Preliminary Drainage Reportn
~~
n
J
~--~ TAH®IVIA TERRA FAIRWAY
~ IVI lJ LTI-FAIVI I LY
YELM, WASHINGTON
~l
~J
~-, R
u FCFj~
o~jl F~
6'~~~6
U
n
r--,
u
n
~ PRELIMINARY ®RAIIVAGE REP®RT
~.,
KPFF Consulting Engineers
4200 Sixth Avenue SE, Suite 309
Lacey, WA 98503
October 6, 2006
n
L.I
rlII
~J
`Jl
t~
~"1
v
tJ
n
i
L~
`~I
U
~1I
i
PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE REPORT
Tahoma Terra Fairway Multi-family Housing
Yelm, Washington
October 6, 2006
PROJECT INFORMATION
Prepared for: TT PH 3-8 LLC
Contact: Doug Bloom
REVIEWING AGENCY
Jurisdiction:
Project Number:
Project Contact:
City of Yelm, Washington
406037.03
James E. Gibson, P E.
PROJECT ENGINEER
Prepared by: KPFF Consulting Engineers
4200 6th Avenue SE, Ste. 309
Lacey, WA 98503
Tel: (360) 292-7230
Fax: (360) 292-7231
Contact: Clint Pierpoint, Civil Engineer
KPFF Project: Flle Number: I:\2006\406032 Tahoma Terra 1-21Fairway
Townhomes-406032.03\Project Documents\Pre Drainage Report
Tahoma Terra Fairway.doc
PROJECT ENGINEERS CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that this
Preliminary Drainage Report and Erosion Control Plan for
Tahoma Terra Fairway in Yelm, Washington has been prepared by me
or under my supervision and meets the minimum standards of the City
of Yelm and normal standards of engineering practice. I understand that
the CITY does not and will not assume liability for the sufficiency,
suitability, or performance of drainage facilities designed by me
i
rl
tJ
~ Table of Contents
~~
~I
LJ PART I -STORM DRAINAGE REPORT ......................................................1
Section 1 -Proposed Project Description .......................................................... .1
r-~
~ I
U Section 2 -Existing Conditions ........................................................................ .2
Section 3 -Infiltration Rates/Soils Report ........................................................ 2
U Section 4 -Wells and Septic Systems ............................................................... 3
Section 5 -Fuel Tanks ........................................................................................ 3
I
LJ Section 6 -Sub-Basin Description ...................................................................... 3
Section 7 -Analysis of the 100-Year Flood ......................................................... 3
Section 8 -Aesthetic Considerations for Facilities ........................................... 3
Section 9 -Facility Sizing and Downstream Analysis ...................................... 3
!-1
Section 10- Covenants, Dedications and Easments .......................................... 4
PART II -EROSION CONTROL REPORT .................................................. 4
n
tJ Section 1 -Construction Sequence And Procedure ............................................ 4
n
I Section 2 -Trapping Sedunent .......................................................................... 4
~--~ Section 3 -Permanent Erosion Control & Site Restoration .............................. 5
Section 4 - Geotechnical Analysis And Report .................................................. 5
Section 5 -Inspection Sequence .......................................................................... 5
r? Section 6 -Control Of Pollutants Other Than Sediments ............................... 5
f
~
PART III -MAINTENANCE PLAN ................................................................
6
n
f Section 1 -Required Maintenance ......................................................................6
Section 2 -Responsible Organization ............................................................... 11
Section 3 -Vegetation Management Plan ......................................................11
Section 4 -Source Control .............................................................................11
~
I APPENDICES
LJ Appendix 1 Preliminary Storm Drainage Calculations
Appendix 2 Preliminary Drainage and TESC Plan
r-~ Appendix 3 FEMA Map
Appendix 4 Facility Summary Forms
tTJ Appendix 5 Soil Evaluation Report
Appendix 6 Maintenance Agreement
'~ Appendix 7 Vicinity Map
I
L_1
11
Ii
L__J
r`1
I
U
n
~..1
n
n
U
n
Past I
Storm Drainage Repot
rl
~`Oir~, jv..'"Y Twin, H°,f - `'i~.ll';°lftc"~iS~ Lti'."~1'1c~U. i'Cw~~it
n
J
rl
PART I -STORM DRAINAGE REPORT
SECTION 1 -PROPOSED PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Parcel Number:
Total Site Area:
Address:
Zoned:
Required Permits:
Section, Township, Range:
78640000009
5.04 acres
Not yet arraigned
Yelm, WA 98597
MPC
Building, Grading, Paving, etc.
Section 24, Township 17 North, Range 1 East, W.M.,
Thurston County, WA
Site Location
The project site is located in Yelm, Washington southwest of the intersection of
Longmire Street SE and Durant Street S in Thurston County, Washington. The site is
bounded on the east by Tahoma Terra Golf and Country Club.
Project Overview
n
The applicant is proposing to construct 3multi-family residential buildings with a total of
48 units. Each building has a footprint of approximately 8,400 square-feet. The site will
be constructed in one phase and well include appropriate erosion control measures as
needed, grading, storm drainage improvements and connection to existing
underground utilities including water and sanitary sewer.
Storm Drainage Improvements:
The total site area is 5.04 Acres.
Proposed On-site Conditions
• 0.58 acres of roof area
• 0.27 acres of impervious sidewalk
• 1.04 acres of pervious pavement
• 3.15 acres of landscaped/undisturbed pervious area
`~ Stormwater Treatment/Storage/Infiltration:
Lf Stormwater treatment requirements are based on the 1992 edition of the WSDOE
Stormwater Management Manual and the Low Impact Development Technical
Guidance Manual for Puget Sound. Pervious pavement will be used on this project.
Preliminary calculations are provided in Appendix 1. Treatment and storage will occur
n through the infiltration through the pervious pavement and engineered base material.
J See Appendix 2 for a preliminary pavement cross section.
i `mss vllfc~ l °?C"2 ~c:~">,c~ - ~'C~1Ci" ~ _Y ~ _4.';~ ~~, ."~", j ti+; r
The Basin:
The Basin includes the 5.04 acres of the proposed site and 0.28 acres of offsite area to
~ the east. The offsite area to the east is vegetated with oak trees and native brush as
part of Tahoma Terra Golf and Country Club. All surface runoff will be infiltrated
through the pervious pavement.
U Roof Runoff:
Runoff from the roofs will be routed to roof downspout drains that will be integrated into
the pervious pavement reservoir base course.
SECTION 2 -EXISTING CONDITIONS
The project site is bounded on the north, west and south by Thompson Creek and
Associated wetlands, as delineated by the Coot Company in March of 2005. The
rl project is bounded on the east by Tahoma Terra Golf and Country Club.
~~ Site Topography is slightly sloping with grades between 2% and 7%. A high point
ridge/peninsula located centrally on the site lies in an east to west position. Generally
~, the site slopes away to the north, west and south from this ridge. Elevations range
from a high of 338 ft. on the described ridge to a low of 330 ft along the northwest
property line. Site vegetation consists of patches of uncropped pasture grasses and
indigenous brush amongst a medium density deciduous and conifer forest. The east
side of the property is identified per the Thurston County GeoData Center as an oak-
coniferforest or woodland canopy per DNR and will be protected and preserved by this
project. On-site soils are a combination of well-drained Nisqually and Spanaway series
{-~ soils formed in glacial outwash.
J There are no man-made drains, channels, or swales, within the protect site.
~ The site is located adjacent to Thompson Creek and Associated wetlands and is within
L.1 the related buffer. The northern portion of the site is identified as a high ground water
flood hazard area per the Thurston County GeoData Center. The site is not identified
as a well head protection area or an aquifer sensitive area per the Thurston County
GeoData Center, but site conditions dictate that care must be taken to properly treat
runoff from the developed site.
SECTION 3 -INFILTRATION RATES/SOILS REPORT
The National Resource Conservation Service (NRCSS) of Thurston County mapped
the on-site soils as a combination of Nisqually loamy fine sand (74) and Spanaway
gravelly sandy loam (110).
Geotechnical explorations were performed by William Parnell, P.E. Soils Engineer. His
report dated 7/10/06 is included m appendix 5. All test pits generally confirmed the
NRCSS soil designations. The soils located on the ridge/peninsula consisted of a
Spanaway series, while the lower elevation soils immediately adjacent to the wetlands
were consistent with a Nisqually designation. A prevalent water table presence
requires consideration for all drainage infiltration facility designs. Soil log test pit data
indicates that the highest water depth was 62" below existing ground. To ensure the
pavement is not saturated by high water levels a minimum of 3 feet will be maintained
between the high water level and the bottom of infiltration facility. Design infiltration
rates will be dependent upon targeted soils, the C-horizon being the most desirable
due to their high permeability rates. The Nisqually series soils adjacent to the wetlands
revealed a shallow water table that generally makes these soils unsuitable for drainage
facilities.
v
The recommendation of the soils professionals is to use an infiltration rate of between
~ 6 and 20 inches per hour for C-horizon soils dependent upon location. All soil horizons
J had a minimum infiltration rate of 2 inches per hour based on SCS soil survey
information. See attached soil evaluation report for more detailed infiltration
information. A design infiltration rate of 1 inch per hour will be used for infiltration
calculations.
SECTION 4 -WELLS AND SEPTIC SYSTEMS
~ The site is undeveloped and has no record of any well or septic systems ever being
LI built on-site. Thurston County has no records of existing or abandoned septic systems
on adjacent properties within 100 ft of the proposed infiltration facilities.
Any septic systems found will be removed in accordance with Thurston County
Department of Health Standards.
City of Yelm sewer and water will serve the development
SECTION 5 -FUEL TANKS
A review of the DOE's Leaking Underground Storage Tanks (LUST) list did not indicate
the presence of any existing or abandoned fuel tanks on or near the project site.
~ SECTION 6 -SUB-BASIN DESCRIPTION
'~ The project site is located within the Yelm Creek Drainage Basin per the Thurston
County Comprehensive Map M-4. The proposed development is being treated as a
single drainage basin for the purpose of this study.
No handling of hazardous materials on this site is anticipated.
SECTION 7 -ANALYSIS OF THE 100-YEAR FLOOD
The site is found in FEMA FIRM panel 5303100001A. The majority of the property is in
zone X. This is an area determined to be outside of the 100-year flood plain. Small
portions of the site along the south west property line lie within Zone A. Zone A is area
that has not been analyzed in detail but corresponds to the 100-year flood plain.
However, local or spot flooding, if it exists, usually is not shown on FEMA flood
insurance maps, and especially if the source of flooding is related to logging,
u8V8i~NiiiBiit, yr uraincgc iiiuuifiCatiuri5 Si1iGe ilie date of the r(lap. AIthOUgh the
Engineer Is alert to the possibility of flooding from such sources, it cannot be warranted
that all areas subject to flooding on or down-gradient of the project site are represented
on the map. A FEMA FIRM map Is included in Appendix 3.
