E., Suite 201 • Bellevue, WA 98005 • (425) 449-4704 • FAX (425) 449-4711 . Geonerco Properties, LLC June 24, 2014 If you have any questions, or if additional information is required, please call. Sincerely, EARTH SOLUTIONS NW, LLC Kyle R. Campbell, P.E. Principal cc: DR Strong Consulting Engineers, Inc. Attention: Mr. Maher Joudi (Email only) Earth Solutions tN-1, LLC ES-2660.01 Page2 • • ~ ! • i I l ! ! i ! • ! w ~ z G w ~ ~ N v <D 0 0 0 I t') < :::, ...J VJ ~ <( I- VJ w I- ~I Cl:'. u w :::, > I ' ••J '~E.y ' I 8 ts~ {nf>.J I ,r NIT E Xu.00 ,. (T'IP.) SE 1/4 SECnON 31, TOWNSHIP 23 N, RANGE 5 E, W.M .. VUECREST ESTATES 5'"10' Qi.0.1£" W/ I..AEaR ., z4• SOfJAR£ RIJI fie S72.00 !S'¥10" G!?A11r W/ LADOOl'., z,• SOUME U1CXAB.£ HNCED ACC£S$ HATCH (T'IP.) RN a-:,72.00 {NoN-TRAFF1C 8£ARJNG) IIAl#KJI.£ SCC110H usm FOR Aca:!iS f.fX:KAlH HMCED Acxns HAn:H {T'IP.) RfJI 372.00 {NoN-TRAF11C 8£,4RJNG) FlNJ$,£D GR:A=OOUD .. --... ------------------·······-----·-------- n;i,, OF VAUI.T :,70.5() .----·--------- t _l A ~11111.lsxw,. 5X#SN.l.UIIIN. :sx1J1N.l!ir111H. I :11 ~: ~ ~: ~ (~:~I AA ~ nloo-22.i!Jr 2.DOO' ---------- ZJ.00' BA_Y MD1H DOS11NCGRAD£ --------------~J __ ,,.,. ~, ..,,,,,,__ ___ r..;;;.~=-=-lf--~ -~.,,.,------- ------------------------1--------------""'"""""' a-na;;-~---- ZZ.ts7' SAY Kl1H ,r OU11ET £ '"-"" PLAN lfEW 1"=20' j.1 -~ Oii 2 ~ 0.,-Bdor'a Yau Dig 811 lJlllla lhdlrgr"CU'ld Locdcln on.. (D.Kr,N),OR,WA) ~·= . """""' moo' r--------if--~~~~.=.:: ------------------------h 12" INLET a. J57.00 a=.,s --a.t.n,>.) --------~ait]----t----~.J --------~--1------~)-----5% a:iij ' 8 S£Cn0N A-A a=u ~7' GRA\oEl BASE ,·-$' MAMta£ SfC11D'i IISB) FCR ACCESS __..,.--~ = LD F1NJSH£1J Qi'AI.E" :t::nzoo "" " '""' ,,..., I I -< ----------+= ------·-----------· ---,, t F "'""" awe ------------~ -~ ----"""""' """" « a"",iioo ---·---·--·--·-· ___ -------~--------:--r I;;,.."""'"" ---------•---·----+----------------·-s;;;.,-- ~' ,a.00' a>£MN(; (T'tP.) ~,,,. ~-------------------------------l----------11".0. D£S/a,l l(,S D.. J.59.00 __ ~ -----------------~------- ,w F0011NG DRAM; = s=-"""~I a=" ~~ ~ ~ SE1JIMCNT §~~G£ D.. 354.00 --------:i!l.1.T'rP.) --------------------L-->-- ' ' @ ' 'l:l'J:l"J:( "'' D.. .J5Z.l6 ""-,• ~1£1 BASE ~I.a' AKRAG£ SEDalENT SJUClAG£ (TYPJ S£C710N 8-8 ,._,. NORTH GRAPHIC SCALE 0 25 so 100 1 INCH,.50FT. ~--11 1111= 1·-1~ ~mYoF ~ ~~~7-=-: I .-:~ I ~ Plo~iog/~"''"~~~,T~~ ~pl NO. REVISION 8Y DATE APPR -_, -... _, ' VUECREST ESTATES I 08.I0.1< PRELIMINARY PLAT '™ VAUL TDET AILS ORS PROJECT NO. 12102 .. VUECREST PLAT TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS CITY OF RENTON Prepared for Jamie Waltier Geonerco Pro~erties WA, LLC 1441 N. 341 Street #200 Seattle, WA 98103 Prepared by [!f:!fflf:1@z TRAFFIC £'XP£RTS 11410 NE 1241h St., #590 Kirkland, Washington 98034 Telephone: 425.522.4118 Fax: 425.522.4311 April 23, 2013 T~~ '1\)~~~~u ~\\~1~1 I I City of Renton Planning Division MAY 2 1 lD13 Traff@x April 23, 2013 Geonerco Properties WA, LLC Attn: Jamie Waltier 1441 N. 34th Street #200 Seattle, WA 98103 Re: Vuecrest Plat -City of Renton Traffic Impact Analysis Dear Mr. Waltier: NORTHWEST TRAFFIC EXPERTS 11410 NE 124th St.1 #590 Kirklani WA 98034 Phone: 425.522.q118 Fax: 420.522.4311 We are pleased to present this traffic impact analysis report for the proposed 21 lot Vuecrest Residential plat on Smithers Ave. S, south of S 47th St. in the City of Renton. Proposed access to the site is to be provided by a street connection to S. 4 7th Street The scope of this analysis is based upon the preliminary plat site plan, conversations with City of Renton staff and the City of Renton Policy Guidelines for Traffic Impact Analysis for New Development. Our summary, conclusions and recommendations begin on page 5 of this report. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Figure 1 is a vicinity map showing the location of the site and study area. Figure 2 shows the preliminary site plan. The site access street connects to Smithers Ave. at the north side of the site. It then runs to the south and curves to the east becoming 1681 h Pl. which then is stubbed to the east side of the site. The site access street will be constructed to City of Renton standards with curb, gutter and sidewalk on both sides. Development of the Vuecrest plat is expected to occur by the year 2015. Therefore, for purposes of this study, 2015 is used as the horizon year. Page 1 Vuecrest Plat TraH@J:r TRIP GENERA T/ON AND DISTRIBUTION The 21 single-family units in the proposed Vuecrest Plat are expected to generate the vehicular trips during an average weekday and during the street traffic peak hours as shown below: Time Period Trip Rate Trips Trips Total Trips per unit Entering Exiting 100 101 Average Weekday 9.57 201 50% 50% AM Peak Hour 0.75 4 12 16 25% 75% PM Peak Hour 1.01 13 8 21 63% 37% A vehicle trip is defined as a single or one direction vehicle movement with either the origin or destination (exiting or entering) inside the study site. The trip generation is calculated using the average trip rates in the Institute of Transportation Engineers {ITE) Trip Generation. Eighth Edition. for Single Family Detached Housing {ITE Land Use Code 210). These trip generation values account for all site trips made by all vehicles for all purposes, including resident, visitor, and service and delivery vehicle trips. Figure 3 shows the estimated trip distribution and the calculated site-generated traffic volumes. The distribution is based on existing traffic volume patterns, the characteristics of the road network, the location of likely trip origins and destinations (employment, shopping, social and recreational opportunities), expected travel times, and previous traffic studies. EXISTING PHYSICAL CONDITIONS Street Facilities The streets in the study area are classified per the City of Renton Comprehensive Plan as follows: Smithers Ave. 102nd Ave. SE (Main Ave S) SE 47'h St. Page2 Local Access Local Access Local Access Vuecrest Plat TraH@J:j Smithers Ave. SE, SE 47'h St., and 102"d Ave SE (Main Ave. S) in the project vicinity have a speed limit of 25 mph and consist of two lanes with curb gutter and sidewalk on both sides of the street. The streets in the area are straight and flat yielding excellent sight distance at the study intersections. EXISTING TRAFFIC CONDITIONS Traffic Volumes Figure 4 shows existing, future without project and future with project PM peak hour traffic volumes at the proposed Site Access St./1561h Ave. SE and Site Access St./1581h Ave SE intersections. The City of Renton Policy Guidelines for Traffic Impact Analysis for New Development requires an analysis of intersections impacted by 30 or more project generated peak hour trips. The proposed project generates less than 30 PM peak hour trips and therefore no intersections meet this threshold. The SE 47'h St./102"d Ave SE and SE 481h Pl./102"d Ave SE intersections were analyzed nonetheless, since they are the nearest intersections to the site and provide access to the site. PM peak hour traffic counts were performed at these intersections on Thursday, April 18, 2013 and are included in the Technical Appendix. Level of Service Analysis Level of Service (LOS) is a qualitative measure describing operational conditions within a traffic flow, and the perception of these conditions by drivers or passengers. These conditions include factors such as speed, delay, travel time, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions, comfort, convenience, and safety. Levels of service are given letter designations, from A to F, with LOS A representing the best operating conditions (free flow, little delay) and LOS F the worst (congestion, long delays). Generally, LOS A and B are high, LOS C and D are moderate and LOS E and F are low. Table 1 shows calculated level of service (LOS) for existing and future conditions including project traffic at the pertinent street intersection. The LOS was calculated using the procedures in the Transportation Research Board Highway Capacity Manual The LOS shown indicates overall intersection operation. At intersections, LOS is determined by the calculated average control delay per vehicle. The LOS and corresponding average control delay in seconds are as follows: TYPE OF A B C D E INTERSECTION < >10.0 and >20.0 and >35.0 and >55.0 and -Signalized 10. .'.:.20.0 .'.:.35.0 .'.:,55.0 .'.:.80.0 0 Stop Sign Control .'.:,10 >10 and .'.:,15 >15 and .'.:,25 >25 and .'.:.35 >35 and .'.:.50 .0 Page3 F >80. 0 >50 Vuecrest Plat TraHfjJJ:j FUTURE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS WITHOUT THE PROJECT Figure 4 shows projected 2015 PM peak hour traffic volumes without the project. These volumes include the existing traffic volume counts plus background traffic growth. The background growth factor accounts for traffic volumes generated from other approved but unbuilt subdivisions and general growth in traffic traveling through the area. A 3% per year annual background growth rate was added for each year of the two year time period (for a total of 6%) from the 2013 traffic count to the 2015 horizon year of the proposal. The 3% per year growth rate should result in a conservative analysis since the growth in traffic volumes has remained relatively flat the last several years. FUTURE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS WITH PROJECT Figure 4 shows the projected future 2015 PM peak hour traffic volumes with the proposed project. The site-generated PM peak hour traffic volumes were added to the projected future without project volumes to obtain the future with project volumes. Table 1 shows calculated LOS for future with project volumes at the study intersections. The study intersections are calculated to operate at an excellent LOS of A for future 2015 conditions including project-generated traffic. TRAFFIC MIT/GA TION REQUIREMENTS The City of Renton requires a Transportation Mitigation Fee payment of $75 per new daily trip attributed to new development. The net new daily trips due to this development are 201 trips. The estimated Transportation Mitigation Impact Fee is $15,075 (201 daily trips X $75 per daily trip). Page4 Vuecrest Plat TraH19sr SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS We recommend that the Vuecrest Plat be constructed as shown on the site plan with the following traffic impact mitigation measures: • Construct the street improvements including curb, gutter and sidewalk to the project site streets to City of Renton standard. • Contribute the approximately $15,075 Transportation Mitigation fee to the City of Renton. No other traffic mitigation should be necessary. If you have any questions, please call 425-522-4118. You may also contact us via e-mail at vince@nwtraffex.com or larry@nwtraffex.com. Very truly yours, Vincent J. Geglia Principal TraffEx Page 5 Larry D. Hobbs, P.E. Principal TraffEx TABLE 1 PM PEAK HOUR LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY VUECREST PLAT TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS EXISTING 2015 WITHOUT 2015 WITH INTERSECTION 2013 PROJECT PROJECT S 4yth St/ (A 7.2) (A 7.2) (A 7.3) 102nd Ave. SE (Main Ave. S) NB NB NB S 481h St/ (A 8.4) (A 8.4) (A 8.4) 102nd Ave. SE. (Main Ave. S) EB EB EB * Number shown is the average control delay in seconds per vehicle for the worst approach or movement which determines the LOS for an unsignalized intersection per the Transportation Research Board Highway Capacity Manual (XX) LOS and average control delay NB northbound approach EB eastbound approach Page 6 I y of Renton Vicinity Map 0 Figure 1 Vuecrest Plat -City of Renton Site Plan Figure 2 PM Peak Hour Traffic Volume Enter 13 Exit 8 Total 21 S 47th St 102rd Av S 48th St 102nd Av Vuecrest Plat. City of Renton PM Peak Hour Trip Generation and Distribution Legend 15% Percentage of Project Traffic .... 3 PM Peak Hour Traffic Volume Figure 3 I I I I I ' !Project Existing traffic o-(D-o 7 .... "I r'" 0 ~ C> I Site I I I I I I I I i~- S 47th St 102rd Av C> C> -J I o,® ' 3 ' I N C> S 48th St 102nd Av Future without oroiect :: C> S 47th St 102rd Av -C> -o,® 3 "'"I I "' --- S 48th St 102nd Av Project Trios S 47th St 102rd Av C> "' Q J I '® 0 • "I I C> "' S 48th St 102nd Av Vuecrest Plat • City of Renton Existing and Future PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 'f1'1T1HJf!l1gz ,NORTHWEST , , , fTR,t>,FFIC 'EXPERTS Future with Proiect o-(D-o ' r 15 , r 0 C> S 47th St 102rd Av en C> -O,® 3-., "\ I "' ... -N S 48th St 102nd Av Figure 4 1i Prepaml for: Traffex Traffic Count Consultants, Inc. Phone: (253) 926-6009 FAX: (253) 922-7211 E-Ma'I: Te1m@TC2inc.com WBEIDBE Intersection: 102nd Ave SE & S 185th Pl/S 48th St Date ol Count: Thurs 04/1812013 Location: Renton, Washington Checked By: Jm Time From North on (SB) From South on (NB) From Eesl on (WB) From Weal on {EB) Interval Interval 102ndAveSE l02ndAveSE SE 185th Pl S 48th St Total Endi1111 at T I. s R T I. s R T L s R T L s R ~-0 II I 0 II 2 3 I 0 0 0 I 0 0 1 2 II 4:30 P _ 0 0 1 1 0 1 4 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 _.:lj~ p . 0 I 2 0 0 2 2 I 0 I 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 5:(lO P II II 2 0 0 3 4 0 0 I 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 ~:JS_P 0 0 6 0 0 2 2 I 0 I 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 _1J_!)P 0 0 2 0 0 3 2 4 0 I 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 ~ 0 0 2 0 0 5 2 J 0 I 0 0 0 0 0 I 14 6:00 P 0 0 0 0 0 2 4 2 0 3 0 II 0 0 0 2 13 6:IS I' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 II . ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:45 P 0 0 0 0 0 0 II 0 II 0 II 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:00 P 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 II 0 0 II 0 0 0 Total Survev 0 I 16 I 0 20 23 17 0 ' 0 I 0 0 I s 93 Peak Hour: 5:00PM '" 6:00 PM . Total 0 0 10 0 o I 12 10 I IO 0 6 0 I 0 0 0 0 3 ll Annroach 10 32 6 J ll %HY •• "" "" "" '·" PHF 0.42 080 0.50 0.38 0.91 111 102nd Ave SE I 20 I ~ . ~ r·--·-1 , 0 ,Bike S 48th St o I IO 0 r·-o·-1red SE 185th Pl ~I ,.,,-,·1 2... "' ~ Bike 0 6 I 161 I ISi 0 0 •Bike I ~ t,··J, .. w ' i--2.... 5:00 PM lo 6:00 PM ' PED, Acr"',. N s F. w Ped~ II IO I '" ~ 1.0 PHF Peak Hour Volum: INT01 0 Dike; __ !} __ ~ PHF %HY INT02 0 EB ()_i) wa INT03 0 LJLJ [::::;;:::J Check WB (l_.',I) wo INT04 0 In: ll NB <).~(' wo INT 05 0 I ll I Out: ll SB 0.41 "'" INT06 0 102nd Ave SE T Int. 0.91 0.0% INT07 2 2 4 Blcyclea From: N • e w !conditions: I INTO/I 0 INT01 0 "'" 0 INT02 0 INT 10 0 INT03 0 INT 11 0 INT04 B INT 12 0 INTOS 0 • ""' NO BIK ·S 0 S"ecia! Notes INT07 0 INTOB 0 INT 09 0 INT10 0 INT11 u INT 12 u 0 0 0 °'' TRA13067M 01p ,; Prepared for: Traffex Traffic Count Consultants, Inc. Phone: (253) 925-6009 FAX: (253)922-n11 E-Mail: Tei:rn@TC2ir.c.com WBE'JDBE lnt«sactlon; W2nd Ave SE & S 47th Pl/S 47th St Dale ol Count: Thun. 04/18/2013 LocelJon: Renton, Washington Checked By: ,~, Time From North on (SB) From South on (NB) From East on {WB) From Weal on (EB) Interval Interval 0 l02ndAveSE S47th Pl S 47th St Total Emlin~ at T L s R T L s R T L s R T L s R _4J5~ 0 0 0 0 0 J 0 I II I I 0 II 0 I 0 1 4!~0 P 0 0 0 0 0 • 0 0 0 I 0 0 0 0 I I 7 1:45 P 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 I 0 0 0 II I 6 5:00 P 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 II II 0 0 0 0 0 2 6 5:JSJ'_ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 II • I 0 0 0 0 2 9 5:30 P 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 I 0 0 0 0 2 ' _ ~:45 P 0 0 0 0 II 2 0 II 0 I 0 0 0 0 0 I 4 6:00 P 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 II 0 0 II 0 0 0 4 6:)5 P 0 II 0 II II 0 0 0 II II 0 0 II 0 0 II 0 6:30 ~ . 0 0 0 0 II II 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:45 P 0 II II II II II 0 II II II 0 0 0 0 0 II 0 7:00 P 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Q. II 0 0 0 0 II 0 0 Total Sun-ev II 0 0 0 0 17 0 7 0 9 4 0 0 0 2 9 " Peak Huur: 4:15PM " S:15 PM . . . . . . .. Tobi o I o o I o o I s I 0 I 4 II 7 2 I 0 o I 0 I 6 28 Annrnach 0 12 9 7 28 %HV "" "'' M .. 0.0% PHF nla 0.75 0.45 0.68 0.78 t ~ S 47th St S47thPI GJ Pod!_<l_J EB ~ Bikel 0 ' !41 I "I Fl= • 0 •Bike , I 4:15PM " S:15 PM 1_:_,j,,, uJ rm>s N s E w •LL[ l....!__ L2£.J 1.0 PHI' Peak Hour Volurre Acroos: INTOl 0 B1ke~ __ 9 __ .,! PHI' %HY INT02 II EB 0 ~~ '"' INT03 0 CiLJ CiLJ Check WB 0.45 '"' INT04 0 ln: 28 NB •l 75 '"' INTOS 0 " Out: 28 SB l\il '"' INT06 0 102nd Ave SE T !nt. 0.78 0.0% INT07 2 2 4 Blcycle1 From: N s E w !conditions: I INTOS ]l INT01 0 INTOQ 0 INT02 0 INT 10 0 INT03 0 INT11 0 """ 0 INT 12 0 INT 05 0 ' INT06 NOB!KES 0 Snedal Notes INT07 0 INTOS 0 ... , 0 INT 10 0 INT11 0 INT 12 0 ]l 0 0 II 0 TRA13067M 02p Existing PM peak hour 3: S 47th St & 102nd Ave SE 4/20/2013 -- f,jovement EBT EBA WBL WBT NBL NBA Lane Configurations t,. ___ __ .fV ___ _ Sign Control-_. ---. __ ·· si"oL Stop __ Stop ___________ ·-_:_-_-_-___ ----J Volume (vph) 0 7 0 0 10 0 Peak Hour-Factiii -------0.78 0.78 o.78 0.78 -~--0~.7~8-------- Hourly flow rate (vph) ·----0 · ____ 9___ O O ·· 13 O · · Pirection, Lane# EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 Volume Total (vph) 9 0 13 ·---· ·--· ____ __ ------·---·----·---~ ~olume Left (vpj,) _____ ._ 0 0 13 ___ ------------· _____ __J Volume Right (vph) 9 0 0 ----------·· ----------________ 1 Hadi.(s)_ ______________ -0.60 _ 0.00 0.20 ----------------------- Departure Headway (s) 3.3 3.9 4.1 begree Utilization, x · ---0.01 _ 0.00 0.01 : .. ~--~--:~~~~~ ~-------:_-:1 Capacity (vehih) 1069 900 859 .Qontrol Delay_(sJ .. ____ 6.4 _§.!___J2_::::::::-::_--------------~------·==-------==--------~--_____ J Approach Delay (s) 6.4 0.0 7.2 AppJWChLOS _--·----A--.A A·----~-----==-__ -_:_-_-_:_-__ -_·-:::_-_-... --·-·------------·== Intersection Summary ---------__ J !l.~@Y ___ _ 6.8 ---· ---··---·---- A ----------] HCM Level of Service A !n_tersection Capacity_~ylization. ___ · __ _ _ 13.3%__ -~IC=U Level of Service ____ _ Analysis Period (min) 15 [ -----·---·-·-----· -------·-------------1 -------· Baseline Synchro 7 -Report Page 1 Existing PM peak hour 5: S 48th St & 102nd Ave SE 4/20/2013 t Movement EBL EBA NBL NBT SBT SBA Lane Configurations . __ ¥ ________ .f -~------------------__ _ IJolume (veh)iif_ _ O 3 12 10 10 0 Sign Control Stop Free Free -------- Grade ____ ---·-0% . _____ 0% 0%_.---==~==-________ --~ Peak Hour Factor . __ 0.91 .... 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91_ 0.91 ________________ . __ _ Hourlyflowrate(vp)l)_ __ .... O ... _3_.13 .11 11 ___ O _______ . ___ =.l Pedestrians LaneWi~dth"'(tt=)--_ ·--------___ ·--· -·-----·-=--==~==-·:: ___ ~ __ J Walking Speed (fVs) Percent Blockage · · ___ -__ ---·-·-· ----------] Right turn flare (veh), __ _ Me~Q..tyRe ·--·---····--------None ... None __ ----------------------____ '] Median storage veh) Upstreamsignal(tti-. --·-··------· __________ ---··--_ _ ____ ._:] pX, platoon unblocked i!:~conflictin-gyolu,"'m"-e __ · _-_ 48 ··11 --11 · ·-----~==:_-=:~---~~==--=:] vC1, stage 1 conf vol ~: ~~~!~~~~:"'1ov"'1 o,._I --__ 4_8__ 11 · 11 ·· ------. ----------------___ :] tC, single (s) · --6.4 _ .6.2 -~_4.1 -· -·---·---_ -· ---1 tC,2stage ·(s) !E.(§)__ --~ _1,L 2.2 _ -=--==----------------] pO queue free % 100 100 99 'cMcapjcity (veh/h)_..... 958 -1076--1621 · ·---~---~~~-·-~~~-~----___ -===i Pirection, Lane# EB 1 NB 1 SB 1 ) /folumeTotal ____ 3 24 11 _________ --------------________ J Volume Lett o 13 o -------------·------. l{QlumeRight ---·-. _ 3 _o ___ o __ -------· __ __1 cSH 1076 1621 1700 ~~etoca[iaQty_ o.oo 0.01 0,01 ______ .. · · __ _ _ ___ ·· · ___ · · :=J Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 1 0 Control Delay (s) ________ 8.4 _4.0_ 0.0 __ .___ ______ · ______ ---_-------___ _I Lane LOS A A 'Ai>P!Oach Delay (s) 8.4 4.0 0.0 -------------------------i ----------~...l Approach LOS A Intersection Summary Average Delay 3.2 ______ _ ·------------------·--··--~ Intersection Capacltvj.11ilization __ 17.9% _ _ ICU Level of Service ___ ·----A_ _ _________ _J Analyyisf'erio!(min). _____ 15 _ [ _________ ·--· ----·--------· .. -------==:---~~---·. ___ ==i Baseline Synchro 7 -Report Page 2 Future Without Project PM peak hour 3: S 47th St & 102nd Ave SE -I> <I- Movemen1 EBT EBA WBL WBT NBL NBA 4/20/2013 Lane Configurations f,. .. ,f V §ign Control Stop • __ ..... Stop Stop ---·--_________________ ] Volume (vph) O 7 O O 11 0 Peak Hour Factor ______ 0.78 . 0.78 • 0.78 _ 0.78 0.78 0.78 _________ .. ::=J Hourty flow rate (vph) O 9 0 O 14 0 Direction, Lane# EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 Volume Total (vph) 9 0 14 Yoiume.Left_(yp_b)_:_ ----O __ ··-0 14 __ -=--::_--=::_-==---::--=--:-=__-==·-===-----] Volume Right (vph) 9 O 0 !:§slj_(s) _______ ·0.60 0.00 0.20 -----·--·-__ ---·--·------- Departure Headway (s) 3.3 3.9 4.1 !)egree Utili;ation,_x_ 0.01 ... 0.00 _ 0.02 _ · _____________________ ---~ Capacity (veh/h) 1068 900 859 Control Delay_{§}__ §.4 6.9 __ 7.2 _____ ···--·---______ ·---·· Approach Delay (s) 6.4 0.0 7.2 ~pproach LQ? A A __ A _____ _ ·------·-----·---- ---·-------·--------- Jntersection Summary Delay -------· ·----6.9 __________ ···---------______ _] HCM Level of Service A Intersection CapJ!City_Utilization _____ 13.3% ... ICU Level of Service _________ A _-______ J Analysis Period (min) 15 C_ _ __ ----:=-~-=--~~~=--=-~---· Baseline Synchro 7 · Report Page 1 Future .Without Project PM peak hour 5: S 48th St & 102nd Ave SE t 4/20/2013 f,jovement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR ) Lane_Qonfigurations V .f f> ,'{olume(veh/h) __ · __ o _) __ 13 .. 11 .11 _ O ---------------···----:=] Sign Control . Stop Free Free fi'rade _ . _ -----__ 0% -------0% 0% ----·-----------------------__] Peak Hour Factor 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 Hourly}low rate.(vpJ,) . 0---.-3 ... -f,j" ~ -_ w-::-:---0-_--------::=-_=---=-:==.-_~ Pedestrians Lane Width _(ft) -____ _ Walking Speed (IVs) ~r9entBlock§ge ~---__ -----=:~--=:--==-·---__ -=--=-~---=-~---·-__ _] Right turn flare (veh) Median typ~.-------_ _ · None None ------~~~ --_-__ _ .J Median storage veh) ),Jpstream signal (~L ... · .------. _____ ·_ -----···---. ----·-· --------------i pX, platoon unblocked :,,g, conflicting volu~·_· .. _ _,,5,,_3 -----w--12--·----· --___ _ vC1, stage 1 conf vol y(:2, stage 2 conf vol · . __ ---------------------------------·-_____ -_____ _] vCu, unblocked vol 53 12 12 tC,single(s) · ·· __ 6.4 6.2 4.1 __ · ---· __ -~----~_:] tC,2stage(s) ____________ .. _______________ _ tF (s)___ _____ 3.5 3.3 2.2 ___ ------------------------' po queue free % 100 100 99 cM capacity (veh/h)_,_ 952 1074. 1620_ ------------· Direction, Lane# EB 1 NB 1 SB 1 ;,Jolume T_'1!2!_ __ , ____ _3 26 __ 1_2 _________________________________ _, Volume Left o 14 o . ;,Jolume Right __ ·---3 0 __ 0 ---------·-------~~---_--_·:::__-_-_-----::_·_· __ =:=J cSH 1074 1620 1700 1,(olumetoCapAci)y ___ 0.00 ___ 0:01 0.01 ----------------------_=.] Queue Length 95th (ft) O 1 O -------------------···----·····---·-"'----------i Control Delay_(s) _____ 8.4 4.0 0.0 _____________ .. --------------------· Lane LOS A A 'iippfOOCh Delay (s)__ 8.4 4.0 0.0 _____________ _ Approach LOS A Intersection Summary Average Delay 3.2 Intersection Capajty Utilization_____ 18.0% __ ICU Level of Servi.ce · ____ A _ --~ t='.'.:=(~ _ 15. _ ___ _ _ ______________ ----=i Baseline Synchro 7 -Report Page 2 • Future With Project PM peak hour 3: S 47th St & 102nd Ave SE <I- f,jovement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR 4/20/2013 Lane Configurations 'f> <f . . V signcontro-1 -·---~op-___ • Stop~Sto~----· -·--·· -] Volume (vph) O 15 0 O 24 O Peak Hour Factor _____ 0.78 0.78 0.78 ____ 0.78 0.78 0.78 . .---· __ =:] Hourly flow rate (vph) O 19 0 0 31 0 Pirection, Lane# EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 Volume Total (vph) 19 0 31 l,lolume Left (vpJ,)__ ______ o_ O •. 31 . · _____ ·---· · -----------J Volume Right (vph) 19 0 0 Fir( l .. --· ·-·~o-00~020---··-··-··-·-·-·---·· 1 a J s __ . . .. . . .. ----·--_________ ___J Departure Headway (s) 3.4 4.0 4.1 ··------. -. ·-· ---·--·-· . --··-----·----·-··----, OegreeUtiliz_ation,x .---· _002 0.00 0.04 ___________ --····--____ ---·--···-.J Cap}!CITy(veh/h) -·· 1052 . 900 _ 854 -----··--··--·--··---------------, ControlDelay(s)_____ 6A 7.0 . 7.3 -------·---· ··------------·---' Approach Delay (s) 6.4 0.0 7.3 ApproachLOS ···--A . A __ A ·-·--·--------· ····--·--_=::] Intersection Summary beiay . · 7.0 -···------------··· _J HCM Level of Service A Intersection Cap}icltylTtliizatio_n_____ -13-.3,.:%.:..... ____ -ic-u-L-ev_e_l o-f-Se-rv-ic-e • ___ ,;.,·-------j Analysis Period (min) 15 c.__~_ ···-· ----------·---··--. --·--·---=i Baseline Synchro 7 · Report Page 1 • Future With Project PM peak hour 5: S 48th St & 102nd Ave SE t Movemen1 EBL EBA NBL NBT SBT SBA Lane Configu::.r:::a1:::ionc::s:__ ______ y ,f _____ f,. )!_olume (veh/_11) O _ 3 13 _. 24 __ 19 ___ o __ Sign Control S1op Free Free Grade __ -_ 0°/,---===-0% __ 0% ________ _ Peak Hour Fac1or 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 4/20/2013 --·-1 _ _________ -] Hourtyflowrate(~p_!>)_ -0 _3 __ --1i__~ -21-0 --------_________ _] Pedestrians LaneWidth-(ft) ------------------------------------_ :J Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage · _____ · __ -------·------------------------__ -J Right turn flare (veh) Median typ~-~-==---= =----None-None---===----=--===-=:] Median storage veh) ,Upstream signaL(ft) ___ _______ _ ______ -----------____________ -·_=i pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 76 21 21 · ~C1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol --=_:-==-:=_--=----=--=~=-=~-=-=---==-== ==.=] ----··-__ ==:] vCu, unblocked vol 76 21 21 !Q,sing~(~)_ .---·_M__ 6.2 4.1 . ---------------_ -------"] tC, 2 stage (s) IF(s)-. --====· --':i.5 3.3 _ 2.2 ·----------------J pO queue free % 100 100 99 QM capacity_(veh/h)__ 924 1062 _ 1608 _ ---------· -1 Pirection, Lane# EB 1 NB 1 SB 1 l{Q!_umeTotal ______ _ 3 41 __ 21 ----------------------------~ Volume Left O 14 O -------------------- 1,'Q!ume Rigli_t____ _ 3 o O cSH 1062 1608 1700 ;Volumeto-C?pacity_· .. o.oo o:of-0,01. ==--· . -J Queue Length 95th (ft) O 1 O ~I Delay (s) ---_--84 · 2.6 ·· _ o.o =--=--:-====--------------_______ _I Lane LOS A A 'i\pp;oachDelay(s)_______ 8.4__ 2.6 0.0 __ _________________::-=] Approach LOS A Intersection Summary Average Delay 2. 1 Intersection Capa§tyJJtilizat_ion __ · _ _ 18.6% _____ ICU Level of Service _________ A ·------·1 Analysis Period (min) 15 [ _____ · --------------·------=i Baseline Synchro 7 -Report Page 2 @. Chicago Title Insurance Company COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE BY Chicago Title Insurance Company City of Renton Planning Division MAY 2 1 l&il Chicago Title Insurance Company, a Nebraska corporation ("Company"), for a valuable consideration, commits to issue its policy or policies of title insurance, as identified in Schedule A, in favor of the Pro- posed Insured named in Schedule A, as owner or mortgagee of the estate or interest in the land described or referred to in Schedule A, upon payment of the premiums and charges and compliance with the Require- ments; all subject to the provisions of Schedule A and B and to the Conditions of this Commitment. This Commitment sh~ be effective only when the identity of the Proposed Insured and the amount of the policy or policies committed for have been inserted in Schedule A by the Company. All liability and obligation under this Commitment shall cease and terminate 6 months after the Effective Date or when the policy or policies committed for shall issue, whichever first occurs, provided that the failure to issue the policy or policies is not the fault of the Company. The Company will provide a sample of the policy form upon request. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Chicago Title Insurance Company has caused its corporate name and seal to be affixed by its duly authorized officers on the date shown in Schedule A. Chicago Title of Washington 701 5th Avenue, Suite 2300 Seattle, WA 98104 FORM 72-83-06 (6/08) Chicago Title Insurance Company ' By: ~ffn~) A-f );~ L President ATTEST: Secretary ALTA Commitment • 2006 . (j .. .~ .... --. CONDITIONS 1. The term mortgage, when used herein, shall include deed of trust, trust deed, or other security instrument. 