Loading...
Salmon Run Drainage and Erosion Control Report 20110111DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL PLAN REPORT FOR SALMON RUN APARTMENTS 10720 VANCIL ROAD SOUTHEAST YELM, WA 98597 Prepared: January 10, 2011 By: Chad Heimbigner, P.E., LEED AP Coffman Project #10247 Prepared By: ~COFFMAN N G I N E E R S 10 N. Post Street, Suite 500 Spokane, WA 99201 (509) 328-2994 TABLE OF CONTENTS Proposed Project Description ........................................................................................................ 1 Existing Conditions ....................................................................................................................... 1 Infiltration Rates /Soils Report .....................................................................................................1 Wells .............................................................................................................................................1 Fuel Tanks ..................................................................................................................................... 2 Sub-Basin Descriptions /Analysis ................................................................................................2-3 Analysis of 100-Year Flood ..........................................................................................................3 Aesthetic Considerations for Facilities ..........................................................................................3 Downstream Analysis ...................................................................................................................3 Covenants, Dedications, Easements ..............................................................................................4 Homeowners -Articles of Incorporation ......................................................................................4 Erosion & Sediment Control .........................................................................................................4 Conclusions ...................................................................................................................................4 ATTACHMENTS "A": Vicinity Map "B": Geotechnical Report "C": Drainage Basin Map "D": Hydrology /Hydraulic Calculations "E": WWHM3 Output "F": Erosion & Sediment Control Plan & Notes ~COFFMAN N G I N E E R S Salmon Run Drainage Report PROPOSED PROTECT DESCRIPTION The proposed project is located at 10720 Vancil Road SE in Yelm, Washington. The on-site improvements consist of the addition of five (5) new multi-family residential buildings with a total of forty (40) units and one (1) community building. Paved parking lots, sidewalk, playground and landscaped areas are also included in the development. The storm water management improvements for the subject site consist of bio-infiltration swales and subsurface infiltration galleries. The project is located in Yelm in a portion of the southeast I/a and northeast 1/a of Section 30, Township 17 North, Range 2 East, City of Yelm, W.M. Thurston County, Washington. (See Vicinity Map, Attachment «A„•) EXISTING CONDITIONS The existing site is undeveloped and relatively flat, with a gentle slope from the northeast down to the southwest. The site is covered with low growing vegetation and a few trees. Slopes on-site range from 1% to 3%. Refer to the survey submitted with the site development plans for additional information regarding existing conditions. INFILTRATION RATES /SOILS REPORT Soils for the subject site are classified as Nisqually loamy fine sand, 3 to 15 percent slopes (74 =soil unit symbol) and Spanaway gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes (110 =soil unit symbol) in accordance with the Web Soil Survey, Thurston County, Washington, as published by the Natural Resources Conservation Service. On-site soils were sampled and classified by the project geotechnical engineers, Terra Associates, Inc. This was accomplished by excavating seven test pits, obtaining samples and performing laboratory testing. Terra Associates, Inc. indicated infiltration facilities would be suitable for the subject site. Based on their analysis, an estimated long-term design infiltration rate of two (2) inches per hour can be used for sizing of the infiltration facilities. A copy of the Terra Associates, Inc., Geotechnical Report, dated May 2010, is included in Attachment "B". Groundwater was not observed during the test pit excavations. ELLS According to the ALTA Survey prepared for the subject site by Gary M. Johnson, PLS (Associates Land Surveying and Dev.), there are no existing wells located on the subject site. Refer to the survey submitted with the site development plans for additional information regarding existing conditions. ~CaFFMAN N G I N E E R S Salmon Run Apartments Drainage Report FUEL TANKS According to the ALTA Survey prepared for the subject site by Gary M. Johnson, PLS (Associates Land Surveying and Dev.), there are no existing fuel tanks located on the subject site. Refer to the. survey submitted with the site development plans for additional information regarding existing conditions. SUB-BASIN DESCRIPTION /ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY Stormwater generated on-site will utilize best management practices recommended in the Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington, as published by the Washington State Department of Ecology, February 2005. The SCS Method is used to determine the water quality design storm volume from a 6-month, 24-hour storm event. A continuous hydrograph created using an approved continuous runoff model (WWHM3) is used to size flow control facilities. Stormwater disposal is based on recommendations from the geotechnical report contained herein. ANALYSIS Runoff associated with the design storm event, generated by the Salmon Run project, will be retained on- site utilizing bio-infiltration swales. The swales combine vegetation and soils to remove stormwater pollutants by percolation into the ground. The SCS Method is used to determine the water quality design storm volume from a 6-month, 24-hour storm event. Runoff from the on-site drainage basins is directed to bio-infiltration swales. The swale bottoms are flat. Stormwater is allowed to pond to a treatment depth of 6" before overflowing into a catch basin which discharges to subsurface infiltration galleries. A continuous hydrograph created using an approved continuous runoff model (WWHM3) is used to size flow control facilities. The geotechnical engineer provided an infiltration rate of 2 inches per hour for the stormwater management facilities. This rate was applied to the bottom area of the infiltration galleries. The swales in conjunction with the infiltration galleries were sized to not exceed a drawdown time of 48 hours. 1. Runoff and Rainfall Data The 6-month, 24-hour storm value used for the SCS Method was estimated as 72% of the 2-year, 24-hour rainfall amount as recommended by the Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington. The 2-year, 24-hour rainfall amount was obtained from an isopluvial map for the state of Washington. The continuous hydrograph utilized to size flow control facilities was produced using historic precipitation data for Thurston County within the WWH1V13 program. 2. Hydrology Computations The site has been divided into three drainage basins, labeled `Basin A,' `Basin B,' and `Basin C' (see Drainage Basin Map, Attachment "C"). The SCS Method is used to determine the water quality design storm volume from a 6-month, 24-hour storm event. See Attachment "D" for Hydrology Calculations and Attachment "E" for WWHM3 output. The following table summarizes the results of the basin calculations. 2 ~CC,~FFMAN N G I N E E R S Salmon Run Apartments Drainage Report Treatment Treatment infiltration Basins :Drains Storage Storage Gallery Within Required _ Provided Dimensions 48 Hours (CF) (CF) ', (W x L x D) Basin A Yes 569 576 115' x 11' x 5' Basin B Yes 1980 1983 318' x 10' x 5 Basin C Yes 898 925 20' x 52' x 5' 3. Stormwater Treatment Per the geotechnical report, groundwater was not observed during the test pit excavations. According to the Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington site suitability criteria, the subject site is suitable for infiltration systems. Runoff from the parking lot areas and hydraulically connected sidewalks is treated with the bio-infiltration swales. Per the City of Yelm, roof runoff was included in the total storm runoff volumes, but not included as a pollutant generating source for the treatment volume calculations. 