SECTION 8 -AESTHETIC CONSIDERATIONS FOR FACILITIES
All disturbed pervious areas will be vegetated and landscaped during construction. A
landscape plan will be submitted and approved prior to construction.
SECTION 9 -FACILITY SIZING AND DOWNSTREAM ANALYSIS
Detailed storm drainage calculations are included in Appendix 1 of this report. All on-
site stormwater runoff will be treated, and infiltrated on-site.
Since all stormwater well be infiltrated onsite, a downstream analysis was deemed
unnecessary.
,~~~~ ,~~.~n~~~it;r~ ~~~~in~~r'~
~C;=~~~ c, ~~sn
SECTION 1 O -COVENANTS, DEDICATIONS AND EASEMENTS
Drainage facilities including the pervious pavement will require routine maintenance
The home owners associations or their assigned representatives will be responsible for
all maintenance. The maintenance manual prepared for the project lists the
maintenance requirements. See Part III -Maintenance Plan of this report.
Li
r-r
J
n
~ct~cWrS ~:Qv
~l
rl
~II
~J
~-,
~--,
Past II
Erosion C'ont~ol Repot
~ti:?`J~'~~, i Y"a r'~1i=.v'=~ YI"'3?~,.lt;u3"J l.ii iil~'~~ ~'<,`~~0;;
I
U
~l
U
U
PART II -EROSION CONTROL PLAN
SECTION 1 -CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE AND PROCEDURE
The proposed project will Include an erosion control plan designed to contain silt and
soil within the project boundaries during construction until permanent vegetation and
site improvements are in place. Erosion/sedimentation control will be achieved by a
combination of structural/vegetation cover measures and construction practices
tailored to fit the site. Muddy construction equipment well not be allowed on the base
material or the pavement.
Best Construction Management Practices (BMP's) will be employed to properly clear
and grade the site and to schedule construction activities. Before any construction
begins on-site, erosion control facilities shall first be installed. The planned
construction sequence is as follows:
1. Install rock construction entrances. Use 4" to 8" diameter spalls with 12"
minimum depth.
2. Install filter fabric fencing and construction fence where appropriate and as
shown on the plans.
3. Clear site (grubbing and rough grading).
4. Designate an area for washing of equipment and concrete trucks to control the
runoff and eliminate entry into the storm drainage systems
5. During November 1 through March 31, all disturbed areas greater than 5,000 sf
that are to be left unworked for more than twelve (12) hours shall be stabilized by
one of the following: mulch, sodding or plastic covering.
6. Install utilities (water, sanitary sewer, power, etc.).
7. Install impervious concrete, curbing, sidewalks and pour building pads.
8. Install pervious asphalt.
9. Landscape and/or seed all disturbed areas.
10 Maintain all erosion control facilities until the entire site is stabilized and silt runoff
ceases.
Pervious asphalt system shall be installed toward the end of the construction activities
to minimize sediment problems. The subgrade can be excavated to within six inches
of final grade and grading completed in later stages of the project.
SECTION 2 -TRAPPING SEDIMENT
Filter fabric fencing will be installed wherever runoff has the potential to impact
..I .........1.... .. .... ~.... TI.... .. V 1 1 1
uvvvllaucalll IcaGiirC@S. i ilia aiiall iliciuue file areas along downstream property lines.
During construction, the Contractor will also be required to install filter fabric fencing as
needed, and as directed by the Engineer and/or the City of Yelm.
Stabilized construction entrances will be installed to prevent vehicles from tracking soil
away from the site. All disturbed/exposed soils shall be covered with straw or mulch to
prevent erosion in these areas. The Contractor will not be allowed to leave disturbed
areas greater than 5,000 sf (that are to be left unworked for more than twelve (12)
hours) uncovered during the rainy season from November 1 through March 31. Mulch,
sodding or plastic covering will be used to prevent erosion in these areas.
Erosion and sediment control shall be strictly controlled during and after construction.
Care shall be taken to not track sediment onto pervious pavement.
K>~~~ CUn~~lt~r~ c„~,~ ~~r~
~~~.: ~ ~, ~~~u~
rl
i u~~ii;~, i 4C"= t'ct~" a.:,',,3 - - ' !~f c~;tF~~t"w t=".~,;,C~ i
n SECTION 3 -PERMANENT EROSION CONTROL & SITE RESTORATION
L~J
All disturbed areas will be paved, covered with a building, or landscaped with grass,
shrubbery or trees per the development plans Special attention shall be given to
areas adjacent to pervious pavement surfaces. Any exposed soil shall be mulched,
planted, and otherwise stabilized as soon as possible.
SECTION 4 - GEOTECHNICAL ANALYSIS AND REPORT
t~
~ See Appendix 5 for a complete soil evaluation report. There are no slopes exceeding
I ~ 15- percent, therefore a geotechnical report for slope analysis was deemed
U unnecessary.
~ SECTION 5 -INSPECTION SEQUENCE
In addition to City inspections, the Project Engineer shall inspect the facilities related to
stormwater treatment, erosion control, storage and conveyance during construction. At
a minimum, the following items shall be inspected at the time specified:
1. The erosion control facilities should be inspected before the start of clearing and
grading to ensure the following structures are in place:
`~ a. Construction Entrance
~ b. Filter Fabric Fences
~
Z
~ 2. The conveyance systems will be inspected after construction of the facilities, but
-- before project completion to ensure the following items are in working order:
a. Pavement Drainage
~ b. Roof Drain Piping
~ 3. The erosion control and conveyance items listed above shall be inspected as
soon as practical following every significant rainfall event (2-inches in a 24-hour
r' period) that occurs during construction.
L,i
4. The permanent site restoration measures shall be inspected after landscaping is
,~ completed
5. A final inspection will be performed to check final grades, settings of control
structures and all necessary findings to complete the Engineer's Construction
Inspection Report Form. This form must be completed prior to final public works
rnng4rNi,rr}inn ~nr~rn~ial
~-rr~
SECTION 6 -CONTROL OF POLLUTANTS OTHER THAN SEDIMENTS
~ Washout from concrete trucks shall not be dumped into the storm drain, or onto soil
and pavement, which carries stormwater runoff. It shall be dumped into a designated
iJ area to be later backfilled or hardened and broken up for disposal into a dumpster.
The Contractor is required to designate a washdown area for equipment and concrete
n trucks well away from pervious pavement.
~~~~~ ;U~Wc,~t=~-~~ ~~nw° r~~rs
r1
r`1
i ~~iul~,~ l vi"~ ^~S~",", :°~' - ~E'~.?~ ,;twa€'~t ~FEear°i?~~ ~i~NCii
Ir'"1
U
U
U
~1
U
U
'~
L__1
r'1
'~
~. J
J
l__1
Past III
1Vlaintenance Plan
Ic's'.~~''"~ T,~r"~ ~,~:P'~;tµf - r'3'c;{~; ~ii~."V ~1"^u-1t~,~~~ ~:''e'~GI"~
PART III -MAINTENANCE PLAN
SECTION 1 -REQUIRED MAINTENANCE
The on-site storm drainage facilities well require occasional maintenance. The following
is based on minimum requirements as set forth in the Drainage Design and Erosion
~ Control Manual of Thurston County. The required maintenance and frequency of
maintenance are as follows:
The following pages contain maintenance needs for most components that are part of
the drainage system, as well as for some components that are not. Ignore the
requirements that do not apply to this system. A checklist should be completed for all
system components according to the following schedule:
1. Monthly from November through April.
~ 2. Once in late summer (preferably September).
3. After any major storm (use 1" in 24 hours as a guideline), items marked "S" only.
Using photocopies of these pages, check off the problems identified with each
inspection. Add comments on problems found and actions taken. Keep these
"Checked" sheets in a file, as they will be used to write the annual report (due in May
of each year). Some items do not need to be looked at every time an inspection is
done. Use the suggested frequency at the left of each item as a guideline for the
inspections.
The City of Yelm is available for technical assistance. Do not hesitate to call,
especially if it appears that a problem may exist.
U
~S
~..1
~II
~1
~l
~~,~„-,~ri_~,
t~~rt= ~,~n~b.;l~€r~r ~ =~,~f~~~~
C~t~~~r u, 2~?u~
~I
U
~II
~J
n`
L~
LJ
`~ Inspection Period:
I
U
Number of Sheets Attached:
n
Date Inspected:
U
Name of Inspector:
Inspector's Signature:
n
'-l
rh
U
ATTACHMENT "A": MAINTENANCE PROGRAM
COVER SHEET
~~
i~
ATTACHMENT "A"
U
~"1
~J
r~
I
U
r"t
J
L~
r--1
J
J
Maintenance Checklist for Grounds (Landscaping)
Frequency Drainag Req'd Problem Conditions to Check Conditions That Should
e System For Exist
Feature
M General Weeds Weeds growing in Weeds present in less
(nonpoisonous) more than 20% of the than 5% of the
landscaped area (trees landscaped area.
and shrubs onl
M Safety hazard Any presence of No poisonous vegetation
poison ivy or other or insect nests present in
poisonous vegetation landscaped area.
or insect nests.
M.S. Trash & debris Dumping of yard Remove trash and debris
buildup in wastes such as grass and dispose as
open space clippings and prescribed by City Waste
branches. Unsightly Management Section.
accumulation of non-
degradable materials
such as glass, plastic,
metal, foam and
coated a er.
M Missing or Any defect in the Fence is mended or
broken fence or screen that shrubs replaced to form
parts/dead permits easy entry to a solid barrier to entry.
shrubber a facilit .
M.S. Erosion Erosion has resulted Replace soil under fence
in an opening under a so that no opening
fence that allows exceeds 4" in height.
entry by people or Causes of erosion
pets. identified and steps
taken to slow down
and/or spread out the
water. Eroded areas are
filled, contoured, and
seeded.
M Unruly Shrubbery is growing Shrubbery is trimmed
vegetation out of control or is and weeded to provide
infested with weeds. appealing aesthetics. Do
not use chemicals to
control weeds.
A Trees Damage Limbs or parts of Trim trees/shrubs to
and trees or shrubs that restore shape. Replace
shrubs are split or broken trees/shrubs with severe
which affect more damage.
than 25% of the total
foliage of the tree or
shrub.
M Trees or shrubs that Replant tree, inspecting
have been blown down for injury to stem or
or knocked over. roots. Replace if
severely damaged.
u
A Trees or shrubs which Place stakes and rubber-
are not adequately coated ties around young
supported or are trees/shrubs for support.
leaning over, causing
ex osure of the roots.
If you are unsure whether a problem exists, please contact the CITY and ask for technical
assistance.