2. If the proposed Insured has or acquired actual knowledge of any defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim or other matter affecting the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment other than those shown in Schedule B hereof, and shall fail to disclose such knowledge to the Company in writing, the Company shall be relieved from liability for any loss or damage resulting from any act of reliance hereon to the extent the Company is prejudiced by failure to so disclose such knowledge. If the proposed Insured shall disclose such knowledge to the Company, or if the Company otherwise acquires actual knowledge of any such defect, lien, encumbranc~, adverse claim or other matter, the Company at its option may amend Schedule B of this Commitment accordingly, but such amendment shall not relieve the Company from liability previously incurred pursuant to paraguph 3 of these Conditions. 3. Liability of the Company under this Commitment shall be only to the named proposed Insured and such parties included under the definition of Insured in the form of policy or policies committed for and only for actual loss incurred in reliance hereon in undertaking in good faith (a) to comply with the requirements hereof, or (b) to eliminate exceptions shown in Schedule B, or (c) to acquire or create the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. In no event shall such liability exceed the amount stated in Schedule A for the policy or policies committed for and such liability is subject to the insuring provisions and Conditions and the Exclusions from Coverage of the form of policy or policies committed for in favor of the proposed Insured which are hereby incorporated by reference and are made a part of this Commitment except as expressly modified herein. 4. This Commitment is a contract to issue one or more title insurallce policies and is not an abstract of title or a report of the condition of title. Any action or actions or rights of action that the proposed Insured may have or may bring against the Company arising out of the status of the title to the estate or interest or the status of the mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment must be based on and are subject to the provisions of this Commitment. 5. The policy to be issued contains an arbitration clause. All arbitrable matters when the Amounts of Insurance is $2,000,000 or less shall be arbitrated at the option of either the Company or the Insured as the exclusive remedy of the parties. You may review a copy of the arbitration rules at <http://www.alta.org!>. FORM 72-83--06 (6/08) ALTA Commitment -2006 CHICAGO TITLE COMP ANY A.L.T.A. COMMITMENT SCHEDULE A 701 F!FTIIAVENUE, #2300, SEATTLE, WA 98104 Order No.: 1349419 Title Unit: U-06 (206)628-5610 (206)628-9717 Customer Number: SCHNEIDER HMS I TO Buyer(s): HARBOUR HOMES, LLC HARBOUR HMS Phone: Fax: Officer: SA VIDIS/CAMPBELL/EISENBREY /HARRIS Commitment Effective Date: AUGUST 28, 2012 at 8:00A.M. 1 . Policy or Policies to be issued: ALTA Owner's Policy EXTENDED POLICY OWNERS EXTENDED PREMIUM APPLICABLE BETWEEN $1,480,001.00-$1,500,000.00 Amount: $1, soo, ooo. oo (6/17/2006) Premium: $4,002. oo RATE/ COMBINATION Tax: $ 380 .19 RATE Proposed Insured:. HARBOUR HOMES, LLC, A WASHINGTON LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY Policy or Policies to be issued: AL TA Loan Policy Proposed Insured: Policy or Policies to be issued: ALTA Loan Policy Proposed Insured: Amount: $0. oo Premium: Tax: Amount: $0. oo Premium: Tax: 2 . The estate or interest in the land which is covered by this Commitment is: FEE SIMPLE 3 . Title to the estate or interest in the land is at the effective date hereof vested in: SCHNEIDER HOMES I, LLC, A WASHINGTON LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY 4 . The land referred to in this Commitment is described as follows: SEE ATTACHED LEGAL DESCRIPTION EXHIBIT COMMMA'S/KLC/11.1.05 CHICAGO TITLE COMPANY A.L.TA. COMMITMENT SCHEDULEA (Continued) Order No.: 1349419 Your No.: LEGAL DESCRIPTION EXHIBIT (Paragraph 4 of Schedule A continuation) PARCEL "C" OF CITY OF RENTON LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NUMBER LUA-02-045-LLA, RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 20020823900003, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. CLTACMA6/ROA/0999 CHICAGO TITLE COMPANY A.L.TA. COMMITMENT SCHEDULEB OrderNo.: 1349419 Your No.: Schedule B of the policy or policies to he issued will contaiu exceptions to the following matters unless the same are disposed ofto the satisfaction of the Company. GENERAL EXCEPTIONS A. Rights or claims of parties in possession, or claiming possession, not shown by the Public Records. B. Any encroachment, encumbrance, violation, variation, or adverse circumstance affecting the Title that would be disclosed by an accurate and complete land survey of the Land. C. Easements, prescriptive rights, rights-of-way, liens or encumbrances, or claims thereof, not shown by the Public Records. D. Any lien, or right to a lien, for contributions to employee benefit funds, or for state workers' compensation, or for services, labor, or material heretofore or hereafter furnished, all as imposed by law, and not showo by the Public Records. E. Taxes or special assessments which are not yet payable or which are not showo as existing liens by the Public Records. F. Any lien for service, installation, connection, maintenance, tap, capacity, or construction or similar charges for sewer, water, electricity, natural gas or other utilities, or for garbage collection and disposal not shown by the Public Records. G. Unpatented mining claims, and all rights relating thereto; reservations and exceptions in United States Patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof; Indian tribal codes or regulations, Indian treaty or aboriginal rights, including easements or equitable servitudes. H. Water rights, claims or title to water. I. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, first appearing in the Public Records, or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof but prior to the date the proposed Insured acquires of record for value the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS FOLLOW WLTACOMB bk ~/17/07 CHICAGO TITLE COMPANY A.L.TA. COMMITMENT SCHEDULEB (Continued) Order No.: 001349419 Your No.: SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS A 1. EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: GRANTEE: PURPOSE: AREA AFFECTED: RECORDED: RECORDING NUMBER: THE CITY OF RENTON AND TALBOT DEVELOPMENT PARTNERS, L.L.C. TEMPORARY CUL-DE-SAC NORTHERLY PORTION OF SAID PREMISES AUGUST 26, 1999 19990826000429 B 2. UTILITY EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: GRANTEE: PURPOSE: AREA AFFECTED: RECORDED: RECORDING NUMBER: PUGET SOUND ENERGY, INC. UTILITY SYSTEM FOR GAS AND ELECTRICITY 10 FEET IN WIDTH AS CONSTRUCTED OR TO BE CONSTRUCTED, EXTENDED OR RELOCATED APRIL 1, 2003 20030401000988 CONTAINS COVENANT PROHIBITING STRUCTURES OVER SAID EASEMENT OR OTHER ACTIVITIES WHICH MIGHT ENDANGER THE UNDERGROUND SYSTEM. C 3. TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF CITY OF RENTON ORDINANCE NUMBER 3790: RECORDED: RECORDING NUMBER: REGARDING: MARCH 26, 1984 8403260504 ESTABLISHING A SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT FOR WATER SERVICE AND ESTABLISHING THE AMOUNT OF THE CHARGE UPON CONNECTION TO THE FACILITIES D 4. AGREEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: BETWEEN: CITY OF RENTON AND: ENVIRONMENTAL DEVELOPMENT, INC. CLTACMBI/RJJA/Wl'J RECORDED: CHICAGO TITLE COMPANY A.L.TA. COMMITMENT SCHEDULEB (Continued) Order No.: 1349419 Your No.: SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS RECORDING NUMBER: MAY 8, 1995 9505080322 REGARDING: LATECOMERS REIMBURSEMENT FOR CONNECTION TO A WATER SYSTEM E SAID AGREEMENT HAS BEEN AMENDED BY ASSIGNMENT AND CORRECTION OF LATECOMERS AGREEMENT RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 9710140140. F 5. COVENANTS, CONDITIONS, RESTRICTIONS, EASEMENTS, NOTES, DEDICATIONS AND SETBACKS, IF ANY, SET FORTH IN OR DELINEATED ON THE BOUNDARY/LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 20020823900003. G 6. PAYMENT OF THE REAL ESTATE EXCISE TAX, IF REQUIRED. THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SITUATED WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF LOCAL TAXING AUTHORITY OF CITY OF RENTON. PRESENT RATE IS 1.78%. ANY CONVEYANCE DOCUMENT MUST BE ACCOMPANIED BY THE OFFICIAL WASHINGTON STATE EXCISE TAX AFFIDAVIT. THE APPLICABLE EXCISE TAX MUST BE PAID AND THE AFFIDAVIT APPROVED AT THE TIME OF THE RECORDING OF THE CONVEYANCE DOCUMENTS. (NOTE: A DEED EXEMPT FROM EXCISE TAX IS STILL SUBJECT TO THE $5.00 TECHNOLOGY FEE AND AN ADDITIONAL $5.00 AFFIDAVIT PROCESSING FEE). H 7. GENERAL AND SPECIAL TAXES AND CHARGES, PAYABLE FEBRUARY 15, DELINQUENT IF FIRST HALF UNPAID ON MAY 1, SECOND HALF DELINQUENT IF UNPAID ON NOVEMBER 1 OF THE TAX YEAR (AMOUNTS DO NOT INCLUDE INTEREST AND PENALTIES) : YEAR: TAX ACCOUNT NUMBER: LEVY CODE: ASSESSED VALUE-LAND: ASSESSED VALUE-IMPROVEMENTS: GENERAL & SPECIAL TAXES: 2012 312305-9048-06 2100 $ 1,440,000.00 $ 0.00 BILLED: $19,061.14 PAID: $ 9,530.57 UNPAID: $ 9,530.57 CLTACMB2/RDA/rfm CHICAGO TITLE COMPANY A.L.T A. COMMITMENT SCHEDULEB (Continued) • OrderNo.: 1349419 Your No.: SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS I 8 .. PLEASE BE ADVISED THAT OUR SEARCH DID NOT DISCLOSE ANY OPEN DEEDS OF TRUST OF RECORD. IF YOU SHOULD HAVE KNOWLEDGE OF ANY OUTSTANDING OBLIGATION. PLEASE CONTACT THE TITLE DEPARTMENT IMMEDIATELY FOR FURTHER REVIEW PRIOR TO CLOSING. J 9. TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY AGREEMENT FOR SCHNEIDER HOMES I, LLC, A WASHINGTON LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY. K NOTE: A COPY OF THE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY AGREEMENT, AND AMENDMENTS THERETO, IF ANY, MUST BE SUBMITTED. L 10. ANY CONVEYANCE OR MORTGAGE BY SCHNEIDER HOMES I, LLC, A WASHINGTON LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, MUST BE EXECUTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY AGREEMENT AND BY ALL THE MEMBERS, OR EVIDENCE MUST BE SUBMITTED THAT CERTAIN DESIGNATED MANAGERS/MEMBERS HAVE BEEN AUTHORIZED TO ACT FOR THE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY. M 11. THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION IN THIS COMMITMENT IS BASED ON INFORMATION PROVIDED WITH THE APPLICATION AND THE PUBLIC RECORDS AS DEFINED IN THE POLICY TO ISSUE. THE PARTIES TO THE FORTHCOMING TRANSACTION MOST NOTIFY THE TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY PRIOR TO CLOSING IF THE DESCRIPTION DOES NOT CONFORM TO THEIR EXPECTATIONS. N 12. IMPORTANT!! THIS TRANSACTION HAS NOT BEEN APPROVED FOR INSURANCE AGAINST UNRECORDED LABOR AND MATERIAL LIEN RIGHTS NOR FOR MATTERS THAT COULD BE DISCLOSED BY AN ACCURATE AND COMPLETE SURVEY OF THE LAND. YOU MAY NOT CLOSE UNTIL YOU HAVE RECEIVED A SUPPLEMENTAL FROM THE TITLE UNIT ADDRESSING THIS PARAGRAPH! TO PROVIDE AN EXTENDED COVERAGE OWNER'S POLICY GENERAL EXCEPTIONS A THROUGH D WILL BE CONSIDERED WHEN OUR INSPECTION AND/OR REVIEW OF SURVEY, IF REQUIRED, IS COMPLETED. GENERAL EXCEPTIONS E THROUGH H WILL REMAIN IN THE OWNER'S POLICY TO ISSUE. A SUPPLEMENTAL COMMITMENT WILL FOLLOW. IF THE ANTICIPATED CLOSING DATE IS LESS THAN 4 WEEKS FROM THE DATE OF THIS COMMITMENT, PLEASE CONTACT YOUR TITLE OFFICER IMMEDIATELY. 0 13. PRIOR TO ISSUING AN EXTENDED FORM OWNER'S POLICY THIS COMPANY REQUIRES THAT THE PARTIES TO THE TRANSACTION PROVIDE AN ALTA/ACSM CERTIFIED, AS-BUILT SURVEY. CLTACMB2/RDA/OCJ99 P NOTE 1: CHICAGO TITLE COMP ANY A.L.TA. COMMITMENT SCHEDULEB (Continued) Order No.: 1349419 Your No.: SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS ANY MAP FURNISHED WITH THIS COMMITMENT IS FOR CONVENIENCE IN LOCATING THE LAND INDICATED HEREIN WITH REFERENCE TO STREETS AND OTHER LAND. NO LIABILITY IS ASSUMED BY REASON OF RELIANCE THEREON. I! NOTE 2: EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 1997, DOCUMENT FORMAT AND CONTENT REQUIREMENTS HAVE BEEN IMPOSED BY WASHINGTON LAW. FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE FOLLOWING REQUIREMENTS MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF THE DOCUMENT BY THE COUNTY RECORDER OR IMPOSITION OF A $50.00 SURCHARGE. FOR DETAILS OF THESE STATEWIDE REQUIREMENTS PLEASE VISIT THE KING COUNTY RECORDER'S OFFICE WEBSITE AT WWW.KINGCOONTY.GOV/BUSINESS/RECORDERS.ASPX AND SELECT ONLINE FORMS AND DOCUMENT STANDARDS. THE FOLLOWING MAY BE USED AS AN ABBREVIATED LEGAL DESCRIPTION ON THE DOCUMENTS TO BE RECORDED TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF RCW 65.04. SAID ABBREVIATED LEGAL DESCRIPTION IS NOT A SUBSTITUTE FOR A COMPLETE LEGAL DESCRIPTION WHICH MUST ALSO APPEAR IN THE BODY OF THE DOCUMENT: PARCEL C, CITY OF RENTON LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT REC. # 20020823900003. R NOTE 3: THE PREMIUM FOR THE EXTENDED COVERAGE OWNER'S POLICY IS ITEMIZED AS FOLLOWS: DESCRIPTION STANDARD COVERAGE: SALES TAX: EXTENDED COVERAGE SURCHARGE: SALES TAX ON SURCHARGE: TOTAL PREMIUM, INCLUDING TAX: AMOUNT $ 2,964.00 $ 281. 58 $1,038.00 $ 98. 61 $ 4,382.19 YOUR INVOICE, TO FOLLOW, WILL CONTAIN THE FOLLOWING CHARGES: INSPECTION CHARGE: SALES TAX: TOTAL CHARGES, INCLUDING TAX: $ $ 230.00 21.85 $ 4,634.04 CLTACMB2/RDA/0999 CHICAGO TITLE COMPANY A.L.T .A. COMMITMENT SCHEDULEB (Continued) Order No.: 1349419 Your No.: SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS END OF SCHEDULE B CLTACMB2/RDA/0999 ... I • T CHICAGO TI1LE COMPANY 701 FIFTH AVENUE, #2300, SEA TILE, WA 98104 PHONE: (206)628-5610 FAX: (206)628-9717 ORDER NO: YOUR NO: UNITNO: LOAN NO: 001349419 06 SUPPLEMENT AL COMMITMENT 0 R D E R SUPPLEMENTAL NUMBER, SELLER, PURCHASER/BORROWER, PROPERTY ADDRESS, R E F E R E N C E I N F O R M A T I O N 1 SCHNEIDER HOMES I, LLC HARBOUR HOMES, LLC RENTON, WASHINGTON 98055 City of Renton Planning Division MAY 2 J ZOU Our Title Commitment dated 08/28/12 at 8:00 A.M. is supplemented as follows: U PARAGRAPH NUMBER(S) 4 OF OUR COMMITMENT IS (ARE) ELIMINATED. V PARAGRAPH NUMBER(S) 12 AND 13 HAS (HAVE) BEEN AMENDED AS FOLLOWS, W PARAGRAPH NUMBER 12, X TO PROVIDE AN EXTENDED COVERAGE OWNER'S POLICY, GENERAL EXCEPTION A IS HEREBY DELETED. PLEASE SEE SPECIAL EXCEPTION 13 RELATED TO GENERAL EXCEPTIONS BAND C. GENERAL EXCEPTIONS E THROUGH H WILL REMAIN IN THE OWNER'S POLICY TO BE ISSUED. GENERAL EXCEPTION D, OUR INSPECTION OF SAID PREMISES ON SEPTEMBER 7, 2012 DISCLOSED NO APPARENT LIEN RIGHTS. ** PLEASE NOTIFY THIS COMPANY IF WORK IS STARTED OR MATERIALS DELIVERED PRIOR TO CLOSING. ** Y PARAGRAPH NUMBER 13 , Z PURSUANT TO OUR PHYSICAL INSPECTION OF SAID PREMISES ON SEPTEMBER 7, 2012 AND DUE TO DENSE VEGETATION OBSTRUCTING ACCESS TO PORTIONS OF SAID PREMISES, THE FOLLOWING MATTERS WILL SHOW ON THE EXTENDED COVERAGE OWNER'S POLICY TO ISSUE, A. ENCROACHMENT OF LANDSCAPING AND YARD AREA, APPURTENANT TO THE NORTHWESTERLY ADJOINER (BEING LOT 8 OF TALBOT RIDGE), UP TO 12 FEET, ONTO A NORTHWESTERLY PORTION OF SAID PREMISES, AND ANY ADVERSE RIGHTS CREATED THEREBY. SEE NEXT PAGE SlJPPI.COM/RDA/(!HJ • ,· AA AB CHICAGO TITLE COMPANY Order No.: 1349419 Your No.: SCHNEIDER HMS I TO HARBOUR HMS Unit No.: 06 SUPPLEMENTAL COMMITMENT (Continued) B. ANY LOSS OR DAMAGE RESULTING FROM THE ENCROACHMENT OF PERIMETER FENCES, PERIMETER WALLS AND PLANTINGS OF ANY NATURE ONTO OR OFF FROM THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. THIS PARAGRAPH MAY BE AMENDED OR DELETED UPON THE SUBMISSION AND REVIEW OF AN ALTA SURVEY CERTIFIED TO THIS COMPANY. EXCEPT AS TO THE MATTERS SET FORTH HEREINABOVE, THE TITLE TO THE PROPERTY COVERED BY THIS ORDER HAS NOT BEEN REEXAMINED. OCTOBER 3, 2012 AUTHORIZED BY, MIKE HARRIS SUPLCOM2/RDA/0999 .. , Vuecrest Estates Title Documents Chicago Title A.LT.A. Commitment Order No. 1349419 Updated October 3, 2012 DRS PROJECT N0.12102 · D.R. STRONG CONSUL TING ENGINEERS 10604 NE 35TH PLACE, SUITE 232 KIRKLAND, WA 98034 City of Rer.ton Plani 1ing Division ... ... '; J RETURN ADDRESS tpll,./ J..,-vc-Lol'"""cA/T f:u.711 e-<-~ tt.C.. 1326 5th Avenue 0 703 Sk.irmer Buildipg Seattle, WA Q8101 11111111111111111 ;:.;:;.;: TALaoy Dhtl..OP SAS KING cou,m' \Mt 13.Dt l'IUR pnnt nc.d1 Of lyJIC llll'Qmatiocl Document Title(s) Tgnpordl:y 0.11-Pe-Sac Easmrot Reference Numbers(s) ofrelated documents AddllJOIIII Rduua l'1 on p.p _ Grantor(s) .,., ""'~•""""...,.., Grantee(s) .... , ..... """""'"'° Ad4a&xNlal lrllfUU 1111 pa.11 _ Legal Description (lblm'rilltd r111111: Le. lwt, block, pis! or Hetlaa, llwmblp, rmp. qurttr/lfUU1u) PorLf.on of: l·: 1/2, I~ 1/2, SE 1/'i, &'EC. )l, T, 2) ~~-1 R. 5 I::1 , W.M. Assessor's Property Tax Parcel/Account Number 312305-9048 MdllKlMI 1e11I ia on P11e _ Addltioml puu-1 n on P11t _ Tht Audilorlkttordrr wili nl,-oo tbl infon111,U111 prcmdtd III IJlb r ... 1"' lbff wll lllll md Llit ~ 111 ttrily thl auurac~ er «1111.pklt11m of tJi.t lndnlq Wtmalloll ~ btrda, 0 . 'I < - D 0 Po< vnlld>le COlllldorctlon, the reooq,t of wfddl IJ 1"'.t,y ~. Ula Caqa, a ••""-l)ion&fto, "Oontor')h«cby 8[1111&,..J ""'"l'• IOdlo Cky ofllmlomml m Talb« Dtwlop,alll l'tltlllln, Lt.C. (lina!tr 'Talbat") D IIIQ1p0tlr)' ~·--o,..., wider 11111 =» di• roal propatJI leg~IJ del<:tU>al on E>hilllt A Jlll' \t,, c:ol!JIIUClioll, -!Did l'Cl)alr of • iomponry cul-do-sac al tlle obi of Buraolt A,.... on tho IOUl!>orn • or IIIO pltt or Talhol Rldao, OI\ Ille !MIii ml ""'4-Id foi1b homn. 8edlll:l 1. '11111 -lhlll lOmllsla compldoly -Ibo la&« of 11D ~ i..o • .,..., 0) 'l1lo rt<Ofdlng of• flnal pkt re, 11,e propotly 1ub),ct 10 1111d .._, 111d (2) Ille Dl'l'Al!lllm06 lly me Cil1 of~ of d>o c:on,pl:d toed""7I ae 1414 pi<:I. s.a... 2. ar-. aa-10 ll>demnlfJ m1 bold ar-""'lht ptop<01J belmlciel "°"' 01l'f -· ,;!,Ima, '""" or 11,blJiy, in<fudloa ....-1, -.,YI' t.u, lo OOIW<llon will> dm cmlllvction, ....,.,_ ind r,pllr of alld l'!IOdwllJ' cuklt-1tt. Sodm 3, TM cul-u-,ac .. ..i .. ay buo 1!1111 p,,..,,., will bo built to Cl1Y or - ~ for • 111bc!Malan ro,dqy io thll Ountor ... UIO IDOll of U o, plrl of tile ~ la ill r...o 1Ubc11'1sioo. -4, T61bot ..t11 clo"' up and -from tho _., pap,,tf 1111 n,M,ioh and -..tlich tc111h from lu work Oil or obc<ll lhe ~. Talbol wl Ollllnlnln the ~ ..... 9odloa S, Tbll Tampon,y Cui-Do-SIO!lolommll bb>4loC vpm lllopm,loa lllllhlmkbohl, """"'°" ondwfgn.,. lb:.._ may beusldby mombonalthel)"bllnader lhOWM....,. an0 -Ill Olha' tlmllu RtnlOO pw,IIC ~I. DATl!I) 1h11 J.tf.,,., •f~.At=-="'7"•'------• 1991. t1 . ------· ... -. --. . . GMNJPJ!: Cl'IY OP IP.NION ~~N-nm,-,--------·---------111:. _________ _ ClllAN'IEB: TAl.80T Dl!YELOl'Ml!Nf PAJI.Tlil!IIS L,L.C. -!9990826000429 Pt« eez or 1906 08 U 191? O? 2, I \It. (00,fT'( l-J'I ·, . ... • 0 STATEOFWASIIINOTOII ) ) ... COUNTY OF ION(.) ) STATE OP WASHIIIGTOII l ) ... COVNl'YOPKING ) I tolll~ tb911 kno<t o,, baw lllllfl<:iorJ mbnco dltl 111116 1••ro•• v.11o -,id l>ofoft mo, llld Nici parwn ceb>OwlaGIC'I !bl oail po,um lip,d \Ill.I llll!i1lmom, Oil o<Jlh ~ wt Ille! pQIOfl WU tulhorilod lo -Ibo ~ and ramwlo4aod It U ~ of crTY OP JU!NT()N, 0 Walb~ madttpOitl)', to be d,e ,... aNI volu""'Y oa nl Mith muni::lpalil!' ror tho ulM 1114 pUtp0111 mllllloa<d lo lb -Dd>:d diil __ day of __________ , 111911. -·- a.i:;M, ~ a It::::;,._. t/JIQ)') N""'J pablle ID mid ft>r dJo llldD of Wllt:!!lll&Um, nddlll81:1 My cppd 1 ..,.... ____ _, __ " .. _...:_ ___ ······ ....... ····-::11111) -.. '') - D STATE OP W A.'lRINGTON COIJllTY OP---- ) ) ... ) 0 • I ~ 1'ltl I~ or b.m ud.of.-y 0-.0 'll>d _J-j,g@ :r: D0C)2D<l'Ll..\'ll1 d>s J)Ollllll Mo 'l'P""* 113~ ""'· 1111d oal<I potlOII ~""' ll!tl sai4 p,ot1 11,!11<d 11111 -, on -......S a.tl llid (JOROD Ml CDdlOIUecl ID "'°"""' lllo """'""""' 111d ~ ~ u Ilic "e1=t of TALIIOT DEVELOPMJ!NT PARTNBIIS L.L,C., a w~ llmi1od &bJJI , ID be ii.. tic. om .. ~ 1<1 of 111dl llm!U:d ltd>IIIIY """POllV !ct tin .... ...i _... ~ ID~ ia,,,un,cz,t, D<lod llli. .fhH::. <1iY of H61 , l!l!IB. ELLEtl F. SMITH STllt OF l'IASHINGTOK NOTARY-•-PUBLIC 11Y COIIHllllOI UP1Rtl U-05-IO f' t tea ~QtJM. -Tlll.lOT 00.0.0f' [l<S " .. 19990626000429 Pl>IA 9M CS "'* 88'26· Im e, z, l(Jr«, COJ1TV UA . .., .... I 0 0 • April H.1998 Triad 97-006-T ALBOT RIDGE LEGAL DESCRIPTION (OFFSrre TURN-AROUND EASEMEITT) WAT PORTION OF A TilACT OF l.AND DESCRIBED rN AN INSTRUMENT RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 9612) 12260. BEING A PORTION OF IBE NORTH HALF OF 11iE NO RIB HALF OF 11iE SOITTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION JI. TOWNSHIP 2J NORTH. RANGE 5 EAST. WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN. IN KING COUNTY. WASHINGTON, LYING WITillN A 50 FOOT WIDE STIUP OP LAND. ntE CENTERI.TNE OF WHICH IS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOU.OWS. COMMENCING AT TilE NORTilEAST CORNER OF SAID SOtmlEAST QUARTER OF SECl10N l I, 11-IENCE NORTH 01('14'48" EAST. ALONG lllE EAST I.INE OF TI-IE NORTIJEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION JI, 25 01 FEF.TTO TRU.! POJNT OP BEGINNING: TI-IENCE ALONG SAJD CENTERLINE, SOlrrH K9°U,'29" WEST 171122 FEETTOrnE BEOINNTNG OF A CURVE CONCAVE TO THE. SOUTHEAST HAVING A RADIUS OF IOU.OU FEET; TIIENCE WESTERLY AND SOUlllERLY AI.QNG SAID CURVE TilROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 88°12'22" AN ARC DISTANCE OF ISJ.9S FEET. TilENCE soumo1•14·or WEST ISi 17FEl,T TO THE TERMINUS Of ll!IS CENTER!.INF. TOGETilER WITII THE AREA INCLUDED WITillN THE CIRCUMFERENCE OF A CIRCLE HAVING A RADIUS OF S!i oo FECT. THE CENTER OF WHICH JS THE AFOREDESCRJBED TERMINUS POINT AND TOGETHER WITH TIIA T PORTION OF SAID TRACT OF LAND LYING SOUlllEASTERL Y OF A CURVE CONCA VE TO THE NORTHWEST HAVING A RADIUS OF 2S FEET WHICH CURVE IS TANGENT TO BOTH THE AFOREDESCRIBED CIRCLE HA VINO A RADIUS OF 55 FEET AND THE WEST LINE OF TIIE 50 FOOT STRfP ANU TOGETilER WITII THAT PORTION OF SAID TRACT OF LAND LYING SOUlllWESTERL Y OF A CUR VE CONCA VE TO ll!E NORTHEAST HAVING A RADIUS OF 2S FEET WHICH CURVE IS TANGENT TO Born IBE AFOREDESCRIBED CIRCt.F. HAVING A RADIUS OF 5! FEET AND THE EAST I.TNE Of THE !iO FOOT WIDE STRIP WR1n·eN JMI. CHEC~f.0 BTF f TRIAD ASSOCIATES 11814115111 Avenue N.E. Klrl<land, WA 98034 (425)821-IM48 / Fax (425)821-3481 -To\l.lOT DCUCLOP [AS " .. 19990826000429 PAG[ ee, ($ 006 oe,u, 1n'9 e, z~ KING COlNTY. MIio C --Nll9'01 '53.,. ,--'ioo.,s 14 \ 15 ,?~ 12 13 ,-t? 16 ,0 j:i I I t r--;;-~··'-N89"26"29-E 178..22-'2s.o,· I ~"J;, oO, ' 2 ~ij 10 ;~,o"· f 1/4 I q;: , 3 2 1 CORM 1: -25 5' 4 aw [I 9 ~ (~ 0 ~~ ~: ~ .. i-~-C B 50' --:) 7 -------~ Na>n?'.>n> -~"°I ..JJ R=25.00" 659..511 R•25.00~ :;~~ " l,=>Z2 • .J9' b L-22.tl' ~;,. LI •5T19'04'" Li ""'50"'8'57"{ ' ~ \ ___:_:= TEAIPORARY TURNAR UND "' ......-,--EASE1!£NT r1 \ (/) /8=55.00' PORTION OF: . LU La27TJ!' • ~ f ~ 1'. N 1/2, N 1/2. ~LI ""282'J8'08" ~ SE 1/4. SEC. 3( ,q I; / T. 23 N .• R. 5 E.. W.M. t: E; ~ ~ N i I ~ . ::::, a:i SCALE 1" = 100' , I I "' r m '""""are::, UIH 11111 bl. Ill .._ ........... Td m.lll."4a ..... _.,.. ............. -- • :< ... i ~ '"'""" ---... -........ ... i5 ill Lu .. (!J ~ "9 ~ Q: ~ ~ i,... !O .. CQ 1. ..J :~ ~ ~ ~ § ; i I! .. ,, ~· RON CVEST ~ FAJ/ ;g ..... 2 4/16/PB g, lllllll.: ,· • ,oo· ""' 97-008 ! ~ ..,._,. , "' ' '-- _,;-<·~ "' N y :i:~ ~! $c5 g; Ni5 "'~ ig ;§ g.:w )$; (1\ 'i ci- -A. en,, I " I! r ' J!ETURN A'!!'RESS: __ _ Return Address Puget Sound Energy, INC. PO BOX 97034, OBC -11N Bellewe, WA 98009-9734 WRC EASEMENT ( customer form) REFERENCE# GRANTOR Sc.i\ne,.w--11£1--- 20030401000988.001 GRANTEE PUGET SOUND ENERGY, INC , 1 SHORTLEGAL :SI: Y¥ Sul Tw z.;i. 12. D'S seo full legal on page~ ASSESSOR'S PROPERTY TAX PARCEL: 1 /Of:"Z.2/28 -/t,51)/ 6/'l'f OPorUMAPNO 2"20l/E/3',, JOBNO JO?e,/'>9o3 FILE: L/22)('.. ,~,,,,.z,,,,; For and m cons1deration of One Donar ($1 00) and other valuable consfderabon 1n hand paid, Schneider Homes, Inc. {·Grantor'' herein), ,ts successors and assrgns hereby conveys and warrants to PUGET SOUND ENERGY, INC., a Washington Corporebon (·Grantee• herein), its successors and assigns for the purposes hereinafter set forth, a nonexclUSIVEt perpetual easement over, under, along, across and through the following descnbed real property {•Property" herein) m King County, Washington SEE EXHIBIT "A" ATIACHED HERETO AND BY THIS REFERENCE MADE A PART HEREOF. EASEMENT LOCATION Excep,t as may be othe1W1Se set forth hereto Grantee's nohts shaR be exercised upon that portion of the Property (the •easement Area• harem) that 1s ten (10) feet in widtli havmg five (5} feet of such widtli on each side of the centerbne of Grantee's systems located as constructed or to be constructe!:f, __ extended or relocated on the Property, except those porbons of the Property occupied by exrstrng bwlOJng footings, foundations, and/or sut:isurface stn.ictures 1, Purpose Gmntea shall have the nght to use the Easement Area to construct, operate, maintain, repmr, replace, improve, remove, and enlarge one or more ubllty systems for purposes of transmtsS1on, d1Sb1butson end 8ale of gas and electnaty Together wrth the nght of access over and across said Property to enable Grantee to exercise its nghts hereunder ~ used harem, the term •systems• shall mcJude all appurtenances and facihbea es are necessary, rn the Judgment of Grantee, for the operation and marntenanci, of said 8y&tems 2 Grantor's Use of Easement Area Granter agrees not to erect any structures on said Easement Area, and further agrees not to place trees, rockenes, fences or other obstructions on the Property that would 111terfera with the exercise of Grantee's nghts h GRANTOR BY BY f':r.ho1>lder Homes, Inc. STATE OF WASH NGTO ) J(' }SS COUNTYOF Tl~ NOT!! SIGNATURIS ARI! REQU\REO OF ALL CO-OWNERS OF PROPERTY On this /Jf... day of fl1arfM , 2003, before duly com'iiissioned and swonf. personally appeared ~ , tJ me known to be the md1V1dual~ who executed the within and foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that ~ f signed the same as Ji.!!> free and voluntary act and dead for the uses and purposes therein mentioned GNEN un~~~').'ttd.P,ffiClal seal this hereto affixed the day and year m this certificate f!mt above wntten ,;-'j-\. •••• .9; ,, ~ ,?bf;' ,I (l_-r.:~ .f'4.~.-:.»°sSION~,;")1,, ~ ~A //_../~ ; '.{J. ~ OTA ';,•,~I / ;; c-· I J ~ . o ti llr 1i\. :o \ c,-rn"-<. c "' L4.rer ~ : 0 ,;;-cn § ~ (Pnnt or stamp name of Notary) 11 ~-. ~BUC / f NOTARYPUBU in dforthaStateofWashonglon, \ '1i;.:~· 19.o,;/ .! res1d1ngat ::;:fi':i<!.::"":::::--,,,-;z,-:-:,;,,,,.----I 11 ·<-~ ...... .: My appointment expires -0 Nollry"81 tex1'-1t":,~ -lf'lllde1'1Nr;,t11 ·-~~.,_=~----1 ,,, .............. -- Cwt form 812000 i. ~ PARCELA: EXIDBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION APN. 312305-9048; 312305-9087; AND 312305-9038 20030401000988.002 THAT PORTION OF THE NORTH Yz OF THE NORTH Yz OF THE SOUTHEAST l4 OF SECTION 31, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M., IN KING CoUNTY, WASHINGTON, LYING EASTERLY OF THE EAST MARGIN OF KENT-RENTON ROAD (TALBOT ROAD SOUTH); EXCEPT THE NORTH 5 ACRES THEREOF PARCELB: THE NORTH Y. OF THAT PORTION OF THE NORTH Yz OF THE SOUTH Yz OF THE NORTH Y. OF THE SOUTHEAST l4 OF SECTION 31, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M., IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTONLYINGEASTERLYOFTHEEASTMARGINOFTHEEASTMARGINOF COUNTY ROAD NUMBER 80 (TALBOT ROAD SOUTH), EXCEPT THE WEST 105 FEET OF THAT PORTION LYING NORTH OF THE SOUTH 30 FEET· THEREOF. PARCELC: THE WEST I 05 FEET OF THE NORTH Yz OF THAT PORTION OF THE NORTH Yz OF THE SOUTH Yz OF THE NORTH Yz OF THE SOUTHEAST l4 OF SECTION 31, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M. IN KING CoUNTY, WASHINGTON, LYING EASTERLY OF THE EAST MARGIN OF COUNTY ROAD NUMBER 80 (TALBOT ROAD SOUTH); EXCEPT THE SOUTH 30 FEET THEREOF. ......... a_ • --------------- QRilfU::A1£" fl:/:J,;t',1,.'f E M.:."Toit.: ·:. : . .: : •.• ,. , .• · !':&to11, ee~l,f>· t~4t tnis 11 t1 tn.t and conect coi1 ol .. 0.f...Q./,11.ftl>J{:..f/. ... lY.;J._~.?.:I:,::; Sul>Wib<d •ncl Sealod lhiA <i;{.~ clayol ~18.fJ;' 4-... • ;e~-.. ~. ·• . /&nztt 'P •:;.Ii: ~"°"~ ' C lTY OF RENTON'. ,/ASH INGTO!I er., , \ t . I) '. ! t ORDINANCE NO. 3790 '. .,. ·, · ., -~-~-·-. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY .r' RENTON, IIASHINGT08/·· ·\'} . ESTABLISHING A SPECIAL ASSESSMZNT DIS'l'RICT FOil ·,.3; . ~~ liATER SERVICE IN THE SOUTH TALBOT HILL-VALLEY ; • GENERAL HOSPITAL AREA AND ESTABLISHINCJl4ii!S'26 tQ504 E AMOUNT OF THE CHARGE UPON CONNECTION TO "i>m r 6. oc. FACILITIES. CPSHS:L ,._,...,,.,e-, oo 55 THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, IIASJIINGTON, DO OB.l\AIR AS FOU.OWS: SECTION I: There is h~reby created a weer ••rvico opaciol assessment diotrtct for the South Talbot Rill-Valley Genorol Hospital a ea, which area ls ~ore particularly described aa fall01fll: See EJdlibit 11A" attached hereto and made a part hereof as if fully set forth herein. A map ,f tlte benefited area is attached hereto as Ezhibit "8" sod mi..'