4. Hydraulic Computations We analyzed the worst case scenario for the roof drain lines and the parking lot storm drain lines. The roof drain lines and storm drain lines are adequately sized to convey the design storm events. See Attachment "D" for Hydraulic Calculations ANALYSIS OF 100-YEAR FLOOD According to the Findings of Fact in the City of Yelm Staff Report for the subject development, the City Critical Area Maps indicate the property is located outside of wetlands, flood zones, and high ground water buffer areas. AESTHETIC CONSIDERATIONS FOR FACILITIES The proposed storm water management facilities will be planted with vegetation in accordance with governing regulations. Refer to the Landscape Plans (Sheets L101 through L103) associated with the proposed development for additional information regarding groundcover and plantings. DOWNSTREAM ANALYSIS Runoff associated with the design storm events generated by the Salmon Run project will be retained on-site utilizing bio-infiltration swales. Runoff from the site associated with the design storm events will not be discharged downstream off-site. Terra Associates, Inc. indicated infiltration facilities would be suitable for the subject site. 3 ~CC~FFMQN N G f V E E R S Salmon Run Drainage Report COVENANTS. DEDICATIONS. EASEMENTS The proposed multi-family housing development does not have covenants, dedications, or easements associated with the storm water management facilities. The storm water management facilities will be maintained by the Owner of the development to ensure they remain in proper working condition. HOMEOWNERS -ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION The proposed multi-family housing development does not have articles of incorporation associated with the storm water management facilities. EROSION & SEDIMENT CONTROL Refer to the Erosion & Sediment Control Notes (Sheet 0002) and the Erosion & Sediment Control Plan (Sheet C101) included in Attachment "F" for additional information regarding construction sequence and procedure, trapping sediment, best management practices, and inspection of the erosion and sediment control measures. CONCLUSIONS The above described stormwater management improvements will provide the necessary systems to control and treat runoff associated with the design storm events for the Salmon Run development. Refer to the attachments for additional information. 4 VICIIVITYIVIAP ATTACHMENT "A" ~i i~~ VICINITYMAP ATTAC~IlVIENT "A" GEOTECHNICAL REPORT ATTAC~IlVIENT "B" cc y., e~° b°• o A rn *y p C ~ '~' O m ~ '~' "' O ~L +1 o~ ~, 0. p = ~ © ~ ~ ~ nl m ~j '~ ~ ~ I c °' ~~c' ~~,~ m ~ ~ roroc ~-.~~ ~' C ~ ~ a ~ rCO ~ ~ ~ ,0 , ~ ~ ~ ~ ; U ~ o .c o `o ~ .~ "' i `a ~~ ~~ ~~ ~' ° o r. *a F~ ~` .~ ~ ~EaTEGl~N1C~-L REPC)RT Salmon Ran Apartments '10720 Vancil Road SE Yelm, Washington Project No. T~6437 Prepared for: Timfeer River development Ee1lev~e, °dl~ashingfon gay 5, 20'10 T~f~A ~?~~~T~~ In~~ Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering, Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences May 5, 2010 Project No. T-6437 Mr. Mark Rozga}' Timber River Development 2223 - 1 [ 2tlt Avenue NE, Suite 102 Bellevue, Washington 98004 Subject: Geotecltnical Report Salmon Run Apartments 10720 Vancil Road SE Yelm, V+lashington Dear Mr. Rozgay: As requested, v~+e have conducted a geoteelmical engineering study for the subject project. Our field exploration indicates the site is geaterally uttderlaitt by 2 to 2.5 feet of orgattic till material overlyinb variable glacial sediments composed of silty sand, sand with silt, variable gravel content, and gravel with sand. The Lill materials are rtot suitable far the support of the proposed buildings and pavements. The fill materials will need to be removed from structural and pavement subgrades. The attached report presents our findings and recomrttendations far the geoteehnieal aspects of project design and c~tnstructiort. We trust the information presented in this report is sufficient for your current needs. If you have any questions or require additional inforntatio~t, please call, Sincerely yours, TERRA ASSOCIATES, INC. Carolyn Sclteppet•, E.I.T. Staff En 7' ecr tarles ;~° ~~~:~• /". ,~'~ Frojec etT ~ ~~' ' • ~. :.: `.f'/:. ~ L~ r~ teo t~ Sche~p~r~P.E. ~~ ~ ~, r.:..~ ~ ,.. 13S' 12525 Willpws Rt~acl, Suite i01, Kirkland, Vl~ashington 98034 Phone (42S} 1321-7777 • Fax (425} 821-4334 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. I.0 Project Description .......................................................................................................... 1 2.0 Scope of V1'ork ......................................:.......................................................................... 1 3.0 Site Conditions ................................................................................................................ 2 3.1 Surface ................................................................................................................ 2 3.2 Subsurface .......................................................................................................... 2 3.3 Grouttdwater ....................................................................................................... 2 4.0 Geologic }3aards ............................................................................................................ 2 4.1 Seisu~ic Considerations ...................................................................................... 2 4.2 Erosioti ............................................................................................................... 3 4.3 Landslide Hazard ................................................................................................ 3 S.d Discussion and Recotnmetidations .................................................................................. 4 S. ] Gctteral ................................................................................. 4 5.2 Site Preparation atid Grading ............................................................................ 4 5.3 Excavations ........................................................................................................ 5 5.4 Foundation SuE~pon ............................................................................................ S 5.5 Floor Slab-on-Grade ........................................................................................... G 5.G Stot~mvater Infiltration FeasiUility .................................................................... b 5.7 Drainage ,. ...........................,........,.........................................,........................ 7 S.fi Utilities ............................................................................................................... 7 S.9 Pavemeiyt ............................................................................................................ S G.0 Additional Services ......................................................................................................... 8 7.0 Limitations.... ......................................,.............,...............................,.....,,................,...... S Figures Vicinity Map ...........................................................,.,.........,........,..................,.................... Figure 1 ExpEoration Location Plan .................................................................................................... Figure 2 Annendis Field l;xploralion and Laboratory Tcsling .......................................................................Appendix A Geotechnical Report Salmon Run Apartments 'i0720 Vancil Road SE Yelm, Washington 1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The project consists of developing the site witlt live new apartment buildings, a corttntuctily building, a play area, and associated parking artd utilities, Based on the conceptual site plats prepared by 7eck Bolter Arcftitects dated September 2, 2008, the buildings will be located on the outer edges of the property with the community building and play area located in the center. We expect that the apartment structures and the recreational building will be two-story wood-ti~amed buildin}s constt2tcted at grade. Structural loading should be relatively light; with bearing walls carrying Loads oft to 3 kips per foot and isolated colunuts carrying maximum loads of 30 to 40 kips. The recommendations in the following sections of this report are based on our understanding of the preceding design features. We should review design drawings as they become available to verify that our recomntendaliotts have been properly interpreted and to supplement them, if required. 2.0 SCOPE Or' ~'4~ORK Our work was eornpleted in accordance with our proposal dated ,Fuly I6, 2009. Un April 27, 2010, we observed soil conditions at 7 test pits excavated to depths ranging from 8 to 10 feet below existing grade. Using the ntE'onnatiou obtained from the subsurface exploration, we performed analyses to develop geotechnical reeottttnendatians for project design attd construction. Specifically, this repori addresses the following: • Soil attd groundwater conditions • Seisrttic design parameters per 2006 International Building Code (IBC) • Geologic critical areas • Site preparation and grading • Foundations • Floor slabs at grade • Stormwater inliltratian feasibility • Subsurface drainage • Utilities • Pavements It should be noted that recommendations outlined in this repori regarding drainage are associated with soil stt~:ngth, design earilt pressures, erasion, and stability. Design attd perfot•tnance issues with respect to moisture as it relates to the structure environment (i.e., humidity, mildew, mold) is beyond Tetra Associates' purview. A building envelope specialist or contractor should be consulted to address these issues, as needed. Vlay 5, 2010 Project No, T-6437 3.0 SITE CONDI'I'1(ONS 3.1 Surface 'The site is located at 10720 Vartcil Road in Yelttt, Wasltirtgton. The approxitttate site location is shown on Figure 1. The site is rectangular with a pan handle that extends towards the west. The site is currently undeveloped and is covered with tall grass, brush, stttall trees, and a few mature ties. 1~Ve observed ]tousehold rubbish scattered throughout the site. The site is bordered by single-family residences to the south and west, an open field to the east, and a retail center to the north, The site and vicinity are relatively level. The ground surface on the site is uneven suggesting some past grading may have occwred. 