Comments:
Key: A =Annual (March or Aprll preferred)
M =Monthly (see schedule)
Q =Quarterly
S =After mayor storms
r' I1
U
Maintenance Checklist for Pervious Asphalt Pavement
Frequency Drainage Req'd Problem Conditions to Check For Conditions That
System and actions to take Should Exist
Feature
M,S Pervious Sediment Ensure that the pervious Sediment is removed
Pavement Buildup on pavement surface is free and/or pavement is
surface of sediment cleaned so that
infiltration works
accordin to desi n
M,S Pervious Sediment Ensure that the Sediment is removed
Pavement Buildup on contributing and adjacent and/or pavement is
Surface landscape areas are cleaned so that
stabilized and mowed infiltration works
with ch in s removed accordin to desi n
Q Pervious Sediment Vacuum sweep porous Sediment is removed
(4 times/yr Pavement buildup on pavement surface followed and/or pavement is
minimum) surface/ by high pressure hosing to cleaned so that
preventive keep pores free of infiltration works
maintenance sediment accordin to desi n
Upon Pervious Spot Clogging Prolonged spot ponding on No prolonged ponding.
Failure Pavement pavement surface. Drill Infiltration works
half-inch holes through according to design.
pavement every few feet.
If you are unsure whether a problem exists, please contact the CITY and ask for technical
assistance.
Comments:
~.-~ Key: A =Annual (March or April preferred)
M =Monthly (see schedule)
Q =Quarterly
S =After major storms
v
~a?i!C(i c"i I r?C.'2 `e~: ~ "C~€€';"i€'€c;i;'a' ~'I''ii~~~u ~~ ~~~
SECTION 2 -RESPONSIBLE ORGANIZATION
The Home Owners Association or its assigned representative shall be responsible for
the operations and maintenance of all onsite storm drainage facilities.
SECTION 3 -VEGETATION MANAGEMENT PLAN
All disturbed pervious areas on the site will be landscaped to provide an aesthetically
pleasing environment and to control sediment distribution.
SECTION 4 -SOURCE CONTROL
Warning signs shall be posted indicating the nature of the pervious pavement surface
and warning against resurfacing the site with conventional pavement or the use of
materials which could affect the infiltration capacity of the surface.
~~~~= CAE ~~~at;ra ~r~~n~~r~ - .
n
n
n
~!
~ Appendix 1
Preliminary Storm Drainage Calculations
r-,
iJ
~}
~J
r?
r-r
~.~t
n
u
PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE CALCULATIONS
The following calculations are based on the requirements contained in the 1992 Washington
State Department of Ecology (WSDOE) Stormwater Management Manual for the Puget
Sound Basin.
DESIGN AND BASIN INFORMATION SUMMARY:
Soil Classification
SCS Soil Classification: Spanaway (110)
Nisqually (74)
Hydrologic Group: B
Infiltration Rate: 2 inches/hour
SCS Runoff Curve Number: (Table III-1.3 WSDOE Storm Manual)
Post-developed (Lawns, 75% + grass cover): CN=80
Pervious pavement CN=80
Post-developed (impervious, roofs, pavement) CN=98
Rainfall Design Storms: (WSDOE Isopluvial Maps-App. AIII-1.1 of WSDOE Storm
Manual)
6-month storm (64% of 2 yr. Storm) =1.28"
2 yr./24 hour storm =2.0"
10 yr./24 hour storm =3.0"
100 yr./24 hour storm =4.0"
Post-Developed Basin Area Summary
Tributary Lot Impervious Area
sidewalk 0.27 Ac
Disturbed Pervious and Undisturbed Pervious
rass/landsca in 3.43 Ac
Pervious Pavement 1.04 Ac
Directly Connected Tr,,;,er~;n~,s Are?
roof area n,SR Ac
Total 5.32 Ac
The Basin summary conservatively assumes that all undisturbed/landscaped area onsite is
tributary to the pavement. In reality some undisturbed/landscaped areas will independently
infiltrate Stormwater that will not be directed to the pervious pavement.
DETAILED CALCULATIONS:
Stormwater Treatment:
Pervious Pavement will provide the treatment for the Stormwater.
StormShed software was used to model the runoff.
l~
u
J
Sizing Calculations:
See the following StormShed software modeling peak output for the design storm event:
Desi n Storm 24 hour Peak Out ut
Q 6-month 0 167 cfs
Q 2 r 0 564 cfs
Q 10 r 1 321 cfs
Q 100 r. 2 200 cfs
Pervious Pavement:
The 1992 edition of the WSDOE Stormwater Management Manual and the Low Impact
Development Technical Guidance Manual (Puget Sound Action Team, 2005) were used to
size the base course for the pervious pavement. The calculations were based on the
infiltration rate of 2-inches hour suggested by soil professionals after investigation of the
site. The WSDOE Manual states that infiltration BMP's shall be designed to completely
drain stored runoff within 24 hours following the occurrence of the 6-month, 24 hour design
storm and 48 hours following the occurrence of the 100 year, 24 hour design storm. The
Darcy's Law approach is used to demonstrate sufficient capacity and drawdown time of the
pervious pavement base/reservoir layer.
Q=f *i*A, where
f= infiltration rate of soil or infiltration media
Q= flowrate at which runoff is infiltrated by soil underlying base course
i= hydraulic gradient
A= surface area of BMP
A factor of safety of "two" was applied to the recommended design infiltration rate of 2
in/hr, thus f=2 in/hr * 0.5 = 1 in/hr = 0.042 ft/hr
The hydraulic gradient is shown by the equation:
where h is the height of the water column over the infiltration/filtration media and L is the
distance from the top surface of the BMP to the water table or impervious layer.
For design purposes hydraulic gradient i was set equal to 1, which made discharge
independent of stage.
L =assume 3 feet
According to StormShed the 100-year/24-hour storm event will result in peak volume of
45,138 cf.
The design void percentage for base rock is 30%.
The pavement area is 1.04 acres = 45,300 sf.
At facility base: A=45, 300 sf; Q(a) _ (0.042 * (0+3)/3) * 45, 300 = 1902.6 cf/hr
Assuming infiltration rate by bottom area only; 1902.6 cf/hr *24 hrs = 45,662 cf.
Thus the pervious pavement and underlying soils will have the capacity to infiltrate 45,662
cf per 24-hour period, which greatly exceeds the 6-month/24-hour event volume of 6,035 cf
and exceeds the 100-year/24-hour event volume of 45,138 cf.
In the case of an event larger than the 24-hour/100-year storm or if the pervious asphalt
fails, excessive runoff will flow to the westerly points of the drive aisles and release to the
landscaped area in the wetland buffer.
!J The StormShed calculations that follow show that the peak stage for the 100 year event
was 0.347'(4.2") above the base of the storage area. Therefore a base course of 4.2" would be
adequate for temporary reservoir storage. However a minimum base course of 14" is
~ recommended in order to provide adequate strength to the wearing course and to minimize
the risk of asphalt failure due freeze damage or saturation damage of the top course. The
designed pavement section includes 14"fractured rock base material lined with geotextile
fabric, and 3" pervious asphalt top course. See appendix 2 for a pavement section detail.
n+
u
n
I
U
r~II
~f
n
Li
STORMSHED REPORT
Wednesday, September 20, 2006
LPOOLCOMPUTE [inf pond] SUMMARY using Puls
,~
~ Start of live storage: 100.0000 ft
Event Match Q (cfs) Peak Q (cfs) Peak Stg (ft) Vol (cf) Vol (acft) Time to Empty
~
_.__ ._,. __._~ __~_.___ w . ~ ___.._._.__ ~, ~.~___~__ W~ _.__..~.__. _ __.. _-___-______ _. ~.. ~....__
6-month 0.1668
0.1365 100.0130 176.53 0.0041 26.67
2 yr _ 0.5640~~ 0.4663 ~~,~~~100.0444 ~~603.15 0.0138 _ 27.00 ~ ,
10 WyrT ^ ...____ 1.3206
1.0507
, l
00.1072
1457.36 „ ~_ 27.17~
0.0335
µ
~
__
_
100 yr 2.1997 ? 1.0555 100.3465 4709.45 m
~
0.1081 27.33
Running I:\\2006\\406032 Tahoma Terra 1-2\\Fairway Townhomes-
406032.03\1Engineer\\inf pond Report.pgm on Wednesday, Se ptember 20, 2006
Summary Report of all Detention Pond Data
Event Precip (in)
r-t ..~...___ _______ _. _ _ .___
6-month 1.2800
2 yr 2.0000
10 yr
3.0000 ~
m
~
100 yr 4.0000
~~
BASLIST2
[Total Basin] Using [TYPElA] As [6-month]
[Total Basin] Using [TYPElA] As [2 yr]
[ T otai Basin] Using ~ T Y PE 1 A] As ~ 10 yr]
[Total Basin] Using [TYPElA] As [100 yr]
LSTEND
,~ BasinID Event Peak Q Peak T Peak Vol i Area
(cfs) (hrs) (ac-cf) ~ (ac) ~
~Method/Loss ~Raintype `
I
Total 6- ~ 0
1668 8
00 0
1386 5
32 ~
.
.
.
.
Basin ~ month ~ _ ~~ ,_~~
~ --
__~____ SBUH/SCS TYPElA
~ ~
.
~ _
_ _ _.~__ ~___ ,
Total
Basin 2 yr 0.5640 8.17 0.3333 ~ 5.32 : SBUH/SCS ,TYPElA
Total 10
1
32
~ =
yr
.
06 8.00 0.6656
5.32
Basin ~ SBUH/SCS `TYPElA '
~ ?
J
Total ~~_ _.._.._____ __________.._______._____~._~..__________.~...____._.._ _ ~______ __~~...._,.______._
Basin 100 yr 2.1997 8.00 1.0362 ~ 5.32
r SBUH/SCS ETYPElA
`~ _ _ _ __ ____
BASL
~~ ~ A ~~ NJ „ ~- ____ __ __~_.
U IST TYPElA AS 6-month DETAILED
[ ~ [ ~
[Total Basin]
,~ LSTEND
Record Id: Total Basin
_
___ _~ ~_._~_~ ~ __
~
Design Method
SBUH
Rainfall type
_
_
~ TYPElA
.
_
Hyd Intv
_ [ 10.00 min Peaking Factor
484.00
~~
___ _ ` __ ~~
~ Abstraction Coeff ~ 0.20
_ _ ~
~
Pervious Area (AMC 2)
~
4.74 ac ~3DCIA ~ 0.58 ac
__
Pervious CN
;
81.51 ,DC CN 98.00
~
!~ ~~ ~
~~
_
Pervious TC
23.83 min
jDC TC ~~
~~
__._. j 10.00 min
L( _
_ _ _ _
Pervious CN Calc ~~
~~~~ _ ~~~ Description ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SubArea j Sub cn~ ~ ~~
Open spaces, lawns,parks (>75% grass) 3.43 ac 80.00 ~
n Impervious surfaces (pavements, roofs, etc) 027 ac ? 98.00 ~
~ ff
u ~~
~
Permeable Pavement ----!