• a part hereof as if fully set forth herein. SE'.:TION II, Persons connectil.3 to the water facilitiao in thio Special Assessment District which properties hllve not lle1111 charged or asseBSed "1th the cost of a trunk water tlain Bhall pay in addition ·to the payment of the connection permit f,.e and in addition to the general facility and trunk connection charge, tha folloving additional fees: Based Oil a net feneral benefit area of 34S acres "'*c"ORDFO llllS DAY a special benef t area of 1S5 acres, the follouing · '' · chargeo result: ~AR2S 11 40 All 'R Development with l,500 -gpm fire flov or less: Area Charge c $0. 034 per square fool: Frontage Charge o $16.00 per front foot i I ! ,. I I J I I liiliH\li luil IN~ fili -·· 0 --·-· ' I ..... 1._ __ _ ·l- _ ... ~·p· -a:.: •• .!.laol...--~,~, -"-'*O.·~cHi ... 'L Willl....~· _,,.....,..,. • .Z.0- i I ! ! ·./ 0 11 ' . fl . ·j • • I . . . . ·-.~..,.] . -·-.....cl Developments with greater than l,SOG·grm f•re flow: Area Charge • $0. 048 per square foot Frontage Charge $18.00 per front foot LID'• 324 and No. 325, althoagh exempt from the !ront footage charge, should still be subject to the applicable area charge. SECTION llI: lhia Oxdinance is effective upon its passage, approval and thirty (30) days after publication. PASSED BY nu: ClTY COtniClL this 6th day of February ,1984. I APPROVE~ BY THE MAYOR this 6th day of Februa:,:y,1984. Mayor Approved as to form: Dace of Publication: Pebt1lAZY 10, 1984 ..• -··1 I ./ l ' . i_ . -... --.~~- r 0 0 ·r.,. .... A :~:.:~=-:..:JI---.. : ___ · _· _ _::__;-v·· ----~~ ... - ..• \9 ;, . # AH tfllt r.o•ttc." l)f !.ec.tto,, n, lCI 11,d )1 1n f{lln'lsh1p a lv.irt'-, '•"9&' s tut, Ii.I!., Ul'l9 Coi.1111. ~u11!11qton, dt\tr1tlf'O u hll~· Be91M'f19 ,t the ,out.hwn ttrl'ler ~f ~ett1011 i9, rwn, 23~ .• •o. H. li.M •• 'llf1'e fflttfl, 1ltM'"il U• u.-... th Hr.e t,..."'t\,, 1 G'sU"(• 11f ~ fttt co,. or lcn '!O lllt Tn..-P-o!M of Nglnrdng ; ll'len(c Cl 0•~•30• t • dhtHCt of ~29 fHt aore or ltn, t~• N u•oe•:,z• ' • a1su.~t or ao f~t a:irt tu· Ins ~ • l't>t p1r111,1 •1tn 11\11 $60 lttt eut,rly, 11 cPHureo n rl9'1t 1ftgla fr.a U11 'llltlt It,-. of u1d SttUOfl N; thef\..• ftQf'tNr y 1Jon9 u111 i>&rtllel l!N! ta the sgut,i 1111111 or Lot~. 1111.9 Cb1,111t1 511CW't•'11l t A.'110S f'KOl'dU undlr Ar, 790Xll0ll,; taenct 111:U\U!f a!Ollg CPII MIUtfl lha of Hid ht J ta tllt IOvttr:,ut COl'NH" l1*'Hf; thcnct nortllt(.y •l>t'IO Ut cut 11M of 011 tot l tot.ht norttldu cONit-r thrl"'tOf; thtfret ouc,:rJ, 1lot1g tht north 11111 of Mid Lot J to I l1n,rp1r111el 1111th ind 661'1 fttt out.orly u CHlurvd •t rlfht 111110 fl'l:Q tlll mt llr.t of nld Soctlewl zt; tlltl'Kt ~b llllftl Mid p1r1\1el 111.2 to tkl to;rttl 11M of th, pbt of '1dor11 Pan: C:O. J H rcc:of'lbd IA 'Joli= as of Pl1t1, paps O alld '4, roconts of ltrit Cowftt,, '8111111QtOl1; tt::i Soutll 1111t lif Mid Pht bthlQ •IIO Ut, Wtn 1fn:t Of tit:, !o&rf.tt=lt q.M,rtc, Of 1110 Sa.t1CR 21\ tn:lnr Qlt.orl11long Ut:t JIOl"tlll 11111 of ufd ll.bd'h1110ft &M tmtt1"111t119 i=zstttly l1on, lb c:ortb Ut:1 of Cb Souuout qu&rhr of St<Uon JG, Ti:2-. Zl:1 1 a,. 51 •• 11.A,1 to Ofl tatcr1cct1o:1 wltll Uto H1terl1 rtttit-tf....ay m'11fl of T1lbt Cow South (so,•-lloodh tllcllco •tbrl1 OlCIQI l.lfd Nlt.tt'ly rlrt•Of•.AJ Dttgfl'I to •l'I ll'IU:tleC\100 ll'IUI UQ outarly procucuoca of Ui2I ftOf'U. 11M o tfQ Sout!t:::fft Qlltttor of Uo '*'1:bst fMtrtef' of 111d SCCtllM JJ; thi:inco i::tStorly •lD:ftf UQ IIOt'UI 1t11e of Hid st,ibdhisfon 1ftd Its Nltarly PfNl,ICt10fl to tfl lalm'lc:I: I= 111th I lint t"llt Hes conten\.rfc wttll aswi J.tO fc,t COl'O or 1eu HHtrlyf II c:,aknld rad11l11 f -,. OIi euterly rl;ht-Gf'--, orgta Cf tllO fAITIJ f=,, ,.,. "')! ~ ICIUU;:rl1 • o:ig utd COl'leal.trtc 11111 to 1ft fntenoctt0111 wttl ~ l'IOt1l 11.:r ~, Lot, of tb pllt Of~ A&ltttOl'I u roC:Ordtd In ftllQ '8 of Pld:1. 11111' 21. f'OCOC'da. of ,1111 Cow\ty, l:!&sM~WI; tM:IICo ~tor1J al(Mg tht north 11M or w111 Lot 4 to Utt cost 11orth:s:u.terl7 CDrMI" tllzftcf; . Ucc.o to11U=rl1 •lOftSI t11c1 con WHtttl.1 HIit of Mlnct Mittton to tho tost M111t.ft. 1:Htff'ly COl"IQr of Wld pbt; th:tice cnter1y a1Clllg tt:t t::eSterly production of llll-soutll line of wtd Mnu Add1tt•. dlldl ao:rt:11 11= b 1ls.o tm nortn ltne of tht Eut van., J::)dlca1 Put Short_,ht u ~ t11 liDt Callnty lll'ldtr Afl 78081S10D9 (SP .. J1J.n) b t;b ·.ortt::at con:,, tb"tOf; tblco sautltlrly 11ong tb 1:::tSl line of Mid Short,aPlet to~ IOUtt=lt CDl'UI' thenof; t!t::;q t::!Sterly along • ltne p,arallel "1th ind 250 ftd c:are or ltst nortn:1:rlJ of, as CNS&lrod •l rf~t &1191• fro::i, the soutb 1tnt of Mid $,ct{on J01 to an htonocttoa tritb \b 0t1t1rl1 r1pt"'°fooWJ mrgtn of tllt V11l1y Frc=iray (Slt-161). tbiq touibrly •lmt wld 00\1:el"\J r\~.uf-t=iy arg11'1 to 1n 1nttnett1o:a trttti thCI t=:stcrly 1tr:, Of t11:t SolM:ut qyarter of M1d Soct1on 31, T-. Zllf. a,. H, 11.11.J tf::t1lce soutbrly 1tq ttio -=stcrly 111111 of wtd slblh1sl0ft t.o en tnt.trscc:t1c>i1 tftti ~ SOir.b-Jy 1111:l of so14 Socl1on 3h tt=co mstorlJ atoev &&14 IOllthllrly ltno of s.c~tm ll to tb:t soutbst ~ -· tb:m ~1, otoz,g tb C4Sttrly ltn:t of"'' Sect101 )l, ~·~ osstorly Jlit:1 ft llsD tb ctStorl11f~ of Section ». Ta. nn. 10. SE. v.a •• tD D::I souta lfM of ti::) '*1t::::nt i=rtor of tt::i c:oru::::nt quarto, of Mid sccuea :12; tblco e:utorty OlDaD tt::I IOUtb 1lt3 of wtd subdtflslo:i o dist.em of 660 flllt. an • 11Sli tbl:o s=wU=rly o:i a ;11::2 pantlet lftttl W 650 feat cutort,10 as ~•5Urcd 11 r1Pt u.gle frcci, tt:, t:)lt Hr:, of SCCttm l2, to a potat o:i tllo ....U. llo:s flt Hid Scr.tlca St, 11td P111t t:,fcg eo f~t oo.,icr1, rd tt:a ~t COl'l::)r of satd SctttDA n1 tt:tct.o t:HtcrlJ o\q tb IIWtb \ta of aid Scct1o:t S2 ~ell 'NlfUI 11• 1, atso tiiii so:itll lfr:::, Of utd kctfoa n. to• potat 58D fcac aro or 1ou·eutorly of u:o SOlltt::oSt corc::r of ut• soetf• 2t t= tb Tno Point of Dofb:111111. ' J H . , .... J-; -·- ' It I -... ·-· T n ®·. > : -----.......----...... -.. - I I r L ·-~ -_,;., •• .. ,· I 11111 i I I -·- i I I ... I I i i.r--_ ··-f 0 • ·---· -··-...:.- - = ;' • ~ :, • n ,, C ~~ i N N C'l c:, Cl) c:, in c:, :n .,, ~ .. WHEN RECORDED RBTURNTO: omc.c ar !he Ciry Clm. Renton Munklpa] Blllldlna: '200 Mm Attme Scaiai &/IIDll. WA9805! • I . flECE\VED \ MAY O 51995 l IATECnMJs AGBEEMRNf"" • tA•94·001 TillS AGREEMENT made and . entered Into this ~d•y of ~ , 1995, by and between the CITY OF RENTON. hcrelna.flcr referred to as "CITY," and Bovironmcntal Dcvelopmcot Inc Tom Ic:bclron PO Box .1574 BcHcYUc WA 98009 hereinafter rcrcrrcd to as "DEVELOPER'; WHEREAS. lhe 'DEVELOPER" Is desirous of fnsralllng certain waacr &ystcms, and appunennnces thereto at, near, or within the herein below described property and to connect same 10 the ·ctTY'S" utility or road cystem{s) so that such improvements will constitute an integral part thereof: and WHEREAS, no other property owners or users 11re presently available to shnre ln lhc cost and expense of construction of such improvements, nnd the pnnies hereto having in mind the provisions nnd terms of the "Municip:i) Water and Sewer Facttilies Act" (RCW 35.91.020 ct seq) WHEREAS, the "DEVELOPER~ is willing to pay all the costs and cxpemcs for the installation of said improvements; NOW, TilEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY AGREED AND COVENANTED BY AND BETWEEN TilE AFORESAID PARTIES AS FOLLOWS: I. The "DEVELOPER" hereby acknowledges and covenants that ho is tho owner or tho following described property. to wit; Sec Exhibit •A• and the .. DEVELOPER• hereby ngrces and covenants 10 cause to have insta11cd the following dcscn'bed improvements, to,,wit: Per npprovcd water plan w.:.2158: Installation of 1256 linear feet of Ir waler line and 2 fire hydrants. and such Installation to be made In full compliance with all appllcablo codes and regulations of the 'CITY." Tho "DEVELOPER" 1i11thor covenants and warrants that all expenses and claims in connection with the construction and lnst3llatlon or the aforesaid improvements. whether for labor 0. :: = j_ f I • , ~ l ....... , .. . t: i\ N 1.'11 2 (l) 0 If.I 0 C") G') 0 or materials or both t.rave been or will be paid In full. all at the "DEVELOPER'S" expense, and the "DEVELOPER" covenants and ogrecs to hold the "CITY" harmless from any liability in connection therewith. 2. The "Developer" further certifies llmt the total cost of said cons1ruction as herein above specified is $841283.60 for an off-she water main and 2 fire hydratits. See Elthibit "B" attached hereto for the legal destription of the lands affected by this latecomer ·agreement. see Exhibit "C" attached hereto for the Final Asse.c;smcnt Roll, and see Exhibit "D" attached hereto for the map showing in outline the land affected by such charges per the 1cnns of this agreement. The total amount of the cost of said improvement shall be employed to determine the pro ra!a reimbursement to the "DEVELOPER· by any owner qf real estate who did not contribute to the original cost of such improvement, ilnd who subsequently wishes 10 tap into or hookup to or use said facilities, which tap or hookup shall include connections to laterals or branches COMecting thereto, all subject to the laws and ordirumces of the ncrrr and the provisions of this Agreement. The method or detennlntng lnteeomer payments shnll be by squlll'C foot of property subject ro these latecomer charges: The pro rntn cost per scjunre foot Is $0.02620327. 3. It Is hereby found and determined that the conscruction and installation of said aforedescribcd improvement is in the public interest. 4. The "DEVELOPER" hereby agrees and covenants to convey, transfer. and assign unto the "CITY· :111 rights, interest and title in and to said improvements and an appunenances and accCssories thereto. free from any claim and encumbrance of any party whomsoever; "CITY" agrees to accept and maintain Silid irtlprovcmcnt as part of its present system upon approval thereof by the City Engineer and after inspcelion of said construction. The "DEVELOPER" further agrees and covenants to execute and to deliver·unto the "CITY" any and all documents including Quit Claim Deeds and Bills of Sa.lo th:it may reasonably be necessary to fully vest title in the "CITY" and to effectuate this conveyance and transfer, The "DEVELOPER" further LATECOMER'S AGREEMENT-2 12J94.671/T'ODJbb · .. )liij ,· 0 •• agrees and covenants to pay unlo the "CITY" such service charge., or other charges as may be imposed by the "ClTYn for uSe or the improvements for which this agreement is granled. S. The "CITY· reserves the right, witllout affecting the validity or terms of this Agreement, to make or cause to be made extensions to or additions of the above improvement and to allow service connections to be made to said extemions or additions, wl!hout liability on the pan of the "CITY", 6. No person, firm, or corporation shall be granted a permit to use or be authorized to lap into the facility during the period of 15 (fifteen) years from date hereof, without fust paying unto the .,CITY". in addition to any and all other costs, fees, and charges made or assessed for each tap, or for the main facilities constructed in connection therewith, the amount required by the provisions of this contract except such charges shnll not apply 10 any extension of the main facility. See Item 10. Furthennorc, in case any tap, hookup, or connection ls m:ide into any such conlract:d f:icility without such p:iyment having been first made, the legislative body or the "CITY" may cause 10 have removed such unauthorized tap, hookup. or conneetion, and all connections or related accessories localed In the facility or right-of-way I and dispose of such unauthorized material so removed, without any liabilily on tl1e part of lhe "CITY" wha1cvcr. It is further agreed, and covenanted that upon expiration of the tenns of lhls Agrecmenti 10 wit: IS (ftfleen) years from date hereof, plus any extension !hereof ~f sranted by City Council, "CITY" shall be under no further obliga1Jon lo collect or make any funhcr sums unto the "DEVELOPER." The decision of the Administrator . of Public Works or the Administrator's authorized representative in dctennining or computing the amount due from any benefited owner who wishes 10 hookup 10 such Improvement shall be final and conclusive in all respects, 7. It is further ngreed and understood that the aforedescn'bed improvements to be undenaken and pa.id for by ·DEVELOPER" have been or arc a.bout 10 be connccled with the utilities systems of the ·c1TY·, and upon such comeclion and acceptance by tfle •ctTY" through Jts legislative body, said extension and/or improvement shall be nnd become a part of the municipal utilities. LATECOMER'S AGREEMENT· 3 12/94-671rI'ODMI •. •: ,' ~ ···--.. :. . r ' -···. ·.·::-'a. = ''\> 't t ~'·-·· .:I • 8. This Agreement shall be placed for record with lhc King County Audjtor's Office within thirty (30) days or final execution of the ngreement. 9. Transfer of title to all of the lmprovemems under the Ja.tecomer's agreement to the "CITY-Is a prior condition to the City collectlng any l:i1ecomer's fee. The "DEVELOPER" will also assign to the "CITY" the benefit and right to the latet0mer's fee should the "CITY" be unable to locate the "DEVELOPER" to lender any latecomer's fee that the "CITY" has received. The "DEVELOPER" shall be responsible for keeping the "CITY" informed of its correct mailing address. Should the "Ctrr be unable to locate the "DEVELOPER" in order to deliver a latecomer's fee, the "CITY" shall undertake nn independent investigation to determine the location of the "DEVELOPER". Should the "CITY," after a good falth anempt to locate the "DEVELOPER" be unable to do so, the Jalccomcr's fee shall be placed in the Special Deposit Fund held by the "CITY~ for two years. At any tinte within the two year period the "DEVELOPER" may, receive the latecomer's fee, without interest, by applying to the "CITY" for that latecomer's fee. Ancr the expiration of the 1wo year period, all rights of the "DEVELOPER" to that ree shall expire. and the "Cl'rY" shall be deemed to be the owner of those funds. 10. Wl1en the "CtTY· has received the funds for a latecomer's fee, it will forward that fee, less 15% for a processing fee, to the "DEVELOPER" within thirty (30) days of receipt of the. funds. Funds received by negotiable instrument, such ri.s a check, will be deemed received ten (10) days after deliveI}' to the "CITY". ~hould the "CITY-fail to forward the latecomer's fee lo _the "DEVELOPER" through the "CITY'S" sole negligence, then the "CITY" shall pay the "DEVELOPER" interest on those monies at the rate of interest specified in City Code Section 3- 241 (B), However, should the "DEVELOPER" not keep the "CI'fY-infonncd of its current correct mailing address, or should the "DEVELOPER" otherwise be negligent and thus contribute 10 lhe failure of the "C[TY" to pay over the latecomer's fee, then no interest shall accrue on late payment of the latecomer's fee. 11. By instituting the latecomer's agreement the "CITY" does not agree 10 as.sume any responsibility 10 enforce lhe latecomer's agreement. The assessment roll will be a matter of public record and will serve as a notice to the owners of the potcnti:ll assessment should connection to the improvements be made. The "DEVELOPER· has responsibility to monitor those parties LATECOMER'S AGREEMENT. 4 1219+671fl'GB/bh . ··---·--·· .... ~---·"·· ' ····~. ... -.i , . e ,fl.. ~\ r:lii'A w V @ • coMecting to lhc improvement. Should the ·crrY" become aware of Nth a COMcclfon, it will use its best cffons to collect the latecomer's fee, but shall not incur any liability should it inadvencntly fail to collect the latecomer's fee. Da!Otl thi~~yof ~ , 1995 DEVELOPER Gt::--~ CID' OF BENTON STATE OF WASHINGTON J ) ss N COUNlY OF KING J ~ On !hl, ~g.//... day oki){1'¢;~%, before me o personally appeared_ 1™,:and ~ /4t:1~ lfbr:ia, to me known to e the . u, Mr and at. Cbd,, -of the O Jll\U(cipal corpomtion thJt executed the within and l!l en foregoing instrument, and acknowledged said instrument to be the free and voluntary act nnd deed of said municipal corporalion for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, D.nd on oath stated that he/she was authorized to execute said instrument and that the seal afftxcd is the corporate seal of said municipal corporation. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hcrcunlo set my lt•nd and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. ~ -~ , ~"""" h1,r/,,,,~ ~ & Titl of officer LtsA 8Tl:1'Hel S Notnry Public in and for the Slate or Washington, residing at 8~ My appointment expires: I0-19-9] By: PEYEIOPEB STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING " on llJi!::'J>ersonally appeared before me ~~~===~W# 2«-4,ke:v -.,---,,-.,-,-,,-,-,-,-(Grantorls) to me known to ·be the individual(s) described in and who executed the within and foregoing ins1rumcn1 1 and acknowl¢gcd that ~ • signed the same :is --1''(,.U,---free~ voluntary act and deed for the uses and purposes lhcreln mentioned. Given under my hand and official seal thls.i!.r day orO .z.:.t , 19N, ~~::(~ Slgn:ul1rcof0ffim & Official Seal Vll"G ,111111 7< Lo 111111 Notary Public in and for lhcStalc of Washlngton, residing at 4ee !r$e!'t;.. My appointment expires: .s-/ f! / 9 :' r r ,_ I .... :~ : i ' P. f ·~ i N N C'l 0 Ill 0 in 0 er) a, - ® • EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF SUMMIT PARK PARCEL "B": THE SOUTH 124 FffT OF THAT PORnON OF THE NORTH HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTE:R OF SECllON JI, TOWNSHIP 2J NeilrH. RANGE 5 EASr, W.M., IN KING COUNTY. WASHINGTON, Ll1NG EAST OF THE EASTERLY MAf/GIN OF C('}UNTY ROAD NO. 80 (KENT-'REN_TeN ROAO}; ALSO TH£ NORTH 7J FEcT OF THAT PORTION OF THE SOPJTl'fl!AST OUA"RTER OF 1'H£ SOUTH°cAST QUA'RTER eF S£isTJON JI, Te>Ws°fllP 2J NeRTrl. RANG£ 5 EAST. W.M .. IN /(/NG edUNTY, WASfl/NGTeN, LYING £AST OF TH£ EASTERLY MARGIN OF SAID COUNTY Rd{'.'O NO. 80. PARCEL "A": TH£ NORTH 241 FEET OF THE SOUTH /267 FEET eF THE S('}UTHEAST IWARTER OF THE: SOUTHEAST OUl<RT£R eF s,cne"N JI, TfiWNSRIP 2J NORTH, RANG£ 5 £AST, W.M .. IN KING C('}/1NTY, WASHINGT@N: £XCE:PT TH£ SOUTH 60 FEET eF TRE: WfST sso FEE:T THERE@F; ANO EXl!:EPT THAT PORTION L l1NG WITHIN THE JOHN LANGST('}N COUii TY ROAD NO. 80. !!QJL BOUNDARIES HA VE: BffN OELINEA rm BASE:0 ()N RECORD Sl180i'1ISION INFORMA llON CONTAINED IN R.0.S. VOL JJ, PAGE: 224, ANO AR£ SHOWN FOR REFERENCE. BOUNOARY POSITIONS SHOWN ARE PRELIM//!;A°RY ANO HAVE: NOT BffN FIELD VE:RIFIE:D BY SURVE:Y. ...... _,. _______ _ _ I!,,.;;;;;;_ ... "f.•Hf".&i::l_~iii#WiillmB-@ii!:. illlit!::il ..Q. I -'I m::1·. • CII EXHIBITB Summit Park Latecomer Agreement Legal Description That portion of the southeast qunrtcrofScction 31, ToM1Slup 23 North, Rnngc S East. W.M., in King County, Washington described n.s follows: Bcsinning nl the northeast comer of said subdivision; Thence southerly along the cast line of said subdivision.. to nn intersection with the south line of the north 5 acres of that portion of s:Ud southeast quilrtcr lying easterly of Talbot Road South (Kent .. Renton Road USO), and the True Point of Beginning.; 111cnce continuing southerly nlong the CMt line of said southeast quarter to a.n intcrscction with the south line of the north quarter of the south half of the nonh h:tlf of s.iid southeast quart.er; Thence westerly along said south line to nn intersection with a line 375 feet westerly of and parallel with the cast line of said southeast quarter; Thence southerly along s.iid line, a distilllCC of 165 feet. more or Jess, to a.n intersection with thi: north line of the south quarter of the northeast qunrtcr of said southeast quarter; TI1encc easterly along said north linen distn.ncc of30 feet. more or Jess, to an intersection with the cast line of the west 940 feet of the south half of the south half of the north hnlf of said southc.tst quarter lying easterly of sriid Talbot Road; Thence southerly along said cast line to 311 intersection with the north tine of the south 124 feet of the north hnlfofsnid southeast quar1er; · Thence ,vcstcrly along said nortlt line nnd its westerly c1,.1cnsion, crossing Talbot Road South, to nn intersection with the west right-of-way margin of said road; Thence southerly .1long said m:irgin to an intersection with the nonh right-of•way margin of South SSth Street; Thence westerly .ilong s.iid margin to the west line of s.i.id ~outhcast qu:1.rtcr; Thence northerly nlong said west line to an intersection with the north line of the south h:ilf of the nonh ha.If of the northwest quarter of said soulhcast quancr; Thence cas1crly along said north line, nnd its easterly extension, to an in1crscction will, the cast right· of-wny margin ofs:i.id Talbot Road; TI1cncc northerly along said margin to nn intersection \\ilh the south line of the north S acres of the cast half of said soulhcast quancr lying CilStcrly of said Tnlbot Rood South; Thence caslcrly nlong said north line lo the cast line of said southeast quarter and tha True Point of Beginning. . ·:;-;--:· . ~-..... .),:, I = ;J. ' N N M 0 CD 0 in 0 :n a, • EXHIBITC NOTICE OF ADDITIONAL WATER FACILITY TAP OR CONNECTION CHARGES REQUIRED BY RCW 65.08.17 (3) RCW 35.92.025 MUNICIPALITY -CTlY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ADDmONAL TAP OR CONNECTION CHARGE PER: Environmental Development Corporation Mr. Tom !chelson Water Improvement Latecomer Agreement PROJECT NO.: 27-0013 RECIPIENT: Mr. Tom Ichelson BRIEF PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Installation of 1256 lineal feet of 12 inch water main leaving in place a low pressure existing main; installation of 2 fire hydrants; and ell appurtenances pertaining to said water main. All parcels contained in the southenst quarter of Section 31, Township 23 North, Range S East, W.M., in King County, Washington. TOTAL ASSESSMENT COST: $84,283.60 TOTAL ASSESSMENT FOOTAGE: 3,216,530.27 square feet TOTAL COST PER SQUARE FOOT: $ 0.02620327 OWNERSIIIl' LEGAL DESCRIPTION AssESSABLE AssESSMENT SQUARE FEET p""" 1 K.C. TA>< AoCT 1312305-9149·04 344.550,60 • 9,028.59 Pt,n,ISTEAO CONST. Co. LOT 2 OF RmTON SP No 399.79 1215120TIIAVNE201 P:ECOROOIIH AF I 800S139001 BEu.EV\IE, WA 99006 p""" 2 K.C. TAX Acer 1312305-9022..0S 73,818,40 • 1,928,99 AWNE.VUX LOT 1 R£NTON SP Ila. 399.79 JUDY P. WRICHt Rc:C:OADCDIH AF I 8005139001 4B27 TAUSOT ROS REtlTON, WA 98055 PAAa!.3 ROOOfT A,CLAY1'Dff, TRn 850 IWH> Wli.Y 1303 CLEARWATER, FL :~ 34830 . ' • P"""'-4 B1.JFWSTEAD CONST. Co. 1215 120TH AV NE 201 BclLEVUE, WA r ,, CII 98005 ! ·, CII M C Cl) i C 11) C :,:, 11) PARCO. 6 ARtll.lR A. PmRsoN 491 S TAUIOT Ro S Rffi'TOH, WA 98055 P.wn 6 BuffGn!AD Cc»cU. Co. 1216 120nt Av NE 201 BOJ..Evur:, WA 98005 PAACD. 7 --PO 8011:3825 fmcRAt. WAV, WA 98063 PARCEL 8 LAA M, CAWEN 4908 TAU101' ROS R£HJON, WA 98055 PAAaL 9 ULA M. CAl.ffH 490B TALBOT Ro S ROOOH, WA 98055 PAnCD. 10 LJLA M. CMffN 4908 TAU101' Ru S ROOON, WA 9805S IC,C, TAX ACCT 1312305-9091-02 9(Q AT f~XN OF C/1. KrM'•RDITON RD WITH N IHOI' N 112 DFS 112 OFN 112 OF SE t/4 THW Al.Oto N lH 300 FT TH S PI.W &Cl C/1. 120 FT THEE PlW SD N LH 300 FT MA. TO 1iO cJl TH N ALO SD Ch. 12.0 l'T TO eeaws co11> K.C. TAX Am l31230S.9D53 N 112 Of S 1/2 Of' NW 114 OF SE 114 LESS lltO NXN 0\ Koff•ROOOH RD wrrH N lH 1'HOF TH W M.O SD N LH 300 FTTH S f\W so CA. to s LH m IWD 'TH E PlW '° N lN 300 Fr MIL TO ID C/1. nt N ALO SD cJl TO BED Ex S 30 FT OF N 160 Fr nlOF Lall CORO K.C. TAX '"'' l31230S·91.2Z.Q5 PTN N 1/2 OF S 1/2 OF N 112 Of' SE 1/4 C£O NXN OF N LH SD Cl.CD WITH CIL CO RD 180 TH W ALO N lH ntOP 300 FT TH S A.T SO c/1. 150 Fr1'0TPOD TH coma 5 TOS LH CO sum, THE AlQ 50 I I.II' 1'0 W MGN £0 flD n1 N AlQ SO MOH TAPE Of 1POO lff W PLT H lH SO CUOO TO 1POB K.C. TAX Acer 1312305•9037-09 S 114 Cl'NW 1/4 OFSE 114 LYW Of' CO IDl60 K.C. TAX ACCT 1312305·9023.QS THE SW 1/4 0F1H( SE 1/4 LESS Co.Ro. K.C, TAX Acct 1312305,9048.0B PcnTIOH OIi N 112 Of N 112 OF SE 114 LY E OIi KCNT·REHTOH Ro LESS N 5 4CIE1 K.C. TAX ACCT 1312305•BOD1-0B PoRTlOH Ofl N 1/4 OF S 112 OF N 1/2 OF SE 1/'I LYE OP co FD ,ao LESS W 106 FTOFPOOLY N OF S :10 FT mOF K.C. TAX ACCT 13123DS·90l8·0B W 106 Ff Cf N 1/2 LESS S 30 fT THOF OFl'OR Of' N 1/2 CFS 112 N 1/2 OF SE 1/4 LYEOFC0,0180 e 32.400.00 345,868.40 49,658.40 427,323.60 399,442,87 448,120.00 200,811,60 14,176.00 • 840.98 t 9,082.83 t 1,301.21 t 11,197.27 t 10,488.71 t 11;742.21 • 5,2111.91 • 371.43 . I ... _! L - PAN:a. 11 K.C. TAX ACCT l3123DS.90l5-01 118,483.20 0 3,104.85 G. WAll'OI DLWOND N HIS FT DPS 485 FTCf' N 112 OfSE 1/4 4914TAUKJTRDS LYE Of co NJ 180 LESS S 13S n Of W REHTON, WA aaoss 260 FTl.ESS E376FT PARCU. 12 K.C. TAX ACCT l31230S.&08B.Q7 33,750.00 • S84.38 O. WABID DIAMOND W 250 FT CFS 135 FTOPl'Olt Of N 1/2 OI' <C914TAIJICTRoS NE 114 OFSEQJ4LY E Df'CORD 180 RolTCH, WA 98055 PAIICU. 13 K.C. TAX Acer 1312305,9095-08 197,328.80 t 5,170.81 ERYN E. YOOCII W 1D40FTCl'FOUO•POROFS 114CIF N 1501 S. EAGIDIDGI! OIi 112H (If SE 114 LV nv Of co AD NO BO fW(Ta,,, WA 98055 vtaWN Al ICINT•RENTON Im LESS S 124 FT LESS E 100 FT TKO!' POI l:C CIIORT l'IAT AMJC\TIClt NO 873047 """"" S0'1lJ,&R 14, 1877 TOTAL ASSESSM£NT IPARaU 1 °13: SUI.UT PAI!:( ATSJ0,998.40 IOUARE Fm'Wll.lfAVE t 70,389.78 PAID '13,813.84 IHlME TOTAL COS'JTOl)(VEl.DPlaS 1MinM I LESS 1 S% HAtfDUNG FU t 10,555.48 TOTAL COST RECOVERY DUE DEVELOPER t 69,714.30 H:\Di¥i1lon.1\P&. TS\Technica,u,U,rop111rv\anrll.doa ·.r.",. r:500' r ~ -~ M -0 "l (lJ 0 II) 0 ' II) . :, ' • S 55th St Section 31, Township 23N, Rcmgo 5E en -0 a::: .. ll) l.at-.n:ir Charaa Area Summit Pailt Plat l.atacomara Boumlary Now 12" Walci man R13111cn Qty llm!ln w en ~ <( -0 C: N 0 ~ ................................................................................................................................................................ . ..-,... ·-rC....Jiiitid\!l:jj ·ii\0 •': »fid \3•· 0 o·$ ;,Af5c.§'*<>iAJ<@f-k!j#4W,tliiit1R'iia~!!t'i:'.·~ ·• -·~· ...... ~· .. '. . , * . ' i', ~' ' .. .lfrii®'tmznri: : .•c,. tt::-mt WHEN RECORDED, RfTURN TD: OFRCE OP THI! CTTY CU!AK R•n1on hlUniCfpd IUcllng 200 t.tll Awnu• South R,nton, WA D8D5S DOCUMENT TlnEISJ, Aulgnmont end Corncdon of Latecoman Agroament GRANTOR(S) (last name, first name, mlddla inltlalJ: C"rty of Renton Additfonal Namu on Paga _ of document. GRANTEE(SI l!Ht name, first name, mlddla lnltlall: Environmental D1velopment, Inc. and Tom lchehon Additional N;imes on Page_ of document. (LA-94-001) LEGAL DESCRIPTION !abbreviated: 101, block, plat or seetlon, township, range): Additional Legal dsscrlption on Paga _ of document. ASSESSOR'S PROPERTY TAX PARCB. OR ACCOUNT NUMBER, REFERENCE NUMBERISI OF DOCUMENTS ASSIGNED OR Ila.EASED, Kltlo County Rec:ording No. 9&05080322 Additional Refurancea on Page _ of document. U(O'JUl.01 ·™,& Wiiih:a I r w• Asseso rnout Diltrict Ne,. 0013 ProJec:t No. 270013 LA-~4-001 ASSIGNMENT AND CORl!ECTION OF IATECOMERS AGREEMENT Thll ill an Aa,Jgnmmt md Correction of the lattcomtfli Agreement dated Aprff 28, 1995, Kina County Rooon11na No, 8605080322, by 111d botwaan 1ho Chy of Renton ("Clty"I and Envlronmenbll Dovalopment, Inc., Tom lcheJson, P.O. Box 1674, Bellovue, Wuhlngto11 98009 1"0.YO'-r"I. Tho name of Dovotopar aa aet forth ln tho oriOlnal Latecomen1 Agreement waa lncorreci, in 1hal 1he named Do\llllopar wan 1110 general pannor of Volley Development Auoclata, LP .. a Washington llmltod partnlflhlp rv,nov Dovaloomont"I, which waa lntandod to be 1ho Developer under the l.atoc:omera AgnHm'lent fend which ownid and currently owns the real pn:,portydllCflbed In Exhibit A of the Latecomers Agreement). Accordlngry, Environmental Development, Inc. and Tom lchellon hanby correct the Latecomera Agreement by replacing v,11av Develapment II Dev81oper. and hereby nsafgn to Valley Development all of Its lntareat 1n the Latecomert A;reemant. Vallev Development hereby accepts tha foregoing correction and aulgnment and agrau to be bound by all of the tefffll of the Agreement from the Initial data of the Latecomtt'I Agroement. City hereby con11nta to and accepta the foregoing correction and uafgnment. The remainder of the Latecorner, Agreement ah all remain In full force and effect 81 amended herawhh. Dato:.----""=,4~h Dato:.