3.2 Subsurface We observed 2 to 2.5 feet of organic fill material immediately below existing grades. Beneath the fill mantel, all of our test pits encountered and were terminated within glacial sediments composed of silty sand, sand with silt and a variable gravel content, and ¢ravel with sand. The Geologic rl~fap r?j nc~• Cerrlrrrlirr Qrrac/rarrgle, {~YR.slrir7gtc~n, b_y Henry 1'4'. Schasse { 1987), sltoty the site is ~vitltitt art area mapped as "Vasltott Ottrivaslt Gravel'' (Qdvg). Native soil conditions we observed ai our test pits are generally consistent with the geologic conditions shown on the map. The preceding discussion is intended to be a general review of the soil conditions encountered. For store detailed descriptions, please refer to the Test I'it Logs in Appendix A. 3.3 Grauttdtvater We did trot observe groundwater seepage in the test pit excavations at the time of our exploration, We did observe some wet soil conditions suggesting areas of shallow seepage possibly deve[ap durinfi the nornally wet winter season. However, based on soil conditions and labot•atory test results, we expect these areas would be limited in extent. 4.0 GEOLOGICAL HAZARDS 4.1 Seismic Considerations Section 14.08.130 of the Yelnt iVlunicipal Code (Y;uIC) defines Seismic hazard areas as areas subject to severe risk of damage as a result of ear•lhquake induced growtd shaking, slope failure, settlement, sot[ liquefaction, lateral spt•eading, or surface faulting. Liquefaction is a phenomenon ~>,~here there is a reduction or complete loss of soil strength due to an increase in ~yater pressure induced by vibrations, Liquefaction mainly affects geologically recent deposits of tine-grained sand that is below the groundwater table. Soils of this nahtre derive their strength from intergramtlar friction. The generated water pressure or pore pressure essentially separates the soil grains and eliminates this intergranular t~iction; thus, eliminating the soil's strength. Page Nct. 2 \~Iay S, 20]0 Project No. T-6437 Based on the soil and groundwater conditions eve observed, it is our opinion that the hazards for liquefaction or settlement at this site during an earthquake and their associated risk or impacts are negligible. Based on soil conditions observed in the lest borinss and our luiowledge of the area geology, per Chapter 16 of the 2006 international E3uilding Code (1BC), site class "C'' sl}ould be used in structw•al design. Based on this site class, in accordance with the 2000 IBC, the following parameters should be used in computing seismic forces: Seisi~ric Design Prrrar~ret~~s (IBC,200b) Spectral response acceleration (Short Period), SS 1.139 Spectral response acceleration (I -Second Period), Si 0.558 Sile eoef'ficient, F, 1.000 Site coefficient, F,. 1.402 Five percent damped. ;2 seco~id ~~riod, SD, 0.759 Five percent damped 1.0 second period, Sn, 0.372 Values determined using the United States Geological Survey (USGS) Ground Motion Parameter Calcttlatot• accessed on April 28, ?010 at the ~veb site httl~:ll~riltgttalt~.u~g5_.t~oi~la~s~atrl~ll~a~nitljis.~d~s,~ti~it7dex.~lap. 4.2 Erosion Section 14,08.130 of"the YMC defines Erosion hazard areas as areas are at least those areas identified by the U.S. Depac•tment of Agriculture's Natural Resources Co~iservation Sen~ice as having a "moderato to severe," °severe," or "very severe" rill and inter-rill erosion hazard. Erosion hazard areas are also those areas impacted by Shore land and/or stream bank erosion and those areas within a river's channel migration zone, The soils encountered on-site are classified as Nisqually loamy line sand and Spanaway gravelly sandy loam by the United States Dcparimcnt of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service Soil Classification System. V-~it[i the existing slope gradients, these soils wil! have a slight to moderate potential for erosion when exposed. Therefore, the site is not an erosion hazard area as defined by the YMC. Regardless, erosion protection measures as required by the City of 7`eim will need to be in place prior to starting grading activities on the site. This arould include perimeter silt fencing to contain erosion on-site and cover measures to prevent or reduce soil erosion during and following construction, 4.3 Landslide Hazard Section ] 4.08.130 of'the YMC defines Landslide Lazard areas as areas potentially subject to la~idslides based on a combination of geologic, topographic, and hydrologic factors. They include areas susceptible because of any combination of bedrock, soil, slope {gradient), slope aspect, stnicture, hydrology, or other factors. Based on tl~e soil and topographic conditions of the site, no portions of the site ai•e susceptible to risk of mass movement and; therefore, no portions of the site would be considered a landside hazard area. Paae No. 3 it9ay5, 20]0 Project No. T-6437 5.0 DISCUSSION AND RECO)<~1MENDATIONS 5.1 General Based on our study, there are tto geotechllical considerations that would preclude development of fire site, as currently planned. l~otvever, as described earlier, our exploration indicates the upper 2 to 2 %z feet of soil is fill rttaterial that contains a considerable amount of organic soil. In our opinion, this upper soil horizon will not be suitable for support of building foundations or irmnediate support of floor slabs and pavements. The buildings Galt be supported on conventional spread footings bearing ott competent native soils observed below fists upper 2 to 2.5 feet of organic fill material or ott structural fill placed and compacted above competent mineral native soils. Pavement and (loot slabs can be similarly supported, The following sections provide detailed recottttttettdatious regarding the preceding issues and otltcr geotecltnical design considerations. These recommendations should be incorporated into the final design drawings and construction specifications. 5.2 Site Preparatior~ and Gradiutti To prepare the site for construction, all vebetation, organic surface soils, and other deleterious material should be stripped and removed front the building and paved areas, Surface sU•ipping depths of about 2 to 2.5 feet should be expected to remove tJte ot•gattic surface fill. The organic fill material will not be suitable for use as structural fill, but may be used for limited depths (n nonstructural areas. Once clearing and stripping operations are complete, cut and fill operations can be initiated to establish desired building grades. Prior to placing (ill, all exposed bearing surfaces sltottld be observed by a representative of Terra Associates to verify soil conditions are as expected and suitable for support of new fill ar building elements. Our representative may request a proofroll using heatry rubber-tired equipment to determine if any isolated soft and yielding areas are present. If excessively yielding areas are observed, and they cattrtot be stabilized in place by compaction, the affected soils should be excavated and removed to firm bearing and grade restored with new structural fill. If the dept.ll of excavation to remove unstable soils is excessive, the use of geotextile fabrics, such as iVlirafi 500X, or art equivalent fabric, cant be used in conjunction twirls clean granular structural fill. Our experience 11aS S1toWI1 that, in general, a ntinintunt of 18 inches of a clean, granular structural fill place and cotttpacted over fire geotextile fabric should establish a stable bearing surface, The: ability to use native soil from site excavations as structural fill Will depend on its moisture content and fire prevailing weatEter conditions at the time of construction, The fines content of the granulat• native outwaslt observe below the till horizon typically ranges between five to 12 percent, Gravel outwash with a fines content of less titan five percent was observed at `l'est Pits TP-4 and TP-7 below a depth of five feet. In our opinion, these native soils will be suitable for use as structural fill and trench backfill. I-lowever, the flues content of most of outtvash twill snake the soil slightly to moderately rnoistw•e sensitive and close moisture couu•ol twill be required to facilitate proper cotttpactiort, During dry weather conditions, fire contractor should be prepared to add water in ordet• to facilitate compaction. During wet weather, the fines content of fire outwash may cause the soil to become unstable in a fill condition and unsuitable for use as fill. ht this case, the contractor should be prepared to dry the soil back to suitable moisture content by aeration or use an additive such as cent~nt kiln dust, Portland cement, or lime to stabilize the moisture. If an additive is used, the pH of the soil will be elevated and additional measures for monitoring p[-i of startnwater runoff along with mitigation measures will need to be included in the projects Stomt Water Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP), Page No. 4 ylay S, 2010 Project No. T-6437 Il' importing soil for grading or backfilling during wet weather conditions becomes necessary, we recommend importing a gI•anu[ar soil that meets the following grading requirements: )' C No. 4 75 maximum No. 200 5 maximwn* * Based on the 3J4-ine13 fraction. Prior to use, Terra Associates, Ltc. should examine and test all materials impot•ted to the site for use as sultctulnl fill. Structural fill should be placed in uniform loose layers not exceeding l2 inches and compacted to a mininmm of 95 percent of the soil's maximum dry density, as determined by American Society for Testing and iYiaterials (/-ASTM) Test Designatiat D-G98 (Standard Proctor). The moisture conttent of the soil at the tithe of compaction should be within two percent of its optimum, as determined by this ASTM standard. In nonsh•ttctural areas, the degree of compaction can be reduced to 90 percent. 