1.04 ac ~ 80.00 : ~
Pervious Composited CN (AMC 2) l 81.03 3
_ ~ _ _ _____.._._ ._~ 3
Pervious TC Calc
_~ WType~~~w~m Description N^ ~ Length ~~Slope `,Coeff_ Misc
TT ~~,
~ ,Sheet SHEET 100.00 ft 0.50% 0.0500
_. _ _...._ ,~......~ ._.. ____ _ _.. __.~ __..._..____._ ~ M_
2.10 in 8.74 min
_ __.... ._._ ~...,._
Shallow SHALLOW 450.00 ft 0.60% '0.0500 _._ ..._.~ ___r ~.___
15.08 min
Pervious TC 23.83 min :_
M __ _____.~..__ _+ _/.. Directly Connected CN Calc
Description ~ ~ ~~ ~ __~...
SubArea Sub cn
~
Impervious surfaces (pavements, roofs, etc)
~~ ,1
058 ac i
98~00
~
____ _ ~DC Composited CN (AMC 2) ~ ~
~ ~, 98.00
___. ~
Directly Connected TC Calc
r~~ ~
~ 3
~
_..__._
_...
_~
yp Description _ Length Slope `` Coeff
~__ ____._.____.~...~_ ___._..~__._._.____~_~__ .... ~~
T
Misc mm TT
ji
Fixed
'None Entered
£ _____~_.__,__ __ _
3t
,10.00 min
~
__._
_____._._
_..~....~~..__.____~ _____._.. _....... _....._~__.....__ _._
Directly Connected TC my ._
~__ ~_..~.. _.
' ~ 1 O.OOmin !
n
U
L~
n
n
n
n
HYDLIST SUMMARY
[6-month ou t] [2 yr out] [10 yr out] [100 yr out]
LSTEND
HydID Peak Q (cfs) Peak T (hrs) Peak Vol (ac-ft) Cont Area (ac)
6-month out 0.1365 8.50 ~ _ ~~~~ 0.1385 _ 5.3200
2 yr out~~ ~~~~0.4663 ~~ ~~~ _ 8.50 ~~ 0.3333 ~ ~~~~ ~~~~~~~~5.3200~ ~~~
10 yr out 1.0507 8.50 __,_ ...___. ~~ 0.6656 5.3200
100 yr out ~ 1.0555 ..__ 9.50 1.0362 ~ _ 5.3200
STORLIST
[pond]
LSTEND
Record Id: pond
Descrip: infiltration pond Increment 0.10 ft
Start El. 100.0000 ft ~Max~El.~ 105.0000 ft
Length `226.5000 ft Width 200.0000 ft
VOID % 30.0000 3 T
DISCHLIST
[infiltration]
LSTEND
Record Id: infiltration
Descrip: ~~ ,Multiple Orifice Increment ,0.10 ft
Start El. "100.0000 ft Max EL 2105.0000 ft
Infiltration rate ;1.0000 in/hr ~WP Multiplier ~ 1.00 _ _~ __.__
Licensed to: KPFF, Inc. -Olympia
'-1
~J
i
U
,II
u
n
J
n
n
n
n
~--~
Appendix 2
Drainage 1-~lan
wF
~K .
x>
,
~ 44
~Y
'
4'
'
;~ Gh sx.
,,t
'~
' i nn g~^
__
,< n
~ 3 ~
' .;
~ ~ II 'o ~i
r~ ..
,~ ~ n clo~ly T
~ i,i21 Y~.i~
i .. ~ /`~ QpN Z
; \ U Z k
p
_ ~
Q~
UO N c
~kls tS .s.li tV pl-6~ n ~Z O
" ~ ~ O
-
..
`^ W
> O y
~ 6~ O
U L U
~oa .4~>,
n s
L<
~: e:a
n sr
}
K
~ °~
~
Z
~ O
~
z ~
O
~
F .:
-
~ O O
? O
~
Z
- ~5>r ~~sa
v
~ ` - ~
S 00 O °[ ~ ~ ° O
=
' T Z
y Q a~~o~g
M, fr
~
z
3 0 ~,
~ •. ~ ~. ~~2) _
r ~ ~ ~
~ ~
~
~
1
- Z Z
Z Z
O O ~+ O O
€
~
~~ :~
~ ~ N
~ b
- ~~oo ~o
~ dS ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
O
s ,i
~ z
~
I
~y
N p ~ I ~ Q
~ I I ' ~
~
o ~
n
~ _ _
\I~ 3NIl,l1?Bd0?Jd
~ \
\\
° ° N
N w ~ 4
w OW = r ? j~a NOLYKZ
a Fmrm °m-Z°~ J
Va°O m ~ ZF~Zwwo J
~ ¢rZ H° ¢ ~KwUwT~ ~O
mW 0>WKSNmm J F~=~O]aO ~W °Z
~~c~w°°~=rc~w3 °W °?3 soap ~qS~O z~ ~
W N ~~l`~ WITi~~ r~ S°WKJW ~O ". QO~i L O
wr ~Oy~N~JW OWO d0!Wm~°~ rLa ~~ O
o as viz>< zo ~a~Jrzz ~~n3 r3 0 ~ Q
cox mEZO ~~ ~W c9wowp Ow ooh i ~* a u,
mroQ~°°oinQ ~¢ oamW~~m ZO ~°g o~ m ~ o m
mw yaw O~s`~Q Fm uJ rw°m ~~"r
~~mz>~~m;a w mo o =mN°~°=~
Z ° r N a r-}
p°V1~Vm JZ Zr JK Z NZ° r¢K ~~yy
¢Z °mwHW dar O =VI a=~>~¢~a LL
¢a ° u»w Z cn~ U NNW Wa~SN O
za ~p~vlo~mZ Z ~~- _ ~zom~o~¢ Z r
aZin ~nmF~"-'°n °zi Q c~ia<~_^~r ij a d.
°Q O~~wo°~w ~ ~a ~r~l^~z°oo~~oQ U ~ ~ ~
~W Um~r-U¢~ W V 1-W U
~°a~ozJa~~ tL ooN O '^mz_aac~~_o ~ a o ~ ~
°°~r~~~~a5 O ~o d wFZ~~a~w O w ~ " a te
D'Z ZN 6 Zw° O ~
a~°~''ac°.~¢°a~ ~' a°a O w ooc°iiw°w 2' ~ F ~ F! w
F- ~oa?w~o~ d o ~ o ~ N o
' ~ ~ ,~d~
u~ 5 v ~ ` ~
z~~
~~~
I/ °m~
- ~
~ uuw~~ ~ a
~~ ~"`~ii ~\ ~
I ~ `
i -
f ~` ~ \ ~
.9~ ~ I
W
~ ~ ~ / ~
Fr-
ao
~ ~ a~
v t
V Sao°o
~' _ ~`" ~'~ ~~a~~
u- ~' ~ ~~ ~~s ~`- o ~ ~
_I Of-wr
/~.. ~~6)~ ~~~
\~ ~ ~yl ~
Z ~ J ~ l ~~p ~~~o, ~\
r` O
,A` ,~ /~ ~ ~ ~ q
Q ~ II m~ \
r ~ Z 'm{
tt
`~~ __ ~ `
O ~ - , ~~ b
_ ~
6,
~~~ ~ ~
9E
rn ~
~/ / ~£
t ~ ~,
r ~ ~ Om
' a zm
9n
', ~ ~ ~ -,
~ `~ _ -
mot' , ' ~ ~ ~ ,\ ~,~ ) ~-
N ~ ~ ~ % ~ ~ ~ ~~~,
Z ~ --~ ~ =r_ ~ ~ ~'~
-, ,A
0 ~~~ ,~~ ,w , ~~~
I- ~- ~ ~ - ' ` ~ ~ ~~,
~ ~~~ ~:~
m~
Cn , ~ o
~{~
~~
~~~ _ . ---
-~..-~~.
$fi rr-
y~~~~ oe~~~~~ ~ _ 9
0
_ - ` ~ ~,
,~y__ ,~ o
~' ,=~o ° a°o~,
' Q U U O ~ 2
' ,.~ ,'- L~~a n ~~Onm~ o~Z O'C
' N" o~C ¢Ow0 'dQI~V 8
4 z ~ uZ = O
~ ~ Q U ~ Q V
~ Q U
i ~pZ ~p~n
~ Q ~~ "~Z ~°~w
oZ~ OV~a
~ ~ O ~ ~ ~
U
O o
3
OtlN0lsomlppPm71f0 df0906-sawoyumol nomxo pZ-I owl nwoMf Zf090W 90lIAI
- _ ~ _, ~_
~ ~zo
_ ~~
_
~ 3 ~
a
~
w
N,=zm
N
~
~ II
H - o~ O
QOl UZ
NZ
Z ~'
w
N
~
O O
N
~~=w
wO~u~d
O
p
.
+
Q ~~ S a o ~
O O z
~ ~ i~ Q
~ O u
:;{ UC~~ ~ uw
~ZO ti~ O ~
L
~ z ~
~ p~OO'=
NQy ~3~
~
~
> O ~ a,~
O o- ~
= U U~ Ul }
~ ~ K oL ~ u~ i
N u_
W o
N oOC
O ~ ¢~
O
~ ~'~
ZO ui~
>> o o w z~
O O Z rc Z ~
F-~
~~z ~
~ Gw~
FO =-zmF
OHw4J
Q ~ ~ ~ K ~ m ~ ~ ~ z o~
~ O a~0[ ~ p ~ ~ ~ N
ti~
O
~ ~ O O j ~ ~ O
z
o a m w 5 o FW-
O ~ O~
~°`
U
o O
~ O~
O
~ ~N
~ ~~"F=0
~
a
Z ~ ~ p O y~u-- ~
~ ~ D ~ Z
3 0
Z
O ~O m
V U^
G
z ~
z= ~
~-
N ~ V~
O
I p d
C9 V' U7 Ul S O O to -~
~
p p~ ~
N Z z~ Z p K~
N~z w ~
U
1
~ O O ~
U U
O OK~zz
t
t1 t1 O
0 0
~~ o ~
u'S 'u5 ~ ~ .n 'uS '~S ~ Z
O ~~
w
~ o a o
t
a~ ~NZ~w
~ ~ N
`I U z
~ r~ ~ ~
~~ a o
~z o
VoOO~
_
I` ~
~ ~
z I I ~ ~
i O w~Q
o a
N f;o
w ~~
~w o~woo
~ 1 ~ c
o
a
a
a~ o~QO~
O
IN W I I I K ~hm N zo No UOn ti
w
00 O
^ . .
r~
rW
V
~~//
LL
~~
L.1_
~~~
VJ
0
A~
V
_®
U
~~
V /
_ _ _ 3NIl,l1?13d021d
I
. i I ,
~x\
/-~-x~... ~~+
~ / \
+~°, ~ ~ O
xy`r ~\ \\ / ~ N
- I' ----. ~,~ 1
1 ~ `~ 11
m i \ ~ ~ ~ I ac
O ~ ~_.
c
~' I L ~ m , ;. z
\ m
r ~ \ ~ ~o~
a y~x ~ \ j' ~ c I ,w-
a \
J l~, p2 WHwr
~/ J ~ ~ o \\pdo
oz ~_~ `O.