-"¥"44'¥"-'~~ ISCD7Ul,01 ENVIRONMENTAL DEVELOPMENT, INC. _/ ~ h? !fa-/ ' Tom lchellOII, Pralidont . / C::::--<,b:5" / Tom lchelaon / YAU.EV DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATES, L.P. 8y: SUMMIT PARK, INC .. gon8111 portnar By, 1......--s----Q Hany J. O'Donnell, Jr., President ·1· Date: 'I-~-f1 " CITY OF RENTON By: ..f1_.-..,..:Z,. M, :,' M'!.,~ ~J•••• Tanner By:&,,;, Print Nlffle:~raen IU: City Clel1c ·2· ·;,~.: ,·:~: -- STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING ... I certify 1hat I know or have aatllflcto,y evldenc:e 1het TOM ICHELSON Is the Pffl<III who appnrtd before me, and uld pert0n acknowledged that aald s,etaOn algned thl1 lnltrumen1. on oath stated that aid paraan was authorized to execute tho lnGtrument and acknowtadged ft aa the Prelldant of Envtronmemal OOYllopmant, Inc., a Wuhlngton corporation, to bo 1ho froe and voluntary act of auch can,oratlon for tha~und p-mentioned in tha instrument, Datod thla l/;!!:_-day of ~( (t( ~ , 1987. •""'ct·;,. -~ ff J d /;L, . ~··'' ), .. ~ .f', '•,.; ~J -~ l-.:? .,,,o,,. ·,.;.. \ CS.-lflllwd f:::J:~~:~ouri:-::.~~) L JJ:b,1/, 674'mLM >:.'. ~:.,::;;;:_;. ~-;~ ,~ ,_;; ____ _ ~ ..... :r ... ~ .. o'> ... 1.) ... l Notary pubnc In ·~A ~of Washington, -~~ • ..... ·-. .... ~ ruldlngat ~ f:f!!!, -=. 0 , k''"~Y"" '•, .. , .. ,,",:> My appoln..,.nt eJqJlrea __ ,.l~i'-~'>f.g,""'~='--- STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING ... I certify thtt I know or have aati11facto,y evid811ca that TOM I CH ELSON ii the parson who· appeared before me, and said person acknowledged that uld per,on 1lgned thus lnatrument and acknowfedced ft to be aald person's free and voluntary act for the uses and purpoaea mentioned In the Instrument. d.. /) J · Dated this~ dav or ~ ('(. • 1997. c;;&ti/ l ~ ~ .... cs.. .. .,~ Notary pubflc: In ntJd forJ:ha state pt_Wuhlngton, residing at ~ ILJlf , Mv oppolntmant axplru_~t.,_,0~~,.,.@Ml=-- .,.,,.,,.,, ·--"/'-~: ""~~:- -~'. ., ..... ,. .1 ¥ * ., j ' . ·· .. .,.. •. STATE OF WASHINGTON I )u. COUNTY OF KING I I certify that I know or have satlafactory evidence thlt HARRY J. O'DONNELL.. JR, ii the peraon who appeared before me, and said pnon acknowledged that said person atgned 1h11 lnstrumant, on oath stated that said person wa1 audiorized to execute the lnatrument and ,dcnowledged it., the President of Summit Park, Inc,, a Wahington corpomfon, ganat11I partner of Valley Devetopmant Auoclates, L.P., a Wuhlnaion limiced partnership, to be the frle and volunta,v act of IUCh COlPOl'atlon and partnerahlp for the uses ,nd purpoaea mentioned In the ln$1tUment. Dated thllMdavof 6pmmb1/' , 1997. ELLEN F. SMITH STATE Of IIASHINGTOII IIOTARV--PUBUC IIIClll!!lll103llll'ill!IIHHO STATE OF WASHINGTON I I u. COUNTY OF KING I Cltw:±f!R.Ub-.... N011fV public in Jfld for the atate of Washington, realdlno et ~Eikbe:VfJp; Mv appointment explru JI -05-Q{) I certify that I know or have satfafacto,y evidence that ls the person who appeared before ma, and aaid peraan acknowltdgtd that &aid person aigntd this Instrument. on oath stated that said person waa authorind to execute the lnttrument and acknowledged it aa the Mayor of The City of Renton. a municfpal corporation, to be the free and voluntary act· of auch corporation for tha uaea and purposes mentioned In Cha lristrumant. UDJ7131.0l Dated this __ div DI , 1997 . .......,,... . ._ ... .,....,, Notary public In and for the state af Waahington, m~~~------------- Mv appointment expJ,u -------- + '"" i ._ ..... .,:i,. O /-c'rrr OF RENTON, .~f _!~lNG CO~;•VlASHINc\lTON .-:-1' .,,-LOT LINE AD../USlME, ,,· O> . ,· No LJ.:)A-02~LLA .,,,· • • .:· j .$"'" .... ,,······ .... ,.,, -~/,· t' .,; N / ,/' QEc1,.MA110N-... ig.,dW A.l.l. MEN 1~Y Tl1E5E pR£5£ljfSTiiA '1/E'ff UNDER- :.=. ··r·!:;IGHED O\Pt1iQrtS) Ol:;·lHE LAND HEREIN O SCRIBt'fJ 00 •', HEREBY l,IAJ(E,: A LOT LIHE ~DI! ERECY .i'URSUANT \~~,. TO RCW,Sli.17.040'AND DEC\'.ARE lHli= AO SlMO.rT TO BE f" .,,_,,,,,, 11-IE l)l'(APHIC REPRESENTktia.i CS' TH[ E. !,'ND THo\J•·~--""- :..,," ·•SAJ15 AO-'JSTM&ff 1S M,.Ot WITH Tljf CONSENTn\NO IN ACCORO,wtE 'MlH lRE DESIRES·· OF 11-1 ~~- OI WITNE~-~ERE°';.'W[ HA~_,f!E'T OUR .... :~ :·;t.ND SE~.~,,-~t,f1,o' ,' .,,/ ~u..c. ··.:s,- ~IMml ~*m.~ ,,/'./ ~~;~i~~i~:>;>~~''), :,. 1,••' .:~·ll\lJ l'alilDll_:"-(f" 1l£ HORIH ~ OF 11£ Na!IH ~ OF ,wt::sQl.lll£,\St"• .,.,,._ .... ,. .:· o.Wl'IIJI IF..'StClllN JI,~ ZJ NORtN, RM1:t S ~. ~ ~ E. SCMNElD£R 'ffll.Ei v.'f f>. Ql,IDJ_ -----M w __ =~°",kilu111 Sl"Alt: OI' 'IMSHNmlN) COi.MY Of" J!i1Ju:...J )SS. '.;. 1 am,~ ir;:;.r -~.<CORY OH °'™~ Tl"'-T &HE... WI$ ""1HOllmP..W ~:,,mcw,t;%~tsro~~- OI' SUCH PNUY FOfl Ut'; USES NID ~ _ INSTlll.UDIT. ..:• ,, : .:' 'IOlllUl...:ir !CIC to:fflf,.'lb0«1lal, t,'(RC"CNJrl1il.l',cr 11£ ~~ OF ,,~·: .. , __ ;~~Zt::-~:·:~~,~-:~:.:-··•,,. THE 1DUH IW.f OF 111: SCIJ!II.6(,fl\WITEII or~ J);TDIINSkP }t NC11'1H, RNIGE 5 £AS., l'WmT[ IIEmll!,. II~ COllftt.: ~- tM £.ISltRY OF ll£ ~ ~ IY coo>ri ID'1D No..~ (lAlBJl' WOIO s.): ..,, EXCO'T 1l£ IDT 10:i ff£l" Of" llW" P!l!IICll l'IX IClRlK 'ct,.ll£ SOJni ·,;;-~ • •: ••• blllEOF. ,,,,,,.,, •• , ••••• ,,,· """-" 1'1,331 'Sft ll.JJ IC. Tl£ l[Sf 105 rm or Ill: fGUH twJ or nw PIJ!lllN or Tl£ NCll'III IWF OF TI£ srurn tw.F or Tl£ NauH fWI or D£ SOUTIDST CXW!IEII or sa:tbl 31, n.lSH:P Zl NORlll, IWll:f. S EAST. ftlAE1E MERllWI, IN DC all.Ml', '111.SHN!mlN, LYN; fAS1ElU Of DE f.l;Sl IIMGlf or a;um-RlWl No. 11D """"""'"' :,,, •• ~·-"''~. U£ SOUIH JO fll:T ll£RECf". APPROVALS i c:::·:::.:~>· ./',,,• ,, .... ---"»,-..• , .. I N'PSOl<D '"~ _JQ_ o,y OF &<1••-<I ""' .,,,,,,,, . .1 ...... , .. -· ,, ~~@;;J~ .............. ~-. . ., ..... , _,,,,······ ··:, .. ,./~: . 'ill .,' -. ,.,, ___ ,. ·-, '-'•<r• z, ... , City of R .. ton Adminlstrolor Pllll'lllingfBuldlng/J>ubllc Wor1<1 Depcrtmen KING 00!.UHY DEPARTMDH DF" ASSE:ssME!ITS &:omlned ond opprD'o'ed !his .2l-doy Qf ~-' ,<>OZ. King County Assnsor t_y ~s_senor t,PPM'/N,, NO}ES: APPROVAL DF lHIS LOT UN( ,l.DJIJSTMEN!DOCS NOT GUARAHTEE THAT THE LOTS lWJ. BE SUIT L£ FOR DEVELOPMENT JN lHE FUTURE. 1HE l£GAL TRANSFER CF THE PROPERTY MUST BE DONE BY A TE INSTRUMENT. ':::,., •. ,-= ,, ., .. ,.,.,,,-.. , .... -· ··.:,?;· ··a~/· VOL/PAGE LS; CITY OF RENTON LAND RECORD No. REFERENCES 1. PW or 5Ul6rT l'AmC, \OL 173 PG. 11-14. 2. ·,a,. SUM:t f'OR ~ !n'EIJJ>MOO oo. or lHE SPRIN:lllllaC Slit" OOID l/2!J/9$. ST IWfSOI ~ #,~ COlfflY OOtEERiMl lVAlmElli SllMY No. 31-23-S-7 • . /~ RO,,D S.19Ml ST. -CMlR RCWl" no.TEO 1WD1 17. 15611 • . ,;·. •-ar.t.>fF RDrn»I IIOlJMlW 1M WJSN£NT No. ~ RCCCAOCD IJ«R .,,~ No. 11601117IOQJ. .,,•·'' .,,,,A~ mu~ COll>AN'I' PlAT CERlflCA1E OIW: No. 498709. OOID .,,,· • .-.'OCTOIER 6, 1999. Nil SI.J'f'l.nll'lt COi111ni1EMr no.TED ~ 21, 2002. -• /. 6. ~IXXfAf'~ ~ or SE 31-23-5. .. ,.:.-.--~~~::::-.L·~,L~:-~ ·. ~}:la>tmN; tw,OITDiAL ~ ~ lSNG A 1ll'IXJI 2110 \. ~WQtt ~ .• ~~,,~.~~NJ. IIEASllEICN1S Mr. .. U.S. ··:, •••. 2. ll£.iffi£f ~ FOR 1115 LOT lJf£ idWSl1ENT EXWllS II£ !llWIEEIIS • ·'Ol''Wl:'~-1~· .,·: .,,· 3. 1iU. .~,~ IIElXRl ~ AND OMR DOClAOfiS llllJ IIA.Y mu:r Tl£ WW1Y or .1'11..E or lHE Ult lN: liWSllENT SHJlftl IE1iEDN W.\S 08TAHD fiD,I OilCIGCI Tll1.E: tGltw::E IXU'.Nlt' /UT aJIIl1CA1E DROCR No. 498709. OOED DC1tlJEJI 5, llm!I, Nil ~ CCMf1llEM" ootD fEEIRUMY 21, 2001. 4. sue.rn TO tTlY or ADffllN l'.lRrllWQ: No. l790 £SDaSDlc SPCCW,. ASS£S:Sl,Of (ISIJIEl Flit mt11 !iEIM:t POI IISTiltllDlt ~ 1/IUR REC. Ko. MOJl60S04. ~-SlBttl" ID Tl£ TtRMS AHO ca.:aTDIS or WECOlilERS IIGliEDE(f ~ 111tE! REC. No. 951!5a!1DJ22, NG AIE«ll Bl'~ NfJ ~ or IAlliXIIERS ~ R£C!RIEil 1JIC:cJI REC. MiJ. 97\0HQl<IO. B. Nit STRtx:llllES I.DCAml wmt:N 7HIS lDT LI£ RlJllSTl,llff ARE TO Br R£llCMD .. cawNC1XlN tml n,; SU8Sm.ElT OC!tllPMEM" 1£RE!:F. 7. IC.IIS1lll tor CIDERS WU BE STAKED Willi 1/'t IJl" 2~· IIElWI Nil l'IASl'I: CN' STAIF'ED "'DIIP IIC f\S 22952" at OTifJI N'l'lla'IW£ WEANS lJ'ffi 1l£ CDf'l£TDI II' TI£ oouoPIIEHT or Co.lllUI SPIIIGS NWmOrS ·:. y;_ .. --····· ,:,, .. ~·-••,,, .. <:;,''t _{_~. LND 30-0242 '·':.~J!(l,.¥-11:.£~31, ~-~NORlH,~5~:~ RECORDING NO. DALEY--MOAROW-POBLE1E, INC. ·.,,,._ 726 AUOURN WAY N. ··: '';;-,·sctmOEaI«:>MES,)IC. .,· _,, H[C0RD£R'S C£Rnf1CATE: ;tit: n.,,.,, --2.!... ..,. II(~ ad3a, h-lS'.!f...«.b-...at-~- ~-£.-~ SLfM'riw"$ JWC <!l o P,.,° ' If' -· ..... LAND SURVEYO/tS CER11FICATF 11>111..0TUE:N1.lll!mJCNr~-onh ·--"'-·_...,._., --u,,,---~-dlr-;,,..,.. 2002. ~-~~ AUBURN, WA. 96002 PHONE: (253)3.33-2200 (FAX)333-2206 ~~~ ·,,. 6S1.0•"SOUTHG0HER Bl:lih. -TUIC\iit.A, WA .• "981W,. .• " .. ,, •• ,. /PHONE NJi.·(206) 2~:.2471 /" ··~ .- __ JM_ ' LOT~~ SlE'~ .. ~ .. · 1· .. 100' 27 .I.JN 02 97390 ' ,(~·· :' _ft ·.,,.,,.._._ VOL/PAGE g_/ C')·.,· Cf.1'Y OF J'll;f:ITON, I .KING CQ(iNTY;··WASHINIJTON _,/LOT LINE AMSTMEI .,23S, t,.;" .-:-0> i/·t No: !;UA--Oy,0-tS~~LA [ I --NaNC.,NCASI: (wml<JCT99) CITY OF REITTON LAND RECORD No. LND 30-0242 ·,.,,,,....... ··1··..--· ,., ....... /· ........ __ ... ,• ,---'-{WSllEIIOCTn} ~.?,-~!!.41~ ,,,..~ -~---'-'----------- , .. ,-...... ,,_.;, i ·\··: .Mt~~;'fl .... ,.,.,_1> 1J1UIJ' ___ -----------------~m ·1 ,;:· ,.•'' • I : { JI~ •' •, ~f W ~ Nil Kf'!XORAPHIC.11. SUll,tt .·.' ' .: ·. ~,· 1; .Ill w,~-ht1/4. SEl(.4.-· ·""""-,,.. OT p ARK II: (D rr~&\~ 01 :: ' ,. J ·->' t ~.;3.1-23-5 ,,• ~i· T ALB t,UNJUM W IIJ twlSDI 9JIM'i»IG.. DAlED l/llJ/95 ._ ::· .,~ . ."· .,.,, ,<' ,,"'-., • //' ,~r: ... c~~ ,40/a-1 3 Itti RIDGE il --~ ,·· ,. •' ,J ~ • .,. • < Pl-1 • ~ aoT F > 4 ,~-17 "" JI ·•···· ,;,> ·'3000• xr:-...,_~, ,~-S.l.H..r<.'5~~/4.SE1.JJ1--2.3-5. TRACT A TAL voL;;.:<(19 / I ,,·· • ,, ~YJN,1 E OF t, ~ IJIF w ~ 9F NEf/4, SEl/4 JHU--5 N891H'oo"w 1309 68' 8 O)~ 6 ,·' I '.;· ,; ,,.. • '699.94· 21~ 02• 7 ! ...... ____ .... I -... . ... · , _,... "' ·.;' _,... ·:;-609, •. ·1 ir~ ~~ I r .,· 1 ·• ,, -· •• . ....... ··,.,t. , i~ ! I···: .;· 1.,[ .,· .. _,. p~~_._,,, .. ,,,,• .t, ... ,'4 \ ~- I I If. .,· .-. ·· ,,· ,,·.,. .. ~---= -~ .. ( ·. -~=·· :'· · ._,.;::'' ··-,,,,. f-. REC. No. 111990826000429 I ga1aj ,, ... { N89:0Too'W .• ; .. , .. , .. ",--./"''·· t ~ ~D ~ I:! 13'. ~ t~- " 3 MERlDIAA ~--, ·. "' ~-~ . .,'155.03' .,• lo ..• ,.,,,. WASHINGTON STATE PLANE NO/!'l'H ON€' ··: ii g~ :;:; • •:,,,. :, !'-!.,•'""•":,. \;. HPGN 8.3/111, PER CITY OP R N '·.. -...._:! "1 1· ":°; ~~ BASIS OF BEAAlNGS: .• •· .. :I 1-;, w si N89'01'00"W • = co=~ "!"""'~ > lf• :g ~ .... ....... . ........ ,·· cc ,.i,,,,..:· _._/Y -'~A~fu...._:c· ~I~ .. ~-c- TI-lE UNE eawEEN q1"'f OF R ·-·. § !'.l ~ c6 .,-··· ").' ·' SURVEY CONI"ROt. PT,•'1872 & PT 1227 I ~~, :>I 110.67 :: .,•' .,.- Bo.RING ,~0-011 04-W ,."• , l ...Jb g N89'0!'00'W ,-,,• GflAfHK: SCAU;, . ·-· . /I <( i O w 166.50' ,oo : 50 10.lil-' 21?9'' //" I-§E 8 -b •• . . _, 1 1 ., 1 I .J· _.,·· ,,,· ............. ,,. , I m ~ ; .,. C •• =·> , I• ,• .·' I ' t ~ !!J ~ , •• , Inch -100°tt"•··· ! ,. ,· : :z: ~~~-~ REITTffl.SV~I co~ .. L, ,,. .. ·r::.:: .· :·,1' .~:w::.~. ;---::;~.~~=~:--------~ (SR) KlNG COUNT'f ENGINEER! G DEP~ •• J ,•· ,-' r ~ i.,.. .'DJlJSl!ll ND. SURVEY No J1-2J-5-• • •·•' ,i?' _.. ~ ';f. 236,701 sr± 5.0N;. --.. 1 ...... .. -~:Jii., •.. ,.: (M) MEASURED I . '· ,•' . '· .. . _._. ·•,,.,._~-···· ~~ 1C5"511'1J(j.4' - (C) CALCIJlATEO oo 1 -6S4.43' ·.'· 606.90' .. ~5f:l:9.J1/C. . .-.· .• t'"' 1;1i;Ht' --S. lll,lllfl_: Kl/l. stl/4,ll-D-S _______________ _ t ,,,· UNPLA , 0 ADJUSTED LOT LINE ,,,,· ,_.,·_,.. ;.,. ... ,· ... ~~ ~~ ;~ D -S- " a z 0 LOT LINE TO BE AOJIJl I ...• N.~~~0·1attw 1301.33' S. I.N~ Nl/2. N1/2. S1/2, N1/2. SEl/i. Jl-i' ,o.00' EXISTlNG OIMENSION 88'311'52"{ ··-,, ... ,:: ,·. § / TO OE ADJUSTED 1 .. _._. ...... ,... ·;.,•· 32.W AOJUSTED LOT DIMENSIO ~~W,6 ---~····-.-~·-_._/· • rii'irii:Vm1u~ -~ -~ ----_ ---_ ---~ 31 ~ 89UTH ,;5th STilEET .' . .-. .., ~ <i • • ! ·' (SOIJU} 1S2ND SJ:1 --,: : : , •• ~·-'•. . llS.!;, p,: ""-lffl I •. ' ' ,.-' ,· .. :~::Ma:;:~.4~ ~7=::~~,WM I oALEY-=-MoRROW-POBLETE. INC." -,;·,. ~'HOMES,'INC. •. ,' 726 AUBURN WAY N. • 6~)D''sounfCENTER Et:VD. --TUK'MLA. WA.."0'9B$ ·1 ~ -•\, .... cir'fOFA.;/TON .,,... ,,.,•· .k,.)i' ENOINEEA<Na -SURVEYINa LOT'UNE APJUSIME,NT i" / LAND PLANNING srTE~ _._;_.:" _/,. -"'JM8/SMR ..,.. 1" 100' -97J90l.l.A'. _, ~•.-, . ....-27 JUN OZ .-97J90 ,:·: . .,.. ~.-~ AUBURN, WA. 9B00Z '.,.,,_.,.., :· •. ( ) .-.: .,· ·· I ----~ONE: (253)333-2200 (FAX)333-2206 . _,-. PHONE_~· 206 ~,a-2-471 .• "•Cc.//-- RETURN ADDRESS ~;t;):,,&v€L-or'.rtc;.A./T ~LT;(J e~~ /LC.- 1326 5th Av~ 703 Skinher.Building 11111,~,,~11/f tlillillliilf llll TALBOT DEVELOP EAS 13 • 011 19990826000429 PAGE ee1 OF 886 88/28/1999 09·25 KING COUNTY , UA Please prmt neatly o;·.-l)'.pe 1nfonria~n/. Document Titl~(s) ·.· Tanoorary Cul-De-Sa~E\is~t ::::::t~s:=~ ::~:c1:~o: .{ .. '[,,.:;:;:,; ·· ·· . Addiljonal R~f•n#e 1·.'on pqo _ Gra~ior(s) ~. Fl;,t am Mlddle lnlllal) ~eq/ Lilk ,/ A, ... .S:•Jl!.r.<.L wc,,.IJ,,J ··-" Grantee(s) <uui;,1n1 and Aflil~ ,~) Talbot Develoµnent Pari::neii:s ,, ILG Additional gramon on page _ ~~itional grantees on page _ Legal Description (abbreviated form: I.e. lot, bloc{pl,#:or ~: ... ~ •. ~. q,..Jer/q~~·> Portion of: N 1/2, N 1/2, SE 1/4, SEC. 31:;T. 23 ;~/. R( sb:".,w.M: .::·Add1uonlft~~II is (in pa~(~ .. .. . ··:,; ,. Assessor's Property Tax Parcel/Account Number 312305-9048 ,.1,nonal M;~l l'~on~~gc i The Audilor/Recorder wUI rely on the information provided on this form. The staff will not read the d~t to.:'i~rifY:·~he T accurac,· or completeness or the indexing information provided herein. ·· 'NMPOl!!AltV Cll'L,~~AC ltA~ • i '~~ 'illlwlble coalideratlon, the r8*pt of wllldl is hereby ~. Ula ClllllpCll, e .~mglo·wommi:(bcroafler "Oraowr') hereby g&'llll!ll lllid l:WIYll)'ii w the Cky otRellmn 811d u, Talbot . J:>e~Joi,inalll Pma,itm, L.L.C. (here.ab.i:r "Talbot") e lffliPOf&r)' ~lllalve e,serneftt o\W, Wider .. ··· am. ~Ill !fie real pio~rty le&alb' ~ on E.lmblt A fer 111.e c:onstfUCtion, mainltl\llllt:II 1111d i repair.of 11 ~~-c;ul.do-~cilll tho.,~ of Bunlelt A~ on tbe COlllbem lldge of ttie pis of T81¥.t R~. 011;1hc .~ ~"coll4km_.~ ~ herein. .~ ~ .1'11~!:U~mc ~J,~/~lelely upon th9 laler of tha fotlowlng IWO evealll: (1). TIie. reair,dlng:of e;:-~ pl1!t vo, lh¢. p~ ,ubject 10 said 118l18111Mt11, lied (2) Ille ~ by. 1be C!&y ofRartim of!tie QI@~ l'Dallweyt on llald pin. · , · . .... ,., .. ·· . ,, .. . ... ',• ~ 3. Grllitlees ~ ~ ~fy;~ 11?,ld Cirmior lft4 the propeny hll1'mlesa frolll any 006t, ,;hilms, llcnli·l)r)illblll_!:)-, liitludJl,a ~b ~s'/tii4, ID COlll*tlon wld,·ttr,, CODSttuction, maintenanc:a end repair of liald ri:iildway ~~ac. . . ., . •' . ..... . S:ectic o 3, Tile cul-lk·1ili' rol!iiway bbl !!id pt~' wl!l be bullt to Cl1)' or aemon allmdarda fot II llllbdivision roadway so tha.fOr~f i:an Ille ~!It otfc ~ .. plllt.Qfdle ~ iii its · nl\UrO subdiylliOII. . / j ,$,e9!n~d~. Talbot will cle11111P mid ~ve .. fr6~.1he ~r,a''.;~:a11 i{;i,~li imd ~~--rea11ltftotn ba wt1r!t on or abOUI Ille cul~./ Talbot v6!:1.malntun.the ~ B1'0:Q.{ ... ··. •' ,:, .. •: .,··· :, :: :: .. /i .. ·-~ S, /Ihla Tempornry Cul-1».Sa; Bllament la binding lli!Pfl J!la ~ a,i,dlhDk hlllu, ,.Sw:ce~ileml tll\d ~.--·TI)\168.lement may be used by members of !be pu~Uc,\ll!der !he IMIIJle tsrmB / and cc:mdJtlalla aa C)lher lllmllar Renton public madWayo. · · · · ·· •, \ -~A1£1),IG :zt)l day of /J1a,1, , 19911 . ............... ...-. . . . ........ , ... jJ GlANTOR: GJlANlP.E: CITY OF RENTON t;..;· .. '\_· ----------·''Prb.llNlllll9l...__ ________ _ •• n.,:" .. ··. TALBOT DEUELOP (AS 13 00 19990826000429 PAGE':.00t OF {li,6 . 0a/26~fn9 09 25.::· KI NG COUNTY{ l-lA .,:' -~,,., ....... " ' S'l'ATE OF W ASHINOTON ~~-.. p!IKING STA'l'E OFVWASmNG'l'ON c9tm,''o~KJNG ) ) JI), ) ) ) 01, ) ' .. ,, ·,, .. ,; /1 c:eJry ~ I,~_or have satisfactory evidance lhl.i& ., .... ·.( /' f _i . la the i paredll wjlo ai,petrid before me, and said person emiowleclp:I ll1lt s&id/pelllllll lllpod 1111D .,, .. ,~ on _!)8111 staled ·that said penon was authorized to execute lbs., Dll1Nll!Alllt amt iickm,wJec18~ lt'i!! th.e. ) •• of CITY OP RENTON, a Wasllln,loa lllUD!clpallty, t.o tie"tlle,·free ~NI ~olnn,tary 81:t,,nf ooi:h munlclpallr;y for the uw and PllfPOtel mCAtlollcd in ~ lnslrulllent . . .. /~cf-) ·"' .. ,, .,· . ~l'li:,sc,IIO!q,llo=411~) N~ P?bHc:. 'in ¢d tor'lbe lllQ .. ot.WlllhlnaUm. relldU13 iii .,... / / -" .,· ./ · ··., .. My eppotiim\Mt ol.pirea ' ,· .. ··. ·. .. STAT£ OF WASHINO'l'ON tO~OP ___ _ ) ) ss. ) , .,I cenliy thiS I !snow or have smafaaory evld=co !bet oog .::r. D'WIX:EU...Ji?J§ \be P«"® ~ ~-b#forc me, mid aaid PfflOll ecl!:nowledged Illa said parllOII alpd chis ·,,,., .. /·· ,•· ~ .. ~/bl!!h ~ IIIS . .sa14 parson wao t:lllhorbed 10 exucuie Ille ~ 1111d -~~~~~=!E~~Tor~n;:s~-~~&; ".(., ', ',.\· CO~ fol' thllll1!11$ ll!ldll\if!IOW 1llOllliol'isd lit.;the UIStNJIICllt, J)~ th~ .. 9:n+-: d&Y or //f:!Aj / / . . 19911. ELLEN :F~ SMITlf sr ATE oF wAsfilNG10N NOTARY-•-PUBLIC / .,. 1!Y COW:!ISSIOH [XPIR£$ ll-05-00 }.f(/01);~· ... , .. ' TALllOT DEUELOP EAS 13 00 .::· ...... ..:: 199908l600~429 PAGE 004 ·oF" 0~ . ~1~~6 ~6~~iv ?9 ~~~ .... (· April 23, 1998 ··... ... , Triad 97--006-T ALBOT RIDGE ... '· J · · · ,,,,. . . . . i . ' LEGAt DESCRIPTION .. ·.. .· .. ·. · ,, · · .. ". , .(OFF~lTE ~'AROUND.EASEMENT) , . , . '. , ,·:,, HIATPORTIONOFA ~cf-~FLANO-DESCRIBEDIN.:INSTR~~•RECORDEDUNDER · · ·. ·: ..... :. ·"'" .. : ,:;.RECORDING NUMBER 9612312260, BEING A PORTION OF THE NORTfl l!ALF OF ·TIIE,N0RTH HM.F. • . \. , •· ' ... J· ,0F,THE SOlITHEASTQUARTEROF SECTION 31, TOWNSHlP 23J~OR'rn, RANGE 5 .. EAST, , ', :·. . .WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, IN KING COUNTY, WAS!JlNGTON; LYING; WI'fWN A 50 FOOT•WIDE, · • ·" ... ;:~~o~s7~' TIIE CENTERLINE OF WHICH l.s M()l_ll;}PARTICUL,,(RLY.bESCIµBED'A:S,\. COMMENCING AT.T!ffi NORTIIEAST CORNER OF S'A:1»-so\frHEAS}'~tJAATER o# Sfj.C'ripN 3,; TIIENCl(NORTl:I 01°14'48" EAST, ALONG THE EAST LINE QF Tiffi NORTIIEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 31,25.01 FEET TO TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE A,U)NG SAID CENTERLINE, soUTH 89°26'29'' WE$T 11s.22 FEET To THE BEGINNING oF A cuiwE coNcAYE to nm SOWHEA.ST HAVING A RADIUS OF 100.00 FEET; THENCE WESTERLY AND SOUTHEJP., Y ALONG SAII> C~VE THROjJGHA.(;ENTRAL ANGLE OF 88°12'22" AN ARC DiSTJ!iNC.:E qF 153'_95 FEET; TI:IENCESOUTH 01°14i0T' WEST 151.17 FEET TOTIIE TERMINUS OF THIS''CENTERLINE. =:·,:,,.,,... "' .... ..· . TOGETHER WJTH THE AREA INCLUDED WITifIN THE CIRCUMFERENCE OF A CIRCLE HA YING A RADii'Js OF 55,.<\o IIEET{I'HE CE!iITER-OFWHJCH IS THE AFOREDESCRIBED TERMJNUS POINT ., ...... ,,.,.,,· :. ·:' _.:: .'.· ./ ····: .. AND TOGETIIER \vrrif.THA T POkTION OF SAID TRACT OF LAND LYING SOlITHEASTERL Y OF A CURVE CONCA VE.TO THE NORTHW!ist HAVING;\ RADIUS OF 25 FEET WIDCH CURVE IS TANGENT TO BOTl'ITHE AFOREDESCRIBEP CIRCLE HA YING A RADIUS OF 55 FEET AND THE WEST LINE OF THE 50.F"OOT S~. .. .,· .,.· .·.· ·· ... , .. ~EE~~~J!&:~~~tr~itr!tlE:~~1!~:FA EAST LINE OF THE 50 FOOT WIDE STIUP. ·•·· .. .. . . . ,.,• .. WRITTEN· lML CHECKED: BTF TRIAD ASSOCIATES 11814 115th Avenue N.E Kirkland, WA 98034 (425)821-8448 / Fax (425)821-3481 TALBOT DEVELOP EAS 13 00 199~0a;~0004i9 PAGE 00~ or ~6 00/26,,.199'9 09·-~s.:'.- KING COUNTY, l,.IA ··· -/• '·•'f . -:. ~., •. , ; ' m ·,·,-'11:it' ···-·., ... __ 1'.5:1 Ill ~®-·'° (\I <I: • . ~:-·'(r>':;;J;-.·.-.· .:= · ...... \Di... G~ --N-.o a-.... '!. -~ _ ··--·--.-.. -., .. ~ i-·-~:-a . T:71. . . . . : '.669~18 + \ ' ----•• ·, N89'D1'""rl . ··17.' ;. :· ... ,. f? -. . ... ,, 15 17 16 'J<, j~ .... .. ;;; ~- . ' "·(l'_ctl .,u 'iJW4AD~--(j\'l,,;l,'-;e(.!I 1181, 115Ui\&:n NI -·· ·.-_ er-Cl " z ~twit·--,,,~-~-· .. ·--~ ~ &:~ Tel !25.AZUm · .· Toll Pret·:aoa.4M,o,~t·· Fu 4ill.li2Ullll ·· . lr'n'.tri.~.COJII ). _;: m m "' I I a,~ ~~ C) 'I~ .1 .J I. / S. 47TH PLACE ' -N89'26'29""'E 178.22 - 3 2 1 .... 75})1' ,·£ . .1/4 ·coRNER .. ifi .. ·.. . ·Jl~ "I: ··'-' . :~~ .·~·.· .• 11.F r,,,, .. ~ ~--: t .. " I "' ~ -----::~· --.,._, 5 I I . . s1 . ·· .. ~ -. I I I , .,.!Ii··· ·· ...•.. ,•· Ii .:· ':··. ~' • . ·ll: -. . ... ·· .•. ••·· ~ i ci: i ~ .... !O ~ tXl -38$.5S. '':.LJ 250.001 ?w' --N89TJ0'56".W . .: R=25.00' -; 659.$ •· ."? ··:'i1219~r·· · ,.. . .... , .•........ ..f?.=21.00-.'.:.· L=22.39' ( ...., ...... ,:-/· ·t· . · L=i22'I7.' LI -5119'04-.." ·.... ". \ ii ,;e~o·4e'tr( · \ ~ TERAPOIIARY TURNAR .. iJND . .. :;, ~ EASEMENT. .: C PORTION OF: ·'N.J/2, ·N .. J/2, SE .. 1/4, SEC; 31, 'T:, 23\N., R. 5:E., ·,,_,.-: -, ~· _ \ Cl) /R=55.q(?' .. ,·.... ·•.:: n ·· _ Ill L=271.J1 ;-· ·•· .•. ,. kl · ~ =282:J!J.'OB" '.__ '\ 3; ,q; ·.. ··.. ' ... W.M. )'., ,~-·.········· ::z:: .! IQ SCALE: 1" ; 100· ~ I:: <., bj -·,'!, •. :-~ i' '; ,'·-! ,:..... 1-.. _: j "'' . ' "' t ....J ~~ I I!:! :,.: I l I le ~ RON GUEST ~ ll.llllGER: DIS!CNEI>. CADD, CIIICDD: DAIi: SCALI: JOB NUllBIR w FAB ~ JML R 4/16/98 °' HORJZ., 1 • = 1 oo· VEl!T.: I 97-006 ~ SHUT NUKBII ~ 1 011 ' .. " 'fl. ~ w ~~ .J w " w Q ... la ,t ... ~ -· • After Recording Return to: Harbour Homes, LLC c/o Geonerco Management, LLC Attn: John Baringer 1441 North 34th Street, Suite 200 Seattle, WA 98103 - I City of Renton Planning Division MAY 2 1 1U1l ' -- ( DECLARATION OF COVJENANTS, CONDITIONS, AND RESTRICTIONS FOR THE PLAT OF VUECREST ESTATES THIS DECLARATION is made on the date set forth below by Harbour Homes, LLC, a Washington limited liability company ("Declarant"). A. B. Declarant desires t~ject the real prone·.. described in Article 2 hereof to the provisions of this Declaration to·or~idential~munity of single-family housing (as "single family" is defined below) ~at<;o uses as seW~~ in Section 6.2 hereof. . NOW,_THE~~.cl~rant n~y ~s1thaf ~l property described in Article 2 of this Declaratton, m9Judmg the imnrovementsiiconstr.ucted or to be constructed thereon, is hereby ~fected to tlflrovision. Declar~mfn and shall be held, sold, transferred, conveyed, 1IT~e'd, OCCMJ!i~d and mortgaged or otherwise encumbered subject to the covenants,1 onditions, rJt'%'ittion~!fe\1ments, a~)sments, and liens, hereinafter set forth, which ar fodlie%t-rnose of ~ro&ctingth-lue ~d}desirability of, and which shall run with the titl,y~\~, the realpr~erty he'fe~ or hereafth{t!\"ade subject hereto, and shall be binding on all perso~1s~p~ving any rigli , title, .or interest in all or any portion of the real property now or hereafter maoe subject hereto, their resnective heirs, legal representatives, successors, successors-'i" and assign and shal~i~ure to the benefit of each and every owner of all or any portion thereo .. ARTICLE 1 DEFINITIONS I.I Words Defined. The following words, when used in this Declaration or in any Supplementary Declaration (unless the context shall prohibit), shall have the following meanings: 1.1.1 "Association" shall mean Vuecrest Estates Homeowners Association, a Washington nonprofit corporation, its successors and assigns. 1.1.2 "Board of Directors" or "Board" of the Association shall be the appointed or elected body, as applicable, having its norrnal meaning under Washington law. 2 1.1.3 "Bylaws" shall refer to the Bylaws of the Vuecrest Estates Homeowners Association. 1.1.4 "Common Areas" shall mean any and all real and personal property and easements and other interests therein, together with the facilities and improvements located thereon as designated on the final plat of the Community or as otherwise conveyed to the Association for the common use and enjoyment of the Owners. 1.1.5 "Community" shall mean and refer to th"atcertain real property and interest therein described in Article 2, and such additions th'b¥dtWas may be made by Declarant by Supplementary Declaration. . I. I .6 "C?~munity-Wide Sta?~-sliall mean .\):~tandard of conduct, mamtenance, or other activity generally prevmhug!jff the Commum~uch standard may be more specifically determined by the Board of~tors. Such determination, however, shall generally be made with reference to the standaro 1 ~~nally established~,Declarant. I. I .7 "Declarant" shall mean and re•g/~-our Homes, · @;"and its successors-in-title and assigns, pro~~d~any such sue essor-in-title or assign shall acquire for the purpose of development or sale all fYal!y):pJ&_rtion off1'~~aining undeveloped or unsold portions of the real property described ~n Articl~~,f ~ provi\}~urther, in the instrument of con_veyance to any susJ.11?1u8ges~or-in-title or assign, such success.wsn-title or a~sign is designated as the "9~l~ant~under li!&&e gralit~~F£ conveya~ce, which grantor shall be the "Declarllnt" hereuno¥i1~ the tJ~~h conve)'l!J)Ce; provided, further, upon such designation offutfos.uccess~eclaran~ghts of the former Declarant in and to such status as "Declarant" hit~under sn-se, it b ~ understood that as to all of the property describ~~cle,2, wh~t:ted to ~Declaration, there shall be only one "Declarll11t''i~ei!Wd'tr'jat,;: one,point i~~ '1, 1. I .8 "De~~Reriod" shall mean that period of time beginning on the date this D claration is recoroed in t~cords of King County and ending on the earliest to occur of (i) five ·-5) years fro~the date dfrecording of this Declaration; or (ii) the date Declarant holds a special meetlWg of the Association, in accordance with the Bylaws, for the purpose of transitioning the ~gement of the Association from the Declarant to the Owners, or (iii) the date 120 days after , eclarant has conveyed 75% of the lots within the Community. 1. 1.9 "Governing Documents" shall mean and refer to this Declaration, the Articles oflncorporation (if any) and Bylaws of the Association, and rules and regulations (if any) of the Community adopted by the Board, as any of the foregoing may be amended from time to time. 1.1.10 "Lot" shall mean any plot of land within the Community, whether or not improvements are constructed thereon, which constitutes or will constitute, after the construction of improvements, a residential dwelling site as shown on a plat recorded in the records of King County. 3 l .1.11 "Mortgage" means any mortgage, deed of trust, and any and all other similar instruments used for the purpose of encumbering real property in the Community as security for the payment or satisfaction of an obligation. 1.1.12 "Mortgagee" shall mean the holder of a Mortgage. 1.1.13 "Occupant" shall mean any Person occupying all or any portion of a residence or other property located within the Community for any period of time, regardless of whether such Person is a tenant or the Owner of such property, .. ~ota ~ssociation M~,[Ile~s all of the votes attributable to of the Association (i~l'ftding votes of©eclarant). ·. ''RTICLE2 PROPERT~Y4SUBJECT TO THIS DECLARATION The real prope.i;f&..,~.d, by the recording of this Declaration, subject to the covenants and restricti~eafter set forth and which, by virtue of the recording of this Declaration, shall be held, transferred, sold, conveyed, used, occupied, and mortgaged or otherwise encumbered subject to this Declaration is the real property described as: LOTS_ THROUGH_, INCLUSIVE, OF VUECREST ESTATES ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME OF PLATS AT PAGES AND RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER _________ . SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON 4 Private Tracts: List Tracts and party responsible for ownership and maintenance Common Areas: List Common areas and party responsible for ownership and maintenance ARTICLE3 VUECREST EST A TES HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION 3.1 Description of Association. The Associa/1-~ay, at the election of the Declarant or the Association, be incorporated as a no~oration organized and existing under the laws of the State of Washingtors~M Association shall be charged with the duties and vested with the powers prescribed £~Wand set fort~eliGoverning Documents; provided, however, that no suc~verning Documents, · t · er than the D~l,rnliM, shall fO' ~, re,so, he am~d~V""''"' w, with this Declaration. 3.2 Board of Director~larant shall H ~e~e right to appoint or remove any member or members of the Board of•IDi~l~,o~ any offic1r1 officers of the Association until termination of the Develop1;1ent~d. Each Ow~er, oy~~ptance of a deed_ to or other conveyance of a Lo\@'ests m Declarant the kffiilonty to ap~t and remove directors and officers of the Ass'Wiati~~\\ring the"!~. elqp.m. 1€'niW~ TI!e directors selected by the Declarant need not9awners. ~ number-~tors sfiaU ue as set forth in the Bylaws. Following terminatio o:£the Development Perioa, the Board of Directors shall be elected by the Owners in accordance with tlie ylaws. ' ,..6'ership .. ,~ Owner~'nterest in any Lot that is subject to this Declaration shall be a,1R to fl!