5.3 )Jxcavations All excavations at the site associated with confined spaces, such as utility wenches, must be completed in accordance with local, state, and federal requirements. Based on regulations outlined Ill the ~~'ashington Irtdustria[ Safety and Health Act (WISHA), the glacial sediments observed would be classified as Type C soils. Accordingly, temporary excavations in Type C soils should have Ihen• slopes laid back at an inclination of 1.5:1 {Hot•izonlal:Ve-•tical) or• tlatter, froth the toe to the crest of the slope. All exposed slope faces shottId be cover•cd with a durable reinforced plastic membrane during constt•uction to prevent slope raveling and noting daring periods of precipitation. For utility trenches, a properly designed and installed shoring trench box can be used to support the excavation sidewalk. "The above information is provided solely for the beltefit of the owner and other design consultants, and should not be construed to imply that Terra Associates, Inc, assumes responsibility for jab site safety. It is understood that job site safety is the sale responsibility of the project contractor. 5.4 Foundation Support The bttildint;s can be supported on conventional spread fooling foundations bearing on competent native soils or on structural fills placed above competent native soils. Foundation subgrade should be prepared as 3•ecommended in Section 5.2 of this report. Perimeter fowtdations exposed to the weather should bear a minimtun depth of 1.5 feet below final exterior grades for frost protection. Interior foundations can be constructed at any convenient depth below fire floor slab. Foundations can be dimensioned for a net allowable bearing capacity of 2,500 pounds per syuarc foot {psf), I'or short-teem loads, such as wind and seismic, cone-third increase in this allowable capacity can be used. With slntctural loading as anticipated altd this bearing stress applied, estimated total settlements are less than one-inch. Page No. 5 May 5, 2010 Pt•ojecl No. T-6437 hor designing foundations to resist lateral Loads, a base friction coefficient of 0.35 can Ue used. Passive earth pressures acting on fire side of the footing and buried portion of the fowtdatirnt stem wall can also be considered. We recommend calculating this lateral resistance using an equivalent fluid weight of 300 pcf. We recommend not including the upper l2 inches of soil in this computation because they can be affected by weather or disturbed Uy future grading acliviq~. This value assumes the foundation will be constructed neat against competent native soil or Uack(illed tivith structural fill as described in Section 5.2 of this report. The ~••alues recommended include a safety factor of I .S. 5.5 floor Slab-on-Grade 51ab-on-grade floors can Ue supported on subgrade prepared as reconunended in Section 5.2 of this report. It is typically recommended to place afour-inch thick capillary break layer composed of clean, coarse sand or fine ravel that has less than three percent passing the No. 200 sieve irtunediately below the slab. 'T'his material reduces the potential for upward capillary movement of water through the underlying soil and subsequent wetting of the; floor slab. However, in our opinion, if clean native outwash that meets the criteria described above is exposed at the floor subgrade elevation or used as structural fill to estabiislt the floor grade, it would not be necessary to import material for placement as capillary break below the slabs. A representative of Tetra Associates should observe the subgrade to verify the suitability of the native oulwash to serve as the capillary break layer at the time of construction. 'T'he capillary break layer will not prc~fent moisture intnrsion through the slaU caused by water vapor transmission. Where moisture by vapor transmission is undesirable, such as covered floor areas, a common practice is to place a durable plastic membrane on the capillary break layer and then cover the membrane wish a layer of clean sand or fine gravel to protect it from damage during construction, and to aid in uniform curing of the concrete slaU. It should Ue noted that if the sand or gravel layer overlying the nternbrane is satut•ated prior [o pouring the slab, it will not be effective in assisting urtifontt curing of the slab artd can actually serve as a water supply for moisture bleeding through the slab, potentially affecting floor coverings. Therefore, in our opinion, covering the membrane with a layer of sand or gravel should be avoided if floor slab construction occurs during the wet veinier months and the layer cannot be effectively drained. We recommend Hoar desio crs and contractors refer to the 2003 American Concrete institute {ASI} Manual oFConcrete Pthetice, fart 2, 302.1R-9G, for further information regarding vapor barrier installation below slab-on-grade floors. 5.6 Stormwater Iutiiltration reasibility ~1'e expect that infiltration facilities will be considered for storrnwater manafentenl. T'he recessional oulwash sands and gravels we observed at the site would Ue a suitable receptor formation for infiltration discharge. Depending on the location of the infiltration facilities, it may be necessary to excavate five feet or more below cun•ent site grades to reach the suitable out-vash layer. To determine the loner term design infiltration rate, we used Method 2 as outlined in Section 3.3.b, Volume 11I of the Ecology`s SYornm~crrc~l• ~Llancrgemeu! r~lmrual,Jnr• iI'crsre~r•rr il'n.slrinbnur. This method conelates the long-term infiltration rate with gradation testing of the soils in accordance with ASTM Test Designation D-422. Gradation cun~es front ]aboratory testing on the soils are attached in Appendix A. Based on the results of the testing and on rigure 3.8 in Eeolog}~'s Stnrnrt~•rrter Minrrr~c~nrc~rrl Mcnrarcrl•Jnr• Ii'c,clerra T•i~uslrirr4lo~r, we recommend using a long- term design infiltration rate of two inches per hour. Page No. 6 Vlay 5, 2410 Project \To. T-6437 The permeability of the native outwash soils will be significantly impacted by the iutnision of soil Gnes (silt- and clay-sized particles). Even a relatively minor amount of soil Pities can reduce the permeability of tl~e formation by a factor of ten. The greatest exposure to soil fines contamination tiviIl occur dw•ing mass grading and constntction. Therefore, we reeott~inend that the Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control (TESL) plans mute constc•ttction stoimwater to a location other than the permanent infiltration site, If this is not possible, the T1/SC pond holtom elevation should be kept hvo Feet above the final infiltration elevation with final grade established after site areas Dave been substantially stabilized. We should review stormu~ater tnanagerttent plates when they become available to verify suitability of soils in the platuted locations and to provide supplemental discussion and recommendations, if needed. 5.7 Drainage Siuf'ace Final exterior grades should promote free and positive drainage sway from the site at all tunes. \~~ater must not be allmved to pond or collect adjacent to fowidations or within the immediate building areas. We recommend providing a gradient of at least three percent for a ~ninitnum distance of ten feet from ilae building perita~eters, If this gradient cannot be provided, surface water should be collected adjacent to the sttvct~u•es and disposed to appropriate stone facilities, Sr~bsuiface Considering the well-drained nature of the native site soils, provided the finish floor grade is al or above the adjacent exterior grade and positive drainage away from the stn~clare is maintained, in our opinion, perimeter foundation drains would not be required, If these conditions are not met, footing drains should be placed at the perimeter of• each structure. The footinb drains should consist of a four-inch diameter perforated PVC pipe that is enveloped in clean washed %-inch drainage abgre~*ate. The abgregate envelope should exleud a minimum of six inches above and to the sides of the pipe and three incites below llte pipe invert, The drain pipe can be placed at a wtifortn grade with an invert equivalent to the bottom of the adjacent Footing and tied to discharge into the development stone system. Reverse gradient or bellies in the pipe must be avoided. Surface water discharge elements such as downspouts or yard drains should not be tied directly or indirectly into the footing drains. 5.8 Utilities Utility pipes should be bedded and backfil[ed in accordance with American Public Works Association (APWA) or City of Yelm specifications, As a minitttttttt, trench backfill should be placed and cotttpacted as structural fill, as described in Section S.2 of this report. During wet weather conditions, 'tt tnay be necessary to import suitable wet weather soil for use as backfill. 