,~ I 1
F- U I
I ~% ' \ ~ Sys ~~
Fes,; ~ \~ ';
m I
U
z
u ~ zl
~,
m ~I
~ wl
~--~.-/ -~t q. ,
~' ~ Q V OC7~ '" t
/ I
I ~
__~_~ ~„`
I ~.
i ^• ~
I ~
wilts C - 9(IOI 9(1 1~0 a11101d
4\~y ~ \ ~ \
'O
1t~ ~ \
,% \\
~ ~v~` ~O
.; ~,
,L, ~ ~,\
y \ ~ ~ 1 ~
\
~ '.
b * A O
i
~v~ ~~4~ ~
-.._-~
~ `,'~
o ~ \ r
~ o \~\
`~ ~ ~ ~
z "~
M ~
911 ~
m IL \ \\
O a 00 O ~O o 0~ 0 0 0 O O O O o o a O
a
0
a
~-
NIW
.ZI
NIW .42 ~
~ __ - -
~Z I~I~I
1 1 ' ~ N LLL~ I I'
~e ~ i
I I
w
~ z
m
~
N a 1=
Q
U
O
U,~
a a~
I III ~ a °~ o
II I in m ~ U ~ U U
V Q~
oo
a
u L-
~
~ HOC
~° No ~
w ZO
~~ ~
`~
V
~~a m ~ '
~
ups ~Q
o w w~
~.p
( r
(~ Z
~ z "~~~
F- p U' z
~umuJJ c~
N OC u~ Z ~ uw
w U a
L
~
N
~u~~~ ~ ~
p~
~~{{p~~
p
O
Q
~ ~
UN U p
m
~
~ F
~ ~ ~
~ K
• oN
N ~ Q
mz3 p
p
y Q
3
w w
Q j upO
_
~
~ ~~
Nw0 O
Z W
N
~_ zp
- ~
~ z ~
`~ °
,c
l
a
°w Ul
~e ~~o -
Upd ___
61 V' ~
a"
~~a _--
U
I ~~k
~~~\) F N O
v / z~~ __
N N ~
000
~~
t V
O
r~
V
/~^'
v /
S~
~p~,'~b
d
J
Q
f-
W
W
U
Z
w
U
m
a
~.
Q'
W
J
z
0
~w~ ~
w =
= a°w o~rz z ='!~
Z L
?~ ou=iaQ"~~ ~ ~w
m
uO >ZU>~°w = _
w ~ F-
_~ Oww~j O
~~ uu~~.~~w~--IIm~~w w wi
~~ OC~~wLH ~ FU1
~~ ~ma~3~ Q O.
U1 V
z ap= Ow w ~o
~~ nG~~~~ _ °o
a~ ~owu~~„u, p ~
4¢ j ~ z w w w ~ N w
~c < w w w
O~ ~~d~~na °wQ =cn
_ z- ~c~
z? ~°~'~~_~ uwlo ~Z
z
po ON~u ~j~~w ~~ F-z
°=~ndS ~~ d5~
ma~~ ~~u~ ~°w ~~
Q'n ~c~or'aaz moo' ~u
=°Z Fzo~`~~~ a~ z4
Na ~w ~w J¢OF ~"~ wKU
d= a~a~moo u~m ~„`w~
,no w~ooq~G~ Y~ aGo
z¢ oa°zo"Z~3 °da „~~~
U Y~~~ Q z w O} Q ; z U
3o~c a~~3~~~ ao moo
m v vi
J
Q
W
W
U
z
Q
~-
z
w
z
O
F-
U
F-
Vl
Z
O
U
z
0
u
C
u
r sno~ 9a i~o muoid
j Q
Sao
~N~ C
~~o
z
;oo
~~
~v~ Z
'Q~ O
U
N
J
a
a
G ~
o
O O
UW ~ d
a Z J
z ~ U
~ ~ ~
w ~ Ir-
~~
s~
ao
Z
Z ~
O a
F
z
0
U
O
p w
j 3
O 5
0
a
m ~ <
~ ^j
v
c
o
~' ~ O
c n O
N N
U ~ ~ ~
W p
J
j c O
N
~ ~ I
~ 3 N
N _
O U O
~ ~ ~.
(n C' ~
~ D ~
~ ~
O ~ I Lil
S O ~ ~ ~
~r~ a ~-
a- w I U Z
~ o ~~
J O~ O
Q W ~
U m I
r
m m tt)
~ O
~ ~ N
~w°~ •o m
~ ~ N ~
° < w O
< ri `r
> ~ ~- v
m m o
°w rn
a 3 w w O
~ J U
Z
O
in
w
rr_
~Q
c~
U
2,
Q
u
i
ava~~~mvn~mco zcosoo-s„»awmol a„u,~o nz-i o~~~i o„~o~lo~ rs oeomvnam I au~
F ~ m
°~ L
~ ~
z
..,
u~
z L
~ o
>
~
w ~' ~ N
~ r O ~ ~
O
° J ~ o o Q
~ ~U1 ° ~ N ~ r O
Z ~ Z ~ FF
Z ~ Z~ Z ~
zm ~ ~ ~ L zUl
~ °w ~
O
m~ ~
~ ~
"~
~ Ul O
wad
O~
Z p U U Q
1a- ~ ~ O=F U
~] to °
F-
O
~ m
U ~ ~O Z
Z y
~
Q Q >
~
~
SS O ~~
W
Z Q
o
r Z
~ ~ K
K
~ O ~
~
°
_
Q c
Q _ _ N -
~ _ cv .n v ~n
0 0 00 0 0 0 0 ro 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 co 0 0
'-1
U
n
u
~J
rl
~J
rl
`~
'~l
~.J
r,
i
U
Appendix 3
FEMA Map
J
~,
L~
U
L~
U
~1
J
n
n
v
riI
~J
n
~I
`~
v
~ Appendix 4
Facility Summary Foams
r-,
In
u
n
~II
L~
~1I
u
lJ
n
n
THURSTON COUNTY REGION
FACILITY SUMMARY FORM
Complete one (1) for each facility (detention/retention, coalescing plate filter, etc) on
the project site. Attach 8 1/2 x 11 sketch showing location of facility.
Proponent's Facility Name orldentifier (e.g., Pond A)... ....:Pervious Pavement
Name of Road or Street to Access Facility .... , .... N/A
.. ...
Hearings Examiner Case Number: ... .
.....
.. ... .. ...
Development Rev. Project No /Bldg. Permit No :. .. .. .
... ...
Parce/Number.~. ............ ............ 78640000009
To be completed by Utility Staff:
Utility Facility Number
Project Number (num)
Parcel Number Status (num, 1ch)
0, Known, 1, Public; 2 Unknown;
3, Unassigned
Basin and Sub basin. (num, 6ch)
(2ch for basin, 2ch for sub basin, 2ch future
Responsible CITY (alpha, 1ch)
Part 1 - Project Name and Proponent
Project Name .. ... .... .
........ . .. .
Project DEVELOPER .. .. ... .
Project Contact .. .. . .
Address .... .. .... ..
..
Phone.. .. .... .. ......
.. ..
Project Proponent: (if different) ............ .
....
Address ................. ..
. .. . . ... ..
Phone ............... .......
...... ... ..
Project Engineer .... .... ... .
.. ... .... ..
Firm. .. .... .. .. ..
Part 2 - Project Location
Section(s) 24
Township 17
Range 1 E, Willamette Meridian
Tahoma Terra Fairway
Tahoma Terra
Doug Bloom
P O Box 627, Rainier, WA 98567
(360) 951-7568
Same
Same
Same
Clint Pierpomt
KPFF Consulting Engineers
360-292-7230
Part 3 -Type of Permit Application
Type of permit (e g., Commercial Bldg ): Residential Bldg
Other Permits (circle)
^DOFNV HPA
^COE Wetlands
~ ^FEMA
^Shoreline Mgmt
f-l r- --- - -' -
NPDES
Other
^COE 404
^DOE Dam Safety
^Floodplain
^Rockery/Retaining Wall
®Grading
~J
Other Agencies (Federal, State, Local, etc.) that have had or will review this
Drainage Erosion Control Plan:
~I
U
r1
~J
~l
i
c_.J
Part 4 -Proposed Protect Description
What stream basin is this project ~n (e.g , Percival, Woodland) . .... Yefm Creek
U Project Srze, acres... ..
..... .... ....... ...
.. . .. 5 04 Ac
oning . ... ......
..
. . . .. ....... . .. .
On-site. ' ' ' .... MPC
~
i Residential Subdivision:
~J Number of Lots'.......... ... ...... ..... 1
Lot size (average), acres:. ... .
rl .. ..
u~lding Permit / Commercial:... .. .
... . ...
Building Footprint, acres• ............. ... 0 58
Concrete Paving, acres:.. ......... 0 27
Gravel Surface, acres•.... . .
...
~ ..... .
Lattice Block Paving, acres::... ... .
.. .. .
~
Porous paving, acres ...
1 04
Public Roads (including gravel shoulder), acres :.......
`~ ....
Private Roads (including gravel shoulder), acres :.......... .. .
On-site Impervious Surface Total, acres .............. . .. .
085
~ •.
Part 5 -Pre-Developed Project Site Characteristics
,~ Stream through site, y/n:
.........
... . ............
.......
....... ..NO
~l .............. . . .
DNR Type. ...... ...........
...
................... ......... .. ..
. ... N/A
...
~
~ Type of feature this facility discharges to (i e., lake, stream, intermittent stream, Groundwater
pothole, roadside ditch, sheetflow to adjacent private property, etc.):
' Infiltration into ground, y/n :........... . Yes
~ .....
Swa/es, Ravines, y/n ::........... ... .............. No
~J Steep slopes (steeper than 15%) y/n:. .... .......... No
.
Erosion Hazard, y/n ..... ... ....
......... ......... No
~ 100 yr. F/oodp/a~n, y/n:... ....... ..
... . ... . ..... Yes
.
Lakes or Wetlands, y/n :............ ...... Yes
Seeps/Springs, y/n: ... No
Hrgh Groundwater Table, y/n: Yes
+~ Wellhead Protection orAqu~fer Sensitive Area, y/n:.... No
~~
~.,i
rl
~._)
`~1
I
U Part 6 -Facility Description -Pervious Pavement
Total Area Tributary to Facility Including Off-site (acres) ~....
.... . 5 32ac
" otal On-site Area Tributary to Facility (acres) ......... 5
04 ac
~
? Design lmperv~ous Area Tributary to Facility (acres) . ........