\~ membersliip in the Association and membership in the Associm°f'-n shall consist e~ively£Qwuch owners. The foregoing is not intended to include Persons wlfo hold an interes erely asis~~urity for the performance of an obligation, and the giving of a security interest s~not ter~nate the Owner's membership. No Owner, whether one or more Pe,~hall have,more than one (I) membership per Lot. Membership shall be appurtenant to and ma~ot ~arated from ownership of any Lot. The rights and privileges of membership, inclclli1*1Ml_tn.,,\~.ffeght to vote and to hold office, may be exercised by a member or the member's spouse,"b~in no event shall more than one (1) vote be cast nor office held for each Lot owned. 3.4 Voting. Members shall be entitled to one (I) vote for each Lot owned. When more than one (I) Person holds an ownership interest in any Lot, the vote for such Lot shall be exercised as those Owners themselves determine and advise the Secretary prior to any meeting. In the absence of such advice, the Lot's vote shall be suspended in the event more than one (1) Person seeks to exercise it. 3.5 Architectural Control Committee. No construction, alteration, addition, refurbishing, or erection of any structure or any nature whatsoever shall be commenced or 5 placed upon any part of the Community, except that which is installed by the Declarant, or is approved in accordance with this Section, or as is otherwise expressly permitted herein. Any such construction, alteration, addition, refurbishing, or erection shall not be made unless and until plans and specifications showing the nature, kind, shape, size and height, architectural design and detail, materials, workmanship, colors, location on site, improvement and site grade elevations, and site landscaping shall have been submitted in writing to and approved by the Architectural Control Committee (the "ACC") established pursuant to this Section 3.5. The Board may employ architects, engineers, or other Persons as it deems necessary to enable the ACC to perform its review. Written design guidelines anditocedures ("Design Guidelines") may be established by the Board for the exe =f this review, which Design Guidelines may provide for a review fee. Copies of the 'i)sign Guidelines shall be available to all Owners upon request for a reasonable fee. ~ 3.5.1 The ACC shall consist o'n~ess than one O'Omor more than five (5) members, who need not be Owners. So long as the Declarant owns ~perty for development and/or sale in the Community, Hi , .eclarant shall have the right to appoint or remov_e any or all members oft~e ACC. Upon the ~~01~ earlier surr~~,i,in w~iting of such nght, the Board shall appomtmffilmembers ofih~. @, however the ACG<shall include two members of the Board. 3.5.3 Tii \iCC snail b~ the sole arbiter of plans submitted to it and may withholdf~for any reason, incl tliJtgmesth ~considerations, and it shall be entitled to stop <:tructi!fit(]p'it'.a1~pp~_qs or this Declaration. 3.5.4 PU\"'NS AND,~CIFICATIONS ARE NOT APPROVED FOR ENGINEERING OR STRtmURAL , SIGN OR QUALITY OF MATERIALS, AND BY APPROVIN~l!T.~H PLANID SPECIFICATIONS NEITHER THE ACC, THE MEMBERS THB~pF, NOR!illHE ASSOCIATION ASSUMES LIABILITY OR RESPONSIBILITY~RE~~, NOR FOR ANY DEFECT IN ANY STRUCTURE CONSTRUCTED FR0~~,@H PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS. NEITHER DECLARANT, THE ASS© IATION, THE ACC, THE BOARD, NOR THE OFFICERS, DIRECTORS, MEMBERS, EMPLOYEES, AND AGENTS OF ANY OF THEM SHALL BE LIABLE IN DAMAGES TO ANYONE SUBMITTING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS TO ANY OF THEM FOR APPROVAL, OR TO ANY OWNER OF PROPERTY AFFECTED BY THESE RESTRICTIONS BY REASON OF MIST AKE IN JUDGMENT, NEGLIGENCE, OR NONFEASANCE ARISING OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL ORF AIL URE TO APPROVE OR DISAPPROVE ANY SUCH PLANS OR SPECIFICATIONS. EVERY PERSON WHO SUBMITS PLANS OR SPECIFICATIONS AND EVERY OWNER AGREES THAT SUCH PERSON OR OWNER WILL NOT BRING ANY ACTION OR SUIT AGAINST DECLARANT, THE ASSOCIATION, THE ACC, THE BOARD, OR THE OFFICERS, DIRECTORS, 6 MEMBERS, EMPLOYEES, AND AGENTS OF ANY OF THEM TO RECOVER ANY DAMAGES AND HEREBY RELEASES, REMISES, QUITCLAIMS, AND COVENANTS NOT TO SUE FOR ALL CLAIMS, DEMANDS, AND CAUSES OF ACTION ARISING OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH ANY JUDGMENT, NEGLIGENCE, OR NONFEASANCE AND HEREBY WAIVES THE PROVISIONS OF ANY LAW WHICH PROVIDES THAT A GENERAL RELEASE DOES NOT EXTEND THE CLAIMS, DEMANDS, AND CAUSES OF ACTION NOT KNOWN AT THE TIME THE RELEASE IS GIVEN. 3.6 Bylaws, Rules and Regulations. The Boar~ehalf of the Association shall have the power to adopt, modify, and amend bylaws, rultiffi}d regulations governing the Community, provided that such bylaws, rules and re-aall not be inconsistent with this Declaration and shall apply uniformly to allfl~ffPcis, excepi~ecifically provided herein. The Board shall have the power to enforce>the rules and regulations on behalf of the Association and may prescribe penalties or fim~or their violation. A'.rrn such bylaws, rules and regulations shall become effective thirty ~.ays after nromulgation. d .shall be mailed to all Owners prior to their effective date. A copy · e b~s, rules and ~lations then in force shall be retained by the secret1@& of the Association. IT'he Declarant on Bfitalfofthe Board may adopt the initial bylaws, r:ules and regulations. 'TICL ASSESSMENWS 4.1 Purpose of Asses~ment. Th:1:ments provided for herein shall be used for the_generaL urp_oses,mnrom&iffg,the recrei,?ealth,_ safety, w~lfare, common benefit, and enJQy.ment,Q · e Owner an occupan.~ Lot , mcludmg the mamtenance of real and pers~mfl.&~~perty, all as may Be more specific~authorized from time to time by the Board of Directors. 4.2 Creation of tli Lien an Personal Obligation for Assessments. Each Owner of any· by accepta~•of a deed therefor, whether or not it shall be so expressed in such deed, covena~d agre~o pay to the Association: (i) annual assessments or charges; (ii) special assessmen~ch(~essments to be established and collected as hereinafter provided; and (iii) specifji~sments established pursuant to the terms of this Declaration, including, but not limited'to, reasonable fines imposed in accordance with the terms of this Declaration. 4.2. I All such assessments, together with (i) late charges, (ii) interest set by the Board, not to exceed the maximum rate permitted by Jaw (but not to exceed eighteen percent (I 8%) per annum), and (iii) costs, including, without limitation, reasonable attorneys' fees actually incurred, shall be a charge on the land and shall be a continuing lien upon the Lot against which each assessment is made. 4.2.2 Each such assessment, together with late charges, interest, costs, including, without limitation, reasonable attorneys' fees actually incurred, shall also be the 7 personal obligation of the person who was the Owner of such Lot at the time the assessment fell due. Each Owner shall be personally liable for the portion of each assessment coming due while the Owner of a Lot, and each grantee of an Owner shall be jointly and severally liable for such portion thereof as may be due and payable at the time of conveyance; provided, however, the liability of a grantee for the unpaid assessments of its grantor shall not apply to any first Mortgagee taking title through foreclosure proceedings or deed in lieu of foreclosure. 4.2.3 The Association shall, within five (5) days after receiving a written request therefor and for a reasonable charge, furnish a certi_f.,signed by an officer of the Association setting forth whether the assessments on a sgecifie Lot have been paid. Such certificate shall be binding upon the Association as ~r,eJdt.fe of issuance. 4.2.4 Annual assessments s;;t1levted equa 1. on all Lots. Assessments shall be paid in such manner and on such dates as may be fixed by e Board. Unless otherwise provided by the Board, the assessment shall be paid in annual · nstallments. 4.3 Adoption of Budget. It shall~duty .Board to prepa and adopt a budget covering the estimated cos\~~foo,~erating th~~~!~1ation during the coIUihg year and the assessments to be levied agains eae.~~ which ma)j include an amount for capital reserves in accordance with a capita~dgetisel)arately preQared. The Board shall cause a summary of the propos~d operating ai:mt~i'tft~~gets and'f1koposed assessments against each Lot for the followmg~xear to be malled to eacll 0wner. Tlie~ard shall set a date for a special meeting of the 0wner t6 conside~ificati n of<tlie budg°lf within thirty (30) days after adoption by tlkBoard and n t less that'rroil'ffl' (14) nor;more than sixty (60) days after the mailing of the proposed budg'ffi:and asse~~ill8ents. Unless at such meeting the budget is rejected by. at least s.ev~~&-~e P.1%ent 75o/c.o) ~,. Total Association Vote, in person or by proxy, the u~g!lt shall be ratifie!,I, wlie lier: o not a gµorum is present. In the event the proposecl 15udget is rejected o~~uired no-s not given, the budget in effect for the then curren ear shall cont~fects:.he Owners ratify a subsequent budget. 4.4 Revised Budget. If the mancial circumstances or needs of the Association materially chan~.-r;i;ng any~, the B~rd may prepare and adopt a revised budget and assessments for tli~anc:, year. The Board shall cause a summary of the proposed revised budget and assessments to be mailed to each Owner and shall set a date for a meeting of the Owners to con~tJfication of the revised budget and assessments in the same manner as the regular annual budget as set forth in Section 4.3 above. 4.5 Special Assessments. In addition to the other assessments authorized herein, the Association may levy special assessments for expenses such as, but not limited to, capital improvements from time to time if approved at a meeting by two-thirds (2/3) of the Total Association Vote. Special assessments shall be paid as determined by the Board, and the Board may permit special assessments to be paid in installments extending beyond the fiscal year in which the special assessment is imposed. 4.6 Lien for Assessments. All sums assessed against any Lot pursuant to this Declaration, together with late charges, interest, costs, including, without limitation, 8 reasonable attorneys' fees actually incurred, as provided herein, shall be secured by a lien on such Lot in favor of the Association. Such lien shall be superior to all other liens and encumbrances on such Lot, except for (a) liens for ad valorem taxes; or (b) liens for all sums unpaid on a first Mortgage or on any Mortgage to Declarant duly recorded in the records of King County and all amounts advanced pursuant to such Mortgage and secured thereby in accordance with the terms of such instrument. All other Persons acquiring liens or encumbrances on any Lot after the recording of this Declaration shall be deemed to consent that such liens or encumbrances shall be inferior to future liens for assessments, as provided herein, whether or not prior consent is specifically set forth in#iite instruments creating such liens or encumbrances. 4. 7 Effect of Nonpayment of Assessment ;. emeaies of the Association. Any ~ssessment or insta!lment thereof delinquent fo~iod _of mci~~\i~n ten (I_ 0) days shall mcur a late charge m an amount as the Boar~~Jfom time to time,lt{rmme. The Association shall cause a notice of delinquen1~ be given to any mem~ who has not paid within ten (10) days following the due date. I stfic•assess~e tis not paid within thirty (30) days, a lien, as herein provided, shall attach and~?ition tlie lien shall mtlbde interest set by the Board from time to time, on~iP,rincipal amoun~?_¥e, late charges, cosWof collection, including, without limitation, reasona 1 attprneys' fees.actually incurred, and any other amounts provided or permitted by la ,. 4.7.2 The lien provia~a~r in this Article shall be in favor of the Association and shall be ~,1hl!1e benefit ~.other ©wners. The Association, acting on behalf of the Owners, shall lfafa\the powe~J~~iid on the Lot at any foreclosure sale or to acquire, hold, lease, mortgage, o •convey 7e. 4.7.3 o ©wner may waive or otherwise exempt himself from liability for the assessments provided for erein, including, by way of illustration, but not limitation, abandonment of the Lot. 4.7.4 All payments shall be applied first to costs, then to late charges, then to interest and then to delinquent assessments. 4.8 Suspension for Nonpayment of Assessment. If an Owner shall be in arrears in the payment of any assessment due, or shall otherwise be in default of the performance of any terms of the Governing Documents of the Association for a period of thirty (30) days, said Owner's voting rights shall, without the necessity of any further action by the Association, be 9 suspended ( except as against foreclosing secured parties) and shall remain suspended until all payments, including interest thereon, are brought current and any other default is remedied. No Owner is relieved of liability for assessments by non-use of the Common Areas or by abandonment of a Lot. 4.9 Date of Commencement of Assessments. The assessments provided for herein shall commence as to a Lot subject to this Declaration on the first day of the month following conveyance of such Lot to a Person other than Declarant. 4.10 Specific Assessments. In addition to the g~nd and special assessments outlined above, the Board shall have the power to lev~@iliecific assessments pursuant to this Section 4.10 as, in its discretion, it shall deem ap11ropriate. ~ll other terms and conditions of this Article 4 relating to general and special a~i:rents shall a ly to the levy and collection of the specific assessments covered1neUlDY and the Association shall have all powers and remedies for collection and enforcement of such assessm'rrft~•as are applicable to the general and special assessments set forth f~;,_ Fines l~d pursu~t~ection 11.1 of this Declaration and the costs of maintenance perfovmed •• Association I<Jf~fhich the o~"' is respo,sih le ""'"' Sttti m®i,J ~d 5 .4 o rlil~~tio• slrnll be sp<eific assessments. assessm:~! by ~::~~icff;i~~-Exemp • Tlfo,@ommon A'~eas,all be exempt from 4 12 C ,Jt 1· r~t'" ' . U . . . f d . 1 L . a 1 a 1zat10n o ~,.,ssociatmn. pon acqy1s1t10n o recor tit e to a ot Owner to the workmg caP.I al of ilie ~s oc1at1on in an amount equal to _______ _ by the first Owner ~n'ellit.lth. er t\i1 D. ecl~r~t~~ contribution shall be made by the first Dollars (If,\ -g~s amount slialt \j · additio o, not in lieu of, the annual assessment and sh@!lt'ot be consiaered adv nee payment ofrsucli assessment. This amount shall be depo~t~~hi~to the pur~~Ya\and WJ~scrow ancl 'isbursed therefrom to the Association for use in covering operating ex11enses an'er expenses incurred by the Association pursuant to this::::s::lVANC~~~~~~i.oN AREAS TO ASSOCIATION • 5.1 Association's Responsibility. The Association shall maintain and keep in good repair the Common Areas described in Article 2 herein and any Common Areas acquired by the Association in the future. If the streetlights are installed and there is no procedure for billing individual lot owners then the Association shall pay the bills for the streetlights. The Association shall also maintain all other facilities serving the Community not dedicated to or maintained by a public entity. The foregoing maintenance shall be performed consistent with the Community-Wide Standard. 5.2 Property Not Owned by Association. The Association shall have the right, but not the obligation, to maintain other property, whether or not owned by the Association 10 and whether within or without the Community, where the Board has determined that such maintenance would benefit all Owners. Without limitation of the foregoing, the Association may enter into a joint maintenance agreement with adjoining property owners or associations for the repair, maintenance and replacement of any shared facilities or other property. 5.3 Damage Caused by Owner. In the event that the Association determines that the need for maintenance, repair, or replacement, which is the responsibility of the Association hereunder, is caused through the willful or negligent act of an Owner, or the family, guests, lessees, or invitees of any Owner, the Associati1lh may perform such maintenance, repair or replacement at such Owner's sole cffd expense, and all costs »~r ,Mil "" added '" md bewm, ' part ,r th, M~C: s,ch o~" is s,hj,c, and shall become a lien against the Lot of such Ownttr' 5.4 Owner's Responsibility. Exli,.#,rovided in Secti ns 5.1, 5.2 and 5.3 above, all maintenance of any Lot and all str:u~es, parking areas, l~caping, and other improvements thereon together with the landsca,p,ing and trees on any p:tRi"hg strip fronting any such Lot, shall be the sole responsibility oft~ne,1;,1,~eof, who shill!gfovide maintenance consistent with the Co1il:munity-Wide Startdar'Tand this Declaratr@. The perimeter fencing, if any, shall be ;m\'i'i?aihed and rep~itfd·:' in uniform appearance, by the abutting lot owners. In the event tha~Wifr1Ja9,{?irectors of the Association determines that any Owner has f~iled ouefuse~ to discl'i~e prop~f~ny ofs~Owner's oblig~tions with regard to the mamtenanc~egair, or replacement 0£ items or wnich such Owner 1s responsible hereunder, tlie A'.ssociation shall, exce11t in an emergeri6y situation, give the Owner written notict:: of the A~~tion's intent o provide ~fi necessary maintenance, repair, or replacement 8c. Owlft~ ~ole cos and expense. The notice shall set forth with reasonabl~11articularity rn,,.ffiaintepance;~air~~ep~ace~e~t dee1:1ed necessary. The Owner snail !fa .. e n I 0) daWer nfu~1nt o suciwottce w1thm which to complete such maint ance, repair, o!iplacem,W,,_ or, in tne~nt that such maintenance, repair, or replacitn~nt is not capa l.~ co~pl~tion within ate~ (I 0) day period, to commence such . work w~;i~all be completed withi~reasonable time. If any Owner does not comply with the provision~1r~of, the A~iation m't provide any such maintenance, repair, or replacement at u h Owner's~ cost and expense, and all costs shall be added to and become a part o~assessmefflo which such Owner is subject and shall become a lien against the Lot. 5.5 Conveyance of Common Areas by Declarant to Association. During the Development Period, the Declarant may transfer or convey the Common Areas to the Association, including any personal property and any improved or unimproved real property, leasehold, easement, or other property interest. Such conveyance shall be accepted by the Association, and the property shall thereafter be Common Areas to be maintained by the Association. The Common Areas are subject to an easement of common use and enjoyment in favor of the Association and every Owner, their heirs, successors and assigns in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Governing Documents. Such rights to use the Common Areas are appurtenant to and shall not be separated from ownership of any Lot and shall not be assigned or conveyed by any Lot Owner in any way except upon the transfer of title to such Lot, and then only to the transferee of such title and shall be deemed so conveyed whether or 11 not it shall be so expressed in the deed or other instrument conveying title. Certain rights of use, ingress, egress, occupation, and management authority in the Common Areas set forth elsewhere in this Declaration shall be reserved to Declarant for the duration of the Development Period. Declarant shall not be required to make any improvements whatsoever to property to be conveyed and accepted pursuant to this Section. 5.6 Further Restrictions on Common Areas. If any Common Area is currently owned or is acquired in the future which is designated as a st~ slope, as a wetland, as a buffer, as a native growth protection area or as any other ty1i;~sensitive area, then use of such Common Area shall be limited to activities approv~ lie municipality which designated such Common Area as sensitive. NotwithstanolllgJ&.e provisions in this Article 5, or in Section JO.I below, or in any other provision oftfii'Woeclaration, there shall be no right or easement of ingress and egress, use and enjoymey~f/it,o?'to such clm'imon Area. Access shall be limited to maintenance activities approved b~unicipality. ARTICBE:l§. ~ . USE RESl'RICTIONS~D~ES 6.1 General/Rules and.ns. This lli'~le beginning at Section 6.2, sets out certain use restrictions which musNfe,co•iID't by"'wners and Occupants. These use restrictions may onl,X b'e amended in~anner Rf ided in!Section 11.3 hereof regarding amendment of this J)ec arafion. ii) additi~n~e Boara ml!Y, romTime to time, without consent of the Ow~promulgate, modify, ov oelete other us restrictions and rules and regulations applicab~ Com~unity. Such'1fse restrictions and rules shall be distributed to all Owner d Occupants prior the date that t ey are to become effective and shall ther~afieE .oe l)jl)~on al~er~ ana ©ccu~a~ until and unless ov~rr_uled, canceled, or mod-m a regular,._orispeciahmeetmg by ,maJoriTy of the Total Associat10n Vote and the oo,~,, of D~l,=t d~fopme"' i'<!lf,d. ~esidential Use. Excep s provided in this Section, all Lots shall be used for single-family resiclential purposes exclusively with the exception that certain home occupations ma/@'P,errnitted subject to the guidelines and rules established by the Board, if any, and subject to ~~al D); e Board. Such home occupations may be limited to certain business uses, shall not create any disturbance, noise, or unsightliness, shall not unduly increase traffic flow or parl<ing congestion, and shall not be in violation of any of the provisions of the Governing Documents. Use of the Lots shall in all cases be in compliance with all applicable laws, ordinances, rules and regulations.} 6.3 Building and Landscaping Requirements and Restrictions. Except as provided in Section 6.4 below, all residences constructed within the Community by any Person shall be subject to design review and approval by the ACC which may cover the minimum size, architectural style, height, scope of improvements, quality of design, materials, workmanship, and siting standards. Without restricting or limiting the authority of the ACC pursuant to Section 3.5 in approving or disapproving of any specific proposal, the following restrictions shall apply to the Community in general: 12 6.3.1 Only one Single Family home shall be permitted on each Lot. Two story or split level homes shall include no less than 1,300 gross square feet of living space, exclusive of one-story open porches and garages. One story homes shall include no less than 1,000 gross square feet of living space, exclusive of one-story open porches and garages. 6.3 .2 After Declarant has completed construction of all houses in the Community, any remodeling or exterior addition to any residence or other structure erected or placed on any Lot shall be completed as to external appearance, including finished painting, within six (6) months after the date of commencement of conftl'uction. All front, side and rear yard landscaping must be completed within six (6) months=-the date of closing of the purchase of the residence by the Owner from the Declarfilf,the event that strict enforcement of this provision would cause undue ha.1 d\Je~eather conditions, this provision may be extended for a reasonable Jen tll ottime when l!P. roved by the ACC. 6.3.3 All homes within the• •ommunity shall contain a garage; carports shall not be permitted. Unless otherwise approveih~fff ACC, alJ garages ~be attached to, or incorporated in and made a part of, the residence constru#pon a Lot. "ffif'~ting waivers to this requirement, the ACC will c~unctio~1ty and architectural llesirability. 6.3.4 All driveways and parRin areas snail e paved with material approved by the ACC. ' . 6.3.? : · fen~ fencing-t:'f.lle barri:f orThedge of any kind in excess of six (6) feet high or extending nto the front yard of~:X r 1aenc~be erected, allowed or maintained upon any J&~twithoJ!e prior w~ consent of the ACC. All fences shall be constructe~ofw~od mate~,'.1?le~wta~~ved ~e A_CC. ~ny ~uch ~ence, barrier: row of trees, or hea~~ stnc~omphaiwe ':'it~s1gn Gmdehnes, 1f any, established by the A@ wliich stanoards may ,de f6illl~ acceptable styles and/or specifications. 6.3.6 ~me constructed on a Lot shall be built of new materials except, with approvakofthe ACC, aecorativ~rns such as used brick, weathered planking, and similar item~ll visible mai shall& native stone, brick or stucco. Types and colors of exterior paint and stain must be submitted to the committee for approval. Any change to the exterior color of any;Junzroveih nt located on a Lot, including, without limitation, the dwelling, must be ap~,Jthe ACC. 6.3.7 All roofs on dwellings and garages shall be of composite, tile or cedar shake and shall have a minimum pitch of four/twelve. 6.3.8 No owner shall grade, fill or otherwise alter the slope or contour of any Lot, construct or alter the drainage patterns initially installed and constructed by Declarant or a Residential Developer, or as established by the grading and natural course of surface and subsurface water run-off without first obtaining i) recommendations from a soils engineer or civil engineer, as appropriate, duly licensed by the State of Washington, ii) any and all necessary governmental approvals and permits and iii) written approval of the ACC, if any. No Owner shall perform any such work except in conformance with the recommendations, 13 plans and specifications of such engineer. 6.4 Existing Residence. Intentionally omitted. 6.5 Signs. No sign of any kind shall be erected by an Owner or Occupant within the Community without the prior written consent of the ACC. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Board and the Declarant shall have the right to erect reasonable and appropriate signs including, without limitation, signs related to Declarant's dev6ropment and marketing of residences within the Community. In addition, "For Sale" Ei-~M' and security signs consistent with the Community-Wide Standard and any signs requireo $x legal proceedings may be erected upon any Lot. 6.6 Vehicles. The term "vehicles~ herein shall'-include, without limitation, automobiles, vans, campers, trucks, buses, motor homes, mobile homes, boats, jet skis, trailers, portable aircraft, motorcycles, snow1~'6i!es, mini-bikes, scooters, go-carts, dune buggies and any other towed or self propelled t~ortation~ e vehicle. rh~rm "passenger vehicles" as used herein;hall include pa eng r automobiles, vans, mall trucks, motorcycles, and similar type vehiiTus~egularly ano rimarily as transportation for the Occupants of the Lot. Vehicles usetlftir cormhercial and ecteational purposes are not considered passenger vehides. "Park~e~~N~~fer tmi1;y/snumber of garage parking spaces and driveway areawntont of garages~Wf!;'//lreas shall be considered "parking areas" for,P.iis~hg~r .. ~bhicles on'-~ 6.6:~"~ehi:lit~er than 11as_senger _vehicles in regular u~e may be parked on any Lot or port10n oft!Jf~p \W·YTu:xce~arkmg areas on Lots, or m a screened area on a Lo!,'{iflF~~ed ar--appr ,;eo bY. the W€C. Any vehicle regularly parked in an unap-~ff area or, ~ged)lan twentyc om f24'fc'onsecutive hours shall be considered a nuisance,and may be rem,:~~ommunity. ~6.2 No passenger ve icles may be parked on any Lot or portion of the Community exceP,t in "parki~eas" a~efined in this Section. ~~~ pa~ger vehicle ~hi~h is inoperable or un!icensed and not . capable of use on the puohc filghways and which 1s parked on any parking area for a penod of more than forty-eight ( 48' mours shall be treated the same as a non-passenger vehicle and shall be considered a nuisance and may be removed from the Community. 6.6.4 The Board may adopt and maintain current rules and regulations concerning the parking and storage of vehicles on any Lot or any portion of the Community. Said rules are to protect the Community from the potentially adverse impacts of vehicles on the Community environment and to accommodate the evolving nature and use of such vehicles. Such rules and regulations may provide for exceptions and/or modifications to the conditions of this Section as determined in the sole discretion of the Board. The Board shall rule on any dispute as to the interpretation or application of this Section and all rules and regulations established by the Board with respect to vehicles. 