5.9 Pavement Pavement subgrades should be prepared as described in the Section 5,2 of this report. Regardless of the degree of ralative compaction achieved, the subgrade must be firm and relatively unyielding before paving. The subgrade should be ptoofrolled with heavy construction equipment to verify this condition. Pace No. 7 May 5, 2010 Project No. T-G437 TIte pavement dcsigtt section is depertdetlt ltport the supportitlg capability of the subgr•ade soils atld t)te traffic conditions to which it >.vilI be subjected. For oll-site access attd parking, with tt•affie consisting plainly of light passenger vehicles 4vith onl}~ occasional heavy traffic, and with a stable subgrade prepared as reconunended, .ve recommend the following pavement sections: • Two inches of hot mix asphalt (HMA) over four inches of crushed rock base {CRB) • Ttivo inc]les of HiviA over three inches ofasphalt-treated base (ATB) The paving materials used should conf'ornt to the Washington State Departtneut of Transportation (WSDUT) specifications for %z-inch class I-IMA, ATB, and CRB. Long-term pavement performance will depend on surface drainage. Apoorly-drained pavement section will be subject to premature failure as a result of surface water infiltrating into tJte subgt'ade soils acid reducing their supportinL capability. For optimum pavement petforntance, n!e recommend surface drainage gradients of at least two per•eettt. Some degree of longitudinal and tt•ansverse cracking of the pavemcrtt surface sllottld be expected over time. Regular maintenance should be planned to seal cracks whets they occur, 6.0 ADDITIONAL S)CRVICRS Terra Associates, Ittc. sJlould review the final desigtl drawings arld specifications in order to verify that earthwork and foundation recommendations have been properly interpreted and imply-mer.tted in project design. We should also provide geoteclutical service during construction to observe compliance with our design concepts, specifications, and recommendations. This will allow 1'or design changes if subsurface conditions differ from those anticipated prior to tEle start of construction. 7.0 LlitiI'TATIONS We prepared this report in accordance lvith generally accepted geoteclutical engineering practices. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is rnadt;, This report is the copyrighted property of Terra Associates, Inc. and is intended for specific application to the Salmon Run Apar•fnlents pt•oject. This report is for the exclusive use of Timber River Development and its authorized representatives. The analyses atld r•ecornrnendations present in this report are based ott data obtaitled i'rotn the test pits atld borings done on site, Variations in soil conditions can occur, the nature and extent of which may not become evident until constntclion. If variations appear evident, Tetra Associates, Irtc. should be requested to reevaluate the recommendations inthis report prior to proceeding with eonsUzrction. Page Na. 8 tv, _ ~ •._ . .`t• r~~ 7~ r~ r;; m'`~ ~~t ~, ~ '~ r~,_,_ ~ d' .~~ ~ 'Ti /s ~~ ~ .,s~,. ~ ~ yi7~t~nt~ry. ~~ rrtib~ ~'Q7. ,;.. ~~' ~4, , }~~Sf~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~J~ . i 43rd Avc 1 t73rcf Avg SE ~_" ~ ~ ~ so ar U ~ ~ " ~ e ~ ... ~ n n. ~, ~th Aye S~ ' **~.. ~ 1 m ~'~d fdE ~ria St 5~ ~.~ ~; ,~ ~ ~ x 8~ ~~. °, n ~ S1T~ cr a. ~ m ~.~taY#~9tk' t ~ ~. ~ _.... i ( i ~ ~., ~ `~~ ~ _~~~ ~~ ~ . ~ i : c~ m x a rVii 09th Avg S;r Clark R~ Sk 5t S~ t_ _-~ - ~ ~~ m `~ ~, a ~,~ ~~ ~~~ ~yM,. _ ~ ` _ " _~'=~ at REFERENCE: GOOGLE MAPS, WVI~W.GOOGLE.COM, ACCESSED 4-27-2010 m w .. 0 h -'ti~I NOT TO SCALE :-;;.,:::.;':<~~~ Terra VICINITY MAP -~ Associates InC. SALMON RUN APARTMENTS •.•.•• YELM, WASHINGTON Gonsuitanls in Geotechnical f~ngineering Geolog and Environmental Earth SGences Proj. No.T-6437 Date MAV 2010 Figure 1 i~'~tF~ V11av SE~ ~71d Ye!m-fVIC henna ~ ~ APPER'DIX A FILLD EI.PLORATIOiV AND LA130RATORY TES'I'I\G Salmon Run Altartmeuts Yelnt, «'ashittgtan On April 27, ?010, we completed our sits exploration by obse[ving soil conditions at 7 test pits. 'the test pits were excavated using ~ backhoe to a maximum depth of ten feet below existing site tirades. Test pit locations were determined in the field by measurements {i•om existing site features. The approximate location of the test pits are shown on the aktached Exploration Location Plan, Figure 2. Test Pit Logs are attached as Figures A-2 tlu•ough A-8. A geoteehnzeal engineer front our office conducted the field exploration. Our representative classified the soil conditions encountered, maintained a log of each test pit, obtained representative soil samples, and recorded water levels obsen~ed during excavation. A[1 soil samples were visually classified in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) described on Figure A-1. Representative soil samples obtained from [he test pits were placed in closed containe[s and taleu to our laborato[y for further examination and testing. The moisture content of each sample was measured and is rep~rtetl on the individual Tesl Pii Logs. Grain size analyses were perfornted on selected samples. The results of the grain size analyses are shown nn Figures A-9 and A-!0. P[•~ject No. T-b437 MAJOR DIVISIONS LETTER SYMBl3L TYPICAL DESCRIPTION - --,- --_- • - ~- ----- - - C1~a~ ~~ Well-graded gravels, gravel=sand muciures, little ar no L GRAVELS Graver _ _ fines. _ - (less than ` ~P Poorly gradedgravels gray_el~sand mixtures, little or p ~ ~ ! More than fi-ie;;) 5% na fines _. -_ .. ~ •~ 50°!0 of coarse ~M Slily graver, grage~-isand•silt ,mixtures, non-plastic fraction is a~ > larger than No. w ~- a~ witll+ fries fines. Z E •~ 4 sieve i~G' Clayey gravels~~ gravel.`-sand-clay mixtures, plastic fines. b ~ a N ~ o ~ - ~ SANDS ~lea~ Sari~~ ~~ Well-tjrade~ sand, gravelly sands, little or no fines, ~ ~--- -- W ~ Z (lest tl?~i'l Sp Poorly-graded sancl~ or gravelly sands, little or no ~ .c c More than r.+ 5%4 ~-~~~] fines.. _ , n ~ 5V°I° Of ooarse ~ ~° .-~ .__-- . _ _.~ m-. ~ ~ p ~ fraction is '~~ Silty sands, sand' $ilt mlxtu~e~, non-plastic fines. U ~ smaller than Sarid~ - -' '_.-~ _ ,-~. - - No. A siev;r ~ wi#l~ ~ln~s ~~ Clayey sands sand=clay, snixtiires„ piastia tines: --. ..-- -~ . -- ---._... - _ ~~ g fc flour, clayey sills with slight Inor ante silts, rQa ~ ~ SILTS AND CLA'IrS~ ~ ' plasticity _ O ~ ~ ~ ~ Inorganic cfa~rs of Iquu fo medium plasticity, (lean clay}. than 5fl°1 le id {i it i ~ E Li - - -•, - ---- --~- ° s ss qu m o ~ -- W o Z .~ ~L organic silts and organic 'clays of low plasticity, _ ~-_ . ,. Q c ~ v ~ ~H Inorganic allls; elastic: ~ ~ a ~~ SILTS AND CLAYS =..a_ . ~_.`~ _ - ~ W ~ ~ (;~' Inorganic clays of high plasticity; fat clays: Z ~ rEn Liquid limit is greater than 50% _-- - - ----- ~ - - ------ -- LL, ('Q}-~ Organic clays of high plasticity. I-IIGNLY ORGANIC SAILS, PT Peat. DEFINITION OF TER MS AND SYMBOLS ~ Standard Penetration Resistance in Blows/Foot w Densil 2„ OUTSIDE DIAMETER SPLIT 1 SPOON SAMPLER - ~ - -- Z Very loose 0-4 T 2.4" INSIDE DIAMETER RING SAMPLER ~ Loose 4-10 1 OR SHELBY TUBE SAMPLER Medium dense 30-50 Dense • WATER LEVEL (DATE) ~ Very dense X50 Tr TORVANE READINGS, lsf Standard Penetration Pp PENETROMETER READING, lsf Consistency Resistance in BlowslFaot pp DRY DENSITY, pounds per cubic foot w l- Very soft 0-2 LL LIQUID LIMIT, percent z Sofi 2-4 Medium stiff 4-8 pl PLASTIC INDEX ~ Stiff 8-16 N STANpARD PENETRATION, blows per foot Very stiff 16-32 Hard >32 .f.. Terra UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM ~~'~ totes Ir~C ~~ ~~ SSOC SALMON RUN APARTMENTS i. . , . ` ; M : YELM, WASHINGTON } Consultants in Geolechnical Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences Proj. No. T-6437 Date MAY 209 0 Figure A-9 1 LOG OF TEST PIT NO . FIGURE A-2 PROJECT NAME:,~a(p~ph$~n Apartments _ PROJ. NO: T-8437 LOGGED t3Y: GS LOCATION: Yelm. Wr34..hiflSl3on SURFACE COND3: Tatl raSS Small Tre APPROX. ELEV: DATE LOGGED: Aril 27 zQ10 DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER; NIA DEPTH TO CAVING: ~Faal m ~ o w ~ ESCRIPTION CONSISTENCYI RELATIVE DENSITY o ' z W n. EMARKS d ~ S w D ~ O a. FILL?: dark brown sand with sill, fine grained, moist, roots, extensive organics. Medium Dense 16 1 . Brown silty SAND, fine grained, moist, roots. (SM) Medium Dense 11 1 . 5 Brown SAND with silt and gravel, fine to coarse grained, Medium Dense moist to.vet. (SP-SM) 9.0 Test pit terminated at approximately 8 feet. No groundwater seepage observed. Minor caving observed below 3 feet. 1a 15 Terra Nt)TE: This subsurface informal:on pertains only to lhls lest pit !o:alion and should ~-SSC+CIatBS, ~ I1C. rot be interpreted as being indi:afive of oU-er Icalions al the site. Consultants in Geolechn!cal Engineering Geolcgy and ---. -~- Enwronmenlal ~arih Sciences LQG OF TEST PIT NO. 2 FIGURE A-3 PROJECT NAME: Salmon Ran Aoa meni$ PROJ. N0: T-6437 LOGGED BY: (:S LOCATION: Yelm Washington SURFACE CONDS: Tall GrasclSm2 I TrpP APPROX. ELEV: DATE LOGGED; Qnril 27, 2010 DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER: NIA DEPTH TO CAVING: 2 Feet t .~'~. 0 w -+ DESCRIPTION CONSISTENCY! RELATIVE DENSITY °-~r "~ w REMARKS w a ¢ 3 Y O N U O a moist roots sand fine grained FILL?: black silt 2fi.9 , , , , y extensive organics. Medium Dense 10.8 5 Brown SAND with sift, fine to coarse grained, moist to Medium Dense wet, varying amounts of gravel. (SP-SM) 2 21 . 