Desi
n Land
d A .
0 85 ac
g
scape
rea Tributary to Facility (acres) :. ..... ...... 3
15 ac
Design Total Tributary Area to Facility (acres).. ..... ....
... .
5 32 ac
rater a one (7) for the type of facility )...
.. . . .............
Wet pond detention . ...... .. .
. . .
. ........ . ....
Wet pond water surface area .. ... .
. .
...... ... ......
Dry pond detention .. ........ .
.
r~ ... .. . .. . ..
Underground detention ........ .
........... .. ...
...
n filtration pond....... .
. ...... .. .. ...........
....
ry well infiltration .... ....... . .
.
................. .
Coalescing plate separator ........ .
'~ Centrifuge separator .........
...
....... .... .... .
Biofilter ........... ......
.
.j .............
Other......... .. (Pervious Pavement
1
~ Outlet type (Enter a one (7) for each type present)
Filter...... .... .....
.............. .............
Oil water separator ..... ....... .
.......
........ .
....
angle orifice..... .... .
.. ..... ....
r-~ .. .........
.. .
ultiple orifice.. ......... ... .
. .
!
~ ......... . .. ...
Weir .. ..... .... ........ ............
~~""' '"'
S dlwa
p y ........... ........
.......
................
Pump(s) ...................... .
.
'-' ...............
Other (Infiltration) ... .. . 1
J Part 7 -Release to Groundwater
Design Percolation Rate to Groundwater (if applicable) ..... ... 1 mch/hour
rl
rt
`~I
~J
~{
~._.1
J
U
n
n
~1
n
U
`~
~I
U
n
~1
~I
~II
~.J
~ Appendix S
Soils Evaluation Report
J
SOIL EVALUATION REPORT
FORM 1: GENERAL SITE INFORMATION
PROJECT TITLE: Tahoma Terra Fairway SHEET: 1 OF 1
SCA PROJECT NO.. 04104
DATE: 7/10/06
PREPARED BY: William Parnell, P.E.
1. SITE ADDRESS OR LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Longmire Street SE Yelm, WA 98597
TPN: 78640000009
2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Create amulti-family subdivision with all associated roadway, utility and
landscaping improvements
.
3. SITE DESCRIPTION: The
roject
it
i
p
s
e
s undeveloped. Site topography is slightly sloping. A high
point ridge/peninsula located centrally on the site lies in an east to
t
i
wes
pos
tion. Generally the site
slopes away to the north, west and south from this ridge. Elevations range from a high of 338 ft
on the
d
.
escribed ridge to a low of 330 ft. along the northwestern property line. Site vegetation consists of
patches of uncropped pasture grasses and indi
b
genous
rush amongst a medium density deciduous
and conifer forest. The project site is bounded by Thompson Creek and associated wetlands to the
north, west and south, and by the Tahoma Terra Golf & Country Club to the east. On-site soils are a
combination of well-drained Nisqually and Spanawa
se
i
il
f
y
r
es so
s
ormed in glacial outwash.
4. SUMMARY OF SOILS WORK PERFORMED: Nine test pits were excavated by trackhoe to a
maximum depth of 168" below existing grade. Soils were inspected by entering and visual) to
ing
each test pit to a depth of four feet
Soils be
ond f
f
.
y
our
eet were inspected by examining backhoe
tailings. Soil log test pit data sheets are included in this report.
5. ADDITIONAL SOILS WORK RECOMMENDED: Additional soils work may be necessary,
dependent upon site-specific drainage design
aramete
p
rs.
6. FINDINGS: The National Resource Conservation Service (NRSC) of Thurston County mapped the
on-site soils as a combination of a Nisqually loamy fine sand (74) and a S
ana
p
way gravelly sandy loam
(110). All test pits generally confirmed these designations. The soils located on the ridge/peninsula
consisted of a Spanaway series, while the lower elevation soils immediately adjacent to the wetlands
were consistent with a Nisqually desi
nation
W
t
g
.
a
er table was present in all test pits.
7. RECOMMENDATIONS: The Spanaway soil series is a somewhat excessively drained soil that
formed in glacial outwash. Infiltration rates are generally rapid in the substrat
il
um so
s. The substratum
soils should be targeted for all drainage infiltration facilities. A prevalent water table presence requires
consideration for all drainage infiltratio
f
ilit
d
n
ac
y
esigns. Design infiltration rates will be dependent upon
targeted soils, the C-horizon soils being the most desirable due to their high permeability rates
.
The Nisqually soil series is also a somewhat excessively drained soil that formed in glacial outwash.
Infiltration rates are generally moderatel
id i
y rap
n the substratum soils. However, test pits in the vicinity
of the Nisqually series soils revealed a shallow water table that generally makes these soils unsuit
bl
a
e
for drainage infiltration facilities. ~
Dunng construction, care must be taken to prevent erosion of exposed soils. Drainage facility
infiltration surfaces must be properly protected from contamination by the fine-
rained u
h
i
,-~ g
pper
or
zon
soils and from compaction by site construction activities. Soils not properly protected will cause
drainage infiltration facilities to prematurely fail.
I hereby certify that I prepared this report, and conducted or supervised the performance of related
work. I certify that I am qualified to do this work. I represent my work to be complete an ac
t
ith
cura
e w
in
the bounds of uncertainty inherent to the practice of soils science, and to be suitable for its intended
use.
r1
J
SIGNED:
DATE:
DRAFT
SOIL EVALUATION REPORT
FORM 2: SOIL LOG INFORMATION
PROJECT TITLE: Tahoma Terra Fairway
PROJECT NO.: SCA 04104 SHEET: 1 OF 9
PREPARED BY: William Parnell, P.E. DATE: 7/6/06
~ SOIL LOG: #1
LOCATION: As per the attached map.
1. TYPES OF TEST DONE: 2. SCS SOILS SERIES: 3. LAND FORM:
None Nisqually Loamy Fine Sand
~74~ Terrace
4. DEPOSITION HISTORY: 5. HYDROLOGIC SOIL
Sandy Glacial Outwash GROUP: 6• DEPTH OF SEASONAL HW:
B Unknown
7. CURRENT WATER 8. DEPTH TO IMPERVIOUS 9. MISCELLANEOUS:
DEPTH: LAYER:
~! 62" 70" Level
~.l 10. POTENTIAL FOR: EROSION RUNOFF PONDING
11. SOIL STRATA DESCRIPTION: See Following chart Slight Slow Minimal
12. SITE PERCOLATION RATE: See FSP
(~ 13. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS: Light mottles were present at 36" increasing to heavy mottles
at 48". Soils were wet at 58" and a static water level was present at 62" below the existing grade. The
,--~ C2 horizon was very hard and extremely manganese stained.
U
Soils Strata Description
Soil Log #1
Horz Depth Color Texture %CL %ORG CF STR
MOT IND CEM ROO <X> FSP
Al 0"- 6" 10YR3/2 LmVFSa <10 <
5 <1 1SBK _ _ _
A2 6"- 23" 10YR4/2 LmFSa <10 - < mf 2-6 2
~ 3 Mas - ff
I A3 23"- 4d^ 1nyo6;3 L~roFSa < 2-6
L~ 76 - <3 Mas F1F - - ff 2-6
C1 44"- 70" 10YR5/1 MSa 2
rrr~~~ < <10 SG M3P _
Cgm2 70"- 96" - >20 -
10YR2/1 Gr with CSa <5 <g7 Mas
border (Ttll) Str Str _ _
I~
~1
~ DRAFT
SOIL EVALUATION REP
ORT
FORM 2: SOIL LOG INFORMATION
PROJECT TITLE: Tahoma Terra Fairw
ay
PROJECT NO.: SCA 04104 SHEET: 2 OF 9
DATE: 7/6/06
PREPARED BY: William Parnell
P
E
,
.
.
SOIL LOG: #2
LOCATION: As per the attached map.
`~ 1. TYPES OF TEST DONE: 2. SCS SOILS SERIES: 3
LAND FORM
.
:
None Nisqually Loamy Fine Sand
Ter
~74~
race
4. DEPOSITION HISTORY: 5. HYDROLOGIC SOIL
6. DEPTH OF SEASONAL HW:
Sandy Glacial Outwash G
ROUP:
Unknown
B
- 7. CURRENT WATER 8. DEPTH TO IMPERVIOUS 9. MISCELLANEOUS:
DEPTH:
,
1 LAYER:
i
~ 140" Greater Than Bottom Of Hole Level
10. POTENTIAL FOR:
EROSION RUNOFF PONDING
v 11. SOIL STRATA DESCRIPTION: See Following chart Slight Slow Minimal
12. SITE PERCOLATION RATE: See FSP
13. FINDINGS i~ RECOMMENDATIONS: The C1 horizon was mod
t
l
era
e
y dense. Moderate mottles
were present at 88+", Soils were wet at 136" and a static water level w
"
~ as present at 140
existing grade.
below the
I
u
Soils Strata Description
Soil Log #2
Horz Depth Color Texture %CL %ORG CF STR MOT IND CEM ROO
Al <X>
0"- 10" 10YR3/2 SaLm <15 <
5 <10 Gr _ FSP
A2 _ _
10"- 34" 10YR4/3 LmFSa <10 _ < mf 2 6
10 Mas _ _
2
C1 -
fm 2-6
J4-- 4y 10YR4/6 MSa <5
a
C2 _
<5 Mas ff >
20
49"- 58" 10YR5/6 ExGrCSa <1
>
20
C3 _
<85 SG - - - ff >20
58"- 96" 10YR5/1 ExGr&Cob <1 >40
CSa <80 SG C2D - - ff >20 >40
C4 96"-140" 10YR6/2 GrFSa <5 _ < -
25 SG F1 F- ff 6-20
C2D
CS 140"-160" 1 DYR2/1 ExGrM-FSa <5 _
<97 Mas
I~
U - Str Str - >20 -
DRAFT
U
~,
~,
~1
SOIL EVALUATION REPORT
FORM 2: SOIL LOG INFORMATION
PROJECT TITLE: Tahoma Terra Fairway
PROJECT NO.: SCA 04104
PREPARED BY: William Parnell, P.E.
SOIL LOG: #3
LOCATION: As per the attached map.
1. TYPES OF TEST DONE: 2. SCS SOILS SERIES: 3, LAS
None Spanaway Gravelly Sandy
Loam (110)
4. DEPOSITION HISTORY: 5. HYDF"' "" - -
GlacialOutwash GROUP:
B
7. CURRENT WATER 8. DEPTH TO IMPERVIOUS
DEPTH: LAYER:
132" Greater Than Bottom Of Hole
10. POTENTIAL FC~R•
6.