14 6.6.5 Off-street parking for at least three (3) passenger vehicles shall be provided on each Lot. Covered enclosed parking shall be provided for one (1) or more passenger vehicles, plus a driveway for at least two (2) additional passenger vehicles, unless approved by the ACC. 6.7 Vehicles on Common Areas. No motorized vehicles shall be permitted on pathways or unpaved Common Areas except vehicles being used for the limited purpose of operating and maintaining utilities. 6.8 Leasing. Lots may be leased for residential P,\J!POSes. All leases shall have a minimum term of at least three (3) months. All leases sli~ll reguire, without limitation, that the tenant acknowledge receipt of a copy of the Declarat.Bylaws; and rules and regulations of the Association. I 6.9 Occupants Bound. All prov;isions of the Declaration,. y)aws, and of any rules and regulations, which govern the conduct o Owners and which ~ide for sanctions against Owners shall also apply to all Occupants. ines • levied ag~ners or Oeo"p.mts. lf, fiae is fi.s< levi,d, aios< '" Oeo"p~~"' paid <im,ly, tlje fio, =Y then be levied against the Owner. 6.10 Animals. No animals, !~to k;Yn_gultry of<!!!.)&tekind shall be raised, bred or kept in the CommunitY.~~~ed, howev-filhthat c nv.onal fi \®hold pets may be kept on a Lot subject to the folfc>Win~:trictions:"l;{Ws ~Jifkib~keEt, red or maintained for any commercial purpos~wners snail be respom;WJ,.e for th~lrrlijlediate clean up and removal of all fecal matter depositi1r pets'!\ any prope~ther than the Lot of the Owner of the pet. Pets shall be confined in lie Owners s Lot unless~ leash and accompanied by a responsible person . .N@,~ti~pet a~ oe ept ifii!,is.a sour~of annoyance or a nuisance. The Board shall~ ai:rth'ffltty~ det rmine whetli ,ii a · articular pet is a nuisance or a source of annoyance, and such d11:'lf"rninaahall be final and conclusive. Pets shall be attended at all times a~~ ~e regist~~n~and inoculated from time to time as required by law. 6.11 Mining Prohitiited. ~o'°rtion of the Community shall be used for the purpose ofboriitg?mining, qu~ing, or exploring for or removing oil or other hydrocarbons, minerals, gravel, o~tth. 6.12 Nuisance. Each Owner and Occupant shall prevent the development of any unclean, unhealthy, unsightly, or unkempt condition on his or her Lot. No Lot shall be used, in whole or in part, for the storage of any property or thing that will cause such Lot to appear to be in an unclean or untidy condition; nor shall any substance, thing, or material be kept that will emit foul or obnoxious odors or that will cause any noise or other condition that will or might disturb the peace, quiet, safety, comfort, or serenity of the occupants of surrounding property. No illegal, illicit, noxious or offensive activity shall be carried on within the Community, nor shall anything be done tending to cause embarrassment, discomfort, annoyance, or nuisance to any Person using any property within the Community. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, no speaker, horn, whistle, siren, bell, amplifier or other sound device, except such devices as may be used exclusively for security purposes, 15 shall be located, installed or maintained upon the exterior of any Lot unless required by law or unless specifically approved by the ACC. 6.13 Unsightly or Unkempt Conditions. The pursuit of hobbies or other activities, including specifically, without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the assembly of and disassembly of motor vehicles and other mechanical devices, which might tend to cause disorderly, unsightly, or unkempt conditions, shall not be undertaken outside of homes or garages. Garage doors shall be kept closed at all times unless they are in use. In addition, the storage of equipment, machinery, construction supplies or ~ilar material on a Lot outside of the home and garage constructed thereon is stric ly,,.prohibited except as required during the remodeling or refurbishing of improvemen,~ch Lot and then for not more than sixty ( 60) days. 6.14 Ant,nn,s. Nooutsidmdi61 tele•isiuu ~"""" iem~"' m satellite dish, aerial, or other such device (coll cJJ?JjlY "Antennas") with afrmeter or diagonal measureme~t i? exces~ of on_e mete~ shal~erec?e'a}constructed ~ced on any Lot. Reasonable restnct10ns which com]lly with Feder~ and local laws an11 do not significantly increase the cost ofth ~ntenna system or slgnificantly decrease its efficiency or performance may be imposed by the J\:@C n .~ntennas w{filfli,ter or diagonal measurement of one meter or less. 6.15 No 06 truction ofJEasements. (Ba ch basin d drainage areas are for the purpose of natural flo~ater 5Tily .. No obstructions or debris shall be placed in these areas. No Owner or OccuP,ant m~bstruct or ~bannel the drainage flows after location d . all.?J'!'.t·1Hi~~:~~ ~I~,,,: tt::E\ ~ d . D I h b an mst . a 10.1:i.,o~, UJ.amage s.Wl!Jl,s, storm%?ers !i~#;toi:m rams: ec arant ere y res:rves for tqe,~h~fit of eclarant a~~ssociai~i;id their respective successors and assigns a perp~~asement ac~all Common Areas an11 Lots for the purpose of maintaining or altering rainage and wat~o;,. ~ture, planting, or other material shall be placed or permitted .main upon a'ement -~bich may damage or interfere with the installation and maintenaM~,t~ny utilities unless approved by the Board prior to installation. At no time shall any acces'e~me'e blocked. 6.16 Sight Distance at Intersections. All property located at street intersections shall be landscaped so as"'t3fpermit safe sight across the street corners. No fence, wall, hedge or shrub planting shall be placed or permitted to remain where it would create a traffic or sight problem as determined by the ACC in its sole discretion. 6.17 Garbage Cans, Woodpiles, Etc. All garbage cans, woodpiles, air- conditioning compressors, machinery, equipment and other similar items related to the operation of the residence shall be located or screened so as to be concealed from view from the street abutting the Lot on which such items are located. All rubbish, trash, and garbage shall be regularly removed and shall not be allowed to accumulate. Trash, garbage, debris, or other waste matter of any kind may not be burned within the Community. 16 6.18 Subdivision of Lot. No Lot shall be subdivided or its boundary lines changed except with the prior written approval of the ACC. Declarant, however, hereby expressly reserves the right to re-plat any Lot or Lots owned by Declarant. Any such division, boundary line change, or re-platting shall not be in violation of the applicable subdivision and zoning regulations. 6.19 Guns. The use of firearms in the Community is prohibited. The term "firearms" includes without limitation BB guns, pellet guns, and firearms of all types. 6.20 Utilities. Except as may be permitted by th ~@C, no overhead utility lines, including lines for cable television, shall be permitted 'illiin he Community, except for temporary lines as required during construction and xc'ept a such lines exist upon recording of<h, pl,1 olili, Comm,olly m ~ reqolred by otilii(il"'=log ~,Icy. 6.21 Lighting. No colored lights ( Jh:c:oliday displays and Y,ellow insect type lights) shall be permitted at any location within tffl€ommuillb,. All exte~i~~res that are attached to the home shall be of comp;;itible design1ffia,ntftrr'i'als of the home. • · y post mounted exterior fixtures shall be ~atible desigfffli1{i materials as the fixtures attached to the home. No fixtures which illumin~ excessiv~~are onto any other Lot shall be permitted, and all exterior lights shall ~ree 'e.cl minimi~cts of light and glare. No unshielded spot/floo;w@uw,s are pe,d. . 6.22 Artificial VegetiIDm, Exteriori ulpture, ii Similar Items. No artificial vegetation, exterior sm1~re, foimt'ains, and !iWilar items shall be permitted in the front yard of any Lot unless approvecl:'by the · ~c. ~ ,23 Mailboxes, All mJ¥Jwxes loc cl on Lots shall be of a style approved by the ACC. Mailboxes shall be att ched o~~ stands provided and maintained by the Association in design~lca~ions. 6.24 Glotheslines. exterior clotheslines of any type shall be permitted upon any Lot unless entirely<Ss;Jle• view from other Lots. 6.25 Exterior Security Devices. No exterior security devices, including, without limitation, window bars, sffilll be permitted on any residence or Lot. Signs placed on the Lot or the exterior of the residence stating that such residence is protected by a security system are permissible. 6.26 Construction and Sale Period. So long as Declarant owns any property in the Community for development and/or sale, the restrictions set forth in this Article 6 shall not be applied or interpreted so as to prevent, hinder or interfere with development, construction and sales activities of Declarant or any builder or developer approved by Declarant. 17 ARTICLE7 INSURANCE AND CASUALTY LOSSES 7.1 Insurance Coverage. The Board of Directors or the duly authorized agent of the Association shall have the authority to and shall obtain or cause to be obtained insurance as follows: 7.1.1 The Board shall obtain insurance on all insurable buildings and, where the Board deems there to be a reasonable risk, other substantifil?structures whether or not such buildings or structures are located on the Common Areasa~ich the Association is obligated to maintain. Insurance on buildings shall pro§'i~~minimum, fire and extended coverage, including vandalism and malicious mischil~d sniuh!l.e in an amount sufficient to cover the full replacement cost of any repair or re.&iistruction iJil;l;Jie,event of damage or destruction from any such hazard. Insuranc~tlfer substantial ~tures shall cover those risks deemed advisable by the Board and shaU!bJ: in such amounts as~femed advisable by the Board. The Board may insure other typesf~provements, includin .en!rY monuments, landscaping, and the like, as it deems advisable. With res ect fo such othe?il'ffr1rovements, the Board shall determine the risks to be insured and tliec:unts of insuranc~be carried. 7 .1.2 The Board shal~t~ih-a1Jlublic liaBil~olicy applicable to the Common Areas covering the Associatio~nd 1fs,e111bers for,al!,damage or injury caused by the negligence of the Asso'cia · n or any oj.\.ls meJtlKr§~genf~d, if reasonably available, d_irecto~s' _and officers H oili~£ance.W~ pAfiljTiiao~~olicy shal! have a c~mbined smglc hm,l of at le s Goe M,ll,oo """" ~0.00) ~less "'"~''" dctermmed by the Board. . . The oara is here]$ ,authori'. d to contract with or otherwise arrange to obtai~~ 1nsurance·c.Q;.~~g~uired her~tlifough t~e Declarant and _to reimburse DeclarantJor the cost tnereof, a~'fil>eclarant sha I be authonzed, but not obligated, to purchasJWsuch insurance ,ge ~lie benefit of the Association and the Owners upon Declarant ~hi Association agreein~on the terms and conditions applicable to reimbursemen ~~e Associ~& for costs incurred by Declarant in obtaining such coverage. Notwithstandingaf.))ii!hing con&ned in this Declaration to the contrary, the Board shall not be required to comply~~~.J[i6~lsions of this Article if the Board has contracted for or otherwise arranged to o 9ne required insurance coverage through the Declarant. 7.1.4 Premiums for all insurance shall be common expenses of the Association. The policies may contain a reasonable deductible, and the amount thereof shall not be subtracted from the face amount of the policy in determining whether the insurance at least equals the full replacement cost. 7.1.5 In the event insurance premiums in connection with the insurance required by this Article 7 become prohibitively expensive, in the judgment of the Board, the Board may with approval of seventy-five percent (75%) of the Total Association Vote reduce the amount of the required insurance, self-insure itself, or discontinue the insurance all together. 18 7.2 Policy Requirements. All such insurance coverage obtained by the Board of Directors shall be written in the name of the Association, as trustee for the respective benefited parties. Such insurance shall be governed by the provisions hereinafter set forth: 7.2.1 All policies shall be written with a company authorized to do business in Washington. 7.2.2 Exclusive authority to adjust losses under policies obtained by the Association shall be vested in the Association's Board ofDirettors; provided, however, no Mortgagee having an interest in such losses may be prohibi~m participating in the settlement negotiations, if any, related thereto. 7.2.3 In no event shall the insurance coverage o tained and maintained by the Association's Board of Directors hereunder be b1'6ti~ht into contaon with insurance purchased by individual Owners, occupants, o ilieir Mortgagees, ana,'ffie · nsurance carried by the Association shall be primary. 7 .2.4 All casualty insurance polic1 haJl ave an inflation u~d endorsement and an agreed amou~~orsement ifthes. reasonably available and all insurance policies shall be reviewed ari~one or · fft~ualified persons, at least one of whom must be in the real estate indus~ familiar with construction in the City of Renton. 7.3 OtherJlnsurance. In additi~o :;lhiwwEr~required by this Article 7, the Board shall obt~orker~mpensati6~~w ranee, if•a@o the extent necessary to satisfy the requiremen~ apflid'i&Ie. laws. 'V..~ard may, in its discretion, obtain a fidelity bond or bonds on dire~to~fic~~loyees;~ other persons handling or responsible for ~he Associatiml's u~ds, ifr.15ly a.e. T;fie A~sociation s~all obtain additional msu~pcoverage, 1liand to tl\ewtent nece§.~ar~~a!Isfy the reqmrements of the Federal Home.~ti~ Mortgage q{!_.m_oratio(ffilhe Federal N tional Mortgage Association, the U.S. Departm~eterans Xfil'airs, o~. Department of Housing and Urban Development. 7.4 ndividual ~ance. By virtue of taking title to a Lot subject to the terms of this Declarationffee&ch Owner &owledges that the Association has no obligation to provide any insurance for~ortio~Jjhdividual Lots, and each Owner covenants and agrees with all other Owners and with t~~ssociation that each Owner shall at a minimum, carry fire and extended coverage casu~insurance on the Lot and all structures constructed thereon in an amount sufficient to cover the full replacement costs of any repair or reconstruction in the event of damage or destruction from any such hazard. 7.5 Damage and Destruction -Insured by Association. 7.5.1 Immediately after damage or destruction by fire or other casualty to all or any portion of any improvement covered by insurance written in the name of the Association, the Board of Directors or its duly authorized agent shall proceed with the filing and adjustment of all claims arising under such insurance and obtain reliable and detailed estimates of the cost of repair or reconstruction of the damaged or destroyed property. Repair 19 or reconstruction, as used in this Section, means repairing or restoring the property to substantially the same condition and location that existed prior to the fire or other casualty, allowing for any changes or improvements necessitated by changes in applicable building codes. The Board of Directors shall have the enforcement powers specified in this Declaration necessary to enforce this provision. 7.5.2 Any damage or destruction to property covered by insurance written in the name of the Association shall be repaired or reconstructed unless, within sixty ( 60) days after the casualty, at least seventy-five percent (75%) of the J/5t Association Vote otherwise agree. If for any reason either the amount of the insurance r ceeds to be paid as a result of such dama~e or destruction, or reliable a~d detailed estim t .. the_ c~st ofrepai~ or reconstruct10n, or both, are not made available to the~ciat1~withm such penod, then the period shall be extended until such infonnation shlilbhf made available; provided, however, such extension shall not exceed sixty (60) da,Mortgagee shal 'ave the right to participate in the detennination of whether damage or des.tructioo cha i,~;-~"' . reconstructed. ~A 7.5.3 If the dama~-estruction for.. llicli the insurance pr ceeds are paid is to be repaired or reconstructed an sucfi roceeds ar m sufficient to defray the cost thereof, the Board of ~irectors shall, ··wout the necess_it~,a~~ v~te of the Association's members, levy a special assessment agamst all ©wners m proP.mr,On to the number of Lots ow~ed by such ~wners. Wdaitio_nal asse~ent~ may, Be made i_n )$e marmer at any.time durmg or followmg,tlie complt;, 10n of any~air Qm: construct10n. If the funds available from insurance exceed tfl costs ofre~or reco~ or if~provemen_ts ~re not repaired or reconstructed, sucn·e cess shalH>e deposite ·o the benefit of the Association. #7-~n tli even · lia it fiould o ~ tennined by the A~sociation in the manner oescnbed a~at tlie clamage or truchon shall not be repaired or reconstructed and no alternative improvilments a e authorized~fhen and in that event the property shall be restored o its natural sta~d maint!tlfled as an undeveloped portion of the Community by the Associatipnt;: neat an~ctiveU~~ndition. 7.6 Damage and Destruction -Insured by Owners. The damage or destruction by fire or other cas.i'ffi'll:Y, to a~~ny portion of any improvement on a Lot shall be repaired by the Owner thereofwitfiin e:venty-five (75) days after such damage or destruction or, where repairs cannot be complete within seventy-five (75) days, they shall be commenced within such period and shall be completed within a reasonable time thereafter. Alternatively, the Owner may elect to demolish all improvements on the Lot and remove all debris therefrom within seventy-five (75) days after such damage or destruction. In the event of noncompliance with this provision, the Board of Directors shall have all enforcement powers specified herein. 7.7 Insurance Deductible. The deductible for any casualty insurance policy carried by the Association shall, in the event of damage or destruction, be allocated among the Persons who are responsible hereunder, or be a common expense of the Association. 20 ARTICLES CONDEMNATION In the event of a taking by eminent domain of any portion of the Common Areas on which improvements have been constructed, then, unless within sixty (60) days after such taking, at least seventy-five percent (75%) of the Total Association Vote shall otherwise agree, the Association shall restore or replace such improvements so taken on the remaining land included in the Common Areas to the extent lands are available therefor. The provisions of Section 7.5, above, applicable to Common Areas improve~ts damage, shall govern replacement or restoration and the actions to be taken in tne vent that the improvements are not restored or replaced. The following provisions are for the ben~fit of hold~f first Mortga,ges on Lots in the Communi~. The _provisions o~~icle appl~ t . tli t_his Declaration 'lffia to the Bylaws, notw1thstandmg any other r ·,Y1s1ons contame11' 9.1 Notices of Action. A~titu·~-&,der, insµrer, or guarantor ofa first Mortgage, who provides a Wl'(ten reque,the Association (s~~equest to state the name and address of sue~ er, ins_~, or guar~r ancl the !ffim!moer, therefore becoming an "eligible holder"), wilhbe entitl to timely writ e report as"tWihe current status of said Lot with respect to the f~l~ing: "' . .. . . ~ ~ny 0£~:mnation bss or an-J',casu~lty loss ~hich affects a material port10n o ;the Commuruty or w!iich affects anyti?,t on which there 1s a first Mortgage held, insurea, or guaranteed"~ eTif;hle holder; .1.2 Any ilJqu:!i~the payment of assessments or charges owed by an o~" ofa La sohjoc< <o ""Jrtg,g, ;;', s~h di~ble holdec. 9.2 ~ority. No provision of this Declaration or the Bylaws gives or shall be construed as giving a~';\'h:J;f, or other party priority over any rights of the first Mortgagee of any Lot in the case of dist~jj:'jution to such Owner of insurance proceeds or condemnation awards for losses to or a taking of the Common Areas. 9.3 Notice to Association. Upon request, each Lot Owner shall be obligated to furnish to the Association the name and address of the holder of any Mortgage encumbering such Owner's Lot. 9.4 VA/HUD Approval. As long as the Declarant has the right to appoint and remove the directors of the Association and so long as the project is approved by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development ("HUD") for insuring or the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs ("VA") for guaranteeing any Mortgage in the 21 Community the following actions shall require the prior approval of the VA and/or HUD as applicable: dedication of Common Areas to any public entity; mergers and consolidations; dissolution of the Association, and material amendment of the Declaration, Bylaws or Articles of Incorporation. 9.5 Applicability of Article 9. Nothing contained in this Article shall be construed to reduce the percentage vote that must otherwise be obtained under the Declaration, Bylaws, or Washington law for any of the acts set out in this Article. 9.6 Amendments by Board. Should the Federa'I~t1ional Mortgage Association, the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, HUD o~~ subsequently delete any of their resp:ctive requireme_nts which necessitat~ the pro'.'.!_sions of tlii~t1icle or make any such reqmrements less strmgent, the Board, without ~fWtj~ of the© ers, may cause an amendment to this Article to be recorded to reflec . such changes. 10.1 Easements for Use a ARS9J!' EASEMENffiS I 0.1.1 Evef:M Owner of ,ot shall ave a rig d easement of ingress and egress, use and enjoY,~~J to the ommoh ~reas which: shall be appurtenant to and shall pass with the<ililffo each >ot;. subject to t)je ollowing pzyvisions: '>:,]. I the right o~ Association to charge reasonable fees for _ any p~°Tun o tlie @ommon ~s, to limit the num~er of guests of ~ot .ners ancl enants wlio may use lie •ommon Areas, and to provide for the exclusive ~ and enjoyment of necific porti n thereof at certain designated times by an ·@wner, his family, t nants~ts, and invitees; ~---. IO. J. J:, ~ight of the Association to suspend the voting rights of an~r and the rigll.t of an Owner to use certain Common Areas for any period during whi%hitany asses~ent against such Owner's Lot remains unpaid; ,, the right of the Association to borrow money for the purpose of improving the Common Areas, or any portion thereof, or for construction, repairing or improving any facilities located or to be located thereon, and to give as security for the payment of any such Joan a Mortgage conveying all or any portion of the Common Areas; provided, however, the lien and encumbrance of any such Mortgage given by the Association shall be subject and subordinate to any rights, interests, options, easements and privileges herein reserved or established for the benefit of Declarant, or any Lot or Lot Owner, or the holder of any Mortgage, irrespective of when executed, given by Declarant or any Lot Owner encumbering any Lot or other property located within the Community; and 22 10.1. 1 .4 the right of the Association to dedicate or transfer all or any portion of the Common Areas subject to such conditions as may be agreed to by the members of the Association. No such dedication or transfer shall be effective unless an instrument agreeing to such dedication or transfer has been approved by the affirmative vote of at least seventy-five percent (75%) of the Total Association Vote; provided, however, that during the Development Period, Declarant may, on its sole signature, dedicate or transfer portions of the Common Areas, so long as such transfer or dedication does not materially and adversely affect the Association or any Lot Owner. 10. 1 .2 Any Lot Owner may delegate su H 'wner's right of use and enjoyment in and to the Common Areas and facilities located tliereon"tJl~ members of such Owner's family llid W soch Ow,,,,, '™" aad gaes<s ""1lll~ be dreme~.a~ made a delegation of all such rights to the Occupants of such O,~Lot, if leased. 10.2 Easements for Utilities. Ther · s hereby reserved to the E)eclarant, the Association and any utility providers designated DY, eithe~~~p;Jll>eclarant or~~sociation blanket easements upon, across, a~i#,1,!d under all ·~ within the Community for access, ingress, egress, installation, reJla~replacin , and maintaining all utilities serving the Community or any portion therellJnc!uaing, but not i ited to, gas, water, sanitary sewer, storm sewer, cable television, ti~o~d!electricm,'Wi1tthall be expressly ~ermissible _for the Dt,._(!J~rn!L~t{le ~ssocia.t,._~n, o~ ~lie ae.signee ~her, _a~ the case ':1ay be, to mstall, repair, replac~am or to autbonze t e ms a lation, repamng, replacmg, and maintaining of suciit~es, condffi'ts, cables mother equipJiJJt related to the providing of any such utility or se~This ~ement shall lle utilized so as to not unreasonably interfere with improv.ements constf)Jot d ~imY, Lot ancl the building envelope for any unimproved Lot. Shcii1lil1aR~~~~umisijing. any sue utility r. service request a specific license or ease~ separatoo~eeicordable clocument, tnyard shall have the right to grant such easemenh '--asement for. Maintenance. Declarant hereby expressly reserves a perpetual easeme~~:o~benefit ofth~sociation across such portions of the Community, determined in th~ole discret~of the Association, as are necessary to allow for the maintenance requi~~~er 8rticle 5. Such maintenance shall be performed with a minimum of interference to the qui~ment of Owner's property, reasonable steps shall be taken to protect such property, and"'damage shall be repaired by the Person causing the damage at its sole expense. 10.4 Easement for Entry Features. If Declarant installs an entry feature, there is hereby reserved to the Declarant and the Association an easement for ingress, egress, installation, construction, landscaping and maintenance of entry features and similar street- scapes for the Community, as more fully described on the recorded subdivision plat for the Community or any other recorded instrument, easement or conveyance. The easement and right herein reserved shall include the right to cut, remove and plant trees, shrubbery, flowers and other vegetation around such entry features and the right to grade the land under and around such entry features. 23 10.5 Constrnction and Sale Period Easement. Notwithstanding any provisions contained in this Declaration, the Bylaws, Articles oflncorporation, rules and regulations, design guidelines, and any amendments thereto, so long as Declarant owns any property in the Community for development and/or sale, Declarant reserves an easement across all Community property for Declarant and any builder or developer approved by Declarant to maintain and carry on, upon such portion of the Community as Declarant may reasonably deem necessary, such facilities and activities as in the sole opinion of Declarant may be required, convenient, or incidental to Declarant's and such builder's or developer's development, construction, and sales activities related to pro~ described above, including, but without limitation: the right of access, ingress and e rfflm'r vehicular and pedestrian traffic and construction activities over, under, on or in tile @ommunity, including, without limitation, any Lot; the right to tie into any portion ofit!)'.e C~uDity with driveways, parking areas and walkways; the right to tie into and/o~·ise conn~d use (without a tap-on or any other fee for so doing), replace, relocate, m i'ntain and repair ~~ce which provides utility or similar services including, withoutifTimration, electrical, telepnone, natural gas, water, sewer and drainage lines and facilities c~ffstructed or~stalled in,'~1~der and/or over the Community; the right to carry on sales and p;N~tional activities in the Glommunity; and the right to construct and operate b~ess offices, signs, construction trailers,~del residences, and sales offices. Declaran . cllany such buil~ developer may use residences, offices, or other buildings owned or ~ed oy , .eclarant or sggh builder or developer as model residences and sales offices. Rights ex~ised pJ/~&~o su~served easement shall be exercised with a minimum ofinterferenc~he quiet ei:ij'oY,!lle~•affected property, reasonable steps sha11 l:5e .. taken to rotect su~3Jf/y,~age shall be repaired by the Person causing the a~e at its ole expense~uring t~e Development Period, this Section shall not be amended wiffi ut the , clarant's. e~, wntten consent. AR ,J@J!;E 11 ·-6ENERAL PROVISIONS Enforcemen .. ach~ and Occupant shall comply strictly with the Association's y~s, rules ana regulations, the use restrictions, as they may be lawfully amended or modifie.