10 Test p+t terminated at approximately 10 (eet. No groundwater seepage observed. Moderate caving observed below 2 feet. 15 Terra NOTE: This subsurface of(~m?alicri Reins Doty to this lest pit !ccalion and should ASS4CIa~QS, ~11C. not be inlersreled as t)eing indlralWe of other IocaGOns al the sale. Consultants irl GEOlechni;zi Engineering G2Ctegy and __ __ :, frivfronrt;entat Earth Sciences LOG OF TEST PIT NO. 3 FIGURER-4 AROJECT NAME: Salmon R ran A~artm -ntc PROJ. N0: T-8437 _ LOGGED BY: CS LOCATION: Yalm. WA~inotn SURFACE CONDS: Tall (;raSGlSmall Try APPROX. ELEV: DATE LOGGED: ~pri! 77. 2010 _ DEATH TO GROUNDWATER; NIA DEPTH TO CAVING: 4 Ft?et t r. d w a DESCRIPTION CONSISTENCYI RELATIVE DENSITY ~ z w w REMARKS a Y A l V V O a FILL7: black silty sand, fine grained, moist, roots. 16,8 extensive organics. Medium Dense 12.5 Brown SAND with silt, fine to coarse grained, moist, roots. Medium Dense (SP-SM} 5 Brown SAND wish silt and gravel, Rne to coarse grained. moist, occasional cobble. (SP-SM} Medium Dense s.4 Test pit terminated at approximately 8 feet, No groundwater seepage observed. Minor caving observed below 4 feet, 10 15 Terra NOTE: Thjs subsuriacq intarma.Uen pertains only to this lest pit locat,on and shccld Associates, ~ I1C. rot be interpreted as being indicative of other locations al the site. Gcnsullants in Geotechrncal Engineering Geology and ~_ Environmental Earth Sciences LOG OF TEST PIT N0.4 FIGURE p-5 PROJECT NAME: y°~^^^^ R"^ ~narimenls PROJ, iVO: T-fi437 LOGGED BY: CS LOCATION: vclm, Washington SURFACE CONDS: Tall t~raGSl$m II Trees APPROX. ELEV: DATE LOGGED; Anril 77, 7f7'ID DEPTH Td GROUNDWATER:. N/A DEPTH TO CAVING: F et LL N G _ d ~ ~ ESCRIPTION CONSISTENCYI RELATIVE DENSITY ~ ~ w n, ~ REMARKS Q a 8;~ ~ ~ Y ~ W W O a 17,3 fine Io coarse ravel ill and d ith k , g w s san FILL?: blac grained, moist, tools, extensive organics. Medium Dense 3,5 Brown GRAVELwilh sand and cobbles, coarse grained, 5 moist, occasional boulder. {GP) Medium Dense Test pii terminated at approximately 8 feet. No groundwater seepage observed. Extensive caving observed below 2 feet. 70 15 Terra NOTE: This subsurface information pertains Only to this test pd location and should ASSOCIateS, ~rIC. not be interpreted as being indicative of other fdcattcns at the site. ConsuNanls in Geotechniral Engineering Geology and Envircnmenlal Earth Sciences LOG OF TEST PIT NO. 5 FIGURE A-6 ! o.... AnarlmontG PROJ. N0: -C-64'~ _ LOGGED BY: CS PROJECT NAME: ~n~~i+i„ nM.. - verm Inr-..~tiinaton SURFACE CONDS: T^--!! ~"~eC/g!'nRll Treea_ APPROX. ELEV: LOCATION: - DATE LOGGED: s~„^r;1 ~T 7(110 DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER: ~A DEPTH TO CAVING: u. ~. LL z i CONSISTENCY! = a DESCRIPTION RELATIVE DENSITY ~ W REMARKS Y v A ~ FILL?: black sand with silt and gravel, tine to coarse grained, moist, roots, extensive organics. Medium pense 18,9 Brown SANp with silt, fine to coarse grained, moist to wet, some silt. some gravel. (SP-SM} 5 Medium pense ~ 5.4 8.5 Test pit terminated al approximately 8 feet, No groundwater seepage observed. Minor caving observed 6efow 2 feet, 10 NOTE: This subsurface iniormahon pertains only to Ibis lest pif i~c.aklun ar>Q should not be interpreted as being ird;cative of other IocaUOns al the slle. Terra gasociatesy Inc. ConSUllartt5lfi Geotechn•.cal Engireenng - hearogyard EnviiOhme~ilnlS9rth Sciences LOG OF TEST PIT NO. 6 FIGURER-7 PROJECT NAME: .^~a[mnn Rtrn Apartments PROD. ND: T-6437 LDGGED BY; C;S LOCATION: ,yelm. Vflashing~on SIiRFACE CONDS: Tall toss APPROX. ELEV; DATE LOGGED: Anril 27. 2010 DEPTH TO GROU{VDWATER: iVIA DEPTH TO CAVING: 2 Feel _ O ~ DESCRIPTION CONSISTENCYf RELATIVE DEN517Y ~ a H REMARKS a ~ ~ Y W O Q N V 0 a FILL?: black sand with silt and gravel, fine to coarse grained, moist, roots, extensive organics. Medium Dense 13.1 Brown SAND with sill, fine to coarse grained, moist to Medium Dense wet, some gravel, occasional cobble. (SP-SNi) ---------------------------------- ----------- 7,4 5 ) SAND with silt, fine to coarse grained, moist. (SP- Medium Dense SM Test pit terminated at approximately 8 feet. No groundwater seepage observed. Moderate caving observed below 2 feet. 1 t] 75 Terra NOTE: This subsurface infcrmation pertains only to Ihis test pit Iccalion and should ASSOC18feS, ~ I1G. ncl be mlerpreled as being rndical'rve of other localicns al the site. Consultants in Geolechn;cal Engieeering Geology and .,. _ Envircnmenlel Earth Scrences LAG OF TEST PIT NQ 7 . FIGUREQ-S PROJECT NAME: Salmon Run Aoartmenis PROJ. NO: T 6437 LOGGED BY: ~S LOCATION: Yelm. VJ~shington SURFACE CONDS: lalij (era /Small Tres APPROX. ELEV: DATE LOGGED: Anril 27. 201D DEPTH TO GROUNOWATER: N/A DEPTH TO CAVING: ,~,,§ Feef LL N LL. ~ m -r DESCRIPTION CONSISTENCY! RELATIVE DENSITY ~- .... w ~ a ~ ~ ~ ~ o u i o a FILL?: blacfc sand with sill and gravel. fine to coarse 18 7 grained, moist, roots, extensive organics. Medium Dense . Brown silty SAND, fine grained, wet, (SM) Medium Dense 19 7 . 5 ---------------------------------- ----------- Brown GRAVEL with sand, fine to coarse grained, moist Dense 6 8 to wet, cobbles, occasional boulder. (GP) . Test pit terminated al approximately 8.5 feet. No groundwater seepage observed. Moderate caving observed below 2.5 Feet. 10 95 Terra. tJOTE; This su6surTace information pertains ontyia rnia test pit localicn and should A$3QC~2r<t$S, Ihl Cr. nvl be mierp;efed as being indicative of other localicns 9l the site. Cofsuhagls ig Gaolechnirzl Engireerirg Ggclogy~ and Environmenlsi Earth Sciences Particle Size Distribution Report C fD f 100 r S C 6 F c C ~ p~ v 1 N X \ 1~ ~ I 1F~~ I { o o n O N ~ t~~ ~ ~ N t ~ 7t It =! if iL A i! ill ~ I ' i ~ ~ I ~ ~J ' ' 1 ' I I I~ I I ~ I i I ' ' i i ~ '' I • ~- _ 70 ~ ----~ -- ~ -- ~ ~ , - _ _~ - -- - , i --- -- ' ' I ' { I I ~ W 60 . z 50 - i - - - -~,._ _ ~. ~--- - ; - - - -- -_ ~ - ~ ' ~ 40 _~ , ~ ~ ~, I ~ T.-. _. ~ ~1 I ~l ~ , ~ i ~ -_.. 1 ~ ~ i i- 30 - - , _ -~- ~ , , , ~ . -~ ~ i ~ r " ; ~~~ ~~ I ) ~ ~~~ ~ _ -'~ -~ r , ~ ~ ~ , ~ ~ -~- 1 ~ ~ I - ~ ~ ~ 1~~ Q ~ ~ I ,I ~~ I~ 100 10 i 0.1 O.O i 0.001 GRAIN SIZE - mm. . ~' ~ ~Yv ~Gray~i _---"/a;San.d °!a Fines ~Q +3 . -- Coarse dine - Coarse' Medium ! Fine Sitt _._. Clay D.0 11.3 62;4 ]4,~ 10.? 3.4 1S n 4.0 II.O 4.4 4.? 5~.6 352 _ ~.t3 0 17,d~ l 7 ~ 1.0~ t A 9, I ~ fiS` 5.3852 1,7647 0.7,3,13 ~;~'~ _ I x.08 ~ 4,7'014. O,a243 O.d6A 1 U,3539 0,2330 4.1570 1.~2 3.34 M aterial Description USCS AASHTO c Poorly gi~dcd G1tAV>;L with sand -- GP ^ Poorl}~ graded SAND ~vitii ~iit - - - _ _. Sl'-Slut Project No. T=0437' Clietit~ 'I'inibei~ttive"rDeveioprii~rit Fter1'~arks: !Project: Salmon Run ApaiYnTents UT~stcd an 4-29-10 ~ aTr:~tcd on 4-29-l0 la Location: 'Teti[ Pit TP-4 Depth: -4 fi:ct Sample Number; 2 ^ Location: Test Pit TP-5 Depth: -7.5 tact Sample Number: 3 Terra Associates, Inc. ;~ilrklarl~, ~"!~` --- - - ~ic~ure A-7 Tested By: CS Particle Size Distribution Report c o o a ~a~ 9i 8i 7! ~ 6f z z 5f ~ 4( 3f zc ,~ a ~~ , i ~i~ I f ~ t~rl ~ ~ l I ~ ~(~ ~ ~1'~ ~ ' I~~Ii- ~ ±~ ~ ~ ~ f ~ i ~ { f ~ I ~ ~~ ~ ~ , ~ ~ ~ '~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ } { ~ t t i i ~ ~ ~~~~~~ i I ~ i ~ ~ ~ 1 ; ' i ~, I ~ I ~i ~ M .I .! ~ , ~ { ~ GRAIN SIZE - mm. % ~,a„ °la gavel °A Sand % Fines - ..T ~ .~~ - - - _. _ _~ ~:_~.----- -- - - - ~oarse !Fine ~GQarsE~ IUlediurn ~ Fine Silt I Clay _ OA iI.U 0:7 11.E ~ SD:1 13.4. 4.9 0.0 A.0 0.3 t1,3 'F.g 73.3 18.4 LL, PL D D Q_ D U D: C C +~ 0.82iiG 0.6465 0,$l2d 0.4903 f},3c562 x.2767 1.34. 2,34 o Q.38t;3. 0,2997 0.2699 4,]937 M aterial Descriptibti U5CS AA5HTO v Poorly graded SAND with silt o Silty SAND SP-5~~1 SM Project No. T-0,437 Client: 'Timber Riacr Development Project: Salmon Run Apartments J Location: Tetit Pit TP-C, Depth: -5 1'cet Sample Number: 2 ~o Location: Test Pit TP-7 Depth: -4 feet Sample Number: 2 Rtzmarks: f~Te,fed an 4-29-10 ^Tested on 4-29-10 Terra Associates, Inc. _.`~, _ I~Irj4E~l;d . ~~ ,_ ~ Figure A-IO Tested By: CS _ DRAINAGE BASINMAP ATTACH-IlVIENT "C" g N (''~ O Z V ¢ ~ YY JJ Q ww I R W ~ U 5Q ® T Q W 2 L \ ~ J ~' ~' " h1,OZlO.lD S U \ U \ a b, z 15~ 'w O u~ 0 3 vJ p p VX~ ~ Z' S 8 S ~ u~ MQM a ~¢ .' W ~ i®l//J~ l I J ~ J Q9 ~ ti~ - 6 - • • S~ N N ,bT ,22 > 3 ~•~ E ~ ~ _ ~,ST ,ya o w ¢ o ~ ~ ~r :.~ a ~ U Z Z K ~ = W f ~ N F ~ r w ~ ¢ ~ f O ~ ~ •' ~ +. L •~~ K O 0 ~ ` ~ O F L~ • J p r S ~~ N a ~ ~ w = z N ~a~ J a r = a N ~/J w ~ w f~ s ~CC C O N Q H l~ ~ ~Nm ~ ca '.~ ua m rn n ~ w W ~~~ Z ~ ~~I ~_ ~0 C X JrL_ a N ~,~ ~,~ B6f ~- y 3 ~i f Z rY w ~•• •,• ~' O~ o -rn O J w z ~ R.'.'60'"•.' I ~ o an z ~w ~~ :_: O o ~ !a O U N m w •.I q ~ °~ U ~ ¢ ~ ::~ Q W ~ <: L N w a~ '`~. 3,. N O r ~ m w L w 3 Z ~ O > q W a~3 - w ~ .• O ~ O 3 ` ~ ~aq '. a ~ w .I ~aa ti U a a w ~ a w r vi ~ a ~ I ~ q ~ ~ ¢ ra 9 > w _ ~ m .•~ ~ N ¢ Z ~ 2 3 v, ~ w ~ vi Q Q > w p Z vwi ~ ~ ~ Z C7 CQp ca a ~ 7 (n N z `~' f 3A6 w w w m ~ z Q ca Z Z ~ ~ /~ ~ a w i;.i (n (n ~w I' ,~ ~/ ~. ~ 3 ti o m m a ~ '~ m w ~ ca z ~ 3 ~ 8bP ~ a ~ri w ¢~ 2 w ~ v ~ d ~u~ U ~ ~"~ cc v ~~ I w w~ 3 a Sad.ZL d T ~ Z HSl Z ^M baH 3NI~ ?J31b'M.B W' Q J S ,Z9'!GZ n~,~~zo.lo s W - 3 8I~ 3M3S.4 ~ b du ~~dM3ats N ~~ii III HYDROLOGY /HYDRAULIC CALCULATIONS ATTAC~IlVIENT "D" y~ X h C U ~ ~ 0 ,0 303 ~ ~ 0 O ~p C ~ m m ~ o ~ ~ a Q C 3 n ~ ~ II II ~ C~ 3 W A N N W fm0 ~. (0 O y m ~ ~ ~ I N 3 j -~ 3~3~0<C)~3 y 3 C 3 p~ ~p ~ N ~ n? tp t0 m m J J m m N N A A W W N N -+ -+ g N O NON O N O N O N ONO N O N O N 1 OO i g j 0~ -+ ~ O ~~ ~ N D p ~-.:;. _ : H i"~ mm ~?