SHEET: 3 OF 9
DATE: 7/6/06
Terrace
PTH OF SEASONAL
Unknown
9. MISCELLANEOU
Level
~rcvoww I KUNOFF I PONDING
11. SOIL STRATA DESCRIPTION: See Following chart Slight Slow Minimal
12. SITE PERCOLATION RATE: See FSP
13. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS: Moderate mottles were present at 73+", Soils were wet at
130" and a static water level was present at 132" below the existing grade. Roots were present to 66".
Soils Strata Description
Soil Log #3
Horz Depth Color Texture
Al 0"- 7" 10YR3/2 SaLm
A2 T'- 24" 10YR4/2 GrSaLm
Bw1 24"- 48" 10YR4/3 GrSaLm
C1 48"- 66" 10YR3/6 GrLmCSa
C2 66"- 93" 10YR4/6 ExGrCSa
C3 93"-168" 10YR5/1 ExGrM-FSa
%CL %ORG CF STR MOT
<15 <5 <10 Gr _
<15 - <15 Gr
<15 - <25 1SBK -
<10 - c30 SG _
<1 - <95 SG C2D
<2 - <80 5G C2D
DRAFT
IND CEM ROO <X> FSP
- ff 2.6 2
- - mm 2-6 2
- - mm 2_a 3
- - fm 6-20 >15
- - >20 _
- - - 6-20 _
`-1
v
LJ
v
LJ
tJ
LJ
LJ
L~
L~
LJ
i
LJ
SOIL EVALUATION REPORT
FORM 2: SOIL LOG INFORMATION
PROJECT TITLE: Tahoma Terra Fairway
PROJECT NO.: SCA 04104 SHEET: 4 OF 9
PREPARED BY: William Parnell, P.E. DATE: 7/6/06
SOIL LOG: #4
LOCATION: As per the attached map.
1. TYPES OF TEST DONE: 2. SCS SOILS SERIES:
None 3. LAND FORM:
Nisqually Loamy Fine Sand
Terrace
(74)
4. DEPOSITION HISTORY: 5. HYDROLOGIC SOIL
Sandy Glacial Outwash
6. DEPTH OF SEASONAL HW:
GROUP: Unknown
B
7. CURRENT WATER 8. DEPTH TO IMPERVIOUS
DEPTH: 9. MISCELLANEOUS:
LAYER:
96^
Level
93„
10. POTENTIAL FOR:
EROSION RUNOFF PONDING
Sli ht
11. SOIL STRATA DESCRIPTION: See Following chart g Slow Minimal
12. SITE PERCOLATION RATE: See FSP
13. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS: Light mottles were present at 58" increasing to moderate
mottles at 66". Heavy seepage was present at 96" below the existing grade. The C4 horizon was very
hard and extremely manganese stained.
Soils Strata Description
Soil Log #4
Horz
Al
A2
A3
C1
C2
C3
C4 Deoth
0"- 4"
4"- 12"
12"- 41"
41"- 62"
62"- 72"
72"- 93"
93"-133" Color
2.SY3/3
2 5Y4/3
10YR3/3
10YR3/3
10YR4/6
10YR5/1
10YR211 Texture
LmVFSa
LmVFSa
Lm\/FCC
LmMSa
C-MSa
ExGrCSa
ExGrSa(Till) %CL
<10
<10
'1~
-
<7
<2
<1
<5 %ORG CF
<
5 <3
_ ~
3
<3
- <10
- <30
_
<95
_ <
70
STR
1SBK
Mas
Mas
Mas
SG
SG
Mas
MOT IND
- -
- -
- -
F1F _
C2D _
C2D -
M3P Mod-
CEM ROO
ff
- ff
- mf
- -
-
-
- _
<X>
2-6
2-6
2-6
6-20
>20
>20
_
FSP
2
2
2
_
-
Str -
DRAFT
L~
I
LJ
LJ
J
J~
n
LJ
~l
LJ
n
u
L~
J
~i
L~
SOIL EVALUATION REPORT
FORM 2: SOIL LOG INFORMATION
PROJECT TITLE: Tahoma Terra Fairway SHEET: 5 OF 9
PROJECT NO.: SCA 04104 DATE: 7/6/06
PREPARED BY: William Parnell, P.E.
SOIL LOG: #5
LOCATION: As per the attached map.
1. TYPES OF TEST DONE: 2. SCS SOILS SERIES: 3. LAND FORM:
None Nisqually Loamy Fine Sand Terrace
(74)
4. DEPOSITION HISTORY: 5. HYDROLOGIC SOIL 6. DEPTH OF SEASONAL HW:
Sandy Glacial Outwash GROUP: Unknown
B
7. CURRENT WATER 8. DEPTH TO IMPERVIOUS 9. MISCELLANEOUS:
DEPTH: LAYER: Level
69" Greater Than Bottom Of Hole
10. POTENTIAL FOR: EROSION RUNOFF PONDING
Slight Slow Minimal
11. SOIL STRATA DESCRIPTION: See Following chart
12. SITE PERCOLATION RATE: See FSP
13. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS: Light mottles were present at 38" increasing to moderate
mottles at 43". Static water level was present at 69" below the existing grade.
Horz Depth Color Texture
Al 0"- 6" 10YR2/1 SaLm
A2 6"- 16" 10YR3/2 SaLm
A3 16"- 30" 10YR4/2 LmVFSa
C1 30"- 50" 10YR3/6 LmFSa
C2 50"- 68" 10YR5/1 FSa
C3 68"- 98" 10YR5/1 ExGrSa
Soils Strata Description
Soil Log #5
%CL %ORG CF STR
<18 <5 <1 Gr
<18 - <1 1SBK
<15 - <1 Mas
<12 - <1 Mas
<5 - <5 SG
<3 - <75 SG
DR~-FT
MOT IND CEM ROO <X> FSP
- - - ff 2-6 2
- - - ff 2-6 2
- - - ff 2-6 2
F1 F - - ff 6-20 6
C2D - - - >2p _
C2D - - - >20 -
~l
L~
~II
tJ
~J
rlI
u
n
nII
L~
Horz
Al
A2
r1 A3
~ C1
~ C2
I
(~
'~
L__l
n
~l
L~
n
~l
SOIL EVALUATION REPORT
FORM 2: SOIL LOG INFORMATION
PROJECT TITLE: Tahoma Terra Fairway
PROJECT NO.: SCA 04104 SHEET: 6 OF 9
PREPARED BY: William Parnell, P.E. DATE: 7/6/06
SOIL LOG: #6
LOCATION: As per the attached map.
1. TYPES OF TEST DONE: 2. SCS SOILS SERIES: 3. LAND FORM:
None Nisqually Loamy Fine Sand Terrace
(74)
4. DEPOSITION HISTORY: 5. HYDROLOGIC SOIL 6. DEPTH OF SEASONAL HW:
Sandy Glacial Outwash GROUP:
Unknown
B
7. CURRENT WATER 8. DEPTH TO IMPERVIOUS 9. MISCELLANEOUS:
DEPTH: LAYER:
69" Greater Than Bottom Of Hole Level
10. POTENTIAL FOR: EROSION RUNOFF PONDING
11. SOIL STRATA DESCRIPTION: See Following chart Slight Slow Minimal
12. SITE PERCOLATION RATE: See FSP
13. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS: Light mottles were present at 35" increasing to moderate
mottles at 38". Soils were wet at 60° with moderate seepage occurring at 70"below the existing grade.
Soils Strata Description
Soil Log #6
Depth Color Texture %CL %ORG CF STR MOT IND
0"- 4"
10YR4/2
Lm CEM ROO <X> FSP
<28 < <
5 1 Gr
-
4"- 12"
10YR5/3
Lm
<28 - - ff 2-6 1
- <1 1SBK -
- - ff
12"- 42"
2.5Y5/2
LmMSa
<g 2-6 1
_
<5 SG
F7 F
- - ff
>?n
42"- 64"
10YR5/1
VGrCSa
<3 _
- <60 SG C2D _
- ff
64"- 79"
10YR5/1
LmMSa
<g >20 _
_ <
5 SG
M3P
- - ff
>20
DRAFT
~II
~1
n
L~
n
L~
L~
L~
!J
LJ
r
`~
L~
~J
n
LJ
LJ
SOIL EVALUATION REPORT
FORM 2: SOIL LOG INFORMATION
PROJECT TITLE: Tahoma Terra Fairway SHEET: 7 OF 9
PROJECT NO.: SCA 04104 DATE: 7/6/06
PREPARED BY: William Parnell, P.E.
SOIL LOG: #7
LOCATION: As per the attached map.
1. TYPES OF TEST DONE: 2. SCS SOILS SERIES: 3. LAND FORM:
None Spanaway Gravelly Sandy Terrace
Loam (110)
4. DEPOSITION HISTORY: 5. HYDROLOGIC SOIL 6. DEPTH OF SEASONAL HW:
GlacialOutwash GROUP: Unknown
B
7. CURRENT WATER 8. DEPTH TO IMPERVIOUS 9. MISCELLANEOUS:
DEPTH: LAYER: Level
115" Greater Than Bottom Of Hole
10. POTENTIAL FOR: EROSION RUNOFF PONDING
Slight Slow Minima
11. SOIL STRATA DESCRIPTION: See Following chart
12. SITE PERCOLATION RATE: See FSP
13. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS: Faint mottles were present at 94+" becoming moderate at
98°. Soils were wet at 112" with moderate seepage occurring at 115° below the existing grade. Roots
were present to 72". The C4 and C5 horizons were slightly to moderately dense and extremely
manganese stained.
Horz Depth Color Texture
Al 0"- 20" 10YR3/2 SaLm
Bw 20"- 26" 10YR4/3 VGrSaLm
C1 26"- 42" 10YR3/6 ExGrCSa
C2 42"- 63" 10YR6/2 ExGrCSa
C3 63"- 96" 10YR4/6 VGrCSa
C4 96"-120" 10YR2/1 ExGrSa
C5 120"-143" 10YR2/1 Pea Gravel
wdh CSa
border
Soils Strata Description
Soil Log #7
%CL %ORG CF STR
<18 <5 <3 Gr
<18 - <q5 SG
<3 - <70 SG
<3 - <85 SG
<1 - <65 SG
<1 - <85 SG
<1 - <95 SG
DRAFT
MOT IND CEM ROO <X> FSP
- - - ff 2-6 2
- - - ff 2_6 ~
- - - ff >20 >40
- - - ff >20 >40
F1 F - - ff >20 -
C2D - - - >20 -
C2D - - - >20 -
L~
v
n
~lI
L_.f
LJ
n
V
n
v
L~
rl
ffI
LJ
I
n
LJ
~1
v
SOIL EVALUATION REPORT
FORM 2: SOIL LOG INFORMATION
PROJECT TITLE: Tahoma Terra Fairway SHEET: 8 OF 9
PROJECT NO.: SCA 04104 DATE: 7/6/06
PREPARED BY: William Parnell, P.E.
SOIL LOG: #8
LOCATION: As per the attached map.