~om time.to time, and with the covenants, conditions, and restrictions set forth in this Declaration an in the deed to such Owner's Lot, if any. After notice and an opportunity to be heard rtfil.e oard of Directors or by a representative designated by the Board, and in accordance with rules and regulations adopted by the Board, the Board may levy reasonable fines for violations of the above (in addition to any late charges that may be assessed in connection with the late payment of assessments or other Association charges) in accordance with a previously established schedule adopted by the Board and furnished to the Owners, which fines shall be collected as provided herein for the collection of assessments. Failure to comply with this Declaration, the Bylaws or the rules and regulations shall be grounds for an action to recover sums due for damages or injunctive relief, or both, maintainable by the Board of Directors, on behalf of the Association, or, in a proper case, by an aggrieved Owner. Failure by the Association or any Owner to enforce any of the foregoing shall in no event be deemed a waiver of the right to do so thereafter. 24 • 11.2 Duration. This Declaration shall run with and bind the Community, and shall inure to the benefit of and shall be enforceable by the Association or any Owner, their respective legal representatives, heirs, successors, and assigns, perpetually to the extent provided by law; provided, however, so long as and to the extent that Washington law limits the period during which covenants restricting land to certain uses may run, any provisions of this Declaration affected thereby shall run with and bind the land so long as permitted by such law, after which time, any such provision shall be (a) automatically extended (to the extent allowed by applicable law) for successive periods often (10) Y,ears, unless a written instrument reflecting disapproval signed by the then Owne~'f,t least seventy-five percent (75%) of the Lots and the Declarant (so long as the Dec.=~owns any property for development and/or sale in the Community) has bee11~,ir<!~';:'.ithin the year immediately preceding the beginning of a ten (10) year renewal peris)cl agreeing to change such provisions, in whole or in part, or to terminate the same, in wifth case this~Kation shall be modified or terminated to the extent specified therein; oi ~o}extended as othe . .ise provided by law. Every purchaser or grantee of any interest (i cluoing, without limitation a security interest) in any real property subject to this Declaration, b~ceptance of,.a deed or otfi~~nveyance therefor, thereby agrees that such provisions of thi~E>eclat.ftfflft may be extenoed and renewed as provided in this Section. 'W 11.3 Amendments. JI .3.1.41lnis , eclaration m~be amenoeo nilaterally at any time and from time to time by Declarim (i) if(&~h amendment · s necessa~~b~g any provision hereof into compliance wZy applicajjle governmental statute, rule, or regulation or judicial determination which~e in c~flict there~~ (ii) if such amendment is necessary to enable any title.insurance"\'comP.~~ssue title insurance coverage with respect to the Lots subjec1p1~l~fagtgitrntion;'*cii!1~sudfalhtndme~;required by an institutional or governmental lenderlocchase~t._mortga~6l~s, including, for example, the Federal Natio~li¥.s o. rt. gage AssocJ~n or .Il,.egj!~, Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, to enable such lender or•purchaser to maRwurcfiase ortgage loans on the Lots subject to this Declaratio~~~ if such amendment i ecessary to enable any governmental agency or private insuranc ompany to ~ure or guarantee Mortgage loans on the Lots subject to this Declaration; pro~d, howe~ny such amendment shall not adversely affect the title to any Owner's Lot unless"f11a,.¥t Owner shall consent thereto in writing. Further, so long as Declarant owns any propei'.!Ylor development and/or sale in the Community, Declarant may unilaterally amend this D~l~ration for any other purpose; provided, however, any such amendment shall not materially adversely affect the substantive rights of any Lot Owners hereunder, nor shall it adversely affect title to any Lot without the consent of the affected Lot Owner. 11.3.2 This Declaration may also be amended upon the affirmative vote or written consent, or any combination thereof, of the Owners of at least seventy-five percent (75%) of the Total Association Vote and the consent ofDeclarant (so long as the Declarant owns any property for development and/or sale in the Community). Amendments to this Declaration shall become effective upon recordation, unless a later effective date is specified therein. 25 ( I 1.4 Partition. The Common Areas shall remain undivided, and no Owner nor any other Person shall bring any action for partition or division of the whole or any part thereof without the written consent of all Owners of all portions of the property located within the Community and without the written consent of all holders of all Mortgages encumbering any portion of the property, including, but not necessarily limited to, the Lots located within the Community. 11.5 Gender and Grammar. The singular, wherever used herein, shall be construed to mean the plural, when applicable, and the use o fi}e masculine pronoun shall include the neuter and feminine. 11.6 Severability. Whenever possible, eacn r,rovisio~this Declaration shall be inte~reted in s~ch manner as to be effective anir~d, ·' ut if tne~,RJ.ication 0~ any ~rovision of this Declarat10n to any person or to any pror,e!.(ty··shall be prohifot~ held invalid, such pro?ibition or i~validity sha~l not affe~t an~·~ ~r?vision or ~he ~pplication of.any provision which can be given effect without the invalid pr~1sion or ar, hcat10n, art to this end, the provisions of this Declaration are declared to be s~rable, 11.7 Captions. The cap~;~h Article . Section hereof, as to the contents of each Article an~ Sec~io~,. are inse~Jk?nly~~on~enien~.~d are in ~o way to be . construed as defining, limiting, ex.tend1,r o. ').,. d1fx. mg or addmg to the particular Article or. Section to wh· · ''the_Y. refer. ' , ' I 1.8 Perp ties. I ilnY, of the co'1enan s, conditions, restrictions, or other pro~isions oft~i~ D~Illra~ion sh~~ unlawf~i.d, or voidabl~ for violation of the rule agamst perpetm!les, th~uch r,rgons shall continue only until twenty-one (21) years after the de."" o ili, lllt~,~;~~~~1\\1.doo<s ,f ilio lrullsldMls sll!"log this Declaration. · . W "'~ lndemnificati~n. Tol\&1 fullest extent allowed by applicable Washington law, the AssociatiQn shall indemW~every o~cer and director against any and all expenses, including, ~1f1'Jlimitation: attor_neys' fees,_ impo~ed upon or reason~bly i.ncurre_d by any officer or directo~~~:mnectuiw1ith.any act10n, smt, or other proceedm.g (mcludmg . settlement of any smhor proceechng, if approved by the then Board of D1rectors) to which such officer or direct~a.yga party by reason of being or having been an officer or director. The officers and directo~ml.ii not be liable for any mistake of judgment, negligent or otherwise, except for their own individual willful misfeasance, malfeasance, misconduct, or bad faith. The officers and directors shall have no personal liability with respect to any contract or other commitment made by them, in good faith, on behalf of the Association ( except to the extent that such officers or directors may also be members of the Association), and the Association shall indemnify and forever hold each such officer and director free and harmless against any and all liability to others on account of any such contract or commitment. Any right to indemnification provided for herein shall not be exclusive of any other rights to which any officer or director, or former officer or director, may be entitled. The Association may, at the discretion of the Board, maintain adequate general liability and officers' and directors' liability insurance to fund this obligation, if such coverage is reasonably available. 26 11.10 Books and Records. This Declaration, the Articles oflncorporation, the Bylaws, copies of rules and regulations, Design Guidelines, use restrictions, membership register, books of account, and minutes of meetings of the members of the Board and of committees shall be made available pursuant to reasonable procedures established by the Board for inspection and copying by any member of the Association or by the duly appointed representative of any member and by holders, insurers, or guarantors of any first Mortgage at any reasonable time and for a purpose reasonably related to such Person's interest as a member or holder, insurer, or guarantor of a first Mortgage at the office of the Association or at such other reasonable place as the Board shall prescribe. 11.11 Financial Review. At least annually, the .• d of Directors shall prepare, or cause to be prepared, a financial statement of the Asso iatim~n written request of any institutional holder of a first Mortgage and upon ifa'xm6nt of all n. cessary costs, such holder shall be entitled to receive a copy of such finan~atement withitfninety (90) days of the date of the request. ~ ' · 11.12 Notice of Sale, Lease or Acguisition~n th~ent a~ ~~~s or leases such Owner's Lot, the Owner shall~i:Ve to the Ass~i~ writing, prior totlie effective date of such sale or lease, the nam~~chaser or lessee of the Lot and such other information as the Board may reason"iffily require. Upon ~isition of a Lot each new Owner shall give the Association, in writing, 'am~'atmailing 1ffl!iress of the Owner and such other information as the Boardmay reasonably reg'ttire. ' 11.13 Agreements. Su .~ect to th"or. approval of<!Declarant (so long as Declarant owns any property fo'ff~opm~nd/or sale~he Community or has the right to unilaterally annex additiowroJ!et!]"to the Com unity) all agreements and determinations, includ'.~Itlhf~~fm~reeme?ts regar ing lit~,~i~nvolving the Associa~ion, _lawfully authol'l.zecl· by the Boara•of Dtrectors shall lie,fondmg upon all Owners, thetr hetrs, legal repre~i~lj:ives, succes1g}si,assigM~~ others 'h~ving an interest in the Community or the privilege ~ssion a;;'fu\'hjoyment~ny part of the Community. 11.14 mplied Rights. uhe Association may exercise any right or privilege given to it expressly by tHi~eclaration, he Bylaws, the Articles oflncorporation, any use restriction or rule or regulatio&d eve~ other right or privilege reasonably to be implied from the existence of any right~. ge given to it therein or reasonably necessary to effectuate any such right or privilege. 11.15 Variances. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained herein, the Board of Directors or its designee shall be authorized to grant individual variances from any of the provisions of this Declaration, the Bylaws and any Design Guideline rule, regulation or use restriction established pursuant thereto if it determines that waiver of application or enforcement of the provision in a particular case would not be inconsistent with the overall scheme of development for the Community. 11.16 Litigation. No judicial or administrative proceeding shall be commenced or prosecuted by the Association unless approved by at least seventy-five percent (75%) of the 27 ,_, Total Association Vote. This Section shall not apply, however, to (i) actions brought by the Association to enforce the provisions of this Declaration (including, without limitation, the foreclosure ofliens), (ii) the imposition and collection of assessments as provided in Article 4 hereof, (iii) proceedings involving challenges to ad valorem taxation, or (iv) counterclaims brought by the Association in proceedings instituted against it. This Section shall not be amended unless such amendment is made by the Declarant pursuant to Section 11.3, hereof, or is approved by the percentage votes, and pursuant to the same procedures, necessary to institute proceedings as provided above. EXECUTED this_ day of _____ _ DECLARANT: Harbour Homes, LLC Justin Harman Vice President State of Washington ) )ss. County of King ) Notary Public in and for the State of Washington Residing at: ________ _ Printed Name: -------- My Appointment Expires ____ _ 28 City of Renton TREE RETENTION WORKSHEET RECE/V :0 SEP 2 8 ?n Cln, Ot= f:;":M""ON PLA ·-:t I NN!NG 011;1~1~,.,. 395 trees (exhides 1. Total number of trees over 6" in diameter1 on project site: 1. offsite trees) 2. Deductions: Certain trees are excluded from the retention calculation: Trees that are dead, diseased or dangerous2 30 trees Trees in proposed public streets 50 trees Trees in proposed private access easements/tracts O trees Trees in critical areas3 and buffers 118 trees Total number of excluded trees,: 3. Subtract line 2 from line 1: 2. 3. 198 trees 197 trees 4. Next, to determine the number of trees that must be retained 4 , multiply line 3 by: 0.3 in zones RC, R-1, R-4, or R-8 0.1 in all other residential zones 0.05 in all commercial and industrial zones 4. 59.1 trees 5. List the number of 6" or larger trees that you are proposing 5 to retain 4 : 5. 44 trees 6. Subtract line 5 from line 4 for trees to be replaced: (If line 6 is less than zero, stop here. No replacement trees are required). 6. 15.1 trees 7. Multiply line 6 by 12" for number of required replacement inches: 7. 181.2 inches 8. Proposed size of trees to meet additional planting requirement: (Minimum 2" caliper trees required) 8. --=2~ __ i. nches 9. Divide line 7 by line 8 for number of replacement trees 6: (if remainder is .5 or greater, round up to the next whole number) 1 -Measured at chest height. 9. per tree __,,9"-1,...__trees 2-Dead, diseased or dangerous trees must be certified as such by a forester, registered landscape architect, or certified arborist, and approved by the City. 3· Critical Areas, such as wetlands, streams, floodplains and protected slopes, are defined in Section 4-3-050 of the Renton Municipal Code (RMC). '· Count only those trees to be retained outside of critical areas and buffers. 5 · The City may require modification of the tree retention plan to ensure retention of the maximum number of trees per RMC 4-4-130H7a 6· Inches of street trees, inches of trees added to critical areas/buffers, and inches of trees retained on site that are less than 6" but are greater than 2" can be used to meet the tree replacement requirement. R:\2012\1 \12102\3\Documents\PP Minor Mod\TreeRetentionWorkshcetl2102_ VCI.doc 12/08 I I l i L_ L I 1-' l = " .. I ~ L> w 5 ' V> le <{ .. V> w .. V> w "' L> w => > -~·~'~:· '4m~·~\: \'. \ \ \.:. \·\~#~~~·~· .~,- 5£ t/4 SECTION 31, TOM/SHIP 23 N, RANG< S E; W.1,/. VUECREST ESTA TES & VUECREST II SHORT PLAT J l 1--;-. I _J L J ·1 . I ·;_1 r11· -i-T --_J 11 ·. J . . I I I -j ' ~·-;, , 1 ·1 '-,; . ::\. ,_ ljl -""'. ~ ' " __ ,.,,_.,. . 'oCIJ'QY'! >; ,G':,:1:'~/ . \;': ' . / / / '{ '\ L ·8 ·8 ~ 8. ~ -CW))?:_~ .... _.,. ___ ,,_ --.!!ll----~-o-.---.NIII~ I"°· -... ---... ..,.l°""rEl-1-,... ~- I I::_:,. I _(j ;R CITY OF RENTON --- l,<tCtlVtU .............. ,,., ................. --- ....... _,_____ "' :::-..::=sr--=-=,·~,[IJ ,,. ,, ll J. -, •• ,.\\l ~ _ _,,,~ -la .......... " - ~!:.~.~JlV!Sl~:.i~·•• ___ _..,. ... .z -·---..--,,..,.._-.. --...---..,. .... • .,.,....,r:m:,, .. .. :::,~-~ ...u .. ,,. ___ 4~" ::::==:. fa~--,u ------ !!!!£ lgg_END @Fi) w::-::=r,:;.,,,.~-- ~ ---- ,tr;\ -···---~ ----- lh I -ig~ ~ ( I I I i .L ' '.: @ NORTH --~ .. ,., ·r RECQl,!MENOEO FOIIAPfOV," BY: °""' BY: °"""'-- ~ ---l!Y· Dalo·-- VUECREST ESTATES & VUECREST II I TREE RETBl1DI Pl.AN DRS PRO..ECT NO. 12102 ~o~~ .~,,~ ·~· 0 §,11; I Ui 2I • § ~~~I§ ! • iUh I ~ • • 5 fo I 0 ~~ ~; 0 •a•i~ , ~ ~ " ~ i ~~J;J ~; ,, a ~~II! ~ !~ • • l->, to ... - ii~ :,: m" i' I ~;~.i • t:L > •o g, •• .i,.rl> ~ ~~~i 3 tlli > i: C-~ii!!l I I Bii·.;1 1;i:i; § 0 'Or @i~ ~ i ! 63< .:::> ID3 !*~Ii 8 i~~ 1 ~ -i •<--. i i;~ i i i S"n "ti 0 • \; o! az I f I~ t" .. ~~g!: = . " l ~~~s I ' ~~ ; .. qr, ~!!;; \:':;ii;; :;:l!" • } n~5 ~. ' ~rg • ~ H z:!! t::l ~· ~ ~ I • ~ ~ • i q ~ ! I • ~ • • • 3 ~ ~ " ~ > ~ ~ g z q ~ ~ ~ i i cl< ~IS s ' ' ~ • 121 I;] [I] El ~ .-. h . ·~ .. ~!ll .~ ~ ii~ t ~~i s; §~ ~ . ,-I -,, sm ~ m i ::!l "' ~ ::u g !ii ti ~l;) 0 i?i ;:J > ,o ;:;o -~ 5 ... ::u ""Cl -~-.. z 'j; · I (/) m 0~ z< rr, () i a~ z 0 -c, ~ '71 ~ m ' 0 •. QC ~ ~ El Ill I ;i'0. "-' < I .•. , ill~ ~!!! ~~ -~ •'::i i = m g~ ~~ ~F i.,, ~i ."' u, ~,, i" .. ! ~~ ~:~ ~ . 0 .~ -~ ~ ~ ':. ·'"'""'""'""'"'" ,- 1r i!'i ---'i!'il !I --'!Ill '. !ii ill pi! --1111111111 I I !!! i -< W il!I Ii P I!! lii1i1 II fi ij l1li! > l!I 111111 Ii li~il!j!I i 1111 'II 111 1r m i;; •! '1! ~ •I i I . ~ 8 ·ii 1hl ' d !! d,11 II 1i ! 1!1! I I I '!! ! !liii• !I 'j ~ •1 ii id h 1-, ·!1, I 1' ! ,ii i ' ! 11 • !! Iii hi ! ii ,l!hi! !ii I ~ ·11 l ' I ,1 Ii '·i·I I! ,1 ! •l !I Ii !!! ~ 11 Iii 11! Ii !!111 -i 11 I If ii jl ii! 11! ! dj11ii!1 1,, i ,: 0 h z m h ·U I I ·i 1q i !I i d1 11 -1• a, II, !Iii j! 1 a !!!!' 111 111 i 1,1! ''! i ij q ,! ' ! ~ p11 ,jl ,ii _,-" 11! iii ~ ~ > z i i 0 ,Iii • 8 ,: l•' j•· . . . . -' Ill ! !i Ill • -111 1;1 111 ; :I! 11m11 m,.-l!lj! I ~ I"' 11 !I g Ii' ij ia -< $0 ' m ,! 1! Ii Ii !I ! I 111 II ill ! I Iii !II 111 1 11 ~ !!!Iii i!!I! ll!1i 1 z z "' " z IIPI .:rp 1, ~~ m " p 'ldj ~ !!I m " h;ji ,!:!! I' i, I i; ! l!I 'P 1 111 i!llil iii il!ill I! 1m!1 ii I lllil s;: •/<j! !I'll : ' 0 z l\t p,, ii ii " ~ 1! I hi• t ; ~ (I) Tr ! i " I ! 11 i 1i1 I iu ! Iii 111 111 11 !!!jl! h ill! Id •!!!!I-< " -' " ! ~ I i 11 I 111 l 11 i 111 ·ii 1! 'I !!:!i I liii 0 ;o !!! I . i •• I ' ! l i ' !!i -I 0 z 0 ,, en:,: m )> ~11111 ~ij I fil~i I I !ll~lli !ll~!lllilil ~ij I i 111111 " llijfil lilll illl!l i " ;o -1 IO 50,, zc::z "';o > -:,: ,-"'oa:: ~ffi3 11•r!11 ' 11 a1 I f!i' .i i' • 1,1 !M ·1 · 1o j ! 1 1 , i·· -''"I -I en " 111~~11 ~I ~if! I 11:iijlil 1llllil!iillill Ill~ II~ 1 11111~1 ij!i! fiill o.> ::E < :j z c: 0 en m z IO-i, =ti~~ "'cnz ljl!ll!I 111 !ill! ll1i1i!i lli!lii1l11i1!! 'illl ,Ill !! !1!·11 !Ill 1j!!1 ~~ ;g ! II z11~! i I~ 1h11 0 . 9! i ~;r .. i=I ~ r1 ~! :~ ,1c1 1! ! i ·, ~ z- G) m j!pl;:111 i !ljl I '! i m1 11nm iill!! I 1111 1ip 111111i 1m11p111 1m I i 1111111i1 i 0, )TI :;; ' i ,i,, ii I 1! ' • I . 1''! ,il. 1 i ·! i lb !, !j'" ., l''i i'i ~ 'I !11 " ~ s;: 1!ijl~f iji! l l!l 1[illl'lijil '11I il!i l!llil lilliil~! fii I lll!II z :j z " "' " m " ...--~ 111 11 6' ii I ' !,• '! !' ii· I !j I I' i" -' i •i I I• ' ~ 1~1111! m 1 1 1,11111111 1111! ill ~ii 1~1111111~1:11111 111~i 0 z ·~~ I "' ,.~ ! i · 11 , lj,! ; i'J ! ' I ! . ! 1 \>, ' I l I ,j' " l 11 ~ !Ii ii !II! I 'lllilll I !i!llll I li!!!li I p11 !'Iii! iii'!!' !ijWII' lj! ! ; I 1!! ib'I 11 11 • •;j.11 ! 1 • p;s ,1!! 1,I,!, 111, II 11,11 ijt i'i fil . ;1! • 11! II lill l!li!!I ! 1 li1lll I -!1!iil 1,11 ,,,1,, . ,; I 111· I ~14 g !'II Pl!l! IHJI! ,!lh l! i ! !ft ., !,· , 1 , 1,1,1 ,·1r:111 ·11 ·i l n; 11 11 Ii! u1!111 111:U s 11111! 'Iii !l1lh li 1!1! i!MU!i l11 ··~ i I ·i! 1,l,I! 1:11 ! 11 •' 11 11 111111 illm !111111 1 1i i f ~i d i 111 11,i 11 h11 ' !hi!! .. "r; i I '·'! •1•11 l ' •'l •' 1 iz !! l 11 i !'i l1j,1• il!••i ,jl lij!ll JI!! I jil!li11 ii -!~j : 'I ' 111 11!1!,I !I ·11 I' ii i .. '1-,, 'i· ,j!! ! l I• I! ! 1,11 Ii 1,1 ' !{fl! !! . . ii ' J:~t~ JHf • 1ii1 ·r [, a ts: f"~ q ! i!' < -:£!~ i<g I p• d «~ ~ ~·" = ' I ' ' -L----------- 0. 00095 q1ir 1 r I l'"i 11rqr1 1111,11 ,. ;;; ",. c;;;;::, l'f l ifi I i~ I I ~ r I I I ii I I !, ii ,il ~ jl I 'I' ----r---------------------- ' I ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' I ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ~I! u tij', gi I !l jltll 11 1111r 11 ,! !' !~~ ~ t II i ' I [Ji ( ' : w ' ' ' ' ' : ' ' ' ' ' : I ' ' ' f--j ' ' ' ' ' ' I i ' ' ' : ' ' ' : ' : lii'Piiji; i ii1h!m;1 Ii ,ii!,!: ! ti!ill· Hi liil!i!llii ''Is j Ji' i!1•: 1,1: 1li!h:i~l 1 ,. II I l i' ,Ua lhf ii ll ' I ' -------------------------------------· 9 -a II es ••ooo@® VUECREST ESTATES / VUECREST II I l SEE SHEET CJO .. ' !! !Ii i!~ ~ •I ~ I l1U 1 -~ 1,1 ·. j! ~ ~,ii ; !I ~ ~ ,1 ~ ~ in 1 ,1 ; ~ !II ij t • ; S31V153 lSJijOJM -~ it9000-£LYn1 53!Y153 1S3~03M ...... -----·- I I I _J ___ _ -----------·--~~---------- l't9000-£LVn1 SJ1V!S3 !S3M0311A -~ • • I I ! 1~11 i I ,., ....... ---"", --·- -·---" ., I J: ztoooo-nvm / ' '/ / 1. i! .. i) S3J.V!53 !53~03M \ \ \ \ I I I I ~i} i,' ll:'.r. 0 ! z . ~ ~~; .,,~ g 1(1>~ ~ !ii iii I ~ I ~ l!I 1 ~a i i'.:~ i u~ \ t ~l I q * I ~!! • I I i I ! 1' f I j '• ":!._ ! I • ! ; • ... ----·- Ii 11,l 1t Iii Ii 11 ii ,1 I 1) 1 I 11 " " !l 1 111 ~ 1! Ii (~f}' l'l'.r. I 0 ! I 'I z ~ 11 II, 1~1 s ••• ~ • 11 ~~I! i! lj, ;11 I i ,i a!1 ~ ! !11 . ' 1 ~e i ~1 I ~t;:: l \ u~ \ ,, ' ~t ~i ~ ' ' \ I i ! I t I 11 @ I ~ ' ·-•.::_ ', y / / 1, II ·, 1, 110 1; i) .I V ~!! I I • I 1 n ~ f 11 f -·-, ' . i ! ! :i.: .• ~ ... --~ • i,0000-nvm 53! VlSJ lSJijJJ/lA ,,,..., .... ........, ----1·1-~- V it9000-n Ynl S31Y1S3 1S3!l03M ' ' \ I I I I I i I ; ! I .1 ·-•C "( ! • ! ', y I / " 'I :.~ ! ~ " II 0 >'i l ,J II ' ' ' j \ ~5 i I I i i=:~ I 7<r7'.T175,-~,· f"'!i' ·1,.J ,.;.;......,..;.,....c·..,;J ; l y j (@ ! ~1! ! 1'-,-h-~ <1; 7¥ -o--· : .. ,,-·-~r1··r ! I • ! • r---,i----~~~' .... I ·~ Zt9000-rLVnl 53J.V153 153H03nA I I f ! IJ11 f I i I ......... ---~--"""·u...i~-, ,-i---.--r··T--1·-· J--, -.. ·1···----·-·· . .,.,.,.--1··1,.,,~ :_~~~~ ~!::. ~ -----------\ .. -i---\ -----· r·-----·---------- ::m ~ =(-=r== ····1 ·· ___ .. \j\-1 · -·- I --~N \----- .... -1·--···---····· I I I I-, ----- \ I . I .. I ... ~~--.... -_ i~ 1~-== \ I --~--.~+ -·-r· +Ji-. . .... 1 ·-·--1-[\-·--I--·-···, __L ___ J____ iv9000-£\Vnl S3!V1S31S3H03n,\ • ' • I I l 1~11 ; ! 'f ~ i I ~01: ! z ~ ~~, g 0~i ~ ~~ d z t l'I I 111 I ·r" I l!I !-ill ! I l,, I I •II' r •• 111 I! i 1111' iJ 1! i . ~· •!I I II I" 11111 u~ -~I !!&ti I ! S3J.V1S3 153ij03nA ........ -----· --·~---·- CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MEMORANDUM Date: September 23, 2013 To: City Clerk's Office From: Lisa M. McElrea Subject: Land Use File Closeout Please complete the following information to facilitate project closeout and indexing by the City Clerk's Office 1 Project Name: Salvatori Additional Animals LUA (file) Number: LUA-13-000673; AAP Cross-References: AKA's: Project Manager: Gerald Wasser Acceptance Date: June 3, 2013 Applicant: Susan Salvatori Owner: Susan Salvatori Contact: Susan Salvatori PID Number: 3307800070 ERC Decision Date: ERC Appeal Date: Administrative: Denial: July 5, 2013 I Approval August 21, 2013 Appeal Period Ends: July 29, 2013 I September 4, 2013 Public Hearing Date: Date Appealed to HEX: By Whom: HEX Decision: Date: Date Appealed to Council: By Whom: Council Decision: Date: Mylar Recording Number: Project Description: The applicant is requesting approval of an Additional Animals Permit to allow the keeping of five dogs where three household pets are allowed (RMC 4-4-0lOG.l) Location: 1315 Redmond Place NE Comments: A denial of the additional animals permit was issued on July 5, 2013; the denial was based on a letter from abutting property owners describing excessive barking. The applicant, subsequently, requested reconsideration based on the fact that the abutting property owners are now neither In favor nor in onnosition to the additional animals oermit. 6enis1~w Mayo·r: · -. jeptembe(18, 2013 ... . . Department of Community and Economic Development . . . cC.E.'.'ChipWincent, Administrator. .. K~lly_ and Susa~ Salvatori ·· · i315 Redrribnd-Place NE Rentcm;WA98056 ·. SUBJECT: '. •.. •. Salvatori Additional Animals Permit .. · · LUA])sooOG73, AAP . .. . . ~ .,· Dear'Mr .. and Mrs,_Salvatori: . ' . . . . -. .· . '\ -This letter. is to inforrrii you that the appeal ·pe~ibd ended September S, 2Q13.fbr the ·.·· . . aboye "referen~ed Additional AriiriialsPerinitap"proval. No. appeals were filed; therefore, . this decision is final. . . . . . . . . lfVou havear\y qu.~stions regard in~ the iss.ued_Additional Arii~als P~r~it please call me af{425) 430:7382. · ' · · ' · ·· · · " ·. , · ·· · · · · · ----~··_-·: .. ····-.. . flff -~· ·. -: .. . ~~ .~ . . ,· _', ~ -, . . ---. -· '·. · Gerald Wasser. Ass~ciate_Plan~er .. . cc:: Rento~ City Hair., ·_, 055 ·south GradyW~y ; Renton, wa;hington 98057., renionwa·:gov : . . . . ' .. · .. , , . ' . ' . ' . '' .• Denis La,;_ _·'Mayor August 21, 2013 . · ' .. Depart~ent o(Community and Econbmic Development·. · · ·. · · · ·. c;E}Ch ip"Vincent, Adm inistrato(. . ' . . ., ' KeUy and Susan s~ivatciri ',. 1315 Redmond Pl~ceNE • . Rentcipn, V;J_A 98056 ·• · SUBJECT: RECONSiDER_ATION REQUEST·' , . ' ·· .. SALVATORI ADDITIONAL ANIMALS PERMIT • '· • " • -I , • • • • / • · LUAB-000673, AAP .i;>ear Mr. and MS. Salvatori: ' •',•, . . /.•. ·, . Tnjs correspondence is in response to yo~r letter, da~~:d Juiy 2!( 2013; requesting ·. -•.· reconsideration of the:denial of your Additional Animalspe'rmifapplication Which was . •issuedon July 5, 2013. , ·. • ·. · · • .. ··_·· : :,: · · ... '. ,-· · i. .·· .·.·_ . • " · ·.•·. • ·. . ·.·. That deni,al was basedbhpbjectioris from neigh.boringprop~rty owners Vl(hO haye . . · •·•· ... · .· . withdiawn their objections. In a letter; dated Juiy 27, 2013,.those,propertyo:.Vners,.. : . · · ._·• •. Ari drew and Shahida Hise; state.that they ~re n-6~ neutral, rieither oppos";d nor in fa~or · . ·oftheadditici_nal animals permit .. Therefore;your request-for reconsideration is granted-, .. _and LUA1fooo673,-AAP; Saivatori AdditionalAnim~is Perriiit;Js apprbved. ,This . . . . •. appro_ital is refle~ted in the enciosed AdditianalAnimals Pe~mit, . . . .. . ', . - '' should you have any questions, please'cont~ct Gerald Wasser; 0 AssociatePlanner a,t · .. (425)A30c7382 cir gwa~ser@reritanwa.gov. · . . . . . . . Sincerely; 3:-s;_ VA~-•-----~---_ c:E. __ ;,Chi p"-_Vincent ' CED Adriiinist~ator ... ~c: A~drew & Shahida H·ise,,Pariies Ot·Record · Greg _Enberg, Party of ~ecord . . . ' ' . Rentoll CJty tjali. ~ ·1055 SoUth Gra:dyWay ·• · Renton,WashingtOn· 98057~ ! r~ntonWa;gOv .. . , '· . . . . ~ · ... ,. •. . . ,_, .. : , '. , -·. ' PLANNING DIVISION ADDITIONAL ANIMALS PERMIT DATE OF PERMIT ISSUANCE: August 21, 2013 PROJECT NUMBER: PROJECT NAME: PROJECT MANAGER: .OWNER: APPLICANT: LOC~TION: DESCRIPTION: DECISION CRITERIA: LUA13-000673 . Salvatori Additional Animals Permit Gerald Wasser, Associate Planner Kelly and Susan Salvatori 1315 Redmond Ave NE Renton, WA 98056 Susan Salvatori 159 Vashon Pl NE Renton, WA 98059-5240 1315 Redmond'PI NE CONCUR. :r{ .... E DATE NAME plicant is requesting approval of an Additional Animals Permit to a.'.