=n~g °~ ~ .c °m , .ii m ~5 a 3 ~`° 5 ~ `y-~ y C ~ m m N N N A A A W W W W N N N -i u O J A m m N ~O m W O V A+ m N N o O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O ~ 0 ~~ n 3~ _ ~ v ~ -i ~ ~ % r~ ~~ ~ ~ 0 0 0 O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 O: i N G 3 vD c ~ ~ ~ = n ut O' ~ 0 0 0 O O O O -~ ~ y~~ -+ -~ N N W W r. ~ ~ ~' -~Y ~ S ~O ~ O O O V V ~l J Oo (n m m t0 tp Ou uNfJ inJ O Nm + W m m-+A V O A ~D AO mJ m NN+--m m m ~ ~ ~ 3 O..'.' .. ' 3 m m ~- ~ m a!-c . ~ m ~ ~ __. mo a co o moo O O Q ~ p~ $ ~ 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 000 000 0000-~ N N fJ IJ IV fV IV N IV G] !J W W fJ A A N ~ ~ N fJ W A Nm V m ~D O NA m~DN JW N~ W ~ ;~~ W D^, D ~ ~ ~ ~ C ~ ~oc a O ~ N ~ m W O ~ ( J 3 ~ ~ ,-I a'~oA m ~ ~ 1 0~ C 0.3~ mm O(n0 Nm N A N ' O O ~ , m ~ N N~ N y O ~ W 3 p,~ N ? (~~ m N ( I T W W N ~ m N O A m V m W V t0 J O ~O O N W W ~ ~ R N.Y.:O N m 0 0 Of `" ~ n ~ A C ? O+ ~ I~ JA ~ m m N N N A A~ V lW.] tN0 ONi N m A -'+ V W ~ -+A V NN A J .m ~JAV ;ONA V!ONAJ W J _ I ~ n I qC ~ ~ _ d ~ ~ y d W m m ry N m f)N ON O m LL O) ~I N V!v (U W m AAJ ~ V O W m W~ A V m N N m LL W T m N V t~ ~ ~ V ai 3 ~ ~ 3 j O ~ ~ .. ~ C ~, O~ O~ X 0 0 mmmI~ N N N N ~~ OtNO m Obi f.] O~-A+ W +m AEON N m m NON JmN W tOmJN A (T N t~TC 0~ ~v I~O V _ (D N d m "'' ' `< w x S'm L7 d t fn2 4.'::O ~,z m ~ O h O H ~ r v ~ ~ m~Ui N p vOi ~ ' ~ A.A o:o ~ ~ ~ s3 m o+ y= ~ C a2 m x ~ 9 ~;~ ' . - ~ J'' - O ni . _ ~~ o ~~?' N O m N: OO' m .t+ m ;o; Do w ~~ A~ r~a~ 00 013 ~°; 0 o yN~ w io a ~ ~' ~' ~'~ 0 o . w m n ~ i o $i ' ^' ~ : ~. ~ o a : ID J '; p o': m• N p N 3 » -I , N.=; 1 N N m d : !0 ~! - < yy J~m rj.o ~' ~ , o r~ ~ ~ . , o. ~' :~ ~; ~i.; }! g ~ ' ~ x ~ ~. ~.0 ~ o :m; a ..,..,. ~' N o o v r '0 -.: C: ~i°' 3 r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ < O N m o ° c S i i ,` p m V ry ~ F ~°m m <~ w om ~ m f]NI _ N'` ~'Om~ ~ ~ m n m ~'o ~~1Om ~n ~•m o°iw N m a~mo~~ m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 D ~ 'm D O O t 0 V N O N~ w O a o t ' 3 m7mmmmm m': O m ~" O N'- O m ~;m m'. Z n oo~,m LLo ~ S m A W ~ ° rn m N O O N NN~p A A N D . ~~i m N N m-+ N 0 0 0 o w w m m I~ _ m N m W N W ~ 0 A m ur qJ ~ y a o v a e r <s UJ S D <S fn S n n u n~ n u n n z 0 D A min ~ m o tf+ -~ . r 23 3N ~.~ 3 -I a Z m A 0 m m ~ D~ ~ w o °1 ~ 3 mho ~dv w 3 ~ ~ ~ o m~ m w 3 w •~ m O O ?~~ NI` N ^~D v~-. o m ° rn ~ 3 3 m ~ ~~ « O p O N ~ N N '~ o Yn -o O ~ ~~ C~i ~ ~'N a v to 3 p~~ N p IG f1 D mN 2 Gw ~o~ m ~ g o ~ m o ° < m 0 00 000000 ? ~ O 0 m 0 0 O J D (O N N:.. y O O n 0 p 03 ooo o~ioo o~~ co O m y m bu m is m m:. (~ N N 0 0 0 0 n o ,,.. , ,-.... ~p oo o ooo 'o p o p D o A W F O O N? m om? ~ ~. m N nu [n m ooo ~ ~m ~ N ; a . . O W v O I A A m c 2 ^ o ~ x e c~O !q !° a+. b a ~ mT A ~ c 3 m m~ yyj {iy H uD,, pp~t W N A W ~ I 3?3m~oo~3 ~ ~ S N O O i O N O f)1 O f ll O f ll O I iI O N O N O N I S ~• n~ ~ 0 O a~ N O ~ I~ D y ul ~yj c g..?n"a(~"n mw p C G) ~ m ~ m O V A~ W (All N IWD m W 0 V A S W N N 0 0 0 o0000oooo~itooooo0o S ~~ ~~ p3n~ h ~ ~' ~_'' »~ o~ . . ~I1 ~ 3 0 0 0 oao 0 0 0 000 00 oooOOO oo a` , m ~ ~~ ~ d Q 3 ~ ~ m' y D ~ 3 ~ a n 3 y ~ H w~ 0 3 ooooo O po o- ~-~-~++~+NNW o ~ ~ a' 3 N, ? ~ _ W OO W t p -V+ fVJ m m~ A V O A IWO A O O) V m N N~~ OWt ~ W 3 ~ W 0; :~ '~ ,. ,~ ~ v ~ , ~ d ` fU ~, ~ ~...~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~o ~ ~~o a °ooooooa°°ooo~.,+++NW w n~ ~ .8 , (/lOt] ~ O~ C~ ~ N O a~ p Q Ol O ~ of = (T W Ol Ol W W .I V ~I W W t0 <DO N?010 l0 ' W N V t0 N N W N V N Oo N A Ol W V 0~ A O A ~N N A ~~ < <. V O ~ O ~ n N ~ A I ~~ m, '0 fp ~ a 3 .$i ~ a - K ~ ~ < ~ p ~ < » {p O ~ pW~ (WO~l W [([(~~~Jt W W W W (NIIp~p N N N Ny N LL N + + + N+I N A J W N A N e'l C G ~ vii ~ ... ~ ~ C~ y n 3 C~ j N O W lp 0 0 0 I p m O ~ V N N J O A N V E l N 0 0 V N A A O W+ W N f0 W N Ol W V N ~ + N + N ~ ~ W O N O O+ N p W:O d H II II p^ 3 at0 ~ II II ~ N - - ~ W W OA'^~~ W NGl (~o -TD.W+AN 41 O : N..._. S D a 3 ~ A ~ a m °'o WO m ' ~°I v m ~m m l m °W' ~ ' N ~ ' rn ~ m ~ ' WO ~ ~ o 2 c m 0 ~ • . • • c N •c ll a ~ rn . n I< i~, W . p ( A N O V m m N W W . ~ ~ _ ~ W W W A ( 0 W O O lJ f D V A ~ N O OD S [ it + 10 J ~ v "' ~ fWJ O A PA p '' O N y. ~. ~ --Oi..0.. O 1 = _ m N r C O] W W W W Oo .Wp W W 00 V V V p~ (pt~ Ul A A N+ ONi fWJI N V fA0 m A OWi N tO0 m ~ m J V tVT OWO 4Oi m ~ + ~ ~ a~~ C O qk W f~ to V (O .....+ N N ? C N --I l7 3 ~p'S~i.-. C W ~ o ~,z m o 0 Gant ~ N ~ 3 r W ~ O o'c ~ » m ~ ~~ o A .;' ~.. ~ ~ W y N ~.2 N. m:N 0 ,....- IO,A.N O ~ N p~ D o m ~, 0 0" w o ~ 0 3 ~ N D(n~ G O N ~ ~ S m j 0 olm 9 0• o o mew (p ID w w ?;'.~ r ~ di.m ~3~ ~ O ~ O 00~3~ mI°U fO o v o ~j~ 3 a' o' ~ m i 3' m' ~' O ~ m ~ ~ m a fA 3 ~ ~ v $ ~ 1p m ~ n l i ~ ~ gm o°iw ~ ~ afo m °,~~ m' + o (~ N~ 0 0 0 o a o o j D 0 0 A O (il O W [1 fd D O O O) N V W Of :,, N n O 3 H ~~ ' 0 W • ' Z N O m mm m N ~? d~ m D ~ o ~ »o~ ~'~3 ~ ~ ~dv » 3 ~ > ? o -~ .~~. m m O O »o~ ~ S m =. v° o m c m ~ ~ -i a ~ m ~ (!/ C pri ~ o . a ° 3 ' ~ D I n o I a ~v o m bi z ~ m~ v ~ 9 p3 ~ N m ~al'om°. ~n~ m' O A +O_ (WJ ~ OO.Op O(O~t 00 DAD O S A N W T OWi v m D i V + ~ _ n O W o O ~ OI V N 0000000' -O1 W W ~C W N' lA N o N 0 ~ y n v o 0 ~m N W,A A F 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 oo((~o~~ttlIoitoiu D O O W m fNJ S IVO ~ W - D ~ NW ~~N.; pmt m ~O N m O V. OW f..Oi. m: ~N:A 'l0 •. w ~ N WO W +=' ~. ~. v _ .. .,_ ...... Ill W W V O N O Ot, oor~~ ~ m n x W IWO o G1 -I ~o~~~~a W 0 0 A O) N Ill oo °o (gi(pp w o°t ^I D Wo S S N A IT A~ ~ IO O A W V N D fo ppltum O O O~ N p p~ fA0 A N W V G1 O D ~w O w n 3 3 V e 3 r G's !ns S Cs W II II II II ~ II II II II Z O W + O ~.. ~ OWi O O O m 0 Oi. D ~ W OWi' N ~~ r m O c 17 0 o m ~ O w m m a m m m A i^n Y d 0 l ~ ~ O d N o N Z 9 ~ Z ^ GO• ~ ~ O1 L G) N m $ _~ m ~ '• m~ `& `° c o ~ ° ~Z ~ 'a' ~' y ~ O ~ d a, ~ W to Qo of V V W N Ul N A A W W N N+~ N N O N O fT O N O NON O to O tl~ O VI O i i (n ' 3_ j -I ~ + '~3DOGOn~ 3 n n W~ C 3 N N gq ~ y ~ u O ~ O ~~~ v N~ ry N^ s, .0.: .:~ F D n ~ ~ n ~ - 'm• mr a ~ H ~ ~ Ns ~ ~ I N ? n ~ ~ m ~ ~ w ~. c o • ~ C tJ ~ ~ + 01 In In tT A A A W W W W N N N+ °o~AOOOOOOOO°ooAOOOOOOOO .°o ~ ^y l '~3n~ i4 . ~ ~_ a 3 §. ~ ~'- ~^ ~ ~ ~ d 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 00000 000000 °o . m l o v ~ o ~$ 4 ~ Z m I ~ ~~ ~- Z ~. 3 v"i I ~ ... c y 3~ g o~ ~ g 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0+ -+ +++++ N N W M ~l J V OJ f U 1 f o u u ti < i J O t q W I J ~ l ~ 3 N P ~ (~ '!~ WW J p 0 0 A n !N -+ W m W+ A V O A tp A O Oo V m N + N [n O ~ y~ _ ' T Q ;~: O ao ~ w ~ a m m ... ~2 . . m oo`o m .. ... . m o a c ° ' g ° > D N O ~ on Q P~ C~ c o m ~ p o n d 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 000 00 00000-+ O O -N+ N I~ (~ N fJ fJ fJ IJ 4f (v W fJ A A [T G~ O NNW A N W V 10 O N fT W N V N t0 + + O ~ I7 ~ ~ p . J N _ ~ A Q ~ m ~ m'D~a ~~~ m va ~ = ' ~ . C o 3, ~ '~ Gg~cc O NC C C~ Gg~N Q6~.7 C ~ •.• O N+++00 O ~D W (O 00m m V V rnmNAA W N N ~O In m II~~ W W O i ~' C G~ m ~m ~ O ~ W O (p 1 9 n fA y 3 61G ~ ~ O V A N f0 Of N N fn CO O+ O ~D V W m N W N tD N~ V N N [n U~~ x j N WO W:O W $' O O N ~~ N II II ~ II II O N '~' +LLNAo 0 +'~J m ~ n 3 a T a C a C ~ _ W A N+Wp~ W W N N A NA NNNN V fVi) wA CD A ~ + W Of N + A N N W W A ~ OC G a ~ c m Ii N~ ~~~ y d -O i V ,f O l O .A.pp O V . y,p tmD ~ O T+ V N OVO ~ tm0 A O ONi + V N OVO W 0 A AA A Yk 4.. ~ ~ S N p j u~i cnm ~ ~ om „ ~ S i I ~ •~ . . , ~ yy [[JJ~~ -V+ ~ 0 0~ tNp ONO J v VNi A !il ~ tN0 V N LL m W m W N N C O~ w W+ ~'! A W A V t0 O fp V W V W to O W N N+ ~ v N V N d d ~ fT 1 A 3 `:o-a S L m w d p °O ~~ mG o~ Z o -~ pw 2,y ~ ~~ 'A ~Z: 7 J _ ~ m ° o.`N I-o o x~~ ~ g O w m ~y . m n ~1n~ --(n v ~ p1°m~ aO ~~ ~; az w m . s: ~mi n c~ <~~O o°~'w ~ w n p m s ~y o3~ m m ~ ~~ m a~ m °. ~ - c'tii A1 1.-.O~ , m !" A P" N m c W ' b ~ ~~~00_ m n;. O O O O 000^ D D C_C ~ }-+3'm Z I y O INTI N. in ~'+w w f.01o NtOiiWWV:n.N o .., j j o mo0o A N.o; . D w ~ o u ! ~ ~ ~ o ~ m ~ `n' oo $ i m ~ =D~m j °' W 3 zv~. N ~ n m m m m o _~~~ ~ 3 ~ ,o 0 a `<a_, W <7 u i amm m Z _ I ~.m=, ~ V D ~ _ ~~ w ~ m m' O'Z~ ... . ,. , _. NOtDANN'N pO (n y m n~ m ~ L7` ~N A o W (.V( .~~ {rn{pp NNAA D O o rn O w S p'Np ~ ` m m,~ N +~~ + V O Omi V fNil m A t 0 ~. y W m ~, c D m o~ o~+; w ~ ' p~ 3 O N Ri- ! K ~ N j+ ~ D NmN O N C O p O ~` ^ w ~ ~: : O ~ m i1 W W W N 0 0 N ~( O ~ D ~: "C ~:.~ O m T Cl W+ V W ~D N W Q d m:, ..~. a m- .~ -.. Si . m w n: i u'pi ~ ~ ~ m... wJ °'v ? ~; ~ O ~ Cn O W O D O.'p '~~O ~ ~ ~.; ~.'~- ~ ~ 3 3 V c 3 ~ ~ r ?~; m~ 3 o i ': ~'°` v o G ~ N G ~ fn s n u n n~ n n u n _ v , n' '. 3'i i ; W cf r: Z ;i ~ ~ ~ 0 ~~ 00 m~ ~~~ 3 ~ o m. pw; . N : . .O _. ~ ~ a: , C ~ . , +o~+_~ o o . ~ N N O 00 OD .. t, . V yq- 6l Oo O [n_. D,- Oo O V. [n.'. ~ ~ , m O r ~. ~ ~-. .n. J ~ o ~ o. 3, O m o~ Go OP~ m ~ o m o m c S ~ F O i ~ om 1 ^O°-d o a O _ w o ~ + ~ m Z . __ .._. f m ~~ °' 0 3 m '"~ o ~d9 3 ~ > > o m, !0 d '"' w ~ J m ~ o v ~ O 'O ~v ~ m ~ ro o w -- a 0 G~ o y c 3 m o ~^ O C ~ m m p w O ~ ~~mG) Ei 3 ~ ~ ~ ° m ~ ~ a o p1O m ~ p n 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o b V AN "` 0 W ONNfOJ 41 V.'~.w y m o O n 0 O 03 T 9 'oooaooo; ~ p N ~ Q 0 01 ~ H (~ - y N m cn +p v ~ m ~, 0000000 ooooco~ rn O V~ J~~ C1 N O (ll + ~'. ~ ~ D _y o ~ ~ o ~ `" ~O N rn m ~ W W V O(p tG O W A Y W W ~, ~ _.::.. '...'. O n + m rn m m N a m ti d 0 ~D ~ Q O `2' m 3 m = '~ 1 Z •• ~ 7 e ~ o' m -'° w _ Na= m,'7~ ~ W s "' __ o m m~ c N~ eta ~, ~ rx ~ ~{%~ ~ ~ ~ 1 t, _ , 1 G-,~ ~ l ~' 4 r ~~ 1ny~~ ,~ ~ \ ~~f U s ~ Y'f /~ ~~~ _~11.,Y/ _ ~ ~~ ~'\ 7 r ~,... ~ i CCU ~ .~ x .-. ~~~ ~- i- \__ ti~ ~ RSV ~ ~ N"~ ~~ ~N N Z ~,._. ~ ~ . . ..... _ .J IN ~ ~~~_, ` Do'9 1 ti ~ _ _ _. ... _. 