1. TYPES OF TEST DONE: 2. SCS SOILS SERIES: 3. LAND FORM:
None Spanaway Gravelly Sandy Terrace
Loam (110)
4. DEPOSITION HISTORY: 5. HYDROLOGIC SOIL 6. DEPTH OF SEASONAL HW:
GlacialOutwash GROUP: Unknown
B
7. CURRENT WATER 8. DEPTH TO IMPERVIOUS 9. MISCELLANEOUS:
DEPTH: LAYER: Level
162" Greater Than Bottom Of Hole
10. POTENTIAL FOR: EROSION RUNOFF PONDING
Slight Slow Minimal
11. SOIL STRATA DESCRIPTION: See Following chart
12. SITE PERCOLATION RATE: See FSP
13. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS: Moderate mottles were present at 107+". Moderate seepage
"
was present at 162
below the existing grade. Roots were present to 42". Soils were extremely
manganese stained at 107"+.
Soils Strata Description
Soil Log #8
Horz Depth Color Texture
Al 0"- 18" 10YR211 SaLm
A2 18"- 33" 10YR3/2 GrSaLm
C1 38"- 64" 10YR4/6 ExGrCSa
C2 64"- 73" 10YR5/4 ExGrLmFSa
C3 73"-168" 10YR5/1 ExGrCSa
%CL %ORG CF STR MOT
<18 <5 <10 Gr -
<18 - <20 Gr -
~~o - «~ SG -
<1 - <90 SG -
<10 - <65 Mas -
<1 - <95 SG C2D
IND CEM ROO <X> FSP
- - ff 2-6 2
- - mm 2-6 2
- - fm 2-6 >40
- - ff >20 >40
- - - >20 8
- - - >20 -
DRAFT
U
'`1
v
'`l
v
v
n
v
r--,
,~J
,-,
v
~.i
~l
L~
L~
'-l
L~
L~
i
LJ
i
L~
~,l
~.i
~,
Soils Strata Description
Soil Log #9
Horz Depth Color Texture %CL %ORG CF STR MOT IND CEM
Al
0"- 12"
10YR3/2
GrSaLm
<18
<5 ROO <X> FSP
<25 Gr -
- - ff
2-6
2
Bw 12"- 26" 10YR4/3 VGrSaLm <18 - <q5 SG -
C1
26"- 48"
10YR4/6
ExGrFSa
<18 - - fm 2-6 2
C2
48"-108"
10YR5/1
ExGr&Cob
<1 - <70 5G _
- - fm
>20
>20
CSa - <g5 SG
- - ff
>20
>40
C3 108"-160" 10YR5/4 Gr with CSa <1 - <95 SG
binder C2D
- - -
>20
-
DRAFT
SOIL EVALUATION REPORT
FORM 2: SOIL LOG INFORMATION
n
U
r1
r1
~.f
U
n
U
~~
v
~...1
J
Abbreviations
Textural Class Structure
(Texture) (STR)
Cobble -Cob Granular - Gr
Stoney - St Blocky - Blky
Gravelly - Gr Platy - PI
Sand - Sa Massive - Mas
Loamy - Lm Single Grained - SG
Silt - Si Sub-An ular Block - SBK
Clayey - CI
Coarse - C
Ve - V
Extremely - Ex
Fine - F
Medium - M
Induration &~ Cementation
(IND) (CEM)
Weak - Wk
Moderate -Mod
Strong - Str
Grades of Structure
Strong - 3
Moderate - 2
Weak - 1
fViottles (NiOT)
1 Letter Abundance
Few - F
CG~iii~ior~ - C
Many - M
1st Number Size
Fine - 1
Medium - 2
Coarse - 3
2nd Letter Contrast
Faint - F
Distinct - D
Prominent - P
Roots (ROO)
1st Letter Abundance 2nd Letter Size
Few - f Fine - f
Common - c Medium - m
Many - m Coarse - c
<X> -Generalized range of infiltration rates from SCS soil survey (<X>)
FSP -Estimated Field Saturated Percolation rate based on horizon specific
factors.
rl
t
U ~~
n
.. .~,
~1~ '_ ~ ~ ~ '~~ ~~- ~® ~ a ° ®°
~~ ~ T r ~. _ r r~ d
.,. ,,. ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t~ [ ~ f~ :.q17
~_ -._ _ ~~-.~ .~_ (5.040 acr ~ ° ~. _; ;: _ .~.
~.-
--,, I
~ _ ,. .,._. .~ ~ ,N_ , ~ a.
_ ~, _,~ _, _~~ - - o ~ o
Thompson Creek and , y '- _„ ', /////~~~~~ ~•~~®"'''~~--~ ~ i ~ ° °
associated wetlands as ~ -
r, delrneated by the Coot _~- ' t~. ', ~ ~- ~ j
~'ompany in March of 2005. ~ i Q sc
~ ._ _~ _. ~ - __ .~~ _~. ~ ~ ° I ~ D
~_~ , u ,, .~_ ._ .__ ,~_ .~ ~ - __
.. .~ _,
~ - -- - - - -
~,
~J
DRA'kN BY DESIGNED BY
~ ace cRS T~
CHECKED BY 0.~PR0
~lD
BY
I r
.
CRS ~
Cons
lti
E
L
DAIS u
ng
nq~neers
420J 6th Avenu:, 9wtc 309
6 /2D06 laccy, Washington 96503
-, S C A L E (360) 292-7230 Far (360) 292-723
VISION
i ~ 0 B No 406032 03 I'= 60'
a
~1
rIl
~J
rl
I
L.~
J
Appendix 6
Maintenance Agreement
LJ
RESIDENTIAL AGREEMENT TO MAINTAIN
STORM WATER FACILITIES
GMS CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION
ITS HEIRS, SUCCESSORS, OR ASSIGNS
(HEREINAFTER "DEVELOPER")
~ AND
CITY OF YELM
(HEREINAFTER "JURISDICTION")
The upkeep and maintenance of stormwater facilities is essential to the protection of
water resources. The DEVELOPER is expected to conduct business in a manner that
promotes environmental protection. This Agreement contains specific provisions with
~ respect to maintenance of on site stormwater facilities.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: See Plat of Yelm Townhomes, Yelm, Thurston County, WA
Whereas, the DEVELOPER has constructed improvements includin
g but not limited to,
buildings, pavement, and stormwater facilities on the property described above. In order to
further the goals of the JURISDICTION to ensure the protection and enhancement of
water resources, the JURISDICTION and the DEVELOPER hereby enters into this
Agreement. The responsibilities of each party to this Agreement are identified below.
~ The DEVELOPER shall:
U
(1) Implement the stormwater facility maintenance program included herein as Attachment "A".
I
~.J The JURISDICTION shall:
+-~ (1) Provide technical assistance to the DEVELOPER in support of its operation and maintenance
~ activities conducted pursuant to its maintenance program. Said assistance shall be provided
upon request and as JURISDICTION time and resources permit, at no charge to
,~ DEVELOPER.
(L) Conduct a mixumum of one (1) site visit per year to discuss performance and problems with
the DEVELOPER.
REMEDIES:
(1) If the JURISDICTION determines that maintenance or repair work is required to be done to
the strom water facilities located on the owner/homeowners association property, the
JURISDICTION shall give owner/association of the property notice of the specific
maintenance and/or repair required. The JURISDICTION shall set a reasonable time in
which such work is to be completed by persons who were given notice. If the above required
maintenance and/or repair is not completed within the time set by the JURISDICTION,
written notice will be sent to persons who were given notice stating the JURISDICTION's
'-1 intention to perform such maintenance and bill owner/homeowners association for all
incurred expenses. The JURISDICTION may also revoke stormwater utility rate credits if
required maintenance is not performed.
'-1
U
~1
n
(2) If at any time the JURISDICTION determines that the existing system creates any imminent
threat to public health or welfare, the JURISDICTION may take immediate measures to
remedy said threat. However the JURISDICTION shall also take reasonable steps to
immediately notify either the property owner or the person in control of said property of such
imminent threat in order to enable such owner or person in control to take such immediate
measures either independently or in cooperation with the JURISDICTION.
(3) The DE
VELOPER grant limited authority to the JURISDICTION for access to any and all
stormwater system features for the purpose of performing maintenance or repair or
inspection pursuant to the terms of this agreement.
(4) The persons listed in (1), above shall assume responsibility for the cost of maintenance and
~ repairs to the stormwater facility. Such responsibility shall includes reimbursement to the
LJ JURISDICTION within 90 days of receipt of an invoice for work performed by the
JURISDICTION in maintenance or repairing such facility pursuant to the terms of this
r~ agreement. Overdue payments will require payment of interest at the current legal rate for
liquidated judgments. If legal action ensues, any costs or fees incurred by the
JURISDICTION will be borne by the parties responsible for said reimbursements.
This Agreement is intended to protect the value and desirability of the real property
described above and to benefit all the citizens of the JURISDICTION. It shall run with the
land and be binding on all parties having or acquiring any right, title, or interest, or any part
thereof, of real property. They shall insure to the benefit of each present or future successor
in interest of said property or any part thereof, or interest therein, and to the benefit of all
citizens of the JURISDICTION.
~ IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this instrument has been executed
n
,2
~I
Owner
rl
J
n
STATE OF WASHINGTON )
ss
~ COUNTY OF THURSTON )
~J
I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that
n (is/are) the person(s) who appeared before me and
said person(s) acknowledged that (he/she/they) signed
this agreement and acknowledged it to be
(his/her/their) free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the
'~ instrument.
Given under my hand and official seal this day of , 200_.
rlII
~J
Notary Public in and for the State of
Washington, residing in
My commission expires:
~f
J
STATE OF WASHINGTON )
ss
COUNTY OF THURSTON )
On this day and year above personally appeared before me,
who executed the foregoing instrument and
acknowledge the said instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said
~ Municipal Corporation for the uses and purposes therein mentioned and on oath states he
is authorized to execute the said instrument.
~ Given under my hand and official seal this day of inn
Notary Public in and for the
State of Washington, residing
My commission expire
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
~l
n
u
n
~J
n
r--,
`~
~i
rl
~,
Appendix 7
Vicinity Map
~,
n
L~
rl
n
~J
LJ
~II
LJ
' 1
LJ
I
LJ
I
L~
n
rl
rl
L~
I \ ~ 93rd Ave SE ~ T ~ -- ._
3
I I~
m I ~ I p I
F I
-~ ~~_ 9LP SF IY I
- I s~ ~~-_ NT.S
s~o I CITY OF YELM
~ i sw sere„ ~,.~~e..
_ _ I TAHO
_~~'ERF
!/l~t~l~'Y !~~'~p
N.T.S.
v,
D~
to !
~~ ~ongmire Si SE ~'
FAIR SAY - _
~I~I'ULTI~ FAMILY ~
~ SITE ~ o ~~~ 51
_~___~ r~
~~ _ J
'„te