~>eff'fttt. the keeping of five dogs where three household pets are allowed (RMC 4-4-0lOG.1). The dogs include: two Chihuahuas, one Dachshund, one mixed breed (mutt), and one Shitzu. All of the dogs weigh between 10 and 25 pounds each. The applicant states that the dogs are indoor pets. The rear yard of the 8,800 square foot property is enclosed by a six-foot high wood fence. The property is a corner lot in the Residential-8 dwelling units per acre (R-8) zone. A denial of the additional animals permit was issued on July 5, 2013; the denial was based on a letter from abutting property owners describing excessive barking. The applicant, subsequently, requested reconsideration of the denial based on the fact that the abutting property owners are now neither in favor nor in opposition to the additional animals permit. The Planning Division Director shall review requests for Additional Animals Permits for compatiblity of the proposal with the surounding neighborhood. In order to determine that the site and facility will .be adequate and to ensure the humane and appropriate care of the animals, the Planning Division Director may require that the property be inspected by an Animal Control Officer. Factors to be considered in determining compatiblity and adequacy are: Page 1 of 4 DEPARTMENT OF Cf"''VIMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT --===-= PLANNING DIVISION ADDITIONAL ANIMALS PERMIT DATE OF PERMIT ISSUANCE: August 21, 2013 PROJECT NUMBER: PROJECT NAME: PROJECT MANAGER: OWNER: APPLICANT: LOCATION: DESCRIPTION: DECISION CRITERIA: LUA13-000673 Salvatori Additional Animals Permit Gerald Wasser, Associate Planner Kelly and Susan Salvatori 1315 Redmond Ave NE Renton, WA 98056 Susan Salvatori 159 Vashon Pl NE Renton, WA 98059-5240 1315 Redmond Pl NE The applicant is requesting approval of an Additional Animals Permit to allow the keeping of five dogs where three household pets are allowed (RMC 4-4-0lOG.l). The dogs include: two Chihuahuas, one Dachshund, one mixed breed (mutt), and one Shitzu. All of the dogs weigh between 10 and 25 pounds each. The applicant states that the dogs are indoor pets. The rear yard of the 8,800 square foot property is enclosed by a six-foot high wood fence. The property is a corner lot in the Residential-8 dwelling units per acre (R-8) zone. A denial of the additional animals permit was issued on July 5, 2013; the denial was based on a letter from abutting property owners describing excessive barking. The applicant, subsequently, requested reconsideration of the denial based on the fact that the abutting property owners are now neither in favor nor in opposition to the additional animals permit. The Planning Division Director shall review requests for Additional Animals Permits for compatiblity of the proposal with the surounding neighborhood. In order to determine that the site and facility will be adequate and to ensure the humane and appropriate care of the animals, the Planning Division Director may require.that the property be inspected by an Animal Control Officer. Factors to be considered in determining compatiblity and adequacy are: Page 1 of 4 City of Renton Department of Com ity & Economic Development Additional Animals Permit LUA13-000673 Salvatori Additional Animals Permit 1. Will the keeping of additional animals have an adverse effect on abutting or adjacent properties or cause ·a detriment to the community? Comments: The original denial of the Salvatori Additional Animals Permit was based on a letter from abutting property owners which described excessive barking. Those neighbors have since submitted a letter which states that they are neither in favor nor in opposition to the requested additional animals permit. ----------- NO 2. Is there a past history of animal control complaints regarding animals kept by the applicant? Comments: City of Renton Animal Control has indicated that there is no past history of any complaints . . YES 3. Do adequate and appropriate facility and rear yard specifications/dimensions exist that ensure the health and safety of the animals? Comments: City of Renton Animal Control conducted an inspection of the site on June 18, 2013 and found the subject premises has adequate ventilation, food storage, and waste management. YES 4. Are the animals' sizes, types, and characteristics of breed compatible with the adequacy of the site and facilities? --····-·-----·---- YES 5. Is the animal waste product managed in a safe, clean and odor-free manner? Comments: City of Renton Animal Control conducted an inspection of the site on June 18, 2013 and found the subject premises has adequate ventilation, food storage, and waste management. YES 6. Is the request for additional animals compatible with the zoning classification of the premises on which the keeping of additional animals is to occur? 1~/A 7 ... Ke~pin~~f A~~itional-:~;:·~:t Anim:i;~:quirem:nts: If the._a_p_p-li-ca-tion is for keeping I. of additional large lot animals does the applicant provide a copy of the adopted farm management plan based on the King County Conservation District's Farm Conservation I and Practice Standards? j •-•••••~-• ••a-~•••---··~•·-~•-----•·•-•----• •m*••M••-------*rn*••w• ~---• -·~*"''*-.-.-~•-·---• ' ._____ · ••--•• 'N/A 8. Keeping of Additional Large Lot Animals Requirements: Is there adequate pasturage to N/A N/A support a greater number of animals? 9. If the application is for animal foster care provider, has the applicant kept paperwork for all foster animals which states that the animals are foster animals from a sponsoring organization? (Such paperwork shall be provided upon request to City officials) 10. Is the shelter location located a minimum of ten (10) feet from any property line and in the rear yard? (Note: Unless Planning Division determines that a side yard would be a better location.) Page 2 of 4 City of Renton Department of Corr ity & Economic Development Additional Animals Permit LUA13-000673 Salvatori Additional Animals Permit YES 11. Is the subject lot smaller than one (1) gross acre in size? If so, are dog-runs, open-run areas and permanent/temporary kennel structures surrounded by a fence of adequate height, located a minimum of ten (10) feet from any property line and in the rear yard? (Note: Unless Planning Division determines that a side yard would be a better location.) Comments: An exiting 6-foot high fence surrounds the rear yard area and is located at the property line. Abutting property property owners have stated that they are neither in favor nor in opposition to the requested additional animals permit. N/A 12. Is the subject lot larger than one (1) gross acre in size? If so, are dog-runs, open run areas and permanent/temporary kennel structures surrounded by a fence of adequate height, may be located closer than ten (10) feet from any property line and if the dog-run, open run areas and kennel structure is no closer than one hundred (100) feet tc any dwelling unit and the location is approved by the Planning Division. YES 13. Are all animals kept in such a manner so as not to create any objectionable noise, odor, annoyance, or become a public nuisance? Comments: Abutting property owners have stated that they are neither in favor nor in opposition to the requested additional animals permit. YES 14. Are animal and food wastes properly removed to keep the kennel free from the infestation of insects, rodents or diseases and from obnoxious or foul odors? Comments: City of Renton Animal Control conducted an inspection of the site on June 18, 2013 and found the subject premises has adequate ventilation, food storage, and waste management. CONCLUSION: Staff recommends that the Salvatori Additional Animals Permit, LUA13-000673, AAP, be approved because the property owners who initially expressed concern about excessive barking are now neither in favor nor in opposition to the additional animals permit. DECISION: The Salvatori Additional Animals Permit, LUA 13-000673 is approved. SIGNATURE & DATE OF DECISION : \) ' J C---. z.. '--.)4 August 21, 2013 0 C.E. "Chip" Vincent, CED Administrator Date Appeals of permit issuance must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m. on Wednesday, September 4, 2013, together with the required fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by RMC 4-8-110 and more information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Re"nton City Clerk's Office, Page 3 of 4 City of Renton Department of Corr 'ity & Economic Development Salvatori Additional Animals Permit Additional Animals Permit LUAB-000673 Reconsideration: Within 14 days of the decision date, any party may request that the decision be reopened by the approval body. The approval body may modify his decision if material evidence not readily discoverable prior to the original decision is found or if he finds there was misrepresentation of fact. After review of tlie reconsideration request, if the approval body finds sufficient evidence to amend the original decision, there will be no further extension of the appeal period. Any person wishing to take further action must file a formal appeal within the 14-day appeal time frame. Expiration: An Additional Animals Permit shall be valid as long as the keeping of animals has not been discontinued for more than one year, the operator is in compliance with the City requirements and has not had the Additional Animals Permit and/or any related home occupation license revoked or renewal refused. In addition, all animals that are required to be licensed shall be individually licensed according to the regulations found in RMC 5-4, Animal Licenses. Failure to renew animal licenses as required in RMC 5-4 shall trigger review and/or revocation of the Additional Animals Permit. Page 4 of 4 Kelly and Susan Salvatori 1315 Redmond PL NE Renton, WA 98056 The purpose of this letter is to formally request that the decision to grant the Additional Animals Permit for Kelly and Susan Salvatori be reopened and to present additional information that is relevant to this case. Let me start by providing some background. Susan and I moved to our current residence with our existing three (3) dogs in December 2012. The primary reason for the move was to acquire a bigger home so that Susan's mother, Betty Shockley, could move in with us. Betty is eighty-four {84) years of age and although she is self-sufficient in many respects, she needed some additional care due to her dementia. Betty has two (2) dogs of her own. Knowing that the City of Renton has a pet limit of three (3), Susan talked with a representative from the City of Renton and discovered that we could apply for an Additional Animals Permit to account for the five (5) dogs that we knew we would ultimately have. With the knowledge that we could be compliant with the City of Renton's requirements, we started our home search. Once we located our current home, Susan and I got in touch with the president of the home owners association, Greg Engberg, and informed him of our current situation, our interest in purchasing the home and to see if there would be any objections to having five (5) dogs in the neighborhood. At the time, Greg said he needed to think about it and so we gave him our contact number. About a week went by before we received a call from Greg who stated that as long as the City of Renton would allow five (5) dogs, he did not have any objections to us moving in. Upon receiving the good news, we went forward with purchasing our current home and had moved our belongings into the new home by January. At the start of February, we had settled in enough that we could move Betty in to live with us. We were still very busy with settling in to our new home so it wasn't until the end of May that we got around to applying for the Additional Animals Permit. The Public Notice was posted in June. After the fourteen (14) day comment period had elapsed, I called Gerald Wasser (on June 25'h) to find the status of our permit request. He let me know that the permit was still under investigation but that one (1) neighbor did respond with a concern and Gerald sent me an e-mail with the responses received. Once we were aware of our neighbor's concern, Susan and I took the opportunity on June 26'h to talk with Shihida and her partner Andrew Hise. During that conversation, we discovered Shihida was mainly concerned that adding two (2) additional dogs would add to the existing barking that could be heard. She was surprised to hear that we already had five (5) dogs and that they had been with us since the start of February 2013. Since we were now aware of their barking concern, we exchanged contact numbers and let both of them know that if they had any issues with barking to please contact us immediately and we would resolve it. In addition, I informed them that we had already talked with Greg Engberg about the neighborhood kids playing next to our fence line, which was causing our dogs to bark as well. All in all, it was a very positive meeting. C'J7y li>.i' o,.. ''0. '9,s; J(!, 12;,v. ,i,_,.o On June 27'", I left a message for Gerald Wasser to let him know that we had talked wlth~lihida7aq,a .9 ~b )v Andrew and that although I felt the issue had been resolved, to please contact them to git.t'l)7ir input.<,?.{? Two (2) weeks later, to our surprise, we received our denial letter for the Additional Animals p~,;;'mit. Specifically, the letter included a statement from Shihida saying that the "barking still continues t~G'e~~ ~~~-~ On July 241", we took the opportunity to talk to Shihida and Andrew again to see if we had misunderstood their stance. Shihida informed us that her response was misrepresented in the letter from the city and that the barking had subsided to an acceptable level. Instead of being against our Additional Animals Permit, Shihida said that she was neither in favor nor in opposition. In short, the issuance of the Additional Animals Permit was denied due to "Attachment A", which refers to our neighbor's (Shihida Khan and Andrew Hise) concern over excessive barking. This concern has been addressed. On a final note, I would like to point out that no formal complaint has ever been filed with the City of Renton Animal Control for excessive barking. In addition, there are other dogs in our neighborhood which contribute to the barking that is heard. All of our dogs are small in-door dogs that are not left outside. Lastly, we ensure that the dog door to the backyard is in place when we are gone so that they cannot go outside and bark. Thank you for taking the time to review this letter. If you need any further information, please do not hesitate to contact either of us at the numbers provided below. Kelly Salvatori Phone: 425-235-4638 ~,~s'J!btr- susan Salvatori Cellphone: 425-466-0470 ~~ July 27, 2013 To whom it may concern, We are the neighbors at 1321 Redmond Pl NE. Previously we wrote in opposition of the additional animals permit. The situation has since improved, therefore we would like to amend the record to show we are neutral in our position -neither opposed nor in favor of the animal permit. Futhermore, the record indicates a phone conversation on July 5th -which was incorrectly documented. The conversation detailed that the situation had improved and that our position was neutral in the matter. We feel this should be noted and corrected in the record. Andrew & Shahida Hise 1321 Redmond PL NE Renton; WA 98056 • DEPARTMENT OF Cl ,1MUNITY AND D ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ~ J.!· PLANNING DIVISION ·. ADDITIONAL ANIMALS PERMIT DATE OF PERMIT ISSUANCE: July 05, 2013 PROJECT NUMBER: PROJECT NAME: PROJECT MANAGER: OWNER: APPLICANT: LOCATION: DESCRIPTION: DECISION CRITERIA: LUA13-000673 Salvatori Additional Animals Permit Gerald Wasser, Associate Planner Kelly and Susan Salvatori 1315 Redmond Ave NE Renton, WA 98056 Susan Salvatori 159 Vashon Pl NE Renton, WA 98059-5240 1315 Redmond Pl NE The applicant is requesting approval of an Additional Animals Permit to permit the keeping of five dogs where three household pets are allowed (RMC 4-4-0lOG.l). The dogs include: two Chihuahuas, one Dachshund, one mixed breed (mutt), and one Shitzu. All of the dogs weigh between 10 and 25 pounds each. The applicant states that the dogs are indoor pets. The rear yard of the 8,800 square foot property is enclosed by a six-foot high wood fence. The property is a corner lot in the Residential-8 dwelling units per acre (R-8) zone. The Planning Division Director shall review requests for Additional Animals Permits for compatiblity of the proposal with the surounding neighborhood. In order to determine that the.site and facility will be adequate and to ensure the humane and appropriate care of the animals, the Planning Division Director may require that the property be inspected by an Animal Control Officer. Factors to be considered in determining compatiblity and adequacy are: 1. Will the keeping of additional animals have an adverse effect on abutting or adjacent properties or cause a detriment to the community? Page 1 of 5 City 'of Renton Deportment of Comn,_.,ity & Economic Development Salvatori Additional Animals Permit Additional Animals Permit LUA13-000673 ! --' ·~---: Comments: Please note that two comment letters from neighboring property owners 1 NO YES were received (see attachments). One letter (Attachment A) states the neighbor's I opposition to the issuance of this additional animals permit. The neighbor states that 1 1 at least one of the five dogs barks excessively. The City of Renton Animal Control has no record of formal complaints regarding excessive barking. Formal complaints I concerning excessive barking may be filed with City of Renton Animal Control which ·1 will investigate complaints and take appropriate action . /I_ The second letter (Attachment B) from another neighboring property owner discusses the history of the five dogs at the subject property and concludes that the neighbor is I neither in favor or in opposition to this additional animals permit. However, this · · neighbor acknowledges that there is barking emanating from the backyard of the subject property. An abutting neighbor (Attachment A), acknowledged in a telephone conversation, on July 5, 2013 with staff, that the applicant spoke with them about attempting to alleviate excessive barking. However, barking still continues to be a problem according to this neighbor. 2. Is there a past history of animal control complaints regarding animals kept by the applicant? I Comments: City of Renton Animal Control has indicated that there is no past history of i any complaints. J I 3. Do adequate and appropriate facility and rear yard specifications /dimensions exist that I ensure the health and safety of the animals? J Comments: City of Renton Animal Control has indicated that adequate ventilation, food I storage and waste management are present at the subject site. 1 City of Renton Animal Control conducted an inspection of the site on June 18, 2013 and I -------~~~:g~~:~:.ject premises has ade~~-ate ve~tilation, food st:r~g~~:~~-:::te·-------l YES 4. Are the animals' sizes, types, and characteristics of breed compatible with the adequacy i YES of the site and facilities? i ·---------·-------1 i 5. Is the animal waste product managed in a safe, clean and odor-free manner? I Comments: City of Renton Animal Control has indicated that adequate ventilation, food ! storage and waste management are present at the subject site. i City of Renton Animal Control conducted an inspection of the site on June 18, 2013 and I found the subject premises has adequate ventilation, food storage, and waste Ii. management. ---,--~-----·-··--·-------·--•--·------··-·---·--•·•-•••-·----M---•-••-•-----·-• YES 6. Is the request for additional animals compatible with the zoning classification of the I premises on which the keeping of additional animals is to occur? ·-·----·-····---------------------------~·-·-----j Page 2 of 5 City of Renton Deportment of Comn. .,ty & Economic Development Salvatori Additional Animals Permit Additional Animals Permit LUA13-000673 friiA 7. Keeping of Additional Large Lot Animals Requirements: If the application is for keeping . • of additional large lot animals does the applicant provide a copy of the adopted farm ! management plan based on the King County Conservation District's Farm Conservation ! and Practice Standards? ,,,m, __ :N/A 8. Keeping of Additional Large Lot Animals Requirements: Is there adequate pasturage to support a greater number of animals? N/A 9. If the application is for animal foster care provider, has the applicant kept paperwork for all foster animals which states that the animals are foster animals from a sponsoring organization? (Such paperwork shall be provided upon request to City officials) N/A 10. Is the shelter location located a minimum of ten (10) feet from any property line and in the rear yard? (Note: Unless Planning Division determ!nes that a side yard would be a better location.) :vEs 11. Is the subject lot smaller than one (1) gross acre in size? If so, are dog-runs, open-run areas and permanent/temporary kennel structures surrounded by a fence of adequate height, located a minimum of ten (10) feet from any property line and in the rear yard? (Note: Unless Planning Division determines that a side yard would be a better location.) Comments: An existing 6-foot high fence surrounds the rear yard area and is located at the property line. Neighboring property owners have stated that dogs on the subject property bark excessively when they are using their own abutting backyards (Attachments A and B ). N/A 12. Is the subject lot larger than one (1) gross acre in size? If so, are dog-runs, open run areas and permanent/temporary kennel structures surrounded by a fence of adequate height, may be located closer than ten (10) feet from any property line and if the dog-run, open run areas and kennel structure is no closer than one hundred (100) feet t< any dwelling unit and the location is approved by the Planning Division. NO 13. Are all animals kept in such a manner so as not to create any objectionable noise, odor, annoyance, or become a public nuisance? Page 3 of 5 ' City bf Renton Department of Comn, •.. ,ty & Economic Development Salvatori Additional Animals Permit Additional Animals Permit LUA13-000673 j ! . Comments: Please note that two comment letters from neighboring property owners were received (see attachments). One letter (Attachment A) states the neighbor's opposition to the issuance of this additional animals permit. The neighbor states tliat at least one of the five dogs barks excessively. The City of Renton Animal Control has no record of formal complaints regarding excessive barking. Formal complaints concerning excessive barking may be filed with City of Renton Animal Control which will investigate complaints and take appropriate action . The second letter (Attachment B) from another neighboring property owner discusses the history of the five dogs at the subject property and concludes that the neighbor is neither in favor or in opposition to this additional animals permit. However, this neighbor acknowledges that there is barking emanating from the backyard of the subject property. An abutting neighbor (Attachment A), acknowledged in a telephone conversation, on July 5, 2013 with staff, that the applicant spoke with them about attempting to alleviate excessive barking. However, barking still continues to be a problem according to this neighbor. ----------------------------------~----~ Ives ' 14. Are animal and food wastes properly removed to keep the kennel free from the infestation of insects, rodents or diseases and from obnoxious or foul odors? Comments: City of Renton Animal Control has indicated that adequate ventilation, food storage and waste management are present at the subject site. City of Renton Animal Control conducted an inspection of the site on June 18, 2013 and found the subject premises has adequate ventilation, food storage, and waste management. CONCLUSION: Staff recommends that the Salvatori Additional Animals Permit, LUA13-000673, request be denied because the additional animals would not be kept in a manner that prevents objectionable noise (Criteria 13) for the abutting property owners as documented in the attached comment letter and email.· · DECISION: The Salvatori Additional Animals Permit, LUA 13-000673 is denied. SIGNATURE & DATE OF DECISION: ~ C.E. "Cliip" July 05, 2013 _ Date Page 4 of 5 City of Renton Department of Cornn, •.. ty & Economic Development Salvatori Additional Animals Permit Additional Animals Permit LUA13-000673 Appeals of permit issuance must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m. on Monday, July 29, 2013, together with the required fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by RMC 4-8-110 and more information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, 425-430-6510. Reconsideration: Within 14 days of the decision date, any party may request that the decision be reopened by the approval body. The approval body may modify his decision if material evidence not readily discoverable prior to the original decision is found or if he finds there was misrepresentation of fact. After review of the reconsideration request, if the approval body finds sufficient evidence to amend the original decision, there will be no further extension of the appeal period. Any person wishing to take further action must file a formal appeal within the 14-day appeal time frame. Expiration: An Additional Animals Permit shall be valid as long as the keeping of animals has not been.discontinued for more than one year, the operator is in compliance with the City requirements and has not had the Additional Animals Permit and/or any related home occupation license revoked or renewal refused. In addition, all animals that are required to be licensed shall be individually licensed according to the regulations found in RMC 5-4, Animal Licenses. Failure to renew animal licenses as required in RMC 5-4 shall trigger review and/or revocation of the Additional Animals Permit. Page 5 of 5 June 11, 2013 Attention: Gerald Wasser Associate Planner Department of Community & Economic Development 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 RE: Salvatori additional animal permit/ LUA13-000673, AAP Susan Salvatori, 1315 Redmond Place NE, Renton 98056 Dear Mr. Wasser I am writing regarding the additional animal permit request at the above residence, to·express my serious concerns regarding the permit five dogs. My husband, Andrew Hise and I, Shahida Khan, live at 1321 Redmond Place NE, Renton, next door to the homeowners making this request. We never received any notice in the mail regarding their request. I happen to read the pink notice posted the telephone pole in our neighborhood. I was informed by the President of the Homeowner'$ Association we were supposed to receive a notice in the mail. Again, we did not received anything. Currently, these neighbors own three dogs and we think one in particular is constantly barking when placed outside. I don't know if it's all three dogs barking, or just one, but as soon as they are let outside they bark at children playing in the neighborhood or us sitting outside, trying to enjoy the sunshine on our patio furniture. Within minutes we have to go back in our home because the noise doesn'.t stop until they let the dog(s) back inside their home. Their backyard is approximately 700sq ft and so is ours. Our backyards are just not large enough for five dogs to run around in. In addition, the noise from the current three dogs I'm assuming will double with two additional dogs. I'm very concerned about the noise. I am asking you to please deny the request for five dogs. We have no.children and no pets and can't imagine living next door to five dogs, when it's loud enough with three. We want to have the option to sit outside to enjoy what summertime has to off~r, kingei than a few minutes, because of a dcig that barks constantly. · What steps need to be taken to assure we will be informed, appropriately, regarding these kinds of matters in the future? I am very concerned we were overlooked when we live next door to these people and are one of the two neighbors affected the most. Your diligence in these matters is greatly appreciated. Sincerely, /_ .. / ·-,~ h an (30 4J33 \ Andrew Hise ( 425) 269-9700 1321 Redmond Place NE, Renton 98056 l ' . Gerald Wasser From: Sent: Engberg, Gregory K <gregory.k.engberg@boeing.com> Monday, June 17, 2013 4:42 PM To: Gerald Wasser Subject: Salvatori Additional Animals PermiULUA 13-000673,APP Jerry-I appreciate the return call earlier this afternoon and the opportunity to discuss the subject permit. As I noted, the backyard of the Salvatori's home is approximately 1,050ft2. The backyard butts up to my property line (3718 NE 13thPI) with exposure to my front door as well as my 81/2 year old daughter's bedroom. The Salvatori's have been upfront about the.possibility of more than 3 dogs on their lot since they first considered the home for purchase. Prior to them buying the residence, they had asked to see the communities CC&Rs and asked what I thought about the additional animals. Because the dogs were described as in-door pets and of very small size, I couldn't see any significant issues. However, I said it was best'to go thought the city for proper recourse. The dogs are rarely seen. That said, one of the dogs has a propensity to bark at the slightest noise, whet.her one of the neighbors are leaving their house in the morning, the kids are outside playing in the street or simply sitting in your backyard having a conversation. I have made the recommendation to the Salvatori's that by possibly introducing the dogs to the neighborhood kids, this action might reduce the barking on one level. As for other situations that might cause the dog to bark, I don't have a recommendation. Therefore, it is my decision that I am neither in favor of or against the addition of two (2) additional dogs at the Salvatori residence. For me, it is the level of and frequency of barking that is of significant issue. Please add my name to the Party of Record. Greg Engberg 3718 NE 13th Pl Renton Wa 98056 425 277-2778 Thank you, Greg Engberg CAS Finance -Customer Support (206) 766-1082 M/S 2L-90 . 1 City of"' Pt .·· nento annmg 0 . . n 1v1sion JUN 1 7 2013 !FW ~rt::~ or:;~@