1 7 C1 r~ `V ~'i r ; e '1. ~.. a "~ I~ ~ {N. Buildina A Friction Method Salve For Manning Formula Normal Depth ~-~-- ~~~~ Q~~~ Roughness Coefficient 0.012 Channel Slope 0.02000 ft/ft Diameter 0.50 ft Discharge 0.26 ft'/s Normal Depth 0.19 ft Flow Area 0.07 ft2 Wetted Perimeter 0.66 ft Hydraulic Radius 0.10 ft Top Width 0.49 ft Critical Depth 0.26 ft Percent Full 37.9 % E- o~ Critical Slope 0.00669 ft/ft Velocity 3.85 ft/s Velocity Head 0.23 ft Specific Energy 0.42 ft Froude Number 1.81 Maximum Discharge 0.92 ft'/s Discharge Full 0.86 ft°/s Slope Full 0.00187 ft/ft Flow Type Supercritical Downstream Depth 0.00 ft Length 0.00 ft Number Of Steps 0 Upstream Depth 0.00 ft Profile Description Profile Headloss 0.00 ft Average End Depth Over Rise 0.00 Normal Depth Over Rise 37.94 Downstream Velocity Infinity ft/s Upstream Velocity Infinity ft/s Normal Depth 0.19 ft Critical Depth 0.26 ft Channel Slope 0.02000 ft/ft Critical Slope 0.00669 ft/ft Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03] 1/6/2011 10:50:13 AM 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1 Buildings C/D/E Friction Method Manning Formula Solve For Normal Depth Roughness Coefficient 0.012 Channel Slope 0.02100 ft/ft Diameter 0.67 ft Discharge 0.80 ft'/s Normal Depth 0.30 ft Flow Area 0.15 ftz Wetted Perimeter 0.99 ft Hydraulic Radius 0.16 ft Top Width 0.66 ft Critical Depth 0.42 ft Percent Full 45.4 % ~- d~ Critical Slope 0.00700 ft/ft Velocity 5.21 ft/s Velocity Head 0.42 ft Specific Energy 0.72 ft Froude Number 1.91 Maximum Discharge 2.04 ft'/s Discharge Full 1.90 ft'/s Slope Full 0.00376 ft/ft Flow Type Supercritical Downstream Depth 0.00 ft Length 0.00 ft Number Of Steps 0 Upstream Depth 0.00 ft Profile Description Profile Headloss 0.00 ft Average End Depth Over Rise 0.00 Normal Depth Over Rise 45.39 Downstream Velocity Infinity ft!s Upstream Velocity Infinity ftIs Normal Depth 0.30 ft Critical Depth 0.42 ft Channel Slope 0.02100 ft/ft Critical Slope 0.00700 ft/ft Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03] 1/6/2011 10:49:38 AM 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1688 Page 1 of 1 Parkins Lot Friction Method Solve For Manning Formula Normal Depth ~~ Roughness Coefficient 0.012 Channel Slope 0.00410 ft/ft Diameter 1.00 ft Discharge 0.60 ft'/s Normal Depth 0.33 ft Flow Area 0.23 ftz Wetted Perimeter 1.23 ft Hydraulic Radius 0.19 ft Top Width 0.94 ft Critical Depth 0.32 ft Percent Full 33.4 % ~- ~'. Critical Slope 0.00480 ft/ft Velocity 2.59 ft/s Velocity Head 0.10 ft Specific Energy 0.44 ft Froude Number 0.93 Maximum Discharge 2.66 ft'/s Discharge Full 2.47 ft'/s Slope Full 0.00024 ft/ft Flow Type SubCritical - ro Downstream Depth 0.00 ft Length 0.00 ft Number Of Steps 0 Upstream Depth 0.00 ft Profile Description Profile Headloss 0.00 ft Average End Depth Over Rise 0.00 % Normal Depth Over Rise 33.41 % Downstream Velocity Infinity ft/s Upstream Velocity Infinity ft/s Normal Depth 0.33 ft Critical Depth 0.32 ft Channel Slope 0.00410 ft/ft Critical Slope 0.00480 ft/ft Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.71.01.03] 1/6/2011 10:51:14 AM 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1 WWHM3 OUTPUT ATTAC~IlVIENT "E" Western Washington Hydrology Model PROJECT REPORT Project Name: Site Address: City Report Date Gage Data Start Data End Precip Scale: WWHM3 Version: 10247 Salmon Run 10720 Vancil Rd SE Yelm 11/17/2010 Lake Lawrence 1955/10/01 2008/09/30 0.86 PREDEVELOPED LAND USE Name Basin A Predev Bypass: No Groundwater: No Pervious Land Use Acres A B, Lawn, Flat .194 2mpervious Land Use Acres ROOF TOPS FLAT 0.12 SIDEWALKS FLAT 0.071 PARKING FLAT 0.118 Element Flows To: Surface Interflow Groundwater Name Basin B Predev Bypass: No Groundwater: No Pervious Land Use Acres A 8, Lawn, Flat .492 Impervious Land Use Acres ROOF TOPS FLAT 0.369 SIDEWALKS FLAT 0.107 PARKING FLAT 0.364 Element Flows To: Surface Interf low Groundwater Name Basin A Dev Bypass: No Gr©~s.dWater: No Pervious Land Use Acres A B, Lawn, Flat .194 2mpervious Land Use Acres ROOF TOPS FLAT 0.12 SIDEWALKS FLAT PARKING FLAT 0.071 0.118 Element Flows To: Surface Interflow Groundwater Basin A Dev Inf Trench, Basin A Dev Inf Trench, Name Basin B Dev Bypass: No Groundwater: No Pervious Land Use Acres A 8, Lawn, Flat .492 Impervious Land Use Acres .ROOF TOPS FLAT 0.369 SIDEWALKS FLAT 0.107 PARKING FLAT 0.364 Element Flows To: Surface Interflow Groundwater sin B Dev Inf Trench, sin B Dev Inf Trench, Name sin B Dev Inf Trench Bottom Length: 318ft. Hottom Width 10ft. Trench bottom slope 1: 0.001 To 1 Trench Left side slope 0: 0 To 1 Trench right side slope 2: 0 To 1 Material thickness of first layer 4 Pour Space of material for first layer Material thickness of second layer 0 Pour Space of material for second layer Material thickness of third layer 0 Pour Space of material for third layer Infiltration Oa Infiltration rate 4 Infiltration saftey factor 0.5 Discharge Structure Riser Height: 5 ft. Riser Diameter: 10000 in. Element Flows To: Outlet 1 Outlet 2 0.4 0 0 Gravel Trench Sed Hydraulic Table 3tage(ft) Area(acr) Volume(acr-ft) Dschrg(cfs) Infilt(efs) 0.000 0.073 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.056 0.073 0.002 0.000 0.147 0.111 0.073 0.003 0.000 0.147 0.167 0.073 0.005 0.000 0.147 0.222 0.073 0.006 0.000 0.147 0.278 0.073 0.008 0.000 0.147 0.333 0.073 0.010 0.000 0.147 0.389 0.073 0.011 0.000 0.147 ).500 0.073 0.015 0.000 0.147 ).556 0.073 0.016 0.000 0.147 ).611 0.073 0.018 0.000 0.147 ).667 0.073 0.019 0.000 0.147 1.722 0.073 0.021 0.000 0.147 1.778 0.073 0.023 0.000 0.147 1.833 0.073 0.024 0.000 0.147 ).889 0.073 0.026 0.000 0.147 1.944 0.073 0.028 0.000 0.147 _.000 0.073 0.029 0.000 0.147 _.056 0.073 0.031 0.000 0.147 !.111 0.073 0.032 0.000 0.147 L.167 0.073 0.034 0.000 0.147 L.222 0.073 0.036 0.000 0.147 L.278 0.073 0.037 0.000 0.147 L.333 0.073 0.039 0.000 0.147 L.389 0.073 0.041 0.000 0.147 L.444 0.073 0.042 0.000 0.147 L.500 0.073 0.044 0.000 0.147 L.556 0.073 0.045 0.000 0.147 L.611 0.073 0.047 0.000 0.147 L.667 0.073 0.049 0.000 0.147 L.722 0.073 0.050 0.000 0.147 L.778 0.073 0.052 0.000 0.147 L.833 0.073 0.054 0.000- 0.147 L.889 0.073 0.055 0.000 0.147 L.944 0.073 0.057 0.000 0.147 3.000 0.073 0.058 0.000 0.147 3.056 0.073 0.060 0.000 0.147 3.111 0.073 0.062 0.000 0.147 3.167- 0.073 0.063 0.000 0.147 3.222 0.073 0.065 0.000 0.147 3.278 0.073 0.067 0.000 0.147 3.333 0.073 0.068 0.000 0.147 3.389 0.073 0.070 0.000 0.147 3.444 0.073 0.071 0.000 0.147 3.500 0.073 0.073 0.000 0.147• 3.556 0.073 0.075 0.000 0.147 3.611 0.073 0.076 0.000 0.147 3.667 0.073 0.078 0.000 0.147 3.722 0.073 0.079 0.000 0.147 3.778 0.073 0.081 0.000 0.147 3.833 0.073 0.083 0.000 0.147 3.889 0.073 0.084 0.000 0.147 3.944 0.073 0.086 0.000 0.147 3.000 0.073 0.088 0.000 0.147 3.056 0.073 0.089 0.000 0.147 3.111 0.073 0.091 0.000 0.147 3.167 0.073 0.092 0.000 0.147 3.222 0.073 0.094 0.000 0.147 3.278 0.073 0.096 0.000 0.147 3.333 0.073 0.097 0.000 0.147 3.389 0.073 0.099 0.000 0.147 3.444 0.073 0.101 0.000 0.147 3.500 0.073 0.102 0.000 0.147 3.556 0.073 0.104 0.000 0.147 3.611 0.073 0.105 0.000 0.147 3.667 0.073 0.107 0.000 0.147 3.722 0.073 0.109 0.000 0.147 3.778 0.073 0.110 0.000 0.147 3.833 0.073 0.112 0.000 0.147 3.889 0.073 0.114 0.000 0.147 3.944 0.073 0.115 0.000 0.147 4.000 0.073 0.117 0.000 0.147 4.056 0.073 0.121 0.000 0.147 4.111 0.073 0.125 0.000 0.147 4.167 0.073 0.129 0.000 0.147 4.222 0.073 0.133 0.000 0.147 4.278 0.073 0.137 0.000 0.147 4.333 0.073 0.141 0.000 0.147 4.389 0.073 0.145 0.000 0.147 4.500 0.073 0.153 0.000 0.147 4.556 0.073 0.157 0.000 0.147 4.611 0.073 0.161 0.000 0.147 4.667 0.073 0.165 0.000 0.147 4.722 0.073 0.170 0.000 0.147 4.778 0.073 0.174 0.000 0.147 4.833 0.073 0.178 0.000 0.147 4.889 0.073 0.182 0.000 0.147 4.944 0.073 0.186 0.000 0.147 5.000 0.073 0.190 0.000 0.147 Name Basin A Dev Inf Trench Bottom Length: 115ft. Bottom Width 11ft. Trench bottom slope 1: 0.001 To 1 Trench Left side slope 0: 0 To 1 Trench right side slope 2: 0 To 1 Material thickness of first layer 4 Pour Space of material for first layer Material thickness of second layer 0 Pour Space of material for second layer Material thickness of third layer 0 Pour Space of material for third layer Infiltration On Infiltration rate 4 Infiltration saftey factor 0.5 Discharge Structure .Riser Height: 5 ft. Riser Diameter: 10000 in. Element Flows To: Outlet 1 Outlet 2 0.4 0 0 Gravel Trench Sed Hydraulic Table Stage(ft) Area(acr) Voluma(acr-ft) Dschrg(cfs) Infilt{cfs) 0.000 0.029 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.056 0.029 0.001 0.000 0.059 0.111 0.029 0.001 0.000 0.059 0.167 0.029 0.002 0.000 0.059 0.222 0.029 0.003 0.000 0.059 0.278 0.029 0.003 0.000 0.059 0.333 0.029 0.004 0.000 0.059 0.389 0.029 0.005 0.000 0.059 0.444 0.029 0.005 0.000 0.059 0.500 0.029 0.006 0.000 0.059 0.556 0.029 0.006 0.000 0.059 0.611 0.029 0.007 0.000 0.059 0.667 0.029 0.008 0.000 0.059 0.722 0.029 0.008 0.000 0.059 0.778 0.029 0.009 0.000 0.059 0.833 0.029 0.010 0.000 0.059 0.889 0.029 0.010 0.000 0.059 0.944 0.029 0.011 0.000 0.059 1.000 0.029 0.012 0.000 0.059 1.056 0.029 0.012 0.000 0.059 1.111 0.029 0.013 0.000 0.059 1.167 0.029 0.014 0.000 0.059 1.222 0.029 0.014 0.000 0.059 1.278 0.029 0.015 0.000 0.059 1.333 0.029 0.015 0.000 0.059 1.389 0.029 0.016 0.000 0.059 1.444 0.029 0.017 0.000 0.059 1.500 0.029 0.017 0.000 0.059 1.556 0.029 0.018 0.000 0.059 1.611 0.029 0.019 0.000 0.059 1.667 0.029 0.019 0.000 0.059